cache_test_dummies

Great story! Do you plan on logging a find on the cache? I would.

Perhaps this incomplete list will be helpful: PA - public address (system) PB - peanut butter PC - politically correct PD - police department PE - physical education PF - PG - parental guidance suggested – some material may not be suitable for pre-teenagers pH - potential of hydrogen: a scale of acidity from 0 to 14 PI - poison ivy PJs - pajamas PK - PL - PM - afternoon PN - PO - someone is angry about something PP - not sure what this stands for, but children giggle when they hear it PQ - PR - public relations PS - an afterthought PT - physical therapy PU - something stinks PV - photovoltaics PW - password PX - PY - PZ -

I know for certain that it is possible (and not uncommon) to properly maintain caches that require a "great deal of" (and every cache hider has their own criteria for this) effort to get to. My only point was that justintim1999 clearly did not say that his what-makes-a-good-location decision to place caches was based on some hidden "don't hide hiking caches" agenda in the guidelines. I was simply objecting to what I saw as an unfortunate mischaracterization of justintim1999's position in fizzymagic's post.

So, in other words, you are living proof that the guidelines encourage the hiding of lame urban easy-to-reach caches, and discourage hiding caches in difficult-to-reach locations. I appreciate your honesty. You'll probably end up getting used as an example in the future; don't think it's personal. It's just that nobody else will admit it. You've attempted to "other word" his post into support for your "guidelines encourage the hiding of lame urban easy-to-reach caches" agenda, but justintim1999 didn't mention the guidelines as being the reason that he chooses to place caches in locations that meet his personal criteria for properly maintaining a cache. If his quote gets used as an example of something in the future, I hope it is only as an example of a proper attitude towards hiding and maintaining a cache - only place caches that you are sure you can properly maintain.

Wayne Police Warn of Booby Traps in High Mountain Park "WAYNE, New Jersey (WABC) -- Police in New Jersey have issued a warning after a series of booby traps were placed along a popular walking trail, and they're hoping to identify the suspect before anyone gets hurt. Authorities in Wayne say a number of objects, ranging from broken glass to barbed wire, were placed along High Mountain Park dating back to June. A resident who frequents the park reported to the police that since June 23, he has found buried wooden boards with nails and screws protruding, broken bottles placed along the trails behind or next to rocks or logs, and rope and barbed wire strung across pathways." Lots of geocaches in that park - watch where you step!

The ammo can may, or may not, actually be missing. The person who reported it as missing appears to be relatively new to geocaching, so they may have just been unable to locate it. Not sure why they logged the cache as found while also reporting that it was missing, unless only the contents of the cache (or at least the log book) were still at ground zero.

You'd probably get more appropriate and helpful responses if this discussion was moved to the appropriate regional forum.

No souvenirs for finding such a cache, but there are a number of Lonely Cache Challenge caches that you can qualify for if you find a cache that hasn't been found in at least a year.

Well, that escalated quickly.

Nicely done! Here you go.

My thought is that this is a duplicate of a topic you started last month.

If you are talking about editing the text associated with a Waymark image, the answer is no - you have to delete (archive) the image and upload it again.

Thank you, lumbricus.

I saw a reference to the "Waymarking Core members Group" in a different topic, and am curious as to what this group is. I can't find such a group listed in the Waymarking Groups - is it something that exists on another web site?

That's great news, Bruce! Thanks for sharing it. And thank you for all of your support for Waymarking over the last 10 years.

I don't always remember this during the winter, but there are a few nice things about the snow and cold.

A long time ago we used to be able to see our individual warning meters in the forums. The meters were eventually hidden from the general forum population because they caused some confusion, but the moderators can still see them (and presumably still use them when making decisions regarding additional warnings, timeouts, and permanent bans). If you do a forum search for "warning meter" you'll find some interesting discussions - lots of contributions from forum participants happily sharing stories of their warning and timeout experiences.

I think so.

The sock connection.

GeoWoodstock List

No. I'm not aware that the OP left any copy and past logs today. But I'm quite certain that the OP has left some copy and past logs recently. And because I can't see the OP's DNFs (especially when they've been deleted), I can't help but wonder what is really going on here.

Not that I remember. But as a CO who may or may not be crazy, if a cache I owned had been one of a number of caches that received the same negative, strange cut-and-paste log from a somebody who found a bunch of nearby caches on a given day, I'm pretty sure I'd at least be wondering whether the log actually was meant for my cache, or if it was a log intended for somebody else's cache, or if the cacher was just having a bad day.

Devious! Did you provide a hint?

Maybe the reason Waymarking still gets brought up in discussions of Locationless caches is that some people are looking at Section 6.10 of the Help Center, which says that "All the Locationless geocaches were archived and locked in January 2006. The new home for these types of geocaches is Waymarking.com."

Yup. Not that it's a reason to stop asking, but other things that have have just about a zero percent chance of happening, in order of relevance to this topic, are: 1) The return of Locationless caches