[Challenge cache FTF question]

Yes, someone has already actually found the physical container. However, and in my opinion, the first person that meets the cache's qualifications and signs the physical log is the actual first finder.  

 

[Deleting account locks all owned caches]

If true, which it seems it probably is,, Groundspeak needs to do something about this. A person's cache history shouldn't be affected just because some bumhole get's upset.

[Location Search Function Not Working]

Just tried it myself and see that it's way off. Inputting the exact coordinates for a known cache should show that cache first on the list. However, the first cache in the results is 30 plus miles away. Needs checking for sure!

[Help with GSAK]

My first thought was to look at a geocaching dot com map. Find three caches that form a triangle that you have not done. These look pretty close to being equilateral. Gsak may have an add on for using coordinates to be more precise but I am not familiar with it. 

 

Edited to delete the image,, I didn't think about it being a spoiler. 

 

 

 

 

 

[First hide stolen before it got published.]

Labeling a geocache does sometimes help. We've had non geocachers sign when they accidently found caches before. But on the whole, if not hidden somewhat, many, if not most, get stolen, labeled or not. 

 

Placing behind a wall that's easily approached in a popular park usually doesn't work out well. Best bet is to camouflage it a bit. Paint to blend in with its surroundings, placing under a natural covering like leaves and/or small branches, or pick other spots not normally visited by muggles. Geocachers, especially those who have been around a while, will figure out where the cache is when hidden in these manner. No digging to bury and no defacing or making holes in anything already in place.

 

Kcreek, this happens at times but it doesn't take long to figure what works and what doesn't. Don't give up! 

[Puzzle cache with no way to get coords]

 

Quote

I am just asking if you think this a legitimate puzzle to ask people to drive so many places and vague clues?

 

To answer,

 

Yes,, since this cache has the ? icon,,, It's  perfectly ok to ask people to drive to so many places. Vague clues are fine. I have not solved or found this cache but the difficulty ratings indicate that figuring the puzzle out may not be that easy. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tree Fishing....Identify or not?]

Just now, Mudfrog said:

 

Yours is the kind of cache that keeps me interested in geocaching. Would love to see something liked that placed around here. Unfortunately, as others have mentioned, you'll have those who won't even make an attempt to do it properly, will mess up the cache somehow, and/or post find logs when they've spotted the container but never actually reached it. 

 

I don't know your layout so this may not be of any concern. If there are branches near the cache, can a bad toss of the cord accidently cause it to make a wrap or two around one and cause it to be stuck?

 

[Tree Fishing....Identify or not?]

18 hours ago, stipman said:

Just discovered the phrase "Tree Fishing"

Have a cache that's ready to go but now I'm second guessing myself.  It involves tossing a piece of para cord up that has a small magnet on the end (a littlt larger than size of thumb nail). The magnet is from a scavenged hard drive and is quite powerful.  The cord is in a lock & lock at base of tree. When tossed up properly, the magnet attaches to the cache, you pull it down, sign the log, release it and it retracts back up in the tree.

 

Should I identify the cache as a tree fishing excursion? I'd really like people to attempt to toss the cord up and "catch" the cache rather than bring their own device/pole to grab the cache.

 

Thoughts/comments?

 

Yours is the kind of cache that keeps me interested in geocaching. Would love to see something liked that placed around here. Unfortunately, as others have mentioned, you'll have those who won't even make an attempt to do it properly, mess up the cache, and/or have find logs come in from people that spotted the container but never actually reached it. 

 

I don't know your layout so this may not be of any concern. If there are branches near the cache, can a bad toss of the cord accidently cause it to make a wrap or two around one and cause it to be stuck?

[What Difficulty and Terrain shall I put for a cache on a steep river bank]

We all have varying opinions but from what we know, mine is that it should be around a 3 or 3.5. It's steep but it doesn't sound like there's much distance to travel (not much of an elevation change). No special equipment needed so that brings down the rating. I don't know the layout but a person might want to grab onto something (root or branch) to keep from slipping on down, still relatively easy for most people. 

[No "NM", when not finding a cache?]

20 hours ago, niraD said:

I've also posted NM logs when GZ was squarely inside a fenced-off construction zone. No, I didn't find it. No, I couldn't even search for it. But the CO clearly needs to deal with the situation, so NM is warranted.

 

Yep, another situation where a needs maintenance  may be warranted. I might also post a needs archived later on if I somehow found out there hadn't been any response from the cache owner.

[No "NM", when not finding a cache?]

20 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

I'm of the mindset that a NM for "container might be missing" should primarily be for GZ has been destroyed or evidence of container theft like a cut chain, scattered swag, or lid without body.

 

For NM due to DNFs I would usually want multiple DNFs from different experienced cachers on different days. How many depends on the hide. There are exceptions, but they are extreme corner cases.

 

 

This is the way I see it as well. A needs maintenance log is better used when there's an evident problem with the cache or cache site. A person should NOT use it just because he or she wasn't able to come up with the cache. But,,

 

 

Quote

Cachers are reminded that the "Needs Maintenance" log should be used only if the cache is found and there are known maintenance issues. If the cache IS NOT found, the appropriate log is the "Didn't Find It" (DNF) log type. A cacher can't know if a cache needs maintenance if s/he hasn't actually seen the cache.

 

I feel the reviewer is off base with his thinking of how/when a NM log is to be used. There are certainly other times when a NM log is appropriate. For instance, a string of DNFs on an easier cache, or people not finding after reading a hint that totally gives the cache's hiding place away. Things like these are good indications there is a problem that needs to be looked into. 

[What irks me? - When the OP deletes the entire thread]

I was going to reply that this was a dumb irk but then figured I better not. I'd sure hate to see this entertaining thread deleted. 

 

Some people have thin skin, some can't stand it when others disagree with them, and some just can't handle the truth. Oh well! 

 

Edited to ask: Didn't it use to be that an original poster could not delete a thread they had started?

[An Example Of Why Webcams Should Never Return]

We have always enjoyed webcam caches. They are a bit different than a traditional cache, no container or logbook, but still require a person looking for it to go to a certain spot. I personally wouldn't mind seeing them make a comeback. 

 

Just like traditionals, they require maintenance. A webcam cache owner has a duty to monitor the logs and delete as required. A webcam needs to be flagged and then archived if its owner doesn't want to take care of business. Traditional caches that get tons of armchair and other false logs should be treated no different but it's funny that we don't see that many complaints about those. And if somebody does complain on here, a lot of posters reply that it's not hurting them and that they need to move on. 

 

Let's not be hypocritical here. Webcams have problems, virtual caches have problems, and you guessed it, traditionals and every cache type out there has problems. It's fine if you don't webcams, I don't care for virtuals myself, but I would never call for them to be blasted off the earth because of my dislikes. The majority of the issues we see are caused by cache owners that don't care or that have left the building. I agree the cache spoken of in the opening post needed to be archived. It should not have gone that long building up the fake logs. However, the cache itself was NOT the problem. 

[Should I write an OAR log?]

On 8/6/2023 at 8:22 PM, Goldenwattle said:

Something like:

The container at stage X is missing, but the CO was kind enough to give me the information when I contacted them. Thank you XXXXX for the assistance. If anyone else has a problem, I suggest also contacting the CO to get the information.

 

The OP stated he couldn't find the container. That doesn't mean it's actually missing. I would go with something like,

 

"Had some trouble with stage X, wasn't able to locate the container. Contacted the  CO who was kind enough to give me the information needed to complete the cache."

[Is cache adoption a legal transfer of property?]

On 7/24/2023 at 12:00 PM, TriciaG said:

(Gotta do it, sorry.)

It's "kit and caboodle".

https://www.wordorigins.org/big-list-entries/kit-and-caboodle

https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/kit-and-caboodle.html

 

Yeah, I didn't catch that when I typed it,, even got a private message from someone setting me straight. 

[Is cache adoption a legal transfer of property?]

5 hours ago, arisoft said:

There is a good reason for this kind of disputes.

For the transferring party, the adoption process is about the listing only

But for the receiving party it is about ownership of the physical cache

I think that the arbitrator (Groudspeak) may be legally responsible for damages caused by ambiguities in the contract terms.

 

 

I'm not reading it the way you are. To me, the "transfer ownership of their listings to other users" is straightforward. The listing is the whole kitten caboodle, cache page, physical cache, and anything else associated with the cache. 

 

I'd probably be the better person and give it back but at the same time, I adopted which makes it mine to do with whatever I please, as long as it meets GC dot com guidelines. 

[Maintaining a cache]

10 hours ago, Viajero Perdido said:

I stepped on an in-ground wasp nest while lifting a cache out of its hiding place.  I lost that battle.

 

I returned a couple of weeks later with chemical warfare (ant dust, carbaryl) and won that battle.  Voluntary cache maintenance.  Nobody cares if it's allowed, but it probably is.

 

Been there, done that. Running and swatting makes it worse. You ain't gonna win that battle. Sure glad I'm not allergic to the critters! 

 

Would have liked to have helped the cache owner get rid of them but had no way at the time. Only thing we could do was post a warning on the cache page.

[Maintaining a cache]

On 7/7/2023 at 12:44 PM, kunarion said:

 

For caches I own, I try to reduce the poison ivy next to a cache if it's in a city park.  But for finding, I don't chop anything, especially PI.  Wait til fall or winter, and, except for hairy vines on tree trunks, the whole place is clear.  Yes, I have done CITOs where we pull up particular invasive plants, invited by the land managers.

 

Here's a place I hunted for a cache.  Among a field of knee-high poison ivy.  "Cutting" this is a bad idea while searching.  The ammo box was on the ground in there.  I often skip these, but on this day, I went extremely slowly and carefully, and came out fine.

 

 

 

 

 

On 7/7/2023 at 12:59 PM, MNTA said:

How is this fun? How is this a good image for geocaching. If this was your first cache it would probably be the last. CO needs to maintain in a healty and safe environment. Move it or archive it.

 

Mentioning on the cache page description that there is poison ivy at the cache site would be nice so as to keep down disappointment. I would add it to a cache if PI ended up encroaching on one of my caches. However, I would not move my cache just because of it and I would not try to trim or remove the PI either. A finder needs to be responsible for their actions and realize when they need to step back.

 

Not that it makes a difference to anyone but that cache looks to be more fun to me than about 95% of the other caches placed. Looks to be woodsie, challenging, has a good container, and probably has a nice logbook to sign. All good qualities imo. Like other more difficult caches, it's not for everyone! 

[Changed a D/T rating and cachers are mad at me]

On 6/19/2023 at 7:40 PM, PlantAKiss said:

I've changed ratings on occasion due to changing terrain or having to move a stage. Ratings are about my cache, not someone's grid thingy. 

 

12 hours ago, Calypso62 said:

 

I agree 100% with this statement. If something needs changing..... then change it!

 

Agree, cache pages sometimes need modifications made to them to become more accurate. I would not make a teensy little .5 change but anything 1 or over can sometimes be needed.

[Geocaching EDC Gear]

I like traveling lite so my lists are short.

 

A normal day of urban/suburban caching requires only my gpsr, pen, and a notepad to keep up with caches found. Whether caching or not, my Skeletool is always with me. No swag since I rarely do any trading.

 

A longer hike in the woods, say 10 miles, has me wearing better shoes and a hat of some sort. I carry a larger Kershaw (3 different blades) on my belt and don a shoulder pack housing food (snacks), water, flashlight, lighter, bug spray, and maybe an extra shirt or light jacket. I sometimes carry a small firearm but that's not very often.

 

Kayaking for a cache means wearing a life jacket and usually applying sunscreen in addition to a few of the above items.

 

 

[Its time for a cache rating system]

1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:

 

There's a caveat there, that Project GC's Top Favourite (%) excludes caches with less than 10 FPs. Maybe that's not a problem in places with a lot of caching activity, but around here even some pretty awesome caches can go many years without getting 10 finders, let alone 10 FPs. One of my all-time favourites, GC6T5PZ, published in 2016, still only has 5 FPs from 7 finds and won't appear in Project GC's Top Favourite (%) list.

 

Another good reason why it would be nice to have a favorite point percentage display on cache pages.

[Have your priorities changed?]

On 3/22/2023 at 2:17 PM, Viajero Perdido said:

I opt out of most "improvements" to the game since 2005 when I started, so I guess it's not me that's changed, but the game as defined by Frog HQ.

1. Non-cache "caches" that are really geology lessons.  I have little time for weird.
2. Badges for participation, I turn 'em off but new ones keep popping up.
3. Some new game that doesn't seem very adventurous in spite of the name, connected loosely to this game by ownership and a "find" count?  Pass, thanks.
4. Old maps are the best, even if GS can't ever make changes to 'em.
5. Old logging page is still the best; it has preview after all.
6. Old search links still work best (I keep bookmarks) because more info, less white space, less waiting.
7. I can't brain the official search, so I don't search.
8. Forums lost Off Topic so I spend more time elsewhere.

The original game still has all the magic I need, to keep it fun through all these years.  Boxes!  In the woods!

 

 

I agree with your 1 through 8. Website page updates/improvements haven't been helpful to me, the old formats were just fine. I have absolutely no interest in souvenirs, badges, lab caches, or other gimmicks. Caches with a series theme aren't usually interesting and I'm  definitely not into power trails. As I mentioned back in 2013, find count isn't important. 

 

GC's decision to drop their promotion of quality and then welcome quantity has had a big effect on the way I cache these days.

[Is signing challenge caches ahead of time and logging them later to maintain a streak against the spirit of a streak challenge?]

To answer the thread title's question,

Is signing challenge caches ahead of time and logging them later to maintain a streak against the spirit of a streak challenge?

 

The order of completion of a challenge cache doesn't normally matter. A person can locate the physical cache/sign the log first or they can qualify for the challenge first. Imo though, the date the last step is completed on is the date the cache is legitimately found. All good if this date happens to fall on a date needed to complete a streak. A bit lame if used for streak if it doesn't.

 

[What Irks you most?]

On 4/16/2023 at 10:23 PM, Goldenwattle said:

When you open them they usually are. That doesn't make them less annoying. The pleasure of finding it dashed away. I agree with LEE737's comment, "Yep, if there's a more reliable way to make me not give you an FP, I'm not sure what it is...."

 

Goes to show you how all of us are different. I enjoy those kinds of caches and in my opinion, I'd rather they not be so rare. For me, there's actually the feeling I've accomplished something when finally discovering the real cache amongst the red herrings. Traditional micro caches hidden same ole same ole are the ones that I pay little attention to. As far as throwing favorite points their way,, forget about it!.

[What Irks you most?]

8 hours ago, Gill & Tony said:

I was once  hunting for a cache and found a container containing a log sheet with several names written.  I turned it over (actually i dropped it and it fell other side up) to see "This isn't the cache. keep looking!"

 

I've found a few like that. Someone not finding a cache and then throwing down can also cause this kind of stuff to happen. I imagine on the whole though, adding a logsheet, and making note of it in your online found log, helps more than it hurts.