niraD

Wow... You certainly convinced me.

I had a similar analysis. The higher D ratings could be covered by puzzle difficulties, with time spent solving the puzzles before the one-day run. The T5 ratings could be covered by specialized equipment, ideally using the same specialized equipment for all the T5 caches. The other higher T ratings could be covered by a single hike where the terrain ratings slowly climbed until you got to the T4.5 caches at the end of the hike. But I hadn't really considered tree climbs as a way to get highter T ratings. But theoretically, it's possible to do with accurately rated caches. Of course, in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But in practice,...

As a relatively new resident of East Tennessee, I had to laugh, because this is very true. It's a good thing there isn't a Souvenir for finding a cache in "The South"!

What makes you think that the current situation with using geographical names (rather than political names) has anything to do with the UK and Ireland not having "an equivalent to states/provinces"? I get the impression that they could have gone with the political names (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Republic of Ireland), but chose not to based on input from "Volunteer Reviewers from the UK and Ireland, the forum community, prominent members of Geocaching Ireland and the Geocaching Association of Great Britain".

You can absolutely send them out again. Trackables occasionally show up after being lost for years, but in most cases, if a trackable has been marked missing for months, then you can assume that it's gone. A replacement would be great. One of my caches was muggled, and a trackable that had been in it was lost. The owner mailed me a replacement trackable (similar item, and a laminated copy of the TB tag) and I added it to the cache when I replaced the container. That kind of thing is fine.

On the flip side, I can't tell you how many times I've arrived at GZ, dropped my daypack or parked my bicycle, expanded my search, then expanded my search some more, then expanded my search some more, then returned to GZ and found my daypack or bicycle on top of the cache.

Maybe it's just me, but distinguishing "educational/informative" emails from "promotional" emails sounds quite subjective...

It isn't a matter of "better"; it is required for a traditional cache to be at the exact coordinates. From the guidelines: "A Traditional Cache consists of at least a container with a logbook and is located at the posted coordinates." Mystery caches take many forms. They don't all have puzzles, although puzzle caches are what many people think of when they think of a mystery cache. See the Help Center article Mystery Caches for more info, including the last section that explains some of the key distinctions between a mystery cache and a multi-cache. The key thing that still seems to be missing from your design is the use of accurate GPS coordinates for at least some of the cache hunt. See the Help Center article GPS usage, which includes explanations and examples of adequate and inadequate GPS usage. It doesn't look like you've found many mystery caches or multi-caches. You might want to find a few more of each before trying to hide a cache of either type.

IMHO, this is true for the oldest active cache in a region, but it's also true for the newest active cache in a region. All caches have history that is more valuable than the stats, and they shouldn't be archived just because situation changes (or the CO's understanding of the situation changes). Update the difficulty/terrain ratings and don't worry about the stats.

As much as I agree with the sentiment, I don't expect this to happen. Once upon a time, logs supported BBCode. A lot of old logs still include BBCode. When Groundspeak first implemented Markdown, all those logs with BBCode became gibberish. Another example of Groundspeak changing the meaning of existing logs by changing the BBCode/Markdown/Emoji/whatever rendering of those logs...

Unless the ex-CO decides to delete a bunch of Find logs (including yours) before deleting his/her/its account, and thus locking the cache listings that had a bunch of Find logs deleted.

Here is the relevant section of the terms of use: "1.3 Minors. Because of the nature of our services, which require a cellular data plan or GPS device and the ability to travel to various locations, our services are not directed toward anyone under the age of 16. Although individuals under 16 are welcome to use our services, their parents or guardians must own and manage their accounts. You must be 18 or older to post in the Geocaching Forums. "If you are under the age of 18 but at least 16, you may only use our services with the consent of a parent or legal guardian who agrees to be bound by this Agreement."

But providing students with a page with blanks to fill in, using information from an article or other written material, is very much an educational task. Having specific questions to answer and/or blanks to fill in helps direct the student's focus while reading the article, and writing the information in the blank spaces helps the learning process. But I digress... I don't think sign-based tasks should be digit substitution or other simple copying like many multi-caches use to produce final coordinates. But... if the goal is to get EarthCache seekers to process the information, and if the information is on a sign, and if I can't just copy the information to my EarthCache description but would need to rewrite the information in my own words, then prohibiting me from using the sign in my EarthCache adds a significant hurdle for me even creating my EarthCache. It also means that any question based on the information can be answered from the comfort of one's armchair, without actually visiting the location.

I resemble that remark. I enjoy difficult "hidden in plain sight" camouflage caches. My record so far is 6 DNFs before finding it on the 7th visit. Each visit represented 45-60 minutes, well over 3 hours total.

No. Again, no. I've heard of members being blocked/banned, but it requires evidence, not just suspicion. According to the terms of use, "individuals under 16 are welcome to use our services, their parents or guardians must own and manage their accounts." But the terms of use are violated rather frequently...

I would expect the prohibition on using information on signs to be another change that affects the EarthCache publishing numbers. I am not a geologist (although I did take some geology-related courses in college as part of my engineering degree). Prohibiting the use of information on signs makes it harder for non-geologists to create EarthCaches.

When did the rule against using information on signs appear? It had to be sometime after my EarthCache was published in 2015.

That worked. But now it often takes a while before it allows me to take the next shot. I assume that it's taking a while to retrieve information from the server.

The Bubble Shooter game doesn't work for me. It lets me shoot the first bubble, then nothing...

That list needs to be a LOT longer...

One pattern I've seen over and over is that a new CO hides a cache in an urban/suburban park, the cache goes missing and is archived, another new CO hides a cache in the same park, that cache goes missing and is archived, etc., etc., etc. Eventually, someone might hide a micro/nano (or a puzzle micro/nano) and that is what survives. Then people complain that the only caches around are micro/nano caches, as if there were some conspiracy among COs to deny them the opportunity to find larger caches.

I think size creep starts at the bottom. New cachers see blinkers, 1.5ml centrifuge, and the like listed as micro, and assume that film canisters, match holders, and preforms must be small. And yes, all the apps have to change. But as a migration strategy, apps that haven't been updated could be served compatible cache data (via GPX or via the API) that translates the nano size to micro.

Yes, I've seen size creep too. New geocachers see blinkers listed as micro, and figure that film canisters, match cases, and preforms must be small, and sandwich-sized containers must be regular, and shoebox-sized containers must be large. It doesn't affect all caches, but it affects enough that seekers learn to look for a micro when the listing says it's a small, and so on. Some of us hope that adding a separate nano size will help reduce size creep, so we can have blinkers listed as nano, film canisters, match cases, and preforms consistently listed as micro, sandwich-sized containers consistently listed as small, and shoebox-sized containers consistently listed as regular.

The current definitions for cache sizes are fine. All we have to do is split nanos into a separate size, rather than have them be a special category of micros ("If a micro cache is less than 10 milliliters, it’s often called a nano cache").

See the Help Center article Log a trackable, specifically: Drop and Visit logs Follow these steps to drop a trackable in a geocache or log a visit to a geocache. 1. From a cache page, select Log geocache. 2. Below the text box, select an action for each trackable from your inventory: Drop, leave the trackable in a geocache. Visit, take a trackable to a cache but keep it with you when you leave.