Search the Community

For me it's very easy to understand. The population is sick and tired of the same to-be-left-unnamed posters dominating and devolving every, single, thread, no matter how benign or useful the original post is. I find myself coming to the forums less and less frequently. I wonder if it's a dip in the interest in the game. Fewer people are passionate about the game, enough that they want to talk about it. Some of those that were passionate and informative have been banned. I haven't seen much talk in any other geocaching forum and facebook sites either. I think there is a combination of the two bolded statements that is killing discussion around here. That, and the fact that those discussed in the former either have no ability to grasp that they are killing discourse, or do see and yet feel the narcissastic need to be "right" anyway. I'm not sure it's an overall dip in interest, but I suspect the fact that one can play this game entirely from a smartphone may have obviated the need for many players to visit the website itself; thus, why visit the forums?

For me it's very easy to understand. The population is sick and tired of the same to-be-left-unnamed posters dominating and devolving every, single, thread, no matter how benign or useful the original post is. I find myself coming to the forums less and less frequently. I wonder if it's a dip in the interest in the game. Fewer people are passionate about the game, enough that they want to talk about it. Some of those that were passionate and informative have been banned. I haven't seen much talk in any other geocaching forum and facebook sites either. I think there is a combination of the two bolded statements that is killing discussion around here. That, and the fact that those discussed in the former either have no ability to grasp that they are killing discourse, or do see and yet feel the narcissastic need to be "right" anyway. I'm not sure it's an overall dip in interest, but I suspect the fact that one can play this game entirely from a smartphone may have obviated the need for many players to visit the website itself; thus, why visit the forums?

For me it's very easy to understand. The population is sick and tired of the same to-be-left-unnamed posters dominating and devolving every, single, thread, no matter how benign or useful the original post is. I find myself coming to the forums less and less frequently. I wonder if it's a dip in the interest in the game. Fewer people are passionate about the game, enough that they want to talk about it. Some of those that were passionate and informative have been banned. I haven't seen much talk in any other geocaching forum and facebook sites either.

Yep I've tried Overcast and a couple of others. I couldn't quite get the same experience as the old podcasts app. (and there were a lot of complaints about their updates to that app in iOS11) As for GS, oh there are loads of differences. Part of it is workflow, part just mentality, but there are features that were around since its beginning that I vastly preferred. But it's way too late to talk about them now and I'm already changing my workflow habits. Other apps just developed from different directions and processes. It's not that I don't like any other app, right now it's just mainly that I have my entire caching career in there, and it's frustrating that there's been no way to easily transfer it, or just allow the app to work on 64-bit. If Geosphere comes back, we'll see how it works. But it's unlikely. So I'm moving on. As a side note, I also regularly experience that my 6S+ seems to be more accurate (precise/speed/something) than my 8+, but I haven't diagnosed whether it's the app, the hardware, or my case on the 8+ (mainly because it's insignificant enough a difference not to truly bug me or affect my caching) But yes now I'm pretty much caching all with Cachly, and a bit with the official app, and reworking my workflow to use the website more than the offline database as GS was so excellent at.

My reply is from the point of view of a participant of events, and not from the point of view of an organizer. I never ever would like to organize a geocaching event nowadays as there are lots of aspects that I do not want to care of. In case you and your wife had attended an event in my area, I would have loved to talk to both of you. What I hate, however, is to talk on an event about which GPS receivers, torches etc are recommendable, how to find cache X (this typically ends up in open spoilers) etc. I prefer topics that are more general than either the basics of geocaching for beginners or cache-talk of cachers who just want to talk 100% about geocaching. Cezanne

Couple o' points. First, there are rules regarding how far a Cache Owner may move their own cache through an "Update Coordinates" log, which is how it's done. If it's too far for an "UC" log, see Point Two below. Second, if you move your cache, are you retaining the identity and experience of the original placement? Let's say I found your cache last week. I had a wonderful time seeking it in its location and defeating its camouflage, and thoroughly enjoyed the mountain vista I could see from Ground Zero, which of course was why you brought me here in the first place. Next week, you move it to a different place five hundred feet away, hidden in a different style, and the surroundings provide an entirely different experience. Is it the same cache, even if it's the same container? Anyone who found it in its ORIGINAL placement will not be able to log it in it's new location; you can't log the same cache as 'Found' twice. You may want to simply archive the old cache and establish a new cache in it's new situ. Talk about the original cache on the new cache's page, drawing a connection between them to acknowledge the history. Thirdly, you own 24 caches. To answer your original question, the process would be the same one you followed to make sure all the others were 'legally' placed. Finally, as coachstahly said, your Reviewer is your friend. Work with him or her. Bring a bone and a ball to throw.

Personally, I like puzzles. I enjoy the extra dimension they bring to the game , and that they give me a bit of mental, cache related exercise on days when the hours of light are few, and the weather is, well, the reason us Brits talk about the weather so much, so I can't get out finding. I've made some excellent caching friends (both virtual and real world) through therm contacting me about my puzzles, or me contacting them about theirs. People with enthusiasm for puzzle solving seem to me to be interesting individuals with inquiring minds who enjoy a challenge, I love that attitude and it is fun for me to try to produce puzzles for them to try, and for me to work on puzzles they set. A proper, varied, convoluted, involved set of interlinked puzzle caches can be a thing of beauty, and an absolute joy to pursue. Along with a couple of good (met through puzzles) friends I've worked on a series of 66 puzzles over the last couple of years, each visit involved us in an 80 mile round trip and a lot of rural walking, many multi stage puzzles, field puzzles, and proper big boxes. The series is linked in a way which would no longer be allowed (a pyramid arranged as biblical 'books' , half a dozen or so first level caches each with part of a clue in , leading to a final cache for that 'book' which in turn has parts for one of two cumulative bonus puzzles, and when you find both of those ...you guessed it, they have information for the final puzzle. I can't even guess how many hours I've spent at home working on those puzzles, researching relevant (and turned out to be irrelevant, but still interesting ) topics, learning things about the bible, Inspector Morse, children's TV programs, Disney cartoons, chemistry, the Industrial revolution, the history of Birmingham and various games ... Those 'aha !' moments when the clues fell into place were joyful, and getting to the end of the series was exactly like reading a great book, you want to find out what happens in the end, but are conflicted about turning those last few pages because you don't really want it to be over. So yes, puzzles can be a joy.for those of us who want to invest the time and effort, but they are not exactly popular : in the course of finding those 66 caches, 7 of them were resuscitation caches, not having been found for a year or more (one of them for over two years) , but every single one was in good condition because they had been hidden with the same kind of care and thought as the C.O. gave to the puzzles. Working through and finding the series was a peak in caching for me, However, caching has many tribes within it, and it appears that the tribe with the most members at the moment is the numbers tribe, and specifically the app based numbers tribe. I don't know to what extent app based users who have started caching solely via their 'phones (rather than via the website ) ever look at cache pages on a computer : judging from the times I've looked to see if a cacher is still active, checked their profile, and seen they've never visited the website but they have recent finds , a lot of newish cachers never visit the site on a bigger screen. It's no surprise then when they don't do puzzles, many of which would be so much harder on a small screen, so those cachers have an extra barrier to puzzles even if they want to spend the time and effort on them. There do seem to be quite a lot of very simple puzzles, and straightforward single stage multis being used for the popular 'Church Micro' series over here, and I suspect the cache type with extra tasks has been chosen with the specific intention of having the cache ignored by folk who do not want to make any extra effort above a fast easy find. I guess having less frequent finds cuts down on the chances of muggles noticing less than stealthy cachers, as well as maintenance for full logs , especially if the cache is a tiny one with a tiny log ! Honestly this sort of easy ,make-work puzzle , set either as a simple hoop to jump through for whatever reason, is less interesting to me than the puzzle set by a C.O.who enjoys the puzzling process first, and the urge to set a cache comes second. I see a similar division in earthcaches, where some older ones are uninspiring in the extreme ( "See this weathered and undistinguished boulder ? What colour is it ?How big is it? What rock type do you think it might be ? " ) and just there for the smiley, not the geology. I'm happy that no more earthcaches of low quality will get past the reviewers with the updated rules. Some puzzles are there for the smiley, great puzzles are there for the puzzle. people who like these cache types * , either to set or find , really enjoy them, just look at the favourite points (that series of 66 have accrued over 1500 fp between them) or the found it logs. It doesn't bother me that so many newer cachers don't do puzzles: maybe they will one day, if they discover there is more to caching than trad.s, but I don't care if my puzzles get found once in a blue moon as long as the finders enjoy the puzzle solving and the cache find. I'll keep on setting caches I'd like to find, *Wherigos could be included here tooI think.

Years ago waymark categories/waymarks would state "no cell phone pics" because the quality wasn't the best (I'm guessing). These days the quality is amazing, and everyone takes photos with their cell phone. But now I'm starting to think the community needs to talk about photo options with today's technology: dashcam photos for posting waymarks (I have only seen bad quality) and drone photos.

I don't think that this is true. Often when I talk with geocachers about Waymarking, they have no idea what it is. And after explaining it to them, they usually ask questions like "is there an app for it?", "can I create pocket queries?" etc. And after all the "No" answers I have to give them, only few of them will even start looking at Waymarking.com. The design and bugs of the website will deter more people from starting to publish waymarks. So, my theory is: If Groundspeak would invest as much in Waymarking as it does with geocaching, it would be much easier to find new waymarkers. Just imagine how wonderful Waymarking could be, if the website would have a modern design, (almost) no bugs and features like pocket queries, a Waymarking app, a Waymarking blog, souvenirs for visiting waymarks in a certain country, better options for filtering waymarks, the opportunity to organize Waymarking events .... and the list goes on and on. If all this was there, people would love to be part of it.

But... again... IF Groundspeak publishes events where socializing is not a requirement let alone even suggested, then events aren't fundamentally intended to be "social". Events are just events. How do you define social, even? To what degree? Do you have to talk to everyone to be social? What if you only talk to one person? What if you go with a friend, stay the whole time, but talk to no one else? "Social" is so arbitrary it makes sense that Groundspeak hasn't required that events be "social". It would be ludicrous to verify and police. I'm amazed this discussion of the social aspect has gone on for so long without the relevant guideline being quoted: As for defining which events are "social", that's up to the judgement of the reviewers, possibly with some guidance from HQ. I haven't looked at the event listing in question, but if it was published, the reviewer has deemed that there's enough of a social aspect to qualify as a Geocaching.com event. It seems to me that as long as the event organizer or his representative is present, then there will always be a social element because an attendee will always be able to stop by and visit.

But... again... IF Groundspeak publishes events where socializing is not a requirement let alone even suggested, then events aren't fundamentally intended to be "social". Events are just events. How do you define social, even? To what degree? Do you have to talk to everyone to be social? What if you only talk to one person? What if you go with a friend, stay the whole time, but talk to no one else? "Social" is so arbitrary it makes sense that Groundspeak hasn't required that events be "social". It would be ludicrous to verify and police. I'm amazed this discussion of the social aspect has gone on for so long without the relevant guideline being quoted: As for defining which events are "social", that's up to the judgement of the reviewers, possibly with some guidance from HQ. I haven't looked at the event listing in question, but if it was published, the reviewer has deemed that there's enough of a social aspect to qualify as a Geocaching.com event.

But... again... IF Groundspeak publishes events where socializing is not a requirement let alone even suggested, then events aren't fundamentally intended to be "social". Events are just events. How do you define social, even? To what degree? Do you have to talk to everyone to be social? What if you only talk to one person? What if you go with a friend, stay the whole time, but talk to no one else? "Social" is so arbitrary it makes sense that Groundspeak hasn't required that events be "social". It would be ludicrous to verify and police. We want them to be social, and most if not all are in some manner social. But if "being social" is not a requirement for an event, then Groundspeak's made that decision. It would only be a matter of time before sometime tries some form of overtly non-social event (effectively a drive-by). Which... again... has not even been demonstrated with an actual example

Quick to blame, slow to learn. How the system behaves is because of Garmin firmware and has NOTHING to do with GS and little to do with the hardware as firmware is needed to make the hardware able to communicate. The first thing that happens when you plug a USB cable into your GPS and it is NOT in Mass Storage Mode(MSM), is the GPS will ask you if you want to change mode. If you don't do so, even the OS will not be able to talk to the GPS. So tell me how it is the fault of GS if the OS can't talk to the unit. When you change the setting to MSM you will find that the OS can now talk to the GPS, and you can put files on the GPS without the plugin. Select Send GPX file and then tell the OS to save the file to the appropriate folder: [GPS DRIVE]\Garmin\GPX. Again GS has nothing to do with this. Or download a PQ, extract the file(s) and drop and drag the files to the GPX directory. Or you can install the plugin, put the GPS in the MSM mode and send the individual file directly to the GPS. The failure for it to work was because YOU did not have it set properly despite being prompted to do so. GS is responsible for many issues but this isn't one of them. As you continue to learn the features and intricacies of your new unit, I'm sure you will really like it. Have fun.

My family is 10 (highly supportive) and 0 (ABSOLUTELY refuses to participate). They do nice things like let me talk about the hobby to them and others, support my geocaching YouTube channel, and help me host my big GIFF event in a movie theater each year (they attend and run the entry table while I'm greeting everyone). So, they're awesome and supportive. But they do not enjoy finding geocaches.

The title of the thread is the pertinent topic here, not the subjective quality of the caches that are being placed. If you're going to talk about "numbers", then you need, well, numbers, not subjective determinations about the quality of new caches. No one is asking if the number of new quality caches is decreasing and there's absolutely no way that this could be determined, as what makes a quality cache is so subjective to likes and dislikes of individual cachers. Apparently you didn't read the title of this thread. Tell this to @barefootjeff (or any other cacher in an area with not many caches and not much hiding activity), who finds that the number of caches available for them to find is finite and will cause them to either travel extensively to find more caches or hope that someone discovers geocaching in their area and starts placing more caches or someone new moves in and starts placing caches. When there are a limited amount of caches in an area and that number continues to decline, it absolutely affects caching, regardless of whether or not it's all about the numbers. Those experiences you hope that people can enjoy won't be there for them to enjoy or will be very limited in scope.

Sure, talk it over with them. Maybe they think it makes sense. Maybe mom planted the cache and the kid really did run out and find it as soon as it was published. I think it would be fun to find out and an easy way to meet them. They aren't adversaries or opponents, just people you're playing a game with. If you decide the FTF was invalid, then just ignore it. I'd try to make my FTF claim lighthearted. Maybe say "first to find after members of the CO's family" in the log. You get to decide if you're FTF. The CO doesn't have to approve your claim.

Three strategies have been recommended in posts - ignore them or talk or call authorities. Talk is least advisable - the 15 minutes of fame, etc. Ignoring them is simple, easy and effective. For hard-core violators, a run-in with the law can be a good thing. Some municipalities use a scared-straight scenario for first time violators. It's: we can prosecute you now based on what you did. But you can redeem yourself. Do xyz act of community service, obey the law, and offense is cleared. HOWEVER, show up here again and we'll throw the book at you. Edit: leniency for violation #1 and a second chance is generally for minors. First time adult offenders get a break, but not as much.

During the Euro Mega event in France GC5YFA8, I met three times Dave Ulmer. The first time i talk to him about Waymarking, i spoke about the "huge" (exactly what i said) waymarkers community in Europe (France, Switzerland, Germany, Slovakia, Czech Republic, etc.) and i asked him to invest more resources in Waymarking because we are the poor parent (french expression) of Groundspeak. He said France is a nice country to play Waymarking and he played Waymarking also and the best waymark for him was where Bonnie and Clyde where shot. The next day he said, I thought last night of what you said, there were a long long time that someone talk to me about Waymarking... but there were too many people and not possible to continue the discussion. The last day he was enjoying watching people playing with zip-line (one of my next waymark) and he said in his house in Oregon in his garden he's got his own zip-line for his children and grand children. But i was geocaching and i could not stay. In conclusion the best way to promote Waymarking is to speak about it, especialy if the guy works in Groundspeak

No - it isn't. Only a blank sheet of paper would be less rigid. Is your system a blank sheet of paper? I start to think that our understanding of what rigidity means differ, or maybe rather we differ with respect to what concept we apply the term rigid to. Somehow your point seems to be that using the existing system (without the need of using any feature one does want to use) would have effects on the creative process of cache hiders and would them make think in certain directions only they have seen in classical caches. My way of thinking is very formal. I argued about the available tools that make setting up certain ideas convenient and not on the process of coming up with ideas. So I applied the term rigid to the technological tool and its limitations and you applied to something different. Not in my understanding of rigidity. As complexity is regarded, I just have in mind to allow everything from very simple to very complex. If you look at the matter from your point of view, yes. If you look at it from the technological point of view, no. See the above. You talk about coming up about the phase of coming up with ideas and I talk about the phase of making the implementation of already available ideas reasonable convenient so that people will not throw them away just due to implementational inconveniences that do not seem to make sense to me. I think that limiting the description to 1000 characters, no option for waypoint up and download etc will discourage some people from implementing some of their ideas for lab caches. Suppose there existed no computers. Then many ideas never would be checked as only a small group of people would be willing to get involved in cumbersome manual work. Of course that's only an analogy that does not match the lab cache case 1:1, but maybe you get that from the example that we talk about two different things. That certainly could be. There also could be other reasons we are not aware of. Asking the question why there is this limit is legitimate in any case. I would be happy anyway if the lab experiment is not central for how the future of geocaching will look like. This is certainly nothing one can argue about. It is hard to discuss only about facts if Groundspeak is promoting lab caches in the way they are doing it. Actually, the main issue I have is not with their experiments and how it is set up, but with the language with which it is promoted. Cezanne

Oh we've had instances of proxy-maintenance being noticed by reviewers and being dealt with. It gets to the point that people won't mention in find logs that the cache was missing and so a replacement was set in place (whether knowing beforehand or not, with permission or not). It happens. And when it happens regularly, and the CO continues to allow it as if it's the norm, then reviewers will take action. At least around here. Now, I suppose it depends on what style of 'maintenance' is happening -- replacement caches (throwdowns or condoned) will likely get quicker action than other people merely replacing wet/full logs. But the underlying point remains - if a CO repeatedly allows others to 'maintain' their caches, they could face repercussive action by reviewers. But my thinking is it's one of those things that can be discussed since it's really a matter of CO reasoning and judgments, how bad the situation is, how it affects the community, and well, whether that cacher is in the reviewers' good books or not (how they've demonstrated their cache ownership ethics in the past). The base point is - you're the cache owner, YOU do the maintenance. There can be exceptions to that rule, and it may be possible to set a different approved maintenance plan in place, but that basic responsibility exists - the cache owner does cache maintenance. Stray from that and you risk repercussions. Always, the best course of action otherwise is to talk to your local reviewer. Positively and respectfully. It goes a long way.

More to the point, what do you call the people who you think are geocaching but when you talk to them you realise they're actually just shuffling around near a cache on their smartphone?

This discussion came up yesterday, but unfortunately the thread was closed. I also would like to talk about false or odd ratings. For reference: Discussing false ratings in a forum post is absolutely up for discussion, and has been discussed many times. Without getting into details, that's not all that was happening with that particular discussion, which is why that particular thread was closed.

This discussion came up yesterday, but unfortunately the thread was closed. I also would like to talk about false or odd ratings. For reference:

It looks fine to me. My only reaction is that any one of those requirements would make a good challenge cache, so putting them all together seems like overkill. If I knew you better, I'd try to talk you into doing 5 different wonderful challenge caches about those attributes instead of just the one. But if you're going to do just the one, and you really think the final location is good enough for that challenge, I think it sounds great. I doubt I'd satisfy the requirements, but I might be closer if I lived in your neck of the woods.

I've taught geocaching to kids at church a few times. I try to keep it simple, and make it as "hands on" as possible. Here's what I do for a 1-hour intro to geocaching: In class, I start by explaining the basic concept: someone hides a container and publishes the location, then others go to the location and look for the container. Then I briefly explain coordinates, using a globe to explain longitude and latitude. I briefly explain how GPS works as follows: Before the class, I hang brightly colored yarn from the ceiling. During class, I explain that GPS receivers use radio waves to measure how far away they are from GPS satellites. Then I use one of the pieces of yarn to show that a distance (the length of the yarn) from a satellite (the spot on the ceiling) defines a circle. Then I show that two pieces of yarn define two locations (where the circles intersect). Then I show that three pieces of yarn defines which of those two locations it is, because the three distances match at only one point. All this takes less than 5 minutes. It's much easier to show it than it is to explain how to show it. Then I show them different containers—at least one container of each size, and at least a couple that are camouflaged. I pass around a few of the containers, and then we look at what's inside an example container: a stash note, which lets me talk about the basic rules printed on my stash notes:If you take something, then leave something. Sign the log. Put the container back where you found it. [*]a log, which lets me talk about geocaching.com account names ("Mine is 'niraD', which is just my first name spelled backward.")[*]trade items, which let me talk about trading fairly, and what kinds of things should not be placed in caches[*]TBs and geocoins, which lets me talk about the rules for trackables I also pass around all these things as we discuss them. Then I show a cache page, emphasizing the type, size, difficulty, and terrain. I explain briefly what each of these things mean. For example, I explain that 1-star terrain is easy and wheelchair accessible, and that 5-star terrain is very hard and probably requires you to know how to use special equipment like scuba gear, climbing gear, or a boat. I don't try to cover what all the terrain ratings mean, let alone what all the terrain ratings mean in detail. Finally, I take them outside to an area where I've hidden more than a dozen containers. I have them stand behind a line and raise their hands when they spot a cache. (This is just basic crowd control.) I call on the ones who raise their hands and have them point to the caches they saw. The first several caches are spotted quickly, but I make sure there are a few really challenging ones. Depending on the time remaining and their interest level, I may offer hints for these last few caches. I print Groundspeak's PDF brochure and have it available for any kids/parents who are interested in pursuing geocaching further. All this fills an hour class nicely. When I have more time, I take them on a hike so we can find actual geocaches, and so they can take turns using a GPSr. I specifically do not take them to the neighborhood caches near the church.