I've really been riding the fence regarding locationless caches.  One min I 
like them and the next I don't.  Its interesting to read another person 
opinion regarding locatinless caches.  One thing I have noticed as a side 
benifit to locationless caches is they do boost areas that don't have a lot 
of caches.  I think I've only found two locationless caches and I actually 
only logged one of them so I won't loose any sleep if they go away.  What 
happens to locationless caches if they are no longer included with your 
finds?  They will go away much the same as benchmarks did.
Now benchmarks not being counted on the other hand I did and still do have a 
problem with.  Using your logic that I included below just proves why they 
should be counted.  Whats different between a benchmark and a virtual, 
web-cam, etc?  For both you must use a GPS to lead you to a specified 
location.

Michael



----Original Message Follows----
Why not then segregate counts for virtuals, web-cams, etc., as well?
Because all of the other cache types share one thing in common with the
"traditional" cache: You have to use your GPS to lead you to some
previously specified location. Locationless is the one category where
that fundamental characteristic does not apply. That is why there are
many posters to the forums who call for the elimination of locationless
caches altogether.

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com