Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by metal-bijou

  1. Does anyone else wonder if they've been considered without their knowledge? Perhaps there's a list of people who will now never be asked. And I wonder if I'm on it. I think I have the qualities to be a reviewer even if the wish is not there.
  2. Here's mine as I'm travelling in India this year. 1000 year old Yoganandiswara Temple by california-jones | GC12RR0| India
  3. I know this thread has deviated a litle since but I'd like to add that I recently did a CM in someone's front garden and it got a favourite point from me. Runs and ducks for cover. Actually it was culmination of a great series of CM that was a perfect caching morning. This was not a trad but a puzzle and you most certainly had to visit the church. What was interesting too was nearby CMs that didn't stand out at all and as the churches were all close had to be conveluted multis for the sake of it. But then going to the church and then heading off was better than not. The experience of seeing nearly half a dozen in the same town was good.
  4. Yes, I have one, nothing to worry about. ... Have a nice stay in Munich! Now where's that likey button??? Thanks for all the great advice.
  5. There's a great facebook group in the Milton Keynes area and they are very active with monthly caching events often leading to night caching. The group is called "Beds, Bucks & Herts Geocachers"
  6. This certainly opens up a can of worms and as has been mentioned it is easy to identify the individuals. Now I don't like to get in the middle of feuds and I agree shouldn't smear others. I don't wish to here but I do have concern that somebody has pushed someone out of caching and are a member of the GAGB committee. Surely members who represent us need to be able to work these issues with us. That's not me picking sides but once dirty laundry is aired it would be nice to hear the other side from a member who oputs themself in the public.
  7. But if you happened to walk past the site after it was archived and you had a quick look and found it, would you log it? I expect I would. For a virtual the answer or requirement is still may still be insitu just the cache page maintenance was lacking. (perhaps that's not true in the example of the ball thrown into the woods ) Edited as I didn't mean is always in situ but is on the occasions when I would log an archived virtual.
  8. I think it's right to log an archived cache generally. If you've found it then you should be able to log. Especially where: The system allows it. I do sometimes argue that where locked for historic politics, they should no longer be locked. You know that there is nothing untoward about the situation e.g. it wasn't archived because it was causing problems locally. A problem with old PQ is it might still be there and you found it yet it was archived for other reasons than lack of maintenance. Gradnfathered virtuals are great to keep alive. I wouldn't want new ones and I think the death of challenges only shows the route virtuals was going and to what extent and therefore right to put a hold on virtuals. That being said, grandfathered virtuals are now generally of great value and have survived because they have that underterminable wow factor that they should be preserved. I would very much like to see a vote on the situation about getting virtuals adoptable. There was a very good point in the thread earlier where people move on from the hobby and dare I say cannot maintain through no fault of their own. P.S. (just because I must be in a biting mood), events are not caches. Yes I believe they should be in the stats as they are part of caching but are date/time dependant and once that is over they don't exist except in hopefully fond memories.
  9. Here's more about my favourite DNF/revisit linky thing. Well actually it's for a challenge cache about DNFs. but links to the right cache. Personally I like my friends account better than mine (JOSSS, Alibags, Simply Paul (caching under The JAMSfor the trip)). Another DNF challenge cache is: Did You Log It? (a challenge cache)
  10. And just to add, take this reply log as you will following a joke about a throw down for one cache. And I did use the cache for a challenge cacheanother time.
  11. Chirp, slightly differnt I think. Because of the nature of chrip I believe the finder has to have an alternative way to find the cache unless it's an unknown. I think it's probably more similar to Wherigo caches. These have polorised popularity due to nature, I expect a smartphone based one would too and would need to be an unknown. My logic is: more limited Chirp receivers and initially only from Garmin. Wherigo was linked to Garmin devices at first, now available on smartphones but importantly was always available on windows mobile devices. Ok, Wherigo was also developed by Groundspeak so that probably had something to do with that being more ok by TPTB.
  12. *clicks the virtual 'like' button* Drat I can't find the button, where do I log my DNF ??? How long do I look for? If I'm not with the wife and I have time and I'm not blatently being overlooked - as long as it takes. Ok not quite true but generally too long. I do get bored for all the reasons stated above but then it becomes a challenge potentiall. And I often have to revisit. Thankfully due to friends I was able to revisit a foreign cache during a whirlwind trip of Europe. It was a good detour with a rewarding fondue and a challenging hike up hill. The first time I looked it was under a few feet of snow so no wonder I didn't find it really. And such a good memory, so giving up the first time as with wife and personal safety (I'm not known for being personally safe so read here, "it must have been bad") was a good call. DNF - I log a DNF predominately unless it's been a half hearted search or someone I'm with logs a DNF. I really like Paul's DNF for reasons of access, tells future searchers what to expect or for the CO to clafiy and expressly state permission. One of my first caches was found by someone, they claimed a find and then said it shouldn't be there, I took exception about that at the time, especially as I had permission and the sign they quoted they had misunderstood (proably due to not knowing the grumpy farmer and them trying to stop a route in the future becoming a legal right of way due to precedent as they were kind enough to let it be used as a cut through). Looking back a DNF would have been much more appreciated by me as the CO. And if they signed the log they could always change to a find after discussing with me. I don't expect cachers to have to open dialogue with the CO as that's not what some people want to do, but using the basic approach first (e-mail or DNF) allows for escalation rather than having to scale back or upset someone. Don't worry, I know the debate about they signed it they can log it, I don't have a problem with that, just the way of checking access could have been "better".
  13. I have a real range of quality/typoes of caches hidden so I'm not one to realy give advice. I was pressed for advice at event, I think as I'd just placed a new series out. My advice is simple, place what you like to find. I read good advice on here before, cache setters are partly responsible for the direction of the hobby in their area. And this is so true near me where there are a lot of good puzzles and due to one cacher there as some exceptionally good quality hides. SO back to me. Mine is a range of what I think is quality, fun, nice place, nice walk, just because I can, why not, "really, here?" and "go on, I dare you". Well only a couple of the last a challenge and a diving cache. But then if you see my finds, it's the same, I find those types too; long walk of mundane in nice area, challenges, puzzle etc. Most of all enjoy it as if you do boith finding and hiding can be addictive.
  14. Definately personal preference of the CO and it's their responsitbility to maintain. I was grateful to receive a find it log from a cacher today who placed a new log for me. Yet I've been astonished at others who have thrown down a cache only for the original to be found shortly afterwards by another cacher. They had even phoned the CO at the time and she diodn't want it replaced as she was only 10 minutes away at an event. I appreciate any maintenance being performed on my caches except for replacement. I am happy to replace if I've discussed with the owner and I appreciate the reciprical. Sometimes it is obvious to the cacher on an easy find but other times it's amazing how easy it is to miss an easy find too. I even had someone drop my cache in my lap at en event as I had archived it not long before, that was kind.
  15. But Seaglass Pirates, I don't see judgement being made by GAGB. GAGB are passing on the message and yes hold on to the information for ease of any geocacher to find. That is where my inflammatory remark of utter tosh came from; my remark was pointless and to me was just a phrase saying I disagree (you can tell I don’t get allowed out much). A land owner has banned geocaching on their land, not GAGB. I assume the answer to your question is B. But that is only my perspective as outsider. But even if that is the case, does that mean that Groundspeak or any other geocaching hosting site should ignore messages that are passed through the GAGB? Your comparison to BSAC is to me good regarding authority but as an ex-BSAC member, I paid for my membership to get legal cover/representation. A diver doesn't have to use BSAC and can pay other bodies to get that legal cover. People don't pay GAGB for legal cover and therefore I interpret that as not an authoritive body. As an ex-member to a BSAC club, BSAC had authority powers over clubs and members in order to fulfil BSAC are also a respected knowledgeable body but that doesn't mean authortive when advising organisations such as the Army, unless of course an Army unit operates a BSAC club. The Army do utilise BSAC for social diving but still have their own qualification for a specific leader role that is advised by BSAC (and I assume naval diving and Army Lawyer).
  16. What utter tosh. MOD bans the placing of new caches, not GAGB. GAGB try to facilitate reversal of decision and GAGB get lambasted with decision. Surely the point is that MOD had to go somewhere and rather than Groundspeak, a single American company hosting a single listing site, they decide to go to an organisation to spread their message. Except they didn’t even do that and still GAGB get lambasted. I read this differently, very differently, GAGB had not choice, they were shown communication from MOD refusing permission on their land. At worst, GAGB has been ineffective but has not caused the ban. I’m reluctant to say that I would like them to have done more as I don’t know what I would have done. However I have written a couple of letters and hopefully one will go up the chain of command (no effect will come of them though, of that I am sure). I don’t believe Commanding Officers know that they aren’t allowed caches in their back garden, especially those that enjoy the hobby. This is the nub of the problem. On top of which, the MOD person will see the GAGB as a perfect means to ensure that the ban is enforced: without them having to ever waste any more time on this trivia. Getting it overturned at that level then becomes extremely difficult as the easiest approach from the MOD point of view is to merely brush away any further discussion. The geocaching representatives having accepted and implemented their decision at national level (as they will undoubtedly see it), thus neatly dealing with the entire matter. Most definitely. Trying to help here has potentially made the problem worse. Though I feel damned if you do and damned if you don’t. MOD representatives not helped here and that is to whom we should all be shouting.
  17. Teach me to read half way down and get frustrated enough to respond. Most prevent that in future. And yet I managed other threads due to not loggin on, if I hadn't logged on to see who leafy was I probably would have gotten to the end and relaxed. Oh well. Told you all I'd make a fool of myself.
  18. Oh I hate politics of geocaching and I am about to step in make a fool of my self. However: There is a geocache in the forest that is archived and LOCKED due to politics. It is safe dry and well maintained. It has full visibility of staff on location and permission yet due to a historic spat we can't log finds let alone have it unarchived and adopt the cache. I raise as once controversey surrounds a cache, it is harder to unarchive. Better to argue before it gets binned. LOTC maybe a sock puppet account but it is not a secret. Judgement has been made that leafy is official at the centre rather than the possibility of another sock puppet by someone wanting to cause mischief. To me this is as logical an explanation as the number of spats people have openly had against LOTC is vast and often been recorded in public. Ok this isn't politics but just a nasty side of caching. Fueled here by "outsiders" (sorry, can't think of the appropriate phrase). I was going to talk about local level reviewing here but others have done a much better job than I could have done. LOTC caches will be managed over time just like other circuits he setup have gone. I'm of course not saying these local caches are ony for local cachers discussion but... it might help. Drat I've potentially been biten by a troll. I know it and yet I still post. I do hope leafy is inicent to all of this and not a troll but I doubt it.
  19. I hope your avitar becomes the most downloaded one.
  20. I too would normally got for camel pack. I have two camel packs and two others: CP 1 - the bees knees but it's dedicated only as a hydration pack (bladder not removable) with no ability to use as a pack. Still the best for insulation and leakage. Rarely used now. CP2 - This was a strong bladder which is what I liked but rucksack is no good. Bladder died but that was due to a friend freezing it when full. Asda own - (looks remarkebly similar to http://www.ebay.co.u...=item19d6a2d6b0 ) - bladder cheap and cheerful, rucksack lasted a couple of years only, maybe not even that. So I guess you get what you pay for. I still use the bladder in other rucksacks and while cheap its lasted well. Blacks rucksack with bladder section - wonderful rucksack that keeps the contents off your back and allows airflow. I could have bought a bladder with it but didn't as my cheap Asda one is still going and if I replaced I would probably replace with a camel. The dedicated bladder pouch, pipe slit and mouth piece clip are great. Not a space saving rucksack due to the frame but perfect for a day caching. Can't seem to find online so may have discontinued. I was about to say it's only 18 monts old but now I'm not sure.
  21. I love caching with my hounds. But mine are labs and certainly easier than when I took a friends pair of mutts the other week. He has three, an old GSD, an old terrier of some kind and a not so old dalmation. We left the GSD at home as she wouldn't have been up for it. The terrier had to be carried after a couple of miles so would be good to take again with my toddler but I think I'd leave her at home really. And the dalmation was just hard work bless him. He was on the lead and has ben trained but what a difference to my lab. My first lab (Tia) nearly did as many caches as I had. When we had to put her down due to cacner at 3y she had done 1200 to my 1500. And I put the 300 difference to me doing caches away with out her rather than not taking her. In fact after she was put to sleep my caching certainly slowed.
  22. I got into caching to take the mutt for a walk. I couldn't agree more.
  23. I’m not sure deletion at all however I do feel for the CO a little too. Perhaps an immediate deletion to hide from future viewers what was there but then courteous to follow up with a quick e-mail to you saying why and discussing. I remember that the location was given away for one of my hides and I was disappointed so I e-mailed and asked to address that one part. The finder did oblige and quickly too but maybe I should have deleted in hindsight. As it turns out he was upset with me asking to change and he changed to just TFTC too. The resultant “stand off” was a pity really because we are now friends but it took a mutual friend to close the gap. I’m not saying you gave the game away with your comments or they deserved to be deleted. I see no reason for constructive feedback in a log. While giving that feedback in a log, perhaps there’s an opportunity to elaborate further with an e-mail to the CO saying why not a D4. It is frustrating to go to a high D or T to find it’s not. I visited a high terrain rated cache in Devon at a waterfall and assumed I would have to climb into the falls, so I did. I only to find my caching buddy had found the cache without getting the slightest wet. Still fun and it was down to my assumption rather than the CO’s description. So true. And that’s my excuse for not filling mine... An insult? I’d say not really. TFTC is at least thanking them on the web. It’s quick boring and well the list goes on but is it really an insult? I want to know a little more about the finders experience as a CO but that’s surely my want not need. I don’t feel insulted if someone uses TFTC, I’m not sure I even take it to mean they didn’t enjoy the experience rather that they don’t do the web, lazy, short on time, new, well the list again goes on. No, it's not wrong to be honest in logs - it's the best thing to do for the overall benefit of caching. If all you have ever found are sympathetically hidden caches in great locations, clean and dry with space in the log book, then you've been very lucky indeed. If a cache is sub-standard then it needs to be mentioned, else everyone who follows you will see the same problems. The log in question wasn't rude, it wasn't even negative, it just stated things as the finder found them, which is exactly what logs are for. Rgds, Andy Honest yes but I’d agree with trying to be considerate in the log and expand personally, which is the point I took away from Lieblweb’s post. Again, not saying TA wasn’t. _______________________ Drat, I kept forgetting to say in my opinion or appear to me... And sorry, I couldn't help laughing when I just googled "in my opinion" and found "Phrase idiots use to let others be guaranteed what he or she says is actually his or her opinion." or "Abbreviation for "In My Opinion." Use if you want to a) weaken your argument significantly, or make it known that this is not your neighbor's opinon or you ..." Edited as links were broken.
  • Create New...