helix149
-
Posts
53 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by helix149
-
-
where did you find the pickle icon i wanna use it
-
Maybe on the cache detail page, where the attributes are listed, they could add a pickle icon.
ROFLMAO literally fell out of my chair AT WORK
-
sent you a pm thanks
-
Usually my XD40 subcompact.
Thats funny I bring my Sig p239 40 with me anytime I cache along with the rest of the usual.
-
We are coming to the area in early aug on a trip to the marlboro ranch and dont think we will be able to do any geocaching while there but would like to set a couple travel bugs free and would like some help if possible. Please message me or leave note here.
Thanks
Helix
-
I know many dont like micros and neither do I. Lately I have been wondering if they will be the eventual end of geocaching. We are lucky enough to live in an area that has over 2000 geocaches within 25 miles of the house unfortunately the majority of them are micros. It seems that there are so many micros with little or no thought to their placement that it has gotten to the point they are interfering with the placement of larger caches due to the over saturation rule. So why if so many feel the same way are there still so many micros placed around. This should be about quality not quantity and I fear if this trend continues we will not draw nearly as many new cachers to keep the sport growing. OK off my soap box and maybe off to find a good ole ammo can.
I would think that if you are so concerned about the amount of micro caches being placed that you might want to up the number of hides you have with the kind of cache you like. What keeps this sport/hobby going is people giving back by hiding caches for others to find. It never ceases to amaze me that some of the people who complain the most about micro caches are those with very few, if any, hides of their own. Filter out the micro caches if you dont' want to look for them and only use their location to determine where to hide caches of your own of the type and size you enjoy finding. Seems pretty simple to me.
Actually I have 3 ammo cans out already. One is listed here, one was donated to upgrade a micron cache near home owned by another cacher so it could be a tb hotel and is currently in place. The last is listed as a terra cache because my local review wouldnt get off his pedistal over like 10 or 15 feet and ok it where I had placed it. I couldnt move it further away in the same area for safety reasons but the reviewer didnt want to hear that so rather than argue more I listed it elsewhere and left him on his pedistal.
-
I know many dont like micros and neither do I. Lately I have been wondering if they will be the eventual end of geocaching. We are lucky enough to live in an area that has over 2000 geocaches within 25 miles of the house unfortunately the majority of them are micros. It seems that there are so many micros with little or no thought to their placement that it has gotten to the point they are interfering with the placement of larger caches due to the over saturation rule. So why if so many feel the same way are there still so many micros placed around. This should be about quality not quantity and I fear if this trend continues we will not draw nearly as many new cachers to keep the sport growing. OK off my soap box and maybe off to find a good ole ammo can.
-
personally I love the idea but I would expect you to get poor reviews here about the idea from what I have seen in the past. I would say you would lean toward the ok much much more if you did a couple things one of which you already mentioned, cover hooks with plastic tubing and ask in the listing that others do the same. The other that will likely help your cause greatly is to make it VERY clear in the cache listing that it is a lure themed cache and NOT SAFE for unsupervised children. If you do these things some will still view it poorly however I believe the community would be more likely to have a more positive attitude about the cache.
As a side note I would not use anything other than a Good condition ammo can for this cache as water is an enemy to hooks and to most people lures are useless with rusty hooks and do not, or are not capable of, replace hooks.
-
We went after GC16PDF in east TN this past weekend on an excursion not knowing it was lonely until we read the logs. It had been 1 year, to the day, from its last find and thanks to it not only being somewhat of a challenge to get to but also because it was an AMMO CAN it was in great shape and bone dry even though it was within feet of the water line as well as only 20 or 30 feet from the falls themselves. It was interesting to get to a place to park the car first then interesting to get down to it. We actually used a rope around a tree so that I could make my way down to hunt it up and bring it back. It was a blast and took us to a waterfall that isn't marked and has no true trail nor can it be seen from the road. I will be heading back to find more lonelies in this area and hopefully soon. I do have to say they are my favorite already in my short stint in the game however I have to admit I prefer to go after these types of caches solo as I find the solitude much more enjoyable than the complaining I usually get.
-
The current workaround would have to involve creating a Pocket Query that includes "Are available to all users" and previewing that as a map.
Or, in the original example, you could log in from the non-PM account on both computers.
You are missing the point. I want to see all the caches but it would be nice also to have an indication on the map of which type of cache it is. Just like you can see the difference between active and inactive caches as well as mystery or multi stage caches. In that way we would be able to make better decisions on whether to look at the cache more closely or if we want to pass it up or if we need to show others in the household on our computer where it is on the map so they can join in the decision whether to add it to the days attempt list or not.
-
I like this idea. We're premium members so it's not a finding or logging issue. It's this - if I'm looking at caches using the google map feature, which I love to do, and click on a cache, I don't like finding out at that point that I'm on the audit list of some PMOC. I'd rather know that before I click on the cache. I might choose not to click on it simply to avoid being on the audit list. Not a big deal, but thought I'd mention it in support of the enhancement.
Thanks.
Didn't think of that but that is a good point as well. I know many of us both sm and pm search for caches with the map feature and if I am just perusing as I often do at work there is no reason to add to the audit list when I often dont intend on hunting the cache anytime in the near future
-
Its not about logging its about sitting next to each other on separate laptops planning a day of caching using the map feature. On my map PM caches are shown on hers they are not so when I open it not knowing it is a PM cache and start talking about it she cannot even see the location let alone have access to the cache info on her computer. If the cache was on the map in a different color such as red I would know it is a PM cache and that if I was interested in it I would have to show it to her on my pute. It would save alot of headache if they were in a dif color. The shading is different on caches that are temp disabled caches so it is doable.
I hear you, That's usually the way I pick my Caches too. Sounds like a good idea to me, and should be easy enough...but maybe not a high priority.
I can see the blank stare now...Umm...what the ....are you talking abut...There are only three on the map...
Oh yeah, I seem to remember there being problems with people deducing the Cache location from the maps, and getting all uppity when they were not allowed to log it.
logging premium caches for non premium is actually really easy to do as there is a back door in place where they can log but see no information about the cache we have done it several times If you dont know how shoot me an email through geocachin.com and ill send send you instructions
-
Requst members only caches be a different color on map for easy identification.
This would make it much easier when looking at map with multiple levels of accounts in same home and premium member is talking to standard member.
If there are premium and non premium members in the same household, why would it matter. The non PMO can just use the backdoor GS put in for such occasions to log it.
Its not about logging its about sitting next to each other on separate laptops planning a day of caching using the map feature. On my map PM caches are shown on hers they are not so when I open it not knowing it is a PM cache and start talking about it she cannot even see the location let alone have access to the cache info on her computer. If the cache was on the map in a different color such as red I would know it is a PM cache and that if I was interested in it I would have to show it to her on my pute. It would save alot of headache if they were in a dif color. The shading is different on caches that are temp disabled caches so it is doable.
-
Requst members only caches be a different color on map for easy identification.
This would make it much easier when looking at map with multiple levels of accounts in same home and premium member is talking to standard member.
-
The part about it "not being safe" does not come into consideration when the cache is reviewed.
And can you point out where in the current Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines is states that having an "inaccessible" obstacle between caches is grounds for placing them closer together? I'm not seeing it.
No I cannot however it is also not in the rules but instead HAS been left as a guideline that caches SHOULD in most cases be .1 miles apart these two would have been if it were not for the circumstances.
-
You must have also missed that due to the terrain you cannot access one cache from the other without traveling further than 528 ft. Caches are approved regularly because of a highway or a water source in between them even though you could grab both caches by moving less then 528 ft swimming/boating or by crossing the highway by foot. This was not the case here even with climbing equipment it is not safe and may not be possible to access both caches without traveling more than the 528 feet required.
-
Looking at the map - there is a prior cache that appears closer than .1 mile from yours.
The cache that was published is just a little over .1 miles away from the other cache near this area. However many if not most would find it impossible to travel as the crow flies between them. As I had stated earlier neither of the caches could have been moved further in the directions necessary to make this grouping work in a safe manner either. I was not and am not willing to further argue this point with the original reviewer who didn't in my opinion pay attention to the notes left for them and that is fine they are busy. I moved the unpublished cache just slightly and posted it on another site. If the site had more traffic in this area both would be on the site. I will be placing more on this site as well as that site in the future as they both have their pluses.
On another note I do not appreciate the moderators hijacking this thread and in my opinion taking it off topic. My concerns were serious concerns as these were both good caches in great locations using ammo cans as containers. It would have been different if I was trying to place a micro at a mc d's across the street from a micro placed at yet another waffle house. This was not the case and my concerns are valid yet I doubt I will ever see a moderator or a reviewer going to the location to see for themselves as it is there has only been one find since the cache was published. Mods Before you start ranting I know reviewers cannot Physically check every cache that is in question and I am not and did not ask that of the reviewer even though I did Offer it as an option if they wanted to.
My original point is while the guideline is ok there is room for improvement and if it is going to be treated like a black and white rule by reviewers it should be called a rule not called a guideline. There was not any discussion in the case of the caches in question. I was simply shot down cold even though it had been recommended that I place them the best I could and leave a note for the reviewer when I voiced concerns about being just outside meeting the guideline in these forums.
-
Without question if we do one or both they will be good condition ammo cans and close to home so regular maintenance can be performed.
-
KBI I hope you dont hate me But I am prolly gonna steal your idea for a cache near home and I posted a thread pertaining to it please by all means join in that discussion as well
-
Thinking about putting out a book and or dvd trade cache book would be open to everyone because of value dvd cache would be a pm cache. Have you seen or placed one. Opinions?? Experiences??
-
I have run into similar problems on other sites. Two things I use a 10 inch notebook and sometimes cannot scroll down far enough if this is the case for you log in on another computer once agree and you should be set second I have seen similar issues on some sites because I use google crome (love it by the way) and some do not yet fully support it in such cases I open explorer do what is necessary then log back in in crome all is good. Hope this helps
-
OK, you can't move cache two.
Move cache one twenty feet.
As I stated earlier that was not an option either moving cache one 20 feet would mean moving it to a place that would also be unsafe for most cachers. I actually looked at placing cache one 20 or 30 feet from where it was and while I could get there I am In excellent shape with years of hiking and climbing experience my roommate that is in more "average" shape with some hiking experience needed me to rope her into and out of the area where it would have to go due to a very steep clay hill that was the only relatively safe way into it. She still fell and bruised herself up pretty badly. Going up and down this hillside also damaged the environment and growth in this area and I am not going to intentionally send traffic into an area that is that fragile. If people have the skill level to explore the area they can decide to do so if they wish but in my opinion its not appropriate for our game to intentionally send someone to an area if they "will" cause damage to get there.
-
Is this one of the caches in question?
http://www.geocaching.com/map/default.aspx...;zm=19&mt=k
Just out of Knoxville, TN
I'm not seeing a cliff. If a revewer saw this maybe they would not see the problem.
I must have the wrong cache. GC21DFR
Yep thats one of them the cliffs are old dry quarry cliffs with trees at the top and the bottom thats why you cant see them on sat photos. Go out and grab the smiley then continue down the trail and you will see what I am talking about.
-
Exceptions should be rare.
Safety is generally not a reason to either place or not place a cache so I can't see where safety should be an argument to grant a saturation guideline exception. I really don't want to see Groundspeak or any volunteer reviewers get into the business of trying to determine what is or is not "safe".
Safety was one of the reasons, necessary travel distance was the other. With cliff top bungalow if I had moved it further from boulder dash safety would be a concern for it and same for boulder dash it is a catch 22 situation as far as the distance traveled issue the forced distance traveled for these two would be over the .1 mile necessary albeit only slightly so either way you look at it it could have had an exception. I also offered to send pictures or personally meet a reviewer or I would have if they wanted met a representative they sent and went to the area with them then waited after return for a decision. If this could have been done I would have felt much better about the decision that was rendered instead of feeling like they scanned over the text not actually reading it then looked at the coords and blocked both from being approved until one was moved. Ultimately the issue is already solved and wont be changed but I wanted to bring the overall scenario to the attention on GS and the community. I am not mad at the reviewer or Gs and that is on of the reasons for keeping the reviewers name out of this but I do feel there is room for improvement without depredation of the current system.
Best Caches on Earth
in General geocaching topics
Posted
Check out Buzzards Roost GCYD4M. It Is NOT a Micro and has an Amazing view along with being very close to the Appalachian trail and a bunch of rafting companies. It is about a 9 mile hike round trip but worth every step and there are 7 or 8 caches in all along the trail. I enjoyed it so much i intend to go back this fall with company to camp at the roost and see the fall colors,