Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Changes to Challenge Cache Guidelines

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Bangor, ME
    Posts
    6,061

    Default

    I guess they figure there is not enough of those to worry about. I have seen several however.

    I am glad they didn't grandfather locationless and they they removed them all from the site.
    I am glad they did grandfather virtuals so the existing ones could stay. I wish they just still allowed new ones gc.com!

    I totally dislike that on one of my caches they grandfathered virtual stages of a multi as being able to be treated as a physical stages and then turned around and went back on their word and took it away from me. But I guess some days ya just gotta go with the flow. In the end I guess they are doing what makes sense to them, even if we would do it differently.
    DNFTT! DNFTT! DNFTT!

    "The funniest thing about this particular signature is that by the time you realize it doesn't say anything it's to late to stop reading it..."

  2. #22

    Default

    I guess I wish whenever someone brought a cache to their attention that should be a mystery or a multi-stage, they would go and contact cache owner and offer to change it to the proper type. I encounter these more often than you'd think, mainly because my caching trips take me out of the usual caching areas that we all know so well here in Maine.

    Like everything in the world, logic never prevails.... especially in Geocaching!

  3. #23

    Default

    I just activated my own Whereigo and it got published this morning. It's in Portland and called Here U Go, Whereigo!

    http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache...f-2b80c97967e2

    Quote Originally Posted by surfacewarrior View Post
    thanks for the explanation and links.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •