patned

You should start a new thread for this. I predict a lot less passion than what's in this thread, and the vote to be much more in favor than a 65/35 split. I'd rather leave it here, looking for the passion. Maybe I should change the situation. You find the cache, the container has the cache ID on it, and the standard GC disclaimer and writeup, there is swag and 2 travel bugs inside, but the log sheet is missing. Now, does it count, since there is no log to sign, other than the one you are about to provide? Where I am headed... If the community feels this is OK, is the situation really different than if all you found is a container without the lid (it had the cache ID on it) and no log? Or, no container at all, but the depression in the grass where it was, and some swag, and 2 bugs, still no log. Where is the dividing line that says "THIS IS NO LONGER A CACHE"? In all of these situations, you did not sign the log, but you found the cache.

I'm really looking forward to the answers on this one. It is a sideways continuation of the discussion as to whether the guidelines or rules should be followed to the letter, or to the spirit in which the particular cacher believes they were written. You go to a cache location, find the container, find the log, it is totally full and pretty much destroyed by handling, absolutely no clear space on which to put your signature. You take a spare log out of your pack, enter the date and your name, and attach it to the existing log sheet. Return to your computer, log the cache as found, noting that you added a new sheet because the original was full. Since you did not actually sign "the log" but a piece of paper you brought with you, should the find count? I predict about a 65/35 split on this one. (65% it counts)

Thanks. Missed the second half of that.

No response from GC on the earlier topic for 2 days. This seems like an issue that has appeared at least twice in the past few months. Some, but not all of the PQs submitted are running. In my case, PQs UP6 and UP7 ran at 12:07:29 this morning, UP8 was submitted at the same time last night, it is still waiting. I've seen at least 3 other posts today reporting the same partial response. Submitting a new PQ to cover the same parameters does not seem to help. Any update or ideas? Thanks. Ed

The word 'easy' in a description usually means the opposite.

Some ran some didn't. UP6 and UP7 ran at 12:07:29 this morning, UP8 was submitted at the same time last night, it is still waiting. How about a reset. Thanks.

It only does DD.MM.MM Per the manual, you can change the coordinate display in the setup menu. The 315 came with major cities and small towns and was intended for land use. The 320 came with major cities and navigational aids and was intended for nautical use. They are the same hardware.

Given time to settle down, the 315 is very accurate. The main difference in the newer units isn't accuracy, it is sensitivity (good lock in bad conditions) and speed. My old 315 will get me within 15 feet consistently.

Thanks for the quick response.

That is what grabbed my attention. Generated but not sent, I could understand as a mail glitch. It is a little odd to have 3 of 5 not even generated

I submitted 5 PQs last night, set to run today. All were created at the same time (within a few minutes), had not run since 2 weeks ago. 3 of them ran at 12:08AM, the other 2 still are in the queue. Usually they come through together. Any issues I haven't noticed? No other threads about PQs today.

In my opinion, yes. If you are going to give the wrong coordinates why waste time with a puzzle, just create a traditional with incorrect coordinates - serves the same purpose, and a lot easier.

I re-ran the 2 PQs that had the most errors - clean. Looks like it is fixed. Thanks. Ed

I'll rerun tomorrow and let you know. Thanks.

I haven't seen this issue anywhere. I ran 10 PQs Sunday night/Monday morning. Radius was 120 miles from my home coords. I got 9 caches that were between 177 and 303 miles away. I could not relate them to any specific date range, they were scattered thru various PQs. Everything else seemed to be what I was expecting. I have specific PQ info and cache info if anyone is interested in tracking down an odd bug. This is not critical at all, I just now have a few extra caches.

I'm sure certain people will jump all over this, but I have a question for all those posting in numerous threads about the need for redundancy and a backup system so the database never goes off-line again. Do you all have a spare computer at your homes loaded with all the appropriate software and data so that you can keep operating if your primary computer quits? If not, why not?

I beg to differ with you. In the right location, they work fine. I've got one a little south of you that has been found a bunch of times, and just about everyone comments favorably. Actually, it isn't even sealed. I have 5 hides, so when you come down, you'll have to find them all to see which one I'm talking about. I'll be looking for your find log... Ed (the back half of PATNED)

After meeting a number of other cachers and finding them to be very similar to myself and my wife in actions and attitude about caching, might I suggest that an excellent name for non-cachers would be "normal people".

I'm confused. The last time a PQ ran for you was around 8pm last night, and you have not scheduled any PQs to run today or any other day this week. Edit: Ok thanks for the explanation. Go ahead and check the boxes for Monday on those four PQs and they should show up pretty quickly. Submitted again, they are now here. Wierd, but thanks. Ed

I want to draw attention to this post by Raine again. Because emails were not parsing correctly, in many cases the PQs were sent to the primary address associated with your account, and not the alternative address you may have entered when creating the PQ. If you commonly request PQs to an address other than your primary email account this may affect you. I had 4 that were run this morning at 12:59:00, they have still not arrived, even with the reset. They have not been received at ANY of my email addresses. Any chance of trying again? Thanks, Ed Some new info... The PQs I ran Sunday show a date of 4/12/2009, around 8:39...PM, and are BOLD in the PQ listing. They were delivered. The ones I had scheduled for today show a generation date of 4/12/2009 at 12:59:00AM, and are NOT bold, nor were they delivered. The date is the 12'th, not the 13'th as expected. This might be the problem. The time incremented, the date didn't. If the system is showing more than 5 on the 12'th, it isn't sending them? Ed

I want to draw attention to this post by Raine again. Because emails were not parsing correctly, in many cases the PQs were sent to the primary address associated with your account, and not the alternative address you may have entered when creating the PQ. If you commonly request PQs to an address other than your primary email account this may affect you. I had 4 that were run this morning at 12:59:00, they have still not arrived, even with the reset. They have not been received at ANY of my email addresses. Any chance of trying again? Thanks, Ed

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong (try to keep it under 3,000 responses). As a cache owner, you can delete ANY log for any reason. It may get you into an email battle, or worse, but go ahead. If your morning coffee was too hot, delete the next 3 logs. If it was too cold, delete the next 4. If it was the perfect temperature, pick 2 randomly and delete them. You own the cache, do what you want with it. Flame away...

Thank you very much, and goodnight. Ed

Glad I could help with the testing I got the first one, looks OK. Any chance I could get the other 4 that were empty? I'm out of PQs now for the day, and still need 4 more tomorrow to do my updates. tucson2773090.zip tucson2773091.zip tucson2773092.zip tucson2773094.zip Thanks for the quick response. Ed

I have read all the threads I could find on the late/missing PQs recently, and didn't see this particular problem listed. I made a copy of my regular update PQs, and the newly created copies ran OK, they had data, they were mailed to me, but the zip files are empty. As an example, the first shows 466 results when I do a preview, the resulting zip file is empty - tucson2773080.zip (0 B, download) - I can save the file to disk, but the zip contains nothing. Any ideas?