+teepeeayy Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Seems to me we're running out of waypoint numbers for caches. GCTxxx is what we're up to now. What happens once GCZZZZ is used? Link to comment
+welch Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 (edited) I wish the search was fixed Somewhere theres a thread about this, the current plan (last I'd read) is to add another digit. edit: Not the one I was thinking of, but this will work. Edited January 18, 2006 by welch Link to comment
+Tharagleb Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 I think we should stick to 6 characters and roll over to GD from GC. Then I can say: "What is the GD waypoint number?" and "I couldn't find the GD cache." etc. Link to comment
+geognerd Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 I know you're joking, but for those who don't know, GD is associated with geodashing. Lep points this out in the thread linked by Welch. Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 (edited) Sure, 'geodashing'. That's what he was referring to all along. Back on topic: I think they are just going to stop approving new caches when they get to GCZZZZ and maybe take a nap. Edited January 18, 2006 by sbell111 Link to comment
+Clothahump Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Seems to me we're running out of waypoint numbers for caches. GCTxxx is what we're up to now. What happens once GCZZZZ is used? We should just reverse the letters and start having CG caches, starting with 1111. That way, it will be a long, long time before we have to start adding digits. Link to comment
+teepeeayy Posted January 18, 2006 Author Share Posted January 18, 2006 If only the search function worked. Already addressed by Jeremy in August. Closing my thread. Link to comment
Recommended Posts