AustinMN

In this area, that feature would be quickly turned off. Hundreds of times a day, I go past nearby caches that I have not found. Just get in the habit of asking the app to find nearby. Then it won't harass you when you don't have the time. wondering if this belongs in a different forum.

Just try to get a cache approved in a Minnesota WMA. You will find out if state laws mean nothing.

Oh well let them script away and put a captcha on top of the registration. At the moment geocaching.com is an easy target for spam-bots and if you leave it this way, it only gets worse. I'm paying my premium membership so someone is developing the site and taking care of things. Right now I got the feeling someone is refusing to do their job. Cheers What do you base that on? Are you still receiving erroneous log entries? The last report of these fake accounts was more than a day ago, as far as I can tell. It has stopped and re-started before. The perpetrator will keep coming back because it is still easy. The reality is, 5 years ago when I got my account it should have already had recaptcha on it. Nope, not doing their job. Much rather create features nobody wants.

This comes from an English-only mindset. It is important to think globally.

It is much more difficult for an individual (not a bot) to get a new email account. Once their email account is blocked by Groundspeak, what are their options? The ease of being abusive is reduced. It can be. Anything can be. It is about making it more difficult to be massively malicious, not about making it impossible. Austin

If possible, try logging in using a different computer and on a different network.

Except when recording coordinates for a new hide, GS does not require the use of any specific technology. I have found caches using sat maps from Google Earth. I was able to zero in on the actual location, found the cache, and signed the log. Nobody cares that I didn't use GPS sats to find GZ. In that circumstance (surrounded by skyscrapers), a GPSr would have been useless. If you wanted to use 19th century survey tools, you could find caches that way. In fact, some might give you a medal for doing so. The satellites are a method, not a requirement. However, not being at the cache container is a non-find. In the same way, not being at the location of the event is a non-attend. Using virtual event attendance as "attended" is as hollow as claiming a find because I looked at photos of the container and photos of the location on a sat map. It's not that GS who will never catch up, it's that those who don't understand that location really is location who will never get it. BTW, if you want to go to an alternate site, be my guest. I hear they even have a cache on every continent.

I doubt it. Why log other cachetypes without really finding them? Why log virtuals without visiting the site? Why log TB codes from lists circulating the internet? Some people just chose to cheat. It's everywhere, sports, politics, financial world.. and in geocaching. They cheat because they can. Indeed, they cheat because they can. And cheating a Challenge cache requires...cheating at other caches.

I would not even hesitate to log an NA.

Once again, no matter how you cache, and no matter how you log, it is wrong.

A park has regularly scheduled hours, usually every day, when it is opened to the public. Groundspeak HQ only has specially scheduled hours.

Personally I would derive some light entertainment by gambling on how long before someone builds up the courage to stick their head above the parapet, suffer the slings and arrows of outraged selfie loggers and post a needs archived log +1. But not until I've logged it. <running from room>

Here is one of your throwdowns. "Fix" lasted two months. You wasted your effort. http://coord.info/GC2GH2T

Ten seconds to find out your last time connexcted to the site was today, and that your last "found it" was 7 days ago..."tons of research?" You are deluding yourself. Edit: Last log was 7 days ago...last found it was over a month ago.

If the cache is a LPC film can and there is only one light pole at GZ and its a 1-1 and its gone I say replace it ....you would have to be sure that the original container was gone and replace it with a like container. Since something like 99.99% of LPC's don't really have permission, replacing one that is missing may be a wonderful way of demonstrating to the property owner who found and removed it that geocachers are malicious.

My inderstanding is the cache size is based on the volume inside the container, so a micro hidden inside a train car is still a micro.

And a disposable camera? Looks like SWAG to most people. You might get 5% of them back...or 0%.

How 'bout a little newsflash: it IS their business. +1

Correct. Which I have admitted and me "fixing" this is what caused this whole mess. Bear in mind, no one ever notified me when this rule change went into effect in 2009. I wasn't scrutinizing the photos people were posting, because it never occurred to me that people wouldn't follow the simple directions. I am not sure how a few of you are not understanding this. Once I realize what was happening, I took steps to correct it. I understand there are a few more logs in there now that shouldn't be (per my rules), but it's clear that these are within GS's rules (right?), so I am notsure why anyone would be advising me to delete them now...? If they are allowed, they are allowed, right? If you had been enforcing your rules all along, you would have found out about the GS rule change a long time ago, and in the same way you just did find out about it. A cacher who knows the rules would have complained about you breaking GS rules. Ok... so what is the point you are making? That we should have had this conversation 6 years ago? Well, unfortunately my time machine cache was archived, so that's not going to happen. How about if we focus on the present? If you are saying it is my fault that that me deleting logs that didn't meet the requirement ended up leading to a cacher reporting the cache to GS (regardless of what year that happened), then I agree with you. If you are trying to make some other point, I'm missing it. I should have trimmed your post. Part of your rant is that the ALR rule has not caught up with you until now. You recently started enforcing your ALR, and now all of a sudden it's a problem. The reality is that many people may have noticed it. But because you were not enforcing it, nobody cared, because it was as if you didn't have the rule. Now you effectively change the rules by enforcing a (long ago diallowed) rule that you have not enforced for years, and it bothers you that people complain. Wow.

Correct. Which I have admitted and me "fixing" this is what caused this whole mess. Bear in mind, no one ever notified me when this rule change went into effect in 2009. I wasn't scrutinizing the photos people were posting, because it never occurred to me that people wouldn't follow the simple directions. I am not sure how a few of you are not understanding this. Once I realize what was happening, I took steps to correct it. I understand there are a few more logs in there now that shouldn't be (per my rules), but it's clear that these are within GS's rules (right?), so I am notsure why anyone would be advising me to delete them now...? If they are allowed, they are allowed, right? If you had been enforcing your rules all along, you would have found out about the GS rule change a long time ago, and in the same way you just did find out about it. A cacher who knows the rules would have complained about you breaking GS rules.

That's interesting.

+1. Yes, I know what this means.

I don't see Ginger Vietys in the photo; she must have finally met her match.

Regulars knew that they could prevent a waste of their time by just going on when they saw that comment. Newbies who didn't recognize the "troll attribute" reply were left to go back and forth with the troll, until/unless someone PMed them what "That's interesting" means. You'll note that "That's interesting" is not derogatory or even a put off if the OP was not really trolling. Just serves as a flag. That's interesting! Just kidding of course. But i will say that, although it wouldn't hurt anything to have a flag like this, i'm not sure it's really needed. I'd say that most who hang around here spot em fairly quickly. On top of that, many see the trolling going on and comment anyway. And others see trolls when there are none.

Did anyone else notice the cat in the sandbox? Yeah, I did, but I'm cutting the newbie some slack. Cat? Sandbox? Oh oh! You best not get started with the dog, sandbox or not!