ePeterso2

Found one of these in a local cache yesterday. Thanks! I've already got a plan for it that I think will serve the goals of this effort.

As I read back over this thread, I wonder if a "Requires Puzzle Solving" attribute wouldn't alleviate some of the confusion. That way, multis with and without puzzles could be differentiated. A "Puzzle" attribute would also help classify things like this: End of the Road # 28. I asked the reviewer how to classify it before it was published, and we came to the consensus of Traditional. But I can see how it would be irritating/confusing for people who were on a waypoints-only numbers run.

The same thing that happens when a cache is muggled or when the sign with the offset for the multi gets changed or removed - the cache is unavailable and needs to be fixed or to be archived. I dunno ... I'm on the fence about this ... I can completely understand Groundspeak being reluctant to provide some kind of file storage for applets, downloadable programs and files, etc. (beyond the image storage they already provide). There's just no reasonable way they could check all of those things for viruses, trojans, and what-not. I can also understand them being leery about having Javascript or Java applets running on cache page windows. That gives the impression that the content is provided by Groundspeak, as opposed to some other third party. But I don't really understand why there's a reluctance to allowing puzzles to be located on other freely-available web sites. Those sites are clearly NOT Groundspeak owned and operated, and there are no more risks to accessing them than there are anywhere else on the internet. The existing ones around my area are certainly no less stable than many of the caches that have been placed here. I can only find one reasonably nearby my home location that uses a puzzle hosted on a site other than the cache description page. Is this over the line? -eP

I could believe that. I don't know this for a fact, but I strongly suspect that many of the active cachers around here treat multis and mysteries as one and the same. I've noticed that someone will hit all of the traditionals in a given area but never touch the multis nor puzzles. I don't know if those are people who just like to cache based upon waypoints alone or if they just have an aversion to more complex hides. But isn't the purpose of a puzzle to discover where your starting point is before you hit the streets? -eP

I would argue that those aren't mysteries, they're multis, each with a virtual first stage. To me, a mystery means that you have to solve some sort of problem to locate the first (and possibly final) point. For a mystery/puzzle cache, you should be able to set the posted coordinates anywhere within a two-mile radius of the final container location without breaking the puzzle. Setting the posted coords to the nearest parking area is a convenience, but you could also create an additional parking waypoint. That really sounds like the definition of a multi/offset. I hid a similar one recently called Frank and Ivy, and it was listed as a multi. Emphasis mine - again, that would seem to fit the definition of a multi. Wow, that's exactly the opposite of the sense I get from my local reviewer. Sounds like another case of insufficiently clear guidelines. ( Insert obligatory "My reviewer can beat up your reviewer" argument here ) Maybe my comment of "poor cache design" came across to strongly. Those all sound like really good caches ... I guess it's just a matter of taxonomy. -eP

I think the situation of the posted point being more than 2 miles from the final point is an indicator of poor cache design. In mystery/puzzle caches, there should never be anything findable at the posted coords other than perhaps a parking space.

That would make a lot more sense, since all the letterboxes near me seem to fit the bill of multi or offset cache. I agree completely. There's no real reason for it to be a separate type ... an attribute would be better. Then you could declare the cache as any relevant type (traditional, multi, mystery) and have it be a Letterbox Hybrid. -eP

There are two mystery/puzzle caches near me that fall into this category. The posted coordinates are 20 and 80 miles from their final caches, respectively. I don't know how they got past the reviewer. I don't know why they were reported that way to begin with, but I have a suspicion - their finals pretty far out into the "wilderness", and the posted coordinates are in populated suburban areas to draw attention to them. That technique was explicitly used in a nearby 2-stage multi where the final stage is 50 miles away.

When I first started contemplating caches, I was amazed by the kind of virtual immortality some local prolific placers had achieved. Most of that was from placing several lamp-skirt-micro cache series ... the obligatory Wal-Mart series (Always), competing Target series (Not Always vs. Bullseye), competing dead end series (End of the Road vs. Road Closed), and more. I even contributed a few hides to the End of the Road series. Since immortality is one of my personal goals, I thought "Since I love 7-Eleven Slurpees, why not start an 'Oh Thank Heaven' series?" I mapped out every 7-Eleven in the area (60+), and began my quest. I started with three, then dropped two more in the series. Right around then, I saw a quote in someone's sig (was it you, Clan Riffster?) that said something like "Anyone whose idea of geocaching is finding film cans in the bushes outside every Burger King along the eastern seaboard needs to take up knitting." Plus I got a "Oh no, not *ANOTHER* parking lot micro series" note from the local reviewer attached to one of those hides. That did it for me ... I finally got the message, and have been working on avoiding placing lame hides ever since. I've been hoping that these all end up missing on their own so I can archive them. Unfortunately, some other local cachers loved the OTH series and asked if they could start adding to it (as if they needed my permission, oddly enough). They're up to #17 in the series so far, with no sign of stopping. My apologies to the caching community for continuing to spread this virus. Having said that, I did try to turn that ship around somewhat with End of the Road # 28. Instead of a film can in a sign post park-n-grab, it's half-mile round-trip hike to a toolbox with a mini-puzzle you have to solve to open the padlock.

That's what I've always thought it was, based upon my reading of the placement guidelines. I mean, the description of the Letterbox Hybrid is one of the few places where the guidelines are pretty specific - it says that it must conform to the requirements for a Traditional cache, and a Traditional cache has the explicit requirement that "The coordinates listed on the traditional cache page are the exact location of the cache." So, according to the guidelines, the coordinates of an LH must be the location of the cache, not the starting point of the trail to the cache. Anything else is a multi. That said, the nearest Letterbox Hybrid to me has coordinates that point to the parking lot, then a set of directions to find the box from there. It's pretty easy to find, but there are a number of log entries that say "Man, I wish I had had the cache page with me instead of just the coordinates in my GPSr." It's all just names, though ... gimme the clues and I'll find it, regardless of what it's called. -eP

Let the Games Begin! (GCTG4C) is one of the coolest and most complex puzzles in my area. I've got one piece left to move in order to solve it! You could definitely steal the concept for your own implementation. -eP

Google might have a cached version of the old page. Other than that, I don't think there's any way to get it ... I don't know the database details, but I highly doubt that the cache page contents are version controlled. -eP

Such a cache might properly be considered a multi. I had a multi published recently (GC1069P) which essentially is exactly that - coords take you to the starting point, letterboxish style directions take you to the final. The definition of a Letterbox Hybrid cache clearly states that it must comply with being a traditional cache, not a multi, which is unfortunate. Letterboxes are more like multis than traditionals. -eP

Yes, we can ... some folks just choose not to :-) -eP

Well, I'll be darned. Not found yet, but the puzzle was cracked in less than 12 hours. Apologies to everyone for making this one too easy.

I've hidden three that I particularly like, each for different reasons: Plantation Preserve - This is the kind of cache I would like to find. In an urban area like South Florida, it can be tough to find a place to take a nature hike ... which is why I was thrilled when I discovered this location. Plus, it was fun to compose the activity you have to complete to locate the final coordinates. Apollo 7 - I was pretty proud of this camo job, and the location is one of those places you'd never know about were it not for geocaching. A bit of history, a bit of nature, and a fun find. Safari Utopia, Yokel Reality - This was just published mere seconds ago. I have absolutely no idea how long the FTF will take.

This link might help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzy_set#Fuzzy_Number I only know a little about fuzzy logic and such ... when I was in college, the department head specialized in it. I left before I caught that infection ;-) -eP

Well, I'd think that if you read the cache description and the last five log entries before you went to find it, you'd realize that there was something fishy about it pretty fast. I learned the hard way not to try caching "blind" (with the waypoint but without the description and log sheets). Or, if I do decide to find a cache blindly, to understand the risks involved (it might be missing or disabled, for instance). And that's just for regular caches. I once got stuck while doing a crossword puzzle ... it seemed like it should have been easy, but I couldn't get any of the answers. Finally, when I realized that the answer to "It's windy" was "WIND" and "Like a bird" was "BIRDLIKE" and when I coupled that with the calendar (April 1), it dawned on me that it was an April Fool's Day joke. Now, I could have gotten really angry about the 45 minutes or so that I spent making no progress, but instead I laughed at the joke and admired the puzzle authors for pulling it off. IMHO, if you don't bother to read the description and the logs and to think about what you've read, then you get what's coming to you (good or bad). Critical thinking is a very handy skill for a lot more contexts in life than just geocaching. -eP

I am totally and shamelessly stealing this idea for my next micro. With proper attribution, of course. -eP

Ahh ... excellent. I'd never noticed that capability before. I'll ping the cache owner. Thanks! -eP

This coin was dropped over a year ago and subsequently disappeared from the cache in which it is reported to be. Unfortunately, the coin owner died approximately six months ago and no one has taken over his account (his caches have been adopted, though). Is there any way to mark the coin's location as Unknown? Do the reviewers have that power or is that an admin issue? -eP

I'm guessing that those caches are NOT evenly distributed across the map and that they are NOT connected to their nearest neighbors in a roughly equal manner. That would imply that there are probably clusters of caches out there ... you can probably see them visually on Google Earth (as other posters have suggested). Instead of trying to use every cache as a stop, why not just pick one cache within each cluster, then have S&T plot the route for that simplified problem?

I had a DNF on one of my caches yesterday that made me smile. If you just blindly follow the GPS arrow, you will get within 200' of the container (in fact, thousands of cars every day unwittingly get that close to it), but unless you're willing to swim and brave alligators and chemical runoff from a nearby major road, you won't get any closer that way. You've got to go a mile out of your way to find the high-and-dry access road leading to it. The hint gives you a clue on how to find the access point, but it intentionally has a double meaning to it - only one of the two meanings is consistent with the guidance given in the description, the other is completely contradictory. Here's the log entry from the guy who chose the wrong interpretation. I've met him ... he's a good guy. He'll have a good laugh when he figures it out.

I hope she doesn't mind me posting this ... this showed up in my mailbox from my local reviewer just before she published my cache. I transcribe them from the email since, as reviewer notes, they disappeared when she hit publish: Then: And then, when I accidentally submitted an unfinished cache report I was working on: I sense a pattern here ...