Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by markandsandy

  1. As much as I would like to accomodate the event of our new residents (I do want to meet them), I'm inclined to stick to the main plan and perhaps start this with a meetup at 10AM so we can be back at the trailhead for lunch.

    What would be ETA back at the trailhead afterward? I mean, if we start early enough, some of us could go to Issaquah afterward, instead of before....

    That depends entirely on the turnback point. Mom can take the entire loop which we ultimately want to do, but I can't speak for LandRover's Mom. I'll put it to you this way, if you feel you need to forage ahead to grab the caches and/or turn back early, our feelings won't be hurt. :D It still counts as an HOTM. :huh:


    Trail conditions I was going to post yesterday were going to be favorable, but I'm afraid part of it now may be worse than what was provided to me. (Mom rode her horse through there Monday morning before the storm.) Most of the trail is groomed but there are parts that become mucky when wet.

    I guess I was hinting that if we started a tad earlier, say at 9 am (the usual time), it might dovetail better with the other event, since a few folks wanted to do both. :D Selfishly, I was hoping to do the HOTM with friends as a birthday treat, then meet avroair at his event, but sounds like coordinating the two isn't in the cards. C'est la vie, it's your hike with your mom! I'll share birthday cake with the 1yo in Issaquah. Tasty!


    This discussion isn't over yet. Stay tuned.

    An earlier time would not be a problem for us, even though we have such a long way to go to get there. :D

  2. Create a bookmark list of your DNFs. When you view your bookmarks, there is a button to create a pocket query. Any new DNFs that you add to the bookmark will automatically be included the next time you run that query.

  3. Hi Programmers!!!! This one is for you. In Minnesota the State Parks are doing a Critter Challenge. 72 parks all done by "MN State Parks". Right now I don't think I can do a query for one group that placed all 72...


    Is there a way that this can happen for the future? The challenge is for 3 years so you have a bit of time "grin".


    Love the ease of the web site, and Groundspeak.


    Thanks Anna "Rosinante"

    There have been requests before for the ability to do a query based on cache owner, or keywords. It would be nice.


    But for this case there appears to be a public bookmark of the caches that you can create a PQ from: State Park Wildlife Safari

  4. Next hike is called Mum's the Word. It is scheduled for Mom's day on May 10.

    This one is practically in our backyard, so we plan to join you. Neither mom will be with us, however. Hopefully we will be able to keep up with your mom. :sad:

  5. I'm curious why we need two threads on the subject.

    The other thread is for closed roads, this is for opened roads. Don't you understand the difference? :(




    Seriously, they probably could be combined.

  6. Ours is one of those names that people THINK they understand, but they are WRONG.


    My wife and I cache as a team, but our names are not mark and sandy. No immediate family members with those names either.


    It all started with a coat. My wife works for a company that is a wholesale manufacturer and supplier of clothing. She bought me a coat for hiking that had a defect, but it had the name Mark embroidered on it. She started joking about me being her boyfriend 'Mark'.


    The Sandy part came about when a Starbucks employee mis-introduced my wife as 'Sandy'. Since they already knew about my 'Mark' alias, we became Mark and Sandy.


    Now when we go in for coffee, they sometimes call us by our real names, and sometimes as Mark and Sandy. It really confuses the new employees. :o

  7. As much as I want to climb the Monkey Tripod (I haven't climbed a tower like that since the 60's), I'm going to have to pass as I have other commitments. Have to do it some other day. Have fun everybody, and DON'T LOOK DOWN!

  8. I'll admit, I did this numerous times in the years BC (Before Caching). The easiest car I had to get into was a '74 Pinto stationwagon. The windows by the rear seat were hinged at the front, with a latch at the back. You could pop the hinges out of the frame and open the window. Unfortunately, the last time I did this I didn't get the hinges reseated properly, and several weeks later they decided to pop out by themselves - on the freeway at 55MPH. Since the window was still attached by the latch, it didn't just fall off, it exploded - little pieces of glass everywhere. Sounded like a shotgun blast right behind my head.


    I haven't locked them into my truck yet. Partly because I have gotten into the habit of always checking (multiple times) where the keys are before closing the door, and usually have them in my hand just to be sure, even if I'm not locking the door. Also the truck beeps when I open the door and the keys are in the ignition.


    And I got to ride in the front seat of both the police car and the county sheriff's car, which was a definite first -

    First time in the FRONT seat... ;)

  9. Well, let's put it this way. You need to have at least visited the cache yourself to be able to log a bug through it.


    Thanks, kind of what I thought. I will be grabbing mostly stuff that I drive to anyway. I'm not planning any 3 or 4 mile hikes to a cache and if I was I wouldn't have dipped those.


    I was just wondering if there was an unwritten rule, like within 100 yards or a 1/2 mile or something.


    I'm strict concerning travelers so I'll only log a bug that I can at least wave over the top of an open container. Logging a bug for being in the proximity starts pushing the boundaries of virtual logging.

    My one exception to what BlueDeuce said is I will log my truck into an event, even if I can't wave it over the top of the building ;), but it does have to make it to the parking lot.

  10. From the cache listing requirements:

    It may be difficult to fulfill your maintenance obligations if you place a cache while traveling on vacation or otherwise outside of your normal caching area. These caches may not be published unless you are able to demonstrate an acceptable maintenance plan.

    Since you would not be able to show that you actually had someone who would maintain the cache, it probably would not even be published.

  11. On Another Note:


    I asked this question a ways back, but suspect it got missed as the last post on a page:


    While turning an ALR into a real, workable puzzle will solve some of the issues with this new guideline, there are still others that will be nonviable as an Unknown Cache.


    Groundspeak's apparent solution is to convert these caches into Traditionals.

    The solution is not to turn them into Traditionals, but if the ALR was the only reason they are a 'Mystery', removing the ALR changes the listing to reflect what they actually are.


    Caches with an optional task retain the same type as they would without the optional task. If your cache was listed as "Mystery" solely because of the ALR, then, once you have changed the wording to remove the ALR altogether or change it into an optional simple task, please contact your reviewer to have the cache type changed to its "natural" value.




    Since I've been here in the forums, any time someone suggests that they want to turn a Multi into a Traditional, or vice versa, someone (usually a reviewer, it seems) chimes in that the CO is better off archiving the cache and resubmitting it as the new cache type, so as not to change other cachers' history. Has this logic gone out the window?


    It has. Why? Can you imagine the outcry that would happen if caches everywhere were suddenly archived because of their ALR? TPTB realize they'd have a whole lot more upset people if they did this the right way, so they're taking the dodge.


    If Groundspeak wants to make this change, I think they need to bite the bullet and tell people to archive & re-list rather than try and take the easy way out.

    The difference that I see between this and the changing the cache type examples that you mention, lies in the 'once you have changed the wording to remove the ALR altogether or change it into an optional simple task' part of statement by MissJenn. If that is all you are doing, then changing it to its real type will more accurately reflect a cacher's history, it will now show what they really found. If I shoot a wolf in sheeps clothing, it's still a wolf.


    If the cache is actually changed, making the type truly different than it was, i.e. a Multi into a Traditional, or vice versa, I would think the appropraite thing to do would be to archive and resubmit and the previous finders histories are still correct, and future finders histories are correct.

  12. I don't have time to spend completely solving it, but in just a few minutes time I identified which barcode type it was, and the part I have read makes sense. My bet is that by the end of the day someone in this thread will have a solution.

    Your doing something better than the people that make barcode reading software then. I sent the pics to three companies. None could read it. They told me it looks like a mix of two types of barcodes.


    What software were you using?

    Since it was pointed out later in the thread that the OT is asking whether or not to have the reviewer ask the owner to prove it's solvable, I won't give any details about my approach here. If my approach doesn't break down, and if I do complete the task, and the owner verifies my solution, I will post that it is solvable. But as someone else pointed out, just because nobody has actually found it doesn't mean that nobody has solved it. I also have a backlog of solved puzzles that I haven't found yet.


    As far as the original topic: It's rated a 5 star difficulty, so it's not expected to be any easy solution. If you can't solve it, then you can't solve it. The owner doesn't have to prove anything to you.

  13. Ok, I'm putting it out there now. May 10th, Mother's Day HOTM.

    Oh boy, a birthday hike (for me)! :D

    Who's bringing the cake?

    Don't know about that, but clearly, a cache must be placed. :D

    I can see it now. An ammo can painted to look like a cake :P .

  14. I don't have time to spend completely solving it, but in just a few minutes time I identified which barcode type it was, and the part I have read makes sense. My bet is that by the end of the day someone in this thread will have a solution.

  15. Thank you all for some great suggestions. I never thought about any of these. It seems that I have so much to learn about this site and all it's features. One question, though. How do I create an unpublished cache? I've never hidden a cache, myself, but I've visited the online form and know the procedure. Is it as simple as unchecking the box next to this paragraph, "Yes, this listing is active (For new listings, if you want to work on this listing before it is reviewed, uncheck this box. Reviewers will only see the listing in the queue when it is checked.)" Or is there something else to it? Thanks again.

    That's pretty much it (others will chime in, hopefully, with other hints and tips). You'll need to choose coordinates for your unpublished cache that don't conflict with possible future caches. Otherwise, when someone goes to publish their own, real, cache, the reviewer could see your unpublished cache as a conflict in terms of the minimum-distance-between-caches guideline. Maybe the middle of a big lake near you. :blink: I have three published caches of my own, so I just used the coordinates of one of my actual caches. That should avoid any potential conflicts.



    There's one more step you can do, and that is to archive the cache listing as well. You will still be able to access it, but that eliminates the coordinate conflict issue.

  • Create New...