HoochDog

There is new UI that shows the cache details at the bottom of the screen when navigating to traditional caches. It appears to be for traditional caches only right now. Bug: The displayed distance to the cache does not update as you get closer to the cache. Opinion: not a fan of the new look. It unnecessarily takes up screen real estate and doesn’t provide any new or helpful information. All the information in that pop up is the same that you see on the previous screen. The cache information screen should contain the cache information. The navigation screen should be for navigating. 🧠

Keystone nailed it. Am I expected to determine the location before I arrive (mystery) or after I arrive (multi) at the posted coordinates? When traveling to a new area, I look for mystery caches I can solve before I get there. When I pull up a mystery and it says “at the posted coordinates do x,y,z” I would have preferred that having been listed as a multi. Conversely, when I’m in the field and I see a mystery, I’m reluctant to pull up the cache page if I don’t have solved coordinates for it.

I tend to list those hillman keyholders as smalls now because they hold a travel bug. The container sizes seem to have skewed smaller over the years. Since there is no 'nano' cache size and there are so many little bisons and magnetic nanos around, I have started considering a relatively large plastic rectangle that is 5.5 inches long and 3/4 inches thick and will hold a travel bug to be more on the small side.

Instead of volume, it would be easier to list containers based on function. That’s what I tend to do. Opinions might vary but mine goes like this. Will the container easily house a travel bug? no = micro Will the container easily fit a full size logbook and several travel bugs? Something the size of a composition book or full size notebook? no = small Is the container at least double or triple the size of a regular container? no = regular yes = large is the container camouflaged in such a way to appear like something other than a container? This is a grey area case by case. yes = unknown i find this easier than having to break out my measuring cups 😀

The flip side of this is that I’ve seen cachers overrate T ratings because a cache is high. They put a magnetic 10 feet high on a pole in a parking lot and call it a T4 because you have to use a tool or a stick to get it down.

project-gc -> tools -> map compare -> add filter -> show disabled/archived

Adoption of popular caches shouldn't be a black and white issue of (yes always allow) or (no never allow). There is no reason it cannot be done on a case by case basis. The following factors should be taken into consideration. 1) Is the cache on public or private property? If public continue. 2) Is the cache owner active/have they logged in or responded to messages within the last 2 years? If no, continue. 3) Are there other factors that make this cache unique and irreplaceable? If yes, continue. If all the above factors are true, then what should happen is that after said cache is archived (or disabled). It is put into a state by which other cachers can add their name to a potential list of adopters. After some time (1 week?). One of the people who offer to adopt the cache get assigned the cache listing. If you place a cache on public property and you abandon it, you have littered, which is illegal in most places. I don't like seeing edge-cases prevent people from doing what is right (allowing adoption). Here is a great example of one such cache: https://coord.info/GC13A It is an old Jan 2001 cache. It is on public property. The current cache owner, who is also an adopter, is no longer active. You can't even send the current CO an email because they have invalidated their account. This popular park doesn't allow placement of any new caches. So, this cache is about to die and their will be a hard-to-find ammo can still on the mountain wedged between some stones. Caches like this that meet all of the criteria should be allowed to be adopted because they represent the heritage and history of this hobby.

Groundspeak makes a big deal (or at least some deal) about milestone finds. It has an entire tab on the profile statistics page. There are geocoins created to mark these events. I made a big deal about my 1000th find. I targeted a specific cache that was meaningful for that find. Somewhere after 1000, I tried adventure labs. These AL's are now part of my total, which I don't care for, and I don't count them as part of my real total finds. I can delete them, but they are a part of my history, so I'll leave them there for that reason. When I was getting close to 2000 finds, I had no idea which cache was going to be the 2000th cache. I'm not going to access my statistics page and do subtraction every time just to see "is this the 2000th cache"? It is for this reason that I color them as indistinguishable. So, for me, find count is now a meaningless statistic, (as all statistics should be). I still enjoy caching for the adventure and smiles.

They're not. It's a different game. How do I know? I enjoy one and not the other. Similar? Maybe. But baseball and cricket are kind of similar too. Doesn't mean the statistics for those games should be combined. The statistics should be completely separated. Even if you enjoy both activities, I don't understand why anyone would want the stats for each to be indistinguishable.

There's nothing inherent about a true dumb GPSr and a smart phone GPSr that makes GPS averaging possible on one and not the other. On the iPhone, I've been using an app such as this one: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/gps-averaging/id841885774 (i hope the link is allowed) to get great averaged coordinates that tend to be a lot more accurate than a single snapshot reading. I've always thought functionality like this should be built into the official app.

Give this a look: https://www.geocaching.com/play/owner/published

I was on board until you said that. It’s entirely different. One has the log in hand with a photo, the other does not. The CO might delete the log either way, but to equate the two as equal is a bridge too far.

I had a cacher friend who refuses to sign those tiny magnetic nano caches because the log is such a pain to unroll and then roll back up. He just takes a photo and claims them as found. If the co deletes the log so be it. He even writes that openly in his log “found but do not sign these types of containers” I used to think he was weird but when it takes 1 minute to find the cache and 5 minutes to put the log back, something is not right.

Just noticed this change and here to pile on. hey Groundspeak, this change to have a pop up stinks!!! we’ve all been using web browsers for 20 years or more. We know how the internet works. when you click a link it may be taking you to a new site. That’s the way the “world wide web” was designed. I don’t need your annoying pop up to educate me of this fact EVERY TIME.

Some of my caches are premium and some are non-premium. Some of the premium caches are designated so because I don't think they are appropriate for brand-new cacher who have never played the game before. However, I frequently get found it logs on them from new users who have made it their first or second find. Are these people who pay for membership before ever finding their first cache or is Groundspeak giving out free trials for premium membership to new users? Just curious! Thanks!

Adventure Labs are not geocaches, despite the hastily implemented (and inaccurate) pop up wording. it’s a different game. And to pre-respond to the same arguments that come up in every thread on this topic… no, virtuals and earths aren’t real caches either 😀

Even with proper footwear, watch where you step. On a new cache hidden near an abandoned building, I stepped on a board with a rusty nail sticking up. It went through my shoe and deep into my foot. Went straight to the doc to get a tetanus shot. I got the ftf though so it was worth it. 😈

I thought that might be the Wasaga River, but then I saw it was nott.

There is a Boy Scout Camp very nearby. The area where the Boy Scout camp is also listed as "Properties Trust" In all likelihood the cache IS on ground owned by BSA and in a proper location. There have been no issues for several years. I'm guessing that you had bad luck and were just accosted by some rude muggles and the cache is fine. I wouldn't have logged a Needs Maintenance, let alone a Needs Archived in a case like this. I'd just log my find, explained what happened in the log and be on my way. I tend not to second guess CO's unless i'm 100% sure there is an issue.

First, you'll have to explain to me where in the official app you are currently seeing FP% Edit: Thanks Keystone, I did not know it existed.

I was responding to a proposed feature (filtering by favorite %) in the official app that does not currently exist. And at no point did I make any statement saying the proposed feature (that doesn't exist) should work one way or the other, but would be something to consider if implemented. I'm not sure how anything about that can be "false".

One complication of Fav % is that only premium members can award Fav points. So if you list your cache as Premium-Only you will artificially have a higher fav % over somebody who lists their cache as open to everyone. Doesn't mean it is a worse cache, but going strictly by % might lead you to think that. I found an amazing cache last month that has many logs from basic members. It has 61 fav points on 152 finds = 40%. Looking at the logs of premium vs basic, the premium fav % is closer to 75%

Having grown up with relatives who hunt... it occurred to me that they weren't trying to scare you, they were trying to protect you. There are certain areas that are frequented by hunters and it's not good to put caches in these areas because, well... like the lady says, you could get shot. There are caches around where I live that are disabled several weeks out of the year due to hunting season. I looked up on a map of private property listings, and it appears my hunch was accurate. There's a hunting club right across the street from the cache location. It could be that the cache is in a proper location and that the local was just over-stepping her hospitality a bit, but I thought I'd offer up this explanation.

One thing that I think Ed isn’t considering is that the problem of fake found it logs may not be an issue on any ONE cache but is a problem at scale. What if there is somebody out there walking around in society, who is a compulsive liar. Does that affect me? Probably not. Now let’s say that 99% of the people walking around in society suddenly become compulsive liars. Does that affect me? Yes, I can imagine it would. What if, in a bizarre episode of the twilight zone, there were no geocaching containers out there. We just think there are. So every time an honest person searched it results in a DNF. Would this still be a fun hobby? Not for me. If you agree with the extreme boundaries instead of focusing on the “any one cache” example, then we can realize that it’s a problem of scale. At what point do false logs start to ruin our enjoyment? 10%? 50%? I’d prefer not to find out. So why don’t we collectively as a community agree that it’s a bad thing on principle, while any single fake log might not ruin our day.

No, that just tells the app they are “solved” coordinates, and the cache will show up with a special icon indicating that on your geomap. As far as I know, the only way to use the solution checker right now is to access the web page.