Hynr
-
Posts
1115 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Hynr
-
-
All earthcaches are owned by the geoaware account. But interested persons or groups do the research and field work necessary to put the earthcache submission together for review by the AGS. So if you submitted an earthcache that was listed, you would be credited as the "hider" on the cache page but not the "owner."
I don't get it. I do all the work and someone else gets to own it?!? That defies logic.
Does that mean that after it is submitted I have no way to make edits. We all have to make adjustments as part of servicing our caches. Given that it is a Virtual Cache, will geoaware be handling all the e-mail verification traffic as well?
I had been very excited about this new type of cache and had been working on a few earthcaches because I was under the impression that they would count as my caches and that I would be the one to service them. I'm sure geoaware is a very nice person, but I see no reason why I should set up caches for her/him. Listing my name on the cache page is not adequate.
I would like to request that a second process for submitting Earthcaches be developed which does not require relinquishing ownership. I would recommend that geocachers who wish to maintian their own caches be given the option of having the information in their cache description verified by a professional and submitting information to substantiate that. I had planned to introduce one of my colleagues (a geologist) to geocaching by having him involved in setting up my earthcaches.
-
There is an option for found caches and updated caches but what I need is an option for ANY logged activity. Found, Not Found, Note, etc should be available.
Am I missing something? I run a query daily for caches within 50 miles but only the found items get updated. The DNFs are not added to the PDA and it has caused me to search for caches that I did not know were archived until I returned home and looked online.
My point of view is a bit different from Hemlock's. I am assuming that you are entitled to use the gpx data the way YOU want to use it, not the way Groundspring thinks you might ought to use it. I for one, am a wimp, and enjoy maximizing the readily-available information before I set out to go caching; that includes having at least 10 past logs, all notes, and DNF info as well as the decoded hint. I generally don't run the same PQ every day, but I do run the local ones two times per week.
I assume you are accumulating the cache information into GSAK and then exporting to your PDA and using Cachemate there (or something like it). There are actually two problems that you are identifying: (1) seeing records that are disabled and (2) not getting logs for DNFs.
I would address the first as follows: you are probably are running your PQ with the checkbox "Is Active" selected. This means that the unavailable ones are not sent to you, so when you load the GPX file into GSAK (or whatever) then there is no way that a record can ever be changed to "archived" unless you do it manually. A partial solution is to uncheck that check-box and have the PQ include caches that are no longer available. But this will only send you the ones that the cache owner has disabled and not ones that have been permanently archived.
The way I handle this flaw in the system is that after loading a new PQ for a particular area into GSAK, I sort the records by the "Last Update" column. I typically find that a few caches in the region were not updated with the most recent gpx file. If I inspect the cache pages for these on-line, I generally find that some have been archived/disabled and others (very few) just have not had any activity in ages. I then force GSAK to mark the unavialable ones as archived (right-click, toggle archive). I, of course, also filter the archived caches out of any subsets that I load into PDAs and GPSrs.
I don't know why you are not getting DNF information, but perhaps it is something similar. If you have other checkboxes in that section of the PQ form selected, then try unchecking them. I find that the only one I generally check is the "I haven't found" box. If this does not solve the problem and you are using a filter in GSAK, then check this filter to make sure you don't have something strange selected on the "log" pane.
-
I would vote for fixing the code so it can be viewed with larger fonts. I'm sure that it can be fixed. The flaw is with the web site, not the user; so telling the user to fix it by selelcting a smaller font is not satisfactory, especially if the user has eyesight that is not corrected to perfect vision.
-
Thanks for the info. Then too if I decided to give that the Legend to my son and get like the 60CS I could use it on that as well.
My experience is with the City Select product and two Garmin mapping GPS units: the Legend and the iQ3600. I believe that Garmin wants you to buy separate mapping software for each device, but ("in their generosity") allows you to install any one of their mapping products on two devices. So you could install on the Legend and on the 60CS, but not on any others. At least not without buying additional "unlock codes". So you should be able to do what you want, but you need to be aware that you cannot freely install the software on an unlimited number of GPS units. And once you have designated a particular GPS you cannot transfer to another without getting Garmin involved.
You should also be aware that the Legend only has about 8 meg of room for maps and that is not much. Loading and unloading is incredibly time-consuming on this GPS because the mapping data loads over the serial port line. It may well take a few hours to fill up the Legend with just the local city maps (depends on the size of your city). But having the maps show up with caches identified is a wonderful thing.
-
How can right to privacy be the issue when the geocaching ID hides everyone's true identity? If the privacy issue were a factor, then there would also be a problem with showing our IDs in the logs. No one seems concerned about that; so "right to privacy" is just an excuse to try to make this issue go away.
I suspect that the real reason is that no one has been able to give Jeremy a compelling reason why he should direct one of his minions (that's his terminology; no disrespect intended to those great programmers) to spend a few hours programming and testing the code that would add this functionality to the watch-list feature.
By the way, what is "MOC"?
-
I've driven and cached much of the part of that route that is in California. My experience is that it takes a lot of PQs to get those 2000 point. If you do to with big circles the that minimizes the number of circles but you still have the following:the Sacramento area requires 3 PQs; Auburn to and including Reno requires another 2 or 3; from the Oregon border to Sacramento is at least 2; I suspect that Oregon would require 2 to get all caches along I-5 from end to end; maybe another one or 2 for Washington. For each PQ you have to figure out where to center your circles and how big to make them so you get them just barely overlapping without exceeding the 500 limit. If you make smaller circles, then there is much more work and even more PQs to run.
12 PQs will take 3 days to run, so even on the day you depart, many of your cache descriptions and logs are already out of date.
What many of us are seeking is a way to specify what we want along a route, so that when we do a long drive, we can get all the information we need in one or two PQs.
I would suggest that further comments on this be made in the other thread (click here) since it is pinned at the top of the forum about the website.
-
Even after reading everything at that site and perusing a few cache pages listed there, there is still some uncertainty in my mind as to what reviewers are going to be looking for. For example: On one page at that site it explains what a virtual cache is and then on the submission form it requests information for the long description:"Details about the cache, including contents of the cache, what the container looks like, etc.". That is in conflict with my understanding of what a virtual cache is.
So in light of that abiguity I would like to ask: If I set it up an earthcache in places where a physical cache is allowed, can I set up a log-only micro cache?
Thanks for the new feature to geocaching.
-
No. That has been requested but it is not available (yet?). But since you have a premium membership you can have the list sent to you as a Pocket query.
-
Maybe a different approach to solving the problem would be for the GC programmers to give the user a choice of icons to use to identify finds on the map. If the second choice were a small transparent dot, then all would be well.
-
If you have your own local ISP, then hook up a modem and dial out to their local number. You might not like the speed of what you get, but it might be better than nothing. I would guess that you might want to not be hooked to the corporate network at the same time (i.e. unplug the ethernet wire while you use the modem for an internet connection).
-
OK. I'll keep waiting for the blip to show on my radar screen.
-
I'm still not completely convinced about adding a "cache is not at posted coordinates" however. All multicaches should have an origin cache that explains how to get the next, and so forth. An unknown means that the cache is not listed at the coordinates. I know that there may be a problem with mislabeling the cache as a multi when it should be a puzzle but adding an attribute won't fix it either.
I see the problem. I was not thinking of multi-caches because there typically is something to find at the posted coordinates (i.e. stage 1). I was thinking of puzzle caches that pop up on the GPS when you have not had a chance to solve the puzzle. It seems to me that many "unknown" caches are such that the posted coordinates are relevant and require a visit or are at least the site of parking. I want to be able to sort for that.
I guess what I really am looking for is a code for "the posted coordinates have nothing whatsoever to do with the cache except to put it on the map someplace in the state/province where the cache is located". Is there a way to say that with fewer words yet more clearly?
-
No action since it was announced. I see no guidelines for how to place or find one of these new types of caches and yet it shows up as a category in PQs. What's the deal? What's the direction of the thinking on this by the almighty geoworld dominator and his minions? If we're going to have them, then let's have some guidelines on what to do and where to submit them. Nearby I have this really great geologic feature that is just screaming for a cache...
As I mentioned back in August, I would suggest broadening this to other informational and interesting physical phenomena and objects, not just geology. But if that's all we're going to get, then let's get on with it.
-
I am looking for the formulas for the following (assuming decimal-degrees in WGS 84 (NAD 83))
1. Distance between two lat/lon coordinates into ft or meters.
2. Calculation of (lat, lon) at a point some specified distance (ft or m) and bearing from a given (lat, lon).
In both cases, I want to be able to make calculations for points close together or far apart. In other words, I don't want to assume that the earth is flat; rather that the points are on an elliptical (or spherical) planet.
I am NOT looking for software; I am looking for the mathematical formulas.
-
Awsome. I had no idea that the PQ generator would accept more than one country or state at a time. I tried it and it definitely works. With two PQs I can get all the locationless caches (first those listed as being in "countries", and then the ones in "states/provinces").
Thanks.
-
You should choose country or state options to get your finds, instead of by distance.
Jeremy, I am trying to run a PQ that will generate all locationless caches. Your suggestion does not work for me because (1) I still only get those whose fake "Country" property are for that country and (2) "United States" is not on the list of countries.
-
I'd like to have an attribute for: "The cache is NOT at the above coordinates". (I really want to be able to filter for that).
I'll join others in saying that I would also love to see a "parking coordinates attribute".
-
I just had another thought. It was mentioned in this thread that two lat/lon coordinates dertmine a rectangle. And I have said so myself many times, and it is "close enough" if the points are not too far apart. But GPS coordinates are assumed to be on the surface of a sphere where two points determine three areas that are not really rectangles at all (but I am happy to call them rectangles for this discussion). To see the relevance of this issue in the context of this thread, imagine the foolowing: I give you the two coordinates of a "rectangle" that includes the cities of San Francisco and Tokyo, then in addition to this "rectangle", these two coordinates also define a rectangle that wraps around the other side of the globe parallel to the equator and yet another one parallel to the date-line across the poles of the globe (the latter would be hour-glass shaped). Since the date-line (the line where W179.999 switches to E179.999 is in the (smaller) rectangle that I actually do want, I might get the wrong data if the software does not "correctly" select the "correct" one.
-
The biggest challenge now is getting the arcfiles we need to do these prebuilt queries. Robert did a great job grabbing I-5 out of Street Atlas data, but the other interstates will be tedius to build, at best. If anyone knows of a place to get prebuilt interstate data, let me know.
I found such data on-line earlier this year in the GIS world (in the public domain). I think it is called a "Road" layer. I also had to find a (free) viewer to view the GIS data, but I found all the major roads in California (but not labled) in an ASCII file (1288k). But I had to stop pursuing this for creating arcs because it is raw data and I don't have the time to sort through the very large dataset to find what I need. So if you go the route of working with GIS data, then it will still be a project for someone to convert the vectors into something user-friendly.
-
... can PQ generate a list of caches including archived ones so that the personal database can be updated with the archived status? If not can it be added as a new feature to PQ., maybe as an include archived tick box.
Getting a listing of archived caches would be worthwhile for those of us who maintiain an off-line database. I have not found a way to do it with PQs. If you are interested in a work-around: Currently the only way I have found to do this is to sort my data by last date updated and look at each cache that has not been updated in my dataset recently. The archived ones are in this subset. With GSAK I toggle the archived status manually.
From what I know about database programming and based on what is already in place, I would say that it is an easy feature to add. But since it would not get used much by most users, I suspect that the programmers will not find this feature a compelling one to add to the PQs.
-
There seems to be a lot of circular reasoning happening in this thread. By your declarations, I abandoned the hobby since I personally have less than 200 finds to my name.
BTW, This is why I go geocaching. This kind of cache would end up archived by your forced rule.
Jeremy, you are the one person here who has access to the database and could thus determine the cause for the low percentage of folks with high numbers and what the behaviour is of your clients once they reach the high numbers. I know it would take some time to do such an analysis and that perhaps no one in the office has the time or skill to do so. I also appreaciate the need to not make such information public. So I am not advocating that you disclose it.
On the other hand, listing your own personal situation as proof is not helpful to the discussion. The rest of us only have our experiences and impressions; but you actually have the real data.
I too love going to sites like the one in your photo. And if you did indeed place or find a cache at that specific location, then the next snowmelt may well render it's life pretty short as it will be underwater in a raging river. What would be wrong with listing that sort of life-expectancy right at the web page. And why not have GC recommend to the hider that every few months s/he re-create the cache nearby so as to encourage folks to come again and again?
You too are assuming that I am advocating that YOU and your staff would make the decision on the life of a cache. I am advocating having the owner do that.
Apart from that, I am very interested in your assessment of whether there are lots of folks loosing interest and not renewing their membership or simply stopping to log finds after they hit high numbers. That would seem to me to be unhealthy for GC.com as a business so that you might be interested in suggestions for imroving the sustainability of your company. If you look at the title of this thread, it is not about creating rules and police; it is about sustainability of our hobby (and presumably your livelyhood).
-
This thread caught my attention because I am giving a talk on the subject of hazardous plants next weekend.
Nettles sting for an hour or two; some little bumps appear on the skin which, if you don't scratch, should go away the same day.When compared to Stinging Nettle which one is more painfull, nettle or poison ivy? As an european, I've never seen poison ivy, but stinging nettles are (too) common here.Poison Oak or Poison Ivy come at you with a delay. Within a few hours you will be able to tell that your skin has been exposed to an irritant. In the meantime gentle scratching will move the oils around and increase the affected area. From then on it depends on how allergic/sensitive you are. There is generally severe itching; scratching; skin infection,... it look very ugly and last several days.
Nettles are relatively minor.
-
Man, you guys just love rules.
The rule and attitude right now is the opposite what I am suggesting. Right now the rule is "no temporary caches"; I am suggesting a rule/attitude change that "all caches in existence today are temporary". In addition I am advocating that cache owners identify the exact degree to which their cache is temporary. In some cases that means months; in other cases it means a few years.
I know that we all have the ability now to archive our caches whenever we want and to set them up again a few feet/meters/yards/miles away. It is attitude that keeps us from doing it.
-
I guess there is a significant regional difference between what you see when you go geocaching and what I see. I would certainly expect that owners would select a long life expectancy for caches that are hidden with the level of attentiveness that you clearly invest (assuming a robust hiding place and a solid container).Most cachers place their hides because of location / view of area. So, your telling me to "relocate". I think "NOT". That's why I / others spent the time picking that location.
I can see that you are a much better geocacher than I am, with much greater wisdom and experience. I hope that when you reach the problem I describe, that you will have an some insight into how the problem might be solved.I just compared your stats and mine, my ratio is 1:21 while yours is 1:115. Maybe that’s why your running out of new hides. Out there you are just finding them, not hiding them
Perhaps that "rule" is contributing to folks leaving, because in areas where there is great cache density, this is nonsense unless you expect that folks will stop geocaching when they reach some high number. Do you intend to have 70 caches to maintain when you hit 700 finds? Think about it...at some point you will be using all your free time to maintain your caches and none to go geocaching.You also need to re-read the rules: Paragraph 3, line 14, states in big bold letters, "If a cacher passes the 400 find mark, they need to place 1 cache for every ten they find". For sure you must have overlooked it.
That's why there are no newer caches in your area. SF1
That's why there are no newer caches in your area. SF1
Geocaching Growth
in General geocaching topics
Posted
While it is pretty iimportant to use maximally 6 characters (that's the most that many older GPSr units support), it is not particularly important to have a C in the second spot; Even the G in the first spot is relatively unimportant. Thus if we continue codes with GD0001 after GCZZZZ, then we can go a few more months without someone having to worry about it.