JimmyEv

Thanks.

I found a Texasgeocaching coin in a cache. The owner wants me to log it, but I don't know how and he doesn't know how. I entered the coin number on the TB tracking and it wasn't valid or whatever. How do you track them?

This is a hoot. Proof that Houston is flat and urban: FOUND: 1397 unique caches found. Avg. Difficulty = 1.61 Avg. Terrain = 1.50 Avg. Challenge = 1.76 154 hard caches (11%) 1 countries 7 US states 342 (24.5%) archived Oldest cache: #515 (GC203) Newest cache: #312748 (GCR97J) Difficulty: 1.0: 535 (38.3%) 1.5: 375 (26.8%) 2.0: 287 (20.5%) 2.5: 96 ( 6.9%) 3.0: 72 ( 5.2%) 3.5: 18 ( 1.3%) 4.0: 12 ( 0.9%) 4.5: 2 ( 0.1%) Terrain: 1.0: 666 (47.7%) 1.5: 345 (24.7%) 2.0: 226 (16.2%) 2.5: 85 ( 6.1%) 3.0: 47 ( 3.4%) 3.5: 20 ( 1.4%) 4.0: 7 ( 0.5%) 5.0: 1 ( 0.1%) Cache types: 1 ( 0.1%) Event Cache 4 ( 0.3%) Letterbox Hybrid 105 ( 7.5%) Multi-cache 1134 (81.2%) Traditional Cache 45 ( 3.2%) Unknown Cache 108 ( 7.7%) Virtual Cache Containers: 9 ( 0.6%) Large 412 (29.5%) Micro 66 ( 4.7%) Not chosen 64 ( 4.6%) Other 622 (44.5%) Regular 138 ( 9.9%) Small 86 ( 6.2%) Virtual Countries: 1397 in United States US States: 1 in Arizona 3 in Louisiana 15 in Nevada 15 in North Carolina 11 in Pennsylvania 1344 in Texas 8 in Virginia HOUSTON: Avg. Difficulty = 1.66 Avg. Terrain = 1.45 Avg. Challenge = 1.78 72 hard caches (14%) 1 countries 1 US states 0 (0.0%) archived Oldest cache: #2240 (GC8C0) Newest cache: #321749 (GCRJJY) Difficulty: 1.0: 192 (38.4%) 1.5: 141 (28.2%) 2.0: 84 (16.8%) 2.5: 26 ( 5.2%) 3.0: 35 ( 7.0%) 3.5: 10 ( 2.0%) 4.0: 5 ( 1.0%) 4.5: 5 ( 1.0%) 5.0: 2 ( 0.4%) Terrain: 1.0: 228 (45.6%) 1.5: 169 (33.8%) 2.0: 63 (12.6%) 2.5: 16 ( 3.2%) 3.0: 16 ( 3.2%) 3.5: 6 ( 1.2%) 4.0: 1 ( 0.2%) 5.0: 1 ( 0.2%) Cache types: 2 ( 0.4%) Event Cache 1 ( 0.2%) Letterbox Hybrid 1 ( 0.2%) Locationless (Reverse) Cache 41 ( 8.2%) Multi-cache 353 (70.6%) Traditional Cache 74 (14.8%) Unknown Cache 28 ( 5.6%) Virtual Cache Containers: 3 ( 0.6%) Large 181 (36.2%) Micro 28 ( 5.6%) Not chosen 21 ( 4.2%) Other 165 (33.0%) Regular 78 (15.6%) Small 24 ( 4.8%) Virtual And proof that I can't find hard caches or solve puzzles: CLOSEST UNFOUND: Avg. Difficulty = 2.02 Avg. Terrain = 1.86 Avg. Challenge = 2.26 136 hard caches (27%) 1 countries 1 US states 0 (0.0%) archived Oldest cache: #1180 (GC49C) Newest cache: #321749 (GCRJJY) Difficulty: 1.0: 103 (20.6%) 1.5: 128 (25.6%) 2.0: 125 (25.0%) 2.5: 34 ( 6.8%) 3.0: 69 (13.8%) 3.5: 12 ( 2.4%) 4.0: 13 ( 2.6%) 4.5: 6 ( 1.2%) 5.0: 10 ( 2.0%) Terrain: 1.0: 108 (21.6%) 1.5: 211 (42.2%) 2.0: 91 (18.2%) 2.5: 25 ( 5.0%) 3.0: 24 ( 4.8%) 3.5: 8 ( 1.6%) 4.0: 4 ( 0.8%) 4.5: 1 ( 0.2%) 5.0: 28 ( 5.6%) Cache types: 2 ( 0.4%) Event Cache 2 ( 0.4%) Locationless (Reverse) Cache 43 ( 8.6%) Multi-cache 315 (63.0%) Traditional Cache 134 (26.8%) Unknown Cache 1 ( 0.2%) Virtual Cache 3 ( 0.6%) Webcam Cache Containers: 3 ( 0.6%) Large 162 (32.4%) Micro 22 ( 4.4%) Not chosen 8 ( 1.6%) Other 187 (37.4%) Regular 115 (23.0%) Small 3 ( 0.6%) Virtual

I think of geocaching like I think of hiking, kayaking, skiing or bicycling --- a hobby. It might be a sport if you're competing with someone, like bicycling, skiing and kayaking are sometimes (and even hiking if you compare miles). It could also occasionally be a game if you set out rules for finding caches, like (I suppose) at the Texas Challenge. But for the most part, it's a hobby, pastime, recreational activity.

You should've asked the ranger if USFS personnel entering the area get hazardous duty pay. If they do, then the area really is hazardous. If not, well then...

Thought I'd add my 2 cents about this stupid law while filling out three forms in triplicate to get Tylenol Sinus non-drowsy for my cold. This law sort of encourages the stealing of children. If you wanna use the park, steal a kid... Back on topic, the only time I'll go after geocaches in playgrounds is if they're empty. Unless there's a kid with me, of course.

I've seen at least three caches that were nothing more than logbooks in plastic baggies stuffed somewhere. If logs referred to a 'clever container' and all I found was a logbook in a baggie, I'd think that either the poster of that log was being sarcastic or truly thought the lack of a container was a clever container. I wouldn't assume that the log had been taken out of the container, because then it shouldn't be in the baggie.

If you posted the co-ordinates to the flag, and instructed cachers to sign the flag, you'd have a cache. Of course, you wouldn't find these flags disturbing the natural environment in any area that prohibits geocaching...

Nice to see that the German Company Daimler-Chrysler still manufactures some models in America. Then again, so do Toyota and Honda. I've been trying the 55 mph experiment to see how it affects my mileage. Its really hard on a 16-lane highway when you have to travel in one of the left lanes to get to your exit. People zooming past you on both sides. But it's kind of a power-trip too

I had two of these from REI. One lasted a year; The other one lasted two years. I just picked up the $10 Wally World ones. They don't seem much different, just brighter.

This is pretty short-sighted. Waymarking has a lot of potential. In the long run, it might end-up subsidizing gc.com, keeping your annual fees at $30.

OK, now I understand that. But some people are going to be voting on whether they think the idea is 'stupid' or not. Judging from the number of people on gc.com that hate a particular type of hide, I think you'd be hard-pressed to get 2/3 of people to say they like a category, i.e. vote to approve it as a new category. Would be interesting to see if it works though.

If there is a rating system for the categories, why do they need to be screened before being posted? Why couldn't one just create a category then let it rise or sink? I get the idea that a waymark should be unique. I'm not going to be seeking out every McDonalds. But, on the other hand, a list of waypoints of McDonalds might be useful if I'm traveling and want to rent a movie. My concern is that if categories have to have a consensus, and be voted on, then mundane (but useful) categories would not get approved. If we can filter by the rating, then if I'm after unique places, I could use that function, but if I just wanted to load something useful, I could just scroll through the categories.

This post started me thinking. In some states, children aren't allowed inside a bar, in other states they are allowed inside. Same thing with casinos --- Nevada they can be in the casino if they're not gambling, West Virginia they can't be. So what you can find as a family is different in different states (let alone different countries), and who knows all these vagaries of law? Then the post came about the lawsuits --- grandma could sue Groundspeak because Junior got rolled in a strip club parking lot. Well, these locations are listed in the phone book (under 'gentlemen's clubs' in Houston), and they're not filtered to 'adults only.' Anyone can look it up in the yellow pages. Anything that is listed in the yellow pages, which is just about every legimate business establishment with a phone, should be fair game for Waymarking. Without age-based filtering.

I'm not sure what this topic is about. Is it asking when Groundspeak should fire a volunteer approver, or when one should choose a different volunteer approver (if that option is available)? I'm more interested in the answer to this question: What should be done when the local geocaching community looses respect for a volunteer approver through little or no fault of his own?

What I like most about caching is that it allows me to discover areas I didn't know about. A new cache hidden in the same place as an older one isn't going to bring that same sense of adventure and discovery. I disagree with the effect of 'cache saturation' on newbies. It doesn't force you to put out uninspired micros; It forces you to expand your caching boundaries. Most cities and suburbs in Texas are pretty much saturated with caches. All the good spots are taken. Most of us live in suburbs. If you turn around and face the other direction, the 40 to 50 miles away from the city instead of the 40 to 50 miles across the city where you're caching, chances are there are miles and miles of virgin territory just waiting for that special cache.

Considering the fact that 179 kids die each week in motor vehicle accidents, I have a lot more to worry about than their picture being posted on gc.com. Like getting into the car with any of my sisters...

One March I decided to solve a series of puzzle caches. I spent all my spare time the whole month on the computer, trying to solve them, and maybe got outside three times. That's when I started filtering out all puzzle caches. Now multis, those are awesome.

I was always under the impression that mystery caches always began with this statement: "Cache is not at the above co-ordinates," requiring the finder to figure out the correct co-ordinates before even leaving home. A cache that starts at the co-ordinates and is off-set, involves a projection, or some math based on what you find at the first set of co-ordinates, I've always seen catagorized as a multi-cache, not a mystery cache. I've also seen quite a few caches disguised with good 'urban' camo as everyday items that one would never think of as being a cache container, some where you even have to figure out the combination to a lock. These I've always seen categorized as traditional caches. Apparently people in different parts of the country are using different definations of the few categories we have now, so how would a new category of cache help?

Last summer I was at my parent's in Pennsylvania. My sister (age: 34) wanted to go blackberry picking; I wanted to go geocaching. So I pulled out my handy-dandy 'blackberry locator' and showed it to her. At first she didn't believe me that this gadget actually detected blackberries. Then I explained to her that blackberries give off a certain pherome that this little gadget detects. All you had to do was follow the arrow. I found the cache, she found blackberries. Last I heard she was scouring stores in the Pittsburgh area looking for 'blackberry detectors'...

Yes. Good thing it was Tupperware. I don't think I would've opened an ammo box.

I don't know about this. I picked up a GPS for hiking because I'm incapable of operating a compass, and learned about the GPS from Backpacker magazine. Actually, Backpacker uses GPS-technology quite alot, with waypoints for almost all of their hikes these days, so it seems like GPSs are commonly used by hikers. Does this make hiking a 'geek' sport or Backpacker a 'geek' magazine?

Almost always alone, except for night caches. A friend of mine thinks those are really cool. But on regular caches, my dog won't even come with me. She doesn't like thickets. But solitude is a good thing.

I hate these. I don't have a clue, but I think it's pretty much verboten to ask for help with mystery caches on here. Your best hope is to find a partner that might be a puzzle person. Good luck, I've been looking for one for three years.

It's very hard to find an adequate place for a cache in an area saturated with caches. Personal circumstances may make it even harder. For example, I know dozens of interesting places where I grew up that would be excellent for cache hides. But that's 1600 miles away from where I am. In Houston, basically the only interesting places I've discovered have been because there was a cache there. Therefore, I have very few cache placements because I don't want to place a boring cache. So give the OP a break.