pcl_el_hefe

Yep, what StefandD said. I have the 650T. If you make the zoom level too high, when you zoom out to see a larger area, the geocache icons can fill up the entire screen. It's usually just a one-time adjustment to find a zoom level you like. Same thing for map's street detail... too much is not always a good thing.

And now the other 6 ran an hour and a half later... Strange.

Is something "wonky" with the Pocket Queries? I have eight PQs for the state of South Carolina set up to run today. #2 and #5 ran, but the others are just sitting there. The check mark is in the boxes for Monday, but they normally run all in less than 10 minutes. I don't know if the is an "odd or even" thing, but it is bothersome.

I thought it was strange that I got an Ohio souvenir even though I have over 700 finds in that state, so I checked here and saw I was not the only one. The souvenirs page still shows the original earned back in 2011 and didn't show an "extra" one or change the date, so hopefully it will stay that way.

I agree this new interface quite convoluted and takes many more key clicks. At least Google Maps lets you choose and keep the old interface if you prefer (which I do because the new one loses a coordinate marker if you change the map view.) Even my phone lets me choose between a "regular" and an "easy" interface. Trying to print a list of results is much less environmentally-friendly and uses much more paper. Don't get me wrong because I like the new features such as the ability to search with a combination of factors such as "Hidden by" and using a keyword in the Geocache Name field and other new features such as searching for a range within the D/T fields, but please let us select what interface we want in the Preferences or give us a button to click to go back to the previous interface. Thanks.

On the other side of this challenge cache issue, I've been waiting a month for the CO to approve my Bookmark List that was posted with a log note and then I posted another log note two weeks later when I found the cache and signed the paper log while on vacation. CO was fairly specific about not logging the cache online until their approval was given so I'm still waiting. The CO logs onto GC.com almost every day so it's not as if they are inactive. What's a fair time to wait?

I do agree with your (in your words) snarky comment, but it was Groundspeak, GSAK and others who have promoted souvenirs, FTFs, challenges, awards, etc. and have made geocaching the somewhat competitive activity that it is. I learned a lot about the EC that I found (GC1D6KE) and I also CITO'ed GZ and removed a garbage bag full of trash (see photos with log). I carry a box of trash bags in the back of the cachemobile and regularly CITO a cache site. Also, I rarely take any SWAG but leave one of my personalized poker chips or something else if there is room in the cache. In addition, I carry spare mini ziploc bags and log strips and replace these on caches as needed, so I believe I am following the spirit of geocaching. I hope you don't think we are shallow people because we expected a souvenir that was very much implied. Why was a souvenir given for finding a cache on Leap Day or attending a World Wide Flash Mob event? It was Groundspeak promoting event and rewarding the cachers who met the requirements and I noticed that you received the souvenirs for these two events. Isn't EC Day just as deserving of a souvenir? This point of this discussion thread is that the rewarding of a souvenir for EC Day was rather heavily implied and not fulfilled. Regards.

Dame Deco, Not everyone is a Platinum EC Master (which is very admirable) or has read the International Earth Day thread. The latest issue of Latitude 47 said in part: "Simply discover and log an EarthCache, or attend an EarthCaching event, this Sunday to take part in the worldwide movement" and that statement was posted along with the "logo" for the event (and as you know, souvenirs have regularly been created from the event logo.) Right or wrong, many folks like me assumed the implied receipt of a souvenir. Anyway, my point is that probably like most of the other responding geocachers, I am not a super-geocacher (more of a weekend warrior), don't have a lot of FTFs, don't read all the boards, haven't been a long-time geocacher, etc. and the souvenirs I receive are some small measure of achievement such as the souvenirs for the 13 states where I have found a cache. At my age, I will never have thousands of finds or make finds in distant lands. Yes, I participated in a World Wide Flash Mob as well as found a cache on Leap Day this year in part because of the souvenirs and I think you would agree that these types of events are far less important to geocaching than an EC event. Groundspeak awards these souvenirs in part to encourage participation and they certainly were encouraging participation in this event. I know you may say that a souvenir should not be my reason for participating in an event and I agree, but again, right or wrong, I think most are disappointed and discouraged because in our collective opinions, the souvenir seemed to be implied in Latitude 47, Facebook and other places and it leaves a black eye on Groundspeak for the ambiguity regarding a souvenir unless they make good on this and award it retrospectively. I would imagine there are thousands out there who are disappointed as well but will never post their comments to the boards. Therefore, I hope we can respectfully agree to disagree. With kind regards, pcl_el_hefe

I agree and was very disappointed as well. After the hype from Groundspeak, you would expect a souvenir for logging an EarthCache on this day, but maybe Leap Day and World Wide Flash Mob are more of what Groundspeak thinks is worthy of a souvenir and what they think should be more important to geocachers and to geocaching as a whole. Go figure!

Right or wrong, I do not post a DNF off the bat as sometimes I don't have time to do a thorough search or it takes two or three times of searching until I make the find. Sometimes I'll see someone post a find after I've looked without finding, so I assume it's still there and I'll go back and check again. If after a few times of searching and no one else posts anything for a while (depending on the cache location and difficulty level), I'll shoot an email to the CO. I've seen many caches where the CO is not watching the logs, but usually they respond to email if they are still involved in geocaching and are still able to maintain it. With a little over 200 finds, I do not consider myself an expert at this. All that being said, I have been in email contact with at least 5 other cachers (one with over 1000 finds) who have looked for these caches. One feels that geocaching.com accidentally dropped the fractional minutes and is waiting (hoping) for the coords. to be corrected. Just a probable explanation of why there are not a bunch of posted DNFs. Thanks for the comments and insights so far.

We have a couple of new caches in WV (GC34DR6 and GC34DQH) that were published a little over a week ago. Several cachers have been beating the bushes for these but without success. Both caches had zeros in the fractional minutes for both latitude and longitude and yes I know that some cachers place them at these confluences, but this cacher is listed as new member with NO FINDS and just these two hides. Also the cache container description and contents were very unusual. Emails to the CO by several have gone unanswered as well as at least one to the Reviewer (also unanswered). Two have asked that these caches be archived and maybe they will be gone shortly. My questions are what do the reviewers check before publishing? Would the triple zeros in both latitude and longitude or a new member with no finds raise a red flag (or at least an eyebrow)? Is it possible that the fractional minutes got dropped somewhere on geocaching.com or would you think this is a prank to get cachers to waste a lot of time and energy? Finally, should the review process be reviewed and should a new geocacher have at least a minimum number of finds before being allowed to hide a cache? Any thoughts would be appreciated as several of us have been obviously frustrated with this, but maybe the process to hide a cache needs revised. Thanks. pcl_el_hefe