bflentje

So glad you are not king. All evil kings and dictators eventually fall ;-)

It's still geocaching. But that's ok.

Cool. Seen this done similarly twice. Once was my own cache several years ago.

Assuming your friend lives in the same area you do, I see places to hide caches all over the place. And it is not wrong or poor management just because you say it is. I find that most cachers that are sore about an area allegedly being "filled up" just want to take the path of least resistance and spend zero time scouting their own hiding spots. I live in one of the most cache dense cities in the country and I have no problem hiding new caches. You just have to work at it and get creative. It's not everyone else's fault you and friend may be slightly late to the game.

I didn't expect you to say anything. I am talking about my own experience. Inside or outside HQ, the experience for me was the same. It's not that I don't love the gang that brings me the hobby I enjoy so much. But I work in an office that does software development so for me it didn't compute to being some life-changing experience. But I'll take the icon because that's what some of us do.

It would be about as exciting as visiting an office space. I've done it both indoors and when it was outdoors. I got about the same enjoyment from both.

Perhaps Groundspeak already knows that the information they're trying to derive isn't going to improve by adding higher find categories.

Inventing things so "we all fit in". For God's sake don't do this for my sake. at 18,000+ finds I am not offended, but embarrassed by the notion that a category other than 500+ needs to be created so that egos get some stroking.

Let them scream. Someone else's stats are not my problem. I will always try to have my cache listings as accurate as possible. Size, ratings, hints, attributes, all of it.

That's right. And while I might not be 100% pure (replace a cache fix a cache there) I refuse to perform such a challenge as streaking for 1000's of days knowing it isn't true and then publicly claiming success. MY blanket statement is strictly referring to our geographically local streakers claiming a streaks on the order of 1000's of days.. 2000, 3000, and higher. I am not suggesting it isn't possible for someone to complete.. just that nearly all our locals with streaks this high HAVE cheated.

I did not suggest there was a lack of options. I suggested those with significant streaks for sure cheated.. for whatever reason. Weather, laziness, other? Stockpile a load of finds on a weekend and then log them with new dates during the work week.

We all already know you prefer quality over quantity. But still 100% irrelevant to the topic at hand. Not every thread needs to be derailed with your geocaching preferences.

I don't know what others do outside of the Twin Cities but I know here that everyone that has claim on a significant streak has for sure cheated. What's funny is that the local cacher that has cheated the most even had an event to honor himself and his "streak". Now, I would never claim that I am 100% pure. But one thing is for sure, I can never imagine having an event to honor myself over what amounts to a lie.

I am not invalidating your opinion. With 13,000 posts here we all know you have one. But everything after the first comma in your sentence was not necessary. Your geocaching preference is not germane to the topic at hand.

I often leave a blank log and a pencil.

Well that was an easy solve. Thanks.

Now if I can figure out how to solve them. My Spanish is very rusty. There's only ONE remaining cache in Toledo that I've found that hasn't been archived so when the world opens back up I'll have to schedule an adventure.

But some of us will still use the phone-a-friend network ;-)

Circumvent cheating (as much as possible) by forcing a question to user that can ONLY be answered while in the woods and not online. Use that answer in an algorithm that then generates the solution to the cache instead of having embedded coordinates in the cartridge.

I just checked this out. If true, dang.. The cancel culture will destroy humanity eventually. But that's just my lowly opinion.

I have no quarrel with my local reviewer and in fact respect the thankless job that he does. He does it well. But he's published his own caches for years and years.. and isn't anonymous. I always thought it was a serious conflict of interest but have never been so filled with angst about it that I felt a need to question it out loud.

Your eyeroll doesn't intimidate me. Of course disabling a cache won't stop some. But if a cache is legally unavailable then it should still be disabled.

I found that one. I personally think it's over-rated but then we all have our own way of interpreting ratings so who am I to judge. I believe the CHS is a good idea that just needs more work.

Wanna bet?

nonsense. The CHS should be tweaked to reflect a closer reality.