waterloo.bob

Tried to get an answer from the Groundspeak help people but didn't, so.... My question is: Suppose I make a list at the beginning of one month but don't get to cache it until the beginning of the next month. I download the list. Is the information in the list still the original list information or has it updated to include any and all logs after the original logs? Thanks.

Didn't know I could encrypt a log. That would seem to offer the best solution on all levels. Glad I posted. Thanks for all the help. BTW the coord's are good, taken with both an Oregon and an iPhone. The difficulty is that there are a lot of hidey spots.

The cacher who logged the spoiler is closing in on a thousand caches. I did email the cacher pointing out that the log was a certain spoiler and apologized that it took the cacher a couple of tries to find it. No response. Curious if deleting the log will subtract the smiley? Don't want to do that.

I hid a cache that is hard to find. Make that 'was' hard to find because a recent 'Found It' log pretty much directs cachers to the cache. I discussed the difficulty of the cache with another cacher who I respect a lot. He had found it without a hint but we decided that perhaps a hint would be appropriate as seasoned cachers were posting DNF's. Ironically as I was uploading a hint a cacher was finding it - without the hint (I asked, he said it was the first place he looked). There has always been a clue in the description. It's not that this cache is unfair, it's just a tough hide that sometimes takes two attempts. But that is no longer the case - with the spoiler log it's a no-brainer. So, I'm asking, is it ok/ethical/whatever to remove the spoiler log? Thanks for your input.

Fuggle: - a questionable find Fuggler: - one whose find is questionable @wmpastor - does 2500 posts count as an obsession?

After perusing over 50+ pages of unbelievable anecdotes regarding either questionable (forgot my pen) to undeniably false (cache was in possession of CO when Find was logged) there seemed, to me at least, that there should be a term to describe these people. I'm tossing Fuggle out there for your consideration.

fuggle?

So is there a caching equivalent of 'muggle' for these folk?

So I guess the consensus is nuh-uh. Never mind. It was just a thought. Amazing how some people get bent out of shape over conjecture. Then again...

I love geocaching. Love finding caches. That said getting the often soggy, sometimes not removable without tweezers, occasionally full etc. logbook out of a cache and then unpacking it from it's torn baggy, getting your pen out, finding out you've lost your pen somewhere after the last cache, signing and dating, repackaging and so on and so on, gets to be a drag. Plus it's a time suck when you are battling mosquitos and could be using that time for doing more caching. So I know there's someone out there that can run with this. What we need is an electronic logbook. Find the cache. Get your GPS REAL close, as in REAL close, an inch (2.54cm) maybe, so you still have to find the cache, and your handle/date gets wirelessly transferred to the logbook. Beep. Wireless transfer successful (also recorded as a Found on your GPS) and bada bing! you're on your way. Likely there are purists out there that will think this is heresy. I always enjoy hearing from them. Anyone out there that can pull this off? Can I copyright this? O<-c (can't find a copyright symbol so that's a little 'c' inside a big circle).

Thanks Great Scott. I'd never noticed the Dropped off any Trackables before - but I've never dealt with Trackables. I'll pass this along and see if it answers her question. Appreciate it.

A friend and cacher asked if I knew, well here's what she wrote... "I notice that there is a "TOOK IT TO" option for Travel Bugs -- the bug is taken to a cache but not left there. I can't find this option. Is it only available to Premium Members?" I'm not travel bug aware but I did notice that 'Took It To' was not an option in the pulldown log menu of a Travel Bug but I also have seen it. I am a Premium Member. Could someone please explain to me how you make a 'Took It To' log entry so I can pass it along to my friend? Thanks

@lookout - guess you didn't read the 'humor' part

LOL, PERFECT. Thumbs Up!! I really can't say anything that is better than this. You hit the nail on the head. To Bob: You know the log, the hints, going geocaching with freinds that is all part of the fun of geocaching. Their aren't any rules that exclude multiple people going out and caching together. For me one of the best parts of geocaching is that it is a social game, something you can do with family and freinds. A system that penializes you for playing with you friends is not right. Just go out and find the boxes, have fun while doing it, that is what it is all about. Yup, you're right and that's what I said. Off today with a friend to do exactly that.

Accumulated Smileys! Now we're talking! We have a precedent - Hangman.

Ok...so, you may have intended this thread to be a joke...fine...but those two statements there certainly stand out as something other than a joke... You did notice the ;-) ? More humour.

First, to the people who recognized this as humour, I'm glad it made you laugh and I too laughed at your contributions. Don't know how I missed the half smiley. The other contributions were similarly inspired. Thanks. To the others, sigh, where to begin... It saddens me to think that some people took this seriously enough to suggest that I really thought caching with friends was somehow less an experience than caching with family. I have a friend who is on a train right now from Toronto who I will be caching with tomorrow. Obviously caching with friends just makes the experience all the more enjoyable. The subject was an exploration into the ethics of 'assistance'. Clearly, maybe not to some, if you have someone else helping you you have more 'assistance', hence the reducted smiley face. Now read the next paragraph... Am I trying to tell you how to cache? Perhaps you didn't read "... so I want to make this point perfectly clear. If you are happy finding a cache by whatever means, then good on you". I don't care a fig about how you cache or with who and I thought that pretty much said it. Maybe I'm touching nerves here? Seems the people accusing me of taking caching way too seriously might be doing just that themselves. And so to all I wish you many future smileys, however you get them;-)

I vividly remember my first cache. I wasn't sure if I was supposed to look at the logs before I went searching because it seemed like I was cheating. While I was out rummaging about for that first cache a very experienced cacher happened to come to the same cache and I asked the question, 'is looking at logs cheating?'. He said he looked at anything which would help him with the find and I took that as standard operating procedure. From then on I've been doing the same. Well sort of. Don't get me wrong I see the value in logs. If a cache needs maintenance or there is something amiss with the site what a great way to find out. But, you know, it's the other stuff, the hints and the like that still don't seem quite kosher. The CO can give a hint should he/she choose. It's the stuff beside 'what a wonderful day for caching I had with my kids and dog' that I know we've all seen. What brought this to a head for me is a local five star (difficulty) cache that has spawned all kinds of questionable behaviours - again, to my mind at least. You can check it out - GC2BBBQ. I've spent more than a ridiculous amount of time trying to find it to no avail. (And learned a valuable lesson in the process - some caches aren't worth it. Spend the time on enjoyable challenges instead.) That said some may now think that this is simply sour grapes, so I want to make this point perfectly clear. If you are happy finding a cache by whatever means, then good on you. I just think that a cache found by yourself without any assistance is somehow worthier of a smiley face than a cache where people have been 'given a hint', or was 'told where it is', and/or 'was told where it is and used a mob to find it', or 'been on a phone while being directed to it' and so on. So I propose a revision of "Select Type of Log". "Found it" should have sub-categories depending on the amount of assistance was used for the find. A graduated declining smiley face seems appropriate. I've put up a web page so you can see the icons and explanations as I can't seem to upload them here: http://www.bobnixon.ca/graduatedsmiley.html But for text only here it is: yellow complete smiley face - you've found the cache on your own or with your family no colour complete smiley face - 'used logs for other than cache status update' blank smiley face one eye missing - 'you found the cache with a friend' blank smiley face two eyes missing - 'had a hint' blank smiley face two eyes and mouth missing - 'found it with a mob' blank smiley face two eyes and mouth and head missing - 'was told where it was' an 'X' for 'do not even get to make a log entry' - 'found it while on a cell phone while being directed to where it is' a representation of something I'll leave to your imagination for someone who posts 'easy find' after being told or being led to where it is - 'banned from logging attempts forever' Your thoughts as to the ethics of assistance would be most appreciated.

Thanks for clarifying this.

Have to admit that confuses me. You can save as a GPX or Send to you GPS which you say is also GPX. Is the GPX option just to send it to your computer?

That did it! Going back to 3.01 Many, many thanks for the help to everyone. I particularly valued the link. Just have to wonder why Garmin isn't suggesting it? Cannot express my relief. I'll be back out there tomorrow. Hope to bump into some of you folks!

The caches were only a few miles away, thanks.

I 'sent to my GPS' a couple of caches as per usual on Saturday but when I got to the caching area neither file was on the 450 even though the message I received in both cases was 'File Saved Successfully'. I came home and repeated the process and once again when I went to 'Find a Geoache' they weren't there. I read about there being a limit as to the number of GPX files but there was no way I was even close to that and I wasn't choosing the GPX option (unless 'send to my GPS' does that? but why the option? anyway..). So I went into the disc image, I have a Mac and use Safari, and deleted about 140 GPX files being careful not to delete anything else. In fact I left a few GPX files in there. But now all I get when I try to 'Find a Geocache' is the message 'No Results Found. Try Adjusting Search Parameters'. I emailed Garmin and got a reply saying that there is a problem with Mac Communicator Plugin (they say the files are said to have been transferred when in fact they are not) and while they try to fix it I can download GPX files to BaseCamp and export them then to the Oregon. Thing is when I do this I still get the message 'No Results Found. Try Adjusting Search Parameters'. So I'm thinking I've screwed up something when I went into the disc image. Would anyone have a suggestion as to how I can get the Oregon back working? Can I reinstall system software? If so, how. Thanks for your help

Thanks to all for the great suggestions. For what it's worth I finally went with the Maxpedition Jumbo E.D.C.-S Versipack. Would never have heard of it if it wasn't for this forum. Looking forward to its arrival. Happy Caching! And thanks again. bob

I'd like to have a look at 'the clone'. Can anyone point me in the proper direction? waterloo.bob@gmail.com