dorqie

I'm actually mostly ranting about them blocking the sidewalk and letting little old ladies step over their sprawled out legs... the log was just what made me revisit it, otherwise i would have forgotten

I've seen the same thing happen, but it doesn't bother me. Everybody plays the game the way they want to. If they get a thrill logging an unfound cache, then I let them enjoy it. It really doesn't effect me. yeah normally it doesn't bother me much either, but I'm not kidding they were literally blocking the sidewalk and being obnoxious and rude with their language (and dress, one had no shirt on and his pants around his knees like a "gangster")while searching for the cache. Then to not sign the log on top of it was just a bit much for me. I feel that by caching in such a disrespectful way to the residents of the neighbourhood, they were putting caching in a bad light, which does affect me. Was the other wearing a leather jacket like one of those good for nothing greasers? rude, rude rude yes in fact,i think he was. I am of the opinion that if I can see your bum, you are not wearing pants. Thus is not appropriate for public dress. Plumbers, and girls with low rise jeans also fall into this category. It's the shirtless thing that bothers me though.

I think you mean "gangsta" pardon me, I stand corrected. if anyone can explain why wearing your pants too low is a trend in that group, that would be appreciated. How are you supposed to run from the "po-9" if your pants are around your knees?

talking loudly about the chache, iphones in hand, being upside down in front of a park bench, looking exactly like the profile picture of the mysterious logger online.

I still have a magellan gpsr! Please somebody claim it.

I've seen the same thing happen, but it doesn't bother me. Everybody plays the game the way they want to. If they get a thrill logging an unfound cache, then I let them enjoy it. It really doesn't effect me. yeah normally it doesn't bother me much either, but I'm not kidding they were literally blocking the sidewalk and being obnoxious and rude with their language (and dress, one had no shirt on and his pants around his knees like a "gangster")while searching for the cache. Then to not sign the log on top of it was just a bit much for me. I feel that by caching in such a disrespectful way to the residents of the neighbourhood, they were putting caching in a bad light, which does affect me.

I saw some geocachers yesterday searching a bench. The first thing that bothered me about them was that they were stretched out under the bench with their legs on the sidewalk, not caring that little old ladies were having to step over them. They were talking loudly about the cache and attracting lots of muggle attention. I decided to be stealthy myself, and didn't introduce myself. I just sat down on the next bench and pretended to be enjoying the view. I kept one eye on them, and I did not see them grab the cache, did not see them unroll the log. Once they got in their car and left I moved over to their bench, grabbed the cache, and unrolled the log to sign it. Nope, they aren't on it. I know this because there are only about 3 other sigs in this log and they are all from cachers I have met. Oh well, they looked like newbs, perhaps they didn't see the nano that really does just look like a bolt, guess they dnf'd I came home to log my find, and lo and behold, they logged it online. I'm a bit annoyed. I'm not the "sign the log nazi" but these guys just really bothered me. I probably wont rat on them, and just keep calm and cache on, but I felt like ranting today.

why have you started a duplicate thread?

I agree with you that the logs are not expressly offensive, however, I do think that it is in poor taste for someone who does not like nanos to go around finding caches that are clearly marked as nanos and log that they don't like them. If you don't like them, don't find them, or just log a tftc.

Well was it wrong of me to take it ? This cache was located in a hi muggle area. I thought I used my better judgement by collecting it. I'm not going to say you were wrong, but I wouldn't have taken it. I would have just gathered it up, rehid it at GZ and posted a NM log explaining the caches condition.

Ice Hokey? The American education system must be in a sorry state if that's what you've learned in Geography. But if that's your idea of "humorous", it failed to amuse me. Actually I thought it was like the us virgin islands where it had its own government and completely separate from the us while still technically owned by it. oh my... please tell me you're trolling...

I was just kinda thought that there was some line through the CRD dividing scootch territory from wizard of ooze. I wanted to know who's side of the line this park fell under. Doesn't appear that this line exists though

I just want to know if there are any hidden waypoints in a particular park, it's just a yes or no answer I want. I guess any reviewer could answer that for me. :S Thanks everyone.

My area recently had a change of hands, and now instead of the old reviewer, we seem to have two in my area. I'm not sure where the line between each of their territory is. I have a question I want to ask, but I'm not sure who to direct it to. How do I find out who reviews exactly what area?

I'm not concerned about the number of finds, lots or few, whatever. What I am concerned about is whiney emails from people angry about the puzzle. I want as few of those as possible.

I was thinking of making a mystery cache where you would have to scan a QR code on the cache page for the co-ordinates. Is that too unfair to cachers that don't own a smartphone?

Just thought i would say that i did not read others reviews before adding mine. Interesting that it gets consistent 8's!

the rubber is coming off on mine as well, hardcore. it's not bothering me though, just looks kinda... ghetto for lack of a better term. I could hockey tape it in place, that would probably last a few months before needing to change the tape.

Hey HHH! Love your youtube channel! -I use a garmin etrex legend Hcx -I'd give it an 8/10 -I like that it is easy to use, it's easy to figure out how to change any function, and preform any operation. It also does just about everything I could need -No paperless caching. This really really bugs me. -I am on the fence about my next gps. I want a garmin. I want paperless caching. Dakota meets my needs, and is in my price range, but I don't like the touch screen. GPSMAP62 and related tick all the boxes as well, but are pricer than Dakota and I find them bulky, whereas Dakota would fit in my pocket easily.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=250224 there, it's actually on the same page as this thread right now, so it's not hard to find.

I make earrings, and handknit items (dishcloths, potholders, baby mittens and socks) that I trade in caches, but I wouldn't call my "signature" items because I don't have my geocaching name on them. There is a thread going of signature items, let me see if I can find it, there are lots of photos there.

So how do you decide which caches to search for?

Great point. Although I am pretty sure that there aren't a ton of one armed wheelchair bound cachers. Not trying to minimize it, but the numbers are important to look at when you really specialize. You can't create a cache that can satisfy all scenarios. Did I just flip/flop on that, because I still feel the same? but how many people do you know in wheelchairs that are in them for exactly the same reason? My point was just that wheelchair accessible for one, isn't for another.

I absolutely agree with this statement and as such I have a problem with people insisting that you can only use a 1 terrain if it is wheelchair accessible (or WCA for short). We have a WCA attribute to indicate this point. I have even heard that reviewers have told COs to change the terrain rating to a 1.5 if it isn't WCA. The understanding of handicapped is often narrow by most "healthy" peoples standard. I am just glad that Groundspeak is such a strong advocate of assisting the disabled, it really shows a sense of condsideration as a company. I am thinking of my father, who was in a wheelchair, and only had the use of one arm. If the hiding spot at the end of the straight paved path was over his head, he wouldn't have been able to get it. If it was on the ground, still probably would have trouble reaching it, but that's why he used a grabber. If the hidey hole was too narrow for the grabber to fit, still no dice. WCA is so hard to judge with geocaches, because getting the chair to the cache is only part of the equation.

This is right and wrong at the same time. I am with you that 1* should really be used only when one is sure about handicapped accessibility in a broad sense. The key issue is how you define disabilities. I guess it would be better to think of our abilities as a kind of continuum and everyone reaches certain scores somewhere on the scale. In some way everyone has disabilities in one way or the other, but of course not all at the same level and some are much more handicapped as others and are handicapped in activities that are really important in their lives while others might have disabilities they are not even aware of. But let's stop with this rather philosophical issue and move over to my geocaching related massage. There are many cachers with various types of handicaps and disabilities (temporary ones, day-depending ones, permanent ones) that are able to cope with caches with ratings >=1.5* depending on the situation and the day. Certainly you can tell them keep with 1* caches and be happy, but I do not think that this is something that will make these people happy. Think e.g. of people who have terrible pains in some limbs/joints during certain phases and then have troubles with walking longer distances, with bending etc while they do not have only minor problems or no problems at all at other days. I can manage some high terrain caches if they are of the appropriate type and might fail with lower terrain caches (some even 1.5+) e.g. if they force me to jump down or if I have to walk for a longer time on a slope keeping the same height or if I have make a very large step up upwards without having any support by my arms (one of my knees is not allowing as the pressure gets too high then). Another example: I know a cacher who has just one arm. She manages to climb up to places where I fail, but opening containers which are screwed up very tightly is not possible for her as she can use her prothesis in a very reduced manner. I also was deeply moved when I read the story of TheAlabamaRambler in a book on geocaching. Have a look at what type of caches he achieved to reach. (Here I feel that the term achievement really fits while I do not regard it as an achievement if a fully fit person finds 1000 caches). Another issue that is typically overlooked at least in the countries where I cache frequently and where multi caches with question to answer stages are very frequent are various versions of partial color blindness. Cezanne what she said. Also, sometimes even with a terrain rating of 1, a person with a certain disability might still not be able to access the cache, for example if they are in a wheelchair and the cache is at the end of a flat paved walkway (to make it a 1) but it's hiding spot leaves it unreachable to them. Terrain ratings give us an idea, but aren't the be all/end all.