mvhayes1982

Are you admitting to not only placing throwdowns, but logging them as a find as well?

It's been many, many moons since I've perused the ToU. Would stealing caches qualify as a violation? Seems like it would only apply to anyone who became a member and therefore agreed to the Terms of Use, no? In this case, since the person in question is reading cache pages, perhaps they are a member, no? As far as I know, you don't have to be a member to read the non-premium cache pages. The cache linked to above is not a PMO, so anyone can see it. You can read cache descriptions, but not see the coordinates. Without signing up for even a basic membership, you wouldn't be able to see where it SHOULD have been.

Perfect example here. This challenge was published in September 2012 and has been found all of twice, once by me (I qualified when I lived in Germany) and once by a German cacher. If this was hidden in Germaany, it likely would have had hundreds of finds by now. Actually, the cache has only been FOUND once. The second logger never actually got his hands on the cache. He simply was near the cache, had completed the requirements to meet the challenge, and was allowed to log it as found by the CO. There is another active thread regarding challenge cache icon/attribute where it was suggested that Challenge caches become an achievement, a souvenir, rather than a physical cache to be found. I'm not going to argue whether or not the CO should have allowed the second cacher to log the cache. That's his/her business entirely. The question this raises, for me, is- Which is more important for a challenge cache: completing the challenge or finding the cache? For me personally, I hold myself to a strict policy of not logging any FINDS that don't have my signature on a log. To be fair, I haven't attempted any challenge caches, but if I did, the important part would be the actual finding of the cache, not just measuring whether or not I'd completed the requirements.

Check out the "CACHE" above the "POLICE" .... a bit different spacing on different pics, but well very done! Sorry but I dont see it. Seems to be police cars in Cache Okla Look at the space between "CACHE", and "POLICE" in the first 2 pics, and compare the same space in the second 2 pics. Also, the "CACHE" is a bit too bright in the second 2 pics compared with the rest of the signage. I completely disagree. The CACHE is spaced identically in the first two pics, and identically in the second two pics. It is clearly a different car in each set of pictures. Additionally, the "CACHE" and the "PROTECT & SERVE" in all the pictures is a white-ish color, while the POLICE is a reflective silver. I say, no photoshop.

How so? Everyone I've seen is a numbers/grid-filling game. Find 100 LetterboxersFind 100 Letterboxers in 10 different countiesFind 100 Letterboxes in 5 different countriesFind 100 Letterboxes where D/T combined equals 5 or more Due to the current guidelines, all Challenge Geocaches have to have an affirmative aim. That is a factual limitation of options, but I understand (and go along with) this rule though. Therefore, in the end, all Challenges have something to do with a certain amount of geocaches that has to be found, yes, BUT on the way to it, one can find really creative ones. Some examples: - find a geocache in all 16 federal states of Germany within 24 hours (I personally wouldn't do that one since it's not very environmental friendly to waste gas on that but many people like such a challenge since that requires a lot of brainwork beforehand and planning: How many cars, who sleeps when, where to take a break - it is a real challenge!) I can only drive one car at a time. Why would I have to worry about how many cars? Unless this is some "team challenge" where you send 3-4 cars full of people out, log them all as "the team" and then everybody can claim the Challenge Cache as found, even though they may have only individually found a cache in 3-4 of the federal states in the 24 hour period.

I do ]not understand this. Anyone who posts a NA should have come to the following conclusion: 'I think this cache should be archived if issue X can not be rendered resolved by the reviewer". Is it really any more complicated than this? Its really simple. The goal is to get issue x fixed. Not a bot like instant achival. Instant archival does not exist. It sure does. It sounds like the problem, in your area, is with the Reviewer's response to an NA log, not with the NA log itself. Where I cache, an NA log causes a disabling for a period of time (30 days, usually) to allow the CO to address the issue at hand. After that time, the cache would be archived.

Yes, thats right. There is a huge discussin and a lot of arguing about it. Here is the cache: http://coord.info/GC4XCXJ Is in slovenian language, but google translate is a miracolous tool There are the people who found the cache and many other cachers on one side and the owner on the other . I just want to point out the incredible joy I got out of reading the cache page after Chrome translated it to English. I hope that you work out your dispute with the cache-owner (it seems as though you have the upper-hand, sign log-get smiley). I do thank you for the enjoyable read.

Show Me The Cache has several RIGHT around the Churchill Downs property. Then there is GC2TGXF, which is close to Churchill. I haven't done that one yet, but have been told it is quite the treat. In Southern Indiana, I'm a fan of where GC94FA takes you. Beyond that? Depends on what kind of caching you are in the mood for.

When you find a cache, do you take the time to determine if the CO is lazy, or not, and log appropriately? I sort out most lazy cache hiders through selective pocket queries. The few which slip through? I just walk away, not logging anything. I haven't sprung for PM yet, (it's coming, just not yet), so I don't know much about PQ's besides what I've written on here. How do PQ's help you root out lazy/apathetic cache owners ?

My first find was a magnetic key box on the underside of a tower support cable. My best friend had purchased a GPS on Black Friday, 2011. We were sitting at a local pizzeria the next day and he was talking about this new thing he had gotten into. I whipped out my smartphone and dropped $10 on the offical Android app right on the spot. (The only app I've ever paid more than $1.99 for, and worth every penny). I created an account, logged on, and found that there was a cache in the very parking lot of our favorite pizza joint. My log that day, "Easy way to start a new hobby" was brief (and failed to thank the cache owner- oops). Despite the simple nature of the cache I found, I was fascinated as I quickly learned that these things are ALL over the place.

Last summer I found about half of my first ever geoart/power trail series, after a year and half of caching. Many of my logs have been short up to that point, but it was right before that time that I found these forums and realized the importance of longer logs. My friend and I found 3-4 caches adjacent to the geoart. While the GA/PT caches all got a cut and paste TFTC... the adjacent caches each got their own, longer, cache-specific log. The problem? I mentioned in those logs that I had found that cache while working the adjacent GA/PT. The next morning I started receiving "deleted log" emails on those caches. When I contacted the CO, he let me know that they delete any log that mentions the GA/PT series. Even though my log had been very specific to his caches, he deleted them because of a three word reference at the end or beginning of a 100 word log. My new logs were all TFTC.

If using a dedicated GPSr unit... yes. If using a smart phone... not necessarily. "Paperless" is a concept rather than a function. It is the ability to obtain and carry (with you) information regarding each and every cache you hunt for, and to log those caches electronically. In essence, you need print nothing onto paper (aside from signing the cache container log) in order to go geocaching. Premium Membership allows for GPSr units (that have that ability) to download the data which almost duplicates the cache page viewed on a computer. Likewise, they can record and upload your "Found It" log (field notes) directly to geocaching.com (via computer hook-up). Premium Membership allows access to those data files which contain such information. Non-Premium Members cannot access those file-types. Premium Membership includes other "benefits" as well-- http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=175 . Smart phones, on the other hand, actually access the website and display that information to you in the field. You can also upload your logs directly from the field. Those phones use a downloaded app to function as such... different apps will have varying degrees of abilities to do such. Not all geocaching apps are equal. Really? I thought if you were a basic member, you could still download the .gpx files 1 at a time from the cache page. With a premium membership, you can create pocket queries which allow you to create .gpx files which include up to 1000 caches. I would have thought that most devices nowadays use paperless caching i.e. instead of entering the coordinates manually, you can simply put a .gpx file on your device. Smartrascal, what device are you using? You can download the files, one by one, with the coordinates, as well as some general descriptors. As a basic member, the download will not have any previous logs, hint, description of the cache itself. Simply it's name, GC-code, ratings, and location. To get the full description (and hence, the full paperless experience) you have to be a Premium Member.

I use my GPS to make Field Note records (no text, just a "found") and then go home to the computer and edit those field notes (directly on geocaching.com) before submitting the logs. When I use my Android, the logs tend to be shorter. LPC's tend to get TFTC's, while any cache with significance is going to get an extended, detailed log. The better the hide, the better my log. My primary caching buddy also uses a GPS to cache (in 2014, he still has no cell phone), but he simply makes a list of GC numbers and enters finds from that list through the website. Nearly two years into my caching career, it was time spent on these forums that taught me the value of a quality log.

I had logs deleted once, from three caches all from one CO in one night. I had done a ridiculously asinine power trail with copy and paste logs, and then grabbed three of his caches that were adjacent to the series. I took the time to write specific logs for his caches, with details of the find and the hunt. The logs were deleted because I mentioned that I was "... in the area working the XXXX Series." The CO ended up with a very generic log from me, instead of the detailed log that simply contained a brief mention of the powertrail that brought me to the area. The CO had a serious case of sour-grapes regarding this powertrail...