4x4van

Why is the only "logical" conclusion the one that you agree with? I still believe that most problems with caches can be addressed effectively without limiting them to only some cachers. That this conclusion has not sunk in yet leads me to believe that no one will ever convince you otherwise, as well. I have also acknowledged that in some cases, MOC is the only solution that worked to solve a problem. assuming that other methods were in fact considered. The fact that you did take the time to investigate my caching history makes me think that perhaps some of my arguments were in fact making sense, so you felt it necessary to try a different tack. Otherwise you probably would have simply written me off as a weirdo and not bothered. And I would be willing to bet that we have all, at one time or another, made a flub or mistake when it comes to TBs, Coins, or caches. When we realize our faux pau, we take steps to remedy the situation. I've already explained the Coin issue, and taken those steps. If that makes you think less of me or my opinions, so be it. No, I don't take your comments to be hostile, as I hope you don't take mine as such. As Nelson Crew said, I was not the OP, and only came into this thread in the 3rd or 4th page. I then unfortunately let my emotions get the best of me and pushed it a bit too far. I should have known better, as this subject has been discussed before, usually with the same basic results. Although the background checks were something new to me, and might make many, myself included, to be a bit more leary of opening up and posting our opinions on future controversial issues.

I'm just curious as to what makes you think people aren't already doing exactly that? I'm still waiting to see some examples of these numerous caches you speak of. Earlier in this thread, someone mentioned Dublin, OH, I think, where nearly all caches are MOC. Was MOC status for nearly every cache the only way to solve a problem in that area? Perhaps, but I kinda doubt it. And as Nelson Crew stated, sometimes we get caught up in the petty stuff and talk (write) before we think. Usually, if I feel my blood pressure begin to rise, I will write a response, then delete it, walk away for awhile, and come back later to repond in a more appropriate way. Unfortunately, I didn't do that in this thread. Again, I apologize to all. I'm not sure why KitFox found it necessary to investigate my caching history to make his point, but all's fair, I guess. In any case, I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of cachers and posters on this thread have much more in common with each other than this thread would seem to suggest, and we'd probably get along famously while out caching.

Hey, I'm just wondering, since y'all feel so personally attacked and all... what about this quoted comment isn't a personal attack on an entire group of people that you don't even know? - Elle Fair enough, I suppose that could be considered an attack, as well. And for that I apologize. I try not to paint groups with a broad brush, unfortunately sometimes I fail. My only goal in this entire issue is to try to get people to think about why they are placing a MOC, and to try to limit them when possible, so as to produce enjoyment for the highest number of cachers possible.

Rather ran make a baseless allegation, show me an example of one poster in this thread spewing venom. "...complaining about PMOCs are really just airing their own sense of entitlement..." "...especially for those who claim to be advancing very sophisticated arguments" "...attempting to clothe their argument for entitlement in fancy words, in the hopes of disguising what they are really saying" "...small but vociferous minority who keep pushing, under various guises and arguments, the totally specious and self-serving hypotheis the PMOCs are elitist and undesirable" "...lack of logic and, most importantly, the lack of a sense of gratitude and appreciation on the part of these people" Actually, this thread has been more civil than some previous threads on this issue, in which I and others have been called many things because of our dislike of MOCs. And of course you have to bring up the Geocoin issue, to get a sly attack in, as well. Just to let you know (not that it's any of your business nor does it have anything to do with the subject of MOCs), I have just recently been in contact with the Coin's owner and will be dropping it into a cache soon when I travel up north over the Thanksgiving holiday. Since I don't cache often, I forgot I even had it in my posession till I was cleaning out my pack just a few weeks ago, at which time I did contact the owner.

Are you serious? Do you truly believe PM-only caches are sometimes hidden for the specific purpose of excluding other cachers out of spite? I believe that is an even stronger and more outrageous charge than the elitism thing. It had never even occurred to me to imagine that anyone was using the PM-only feature for no other reason than to be cruel, vindictive or mean. Other than the speculation you have posted here, do you have any real-world evidence you can show us which led you directly to that conclusion? I never said it was done out of spite. I do believe, however, that in many cases it's done for no other reason than to exclude cachers, using no other criteria than money. And IMO, that's the wrong reason to place an MOC.

If GC.com closed up shop, I don't believe that the activity would disappear. It would continue, and other sites would step up to fill the need. Perhaps there would be one similar to GC.com, or perhaps there would be multiple smaller sites, more regional in nature. Don't get me wrong, GC.com is the best. Jeremy came up with a great combination of features that helped this site to grow exponentially, and I am thankful for that. But the site exists because of the activity, not the other way around. Actually, I think there were in fact "tens of thousands" prior to PMs (there are nearly 3/4 of a million now), but since I don't have any way of verifying that, I'll concede that point. Look, every time this issue comes up, the same thing happens (which is why I didn't post at all till it was three pages long); Someone states their opinion that MOCs seem to divide us up and don't seem fair. The first few responses are usually pretty civil and give some legitimate reasons that people use them. Then it inevitably deteriorates into many people insulting the OP, calling them freeloaders, self-entitled, etc, and within a few more posts, more people jump on saying that that's what's wrong with the world today, etc, etc. Look back over this entire thread, and any of the others on this issue, and you will see the same thing. The amount of venom and insults thrown around by those PMs say more about them and their real motives for MOCs than anything else. BTW, Jester, I'm not aiming that comment at you; you actually made some logical points above that I quoted in order to respond to. And with that, I'm outta here. I'm tired of being attacked for my opinions, and I feel sorry for the many cachers who have been likewise. Debate me on the merits of the issue, I have no problem. You may even change my mind. It's happened before. But start to question my motives, character, integrity...I have better things to do and better people to spend time with.

It also doesn't mean...never mind

And what I find most sad is that the majority voices on this thread (which always seem to find it necessary to attack those of us that have a different opinion) might be representative of the entire geocaching community. I have never "attacked" anyone on this forum, nor have I ever "attacked" MOCs. I have, however, been attacked myself, and called many names and many things on this thread (see above), as well as on previous threads about this issue. Other than the fact we have a different opinion about one single feature on this site, you know nothing about me, yet you feel qualified to make the above sweeping statements about my character?

A couple of points here; while I have always disagreed with the idea of MOCs (no secret), I don’t think it can be said that I have ever “Railed” against them. I simply think they do more harm than good to geocaching, and have always explained my reasoning without resorting to insults or name calling. In fact, I’ve never personally called MOCs elitist, I’ve only tried to explain why some people may consider them so. The last time I checked, I was still allowed to have an opinion, even if you don’t agree with it. Let me know if that right has been rescinded. And while I have never given money directly to this site, I have made a number of purchases over the years through advertisers on the site. More importantly, I find it puzzling that many of you don’t think that caches “contribute” to this site. Without caches, all the money in the world would be useless to this site because there would be no reason for it. Hiding quality caches and maintaining them, treating caches with respect, trading up, repairing caches, etc. all support (and indeed created) the activity that this site is dependent upon, and therefore those things do support the site, IMO. Tens of thousands of caches were placed prior to the existence of PMs, and many more continue to be placed every day by non-premium members. To simply disregard those as irrelevant are an insult to every cacher whose actions (as opposed to cash) created this activity and created the need for this site in the first place. The site doesn’t exist in a vacuum; all of the things that make it possible need to be taken into consideration. Again, my opinion. Obviously many of you would disagree. And while I will always respect the right of a person to have an opinion even if I disagree with it, I guess I can't always expect the same in return. Sad, but not entirely unexpected.

There will never be a consensus on the issue of MOCs, of that I am sure. My own thought is that every cacher, regardless of their level of caching involvement or membership status, fully believes that the line that defines "elitism" is probably just slightly beyond what they themselves are willing to engage in. After all, perception is reality, and we all have different perceptions. Put another way...You can justify anything to yourself!

You're looking at it the wrong way. They weren't designed to "exclude" a large number of cachers, but to "include" any number of cachers who are willing to support this site (i.e.. pay money voluntarily). Thanks for the reminder that there are two sides to every coin!

I never said I felt entitled to a PM cache. I also never "admitted" that MOCs have solved numerous problems, because I don't believe that. Perhaps you should go back and re-read what I actually wrote before you make those accusations. That's where you're wrong, and you make my next point for me: MOCs are actually the easy "sweeping" way to solve many problems that most likely could have been solved without excluding a large number of cachers. I've already suggested at least one way for each of the problems that I listed in my first post here, ways that could in fact improve the game, as per you suggestion. Will those solutions work in every situation? Of course not. Sometimes you have to be creative to find specific workable solutions to specific problems, rather than simply taking the easy route. What I'd be interested in learning is why you feel excluding a large number of cachers "improves the game"?

My point is that all of the other features (PQs, GPX files, bookmarks, audit logs, etc.) available to Premium members are there to make geocaching easier, more conveinient, more "productive", etc. By contrast, MOCs are, by design, there to exclude many geocachers. Therefore, I think it's perfectly fair to paint MOCs with a different brush than the other Premium "perks". If you pay extra for first class and I fly coach, you rightly get extras that make your flight much more conveinient, comfortable, and enjoyable, but we still go to the same place and they don't prevent me from getting off the plane when it reaches it's destination. I simply think that the net result of MOCs on the geocaching community is more negative than positive. So I ask PMs to think about what they are trying to accomplish with a cache, and then decide if making it MOC is really necessary. Ultimately, TPTB have decided to offer MOCs, so any Premium member does indeed have the right to use that feature. I would like to hope it is not used simply to exclude and/or divide geocachers into two groups based on something as arbitrary as the desire or ability to pay $30. Unfortunately, based on some of the responses in this (and many previous) threads, that does seem to be the very purpose of some MOCs.

IMHO, there are very few legitimate reasons to make a cache MOC. Yes I've heard all the excuses to try to justify them, such as: 1. "It makes them less likely to be muggled". Wrong. Muggles, by definition, are non-cachers, and therefore didn't get the coordinates from the website, they stumbled onto the cache. 2. "It protects them from inexperienced cachers damaging or destroying them." Really? Weren't we all inexperienced at one time? Does that mean that every premium member damaged or destroyed most of the caches they found early on? I certainly didn't, and I doubt most of you did either. And does a single $30 payment really improve the integrity of a person? Boy, that's a scary opinion. 3. "It's to reward those who support the site." So are you trying to tell me that the thousands of caches placed by regular members are not in any way supporting the site? I'd lay odds that if every cache placed by a regular member disappeared tomorrow, the site would be in a world of hurt, regardless of your generous $30 support. 4. "It's to limit the number of visitors to the cache, because it's a sensitive area." Perhaps there shouldn't be a cache there in the first place if it's so sensitive. 5. "It's to limit the number of visitors because I spent so much on the cache & it's contents." That was your decision, and simply hiding it in a location that takes more work to get to, like a longer hike, would accomplish the same thing. 6. "I only make my caches MOC till the first few finders have logged visits, then I open it up for the rest of cachers." I don't buy it, at least not in my area. I have yet to see an MOC in my area be changed over to a regular cache. 7. "There is a cache maggot in the area so I need to protect it." Okay, I'll give you this one, but even then it should be temporary, since cache maggots tend to get bored and go away after awhile. There are many more reasons given as well, but realistically there are other ways of addressing nearly every one of those reasons. Ways that don't exclude a large number of cachers who make this game possible in the first place. Caches are the reason for the site, not the other way around. In many previous threads on this subject, I've been called cheap, a freeloader, been told that they are subsidizing my caching, etc, and even been told some things or called some things that I'd rather not even repeat. But when it's all said and done, the reality is that they are telling me that I am not good enough to search for their caches, but they are good enough (better) to search for mine. In other words, people who pay $30 are better than those of us who don't. And that is what makes alot of people look at MOCs as being "elitist". I have found about 300+ caches, which is actually a small number considering that I've been caching since 2001. I may go several months between cache outings, but then go out on a Saturday and seek 10-12 or more. Then it may be another couple of months before I get the chance to get out again. When I cache, I love it, but do I "live" for caching? No. Do I think I am freeloading because I have not paid my $30? No, since I have a placed high quality caches that get very good feedback, I trade up, I rehide caches well, I maintain & repair caches that are in need. There are more ways to support the site other than with cash, and the most important is hiding quality caches and treating found caches with respect. At some point, I may decide to become a premium member, but I really hope that I will never feel the need or the desire to exclude any cachers from my hides. After all, I want people to find my caches.

Perfectly fine. Just remember to adjust the date when you log her finds online to the date you & she actuallly found it; the logging page defaults to today's date when you open it up.

Not true. Geocaching.com uses either .gpx files or .loc files, either of which will work fine with your 315. Simply download the caches you want from the site, then use a free program like EasyGPS to upload them to your unit. You will need a cable, but any of the older Magellan cables will work (SporTrak, Meridian, etc.). The only thing to remember is that you need a serial port on your PC. I haven't heard of anyone so far that has has good luck with serial-to-USB adapters when using the Magellans. The 315 is a good, solid unit. I started out with the same unit, and found over 100 caches before buying a Sportrak Pro.

Again, double-sided tape (or something similarly sticky). All I know is that I would definitely look for a less labor intensive solution than hauling an empty 5-gallon jug 300 yards to the site, a full 5-gallon jug 450 yards (9 trips to the creek), an empty 5-gallon jug 450 yards (for refilling each time), and finally an empty 5-gallon jug 300 yards back to the car.

Back to the OP's original question, I use EasyGPS to load caches into my GPS. After editing a couple of fields in EasyGPS to include info that I want, such as container type/size and hint, I print out that page. Everything I need on 1 sheet of paper, along with room to keep notes about what I traded or anything else pertinent to the cache for when I later log online.

Hmmmm...interesting. My first thought is that I doubt many will make multiple 50 yd trips to the creek and back with a 5 gallon jug to fill the pipe. I would simply take an 8' piece of 3/4" PVC with a large lag screw attached to the end stick it down the pipe into the foam, and pull the cache up. If you reverse the container so the foam is on the bottom, a large hunk of strong double sided tape instead of the lag bolt would suffice. Just my thoughts. Not sure what the difficulty rating should be. Obviously you will need to spell out at least some of the requirements (water container of some sort) on the cache page. Again, interesting.

Every time this idea comes up, I read/listen to all the arguments for a system to do this, and I come to the same conclusion: NO!! There are already mechanisms in place to accomplish the "thinning out" of caches that are no longer viable. If a cache is in bad shape, then post a NM. If it doesn't get taken care of either by the owner or another cacher, then subsequent finders should post a SBA. If the issue still isn't taken care of (again, by the owner or another cacher), the the approver archives it...problem solved. If either the owner or another cacher takes care of the problem, then...problem solved. Whether the owner of a cache is still involved and actively maintaining his caches is irrelevent; the only issue is whether the cache is viable (and the fact that you and most of your friends have already found it doesn't make it non-viable). There is no need to "clear out" a viable cache simply because it's been there for a long time, or the cache owner is MIA, or most of the cachers in the area have found it. What about new cachers just entering the sport? Or cachers traveling through the area? Just because you have found all the caches in your area, doesn't mean that other cachers have. I have a cache that gets very little traffic; Fuller Falls. It's been in existence for nearly 6 1/2 years, with only about 20 finds in all that time. Some years, it only got 2-3 logs. It hasn't been found in nearly 18 months. Should it be archived? No way! While it's a short hike, it's a strenuous one, and by reading the logs you can see that its' lack of visitors have nothing to do with the quality or viability of the cache; not a single "TFTC"-only log, nor complaint, nor NM, nor SBA. Instead, there are long logs raving about the hike, the location, the cache, the view, and many finders have posted pictures, etc. I check it occasionally, but even if I dropped off the planet, as long as it is in good shape, why archive it and deprive new cachers of the experience? If a cache is no longer viable, then post a log stating the reasons why. NM & SBA logs are not ignored by approvers; although it may not happen quickly enough for your liking, the problem eventually gets taken care of, either by archiving or repairing. If you can't make the case for having it archived, then I have to believe that it's still viable and you are just wanting to clear the area for your own selfish reasons. And I have a hard time believing that all the Open Lands (Wildlife Areas) in Indiana are "taken up and well used". Sorry, but till I see a map showing caches scattered evenly all across the state's wilderness areas, I don't buy it.

Here's the deal: I have a Magellan SporTrak Pro (firmware 5.34). I just bought a new computer, running Windows Vista Home Premium. I've installed EasyGPS and Magellan Mapsend Topo, both of which work fine on the PC. Now the glitch: Of course my Maggie uses a Serial cable, not USB, and of course my new PC lacks a Serial port. After doing a bit of research, it seems that using a USB/Serial adapter to bridge this gap tends to be a hit-or-miss proposition; depending on brand of adapter and driver, software, and GPS unit. So rather than trying to re-invent the wheel, I'm asking for your help before I purchase a USB adapter. Has anyone had success with USB adapters for an older Magellan and either EasyGPS or Mapsend Topo on Windows Vista? If so, details please (adapter brand, drivers, software, settings, etc)?

Okay, due to a PC (dinosaur) freeze-up while my flash drive was plugged in, I have lost everything that I had in one particular folder on that flash drive. While some of the files will be impossible to get back (stuff that I wrote myself, etc), I'm hopeful that the geocaching community can help me with at least some of the others. If anyone here can help me with these files, either emailed or a link, I'd really appreciate it. 1. EasyGPS for windows 98SE 2. MyMeridian This was a program to customize/personalize the opening screen on Magellan units. 3. PLEASE HELP WITH THIS ONE! There was a "how-to" written on changing the appearance of the maps on the GPS screen when using Magellan's Topo. It gave instructions on modifying the Topo program so that certain streets and roads didn't show up quite so dark (change from black to grey, etc.) and also how to change what items showed up at certain "zoom" levels. Anybody remember this? Got a copy? Thanks in advance to any and all help. I'm sure over the next few days (or weeks), I'll remember more that I lost, but those are the ones that come immediately to mind. Thanks.

Largest: a 5 gallon bucket hidden within the roots of a felled tree (and covered with 6" of snow at the time!). Smallest: a breath-strip container (that actually had a small geocoin in it as well as the log sheet!).

100 square feet translates into a 10' x 10' area. That's as close or closer than any GPS is going to get you, even the newest, most expensive models. Within 30 feet is generally considered pretty good, since you have to deal with not only your own unit's accuracy, but the accuracy of the hider's unit as well. Also keep in mind that the yellow Etex doesn't have a magnetic compass. The direction of the compass rose (the navigation screen) is dependent on the unit knowing which direction it is facing. It only knows that based on where it is compared to where it was, and assumes that you didn't turn to face a different direction since that last movement. So if you are turning around and back and forth in a short distance, it has no idea which way to point because it has no idea which way it is facing. Walk in a straight line for at least 10 feet, and then don't turn. Now look at the compass rose to see which way to go. Yes. upgrade the firmware to v2.14. It should help. My son uses an older (like yours) yellow Etrex, and he finds as nearly as many caches as I find with my SporTrak Pro (although I think my "geo-sense" is better!).

Not sure, but try checking the Datum settings on your GPS. It sounds like you may have it set to NAD27. Geocaching.com cache sites' coordinates are listed in the WGS84 Datum. That may be the difference, since your error seems to be consistent. Coordinates in WGS84 will not necessarily be at the same location as the same coordinates in NAD27.