ThePropers

There's some people that have almost as many "fake" finds (for lack of a better term) than I have real finds...I do like being able to lower people's find counts by 700+ Anyways, back on-topic, any word on this and the TOU? I'd like to run my stats through if possible. Also, as for a suggestion, how about a third column to calculate a logs/uniques ratio? For instance, I am looking at someone who has logged 687 finds on 33 events, so their ratio would be 20.8:1. I also found someone with 218 logs for 10 events, which would be a 21.8:1 ratio. Someone with 10 logs for 10 events would have a 1:1 ratio. I think that would be an interesting stat to see.

The first thing you should do is hide 50 lampost skirt caches. Then spend 30 seconds each looking for nearby caches, and if you can't find them, assume the container is missing and replace it with one of your own. Don't forget to ridicule how lousy all the caches are in your new town as opposed to where you used to live. Finally, seek out the most respected cacher in the area, and go to the local forums and publicly challenge them to a fistfight for caching dominance. Then at your first event cache, announce that you were "just kidding" and undo everything. Everyone will think you're funny and cool and buy you beer. It'll be a grand old time. Or you'll just get beat up. As for what I would do, I have this thing about finding every cache within 10 miles of my house, so I'd probably start there. It's only taken me 2 1/2 years to do it here, and the idea of having to start over makes my head hurt. So I can never ever move.

I believe you can just have them adopt it by going to www.geocaching.com/adopt

I like this topic too. Let's see, I estimate that I do about 90% of the caching myself, with another 7% with other cachers and 3% with my family. Rough estimate of course. I am more of a finder than a hider. When I do hide a cache, I tend to overthink it and end up with something a bit "out there" but I believe that's fine. In fact of the 12 caches I've hidden, only 2 of them are normal "go find the container" caches and the rest are pretty unique ideas to the area. I guess I'm a big fan of puzzles, and a well thought out cache gets much better online logs. As far as finding caches go, I prefer a hike or something very interesting to see. My favorite types of things to find are abandoned man made objects that are out in the woods, such as ghost towns, old cars, old mining operations...etc. I also like puzzle caches, but only if they aren't some kindof obscure cryptography lessons. Something where you have to use your head rather than Google. I also have never ignored a cache, and I tend to look at my donut-shaped pocket query and "clear out" areas of my map. For some reason I can't bring myself to ignore caches that I know that I will probably end up hating, if only for the fact that I have been pleasantly surprised a half dozen times doing a cache that I was sure would be lame but ended up being decent. If there is a logbook (as opposed to just a logsheet) I almost always take some time to write something besides just signing my name. I like to read the logbooks on my caches, so I like to return the favor. I usually go into some detail in my logs, but am usually honest if the cache has problems with it or if I had a bad experience because of where/how the cache is hidden. I also tend to only leave the TFTC or TNLNSL or Found It logs for unremarkable parking lot micros...adherring to the if you don't have something nice to say philosophy. I'll go after the FTF if it's convenient, but I don't typically grab my gear and rush out the door to go find them, although I have done so on some occassions. I rarely trade, but do carry some trade items in case I find something I know my son will enjoy...such as hot wheels cars. I tend to take TBs and Geocoins if I can help them along or they don't have a mission sheet with them (I'll just assume I can help them). I am not that big on having my own TBs and coins, but do have a few that are still active. The best part of geocaching is getting out into the woods and finding new things and places. I like the outdoors, although I wish I would have appreciated it more when I was growing up and actually lived in the country. I guess I was too distracted by not having a lot of kids to play with or being able to participate in extra-curricular activities since we didn't live in town.

I noticed the same thing the other day when I was doing a huge elevation change over a short distance. My stamina has improved tremendously. However, I am about ready to start my winter hibernation cycle where the most exercise I get is complaining about having to snowblow the driveway (I do so much complaining that I probably burn more calories doing that than actually doing the driveway).

I also like the date breakdown. For instance, I know the best time to break into The Cheesehead's house is a Saturday in December Just kidding. I like the graphs a lot.

Yep. I believe it's the "I want to share this list with others" checkbox that does this. Edit your bookmark list and make sure you've selected that. EDIT: actually after testing a couple things, I am pretty sure you also have to have the "make this list public" checkbox checked. Which is odd, because there are times I definitely want to create a "today's caching run" bookmark list that other people I'll be caching with can view and download, but I don't really want/need that to show up on the cache listing pages. Is that how it's supposed to work?

Hope the ruling is in your favor....seems like you put quite a bit of work into it. Yeah, and I think the "don't display this to the public" option would be wise. Or at least put something in the FAQ or on the front page saying that by submitting the information, it's going to be displayed on the site. It is interesting to view other people's stats though....if a bit eye opening when comparing logs/uniques. But that's a separate debate

I guess I'll wait til TPTB chime in before I do mine. One thing though: 1) If I click on a person's name that's already added theirs, I don't like having to click again to view them (with the "stats for so-and-so are loaded. Take a Look" message). I like that it will show you which caches have multiple finds on it. For instance, I can view 2_Up_Geologists stats and see they've logged 95 finds on 7 event caches. I only use them as an example because that was the first name I clicked on. Which brings me to why you might want an option to not have your stats displayed for the general public.

I looked through some of the existing ones and I think it looks promising (I like the graphs) but I will wait for CTD's question regarding the TOU to be answered before I submit my own file.

If I am understanding you correctly (and I'm not sure I am) you have subscribed to several topics or the forums and now wish to unsubscribe from these topics. If that is correct, then: click on My Controls (top right) Click on either View Topics or View Forums on the left side menu under Subscriptions Place a checkbox beside each one you wish to usubscribe from and press the "with selected" button.

I'll second that. I just use basic Duracells with everything turned on and I get at least 15 hours out of them.

Yep, I have one for my 60CSx and it works great...can't even tell it's there, but because it had a lifetime warranty, I tried to scratch it with my fingernail, and as someone mentioned earlier, it made a dent but worked itself out in a day or so and is as good as new.. I know a couple who use the neoprene covers, and I don't care for them. The sun glares off of them, it's harder to work the buttons, and it's much harder to use with the clips and mounts with that case on there. Of course, they do protect the entire unit (as opposed to just the screen) but I'm not that worried if the case gets a scratch...as long as the screen doesn't.

I've had to add an extra meal to maintain my obesity.

This was pretty much my reason for the OP, as 500 caches currently covers a 27 mile radius from my house, but I very frequently travel 40-50 miles away and tend to be more of a "when the opportunity arises" cacher. However, the 'PQ by date hidden' method mentioned earlier fits my needs to get the necessary radius that works for me and I get my 1000 caches that I wanted (well, I only get about 900, but leaves room for the child waypoints). Whether or not me running 3 PQs in order to get that is better than running 1 PQ that would return the same 1000 is another matter, but as far as being an end-user, it functions ok for me (despite the PQs coming in at different times so I have to wait for both to arrive). Regardless, I am satisfied.

IMO, what determines a new cache is the GC number. So new GC number = new cache, which should be open for everyone to find. This is the exact same thing as finding a location that had a cache that was archived 2 or 3 years ago, putting a new cache there, and then telling people who found the old one that they can't log the new one. It's a different cache, with a different GC number, a different set of logs, a different "hidden" date..etc, so it should be available for everyone to find. I can't wait for people to start complaining about "numbers hos" who log two different caches 2 years apart that happen to be in the same spot as each other

That would be neat, but you could just go here and type in the area you are looking at (nearest street, city, state). However, that's a couple of extra steps than what you are describing. I also typically use the Google earth KML plugin (with the roads turned on), and don't typically surf Google Maps. To answer you question though, I don't have those kindof mad coding skillz.

Thanks for the heads up on a good system. You are correct that I wouldn't need more than 2500 caches....I actually only need 1000 so I should be able to do that with 2 queries. I would still rather just have one query (so they'd arrive all together and I wouldn't have to merge files and all that), but it'll work. I still wonder though, would it be less overhead (serverwise) to run less queries that would return more results (i.e. setting the higher limit) or more queries that return less results per query? Serious question.

No kidding. Don't make me go to YouTube and watch some horrendous videos of people who think they are interesting! I'd much rather hang out here with people who think they're interesting. Present company excepted of course

That's actually really funny, and may explain the slap I got when I was talking about how absolutely HUGE our server was. Ok, that didn't happen, but with the site down and all, I got nothing else to do but make up stories.

Have you tried using some WD-40, a hammer, and a roll of duct tape to get it in there? Just don't put one in it. Most cachers carry a pen or pencil with them anyways. Of course, I tend to forget mine, but only when doing caches where I need one.

Ya know, if tryin to get under my skin with snippy comments is your goal, you are doing a fine job. This is the second time you have off-handedly suggested that I haven't the capacity to understand you. What I have concluded is that you keep redefining your issue. So no good cache is ever abandoned? Is it a requirement to prove experience that you are advocating, a better review process, or the ability to filter caches based upon the experience you cited as a "nice thing". While I am confused as to just what you are seeking here, I am not nearly as confused as you... It would really be more productive dialog if you stuck to what you are looking for with this thread. And before you suggest it, I did go back and read each post. Seems most responders appear to be missing your point as well. Sorry for the negativity but I am really tired of being criticized publicly for my responses. Directly or indirectly. I believe the point of "discussions" is to "discuss" which may result in a change or refinement of ideas and suggestions, rather than (to use a recent political phrase) "stay the course". If you're that offended by me, choose to add me to your ignore list, as I will be doing to you as soon as I get done typing this as it's obvious you are so offended by my first post that you can't get past it. As for snippy comments meant to get under the skin:

Yeah, that's what I was getting at...it's really only a "problem" per se if it's in the description but they didn't list a child waypoint. I certainly don't want to be the cache police (unless I'm getting a uniform), which is why I've been hesitant to post logs or email the owners when I run across them...also 9 times out of 10 it's not that big of an issue anyways.

It's obviously a conspiracy that goes to the highest levels of the company. I fear I have said too much, so if I don't check in on the forums tomorrow, avenge me!

I did this with mine when it first came out. I wonder if it would acceptable/rude to post a note to any caches I run across with waypoints in the description that haven't been added as child waypoints. What we really need is a "Needs Child Waypoints Added" logtype