MartyBartfast

If you mean this: Then the function of that is about matching caches with or without corrected co-ordinates, it's not intended to affect the display of those on the map. It's a poorly worded filter.

As the OP let me provide a prime example of where the current situation completely fails cache hiders (and Groundspeak, remember that without us you don't have a business!). On the map below all the smilies on the left are within the area bounded by red. If I wanted to hide a cache in that area there is NO WAY for me to see conveniently where the vacant spaces are, the hider proximity map won't show them because they're puzzles, and the current maps won't show them at the solved location, the only way would be for me to manually plot every individual cache on another tool. Before anyone comes to say it, I know that area is pretty much saturated in this case and I wouldn't want to place a cache here but I'm using it to illustrate the point.

Just wanted to say a big thank you to @2Abendsegler for picking up maintenance on this script. It's been my goto option for mapping for many years, and not just for geocaching. While I've never had any major problems with it I always dreaded the day when it might stop working as JRI had backed off from maintaining it, but it's really good to see someone's keeping it alive.

@niraD You've been doing a lot of googling I suppose it's all in the same ballpark (see what I did there!) but 60m vs 45m is still an extra 33%... But irrespective of all the above, do you actually think that the person who included the reference to the Football field was thinking of anything other than an American Football field? Hence my coment about it being USA centric. I think it should have been measured in double decker busses, something which we can all relate to - as I'm sure you will agree.

Rugby Football, two codes - Union & League, both having different pitch sizes. Aussie Rules - they have an Oval pitch which varies in size.

Some honest feedback in no particular order: Clicking on many different icons simply in the hope of finding a clue isn't particularly stimulating: click - no clue, don't bother reading, click on another, and another... Maybe it didn't help that I guessed the country after the first hit, but went on to search the other clues to see how the game played out. Having identified the country it's simple to just hover the mouse round the country until it changes to a clickable icon without needing to know where the site is within the country, this would be a different case for some larger countries though. The link for the free T-shirt is just generic, so I could share it with my friends (or sock accounts) in the hope of them getting a T-shirt without them having to play the game. Don't be so USA centric - "Half the length of a Football field"! what kind of Football? They're not all the same size you know I'd rather see the effort put into the basics of Geocaching, fixing the outstanding issues and improving the basic game, rather than inventing more sidelines that are not really anything to do with Geocaching.

It's been discussed elsewhere that the way the website calculates the % score for favourites is wrong, but I just saw something that is so wrong it's frankly bizarre. Consider this cache which I logged a find on 2 days ago: 11 finds, of which 10 are PM, and 3 favourites, so that should be either 27% or 30% depending on which count you're using, but the website shows 40% (see screenshot)! Then when I went to add an FP to my log from 2 days ago it records my FP, so now 4 out of 11 or 10 finds , which should be 36% or 40% but it now calculates it to be 30% (see screenshot). Whatever method is being used to work out the percentage how on earth can adding an FP (without adding a log entry) lower the % score

I suspect it's you, the website is fine for me right now, and I haven't seen it down for many months and I'm a fairly regular visitor to the website.

For the record I installed 0.8.2.2As.4 a few days ago and worked perfectly, and just installed 0.8.2.2As.5 and it's working fine too. The minimap started working for me at some point, I think it was before I installed the newer versions but may have been as a result of a clear cookies and cache which I did. From my point of view, running Firefox on Linux, the script is working perfectly.

It's not going to be so simple given that (if I've understood correctly) you would want to be looking for all caches with .000 as the Longitude part, so N45 01.000, N45 02.000,..., N45 59.000, (repeat for N40, N41,.. N50 depending on how far you're prepared to travel) then the same with the Latitude. It would be possible to setup something in GSAK if you use that. Simplest would probably be do a GSAK export of all unfound caches to a .csv (make sure you include the Latitude and Longitude columns) then open the .csv in your favourite spreadsheet app and do filters for Longitude or Latitude including ".000".

Don't know whether this is still a problem for others, but I had to clear my browser cache & cookies the other day and I noticed today that the blue line is back on the embedded map.

Did a clear cache & cookies and it's all back to normal.

Update: I'm seeing this with Firefox on Linux; Chrome on Linux is OK and so is Edge on Windows.

I don't understand what you mean by "sort code". If you mean the GC code it should be up on the top right hand corner of the page:

Same for me for most of yesterday and still the same. FWIW this is the new dashboard, the old one still works.

Found this one, which is a wheelie bin just tied in the tree with straps then covered in army camo netting. https://coord.info/GC78ANF

Would like to see pictures of the container!

I rarely use that map, so can't say for sure, but I don't think GME is active for that map and hasn't been for a couple of years. I don't see the caches placed at their corrected co-ords on that map, so this probably is a Groundspeak problem not GME. It could have been like this for ages for all I know.

I've popped a link to this in the UK Facebook group, which will have a far wider audience than here. Bit too far for me otherwise I'd have taken them.

I find it useful and I have the max range of 100km, as that then covers both home and work for me. I can see at a glance: Days with events scheduled - faint red. Select any day and see all the events listed on that day. Days with events you've logged a Will Attend are green.

I can see that, and almost relate to it, but then we'd have to agree that Earthcaches, Virtual and Labs aren't caches either, and I think the game would be poorer without them and events- Labs excluded as I consider them to be a different game altogether.

So give us your definition of a cache and we might or might not agree, but at the moment I don't... Back to the OP: If Events were to be included on that search then GS would have to: Filter out past events. Currently that search for me has about a dozen past events on the first 6 pages of the list, which would be pointless and probably confusing to newbies. Filter out future events, or at least events more than XX days in the future. At the moment the first 4 pages of that list is for caches which are in the future, some 3 months away. Having to scroll through pages (5 for me) of events which are months away before getting to the "real" caches is undesirable. Given that there's a whole section for upcoming nearby events on the Dashboard I don't see adding them to the search list would be beneficial.

Haha, so 81 it is then! When I saw your post I initialliy wondered if challenges with such trivial qualifications would be allowed, and I can see that they are/were.

So are you saying that if I find this cache of yours, I can then ask you to place, for example, a D1 T5 Large cache up a tree? You would be the CO of the new cache, so I can then go find it to fill that gap in my 1/5, large, tree climbing challenge? I could see this might become very onerous for you as all sorts of weird combos come in.

I agree it's a little confusing, I found it easier to work out exactly what you're aiming for just by looking at the checker output (I got 23) rather than reading the text. Personally I'd just skip it if I had to work it out manually and while it could be done it would be way too much work. If you're excluding the Virtual size (why?) then I think you should also drop Not Chosen, as it's not possible to create a cache with that size any more, and any cache page that does have it and then gets edited will have the size changed to Unknown automatically by the system, so these are disappearing rapidly. I had a challenge which I was qualified for requiring 7 cache sizes in a day, but by the time I got to go find it the cache which had previously been not chosen had been updated and automatically changed to Unknown so I was nolonger qualified. Having said all that it's an interesting twist so a shame it wasn't published, maybe simplifying the description might be enough to get it over the line - good luck.