Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 4wheelin_fool

  1. I asked the same thing. http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=327903
  2. This TB is likely not going anywhere. It's possibly mounted on the cachers wall in his mothers basement while he posts virtual visit logs. Infuriating? I don't know, but it's certainly annoying. Pages of nonsensical logs which don't mean anything, with fake mileage, and no actual movement. And it's becoming more popular.
  3. I reckon the reviewer has made the right call here considering the CO's past maintenace history and the information in the DNF log. Don't think so at all.
  4. Doing maintenance on a cache is a great thing to do for the owner or next finder, so your initial instincts are correct. However, the situation changes quickly if you discover that a very high percentage of the caches in an area need repair, then at that point doing maintenance is not recommended, and likely to take up more time and effort that you are willing to do, as fixing them will only promote more of the same. Replacing a cache without finding the original is even worse, and especially if the owner is not aware. So feel free to clean out and dry that interesting or ancient every hide now and then, but please don't make it your side hobby.
  5. Are the logs blank? If not, when was the last one, and who signed it?
  6. If it took you to the munzee site then it is a munzee, only masquerading as a geocache. Probably breaks all sorts of munzee guidelines with unauthorized use of someone else's trademark. Okay... so I'm still confused. It is listed on Geocache as: GC574BT Loafers. It has a lot of DNFs but also some Finds and it has 6 Blue ribbons. Scanning the sticker leads to: http://www.munzee.com/m/hawthorn181/788. It is also on what I would call private property? A light post in Costco parking lot? Like I say, I'm new so I don't really know enough to draw conclusions. The alternative, I guess, would be that the Munzee sticker and the Geocache are two different finds that happen to be pretty much on top of one another and I am just not finding the cache There is a spoiler picture on the page which points to the location and indicates that it is not on any light post. If it's not as in the picture, then it's missing.
  7. I looked at the map that Prime Reviewer posted then looked up the RV park in google maps so that I could see a street view. Assuming that the coordinates are good, it appears that the cache is located near a planting area next a driveway. Someone searching for the cache would never have to go past GZ to to where the business office is located 60 feet away and interact with any employees. The area where the campers park is well past the business office so it would be unlikely that geocachers would have any interaction with campers either unless the campers were entering or leaving the campground. If the reason for the cache not being published is due to the proximity of the business office and the cache then most urban caches would not be published. So the fee tangent is not relevant to the latest location and we're back to splitting hairs.
  8. That's a rather serious allegation you are making against your local reviewers. Logging rules that create TB prisons have been restricted for some time now. "Always leave TB's behind in the cache", seems to be an obvious attempt to create a loophole around it.
  9. If, as you suggest, calling a cache a TB hotel invites problems, then one would hope that someone calling their cache a TB hotel would, indeed, feel some sort of extra responsibility. They feel much more than responsibility, as they very often develop a loving relationship with each of the travel bugs that visit. Historically this is why many TB hotels tend to turn into prisons, as so much responsibility morphs into possession, caring, and nurturing. I believe there is one hotel which is specially setup where you can drop a bug but not retrieve any, as only the owner can do that. A locked box of some sort. It reminds me of a big Barbie dream house where Ken, G.I.Joe, and stretch Armstrong can all party with the owner for extended visits.
  10. Geez, why can't you just find a very nice Walmart parking lot like everyone else?
  11. Sometimes mistakes are made with home made log sheets, but there's nothing sneaky when the CO checks and declares the log sheet has been tampered with.
  12. Noticed something that happened twice in the past week on two different caches with two separate groups of people. A FTF is claimed, then another cacher finds it and claims that the log is blank. An examination reveals part of the log is missing. Not to name names or to point out specific people, but really? Hope this isn't the newest trend..
  13. I voice log frequently, but speaking slowly and correcting the errors can be annoying, although sometimes the wacky interpretation is funny.
  14. So they pick up the TB and a week later get an email asking why they haven't dropped it yet. So they drop it in another cache and 4 weeks later that CO gets a email, asking him to move it. Seems like the TB owner might need a sedative. Now if it's marked missing every time the TB owner does that, eventually they may stop.
  15. I see your point. If I found a dozen caches and then logged them later it would be hard enough to remember which was which let alone compose a decent log. I love being able to key my log as I walk back to the car or while heading to the next cache on the trail. Exactly.
  16. Requesting for someone to visit their cache and move a TB after only 4 weeks is unreasonable. Marking it as missing even if it is there, solves that problem and may prevent the cacher from repeating it on others. First they panic, then later the TB shows up, and from the cache it should be in. Then they think about the chain of events, and don't do it anymore.
  17. I don't think logging DNFs is a good idea anymore, due to the willingness to archive a cache over them, such as this one: http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCY3ZG_johnny-cache Post a note to keep it out of the reviewers PQs.
  18. The logbooks in the older caches is was what I enjoyed reading. Todays geocaching logbooks are rather boring, compared to the logbooks left in state park cabins and hiking shelters. Ironically the only time a geocaching logbook becomes interesting today, is if muggles constantly find it but manage to treat the cache properly, which I've noticed happen more than a few times.
  19. Here are the reasons why caches get multiple favorite points: breaks guidelines virtual, or unique icon very old, or unique Jasmer challenge hide date high traffic area, yet creative With the Washington APE cache gleaning 700 points, it would be difficult to determine the actual favorites, or just the ones due to the icon. The same goes to virtuals, or old caches. A creative hide in a high traffic area is the only one that has genuine favorites, but that still isn't accurate, as the number goes up simply to the amount of visits, not the experience. I simply award favorites based on the top 10% to encourage more of the same.
  20. If I got a note like that, I'd immediately mark it as missing without even checking to see if it was there or not.
  21. I don't know why some are stingy with the favorite points. I use them to encourage more of the top 10%. Running out of favorite points is lousy though, as I hate taking them back for redistribution.
  22. I think you all missed a word. Certain challenges aren't allowed anymore, like he said.
  • Create New...