If you could change one thing about geocaching what would it be?

[+Team GPSaxophone]

I am relatively new, but I would love the opportunity to see beautiful spots through virtual caching - if I understand what they are correctly.

You can't see beautiful spots by following your GPSr to a cache?

[+StarBrand]

I am relatively new, but I would love the opportunity to see beautiful spots through virtual caching - if I understand what they are correctly.

You can't see beautiful spots by following your GPSr to a PHYSICAL cache?

 

fixed it for you....

[+TrailGators]

**fighting the urge to debate, fighting the urge to debate**

 

My suggestion would be: no more micros under garbage cans

They won't get rid of those because some people like them. So what we really need is a super easy way to ignore types (categories) of caches that we don't like from our nearest cache lists, google maps and PQs.

[+JohnnyVegas]

I would bring back virtuals. They allow cachers to place new caches in the places they visit without going through the hassle of finding a person that would maintain their cache. A place like Ocho Rios, Jamaica doesn't even have a cache and no cacher is there to provide maintanence. I really like the cache quality rating system too suggested at the beginning of this post.

It sounds like you are describing some non virtual caches that I have found.

 

There are lots a cool regular caches not far from you, just go north accross the Golden Gate Bridge to the Mt. Tamalpias state park. This area has quite a few good scenic caches. Start a search from these coordinates N37 45.447 W122 37.033

 

Then if you north of San Rafael between San Rafeal and Novato there are more hills full of caches that will take into some good hiking areas.

 

Then if you go the north end of Marin around Novato there are even more good caches in those hills.

Edited February 25, 2008 by JohnnyVegas

[+ReadyOrNot]

**fighting the urge to debate, fighting the urge to debate**

 

My suggestion would be: no more micros under garbage cans

They won't get rid of those because some people like them. So what we really need is a super easy way to ignore types (categories) of caches that we don't like from our nearest cache lists, google maps and PQs.

 

Hey, I think you're on to something. And maybe we could ignore caches that fit a certain criteria based on the input from other cachers? Or find caches that fit a certain criteria based on the experiences of other cachers. Or maybe there's a greased up monkey that can do that too?

[+redtech]

**fighting the urge to debate, fighting the urge to debate**

 

My suggestion would be: no more micros under garbage cans

 

I can't really chime in because I'm new. I just wanted to chuckle loudly!

[+Harry Dolphin]

I am relatively new, but I would love the opportunity to see beautiful spots through virtual caching - if I understand what they are correctly.

You can't see beautiful spots by following your GPSr to a PHYSICAL cache?

 

fixed it for you....

 

Well, I was going to stick to OP's thread guideline: "What ONE thing would you change"...

But this is a forum suggestion... Prevent forum posters from claiming to 'fix' a post, when they're presenting their opinion instead. That was tired the first time I saw it. And borders on the insulting.

[4wheelin_fool]

It would be nice to have more icons to describe cache types (such as splitting the mystery/puzzle type up) and have a night cache icon.

Edited February 26, 2008 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

It would be nice to have more icons to describe cache types (such as spitting the mystery/puzzle type up) and have a night cache icon.

For me, it would be nice to have a little icon or something on each user's profile page telling me if they were a human or a reptoid reptilian shapeshifter or an NWO agent. A good case in point is 4wheelin_fool, who has visited our home several times and with whom we have also shared meals (Chinese/Asian/sushi buffet), and whom we only belatedly discovered is a reptoid reptilian shapeshifter and agent of the New World Order (NWO) grand conspiracy. sheesh!

 

 

 

 

 

[+team lagonda]

it would be that i am a rich geocacher..

[bogleman]

 

wonder twins powers activated - java enabled cache logging (click on the ring for the full story if you dare)

[+casey97]

a cache quality rating system with the cumulative results of that rating appearing on the page.

 

This should be every Monday, for a three day weekend.

[+TrailGators]

 

wonder twins powers activated - java enabled cache logging (click on the ring for the full story if you dare)

That's cool! Now I want to change my answer! Edited February 26, 2008 by TrailGators

[+Michael]

To keep this thread open everyone needs to stay on topic. PM or email if you have questions or want to debate.

[SpaceHiker]

I haven't seen this mentioned yet, I hope I didn't miss it somewhere:

 

Split Geocaching into 2 separate sports with separate sites and searches: driving caches and human-propelled caches.

 

To see an example of what I mean, open up the Google cache finder and type in Central City, CO. It's so hard to find a real cache to hike/ski/climb to in this beautiful wilderness area, and the roadside cache saturation is so extreme, that it's really making me sick of Geocaching altogether. Even many of the caches that appear to not be on a road, when you look at the description for the cache it will say "You can't take your car to this cache, so you'll need your 4-wheeler or dirt bike". Sheeeesh!

 

The human-propelled distance from the nearest parking area wouldn't even need to be that much to classify it as a human-propelled cache, say 1/4 mile for instance. It would at least separate 2 forms of Geocaching into a common-sense distinction, those who open their car door and sign the log, and those who put some human power into it (whether it be hiking, skiing, snowshoeing, rock climbing, paddling, etc..., you get the idea).

[+sbell111]

I'd make a rule that stops people from trying to change the things that other people enjoy in the game.

Edited February 26, 2008 by sbell111

[+artist2c]

Living in the NE in the winter time can be a challenge in many ways.

 

I would like to have caches that may be covered w snow and unfindable because of snow cover have a label that shows just that.

 

It is discouraging to travel to a site only to fine the snowplow has buried it... or that the snow cover is hiding the area.... or... (and here is an interesting thing we have here)... the cache is either frozen in the ground or the protective cover ... be it a rock , log or other... is frozen to the ground.

 

Perhaps labeling a cache site as being seasonal because of snow cover would help in many cases.

 

On the other hand... caches that can be recovered all year because they are not on the ground would be very helpful to this end.

 

thanks

[+bluemustangpride]

Tiny, virtually impossible micro hides. I like a challenge, but many go beyond that. I get so little time to cache, and when I use my gas or my energy and time to reach GZ, I don't want spend an hour looking, especially when it is rated only a 1 or 2. I will avoid 3-5 usually, but a 1 or 2 should be pretty easy to find for a guy caching with a kid.

[+tozainamboku]

 

wonder twins powers activated - java enabled cache logging (click on the ring for the full story if you dare)

That's cool! Now I want to change my answer!

Not a bad idea. Instead of logbooks there would be an i-button reader in every cache. Each cacher would carry an i-button with his cacher id encoded. Caches would record the cacher's i-button information and would also information about the cache would also be recorded in the cacher's i-button. Fake logs would no longer be possible and the degradation of geocaching would immediately stop.

Edited February 26, 2008 by tozainamboku

[+TrailGators]

I'd make a rule that stops people from trying to change the things that other people enjoy in the game.

The ideas don't have to be just what people want to get rid of. Even though those people are more than entitled to their opinions. The change could be what people would like to see added to the game and some interesting ideas have come up. If I were Jeremy and some of these ideas were suggested to me, I'd be interested in continuing the conversation with those people. Remember I said to say what you would actually say to Jeremy if you had the opportunity...

[+sbell111]

I'd make a rule that stops people from trying to change the things that other people enjoy in the game.

The ideas don't have to be just what people want to get rid of. Even though those people are more than entitled to their opinions. The change could be what people would like to see added to the game and some interesting ideas have come up. If I were Jeremy and some of these ideas were suggested to me, I'd be interested in continuing the conversation with those people. Remember I said to say what you would actually say to Jeremy if you had the opportunity...

I'd say 'Dude, why do you let people continue to ridicule the work of others and try to limit geocaching to only what they prefer?'

 

He'd likely give an eye roll and mention that it doesn't matter because all of thier whining leads to nowhere.

Edited February 26, 2008 by sbell111

[+ADKcachers]

I would suggest he go incognito so that he might avoid the suggestion-making minions.

[+TrailGators]

I'd make a rule that stops people from trying to change the things that other people enjoy in the game.

The ideas don't have to be just what people want to get rid of. Even though those people are more than entitled to their opinions. The change could be what people would like to see added to the game and some interesting ideas have come up. If I were Jeremy and some of these ideas were suggested to me, I'd be interested in continuing the conversation with those people. Remember I said to say what you would actually say to Jeremy if you had the opportunity...

I'd say 'Dude, why do you let people continue to ridicule the work of others and try to limit geocaching to only what they prefer?'

 

He'd likely give an eye roll and mention that it doesn't matter because all of thier whining leads to nowhere.

This is supposed to be a fun "What if" scenario. Just ignore the responses that annoy you and focus on the ones that are interesting or perhaps make an interesting suggestion yourself...

[+ReadyOrNot]

If I met Jeremy, I'd ask him to develop a SOAP web service API. The API could provide functions for logging finds, searching for caches, creating PQ's, etc. There would have to be rules set in place, but can you imagine the possiblities and 3rd party application possibilities? The big concern would be of course someone stealing listing data and using it for their own purposes, but a well worded ToS and a lawyer at the ready could remedy that.

[Ferreter5]

I would like to have caches that may be covered w snow and unfindable because of snow cover have a label that shows just that.

There is this attribute that can be assinged to caches that are not accessible in the winter:

 

 

I use it for any of my caches that are less than two feet from the ground because it's likely they'd be covered with snow in the winter.

[+Walt Jabsco]

Make the ammo can the only acceptable geocache container.

[+sbell111]

I'd make a rule that stops people from trying to change the things that other people enjoy in the game.

The ideas don't have to be just what people want to get rid of. Even though those people are more than entitled to their opinions. The change could be what people would like to see added to the game and some interesting ideas have come up. If I were Jeremy and some of these ideas were suggested to me, I'd be interested in continuing the conversation with those people. Remember I said to say what you would actually say to Jeremy if you had the opportunity...

I'd say 'Dude, why do you let people continue to ridicule the work of others and try to limit geocaching to only what they prefer?'

 

He'd likely give an eye roll and mention that it doesn't matter because all of thier whining leads to nowhere.

This is supposed to be a fun "What if" scenario. Just ignore the responses that annoy you and focus on the ones that are interesting or perhaps make an interesting suggestion yourself...

Hello? You might have noticed that the posts you keep replying to are my suggestions.

[+ReadyOrNot]

I'd make a rule that stops people from trying to change the things that other people enjoy in the game.

The ideas don't have to be just what people want to get rid of. Even though those people are more than entitled to their opinions. The change could be what people would like to see added to the game and some interesting ideas have come up. If I were Jeremy and some of these ideas were suggested to me, I'd be interested in continuing the conversation with those people. Remember I said to say what you would actually say to Jeremy if you had the opportunity...

I'd say 'Dude, why do you let people continue to ridicule the work of others and try to limit geocaching to only what they prefer?'

 

He'd likely give an eye roll and mention that it doesn't matter because all of thier whining leads to nowhere.

This is supposed to be a fun "What if" scenario. Just ignore the responses that annoy you and focus on the ones that are interesting or perhaps make an interesting suggestion yourself...

Hello? You might have noticed that the posts you keep replying to are my suggestions.

 

A request of "Don't make changes that will ruin others experience" is like saying, "Don't make any changes at all", which was not the question. If you change one thing, its likely to upset someone, somewhere.

[+infiniteMPG]

Here's my 2-cents and this could possibly answer a lot of concern's of others as it seems like a topic that comes up is the enjoyment people get from geocaching is from hunting and finding caches they like. Right now a cache has three basic "ratings" (outside of the attributes) that define the cache. Container size, difficulty and terrain. These help but they are defined by the owner, not the cachers. A rating system would help but not just a "Is this a good cache?" system. One that is more encompassing, maybe like this (with ratings from 1 low, to 5 great).

RATE THE FOLLOWING

Hide location – 1 2 3 4 5

Technique – 1 2 3 4 5

Kid friendly – 1 2 3 4 5

Description accuracy – 1 2 3 4 5

Overall rating – 1 2 3 4 5

 

This could be part of the LOG YOUR VISIT page and then compiled and averaged for the main cache page. Wouldn't take but a few seconds to answer this when entering a find. So if you looked at a cache and if it had several dozen finds and everyone rated the Hide Location a 1, you might not want to visit it if that is a concern of yours. Or if you are into unique techniques of hide or camo jobs, you'd look for a high rating for Technique. Same would be if you were caching with your kids.

 

As an owner you can flag a cache kid friendly, but you can still do this even if they have to hike a dozen miles and bushwhack thru a hundred feet of thorny vines and march along alligator riddled river banks. Having a way cachers can review the caches would help all the way around. Some people might skew the rankings but overall it would balance out to what it is perceived as.

 

And it could also be used to determine cache ratings to find the "best of" in a certain area when people visit. Add this to the PQ's, too. Search for 100 caches I haven't found near my home coords with a Kid Friendly rating of 3 or better and a Technique rating of 4 or better. Then you'd have incentive for a cacher to hide a unique hide in a good location.

 

I'd buy that for a dollar!

[+ReadyOrNot]

I'm seeing a lot of requests for a rating system. Everyone may not be aware (I try to say it as much as possible) that version 2.0 will incorporate a ratings system. From what I've gathered, it will be a positive "Awards" system, where cachers can give "Awards" to caches. And then you'd be able to find caches based on these awards. Sounds pretty cool to me I'd pay an extra $1/mo just for that!

[+infiniteMPG]

I'm seeing a lot of requests for a rating system. Everyone may not be aware (I try to say it as much as possible) that version 2.0 will incorporate a ratings system. From what I've gathered, it will be a positive "Awards" system, where cachers can give "Awards" to caches. And then you'd be able to find caches based on these awards. Sounds pretty cool to me

Sounds like a good step in a good direction but like I said, to get benifit out of it I think there needs to be more then "Rate this cache 1 to 10". Someone who loved guardrail PAG's would rate them high while someone who hated them would rate them low and that would leave anyone looking at the rating confused to what they're reading. They want useful information.

 

There are several parts to a hide that people put emphasis on. People with kids want kid friendly caches. I would rank some caches extremely great but I'd never advise someone to take their kids along. Same goes for technique. An ammo can thrown at the base of a tree at a totally cool location would get a high rating for location, but a low rating for technique. And I don't think it would take much to break it down to get it really user friendly and useful...

 

I'd pay an extra $1/mo just for that!

You mean some people actually pay for this and don't just hack they way into their account information? Dang.... <just kidding>

 

"I'd buy that for a dollar!" ~ Robocop quote

[+NetworkCacher]

a cache quality rating system with the cumulative results of that rating appearing on the page.

 

That covers most of my request, however I would add the ability to filter PQs on said ratings.

[+ReadyOrNot]

Sounds like a good step in a good direction but like I said, to get benifit out of it I think there needs to be more then "Rate this cache 1 to 10".

 

With the awards system, it wouldn't be a rating. I guess it all depends on what awards are going to be made available. "Unique Hide" would be a good one. It's very open for interpretation, but if a cache is awarded with that, there's probably a good chance its going to be unique in some way. Personally, I like any unique cache, regardless of the size. But what would keep you from filtering based on, lets say, "Show me all caches within 15 miles of my home that have won the 'Unique Cache' award and are NOT micros"...

 

Sounds interesting doesn't it?

[+infiniteMPG]

That covers most of my request, however I would add the ability to filter PQs on said ratings.

Exactly!!! A cumulative and useful rating system with PQ filtering answers a ton of questions....

[+infiniteMPG]

But what would keep you from filtering based on, lets say, "Show me all caches within 15 miles of my home that have won the 'Unique Cache' award and are NOT micros"...Sounds interesting doesn't it?

Very.... but part of it comes back to an owner's interpretation of things like kid friendly. What an owner thinks is kid friendly may be posted that way as an attribute because he takes his 15 year old son hiking with him every weekend. The next family that brings their 6 year old daughter along might think differently. But the only thing on the page has what the owner thought. If the first dozen finders didn't take kids but thought it wasn't kid friendly, their feedback rating would show that.

 

Same would be for someone that wants to go to unique locations and doesn't care what container is there. If there was a totally cool and unique camo job at a totally terrible location, it might still get a "Unique Cache" award. The person wanting to visit unique locations wouldn't like it yet it could have a "Unique Cache" award. Awards/ratings/reviews/whatever... needs to be broken down into usable information so the major different phases of "unique" or "good" or "friendly" could be defined and searched on.

 

Can't have too much information

[+tozainamboku]

What an owner thinks is kid friendly may be posted that way as an attribute because he takes his 15 year old son hiking with him every weekend. The next family that brings their 6 year old daughter along might think differently. But the only thing on the page has what the owner thought. If the first dozen finders didn't take kids but thought it wasn't kid friendly, their feedback rating would show that.

That's the problem with all the categories you gave - what is kid friendly to someone with a 15 year old won't be kid friendly to someone with a 6 year old, and someone who doesn't cache with a child may have no idea what kid friendly means. You'd have to be more specific than kid friendly. Soon you'd be having ratings for way too many categories to make it worthwhile.

 

The way I imagine the awards system that has been proposed in v2 is that groups of users would be able to propose award categories. These would likely be peer reviewed and once accepted nominations taken. The awards group managers would review nominations and award the caches who seem to meet the criteria - or perhaps the cache would automatically be given an award if it got a certain number of nominations. A group could setup an award for kid friendly and define what that means.

[+TrailGators]

What an owner thinks is kid friendly may be posted that way as an attribute because he takes his 15 year old son hiking with him every weekend. The next family that brings their 6 year old daughter along might think differently. But the only thing on the page has what the owner thought. If the first dozen finders didn't take kids but thought it wasn't kid friendly, their feedback rating would show that.

That's the problem with all the categories you gave - what is kid friendly to someone with a 15 year old won't be kid friendly to someone with a 6 year old, and someone who doesn't cache with a child may have no idea what kid friendly means. You'd have to be more specific than kid friendly. Soon you'd be having ratings for way too many categories to make it worthwhile.

 

The way I imagine the awards system that has been proposed in v2 is that groups of users would be able to propose award categories. These would likely be peer reviewed and once accepted nominations taken. The awards group managers would review nominations and award the caches who seem to meet the criteria - or perhaps the cache would automatically be given an award if it got a certain number of nominations. A group could setup an award for kid friendly and define what that means.

I thought they were just going to create a bunch of different awards. Then each person could give caches various awards that they have found. Then they would compile that data to reveal the top vote getters for each award category in each region. Anyhow, I like the idea because it should inspire more people to create caches to try to win an awards. It also groups caches so you can find the types that you enjoy more.

[+sbell111]

I'd make a rule that stops people from trying to change the things that other people enjoy in the game.

The ideas don't have to be just what people want to get rid of. Even though those people are more than entitled to their opinions. The change could be what people would like to see added to the game and some interesting ideas have come up. If I were Jeremy and some of these ideas were suggested to me, I'd be interested in continuing the conversation with those people. Remember I said to say what you would actually say to Jeremy if you had the opportunity...

I'd say 'Dude, why do you let people continue to ridicule the work of others and try to limit geocaching to only what they prefer?'

 

He'd likely give an eye roll and mention that it doesn't matter because all of thier whining leads to nowhere.

This is supposed to be a fun "What if" scenario. Just ignore the responses that annoy you and focus on the ones that are interesting or perhaps make an interesting suggestion yourself...

Hello? You might have noticed that the posts you keep replying to are my suggestions.

A request of "Don't make changes that will ruin others experience" is like saying, "Don't make any changes at all", which was not the question. If you change one thing, its likely to upset someone, somewhere.

That is simply not true. For instance, if two weeks ago, you wished for Wherigo caches, you wouldn't be limiting any one elses ability to enjoy what they have been enjoying.

[+Moose Mob]

Repeating the OP's request....

 

No debates please.

 

This is a brainstorming session, discussion of ideas is very limited.

Edited February 26, 2008 by Moose Mob

[+briansnat]

Living in the NE in the winter time can be a challenge in many ways.

 

I would like to have caches that may be covered w snow and unfindable because of snow cover have a label that shows just that.

 

It is discouraging to travel to a site only to fine the snowplow has buried it... or that the snow cover is hiding the area.... or... (and here is an interesting thing we have here)... the cache is either frozen in the ground or the protective cover ... be it a rock , log or other... is frozen to the ground.

 

Perhaps labeling a cache site as being seasonal because of snow cover would help in many cases.

 

On the other hand... caches that can be recovered all year because they are not on the ground would be very helpful to this end.

 

thanks

 

We already have that.

 

It's just a matter of cache owners using it

[+Mule Ears]

The ability to use the number of watchers (absolute or relative) as a criterion in a PQ. A high relative number of watchers (i.e., more watchers than surrounding caches) is a pretty good indirect indicator of a cache that people find memorable in some way--tough, scenic, clever, worthwhile.

[+edscott]

Sounds like a good step in a good direction but like I said, to get benifit out of it I think there needs to be more then "Rate this cache 1 to 10".

 

With the awards system, it wouldn't be a rating. I guess it all depends on what awards are going to be made available. "Unique Hide" would be a good one. It's very open for interpretation, but if a cache is awarded with that, there's probably a good chance its going to be unique in some way. Personally, I like any unique cache, regardless of the size. But what would keep you from filtering based on, lets say, "Show me all caches within 15 miles of my home that have won the 'Unique Cache' award and are NOT micros"...

 

Sounds interesting doesn't it?

 

Unique does not necessarily mean good. It could just as easily be unusually poor. I would find a 1-5 star quality rating on every cache much more useful than some sort of good housekeeping seal of approval on a few select boxes.

[+edscott]

The ability to use the number of watchers (absolute or relative) as a criterion in a PQ. A high relative number of watchers (i.e., more watchers than surrounding caches) is a pretty good indirect indicator of a cache that people find memorable in some way--tough, scenic, clever, worthwhile.

 

Really? I've found over the years that the more watchers the worse the coordinates... all those dnfr's looking for some guidance.

[+Packanack]

1. I would encourage participants to hide more , so they are invested in the game. I would give them a smilie for a hide. Or perhaps they should get a hug and kiss.

2. I would encourage participants to integrate geocaching into their other outdoor activities, such as paddling, biking , hiking, birding , scouting, camping, naturalism etc.

3. I would encourage participants to engage in forming social groups involving caching, such as group hikes, which some people seem to enjoy, which add another dimension to the hobby.

4. I would invest in a math book, cause it looks like I never learned how to count.

[+ReadyOrNot]

Unique does not necessarily mean good. It could just as easily be unusually poor. I would find a 1-5 star quality rating on every cache much more useful than some sort of good housekeeping seal of approval on a few select boxes.

 

What was your idea again? I think I may have missed it.

[+infiniteMPG]

The way I imagine the awards system that has been proposed in v2 is that groups of users would be able to propose award categories. These would likely be peer reviewed and once accepted nominations taken. The awards group managers would review nominations and award the caches who seem to meet the criteria - or perhaps the cache would automatically be given an award if it got a certain number of nominations. A group could setup an award for kid friendly and define what that means.

I agree that it needs to be made the most helpful it can be, but awards only give kudos to a select few. Doesn't give any help to people trying to rule out lame hides or cr@ppy locations or unique camo jobs or whatever they want to search by.... I would opt for some review/rating system that's applied to all caches. Edited February 26, 2008 by infiniteMPG

[+edscott]

Unique does not necessarily mean good. It could just as easily be unusually poor. I would find a 1-5 star quality rating on every cache much more useful than some sort of good housekeeping seal of approval on a few select boxes.

 

What was your idea again? I think I may have missed it.

 

Way back on page 1 somewhere... but essentially to add a quality rating to the cache log-in process and have that data compiled and displayed on the cache page. Others have suggested specific aspects of "quality" which is fine, but my thought was keeping it as simple as possible while still providing a hint of data. Essentially a peer review of each hide.... Just a 1-5 Quality Rating to go with Difficulty and Terrain. We see those ratings and don't know why the difficulty or terrain is a 2 or a 4.. but still have that bit of data that helps us make choices as we plan our day of caching.

[+infiniteMPG]

I thought they were just going to create a bunch of different awards. Then each person could give caches various awards that they have found. Then they would compile that data to reveal the top vote getters for each award category in each region. Anyhow, I like the idea because it should inspire more people to create caches to try to win an awards. It also groups caches so you can find the types that you enjoy more.

There are awards from FGA for best caches in each of several areas of Florida. Okay, one cache won in each area. So now how does that help anyone searching the other thousands of caches? It doesn't. And I think there is as much to be gained by giving bad reviews to bad caches as there is rewarding great ones. If everyone got rated or reviewed on every cache, then everyone would be inclined to make every cache good, not just the people who would be inclined to make their caches the BEST. If someone didn't care about trying to beat out the other 10,000 caches in their area they wouldn't change a thing they're doing to try to win and no one would know it's a lame cache until they found it.

[+Mule Ears]

The ability to use the number of watchers (absolute or relative) as a criterion in a PQ. A high relative number of watchers (i.e., more watchers than surrounding caches) is a pretty good indirect indicator of a cache that people find memorable in some way--tough, scenic, clever, worthwhile.

 

Really? I've found over the years that the more watchers the worse the coordinates... all those dnfr's looking for some guidance.

 

Dang! OK, make that a 'watchers' criterion and a percentage-of-DNFs criterion.

 

I tend to only look at a subset of caches, remote and/or high-terrain rating, and among those a large number of watchers is usually a good thing.

[+ReadyOrNot]

This is a VERY good topic and it would be a shame to have it shut down.... If you find yourself hitting the "Reply" button, slap yourself. Thanks!

 

On topic:

"Jeremy, a cache rating system of ANY kind would be better than is in place right now. And by the way, how did you get in here, this is a secured area.. Security!"