J Grouchy

I have a multi where stage one is a travel bug. It was actually the virtual "Mary Hyde" code that I engraved on a metal tag, so it's easily replaced. I won't spoil the whole thing, but it's been successful and has been out there for a few years now. Found just a few weeks ago, actually.

Like I said...rare. How many people would actually go to the trouble?

Maybe I'm missing something...but in order to even log it, you have to answer all the questions correctly AND be in the correct location. Not to say it's impossible to 'cheat'...but I imagine it's exceedingly rare with ALs.

I just got notification of a new AL near me in Atlanta, so I naturally opened the app to see where. I had to zoom way in, because the icon for the new one was sitting almost entirely on top of an existing AL icon. When I looked at the description, I realized it almost completely duplicated the existing AL. I mean, this isn't really what they want, is it? Are we going to start getting more and more of these with the influx of people being able to create them and publish them without proper review?

https://tubitv.com/movies/494200/rifftrax_grizzly?start=true You can see the whole sequence starting around 1:23. The line itself is just about at 1:24

So if anyone is not familiar with Mystery Science Theater 3000 or Rifftrax, it's basically funny commentary recorded over bad movies. In one particular movie ('Grizzly') on Rifftrax, a character named Scott gets mauled and killed by a bear. Two park rangers find his body and wonder how to get his body out of the forest. One says they should bury the body and send the coordinates for it to be picked up later...at which point Mike Nelson says "Okay but bright side...Scott is now an amazing geocaching destination" https://www.amazon.com/RiffTrax-Grizzly-Michael-J-Nelson/dp/B07BF31NZ7 (also availabe to watch for free on "Tubi")

I can save my maps in the app I use, but it takes planning...something I'm not always great at doing.

I use my phone almost exclusively. I've really tried to make my Garmin more useful, but the interface is just awful, the display is substandard (compared to what I'm used to with my smartphone) and I've found the accuracy to be pretty much equivalent in most circumstances. The few times I used my etrex, it was on a long hike or in rainy weather or when I was in a location without a reliable 4G signal.

sent you a message

I assume it's because each stage of a lab is verified through the app. That being said, I would not support any sort of electronic verification for each stage of a multi-cache.

So I ran through the Project GC adventure and just today did the "Netchvilski: LABrador" one. Is there a list of other locationless adventures or a way to search for them? Or do these just get around by word of mouth?

That's boilerplate language. Follow that person's cache logs and they say that same old [thing] on every log they write. One of my many peeves

Thanks for the permission i never needed in the first place. Personally, I think my perspective is probably shared by Groundspeak itself. If an honest and verified case could be made for NA on Mingo, I doubt TPTB would give a second thought to archiving it. So my advice to those who assign unearned value to these caches would be "it's a geocache". That's really and truly all that needs to be said.

Seems pretty clear you WERE equating them. Big difference between historical value placed on an architectural style and a permanent object designed and built with intention...and an ammo can in a tree stump. And I don't know what "praise" you are talking about. I honestly feel like I'm the only one with any real perspective on this thing. People honestly need to relax a little bit "historical" caches.

Sorry....but are you really comparing plastic bins and ammo cans to art and architecture?

Finally figured it out. Kind of a weird interface on that app...but I suppose a good way to get started on the Adventure Labs. There are a few in Atlanta, so I'll have to check them out soon.

So I'm new to all this Adventure Lab stuff...never done one. Then I saw the PGC Locationless Adventure posted on Reddit and I'm completely at a loss for what I'm supposed to do. Has anyone here done this yet?

This is the reason that any cache from the early years that is still being maintained by the ORIGINAL OWNER has value...because even after all this time they still deem it worthy of their time and attention. If the person who put it there can't be bothered, I'd argue that nobody should bother doing their work for them. Just make a new one if you think the place is interesting enough to bring people to. Which is why we should never have an officially defined cutoff point. It's almost entirely subjective and therefore impossible to assign value to. Some (myself included) might argue that no single cache is worth saving if it is 100% being propped up by everyone but the CO. I wouldn't go so far as to argue for it to be archived, but I certainly would never dream of maintaining someone else's cache just because it happens to be from 18 years ago.

Grid-filling, to me, is no reason to keep an abandoned cache active. Maybe it's a reason to NOT abandon a cache...or to adopt it out to someone who won't. Apparently the vast majority of COs of caches that fill those rare grid spots didn't think it important enough to keep them well-maintained.

This bugs me. What's the threshold for "oldness" that allows a cache to survive even when the CO isn't maintaining it? Seven years? Ten? Fifteen? Or is it age beyond owner abandonment? What about if it's a film canister that's been out there for 18 years? Does that make it less worthy than an ammo can? Maybe we should just, oh, I don't know, hold all caches and their owners to an equal standard and make, umm...guidelines?....for people to follow when hiding and finding and logging caches? What do you all think about that idea?

No thanks.

I don't see that as particularly helpful, honestly. It doesn't help anyone who might be out looking for it after you visit. They have these very specific log types FOR THIS VERY REASON. Any CO that gets offended maybe shouldn't be a CO. It's all a well-established part of the game and we should all understand nobody is "out to get them" or publicly shame them. Posting an NM log is a service and ought to be appreciated rather than avoided.

This isn't intended to be rude or snarky...but anyone who reads up on the guidelines or even spends more than a few seconds thinking about it knows. There's a "Did not find" option for any cache you do not find. That's precisely what it's for and I really wish folks would use it instead of finding weird ways of justifying a "found it" log. So, I apologize if that does sound rude...but it's honestly exhausting to see this sort of thing all the time.

I'm actually surprised that anyone actually tracks FPs on their caches. Right now I couldn't tell you if one or ten were taken from any of my caches if you paid me. Personally, I think Favorite Points are nonsense anyway. I'll occasionally give them out, but not with any consistency and only when it occurs to me. I never notice how many any given cache has. When I did, I rarely ever felt the ones with higher numbers really were worth any more than any other well-done cache. Basically, to me, tracking FPs is pretty much as silly and useless as tracking souvenirs and getting upset over either (be it the existence or absence of one) is a bit ridiculous. But that's just me...

As a CO of many puzzle caches, I found it useful to get a good sense of how difficult and interesting my puzzles were to other cachers. Many repeat visits from someone generally meant that it held their interest enough to want to look at it again. No visits in a long time or only single visits from a lot of folks often gave me reason to consider packing it up and archiving the cache. So count me as another who isn't all that happy about this decision...but then, I'm used to Groundspeak making decisions I'm not happy with, so what else is new?