Gan Dalf
-
Posts
619 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Gan Dalf
-
-
I need a few things here:
1)Ideas for GEOCACHING-RELATED topics to discuss in the podcasts... and the one vodcast we will be doing later in the semester.
C'mon, are you really a stundent that geocaches or a marketing major used to using cliff notes and his frat buddies to give him the answers to (not so tough) questions?
Ok, Giving you the benefit of the doubt... 
1) What Geocaching is, how it works, what you need to do it
2) Containers, types, sizes, what not to use...
3) Cache types, traditional, multi, puzzle, earth
4) What not to do (should get loud aplause from those that frequent these forums
5) Types/brands of GPSr's (kind of relates to #1)
etc. etc.
-
I've read a lot of posts and I'd have to say this is one pile of self-serving duty. "Why do people have an opinion and this is what I think." pppttthhhhh.
+1
-
I will NEVER pee outside again!! Ughh I never realized that I might have an audience. Thanks for the thread.
**not that i pee outside alot but when you've been hiking all day in the woods sometimes theres no other option****
Peeing outside is one thing. Peeing outside near a road within plain view of the cars driving by is another ting entirely. If someone does that, they deserve to have their picture show up on Street View.
-
All these theories are nice and one or two have at least some merit but the bottom line is people want to see the audit log, either becuse they want to use it to keep better track of itmes in the cache or becuase they just like to see all the people that are looking at their caches.
-
My greatest wish is that some people would not be quite so reactionary.
Questioning is hardly damning or shunning. And no one is questioning your intentions, which I think everyone recognizes as good. All anyone has to go on is the what you and others have said in this thread. Someone does not log in for a month and suddenly we are parsing their "last wishes". That seems a little hasty. I'm sure AJ will make his actual wishes known soon enough.
It's also quite possible, that inundated with e-mails from well intentioned (albeit in some cases misguided) cachers offering to adopt or replace the cache for them, that the CO logged in to the cache page to see what all the fuss was about after not being on for a month or more. Being one of the cachers that would like to (or would have liked to have) find this cache, I know that they might not have abandoned it but they certainly are not on the site regularly. I seem to remember when I was considering a trip last year at this time that they had not logged onto the site for more than 6 months. That's a rough guess from memory without an ounce of proff so I will gladly pass you some salt...
Hypnopaedia, here's a suggestion, since you started the thread you can ask a moderator to move it to the Northwest Forums and combine it with the thread there so the east coasters don't have to listen to our whining...
-
Jackarmy4, I just gotta say, "Thank You! Thank You! Thank You!"
If for nothing else, for seeking an alternative to the poster child of crappy containers. As the Rasta Pooch stated above, match containers work great, and they are readily available. Another quality micro is the soda bottle preform. If you don't mind bulk, you can get 30 for $20. These things are unbelievably tough. Or, for a couple bucks each, you can buy Bison Design containers, which are machined, as opposed to the el-cheapo stamped out ones available on E-bay.
thanks for the link CR, I've heard people talk about preforms but never knew what they are. Turns out, I own a cache that uses one, go figure...
-
I could find no other caches at that location, whether archived or current. No final stages of multis, puzzles or anything. So it's either a letterbox, a geocache listed elsewhere or a cache that someone hid and never submitted.
Could it not alsu be true that it is an older puzzle that was made before the guidelines were changed to require posting of the final location?
I know of at least one traditional very near to me that was placed within 50feet of an older puzzle cache and allowed to stand because the puzzle was placed in the early days of geocaching with no final WP, hidden or otherwise...
-
I guess it seems kind of unfair that 25% of the COTM caches are archived, yet they can still be counted by previous finders. Let's see, 77-11-19=47 47 COTM caches are available to find, but if someone had previously found all the archived caches, they have 66 to draw from. Thats a pretty big advantage, almost 30% more caches. I guess we just don't see what the "challenge" is when old finds count. I look forward to not doing a challenge where all the locationless caches in Washington must be logged.
Don't forget that at least four of the former COTM's are series caches where in order to qualify to find the COTM winner you have to find anywhere from 40 to 90 other caches before you can log them.
Historical challenges desinged to require a certain number of specific caches in order to log the challenge are going to be easier for a long time cacher to qualify for than someone that just started caching yesterday. I beleive easier is the wrong word to use because at one time, those older cachers that had already found them had to take the time to go and look just like a new cacher would have to. They just have the "advnatage" of having done that before they knew this challenge existed. That doesn't make it any less of an accomplishment to have found them before the challenge existed.
-
Maybe make it a requirement that finding my COTM cache is mandatory... Peace, Nolenator
Considering all of the group expeditions that are being set up to go and find it nolenator, I have a feeling that will be come true by default... Still gotta go out out there and get it myself.
-
Well that was weird!
Work fine now that I rebooted. Nervermind... -
Is anyone else having trouble getting to www.geocaching.com. When I click my bookmark that should take me to my profile I get:
404. That’s an error.
The requested URL /my/default.aspx was not found on this server. That’s all we know.
If I type the url www.geocaching.com direstly into the address bar it reroutes me to google. I can get to other web sites jsut fine. Including these forums (obviously).
Will try rebooting and see if that works but it is weird none the less...
-
Thanks for the support Abby.
B+L, I understand your point of view. My feeling is that there are only a handful of cachers that are even close to being able to qualify to find the final. If FrodoB can't even log it right away then chances are small that anyone else will be able to either meaning that most others will still have to go out and find several former COTM winners.
Fan of it or not, there are plenty of other challenges that allow for former finds, even ones that are archived. That is not why I decided to allow it but it made the decision easier. As I said before, the intent is not to make the overly difficult and plenty of people will still have to go out and find more COTM winners, including myslelf. I appriciate our input, really I do, but I'm goign to leave it as it stands, original finds on archived caches will count.
-
My intent was to draw attention to the COTM, not to create another difficult to achieve challenge, although I realize that there are a number of cachers that enjoy that sort of thing.
There could be a couple of unintended consequences. The most important being that at least one person has enough
caches to qualify, yet they are unable to complete the challenge until the one year moratorium
expires for them next January.
That is indeed an unintended consequence. I figured by allowing archived caches, that would negate the one year waiting period. Also, there are quite a few others available foe people that happens to go get without having to wait 4 months to do it.
-
Why the one year waiting period? That's a disincentive, as is the count those you've found already provision.
We are not fans of "time machine" challenges. Having said that, it looks like fun and it's a nice tribute to Brian as well.
We do not factor in COTM status when selecting caches. Maybe we should.
Really? We have six years of COTM winners - why is finding older caches a disincentive to do the challenge? It would be much more dodgy to create the challenge only allowing new COTM winners - we wouldn't want the challenge to skew nominations or voting, or for people to create caches, then stack votes, just to get COTM and become part of the challenge. That's why there's a rolling one-year blackout, which the COTM manager approved.
Think of this as the WSGA version of the History challenge - classic older caches in Washington - albeit not quite to the dawn of geocaching.
To the OP: The challenge was published Sept. 4; that was only four days ago. Patience, grasshopper.
Edit: Adding link to the challenge: WSGA Cache of the Month Challenge.
Thanks hydnsek, and yes, that provision was put in place as a suggetion by the COTM administrator when I brought up the idea for the challenge several months ago. The fear was exactly as hydnsek stated, that the challenge would affect the nominations and votes for caches that truly deserved COTM status. When I realized that the provision would result in barely enough active caches available for people to log to be able to qualify for the challenge, I decided to allow archived and/or previously logged COTM winners to qualify. Especially when you consider that several COTM's are high terrain difficult to get to cahces. My intent was to draw attention to the COTM, not to create another difficult to achieve challenge, although I realize that there are a number of cachers that enjoy that sort of thing.
-
Doing a bit of shameless self promotion here...
Perhaps it's location is the reason and since it is not a PMO cache I really don't know but I expected a bigger response to this cache. The rules are pretty simple, log 30 WSGA COTM winners that are more than a year old. Archived finds count. The cache itself is in Allanon's Forest so lots of opportunities to get other caches when you go out to find the final. Create YOUR boomark list today!
-
Are there other reviewers of earthcaches other than geoawareusa1 in the US. They have not been on the site in over a week...
-
Would you mind emailing the cache link in question? You have a bunch and I didn't find it right off. Thanks.
e-mail sent. Are you just curious?
A little background sometimes provides insight on a situation. I don't doubt you, but you never know.
I wouldn't lie to you deuce...
you most likely don't remember but you helped me with my very first Travel Bug issue and post in the forums nearly 4 years ago. -
Would you mind emailing the cache link in question? You have a bunch and I didn't find it right off. Thanks.
e-mail sent. Are you just curious?
-
How long have you waited for them to respond? If it's been a week contact your local reviewer.
In most cases where people don't respond, you get a proper response after you have deleted their Found it.
Edit: It would also be helpful to explain exactly why this is a problem. You might want to send them the details of this thread: Please Do Not Post TB Tracking Numbers Online!
thanks duece It has not been long since I sent the e-mail. I am just trying to prepare myself in case I do not hear back from them. Here is the e-mail I sent:
-- Copy of email sent to MoxieGrl --
Hi,
I apologize if this is a double reminder. I never got the notification that the e-mial was sent.
You found my cache in Snohomish Washington a few weeks ago and reported that you took a travel bug form the cache. You also took a picture of the TB and posted it with your log. The Travel Bug is still logged into the cache. If you removed it, I would appriciate it if you logged it out. I can explain how to do this if you do not know how.
Also, in the picture you posted with your log, the tracking number is clearly visible in the photo. This is not a good idea as people that have never found the Travel Bug can then log that they have found it. I know it sounds childish but some people never grow up. Please either modify the photo so that the tracking number is not visible or remove the photo from the log.
Thanks for your understanding.
FM
this might sound a little brusk but I am a tell it like it is type of guy. Hopefully they won't be offended and will respond to my request in a day or two.
Thanks for the info, I'll contact one of our local reviewers before deleting their log if they do not respond.
-
Moun10Bike commented on a post on the website forum saying that he has notified the team of this issue. It's happening to everyone and being worked on. I recomend patience...
...ten years have got behind you.
Nice try,
unfortunately forum sigs don't come through on quotes... 
-
Regarding summer: Crappy hides by new cachers are a year round phenomenon but I would agree that there are a higher degree of crappy hides that come out in the summer. They are mostly placed by kids, junior high age and high school with nothing better to do then to put a ziploc storage container they bought at Safeway in a shrub along the walking path that they walk with their mom every night. They don't last long and tend to get archived come winter when the kids are in school and have other activities to focus on.
-
Last few hours, all the caches I own or watch do the following..
Location: Washington, United States
found Peace Sign Series #18 - Anagrams, Yea Or Nay (Unknown Cache) at 8/20/2011
It does not say who found it. Sure I can go into the cache listing and see it, but that is an extra step. This just a glitch? I tried to search the forums to see if this was addressed already and I did not see it. If there was a topic or place for this already or better, I apologize in advance.
Strange they would implement a change at night like this, so I think its an error. Strange error though.
Moun10Bike commented on a post on the website forum saying that he has notified the team of this issue. It's happening to everyone and being worked on. I recomend patience...
-
This might be more appropriate for a different Forum but since it is TB related thought I'd start here. A user recently posted a photo of a travel bug they found in one of my caches along with their cache log. The photo clearly shows the tracking number on the dog tag. I have written to the poster of the log and asked them to modify the photo or remove it but my questions is, if they do not respond, as the Cache owner, can I remove the photo from the log without deleting it? If not would deleting the log be justified? I am all about proper trackable ettiquette so I want to do the righ tthing but I have never been faced with this issue before. The cacher is relatively new so if I can avoid deleting their log, that would be preferred.
Thanks for any input.
-
Nope, I menat in a log, and both of those methods work, Although Yuck's is a little easier to remember.
thanks to both of you.
Ok, Giving you the benefit of the doubt... 
Work fine now that I rebooted. Nervermind... 
you most likely don't remember but you helped me with my very first Travel Bug issue and post in the forums nearly 4 years ago.
Site Update (September 15th)
in General geocaching topics
Posted · Edited by FobesMan
Predicted responses to the update:
What the HELL were you guys thinking?
+1
I'm not sure I notice any differences...
I like it, the changes...
Why is everyone so mean? <3 <3 <3 The Lackeys <3 <3 <3 are just trying to make it better for us!
That's not what I asked for!
I like X but Y is stupid and Z makes my cache page look bad.
Why did you fix something that wasn't broken and then broke it by fixing it?
[enter your own prdiction here...]