stijnhommes

Did she get the reward, or did you give the rest of the class a chance to find it as well?

The proper protocol is "cache in, trash out" (CITO). Removing worthless items as trash, cleaning the cache out and informing the cache owner to fix the cache is exactly what you should do.

- Locked - The Key to Finding a Cache - Lock 'n Lock - How to Log a Find - How to Lock a Log

I would avoid any names that include the name of the reserve in case someone thinks it's a hint and starts digging...

According to the listing guidelines, the owner is responsible for maintaining the caches they place. I have no idea how your cache managed to get published without a maintenance plan in place, but I would suggest you make sure you have a maintenance plan for any future caches you place before submitting them for review.

Logging that a cache needs maintenance is separate from the find. You need to log a "found it" too.

I'm more bothered by the fact that caching Belgium or Venice doesn't get you any special souvenirs, but I completely agree that not removing souvenirs for deleted finds is a bug and not a feature that should be handled by Groundspeak.

If you can't make that selection in the pocket query, you can use GSAK to do it.

As you may have noticed, there are no FTF statistics on your site profile because it's not an official part of the game. Add a FTF prize if you want to, but don't feel obligated. I've seen plenty of places that do no include one. (They still get found by 3 different teams in the first hour after publication)

I'm afraid (or rather glad) that I can honestly say that I've never attended any sort of event where language was a problem for me. In most cases the participants were fluent in Dutch, English or German meaning that I could talk to them. On holiday in Venice the cache owners were smart and kind enough to provide English translations for their descriptions because they know their town is very popular with tourists. The only way to solve the problem in an event is to have people who speak several languages who can act as translators and have descriptions of caches translated to whatever language you need.

If you remove a log to replace it with a fresh one, just send the owner a message through the site and ask them if they want it back. Sending nano log can't cost all that much and if it's a problem you can always ask them to foot the bill for the stamp.

Although I rarely rant, that pretty much sums up my feelings. Waymarks might be fun for some people, but they're not for me, because, to put it bluntly: they are not caches. They're not listed on geocaching.com as a cache and they don't factor into my cache statistics. On a side note: there are too many waymarks to ever get all your "smileys" in one area and far to few rules to govern what can and cannot be waymarked (as compared to caches) I'd be perfectly happy for waymarks to exist, but I too harbor a secret feeling that if they were killed off, perhaps the virtuals might return instead. And THAT would be fun for me.

That is part of a GCvote extension (or something similar. I think that the part that says "Check distance from here" is another browser extension or Greasemonkey script.

I'm not aware of any GPS units that can import CAD files. Even if you were able to, how would you know where on the drawing you are if it's not locked to a particular map location?

Instead of archiving your old listing, you might chat with your old Cornwall cache buddies and see if any of them are interested in adopting your old caches over there.

Your profile takes time to update, unless you hit the update button on your stats yourself. Have you tried that?

There's nothing wrong with helping a CO to maintain their trail, but before you place a replacement container, you need to make very VERY sure the original is in fact missing. It wouldn't be the first time I found two caches in the same location.

To be specific, go to Upload fieldnotes (http://www.geocaching.com/my/uploadfieldnotes.aspx) and select "geocache_visits.txt" from the Garmin directory on your device and click upload. From there you can click each link in order and write your logs.

Roadrunner, it's GC2A7XM. I'm sorry to hear you discovered the cache in that state. I've been lucky to not have seen such a thing so far, although some of the ground zero areas I've visited have been repugnant all on their own.

If you're referring to the parking area outside a Wal-Mart, I'd ask the store manager and/or perhaps the store security people. You don't want the store owner to give permission and the security people not to be in the know.

I agree with the previous two people that a BYOP attribute would add very little to a cache. Especially when micros are concerned, I assume I need to bring a pen myself. I'm always happily surprised if one is available but for the 657 caches I found so far, the amount of caches that had a pen where clearly in the minority.

Just contact and report to a Groundspeak support person and they'll take care of it.

Being mean to a newbie is completely different than pointing out the rules to a seasoned cacher. I'd give a newbie the chance to answer those questions. A non-newbie, not so much. Besides, I am less inclined to delete Earth cache logs than traditionals and puzzle caches, because the rules for them should be clear to anyone going out to find a cache. I've come across a cache that was filled with kinder eggs: all had a marble in, one with a logsheet. I also found some caches that had several keys on a ring one of which fit the lock on the cache. It might take time, but as long as you can reasonably expect it based on the cache description page, you should know when you go out to find them. I enjoy caches that make you take a little effort to claim your smiley. I only log a true find, no throwdowns. When a CO offered me permission to log a ripped cache I declined, because I felt I didn't truly find it. Why are some people so averse to some hard work to reach a cache and write a proper log?

Reviewers know more than the general geocaching community -- especially on hides they approve themselves. If the reviewer likes the FTF this much, I think making them a reviewer is a bad idea. Claiming a smiley on a cache you hide yourself is bad; claiming one on a cache you publish as a reviewer is just as bad.

Replacing logs is fine, but I think it's a good idea to keep the wet one in case it can be dried and the owner wants it back. Replacing broken containers is something you should only really do after getting the go ahead of the owner. They'll probably be happy to be spared a maintenance trip, but a different container might mean hints need to be adjusted or something. On the other hand, there are people who say that you should let broken caches sit and allow them to be archived if the owner doesn't take care of it. Personally, I feel it's a little too cruel, but I can see the point. Just check with the owner beforehand and you'll be fine.