Mary and I have been counting down the days until vacation time, and now that time is just about here. Tomorrow we leave for a kayaking trip in the Apostle Islands of northern Wisconsin on Lake Superior. If you're a long-time reader of this blog, you may recall we kayaked the Apostles three years ago. On that trip, wifi hot spots were more rare than they are now. Nonetheless, I will be getting some help during the week from a fellow volunteer reviewer, so Iowa geocachers, don't be surprised if you see a new geocache published by someone other than me next week. I'll post some photos of our trip here and let you know if I find any cool geocaches up there.

Churning

If you haven't checked out the brouhaha going on in the Groundspeak forums about a pair of geocaches that I reviewed, you should take a look. Apparently a friend of the cache owner objects to the fact that I wouldn't publish two caches that his friend submitted. The caches were not new. They were simply renamed versions of his existing caches, which he had recently archived so he could resubmit them. When stock brokers buy and sell a client's portfolio simply to inflate their commission, it's called churning. That term can also be applied when cache owners archive and then resubmit their caches when nothing about them has changed -- not the location, not the cache container, or not anything about the hide. Most of those posting in the forum topic seem to agree with me when I requested that they should ask for their previous caches to be reactivated/unarchived rather than published as new caches. What do think?  And for the record, despite the title of his forum topic, I never claimed that publishing these caches would cause a FTF frenzy. I simply implied that this appeared to be the only reason for relisting the exact same cache at the exact same location. So, OK. Maybe I should keep my opinions to myself? ..... nah