JohnnyVegas

I think this is the Thread that will not die I seems to me that the guidelines are very clear regarding what a buried cache. But there are some cachers that just do not want to get it. If you have to break the surface of the ground to hide the cache, you are in violation of the guidelines. Part of the problem is that other cachers find illegal caches and just look the other way because they do not care because all they want is a high numbers count. Then other cachers see this BS and they copy it. If some wants to bury a cache let them start their own website and they can deal with the legal issues.

I never put out travel bugs, I had a bunch when I got started but they all got vanished and have never been seen again Now I also stopped picking them up because in my area it is hard to find a cache that has room for a travel bug.

I think it is called marketing. Like buying a car, if you want XM radio you pay extra, If you a convertible you pay extra, So with geocaching if you want to read audit logs you pay extra. That's not true. I've paid the extra but my choice was to make my cache available to everyone but no audit log. That was your choice but I want the feature offered. Just because the audit log is not the reason you paid for premium membership does not mean other did not pay for premium membership to get the feature.

I think it is called marketing. Like buying a car, if you want XM radio you pay extra, If you a convertible you pay extra, So with geocaching if you want to read audit logs you pay extra.

There ya go using logic and facts

I have no problem deleting phony logs. I get tired of the cop out reply by some cachers, "well if that is the way they want to play the game that's their business" this is C^&p It would be like say two teams on a football team could make up their own rules. I my book cachers to claim finds without really find the cache are nothing more than dirt bag scum and I do delete such logs. I deleted three in the past two weeks

AN easy example when using my Explorist 710 it takes it a bit longer than my older Exp 500LE to start pointing in the direction of the cache when I start a search. It is also slower to get to ground Zero as I close in on a cache. As far as interface times with GSAK (I think that is what you mean by interface times) they appear to be about the same.

Part of the reason a GPS that is loaded with extra functions is that the processor in the GPS has to run all this crap which can slow down the response times. My old Magellan Explorist 500le appears to run faster than my newer Explorist 710. The 710 has many more functions and much larger map to run this creates more work for the GPS. I do not think that the smart phone issue has much to do with sales of dedicated GPS sales. The number of people that buy a dedicated is very small. Reading other comments one can see that the ability for and older GPS to locate a geocache when compared to a newer one GPS is about the same. As geocaches we do not account for much of a market in the GPS market when compared to other segments, it is just the way it is. Accuracy is about as good as it can be unless a person wants to buy a commercial grade GPS for several thousand dollars, but this will not make any easier to find a geocache. Unless the cache that was hidden was hidden with a commercial GPS. Much of finding a cache has to do with experience.

the current limitation is a side product. It wasn't intended. Smartphones are the easiest tools to use to play the game. So an app was a natural path to take. If there is any interest then I will extend the functionality of the website and the app. I'm just one guy who wrote it in his spare time... Didn't know about "Ispy" mentioned above. I wouldn't bother if I knew something similar was already invented... the smart phone requirement will limit who can play the game and it will restrict the ability of a real photographer to create an outstanding image. Some people will claim that a cell phone can create a high quality image but those are people that do not understand photography

For years I have thought that ground speak should have cachers take a quick online test re guidelines before they can post a hide.

interesting, the reviewers in my area not afraid to take care of all types of caches that violate guidelines. All one needs to do is send a picture with the GC code and they contact the CO and take of the problem.

this has been a problem in Sacramento recently, A cacher from Denmark has been claiming finds here that he/she has not found. Another cacher and I saw logs in on some of our caches I which this person claimed it was raining cats and dogs. Well I have been caching here ever day as far back as Sept 1st and it never rained. So I check my caches an this so called person had never sign any logs, so I have been deleting all his logs on my caches. I filled out the above mentioned form for ground speak last night.

Unfortunately the cacher is from Denmark instead of the Netherlands, otherwise: Of course if he would be from the Netherlands it would be common practice, how else do you expect us to find caches on our wooden shoes while smoking weed and trying to avoid all those windmills?! Weed, like the stuff in Amsterdam. I kind of remember being there about 15 years ago

I do not allow photo logging, geocachers are to sign the log books

He has been a member for 6 years and claims 24,441 finds http://www.geocaching.com/profile/?guid=7cc5a5b8-3f15-475b-a6fe-e1ef0a5ad365

It depends on how well a cacher can maintain them. Hiding is one thing but maintaining can take more work. I fell way behind when I went back to school full time but now I am catching up. It seems going to college and geocaching while in school full time is not a very good idea

This cacher has been logging finds on my cache in the Sacramento area, but has never sign any logs in my caches or the logs in other caches that he/she claims to have found. Is this a common practice in the Netherlands. I have been deleting his/her logs.

If you also wand bold faced fonts font For larger fonts font For bold fonts For larger font have fun but ll these things add time toyour loging so I do not use these functions on all my logs

Why would anybody go to church where they could not be dressed like a childrens entertainer. Those are churches run by small minded people.

Caches that violate the guide lines,and the number of experience cachrs thatfind them and that do not care. And there are lots of caches that violate the guidelines that are not grand father in.

Aside from condition the price, A used GPS should never be more than 50% of the price when new. Then take off more versions that are not longer in production

I remember when I got started many years ago cachers would place cache containers in large trash bags. This meant when finding a cache one would be required to dig through decaying leave and slime to get to the cache. These finds were just plain disgusting to deal with.

While not buried the CO drilled a hole in a tree that would fit the container, And no the whole is not a naturally occurring part of the tree. IT is the exact dimension of the cache. This find will be reported to a local reviewer that I know will archive it.

So, was it archived after you logged the NA? Nope. Did hear back from the owner, though. I don't know that "partially buried" is an accurate description of a Gatorade jug buried up to the lid, but I reckon that's between the owner and the reviewer. It's not that simple, if the cacher does not tell the reviewer that the cache is buried there is no way for the reviewer to know that the cache is illegal. Many cachers do nor read the guidelines for placing a cache or they read them and do not care.

It almost sounds like finding a virtual cache but those not been allowed for a long time, at least new ones,