wmpastor

I agree with a 4.0 rating, maybe 3.5. It's a true climb, not way up high but tricky and difficult nevertheless. However, no special equipment is needed, so that probably eliminates 4.5 or higher. So likely 4.0 for terrain. Difficulty is a completely different animal. It's based on searching difficulty once you're at GZ. For example, if it's easily visible from the ground or when up in the tree, it could have a *terrain* rating of 4.0, but a *difficulty* rating as low as 1.0 or 1.5. People sometimes forget that the two ratings are completely independent of each other.

Haha, but how long is later? With me, one to three hours. I've written those words more than once, and followed through every time.

Well said, and your example shows that it's possible to ask/remind politely. "Fishing" for points would occur if the finder said nice things in the post but never mentioned FPs, and the CO suggested they award an FP. Here the finder said he/she was going award an FP, but didn't through oversight.

Sure. Be sneeky and don't let them see you. Maybe, but the the true art is being sneaky without looking sneaky! The pick-up-trash tip is good because then people glance at you, think they know what you're doing, and move on. Or start with caches in the woods - no one is around, so no sneakiness is required.

Sounds like that cache is definitely not a traditional. If you need to calculate coords, that should not be listed as a traditional. Contact cache owner or reviewer.

Sure there is! If two people are searching simultaneously, each benefits from what they see the other do. One searches here, one there. It's a team effort. If the other person weren't there, you would have searched differently. Both get credit. That said, I once arrived just as the FTF person was opening the cache. Naturally I did not even think of claiming co-FTF, because I contributed nothing to the search (which had already ended). Now the flip-side. Twice I was at GZ, once with the cache in my hands and once not quite. In the first case, the other person did not claim co-FTF (which was accurate, IMO), and in the second case, I (graciously ) invited the other person to consider himself co-FTF. But either way, these are not life and death matters. Whenever I keep stats of any kind for myself, I'm strict about it. That way, I know that my stats are rock-solid indicators, without asterisks or qualifications.

Then there's the other polar opposite!

Another issue - and this ties in with the "ecosystem" in the jar issue - is that it's difficult to find a glass container with a waterproof lid. A screw-on lid is probably not really waterproof.

I skimmed through part of this thread and also read a number of posts. I didn't see this issue covered. We don't know what the hamster algorithm is, but quantity of DNFs ideally is not the sole factor. The expertise of the searcher, loosely correlated to number of finds, could be relevant, as discussed, but suppose a group of six novices goes hunting, 4 post DNF, one posts NM, and one posts NA?! This is not a far-fetched hypothetical!

And therein lies the problem. The accusation by the newbie is accepted at fact. Actually, specks of dirt can easily resemble mold. I would not go as far as to say that mold is a universally-recognized substance. What happened to the presumption of innocence?

An inquiry by message or email is appropriate. The experienced cacher undoubtedly knows his to log TBs, and in all likelihood just forgot. Most people in that situation would appreciate having their oversight pointed out so they could correct it.

Not only that, but if the searcher is trying to be stealthy, this "announcement" draws attention. Best advice is to routinely turn the volume way down or off.

If you can't afford the GPS unit now, consider caching with someone else who has one. This can be a fun social activity. Maybe someone already caching you meet at a caching event, or a friend who'd like to try it and can load the app on his or her phone. By the way, your technique for finding the cache placement coords was clever and resourceful.

This topic has also been discussed in the context of where the area around GZ varies widely. The altitude could clue you in on whether to search high or low. For example, I searched for a cache on or near steps in a terraced parking lot. In that case, the difference in altitude (maybe 10 meters or 40 feet) would have been less than the accuracy of the device I was using.

Hi elyob, yesterday? Do you mean for April Fools? Nope. The driver of that blue car is so brazen he even parks in our driveway. Have you introduced yourself yet?

Data-mining must be a profitable business. Scary! Plenty of opt-outs, we hope!

With the key word being "invites." If someone doesn't want to play along by weaving a tall tale about using scuba gear and climbing ropes to reach the cache, they can log their smiley with a "TFTC for the quick park and grab at this nice shopping center." The owner cannot delete that log. Requiring the tall tale would constitute an Additional Logging Requirement (ALR) and these were prohibited in 2009 or so. Totally agreed. In fact, as I looked over the "found" posts, there were a few very short, matter-of-fact posts.

I was watching one where the CO invited finders to post a fictitious story about their find. Some posts were quite entertaining and humorous (fighting off tigers, swimming across an alligator-infested river, etc.). Sounds like okay fun to me.

Which menu are you looking at?

They could have both a technician, and a social media expert on duty 24/7. But that would be a waste of time and money... Agreed. I for one don't want dues to increase by fifty cents to cover 24/7 hospital-grade or military-grade instantaneous IT support and social network minute-by-minute updates. A short wait harms no one and the response-time was great. Well done, GS!

Hey, that works for the President! 500 error also - 1st time I ever saw that.

Really? You think there are actually multiple people that have that kind of time and values about how they spend their lives? What will they do with their treasure trove of 100 extra FPs?

Of course some D5/T5 caches are also "a bit involved for a light hobby." I never heard of the filming being done, but it's an excellent idea for a new cacher, especially if the GZ area is filled with muggles. Go home, look at the images, and ask yourself, "Where are all the possible hiding places?" Never assume anything is as it seems. Things can be hollow or fake. Or attached with magnets. Or parts can move or open that you wouldn't expect to move or open. Etc. GL!

"Muggle" is neither positive nor negative in general, it's an outsider, generally said with a bit of a smile. If it's meant negatively, generally if a muggle muggles (steals, wrecks) a cache, some other words are added on (e.g., "#$!@#! muggle").

First, you are clearly within your rights to find the cache and log it at your convenience. No rule says otherwise. A few people here seem to look down and the whole FTF so-called side-game, and they'll tell you to do what you want and ignore the "totally unreasonable" requests of the FTF hounds. And then there's the matter of just being a nice person. You said you have no interest in FTF. So why not wait until the new cache is found? No big deal for you, and you avoid irritating others. In my area, any new cache rated 2.5/2.5 or lower is *guaranteed* to be found within 24 hours, and more likely within a few hours if published during daylight. So merely by waiting a day to find the cache, no one is bothered. Sure, we could debate from now until doomsday whether the FTF crowd is being reasonable. But just by waiting *one day* to search, everyone is happy.