Reaching one million Published

[+Matt_B_Good]

Well, Being mid autumn now here in the Northern Hemisphere Geocaching has slowed down but this is a world wide game. We are so close to one million active caches. There are only 64,595 to go. Surely at this point over one million have been published but active are 935,405. So 55 days not counting the rest of today are left. That leaves us with an average of about 1,174.5 caches to be published or re-activated to give us one million before the end of the year. Realistically that looks like we will reach one million sometime in January or February but there is still hope we could make it. Just need a few days that are much greater than the average.

Edited November 7, 2009 by Matt_B_Good

[+popokiiti]

When we reach that magic million....how about a Global Flash Mob to celebrate?

[+Do-doille]

Last summer we have maintain an average of 800 new caches per day. since mid September it is slowing down and we are now below 600 per day. Expect to hit 1 000 000 in late February or early March. No earlier.

[+briansnat]

We made one million published caches a while ago.

[Keystone]

So far in November, I've archived 50 caches, and published 56. I need to find about ten more missing caches to archive in order to get back on schedule. I've called upon all the other reviewers to do the same. With some effort and a bit of luck, we should reach our goal of 900,000 active caches by the end of the year.

[+Too Tall John]

So far in November, I've archived 50 caches, and published 56. I need to find about ten more missing caches to archive in order to get back on schedule. I've called upon all the other reviewers to do the same. With some effort and a bit of luck, we should reach our goal of 900,000 active caches by the end of the year.

I could dig around and find a few for ya to archive.

 

Of course, you'd be cutting into NH Zamboni's quotas...

[+StarBrand]

We are well over 1 million published. I think you mean 1 million active. That will an elusive target.

 

I may archive a few when we are on the brink - just to mess with somebody.

[GOF and Bacall]

Well, Being mid autumn now here in the Northern Hemisphere Geocaching has slowed down but this is a world wide game. We are so close to one million active caches. There are only 64,595 to go. Surely at this point over one million have been published but active are 935,405. So 55 days not counting the rest of today are left. That leaves us with an average of about 1,174.5 caches to be published or re-activated to give us one million before the end of the year. Realistically that looks like we will reach one million sometime in January or February but there is still hope we could make it. Just need a few days that are much greater than the average.

[+Matt_B_Good]

We are well over 1 million published. I think you mean 1 million active. That will an elusive target.

 

I may archive a few when we are on the brink - just to mess with somebody.

 

I made an error on the title. I see no way to fix it. Sorry for the error.

[+Matt_B_Good]

So far in November, I've archived 50 caches, and published 56. I need to find about ten more missing caches to archive in order to get back on schedule. I've called upon all the other reviewers to do the same. With some effort and a bit of luck, we should reach our goal of 900,000 active caches by the end of the year.

What? I mean no disrespect but that is crazy. I don't understand that mentality. I mean sure you don't want people looking for caches that aren't there or are in very bad shape but don't you want to see more caches? Maybe you need more reviewers but I would think you would want the site to grow not shrink? Then again maybe your trying to be funny and I didn't pick up on it. I don't know your comment just seems odd too me.

[GOF and Bacall]

So far in November, I've archived 50 caches, and published 56. I need to find about ten more missing caches to archive in order to get back on schedule. I've called upon all the other reviewers to do the same. With some effort and a bit of luck, we should reach our goal of 900,000 active caches by the end of the year.

What? I mean no disrespect but that is crazy. I don't understand that mentality. I mean sure you don't want people looking for caches that aren't there or are in very bad shape but don't you want to see more caches? Maybe you need more reviewers but I would think you would want the site to grow not shrink? Then again maybe your trying to be funny and I didn't pick up on it. I don't know your comment just seems odd too me.

 

What's the matter? Your leg come off in his hand?

[+welch]

When we reach that magic million....how about a Global Flash Mob to celebrate?

You want to celebrate, but only for 15 minutes?

[+gorillagal]

So far in November, I've archived 50 caches, and published 56. I need to find about ten more missing caches to archive in order to get back on schedule. I've called upon all the other reviewers to do the same. With some effort and a bit of luck, we should reach our goal of 900,000 active caches by the end of the year.

What? I mean no disrespect but that is crazy. I don't understand that mentality. I mean sure you don't want people looking for caches that aren't there or are in very bad shape but don't you want to see more caches? Maybe you need more reviewers but I would think you would want the site to grow not shrink? Then again maybe your trying to be funny and I didn't pick up on it. I don't know your comment just seems odd too me.

 

What's the matter? Your leg come off in his hand?

[+Kyle98632]

"Maybe you need more reviewers but I would think you would want the site to grow not shrink?"

 

Wouldnt we have better growth if the old caches with owners who are MIA are removed if they are not there and new ones come up in its place? I would think that is more meaningful growth in actual caches rather than an artifical number.

[+Matt_B_Good]

So far in November, I've archived 50 caches, and published 56. I need to find about ten more missing caches to archive in order to get back on schedule. I've called upon all the other reviewers to do the same. With some effort and a bit of luck, we should reach our goal of 900,000 active caches by the end of the year.

What? I mean no disrespect but that is crazy. I don't understand that mentality. I mean sure you don't want people looking for caches that aren't there or are in very bad shape but don't you want to see more caches? Maybe you need more reviewers but I would think you would want the site to grow not shrink? Then again maybe your trying to be funny and I didn't pick up on it. I don't know your comment just seems odd too me.

 

What's the matter? Your leg come off in his hand?

 

A tone is really hard to perceive in a mediated form of communication like this forum. I'll just assume he meant it as a joke but really it is hard to perceive how someone means any statement so on a forum the best advice is to not take it very seriously especially since one's perception may be very different from the intent.

[GOF and Bacall]

So far in November, I've archived 50 caches, and published 56. I need to find about ten more missing caches to archive in order to get back on schedule. I've called upon all the other reviewers to do the same. With some effort and a bit of luck, we should reach our goal of 900,000 active caches by the end of the year.

What? I mean no disrespect but that is crazy. I don't understand that mentality. I mean sure you don't want people looking for caches that aren't there or are in very bad shape but don't you want to see more caches? Maybe you need more reviewers but I would think you would want the site to grow not shrink? Then again maybe your trying to be funny and I didn't pick up on it. I don't know your comment just seems odd too me.

 

What's the matter? Your leg come off in his hand?

 

A tone is really hard to perceive in a mediated form of communication like this forum. I'll just assume he meant it as a joke but really it is hard to perceive how someone means any statement so on a forum the best advice is to not take it very seriously especially since one's perception may be very different from the intent.

 

I know what you mean. I was serious. Are you OK? Did you get a tourniquet on quick enough? Get that "I've fallen and I can't reach my beer!" button pushed without too much delay? I'll assume you survived as you are still posting and I have never heard of a ghost haunting a website.