Jaz666

Yeah - he was my first guess too, Steve!! Hazel I'm sure as your such a well travelled and event experienced Geocacher, you'll be bound to have meet him/her at some point. And the same applies to Steve Deci I've had a small tip off, and yes.... If my source is correct, I know them relatively well!!! Is that a not-so-subtle hint there Hazel?

"The Woolpack" is a fictional pub... In real life the pub is called by another name. Yep I know that, have been in it many times. The Pub is real, the name is fictional. It is called the Commercial, as mentioned in the cache blurb. Sorry but you're both wrong - The pub was called "The Commercial" and the signage changed for filming (every day) So in the end they changed the name to "The Woolpack" fo the benifit of the set dressers and the tourists, It's well over 10 years now since they stopped using the village for filming, but the name remains. And I've an adopted cache which has mentioned the Woolpack since it was published in 2002, and that blatent advertising didn't stop the pub from shutting down due to lack of trade last year!

That's quite a low estimate, there will always be lurkers who read forums and don't contribute. I put your communication on the Yorkshire site which has had 76 users logged into the website in the last 7 days. As the game grew, local forums were always going to appear; you've done a good job in the past of posting key information to as many as you can. Perhaps the reviewers could investigate an alternative way to converse with the community. e.g. a UK Geocaching Reviewers fan group on facebook

The word has been put around on the Yorkshire Geocaching community site.

The cache owners made a very informative post over on the Yorkshire Geocaching site. http://www.yorkshiregeocaching.co.uk/index...w/id,9535/#9665

I've created a "caches along a route" route for you. There's only a handful of caches directly on the path, so this PQ preview shows all caches half a mile either side. http://www.geocaching.com/map/default.aspx...07-aa21435581e4 I'll stick this on the Yorkshire Geocaching site too tomorrow.

Welcome, you must be mad; but I can't think of a Yorkshireman better suited to the job.

I created one last year, but forgot to put any keywords in for the search. http://www.geocaching.com/my/userrouteedit...11-dd1f06ab7027

It's been said before.......... They are doing it for the attention, and discussing them in an open forum or on cache logs plays right into their hands. No doubt they are reading this; and in which case they may be interested to know that a person trashing caches in the NW was identified and visited by the police last year.

There were 8 caches in a series called As Common as Much #1 to 8. Linky to first listing http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...73-19418254bf3f

It's Groundspeak's anti-scraping software, which has been reported as being a little over cautious with quite a few members recently. Typically it'll kick in if you open several pages in tabs at once, and GSP also say certain Greasemonkey scripts will trigger it as well.

So far I've found my cat and father-in-law. The amount of detail they've gone into is staggering - I'm currently "driving" underneath the Ribblehead Viaduct!

As I wrote on one of your caches last year, quite a few Ammo boxes or similar large containers went missing in the area, but your Sheffield Cache widens the radius now. It's a possibility that some people think it's easier to take an ammo can, rather than try to find somewhere local that sells them. But as all the swiped boxes have been in remote locations I think it's unlikely. I suspect they are being taken by one person, and the remote locations raise one suspect in my mind; I'll do some digging......... (p.s, something you posted on a cache page earlier isn't going to win you any friends)

I've been pondering whether GSA have toughened up the review process to try to up the "wow factor". i.e make the whole submission system so off-putting to all but the most dedicated Cachers, thus reducing any possible influx of "here's a rock, now where's my earthcache icon" ECs. After all, the increase in lame virtuals led to Groundspeak phasing that cache type out..... This post in the NW forum is interesting. That was one of the reasons for the change in the EarthCache submittal process. The old system was totally overloaded and many ECs were published that were no more than rather poor vituals. Hopefully, the new system will improve the quality of ECs in the UK both in terms of the listings and of the 'science'. Personally an increase in quality of Earthcaches is a good thing, but I think they've gone a step too far.

I can see 'mark for review' or similar causing a "hang on, my cache has already been reviewed" confusion. 'Needs reviewer attention' gets my vote; though I feel those who use it will still "feel the wrath" from irate cache owners etc unless the process becomes anonymous.

Bravo to all involved. It is very pleasing to hear Ewan's legacy will live on.

Brilliant, that Dakota 20 is looking more and more tempting everyday.

Found 18 other logs, a lot of which Alba has repsonded to.

http://www.geocaching.com/profile/default....57-7ed146e1f792 Not a reviewer - gsak is having a trundle to try and find any other logs they've made.......

Dare I say it, the Openstreetmap project will be closed down In case you wanted a different opinion, the Guardian has also reported it here Nothing I've read suggests we'll suddenly see free OS maps on our GPSr; but it would open up the possibility of getting the best of both worlds from both projects. OSM might allow users to use the (free) OS mapping to improve their service. As we've seen with the OS maps on the modern Garmin units, their mapping is raster based, designed to be printed on paper at a fixed scale. When you zoom in the mapping doesn't re-draw, until it becomes an unreadable mess. OSM is vector based, allowing you to zoom in with no loss of detail. What a lot of modern users of OS mapping want is access to a vector based version of their mapping. Next year should be interesting!

A quick bit of research in gsak has yielded the cache in question (complete with the deleted logs). By all means bring it to the attention of a reviewer, but I would do it privately so as not to wind the cache owner up any further.

What and spoil all the fun waiting to see how long it takes for someone to spot the news. You never know he might wish to remain anonymous for the moment, hence no official announcement. And not even an "unofficial" heads-up when you saw a group of cachers on Sunday!

Mine arrived this morning, I particularly like the one taken in Lochranza as I have distant family ties to the village.

It looks like the direction finders I've been selling in my day job recently. You mark a location(s), say where you've parked the car, and it navigates you back. Aimed at those who don't want to learn how to use an eTrex to do the same job.

I don't think bold is necessary here! Sorry to be a pendant Ian, but most, if not all references to logging online have been added in a code release this year. The same section taken from archive.org (Feb 2008) The closest I can find was a page that suggested you could "EMail" the hider to let them know you've found their cache. So yes, it was suggested, but not insisted upon. I recall this being discussed in the forum a few years back, and it didn't seem to cause as much fuss then - non-online-logging geocachers seemed to be quite common, and accepted as long as they didn't mess with TBs. I've always made a point of reading the physical logbook, both in my caches, and caches I find. Back when I started there were at least two caching names/teams who's names appeared in all the logbooks of caches I was finding, but never online. I quickly learnt that these were people who chose not to log online, and talking to local cachers showed they were all well known and liked. To this day, I still give a wry smile when I see their caching names in logbooks.