Don_J

Curious whether you've actually had any yet, whether the finder appealed and what transpired when you received the "It's allowed" letter. - So far any we deleted were folks with no validated email, no never were faced with an appeal. I've had one period, and a couple random single letters. I deleted them. They had never been re-logged. While there are no real restrictions on what has to be contained in a log, except for the whole no spoilers, and keep it PG, I would imagine that GS would use their discretion. You wouldn't expect GS to force me to accept a found it log saying that they did not find the cache, or that it should be archived, so why would I keep a log that doesn't say anything at all? There was the one time when there was some gibberish in the found it log, and I figured it was an honest mistake, so I contacted the cacher. Turns out they did find it and I alerted them to their field notes on the GPS messing up when uploaded. I guess I'm trying to say there's a difference between an honest mistake, which I'm sure we've all done, and someone being too lazy to write 4 letters, or trying to be an arsehole. Actually, there is a post buried somewhere in these forums from Jeremy himself, where he says that blank logs are completely acceptable. It is possible to post a blank log through the api, and the idea was that this would be expanded to the web site log interface. I personally don't agree, but it is what it is. Posting a found log, regardless of what it contains, is first and foremost a process to indicate that you have found the cache that you are posting it to, and mark it as such in Groundspeak's database. The only time I would even consider deleting a log is if I had a valid concern that the logger did not find my cache.

The good thing about the side game is that you can claim whatever you want in whatever way you want and it has as much validity as anything else. Of course there will be people who will remind you that only the first to sign a log can be the first. But that need not affect your claim at all. Even if I find the cache on my friend's kitchen table and sign the log two weeks before he even hides it?

Maybe even more than an attribute we just need a quick way to bulk add a large number of caches to our ignore list. That already exists. It is called GSAK. Not everyone wants to invest more time & money to learn & use GSAK It's easy to get a list & coords for a series or group of caches I'd like to find on Groundspeak, either by PQ, or doing a general search using a series name & clicking 'check all'& 'download waypoints' ... But I'd like it to be just as easy to ignore a series or group of caches I'm not interested in. Is there a way Groundspeak could add an 'ignore' button next to the 'download waypoint' button as another option after 'check all'? Or is there already any easy way (without GSAK) that I've overlooked? I have been advocating that Groundspeak give us the ability to set any Bookmark list as an Ignore list by simply checking a box in it's options. This way, we could build lists of common caches that we wish to ignore, such as a power trail that is overwhelming a PQ that is in the same area. Then, if we later want to to go for those caches, we can simply run a PQ on that list, or un-check the, "ignore this list" box.

You can't daisy chain Bonus caches. If cache 1,2,and 3 have clues to find cache 4, then cache 4 is a bonus cache and the chain has to stop there. It can not be used to hold clues required to find another cache.

Hi Manville Possum Hunters, I have not found any forum or topic mentioning this supplier. Have you made any successful transaction with them? Thanks in advance & regards, Seriously, there is this giant search engine on the Internet called Google. Put NAVI TECHNOLOGY GROUP into it and read the second link listed. That should be all you need to know.

The zip file contains a GPX file, which is a XML formatted file.

Plain wrong. Have you not read my reply to him??? I think that it might be time to appeal directly to Groundspeak.

That makes exactly zero sense. Those finds weren't actually your milestone finds, and pretending they are will not change that fact. Leaving multiple find logs in order to preserve some mythical divide-by-100 goodness is just sad. It makes perfect sense. You have a tool (the Geocaching.com website) that generates numbers based on the information it is fed, no matter whether or not that information is accurate. Once generated these numbers become magic numbers. They influence the geocaching you do. Based on the magic numbers you select special caches to find for your magic milestones. Later, you discover the input to the magic number generating tool was inaccurate. It makes no sense to back and change the input because that will change magic numbers that you've already used to select the special caches for your magic milestones. New magic numbers don't really provide you any information that you can use. You can't go back and change the caches you've selected for the new magic milestones that have long passed. So there isn't any reason to fix the inaccurate input. On the other hand you could always tell the tool that your old magic milestones are based on the old magic numbers and the new magic numbers are used only for milestones in the future. Both GC.com and pretty much every stat program allows you to adjust your milestones. This is usually to help in the case where you logged your caches out of order.

That seems to be an issue as FTF is a statement of fact Exactly. A cache owner can proclaim whatever they wish. That doesn't necessarily make it so. Picking one of the 16 hiders at random, (let's call him Fred), did Fred actually find all 650 caches? If Fred hid 40 of them, could it be said that he found those? I suppose. Folks claim all manner of silly acts as finds these days. But what about the other 610? Was Fred the first person to find those, as well? If Fred, and the other 15 or so hiders claimed finds as beta testers, I would simply shrug, and move on. But for Fred and his cohorts to pretend to be the first person(s) to find all the caches is patently absurd. Personally, I don't go in for the whole FTF thing. It's just not my cup of tea. If I happen upon one, I'll do the little FTF dance, and might congratulate myself in my log, but it's not something I shoot for. However, I have several friends who do place great value in FTFs. For them, the 'value' of the FTF, whatever it is, just got shot in the head. What for me has become meaningless, has just become meaningless to anyone who values accurate claims. Here's the thing. I pretty much know if I'm FTF or not. I don't need anyone to congratulate me, put my name in the cache description or any such thing. I just throw a few extra smileys in my log and add it to me personal stats. If someone else wants to say that they were FTF on the same cache, oh well.

In Mapsource, go to the Edit menu/Preferences Routing Tab and select, "Use Direct Routes". Next go to the Tools menu and select Route. Click on the map to draw your route, using as many points as necessary to keep it accurate, then save the GPX. What you are currently doing is setting a few points and letting Mapsource auto route them. The resulting GPX only contains the points, not the auto route information, so when it gets imported, the Cache Along A Route tool only knows to connect those points.

You need to log out of the Forum, and back in, not Geocaching.com

I would have responded with this: "Any local cacher can achieve this challenge.". Whether they have or not is, of course, an entirely different matter and, depending on the exact requirements, may be unknowable just by a perusal of their profile pages. The question as put in this translation seems rather irrelevant. Anyone can, potentially, achieve any requirements set forth in any challenge (barring the use of now illegal or unusable cache types- APE, LC, 10 Year events etc.). I also think asking whether anyone other than the owner has met the requirements is an undue burden placed on the CO. That being said there are some quite outlandish challenges out there. I've tried to make mine fun and doable yet still a challenge in some way. Sometimes I'll even give different options in how to qualify, yet still keeping the same basic flavor. This is exactly how I feel about this. I put the challenge out there and the local cachers tell me if they can/have achieved it, not the other way around. I makes no sense that I should have to carefully examine the find history of my local cachers and find 5-10 candidates to present to the reviewer.

It's not only the fact they all claimed FTF but it means that not all of the 16 cachers actually went to all of the caches but only a small part. If you were to stretch this GeoArt in a long line I think you would call this Leap Frogging. Not really leapfrogging, but they feel that since they were they all part of a collective effort, they are all entitled to the total reward. I personally draw the line on this as to when I am actually on site and involved in the active search. I remember being part of a 10 mile deep mountain hike that involved about 15 cachers, and 40 potential caches. Towards the end was a 2/4.5 cache that was up in the boulders and well out of sight of the trail. Most of the group went on, but three decided to go for it. I wasn't up for the climb, but I told them that I would wait on the trail in case they ran into trouble. They found the cache, and logged it. I wouldn't dream of logging it as I wasn't part of trying to find it, but two people that were part of the overall group did, even though they were 3/4's of a mile down the trail when it was found. I look at their numbers, which are multiples of mine and just kind wonder.

What?

Great post! My numbers, and my stats are important to me. I do set goals and I accomplish some of them and fall short of others. If I started logging caches as found when I wasn't even present to help search for them, it would all become meaningless

That's a good attitude. That said, let's look at what is going on here. The CO gets 15-16 other geocachers to help place his Geoart caches. They split the 650 cache between them. They each place 40+- caches and as a reward, the CO lets them claim finds on all 650. On top of that, they all claim FTF on all 650. Yes, we can each play the game as we choose, but I think that this is a total abomination on how the game is supposed to be played. Meanwhile, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it, but if I went out and found some of these caches, and was confident that I was the first cacher to actually find these caches after they were hidden, I would include them in my personal FTF stats.

Read post #27.

Shouldn't take 20 minutes. Should take more like 1. On Google Maps you can place "via" markers. Just put one near each end of the route. Voila. I'm going to need a little help with this. On "Google Maps" I see how this can be done, but I don't see a way to save it as a KML file. On "Google Earth" I don't see a way to add a via point to the route I created. So what am I missing? That the routes on Google Maps and Google Earth are identical? Just use Google Maps for your route instead of Google Earth. Ideally, you should be able to do this entirely on Geocaching.com, stating at http://www.geocaching.com/my/userroutes.aspx. Is this the Google map that you are using, or are you creating your route at Google.com? It does seem that there is an issue on Geocaching.com as I can't seem to click the map to create a start and end point. This is using FF 27.0.1, and IE 11. I can create a route by entering start and end points manually. Once that is done, I can add nodes and drag them where I like. Note, if you are creating the route by using, "Get Directions", at maps.google.com, you can add nodes by dragging the line where you want it. You then have to save it to My Maps, (scroll to the bottom of the driving directions). The next screen will give you a link for a kml file that you can then upload to geocaching.com.

Since FTF is a personal stat that is not officially tracked, if you feel that you were FTF on those 80 caches, go ahead and count them.

I get the impression that he wants to see his recently viewed caches, but doesn't want it it cluttered up with caches that he has logged as found.

Shouldn't take 20 minutes. Should take more like 1. On Google Maps you can place "via" markers. Just put one near each end of the route. Voila. Or, just extend the route by a little bit and then add a via point where your original end point was. That should give you exactly what you originally intended. Thanks to Moun10bike for explaining what the issue is. It's really a simple workaround.

IIRC when the original Fizzy challenge came out nobody qualified. Around here, it is convenient that we have Alamogul, who basically qualifies for everything so makes an excellent exemplar. There was a challenge published around here about six weeks ago that probably no one had qualified for. I was third to find, last Tuesday and many others are actively pursuing it. It motivated me to get off my butt and back up on the mountain trails. I guess something like this is no longer possible in Germany?

We were told that this was going to happen, quite some time ago. It never did.

And here, I'm driving around with my air conditioner on. Did the Earth tilt and nobody noticed?

This is not clutter. Plus, you can enter TB codes and tracking numbers as well. I use it daily. Firefox, Greasemonky and Prime Suspect's Waypoint Finder script.