FireRef

Why is it called a Fizzy challenge? I understand the concept - just not the reasoning behind the name - which I actually don't have any... lol

I was approached by a DCNR (Park Police) officer who saw me and a friend on the side of the road looking around, and my car was down about a half block away, off the road but with the flashers on. I walked back to the car he was in when he pulled up, and said hi, We're Geocaching. He hesitated about a half second, and said, "Ok, have fun - just thought maybe you needed help or something" - I said "Nope, but thanks!". Very positive experience. And this is a good thing, considering how many caches are in this area, and how many cachers will be in this area next summer because of Geowoodstock.

I don't see why we would need a new cache type for a power trail. Look at a map - see a chain of caches - assume it is a PT... don't create a new cache type for this. A new attribute would be cool, though. Written by someone who feels all cache types are good...

What's the general turnaround time for those of you who filled it out and got the ok to download?

I do not believe limiting people in this manner would be a good thing. Some people will make hides that are not appropriate after an unlimited number of finds. Others will be good after 5 or 10. It also depends on who they work with, who they talk their hides over with, etc. We all have found bad hides - whether they are from newbies or established people (there's a pair I won't hunt for caches from near where my family camps, because consistently their hides are nowhere near the coordinates, but they are long time cachers and put out a decent number of hides) - this wouldn't fix the problem - it would most likely cause one as cachers who didn't want to "find" 100 would log extra finds to make sure they met that minimum to get a cache published, on caches they didn't actually find.

Seems odd that it would have done that without warning, and just when I got it lol. And its not that I bought it - I borrowed it to get the data connection set up for that friend.

I just got a GPS to work on from a friend. It worked fine when he had it, but since I got it, I can't get anything but the backlight to work. It couldn't have broken between him giving it to me and me trying it - it worked a day or two ago and now doesn't. I tried the hard reset procedure, and tried playing with the contrast (but I can't see the screen to see if I'm on the right screen to get the contrast to change). I can get the backlight to work. I know when it is on by whether the backlight comes up when I press keys. But other than that, I can't see anything. Help! Also tried 3 sets of batteries - ones he gave me, freshly charged new energizer recharge, and fresh duracell alkaline non-rechargeable. No change.

I think that something that a lot of people don't take into account is the fact that while some people like numbers, some don't - Some like cool places, some don't care - Some want large containers, some want smaller, and some don't care... I think that some people just like knowing something is hidden somewhere that almost no one else does. That is part of why I like doing geocaching - sometimes its a nice place to go, sometimes its just a smiley for the number, but always, its something I know is there and almost no one else does. Middle of the woods, middle of a mountaintop, or middle of a Wally-world parking lot, all three meet this requirement for me, and I'm happy to look for any of them.

Could you move the cache over a few feet and put it outside the cemetery but still on your land? There might be room for compromise here. Reviewer said I have to move it 528 feet from the cemetery, which is no longer on the property I think some of the reviewers are taking this law a little more into their own interpretation than is really necessary. I was at the MWGB where a Tennessee reviewer was in a panel that talked about this. He is erring completely on the side of caution by saying it would be silly to get a felony charge for playing this game in the cemetery. I highly doubt this is what was intended by the law, and in my personal (and not legal in any way) opinion, I think it is being way overprotective. As for the 528 feet, that is completely arbitrary. There is no rule from this website which prohibits the placement of a cache within a specified distance from any cemetery. The only other specified distances I have ever heard of are 150' from certain things like bridges or railroad tracks. I believe the reviewer is making an arbitrary decision on this one, and you would be best served by appealing to the reviewers email address.

There are people who like the concept of 2000 virtual cache finds in 4 hours. Can I get your vote for my virtual repitition trail? If you're stopping and signing the log, they're not virtual. There's no "click your camera and get a find" caches. The power trails aren't what you're talking about. If you don't like them, don't do them - but please stop trying to ruin them for the people that do!

I can provide numerous reason why I feel powertrails are a reason for concern and when I did in the Get Satisfaction forum about 175 people agreed with me. Yes, there were many that chose to ignore those reasons for the sake of increasing their find count at a mind boggling rate (one E.T. cacher claimed to have found more caches in a single day then I have in 3.5 years (just over 1000). Frankly, when it comes to power trails most that are pro-trail take a selfish approach. As long as they're have a good time, finding several hundred caches in a day they don't care if there are others that have concerns about the impact of power trails. Honestly, I think it is more the opposite - the people who are anti-power-trails are being selfish. "I don't like them, so I don't think anyone else should be able to have or do them". If your find count means nothing in the grand scheme of things to anyone other than yourself, which is what the website always says, then what does it matter if someone outcaches you because they enjoyed the challenge of following that trail and finding that many in a short time? I like a little of everything - I've enjoyed the few mini power trails I've done, a few seriously challenging caches, and everything in between. If you don't like them, don't look for them - don't begrudge people who do like them the ability to do so. That is what has removed locationless caches, and prohibited new webcams and virtuals. Look for what you like, ignore what you don't.

But it would definitely make things easier - "I can do this because it says I can", or "You can't have this cache because it violates this guideline". And definitely more consistent.

Now thats really up north! Maybe the trick is to get a truck, and drive the scooter to the area where you are going to cache and then off load it and ride it around. I have a scooter (Honda Elite 80) and it works well - 84 MPG, cruises around 40. Good for around town. I've actually been thinking about getting something I could put it on the back, and take it on my Explorer/Mountaineer and go to some cache rich areas a few hours away, then use the scooter to go get them all. Anyone have any suggestions for something that carries them? But it is nice to pull up, hop off, get the cache, hop back on, and go on to the next one, without thinking about how much gas I'm gonna have to put in it later lol.

It is somewhat confusing when people want to place a cache, and have to put it out before it is approved. I had a set of five that I put out, and ended up having to remove 2 of them because of issues. However, had I been able to submit them before I placed them, then get them approved, then place and activate them, I could have saved a trip.

We were in Tennessee weekend before last. Did some caching while there. From what we saw, there are a LOT of caches in cemeteries where we were. We did a little night caching and skipped over all of the cemetery caches simply because of the implications that can be made when someone is in a cemetery at night. Glad we skipped them! Being from SC, I can assure you that the reviewer here will NOT allow caches anywhere near a cemetery. Even stages of a multi that are simply to gather information are not allowed. This is what I was told by the reviewer. It all has something to do with a bit of legislation that would make it illegal to operate a GPSr on any historical grounds. These grounds included, among other things, cemeteries and, theoretically, could have been adapted by the state to include whatever they wanted. Members of local geocaching associations sat with legislators and made an agreement to keep geocaching out of the area the lawmakers specified and the lawmakers would let the bill die. Again, this is what I understand from the SC reviewer. Hence, there is no ACTUAL legislation, but geocaching folks in SC like to keep the status quo and stay on the state house's good side. Once more, I am in now way an authority... this is just what I have understood from past conversations and emails. I have to say this is a little ridiculous for a free country. No GPS's on historical grounds? Next thing you'll know they'll say no cell phones there either. Wow... sad.

Genius! Just have to make sure it's not an actual cacher seeking the cache! If that's your game, deactivate it as a geocache and leave the location vacant for at least a month. No guarantee you will get your intended victim. So think it over. I know that we're all kidding here about a dye pack, but the topic of what to do with a cache "maggot" comes up here from time to time. The other day I was re-reading the Terms of Use and this point caught my eye: You agree not to: (j) "Stalk," harass, or otherwise harm another Site user. Even a "cache maggot", if they have an account, is a Site User. But more important is the potential legal repercussions that could come from many sorts of retailiation. Honestly, I would love to know how you are in any kind of defensible position if you stole the cache, and ended up getting dye all over yourself. A legitimate cacher might be upset, but wouldn't be stealing the cache. A person stealing them would have trouble filing a complaint - "I got this nasty dye all over me, but did it while stealing something...um... forget that complaint - have a nice day".

Erie PA - Goldsnoop, who you can usually add 1-2 stars to the difficulty he chooses and he comes up with some amazing hides, and T-Prints, who has a ton of various types and difficulty caches out, including some amazing puzzles and simple yet elegant hides. Rev Mike was pretty prolific a while back, with Team NOVA, who was most of my original finds.

I recently started taking newbies out finding caches - I post my adventures as notes if I have already found the cache, so a few times I have come across ones I know where they are, and they're not there. In some cases, the owner hasn't checked on it for a long time, or in one case, actually admitted on the cache page that they knew it was missing (but didn't disable it). I have taken to posting "NA" logs, with a simple statement that I don't feel it necessarily needs archived, but am using the log to bring it to a reviewer's attention because it is missing, and ask that it be disabled since the owner hasn't done so. Any of these I've done that for have a string of DNF's over many months with a cacher who hasn't logged into the website for a long time (months), or I am sure it is gone because I found it before. I did have one hider in the Western NY area who was like the one the OP described. I went for a night cache years ago in a state park, and the coords were completely off (like hundreds of feet) and no where near the starting point from any angle, nor did they help you find the starting point. It was a night cache. The hint in it no longer worked (a glow in the dark skeleton that I could only find during daylight, and when I went back at night, didn't glow anymore), and about half the markers were missing. We did find the cache, but only by brute force, during the day. When I posted about the current problems with the cache, my log was unceremoniously deleted. Same with any other logs by me for that CO's caches. They weren't interested in finding out problems or fixing them, just putting a bunch of caches with poor coords out. So I took to posting TFTC and stopped hunting for most by them. Some people are like that.

Problem is that it still supports a double standard - we can place a container here in this completely nondescript place, or we can place a virtual cache - oh wait, we can't do that. But we can place a container in a place with no wow to it. If they wanted to stay away from double standards, they could have just as easily required a container for an Earthcache. Most of the places I have done earthcaches, it was perfectly possible to place a container there, or somewhere closeby. Why make the exception for that, but not for other kinds of educational caches - many virtuals I have been to required some kind of learning - read a plaque, look up some stuff using info at the site, etc. They're not staying away with double standards - I still feel the reviewers just had a big enough problem sorting through them that they made it easier for them by just removing it. And that's not the right way to deal with a (perceived) problem. Add more reviewers if necessary - it doesn't cost them a dime.

There is an element of hide-and-seek that clearly appeals to a percentage of cachers , even when the cache is fairly "wowless". It's apparent that many folks enjoy the hunt, even when the cache location and hide style is redundant to those who've been caching a while. The problem with the "wowless" virt is that the hide and seek element is gone. Many bring back virt threads are started by those who praise the special character of the virts they've found - this precisely because virts where subject to "wow" for most of their life on the website. The other negative (to me) for virts is that they're nearly deathless. I saw a Needs Archived log on a virt recently - the virtual object had been gone for 2 YEARS, but folks kept on logging finds on "the place it used to be". Missing physical caches will sometimes get these kinds of runs (once one person logs a find on "the place it used to be" others will follow) - but rarely for this kind of duration. Ive seen missing physical caches that have lasted longer. That is a reviewer issue - if theres a NA log, and it isn't there anymore, the reviewer needs to do his/her job and archive it. Until virts come back, people are trying to preserve the few that are left.

Coming anytime soon?

I've read through a lot of the various arguments for and against the virtuals over the years. Here's a simple point which seems to get missed: One of the issues that is always brought up with virtuals is the wow factor, and how they need to be something of significance. As I understand it, this is the main reason why virtuals were dropped - lack of a good way to determine wow factor. However, there is no wow factor for any other kind of cache. I can put out as many LPC's and guardrail caches with no wow factor as I want to, as long as I'm willing to invest in some kind of container to put out there, and stay within the saturation guidelines. Instead of signing a paper log, emailing the owner for a virtual takes that place. You have to go there and find some kind of unique feature which can be observed from the virtual site. If the wow factor is all there is to it, or the main argument at least, then it seems simple... it needs to be enforced across the board - ban LPC's, guardrail caches, and any other cache which is nothing more than taking you to a boring place to sign a log. Or bring back virtuals. Double standards are very difficult to support - unless you take the "This is what I'm doing and you have to live with it" approach, and I have never accepted this in my life, nor when I have children do I plan to use it - there's a reason for everything. What are we missing here?

I've said this multiple times in nice and not-so-nice ways, and gotten in trouble for the not-so-nice ones - but I still feel the last paragraph was the big issue - a few people in influential positions had a problem with it and away they went.

I had actually considered using some stickers for a cache run for numbers - make some larger ones and some smaller ones for a group that is going, and that way we don't have to wait 2 minutes for one person to sign 4-5 names so we can move on. Haven't ever done it before, but it makes sense when going with a group. Signing FireRef and the date doesn't take much time, but a bunch of names takes exponentially longer.

Why are you attacking me? It goes against my personal caching ethics. This is what happens in a free world. I know you like to follow me and attack everything I say but please just walk away if you have nothing to add. What would happen if they used a sticker made of plastic? It would degrade as fast as a rose in liquid nitrogen! Lol - coming from a science teacher, it actually is quite well preserved in liquid nitrogen. Just don't bang it on the table