derangedlunatech
-
Posts
121 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by derangedlunatech
-
-
That speaks for itself that a lame location or technique makes for a lame cache... don't think the size of the container has much to do with that. I would agree that grabbing a bag of free 35mm canisters from Walgreens, tearing up a sheet of paper and stuffing it somewhere is easy compared to spending the money on an ammo can or painting up a Lock-n-Lock and and buying the swag to load it with then hauling it out to find a spot. And lame caches are probably mostly due to people not willing to put much effort or creativity into their hides so would also choose the easy (cheaper) route for the container. But I don't think anyone can state that any cache is lame just due to the fact that it's a micro. Every cache needs to be judged on it's own merits.
Absolutely agree. I just think that the micro begs to be "shotgunned." Small, cheap, minimal maintenance, can be placed anywhere.
I mostly cache in an urban environment, where stashing an ammo can, or even a decent sized lock 'n lock can be pretty challenging. There's a few locals who do it very well. In fact there was one I fund recently that I commented not only on its location, but also how it was hidden almost in plain sight. It really amazed me - there's an art to that. The same hider stuck a micro in a great spot almost literally right across the street from my house, and it took me 6 tries before I found it. Again - it was a great use of a micro.
I tend to think (and I could be wrong, of course) that spend 5-10 bucks on an ammo can, + stocking it, + camo (if desired) to hide somewhere (especially in an urban environment) and you put some care into the hide - especially that it be unlikely to be muggled - or worse yet, set off a bomb scare. But a micro? Heck, like you said - a buck and a piece of paper, throw it anywhere.
I recently made up 6 caches to be placed...when I find the right spot. 3 micros and 3 lock 'n locks. Been carrying them with me for 2 weeks now - and although there are plenty of places I *could* put them - I'm looking for places where I *want to* put them. Might take me a while, but that's how it goes.
-
Yes, I apologize to all. In my quick read of the post, I had assumed that OReviewer was actually addressing the issue that was presented, not a completely different one. The issue itself, and related questions about it still stand unanswered.
-
Please go back and read my message. I never claimed there was an answer to this thread. I said that, from my experience, there isn't really that big of a problem puzzles/multis worth the time of programmers. The problem is with posted coordinates and people not checking them.
Please go back and reread what you posted. You stated:
People have the tools to check this and don't.
In response to the point that it is difficult with caches that are not at the posted locations, like puzzles. I asked specifically what tools I have available to tell me that I am in the vicinity of a cache that is not at the posted location (which is the topic of the thread), and you went on to illustrate the problem presented by the OP.
Your point is well taken that some people may not check the posted coordinates before posting their own. But that wasn't the question presented in this thread.
Again, I'll bring up the illustration that I asked about earlier - there is a park right down the street from me. It is a puzzle cache that essentially has the solver walk the entire perimiter of the small park. There are places that I could hide in this park that would be > .1 mile from the posted coordinates. There are places where I could hide that would be >.1 mile from the actual location. There is nowhere that is > .1 mile from the various waypoints along the way. Supposing that I wanted to do my due diligence before submitting a cache to a reviewer, how could I possibly tell that any cache I placed in this park would not be OK, short of doing the entire cache myself? THAT is the topic being addressed - and I imagine that it is not all that rare of an occurrance, based on some of the responses in this thread.
-
OReviewer clearly states that this only helps with the posted coords.
For the record, OReviewer stated initially:
People have the tools to check this and don't.
...then went on to illustrate that we can't really do it, which was the OPs point to begin with. That statement was what i was addressing. Please follow the quotes.
-
Other then not having a residing spot for TB's and geocoins, it's starting to sound like people that profoundly like ammo can's over micros are saying so because they're just plain old easier to find. I know some people like to walk to ground zero and hear that clunk of an ammo can at thier first hiking stick poke under the one lone tree within 50-feet, but some of us would rather get to ground zero and then try to out think the owner. Or place caches that will make people try to out think us.
So far, from what I've seen in my limited caching experience, it strikes me that larger caches seem to be better thought-out and more interesting locations. I have seen a few micros where the locations were great, and a micro was the only thing that would work well there. I've also seen several where the deciding factor to place them seemed to be "there's no other caches within .1 mile."
-
No, White Castle already does that. And by only squaring the burger, they're throwing off the shakles of uniformity, which is darkly ironic for a fast food chain.
Besides, if you are going to go with a square bun, you can't then neglect the tomato, onion, and pickle.
White Castle is like the "pointless micro-spew" of fast food
-
Please don't say that there are tools in place that address the problem when there are not.
There aren't tools - we're just discussing the possibility.
I am aware of this. OReviewer said there were. Please follow the quotes.
-
TFTDP
-
Help a newbie out here - how can I check the location of a cache with a location that is not published, short of doing the cache and finding it myself?
Go to http://www.geocaching.com/seek/
On this page, enter the coords at the "Latitude Longitude Search" area.
The next page will tell you how close it is to another cache. Again, this will help you with posted coordinates only but it still helps!
Example, I want to hide a cache at N 39° 59.498 W 075° 11.772. I put the coords in, hit search and get thi page. I can see that I am only 93 feet from another cache and that won't fly.
Well therein lies the problem. If the published coords are incorrect, that does me no good. As one person in the thread mentioned, they ran across a puzzle cache that was 3 towns over from the published coords.
That's no good. Please don't say that there are tools in place that address the problem when there are not.
-
From a reviewing stand point, for every 10 caches that have a proximity issue, ~9 of them are with the posted coordinate of a multi, an onsite puzzle or a traditional cache. A noticeable portion of the time is it with the cache hiders own caches.
People have the tools to check this and don't. I wouldn't expect an automated way to check thing to change that too much.
Help a newbie out here - how can I check the location of a cache with a location that is not published, short of doing the cache and finding it myself?
For example - at a park near my house, there's a puzzle that basically takes you for a walk around the perimiter of the park. The only published coords is the start point. Let's say I wanted to hide a cache in this park, saw that it was > .1 mile from the published coords, how could I tell?
-
...and I choose not to eat at Wendys because I think that square hamburgers are unAmerican. Which I'm sure everyone on here cares as much about as they do your choice not to eat at CB *shrug*
-
Another solution would be for people to use posted coordinates for puzzle caches that are within a mile or two of the actual location, like the guidelines state.
More like .1 mile, I would think - since that is the distance limit for placing caches.
Or maybe just not count puzzle caches when judging proximity.
-
Oh but you can - run your PQ by date placed instead of a simple radius and there will never be any overlap.
How exactly do you mean?
The way I have changed mine in the last few days is by cache size. But that has its limitations as well.
(BTW - when I said overlapping physically, I don't mean the entire search overlaps - I mean that I have different centers for the search, and parts of some of the circles overlap)
-
My preference is to solve real problems.
If saturation is an issue the BLM he was talking to would bring it up.
Is it policy to ignore land managers? I know that this happens on occasion but why not have that be the exception to the rule?
It seems to me (and I'm just making a SWAG here) that the saturation issue (as it applies to geocaching) is not a concern of the BLM manager. His or her concern is the impact on the land itself, not the impact on geocaching.
The reviewer, on the other hand, has to balance the 2 - what is in the best interests of the land manager and the best interests of geocaching.
Not saying that I agree or disagree with this - just my thought as I read this.
-
-
-
For me it has nothing to do with the size of the cache and everything to do with location. I did a study and
87.3 percent of micros are hidden lame spots. To contrast that, only 11.6 percent of ammo boxes are hidden in lame spots. Tupperware is slightly higher, with 15.1 percent hidden in lame spots.
Was that based on random samples, or were all caches counted?
-
I run GSAK on Vista Home Basic with no problems. Can't help with much more than that.
-
… and then of the first 7 responses, 5 had to make what they thought to be clever comments about genocide – shame on you and the rest of the clever genocide ‘raters’ as well.
No-one said anything about genocide...
Perhaps what you meant was "geocide" - and that wasn't mentioned until post #30.
-
you do realise that you will never look at small dark holes, or ivy covered trees in the same way now. Always wondering.....
HAH Truth!
-
Im new to geocaching. I've read through some of these forums but cant find my answer.
In some of my caches, the term FTF is used. What does that mean?
First to Find.
You might want to take a gander at this thread - lots of good info in there, including a lot of the common abbreviations and terms.
-
Why the lack of love for Nano's? Sure, they are frustrating to find, but I have a good time looking for them (usually). There is a set of local nano's at various bus stops around town. Considering I work for the bus system, its kinda fun to combine work and fun with that.
Off topic, but my outlook is if you dont like a cache type, just dont go looking for them. Others might enjoy it. I am not one for puzzle caches, so I just filter them out.
Actually, what I said was more of a jab at the constant micro whining.
I'm not a huge fan of them, but I don't hate them either. But since most of my caching is done with my 6-year old, and for him the fun of the caching is "the treasure hunt" (not much treasure to be found in micros), so I don't usually bother looking for them. Doesn't mean I won't grab one if I'm near it tho...
-
I can see a good and practical application or this - if you have PQs that overlap physically, it would be kinda nice to have some way to filter out caches that appear in PQ A when you run PQ B...
But generally speaking I agree - it would not be good to spend a day looking for a cache that had been archived a month ago...
-
Does anyone know where I can buy logs for the Nano caches? I know when you buy one it comes with an extra log, but sooner or later your going to need a fresh one without having to buy another cache.
Figured someone here might know.
The easy solution to this problem is to plant bigger caches
(Sorry - I couldn't resist...)
Advanced Nuvi Macro
in GPS technology and devices
Posted
jjreds,
The new changes are awesome!
I do have one question/feature request: How difficult would it be to separate the functions of the "use my own icons and sounds" into "use my own icons" and "use my own sounds?"
I have been manually replacing the wav file every time I run the macro because the default "DING!!!!!" is way too loud on my 200w, and I'm worried it's going to blow out the speakers. If I turn the volume down, it goes so low I can't hear directions on it.
It would be nice if I could somehow set it up so that I don't have to manually change out the wav every time I set up new files to export. Or maybe if there was a manual way I could do this without having to swap the file every time, that would be cool too...
And if not - then oh well - I'll live with the extra step