baer2006

There is no difference - you log a find with the same day you actually find the cache. Anything else (like, say, distributing the logs for 10 finds from a Sunday evenly across the whole following week) is cheating.

Du kannst natürlich nach einem Jahr kündigen. Aber wenn du das nicht machst, dann wird die Mitgliedschaft automatisch verlängert, zu 2,50€/Monat. Ist wie bei den meisten Abos - wenn du nix sagst, verlängert es sich automatisch.

So much for the value of "Great Story" ...

Das mit [BR] ist letztlich nur ein Workaround für einen seit Monaten bekannten Bug:

I spoke with people intimately connected with the situation. Your claim is false. And the truth is what? I ask because ... ... I'm generally curious ... I tend to be slightly irritated by statements along the lines of "You're wrong, but I won't say what's correct instead"

Not nearly "what irks me most" (or at all), but something which I find a bit sad ... From time to time, I'm in the mood of browsing the cache map in really "exotic" and remote places (like, say, Central Africa) and see, if there are caches, and if they have actually been found. With the hope to get some interesting stories and photos in the logs. But often all I can see are obvious fake logs - and not so rarely, this "all" is literally all, as in "every single log".

Ok, challenge accepted . I gave it a shot for one notorious example. The AL geoart I reported still exists. Therefore it's apparently OK for GS to create ALs, where the questions have nothing to do whatsoever with the location (and can therefore be answered by "virtual visits", i.e. using a location-spoofing app).

^This! The "auto-visit everything in my inventory" feature of many caching apps is downright evil IMHO. Do this for you own trackables (for "tracking" purposes or whatever) - fine. But not for others' trackables, which you are only moving on. WIth the "auto-visit", you probably never actually look at your inventory, so that it's very easy to forget to log a TB drop. Couple this with high-numbers caching and automated copy&paste logging, and it's more or less certain to happen sooner or later.

Annoying: Cachers who don't log DNF when failing to find the cache when going for FTF Had this happen twice in the last few weeks in my home area: A new cache is published (low D/T, nothing special), in an area where the FTF is usually logged within hours, but definitely on the same day. But no logs on the publish day, nor on the next day. I don't believe for a second, that none of the "usual suspects" tried to get the FTF. I really wish people had the b***s to write a DNF, admitting that their FTF attempt was unsuccessful. Regarding the two caches, that's what happened eventually: In one case, the CO logged a note on the 3rd day, saying like "Sorry!! The coords were way off!". And in the second case, a DNF was finally logged on the 3rd day - final resolution (cache missing, difficult hide, incorrect coordinates) still pending.

Cool! I have been there with my family last year. As a German, https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC71Q8V was kind of a "must have" . And I remember that we had some trouble figuring out EC https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC71Q8V question #3 - wife, son and me looking at several of the columns and thinking "What plant imprints???". Felt like a DNF, so I specifically asked about it in my mail to the CO. But never got an answer, so logged it as found anyway.

If you complete an AL and only leave a rating, but no review, the ALO has no idea that you did their AL. And even if they do (e.g. because you logged the AL's bonus cache), so what? Do you think the ALO is going to contact you like "Hey, I think you gave me a low rating! Please give me more stars. And if not, %*&§ you!!!" ? My point is, every AL player nowadays could leave honest, balanced ratings, but most cachers choose not to. And I'm pretty sure it's not because they fear the wrath of the owners.

Brought to you by the nice combination of small(-ish) countries and totally open borders 😉.

They are given anonymously. There is no way an AL owner can see who awarded how many stars. I've read and heard a lot of statements from cachers saying they give every AL, even the most mundane one, 5 stars except when there are really serious technical flaws.

I join the club . When I noticed the change, I tried out my (so far) "favorite" smileys, and in general the differences were not that big - except for the "dead" one. The context, in which I used it so far was always "tired", "beaten", "exhausted", even "bored to death". The green face with crossed-out eyes and tongue sticking out worked well for all that, but the skull just doesn't.

Ok, challenge accepted . I gave it a shot for one notorious example.

Eine Anforderung, dass man als Owner eine Mindestzahl an Caches gefunden haben muss, gab es nie. Und selbst wenn - dann sagt man dem Reviewer "Hinter Account XY stecken die folgenden Cacher: ...", und alles ist gut. Der Owneraccount natürlich, mit dem Vorteil, dass sich _mehrere_ Leute drum kümmern können. Ach ja? Wo soll denn da bitteschön das Problem sein? Es geht hier um den Account bei einem Spiel, und nicht um eine Bankverbindung.

Doch, das geht ohne Probleme. Auch Zweitaccounts an sich sind erlaubt. Das einzige, was in dieser Richtung nicht erlaubt ist, ist sich einen Zweitaccount anzulegen, um eine Sperre des Hauptaccounts zu umgehen.

Man kann auch einen neuen Account anlegen, der nur dafür da ist, als Owner des neuen Caches zu fungieren. Dann könnt ihr euch die Zugangsdaten zu diesem Account teilen, und jeder hat die Möglichkeit, das Listing zu bearbeiten, und später nach Publish dann Owner-Logs (Disable, Enable, OM) zu loggen.

Nein, geht nicht. Wer die erkennbare Arbeit des Owners{*} bei der Ausarbeitung des Caches halbwegs zu würdigen weiß, schreibt freiwillig ein entsprechendes Log. Und die anderen wirst mit keiner Vorschrift der Welt (die du ja eh nicht durchsetzen kannst) beeindrucken. {*} Die liegt bei vielen "Massen"-Caches allerdings nahe Null, und dementsprechend darf dann gerne die dafür angemessene Mühe ins Log fließen .

Wow, that's quite a bummer ! Anyway, if I were in your situation, I would privately confront the thief (via all available channels, i.e. e-mail and GS "Message Center") that I know they have stolen my property, and that I have very good (i.e. useful in court) evidence for it. Where I live (and I expect it to be the same in the USA) a theft is a theft, no matter how big the material value of the stolen items is. I would make it clear, that if the stolen cache and its contents (incl. TBs) is not returned, I would seriously think of contacting a lawyer. I agree that this will not help your relations with the thieving cacher, but it seems that this is a lost cause anyway.

Huh? Did I miss the joke here ? Never heard of a "Virtual Caching Day" souvenir, and Project-GC doesn't know it either.

Nice writeup ! The style reminded me a bit of xkcd's "What If?" . And BTW, Lærry's record rate is simply the result of account splitting and then re-logging the vast majority of finds on a single day. Anyway, the solution to "Find all caches in a lifetime" (or at least almost all) is much simpler. Super-high (pseudo-)finds-per-day numbers are usually achieved by "divide and conquer" tactics: A group of cachers splits up, everyone finds separate caches but signs with the "team name of the day", and in the end every member of the group logs all the finds of the day. There is no limit to the size of the group, so you only have to do this: Organize a world-wide "log them all" day (or week/month - no need to rush) Announce that every geocacher is part of "Team World" Cachers everywhere go out, and log every possible cache as "Team World" in the logbook. Coordinating visits to more remote caches can be organized by local communities. The most difficult part is collecting the list of caches, which have actually been found and signed. But I'm sure that the combination of a pre-agreed standard log text (e.g. "Found by Team World") and clever scripting can do the trick. Afterwards, every member of "Team World", i.e. every geocacher, can log all the finds as their own. I leave the actual implementation of this plan as an exercise to the reader

I know at least one "FTF monster" (as you would call him ) in my home area who does exactly that.

This is one of the reasons, why I only post a note with "FTF". The find is stored as a draft, to be uploaded and filled out later at home.

I agree with "as soon as you can". But there are any number of reasons why this might not be "immediately after I signed the physical log and replaced the cache". No cell phone reception at GZ (I'm German - this happens a lot here in the countryside) Depleted phone battery. I've seen more than one FTF log, where someone said they ran out in a hurry after a long day, their battery ran out shortly before they reached GZ, but the hide was obvious so they found the cache anyway. Someone doesn't cache with a smartphone (rarely nowadays, but still happens) In the end, if you go FTF hunting, you should not assume that the first finder logs his find immediately, even if everyone follows an agreed best practice of "logging as soon as they can". If you cannot stand the sight of a non-empty physical log without a corresponding online log, you shouldn't run for FTFs IMHO. And BTW, my own "as soon as you" can online logs after FTFs are just notes and not finds (for several reasons).