Jump to content

paleolith

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    952
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by paleolith

  1. Can anyone suggest the best way of finding the most/more active caches in an area? Reason: I have several travel bugs I brought from another state, and I want to drop them in caches where they have a good chance of moving along. Obviously I can get a list of appropriate caches in the area and then go through them one by one to look at activity, but that will take a lot of time. I could search for caches found in the past 7 days, but that would miss a lot of fairly active caches. Certainly I'm also interested in suggestions on other approaches to placing TBs well, but that's more a topic for the TB forum and this was a search question. And links to other discussions -- I searched but didn't find anything, possibly didn't think of good keywords. Edward
  2. I agree. A few weeks ago I hiked part way up a trail with lots of dry grass, and lots of ticks on the grass. I gave up because I had no repellent with any effect on ticks. I was stopping every 50' to knock off a dozen or so. I went back a week later with a spray bottle of 25% DEET. With lots of spraying, I reduced it to a couple of ticks every couple of hundred feet. Still a lot of ticks, but I was able to do the hike. I was worried about spraying that much DEET on nylon pants, but suffered no damage. I definitely intend to invest in some permethrin-based product to prepare for the next such adventure. One advantage of permethrin is that even if the ticks crawl over it, they will probably die before they bite. I recently found a tick crawling on me three days after I'd last been in the wilds ... I don't know for sure how it hung around and got back on me, but if I'd had Permanone on my clothes, it would probably have died. Someone mentioned Repel. Note that Repel is a brand name most of whose products are DEET based -- good brand, mostly unscented, low cost. To get the permethrin you have to look for the specific Repel product labeled Permanone. Permethrin should work on all ticks. The effectiveness of DEET probably varies a lot depending on the species, and there are many species of ticks. One other thing: ticks crawl up. If you wear convertible pants, they are likely to crawl up to the zipper flap and get trapped. They might find their way through the opening at the end of the zipper and thus inside. Or they might remain stuck there until you get in a car, and "up" changes and they crawl out. It's a good idea to check the flap for the convertible zipper regularly, and all flaps at the end of the hike. Edward
  3. Just yesterday I took a pass on a cache which would have required me to walk 100 yards through a field of nice, dry, mature cheatgrass -- the stuff whose seeds work their way through fabric parts of boots and scratch your skin and are the devil to get out. Then there's this TB ... Nun the wiser ... And this cache quardian ... Edward
  4. Oh, and to follow up myself once more ... why not make the required spacing larger for PMOC caches? Say for example that PMOC caches have to be half a mile apart. This would still allow them to be roughly 4% of caches in dense areas, but would prevent the phenomenon I described earlier, where a short trail was dominated by PMOCs. With such a rule, I'd have seen at most two PMOCs and probably only one in that area, and wouldn't have gotten such a strong negative initial impression. Edward
  5. To me, PMOC caches are a negative, not a benefit. Therefore I'm more willing to pay if they are eliminated -- or at least if the idea of semi-private caches is separated from the issue of web site benefits. I suppose (and this is separate from what's gone before) that I also see semi-private caches as having nothing to do with web site benefits. The other PM benefits, as I remember at the moment, all have to do with use of the web site. Makes total sense. But PMOC caches is just something stuck on for no reason other than to help persuade people to pay -- people have come up with other defenses, but payment solicitation seems to be the main reason. So perhaps there's a better way to make some caches semi-private rather than tying it to PM. Edward
  6. Thanks to tozainamboku for at least understanding my points. And yes, it's that emphatic "never!" that bothers me. Especially as an HMS Pinfaore fan. A couple of people still seem to think I'm in the "make it all free crowd". I think I made it pretty clear that I'm not. There are web sites for which I pay more to get less benefit -- gc is cheap. (Of course, mycomicspage.com is cheaper and far higher benefit ... ) Others thought my claim of elitism had something to do with money. Elitism has never, anywhere, any time, been about money except secondarily. Yes, it's easy to buy your way in on gc.com -- but sometimes the first impression presented to new users is "you aren't part of the in crowd". See below for more details on my experience. 4wheelin_fool's suggestion that PMOCs should simply be invisible is one I find good. The part I dislike is when it's flashed in my face and then I'm told "you can't see it until you pony up". Of course, then the problem about hiding new caches gets worse unless you set up a totally two-tier system, which probably everyone agrees would be a bad idea. But see the following paragraph. egami: I think you missed my point on #4 -- it's not the issue of saturation but of knowing where other caches are. Actually it's a problem anywhere there is a PMOC and I might want to hide another cache nearby, even at low density. But OTOH I withdraw that objection. There have to be real costs associated with the whole process of allowing caches to be reported on gc.com, so I wouldn't mind a rule that required PM status, perhaps for a year minimum, to report a hide (as long as you could then drop the PM status and still maintain the cache). I'd prefer (personally, emotionally) to see PM status as a barrier to hiding/reporting than to finding PMOCs. Nonetheless, thanks to the people who provided tips on getting around the issue. also egami, as for reducing traffic, I read that from members on the forums, not from gc.com. It's been used here as a defense for PMOCs. I did not intend to imply that it is in any way an official gc.com position. There clearly are plenty of non-PMOCs. Yet one of the first places I looked on gc.com had, I think, ten caches on a popular two-mile loop trail -- six of them PMOCs. On the average there are plenty of non-PMOCs, but that doesn't mean that someone looking in a specific location won't ever see a preponderance of PMOCs. And I do think that first impressions to newcomers are very important. (As I said in my earlier post, those PMOCs are now standard. But there wasn't anything in the descriptions indicating a temporary PMOC status. I'd also drop most of my objections if PMOCs always became standard after a period of time, say a year.) ncfinn: your comment wasn't directed at me, but I agree. I'll never have a high find count, because I really don't care about caches that don't take me somewhere I find interesting. Which of course is often different from what other people find interesting. Vive la difference. If everybody were exactly like me, we'd all go to the same place at the same time, and since we hate crowds we'd be miserable. Edward
  7. Oh, and of course I forgot one thing. I understand why hiders might want to see who has been visiting the cache page. So make this a PM feature -- one more benny for PMs. But make it a benny for a hider who is a PM, unrelated to the hide being a PMOC. Edward
  8. I can't read the listing because I'm not a PM. That alone should say there are problems with the system. Why I think PMOCs are bad for GC.com and for geocaching in general: 1) Loss of revenue to gc.com. How much, I don't know. I'd be quite happy to put up the money for the other PM features, and in fact I do put up money for access to quite a few web sites. But gc.com is losing my money because of the existence of PMOCs. 2) PMOCs smack of elitism. True, it only takes a one-month membership to get the coordinates. It's the smack, not the money. 3) Hypocrisy: refer to the PM page, where it says "Some caches are only available to Premium Members" and then just a few lines later "Do I have to pay to go Geocaching now? Never!" (yes, including the exclamation point). These statements conflict. I'd drop this objection if they changed "Never!" to the Gilbert and Sullivan quote "No, never! What, never? Well, hardly ever!". 4) In some places, I simply cannot hide a cache without being a PM, because there are enough PMOCs hidden that I have to know their coordinates to place another cache. Yes, it's true that in such places there are probably too many caches already anyway. But I'm familiar with one popular loop trail where one cacher saturated the trail with PMOCs (now however changed to regular). It just left a really bad taste in my mouth that one of the first areas I looked at on gc.com was saturated with PMOCs and I could only find empty areas if I were a PM. 5) If excessive traffic is really an issue, a PMOC is a poor tool to address it. There are much more effective ways to restrict access. An idea that pops into my head is to make it an offset cache, with the offset obtained by contacting the owner, who will give the instructions to anyone with 100 or more finds, and only to such people. More experienced cachers probably have better ideas. The point is that anyone can get the coordinates of a PMOC for $3 without demonstrating any skill or level of responsibility. Edward
  9. I may have mislead you -- sorry. I missed the part about using the "print PDF" link. I'm not a premium user and so wasn't familiar with it. My guess (I can't look at the JavaScript without being a premium member) is that the link loads a new page temporarily and does the print-to-PDF, so you don't have a chance to decrypt anything. Here's how I got it to work. Using Opera 9.10 under WinXP, clicked on the show all logs link ("view them all on one page"), then on decrypt. Then I printed and selected a PDF print driver, either Docucom PDF Driver (the one I usually use) or Acrobat PDFWriter (version 5.0). In both cases I got all the logs and the decrypted hint, and presumably would have gotten any decrypted logs as well. I didn't try restricting the number of pages, but that should work, giving you the amount of information you want.. Since you have Acrobat Pro, this should work unless something has changed in a later version. Docucom PDF Driver is $50 from pdfwizard.com. There's a good chance this method would work with any browser and any software which creates a PDF by acting as a print driver. Edward
  10. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that it depends on what browser you are using. I just tried a simple case using Opera and it worked fine (PDF had decrypted text). Try a different browser -- on Windows, IE, Firefox and Opera are all free. On a Mac, try switching between Safari, Firefox, and Opera. Edward
×
×
  • Create New...