NYPaddleCacher

Years ago I saw that there were a few people watching one of my caches. I sent them a PM and they said that they were basic members and were using their watch list as a "bookmark list"

That's right. In our area it would be possible to find many caches of all types before hiding your own one. And so I would enocurage new cachers to do so while you shouldn't do for obvious reasons. That can't be handled by a rule or a specific number. And as someone told, a number doesn't mean anything: finding 100 traditional caches from a powertrail and than hiding your own multi cache without ever having found one usually does not give a good working cache. I think what barefootjeff is suggesting is that there are a lot places around the world where the number of caches available is so low that it would be impossible to qualify to place a cache unless they travel outside the country. There are 73 countries in the world that have less than 20 caches of any kind in the entire country. It would seem to me that we'd want to make it *easier* for people to place caches in places which have very few caches.

Guess it's been a long time since I looked at those guidelines. My last hide was in 2009

Although I think that is a step in the right direction, it says "at least 20 geocaches", suggesting that it's simply a matter of quantity rather than an attempt to gain a breadth of experience about how and where caches should be hidden. Of course, the easiest way to find "at least 20 geocaches" might be to go after a small series or power trail of caches, placed by just one CO, and probably using the same type of container for all of them and hidden in a similar manner. I'd rather see GS encouraging potential hiders to find a "variety of caches from different owners".

The problem with ignore lists is that you can't put a cache on an ignore list unless you've refrained from ignoring it.

I've never seen anything to suggest that that site can't be mentioned here. I don't remember every seeing anything on it that would compete in any way with the Groundspeak site. It's primary links to tools for helping to solve (or actually solving) puzzle caches.

I've got a bit over 1300 finds, something a brand new cacher could achieve in a weekend in Nevada. I've also been geocaching for 14 years. Does that make me a new cacher, a somewhat experienced, or veteran cache. when I visited HQ several years ago, the very first thing I was asked by a lackey was "how many finds do you have?"

Sure, that's today. If the Groundspeak site and project-gc communicated through an api, data could be tranferred in real time. That's that way APIs work (I'm an api developer).

If Challenge caches became a new cache type, the guidelines would have be be changed anyway to indicate that they are a new cache type, so "current guidelines" don't really apply.

I created a cache with Challenge in the title that wasn't a challenge cache. It was located very close to a ropes/challenge course. The people that managed the challenge course didn't like people wandering around "their" woods and after a couple of finders complained about getting yelled at, I archived it. I don't remember the term "challenge cache" being used until long after Fizzy, Delorme, and Jasmer challenges were around. None of those earlier ones had the attribute unless retroactively added.

That's the way pocket queries work. You create search criteria, give it a name and save it. You can then select which days of the week it will run. On days that you've selected for the query to run, it will execute the search, and send you a link for the results. Note that you don't *have* to select a day of the week for a query to run. You can create dozens of different searches, run them one time, then run it again only when you need it. For example, whenever I travel (or travelled) I create a pocket query for the area I'm going to. For example, I have one for Rome, Italy that I created the for first time I went there. I had no use for it until I traveled there again (and again). I've used it six times.

They haven't always had their own attribute. There may be a lot of challenge caches created before the attribute was available that have not had it retroactively applied. Using a Pocket Query search doesn't work so well because you can't search for caches with a specific string in the title. Challenge caches must be created as a puzzle cache and have "Challenge" in the title. Use both criteria on the main search page and that'll give you a list of challenge caches, though there may be some false positives.

I remember reading that it took a year (and 3 geocachers) to create Key to the Cryptonomicon (https://coord.info/GCXBFC). It's based on Neal Stephenson's 1000 page, book Cryptonomicon. Easily the best puzzle cache I've ever done. It took about 3 months to solve.

The icon for challenge caches could be changed to a flaming hoop.

I can show a specific example where you moved the goal post. It's not worth the time it would take the time to type out a paragraph.

Okay, you're right. You win. Happy now? Now where did that goal post go?

I'm more interested in the Mastcam-Z camera. I really don't have any interest in adding a souvenir image to my profile for something that to me, doesn't seem to have anything to do with geocaching (other than the word cache is used in a different context). However, my interest in the Masthead-Z, Perseverance (as well as Spirit and Opportunity) comes from the fact that current and former employees where I work were significantly involved.

Good thing that hasn't happened then. Quantity vs. Quality is relevant in a discussion of Geo-Art, especially an instance that sets the Guinness world book record for "the number of caches in a geo-art". If you don't like hearing my preferences, there's a simple solution for that, and it isn't censuring my opinion.

I already said that how niraD did it (finding a cache before and after midnight) wasn't cheating. I've been offered to log a find on a missing cache twice and didn't accept either time. Guess I'm not most people. If you didn't even go out, how can you claim that you found a cache? Sure, you logged a find online, but you didn't find a cache.

I had one like that. It kept on getting logs thanking the creator of the power trail that subsequently saturated the trail. I'd wager that the number of caches in just one power trail in Nevada greatly exceeds all the multis, puzzles, and any cache using any definition of quality you want, in the world that have any negative impact at all on a power trail.

I just found out that "The Spot" (GC39), a cache with a placed date only 15 days after Mingo, went missing in October. It was originally a 5 gallon bucket but was replaced with an ammo can two years later after the original started leaking. All the contents, however, including the original logbook were transferred to the ammo can, which remained there until last October. Earlier in the year the CO (gpsfool) replaced the original ammo can with a newer one and then when it went missing someone replaced with a cheap plastic container (really?). Gpsfool recently posted that he's fixing the original ammo can and will be replacing that throwdown soon.

I l consider that cheating, because you found a cache every day. Finding six caches along a trail, then logging each one over the next six days would be cheating. Finding two caches at 11PM, logging one immediately, then waiting until after midnight would be cheating. Going on a trip that required traveling on a plane (or laying over in an airport) for 24 hours and getting a friend to write your name in a logbook so that you can post a found it log would be cheatiing. Basically, if someone hasn't actually found a cache each day of a streak then the streak is broken.

I can alway count on you to post your opinion that due to the number of posts I've made, my opinion doesn't matter. Your entire post added nothing to the thread. At least mine referenced to the topic of large scale geo-art, but for some odd reason, you seemed to be more offended by it than the OP.

Choice implies there is also an equally valid option to choose a cache which does not have legitimate D/T ratings, but has ratings created specifically to complete a challenge. I wouldn't choose to find a cache like that nor will I condone the practice of using invalid D/T ratings.

The point is, I wouldn't feel right using a cache with a contrived D/T rating to make a claim that I completed a challenge.