ecanderson
-
Posts
5639 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by ecanderson
-
-
Seems intermittent. I noted the same thing, and copied/pasted the content of the email into the MC when I later noted that the email didn't seem to have hit there.
Unfortunately, it seems to be hit and miss as to whether email-to-MC transfers are going to occur, which is making email MC replies too unreliable to use at the moment.
-
Didn't know you'd been a popular topic here for a bit, eh?
Can't tell you how many times we've gone to log a cache, and your name is already there!
- 1
-
+1 using Firefox. Stuck at login. First time this link has failed for me.
+1 using Edge.
+1 with Chrome.
It's broke (sigh).
I wonder if we were enjoying a feature that they planned to take away from us, or whether it's just hosed at the moment.
-
Wish you'd taken enough log info to get a couple of actual caching handles with dates. With that kind of info, you can look at the logs of specific cachers to see where the intercept occurs.
-
15 hours ago, Viajero Perdido said:
Mexico has states too.
Si. Preferimos Quintana Roo.
-
Sweet. As an early adopter, I can only imagine the features this will bring to an AA platform. Very much looking forward to it.
-
Not as nicely done as the one in Utah.
-
All I'm seeing with Firefox 83.0 is blank white on both this page and the Dropbox page.
Dropbox starts to produce an image (I see the gray/white checkered image space), but then just white.
- 1
-
Yes, as I say, it comes up FINE on the phone display, but when Google Maps on the phone is rendered on the Android Auto screen version of Google Maps (the one with the completely different UI), you don't see those points.
-
1 hour ago, HHL said:
On your car's NavSat:
1. Open Google Maps
Step 1 will hang up most people. Opening Google Maps on a phone and using Android Auto or Car Play might work, except even then, the mobile version (at least for Android) of Google Maps does not seem to support pulling in the MyMaps for display through Android Auto. They show up fine on the phone, but not the vehicle version of the map.
I find it much easier just to export the day's run to my TomTom from GSAK.
-
2 hours ago, Lynx Humble said:
8 months later any update on this highly requested upgrade?
Yup.
Dozens more requests.
-
It's not that they are 'recorded' differently, it's that they are displayed differently. Still, consistency in rendering the database content for display would be nice.
-
1 minute ago, NYPaddleCacher said:
Though that would usually affect the terrain, not the difficulty rating.
I don't think that's what was meant by 'environment'. I believe it's referring to what I originally called 'context'.
-
1 minute ago, Goldenwattle said:
I would rarely comment on a cache rated too high, unless it was an extreme case, but I might comment on an underrated cache.
And a new CO learns nothing from that.
-
3 hours ago, arisoft said:
Intentionally underrated difficulty tends to create feedback but overrated won't do that
Some finders look at a cache rated too highly, and call it 'caching karma' (making up for others that were rated low and hard to find).
Others of us will comment either way if we feel the rating is 'off'. I've written quite a few logs where I said something along the order of "Felt guilty taking the 3.5 for this one". An example:
-
An excellent description of "context", Jeff.
-
To start, D ratings do tend to be a bit regional. As I have traveled, I've noticed easily a full point difference in how D is viewed from one region to another. Since most of your finds are in the same area as your hides, you should by now have a good feel for what the locals think is a 1.5 vs. a 2.5, etc.
Many people will point to the Clayjar (http://www.clayjar.com/gcrs/) method for evaluating their D/T ratings. There, you see 1.0 through 5.0 (you have to interpolate the .5's based up those).
But there are SO many factors involved since each of the Clayjar levels is also subjective. "Cache may be very well hidden, may be multi-leg, or may use clues to location." What is "very well hidden"?
We used to see a CO here who couldn't sort out hide difficulty from overall context. Yes, if you knew where to look, it was easy, but with loose coordinates in a 'haystack' of a forest ...
The context of the hide MUST be taken into account to provide a fair estimate of the difficulty to find a cache. That could be part of the issue you're facing.
What hints are being provided in the description, or as specific hints? The time to make the find, especially in a haystack, can be changed GREATLY by either of those.
-
Duplicate thread to this one
- 1
-
2 hours ago, Atlas Cached said:
It has been a decade since the original Montana was released, and a lot has happened since then, but I am certain I remember reading posts on multiple forums about the resistive layer on the Montana 6x0 display becoming brittle and cracking when used in cold weather (i.e. below freezing). Conversely, that same resistive film would expand and/or stretch when used in hot weather (i,e, direct sunlight >85°F), which would result in a screen that did not respond properly when touched and/or phantom screen presses occurring without ever touching the device. (Example 01) (Example 02)
Guess the old Oregon 450 is even better than I thought!
(Still available used at bargain prices.)
'Normal' resistive screens haven't done that. They were successfully used for eons in automotive PND applications where temperature extremes are FAR greater than you'd experience with any handheld. If true, the problem is with the Montana, not resistive screens in general.
-
+1 to 700 UNLESS you want to pay extra for camera and Garmin's maps.
-
10 hours ago, Chrysalides said:
Let's do one better than a virtual. Let's have an event there. Participants must show up in ape suit.
Who's going to be in charge of bringing in a tibia or two?
-
2 hours ago, Atlas Cached said:
Yes, easier to use in cold weather because your hands were gloved. Most glove manufacturers now provide some capacitive material in the pointer fingers of their gloves for this very purpose.
You can buy new gloves that do this, but even then, a small screen with fat glove fingers can be difficult to hit correctly. Heck, I screw up often enough on an Oregon sized screen with just my fingers. Much depends upon how heavy the gloves are.
Still, the idea that the resistive screens don't like cold weather -- just not true. I'm NOT in Arizona, I'm here in Colorado where we actually do get winter (though this year, I'm beginning to wonder!) and have had plenty of time caching in cold weather with a couple of previous generation Garmin touch screens. All good. There may be other reasons for preferring capacitive screens, but that wouldn't be one of them.
-
11 hours ago, Atlas Cached said:
Ice fishing sounds very cold. I do not think the Montana 6x0 touch screen resistive film likes cold weather. Also, the Oregon 7x0 is much more capable with many more features.
Gotta get out of Arizona more often!
We had nothing but resistive screens for YEARS and they were actually easier to use in cold weather - you could use the tip of your closed logging pen to activate the screen without even taking off your gloves. Touch my pen tip to this new Oregon 700 and you get nada.
- 1
-
4 hours ago, cerberus1 said:
Curious where you're seeing this. Thanks.
Nowhere. I typed that COMPLETELY in reverse! Should have read "are NOT also notified". I would love to see followup logs.
Utah Metal Monolith
in General geocaching topics
Posted
Scrap 301 stainless goes for about 31 cents a pound at the moment. I noted the estimated weight at 200lbs. Not sure I'd be willing to haul that much out of that location as $62 worth of scrap steel!