Mudfrog

Not sure if it's still available today but setting up a free Google phone number some 12 years back did the trick for me. Only gave it to geocachers. It was very customizable so I set it to ring both, my cell and home phones. Figured that if it ever got out of hand with spam or too many calls, that I could just disable the ringing to either of the phones. To my surprise, I never had that problem. I lost the Google number after forgetting to renew it? a few years ago.

This is a problem I have with some of my geocoins. They''ll go a long time without any logs then several will come in all of a sudden. Almost every one will say something like, spotted at an event. These will be on different coins so I have a feeling the coins aren't physically there and that only the numbers are being seen from a sheet of paper getting passed around.. Edited to add: One of my USA coins still getting logged was put out back in May 2003. Almost 20 years but as I said, probably ain't really traveling.

Our area, definitely a slow down on both events and physical caches. One example, a CITO event held yesterday has only 5 attended logs. Unfortunately, some of this may be due to people like me that don't geocache much these days and therefore don't keep up with new events coming down the pike. I do have notifications set to alert me of newly published traditional caches and archivals of existing ones. The archival rate is higher than published unfortunately. One thing for sure, the majority of our caches are slow to get found these days. Part of the problem there, I believe, is that most of them are a bit higher in difficulty which I believe, keeps them from being seen in the free app. What I wouldn't give to see geocaching revert back into more of a hobby than the game it is today. Was sure fun finding and placing caches that had a little thought and creativity put into them. Sometimes with neat containers, sometimes in great locations, sometimes just flat out challenging to find. There's still some good caches out there for sure but the vast majority placed these days fail to come close to meeting any of the above specs.

You aren't the only one. I have a few caches that have been found by different boy scout groups. Can't remember any problems ever developing because of this. Geocaching has really slowed down around here so there aren't many issues these days. In the past however, it was mostly new cachers that messed things up. As far as boy scouts being interested in geocaching,, they won't be for long if what they're going for is a trail of micros.

Some will say it's not a big deal and to just let it go. I'm not in agreement with that thinking. A good cache owner has a responsibility to be somewhat diligent in making sure stats associated with his or her caches are correct. Unfortunately, there's only so much a cache owner can do and the odds are against setting the record straight. One reason is because of GC dot com's stance of "signing the log isn't necessary to claim attended". I have never understood that. In your case, I can't think of one reason why a person would choose to not at least show his face for even a minute or two at the event. Not doing so is suspicious and I can see why you question the attended log. You can try but there's probably not much you can do about it.

I do not like using the Groundspeak app for caching. Whether I have full bars (good cell service) or not, the app on my Android phone doesn't always work. I just tried it the other day but couldn't get it to zero in on my location. This after hitting the "center on my location" button repeatedly. Yes, location services and cell data were both on. I had to manually zoom out, move over to where I was, then zoom back to load caches near me. It's hit or miss with the app, probably works ok about half the time. Thankfully, I still have GSAK and my old Garmin handheld.

I don't usually mess with these types of things but I went ahead and did this one yesterday. I know it was just for fun but imo, some of the multiple choice responses for the survey were too far out there and not really helpful in determining anything about what kind of geocacher a person is. For example, I did not choose "party bus" but for some reason it labeled me as being an extrovert who likes being the center of attention. Not even close!

The first ever LPC that I found back around 2004 was kinda cool. After that one, NOT! Like Amish Hacker, I don't like them and feel they don't do much to help our hobby along. While I appreciate the effort to make them more interesting, my dislike for LPCs is just too strong for it to make me want to play.

I'm still interested in geocaching but can't bring myself to actually go for any of the caches around our area. There are plenty (I've let them stack up over the last few years) but none that are interesting to me. The archival rate has been greater than the published rate in the last couple of years around our area. I'm thinking, mainly because new "gung ho" cachers hide but then lose interest after a short time. Maintenance doesn't happen and the caches get archived by the reviewer.

It's really all up to the individual. I used to keep replaced logbooks because they usually had entries that included nice little stories and/or details of the cache hunt. Unfortunately, those kinds of logs are few and far between these days so most go into the trash.

Well, funny coincidence. Just got this log in today. His photo was of the cache so I accepted it!

I'd rather see someone sign the logbook/logsheet than take a picture for proof. But a picture is not a deal breaker when it does happen to occur. Fortunately, seeing it done has been a rare occurrence over the many years I've been caching. I do agree that having a writing utensil is important. But even if a person doesn't have one for some reason, it's really not that hard to leave a mark showing he was there. I remember a couple of occasions when I lost my pen along the way (left it in a previous cache) and had to improvise. A stick dipped in mud works in a pinch. There was one time where I used a stick and a blade of grass to leave my green initials. I wouldn't do it but I believe I've even read replies on here where someone used their own blood to sign a log.

I've never cared about souvenirs but I did want to help with trying to break the record. I believe I read about it in the newsletter email days before but as per usual, it didn't take me long to forget. Would have been nice if a reminder could have been sent out the day before or maybe even that morning. Edited to add: Ooooppps, just reread the newsletter and see that it did come in the day before. No excuse, I goofed up with the dates. Oh well,,,

I have an older adopted cache located at a travel stop here in the USA that I'm trying to keep active. I've had to disable it twice because of a storm and then again when the travel stop was torn down and rebuilt. First disablement lasted right at 2 years and the second was 15 months. I tried to remember to post monthly notes but I would forget and ended up getting reminded by the reviewer to check the status of the cache several times. There was one point that I did have to explain to the reviewer, that my cache was not hampering anyone else from placing one since the whole area was closed. It worked out but yes, it did require a lot of cache update communication.

Agree with almost all of the above! Personally though, I don't think a cache owner should ask people upfront to maintain his or her caches. I suppose there could be a unique situation where it's ok, but for the most part, the cache owner should perform his own maintenance.

I've gotten a couple or three of these nudges come in from Groundspeak over the years but never had one that got me upset. Have never had one I'd consider a nastygram. For me, it all depends on the cache it comes in on as to whether I think I need to take action soon or put on the back burner. A difficult cache that I believe is probably still in place get's assigned to the latter category where, who knows, it might be found by the very next geocacher. To be honest, I'm very forgetful so these kinds of reminders are sometimes helpful.

Glad your irk level is only a 4 as I have some old challenge caches that have no checkers on them. Personally, I feel there is too much hand holding going on in geocaching these days! For me, having to figure out whether I qualify for completion of a challenge cache is just another part of the challenge. Imo, the addition of a checker should be left up to the cache owner. Yes, I'd say this is my irk for the day.

Yes, I know that a big part of this is because of the commercial guidelines. Imo, the multitude of guidelines that Groundspeak has implemented over the years has taken away a lot of the fun and creativity of our hobby. There were basically three guidelines back when I started in early 03 but clicking on the link you've given brings up tons of guidelines, pretty much rules, that cover just the hiding of a cache. Shouldn't matter if the cache is hidden on private, commercial, government, or a non-profits property if permission is obtained. Whether it be a venue we don't agree with, the requirement of a high fee, a cache's difficulty, etc,,, we all have the ability to ignore those that we don't like.

Imo, a fee is a fee. Whether it be private or not for profit, they both cost us money. It should not matter as long as permission is given for the cache placement. There are a lot of caches placed that we sometimes have to put on our ignore list for one reason or another. Caches hidden in the top of trees, ones we feel are too dangerous, and ones that cost more to get than we want to spend are all examples.

This is what we've always encountered. It's sometimes in the cache description but we see it mostly in cacher's logs. Sometimes a critter of some sort moves in close by after the cache is placed.

It's not mine but there is, at least there used to be, a cache at street level between some tall buildings in Houston. The gpsr readings were all over the place causing us to have a heck of a time narrowing down that one's hiding spot!

I've seen a couple or three come in that went something like this, Not necessarily from a new cacher but a good indication that it is.

And this is one of the reasons I've lost interest in geocaching. Too many dad blasted guidelines that, imo, hamper the hobby. For me, a cache with limited accessibility would add a tiny bit of a challenge and make it a more enticing and memorable cache. It would be a cache that, like every other cache out there, could be ignored if someone thought it was too difficult for them to get. In this case, what would be better,,, having a cache with limited availability or having no cache at all?

I know you're joking,, I think.

If you read the bolded part of Keystone's post that I quoted earlier, If I'm interpreting this correctly, then it sounds like the OP's caches were NOT all submitted at one time. Not complaining, just voicing an opinion. And yes, I do appreciate reviewers doing the work they do, especially with all the annoyances from us that they have to put up with.