Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Flipper

  1. Another interesting discussion pops up...LOL. I agree with the poster, in general, the container should generally match the location. Why not have a decent sized container if the location can properly conceal it?
  2. Eh! That my cache, and I'd like to point out, its split into 2, and takes you through a beautiful path/park system that runs along a creek within the city. It also drops you off at one of the biggest and best parks in the GTA. Its a place that contained no other cache's and cachers are already enjoying. Nothing trash about it, and the problem with getting it posted was that I put OTHER singles in the area that were too close. None of it was trash. So mind your examples. Also, I dont think that Walmart caches should be published no? Isnt that private property? And I think some of these users dont understand urban cachers and the fun of a cache that even 1000's of people walk by everyday and dont even know its there. You misunderstood what I wrote. I wasn't using your cache as an example of a trash-cache. I was struck by how your cache was criticized and unaccepted by your reviewer and others in this forum. At the same time many people were saying that it's so great to have a lot of caches and a big variety and we shouldn't ciriticize one particular type just because we may not like that particular type. I was just pointing out the irony after reading through your topic. If somehow I didn't make it clear, then I'm sorry, but I never meant to call your proposed cache a "trash-cache" Quite the opposite, I am going to a lot of trouble with GSAK, pocket queries, PDA etc. so I can hunt caches like yours rather than the hundreds of park bench caches that are placed simply because "there wasn't one there yet" (as someone described).
  3. OK, tell ya what. I've got a couple frequent flier free tix on SW airlines. I'll give you a round trip to any city they fly to and you have three hours. Paid for. Wouldn't it be neat if you could download a few geocaches onto your GPSr so you can find some neat spots? Now, I don't care who the arbiter of cool or trash is. I just think it would be neat if one could do it. Now maybe you understand the question/suggestion. If you still don't. Then fine. You get over it. (I only used my area of San Diego because I know how saturated it has become with little caches, the the same rules apply to every other major city I'm sure. I'm not just limiting this request to my home city)
  4. How easy is it to do that if you are going out of town and want to go find a couple cool caches while you are there? Am I supposed to memorize which are the good cache hiders in Oakland too? Baltimore? Salt Lake City? The other reason I'd like this feature is because I travel and would really like to be able to quickly downlaod some points onto my GPSr (cool caches, not trash-caches) and have them ready when I have an impromptu trip out of town. Not so easy peasy, especially if the trip is short notice which in my case, it often is. When I get back home, it often strikes me as a real shame I didn't have a way to find some of the cool gecoaches in that city I just came from while I was there. I can almost always find an hour or so to kill before my plane, but that's not enough time to do all the stuff everyone suggests. Last Month I was in Washington DC and had 3 hours to kill while waiting to pick someone up at the airport. How many geo-cach-a-holics around here would kick themselves at a missed opportunity like that? I'm not a diehard, so I don't lose sleep over it, but I do think it's kind of a shame.
  5. Simple: I've been reading the forum since posting, and it seems to me, many people are quick to criticise people who yank a cache from Iraq, or carry them around in their pocket and log them in at events. Or who place a couple in a 17 stage multi too close together. They quote rules, guildelines, etc. They say that so-and-so isn't following the rules, or "this" or "that" is unethical. But as far as I can tell the only crime any of these "offenders" has commited is doing geocaching a bit differently than others. Meanwhile, I point out that I don't want to take away anyones fun, but would like a way to weed out a particular type of cache because it's very difficult in densely populated areas to find true "Traditional" caches that meet the original standards (which have changed over the years). And some of the same people complaining above, tell me that: I should live-and-let live and just dela with it because the micro-cachers are just having fun or... I need to get special software, make custom queries and build internal databases, do careful reasearch and read each of the 5,000 logs of caches or...it would be too difficult or controversial to make a start rating, or a favorites list, or whatever other method I or others here have proposed because that would take away from other peoples fun. Yes, that all seems a bit hypocritical. Maybe it's just me.
  6. I'm a bit troubled by lousy grammar. I know and work with too many foreigners who speak/write English as a second language better than someone who's born and raised here. Naturally it's different in forums and such. I guarantee, my 8th grade English teacher would shudder if she saw many of my posts, (this one right here for example) but writing in a shorthanded, off-the-cuff manner helps convey the sense of what you are saying better than a 100% proper sentence and paragraph structure. Typos are another thing altogether. My brain always goes faster than my fingers and I do my darndest to go back and correct all the little mis-strokes, but I almost always miss at least one.
  7. I don't think you are a woos. I tried for a cache last weekend with my girlfriend and we had to turn around half way down the road because the steep terrain, thorns and snakes were just too much for her (and too much for me to carry her out again). That cache was also rated as a 1.5 terrain and while it certainly wasn't a 5, I don't understand the hiders idea of rating one little bit. Someone above said he's gotten his butt kicked for a low rating. I'd like to know how or if there is a way to report these poorly described caches and have the description changed. I also know of several "traditional" caches that are not at the locations specified and you have to figure them out based on clues from the description. Isn't that what we call a puzzle cache? Seems to me, if I load up a few 1/1 traditional caches on my GPS, I should be able to walk right up to them without any fuss or stress! I'm certainly not going to get into a big shouting match with the owners of these caches, or post a dirty note on their log (last thing I'm interested in is a flame war), but I do think that caches like this need to be modified. I don't see any reason for a separate category. A 1 terrain should be enough if they just follow and enforce the rules (oops, sorry, guidelines).
  8. Wow, Interesting conversation this sparked. I've been following it since I posted. I agree that if you like to hunt for guardrail, trashcan micro-caches then bully for you and I have no problem with that or do I want to detract from your ability to do so. But I've been here long enough to remember that the Geocaching guidelines used to say (somewhere along the way they've removed this) that a geocache should be hidden in a place of interest. Now, if they want to relax that because they've gotten requests for more trash-caches I can deal with that too. Personally I don't like those and just want a way to eliminate them. So far I've run 6 pocket queries, downloaded over 1000 caches into gsak and done what I could to try and figure out a way to weed these caches out a little, but I'm still swamped by the sheer volume *sigh* I can't help but find it ironic as I read some of the other topics and spotted a guy who's having all sorts of problems getting his 17 cache multi approved bacause a couple of them are too close together. Another thread has the community in an uproar because people are moving caches around to events and designating "pocket caches". For those of you who feel so strongly that trash-caches should be allowed because some people like them: Why do so many of you look down your nose at these event/pocket cachers and the other guy trying to "bend the rules"?????? I thought this was a popularity contest (isn't that the argument?). Make it possible for people to put caches wherever, however they wish and if you don't like it...tough. Sounds a bit hypocritical to me. (just to re-state it though. I don't care if people plant trash-caches, I just want a way to filter them out and GSAK/pocket queries etc. are only as good as the categories available and there is no category for a trash-cache. That's my point...there should be another category of SOME type).
  9. Yup, I have Delorme TopoUSA and have done it that way a couple times on camping trips. It's interesting, but when I did that we spent the whole time staring at the laptop screen instead of out the window. Uhh, kind of misses the point of camping and geocaching if we're just going to stare at a laptop. It was kind of neat though. Besides, it was a whole mess of cables criss-crossing around the car. Plugs/Inverter and AC adapter for laptop power, cable from GPSr to laptop. Trying to keep the laptop from bouncing all over the truck while driving and breaking. Kind of a big mess of hassle to do it that way. I've concluded the mapping software/laptop is best left in base camp to plot our tracks after we're done and re-live all the wrong turns we made along the way.
  10. Wow, what a read this whole topic was. Seems awfully silly to me though 1) From what I can tell most of hte logged visits have been changed to thank you notes so are those of you crying blaspemy ready to take it back? 2) Some here are dissapointed that the thought behind it was lost by some. Well, so what? The thought was obviously very much understood by a lot of people who left very kind words and thoughts. Why spend time worrying about the people that "didn't get it" instead of appreciating the thoughts of the people who did. Personally I thought it was a pretty cool thing to do on Memorial day. Perhaps there could have been an adjustment to make sure that the purists who value the sanctity of the holy smiley faces don't get upset, but hey, it's the thought that counts. As a vet myself, when I was in uniform, I always appreciated the thanks and congratulations I got from those who cared and rarely thought much about the thoughts of those who didn't give a whit about my service. I wasn't in Iraq, and my particular era (cold war) was a lot less politically controversial as it is today, but I still appreciated the thank you's in whatever form they came (when they came). 3) As someone who's been hunting caches for years (casually, it's not an obsession) I actually have very few official smiley faces to my credit, but dozens and dozens of very happy memories treking around (and more than a few disappointments at caches not at their listed locations), so I don't get the whole obsession with how many caches you've logged. I don't get it, plain and simple. Who really cares if so-and-so has 2313 logged caches, or someone else has spent their time logging caches they haven't actually found. 4) I do have a problem with people putting up pocket caches though. I'm just a stupid casual cacher, and when I download the waypoints and go hunting for a cache I expect it to be at the coord's, not in your doggone pocket 100 miles away. If you want to do an event cache thing, cool, go for it, but why spend time corrupting the geocaching.com website when you can just make a list of caches and hand them out for your event and leave it at that? Again, I don't get it. Maybe I'm just too simple and unedumacated to understand the glory of having an "Official illegal pocket cache". JerseyGirl you sure look silly complaining about the sanctity of your precious web page that's for a fake cache that may or may not be at the coordinates you have posted depending on if you happen to be at an event or not. My congrats to criminal that spotted it, (or whoever it was). Those are my 2 cents
  11. As many have said, you can get your Geocaching fun back by using Pocket Queries and GSAK. But, don't filter out all the Micros or you will miss a very fun one at this location not too far from where you live. Wow...I recognize that area from the pic. Gorgeous spot....That one is now loaded onto the gps so it's ready and waiting for me. Thanks
  12. OK...just to follow up. Did a couple of pocket queries and moved them into GSAK to help trim down and manage the results. I suppose this will work (kind of), but I'm still left dealing with hundreds and hundreds of potential candidates and am having a pretty tough time trying to figure out how I might be able to sort by a "cool factor" and avoid having caches on my gps that can't be found by coordinates only. As I was going through my modified query it didn't take long to find an example of a cache (it was the 7th cache on my simple, traditional, easy filter) that has no business in my query. A cache called "How's your geography" that supposedly a regular cache, easy find easy terrain large container. But look at the description and guess what? Right there it says "The cache is not at the listed coordinates" and gives you a little puzzle to figure out the genuine location. Very cute, and I'm sure a lot of people would really enjoy that one, but excuse me, if that's not a puzzle cache I don't know what is. And how can it be called easy? What good is going through all these extra steps, sorting through the listings only to still end up with the same results - (caches that I have no chance of finding unless I printout/read the description)? OK, this time I'm done complaining...I promise. Thanks again for the suggestions.
  13. And being an old San Diego cacher myself, I just had to look and see what caches you have found, all I could see was this one. Now I myself know that there are quite a few nice caches in the area. And as for caches under a bush, I think the majority of early caches I did in the SD area were under a bush I know, I've been a bit delinquent logging caches back into the website like I should - guilty as charged. I've actually spent more time helping my uncle/aunt and friends log theirs than I have myself. If you search for Bwana and little follower you'll see a lot more log entries. I know we're over 100 and I'm sure she's logged most of them. It's not that I don't enjoy it, or I'm lazy. It's just that I browse the site, get the waypoints, visit the spots leave my swag (I have a stash of old coins in my car ready at all times) and then by the time I get home I've forgotten which GC12345 sites we actually made it to that day and balk at going to each one and logging them down like I know I should. But I always sign the book and I always leave something for the next person...do I get partial credit?
  14. Well I'll just add one more thought and try to keep from stirring up the hornets nest any further First off. Thanks for the links to GSAK, paperless and whatnot. I really appreciate the help and I'm off now to do exactly what you all have suggested Second. I hope my tone didn't come off too negative. I do love caching and even the tupperware under the bush caches are fun sometimes. I wouldn't still be doing it and coming back here if I didn't enjoy it. I'm not however a hardcore type, I just do it occaisionally, don't have a PDA loaded with all the pages and hunt when I have time or am looking for something different to do with friends/family. I rarely have a lot of time to "prep" or "plan" it's almost always done off-the cuff. Third, I think the best solution is to have a rating system so we can all recommend the really awesome caches that we all know about so we can share them. Sure we might get a few bad votes/voters but they'll be outvoted by the rest if we just place a limit to the number of "favorites" everyone gets to have and make the votes positive only, not negative. Maybe everyone gets to have a top 5 list so we can search for the caches with the most votes. Also, if you have more than 5 favorites, then you should be free to change them if you see a cool cache that's not getting the credit that it deserves, switch your vote. Fourth, for those in the less dense areas, I hear you too. I visit my Uncle in New mexico and they only have a few caches to pick from too. But they've planted their own caches for others to enjoy because there's still many neat spots they know about to choose from and have really added to the geocaching community. So you're lucky in a way, you can actually plan caches because you still have lots of spots to choose from and we all are eternally grateful that when we visit your neck of the woods we can visit your spots...so Thank you
  15. Good call, I didn't notice that myself. Flipper, go to the regional forums in the West/Southwest threads. There is a very active San Diego based community that is more than willing to help you figure this out. We are all very nice, but be careful with the pollution comments. Even nice people get their feelings hurt. OK, I'll tone it down. What can I say? I'm an old fuddy duddy and more direct than I should be sometimes. I call 'em as I see 'em, but I'm not saying we should delete caches. I just want to be able to find those really cool caches that I know are in the vast database and have them ready when I'm travelling. Keep in mind, that I'm not looking for the caches in San Diego. I just used that search query because it's an example of how dense the caches have become over the years. I have all the time in the world to download those and pick through them and visit them when I have time. Something tells me the solution is to just spin off a separate website. MyFavoriteCaches.com or something where people can post a list of the top 10 favorite caches that they've visited. That way we don't disturb the sensitive community over here.
  16. YES YES YES...you hit the nail right on the head. I also know of several caches that I would like to highly recommend to others. For instance, if you're in my neighborhood, I've visited most of them at one point or another, there are dozens and dozens of them, but let me tell you there are 2 of them that are really REALLY cool. Plus, it's funny that you gave that example, because I have definitely been that fictitious Wandacache person myself many times.
  17. What may be pollution to you is opportunity and variety to other people. Seriously, check into becoming a premium member and seeing what you can do with Pocket Queries. Combine them with GSAK and you will be able to filter out all that pollution you don't like. No, I'm not looking for an argument. Honestly. And like I said, I've been geocaching for many many years and I do love it and have recommended it to many others. I've also helped place a cache and we took it very seriously. We looked at geocaching.com's guidelines which told us: 1) No caches allowed close to an already existing one 2) Should be a interesting point of interest 3) Cache maintenance etc. etc. etc. gecaching rules not mine and I agree with them we carefully selected a really neat spot, hunted around for a really good hiding spot and even changed our original location because there just wasn't a good place to locate the cache. All in all we spent a couple days doing it the right way and I think we (I hope anyway) have contributed a little to the enjoyment of others as well. But I think of all the care we took to maintain it and select it and then read through the 100 caches within a couple miles of my house and most of them are just placed under a bush beside a trail (yawn). I don't think it would be too hard to have a voting method of determining if a site gets a star rating. When I log my visits, I have a droplist of choices for "found, didn't find, etc." beside my log entry. It wouldn't be too hard to give seekers a way to vote for their favorite caches so I can search for the top vote getters. But seriously, if you can honestly tell me that you don't think >100 caches within 5 miles of each other isn't too many and we shouldn't be given a way to sort out the non-special ones I'll drop it. I didn't post this to make someone mad, I just wanted to be able to cache again like I did years ago. Of the first 10 caches I visited many years ago, I found all 10 and every one was such a cool spot that I never would have found otherwise. Spectacular views, interesting little memorial to an old mans dog that brought tears to my wifes eyes when she read the plaque, an arch right beside the road that you have to get out of the car to see or you would have driven right by it, historical places...you name it, it seemd like every time I found a cache I was in for some kind of special treat. These days it's just a tuppwerware under a bush 9 times out ot 10.
  18. In the time it took you to write your original post, I could have downloaded 500 caches from the web site, loaded them into both my GPSr and PDA, hopped in the car and gone caching. Paperless is the way. I hear you all. And thanks for the tip! I am going to check it out. I still say that 100 caches within 5.2 miles of each other is totally out of control. I'm glad it's gotten so popular, but this is ridiculous. I'll get paperless, but I'm skeptical it's going to let me weed out all these loser caches unless I pick through them one at a time and I don't want to spend my free time on a pda looking for a needle in a haystack.
  19. Still doesn't solve the problem. For example, I just did a quick search in my own zip code here in San Diego...92129. (Traditional caches only) As I jump to page 10, and look at caches 91 through 100, each cache is still within 5.2 miles of my house. For crying out loud, even if I download 500 caches onto my PDA, GPS whatever, if my family and I find myself driving on the other side of town and want to do a quick cache, I'll turn on my GPS and have no caches to pick from because it's stuffed completely full of caches all centered around our home. I think it's cool that I have so many caches to choose from right near my house, but come on, let's do a reality check. I've lived here for 20 years and trust me, there ARE NOT that many interesting places to go visit within 5 miles. There's simply too many geocaches in the database and no way to weed out the losers (sorry, but there are a lot of loser caches plain and simple).
  20. Hi all, I've been geocaching for years now and love to do it when I'm driving around or traveling and find myself with time to kill. I've also introduced geocaching to many of my friends and family to their utter delight and have even been responsible for creating a few cache-a-holics (hello Bwana and little wanderer, yes I'm talking about you) But more and more I get thwarted and frustrated with the vast number of caches out there and particularly the multi-caches, virtual caches, disabled caches and any other cache that requires you to actually log into the internet and look at the page before you can have a reasonable chance to find it. Folks, these cool glitzy features are neat, but they really detract from the original fun of geocaching. Let me explain how I typically start my geocaching adventure: 1) I make a quick plan to visit an area. Perhaps I'm travelling and find myself in a new city, Denver, KC, Baltimore...whatever. So I log into geocaching.com, do a zip code search and download 30 or so caches onto my GPS. 2) I jump into my car/truck and start hunting. As I near the area I look at my GPS and start going after the caches that are nearby or look like an interesting direction to go. 3) I start hunting for the cache The problem is: First of all, there are so darned many caches out there, that downloading 30 caches usually only covers a couple miles. Second, most caches nowadays seem to be "me too" caches. Nothing speical about the location, place, view, al they are is a hiding spot. Third and the most frustrating is the cache itself ends up being a virtual cache, puzzle cache, mystery cache, webcam cache or something that is basically impossible to find unless I've downloaded and printed out the web page, so I end up looking all over the place, hi low and can't find it. Fourth, even if I am looking for a traditional cache, because of so many past failures to find caches (because of #3) I often now just give up if I can't find it right away only to go back and look at the web page and realize that the cache I was hunting for was just well hidden. Folks, the new cool things we've added to geocaching are neat. I'm not saying to get rid of it, but I'd like to propose a way "return to the basics". I think we should have a star rating for geocaches that we can use when you search for geocaches. This would allow us to search for "STAR" caches (change the name if you think of something more catchy) only and avoid all the others. In order for a cache to be a "STAR" cache: 1) No more than 1 "STAR" cache per mile or 2. A geocaching.com search for "STAR" caches should cover a decent amount of territory. This is most important near large cities that are overflowing with all kinds of caches. Most GPS units top out at a hundred or so waypoints. This should be plenty for me to download all the geocaches for (for example) the San Diego area, or Denver, or Baltimore or whatever area I'm at and have at LEAST 50x50 mile coverage of geocache waypoints to pick from so I know I'll have geocaches to hunt wherever I find myself. As it is, if I try and download 100 caches in San Diego or Denver, I'll spend an hour doing it and I'll still only cover a 10x10 mile area and have my GPS unit covered with dots. That's too darned many, not spread out enough and too many of them can't be found. 2) Traditional caches only and only the type that can be found without a printout of the web page. If the owner has gotten tricky with the location, or the log files show people are having a hard time finding the cache, then it loses it's star rating. 3) The cache must be a good point of interest (like the original requirements say). If the owner has just hidden a cache in (for example) the place he and his wife first met and it has no other real significance, then it does not get a star rating. 4) No long hikes through difficult terrain. If your cache is up Mount Kilamanjaro then forget it. Golden rule should be if a small child (or maybe I should say a small childs MOM wearing sandals and shorts) can't easily get to it then it doesn't get a star rating. 5) No disabled caches. If a cache is dead, then take it off the doggone list! When I do a search these days, I get at least 1 or 2 out of 10 caches that are disabled for one reason or another. I'm not a killjoy. I realize a lot of people are having a lot of fun with the wide variety of special chaches we can do now. I don't want to take any of that away, but I would like to see a way to go back to the fun days when I could just download 20 caches in an area and spend the day bouncing from one to the next with my friends/family. It seems like this has become impossible because the whole cache database has gotten so polluted. I can't be the only one who feels this way. Please...HELP...give me my geocaching fun back again..I beg you
  • Create New...