infiniteMPG

Personally if you wanted the spot then a quick email to the owner asking their intent would settle it for me. If they wrote back they're working on the replacement, I'd move on. If they didn't reply.... pounce! More someone who circles over a problem hide hoping that the owner will archive and as soon as they do, they pounce on it with no consideration for the previous owner when the previous owner made their intent to replace publicly known. It's not a "bad" thing to do or a "wrong" thing to do, more an unethical thing to do.

A game but in many ways, far from "silly" Have logs of caches not far from interstate highways that are posted "not accessible from interstate" yet someone without the listing page pulled off, jumped a couple fences, pushed their way past cattle, and bushwhacked thru stuff they should never of had to in order to make the find (and then turn around and do it all again to return to their car). That I don't mind at all.... they made the challenge more then I intended, and wrote one of the most fun logs I have read. The fundamental issue here can be shown with this example : You visit an area for a couple days for business and run a PQ and see a puzzle cache listed very near your hotel. You note that it's been found 25 times in the last couple months and the last time the day before, so when you arrive you take it on. You burn thru all the paper supplied in your room and start ripping thru your work pads and burn up the wi-fi in your room, also noting it was found a couple more times while you were there by rookie cachers with less then a handful of finds. As soon as you're out of your business meeting, you're at it again. After a frustrating couple of days wasted trying to figure it out, you log your DNF, hang your head and fly home. A couple days later you find out that the brother of the owner saw the coords writen down in his brother's bedroom. Being part of a large group of local cachers he immediately emailed the coords to all his buddies who all went out and snagged the find. Turns out the puzzle is impossible because of some mistake in the logic. Do you think back at your days of struggle and think "Oh well, the object of the game is finding the container by any means available and that's what they did"?

Never underestimate the disgusting habits of the ignorant.... If it was a cacher you may end up with problems like this again. If it was a nearby muggle and you don't move it very far, once again you'd be tempting fate. Since the original container was replaced it would appear whomever did it, had time to pull off the switch. How well was it hidden and how remote is the cemetary? Someone had to discover it and if hidden at all would of been during daylight. And doubt the switch was done during the day as preparing the replacement would of been a little odd to observe, so there was some planning in this. Doesn't appear to be a random spur of the moment thing. You might have a local GC prankster so keep in touch with other local cachers and see if they get hit, too. GC is not immune to the dirty side of humantiy.

Next weeks winner will be Miss Tree

Legally as soon as it's archived it's toast and the spot is open but ethically and morally you grant the owner the first dibbs. IMHO if I own a cache and have the spot and was going to archive it and replace it, I'd only deactivate the cache, hide the new one, and then archive the old one at the same sitting when I post the new one. That way you don't have to worry about vultures circling over your hiding spot. And I am sure there are vultures out there. Some people will take offense but still better to give them the benifit of a doubt and try to help. Here in west central Florida, this time of year is when the weather worthiness gets tested. I have seen people plop a 35mm film canister at the bottom of a tree just laying on the ground between the roots and only covered with pine needles. The first 4" gully washer day we have that thing is going to be in a new zip code. But all you can do is offer advice. If they don't take it we can't take offense as some people just need to learn the hard way. But feel good you're considerate enough to try to help.

I agree that as the owner of a cache you are setting out a challenge and not following the "rules" of the challenge means the owner has the "right" to delete the log. Not saying they will or have to, but they legitimately "can". I recall a thread recently about someone logging the FTF in a park outside the normal park hours and the log was deleted. The owner was actually protecting the future of GC in their area as people violating local rules or laws to access a cache can impact the acceptance of GC in their area. Same kind of goes with the cache in question GC1EP0Z "Ready Oar Knot". Nothing around it but high priced homes and a golf course. And even getting thru someone's yard you'd have some pretty dense bushwhacking and steep banks to get thru (not counting the water). The launch at the lodge is at N 27° 24.729 W 082° 26.917 and the public launch is at N 27° 25.910 W 082° 28.866 so you can see there's a big difference in the paddling from those. If I change this one I'd end up probably archiving it and moving it slightly and re-listing it as a multi. I like the tag idea, that takes a lot of the math away from someone sitting in a 'yak. It kind of comes down to the fundamentals of geocaching. Is the theme of the game to simply find a container or to conquer the challenge set out by the owner? If it's just finding the container then where do you draw the line at what is acceptable to just find the container? Calling the last logger and finding out exactly where it is without doing the stages or hunting for the camoed container? I think the game is conquering the challenge as much (if not more then) making the find. I agree with taking a shortcut you figured out, or finding a little easier apporach then others (which is why I won't balk at someone launching from the lodge), or somehow stratigically thinking and figuring out your best approach is totally acceptable as long as you still hold true to the theme of the challenge. If an owner posts the hint AT THE END OF THE FENCE UNDER THE ONE BIG OAK TREE then that's the challenge they put out. If another owner makes subtle hints, evil camo and tricky text then that's their challenge. Cachers are trying to tackle the cache's challenge, not just find the container which is the final stage of each challenge. Which is also why I feel the FTF is the FTF within the theme of the challenge. Not that they live next door to a cacher and saw them hiking off with an ammo can so they followed them and saw where they hid it. But then again, that's just IMHO and to each his/her own.

Been there and seen it. Got a local puzzle cache I've had people email me quit a few times on since over the last several months my FTF is the only find. If the owner wants to make it easier then that's what they'd do, I'm not about to turn my days of number crunching and brain bustin' turn into a PAG for someone else. Now if it was my cache I might save someone from going iNsAnE by helping a tad but if it ever got circulated I'd probably not do it again. Yup.... mutli's do serve a purpose and I enjoy putting them out. But then again one of my better camo jobs seemed to of gotten bypassed somehow when a log sounded like someone couldn't find stage 2 of 3 but somehow still found the final hmmmmmm

Never going to insist anyone do anything with my hides except enjoy them and hide them back correctly, but with a couple hundred hides for years I have still only deleted one log and that was for harsh language. Doubt I'll change this one but consider a lesson learned. It's still almost 2 miles one way from the shorter private launch, so it's still not easy. And if someone tries to access it from land, the only place is in the middle of a golf course and it's on the other side and steep banks and they'll probably not enjoy the rest of their game. I also disagree with the automatic 5 terrain on paddle caches and I use the difficulty as a measure of the paddle. I don't mind seeing a 1.5/5 a few hundred feet from the launch, and a 5/5 that takes a half a day to reach. Makes me glad the ratings of caches aren't posted as part of a user's stats on the GC site

6 mike yak trip in west central Florida during the rainy/stormy/lightning season probably isn't going to see a quick FTF.... but you never know with some FTF hounds around here and then again, I paddled it to place it. And for some strange reason I think my local reviewer is aware of this conversation More of a curiosity then a care. If I beat myself up for a find because it's some 5/5 or something and then find out the people before me or after me jumped a fence or tresspassed somewhere or something like that and snagged it in 2 minutes I'd feel a little slighted. I like the challenge and feel good about cutting 1/8 mile off a hike or paddle because of a shortcut, but to turn an all day hike into a PAG kind of yanks the carpet out from under the owner's intent. I can see the point as this is a bit of a strategy game as well as a hide-and-seek game, and if someone figures a quicker way to something then I guess they had a better strategy. In most cases when I read logs of people altering their approach it's usually them making it harder and not easier. But some rich person getting air lifted to the top of the mountain by private chopper still get's 'em a smilie but I think taking credit for a 5/5 isn't too ethical.

Didn't think about making it a multi and that would be pretty easy to do. I already have the cache hidden at the extreme end of the river and it's published so wouldn't work to make that the final for a multi as anyone who PQ'ed in the last couple days would have the coords (but that could be changed). I have a couple paddle only caches along the river already and I could move this and make it a bonus (mystery) cache, too. My problem with mystery caches is that if one of the pre-bonus caches disappears then they can't find the bonus either. I like the idea of the final at the launch but the problem is there is already a cache there and I doubt I could get 1/10th mile away (via land) but the launch is actually on a decent sized lake so I am sure I could find a paddle spot for it. This could be gotten around, too as someone could launch at the lodge, find this cache, load the boat up and drive to the launch and find the final, but I guess that's about the same work as doing the paddle but a lot less scenic... I am thinking best bet would be use landmarks as clues along the way to get the coords to the final which will be the existing cache relocated slightly. That way I don't have to place things along the paddle trip, just go off existing things. Got me thinking.... and thinking if I want to change it I need to paddle out and move it. Might just chaulk it off as lesson learned as it's still a 4 mile round trip from the lodge and pretty narrow paddling, too. Is it possible to make it a mystery cache or something and let people find it but request they email me information to get credit? Like at such-and-such coords what is there or how many somethings? Is that allowed (if a non-traditional cache)?

I know there's not much (short of deleting logs) that we owners can do about this, but I wanted to bounce this out there and see the general GC public's opinions. I have several paddle only caches placed along a nearby river that's a nice paddle. In an attempt to salvage some sanity a few days ago after massive manual labor at home during "vacation" time I decided to explore further upstream. I found that what I used to think was the furthest point to paddle to about 4 miles out, actually was not. This spot is an old hunting/fishing lodge that is now a local icon restaurant. I now found I could get almost another 2 miles upstream. This was a beautiful part of the river and very remote so I placed a challenge paddle-only cache to challenge other to make the 6 mile trek upstream. The lodge has a small boat ramp that's listed for customers and is only used by people who head upstream from the one public boat launch in canoes, kayaks or small fishing boats to stop in for lunch or a cold one. I just got an email from someone who stated they think they can get special permission from someone they know at the lodge to launch their canoe from there. The difficulty and terrain are rated for the challenge. My gripe is that the deep cache was placed as a boating challenge from the public launch and I doubt the general caching paddling public can launch from there. Kind of the same if someone got permission a few hundred feet away to launch from someone's house, or wandered thru the woods and waded in the water to find it on foot. I discussed this with them and they understand my position to keep it a paddle challenge. Another example is a cache a friend has that's an 11 mile hike (or tough mountain bike) deep to the far edge of a 5,700 acre preserve. The land on the far side of the preserve is farmland and if someone got special permission to drive thru their farmland for a little they could take this tough challenge and turn it into a PAG. My gripe is I know people can do what they want but short of deleting logs, how can we word or request that the challenge is tackled and that someone doesn't shortcut it? Is it "legal" (by GC rules) to ask someone for info along the paddle to confirm that they DID the challenge? Or at the least imply that you might request some info to confirm the find? Especially for the FTF. Does that make it a puzzle or mystery cache or how else can you protect your challenges????? Would be nice if we could have options for difficulty or terrain so someone finding a way around a difficult challenge wouldn't get credit for finding a high rated cache or getting a FTF on it. Opinions???

Well, in our area we tend to have a lot of micros in free town paper boxes, and micros under lamp post skirts, nearly every bus stop in town, and oh yeah, can't forget the nanos stuck to the bottom of the benches. I think that's a common issue which is why I really like the full sized Lock-n-Lock hide I recently put out right in the busiest part of town amongst the micros and nanos What it kind of boils down to is to hide the type of caches you'd like to find and hopefully they breed by inspiring other local cachers to follow suit when they see how much fun they are.

Don't want to rock the boat but since things are being re-vamped, any possibility to get the list of MINE under CACHES for MY ACCOUNT could have an option to display in ALPHABETICAL order rather then sorted by LAST FOUND date? Us owners of several hundred caches often have to pull up our own cache listings for various reasons and it would be really nice to get an alphabetical list rather then having to call them up and then do a SEARCH in IE7. Even caches in a series with typical name beginings are all over the screen since the only sort option is by date last found. Humbly asking.... And I sure as heck don't envy you guys right now Good luck and happy caffeination

Thanks but I was just testing on a temp page (which was not HTML before but it was the only way I could play with the code and see how it did coming from GC) just to see if the height=??? code would alter the row height in IE. It does. I also agree but this is a table on one of Cooker's puzzle caches, not mine. Was just trying to help them find a quick fix to get the cache back up into a useable condition. They could probably find a balance between font size and row height and get it to work for now. FF displays it fine, IE "used" to display it fine. But it's odd because I have puzzle caches using the same type table coding with no height callout and the text displays fine. May also be a function of the font. And IMHO they should go with all UPPER CASE for charts and tables like that, keeps the characters all along the same horizontal lines.... Thanks!!!

Just used one of my currently deactivated caches as a test base and found that the row height over-ride does work. From the example from Cooker above, I made the line calls in the HTML code be <tr height=40> and this is the result : Might play with the height setting but looks like that's at least a temp fix for most of the HTML IE7 table issues....

You can override default row height with the <tr height=???> line, is there any way to try to see if we just define a specific row height it will force the row to the height we want?

Totally cool.... in the search by city or zip code, I typed in LITTLE MANATEE RIVER STATE PARK, FL and if zoned right in on geocaches at the state park..... me like!!!! KUDOS!!!!!

Maybe on http://www.geocaching.com/track/ it's time to get rid of the link to : SEARCH. RECOVER. WIN. Thanks for visiting the Jeep 4x4 Geocaching Challenge! The 2007 challenge has ended...we'll have announcements of the monthly winners and grand prize winners in a few weeks.

Kind of strange because I have a mystery cache and the code is also an HTML table very similar to Cooker's but the table displays fine. GCZKPB

That's odd, but I think these are a lot of little quirks they'll be working out. Just like your puzzle cache, when I copied the source and created a local HTML page to look at what was going on, it was screwed up on the GC page in IE7 but when I looked at the same code in IE7 but not thru GC it looked fine. Go figure. Might for for the "weekend" you are sure to be putting in

Also, when I go to your profile page, your profile image is waaaaay pushed to the right and slides off the main listing page before I can even start to shrink the window. Yet when I go to my profile page, my image appears about the same size by my image slides way over when I shrink the window. Not sure if that's because it's me looking at my image, but something funky seems to be going on there.

Not an expert here but in yoru HTML code when you do your table, you're not defining the height of the table rows so you're letting the browser decide it for you. Maybe take your row definition lines from your table that state : <tr> and change them to be something like <tr height=70> and see if that forces the browser to display the proper height. Just a thought.

Been toying around the new sight and a couple observations (not complaints as I understand this is fresh outta the box and some tweaking is going on behind the scenes as I noticed the GC logo now fully appears in the top left when it was only partially appearing on cache listing pages this morning). - Some of us compose our listing pages and spend time finding a good background image but now the listing text box appears to be set to a larger percentage of the window and this almost totally blocks out the background image. Used to be you had some of the background showing but now it's pretty much just a border around the egde. And the old site the background would load and there was a slight lag for the listing to load and it was nice to see the entire screen as the background image and then the cache listing popped over top of it. With the current scheme there's not much gain in providing background images. - This is just an observation. When you have an HTML listing page and there are images on the listing page, when you shrink the window width down the menu boxes such as Navigation, Attributes, Inventory, etc. will run against the edge of the embedded image and stop, causing them to seem to extend over the background. When you are on a plain text listing page these menu boxes keep sliding in. I can shrink a plain text listing page down to around 750 pixels wide and still have full side menus. With a 600 pixel wide image on an HTML page when I get down to about 1000 pixels wide the menu windows start slipping off the side of the page EXAMPLE Not sure how that will work with someone on a 800 pixel display as the side menus on an HTML page might not show at all (or they may have to side scroll to them). Just something to check on. - Appears the text on many pages has too much white space, too much space between the characters and the lines, causing it to take a lot more realestate to display the same text. - Also agree it's not really uniform the way you can display an image from a log directly over the log listings but if you display them from the gallery they open a whole new window. - Link text on account page allowes you to instantly search for caches from your home coordinates. Then there is a link to do the search again but FILTER OUT FINDS. Even though it only says it's filtering out "finds" it also filters out "owned". A good thing but might want to add that in the text so people know. Nice look and more modern feel. Good work!!! Read some blurbs about a rating system incorporated in the new page, was this just rumor or is that coming?

Brain damage????? DANG! All this time I was blaming it on old age

The current rating system is based on only one person's opinion, the owner. If there was even a basic user applied rating system then it could help in some situations as I am sure have been discussed here previously. Such as the owner who places a cache and his teenage son can scamper to the cache like nothing so he rates it kid friendly. The next cacher along has a 6 year old who can't even get to the hide with help from their parents. Also it would help flag caches that sound nice on paper but when you arrive are a shabby Tupperware box thrown under a bush off the side of the road with no allure to the area. Ratings for creativity, uniqueness of the surroundings, child friendliness, technique or other things would be nice. And they could get some skewed ratings but it would settle out after a quantity of finds. Also at times locations degrade from increasing muggle activities or areas get trashed and the ratings by users would reflect that trend. And from an owner point of view, I would use it to see what caches people like more then others and plan future hides along that methodology as what I think is a good hide might not be what the majority think. And only allow ratings entered via a note, find or DNF on a cache site so someone can't go in and secretly load the ratings. Just my 2-1/2 cents