SE7EN

quote:Originally posted by Scott Johnson:The best trinket to leave behind in a quality cache is a coin or two to reward the guy who placed the cache. These puppies get expensive after you start making a few of them (containers, note books, trinkets, and travel bugs, etc.). I actively discourage common pocket change in my caches. The "reward" for me is my fellow cachers enjoying the cache. For this reason, I ask finders to think of those who come behind them and please trade kindly.

quote:Originally posted by RedShoesGirl:How did you do that — make it fill the whole page!? Layers and style tags.

I fail to see where these "updates" have happened. Granted, I only skimmed the FAQs and whatnot, but still...

Nope. Place a thoughtful cache somewhere in the area. Place your recommendation on your personal homepage. Mention your homepage, with named link, in your cache page. It's really fairly easy to do what you want to do here. You just have to figure a way to do it. Some even simply mention a nearby attraction they like right on the cache page. I've never minded and I've eaten at some pretty good little hole-in-the-walls.

Life happens for a few days and I get so far behind in the ever changing world of geocaching. So now roaming caches are a no-no? Go figure.

Incomplete? I guess you wouldn't care for mine, then. It's all I'm willing to give out.

I know I look stupid doing the FTF dance, but what the hell... -or- Okay, guys, I'm hiding the cache. Make sure no one is looking! -or- 29 of 42 for the day. Here's a pic of "Nike," one of Team Kick ***, returning the cache to the hiding spot. Took broken McToy and contraband. Left Iraqi "memento."

quote:Originally posted by Markwell:But couldn't you do that with ANY information for verification of a virtual cache? Tis, true. I figure it's just a matter of time before some joker starts a site dedicated to listing detailed cheats to caches. Mark my word, it's just a matter of time...

My ZIP password cracker busted that zip in a blink. Passworded ZIP files aren't very secure because of the tools readily available. PGP 8.0 Freeware will allow you to wrap a file into a self-decrypting file, or SDA. I know of no readily available PGP password crackers. You can still use the exact same password and be much more secure. The problem is SDA's are platform specific. You'd need a Mac to generate one for those guys. Or you could simply encrypt the file and make the Mac users install PGP to decrypt the file, while having an SDA for Windows users. ...or simply set up a password protected directory on your own site. ...or have really obscure directory they can go to, i.e. http://www.my-site.com/jeurtidsjeu73mxhd8/verify.jpg where "jeurtidsjeu73mxhd8" is the "password." So, if the file inside that zip is the means of verification, even though I haven't been to Chicago in decades, I guess I could log it, because I have the verification file. (Don't worry, I'm not.)

Finally, an article that makes sense.

quote:Originally posted by Mopar:Have ya ever seen the http://www.beltsander-races.com/ on ESPN? I wonder if Tim Allen shows up. I especially liked his gas-powered screwdriver on "Home Improvement."

It's not likely, but I'm with DW, if it'll make our soldiers safer... Besides, how many days will it be off? Two? Three?

quote:Originally posted by flask:yes, the owner has the right to delete finds. this allows the owner to be certain that rules are adhered to. The cache owner has the ability to delete finds. This allows the owner to abuse the system. I think it is pretty much a given, and the popular opinion here, that the owner doesn't have the right to delete legitimate finder's logs. Now, the power is a different story. We have to make it perfectly clear there is a difference. Loose analogy: a police office certainly has the power to arrest people, but that certainly doesn't give him the right to arrest anyone without legal cause. The same applies here.

Nah, I'm up to date on my paranoia shots.

Where'd Sock Puppet's posts go? You can't just delete your posts. What gives? Oooo... Maybe Sock Puppet is an admin?

quote:Originally posted by welch:There is a difference between locating a cache, and "finding" it. I agree, but IMHO it's more like there's a difference between successfully locating a cache and successfully logging it as a find on GC.com. quote:I think this runs back to a question Ive asked before (and never got a straight answer to), What can a cache owner require someone to do to claim a find?I was under the impression it was whatever they wanted, but a another recent thread seems to indicate you need to have a log book... With the power that an owner wields, yes, they can dictate what a finder has to do to claim the find. Basically, to answer your query, "anything they want." You can do everything they want and still they can delete your log. At this point there is nothing we can do about it except ask TPTB to change the way it's handled. If we're lucky, Jeremy is working on a solution as we speak. AFAIC, it's not up to the cache owner to deny a find, but the community at large. We're supposed to be a self-policing community, not a group of little dictators.

quote:Originally posted by Dave54:Where do you carry all the swag? I've heard prison inmates carry their toothbrush in their butt crack. I humbly apologize for such a mental image.

quote:Originally posted by Sock Puppet:...the find still belongs to the cache owner. Huh? I see no lists of owners' finds. Finds aren't even listed on the cache page, logs are. It belongs to the finder, hence the name "finder." Also, the type of log, "Found It!"--the "I" is assumed, meaning "I found it"--thus the find belongs to the finder. That's not to mention finds are listed in a person's stats. Hides are listed, but not how many people have found those caches. A find is something the Finder did, not the owner. Other than the hide, the owner has nothing to do with the find. The owner owns the hide, but the finder owns find. The way it's set up, with all of the power with the owner, it gives a misconception of the cache owner controlling everything. I can understand your confusion. They hide it, but the finder finds it. The hider shouldn't have the ability to simply deny that someone found their cache. They should have control over their own cache, but not the ability to control "facts."

This illustrates a fundamental flaw in the logging system here at GC.com. While it is true that the cache owner has control over another player's find, the finder is the one that OWNS the find. Let me say again, the FINDER owns the find, not the owner. He found it, it was his experience, his sweat, his tears, his joy. It's his! The owner shouldn't have the power to simply deny the find actually occured; dispute it, yes, but not simply deny it by deleting the Found It log. In fact, here is how I would do it: Logs can not be deleted from a cache page. A check box for caches that require verification other than a logbook--password required to log a find and the password is something found on site. Owner can hide, but not delete, a log. User, date, type of log, etc. is still visible, but log text and pictures are hidden. Anyone can dispute a find. Owner can override a dispute, or confirm a find if disputed. Maybe even confirm the find so it can't be disputed. Disputed finds are removed from find list and marked as disputed. Moderators can override a dispute or confirm a find. Multiple persons can vote to confirm a dispute, thus removing the find, or to confirm the find and remove the dispute. ...there's more, but no need to list them here. I have no power to implement these changes and this is likely an exercise in touchtyping and nothing else. However, I still hold that the finder owns the find, not the cache owner. Owners on this site have too much power. There aren't the proper checks and balances.

"No more rules!" "This site is trying to regulate the sport and is going to kill it!" "Too many rules will kill it!" "Rules will push people away!" HELLO! This sounds so familiar. Only it was "Don't go commercial! You'll kill the sport!" Only thing is, this commercial site is, and has continued to be, the defining site for geocaching. Looks like those who thought going commercial would kill the sport was WRONG! It's the same now. Trying to create an anarchist's hobby is what's going to kill it. Creating rules, adjusting the rules to make them work, and sticking to the rules is what is going to make the hobby grow and prosper. What is needed is to closely define what is a cache, what is required to be a cache, and what is required to maintain the cache. Anything else is not accepted. It's your job to work within those guidelines. If you can't do it, then you don't get to place the cache. From the FAQ: "A cache can come in many forms but the first item should always be the logbook." Though pertains more to that other thread than this one, but it seems pretty simple to me. quote:Originally posted by ZBlack:It's not like it's an activity that really requires rules. How many rules are there for easter egg hunts? Hide and seek? Ha! Yeah! Like the rock wall doesn't require rules either, right? Don't follow the rules and help get our hobby banned from more public lands. Thanks, dude. Back on topic. There should be no requirement, experience-wise, to place a cache. Just the ability to follow good cache guidelines. It's always best to wait to get creative (read: away from the normal, accepted, everyday cache) until you have a few placements under your belt. How well your basic hides are doing should be your judge to experiment with something out of the ordinary. Just as it's always best to learn the fundamentals of any activity before trying to reinvent it. 'nuff said.

quote:Originally posted by TeamWSMF:Still dont get it, oh well... Nothing to "get." You want open source, go start your own site. If open source is so great, I'm sure your site will over shadow this in no time. I doubt Jeremy and friends will even consider opening their site to people like you. Don't like it? Do something about it.

quote:Originally posted by TeamWSMF: quote:Originally posted by SE7EN:Run a site a like they would want you and you'll end up like one of those _other_ sites. 'Nuff said. YEa running an open data project never works...not ever...not even these.. http://www.wikipedia.org/ http://www.openoffice.org/ http://www.winamp.com/ http://www.gutenberg.net/ http://gnuwin.org/index.html http://sourceforge.net http://countermoves.sourceforge.net For those who still dont get it, thats ok, seems there are more who do such that the tide will turn. -tomwsmf ---------------------------- TeamWSMF@wsmf.org Care to explain how those above sites allow you behind the scenes? Allow you access to their raw data? I suspect they don't. Nor should they. They have every to deliver you the data as they see fit. Everything about caches that you need to know you can get to. Your major complaint is you can't get to it and use it just like you like. We can get caches on our PDAs now, you don't need to be able to serve them up. We will soon be able to do pretty much what ever we please with the data. We don't need any third party as a warehouse doing what ever he wants with it. But that's okay, show us how much more smart you are than those of us "who still don't get it." BTW, you're not getting the keys to my house or car either.

Too funny! Yeah, those sites give away stuff, so does GC.com. (BTW, two of those sites wouldn't even come up. Money probelms maybe?) GC.com is free for the most part. So where's your gripe? Anyway, go to those sites and see if they will let you take parts of their sites and put them up on your site to do as you will. How many do you suppose will do that? But that's okay. Blame the people who think your ideas stink. Better yet, insult the very audience you're trying to woo. Good job!

No, I wouldn't. I'd be more inclined to create a website about it, or a page on my personal site, and post a link from my profile to the page, just as an interesting thing that people might like to try.

Why? If you want to have other people's cache on your site, why not just ask they post them? Why muddy GC.com and their hard work so you can ride on their coattails? I'm not going to grant just anyone license to be able to list my caches. At best, I'd selectively list. I might want to be on Joe's site, but not John's site. With your method, I couldn't be listed on either. That's not to mention the confusion to newbies. Not to mention the potential for abuse. No, I think it a bad idea in the extreme. If it were implemented, I'd advise against granting license to anyone who asks. If you want a local club with club caches, let your club members post them theirselves and stop trying to create a backdoor for people who like to exploit others.