Totem Clan

Oh Gawd!! Don't get me going on that fake a** lying twit. I spent over 6 years as a SF survival instructor. Trust me don't listen to what he says. Also be very carful about following streams and river. Yes people do live near them and normally at lower elevations but water takes the pathes into cayons and over cliffs than can quickly lead to trouble. Be careful not to get yourself trapped. Following their general course is very good idea just don't let it lead you into something you can't get out of. The best advise if you truely get lost is stay put and wait.

Nope. It doesn't bother me at all.

That's the Bookmark List icon. The only way I knew that was to open it and see the filename. Would anybody on this planet ever guess that was what that shape meant? Apologies to the icon designer... I'm sure you're not feeling very good about this thread right now, but really... how does that shape represent a bookmark list? Oh c'mon man! If you get close enough to the screen, squint your eyes, and hold your tongue just right you can tell that is clearly a book with bookmark sticking out of it. I think.

Good grief. Let's all start a list of specific things that aren't in the guidelines. I'll kick off the list with: *Do not place your cache container inside the cloaca of a living alligator There's no rule about hanging it around a rabid raccoon's neck either. Show me one.

I got mine. A new cache came out a couple of days ago. Just so happens it was between me and the store today so that worked out nicely.

I agree with you for most part. Most of the post here are just knee-jerk reaction to something new and differetn. Change will always stir up frustration. Regardless of that there are some flaws in the new system that should be fixed, such as the PMO icon looking like a coin. Also the R/G colorblind issue should be corrected. Now would be a good time to fix them instead of waiting until everyone has adjusted to the new icons.

I'll get use to them I'm sure and then it won't matter but....... something has to be done about the PMO cache icon. Maybe even just change the color so that it doesn't look like a coin icon.

Starting? I was trying to be tactful.

Turtle River State Park in North Dakota. If I'm not mistaken every State Park in North Dakota has thier own account. Quartz Mountain State Park here in Oklahoma has their own account to watch the caches in thier park, but I'm not sure what it is.

Is it just me or is this thread starting to go in circles?

I've seen people who registered and then never found a cache or hid one for months if not years, so you would still have the same problem.

Groooaaaannnnnnnnn.....................

So maybe those who are interested in the various competitive aspects of geocaching can start their own website to keep track of everything and create their own governing body to make important decisions and resolve conflicts. And leave the rest of us out of it. PAul ...and if you don't like that site, you can start another one. ...and if you don't like that site, you can start another one. ...and if you don't like that site, you can start another one. ...and if you don't like that site, you can start another one. ...and if you don't like that site, you can start another one. ...and if you don't like that site, you can start another one. ...and if you don't like that site, you can start another one.

I bet that you can get some good results, if you set the field "That (And)", together with a large date margin on "Placed During". Give it a try! I bet that using the date placed you would not get anything close to what the OP is asking for. OP wants caches placed anytime that have been found within the last month (for example) but not caches placed within the last year (for example) that have not been found in the last 2 months (for example.) Some of us get it, even if you don't. Exactly To the OP, I think it's a good idea. I don't think I would use it much because I use GSAK to sort my PQs. GSAK will do what you want for now, but GC.com should consider this.

I was at an event yesterday where 65% of the adults were female. That's norm around here. .... or at least 50/50.

Stats and manure have a lot in common. Once they're processed that are beneficial and promote growth; however in their raw state they are both stinking piles of #$%* and nobody wants to deal with yours.

Not sure I understand this as "bad swag". A new clean bouncy ball should be good swag. There are plenty of houses where kids could have it and might like it. i have to agree with you. a clean bouncy ball is fun. i generally put all swag i leave in zip baggies so even things like bouncy balls stay clean. While a clean bouncy ball may be fun, it is a serious safety hazard for small children (who havn't learned not to put things in their mouth yet). In another year, I will not have kids in that age catagory anymore, and then I will start thinking they are great swag. But for now, they are really anoying. They may be annoying to you, but to list something as bad swag because you don't want it borders on being a little self centered. I know it is hard to get our ideas across in the forums. Very easy to be misunderstood. However, you even admit you may find them great swag later, but you say they are bad swag now. Perhaps the problem is I took this thread to mean bad swag, as in stuff that shouldn't be in a cache. You take it as bad swag is stuff you don't want in a cache. Not really the same thing at all. Well I think the thread is kind of about both. In addition to the many comments about things that should not be in caches, I pulled up some quotes about preferences . Well by that very broad definition all swag is bad swag because I don't trade swag ever, so it's all in my way cluttering my caches.

Geocaching is a real-world, outdoor treasure hunting game using GPS-enabled devices. Participants navigate to a specific set of GPS coordinates and then attempt to find the geocache (container) hidden at that location. That is 'governed pretty well. All the rest is just so many little sides games. Why should GC.com give a carp about governing them?

I don't think I would even try. I have some 4+ plus terrain caches fairly close to me but the closest non-hiking cache is 30 miles away. In order to include 365 unfound caches a circle starting at my home coords would have to be 60 miles in radius, and that's if I include all the high terrain cache and all the puzzles. That would not be caching. That would be work.

My 16 year daughter has an account where she hides caches. She does have a handful of caches the she has logged even though she has found hundreds of caches with me. Under a minimum rules she couldn't hide her own. She only hides quality caches. I would hate to see caches like that blocked while a 1,000+ find cachers few towns over that will go un-named keeps hiding low quality unmaintained caches that end up as geolitter.

I would agree. On some caches even 4 DNFs doesn't mean anything. I used 2 DNFs for my check only because that what the OP stated.

Employing the same strategy is only one factor. I would think that the general location where one caches, and the relative cache density would have a far greater impact. If someone living in the state of NY want to get 400-500 caches (or more, in a day) it's very unlikely that they're going to do it here without a large team leapfrogging caches. There are essentially no power trains in the entire state. The closest that I can find is one in Westchester county that has less than 150 caches and each cache pages stats, "If you are looking for a quick P&G numbers crunch like other mega-series runs, this isn't it." There are a *lot* of countries that don't have 150 caches in the entire country. Someone living in any of those countries trying to see how many caches they can find in a day is likely going to have a hard time breaking a dozen, no matter what strategy them employ (outside of armchair logging). Huh? How does cache density relate to if one has legitimately found a cache? If we are competing and using the exact same criteria to determine what is a found cache, density may have a factor on who wins, but it has nothing to do with us accurately comparing our progress. Cache density doesn't determine if the find is legitimate. It would however be a factor if you were trying to see who holds the "World Record" for caches in day. The playing field would have to be level is what I think NYPaddleCacher was saying. From my home coords you would have to scour an area of over 11,000 square miles to find 1,000 caches, and a good number of those are 4+ terrain caches. In some parts of LA it would take an area of less than 200 square miles to do the same.

Done: "Needs Archived." Of course if you log that you will get a ton of backlash from angery cachers. Not that care, but it will happen.

Looking at the closest 1000 cachces, excluding events, to my home coords, as of now 3.3% are disabled. Of the enabled caches, 4.9% 2DNF logs as their last logs. A handful or more of those are hard caches that I'm sure are in place.

I think that is a fine idea, and I hope that Groundspeak is listening! A t-shirt or something like that that you could wear to events would be appropriate too, I'd think. That would be nice.