GearHeadAZ
-
Posts
16 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by GearHeadAZ
-
-
I would think this would be a multi cache with a virtual first stage.
-
I've only ever done a couple multis and they were because they had high FPs and just two stages. One had the second final coordinates hidden in a very clever way. Another one had a PVC faux telescope which directed you to the final. I've never placed my own because I know they would get less finds, but I do plan on hiding one in the near future.
-
On 11/5/2022 at 5:58 PM, mysterion604 said:
Geocacher lifecycle factor:
I'm sure some academic could do a long term study on factors like geocachers dropping out of the hobby after and average of X number of years, resulting in a correlation in Z percentage of caches falling into disrepeair and getting archived after and average of Y amount of time since last known maintenance. But basically, if you're looking at more geocaching retirements than committed new memberships, you will (with some lag time) get more caches shutting down than popping up.
Rules complexity factor: the rules regarding caches are over time becoming more complex & stringent. Older caches may rely on "grandfathered" permission to remain active under conditions which are not allowed anymore. As those caches gradually disappear, the new caches must meet new & tougher requirements, increasing development time and decreasing the total number of approved caches.
I actually think more abandoned and NM caches getting archived is a good thing. How is the next generation of cachers supposed to get invested in the game if a high percentage of caches they look for are in disrepair or legitimately missing? Or if they can't find any special hiding places for their own hide because they're already taken up by a hide in disrepair and the CO is either inactive or just doesn't want to maintain it?
The rules can be a good thing. If you're made to jump through hoops for approval from the land manager then it will be less likely that a newb will dump out a bunch of crappy caches in a nice park then quit the game after a few months.
-
.png)
3
-
.png)
1
-
4
-
-
I sure wish there was a nano category!
-
2
-
1
-
-
My emails for PQ, logs, and DMs have all been having issues for the last week or so
-
For the last week or so I've been getting some on time, some a day late, and some not at all. Even yesterday I got one on time and one nothing.
-
On 10/18/2020 at 11:14 AM, TeamRabbitRun said:
Me.
As I play, the awarding of a FP is not "VOTING" for a cache, so NOT awarding a FP isn't voting AGAINST a cache.
Nor are they 'Likes', as commonly thought of in Social Media.
Whoever the heck it was that started this "FP" thing (THIS TIME!!), what you're missing is the common attitude that everybody plays this game and applies the guidelines as THEY SEE FIT within norms. The game is NOT designed to be a competition, despite what people make out of it and some of the things and language that HQ had added, and the vast majority of people who participate (not PLAY) are doing it for themselves.
So, for you to hold the attitude that if I don't feed your ego or I'm cheating the COs because I don't throw FPs at caches whenever I'm able ignores the fact that I'm playing for ME, not YOU. If I like a cache I'll say so in the log, directly to the person who put the effort into it. I may (and have) awarded FPs to some caches that struck me in some way, but the criteria for doing so is mine, and mine only.
Because of that, it's SILLY of you to seek caches based on FPs as a metric of cache quality, because not everyone uses them that way, regardless of how YOU think they should be awarded and your personal practice. Several people above have explained how because FPs are not always available the statistic is meaningless. And because people who DO award them, award them for different reasons, they cannot be used to evaluate your 'upvoting' and 'downvoting'.
They don't mean anything specific, across the board. If YOU want to "upvote" a cache by awarding a FP, but I don't evaluate FPs the same way you do, then you've accomplished ...nothing. Use them for your own purposes as they were intended.
So (again,) stop telling us that we're lousy cachers because we don't ascribe to your need to put a personal rating on everything you touch.
Geocaching is NOT THAT STRUCTURED.
Why are you so offended at opinions that differ from yours? You don't have to justify yourself.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 10/18/2020 at 9:54 AM, cerberus1 said:
I didn't really want to get involved in this silliness, but favorite points, as even stated in the Help Center, is just "a simple way to track and share the geocaches that you enjoyed the most. "
When favorite points were added in December, 2010, most caches we favorited were already archived years before you joined.
That didn't help you, or anyone but us. They were our favorites.
Riddle me this: If it's not voting then why would Groundspeak add the FP function and sort by FP to the game; when all those years up until that point you all already had YOUR favorites in your own personal favorites bookmark list?
What do you think they meant by to "share" your favorites? Because I'm sure nobody's inclined to go checking some random persons favorites list off their profile.... If they even have have a public list at all.
-
2
-
1
-
.png)
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:
What is worth a favourite point is a personal thing and it's up to the individual to decide what that is. For me it could be a nice cache, something interesting I was brought to, a good view; even something as arbitrary as I wanted a coffee and the cache brought me near a cafe, or I wanted to buy some milk to take home, and the cache brought me to a shopping centre. I rarely give a nano a favourite, and it would have to be an exceptional cache for me to give a point to it, if the size or I considered the rating was wrong. Also very unlikely to give a favourite to a cache that needs maintenance. I might write something though like, "I would have given this a favourite, if the log was writeable on." None of us has the right to attempt to bully (as you are attempting to do) others into giving a favourite that they don't consider deserved. A gentle suggestion maybe (and leave it there), but not bully.
I have 56 favourites available to reward, but as I have 11,147 finds, that must mean I have given 1114 favourites.
on4bam has 10,842 finds, which means they have given more favourite points than they still have.
You have 224 finds, so you have only had 22 favourite points to give, which maybe is effecting your perspective on this.
Bullying? Lol ok. I'm sure he doesn't care what some random newb says on a forum. Him and a few others' opinion is a favorite point is only for your favorites of all time. Me, I think they should be given as top 10% since that's how they are accrued. Favorites is the only form of a voting system we have so I feel like "voting" is contributing to the game. I think that YOUR perspective is skewed, you are such a vet and you've seen so many that you are forgetting how excited newbies are to find certain types of hides for the first time. Or maybe that newbie who hid a hide that they think it's super clever, even though YOU may have seen it 100 times... getting a favorite point here or there means a lot to them and may inspire them to keep making better hides.
EDIT: your give ratio is pretty good though. I'm definitely not saying you should give out every point as soon as you get it. But I've seen ratios mentioned that are worse than on4bam's
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, on4bam said:
Hoarding? Are you suggesting FP's should be given because a cacher has plenty? I give FP's because it's .... well... a favorite cache not because I have 300+ to give.
That's exactly what I'm saying. So out of 3,000 caches found, not a single one meets your standards? Get off your high horse. It doesn't have to literally be your favorite, they votes to tell other cachers which ones are the best of the 3,000. If you haven't found one favorite in the last 3,000 (ratio) then you sure as hell aren't gonna suddenly find 300 in a row that you deem worthy, so what's the point of saving them? But hey, I'm just a peasant with 200 finds. It would sure be nice to have some more votes on the thousands of caches around me so I can visit the the better crappy caches over the worse crappy caches on my way to 300 finds.
-
3
-
1
-
-
Loggers insisting that the 50ml preform they found is really a small and not micro as it's listed as.
Hoarding hundreds or even thousands of favorite points available to give.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
On the website you can dip your whole trackable inventory as part of the find log. It would be nice if the app worked the same way instead of having to manually dip each trackable.
-
same problem. usually only on bigger lists.
-
On 9/1/2020 at 9:30 PM, Play Cache said:
Note: If SkeetSkeetSkeet has logged any of your caches, you might want to do some checking. It seems this cacher has logged numerous caches all over the country in the same time frame, and his/her logs should really be deleted. Unless he/she travels the speed of light, something doesn't ring true. Many of these log-ins seem to be on lonely hides or where the CO might be either inattentive or absent. Really kind of sad.
I recently found a high terrain rated lonely cache with an MIA CO and low and behold SSS is on the online log but not the physical log.
.png)
.png)
.png)
Difficulty / Terrain rating changes - What would you do?
in General geocaching topics
Posted
The argument to NOT archive is also just to please a small amount of the community who play the game differently. (Jasmer)
Personally I have zero interest in Jasmer, Fizzy, or Challenge caches, so my vote would be to have accurate ratings regardless of weather it's by way of editing or republishing.