Jump to content

Backwards Charlie from Austin

+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Backwards Charlie from Austin

  1. While grocery shopping a while ago I passed the cosmetics counter in the grocery store and noticed the compacts. The face powder didn't interest me, but the 2 inch mirror did. While looking at them I also noticed one that didn't have any face powder in it, only two mirrors, one a regular mirror and one a magnifying mirror. Just the thing for geocaching! It comes in handy when looking for micros attached to benches. Just sit on the bench, open the mirror and palm it in your hand and sweep your hand around. Muggles don't notice anything unusual. (At least not any more unusual than normal for a city whose motto is "Keep Austin Weird!" ) Happy Geocaching, Backwards Charlie from Austin
  2. Hey, Goodbuddy and Ft. Meade! I was an Air Force officer assigned to the National Security Agency during the Vietnam era so I am familiar with those two places.
  3. When there is something to say about a cache other than TFTC, I try to take the time to say it in the on-line log.
  4. If the additional logging requirements are stated on the listing page, then I can decide if I want to search for the cache or not. If I do decide to search for the cache and find it, I will either comply with the additional logging requirements and get a smiley, or I will just post a note and not get a smiley. Luckily for me, the number of caches with silly logging requirements has been very small so far (488 smileys out of about 600 searched for, with only 2 notes instead of smileys).
  5. I've never used the Ignore button. I find that the people(?) that have nothing positive to contribute to the forums seem to get bored and drop out after a while.
  6. If I am reading you right, you want a method for assuring that abandoned caches that are archived are removed. If so, that is a good idea, but so far nobody has suggested any formal way of doing it. Maybe we can get some people to volunteer to be "archived cache removers" and have reviewers send them lists of archived caches to be removed?
  7. Briansnat must not be a government bureaucrat. Having been one for many years, I am well aware that some parts of the mission statement and regulations are strictly enforced while other parts are ignored, depending on who is in charge. And this is quite logical since in almost all government agencies there are conflicts within their mission statements and regulations that cannot all be enforced at the same time. The mission statements and regulations are always political compromises.
  8. I have never hidden a cache and do not feel that I am any less a geocacher for it. I am in a cache-rich area and have found a few good places to place a cache, but in each case they were too close to an existing cache, some of which were just "micro spew." Unfortunately, the few areas where a cache can be placed do not have any good hiding locations that I can find. But some other more imagitive local geocachers have found hiding locations in some of them so the available areas are getting fewer and fewer. I try to keep the sport going in my own way. When I am travelling in sparcely populated (people and geocaches) areas I carry some cache supplies with me so I can repair any geocache I come across that is in need of repairing and then notify the owner about it. Also I have several local caches on my watchlist where I live closer to the cache than the cache owner does. So when somebody reports problems with the cache and I am in town I will check the cache and report to the owner what I found and/or did. You play the game your way, I will play the game my way. As long as we both go by the rules/guidlines of gc.com, then we are both geocachers.
  9. Because then it's just my opinion. The idea was to get a consensus. Edit: Plus we can do it that way now and nobody ever does. But that's understandable because most people don't like being the bad guy! I don't know about other people, but I have no hesitation about posting SBAs. I've never posted an SBA for a "lame" cache, but many for missing caches that the owner does nothing about.
  10. horsegeeks, you are right, it is a game to enjoy. But as with all other games involving more than one player, there are rules to follow. If you don't want to follow the rules, then don't expect to get credit for "finds" that are not within the rules/guidelines. Just enjoy the experience of "finding" them. I've enjoyed the experience of visiting a cache more than once, but I only log one "find" per cache.
  11. Having read through this and other threads about the problems caused by GW4, I do not recall anybody saying that pocket caches should be banned per se. What is objectionable is the logging on GC.com of "finds" of things that do not meet the guidelines of GC.com. Nor do many object to you playing the game your way. What is objectionable is trying to get credit for things that do not meet the guidelines of GC.com.
  12. Celticwulf, it would be fine with me. from this time forward. However, I have problems with retroactive rule changes. It's not kosher to make actions that were legal at the time illegal.
  13. Having organized events for several different types of organizations I know that the first thing to do is to become familiar with the rules of the organization so the event does not run afoul of the rules. Common sense, which of course is not commonly used. Sorry if this comes off as an attack of SDS, I know he meant well. But foolishness is foolishness.
  14. Geocahing.com aka Groundspeak is a private company. They have a set of guidlines we all agree to follow when we hide a cache. If you do not like the guidlines there are other cache listing services you can use. Traveling cache are not allowed, it is in the guidlines, try reading them. Sure is about people as well as the search, but how does it being about people as well as the search make OK to violate the guidlines? I keep hearing this lame argument that it is about someones style of play, or how you play the game, what a bunch of bull. That is like saying if a sports team does not like some rule they can change it to suit their style of play. Mabe a baseball team could have six outfielders, or a football team could have an extra 5 palyers on the field. May a basket ball team could have 8 players on the court at one time. JV has stolen my thunder He is correct that Groundspeak.com is a private company that has a set of rules/guidelines that we have all agreed to follow when we signed up as members. You can play the game of geocaching any way you want as long as it does not violate the rules/guidelines. If you cannot abide by the rules/guidelines of this web site, then you are free to take your game to another web site. Or you can try to persuade Jeremy & Co. to change the rules to fit your style of play. As in real life, if you want to violate the rules, you must be willing to accept the consequences. If you cannot accept the consequences of your actions, then abide by the rules or leave! Jeremy & Co. have been a little lax in enforcing the rules in the past. I think the abuses of the rules that took place at GW4 have shown them the folly of laxity. But they cannot enforce the rules all by themselves. When we notice possible rule violations, we should politely point them out to the violator, the cache owner, a reviewer, or gc.com, as appropriate.
  15. I have Firefox and all I get is a white square where the old map used to be. Same with the "printer friendly" page. So, unless there is some setting in Firefox that I can change so I can see the new maps, they are useless to me.
  16. Oh, oh! I thought this was the way radio buttons worked -- one could select as many as applied! It this NOT the case, then we definitely NEED this ability, and I've got to totally rework my variables. Yikes! By definition radio buttons are mutually exclusive. Only one in the group can be selected. Check boxes are the appropriate variable tyoe when more than one selection is allowed.
  17. One reason stated by one of TPTB is that VCs do not have physical logs to sign, so they are not really caches. Another reason that I have not seen explicitly stated is that Groundspeak is running out of six character codes for geocaches so something had to be done to delay the arrival of GCZZZZ + 1. That something was to stop creating new caches of the types that do not have physical logs to sign. They now can be created as waymarks which have six character codes starting with WM. Though if all the plans to create millions of waymarks come to fruitation, it won't be long before the problem of WMZZZZ + 1 arrives. Maybe before either of these doomdays arrives all geocachers and waymarkers will have junked their old GPSrs that can only accept six character codes for newer GPSrs that accept at least eight character codes. For those of you in the computer business, this sounds like Y2K all over again.
  18. I hate to think that you are running without your Norton AV on. Before you turn off your AV, I would do a cold reboot and try it again with your AV on. If it is still happening, then turn AV off and try again. If that does make a difference then I would call Symantec and report the problem to them. In any case, your problem is not related to geocaching. It is a hardware/software problem. So this does not merit futher discussion on this forum. If you want to discuss this further, I can consult privately with you at my normal hourly fee.
  19. I am as much interested in visiting existing waymarks as in creating new waymarks, unlike many in Waymarking that only are interested in creating new waymarks. I think ibycus (and anyone else) should have the ability to upload the canned data he has found with the following provisos: 1. They be flagged as "canned, unverified data," 2. The owner, if the waymarks are not wiki-enabled, must monitor and update the waymark with the updated data from visitors to the waymark. I shall leave it to others to determine how ownership should be determined for such waymarks.
  20. If all you can find is a year, then you can be sure that the last day of the year, December 31, is a valid date to use for when it was open.
  21. This group management scheme seems like a lot of hassle to solve a minor problem. If a category owner is slow to approve new waymarks to a category and TPTB are getting a lot of complaints about him, then TPTB can order him to get alternate approvers or lose the category. Why make the category owners that are doing a good job go through this group management mess?
  22. 2. is a way of sorting and displaying data that goes back to the dark ages of computing. So you are not the first, nor will you be the last, to complain about this. TPTB could change it, but it is easier for you to change your way of expecting data to look. User-friendly! Who said computers have to be user-friendly!
  23. See my reply in the other thread you created on this problem.
  24. I haven't seen the particular error you are describing, but it sounds as if something got messed up on that page. Try logging out and then logging back in to see if the error gets cleared. I presume rbPan is the name of the radio button that is supposed to be displayed. For some reason the name of the object is being displayed instead of the object itself. If logout/login doesn't clear the problem, then the page itself has been corrupted and you need to report it TPTB. Please send them a screen shot and the complete page address so they can figure out what the problem is.
  • Create New...