mtn-man

Already being discussed in depth in this thread. I'll just close this one too. Again, go to the linked topic. Those glasses are great for seeing duplicate topics.

Closing this duplicate topic. Thanks to my fellow canine cacher for the link.

I guess I am going to close this topic. This is a geocaching forum. Since this was yesterday and since you did not even do the performance, I don't see the need for this to remain open. Hopefully you can go out and find some geocaches and see if like the game as a whole.

I saw this today and wanted to share it:

For what its worth, this goes back into 2003 I think. With the origin of Signal as the mascot, the natural place for Signal to reside is a lily pad. The office became known as the Lilypad and the rest is history. The first instance of the name in the forums I can find is here: clicky clicky Volunteers had been calling it that before that first post in the forums.

Ironically, I've noticed an interesting trend on mine. My top seven are virtual caches. The top three are my Washington DC virtuals with 101, 85 and 62. Number 8 is my traveling cache, the very first one put out. Number 9 is a traditional, but number 10 and 11 once again are virtual caches. Of my top 11 favorited by others, 9 are virtual caches. I just thought it was an interesting trend.

Thanks for bumping an ancient post... and having it closed with your language.

Just way to slowly. We need some updates stat. Yeah, I understand that. It has been a while since the last update. I will say that I really like the newest version I see in testing and it is getting to look more like the iPhone version. It looks a lot different than the current 1.1.3 version. I figured Bryan still traveled by Greyhound. He is moving up. When Googling directions for a trip overseas, the site said he should kayak over the Pacific Ocean. He said, "Oh man" but went over and got his kayak and was off. You have to love a good company man.

Perfect. LukeTrocity, I think the Android app is slowly getting better.

Actually, there is something in the works with regard to this. It is and always will be a work in progress, but some ideas are working to bring this together into one consolidated area. Your best option is to contact your local reviewer at this time if you have any questions. Right now I have two areas that are in flux and are a bit muddy, so like I say it will always be a work in progress.

We have plenty of experience with phones at Groundspeak. I have one of the most accurate new Android phones (Motorola Droid X) and I tested it recently and the coordinates generated in a parking lot with no trees were about 8 metres off. That is a parking lot. Now, if you take your Android phone into a group of trees to find a cache, you will constantly see it freeze up and you have to be patient and sometimes get out of the dense vegetation to get the phone to reacquire. This isn't the exception, this is the norm. I now use the GC.com Android App all the time and when I see caches in trees I carry my GPS just in case I need "real" GPS satellite lock. I have done this enough to where I typically just set the phone down and let is settle out and occasionally come back to it to move it a bit and see where it is pointing to. Most of my finds now are done through the phone as I test new versions of the app and since it is just so easy to log field notes using the voice recognition software to simply speak my logs into the phone (which just flat out rocks). Your solution to just publish caches with incorrect coordinates leads to frustrated first to find seekers due to these errors and environmental damage as people trample around in the wrong area taking extra time to actually locate the cache. In the early days we saw the latter more frequently with less reliable antennae in older GPS units. Newer designs are better, which any long-term cacher will probably agree with. Shoot, I see a difference in our Garmin 60CSx and the Oregon for heavens sake. The Oregon is newer, but the 60CSx is way more accurate. That's a fact. The best advice is found in this post. Excellent suggestion here:

Cell phones are notorious for bad coordinates. You should really use a hand held GPS when you hide a cache. I would suggest enjoying finding caches until you can take the extra step and buy a hand held GPS unit.

One thing I have learned as a reviewer is that Google is close, but not perfect in many cases. Some of the more interesting spots are the areas where images are stitched together. Satellite images are not always spot on. Sometimes they are, but it isn't something you use as an absolute. This case shows that pretty well.

I've hidden and found caches with my dog, yes. The scent thing is a double edged sword though. For my dog to find it, the cache would need to smell like Milkbones or bacon. The problem with a cache that has a scent to it is that other animals will also be attracted. I've had an ammo box in the woods for nine and a half years now. It is in perfect shape and is in a black bear aware area for several reasons. Since it is scent neutral, it is not noticed by animals. It basically smells like leaves and pine straw and dirt at this point. Perfect.

It's my fault. I posted on my Facebook page today that people should wake up and get out and have some fun. Next week I'll post that everyone should stay inside and catch some extra zzzzzz's.

To be honest, I don't think we want a new topic posted for each blog on the internet. There are topics here regarding geocaching blogs. You can do a simple search, find the most recent topic, then post a link to your blog to that topic. That is the proper way to advertise your blog in this forum. You can also choose to list your blog in the Waymarking site category for blogs, like I did. http://www.Waymarking.com/cat/details.aspx?f=1&guid=af9c77fa-8730-44f7-a9ec-eb8fb2291d53 I am going to close this topic. For further comments regarding your blog, please search the forums and post in the most recent topic regarding geocaching blogs. Here is an older topic, but it has the most recent posts and shows over time how you bump a topic every now and then. http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=94116 Closing this duplicate topic rather than merging it due to all the comments here.

I am not sure what the deal is exactly, but THE TEAM has not maintained their caches for years. I've written them several times over the years and I don't think I ever got a single response. I do understand the emotional attachment to these old caches and like to seek them myself, but if the community is not fixing the caches and if the cache owner wants to archive their caches instead of fixing them, then they can. That choice does not involve Groundspeak or the local reviewer. I've archived some of their caches over time too after they did not respond to emails and cache notes. I guess I am scum too? Edited to add that I've read the other topics elsewhere and it sounds like Wiz-of-Ooze was working with them to get them adopted out and they just up and archived them all but two. I think your anger at Wiz is misdirected since they were actually trying to work to keep them going it sounds like.

Not funny. Exceptionally offensive and uncalled for.

Drop the side argument. Out of the topic with ya'.

And you are playing right into their hands by posting this topic. Delete the logs. Write to Groundspeak. Do not give them a 16th minute of fame. Closing this topic.

It would be interesting to know that the difficulty and terrain ratings were too. That might have been a clue in addition to the other comments people have made. I am kind of thinking like Ecylram, as if it were stolen, replaced, and not properly updated.

From a reviewer point of view I would say this... There are liar caches out there, yes. In a case like this regarding the container, I think it is irresponsible. If you are looking for an ammo box, you would expect an easier hunt due to the size. You will obviously spend more time out there looking since you are being mislead. This will mean you will be trampling the area more than you really need to with a well planned and executed cache. This leads to undo environmental impact. Now, multiply that times multiple cachers. You end up with an area that becomes chewed up over time due to the impact of people going round and round, then expanding their search out creating a wider area of trampling. The evidence is probably clear with the cache area that it isn't as natural looking any more. A well executed cache will minimize this. While some think it is funny to mislead people like this, it isn't. Then again, perhaps the cache was an ammo box at first and has been changed after being stolen. In this case, the cache owner should update the page so people once again don't spend an undo amount of time trampling the area. I would write to the cacher and ask which scenario is true. If they are smug about it in their reply, then write your local reviewer.

It is either one or the other. It cannot be both. Can you give a link to the cache page?

We all know where this is going to end up, so I am going to head it off at the pass. Feel free to take your discussion of this new waymark over to the Waymarking forums. http://portal.Groundspeak.com/forums/25/ShowForum.aspx Heed Keystone's words that closed the other topic, and are also quoted above.

I am going to move your topic to the UK and Ireland forum section. With so many helpful people there, I am sure you will get some great assistance. Thanks for adopting out your caches and keeping them going for your fellow cachers!