Nozzletime

Looks like the Bruce trail is banning caching where they can. From the Ontario Geocaching site....... From the Bruce trail Site..... Let's hope there can be a middle ground. What are your thoughts?

Going through life you have all sorts of levels, the cache owner wishes to set up a small (9 caches stated in the first listing) series. I went through school Kindergarten to grade 13 and beyond. I went through different levels of scouts. I played levels in video games. I earned different certification levels in teaching and coaching sports. How about the forces? What is the problem with his explaining karate levels with caches that build on each other? The guidelines are wishy washy.(PERIOD) They are strewn all about with all sorts of local unwritten guidelines (nothing on Canada post property, you have to search the forums for that one.) Don't forget Knowledge book 4.13(sheesh) Bonus caches, 8 bonus caches is not what it sounds like, it sounds like you have to do the caches in the order intended. A bonus is a reward for your effort. eg. I found two caches and in the same area there is a freebie smiley because I wrote down the coords from the lid of the other two. Lets get back to basics, he hid the caches,he wrote them up, he submitted them. Puzzle or mystery designation is catch all, so they are correctly labelled. Hit the publish button, why give him grief? It is tupperware in the woods. It is a game, we are not saving lives here. Groundspeak is a listing service, so let's get them listed! What's the problem?

http://www8.garmin.com/support/download_details.jsp?id=4995 Changes made from version 2.70 to 2.80: Fixed shutdown related to the current track that occurred after updating the software Fixed a hang that occurred when a unit had 1000 auto-named waypoints Fixed issue with marine map points sometimes drawing with the incorrect symbol

I just logged a couple of caches. I usually just copy my signature from the logging text box and then paste in each of the following logs after writing them. I cannot copy now. I am not sure if this has been reported or not. Thanks

If they don't do a maintenance visit do they get archived?

Event was in 2009 http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/08...477621-sun.html

I don't know what the problem is. On my netbook XP IE6. screen size is 800x600 The my profile page gets locked in some sort of loop that tries to constantly resize while it is loading. Only way to fix it is CTRL ALT DELETE. Firefox works, but IE doesn't Update sure seems to have played havoc on PC's using IE6.

Pretty much sums it up!!

I tried to look at a picture gallery of a cache I tried today. I can see the thumbnails. when I click on the images, I can see the first two that are in the same log. I cannot see the full size pictures of the logs that have an individual picture. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/gallery.asp...17-f37dec7c1436 I tried it in Win7 using IE8, Google Chrome, and Firefox 3.57 On the Win XP Netbook, Firefox gave the same result, and IE6 just crashes when I open the website. On the My/Your profile page. I don't care what you want to call it, just pick one and change it all to the one chosen. I wouldn't call this much of an update, at least on the user(my) end. The cache pages formatting are screwed up. The additional hint section, why is the decryption key in between the title and the hint? I also dislike the double spacing, I thought the site was much easier to read/scan preupdate. If you want to print anything it takes double the paper for the paper, for the same information. I agree if browser support is going to be dropped, give people a heads up.

I am also having the large body of water problem. I can see the rivers and streams but all lakes and ponds seem to be missing when I look in Mapsource. Was my download corrupt, or missing a tile?

Re: the bold text. Do not put words in my mouth that I did not say! That is the second time you have done so in the public forums, and I expect you to exercise some restraint here after. I will not be removing the notes as they were posted as a courtesy. I do see the troubles putting MY thoughts in quotation marks has caused. I am sorry and apologize if people read it as I quoted you CD.

Re: the bold text. Do not put words in my mouth that I did not say! That is the second time you have done so in the public forums, and I expect you to exercise some restraint here after. I will not be removing the notes as they were posted as a courtesy. I guess you will have to forgive me for misunderstanding what a quarterly sweep is. A reviewer posts a note like below and says you should do a maintenance visit to say the cache is OK. I wrongfully assumed that there would be a consequence for not doing it. "to give you a heads-up that it may be best if you can physically visit your cache" The note doesn't say this is a courtesy and "I have no intention of doing anything else" I have the understanding that if there is a reviewers note posted on the page it typically means action is required.

I don't see that in the geocache logs pasted into this thread either. Language is important, please don't embellish. Embellish?? If my cache is not found for 6 months I have to visit it and post an owners note, does that not sound like a MUST? How should I view it? As of now there are over 700 caches unfound in the last 6 months, I imagine by March or April(the end or the winter season) it will be much higher. Oh Thanks for showing me how to bold something too!

All cache owners must do a physical visit every 6 months if the cache has not been found. (edit to remove quote marks as it was my take on the note and not actually a quote) I didn't see that in the guidelines that are being linked to. I have a cache that hasn't been found in 6 months and is a 25K (15 mile) hike, I guess I am going to get a lot of exercise. If this is not a new guideline, I would hope Groundspeak would have the reviewer remove all those notes. That is one of the caches I found the log below on GCDFB 4.5lb Walleye by Jamie Matear (4.5/2.5)

8/188 = 4.26%

The cache in Illinois was found. The reviewer for the Illinois cache seems to have jumped the gun disabling it. What should they do now? Should they reenable it and apologize to the owner? Do nothing because it is the cache owners own fault putting out a hard cache? The owner has it listed properly, and the difficulty seems to be appropriate.

Someone said what I was going to.

Another out of state reviewer disabling a cache after the owner did a maintenance visit, 5 logs earlier. Anyone else having a bit of Deja Vu

no. My first cache was listed by this guy. Does that count? Who is that?

He was contacted. TPTB had evidence that the cache was a hoax. They asked SF/TDE to verify that the cache was there. He stated that it was. Since the cache didn't, in fact, exist, SF/TDE once again had lied to the reviewers and the community. The cache was archived. He stated the cache was there and it was archived. The archiving sounds predetermined.

So we're supposed to know that the hide is so devilish that no one could find it, we should warn the reviewers of the possibility of a lot of DNFs and we should jump through hoops not jumped through by other hiders all because we're creative? And so what? If people can't find it and complain, do you believe TPTB would have acted any different? We're helping THEM. Without US hiding caches, how far would this activity go?? After talking with a cacher in Alaska, I can tell you what a lack of caches to find means...to them!! Without us hiding caches, there'd be no need for reviewers at all.... OK, I have to completely and thoroughly disagree with RR here. As a cache hider, it is your responsibility to rate your cache placement reasonably accurately. Most cachers know and understand the difference between an easy cache and a very hard one. As for US helping THEM, the reviewers are not paid to do their "job" they are VOLUNTEERS, this means that the time they spend on that part of the sport is time they are taking away from their families, hobbies, etc. Even if they were being paid, why in the he** would you want to make the job HARDER??? I see noting wrong with the idea of being proactive and giving the reviewer some "extra" information on a tough hide. Hey, if SF had sent Nomex a few photos of the container, do you really think we would have even had this thread? Even if he had archived the cache anyway, I'm 100% positive TPTB would have quickly overruled that decision. BTW, what's the GC # of the cache at the bottom of the ocean? Rainbow Hydrothermal Vents http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...&Submit6=Go

The folder should be in "C:\GSAK"

My large map was 3072x2304(3.3MB), I guess I have to figure out how to cut it apart now.

They changed the size of custom maps that are allowed. My big custom map doesn't show now. A message saying my map was too large and would not be displayed came up when i started it. Does anyone know the new size limit of an individual map? I found out on the Garmin forums, the maximum size is now 3MB per map.

May 23, 2007 by MissJenn (627 found) Following a recent review, Groundspeak has decided to archive this cache. That is the archiving log for Head of the Hydra that was talked about earlier. Why was a canned note like this not used? That would have stopped this at the start, it would have still left questions. It does not call anyone a liar and the result of archiving the cache is the same. I agree 100% with Bittsen's post.