Search the Community

The last ten posts have been a tangential back and forth quotefest between two users. If you wish to hammer out your differences or clarify your intentions, please use the forum or website messaging tools. The rest of us would like to talk and read about the criteria for being a virtual reward cache owner.

It would be difficult to climb a tree using top rope (as the name implies, you are secured to a rope from above and belayed by another person or device), so of the two lead climbing (the first person up a route) would probably be better.... I would however, just talk to a climbing club local to you and get some experience climbing walls etc.... there really is no sport applicable strictly to tree climbing except for perhaps lumberjack. DD

It's not just the souvenir, but also challenge caches that ask for "find x different cache types in x different countries" that have lead to these events. In some countries/areas there are only tradionals, mysteries and multi's, so an event is an easy find for an extra type of geocache... I never go to events that are clearly organized just to get that souvenir/challenge etc. and I think that is the only thing you can do to discourage these type of events. Adding extra guidelines/rules etc. would not make it any better, since cachers always find solutions to get what they want eventually. By reading the event page it now is at least clear if an event is interesting for me or not, if cachers would lie on the cache event page just to get it published, that might change. I've been to events abroad and also co-hosted (just a few) events, always working together with a local cacher to make sure the event would be at a suitable location and time. And of course with a local involved you are already sure not to be alone, since I agree the social part is what it is all about. For those who want to this as well and are wondering how: just look at recent events in the area where you are going and contact the event organizers for information/help. Someone mentioned they don't like events in a pub, they rather go outdoors to a park. I've seen events that got cancelled on the day itself because of rain, so I prefer indoor events and a pub is often a nice informal location where people don't mind if you walk in with your muddy geocaching shoes. Being able to sit down makes it easier as well to chat, and a toilet nearby makes sure you don't have to leave the event earlier than you or someone in your cache team/family might want to. The amount of people attending is unimportant to me. In my experience the smaller events are a lot better that the larger events since a small group makes it easier to really talk to each other, instead of trying to mingle with geocachers who already often arrive in groups of friends and seem to have no interest in really meeting other people. And of course when an event organizer really wishes to meet other people, you can always decide to cancel the event 2 days before the actual date if there are no "will attend"-logs. Seems to me a lot better than just going ahead, waiting for half an hour for someone to show up while you could have used that time to go geocaching or sightseeing and then claiming your smiley just for the wait. Maybe the website could automatically suggest cancelling the event when there are no will attend-logs 2 days for the event, of course it will be up to the CO to follow this suggestion or not.

This could be very difficult to automate. I am regularly asked by Responsible Cache Owners to archive their old listing when I publish their new listing nearby, so they would be excluded unfairly if the algorithm searched for all archived caches where the archive log came from a reviewer. Conversely, an archive log from a retired reviewer or lackey would not show up in the results if the algorithm searched for archive logs from the reviewer or lackey account types. "Well then, just search for the word 'maintenance' in the archive log." That won't work, either. You would need to search in every language used by a reviewer worldwide. Not all reviewers use the same template. For example, I talk about the maintenance issue in my temp disable log or my reviewer note log. The archive log is very short and sweet: "As there's been no response to my prior note, I am archiving this cache page."

I'm talking about events like these: - An event on a highway while having some rest and a lunch with companions. - An event in a local village near a big river in taiga during a 2-hour stop of a cruise ship. - An event in a remote monastery deeply in woods/bogs. - An event at a gas station right after the hosts crossed the border and entered the country. - An event in a hotel lobby at 6am "because we're going to leave early". Events are supposed to be a social side of the game. Geocachers meet, talk, exchange trackables, walk, spend time in a pub, whatever. It's usually quite clear if an event is published just for a souvenir in someone's profile. Formally, nothing is wrong with such "lunch events" in most cases but - in my opinion - this practice undermines the very idea of geocaching events.

Throwing out some quick thoughts/calculations: It looks like they gave you decimal degree coordinates, and they are not very precise. The distance between 49.75, 6.67 and 49.76, 6.68 is 0.82 miles - so realistically, if they rounded correctly, this cache can be anywhere within a radius of 0.41 miles (a 0.52-square-mile area). So widen your search. She gave you no other information? Approximate size of the cache? What day did she drop it? EDIT to add: Assuming it's a traditional cache, your best bets are these: https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC4TB11_im-wilden-talchen https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC4BKDB_in-den-wandelgarten https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC63B0F_lies-lieber-mal-n-gutes-buch https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC6P5CD_zu-ehren-meines-papas Here's the search I used: https://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?t=m&lat_ns=1&lat_h=49&lat_mmss=45.000&long_ew=1&long_h=6&long_mmss=40.2&dist=1&submit8=Search Use Google Translate to check the most recent logs. They may talk about your TB. And finally, Germans seem to be on the ball with trackables, so worst case scenario, they'll find it and correct its logs.

Agreed! Change your citizenship and take it up with your elected representative. Hmmm maybe we should start a thread on gun rights and regulations. Talk about a can of worms.... Same results BTW.

I will talk with Groundspeak on Monday.

I am going to dismiss what you've said about "being yelled at". ( I didn't want to disappoint L0ne.R...) Those are both perfectly reasonable points of view that, at least as you've presented them here, don't sound at all like yelling and should give you no reason to stop posting future NMs, even for those COs. Neither rejects NMs in general, they just explain why your NM isn't going to be acted on. That's such an important point about NMs and NAs: they are input, not demands, so you should expect a CO to sometimes read the input and then reject it. As we've already discussed, the first example I think many, if not most, people agree with: full logs are worthy of mentioning in a found log, but they aren't maintenance issues. After all, nothing stops anyone from finding the cache and signing the log, they just have to, worst case, obliterate a previous finder's signature. I know GS keeps acting like full logs are a maintenance issue, but it really doesn't make much sense to me, so I don't know why they're holding on to that notion. My guess is that it's just become such a standard example of a something that a cache needs that it's hard to keep from using it as an example of when a Needs Maintenance could be posted. It makes sense if you're coming up with a list of things that could be wrong with a cache for a dropdown box, but it makes no sense if you look at it as things that seekers should feel justified in demanding be fixed. For me, the deciding factor is that an unmet NM should lead eventually to archival, but do I really want a perfectly fine cache to disappear because the log's full? I'd say not. In fact, I'd say the fact that the log is full is testament to the value of that cache to the community. The other one's a little muddier, but, still, the CO just didn't see the problem you described. Why does that make you think you shouldn't have described it to him in the first place? Is he right? Is it not as big a deal as you thought? Or is he wrong? If you think he's wrong, carry on the conversation privately to make sure he understands what you were saying. And, while you're at it, think about why your original log wasn't enough for him to see it to begin with. Or do you just disagree about the definition of "broken"? If so, is the CO's definition so wrong you can't accept it? So I think these reactions fail miserably as examples of why NMs shouldn't be posted. In my experience, these are both great examples of the worst reaction you might get from an NM, and in both cases it's a ho-hum situation. Indeed, in both cases you have a chance to establish a relation with the CO and discuss the standards in your community. Perhaps you could convince the first CO that full logs should be NMed and dealt with if it means that much to you. Or he might help you see why it's not a big deal and why he offered to supply the logs for you, since you're going to be visiting more caches in the series. We talk about not maintaining other people's caches, but those objections tend to evaporate when you're helping a friend maintain his caches by replacing full logs with new logs he's supplied you with. You seem to be enjoying this series, so it makes sense for you to help keep it up for the next person to enjoy, too. Oh, and one more thing, to address L0ne.R's point: Even if you've left out some exclamation marks and curse words that are what made you describe these reactions as yelling, that's all the more reason to see it as a reason to engage the CO with a conversation about standards of discourse and the value of NMs and NAs to the game. To me, the worse reaction possible is to accept the yelling as normal and adjust your behavior to try to avoid it in the future. Rude people need to be confronted, not left to act as shining examples of the community's standards.

Nonsense to you, not at all to me. I've had at least one negative personal experience with armchair NA logging. The logs that came in on one of my caches, DNFs mostly, made it sound like the cache may have been missing. To alleviate that goofy NA, I had to schedule a maintenance run, break out the kayak, and spend half a day on the water,. All this to find that the cache was right where it was supposed to be. Feel free to talk to me at an event, email me, message me, or even call if you have my number, to discuss negative sounding logs on one of my caches. But don't throw out a NM or NA from the comfort of your living room until after you've actually tried finding it.

Ever noticed that GS collects VAT (although they don't disclose their VAT registration number ) on PM's of EU citizens? Same difference. As said before, it's because of the likes of FB that this law was made. Even people without accounts had their data collected without their knowledge, talk about scary. At least now rhere's a tool to fight this. Rest assured, one of the the first to experience GDPR will be "one of the big ones" (FB, Google,MS, Apple...)

Glad you found your way here. Let's talk some Geocaching.

I'm not religious about it, but generally if I'm really revisiting a cache (as opposed to just checking to see if it's still in place), I'll open it and sign the log again, yes. It doesn't take much to talk me out of it, though, like if it's hard to retrieve or has some delicate camo that I don't want to disturb.

Rhyming logs ... cool . I my home zone, there is the mystery cache GC522C5. It turned out to be very hard to solve, and it took almost 9 months until the FTF was logged. It's an all time record for a cache within ~100km from my home. 6 months after the publish, with no FTF in sight and the cache being _the_ talk on many events, I logged the following note. The cache title, "4 Gurken", is German for "4 cucumbers", in case someone actually reads it and wonders about the reference . ------------------------------------- Queen, Bohemian Rhapsody, alternate lyrics: Bohemian Mystery Is this a real cache? Or is it mockery? No-one can tell me, so it still is a mystery. Open your eyes, look up to the tree and see! There is a T5, should not be hard to get. because it's 4.5, no D5, not too high, not too low. Be the first to find it! Doesn't really matter to me, to me. Hooray! Just found a cache. Turned a stone and then I saw the box - just like so many more. Found it! It was such a fun, and now I'm gonna search another one. Caching, oooh! Such a thrill to make a find, today it's great and it will be tomorrow. Caching on, caching on, as if nothing really matters. Too bad, a mystery sends shivers down my spine, head is aching all the time. Help me, anybody, I've got to find the solution to the riddle I can't solve. Help me, oooh (be the first to find it) I just wanna log, I sometimes wish I'd really clicked on "Ignore" ... (* guitar solo *) I see 4 little green cucumbers on my screen, And a hint, and a hint! But what is the solution? Cucumbers are lazy, brain is going crazy, see?! The reviewer (the reviewer) The reviewer (the reviewer) The reviewer eahmschaugo The one who knows I'm out of mind now, nobody helps me! He's out of mind now, will someone help him out? Help him ignore all this dadgum mysteries! Easy come, easy find, will you tell me where? No, never! No, we will not tell you where (tell him where!) No, never! We will not tell you where (tell him where!) No, never! We will not tell you where (tell me where!) Will not tell you where (tell me where!) Never never tell you where. Never tell me where. Oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no! Oh the cucumber, the cucumber (oh cucumber, where are you?) An FTF is just out of reach for now for me, for me, for meeeeeeee!!!! So you think you can tease me and laugh in my face? So you think that there should be no FTF race? Oh, owner, can't do this to me, owner! Just gotta find out, just gotta find out where it is. Any other caches, Anyone can see, Any other caches, don't look just as haunting to me. (Be the first to find it.) -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is - in other words - exactly what I said. The rest of your posting talks a lot about numbers. Numbers of waymarks in a category, numbers of officers. But you never talk about the subject of a category. Whether it is an interesting subject or not. To make it short: It seems that you prefer to have prevelant and global waymarks and I prefer to have interesting waymarks and don't care that much about the numbers. Fortunately we both are allowed to have our own opinions.

Well, please don't get me wrong, but I don't think that it is up to you (or anybody else) alone to decide what is "outstanding" for the entire planet. We are all people from different countries of different ages with different interests and so on. What you would call an outstanding category might bore me to death and vice versa. Don't get me wrong: I don't think that your opinion is wrong, I'm just trying to explain, that my opinion isn't completely wrong either. Now for the prevelance: The category "Ancient Traces and Roads" needed more than 10 years to collect 261 waymarks worldwide(!). If we had to decide TODAY, if this category should pass peer review, would you vote against it? I know that I wouldn't. Simply because there are people out there who would be enthusiastic to see them and this category would help them to get all the information needed to find them. Next example: "Glaciers", 12 years, 77 waymarks. Next: "Martello Towers", 10 years, 55 waymarks. And the list could be continued for a while. If all these categories would have failed in peer review, how boring would this hobby be? To get some facts I checked Wikipedia and found a list of all Romanesque buildings in Austria, which is a quite small country. I was very surprised to see that the list contains 136 buildings, 4 of which are in my hometown Wien. I know that we have one or two ancient roads, some glaciers and - as far as I know - not one Martello tower. But still all these categories would get a positive vote from me. Furthermore, if I could do what I wanted I would kick out the thousands of McDonalds Restaurant waymarks to make room for a few hundred Romanesque buildings, but that's a different story. The point (in my humble opinion) is: The prevelance criterion doesn't include a specific number, because it would be impossible to define one. Some things don't exist in large quantities, because only a few of them survived for hundreds or thousands of years or simply because there aren't endless volcanos on this planet. So, if we talk about buildings that are hundreds of years old, we have to accept that there are less than from younger periods.

Here is what was sent to my account by the above waymarker: "I don't expect this to help my cause but you are an officer in the Iowa Historic Markers category. WOW, talk about a category which is NOT GLOBAL. Shame on you! " I'm going to REALLY try to be diplomatic about this since you are obviously pissed off and not thinking clearly. I will tell you right off the bat, however, what you did is truly outside the boundaries of acceptable social norms - I guess it is to be expected in these days of computer anonymity. Act first, get called out on it, then apologize - pretty much par for the course in this day and age. First, I did not create the Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, or Oklahoma State Historical Marker categories that I officer, and, as a favor, became an officer to keep them alive. So, no, actually, I'll take your thanks and not your shame for doing that - I had NO control on whether or not those categories were created or not. If you look at the dates of creation of those categories, three were created at the time Waymarking was created and Oklahoma was created in 2008. For more of your information, Missouri Historical Markers was created by one of the early founders of Waymarking - the late GEO*Trailblazer1. I was more than honored when I was asked to take a spot as an officer in a group that he founded. I think I would try to get my facts straight before I went on an email blast, but that is just me... Second, I gave my HONEST opinion in both the forum and in the Peer Review - DEAL WITH IT AS AN ADULT!!!!! Everyone isn't going to like your category. I thought then, and I think now it is a niche category that is limited in both of those buildings that CAN be waymarked and WHERE they can be waymarked. You knew EXACTLY how my vote was going to be. If you didn't, go back up about halfway up this discussion - I said it would be a tough sell because of the limits of geography. Sorry, I didn't sugarcoat, I didn't lie, I didn't blow smoke up a certain orifice - I told you exactly how I was thinking then, and it was exactly how I voted in Peer Review. At least I had the guts to keep my comments public, I could have hidden them and as well as my name. It's crappy emails like you sent is the reason that the tickbox to keep comments hidden is there. I was at least trying to give you some feedback, obviously, not wanted UNLESS it was of the positive kind. Third, you actually got some very nice comments from some VERY well respected waymarkers in Peer Review. WHY, do you then feel the need to go ahead and slam other waymarkers like this? Are you really that insecure of the category passing that you feel the need to lash out at negative comments? If my actually very calm comments in the peer review section touched a nerve like that, just imagine the first time you deny a waymark? You will learn very quickly what "Shame on you!" REALLY means when you read what an angry waymarker writes. In conclusion, this is the second time this year someone from across the pond has felt the need to admonish me through a private email. This is a global hobby, not just one for either the European or North American areas. Seriously, and I really say this with the utmost respect, what you said in the forum and privately was totally uncalled for. You should have researched more about those State Historical Markers before you decided to put some of the Waymarking population on email blast. Seriously, you look really immature by slamming fellow waymarkers in the forum and in private emails. I'm not holding my breath for an apology, although one is certainly due me and the rest of the waymarkers you decided to go on full tilt. To the rest of the Waymarking population, I'm sorry you have to read the above diatribe from me. I guess I could just have bitten the bullet and taken the personal attack, however, our friend above has decided the measurement of certain body parts is in order. I guess from now on, we have to agree with EVERY category that comes down the pipe,

Thanks for the enjoyable read! Talk about epic road trip. There was a post awhile back that showed a route they took through Europe to get as many countries as possible.

Yep. I believe folks sometimes confuse faceboook with forums. Disagreeing with another once on a local caching site, they said, "you couldn't talk to me like that on faceboook, a mod would stop that" after I called bs on something said (I was where he mentioned, he wasn't...). I asked "what would be the purpose of a 'discussion' where everyone agrees with you ?".

Thanks for the enjoyable read! Talk about epic road trip.

A. Responding does not necessarily equate to "being nice". B. You can never control whether someone is "offended". Even a "nice" response could end up being read as a swipe at them or rude response. I'd rather let them get frustrated by no response than interact with someone who chooses not to put effort into a solve...or at least say they did. C. Not responding to lazy cachers takes precisely zero effort, so it already has an advantage over any interaction at all. and... D. I've actually been interacting with you about this, yet you still feel the need to talk about it and make me out to be some rude jerk. This is PRECISELY the sort of issue I'm talking about. By pursuing this discussion, you are actually, in a way, proving my point.

Meh...I don't feel like responding to every request for a hint on my puzzles. I don't feel like it's reasonable to expect me to always respond. I don't get offended when others don't respond to my own messages. All this talk about what is "reasonable" is...ummm...unreasonable?

Hi All. Brand new here (haven’t found a single cache yet), but the whole concept is so cool i am now after my first one. Tell me: is it addictive? :-p Anyway, I’m Brazilian but now living in Berkshire, UK. If anyone wants to talk that’s nearby, give me a shout!

You may be right. I'm trying to understand why someone would suggest that a CO would be better off placing a string of traditionals caches along a route, rather than make the same experience a single multi-cache. That was basically what someone suggested in another discussion thread, and it rubbed me the wrong way. I can see that, but I'd take the advice as the simple practical comment: very few will do 1000 stage multi, so do a 1000 traditionals, instead. It doesn't much matter why that is. Even what you quoted in the OP sounds like nothing more than "don't bother me with a multi", not "if you do a multi, I won't get as many smilies." What's struck me about the quality question is that in almost every response to the quality poll, people keep calling it "quality" when what they talk about is what they like. I appreciate this thread in this context, because I think what we're seeing is that the multi-trad vs. multicache discussion boils down to what people like and not at all about which has more quality. Specifically, some people like lots of simple, individual caches, so by what right do we say those caches don't have "quality"? Yet dissing power trails in just what way is a prevalent position in the quality discussion.

The case you made is that numbers are the only reason for people to pick multiple caches over a multicache. I argued against it. It doesn't really make sense for you to turn around and talk about the fact that you can imagine a situation where the numbers really would be the only difference. Although I like multicaches, my point was that many people (most people, actually) don't like multicaches, so you just strengthen my argument by making the multicache in your thought experiment devoid of anything that would make anyone at all want to do it. All the more reason for people to pick the traditionals instead. I'm not really sure I know what point you're trying to make, but I think the multicache doesn't support it. I think what you're trying to say is presented just as well with the thought experiment of 2 traditional out in the desert 100 miles apart vs. a string of 1000 traditionals strung out a tenth of a mile apart. I think you're trying to suggest that it's only an obsession with numbers that would make the 1000 cache string more popular. Would that be as valid a thought experiment to get to your point? There are people that do power trails. Some of them, I guess, do it just for the numbers, but I think most do it for the challenge. Yes, the mind numbing challenge. I've considered trying one for that reason, but haven't had a reason to be near one. Furthermore, even if you could prove that the only people that ever did power trails were people that had no interesting in geocaching beyond the find count, I'd still just say, "More power to them!" There's invalid about being motivated by numbers.