Cedar Grove Seekers

Typically in these types of puzzle caches, you have to use some obscure method to find numbers that will yield a meaningful set of coordinates. In this case, since you are given names and years from a baseball team, I'd guess that maybe the players' jersey numbers, or possibly batting averages from that particular year, would give you a menaingful set of numbers. If not then I would suggest expanding your search to other related numbers. Knowing the possible first few numbers in the coordinates of your general area (i.e N38 or W121) will often help you to quickly eliminate possible solutions.

I'll tell you there have been several occasions where I have been deep in the woods and could certainly have used a religious pamphlet, or any piece of paper for that matter.

In general, I tend to agree with those who say that Difficulty and Terrain are independant of each other. To me, an ammo container sitting out in the open at the top of a mountain is a 5 terrain, but only a 1 difficulty. I do realize that such caches exist and have been rated a 5/5, but I've never quite understood this.

We usually refer to that tactic as "brute forcing", after the term used to crack a code by trying all possible combinations or passwords. In our case, we're trying all the possible places we can think of where a stage (or the final) might be hidden. I've been on one hunt where we successfully brute-forced a multi. We couldn't find one stage, but we managed to find another just by guessing and getting lucky. Yup, we call it 'brute forcing' too. We've FTFed two multis, both with bad coordinates, by paying close attention to the cache description.

We used the yellow Garmin etrex for our first 500 cache finds before upgrading. We entered all cooridnates manually, didn't have base maps, but loved the simplicity and cost of it. I would recommend this for you.

I once found a cache on an island in a small lake in a public park by merely waiting until winter and walking across the ice. The owner didn't like this and disabled the cache for the rest of the winter (guess they didn't think it through when they were placing it in the summer). If you want cachers to use a similar route/means to the cache as you, then force it though a mutli, otherwise be happy that people are finding your cache their way and having fun doing it.

I agree that FTF criteria are your own. With my criteria I would consider myself FTF if I was first to find the cache after it was published. I would not claim an FTF if the cache was merely replaced and relocated, but used the same GC number.

Tresco, for clarification, is your issue with inaccurate coordinates, or with certain types of caches (i.e multis, puzzles, letterboxes)?

Star*Hopper: Do you ever go caching with a fellow cacher and they are the ones who actually spot the cache first? If so, do you also log a 'Found It'? Most people who do cache with fellow cachers will all log the find despite who actually spots the cache first. I don't see why claiming a co-FTF would be any different.

I'll never begrudge someone for making a buck. As a customer I merely ask myself if I am getting good value. Is what I receive worth at least what I pay? I'd say the use of geocaching.com for $0 is pretty good value, and doubt many would disagree. I also feel that $30 per year for the additional benefits of a premium membership is good value for me. And the additional (undisclosed cost) is definitely worth the rewards and advantages offered by my platinum membership. Frankly I hope that Groundspeak is making a killing so that they are incited to keep this site running.

If the cacher didn't find the caches, then go ahead and delete the logs. Otherwise it's bad form to punish them by deleting legitimate logs. I'd say you've lowered yourself well below the offending cacher.

From experience we can tell you that it's better to put the holes in the container BEFORE placing the hamster in it.

Quite imaginative!

I've seen this happen a few times, and back when I was chasing FTFs it annoyed me. In fact I am aware of two cachers who lived 30 miles apart, yet seemed to place most of their new caches very close to each other's house. They always got the FTFs on each others caches, and then even maintained those caches for their friend. Like many threads, I notice in this thread many people asking 'why do you care', and stating that FTFs are not sanctioned. Chasing FTFs has become a bit of a game to some cachers, and most FTFers will play by the same rules. These rules don't need to be written down for FTFers to understand and follow them. Those who are not playing by the local rules know they are cheating, and hence try to cover it up.

I like your idea of FTS. I've given honorable mentions to the first to solve in the past.

We were doing a difficult multi, and there was an obvious hiding spot at one of the stages. There was a note that read "Do you really think I'd place it here?" We liked it due to the fact that the owner anticipated people would look at the obvious spot.

I've seen four caches placed by four different cachers who each had only one find. Each one of the four caches had significant problems. I've learned to ignore these until the bugs have been worked out. I would also suggest to any newbies that they place a few before hiding their first, but don't expect to see it as a rule. As for the FTF tip-off, I'd claim the FTF if I was the first to find after it was published, even if someone found it prior to being published, because those are the criteria I impose on myself. If the cacher who received the tip-off also claimed FTF, they would be free to do so. I on the other hand would never claim FTF if I was tipped off. I guess my point here is that your FTF count is your own personal list based on your own criteria.

I didn't use HTML, but will give it a try if that's the only solution. Thanks.

Lately when I submit a new cache, the text area seems to ignore my Enter keys and just lumps the text together. For example, when I write: Roses are red, Violets are blue, ..... The cache page shows Roses are red, Violets are blue,..... Anyone have a solution to this?

I second this. I'll third this.

Not such a great place to watch a sunset if you have to hightail it out of the park before the sun has completely set. I just may be too literal here but... Dusk, by definition, does occur after sunset...at least that is my understanding!!! Civilian Dusk: The time at which the sun is 6 degrees below the horizon in the evening. Nautical Dusk: The time at which the sun is 12 degrees below the horizon in the evening. Astronomical Dusk: The time at which the sun is 18 degrees below the horizon in the evening. Yeah, tell that to the cops as they're beating you up for being in the park after dark.

It does NOT say to delete bogus logs, it says to delete logs that APPEAR to be bogus. Same as saying shoot anyone that appears to be a terrorist or shoot anyone you've proven to be a terrorist.... big differenc between those two.... and the guidelines only refer to logs that APPEAR to be bogus. So if all the logs, fake or not, appear to be valid, the owner doesn't have to do a thing. Guidelines state that. Literally. You want to interpret them to something else then that's your option, but it's not what they literally say. The guidelines state what they state, and the facts are they don't say it's an owner's responsibility to delete bogus logs if they think they don't appear bogus. If you WANT them to say that then you need to contact GC and have them edit that, because it's not what they say. I am sure anyone who has it brought to their attention that a log is bogus would deal with it, but they are not mandated to. Huh?

I would say No, and compare the cacher who did not wait until the park opened with a runner with a false start. Even if the runner with the false start crossed the finish line, the race had not officially started so he could not be the winner. Didn't wait until the park opened, no FTF. What if the second finder had a dog off its leash (another blatant contravention of park rules)? Would they forfeit the FTF if they acknowledged this in their log?

From the cache page: Not such a great place to watch a sunset if you have to hightail it out of the park before the sun has completely set. Edit: added quote box

I'm not one for dictating hard inflexible rules over geocaching, but fake logging is simply not geocaching.