Posts posted by RPW
There is a very simple solution to that ...... DONT HUNT THEM if you dont like em ... not every cache has something that you are going to like , not every location will you like ... some you can look at the cache page and just say no to ... No place is it written that one has to find every cache placed ... Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesh I just don't understand why people feel they have to degrade put down or *insert 4 letter word here* about something they can simply avoid if they choose to .
I think you indirectly answered your own question -- information about cache quality and desirability is not something that can always be found via the cache page. So all too often you actually have to go to the cache site (spending money and time) only to discover that it is a cache that you do not wish to look for.
Also some people worry about the overall respectability of Geocaching in the public's eyes. Having a newspaper report that geocaching is all about stopping on busy and dangerous highways in order to morbidly look at roadside accident sites would not be very conducive to the public appreciating our hobby, eh? Fortunately I do not think that any newspaper has reported such ... but it could happen.
My crashes (all three OSes, all browsers) are occuring immediately after I press the "Find caches..." link from my geocaching page. I don't even have a chance to look at or enter routes. I actually haven't used this feature in several months so, maybe, I have old data that is interferring with the program? Anyway I will try it out again later today on the assumption that new software will be in place.
Also fails for me using IE7 on a WinXP machine. Am I the only one seeing this problem? I would have thought that there would be more complaints.
It doesn't seem like the other topics cover this but if one does then please redirect this one and/or close it.
For the past several day in the "find caches along route" I keep getting the following error. Systems are Linux (firefox) and Mac (firefox and safari):
Server Error in '/' Application.
Index and length must refer to a location within the string. Parameter name: length
Line 35: <td><%# ConvertToDescr(Databinder.Eval(Container.DataItem, "Descr"), 60) %></td>
A lot of the screen dump is cut out of the above. Any idea of what is going on? Thanks.
Or, if you want lots of replies, you could post in the MiGO forums (http://www.mi-geocaching.org). They are very active and have not only on-topic messages (e.g., "how to reset a Garmin for the new DST") as well as many off-topic message (e.g., "this place needs a joke"). As an added bonus you don't have to hang around us Hoosiers. :-)
I suspect that what raised PureCDN's ire was not that his post was, correctly, put anonymously on this thread but that Criminal then went to the actual cache page and posted a note about PureCDN being a fake finder. Personally I think that this is in bad taste. Yes, let's make anonymous comments about fake finders. They are often funny and informative. But pointing out the fake find to person him/herself? I just don't think that this is a good idea. It turns the point of the thread from anonymous humor to chastising the finder. Of course Criminal is entitled to his own opinion and certainly has the right to post notes on cache pages.
It is interesting what people focus on when reading skullznbones reasons. As far as I can tell they seem to break down into three parts. At the risk of cutting away too much from his comments, here is the bulleted version.
1) Due to ... Home Land Security, I am disabling [urban] caches .... [because of] suspicion of foul play.
2) ... protesting ... that the local reviewer MIGHT be ... issuing Coords to personal compatriots ...
3) ... promoting quality caches ... Saturation caching ... achieves nothing.
Three reasons. And which is most important? I'd choose #3 myself (promote quality caches) but that is just my bias.
Too bad you don't still work for Purdue. Then you could go into work like the rest of us.
Hah! Purdue just closed for 24 hours. Noon today (Tue) through noon Wed. All of us old-timers are standing around and wondering when the last time the campus closed down. It is probably a once in a decade event.
And, no, I probably won't go out geocaching in this weather. Too much snow to see the caches.
Anyone going GEOCACHING in INDIANA today? I seriously doubt that I will even though I don't have to go into work today. Indeed, I'm not at work today due to a massive winter storm that's shut down the company for the first time in the six-plus years that I've been there. ...
Too bad you don't still work for Purdue. Then you could go into work like the rest of us.
In the meantime why don't you go hide that cache in Benton county. We could call it "Mad Scientist Found Frozen in Car".
I say do it! Mark is a very easy guy to talk to/work with.
I also bet that he would not be too disappointed to give up maintaing a cache 200 miles aways either.
In a private email with Deermark, I have offered to put out a memorial cache near that location if he ever decides to give up the Boilermaker cache. I do not wish to pressure him in doing so. He has good reasons for keeping the BM cache active. I do not agree with the reasons but I do respect them. As in any good democracy we have "agreed to disagree."
I have had my say in this matter and will now drop out of the topic unless something really interesting comes up.
I think I know why ...
How about sending each of us private email then? It would be about 20 emails but, heck, cut-n-paste is your friend.
Yesterday, en route to a Super Bowl party (go Colts!) I stopped by the revived cache. As would be expected from Deermark, the cache is well done -- a wide bison tube plus a special "extra" as a bonus. Never-the-less to me it simply isn't the same cache.
I fondly remember way back when Kelly and I first found the cache almost three years ago. As we drove towards the cache we could see it from 1/2 mile away -- our anticipation mounted as we got ever closer. (see
my picture or the web page for idea of how isolated that one tree was from the rest of the indiana corn/soy fields. I also fondly remember the race that my wife's and my twin travel bugs had from San Diego back to the Boilermaker cache. It was back and forth for a while on which TB was crossing the country the quickest. Hers got close but then was re-routed down south. My TB got kidnapped by an anti-Purdue zealot but eventually did make it to the cache only to disappear again into never-never-land.
Ah memories! And certainly history -- we should never forget it. I would have preferred, like CyBret mentioned, a new cache memorializing the old Boilermaker cache instead this reincarnation of a log-only cache on yet another Indiana country road. But I suppose I should have come up with that idea several months ago when Kelly and I were out unsuccessfully hunting for a replacement spot for the Boilermaker cache. Anyway it 'taint my cache and so I'll just accept it for what it has become.
Let's see. A bison tube in the midst of no-where being maintained by a person 100+ miles away. Sounds like a winner of a cache.
Now I'm all in favor of keeping up tradition but there are times when things should simply be let go. That old football team full of memories moving off to a new city (Baltimore Colts, anyone?) The old grade school being made into a community center. The family Christmas holiday once held at Grandma and Grandpa's but now hosted by sister Sally. If it wasn't for change then we would never see the new. If it wasn't for the old moving on then we would never have the new becoming old and venerated.
If was anyone beside Deermark doing the maintaining then I could see this rapidly falling apart. But at least we know that he'll keep on top of the email logs and will occassionally get up here to change out the paper log or replace the tube when it goes missing. But still ... I think that the Boilermaker cache should have be left to rest in peace. It was a good cache in a nice old tree. Now it is just a tube on the ground.
I have a bad habit of simplifying things too much and for that I apologize but I would like to make one simple point. If a geocache is there, then I can be there.....right? Permission has already been granted, that is if we as the cache hiders are following the rules.
IMHO, the above is the funny part of the last couple posts in this thread and not (sorry LeadDog & EDP) the "cave man" saying.
I am willing to bet that 75% of the caches do not have explictly granted permission. As we all know geocaching.com does not actually check for permission (except in some areas such as Indiana state parks) and thus every time we look for a cache we have to ask ourselves "should we be here?" I've passed up several caches simply because they didn't seem to be on public property.
Anyway, the last several posts (including mine) don't really pertain to the idea of "stealth camping" however I suppose since the topic is so old then we can hijack it.
... not another cold wet shopping bag!"
Actually I've never found a cache that is a cold wet shopping bag. All sorts of other containers, to be sure.
Anyway I'll agree with TrailGators -- Lamppost caches. Seen one, seen them all. And they are very annoying to find without attracting a bunch of non-cachers.
Also agree with Team Turtle -- just another cache for the sake of a cache. Ugh. Put at least some thought into it. These days, unless I am desperate, I'll go by the number of lines in the cache description because people who tend to make an interesting description (or at least a wordy one) tend to have interesting caches.
Too bad 4damFam never did more with their It's all about the numbers series of caches. Then you could hop over to Indy to get those smilies.
I'll agree with Jamie -- most 5/5s are not really 5/5s. Just the other day I was reading a cache description of a 5/5 that basically said that it was an extremely challenging cache that required the person to be in good physical condition but that no special equipment is needed. Hardly a 5-terrain rating. As for the difficulty, well I didn't actually give it a try (it was getting late in the day) but I had just completed a cache by the same cache hider that was rated 3.5/3.5. The container was a nice large ammo can hidden under a pile of sticks. I found it within 4.3 seconds after getting to the co-ordinates. Not what I'd call a 3.5 difficulty. So I am similarly suspicious of the actual difficulty of the 5/5.
My parents live in Kzoo and so sometimes when I am up there I'll go GCing. The following may not be much help and I agree with the previous poster that MIGO will be the best help for specific caches.
First, you may want to consider an event: Texas Drive Park Meet & Greet II by Folshen & Mousie (GCYN5B)
Michigan on Oct. 29.
Second, the Bishop's Bog area in Portage is interesting because it has (or had) a rather slippery walkway over a bog. I almost lost my camera, cell phone and GPS to the bog. My favorite cache in that area went MIA a while back but there are others. See GCW5FJ and surrounding caches.
There are a lot of interesting parks in the area. Lots and and lots of caches. A PQ of 3.5+ terrain caches show about a dozen in the nearby region none of which I have been able to get to due to a lack of time (it hard to drag my 80+ year old parents to them.) I swear, I am just going to have to quit my job and go geocaching full time.
Have fun in the area. It is nice. A couple of the USA's billionaires live in the area. They are big supporters of the arts and so there is always lots to do. Be prepared to hear about the "Kalamazoo Promise" -- not a geocaching thing but rather a program by which *all* high school students get full tuition and expenses (not including room and board) paid for college.
Let's see. A person with 32 finds puts down a tennis ball as a marker because the cache is mssing. Then a person with 266 finds logs it. Then a person with 212 finds. Then a person with 151 finds. Then a person with 60 finds. And finally:July 3 by BSer1 (10 found)
Saw the tennis ball. After reading the other logs, I am also logging it as a find.
This is the way the newbies are corrupted.
Just to clarify. The subject line says May 7. The first post says May 12. Which one is it?
Since May 7th, 2007 is a Monday (when, unfortunately, most of us will be at work) while May 12th, 2007 is a Saturday (when most of us will be free) then I suspect that the date is May 12th. Still, that is a rather embarassing error in the subject line.
Alright!! Nothing short of losing my job ...
Actually I find that having a job cuts into my geocaching time.
Fyi, I KNOW the two teams that logged the find. The cache was there it just feel in somewhere, can't say more without giving it away to other people.
I presume you meant "fell" instead of "feel" in the above sentence.
So if they didn't find the cache why did they log a find on the cache?
While Criminal is sometimes over the top he does have a valid point that, especially for some high number cachers, the numbers are not from true finds but rather from people just throwing down new containers and claiming a find or from multiply logging a cache that does not exist or ... well, from any number of other inane reasons. Personally I find generally find the logs rather funny. It is amusing to see what people will do.
In this thread we do try to blank out people's names and the cache names. The idea is not to make fun of the people themselves but rather illuminate the process where by some people make lots of finds.
It's only a game, after all. One where the top prize does not go to the person with the top score.
My report on the Prophetstown SP cache.
As always it is fun and interesting to get out to P-town. It keeps growing and changing. We had a nice hike which is, of course, the real object of geocaching. However the cache location itself is nothing special. Just a micro in the wilderness. It could have been placed anywhere.
Well, the nearest 10 caches to me are a semi-circle of 72 miles from the south-west through the east and up to the north. Of course that is via "how the GPS flys." If I drop Tippecanoe River, then the semi-circle widens to 80 miles but only goes from the south-west to the east -- a bit more managable but still a trip of hundreds of miles. It makes me wish I lived in the southern part of the state where most of the parks are located.
I'll head out to Prophetstown tomorrow and give a report on that cache.
BTW: Thanks to the wolverine warriors for the bookmark list of the DNR caches.
...A minimum of $50 park fees per cacher ...
Just buy the annual pass @ $36. I suspect many people do this already. Personally I am more concerned about the gasoline costs. Unfortunately most of the state parks are in the southern part of the state where I am in the northern part.
Still, if people aren't already buying annual passes, then you are correct -- this may be a breakeven for the DNR. T-shirt, postage for the shirts, cache container and personnel costs have to be factored in as well as the $100. My really rough guess on the total cost is $5,000.
Problem with caches along a route
Keeps failing on me as well. I've sort of given up on it.