Goldenwattle

I opened a puzzle and you are correct. I needed to wait. This will slow down logging. Why can't they leave alone that which works

I went and looked at this and I couldn't change the coordinates of a puzzle cache. How will I update this now? I can't put the coordinates in a log as everyone will see the corrected puzzle coordinates. Those I have already changed the coordinates on appear to show the corrected coordinates still, but I can't add the corrected coordinates to other puzzle caches.

I would have guessed that from your photograph . Although, I guess I could have been wrong; it is a b/w image. And you can fly too ...

I agree; getting the Antarctic souvenir would be special. Although I haven't been able to get the souvenir, I managed to get a TB a visit to one cache. It's aim was to visit Antarctica and I knew someone who was visiting there, so they took the TB there and got appropriate photographs of it visiting there. After all that effort the CO couldn't be bothered to contact me to comment on it. Silence until I contacted them to ask if they had seen the photographs of their TB visited Antarctica. I have had polite thank you messages for far less than that concerning TBs.

What I find weird is the CO writes about himself, " I am a White Male ." Um, er, what relevance is the non-importance of his complexion?

Sounds like they 'might' have found it, but if I were the CO I would be sending a message to ask for a good description or photographic evidence. Although if a person forgot/lost their pen, they should send this other proof to the CO before logging and wait for permission to log. Not just go ahead and log. As a CO I am flexible enough to accept this, but I do need proof. I recently sent messages to six people whose signatures I couldn't find. (For two caches.) Only one got back to me, saying they didn't know they had to sign, but supplied no more proof. I deleted all six logs.

I can also see the logs. However I had problems recently with two computers with clicking on the link on an email in my web mail. The caches wouldn't load, when it always has before. This was working when later I tried another computer. I don't know if this was a computer problem, or this problem was fixed before I tried it on the third computer.

I left one of my TBs at a Mega event. Never again, because of the huge number of emails. Lists of TBs were handed out.

Yes, that's the show I couldn't think of the name of, as I have never watched it. I believe you are correct; it's more noice than naice.

That was not the source I was thinking of, as I have never watched Borat. Has it been on TV in Australia? I've never seen it.

I suspect that's taken from a TV show. Which I didn't watch, but I have heard others making quotes from it.

I hid my first cache after 800 finds. I thought the nano (a lump of pink chewing gum) was special. Which just goes to show how inexperienced I was still after 800 finds. Nano plus thinking that lump of chewing gum cache (I have seen many since) was special. That cache is archived now, and I have never placed another nano cache. I can't say I should have thought I was inexperienced still with only 800 finds, because I was and I knew that, but going back to the original question ("Things you wish you knew about for your first cache"), I guess one thing would have to be, just because I hadn't seen something before (eg. the chewing gum nano), didn't mean that others hadn't and therefore wouldn't have been necessarily impressed with it.

If I know who has taken a TB and they haven't logged it, I will write on the log of the TB to let the owner know who has it. That allows the TB owner to contact the person with the TB, if they so choose.

I sent messages to each of these cachers, as I am willing to accept photographic evidence and/or very good descriptions. Only one replied. I gave them about six weeks to get back to me. From memory their cache find numbers varied from two figures to three figures. It was about time they realised they needed to sign the cache. I suspect most of them didn't so much forget to find the cache, as they didn't find it.

There are dishonest geocachers at all levels. That doesn't take it away from the fact that finders who have found more caches are likely to be more experienced. I am finding beginners are the ones logging finds and not signing the log; rather than more experienced cachers. I have just removed the logs of six beginners for not signing the log ("I didn't know I had to sign the log." ), and I should have removed another.

It's a while since I've flown out of my local airport, Canberra, but I think that to visit a cafe, etc, you do need to pass through security, which anyone can do as long as they are not carrying banned items and don't mind being wiped for explosive material, etc. There is a virtual there and I went to do it not long ago, but didn't, as I wasn't prepared to travel through security, as my bag wasn't security prepared. I will remove a few things next time I attempt this cache.

This recent incident 'Irked' me. My log: After a description of the find I finished off my log to let the CO know the log was full: "The log is full and a new log is needed. TFTC (name of CO)." How else will the CO know? Then when nothing had happened, about six weeks later I did a NM as a nudge. People were still logging finds, even though the log was full. I wondered if they were finding room to sign it, and none of them mentioned the log was full. I appreciate NMs on my caches to let me know there is a problem. When something needs attention, NMs are helpful. I wrote nothing impolite. "Needs Maintenance Reminder. I wrote in my log on 28/Oct/2019 that the log is full and a new log is needed. After more than a month I can't see an OM, so making a NM as an extra nudge. This needs the tender loving care of the CO." I left it at that. However then this several weeks later, and this irked me. "As a fellow CO, I know how much of an inconvenience it can be to have to replace a log. I also know how much a CO appreciates another cacher helping out with the odd maintenance here and there. If the previous cacher who left a NM log (with 10k finds I'll add) was so offended or outraged by a full log, then perhaps they could have spared a page from their notebook like I just did. No need for any action from the CO. The cache is in good shape with a fresh sheet alongside the old one. Time to clear that NM log! Many thanks for the cache." I was not "offended or outraged by a full log", but that (slimy) log offended (and irked) me. They could have just replaced the log without the need to snipe. They made several presumptions; that I had paper with me to replace the log - I didn't, and that all COs appreciate someone replacing their logs without checking first. I certainly don't want anyone to replace my cache logs without checking with me first. Log a NM please and I will attend to it.

A Virtual after security at Canberra airport too. You just need to make sure you are not carrying anything banned. Don't need a ticket.

All nano logs I have seen have room for more signatures than that, and many people will only use their initials (GW in my case), but there will be less room and the cache will need more log replacements than a bigger log in the same position. Also, when checking the log and comparing signatures with the on-line logs, the signatures will be harder to read.

I never said that everyone writing logs on an App writes short logs; only that it encourages short logs. Your words, "that’s pretty presumptuous of you" to suggest that's what I wrote.

Sounds a fun cache. Definitely sounds like an 'Other'.

And from the logs of the last two caches I checked, that weren't...

My thoughts exactly. They chose this, even when often a bigger cache could have been used, so this can be a lesson how much maintenance these need. Unfortunately I find that people who choose to use nanos and micros over larger caches, are less likely to maintain them. Throw away world; throw away cache.

Seems strange to change the requirement for a challenge, as then suddenly lots of people might not qualify, but who qualified before.

Sure...all 18,000