dubidubno

I have the same problem. Any response from Groundspeak yet? I'm a paying customer if it matters.

What does "biltema" mean?

Are there any plans to implement two factor authentication? I'm concerned that my important geocaching account has so low security.

The global environment. Reducing the number of trips reduces emissions.

So I did this and submitted a "Coordinate Check" cache. This is the reply I got from the reviewer (my attempt at translation from Norwegian): This is absolutly the wrong way to do it... When a cache is completly ready and ready for publication, only then should you submit the cache. If you want a coordinate check, make a GC-code and send it to one of us reviewers. If the spot is free, your GC-code will have the lowest number and you have first rights to the spot. If the spot is not free, you will get a notice about this and you can find a new spot. This just makes a mess [tull i rekkene], since you have found a spot withh coordinates that are not free.This means you must find a new spot, and I send your request backPlease do not cross off that everything is ready, when that is not so. [...] Any comments?

Who said I was driving? You are making assumptions. I use public transportation. I pass the area frequently enough to do maintenance. Why should I waste my time and damage the environment by doing more trips than necessary?

Non-traditionals are not my thing. I rarely do them.

Well, I can't continue to travel back and forth 50 mins each way to find a new spot to try, so I guess the cache community will have to do without my cache.

This is frustrating. Before placing a cache I used an app that draws circles around traditionals to show occupied space. Multies and mysteries can not be shown since you can't know the end coordinates without solving them. However, geocaching.com accepted my coordinates, and I submitted for review. The reviewer denied publication a few days later, saying the coordinates are less than 161 metres from a cache I haven't logged online. I moved the cache and submitted again. Same response. He will not tell me which cache blocks mine, nor where there are free areas. In my opinion this is less than helpful. I just wan't to give back to the community by placing caches, but I can't travel back and forth endlessly to try to find an available spot in the area. In my opinion geocaching.com should tell you during the submission process if coordinates are not available. What do you suggest I should do?

You are entitled to your opinion, and I'm not going to debate you on that. I would, however, like to clarify that I did not say I was very well liked, just that it does not seem like I'm very unpopular.

No. As you may recall, I started this topic to ask if it is possible, and now there is an official answer.

Here is the answer from Groundspeak:

For information, it was not a discussion. It was him telling me to stop deleting the entry and answering my questions with new questions. He did not seem intent to resolve it so I saw no point in continuing that route. Regarding the impression given of me being very unpopular in the caching community; that seems unlikely to be true. I have more than a hundred caches with a total of several thousand happy found it logs.

This is how the logbook looks to me. As one can see, the UV log has been overwritten by subsequent cachers, because they of course could not see the UV ink.

Why didn't you just attach this photo to your log or send it to me when you contacted me? I think your plan was to provoke a deletion.

I consistently delete cheaters who claim a find without an entry in the log. I cannot verify this entry, and I suspect that they are claiming to do this to make it harder for me to stop cheaters.

What could the motivation of the loggers be, to sign the log in invisible ink? They must have known it would be overwritten by subsequent loggers. Also, I think it's unreasonable to expect cache owners to invest in ultraviolet light equipment. It's like an additional logging requirement in reverse. I have asked some of the invisible ink loggers about their motivation, but they have chosen not to state.

Is this your personal opinion or official Groundspeak policy?

Is this your personal opinion or official Groundspeak policy? Can I sign the log with my own saliva and claim the find?

A geocacher claims he has signed my log with invisible, ultraviolet ink. I have deleted his logs several times, but he keeps re-logging. Is it possible for Groundspeak to block his account so he can't log this particular cache?

In Norway?

I once deleted a log where the description of the container was very different to what I had hidden. The cacher sent me angry messages saying I had ruiend his 'streak'. Several of my containers dissapeared after that. It could be a coincidence, of course.

I have never accepted a log without a corresponding signature when I'm aware of the missing signature. If a log mentions they did not bring a pen, for example, I delete. The logger may be aware of this. (I do not check every log, but I do check some logbooks from time to time.)

I think he' did it deliberately on this cache for some reason. He's links to a blog post about his trip, where he says (google translate): http://www.korsgat.com/blogg/arkiv/2957

I got this log on one of my caches: It's in Norwegian. Here's my attempt at translating it: I'm going to delete the log, but I wonder what will happen in response. https://coord.info/GLWPXAB9