Search the Community

I think September is the best time for pirates. I have been thinking about having a pirate event on the water - taking the kayak out near to where I have a pirate themed cache, hoisting the Jolly Roger, and seeing if anyone else makes it that way. The tides look favorable for the 17th - it might be close enough to give people practice in pirate talk. Maybe.

This is why these topics tend to get heated FUndamentally, the only "legitimate" find is one where your name is in the logbook. Objectively legitimate. Officially legitimate. HOW one gets to that point is entirely subjective. Geocaching is different to different people. It gets heated when you presume that your way is the "right" (or "legitimate") way. All I'm saying is, be conscious of how you describe the act of geocaching, because it's really easy to use words and terms that come off condescending. Describing the experiencial benefit of the full experience is better than down-talking to people who do it differently (and may thus be missing out on that experience, though to them they are getting a different experience which they enjoy)I LOVE slow days with wonderful locations and just merely enjoying nature. My Iceland trip was only a handful of caches but loads of absolutely amazing locations. But I've also had fantastic days with friends seeking out oodles of easier, quicker finds; or targeting specific caches to complete goals and challenges. I don't like quick-finding longer caches, or skimping out on a deeper experience the CO may have intended finders to have. I get annoyed at big group caching days, but know there's nothing I can do about them, and as long as they enjoy their day and don't ruin it for others, then whatev. Geocaching is ALL of these things. Enjoy it. Don't talk people down because they enjoy something different. (insomuch as what everyone enjoys doesn't actually directly negatively affect others, of course! That's why there are guidelines) Yeah that can happen. And in some of those cases it's a mistake... just another reason not to be overly distraught or competitive with other peoples' find counts. Maybe they just don't care It's not then their fault if someone else gets frustrated and angry at their (incorrect) statistics. Just let it be Or if they fix it, great! I actually placed a challenge cache 5 years ago (long pre-moratorium) knowing the drama surrounding high count days and competitive records.I'd say the average finds per day from its finders (minimum is 100) is somewhere around 140-150.

I see that your cache is in a nice-looking wooded area, the "Ray Harral Nature Park." Consider doing some self-promotion by adding a description of the Nature Park to your cache description. Are there trails there? Educational programs? A playground? Talk about the reasons why someone would want to visit here. I wonder whether geocachers are nervous due to the proximity of the park, right next to the school to the north. You might assure readers that it's cool to be there, as it's a park, not the "woods behind the school." Caches are not allowed at or near schools.

I am a Premium Member, but my options are becoming more limited for the type of caches I enjoy most. First, I limit the puzzle caches. Further, I favor the point Steve Jobs made "The journey is the reward" as well as another quote, "The journey is the destination." Thus, for me, the preferred is a Difficulty under 4.0 but a Terrain of at least 3.0. To see what was now available for me within 30 miles of my home (South of Titusville, Florida) and also just 1,000 caches I came up with the following: So, what this tells me is that my continued participation in the Geocaching site is becoming limited while on the Terracaching side I remain active. I have expressed my concern for all the area P&Gs to our reviewers, one of which wont' even talk to me anymore, but such placements continue. (Note: They do help the new-comer so there is value but, IMHO, the volume is out of control) Anyway, my $.02, like it or not

I too have been having issues loading to my GPS but I have a Magellan and all the talk is about Garmin ?? How do us Magellan users download ?? Why did the "download to GPS" be taken off line ?? HELP PLEASE !

I think that plan is safe. I have never seen someone in the Forums complain that someone is posting stories and photos at each cache, and if they did complain, I'd try to talk them down from that ledge . It almost doesn't seem "lost" if the logs are by an actual human. But since the problem seems to be that takers keep a TB for months and log it through dozens or hundreds of caches, reconsider keeping the TB. Unless the TB's mission is about that, the default is that you place it into a cache and log the drop.

Excellent catch. The order is intentional, the routing is not. I intended to make 6, 7, and 8 a three-fer, parking just uphill of 6, heading down to the basketball court, and then along the trail to 7 and 8. That plan didn't make it into the draft, though. oops. The reasoning: it's early morning in a residential neighborhood. We tend to be a little disruptive, so in order to wake as few neighbors as possible, I'm suggesting parking's better at 6 (a residential parkside road) than at 8 (trailhead between two homes). Stop 7 is a 0.1 mile hike from either side (looks like foliage or maybe a creek blocks access from the north), and once we're there, we're 0.1 miles to the third one. The best parking, in terms of non-disruptiveness, would be on the west trailhead end, at the park parking lot, but that's probably too much to ask. That's like an additional 0.1 miles to hike, and that's just crazy talk Of course, if you're lucky enough to have a non-caching driver, they can drop you off at 6 or 8 and pick you up at 8 or 6. That's not how I figure the route, though. Probably clearer with a JPG update: Reference links: 6: GC1GZVV Hoops Anyone? by Baradam 7: GC2E88 F.F.T.E. by Laserman Little Dolphin 8: GC1JEJ9 Killing the Urge give me more by Baradam

Here is an excellent example of a bad one. A wooden mailbox post. Permission given to hide on this post. The cache owner drilled a hole to hold a film canister. Attached a hinged lid of wood to cover the hide. I found it and the husband of the woman who gave permission came up to me to talk. I asked if he was to CO, No he said. He then told me his wife gave the permission. I told him that hide was a violation of guidelines. I let the reviewer know that he had better go see this set up. The hide was immediately archived. Defacing in any manner private or public property is not allowed. You may not place a screw into a dead tree either. Not even a wooden fence post. Doing so is the same as spiking a tree. Which is what the anti logging people do. A chain saw or other power saw hitting this will explode.

Just to be clear, the fact that a statement was "in writing" doesn't mean they were in any way bound by it (I think everyone agrees) especially since it was not a 'promise'. The process therefore towards the archival, itself, may be what is the pits, depends on who you talk to. It could have gone smoother. But at the same time, there are people who would not have been satisfied regardless of how it happened, and would only be happy if they had remained untouched. They would criticize the act, not the process, no matter how smoothly HQ did it. Those are likely the same ones who actually contributed to the archivals, the ones who raised so much ire at the situation that caused them to throw in the hat. IMO, it's fine to be upset how it came to pass, but that it came to pass is entirely legitimate, as much as it may suck for those affected.

Here, we see some logs from younger folks with anger issues mostly, but don't believe it's this hobby that started it... It seems (to me) that many don't want to work a problem/talk things out in pretty-much everything in life. Things don't go their way and they freak. If you're brought up with that "everyone's a winner", or "everybody gets a trophy" mindset, there's a good chance that something as simple as not finding a silly geocache is enough to send some nuts. - Sad.

Of course! Because my simple expression of dislike of a particular type of cache means that I absolutely MUST be gnawing my leg off in rage to avoid them, doesn't it? It's good that you feel able to acknowledge your dislike of some types of cache here - even to describe them in such strong terms as very bizarrerules, quite unreasonable and crappy, and I hope that doesn't mean you're gnawing your leg off rather than just ignoring them It's good to talk

We talk like cache ownership is such a burden; that reading logs is annoying. Don't most COs enjoy reading each email log that comes through? I was not suggesting reading the logs would be a burden or that the CO's wouldn't do it. I was pointing out that it will be harder for them to figure out what they need to correct, and that's assuming the person posted the log actually said somehwere what the problem was and didn't just click "Needs Maintenance" thinking it was like a thumbs down. Of course I assume the CO will immediately want to fix the problem as quickly as possible, and I'm pointing out that not encouraging a clear report focused on the problem will make that less likely to happen.

I did not think you were saying anyone was doing anything wrong. Your questions implied that you were trying to get a better handle on what we wanted to do so you could change the list to better fit our needs, and I was merely emphasizing that our needs are defined by the current functionality, and the current functionality is defined by our needs. I'm not trying to talk you out of making improvements, but when you ask questions like this, you're going to get people answering with whatever whizzbang function they've always wanted without any consideration for how that feature will undermine the more fundamental features that we all take for granted. You call it a special snowflake and make it sound like geocachers tiptoe around it. I see this list as battle hardened, adapted and proved through the years to provide geocachers with an essential service. A failure to appreciate that led to several key features of the original list being lost in the replacement. Let me give an example. The primary link being to the cache itself was a carefully considered choice that's obviously correct to anyone using the list, but the replacement page assumed that link was unimportant and arbitrary, so it was eliminated it in favor of the almost never useful link to the cache log itself.

We talk like cache ownership is such a burden; that reading logs is annoying. Don't most COs enjoy reading each email log that comes through?

This is true. They have done nothing special for these units. They use the normal API connection like many other programs. The problem is on Garmin's end. Talk to them.

I think the amount of rules is also a result of the amount of "geocachers" that couldn't handle the few rules that were first in place. Take for example how people fail to comply with a simple rule to post a webcam photo but feel they are in their right to post a regular photo when the webcam is temporarily not working. It is "no fun" if their visit to the location isn't "rewarded" with a find. Some CO delete the log, which is also "no fun", others complain it is "no fun" when people claim the find without the webcam photo etc. etc. Same with earthcaches and virtual. More and more cachers don't care about the (original) intend of a cache, they only care about their rights to log. "It's my right to log this as a find because my name is in the logbook", no matter what the CO's intention was with this cache. I don't have to solve a puzzle, there are databases with the answers. I don't have to walk a multi, there a databases with the end coordinates, I don't have to climb/dive for cache, my friend has done that and now the whole group can log this cache. I don't have to post a photo with my log for a virtual or earthcache, this is not allowed to be mandatory etc. All based on the rule "name in logbook so valid log". That is a convenient "rule" isn't it? But for who? Is it still just a game when people talk about rights and "claim" finds? The game has changed with the amount of people that play it, because different players get different kicks out of the game. What is fun for one player is no fun to another. Can a game be fun to all players when players have very different motives on why and how to play the game? More differences in opinion mean more discussions, means less fun, means more effort to solve these issues, resulting in more rules. You can't expect a game to stay the same if it evolves from a game played by a hundred people, to a thousand, to several thousand, to a million to many millions. And then I'm not even taking into account all the differences with respect to countries: culture (language in logs, the way other players are "helped" etc.), rules by government or other organisations, economic differences resulting in different expectations in what should be free and what not etc. etc. And geocaching.com doesn't seem to think they are running a multinational business, they actually are. The business is based on a game, but still it is just a company with employees who have to earn money. Its success depends on the amount of people that play (and pay for) the game and the amount of people that volunteer to help by either reviewing or placing caches on their website. For the business side of geocaching really only one thing matters: are there enough (new) players who pay for the game. As soon as this amount isn't enough, things have to change to make sure the growth continues. When there are issues within the game people complain this isn't good business wise. Because people who complain don't promote the game to new players. Next to this they take up time from the people who work at the company who should be focused on work resulting in more money. And they take up time from volunteers who don't like to handle complaints either, they also like the fun aspect of the game. How else to solve this issue if you don't add rules? So from a business perspective I totally understand the decisions, for some issues it's hard to see any other solution. With respect to communication and implementation, it could have been done in a better way, but pleasing everyone will be impossible anyway. From a player's perspective all the changes (not just the rules NLBokkie sums up) don't make the game more fun or more attractive to me. But what I enjoy in the game, is not what the majority of today enjoys in the game. So I have to deal with the changes although they are "no fun" to me. Things I like to have implemented aren't done because time and energy has to be spend on app development to accommodate new players etc. Do I like all the changes? No, definitely not. Do I think all changes benefit the game I play? No, I'm sure they are not. But that's just my perspective, I don't run the business I just play the game and in a very old fashioned way. And with every change it's just a matter of decision making if I still like the game, if I can play it in a way I can still enjoy it. If not I will have to change hobbies and say "goodbye it has been fun but now it's time to move on", like with every hobby. Running a business based on a game with players is different than running a business with clients. Players and clients aren't the same even if they are the same person. Compare this game with a soccer club. A local soccer club needs volunteers to keep the club going, to have enough funds, to get things done. People put their hearts and souls in it to make sure others (or themselves) can play the game and everyone is having fund! It is a major part of their lives until something happens, an issue within the club, parents that don't want to volunteer, a referee that gets kicked etc. At the same time there is the soccer game that people watch on television. The amount of money that goes around there can't be compared to that local soccer club, but millions seem to have fun (I'm not a soccer fan ). In the stadiums people have fun, but the stadiums have changed over the years. Bigger, more people, more security, more rules, less fun in lots of cases with people who wanted to take their kids to the game like they did when their dad took them many years ago. Technology is necessary to determine if a referee is right etc. etc. Games just change when more people are interested in taking part in a game, one way or another.

I suspect the cache pages are locked precisely so that those of us who are upset cannot add a note. Quite likely. Cache pages are not supposed to be used a forum, that's why we have the forums here! You can talk about it as much as you like here.

Umm, one of the reasons that traveling caches were having problems is because a lot of them are just carried to events and have become pocket caches. Not sure how that's better than parking lot caches. I'll keep on enjoying caches by going out for a hike or traveling to an interesting new place. And so will I. I just wont be wasting my time looking for garbage (because really that's all it ends up being anyway) and enjoying the sites and walk more. As far as the other two delta bravos that think Im part of the melt down,, like I said I just dont care anymore. First post here in years and definitely the last Okay. So I have no idea what your goal is here. Are you trying to get people to talk you out of leaving? Not likely, given your clearly antagonistic attitude. Are you trying to denigrate those of us who continue to geocache? Well, there is no need for anyone to tell you that we'd all rather just see you leave. Are you trying to change the minds of the powers that be? Surely there is a much more productive and diplomatic way of doing that.

One done only a couple years after starting (and the other 2/3rds was a FTF monster), was supposed to be at a kid's "Grandma's house". - "She can't wait to talk to people! ". So apparently we're there for her amusement as well... Six in the morning, 2/3rds searching along a hedge at the sidewalk and finds it. A man comes out, asking her what the #$** is she doing, she tells him, and he directs her next door, where the kid's Grandma lives. The container was given to "Grandma", and now she really had to watch and talk to people, until the kid got outta school. Sheesh...

This design proposal looks great! But it's not so important whether Groundspeak will agree with you, these design thing are changeable using Javascript/GM and guys behind GC little helper II will surely be fast. As for the stalker thing someone has mentioned: I am not a stalker as well but me and my friends often visit the Friends page and check out others' new finds (GClh II is very helpful in this) as we like to talk about where we were, what we experienced there, watch the pics etc. The feed will make it much easier for us. Wow, if the feed items only indicated somehow there are images attached to them, that would be something! People who don't want to share their activity with their friends can easily switch it off. One click is all it takes. No need to talk about stalking anymore.

Did a yard cache once. Knew was right yard because we had to go through gate and "not let two big poodles out". Started searching when home owners came out. They had this perfectly laid out sitting area where they lounged around watching us trying to find the cache. Talk about turning the tables, we were their entertainment. Can't complain because they were really nice.

The one "in my yard" cache I found belonged to a friend, knew right where to go, but still felt awkward nosing around their house . We'd worry about strangers and our kids... The other 2/3rds has done a few, but the last couple had coordinates so far off, that she doesn't bother now either. Every once in a while, we see examples from others here in the forums, getting rave reviews and FPs. We don't see that feeling by many others in most areas we've been. Neighbor issues mostly. Surprised how few talk to the neighbors, to see how they'd feel about it first...

I think part of the problem is, that there is no easy way to communicate with a group of officers. I wish there was a "Send message to the Group" button somewhere. Many times I sent messages to an officer and after a while even to the leader, and many times I didn't get any answer at all. If you say that "calling out other members" is ugly, then I say "ignoring other members" is ugly too. And just to avoid misunderstandings: I'm not saying that YOU were ignoring other members, but it was once a reason for me to ask a question in the forums with the result that I was "attacked" for doing that. Another part of the Problem: We are all different people living in different cultures. In one culture you're supposed to talk about "A person/reviewer/waymarker" and describe what he/she did and in other cultures (like mine) it is common to be more specific. If you think (or know) that someone did something wrong, why not be specific?

20 caches that take more than an hour? Ouch... I'd think at least a D3. Consider higher? Because any cache with an hour's hike would probably have at least a D3 or a T3... likely higher. Yours would be a great long term caching goal. It's not necessarily an hour's hiking - one of mine with that attribute just has multiple waypoints spread out over a large area - but yes, most would I suppose, although an hour's hiking is only 2km each way at most. Looking at my own ten hides with that attribute, the majority are T3, with a few 3.5s, a 4 and a couple of T5s that require a boat. But I'm having a hard time putting a scale on the difficulty rating for the challenge - it's obviously not a D1 or a D5 but where does it sit in between? I don't think it's anywhere near as hard as a grid-filling challenge or one that requires visiting multiple states or countries and there are plenty of qualifying caches within reasonable driving distance of GZ to choose from. It's more about time, which is what this challenge is about anyway, but how does that equate to difficulty? The way I see it (and it's just my opinion) is that the challenge cache should have the D and T of the hardest cache you need to qualify. If I've got to find a D5/T4 in order to qualify, then the challenge cache itself was a D5/T4. To me, finding the challenge cache itself has been relatively low d/t on that container, but to qualify to log a find was much harder over rougher terrain. Also - to me, finding 20 caches, regardless of d/t, is much harder than finding 1 (the challenge cache), so I'd look for it to be rated higher than if it were just a GRC or some such... And most challenges I've read state that the rating are for the qualifiers and the cache isn't self was an easy one... But - whatever rating it has, its pretty much irrelevant unless you're looking to fill in the d/t matrix on the profile (or qualify for a challenge cache). As I said in a previous post somewhere, challenge caches just give me a goal to accomplish regardless of the ratings... With 815 qualifying caches to choose from and only 20 needed, it's a bit hard to say what the hardest one is - there are 155 of them with both D and T 2.5 or less and 89 with both less than or equal to 2. It'll take longer to find those 20 caches than it would be to find one, but I wouldn't necessarily say that it's harder. Anyway the whole thing may well be moot as I've just had a talk to the park ranger and she's not too keen on where I wanted to put the cache. She's going to discuss it with her manager and get back to me in a couple of weeks, but I got the impression that in spite of having a policy that's supposed to encourage caching as a recognised national park use, they don't want any in their park.

Correct, just "happen" to spot it. We don't even talk with the people who show up at events with "lists" of trackables anymore. The last time was when I asked if those trackables were all theirs, they said "no", and I handed that list back to them.