> What happens to locationless caches if they are no longer included
with your 
> finds?  They will go away much the same as benchmarks did.

I think that's less likely to happen if they are counted separately, and
it would be my personal preference to see them counted separately
(which, according to Sand Dollar's email, will happen at some point).

> 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.

That's true, and I suspect counting them would lead to more interest in
finding them. But I would make two somewhat related arguments for
counting them separately from both  "traditional" caches and
locationless caches. First, quantity. There are just under 24,000 active
caches. There are over 735,000 listed benchmarks. But the second reason
is more significant: Benchmarks are only in the United States. You would
be doing a disservice to all of the cachers elsewhere in the world were
benchmarks to count the same as caches.

Steve
Team Tierra Buena