Shiny Black Shoe

I'm still confused what you actually logged this as: Did Not Find Needs Maint Found It (Needs Archive) Note People will often mention in a Found It log that the log is wet etc. For me that gets mentioned but then a separate NM log. Reason being a cache owner may not read every find log, but certainly as a CO, I read anything that says Needs Maint. Plus as someone else said - I'm far less likely to try a cache that is showing the NM flag. At the very least I'll read the NM log to see what the issue is (wet log - I will take a spare log and silica sachet)

There were two potentially correct responses here: Log a DNF and in the log state "made visual contact with the container but was unable to retrieve it to sign the log, so recording this as a DNF. Taking on board comments from last month about broken string - this may NM" (I'd expect the CO to respond publically to that along the lines of "Many thanks for querying if this NM - It doesn't there should be no string, you'll need to try harder!") Thats then on record for everyone in the future. Or you are convinced it NM. In which case log an NM "made contact with the container but string broken/missing so unable to retrieve. NM." If thats what the CO deleted - I actually think that was wrong - s/he should have simply added a log note to it. There is no reason to delete a NM log. Simply log it as having been maintained and provide enough information to say it didn't need any work. However, if you logged a find - it needs deleted as you didn't find it...

In the early days of TBs a few were released with disposable cameras. Not sure how successful they were. In those days digital camera tech was rarer and expensive and mobile phone cameras while they existed were not easy to download pics from. I agree - I'm not plugging media I don't know into my network. I might consider plugging it into someone elses!!? I'd be concerned about a trojan on the media or even an inappropriate photo! Fairly common to release a TB that asks people to upload pictures of places it visits. People then tend to take a pic of the TB at a location...

While plain wrong, if the next cacher then "grabs it from somewhere else" like they should it will log miles just fine. I do wonder how much longer TBs are going to survive. Two sat here waiting to release. One with mission set and a laminate attached that says "This TB is owned by a 5 year old. If you steal it you are stealing from a child" Lets see how that survives. (Its true its the littlest shoe's first TB). I do wonder how many are stolen vs taken by relative newbie cachers who get the concept (we all attach a laminated note explaining it don't we?) but then visit 20 nano's and fail to drop it in the nanos. And then they give up caching and the TB sits in a drawer. Probably never claimed as lifted coz it was a first time and they hadn't worked out what to do with it. I'd very much expect you should always be able to retrieve your bug yourself. So if someone's bending the rules they should tell the TO where it is. Just occasionally it strikes me geochaching needs a wrap over the knuckles function, that would allow some form of moderator to tell a player they aren't following the rules and if they continue to do so their account will be suspended for X days followed by lifetime ban. For the numbers players at least that would focus the mind..

Probably bending the trackable rules but you could secure the trackable to your cache. With a tag saying it is NOT to be removed. So the cacher simply notes the TB code and tracks it... if they get all 4 or all 32 or whatever they "win" Someone may still nick them. Caches get muggled etc. And it doesn't achieve anything that saying the cacher must log these 4 caches wouldn't other than saving you needing to check the paper log if you had doubts they'd been as they would be able to provide it by getting the TB #. Although as I type this I realise YOU could move the pieces about. Actually if you could find 64 caches in an 8 x 8 grid... ...you could play chess with the pieces...

Not aware of Tax Maps in the UK. But we do have Land Registry - who will know who the registered Land Owner is. They exist to ensure I cant sell the land to someone else by claiming I own it... There is a cost involved in searching them. I'm not sure how much or what they will tell me... for my house I suspect they tell you my name and my address which is my house. For effectively a field will they just tell me the address of the field?

OK so chance has it I was trying to indoctrinate my brother into caching. I've tried and failed before. He thinks caching is "sad" blah blah. Well then I briefly mentioned puzzle caches. Doubtfully he looked as if to say how hard can it be. There was one with co-ords 400m from his house so I said crack on (it was T2 D4!) - we couldn't even work out which part of the listing was the puzzle! We spent about 3 hours reading it, reading linked pages in the listing and still perplexed. I found an easier one which is more like puzzles I've studied before - go here get info X and Y add them together and replace ABC in the long lat with X+Y and go get cache. He seemed to be getting the idea so I found a D3 from the same CO as the first one and after an hour we cracked the puzzle. He now looks hooked. I'm not opposed to puzzles etc - but I've spent a lot of time looking at them and getting no-where and so I'll tend to pass them by. But I do like a puzzle. I don't think the cache I'm proposing is a puzzle... I'd liken it to the ones where you have to float the cache box out the tube with water while plugging the holes at the bottom... Are they puzzles? I've not come across one in the field. In comparison my cache and sub cache would be the cache and the bucket for collecting water from the stream... Is the bucket a multi? While agreeing with the logic of your argument, I remind you that the OP told us he is such a person, so he was trying to avoid making it a multi because, as a seeker, he wouldn't want it to be a multi. So- A. I like the idea of getting people to try things that are a bit different to box hidden in base of tree. Its an easy physical puzzle IMHO. People into Puzzles will be disappointed. People into normal caches will (I hope) think - well that was a bit different... I'm aiming for that audience not the people who like to solve the cryptic crossword to get the co-ords... B. I agree - I wasn't planning to have Cache A point to Cache B. If you bring the right tool you don't need to multi it... OK so as CO thats my risk. Its 2 miles from the house, with minimal access challenges to GZ. I can maintain it, no issues. I'm accepting that if I list it as a puzzle/multi it may get less DNF/NM notes. I'm also feeling it may get less visits.

I'd have converted the easy stuff, but think tables may be harder to ensure done right. If people really render stuff like that in logs. BUT - what happens with encyrpted logs? Will putting [ ] round things break that?

FWIW, there is no minimum distance between stages of a multi-cache. I've found more than one where I could touch the first stage with one hand while touching the final with the other hand. And I've found a few more where the stages were within the distance I consider a normal search radius. Mmmm... does that not risk people getting the two mixed up... "FTF: Found the cache couldn't get into it... sawed the top off using my angle grinder that I carry in my cache box for such emergencies. Got the container out eventually. Strangely no coords for the next stage and it says well done on finding the final cache. SL, TN, L-sawn open cache"

If it requires people to visit multiple waypoints, it is disingenuous to list it as a traditional no matter how much you dislike yellow boxes on your map. People will be, as you say, "cheezed off" when they find the tool missing. You are setting yourself up for a great deal of maintenance and/or many frustrated cachers. Good luck. The two would be so close together I don't think its fair to call it a multi. In-fact if you are given the coords for the tool and find the cache first you will then be left posting - "NM: tried to get into tool box - couldn't" True - maybe I'm trad'ing it to lure me in if I was playing it! Tool will be a standard bike tyre pump. Certainly planned to make some hint/reference. Making a cache a multi is a far more effective way to increase the quality of visitors than adding attributes, scolding people in owner logs, writing lengthy cache pages, or making a cache PMO. Agreed, no matter how many attributes you add or what you put in the description some people are still never going to look at them and just follow the arrow and expect an easy find. By making it a multi or mystery (depending on what's involved) cachers that choose to look for it will know there's more to the cache and reading the description/attributes will be necessary. You could of course do away with the hidden tool and call your traditional cache something like "BRING A 1/2" SPANNER" with a similar guideline added to the hint. There was a series near me that told you on each page what tools you needed to bring. I could - but I think that increases the likelihood people will turn up not tooled up and then get cheezed off. At least if I turn up for a lazy driveby and haven't read the description if I am "stuck" opening the box I'll soon read the description and toddle off for the tool. I know some wont have smart phone, and some with it wont read it. And make/buy more than one, so you're ready to replace the one in the field when it goes missing. Yip thats in the master plan. Although not keen on providing a box of 10 as suggested....!

Oh and both the main cache and helper cache will be in plain sight ;-)

Wow thanks for the replies. I have to say I'm not a multi fan. I avoid them - I had a bad experience twice. Both with 3 stage multi's that led to a final. First time I did the 3 stages and the DNFd the final which you got using data from the 3 stages. That cheezed me off. It was found by other later so it was a true DNF rather than NA. I'd done a lot of walking and it felt like a ruined day. Never been back to retry. The second time Found 2 of 3. Third cache had been muggled. Again wasted time. I now avoid the stack of yellow lock n lock boxes on the map now. Avoid puzzles for similar fears... So its gonna be a traditional. The tool is obtainable from the £ shop. Quite happy to plaster GC stickers all over it and sign it up to say to return it or die ;-) Placing it 30ft from the cache I hope will help it be returned, placing a TB tag on it risks two things - it might travel (although the tool is large enough that finding a cache for it will be a challenge) or more likely as most TBs seem to these days - it will vanish to then be tracked by a load of people in Germany who've never seen it!! I will buy 2 or 3 so if one goes missing (or breaks it is a £1 shop tool afterall) I have a spare ready to deploy. Can be at cache within minutes of a NM. It will probably be a Premium Cache. I vaguely hope that helps. Not sure I understand the point of providing the tool on a string to stop it getting filched. Short of getting a saw out I don't think its possible to retrieve without the tool ;-) I am ready to be proved wrong. Might all be fruitless - I've just had a reply from who I thought was the land owner to discover they aren't the land owner. How do you find a land owner of an abandonded bit of land? So the helper cache was my plan. How do I label the helper cache box is really the question. Is it physically in the field labelled as a cache?

So, I am currently creating a cache that will require specialised 'tools' to accomplish it. I'm thinking that the simplest thing to do is to provide to tool. So what is the etiquette of providing a tool... The cache will be on the SW corner of a square compound about 15m on each side. Can I place the tools in another "cache" on the NW corner. If so how do I label the tool cache? Does it get labelled with an "Official Geocache" Sticker? I'm not expecting to have the co-ordinates allocated a different cache ID, they would just be a useful WPT in the description...

There was someone in the NE who was looking to adopt. He/she was in Gateshead so may be too far away, but may depend how prone to needing maintained the caches are: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=336417&pid=5554323&st=0entry5554323

Technically it is possible. You should be able to use the UK Land Registry Website to determine landownership. http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/ Click - "Find A Property" then "Map Enquiry" - navigate down to 1:1250 and you can the select the location you want... will cost you £3.00 to get the landowner's details... Not saying I've ever done that for a cache though ;-)

Thanks guys for the feedback. I'll have to set about designing a new cache for it then. Glad you guys liked the location. The brain is therefore now trying to devise a more suitable container. (Anyone fancy a 35mm photo container for it...? And since I've archived the cache it might have to be called Another Paws for Thought - which means jerryo'll have another chance to see if the gods treat you more favourably this time.

I'm in a bit of a quandry... I placed a cache back in June (Paws for Thought) which was submerged by the tide twice a day. It seemed to be holding up well right up to the end of October at least. Two DNFs over winter from tide more than anything else and then this week it seemed to have gone. Checked it today and it defo looks like its been had. I don't think it'll have been muggled by the locals rather by the sea. The question is - is it worth replacing it? Do people have an opinion on what makes a cache worth replacing? (Everyone who found it gave good opinions) Should I try making it summer only and archive it for winter...? There's no TB's missing - but imagine if there had been - it'd be such a loss... Or should I find some place better near by - perhaps still only accessible at states of the tide but where the cache box might not be in the sea... (seems a little defeatist). Or has anyone found cache box/hiding place thats up to sea storage? (For info the box was two lock'n'locks inside each other. The outer box was weighted with stones - although it was still light enough to partially float (usual problem of box size versus hide-ability). The container was then under rocks in a sort of natural hollow, and tied to the cave by some 3mm marine rope. Why would I be tempted not to replace it? Well because it only got 9 finds... ...that seems low to me. My other cache which has been around longer and is not at risk of being stolen by neptune has had 13 finds in a year - but its nothing like as good a location for people to visit... Anyway - welcome thoughts on if I should replace it or place something new nearby or just leave it for history.