Cryptosporidium-623
-
Posts
189 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Cryptosporidium-623
-
-
My sous chef and I went caching one day and found one that was definitely an interesting container. It was one of those water-squirting toys shaped like an odd fish, bug-eyes and everything. A hole was cut in the bottom and filled in with the top of a water bottle so it could have a screw top.
Cruddy cell-phone picture taken on the site with said cache.
Thanks for considering those worthy the funny caches thread. My wife makes those and she was tickled pink to hear people talking about them.
-
well, first it's not a need.
you are asking for a new and dubious functionality that won't just allow people to cheat multis and puzzles, but it will give them an additional and easy-to-use tool with which to do so. if you know people will try to cheat the system, why would you want to create a new way to make that easy for them?
it's like saying to the state "i'm too impatient to go through procedures when i come in and out of the prison. we you need to do is put a big open door over there. of course the inmates will try to escape, but they're going to do that anyway, so you might as well give me the door i'm entitled to."
Except in your version, everyone is already guilty.
and ok maybe it isn't a "need" for everyone, but golly gosh gee, it should would be nice after driving 35 minutes to an area with no caches to get hit by a waypoint belonging to some puzzle cache 10 miles away...Anyway, I still contend that there can be ways to implement such a feature that do not easily permit this to happen. For example:
1. Only allow access to it from the New cache reporting form
2. Only give access to a certain number of times per day/week/whatever
3. Don't give out too many specifics (don't mention the cache or waypoint you conflict with, the exact number of feet, heck, if you really want to be a butt about it, don't even give them a direction).
4. Maybe it's only accessible by paid members.
Personally, I don't feel this type of implementation certainly wouldn't be any "WORSE" than when the reviewer tells you what cache you're conflicting with but at least it would be a bit more automated.
Now, can we have a positive and constructive discussion of how such a thing might be doable and limiting the "cheaters" instead of jumping on the old negative-nelly/change is bad/pee in the cornflakes of the poster bandwagon? Sheesh.
-
No, unfortunately it is not. With a total of about 7-10 queries I can locate the final of a puzzle given that information to within 20 feet. I know. I have done it.
Come to think of it, that's a good idea for a puzzle.
And so, some people cheating the system (which clearly they will try to do no matter what) overrides the need for legitimate functionality that could be used by cache hiders? That's like saying to the city, don't bother putting up stop signs, because some people will right through them every single time...
-
Except that it's been suggested many times and people will point out that it would also enable folks to deduct unknown final coordinates through trial-and-error.
The best solution today is to email your local reviewer with proposed locations to see if things are clear. (or find all the multis and puzzle caches)
Not if the service didn't give specifics about what the cache or waypoint was that you were conflicting with. It just said "there is a cache or waypoint less then .1 miles SW of your coordinates".
That's a pretty wide area to search! [
] -
When placing a cache that is conflicting with a waypoint for someone's puzzle cache, it becomes a royal pain to get in touch with the owner to verify the waypoint (since the reviewer can't / won't tell you what the conflict is exactly) or solving it yourself, either of which slows you down when all you're trying to do is get your cache out there.
Why can't there be a feature on geocaching.com where I can enter potential GPS coordinates for a hide and have it tell me if it conflicts with any hides or waypoints and approximate distance and direction. That would REALLY speed up the process of resolving issues.
-
I agree, it sucks to stamp the little guy out, and I'll keep using geopher, because it does what I want, but remember, even though just a hobby to most of us, Groundspeak is a business.
I completely agree. Groundspeak is a business. And they have every right to develop their own iPhone application and access their data (which they essentially own). But that doesn't preclude them nor excuse them from working with people in the community that also work hard to promote Geocaching and support current and future Geocachers (which they seem to forget helps their business along the way, too).
I just hope the new Groundspeak's new iPhone app will be great and I hope it is worth the cost in terms of both dollars and the folks in the community they might have alienated in the process.
-
Any updated from Apple on the approval of this App?
I currently am using Geopher almost exclusively for caching now. I will carry my Etrex yellow in my car with me if a cache is a good hike from my location, mainly just to save the battery on my iphone. I was previously using Geoniche on my palm, and I think developers for iphone apps could learn alot from that app, it worked extremely well and was simple to use. Combine it with the power of the iphone and it would be an amazing tool.
Chalk me up as another heavy Geopher Lite user. The ONLY thing it didn't do for us was auto-enter the coordinates and have DIRECT access, which would have cut down on a lot of overhead on EDGE. Both issues, as I understand them were limitations forced upon the author by Groundspeak's highly-restrictive (and arguably anti-competitive) terms of usage agreement... (Can't even scrape GPS coords of a page? give me a break, guys!)
As a software developer as well, I can certainly understand both sides, but considering that Geopher Lite had been out for quite a while, already had the makings of a great Geocaching tool, had a strong following, and the author tried time and time again to partner on it with Groundspeak, it seems like they should have done the right thing here and worked with the author to enhance the existing product and make it even better versus rolling-their-own while pigeon-holing him in the process.
From the screenshots, one of the concerns I have with the Groundspeak app is that it doesn't display when the cache was last found on any of the primary screens (looks like I have to get to the log entries to know for sure). Users shouldn't have to dig through 2-3 screens to figure out if the cache has had a bunch of DNFs posted over the last 6 months... Someone will have to tell me if it can be customized and I'm just not seeing it or not.
I think I'm going to stick to what I have for now. I'm not planning on spending another $10.00 when my $1.99 tool works fine for me. I'm sure Groundspeak will eventually find a way to force the developer to give up on enhancing his product altogether and then I'll have no choice, but today, I choose to support the little guy.
-
On Friday I found a GeoCoin that hasn't been logged since March 2008. When I got home and looked it up, it turned out that the cache I retrieved it from was its final destination. (oops!) Needless to say, I need to go put it back and LOG that it's there so the owner can pick it up, but it had me wondering:
1. Why/how was this NOT logged for so many months? Surely someone with the experience to log/grab a coin had touched it within that period of time, right?
2. For GeoCoins that go "missing", is it possible that a many of them are still out there but simply not being logged for months at a time or is this considered more of a happy (and rare) coincidence?
Thoughts?
-
I took a gander at your cache GC1EX03. I'm not sure what your puzzle community is like around the Denver area but in most areas I have experience in, a cache like this with a familiar theme and this accessible would have had a few more finds by now. What gives me additional pause is that after two weekends in your areas new cache listings, your one finder said that he didn't have the coords right.
Perhaps it might be a good idea to check your work?
If everything checks out, then the previous poster makes a good point. Nobody here can answer this question for you as this is an individual choice you need to make. There is no standard, especially with puzzle caches. You and you alone decide how much help you want to give.
Do you want people to find it?
I did get a bit nervous after the first log entry, but I've double-checked the puzzle a couple of times and the coordinates work out fine.
Ultimately, sure, yes, I DO want people to find it. I guess what I was looking for was more of a general consensus (if there was one) on how far I should go with the hints.
Thanks
-
If you've played with the geocaching.com website from the iPhone, you know what using the scrollable map doesn't work too well (basically you have to move with the arrows and then tap refresh all the time).
I like the idea of something like iGeoCacher for paperless, but want I REALLY WANT is something where if I'm in a location I'm not normally in, I can simply whip out my iPhone, pull up a full screen map, move and drag it around (like the built-in maps) and find some nearby caches.
Any possibilities of supporting something like that in the future? Thanks.
-
Hi folks,
After creating my first puzzle cache, I've had a few e-mails from people asking for help ranging from just a few general hints to spelling out the entire method for solving the puzzle.
My question to the more experienced folks out there is: Is there a limit on how much help I should be giving on a Puzzle Cache?
Isn't the whole idea of the puzzle cache to SOLVE THE PUZZLE? If I'm spelling out exactly how to solve it, doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose?
Thanks in advance for the input.
Funny caches
in General geocaching topics
Posted · Edited by daschpeeg
Thanks for considering those worthy of the funny caches thread. My wife makes those and she was tickled pink to hear people talking about them.