TerraViators

I do not know the answer to your first question. However, and I do not condone the practice, you can only *illegally* shoot them.

That's an excellent illustration.

I haven't heard this as a hard and fast guideline. If it is, does anybody know the details? Library multi-caches are popular and I wouldn't see a problem unless it is perceived as an agenda.

Aren't many reviewers dogs?

Hi, this is very last minute, but I'm hoping cachers in the NOLA area could hook me up with a couch tonight. I'll be arriving around midnight. If possible, please let me know. Thank you.

But you move earthcaches.. shame shame. Please explain. How does one move an earthcache?

This is not a guideline change. There are no guidelines for D/T ratings. As Keystone noted, ratings are not currently policed. We only offer suggestions and guidance, such as what is found in the Help Center. The reason for the update to the Help Center article relates to the Geocaching Intro app. The Intro app allows users to tap on the D or T number to see an explanation for the particular D or T. Before, we only had descriptions for whole numbers. We needed to write descriptions that included the half-number ratings. Which is what led to the updated D and T descriptions. Since they are going to be added to the app, it only made sense to update the Help Center page for uniformity. If this were a major guideline change, I would agree it should be communicated broadly. But that's not the case here. However, I do agree that it is often appropriate to add a "Last Updated" date to Help Center articles. I'll see about adding it to the page in question. I have proof that terrain ratings have been policed by a GS reviewer in my state. I've been told to change a T rating. Just saying.

I'll give the finder about a week to submit answers due to busy schedules, vacations, etc. After that, I'll send an email reminding them to submit the answers. Depending on the feedback I receive, I make a decision to delete the log or not delete it. Sometimes, they are new and don't understand. I'll cut those folks some slack, especially if I see proof they actually visited the site and will explain earthcaches. Sometimes, new people are confused about how to submit answers. Seasoned cachers don't get the same treatment. If you're lazy or too arrogant to believe the rules don't apply, then your log is deleted.

I once encountered an officer who just wanted to be difficult. I gave him the brochure and he said any criminal could print one of these out. I told him I agreed but if I was going to do that, I would have made up something more impressive and printed a fake brochure about it instead of a GPS game. He had his partner hold me while he, as he said, "checked the spot I was in because he'd look foolish if it was later discovered that I hid drugs or a corpse there." I didn't find the cache. I assured his he wouldn't find drugs or a corpse but if he happened to find the container if he would please bring it out for me." He didn't see the humor in that.

I found 270 in one day and that was exhausting and took all day.

You have some good thoughts. However, regarding marbles, I know a cacher who absolutely loves to trade for marbles.

You have some good thoughts. However, regarding marbles, I know a cacher that absolutely loves to trade for marbles.

I suspect it has something to do with qualifying for challenges. I suspect it has something to do with mosquitoes. I can see the mosquito thing if the person signs the end of the scroll instead of unwinding it to the proper spot. But if they unwind a scrolled log to place their signature halfway where others have already signed and not include a date makes me think it's done so they can log it with whatever date fills their grid. I disagree. I believe if a geocacher is going to be dishonest with their find date on the e-log, they're going to be even if they use the correct date on the physical log. Moreover, I often do not date the log sheet as I don't see the relevance. However, I do accurately date the e-log. It's akin to some geocachers having hang-ups about signing the log themselves when in a group. I don't care who writes my username on the log, but I go out with folks who not only care about it, but insist on using their own colored ink.

+1

It may seem nuts to some people but to the geocacher who thoroughly enjoys it, it is an actual vacation. For example, perhaps one enjoys fishing, so they take a few days to fish a specific spot on a lake but never venture into the city to visit the museums, galleries, restaurants, etc. It doesn't make the fishing trip a negative venture. Also, maybe they only have three or four days available for the geoart/power trail and no extra time for other things. It's all relative.

...you see a grave marker in a cemetery on TV and you search findagrave.com to find the cemetery and check for geocaches.

I enjoy looking at stats and reading about a geocacher equally.

With over 5,600 finds, I don't qualify for many challenge caches. Some I have qualified for before I even knew it, but it's still fun for me.

This is a refreshingly honest answer to the question. For many, it has become an online rather than offline game. Myself included. Although I enjoy the outdoor aspect, I am often influence to take an "on to the next one" approach as I compete with myself and friends. That competition doesn't always allow for good laid-back strolls down a trail.

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large? . I know that they do this all the time, emmett, and I have done enough research to convince myself that a few nails are not going to kill a tree. But that is not the point, and you've been around here long enough to know that. The point is land manager perception. A few years ago, an entire city was banned for about two years from placing any goecaches because a land manager saw a fake birdhouse nailed to a tree. It happens. I agree. A nail in a tree is not going to hurt it. Heck, I've seen trees growing completely around a t-post or rebar. They're going strong to this day. Now, if the tree objects, that's a different story.

I would accept that. For me, the physical log is irrelevant. If I believe you found my geocache then that's all I need.

Off topic a bit, but Cape Cod is a mighty find place to spend the summer days geocaching.

You do not have to alter anything. If I see a Challenge I do not find interesting, I just don't do it. I really don't care if there's a 1000 day streak cache down the street from my house. Why do people feel they need to find everything out there. There are plenty of lamp post caches around here that I dislike even more. I don't sit here and bitch about them. I simply ignore them. Exactly. I have never understood that argument. You don't have to find everything. There is a great mechanism in place...the ignore list. Sorry, but the ignore list isn't as great as advertised. Caches can only be added to an ignore list one by one. In one of these threads someone mentioned that they had 700 challenge caches within 30 miles of their home location. Why should someone that doesn't want to find a certain type of cache have to go through the process of adding each cache, everytime a cache of that type is published? An ignore list doesn't stop notifications of new cache of a type one has no intention of finding from getting sent their email. Not only does someone have to go through the process of adding these caches to an ignore list they have to delete the 700 email message from their inbox. Then there is the simple fact that ignoring something doesn't make it go away. Ignore a cache only hides it from pocket queries, displaying on the map, etc. It doesn't stop it from impacting the game in general. Challenge caches definitely do have an impact on the game, even when some people ignore them, and that impact is not always positive. Finally, it's really easy for someone that likes a certain type of cache to tell someone else to just ignore them. However, that completely dismisses the concerns someone has about said cache type. Although on an entirely different scale it's sort of like a rich person telling a poor person to ignore the fact that they have no money and can't afford food. I understand your points and they are a valid concern for many geocachers. But you can apply those arguments to any cache type. For instance, if I don't like tree climbs, which can impact the game, I don't expect Groundspeak to make it easy for me to deal with them on the map, in e-mail notifications or PQs. My only option is to ignore them. I do believe being able to ignore a group of caches in a polygon by a specific attribute would be very nice. Maybe it's time to finally allow an ignore hider function. Hundreds of (to you or me) carp hides could be ignored in one click, instead of hundreds. Now you're on to something.

You do not have to alter anything. If I see a Challenge I do not find interesting, I just don't do it. I really don't care if there's a 1000 day streak cache down the street from my house. Why do people feel they need to find everything out there. There are plenty of lamp post caches around here that I dislike even more. I don't sit here and bitch about them. I simply ignore them. Exactly. I have never understood that argument. You don't have to find everything. There is a great mechanism in place...the ignore list. Sorry, but the ignore list isn't as great as advertised. Caches can only be added to an ignore list one by one. In one of these threads someone mentioned that they had 700 challenge caches within 30 miles of their home location. Why should someone that doesn't want to find a certain type of cache have to go through the process of adding each cache, everytime a cache of that type is published? An ignore list doesn't stop notifications of new cache of a type one has no intention of finding from getting sent their email. Not only does someone have to go through the process of adding these caches to an ignore list they have to delete the 700 email message from their inbox. Then there is the simple fact that ignoring something doesn't make it go away. Ignore a cache only hides it from pocket queries, displaying on the map, etc. It doesn't stop it from impacting the game in general. Challenge caches definitely do have an impact on the game, even when some people ignore them, and that impact is not always positive. Finally, it's really easy for someone that likes a certain type of cache to tell someone else to just ignore them. However, that completely dismisses the concerns someone has about said cache type. Although on an entirely different scale it's sort of like a rich person telling a poor person to ignore the fact that they have no money and can't afford food. I understand your points and they are a valid concern for many geocachers. But you can apply those arguments to any cache type. For instance, if I don't like tree climbs, which can impact the game, I don't expect Groundspeak to make it easy for me to deal with them on the map, in e-mail notifications or PQs. My only option is to ignore them. I do believe being able to ignore a group of caches in a polygon by a specific attribute would be very nice.

So that plain old park and grab at the same location is somehow much better because you had to jump through hoops just to be allowed to log it as found? Colour me bewildered And really HOW does that challenge make the game more interesting? Consider the two options: 1. Go out and find a bunch of caches because you want to. 2. Go out and find a bunch of caches because a challenge says you have to - then go and sign the log on that plain old park and grab. What did option 2 add to the experience to make it more interesting? Oh yeah - that plain old park and grab at the end. Logic like that I just can't take seriously. I believe you have misunderstood tomturtle's post. I agree with him. I find a challenge cache much more interesting. I enjoy the challenge of it. It's not about what I found to qualify, it's about completing the challenge. The basic novelty of finding caches have worn off for me. It's like betting on a sporting event. If you have a vested interest in the outcome, it's more exciting. I see. Could you explain how you think I've misunderstood tomturtle's post and we'll see if you're right? Sure, I'll bite. I believe your answer was in your question. Yes, that plain old park and grab challenge cache is more interesting to him than the plain old park and grab caches he found to qualify for the original plain old park and grab challenge. I suppose you didn't misunderstand it. You nailed it. Well I'd say one of us has defnintely read tomturtle's original post wrong. I don't think it's me. He refers to a single cache in a single location and how that cache is much more interesting if it's a challenge cache and I still maintain that there's no logical reason why it should be. It's quite possible I misunderstood tomturtle's post. I'm not very good at this game. In my opinion, the reason the single cache (the challenge cache) is more interesting than a plain old park and grab in the same location has nothing to do with the location. It has to do with the challenge aspect only. The location is irrelevant to him. Like eating a hamburger in the park for lunch everyday could be mundane, but I'll bet that same hamburger in that same park is much more satisfying if you haven't eaten in three days. It's not about the hamburger, it's about how it satisfies you.