Jump to content

mustakorppi

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    369
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mustakorppi

  1. It’s a coin toss whether the maps on the website even load properly so…
  2. This has changed sometime in the last few days, apparently with no announcement. A fieldset element is expected to render with a visible border by default. Now it gets a border-style: none; from somewhere. This messes up a number of existing cache descriptions' layouts. Any user-applied borders and stylings get stripped away on save.
  3. Does that thread still exist somewhere? Can anyone find it? I have vague memories of even posting in it, but I can't find it anymore...
  4. This was in reference to Goldenwattle's idea that a magnetic cache high up a lamp post cannot be T1.5. If you don't bring the appropriate tool to retrieve the cache from the ground, that's not a problem with the rating. If the CO is intentionally jerking people around (e.g. by omitting the special tool required attribute), then I personally have no issue with returning the favor. But messing with correctly rated caches just because you choose to interpret the ratings differently isn't right. Having to cross sand, boulders and cliffs is an entirely different matter.
  5. If in doubt you could always ask the CO. Or post a maintenance log. This particular case, whether a cache that's high up but can be retrieved and returned with a tool without moving from the ground should have a high T rating, can legitimately be interpreted both ways. Your interpretation doesn't match the HQs, but that's beside the point as far as I care. The people who take it upon themselves to enforce HQs interpretation by attaching other people's high T caches up in trees so they can't be fished down are equally in the wrong.
  6. I log FTF for new container/logbook if I'm first to find after owner maintenance. But I try to make it obvious it's a joke: I certainly don't write such a log in a format Project-GC picks up on, nor enter the find on any other list of FTFs. My area uses the anachronistic initialism FBA, found before approval, to distinguish finds predating the listing. It doesn't matter if the CO handed you the cache, if the CO is your sockpuppet account, if you stumbled on the cache by accident or if you have an old photo that fills the requirements of a virtual cache etc. That find wasn't part of the FTF game, so as a courtesy you don't mess with a game you're not participating in. But I'm honestly surprised to see any variation of "what the CO intended" argument here. "Find the cache by doing X" is essentially ALR.
  7. "Return the logbook and cache to their original location"
  8. There is obviously regional variation in this, and even inside the same region different people stretch the unwritten rules in different ways. But I can't imagine any experienced cacher in my area claiming a FTF on find before publication. I also can't imagine a CO trying to inject themselves into the FTF game; the CO doesn't get to enforce any rules about FTFs and FTF isn't something a CO can "award".
  9. The one time I've hunted a cache like this, I got to the first waypoint the same time as the "birthday girl" and we did the rest of the cache together, joined by the cache creators near the end. There were two groups of hunters ahead of us the whole time and at no point did anyone even hint that etiquette was being breached (except with regards to one group of hunters apparently taking a shortcut through private property). But essentially, published caches are fair game to all and FTF hunting is a race. It can be a friendly race full of cooperation, but it's still a race and you can't show up to a race saying only one person is allowed to compete. If you want a private caching experience, don't publish the cache. I wasn't around in the early days but I know it was reasonably common for hiders in my area to publish the cache details on IRC or their personal homepage etc. while waiting for approval on gc.com. Today it would be a faux pas to claim an FTF on cache before it's listed, but I assume the "honoring" here is supposed to be the cache itself, not awarding "points" in a sidegame. Your local practices may vary of course.
  10. Not really interested in entering remoteness contests with Australia I have replaced someone else's broken down container (and logged a find) at a ski resort that doesn't seem to support a native geocacher population, but sees a lot of people coming to find caches. Apparently the container I placed has since broken and been replaced by someone else. The way I see it, either the visiting community maintains the existing caches, or there's no caching in that area (apart from containerless formats I guess).
  11. Because that 1% is also mostly smartphone cachers. Who cares, in the context of this particular topic, what people who only find a few trads every now and then use.
  12. I'm sorry to second guess you, but is this really correct for multi-caches? Mystery physical stages sure, but I would have assumed it's too much for a multi. Unless maybe you can require that the QR code gives the directions to the next waypoint directly, instead of, say, pointing to a website with a puzzle...
  13. Open the cache in app and swipe down to make it fetch updated data.
  14. Yeah that's the one. I think that it's more than a bit silly that calculating an area inside caches is not allowed for a challenge, but calculating distance between caches is.
  15. The "What can we help you with?" selection doesn't have an option for reporting caches that don't comply with guidelines.
  16. Quoted the fun bit. But come on. Degree squares, combinations, graticules whatever you call them are obviously and explicitly banned as challenge criteria. I disagree with that particular rule as it also covers the "geocaching territory" idea (which I think would be the funnest area-based side-game geocaching has), but I don't think it's fair to characterize HQ as not understanding what your challenge was about.
  17. I don't know why you had interest in travel bugs in the first place, but the caches you mentioned literally did not break rules, and someone's travel bug stats aren't a COs problem. Not to mention that travel bug's history has "issues" beyond a few legacy mystery caches.
  18. I also disagree that attributes are a problem. The current rules force truly hard challenges to be cumulative, but cumulative challenges that target the most active long-time cachers can get pretty daunting for everyone else. You either get obscenely large raw numbers or challenges combining multiple difficult things. e.g. "find 6 different types of T5 caches in 100 different counties" to make up an example without using attributes.
  19. This isn't covered by the rules explicitly, but a post-moratorium cache has been published that requires finds on 1-31 but the finds can be in any month, in addition to any year. This challenge has additional conditions but not on the cache type.
  20. I'm not trying to be snarky or anything, I'm just genuinely surprised a list like that exists. So ignoring my choice of the word "trickery" and with it any speculation of the motives of COs and cachers, why do grandfathered long distance mystery caches get special treatment "to keep stats and souvenirs correct", while long distance multis/wherigos/letterboxes don't? Or normal-length mysteries that cross a border? I guess multis and multi-like letterboxes are supposed to require visiting the starting coordinates, which would mean you've at least had a friend visit the place you get the souvenir from (teamwork eh). Is that the distinction? But that explain wherigos and normal-length mysteries. Edit. No wait, there is a new-ish long distance multi on the list. It's listed as "Cache in Poland but listed as in Aland Islands (without need to visit there)", even though the multi description specifically tells the cacher to look at an information board on location to solve the multi. I assume there's a photo of that information board somewhere on the internet, but that just fills my head with questions on the criteria for inclusion on this list. Is the actual reason that the multi cannot be solved by visiting the coordinates (as the info is currently missing)?
  21. Is this still ok if the CO lists every applicable attribute/county on the cache page, instead of using this "begins with the letter..." shorthand?
  22. Curious, what's the point of excluding a few mystery caches when the same souvenir and stat trickery can be and is being done with other cache types?
  23. (Slightly off topic but it strikes me that kayak would always be a "boat required", climbing aids are "climbing gear required" and FM radio "wireless receiver required" over here...) In my area the most common "special tool" would a telescopic pole, and the ones long enough are annoyingly large even when collapsed, so I won't carry one on my bike "just in case". I can fit a packraft, paddle and life vest into a 20 liter backpack so carrying "easy T5 boating gear" around without a car isn't a problem, but it's still not something I would consider doing for just in case... For all the small stuff, any individual item is just too rare to be needed and there are too many possible things it might be, so I don't feel it's worth it to carry that stuff around either. So when I'm riding a bike, I generally just ignore special tool caches. Which I think is a shame.
  24. Mega events get to publish temporary Adventures now, if that's what you're asking. I think the mega we had last week had five 10 waypoint Adventures in a walkable area that already had a few normal Adventures...
×
×
  • Create New...