Durango!

Brian, are you cyclothymic?

The requirement for maintenance should be in proportion to the remoteness of the cache. A micro in the city may have to get its log changed every month as it fills up. A trad cache in Kluane may need to have a visit once every two years or more, as it is in a tough ammo can and not many people get out there. (I assume.) Should be fine.

I think I'll close this one now, as it seems played out. Email me if you really want it to continue. I am very happy that talks have been re-opened. I would like to continue to hear updates about what is going on. I hope no one is left hanging on the issue.

How bout getting rid of post counts too ... (bait for those taking the week off Losing the find count would be nice since they are cacher specific and not cache specific I agree!

Basically, people want the ability to cheat a little if they think it is justfied...

Not too ancient for plastic? Is that how you found it?

I own S & T, but lots of folks don't. I think it would be a nice feature for the site.

I'm glad that ranking isn't done on the site. This would be pointless when this is really all "honor system" anyway. How many people cheat when they report golf numbers? I bet it is pretty high in geocaching as well. I personally think that if you don't findi t YOURSELF, it is not a find. Yet tons of people go around racking up 50 caches a day in these 'cache machines.' I'm surprised TPTB would condone calling these "finds" (Everyone in the group logs a find, even if each person didn't really have to "find" anything.) What matters to me is quality, not quantity. Most of my finds involved a hike and some great memories. I especially like to look back at photos of the kids on cache pages from years ago. Great memories!

Where it "belongs"? Isn't the cache owner the one responsible for this judgement?

If I sort for the 10 caches closest to area code 99654, I get them numbered by their distance from that center. I would then like to hit a button that sorts them by most efficient order, based on how close the caches are to each other. For instance, you should start with cache 2, and proceed 5312 for the shortest route between them all.

Yep. just disable the found it option if the ownder is logged in to that page. looks like easy code writing.

I think my suggestion was a little misunderstood, Jeremy. I agree that turn by turn maps would be a huge deal with massive mapping and computing requirements. I'm just talking, however, about lining up the waypoints for the closest distance, as the crow flies. This wouldn't require so much power, and the user could figure out the street turns. This really isn't a problem in an urban setting, where streets are going everwhere. The program wouldn't have to be perfect to be helpful.

Thanks for the explanation Jeremy.

MS T & S does these computations fine. It shouldn't be any more of a burden than any other function. It is simply a matter of the computer doing a little quick math- much easier for a computer than a person. Don't be so quick to shoot down my idea!

I have an idea for a new feature. When you use programs like MS T & S, you can take all your stops and arrange them according to efficiency. It will arrange this to save you mileage or time as you make all your stops through town. When I find the nearest caches, it arranges them in order based on distance from a point. How about another button that you can then hit that will tell you in which order to do them all most efficiently. (The current method doesn't always help much, because stop 2 and 3 may be both 1 and 1.2 miles from a point respectively, but in opposite directions of the compass from that point. So obviously, you wouldn't want to go to point 2 and then 3, when there is another cache .3 miles out from cache 3, but in the same direction. ) You could then easily plan a day of caching with the least driving/riding/running.

Thanks so much for the help. I don't have my topo map set loaded right now, so that must be the cause of this large margin of error. cheers!

I will agree that caching has gotten a little more bland. If you have read some of the very first posts, they said that you might find cig lighters, a beer, or other things in a cache now considered "naughty." You guys are much too literal with your analogies, but I'm glad someone finally realized that the beans are all contributed freely. I wish we could all contribute these beans to a non-profit .org rather than a for-profit .com. Then the .com's could freely brew them in whatever way they desired, but other sites could brew up different recipes with the same pool of beans. Of course this was tried but failed very early on. Of course the evil capitalists just want to control the "means of production." j/k (Really, I'm not a communist.)

May I have the same? thnx!

My GPSr has a circle on the map view I'm sure you are all familiar with. It basically shows the zone of uncertainty, and as you zoom in really close, you will see it appear. If the GPSr is accurate to only 20 feet, and you are zoomed in to the level where your screen shows 20 ft across, the accuracy circle will be about as big as the screen. Well, the circle on my unit is staying really big, it shows at about 0.2 miles and doesn't change. It is hard enough to explain this, can anyone help me out with what is going on?

I see at least one person is missing my point entirely. Oh well, think a little more dude. What is often said is that the paying membership is for some "extra" features. Well, some time ago, functions like panning the map and zooming were free to everyone. So in a sense, some features have been taken away from those who don't pay. If someone isn't a paying member (I am!) then they can't use the maps efficiently. Now with Groundspeak cutting off Buxley, they have no good mapping resource without paying. It just seems a little underhanded to me. That is why I question the ethics. I think you should at least be gracious enough, Jeremy, to reopen talks with Buxley. I don't know the guy and have always used this site primarly. But don't just leave the phone on hold, so to speak. Finish the conversation. I hope the folks at Groundspeak will continue to provide him with map data, it just enhances the sport and makes it more fun. You won't lose any members over doing so, but you will over monopolistic practices.

The most infuriating thing I read here is the profound tendency to want to limit free speech for any excuse. Topic should be closed, right!

Bear with me for a moment while I use an analogy... I enjoy going to Starbucks. I have actually been with Starbucks from the beginning, and think they have some really good coffee. But here in my Seattle neighborhood there used to be a nice little local chain I'll call X-Coffee. There was a great store across the street, part of the X-Coffee chain, that made a wonderful specialty drink. Yes, I usually went to Starbucks by my work, but at least once a week there was nothing that satisfied like that specialty drink from x-Coffee. Well, a couple months ago, Starbucks opened a store next door to the X-Coffee. X-Coffee just isn't as popular, doesn't have as many users, and isn't the "coffee standard" everyone wants. Well, it wasn't too long until X-Coffee across the street went out of business. They worked really hard, provided the most service at the lowest prices, but couldn't compete when Starbucks opened next door. I still like Starbucks, but I really miss X-coffee. It was nice to know they were there. I do like to root for the little guy. Now I wish I could have given more of my money to X-coffee, but I didn't know Starbucks would become such a monster when it was a little guy. Now suppose X-coffee had their coffee supply cut off by their supplier, Starbucks. Starbucks knew they were better and were not threatened, but they just cut off the supply to x-coffee to make more money. Does this analogy fit? Well, I get the same feeling. I kind of liked the little guy, and wish he was still here.

I have been out of the loop for a little while, but just went back to Buxley's Waypoint. I can't believe that you have cut them off... that has always been a great site and compliment to the sport. I am having trouble believing that the Groundspeak folks could be so cold hearted and narrow minded. This certainly wasn't how geocaching started out, before the money became an issue. I just renewed my Premium Membership, more to help out than anything. But now I have my doubts...

Okay I challenge you all to find my Robert Service Poetry Cache. It is on an island in a lake in the Yukon Territory in Canada. It is an island with great history. does anyone have the courage to try?

I say no... numbers are worthless. I didn't get very many caches while in Alaska, and did that make me a "non-top" cacher? What if you considered that many of these required several hours of hiking? Meanwhile, people in Seattle are hitting 50 urban caches a day, sometimes in large groups with everyone calling it a "find" that was there? Numbers mean nothing. Let's not try and be competitive about them.