Search the Community

Really? For what reason experienced players need more promoting features? May be there are some challenge caches you could consider to chew and be challenged? It's good to have something to spark a bit of new interest after you've been in the game a fair while. Yes, challenge caches can do that but they need to be in that sweet spot where some extra effort is needed to qualify but it's not beyond the bounds of reasonable possibility. For example, the only way I could qualify for a 365-day streak challenge (or even one a fair bit shorter) would be to move house to somewhere with a lot more caches, but even then, having to go out and find a cache every day regardless of the weather would be more likely to kill off my interest in caching. There's a new challenge just been published near here that I might have a chance with, but it'll require three interstate trips plus a trip to New Zealand so I won't be qualifying any time soon. The promotion I enjoyed the most was the Road Trip one in 2015 where you had to find a specific cache type for each week of it. Mystery at the Museum started off fun until the final stage was revealed where you had to just find 35 more caches. That might be trivial for someone in a big city with thousands of caches close at hand, but for anyone with limited unfound local caches it was a tall order in the short time allowed.

As GS stated, challenge caches need to be attainable at any time. While there will come a time when the number of webcam caches is less than the number of mega events in a year, the remaining webcam caches will still be attainable 365 days of the year. The mega event lasts a day or two, and is not attainable for 314 days out of the next 365. Heck, even the remaining APE cache is available 365 days of the year. The only thing stopping me from going and finding it on any particular day of the year is me. Which is more rare? It depends on your definition of rare. To me, rare has multiple meanings, and your statement that webcam caches will be rarer than mega events is mixing the meanings. Rare as in few remaining, versus rare as in having limited availability.

I have never used this feature before but it seems to be a very practical way to find a particular day instead of browsing all logs as I am used to. To make it faster you can edit the link in the source code. For example, the left arrow "Go to the previous month" contains: <a href="javascript:__doPostBack('ctl00$ContentBody$MyCalendar','V7944')" style="color:Black" title="Go to the previous month">&lt;</a> Here you see a coded date 'V7944'. If you want to go back a full year you can subtract 365 from this number and change it to 'V7579' before you click the arrow. I just tried this and got immediatelly 2020 October instead of 2021 October. Of course, editing the source is not the way you are supposed to use to change the date but it is the way how you can do it immediately and pretty fast until this feature is added by Groudspeak or made possible by some add-on developer. I suggest you find an easy way to edit the date yourself as it may take quite a long otherways.

Today marks MarauderMom's 365th straight day of caching. Way to go, Susie!!!

It helps to use the same terminology as the Challenge article. What you're calling a, "calendar streak", I'd call "cumulative month(s)". https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=127&pgid=206#timeLimited Read the time limited section. I'd say cumulative month of Multi-caches is probably fine. You see there streak of 365 days of less, cumulative month, and cumulative day of week. You don't see cumulative year.

How are challenge caches without the word challenge in the title supposed to be handled? According to the current guidelines the English word challenge must be in the title. https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=127&pgid=206 Required for all challenge caches: 1. Type, Title, and Attribute Challenge caches must be listed as Mystery caches, must have the English word "challenge" in the title, and must include the challenge cache attribute. About challenge caches published before April 2015 it's only mentioned that they are legacy caches and "may have Additional logging requirements that require further documentation". The ones I have seen are all in Finland, published before April 2015 and have haaste instead of challenge in the title. For example these 2: https://coord.info/GC5AA26 Combohaaste (T900/MM600/365) https://coord.info/GC2P98D Pitkän viikonlopun kuntahyppely -haastekätkö So my question is are the title also included in the legacy category or are an needs maintenance in order?

Garmin Nuvi 750 NIB $365.00 + actual shipping costs to your area or if you are a UT. local we can meet. Here is a link to the garmin site for details and features etc. https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=134&pID=10625 email me with questions kgibso01@gmail.com thanks, kg.

They do. Keeping this site running 24/7/365. Newer people haven't experienced the site going down over the weekend because of heavy use like it used to a lot about 15 years ago.

Zu einer der Teildiskussionen hier: Normalerweise mache ich keine Power Trails, die geben mir nichts, die finde ich langweilig. Wenn ich aber mal wieder versuche eine paar Challenges zu erfüllen (ich weiß, dass hier im Forum Challenges umstritten sind), dann sind Power Trails echt hilfreich. Zur Zeit arbeite ich z.B. an zwei Challenges: GC4JFXW (88 Tage einen Tradi/Tag) und GC4P8GX (222 Tage Dauercachen), bzw. eigentlich arbeite ich an ein paar mehr, aber das ist irrelevant. Wenn ich nach den 222 Tagen noch Lust habe, will ich versuchen, auf 365/6 Tage zu erhöhen. Allerdings habe ich von einer alten Häsin in meiner Region auch schon gelesen, dass die, als sie kurz vorm Abschluss der 366 Tage-Challenge stand, ihre Lust am Cachen verloren hat, seitdem pflegt sie tatsächlich nur noch ihre Dosen und geht selber kaum noch suchen. Kann also durchaus ein Lustkiller sein, dass Kalendercachen. Und genau dann, wenn man in seiner Umgebung alle (vermeintlichen) Quality Caches schon abgegrast hat (denn es werden ja nicht jeden Monat 31 neue Caches in der Homezone verlegt) und wenn man so blöde Challenges mit 88 Tage jeden Tag einen Tradi angeht, da ist man plötzlich über blöde Power Trails ganz glücklich, denn die sind i.d.R. relativ einfach und nicht zeitaufwändig. Also zwischen Arbeit und Einkauf mal irgendwo kurz aus dem Auto* springen und am nächsten Tag 161 Meter weiter dasselbe (so mache ich das normalerweise nicht, ich versuche zu vermeiden, zwei Tage hintereinander denselben Tausendfüßer anzugehen). Natürlich sorgt der Versuch, solche Challenges zu meistern auch dafür, dass ich Tradis angehe, die ich sonst eher meiden würde. Etwa https://coord.info/GC2RTYJ, der erstaunlicherweise 236 FF.PP. hat. (Es handelt sich um einen einfachen Abzweigdosen-Tradi an einem nicht weiter sehenswerten Ort hinterm Hauptbahnhof, ich war eigentlich erstaunt, dass ich nur eine Urinpfütze überspringen musste, was aber daran liegen mag, dass aufgrund der Pandemiesituation in der Gegend in den letzten Monaten weniger los war, als sonst.) Warum mache ich Challenges, zwingt mich doch keiner zu? Weil ich ein fauler Hund bin, eine richtige Couch Potatoe. Das Kalendercachen zwingt mich zu mehr Aktivität. *Die meisten Caches versuche ich allerdings schon mit dem Rad zu machen.

Ja, leider. Die D/T-Matrix 27* füllen oder 365 Tage am Stück cachen (was für alte Hasen die schon alles in der Gegend gefunden haben eine fürchterliche Ressourcenverschwendung darstellt) ist erlaubt, kreative Lösungen die den Grips anstrengen sollen sind verboten.

Let me offer a recently reincarnated challenge trail we put out around here. A few pre-moratorium caches are in it but most are under the new guidelines. The goal was to make interesting ones under the new guidelines. Feel free to crib ideas as some of these were cribbed from other creative folks. GC3F12D Neglected Cache Challenge GC55XPN The Bigcall Challenge: A Baker's Dozen GC55XP0 The Bigcall Challenge: Nifty Fifty GC980EH 365 Unknown Dates Hidden Challenge GC980EK Feet Under the Sea, Head In the Clouds Challenge GC980EJ All The Attributes Challenge GC9838K The Golden State Challenge GC9839B The Best Finds Challenge GC9838Z The Perfect Country & Western Song Challenge GC9834G Globetrotter Challenge GC9834D The Island Life Is For Me Challenge GC9838F Virtual 👻 Border to Border Challenge GC98388 5 states*100 Finds Iconic Challenge GC9838P Iconic Traveler Challenge GC9834N Every Day Hidden Challenge GC98396 The Bay Area Puzzlers Challenge GC98393 The Taking a Long Lunch Challenge GC98341 Largest Counties Challenge GC9839N Road Less Traveled Challenge! GC9833X Wherigo Quarter Century Challenge GC98347 So Easy a Child Could Do It Challenge GC9838D It's Five O'Clock Somewhere Challenge GC995K7 Mysteries Across The USA Challenge GC995K2 5 Types x 10 States Challenge GC99842 Historic Alameda County Caches Challenge GC99A3G The Demented Diminishing Dozen Challenge GC99AD4 1000 km Altitude Challenge GC99ACQ The Blue or the Gray Challenge GC9986G Hazards of Geocaching Attributes CHALLENGE 313 GC9986J Accessible Attainable Attributes CHALLENGE 1313 GC99X8B The Lazy Cacher Challenge GC9A2N2 The Good N.E.W.S. or Bad N.E.W.S. Challenge GC99EMN The 3.5 Billion Year Challenge GC99AE7 Well-Traveled Cacher: Degree Squares

Found a lot of challenge caches a while ago. Some of them I qualified immidiatly and I could log them as found. And for some of them I logged at the cache and logged a write note online. Later, all of them were archived without written down a reason, just a small note were it looked like the CO was annoyed by the situation. Today, finally, after a long time, I qualified for a challenge I had logged before. 365 days of the calender full with a found of a traditional. And now I wanted to log it as found, or change my write note in a found, but now it seems to be locked. I can't find a way to log it now, even when I think I am allowed according the rules. Is there a new rule that archived challenges are not allowed to log? Or was there a situation with the CO all geocaches that found a cache are now suffering from? Why isn't there a note that explains this situation?? The cache I wanted to log is http://coord.info/ GC8JG9W

Was ist denn mit type of log genau gemeint? Ich habe z.B. mal einen Challenge gesehen, da musste man 20 Logs haben, wo im Cache-Namen das Wort Hütte vorkam (Zwillbrocker Venn). Ein Arche-Noah-Cache (Hamm oder Unna) verlangt von den Loggern, dass sie 40 Caches mit Tiernamen geloggt haben (ohne dass sich ein Tier wiederholt bzw. GCSchwein, GCEber, GCSau, GCFerkel als vier Tiere gewertet werden. Manche verlangen, dass man an allen 365/6 Kalendertagen je mindestens einen Cache (oder vielleicht sogar in einer verschärften Version je einen Multi oder Mystery) geloggt haben muss. Es gibt jede Menge Challenge-Caches mit teils absurden, teils interessanten Anforderungen an die Community (wobei sich absurd und interessant nicht gegenseitig ausschließen müssen).

Right, it’s not like an urgent and stressful activity... that’s why I really like it! I’m trying to get 365 caches this year though so I can say that I got one cache everyday for a year! So maybe I’ve got a little stress but it’s definitely a type of stress that I like

Someone let me know I was mentioned in this topic. If you have any questions, I'll answer them. Here are some answers to start out with: I started a streak just because I noticed I had found caches each day of the month, save for the first where I DNFed one and didn't find another. Before then, I believe my longest was 28 days. I wondered for how long I could keep it up, so decided to see. This was before I heard of the term "streak". I called it "cache-a-day". I'm single, don't have a family, never dated, and don't have much of a social life. I feel most people wonder how a streak is possible because they're thinking in that context. That's not to say I don't have my own challenges. For example, during haunted attraction season, I work 7AM - 4:30 PM, cache 5PM - 6PM, shoot a haunt 6:30PM - 1:30AM, and edit photos 2AM - 4AM. If a convenient cache to a haunt is published in February, I just don't find it until October that year or the next or the year after. It's that simple. When I worked basketball games and tournaments, I usually finished around 9:30PM, so I'd find a cache somewhat convenient after that. There was one time I had to work until 2AM with the team. I took a slightly longer supper and found a convenient cache I was saving. If it's forecast to snow, I'll drive somewhere and sit in the car until after midnight before I get out and look for the cache (were I to see the cache from the car, I'd have to count it at the time I saw it). So I do have my challenges. These days, the streak has a few purposes: force myself to get out and do something and make sure I continue to play the game. For me, geocaching is synonymous to going out every day and finding something (since, even before the streak, I never missed too many days). I could do a streak at first because it fit with my original rule: leave caches to find on a rainy day. I believed caching out my area was a failure because I wouldn't have anything left to do if I wanted to find something and either not drive far or the weather was bad. On average, I spend one to two hours every day to find one cache due to driving. I likely have around fifty to a hundred convenient caches I could find and not spend too long. However, those must be saved for a rainy day--in other words, when I either don't have time, don't want to spend the time, or there's bad weather. Every now and then, I have really annoying days where I DNF three to five caches in a row because I attempt to look for neglected caches. When that happens, I just want to find something to be done and over with it. But I don't see the streak as a burden because it's forcing me to get outside and do something other than work. So even when I'm frustrated about that and just want to have a relaxed evening and do nothing, I know what I'm actually doing is good for me. I can get upset all I want, but it's good medicine, both for physical and mental health, so it must be taken. I've never traveled across an ocean, so I've no need of my personal rule about that. However, I created that rule to be fair. I want my rule set to be as hard, demanding, and constraining as possible, but fair. I don't hold anyone to anything because I don't care about anyone else's streak. (To impress me, tell me a story.) Remember, I'm doing this to force myself to get outside and continue being involved in this game, so I see the streak as part of my internal game-playing infrastructure--a means to an end. Its value lies in what it does for me, not in its being an achievement. Besides, there is someone in my area who wants to garner acknowledgement and praise for his streak. I'll let him have that since he needs something to make him feel good. He can keep up with the day numbers. I can barely find the motivation to set aside time once a week or two or three to slog through the process of logging the finds. Forget the streak: I'm impressed people can consistently log caches on the same day they found them. By the time I'm done finding caches for a day, I'm done with caching. I will not ever have a logging streak. I came up with my rule set by talking to people and finding out what their rules and beliefs were. If they came up with a sensible rule more restrictive than mine, I'd adopt it. I'm bored enough that I want to play on hard mode. That part about its being a physical cache came from this. Later, someone suggested I write out all these rules I had acquired for myself. I shrugged and said perhaps, some day, I would. There was a time my area didn't even average 365 caches published a year. That was hard. It used to be some 1000/year, I'd guess. These past four or five years have been skimpy. I get by. Do I want to stop the streak? Well, there's a reason I'm doing this, so the answer would be if I wanted to stop forcing myself to leave work and go somewhere every evening. No, I believe it's healthy to force oneself to disengage from things and just to do something relaxing for an hour or so every day even if you don't think you have time to do so. I hope this answers some questions. Though I'm slow to reply to topics outside the Wherigo forum, I'll reply if anyone asks something. I hope I can either help or inspire someone if you really want to do something like this. Other than that, a streak is nothing but simple strategy. It's not that difficult to pull off in a somewhat active area--that's the part you can't control. But I do feel like most people will fail if all you're getting out of it is a number of days for a streak. Since there's a personal point to mine, I feel it's easier to do even on days when I want to be downright lazy.

Why shouldn't they allow 30-day Unknowns, just as they have in the past? Nothing has changed about the "positive" guideline, and the new cap on streaks still allows for 365-day streaks (which is more than enough to cover 30-day streaks). I don't know why they shouldn't. I think they should. But they have grounds to subjectively judge that it is not reasonable. Perhaps not explicitly on one point, but perhaps on multiple. I can't project my interpretation of subjective guidelines into the reviewers' minds. When we have an example of one that's published, or denied, then we'll know how that specific reviewer has subjectively interpreted the guidelines in their mind, and by potentially eventually find out if Groundspeak is in agreement if it's disputed. Would a reviewer publish a 365 day streak of Unknowns? Same judgement has to be made. Why is 30-days reasonable and 365-days not reasonable? If there's a region with 400 Unknowns, one might argue that 365 of unknowns is reasonable. A reviewer may quickly retort that no, it requires holding back on finding unknowns in order to save them, and may deny it because it's not "positive" geocaching. We can come up with any number of reasons as to why we may feel that a challenge is or isn't "reasonable", but all of it is absolutely pointless until we have concrete evidence one way or another from reviewers in specific regions. I'm only attempting to explain and explore how they might support a decision we don't like based on their interpretation of the guidelines - past, and present. Even then they have no obligation to explain their decisions. At the least, they will simply point to the guidelines, and support their position as authoritative, prompting us to take it to appeals if we disagree. Mine. I made adjustments to make the streaks reasonable for my region. I don't remember if I took it to appeals, it was years ago and I moved on. Denial based on "reasonable" is and must be entirely up to the reviewers' discretion, before appeals. The only reason I'm not for dropping the guideline (which I think is fine as long as the reviewers' judgements are also reasonable), is because of what I explained in a previous comment - the community grows enormously year by year, and the span of experience and stats from beginner to veteran grows likewise. "Reasonable" is going to change over time, and so cannot be static (unless universal standards are documented and regularly updated). So giving reviewers the right to make their own calls, while allowing their judgement to be called into quesiton (appeals) is, IMO, the best way forward. Do we trust the reviewers' judgement to be reasonable? THAT is the question. Single instances are only single instances. This would only happen if it can be shown that there's a signficant problem with many reviewers' judgements. I have no idea what that would look like. It would mean that there are enough complaints and legitimate concerns from the community about reviewers' interpretations of the guidelines (effectively a mass uprising) that Groundspeak takes notice and changes the guidelines. If they don't, then reviewers are doing what Groundspeak wants them to do, and GS considers the judgements "reasonable". On a small scale, individual reviewers could indeed lose their status if Groundspeak finds that they are abusing their responsibility, or incorrectly judging in their reviews. We can't simply point to single examples of denials or excepted publishes by individual reviewers and expect that Groundspeak will agree that a guideline is "too subjective". We already covered the difference between challenge and non-challenge caches earlier in the thread. Not going to revive that again.

Yep! And this is another reason for some of the post-moratorium guidelines on what constitutes an acceptable and/or reasonable challenge. When it comes to streaks they capped it at 1 year without requiring Feb 29. To HQ, I suppose after polling reviewers and observing general community, one year was determined the maximum reasonable period to have to 'start over' if necessary. But if I recall, that length for streaking is only allowed for general find counts, not with additional parameters, like 1 year of a specific cache type, eg. All this is laid out in the guidelines for challenge caches, and the reasons they chose the rules they did (with examples). If I was going for a one year streak, and I really wanted it, I might consider starting over if I missed a day; mainly because there are still thousands for me to find within an hour drive. But those 555, 1000, or higher streak challenges - those were one-attempts. They're in my "too hard, won't finish" List. Might find it and sign (because hey, geocache), but almost certainly won't ever qualify. And those are the ones that HQ doesn't want to allow published any more, for that very reason. Too many people simply don't want to do or find it. My streak cap was an intentional 366 consecutive unique days (Mar 1 - Feb 29) and I'm happy with that. Anyway, this has drifted to challenges - and those are what I'd call "statistical streaks". Regardless of logging ethic, it's a pure number analysis. One person's 365-day streak qualification may have been much easier than another person's, if their logging ethics were vastly different. Direct/competitive comparison will benefit no one in those cases. The person who did it more strictly can't/shouldn't say the other objectively "cheated" because (assuming all logs are fundamentally valid) they didn't. They just accomplished the same challenge goal a different way.

Do adventure lab caches count for streaks? They work for filling up yout 365 days matrix (not on project-gc.com but on the geocaching.com website) so they should work for streaks, too? If so they might help with honest streaks if you only do one lab cache at a time. You do not have to complete the full adventure to score the daily find. There is another way for a non-honest streak no one has mentioned so far. Look out for caches with an inactive owner and simply log those. No danger of your log being deleted. I've heard of cachers that found logged caches with an old date soon after they disppeared and deactivated. What a coincidence, the lobbook has been stolen? They found it only two days before it vanished or can someone proof the contrary? That's another way for an easy find if you have missed a day. Jochen

There is a guideline, which says that a challenge must be attainable be enough local cachers (whatever "local" means in that context). So a 365-day-streak challenge somewhere far away from any cache-dense area should not be published.

Challenge Caches cannot require Lab cache finds, but challengers can choose to use them towards qualifications, if they are allowed. For example, "find 1,000 caches" or "maintain a 365-day streak."

Atualização mensal da atividade geocaching no Brasil (1 de janeiro de 2021) Total de caches publicadas 7842* Não arquivadas 5118 Caches sem nenhum Found 749 das quais 368 já foram arquivadas ou despublicadas Caches aguardando FTF 365 Caches com 5 Founds ou menos 3908 Caches com 6 a 10 Founds 1550 Caches com 11 a 50 Founds 1830 Caches com 51 a 100 Founds 169 Caches com mais de 100 Founds 216 Total de Founds 119148 Cache com mais Founds 928 - Frederico Engel Caches com Favoritos 1952 sendo que 280 já estão arquivadas Caches até 5 Favoritos 1728 Caches com 6 a 10 Favoritos 91 Caches com mais de 10 Favoritos 112 Total de Favoritos 6895 Cache com mais Favoritos 495 - Mission 4: Southern Bowl * Estão incluídas as Adventure Labs.

QUESTION about trackable statistics on Geocaching.com Hello everybody. Unfortunately, after my GSAK database has completely evaporated, I have to track my logged trackables manually. Hereby I noticed a difference in the statistics on Geocaching.com which unfortunately does not open to me at the moment. In my statistics on Geocaching.com 1990 trackables are listed as "have found". To see when I click on my overview of "Trackables (Deine)" and then in the right box on "have found". But if I go to "Discovered it" on the same overview page, this results in a number of 2265 TB's. Is not a big difference but still 365 pcs. What is the difference to the official statistics in 1990Stk. The other 365pcs. I also logged and discovered. Why is the statistics different here? Do I have to manually adjust the 2265 now to get the missing 365 pieces out and then somehow log them? I'm really confused Sorry. Would be grateful for explanations. Also, any new TB that I as a "discovered logge" does not increase my total number of 1990 pieces? Ok, if I go to "All Logs" I come to just under 5,000. But it is also clear then my own TB's which I logged as visited on some caches also counted here. Interesting is actually but the difference of the listed TB's in my statistics from 1990 pieces in my profile to the 2266 listed as a discovered TB's under "discovered it". I actually think that the "discovered it" and the list in the list "list trackable items you own or have found" under "have found" should be the same. Or when is a TB counted in the statistics? My 1990 somehow does not change anymore !?

FRAGE zu Trackable Statistik auf GC.com Hallo Zusammen. Nachdem meine GSAK Datenbank ja leider komplett abgeraucht ist muss ich nun meine geloggten Trackables leider händisch nachführen. Dabei ist mir nun ein Unterschied in der Statistik aufgefallen auf GC.com der sich mir leider nicht erschließt derzeit. In meiner Statistik auf GC.com sind 1990 Trackables als „have found“ gelistet. Zu sehen wenn ich bei meiner Übersicht über „Trackables (Deine)“ und dann im rechten Feld auf „have found“ klicke. Gehe ich aber nun auf der gleichen Übersichtsseite auf „Discovered it“ ergibt sich eine Anzahl von 2265 TB’s. Ist kein Großer Unterschied aber dennoch immerhin 365 Stk. Was ist hier der Unterschied zu den offiziell in der Statistik geführten 1990Stk. Die anderen 365Stk. habe ich doch auch geloggt und entdeckt. Warum unterscheidet sich hier die Statistik? Muss ich jetzt die 2265 auch noch händisch abgleichen um die fehlenden 365 Stk. herauszubekommen und die dann irgendwie nachloggen? Bin grad echt verwirrt Sorry. Wäre für Erklärungen dankbar. Zudem jeder neue TB den ich als „discovered logge“ erhöht nicht meine Gesamtanzahl von 1990 Stück?

I'm curious, then, because there's a mystery cache with Challenge in the title and a Project-GC challenge checker requiring finds on five caches that have been unfound for 365+ days. It was published today but it doesn't have the Challenge Cache attribute (or any attributes at all for that matter). So is it a challenge cache or just a mystery with an unenforcable ALR?

If you did a 365 day streak mystery challenge, and a CO deleted your find on the challenge cache because a cache that you found (when it was a mystery) cache was changed to a "challenge cache" I would take it appeals, where I am almost certain GS would tell the CO to let your log stand. I suppose that if you were working on a 365 day mystery, and had targetted a bunch of mystery caches that became challenge caches that you might have to work a little harder to complete that challenge, but the benefit being able to look at a map and easily distinguish between a puzzle cache and a challenge cache and the ability to create a pocket query of filter a search such that it only shows challenge caches (but not puzzles) far outweighs the inconvenience it may cause to someone that chooses to take on a challenge.