drewmm

It'll also save you battery because your iPhone won't be querying the map databanks over the cell network as much.

It's funny how everyone complains when questions are reasked, but then they take the time to answer them anyways.

"High potential for Personal Injury" So does licking frozen metal poles, put I don't need people telling me that or having a warning sign posted on all metal poles in the world!!! The solution is clearly banning all freezing temperatures. Just a theory but this is what I think is happening here. Dad goes geocaching but mom is a muggle. Dad says he's taking daughter caching Mom says "No way! It's dangerous" Dad says he will only take her to kid friendly caches. Mom and dad argue for a half hour and dad assures mom that caching where it says "kid friendly" is 100% safe. Mom finally relents with a scowl and a firm warning that if anything happens, it's his head on a platter. Dad and daughter go caching and daughter gets scratched. Mom does full body inspection on daughter to make sure she's OK and sees scratch. Dad assumes defensive stance as pots and pans are hurling at him. Dad argues that it's not his fault and tries to explain as a cast iron frying pan connects with his skull. With blood streaming down his face he swears that "kid friendly" is supposed to mean the cache experience should have been safer than a teddy bear. Dad begs mom to stop hitting him as he starts to collapse in the corner Mom finally gets tired and begins to listen as dad promises it wasn't his fault and that he will stop at nothing to make sure this never happens to another kid. Mom reluctantly relents but tells dad that there will be no more communal nighttime togetherness until the cache is archived or the attribute is removed. And then we end up here.

Logbook was taken out with this recent update: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...e2-e9369e3f2df2 The CO seems not to realize that there are "logbooks" that can fit into 35mm's. He seems to think of logbooks as actual books. Perhaps someone could send him a polite email.

meh, I'm not so sure...google said I asked about his dog? Yeah, translate-retranslate never works very well. But unidirectional translating is usually alright.

Google Translate is very useful. All hail our masters at Google.

I've paid for what I want to use that Groundspeak has asked for money for, and respected their rules about what I can use for free. I wanted to cache from my iPhone so I ponied up the $10. The rest of it I'll use for free as Groundspeak allows, but I won't try to steal from them. You seem to have some problems with the concept of rules.

I think you got that backwards. We're relaxing just fine. We didn't start a topic ranting about how Groundspeak just screwed us over. And how did you know I owned a high horse? Can I borrow your high horse? The view must be nice. *** joke

I couldnt have said it better myself. I agree with you COMPLETELY. Like I said, had a big outing planned tomorrow... Just a little bummed, thats all. Calm down people, lets show a little restraint and not turn this into just flaming me. Thanks CX1 Flaming you? I believe all that's happening is people criticizing you for complaining about no longer being able to violate the TOU. That's not flaming, that's valid criticism brought on by a perfectly reasonable reaction to your own post.

How is it stealing? I pay (paid) for a service. Now I'm just gonna tether from my lap top. Which uses even MORE bandwidth, yet it is legal. You dont really have much of a statement here. Quit trying to flame me. I'm just a little upset, had a big day out planned tomorrow. Oh well, i'll get over it. You guys need to relax and get off your high horses once in a while. It's stealing because Groundspeak says you can't access their website using that program. Amount of bandwidth used is irrelevant. It's their things and they told you you can't access it a certain way. You did anyways. Stealing. Do you like to download torrented songs from the internet? After all, it doesn't really hurt the music labels, right? I'm sorry. It's hard to resist sometimes.

I'm so sorry that you're now finding it so difficult to steal Groundspeak's resources.

Also... no printer? Try a pencil and paper. Or, for that matter, a typewriter.

This website is not just "open to the public," it's open to the public who agree to the Terms of Use. And you were violating those Terms of Use. Pretty simple. You sound like the kind of person who downloads pirated music. True?

So, in other words, you're complaining because you were stealing Groundspeak's services and they stopped you? You might want to read the Terms of Use...

The cache you found was a blinky, I suspect, not a bison tube.

The iPhone also has a Google Earth app so you can take it on the go.

After reflecting on this some more, I realized that i've been unfairly generalizing. I really don't know how many people are just trying to donate, and there's no way for me to know. It's unfair because the people who actually are getting PMs just to donate won't be posting here exactly because they don't care what others think. So I think I'll just go with saying that many people who claim to be getting PMs just to support the site really have other motives.

http://www.geocaching.com/contact/default.aspx I'm sure they would be happy to tell you how. Check in the mail probably works. If not, I'm sure they will tell you another method. I know GS has PayPal, you can send someone money via that, right? If Groundspeak doesn't have a normal way set up to donate, it's probably because they realize thatmost people aren't interested in just donating. I was unaware that you could log PMOC from a basic account. But regardless, even if they do just use the benefits on one account, they still get the recognition and other such effects of becoming a Premium Member. In some strange way, what's going on in this thread is almost exactly what I'm talking about. I haven't criticized anyone. I haven't called anyone a liar or suggested that they've done anything wrong. But the various people who've been responded seem interested in milking their Premium Membership for all the "street cred" it's worth. All that Premium Members want to do is support the site....and make sure that everyone else knows what great, selfless people they are. After looking more into the donating thing, I will acknowledge that it's not obvious how to do so. That increases the likelihood that some (especially people who aren't very comfortable on the Internet) will be willing to get a PM as their choice of support even if $30 isn't exactly the amount they care about supporting GS. Maybe they don't care enough about supporting to make the slight additional effort to figure out how to just donate But those people are not the people on the forums who will take every possible opportunity to point out what great people they are because they get a PM just to support the site. It's not a bad thing. Seeking recognition and such from others is not wrong. But it is part of the motivation.

I'm sure that couple prefers to have two accounts rather than just one. If they just wanted to give extra money to Groundspeak they would donate the extra $30 I've never denied that people would donate. I'm sure there are PMs currently who only consider the benefits worth $10 and treat the remaining $20 as a donation. If there were no PMs those people would likely donate about $20. Are there people who would donate >$30? Maybe, but if they aren't already...why not? Purchasing a PM will never be completely a donation, just like buying Girl Scout cookies is never just a donation. Partially, yes. Completely? No.

I googled. Interesting. http://www.king5.com/news/local/Geocachers...s-95281104.html and another article http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20100531/...&news01ad=1 Probably the worst thing that has happened to this sport. News organizations feed off the ideas of others, so we'll see more of these articles that will do nothing but promote the agenda of this miscreant. That will only promote her previously obscure website and attract more of these wackos. And of course next will come the "investigative reporters" who will do everything they can to paint the sport in a bad light and exaggerate the issues. No, I'm not normally a paranoid person but I know how the media works. Just watch. Oh no. So how do we protect our caches? Maybe more multis and puzzles, even simple ones should deter most of them. For what it's worth, those storied did paint the cache maggots in a bad light.

Did you say that it was your house? I know I would be uncomfortable hunting such a cache if the cache page didn't explain that the owner of the house had given permission.

You're again basically failing to read what I wrote. My theory is not that "when all the benefits of premium membership can be had for free, nobody will pay for it anymore." Like I said, I suspect there are people who actually do just donate to Groundspeak, and of course that wouldn't stop. And even if Pocket Queries, notifications, and all that become available to anyone, there's still the bragging rights, recognition, and moral superiority benefits of a Premium Membership. I'm not accusing you of lying. Perhaps you really think you're only a PM out of a desire to support the site. But your behavior strongly suggests otherwise. Yes, it's entirely possible that someone would want to support this site out of the goodness of their heart rather than for any benefits or recognition. It's possible that the amount they want to support the site just happens to work out to exactly $30 a year. It's possible that such a person would jump into an argument like this by pointing out that they are, in fact, one of the morally superior Premium Members. Possible, but extremely unlikely. Like I said before, I'm sure that there are people who donate with no desire for benefits or recognition. We'll never know exactly who they are because they don't need recognition, of course, but I don't deny or belittle their existence/contribution. But having a Premium Membership does not make someone one of those people. I'm sure that many Premium Members are sure that they only have the membership because they want to support the site. And I'm sure that those PMs have rationalized why exactly $30/year is the right contribution. If you're one of those people, though, ask yourself: do you pay $30 a year because you want to support the site? Or is it because it's a way to support the site that lets you feel good about yourself, and feel like part of a select, higher-up community? If instead of Premium Memberships, Groundspeak had a "donate" button, would you donate exactly $30 a year? Why? ~~~ As to the actual topic of this thread. No, I don't think the smartphones will make Premium Memberships obsolete. PM's would still be helpful for off-network areas (I've run into a few really slow spots with my iPhone) as well as for caches along a route (I might get a PM soon because I'm planning a trip up north) and other PQ functionality. And, the folks at Groundspeak are smart. If being a PM looses its appeal, they'll give PMs more benefits. ~~~ A final challenge to any PM's who assert that they only have the PM to support Groundspeak and geocaching: this year, instead of paying just $30, donate an extra $5 to Groundspeak. Don't tell anyone you did so. Just do it. If you feel so strongly about supporting this, and aren't just getting a PM for the benefits/bragging rights, give them a few extra dollars. I won't know who you are, obviously, but you'll have my respect.

"Age of consent" is defined by the law in Canada, but it has nothing to do with geocaching or using the internet! Fair enough, I shouldn't speak so broadly. It's different in every jurisdiction, of course. In Michigan it's much more complex with varying ages and all that. Anyways, this is getting more and more off topic.

I use only my iPhone and I've done various different types of caches, including wooded areas.

People who think 16 year olds can't maintain a cache must have been pretty sad children. There has been so much mangling of legal terms in this thread (mosly by the OP) that it's just hilarious. 18 is not the age of consent, it is the age of majority in many countries. The age of consent is a loose concept, not even really a legal term at all. COPPA has nothing to do with the age of 18. The cut off when it comes to COPPA is 13. When it comes to COPPA, I assume GS knows what it's doing and I don't know why you care, because it doesn't affect your life.