Jump to content

GC20000

Fuzzywhip

By Fuzzywhip
in General geocaching topics

Followers 0

Recommended Posts

briansnat

+briansnat

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'd wouldn't be surprised if several people didn't try to submit a cache to get that number. The "winner" may be sitting on it, not even submitting it for review.

 

I recall one cacher who submitted dozens of caches in hopes of getting a similar landmark GC number. When he got it and submitted the cache it violated the guidelines and was archived.

 

Something like this can work out though. When the GC code with NNJC in it was coming up a member of the NNJC submitted a bunch of caches and held them. The GC codes were then adopted out to people who were participating in hiding a NNJC challenge series of caches. That was kind of cool.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment
knowschad

knowschad

Posted
Posted

Yawn! :blink: Yet another round number in the base-ten counting system. Why do we care so much about round numbers, anyway? Why is GC20000 more significant than GC19567? I don't see anyone geting excited about GC47040 (20,000 in octal). Hey, it could happen. Or what about GC4E20? We are a nation of decimalists, and I think that needs to stop right now!

Link to comment
ecanderson

+ecanderson

Posted
Posted
Yawn! :blink: Yet another round number in the base-ten counting system. Why do we care so much about round numbers, anyway? Why is GC20000 more significant than GC19567? I don't see anyone geting excited about GC47040 (20,000 in octal). Hey, it could happen. Or what about GC4E20? We are a nation of decimalists, and I think that needs to stop right now!
It's actually (more or less, discounting a few like S and L and ..) base 36. It's like finding your 4000th cache. Another milestone in the history of the gc.com game, I guess.
Link to comment
ecanderson

+ecanderson

Posted
Posted
Yawn! :blink: Yet another round number in the base-ten counting system. Why do we care so much about round numbers, anyway? Why is GC20000 more significant than GC19567? I don't see anyone geting excited about GC47040 (20,000 in octal). Hey, it could happen. Or what about GC4E20? We are a nation of decimalists, and I think that needs to stop right now!
Hey, wait a doggone minute! ... in another thread (what you like in a milestone cache), you said "Personally, I prefer a nice round number in the base-ten numbering system for my milestones. :blink: "
Link to comment
genegene

+genegene

Posted
Posted

Yawn! :) Yet another round number in the base-ten counting system. Why do we care so much about round numbers, anyway? Why is GC20000 more significant than GC19567? I don't see anyone geting excited about GC47040 (20,000 in octal). Hey, it could happen. Or what about GC4E20? We are a nation of decimalists, and I think that needs to stop right now!

 

I so disagree with this.

 

I would love to get GC2GENE and if I need to tell you why then you did not read the GC#

 

A small monetary value would not be out of the question if need be.

 

Now I know some of you will have some negative comments about that as a way to get a GC#, but I just see it as the cost of a container.

Link to comment
jholly

jholly

Posted
Posted

the_bell_dingers, if you want to be taken seriously here, posting a link to "RickRoll'D" certainly is NOT the way to do it.

 

If you wish to post Off-Topic, please do so in the appropriate forum. Thanks.

 

Yes, I have learned that with this particular poster I need to check the lower left corner of my browser before clicking the link.

 

Jim

Link to comment
wimseyguy

+wimseyguy

Posted
Posted

Or you could just put him on an ignore list and only know when he has made a forum post if someone quotes him.

 

Let's just home that the owner of this listing finds a longer lasting spot than the guy who wasted dozens of gc's to get GCXXXX only to have it archived the day after it was published.

Link to comment
Mr.Yuck

Mr.Yuck

Posted
Posted

I'd wouldn't be surprised if several people didn't try to submit a cache to get that number. The "winner" may be sitting on it, not even submitting it for review.

 

Considering a number well over 20000 was placed and approved in my area way back on October 19th, there were definitely people trying for that one. Not a problem I suppose, the "winner" of GC10000 did a fine job with it. I'd consider that waypoint name milestone much more significant though. B)

Link to comment
Mr.Yuck

Mr.Yuck

Posted
Posted

Or you could just put him on an ignore list and only know when he has made a forum post if someone quotes him.

 

Let's just home that the owner of this listing finds a longer lasting spot than the guy who wasted dozens of gc's to get GCXXXX only to have it archived the day after it was published.

 

And the funny thing is, he was still trying to pimp it here in the forums yesterday, if I'm not mistaken.

 

So, are you watching it? B)

 

And Bell Dingers, stop trying to make those of us look bad who occasionally engage in Rick Rolling people in moderation. :)

Link to comment
the_bell_dingers

+the_bell_dingers

Posted
Posted

Or you could just put him on an ignore list and only know when he has made a forum post if someone quotes him.

 

Let's just home that the owner of this listing finds a longer lasting spot than the guy who wasted dozens of gc's to get GCXXXX only to have it archived the day after it was published.

 

And the funny thing is, he was still trying to pimp it here in the forums yesterday, if I'm not mistaken.

 

So, are you watching it? :rolleyes:

 

And Bell Dingers, stop trying to make those of us look bad who occasionally engage in Rick Rolling people in moderation. <_<

I've only made 2 maybe 3 RR links. How many have you made?

Link to comment
Mr.Yuck

Mr.Yuck

Posted
Posted

Or you could just put him on an ignore list and only know when he has made a forum post if someone quotes him.

 

Let's just home that the owner of this listing finds a longer lasting spot than the guy who wasted dozens of gc's to get GCXXXX only to have it archived the day after it was published.

 

And the funny thing is, he was still trying to pimp it here in the forums yesterday, if I'm not mistaken.

 

So, are you watching it? :rolleyes:

 

And Bell Dingers, stop trying to make those of us look bad who occasionally engage in Rick Rolling people in moderation. <_<

I've only made 2 maybe 3 RR links. How many have you made?

 

Here, in these forums? zero. :lol:

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
Followers 0
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...