Publication of 2,000,000th Active Cache

[+geocat_]

2,000,000!

 

I guess that means I have just over 1,995,000 to find and then I can retire

[+Crow-T-Robot]

Well, that didn't last long

 

1,999,876

[+Maingray]

Well, that didn't last long

 

1,999,876

 

gc.com server web06 has been stuck on ,876 for a while.

[+The Blorenges]

Well, that was all good fun.

 

Now will anyone at HQ be able to pinpoint which was the magical 2,000,000 published active cache?

 

 

MrsB

[+murrayegger]

Well, that was all good fun.

 

Now will anyone at HQ be able to pinpoint which was the magical 2,000,000 published active cache?

 

The claim is they will and will release the info later on:

 

http://blog.geocaching.com/2013/02/two-million-geocaches/?utm_source=geocachinghomepage&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=celebrating2millionimage

[Pup Patrol]

*

*

*

 

2,000,131

 

*

*

*

 

 

 

B.

[+The Blorenges]

Looks like Australia got the 2,000,000th

 

Overwatch #1

 

Now, don't all rush for the FTF...

 

MrsB

[+Markwell]

1,999,950 right now.

[+larryc43230]

1,999,950 right now.

Now at 2,000,147.

 

I need to get a life.

 

--Larry

[+murrayegger]

1,999,950 right now.

F5

 

At least all the naysayers will be happy that the cache isn't a Park and Grab or a Skirt Lifter.

[+larryc43230]

1,999,950 right now.

F5

 

At least all the naysayers will be happy that the cache isn't a Park and Grab or a Skirt Lifter.

How do you know it isn't?

 

--Larry

[+murrayegger]

 

How do you know it isn't?

 

--Larry

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=307763&view=findpost&p=5214002

 

I feel sorry for the cache owner, new to this and now his or her first cache hidden is covered with congratulatory spam. I hope the local reviewer will be kind to help him or her out.

Edited February 28, 2013 by murrayegger

[+Markwell]

The truly ironic part would be if they archived it because of the congratulatory spam.

 

 

Reminds me of the commercial where the Pepsi truck driver sneaks into the convenience store to buy a Coke, and gets showered with confetti for buying the "X millionth product"

Edited February 28, 2013 by Markwell

[+Markwell]

The truly ironic part would be if they archived it because of the congratulatory spam.

 

 

Reminds me of the commercial where the Pepsi truck driver sneaks into the convenience store to buy a Coke, and gets showered with confetti for buying the "X millionth product"

Sorry - other way around:

 

[+larryc43230]

How do you know it isn't?

 

--Larry

http://forums.Ground...dpost&p=5214002

 

I feel sorry for the cache owner, new to this and now his or her first cache hidden is covered with congratulatory spam. I hope the local reviewer will be kind to help him or her out.

Very cool! I somehow missed MrsB's post.

 

I'm also glad (and very surprised) it wasn't a skirt lifter or guardrail hide. There was a flurry of (mostly) park 'n' grabs published in my area yesterday by one cacher. Maybe it was a coincidence, but it sure looked like he was hoping one of his new caches would be #2 million. Not that I blame him.

 

--Larry

Edited February 28, 2013 by larryc43230

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Looks like Australia got the 2,000,000th

 

Overwatch #1

 

Now, don't all rush for the FTF...

 

MrsB

 

It's a 3.5/3.5 cache near Alice Springs. It looks to be fairly remote and a nice to represent 2,000,000. It has not yet been found but has over 500 notes logged.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Looks like Australia got the 2,000,000th

 

Overwatch #1

 

Now, don't all rush for the FTF...

 

MrsB

 

It's a 3.5/3.5 cache near Alice Springs. It looks to be fairly remote and a nice to represent 2,000,000. It has not yet been found but has over 500 notes logged.

[+Pink Paisley]

I wonder which will be the next 2,000,000th?

 

PP.

[+YaYa&PaPa]

2,000,355

[+UMainah]

I wonder which will be the next 2,000,000th?

 

PP.

 

If you think about it, GC46N4E is already no longer the 2 millionth cache. Any Active cache that was published before GC46N4E and was archived after GC46N4E was published, has bumped GC46N4E's ranking.

I'll try to be clearer. Say GCX123X was published on 1/1/2011 and remained active until GC46N4E was published. Then a moment after the 2millionth active cache was published, GCX123X gets archived, that pushes GC46N4E down to the #1,999,999 active cache. Every single time a cache that was published before GC46N4E and gets archived after GC46N4E, it pushes GC46N4E down one more spot. Meaning, there have probably already been 100+ 2millionth Active caches published as of this moment in time.

The Active cache number is almost meaningless, other than the fact to tell you that there is a lot of caches out there.

I'm much more interested in the total number of caches ever published.

Edited February 28, 2013 by UMainah

[+Great Scott!]

New goal now is to write the 2,000,000 congrats note log on GC46N4E.

Edited February 28, 2013 by Great Scott!

[Mr.Yuck]

1,999,950 right now.

F5

 

At least all the naysayers will be happy that the cache isn't a Park and Grab or a Skirt Lifter.

How do you know it isn't?

 

--Larry

 

For years we all speculated how the 500,000th, 1,000,000th, and 2,000,000th active cache were a dynamic event, and could not be defined. And two posts above me, UMainah speculates how it could be argued the 2,000,000th active cache will change every single time a cache is archived anywhere in the world from this date forward.

 

So the conspiracy theororists will say that they (Groundspeak) wanted the cache to be a regular in a location with a nice view in the Australian Outback.

Edited February 28, 2013 by Mr.Yuck

[+fbingha]

I wonder which will be the next 2,000,000th?

 

PP.

 

If you think about it, GC46N4E is already no longer the 2 millionth cache. Any Active cache that was published before GC46N4E and was archived after GC46N4E was published, has bumped GC46N4E's ranking.

I'll try to be clearer. Say GCX123X was published on 1/1/2011 and remained active until GC46N4E was published. Then a moment after the 2millionth active cache was published, GCX123X gets archived, that pushes GC46N4E down to the #1,999,999 active cache. Every single time a cache that was published before GC46N4E and gets archived after GC46N4E, it pushes GC46N4E down one more spot. Meaning, there have probably already been 100+ 2millionth Active caches published as of this moment in time.

The Active cache number is almost meaningless, other than the fact to tell you that there is a lot of caches out there.

I'm much more interested in the total number of caches ever published.

 

For this exercise, it only matters which cache was the first to hold the 2,000,000 spot.

[+6NoisyHikers]

Interesting to note that the cache owner has 7 FINDS and this is his/her FIRST hide.

 

If this cache turns out to be a good solid cache that earns a lot of favourites by being in a fabulous place, you know we'll never hear the end of it when someone starts another thread about newbie cachers placing terrible caches :lol:

[+Don_J]

New goal now is to write the 2,000,000 congrats note log on GC46N4E.

 

LOL, if it was my cache, it'd have been archived and locked hours ago. Last thing that I need is a 1000+ emails. I guess people just want to part of something. Does the guy who posts the 15,000th comment on a viral Youtube video really think that someone's actually going to read it?

[+larryc43230]

This just in...

 

One of my local TV stations has just reported that a bomb scare in Mansfield, Ohio was "caused" by a geocache. Based on the intersection mentioned in the report (Winwood Lane and Hollywood Drive), it almost had to be this cache:

 

Will I Be The 2,000,000th Cache?

 

No mention so far on the cache page itself, and no word yet on the disposition (blown up or not) of the cache..

 

I guess it had to happen somewhere, though I wish it hadn't been in my own backyard.

 

--Larry

Edited February 28, 2013 by larryc43230

[+Don_J]

Well, the cache is up to 960 notes. 1 extra reviewer note from France, 56 watchers and it's been visited by 195 trackables, despite the fact that no one has actually found it.

 

I also notice that the count is increasing at a faster rate. I wonder how many reviewers were sandbagging because cache submitters were requesting that they do so?

 

Edit to add: Why is a .1mi walk through a basically flat desert a 4.5T, and why was it raised from 3.5T after it was published?

 

Can anyone pinpoint the exact date that integrity died?

Edited February 28, 2013 by Don_J

[+larryc43230]

Here's the bare-bones news item, from the Mansfield News Journal:

 

Bomb squad deploys robot for geocache

 

Based on the photo, it looks like the cache wasn't blown up, anyway.

 

--Larry

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I wonder which will be the next 2,000,000th?

 

PP.

 

If you think about it, GC46N4E is already no longer the 2 millionth cache. Any Active cache that was published before GC46N4E and was archived after GC46N4E was published, has bumped GC46N4E's ranking.

I'll try to be clearer. Say GCX123X was published on 1/1/2011 and remained active until GC46N4E was published. Then a moment after the 2millionth active cache was published, GCX123X gets archived, that pushes GC46N4E down to the #1,999,999 active cache. Every single time a cache that was published before GC46N4E and gets archived after GC46N4E, it pushes GC46N4E down one more spot. Meaning, there have probably already been 100+ 2millionth Active caches published as of this moment in time.

The Active cache number is almost meaningless, other than the fact to tell you that there is a lot of caches out there.

I'm much more interested in the total number of caches ever published.

 

For this exercise, it only matters which cache was the first to hold the 2,000,000 spot.

 

Agreed. There's never going to be another first 2,000,000th cache.

 

I'm glad that Overwatch #1 won the luck of the draw.

 

It's not a run-of-the-mill park n grab, but instead a 3.4 difficulty, 3.5 terrain cache that appears to offer a nice view and requires some effort to reach.

 

It's in a somewhat exotic location (from the perspective of where most geocachers live) yet still fairly accessible.

 

While it won't likely achieve the status of Mingo or the only remaining APE cache I hope that it becomes a destination cache that will be on the bucket list for many. As an ambassador for geocaching it would be hard to find a much better choice. If I ever get the opportunity to visit Australia I would very likely be looking at travel options to Alice Springs in order to find Overwatch #1.

[+fbingha]

Personally, I think Groundspeak cherry picked the cache that they want featured as #2,000,000.

 

Wouldn't you?

 

Something scenic, something remotish, something big, something far away from Seattle, something a lot like what a lot of geocachers wish every cache was.

 

Even better, have it hidden by a newbie, highlight the sport for the newcomers.

 

More power to them. I wouldn't want an LPC or a power trail to be featured.

Edited February 28, 2013 by fbingha

[+TheWeatherWarrior]

Now everyone has to go and make a guess at the 3,000,000th cache date in this thread:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=307716&st=0&p=5209679&fromsearch=1entry5209679

[Trinity's Crew]

Well, the cache is up to 960 notes. 1 extra reviewer note from France, 56 watchers and it's been visited by 195 trackables, despite the fact that no one has actually found it.

 

I also notice that the count is increasing at a faster rate. I wonder how many reviewers were sandbagging because cache submitters were requesting that they do so?

 

Edit to add: Why is a .1mi walk through a basically flat desert a 4.5T, and why was it raised from 3.5T after it was published?

 

Can anyone pinpoint the exact date that integrity died?

[Don McLean] A long, long time ago...[/DonMcLean]

[+The A-Team]

Well, the cache is up to 960 notes. 1 extra reviewer note from France, 56 watchers and it's been visited by 195 trackables, despite the fact that no one has actually found it.

It's very sad that over 1000 people have felt the need to spam that poor newbie's cache. I find it even more sad that no less than 3 reviewers have also done so. They should be trying to stop it, not add to it. There has also now been one bogus find.

 

I hope the local reviewer helps the CO out by deleting all those notes and the bogus find. Maybe the cache page should be locked and a message added that if someone legitimately finds it, to contact the reviewer to get it temporarily unlocked so they can log it.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

Well, the cache is up to 960 notes. 1 extra reviewer note from France, 56 watchers and it's been visited by 195 trackables, despite the fact that no one has actually found it.

It's very sad that over 1000 people have felt the need to spam that poor newbie's cache. I find it even more sad that no less than 3 reviewers have also done so. They should be trying to stop it, not add to it. There has also now been one bogus find.

 

I hope the local reviewer helps the CO out by deleting all those notes and the bogus find. Maybe the cache page should be locked and a message added that if someone legitimately finds it, to contact the reviewer to get it temporarily unlocked so they can log it.

 

I couldn't find the bogus find log but I did notice the 3 DNF's logged are also bogus, two of them posted by the same cacher. I can understand the notes but why log a DNF if you're not even in the same country the cache is?

[+UMainah]

I wonder which will be the next 2,000,000th?

 

PP.

 

If you think about it, GC46N4E is already no longer the 2 millionth cache. Any Active cache that was published before GC46N4E and was archived after GC46N4E was published, has bumped GC46N4E's ranking.

I'll try to be clearer. Say GCX123X was published on 1/1/2011 and remained active until GC46N4E was published. Then a moment after the 2millionth active cache was published, GCX123X gets archived, that pushes GC46N4E down to the #1,999,999 active cache. Every single time a cache that was published before GC46N4E and gets archived after GC46N4E, it pushes GC46N4E down one more spot. Meaning, there have probably already been 100+ 2millionth Active caches published as of this moment in time.

The Active cache number is almost meaningless, other than the fact to tell you that there is a lot of caches out there.

I'm much more interested in the total number of caches ever published.

 

For this exercise, it only matters which cache was the first to hold the 2,000,000 spot.

 

Agreed. There's never going to be another first 2,000,000th cache.

 

I'm glad that Overwatch #1 won the luck of the draw.

 

It's not a run-of-the-mill park n grab, but instead a 3.4 difficulty, 3.5 terrain cache that appears to offer a nice view and requires some effort to reach.

 

It's in a somewhat exotic location (from the perspective of where most geocachers live) yet still fairly accessible.

 

While it won't likely achieve the status of Mingo or the only remaining APE cache I hope that it becomes a destination cache that will be on the bucket list for many. As an ambassador for geocaching it would be hard to find a much better choice. If I ever get the opportunity to visit Australia I would very likely be looking at travel options to Alice Springs in order to find Overwatch #1.

 

I think I read somewhere on the forums that there have been ~3.5 million caches published. I would much rather add the actual 1 Millionth, 2 Millionth , and 3 Millionth caches to my To-Do List (if they still exist), instead of the "First 2 Millionth Active Cache".

[+Don_J]

I wonder which will be the next 2,000,000th?

 

PP.

 

If you think about it, GC46N4E is already no longer the 2 millionth cache. Any Active cache that was published before GC46N4E and was archived after GC46N4E was published, has bumped GC46N4E's ranking.

I'll try to be clearer. Say GCX123X was published on 1/1/2011 and remained active until GC46N4E was published. Then a moment after the 2millionth active cache was published, GCX123X gets archived, that pushes GC46N4E down to the #1,999,999 active cache. Every single time a cache that was published before GC46N4E and gets archived after GC46N4E, it pushes GC46N4E down one more spot. Meaning, there have probably already been 100+ 2millionth Active caches published as of this moment in time.

The Active cache number is almost meaningless, other than the fact to tell you that there is a lot of caches out there.

I'm much more interested in the total number of caches ever published.

 

For this exercise, it only matters which cache was the first to hold the 2,000,000 spot.

 

Agreed. There's never going to be another first 2,000,000th cache.

 

I'm glad that Overwatch #1 won the luck of the draw.

 

It's not a run-of-the-mill park n grab, but instead a 3.4 difficulty, 3.5 terrain cache that appears to offer a nice view and requires some effort to reach.

 

It's in a somewhat exotic location (from the perspective of where most geocachers live) yet still fairly accessible.

 

While it won't likely achieve the status of Mingo or the only remaining APE cache I hope that it becomes a destination cache that will be on the bucket list for many. As an ambassador for geocaching it would be hard to find a much better choice. If I ever get the opportunity to visit Australia I would very likely be looking at travel options to Alice Springs in order to find Overwatch #1.

 

I think I read somewhere on the forums that there have been ~3.5 million caches published. I would much rather add the actual 1 Millionth, 2 Millionth , and 3 Millionth caches to my To-Do List (if they still exist), instead of the "First 2 Millionth Active Cache".

 

It's hard to say how many were actually published, but GC46N4E works out to the 3,482,029th GC# assigned. I have read that this is probably off by a little because some of the early numbers were never used.

[+CanadianRockies]

I think I read somewhere on the forums that there have been ~3.5 million caches published. I would much rather add the actual 1 Millionth, 2 Millionth , and 3 Millionth caches to my To-Do List (if they still exist), instead of the "First 2 Millionth Active Cache".

It's hard to say how many were actually published, but GC46N4E works out to the 3,482,029th GC# assigned. I have read that this is probably off by a little because some of the early numbers were never used.

As well, a fair number of those GC Codes were never published.

[+tronador]

 

Edit to add: Why is a .1mi walk through a basically flat desert a 4.5T, and why was it raised from 3.5T after it was published?

 

It's obvious from your comment you know nothing about Australia. Alice Springs is not "flat desert" the Macdonell ranges run east to west right through this area and the cache highlights a part of the East Macdonell Ranges, the highest points being 1531m above sea level.

My link

Edited March 1, 2013 by tronador

[+Bundyrumandcoke]

The McDonald ranges, near Alice Springs.

 

[+Great Scott!]

Cool view! But where are the golden arches?

[Andronicus]

Cool view! But where are the golden arches?

...And the lamp post?

[+roundcircle]

 

Edit to add: Why is a .1mi walk through a basically flat desert a 4.5T, and why was it raised from 3.5T after it was published?

 

It's obvious from your comment you know nothing about Australia. Alice Springs is not "flat desert" the Macdonell ranges run east to west right through this area and the cache highlights a part of the East Macdonell Ranges, the highest points being 1531m above sea level.

My link

 

I think I know a little something of Oz. Looking at the Sat view in Google, this cache looks to be about 200m from a suburban street on the edge of Alice Springs. I've not been to Alice Springs, but I don't think it looks like it would be that tough to get to the cache.

 

Perhaps I should nip up and check it out.

[+Don_J]

 

Edit to add: Why is a .1mi walk through a basically flat desert a 4.5T, and why was it raised from 3.5T after it was published?

 

It's obvious from your comment you know nothing about Australia. Alice Springs is not "flat desert" the Macdonell ranges run east to west right through this area and the cache highlights a part of the East Macdonell Ranges, the highest points being 1531m above sea level.

My link

 

My knowledge of Australia is not the issue. According to Google Earth, the closest paved road is at 1973', the cache is at 2000'. That's a whopping 23' of elevation gain. Here's a Street View image, the cache is just over the lower hill to the right of the dirt Rd.

 

 

I hiked 5.7 miles on Tuesday and had a total elevation gain of 1790'. Four caches were at the top of .1 mile long grades of 24-27% and not one was rated above 3T. So, I'll ask again, why is this a 4.5T?

Edited March 2, 2013 by Don_J

[+Bundyrumandcoke]

Fair suck of the sav Don, how many caches have you found, and placed?

 

As has been pointed out in this discussion, the cache owner has 7 finds, and this is their first hide. That makes them a NEWBIE. Remember back, in the dim dark annals of history, we were all, at one time or another, a newbie. And, as such, we all made mistakes in our D/T ratings, and everything else caching, and life related.

 

I for one, have been to Alice Springs. I was there in 2011. Even got a FTF on our travels, My link and the terrain around those parts can be tough. Its not just the actual flatness or otherwise of the ground, but heat, cold, ect, that can affect a D/T rating. I am sure, that over in the USA, the D/T rating can vary wildly on a particular cache, depending on whether it is found in summer, or the depths of a frozen winter.

 

Give the cache owner a chance. They have a lot to learn, and only time will educate them. Unfortunately, if they dont travel far and wide, the available local caches to find will dry up quickly- a situation I know too well- as The Alice is pretty much in the middle of nowhere, and caches can be tens or hundred of kilometres apart, instead of the luxury of tens or hundreds of caches within a few square miles.

[+wmpastor]

It's very sad that over 1000 people have felt the need to spam that poor newbie's cache. I find it even more sad that no less than 3 reviewers have also done so. They should be trying to stop it, not add to it. There has also now been one bogus find.

 

I hope the local reviewer helps the CO out by deleting all those notes and the bogus find.

 

This is history - and this is human nature.

 

This is the CO's "15 minutes of fame," even if it lasts 15 years (or at least until the 3,000,000th cache).

 

The CO is the one to delete logs, not the reviewer. But the CO would be foolish to do - then he'd have just an ordinary list of logs. The "spam" logs are part of the history of the cache, and this is a famous cache. People went crazy, as expected. Delete a bogus find? Absolutely. But this CO now has a full-time job "police-ing" the logs. Oh, the price of fame....

[4wheelin_fool]

 

Edit to add: Why is a .1mi walk through a basically flat desert a 4.5T, and why was it raised from 3.5T after it was published?

 

It's obvious from your comment you know nothing about Australia. Alice Springs is not "flat desert" the Macdonell ranges run east to west right through this area and the cache highlights a part of the East Macdonell Ranges, the highest points being 1531m above sea level.

My link

 

It's obvious from your comment that you didn't look at the cache on a map. It's also obvious that either the terrain is overrated, or the coords are incorrect due to the CO having very little experience.

[+Lil Devil]

It's obvious from your comment that you didn't look at the cache on a map. It's also obvious that either the terrain is overrated, or the coords are incorrect due to the CO having very little experience.

It's already been established that the coords were wrong. Two digits transposed. Looking at the new coords in Google Earth, I can see how it could be 3.5 stars of terrain. Pretty rocky in that area.

 

3.5 stars for difficulty.. now that's another question

[+The A-Team]

So, I'll ask again, why is this a 4.5T?

I can't figure out where this "4.5" number keeps coming from? When I look at GC46N4E, the D/T is 3.5/3.5.

[+cache_test_dummies]

If you are interested in discovering lots of trackables that you've never actually seen, all from the comfort of your recliner, then the two-millionth-cache is the page for you!

 

But be forewarned: in at least one note on that page the poster drops the F-bomb.

 

Hopefully someone will clean up that mess someday.

 

CO hasn't signed in in a few days - probably too busy deleting notification emails.

[Keystone]

The posts prior to this one were split off from a now-closed thread that discussed why the total cache count rose and fell on its way to 2,000,000. I felt that the discussion about reaching this milestone, and about the cache that took us over the top, deserved its very own thread with a more appropriate title.