GOF and Bacall

I wonder how many LPC caches are not accessible. Remember, if they can't be reached from the seat they are not accessible.

When I first started it was because Groundspeak noted, " The Language of Location", "Explore the World" and "Discover new Destinations" in their spiel. Location was the key in keeping me interested. If it was only a container, a cache, found every .1 in every parking lot in the World, I never would have stayed. I've been to some awesome spots and never found the container. - That was fine by me, as I did get to see the location it presented. It needs to start with a quality geocache then layer on all the other qualities. Bring someone to a quality location without the geocache would make it a waymark. But I agree that quality-cache and quality-location go hand-in-hand. A lot of puzzle caches including challenges have very little to do with cache and location quality -- it's about brain teasers, smileys, and statistics with the cache taking a back seat. I don't think you can have a decent cache without a decent location. I don't expect every cache to bring me to a spectacular location. But it would be nice if it wasn't in a sea of blacktop and shopping carts. There are many millions of miles of trails, bike paths, and many more hectares of park land. Countless locations of historic or cultural significance. Why people like to play in a filth parking lot is a mystery to me.

Less in not necessarily better, either. ETA: Yes, we could trade examples to "prove" out own points, but let's not. When CR rails against LPCs I always think to myself: Cache in a lamppost in a parking log vs. cache where you have to wade nipple deep in an alligator infested swamp. Which will have more people decide this is something they aren't going to look for? It is sad commentary on people these days. Most would rather chase the mundane crap than experience anything off the sidewalk. But thank God they have people like you to laud the virtues of mediocrity while denigrating those who would promote something more.

Sign the log in the first cache. Watch the caches. When the first cache is found by another cacher they will take that container to the next cache. At this point your signature is now in the second cache. Log it When the next cacher comes through they will move it to the third position. It is now time to log that cache. Keep repeating the process until your signature finds its way into the last cache on the trail. You are now finished and your signature has been in every cache.

There is no way to see who has your cache on their "Watch List." If your cache is a Premium Members Only cache, then there is an audit record that lets you see who viewed your cache page via the gc.com website. You can post a note asking the watchers to contact you. But I wouldn't hold my breath. The same people that enter credit card numbers into half a dozen web sites a day will get suddenly paranoid if asked to share their nom de plume with a curious cache owner.

I would not pay a fee. At least not around here. We have plenty of places to place a cache that don't require taking a hammer to the piggy bank.

Kind of a tough call. The residents say they don't mind then it shouldn't be a problem. However, the first time I hear of a cacher having problems with the locals at one of my caches I archive it. It's just a game and nobody needs to have that kind of encounter. Are you sure that you have adequate permission? It may look like public property but may actually belong to an association or some such entity.

May not be nails or screws but glue is still gonna do damage.

I don't care for them either. But everyone has the same hurdles to cross. They are not inherently unfair.

There was a nice response on another recent thread... Agreed. I would be quite capable of ignoring your caches. But that doesn't change the guidelines. Grounspeak wants the listings they publish to be family friendly. It is obvious from the fact that they refused to publish your listing that they include any outside material linked to from the page.

Once you find a night cache check to see if it is on any bookmark lists.

Agreed.

I'm not into the numbers either, but I like a clean record of what I've found. And I like to see the map accurately reflect what I've found. I don't want to find and log a challenge cache (with a Note) then have to put it on my ignore list. And because I don't have a ton of finds or a lot of free time to find a cache-a-day or the money to travel or the physical ability to do T5 caches, so most challenge caches are not something I can achieve. In the last year there seems to be an exponential growth of them, at least in my area. Not everybody can complete every cache. I can not complete a technical rope climb, for example. I except that and move on. I also don't log finds on many caches. That means that I don't qualify for most, if not all, challenge caches. I except that. In both cases I am unwilling or unable to complete the requirements needed to successfully complete the cache. I don't expect to be given a pass on either situation. Instead I complete those caches that are withing my abilities.

What?! What is unfair about challenge caches? If someone wants to log them they can work for it like those who have. If someone wants to argue that they are ALR caches I can understand that. If someone wants to argue that they are silly I can understand that point. But to say they are unfair? Nope, that just doesn't make any sense. It's unfair that someone who hasn't found 200 caches whose names begin with the letter 'F' can't use the Found It log to log they found the cache. The OP considers it unfair that for a newbie it may take awhile to find 200 caches whose name begins with the letter 'F', but an experienced cacher make already have this accomplishment. I guess the point you make is that if you are so motivated by the smiley that you must have the Find Log online, then you can go find 200 caches whose name begins with the letter 'F' (or make a list of caches you've already found) to qualify "like everyone else". That is true. And for now I might just post a note. But the Found log on geocaching is used by some people for a different reason - to track what caches they have found - and challenge caches force them to view the smiley as a reward - not for finding the cache but for meeting a challenge. If Groundspeak and the geocaching community want to have challenges, there are plenty of ways to do it that don't involve perverting the Found log into a prize. Everybody needs to complete the same requirements. We all started with zero finds. People who have been caching for a while have already invested the time and effort it takes to find those 200 caches that begin with the letter F. It is not unfair for those who have just started to need to invest the same time and effort in their new pastime. They can even be said to have an advantage. There are more caches every day. Now, if what you mean is that these challenges are no different than any other ALR I understand that. They are ALRs. But the only people they are not fair to are those who had their ALR caches closed or were forced to change them to comply with the rule change.

What?! What is unfair about challenge caches? If someone wants to log them they can work for it like those who have. If someone wants to argue that they are ALR caches I can understand that. If someone wants to argue that they are silly I can understand that point. But to say they are unfair? Nope, that just doesn't make any sense.

Assuming that it had proper permission I would add a favorites point. I just knew it must have been done: I co-hid a lamp post like that one, though mine was miles deep in a swamp. And it had an ammo can chained to its base. No nanos involved. While a prefer a larger cache I have often said, my distaste for micros is the usual locations you find them.

Assuming that it had proper permission I would add a favorites point. I just knew it must have been done: Visions of Narnia Is that "a hundred miles in the middle of the wilderness" or just somebody's back yard?

Assuming that it had proper permission I would add a favorites point.

if permission from property owners from assorted business (including LP caches) was actually asked for, about 20-40% of caches would never have been published. I'm constantly asked by security/police what I'm doing. About 1 out of every 10 subuarban or urban caches like LPs, Guardrail, etc. type caches. Granted I'm also in the DC area....most paranoid area in regards to security there is. Personally I don't see the problem with fewer caches if it means they are coming out of the parking lot hides. If I got questioned at 10% of the hides I searched for I'd have to reevaluate the caching I was doing. Either the caches are in poorly chosen locations or your methods appear suspicious to those who observe it.

You're a day late for April Fools day, bud. Who the heck are you to say when someone can or can not be a fool?

Nothing explains Columbus Ohio. Trust me on this. --Larry OK. I'll concede that point.

Don't get too excited. I will be following you everywhere you went. Geostalking. What do you know? You weren't have been there. These multiple temporal positionings will are have been hard on the syntax.

Oh dear, not that old bit of nonsense. No educated person at the time of Columbus, and certainly few sailors, thought the Earth was flat. However, Columbus did think the round Earth was smaller than it was, and always thought he was exploring the east coast of Asia, not a new land. He also never set foot on the mainland of what is now called North America. And no, this is not an April fool remark as it’s the second of April here in Australia as I write this. Normal transmission may now resume. Oh yeah! Then explain Columbus Ohio!

Don't get too excited. I will be following you everywhere you went.

I have never understood the need to make a cache live forever. If the owner is gone and the cache is devolving into a lower state of fertilizer just post the NA. When the cache gets archived clean up the mess and create something new.