Jump to content

Dame Deco

+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dame Deco

  1. Thank you thank you thank you for posting this! Exactly! ETA: went through and read the Australia logs--it's a total bait and switch. And I had the exact same reaction in Ohio--? container, 2.5 D, cache description--I was excited to go look for it, then it's a total dud. Nice to know that's how they feel down under, too. Sick joke, indeed.
  2. I do believe he told you that it was Team Sagebrushers. Don't bother using the site search--just google geocaching and Team Sagebrushers. They had 24,000 caches in Nevada and other parts west. I'm not sure I agree that it's the same situation. But I really hate a 1000-cache series that's only growing and spreading with fake D/T ratings.
  3. Anybody who simply looked at the account before publishing one of the caches in Europe could have seen that there were over 500 caches placed the same day with the exact same D/T rating and almost no favorite points. But...probably not their job. This is more about Groundspeak than the reviewers. Pretty nice racket for them--volunteer reviewers,volunteer hiders, volunteer finders...all they have to do is rake in the cache by selling merchandise. I don't want to derail the thread, though--this is just a response to Nira.
  4. We're just grumbling a bit with like-minded people. That is one of the purposes of a forum, is it not? No despair needed on your part, nor on ours.
  5. Brother, these ain't that! But, yes, I understand the difficulties of your job.
  6. I guess I just think it's one thing to have a joke high D cache or two, and of course people make mistakes. But to have a whole series of "most awesome of all time" with fake DTs that are mostly guard rails and LPCs--and spreading from Ohio to the world? Meh... Now that they are spreading so widely, they are more and more likely to be among newbies first caches. They might think the hobby is lame. I would think Groundspeak wouldn't be happy about that. I just don't think this series is any great ambassador for the sport. They should have kept it corralled as a local thing.
  7. I understand. So the hobby is a bit of a farce...
  8. Can you tell my why this account is allowed to publish hundreds and hundreds of caches with completely fake D/T ratings? All are rated 2.5 difficulty when the vast majority are simple LPCs. It's total baloney that makes the whole hobby look like a farce.
  9. A few years ago, a I had a HUGE rubber ducky collection that I got from caches! Now it helped that we had a local cacher who liked to leave rubber ducks! But I found them all across the US, too. It was a lot of fun being on the look out for them.
  10. I agree with you 100%! I should have done the multi-quote thing--I was responding to someone who quoted me, etc.--the person seemed to imply that ammo cans were for kids only, etc. I love larger containers and wish everything in the woods was an ammo can! There's nothing like opening up an ammo can in the woods and seeing what's inside--
  11. Why bother with ammo cans, then? Or do you? If you're saying that your higher terrains are smalls and micros, that's fine. But you're kind of misrepresenting the point of my post which is simply to say that an ammo can doesn't guarantee anything about the cache--didn't back then, doesn't now.
  12. I started caching in 2010. The number of wet, moldy logs outnumbered the number of nice, dry ones even then. Also--found plenty of trash in larger caches, as well as empty ammo cans with nothing but a log. And as for more hiking back then, that's generally true, perhaps--but I always point to Mingo as proof of truly lame places for a cache right from the start.
  13. Buttermilk--the thrill of something so old and linked to the earliest days of US History, https://www.geocaching.com/mark/details.aspx?PID=LX4113 Dayton Harris Gravity Station--the rarest kind of disk, and it's in the middle of Death Valley! I was FTF on a benchmarking challenge (find 10 of the 11 kinds of disks), but darn it I just didn't want to find them all even though I'd already completed the challenge! I had a great trip to Nevada and California and explored Death Valley just so I could find that benchmark, https://www.geocaching.com/mark/details.aspx?PID=GS0206
  14. Louisville, KY--lots by Show Me the Cache
  15. Virtuals can't be adopted. Not sure what you are referring to. How could people scramble for his virtuals?
  16. Wow! What a great site! Thanks so much for posting this! I do miss the old app, I loved that app. But this site is very helpful, love it!
  17. I haven't been getting email about messages for a while now--have to check the message center when I get an EC log but no email. Hope this gets fixed.
  18. much like geocaching? According to my mother, anyway-- lol! It's not really pointless--I don't think GS would reinstate it. I'm not sure the person would even appeal the deletion. It just seems like common sense that you log caches after you find them. Anything else is a farce.
  19. I would personally delete the log. The person could appeal to Groundspeak, Groundspeak could reinstate it, and then I would just let it go and forget about it. Deleting it would satisfy my understanding of geocaching--visit, then log. If the powers that be reinstated it, I would shrug and try to forget about it. But at least I would be true to myself. I have had 12 EarthCaches published.
  20. I advise deleting it. They didn't actually do your Earthcache because you hadn't even created it yet. Letting someone log an EC even if they missed a question or two after making an honest effort after visiting is one thing, allowing someone to give only half the answers based on a visit from years ago is totally different. Apples and oranges. It isn't truly ONLY about the lesson--perhaps the lesson is 90-95% of it. But it isn't geocaching if folks can just log any virtual or EC they like because they visited the spot years before. That's sort of a farce. Folks can cheat, but if they flat out say they're cheating, then delete their log. You worked hard to create that EarthCache, folks who want to claim it as a find should also put the effort in to visit and answer your questions.
  21. Don't bushwhack until you're absolutely sure no trail will take you closer by curving around, etc. I've gotten into a lot of poison ivy, prickers, and like that by bushwhacking way before I needed, too. Most geocaches aren't really that far off the trail--some are, but most aren't. Read previous logs for the caches and see what folks say. A direct route is often not the best route.
  22. I'm sorry to say that the geocaching.com database is a snapshot only from one point in time, I think, and very incomplete. It's not uncommon at all to find benchmarks that aren't in the gc.om database.
  23. If you drive to the top of Pikes Peak--you've got a view, a virtual, an EarthCache, a traditional, and some cool benchmarks.
  24. I always start with virtuals and earthcaches--pick ones I want. Then I look for oldies in the area--any earlier than 2004? Then I go to favorite points. Also--look for larges and regular ones. Then I pick up whatever is close to what I want. Any charter members in the Denver area? Look for caches by the oldtimers. Those are my starting points, then I take any P&Gs I want along the way.
  • Create New...