Clan Riffster

Shhh... That's supposed to be a secret...

This. Exactly.

It's been many, many moons since I've perused the ToU. Would stealing caches qualify as a violation? Seems like it would only apply to anyone who became a member and therefore agreed to the Terms of Use, no? In this case, since the person in question is reading cache pages, perhaps they are a member, no?

No, you did a lot more than that. You utilized this forum to express your views, (nothing wrong with that), then you pretended that some imaginary 'rules' supported your views. That's a fish of a whole other color.

I'm assuming you can cite a source for this? I've read the guidelines several times, and I can't seem to find it. Help a brother out? < meaningless text snipped for brevity > Is it clear for you now? A simple "No, I can't cite a source" would suffice.

It's been many, many moons since I've perused the ToU. Would stealing caches qualify as a violation?

I think he means something to see if you have completed a Challenge such as a DeLorme or Fizzy. You may be right. I see GeoTrekker26 found one. I didn't think there were folks out there willing to create complex challenge caches, who were too lazy to use the Groundspeak logs, and a bit of skull sweat, to see if folks actually met the challenge.

If true, please shoot me now...

I'm thinking you must really like exclamation marks... That being said, I believe your analogy falls well short of the mark. You may not be aware of this, but geocaching is a hobby, not a rigidly controlled sporting event. Whilst there are numeric values saved to your profile, with the possible exception of a few folks who are numbers oriented, these numbers are not a 'score', as they are not utilized in any officially sanctioned competition. Oh. More exclamation marks... I'm assuming you can cite a source for this? I've read the guidelines several times, and I can't seem to find it. Help a brother out? More exclamation marks? Sigh... You may be confusing a couple things. First, an unpublished cache is loggable, but only on a limited scale. The cache owner can post logs on their unpublished caches, as can Reviewers and Lackeys. Second, there is a distinct difference betwixt loggable and findable. Just because a geocache is not active on this website, does not mean it magically becomes invisible, or slips into some alternate dimension. Quite often, unpublished caches are actually out there, in the wild. If a person locates one of these, and signs the log, which log type should they utilize once the listing becomes active? I'm thinking they should use the "Found It" log type, since, well, they 'found it', but I'm open to other interpretations, so long as you can express them logically. And without excess exclamation marks...

I'm not sure what you mean? I've seen puzzle checkers, but I've never heard of a challenge checker.

I'm not sure that having more caches with periodic table element names in their titles is significantly impacting geocaching. If that were the only challenge cache type then I'd agree, however, when a significant number of people create geocaches that have no other redeeming qualities other than it can be used to help complete a challenge, that does have an impact. A significant number of people create geocaches that you probably feel have no redeeming qualities and have nothing to do with challenge caches. That's a problem with cache hiders, not with challenge caches. I'd offer a lesson in cause & effect, but I suspect you wouldn't get it.

I don't think one has much to do with the other. For instance, the cache on the International Space Station is most certainly obtainable, though, rather challenging. All one needs to log it is a ride up there, and, perhaps, a writing implement capable of operating in a zero gravity environment. Fisher makes a pen which will do the deed, or, you could just bring a pencil. I understand you can get a ride for the low, low price of 20 million dollars. I don't know if they'll throw in a set of Ginsu knives... If a cache is truly unobtainable, I think it should be archived.

It can be rather annoying, especially when one of your Faceybook 'friends' is engaged in a power run. Gobs of posts worded to the effect of, "BillyBobNosePicker found Lame Cache Run # 639", repeated ad-nauseum. I like to post my adventures as Faceybook photo albums, instead. When I log my find(s), I use a blog style format, covering the whole adventure.

That's not really an argument in favor of keeping them. After all, some folks like the idea of having event power trails. Just because some folks like something, doesn't mean it should stay.

I think it's good practice. Helpful to the community, helpful to the cache owner. Agreed. Kudos to you for checking. There are a few local caches, in spots I love to dwell, that I'll look in on from time to time. If all is well, I generally don't post anything. Maybe I should start? If there is a problem, I call the owner.

I wonder if I'm the only one who read "Spoonbridge" as "Sponge Bob"? I'd say it works well. It's a very simple puzzle format, which has been done many times before. As others have noted, a straight forward, simple puzzle can be a good thing. I'd rate it at a 1.5 for difficulty.

Puppy-Monster can...

What led you to believe this? In your two years of playing, have you never seen a cache which was archived? I hope you can accept my word when I say, under the correct circumstances, with a properly worded NA log, caches can be archived. The key to accomplishing this is two fold. First, you must adequately communicate why a particular cache needs to be archived. These notes should be specific for each cache. A boiler plate, copy/paste log, applied to a bunch of caches, will seldom get the desired results. Second, your Reviewer needs to agree that your stated reason for believing a cache should be archived meets their criteria for taking action. For instance, stating something like, "I couldn't find it. It must be missing." would likely not be sufficient grounds for an NA by any Reviewer I know. The proper log type in that case is a DNF, not an NA. You've tossed in a couple more tidbits, (cacher has moved / some caches are in poor shape), which might bump a cache from needing a DNF to needing a NM, but it's still not clear that you've reached the level of an NA. My personal criteria for posting an NA is as follows: (Assuming there are no serious guideline violations) 1 ) The cache is in serious disrepair. (A DNF does not mean a cache is missing, or needs repair) 2 ) The owner refuses to respond to NMs. (A buddy who agrees to care for it qualifies as owner maintenance) 3 ) The community is not keeping it viable. Are they missing, or are they in disrepair? We're back to square one here. Take the caches individually, and apply the proper log type, detailing your concerns in the text. If your only legitimate observation is that you couldn't find it, the proper log type is a DNF. If a cache offers more observations, (such as finding just a piece of Velcro, combined with a hint saying it's held in place by Velcro), would warrant an additional log, using the NM log type. This hypothetical example is clearly a case of a cache in need of maintenance, not a cache which needs to be archived. If your buddy was with you, and found it before, and can verify it is missing, you should post your DNF to reflect the fact that you could not find it, as well as an NM, detailing why you believe it's missing. At that point, the second stage of my criteria kicks in. You need to give the owner a reasonable amount of time to respond to your NM log. How long? That varies from Reviewer to Reviewer. Locally, I think 30 days is a good time frame for the owner to either fix it, or, at the very least, post a note to their cache page explaining their intent. After a reasonable time frame, you'll have additional observations to pass on to the Reviewer, such as, "On February 2nd, I DNFed this cache. My buddy BillyBob, who has found it in the past, verified it was missing on February 18th, so I posted an NM log. It has now been 30 days since the NM log was posted, with no action from the cache owner. This one should be archived". A log like that is quite likely to generate a response from a Reviewer, disabling the cache, giving the owner X number of days to respond. If the owner refuses to respond, the cache will likely be archived. Back to you hiding caches. Is being a cache owner something you enjoy? If so, why would you want to stop doing something you enjoy, just because you have had a problem getting some caches archived? That equates to cutting off your nose, to spite your face. Don't let the actions of others dictate an activity you enjoy.

If, in your opinion, you need to apply this petulant attitude, (I'm not getting my way, so I'll quit doing something I enjoy! Take that!), to finding caches, as well as hiding them, please remember to fill out the appropriate form: Geocide Form

I've got two out there that have yet to be found. So... Are you bored? I couldn't quite wrap my head around why The_Incredibles would 'sit around for days', (or even minutes), waiting on someone to log their cache. Do folks really do that? When I hide a cache, and get it published, whoever happens to nab the allegedly coveted FTF will generate an email with their log. I'll see the logs the next time I'm online.

How do I feel? In the west end of Paris France, somewhere around May, 1963, a young man was playing a game of solitaire. One hand wasn't going well, so this dude peeked under one of the stacks, in a bid to better his odds. I have about as much care for the way folks engage in the unsanctioned, unregulated FTF side game as I do for the aforementioned Parisian. It doesn't affect me in any way, so I really don't care. If you like, feel free to claim FTFs on all my caches. Maybe that'll make you feel better?

The phrase 'stupid needle in a haystack' is also subjective.

This! If the only reason people are coming to my event is so they can rack up a bunch of numbers, I really don't need them there. Exactly. I host events, and attend events, so I can schmooze with old friends and new ones, chatting about this quirky hobby, and occasionally playing games such as those listed by Never Summer. Not to boost my smilie count. If you do opt to archive/replace all the caches in some bid to attract the numbers crowd, please, for the love of Giai, put the new ones somewhere other than where the old ones were.

Memorable could mean many things, both positive, or negative. The cache where I tried crossing a gorge on a dead tree, which broke, halfway across, is one I'll never forget. The cache where I suffered heat stroke, and ended up unconscious, in the woods, for over 8 hours is one I'll never forget. The cache where I parked my kayak on top of a 12' alligator is one I'll never forget. The cache where I crashed my KLR-650, three times, over a stretch of about 5 miles, is one I'll never forget. But these are not necessarily positive experiences. In looking at what makes the greatest caches, for me, I see a mixture of four different elements. First, is the location. This particular preference can be fairly subjective. For instance, I absolutely love old growth cypress swamps. I could spend all day wandering around them, score nothing but DNFs, and come out perfectly content. The Appalachian Mountains is another place I could wander all day and come away happy as a clam. Wally World parking lots? Not so much. Second on my list is the container. While I'm okay with finding any quality container, (quality defined as any container which keeps its contents dry, in its posted location), I must admit a fondness for ammo cans. The feel. The clunk of the latch. The "squoosh" of the lid opening... Love it! Third, is the write up. I'm a story teller at heart. I truly enjoy a well written cache page. I suppose that's my awesome cache trifecta. You could probably add hide technique in the mix somewhere, but for me that's not a crucial element. Give me an ammo can in a nipple deep, alligator infested swamp, with a kewl story, and I won't care if you just toss a bunch of sticks on it.

This CO does not.