cache_test_dummies

No rush. It's not a big deal anyway. I used to play a mean game of ping pong myself. Or so I thought until I played someone who really could play ping pong.

Could you be more specific? I can't tell exactly which activity or activities performed by members of the geocaching community you are trying to belittle. I can get a souvenir by caching in a state - without having to find another cache. To get a challenge stat I have to log a cache that in some situations I placed. I don't consider that caching, or belittling. I'm not sure I understand what you are saying, but what I think you are saying is that you don't consider it legitimate to log a challenge that you yourself have placed in a different state simply in order to get a GC.com souvenir for that state. Ok. Nothing wrong with taking that position.

Could you be more specific? I can't tell exactly which activity or activities performed by members of the geocaching community you are trying to belittle.

I'm not sure if this is really an ALR. The way this is worded, your log can remain, but the person who logged it will be deleted. Even if people are deleted, is it an ALR if their logs are allowed to stand? In any case, although not specifically mentioned in the guidelines, deleting people doesn't seem to be a good idea.

I would log a challenge that I had submitted only if I completed the challenge after I submitted it. Some think that you should only submit a challenge after you have accomplished the task for yourself first. Congratulations from a cache owner who hasn't made the journey for themselves is pale. I hear you, but I didn't say I wouldn't make the journey or accomplish the challenge first - I said I would log the challenge only after I had submitted the challenge and then completed it. I've submitted one challenge so far. The challenge is to take a picture of yourself touching the summit sign on the top of Mount Washington. I've climbed Mount Washington and touched the summit sign, but not since I created the challenge. Some day I plan to climb Mount Washington again, and at that point I'll likely log the challenge as completed.

I would log a challenge that I had submitted only if I completed the challenge after I submitted it.

I'm not so sure that people wouldn't respond favorably to a suggestion to post a link to an interesting log they've posted. People who write interesting stories enjoy having people read them. edit: said "the people", meant "that people"

Creative, but certainly an ALR. Maybe with a little dash of subtle agenda, too. You could run it by your reviewer, but you might want to have a Plan B standing by.

Have a good time. Make good clothing decisions while packing, or you'll regret it.

By "turn them into ..." I hope you mean to list them in both places, and not remove them from the Waymarking site. You've listed some really nice Waymarks, and it would be a shame if they were removed from the Waymarking site. But whether by 'conversion' (as you refer to it) or by happenstance, I suspect that many locations and objects that are currently listed on the Waymarking site will become the photo and action targets of Challenges. Many of the most interesting places on the planet have Waymarks associated with them, so it seems natural that there would be lots of overlap between Waymarks and Challenge destinations. If you want to take some of the locations you've Waymarked and create Challenges from them, go for it! Are there any Challenges listed in Russia yet? Perhaps one of the locks you Waymarked could be the first.

This immediately came to mind! Doesn't look like there is a taphouse at the final, though. Speaking of caches on private property, I'm pretty sure I found a very large cache on somebody's front porch once. In fact, I think it might have been your porch.

I've seen many undeveloped islands on many New Hampshire lakes, and almost every time I am near one (in a boat, or a car, or on foot) I think ... "Now that would be a great place for a geocache!" I hope you change his mind someday. Let me know if you do.

Very nice story! ... assuming that when you get the coin purse back there is still $6 - $7 in it.

From the Listing Guidelines:

According to the Release Notes for the August 2nd 2011 Update, the release will include: "Updated Terms of Use Agreement (Section 4) to clarify age restriction for posting to Groundspeak Discussion Forums"

Postponed.

This a multi-cache, not a traditional as you said in the OP. It appears that several stages of your multi-cache are too close to the final of the Polar Bear Dip cache.

Some cachers don't log their finds online. It is quite possible (likely, even) that this geocacher has many finds under their belt.

Revisiting a cache to pick up a TB is fine. Just leave a note rather than another "Found it" log on the cache this time.

I can't find a reference for this (bolded statement). Is this speculation, or did I miss this in a previous post? Okay, good catch. There's not specific a mention of that from Jeremy, but he did say this: I guess I took that to mean that it would be listed on the Profile page like Benchmarks, but looking back he doesn't specifically say that. But it will at least be on your gc.com profile and not some other site. Oh, ok. I thought I might have missed something. By the way, with respect to Jeremy's comment "Currently they will not go towards your find count, but it might at some point", can anybody think of a type of log-able cache that started out not being included in your find count, but later was? Other than Earthcaches being returned to GC.com after spending a short period of time on the Waymarking site, I can't think of any.

I can't find a reference for this (bolded statement). Is this speculation, or did I miss this in a previous post?

Really old caches are cool. So was Abe Lincoln. And it would also be really cool to see Abe Lincoln's axe, but not so much if the handle had been replaced twice and the head replaced once. I can't decide if these once-archived-now-available-for-adoption caches are like Abe Lincoln's axe, or if they are like something else. According to the Knowledge Books: "Groundspeak will not process a geocache transfer without written permission from the geocache owner." Ok, so maybe in this case Groundspeak obtained written permission from the geocache owner to transfer permission. Maybe before the caches were archived, maybe after. But the caches were, in fact, archived, and according to the Knowledge Books: "Archived caches cannot be transferred, either." Maybe the Knowledge Books are wrong. In any case, I still think Abe Lincoln was cool.

Signal throws them into an industrial paper shredder when they're too old to be of any use any more.

Like most private companies, Groundspeak doesn't make their financial records available to the public. For what it's worth, one could make a guess about Groundspeak's annual revenue by counting the icons on the About Our Team page, multiplying that number by the average annual salary for people working in the Seattle area, and then multiplying the result by 2.5. But that wouldn't tell you where the money goes. But I will say this: every year I pay $30 to Groundspeak. I don't care what they do with it, but I'm hoping that at least a portion of my $30 is budgeted to go into some sort of retirement fund for the hamsters. Seriously - those little guys can only 'run the wheel' for a few years when they are young, and then they have to be replaced by younger hamsters. Once off the wheel, their working days are numbered, and then what? Sure, they can probably help around the office for some time, answering the phones and making coffee. Some of the smarter ones might even make it into middle management, holding meetings and shuffling paperwork. But eventually they all have to leave the Lily Pad. I really like to believe that Groundspeak cares about the hamsters, and has established some type of financial support system to help these hardworking, dedicated creatures when they reach their golden years.