niraD

The stated service goal is for a reviewer to read the submitted cache page within 72 hours. In my very limited experience, it happens much more quickly, but that depends on what else is going on in your local reviewers' lives. Also note that that goal is for reading the submitted cache page. If there are problems that you need to work out, the actual publication of the cache will be delayed. I tried to rate mine as accurately as possible, based on the descriptions here: http://www.markwell.us/geofaq.htm#Ratings With that said, it is extremely easy for cache owners to underestimate the difficulty of their own caches. After all, it's very easy to find a cache that you've hidden...

Find a spot that isn't so close to another cache, and move your cache there.

That sounds like a lot of fun! I see this problem in one of my other hobbies. New rallyemasters (for gimmick car rallyes) want to include every single gimmick they've ever thought of in their first rallye. It doesn't work. Try to resist the urge, and save something for your second cache, and your third cache, and...

Logging "almost as quickly" as downloading cache data? I don't think so. I can download data for hundreds of caches in less than a minute. I spend more time logging even the most trivial find, and on more than one occasion, I've spent more than an hour logging just a handful caches. Anyway, there are several reasons why someone might sign the physical log, but not log online. For example: Some started geocaching before one could log finds online, and never bothered to start logging online. Some were put off by "drama" of some sort, and stopped logging online in response. What kind of "drama"? TheAlabamaRambler described the controversy surrounding the Dallas Record Run. Others have been put off by cache owners deleting logs to enforce ALRs. Others have been put off by cache owners who deleted logs that weren't "good enough" (e.g., too short, too critical of the cache location). And I think I've seen other forms of "drama" described in the forums, but I can't recall examples offhand. Some are concerned about privacy, so they don't log online (even using a pseudo-anonymous nickname). Some just don't bother logging online because they don't enjoy it. Some actually do log online, but they just haven't gotten around to logging their recent finds online yet. At times, I've gone a week or two before logging my own vacation finds. I've met other cachers who have been months behind on their online logs. Some have never visited Geocaching.com and don't have Geocaching.com accounts. They go geocaching with someone who does have a Geocaching.com account, and they care enough to sign the physical log, but they haven't bothered to visit the site themselves. Sometimes my non-geocaching friends and family fall into this category. In what way would he be "a total freeloader"? It sounds like you expect Groundspeak to get a commission every time someone uses a GPSr to find a geocache.

When I've taken kids from church geocaching, I just listed the park name. I didn't specify exactly where in the park we were going. I specifically avoid taking the kids to the suburban caches in the church's neighborhood. Even if I trust all the kids not to loot the caches, I don't necessarily trust all the other kids that they might tell about the neighborhood caches. Taking them to caches that are more out of the way helps protect the caches.

One way to make a film canister more waterproof is to cut a 4" length of bicycle inner tube, and put the film canister inside it. There are photos here: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...9023&st=100

I've bound a few handmade books before. Yours looks very nice. But for a log book that's going to sit in a geocache, I'm with ngrrfan. I use my band saw to cut down spiral-bound notebooks to the size I want.

Among the tips The Rat offered at his puzzle-solving class: Identify the theme. Check the cache title, the hint, the HTML source, the graphics (including names/URLs), any links (including URLs), whatever is at the posted coordinates, etc. If you can figure out the theme, then you should look for numbering systems that are associated with that theme (zip codes, area codes, telephone keypads, episode numbers, etc.). Around here, coordinates will have 15 digits, and will look like "N 37° xx.xxx W 122° xx.xxx". So when I'm solving a nearby puzzle, I look for a group of 15 things, and then I look for ways to get the digits 37xxxxx122xxxxx from them. In general, I look for ways to get the number 37 (or the digits 3 and 7) from something near the beginning of the puzzle, and the number 122 (or the digits 1, 2, and 2) from something near the middle of the puzzle. (Of course, you'll need to adjust this for the coordinates near you.) Other useful resources include the Puzzle Solving 101 Series http://www.geocaching.com/bookmarks/view.a...ef-901807ba9c98 and this "Solving Puzzle Caches" article http://bcaching.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/puzzles-part-1/

Consumer GPS devices are accurate to about 10' under ideal circumstances. So 20' is pretty close to ideal: your GPSr could be off by 10', and the cache owner's GPSr could be off by 10' in the other direction. Under less than ideal circumstances, each could easily be off by 20', for a 40' error. This has been known to happen, but posting "soft" coordinates is a bad idea for many reasons.

I try to write a short paragraph when the logbook is big enough, especially for puzzle caches (where you can't write about the puzzle solution in the online log). Some of the puzzle multi-caches around here still have significant handwritten logs in the logbook in the container.

Are you looking for the Pictures - Cool Cache Containers (CCC's) thread?

My handmade sig tokens are trackable at the sigitem.com site. It's free, but it can take a while for the owner to get around to adding new accounts.

My G1 and my Nexus One have been at least as accurate as my old yellow eTrex. But they all lose signal under tree cover, where modern handheld units with high sensitivity receivers do okay.

As Chrysalides indicates, you have to request the special "My Finds" PQ every week. It will be emailed to your primary email account, so unless you're using the Geocaching Basecamp email address as your primary email address, you'll also need to forward that PQ to Geocaching Basecamp every week. There are ways to automate that, depending on your email system, but I haven't found a way to automate the weekly "My Finds" PQ.

I use GeoBeagle on my Nexus One, and I'm still trying to figure out the best approach for multi-caches and on-site puzzles. At this point, I usually use some scratch paper to do the work, with GeoBeagle displaying the cache info that I need to calculate the next set of coordinates. Once I've got the next set of coordinates, I enter them into GeoBeagle and off I go. If I were to improve anything with this process, I'd copy the cache info into an editable document, so I can view the info I need and do the work, without switching back and forth between two documents. That's what I used to do when I used a Palm PDA.

You mean like this? http://boulter.com/basecamp/blog/niraD It's based on the "My Finds" PQ.

Also, some cache owners don't worry about fizzy challenges and the like, and use the terrain/difficulty ratings just to communicate with cache seekers. If the terrain changes (e.g., a closed bridge converts a PNG into a 5-mile hike), then they change the terrain rating.

Another approach is to let Google search the geocaching.com site for you: site:www.geocaching.com "night cache" vancouver Some of them may be on bookmark lists of night caches, and those bookmark lists can help you find more nearby night caches.

FWIW, the caches around here that require UV lights do not provide the UV lights. They simply indicate that "special equipment" is required, and provide some hints about the nature of that "special equipment". It probably helps that there have been a few group purchases of UV flashlights, and many people (including the owners of the UV-dependent caches) are willing to loan their UV flashlights. The local caches that use UV paint don't have problems with the rain. They do have problems with prolonged exposure to the sun though, so the cache stages are designed to protect the UV paint from such exposure. (If you want to use UV paint/ink to make a night cache, then it can help to use multiple symbols: some in fluorescent paint/ink, and some in non-fluorescent paint/ink that looks the same under normal lighting conditions.) I looked for thermochromic materials, but didn't find any that would match your budget. The best idea I had was to use strips of different materials to create a 7-segment display. At normal temperatures, all the segments would look the same. When heated, some of the segments would change color, and those segments would form digits. But I'm not sure where to get those materials within your budget, and the natural/vegan requirement may be an issue too.

I love on-site puzzles. It sounds like you've got some very interesting ideas. I wish I lived in your area. Please consider the longevity of your cache materials. The owners of local caches that use fluorescent paints (visible under UV light) need to refresh the paint on a regular basis. The invisible ink ideas you've suggested would involve consumable clue sheets, and they sound very sensitive to water damage. You would need to keep making more clue sheets whenever seekers use them up, and whenever the cache gets muggled or damaged by water. Grape juice is food. In addition to turning to vinegar, it will attract critters, and they will destroy the cache container to get to the food inside. Also, my experience is that putting any liquids in a cache can ruin everything in the cache when the bottles leak. I like the idea of a heat-activated clue, and leaving it to seekers to figure out how to provide the necessary heat. The only reusable idea that comes to mind is the material used for color-changing thermometers. But I'm not sure how to use it for this purpose. HTH.

How far apart do you want the stages to be? I've found a multi-cache where you can touch one stage with one hand, while touching the other stage with the other hand. Another local multi-cache requires traveling more than 100 miles total. I've heard of multi-caches that require traveling thousands of miles. The longer the distance, the fewer the finds. But the important thing is that you create the kind of multi-cache that you find interesting and worth maintaining.

If you want a simple 5-star rating system, GCVote is available as a plugin for Firefox and MSIE. What Amazon does well is the "you may also like" recommendations. I find the number of stars just as useless there as in other 5-star rating systems. FWIW, YouTube recently switched from a 5-star rating system to a simple liked/disliked system. Ultimately, that's all the meaningful information you're going to get when someone rates something like this. The key is to use it in a useful way, to show me caches that I'd probably like, because others who like/dislike the same kinds of caches I do have liked them.

When I find a cache with a wet/full log, I often leave a replacement log. Actually, since I never remove the original log, I suppose it's a "supplemental log", rather than a "replacement log", but you get the idea. There's also an abbreviated stash note printed at the beginning of the log. I always mention what I've done in my log, so the owner knows there was an issue, but that it has been addressed.

There used to be one around here that was similar. The number you called was a toll-free number, which eliminated the "requiring a purchase" issue. IIRC, you had to call the toll-free number from the specific pay phone and enter some other information. If everything matched, a recorded voice gave you the coordinates for the final.

GeoBrowse was replaced by GeoBeagle.