niraD

IANAR, but that sounds fair to me. I've found a few caches where part of the challenge is determining the altitude of the container.

What kinds of caches do you enjoy the most? What characteristics do they share? In what way do they differ from the caches you enjoy less? I enjoy caches with 4-star camouflage, caches that feature public art, and puzzle caches with great "Aha!" moments. Others prefer caches with 5-star terrain (4x4, scuba, rock climbing, kayaking, etc.), or caches with trade items that are easy to find with their kids, or something else entirely. You won't be able to please everyone, but that's okay. What is important is that you hide a cache that you think is enjoyable, and worth maintaining.

Well, I started using GeoBeagle because I know the developers. I keep using GeoBeagle because I'm familiar with it, and because I don't want to switch to an app that doesn't support GeoBeagle features that I value (e.g., offline access to PQ data, compliance with geocaching.com TOS, online interaction with browser viewing geocaching.com site, posting field notes).

Yep. The more complex the feedback request, the more likely you are to get meaningless data from people who just want to log the next cache. What really matters is whether someone liked or disliked a cache, and whether the system can do anything useful with that information to predict what other caches they might also like or dislike. FWIW, I noticed that YouTube recently switched from a 5-star rating system to a simple like/dislike system.

Sometimes, it is all about the hunt. Other times, it's all about the journey, or the final location, or the "Aha!" moment solving a puzzle to get the coordinates, or the companionship, or even the planning and execution required for a numbers run.

My cache kit includes an Ultra-Fine Sharpie and a Fisher Space Pen (actually, a Bic pen body with a Fisher Space Pen refill). I also carry weatherproof replacement log sheets that I leave when a cache's existing log is full or unusable.

Note that GSAK requires MS Windows, and this thread is about sending PQ data to a GPSr from a Mac.

All else being equal, I don't care whether geocaching.com has a simple 5-star rating system or not. I'll ignore it the way I ignore other simple 5-star rating systems. But Groundspeak has limited resources, so all else isn't equal. If GS invests resources in developing a simple 5-star rating system, then they won't be able to invest those resources in developing something else, something that might actually be useful. A "you may also enjoy" system could be useful. For that matter, a system that allows seekers to save puzzle solutions and have the solutions appear in PQs would be very useful. I'd rather GS invest in something like that.

I found a few hundred caches with Google Maps before I finally bought a GPSr. If you don't think you need one yet, then don't invest in one. Later, when you're ready for a GPSr, you'll be able to buy more capability for the same price (or the same capability for a lower price, if you prefer).

It seems like the "not available at all times" attribute would be appropriate.

It isn't only for geocaches. Some of us find simple 5-star rating systems useless for movies, restaurants, books, household appliances, and so on as well. Reviews can be very useful. I pay attention to them when I'm shopping. I just don't pay attention to how many stars the review gives the item.

If the terrain is such that I don't feel comfortable carrying my phone while walking, then my phone is in its padded case in my fanny pack, and I'm using my old yellow eTrex. I take the phone back out once I reach GZ, assuming that there's a safe spot to do so.

I don't understand it either, but I've used GeoBeagle for more than a year, and have never noticed any problems with accuracy. Back to the original topic, to install a version other than the one available from the Market, you'll need to enable Settings > Applications > Unknown sources Then the easiest way to install the version you want is to use the Android browser to download the installer. When it finishes downloading, you can pull down the status message and click on the installer. It should walk you through the installation dialog.

Be sure to read and understand the Cache Listing Requirements / Guidelines. As others have pointed out, the saturation guidelines apply to all cache containers and physical stages.

As others have pointed out, the guidelines require only "the option of using accurate GPS coordinates". And frankly, most of us who find caches without a GPSr are using accurate GPS coordinates to find GZ. We just aren't using a GPSr to find the location that corresponds to those accurate GPS coordinates.

An easy way to be able to find an exact spot again without leaving a marker that others could spot is to use triangulation. Use two nearby locations for reference points. Take a flexible tape measure and measure the distance from one reference point, to your spot, and to the other reference point. You should now have two measurements: the total distance, and the distance from the first reference point to the spot you're interested in. To find the spot again, have one person hold the end of the tape measure at the first reference point, and have another person hold the mark for the total distance at the second reference point. Then have a third person hold the mark for the distance to the spot your interested in, and pull the tape taught. This is most accurate when the angle formed by the tape at the spot is near a 90-degree angle.

Other than events that were specifically organized for a certain activity (i.e., workshops of various kinds), most of the events I've been to haven't had any activities planned, other than possibly a drawing for door prizes. They're just social gatherings. Make sure there's a table with a log book, blank name tags, and pens, and the people who attend will do the rest. But with a large event, people may not know each other, so low-key icebreaker activities might be nice. For example, you can encourage people to mingle by giving them "bingo" cards that they have to fill out with the names of other geocachers, for example: Write the geoname of someone here who has/owns: <=100 finds | 1 GPSr | a multi-cache | a micro | a TB ---------------|------------|-------------------|--------------|----------- >100 finds | 2 GPSrs | a mystery cache | a small | >10 TBs ---------------|------------|-------------------|--------------|----------- >500 finds | 3 GPSrs | a virtual cache | a regular | >20 TBs ---------------|------------|-------------------|--------------|----------- >1000 finds | 4 GPSrs | a webcam cache | a large | >30 TBs ---------------|------------|-------------------|--------------|----------- >5000 finds | >4 GPSrs | an EarthCache | an "other" | >40 TBs

Absolutely. Around here, Google Maps offers a high-resolution satellite view that is calibrated very well. I've found it to be at least as accurate as a basic hand-held GPSr. But I've also seen other places where the satellite view is much lower resolution, poorly calibrated, or both. A consumer-grade GPSr gets 10' (3m) accuracy under ideal situations. Since that applies both to the cache owner and to the seeker, you should expect 20' error under ideal situations. In less than ideal situations, your search radius can be significantly more than that. And FWIW, I don't have experience with iPhones, but my experience with Android phones (G1, Nexus One) is that they are at least as accurate as my old yellow eTrex.

Oh, you betcha. I'm sorry it happened to you, but unfortunately it's part of the game. I learned a lot from my first hide. I was making maintenance visits every couple weeks. Eventually, I realized that I couldn't keep up with the damage the muggles were doing and archived it. My current hides need hardly any maintenance. I still drop by when it's convenient, but I no longer need to fix something regularly.

I've found puzzle caches placed before the current 2-mile guideline, where the bogus coordinates and the final cache were more than 2 miles apart. I've also found more recent puzzle caches that had a good (puzzle-related) reason for the bogus coordinates to be more than 2 miles from the final cache. And with some of the puzzle multi-caches I've found, the bogus coordinates are within 2 miles of the first on-site puzzle, but are much further from the final cache.

I think the best way is to use a decoy that isn't a container. The one I used was a solid block of wood, with the message written on an unexposed surface. I've seen "replacement" logs show up in clearly labeled decoy containers. But then, I've also seen "replacement" logs show up in on-site puzzle components that weren't even really containers, so it may be a losing battle.

I think it depends on the "decoy". I've found puzzle caches with "decoys" at GZ that were actually part of the puzzles. I've found a puzzle caches with "decoys" at the coordinates for incorrect solutions, with "this is not the cache; try again" messages. (But one of these "decoys" acquired a "replacement" log, which several people signed, not realizing they had solved the puzzle incorrectly.) The camouflage for my first hide required me to construct two pieces for symmetry; one held the cache and the other was a "decoy" with the message "The other one is the cache" written on it. And you know what they say about the eye of the beholder. I would find a 5-gallon container full of 35mm film canisters tedious if the cache was one of the film canisters. But if the cache description listed the size as Large, and there was a huge industrial film canister hidden nearby, then I would find the same stash of 35mm film canisters to be very amusing. (Thanks, Viajero Perdido!)

If you do, then don't forget: trade up, trade even, or don't trade...

According to the guidelines, "The information needed to solve the puzzle must be available to the general caching community and the puzzle should be solvable from the information provided on the cache page. For example, a puzzle that requires research on public websites in order to determine the coordinates may be acceptable, while a puzzle that requires sending an email to the cache owner with the solution in order to obtain the coordinates may not be."

Who said anything about finding 50 caches in a day without a GPSr? The most I've found in a day without a GPSr was 8 caches. But the most I've found in a day with a GPSr was 10 caches. Not everyone is into finding dozens of caches a day. I don't use Google Earth. I use the satellite images from Google Maps. I've occasionally printed the satellite images, but usually I just remember where the cache is, perhaps with a few notes about where it is relative to the landmarks I saw in the satellite images. Also, my notes have usually been paperless. Clearly, this approach works better when you're more familiar with the area, when there are clear landmarks visible in the satellite images, and when the satellite images are high resolution and well calibrated.