niraD

One of the things I appreciate about Groundspeak is that they generally avoid creating benefits for hiding caches, other than the desire to own and maintain a cache. For example, challenge caches cannot be based on anything related to cache ownership. Can you imagine the junk caches that would be listed if cache ownership was a ticket to free premium membership?

Once upon a time, the guidelines actually specified that the ultimate goals of the saturation guideline were "to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area". IMHO, if the only way you can find an allowable spot is to look for tiny gaps in the saturation map, then that area already has plenty of caches, and it's time to seek out new places to hide caches.

You can always hide an Unchallenge Cache. That provides the fun of finding caches where certain words or things are in the titles, but without tying it to the accomplishment of logging a Find on the Unchallenge Cache (because the challenge is optional, and the cache can be logged whether you complete the challenge or not).

So are you suggesting that the event organizer should use one account for listing the event, and another account for posting an Attended log?

A sort of "Wall of Shame" then?

I think the decision to archive and publish a new cache depends on whether the "heart" of the cache changes. If the point of the cache was for seekers to walk across the bridge, then removing the bridge changes that, and the cache should be archived and a new one listed. If the point of the cache was the view from the island or a historic location on the island, then removing the bridge doesn't change that, and the cache should be updated to reflect the new situation. Only the CO can answer that, and yes, it's very subjective.

You can't require people to use a GPSr. I've found hundreds of caches without a GPS device of any kind.

Unless the point of the cache hide is for people to enjoy the bridge, I would change the terrain rating. The point of the terrain rating is to communicate the nature of the experience to potential seekers, and it should be updated when the situation changes. If the point of the cache hide is for people to enjoy the bridge, then I would archive the listing once the bridge is gone. But that's the only reason I would archive the current listing. Meh. If the USACE were to build another bridge, then I'd just change the terrain rating back from 5 to 2.5. (Unless the point of the cache hide had become accessing the island by boat.)

You have to find a cache in every USGS quadrangle of a specified region. I was working on GCYNR9 until we left California. But like I said, they aren't allowed any more. Challenges can use states (or provinces, or commonwealths, or whatever) and they can use counties (or parishes, or boroughs, or whatever), but you can't use user-defined polygons, latitude/longitude, etc.

What are quad challenges? Fizzy, Jasmer, Date found, and Date hidden filled out? You have to find a cache in every USGS quadrangle of a specified region. I was working on GCYNR9 until we left California. But like I said, they aren't allowed any more. Challenges can use states (or provinces, or commonwealths, or whatever) and they can use counties (or parishes, or boroughs, or whatever), but you can't use user-defined polygons, latitude/longitude, etc.

The first example is pre-moratorium and would not be publishable under current Guidelines, for several reasons. Is the problem with the first example just the specific mini-challenges, some of which are no longer allowed? If so, then all the CO has to do is choose mini-challenges that are allowed. Or is there a deeper issue with the first example?

I like "bingo" challenges, where the CO presents a 5x5 grid, where each square has a different mini-challenge. To qualify, you need to complete mini-challenges that form a straight line (horizontally, vertically, or diagonally), just like in the game bingo. Here are a couple examples: GC4ZM2V and GCAJ8HF I also like quad challenges, but those aren't allowed any more.

The three main ways that I've seen multi-caches use nnn www to get the final are: 1. Replace the decimal minutes part of the posted coordinates with the nnn www digits. For example: Posted: N 37° 25.502 W 122° 06.834 nnn www: 321 123 Final: N 37° 25.321 W 122° 06.123 2. Add the nnn www digits to the decimal minutes part of the posted coordinates. For example: Posted: N 37° 25.502 W 122° 06.834 nnn www: 321 123 Final: N 37° 25.823 W 122° 06.957 3. Use the nnn www digits to complete the final coordinates shown in the description. For example: Posted: N 37° 25.502 W 122° 06.834 Partial Final: N 37° 25.xxx W 122° 07.yyy nnn www: 321 123 Final: N 37° 25.321 W 122° 07.123 But really, the CO should make it clear what you're supposed to do with the nnn www digits once you have them. If it isn't clear what you're supposed to do with the nnn www digits, then ask the CO to clarify.

Wait... I thought it was a year of platinum membership!

Until the other cache is archived, new caches within 528ft/161m of its location will not be published. If there's really a problem with the other cache, then a Note (or a Reviewer Note on your own cache) is not going to change anything. For details, see the Help Center article When a cache needs maintenance. But note that if the owner of the other cache has disabled it during construction, and plans to reenable it after construction, and is communicating with the volunteer reviewers regularly, then the volunteer reviewers will allow the other cache to remain disabled indefinitely until construction is over and the owner has a chance to replace and reenable the cache. I had a cache that was disabled for several months because of construction, and construction delays, and more construction delays, and I was allowed to leave the cache disabled until construction was over and I was able to replace the cache.

I hadn't noticed until now, but around here, when streets change from (for example) East Magnolia to West Magnolia, the addresses count down to 100, then the name switches and the addresses start over at 100 and count up. There are no 2-digit addresses.

If the point were merely to qualify, then it would be some sort of online badge or souvenir. But it's a cache, so like all caches, the point includes visiting the location and signing the log.

Even if the location isn't sensitive, maybe the CO doesn't want to deal with what the hoards of irresponsible seekers would do to the cache itself. I don't blame the CO one bit. If I owned a traditional cache that was within 100m of a mega event location, then I'd probably disable the listing and retrieve the cache for a week before and a week after the mega event. Let the mega event organizers entertain the attendees. I don't need to sacrifice my cache for the mega event's benefit. Ultimately, it's up to each CO to decide. I'm sure there are plenty of other caches near the mega event location for everyone to find.

This sounds like a responsible cache owner to me, someone who gives up the extra smileys to protect a sensitive cache/location from the hoards of irresponsible seekers that a nearby mega event will inevitably bring.

You don't have to do anything fancy. I've attended events at picnic sites where attendees could bring a picnic or not, and everyone just spent time visiting. Or events at coffee houses or donut shops, where you could patronize the establishment and eat/drink during event, or you could just show up and visit.

The open spaces near where we lived in California encouraged virtual caches. At the time, there were no Virtual Rewards, so the only virtual caches were EarthCaches. There were still a few rules (e.g., they had to be listed on the geocaching.com site), but most of the rules applied only to physical caches.

They won't be archived because the logbook got wet, but they might be archived because they no longer have an active owner.

"Hoops? We ain't got no hoops. We don't need no hoops. I don't have to show you any stinking hoops." Seriously, I haven't had any issues. But I've hidden caches (including an EarthCache) in public spaces with official geocaching policies that didn't require caches that met their rules (not "guidelines") to get individual permission, or in spaces managed by people I already knew personally. The closest I got to an issue with a land manager was when the community garden closed (the church sold the land to a developer), but I was notified well in advance, and I archived the cache and collected the container before the garden closed.