Search the Community

If 10 DNFs isn't enough for a CO to self-check the cache, then it should be archived, unless it's a high D cache, in which case the NRA wouldn't really be appropriate either. The first step should be a NM to notify the CO that something might be wrong, not jump immediately to a reviewer with a suggested NRA. If no action is forthcoming from the CO, the next step is the NA. There's no need for a separate NRA log in this example because a mechanism exists and should work as it is supposed to but cachers don't want to file the correct logs to get this addressed. In this example you've provided (and assuming the NRA was in place), does that mean you would bypass the NM log (and suggest others do as well) and go directly to a NRA to initiate reviewer action on this cache? If so, then what does that say about the NM log? You've essentially rendered it irrelevant. Also, if the CO doesn't respond to this reviewer action, then the cache is archived. Basically you're asking for the reviewer to disable a cache that has no NM log (because a 10 consecutive DNF cache probably needs a CO check), see if the CO responds, and then archive the cache when they don't. And that's somehow a different process and result than the current NA log we have available now because the implication of the terminology is better and not used out of context? I'm all for changing the name of the log but I honestly can't think of how the process and possible results would differ from how they currently stand or do anything to address the issue of not using the proper logs for needed maintenance and/or reviewer action. I did and there's very little that addresses examples, only most people agreeing with the suggestion of a name change of the NA log to the NRA log. I suggested they keep both (in my initial reply) because there are some cases where immediate action/archival is needed (cache on private property without permission, for example) vs. just the normal progression of an unmaintained cache from NM to NRA. NRA makes much more sense because it applies across the board to every situation but since that hasn't happened, the NA is what we have so that's what we have to use. I still don't think there are any examples that would make sense for a community member to forego the NM log and proceed directly to a NRA log. Most examples (like the 10 consecutive DNFs) should be just as adequately addressed using what we have in place (NM then NA). The problem is that the community is hesitant to use them or refuses to use them. The NRA isn't needed if people file the correct logs and use the established process. The NRA apparently is needed when people choose not to file the correct logs and not use the established process. Creating or renaming a log that asks for reviewer action doesn't address the problem of people not using the correct log types. It doesn't change the process already in place, although if you're going to bypass the needed NM log (in the example you provide) to file the NRA log, then it completely changes the process and renders the NM log irrelevant. It only clarifies the implication of the log being used. This does nothing to address the root of the problem. It's because the community hasn't been "educated" or properly "refreshed" in their proper use. Now that the CHS and reviewers are apparently pro-actively seeking out caches like this particular example, the community doesn't feel like it's a needed action on our parts, despite the fact that it is. Some of it is related to the actions of GS, some of it is related to COs' reactions to NM/NA logs, and some of it is related to the community's hesitancy in their use. All this talk between Bruce and I about NA/NRA is completely irrelevant if the community just follows the protocols laid out for us and files the NM/NA logs and COs get over themselves and realize that it's not some personal attack but instead a plea for them to maintain their cache. They fail to maintain it and it's off the books, as it should be. Like Bruce, I wouldn't have taken action like you did but I would be just as frustrated at the lack of action by the community prior to you. I might have contacted the CO and/or written a note on the cache page but like some (but not others) I prefer to have firsthand knowledge and visit a cache before filing a NM log. I have no issues with following up later (I typically wait 4 weeks/30 days), if no action is taken by the CO, with a NA log. If I didn't file the NM log, I won't file a NA log because I'd prefer to have visited the cache to feel confident in my choice. I'm sure dprovan doesn't feel like that's needed but if a reviewer is going to take action (or is summoned to take action), then I believe they need as much firsthand information as they can get to help make their decision, not someone else acting, in essence, as a reviewer from afar. I don't think it's wrong what they do, although I'd not endorse their actions; I feel it's wrong for me based on how I choose to participate.

As a RN, I can talk about 16 hour shifts all the time. We get that. It sucks, but its our reality, COVID-19 or not. Also consider, this is not a one size fits all situation. Our policies and protocols within the hospital change several times each day. Yesterday evening we separated a brand new baby from its PUI mother five minutes after birth. Today, we would not do that; they would stay together and mom would wear a mask while breastfeeding. I am 20 miles north of the first Washington state COVID-19 case in Snohomish County and 50 miles north of Seattle. I'm not being negligent. I'm avoiding stores, crowded areas, my nursing conferences have been cancelled, practicing social distancing, etc. I'm following the recommended guidelines AND caring for patients with inadequate PPE, not nearly enough supplies, etc. However, the fresh air part is recommended by State of Emergency declared by the Skagit County Health Department that recommends people getting outside. It's also recommended that kids spend two hours playing outdoors. People who are sick should self-isolate except to seek medical care. People at higher risk of severe illness should self-isolate now. This includes physical isolation from non-household family members, including grandchildren. People at higher risk include people over 60 years of age; people with underlying health conditions including heart disease, lung disease or diabetes; people with weakened immune systems; and pregnant women. Everyoneshould limit activity outside the home to essential activities only. However, outdoor activities such as walking, running, biking, and hiking are encouraged. If you go with another person, maintain 6 feet of distance. So, to answer your question, CITOs ARE good for you, if you are healthy.

I'd argue with your cause and effect order. In my area, at least, NAs were common until reviewers started taking action based on DNFs, and only then did people stop posting NAs. If it bothers you to search for something that isn't there, then geocaching isn't the game for you. There's always a first person to search for a cache that has gone missing. Nothing can change that, and I think it's detrimental to the game to pretend otherwise. From what I've seen, the reluctance to log DNFs is entirely cultural. All the serious geocachers in my area log DNFs when they can't find the cache. I've never noticed the casual geocachers being very shy about it, either, although I'm sure there are some that don't, and that doesn't really concern me. To be honest, I'm always a little puzzled when people from other places talk about it being common for people to not file their DNFs. Even with the reviewers swooping down on caches with a couple DNFs, everyone still seems it's more important to tell everyone else that they couldn't find it and not worry about how the reviewers will react. It's kinda sad you think there are people that can't laugh at themselves when their DNF comes between two easy find logs. If you think you know someone like that, you should definitely remind them that they're geocaching so they can enjoy themselves, not so they can compare themselves to other people. Failure is an every day occurrence in geocaching, so if someone finds it embarrassing, they're not going to have much fun in this game.

I'd suggest archiving the event after a few weeks or when everyone has logged they have attended. I believe this is automatically done by the site these days after a certain period of time elapses. Also, if your event is held at a park or other such venue, I'd strongly suggest making sure the site be cleaned and trash deposited in appropriate receptacles. Make sure all travel bugs have been picked up from tables. As for things to do after an event, you could stay and talk to people, find some caches, look for waymarks, place a cache, play a Wherigo cartridge, go for a hike, do chores, do other satisfying and filling activities, or put in more unpaid overtime at your job. Whatever you decide to do, make it worth your time. You only have one life, so live it.

Do you mean the GIFs are in view but they don't animate? Do you have an example? You have a ton of puzzle caches, and here's one of them with animated GIFS embedded in the page and hosted on Geocaching.com, and they are animating. If you have GIFs hosted on Geocaching.com and they aren't loading properly anymore, you may have to instead host them elsewhere. If the files are especially huge, you also need a suitable server and cache page visitors who have a fast connection or patience. The thread you linked to had a "9.1 MB GIF", and it's been 3 months without publication of that cache. If it's not part of the puzzle, it could be a static JPG and exist on the page just fine. Or it can be any kind of linked file that users are likely to be able to run. I've found that I can't talk people out of a way-cool (and ill-advised) "animated GIF idea", so I tend to just post what one may try, and watch them crash and burn .

There was an alternate Wherigo player for iOS, but you can't talk about it since it directly "competes" with Groundspeak's app. Fun with guidelines...

I prefer both. I use "Waze" to route me to a cache area (or to hunt for a parking place for individual caches), and it cannot be pre-loaded, so it works only in an online phone and fails miserably at times. So my toughest challenge is mitigating the problems when the phone Apps fail... preparing in case they fail... in case there's a bug this month that has broken some App function. I have an old Garmin Nuvi ready to route me home, just in case. So it's more like both, plus a backup. But I have a Garmin Oregon 750. The phone can talk to it. So that setup is fluid. It's one or the other or a combination of phone and GPS. The deciding factor is just how solid, or how borderline, or how gone, the data signal is. Which you don't always know in advance.

Wow. Thanks for that. All this talk about "5G" with every carrier, and the area I'd think would be most up on this would be silicon valley.

G'Day My Fellow Geocachers, How are you doing on this fine day? I’m DARKSIDEDAN aka Daniel from Canberra, Australia. I love discovering Geocaches, Trackable items and collecting Pathtags. I hope that you all enjoy Geocaching as much as I do. For me geocaching is a way of life. When I am not Geocaching, I am thinking of Geocaching. Here is a little information about me. I have been geocaching since 2015. At the time of this post I have over 6850 finds plus 340 hides. I am the creator of the “Duck Dip” Lab Cache that won 2nd Place for the Australian Capital Territory in the State Vs State - Battle of the Lab Caches at the OzGeoMuster - The Gong Mega 2019 in Wollongong, Australia (GC7N7ZC). Now let’s talk Pathtags. Currently I have over 8000 Pathtags in my collection plus about 500 Etagz. I currently have three of my own Pathtags (45762 / 46950 / 47696) with another one in the works. https://www.geocaching.com/profile/?guid=2a2a54fb-66e6-4b02-ad79-fae27aa04984

Pen doesn't work (empty, broken, lost in the woods). The rusty can won't open. The logbook is wet and I don't want to touch it. ... In each of the cases I have the cache in my hand and have successfully fulfilled the task given by the owner. Why do you have a problem with me not signing the log? Only because of the rules? (I don't talk about "seen it up in the tree and could not reach it" or "could not open the trick lock" or ....)

I'm trying to get a good long streak of consectutive days with finds going (currently at 51). As a freelance photographer one of the things I get to do is talk on cruise ships, which is fantastic for increasing the number of countries I have cached in but the 'sea days' do make it difficult to get a really big streak of consectutive days caching. I know there used to be such things as 'locationless' caches, but are there any caches left that could be legitimately logged on a day when I am in the middle of the ocean? I did wonder about 'banking' some earthcaches - visiting the locations, just photographing them in detail and then only answering the questions when I'm out at sea. But that feels like cheating. Thanks Ian.

How do you know the other cacher's "better coordinates" are "spot on"? How could your coordinates be typically 80 feet off and you not know there's a problem until you hide a cache? Many GPSs have magnetic compass sensors which you can calibrate to see better compass directions. You don't calibrate coordinates. Can you get together with the other cacher and get some pointers? There seems to be a disconnect where you're having trouble with coordinates. Maybe entering them, or maybe with some setting that could be changed. I try to talk people out of the "Waypoint Averaging" thing. It's best used for specific purposes, and way beyond what is required for "geocaching". It requires a definite plan, a lot of time, and visits to the same spot in various weather conditions, times of day, and seasons. After all that work, all you get is an average of waypoints (go figure). Instead, walk to your chosen waypoint (the cache hiding spot), stand there for a while, take some snapshots (save some waypoints), walk a few yards away, return and see which snapshot is closest. Use those coordinates for the cache. Takes 10 minutes. When you return to place the container, check that selected snapshot again, and see if it's still fine. If so, submit the cache page.

I think it's OT, but I kinda agree, though I feel even having the find count on your profile doesn't mean much to many folks. By talk at events, all those graphs, badges, and animations added-on are wasted on most of us here. We remember there was a lengthy period where we'd time-out before all that carp finally loaded. They can look at your stats page if they're that interested (if not already "compared" to on a third-party site)... At a mega event once, before they even asked who I was (the cord was buggin' my neck...), a Lackey asked what my find count was. - So it's possible I guess that "points", no matter how they came by them (and we've seen some examples...) do matter to some.

Hi you guys I am a long time geocacher who lost touch when I moved to Maui, its just not happening a lot here. Beautiful, but not a lot of caching. OK so I have two Garmin Hcx Etrex. I know, its been a moment. I need to buy a new unit, and am eyeing the link below. Is this my best bet right now? I have bad eyes, so will this be a step up? And oh, I am not a touchscreen fan. Any feedback welcome. And also, new friends Please? I am taking tomorrow off so I can sit online and make friends and talk story and rekindle my passion for geocaching. I am ready to purchase tonight, so talk to me.... Mods, if in the wrong place, please let me know <3 Garmin GPSMAP 64st, TOPO U.S. 100K with High-Sensitivity GPS and GLONASS Receiver

The first rule of platinum membership is you can't talk about platinum membership.

I have no interest in souvenirs. For challenge caches that are challenging, in particular, when I meet the challenge, I want to log the find so I can talk about the challenge and what it meant to me for the same reason I want to log cache finds and talk about them. I'm not doing it for trophies. Yeah - I'd rather have challenge caches continue as-is than to see them completely banned and replaced by souvenirs. The post-moratorium rules have eliminated some challenge types that I enjoyed, but at least the pre-moratorium ones have been allowed to continue and there is some potential for new challenge caches that might be interesting, if a CO can come up with a good idea that works within the current guidelines. I wouldn't be opposed to simple souvenirs, like Jasmer or Fizzy or calendar, but I wouldn't want to see GS resources spent on something that is currently accomplished by BadgeGen. I wouldn't be surprised if GS ends up getting complaints from cachers about how a particular 'accomplishment' doesn't have a souvenir. "There is a souvenir for having 2000 and 3000 finds, but how about a souvenir for having 2500" or "There is a souvenir for completing a Fizzy grid, but how about a souvenir for completing half of a Fizzy grid"... There have already been complaints about how some countries don't yet have souvenirs, so I don't see how 'accomplishment' souvenirs would be an attractive use of time.

That's a good division that covers most everything, although one of the problems I have with GS's attitude towards challenges is that in preventing challenges, they rule out everything except accomplishments, so a CO can't come up with a new idea that isn't really either. I have no interest in souvenirs. For challenge caches that are challenging, in particular, when I meet the challenge, I want to log the find so I can talk about the challenge and what it meant to me for the same reason I want to log cache finds and talk about them. I'm not doing it for trophies.

The key point is "user-defined" (I know you latched on to 'geocraphic' as the context for that clause though). Anything other than what's HQ-defined. On the DT grid, an explicit shape is a "user defined region". There's also a bookkeeping aspect which I've been cited. Having to keep track of numerous components of a challenge - the fewer the better; a challenge with 3 simplistically defined parameters (x Traditions, y Mysteries, z Multis, for example, or 400 of each D rating, or 30 finds in each corner) is easier than a list of specific matches (all the 15 DT combos required to form this specific shape). A user-defined shape means a list of very specific qualifiers, or a detailed description of qualification 'region', and having to seek out specific qualifiers and keep track of what you've got. That's why I suggested how you describe the challenge could make a HUGE difference. Instead of saying "form an X of a certain number of finds", have a quick math checker that can determine qualification. This is not me saying I'm a fan of decisions based on "user-defined" and "bookkeeping" clauses, but these are what I have been told as reasons ideas like yours are declined. I'm just passing on what I know from experience, whether in agreement or not. Honestly I could potentially see the challenge idea you cited as allowed if worded acceptably in my province. We already have SO many very similar. As long as it doesn't look like a 'pattern' or 'shape' and isn't too difficult to keep track of (bookkeeping), I think my reviewers may allow it. Again though, I'd suggest you talk to your reviewer to find out what they think of the challenge. That's the best way to find out what would be allowed and not, before putting in too much work only to be declined.

I think the problem is that you haven't explained a specific problem, only an expression you're unclear on. Has a specific challenge cache idea been denied? It's hard to tell from your original post if you're looking for an opinion, or an explanation. Now that you've explained in more detail what an example challenge is, can you say that that is precisely what you've submitted for review, and it was declined? And that the reason you were given was that "grid art" is not allowed? If so, then the reason is 'user defined regions' (or patterns or shapes) are not allowed. If you want clarity on that point, you should talk to your reviewer. Beyond that, you could only try making adjustments as described in this thread.

Has there ever been any talk of creating a app for Waymarking ?? I bet alot more poeple would get into it if there was something quick and easy to use When I am out geocaching I usually forget about waymarks and log them after the fact

The best place to discuss the GSAK program is on their own dedicated forums. But, it's also fine to talk about GSAK here, because it's an authorized partner application. As such, the best place on the Geocaching Forums would be the API Forum.

In geocache talk it don't mean stolen loot though. Street talk, swag is low grade stuff. Kinda makes sense as to what I find left in geocaches.

G'Day My Fellow Geocachers, How are you doing on this fine day? I’m DARKSIDEDAN aka Daniel from Canberra, Australia. I love discovering Geocaches, Trackable items and collecting Pathtags. I hope that you all enjoy Geocaching as much as I do. For me geocaching is a way of life. When I am not Geocaching, I am thinking of Geocaching. Here is a little information about me. I have been geocaching since 2015. At the time of this post I have over 6850 finds plus 340 hides. I am the creator of the “Duck Dip” Lab Cache that won 2nd Place for the Australian Capital Territory in the State Vs State - Battle of the Lab Caches at the OzGeoMuster - The Gong Mega 2019 in Wollongong, Australia (GC7N7ZC). Now let’s talk Pathtags. Currently I have over 8000 Pathtags in my collection plus about 500 Etagz. I currently have three of my own Pathtags (45762 / 46950 / 47696) with another one in the works.

I feel blessed and lucky enough to say, I've been chosen to create one of the 20th anniversary events. I came to the forum to see if anyone has starting to talk about them only to not find much info. So I'll start by saying, I am seeking a little help and guidance on how to pull off a special event like this. I have previously hosted and held events in 4 different states, including my home state of Ohio. The event I will schedule to celebrate this 20th anniv. will take place and be held here in Ohio. Outside of that, tips, ideas and the like on how to make this special for my area would be appreciated. I go by the name Corn-fed and live in the center of that state approx 30 minutes from Columbus.

Not publishing on geocaching.com is determining what is reasonable. If it's not reasonable, it won't be published. They might indicate what should change. If it is published, the reviewer has deemed it is reasonable to publish. What it is not is your strictly literal definition. We will continue to disagree until we agree on the definition of "Date Hidden" in the context of a Geocaching.com listing property. Until then, continue to bang on. No opinions changing, per all the discussion up until now. Already answered that, and as others have said, because most likely a reviewer will recommend making the date the date the container was hidden as a geocache. Oh they make many decisions I may not like. But I make every effort to determine the reason for such a decision. And at worst it comes down to people trying to push the limit so far that they simply have to say "No". Sometimes parents and teachers have to do that with unruly kids. In the case of this website, they make the rules, they define what is allowed. For a "Date Hidden", they have every right to determine what is "reasonable" for their website. Even if I don't like it. But for the record, I don't think 1995 should be allowed either. Because I believe the definition of (and I believe they define) the field is explicitly in the context of a geocache. (psst and if it's not already clear, I also believe that to be reasonable =P) Hey, we agree. No one said you can't talk about how restricting 1995 for whatever reason is a silly reason. But you can't say we can't repeatedly disagree with you = P If you created or owned the sky, or you fundamentally defined "blue" and "green", you'd have every right to say what is or isn't blue and green. Well for the cave, no, because the cache is in the cave. The example was using the actual container as the cache. If that box is the cache, and it's been there since who knows when, then the box itself was hidden way back then, so why not use that year? Why would you say that's not reasonable but 1995 is? Why is it okay to use someone else's box with their placed date because it was a geocache and owned by a geocacher but not the ex-summit log box because it wasn't? These seem to be entirely subjective parameters you're adding to the situation to define "reasonable" in your own opinion. Now if you owned your own geocaching website, you'd have every right to allow that date, define it however you wish, what you believe to be "reasonable" across your website. But HQ owns geocaching.com, and they get to decide what is a reasonable set of parameters for the value of the field. And as described by IceColdUK, pretty much every aspect of the listing is in the context of the geocache. At worst, we can infer by context what is reasonable for the hidden date, before a ruling is made by a reviewer. If you infer something different, well then there's a test - find a way to publish a listing using a container with a relatively extreme Hidden Date by your definition of 'reasonable' that may be in conflict with the argument we're making. Then find out what a reviewer decides. Heck if they say no, you could even take it to appeals and get an official ruling from HQ directly. And even if they still say no to the date that you think is 'reasonable', you would still have every right to believe that HQ is being "unreasonable". Probably won't change much though I think this is what I would do! Such a cool idea Absolutely! I think it would be awesome to find a cache that's actually been there decades, with a very interesting and inspiring story Depending on how much is still tied to that time, it could even get loads of FP recognition.