Jump to content

Mike & Jess

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    519
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mike & Jess

  1. Wav data is audio, not necessarily music. I started working on a puzzle once that involved finding a 2x2 pixel in an image that when one hovered over it with the mouse would play an audio stream. The audio stream could then be downloaded (as a wav file) and a spectrum analyzer used to discover a binary pattern that could be turned into numbers. And that was just the first part of the puzzle. Holy crap!!! I would so give up on that cache. I only have audio (speakers or headset) connected or powered on when listening to music. Some of the puzzles out there are very tech/skill specific. To the OP: Be sure to indicate audio is used so people will know to turn on or aquire a set of speakers.
  2. For the cache in question, has there been may found logs, dnfs, notes, etc that would indicate major issues? Is the cache fairly new or been around for a while? It could be a fairly easy cache location to spot, and the margin of error may not be a huge concern.
  3. Does the cache in question specify Magnetic vs. True North? I own 2 caches that have projections, and I either give both, or specifically identify what I have given, and provide the estimated declination for the area to allow for adjustments (maybe I give the cacher too much info). If no indication is given, fire off a quick note to the CO and ask. Both mine have been shorter projections, with the longest being 241 meters away with no direct line of sight.
  4. In the example choochoo raised earlier in this thread, I was/am one of those that had found it when it was harder and also found it when it was easier. Although the rating has not changed (and shouldn't), I'm more disappointed that it has become as easy as it is,and would not take any offense to the rating going down. My log and photos alone with everyone else of that time did state it was a tough cache and one hell of a great adventure. I cache for the experience and adventure, not for a number. I will again state (slightly off topic), that the example Steve (choochoo) raised should not be adjusted. It's still a cache/trip/adventure that requires skill sets that are well above the majority of cachers.
  5. They sell them in most major department stores or outfitter's store. They are give or take $5 here (Ontario Canada).
  6. I quoted you CanadianRockies before you made the edit I recommended the bear bell for this as they are cheap and some come with a silencing bag (as I showed) which is nice to have. They are also good for small children who have fast legs (my 3yrs old). Just don't attach it where they can reach it.
  7. - weird double post thingey... We temp disable our hides in game lands during the very busy rifle deer season and remind people to have a blaze vest (a requirement) when hiking/caching during other seasons. - But a bell ringing as you're walking in the woods here will probably get you fined (or worse) for harassing the hunters. Our Game Commission owned game lands are funded by hunters and leasing oil & timber rights, not by tax dollars. We are guests there. Many hunters have a bell on their bird dog when hunting fields though. Interesting. It is totally different up here. The majority of hunting areas up here are generally crown land (government owned). The land, trails and forests we enjoy is shared usage and not restricted to one group or another. You might upset a hunter if you happen to walk by his tree stand with a bell on, but he'd be much more upset if there was a mistake made and a shot fired. Yes, please take appropriate precautions during hunting season. And, yes, also be bear aware and know how to avoid them. There's a mixture of opinions about the effectiveness of bear bells. Many tourists buy them. Many locals and back-country veterans ignore them. There's been a little testing. Wearing bear bells probably doesn't hurt, unless they give you a false sense of security and cause you to be less cautious in bear country. I rarely, if ever use a bear bell for avoiding bears. My two primary uses for them are for hunting season (avoid shots) and to attach to my food bag (bear bag) while back country backpack camping. I have come up to bears on the mtn bike with a bear bell attached. An exit stratagy for them (there was two) and myself was quickly identified and we went out own ways. They are only as efficient as the distance their sound will travel.
  8. Sounds like I hit a sore spot. I was just saying, for myself and others that are not about the numbers, these C&P GC pages leave the same feeling as power trails. If you are going to put the effort into mapping out an image, placing all the caches, and maintain them, why not go the extra step? On a side note, favorite points are used heavily in some areas, and treated like the newer challenges in others. I've seen amazing caches get a half a dozen favorites, and garbage P&G (Pringles chip container) caches get tons else where. If your in a high favorite usage area, an average of 2.6 favorites across 25 caches isn't something to get excited about. Anyway, I'm not trying to pick on you. Just suggesting that you should go the extra step and raise the bar that much higher on your battle ship series. If it takes you an extra day to get them all listed, you're finders will be glad you did.
  9. Sometimes you have to be that way in these forums. If not people try to nitpick the smallest things or end up running the topic off course. I've been guilty of being not specific enough and unintentionally running a topic off course. Back on topic. I mean who really cares about a .5 or 1 star change in terrain? Maybe those trying to complete a fizzy square challenge but that is all. Who really cares about a large change in the terrain rating of a new cache? The CO changed their mind about the ratting and is now correct it. Good for them (and us)! But once a cache has been established (has had more than just a few visitors) if anything that happens that would justify a major and permanent change in the rating then the CO should be also consider archiving and relisting the cache. Something that major of a change I would also image would justify a change in the cache description of the cache and possibly the hint too. haha, for your example... Original hint: Up, way Up New hint: watch your ankles. The cache I had in the back of my mind during the OP (and no, I don't what that CO to change a thing), would not be an extreme change (half to maybe a star tops). Again, this wasn't specifically about this cache. Depending on the means of travel, and the ratings on most geocaching cultures, it is still a 5 terrain. Just a milder 5 (should have been a 5.5 rating previously if existed).
  10. Just a quick friendly reminder, it's hunting season. When out hunting for caches (non-lamp post caches), be sure to wear your bright orange clothing. I also strongly encourage to carry a bear bell on yourself and your 4 legged caching partner if you have one. This is what the one I carry looks like. It has a magnet in the mesh bag which does silent the bell when not needed. They are annoying, but remember, deer and other wild game don't wear a bell. Pretty hard to be mistaken for wild game if you're wearing one.
  11. I finanace and contribute heavily to a local geocaching group forum Northern Ontario Geocachers, and have a Geocaching vendor's site Up North Tracks.
  12. Isn't that what a template means?? For a series of 100 caches.... I AM NOT creating 100 separate pages. I have a Battleship series of 100 traditional caches and 5 puzzles. I used a template and copied that for all of the traditional ones Nothing wrong with that. It's called being efficient!! I should have said the template should be the shell of your GC cache page, not the entire contents. As for being efficient.... You're one of those "" type log guys aren't you. Cookie cutter GC pages, toss and log caches aren't my thing. For the example I gave, we spent the extra effort to make each look slightly unique so it didn't contain the perception of being a thoughtless hide. Not saying your is, but when I see caches (or logs) that are cookie cutter or just a smilie face, I get the impresson no effort or thought was put into it. That is just my $0.02.
  13. +1. That would be great. Save the poor guy who just finished his matrix, while enabling the CO to accuriatly rate his cache. As great as that would be (and I'm all for it), I suspect there would be a HUGE system (database and page coding) change to accomplish this. Would be great for the game, but very expensive and a lot of risk on the system side Say a cache had a terrain rating of 5 because it was up a tree and climbing gear was needed. Then Mother Nature caused the tree to fall. Now the cache is 6 inches off the ground instead of 30 feet off the ground. If you decided to leave the cache as is. Would you adjust the terrain the rating or is the change significant enough to warrant it to be archived and relisted? Say a cache was 10 miles down a trail with a significant change in elevation. Now loggers come and build a road thru the forest that comes within' feet of the cache. Would you just adjust the terrain rating or relist the cache? Although Pretty extreme examples, this does show exactly what I was asking in the OP.
  14. I wouldn't put out something of that much importants to me. Nice looking book btw.
  15. A template should only be used as a starting point. It shouldn't be the final product for all your caching pages. When I did a FTF challenge, all the caches had a basic template that outlined what the FTF challenge was all about. Each cache page did have it's own description and hints, just the look and feel was similar.
  16. This coming from someone who has never been to the cache. It was a 5/5 in 2010. Now with a bridge crossing the river, no bushwhacking, if you can hike a distance (no special gear required), it is not a 5 terrain anymore. The top of Ontario is a tourist trap now. Driving the family minivan ~80km on smoother then in town logging roads, biking a gravel road (or driving if you cross the river/bridge) for 10km, and hiking 4km +4km (~4km to summit trail head and just under 4km to tower) is not tough terrain. I do however think it should stay as is to keep the those non-bush savy safe. I don't want to see a cacher from the city assume that a 4 or 4.5 terrain rating in Southern Ontario is the same as a 4-4.5 in the North. There is no cellular coverage, so this could pose an issue for the newer P&G geocaching population. That being said, this thread wasn't about a specific cache. It was more to grab other's opinions as our large play ground is changing. The cache I revisited this past weekend (because I loved the area) just happen to be the fuel behind my OP as it has changed so much. It went from a very tough trek (6.5-7hours bike/hike/bushwhack from the van) to a weekend outting I'll be bringing the family on next summer (now 3.5 hours). If my (will be 4yrs old next year, with autism) son can hike the trip (which he currently can), it is not a Northern Ontario 5 terrain. A terrain rating is just that. A rating. It should be applied equally, everywhere. The idea that a 4 in the south should be any different than a 4 in the north does not make sense. I understand your concern, but it sounds to me that people in the south might be over rating their caches. My personal physical capabilities say that if it is a cross country hike with mountains involved, I can handle a 4. I need to be careful with a 4.5 and a 5 is totally out. If people consistently rated their caches based on the actual criteria and not on their own capabilities or the local culture, I should be able to look at a cache anywhere in the world and know what type of adventure I am getting into. That would be a perfect world however. In reality, I can easily find examples close to me where three caches are placed within a half mile of each other on a local trail, one will be a 2, another a 3 and another a 3.5, when using the criteria on the website, all are a 2.5. I feel the exact same way about the rating system. I have however seen tons of logs (local caches) from southern (Ontario) cachers indicating that what we consider say a 3 terrain, should be a 4, or that our local (culture) terrain ratings are under rated (lower number then they expected for the location). I should also clarify that Southern Ontario is a high population, mostly cities and organized (trails and maps) parks. Most caches are park & grabs with a couple light hiking caches in local parks. Northern Ontario is smaller cities/towns, scattered with lots of forest (a very big play ground for some of us geocachers). I placed our first local lamp skirt cache a couple years ago in a city of ~100k POP. Until recently (last 2 years), caching was more of an outdoors sport in the bush (hiking, biking, quads, etc). Park & grabs only recently taken over locally but are still fairly outnumbered outside the city.
  17. You either have a HUGE caching budget and big fireplace mantle, or have not recovered many logs. I'm pretty much the same. I'll read through them then toss the single sheets. If a log book is hardly used, I may pull the consumed pages and re-use the book. I have as of right now (going up again in the next couple days) 62 hides (active, and archived with a couple events in there). My geocaching budget isn't high anymore, so re-use what I can is a must.
  18. I've done this a couple times and noticed way more online then in the books or log sheets. True, it's not about the numbers, but I don't log online for the bragging rights. I do because there's more space there to tell any stories I might have about finding the cache than there ever will be in some log books. I do the same for the caches I find. Drives me nuts when cachers put "TFTC" only or worse yet "" in the online posts, so I try to put a little bit of a personal touch to the online log. In the paper log book, name, date/time and something very breif so I don't consume too much log space. I've done this one for a wet log book I recovered. Sent the photos to the CO. I also do this occationally if I happen to pass one of my caches. Nice to read the hand written notes when time permits.
  19. I thought I would toss this up as I'm interested in what others do with their old cache paper logs (books and strips) when they either get full or you archive the cache.
  20. This pretty much covers what I would say. I've added plenty of new log books to caches and or repaired caches (generally early spring when they come out from under the frozen snow). Depending on how I am caching (via mtn bike or with my young boys) I tend to carry one regular cache (complete), a number of ziplock bags and a pack of dollar store note books. I'll also carry a bunch of nano and micro log strips. If a nano or micro is full and I know the cacher is a local, I'll replace it and contact the owner so they can meet up to obtain the log if they want it. If I repair a cache (with NM attribute or not), I'll inform the CO so they are in the know, and can remove the NM attribute if exists. In all honesty, not this year, but the previous, I replaced/repaired too many caches. I had actually impacted my own supplies to the point where I had to start letting caches go. Now, if the cache is worthy, I'll still repair/replace the log book. If its a toss in place cache, I'll let it go. Sorry, went a bit off topic.
  21. I think the two quoted posts above cover my thoughts. Inaccurate hides doesn't mean it was a smart phone. I've had days where my Oregon 300 was dead on with my other GPS units, and other times, it was all over the place. A critical item I watch for is the GPS's estimated accuracy. Of my Garmin indicates above 3-4M accuracy, it's going to take some time to place the hide. If I have a 3-4M estimate accuracy, I'll do a couple tests (approach from different directions and/or with a different unit). Some area or days, accurate cords can be tough to acquire. I've had to return a couple times to place a hide because I just couldn't nail down anything remotely accurate. For a couple of my caches, I've had to give better hints as the location just wouldn't give up a satisfactory accuracy. The two caches that come to mind where both along fault lines in a rock face and/or with heavy tree coverage.
  22. I think all the previous posts covered my thoughts about what the attribute should be used for. My only suggestion would be to make some sort of clear indication of what needs to be done. I've seen a few mystery cache where the CO put a lot of time, effort and thought into it, but did not give a clear hint or indication as to what was needed to be done on the cache page, image or external link. Some people might get the CO's idea right away, and others will lose interest and move on to another cache.
  23. We did something similar about 2 years ago. There was about 5 of us that placed the caches in Sudbury to create the Northern Ontario Geocachers initials (NOG). Some of the cache page was copy & paste in order to make it known they where part of a set (41 caches). We did however place them as seporately (not the whole group at each cache) so that each cache as a slightly different flavor based on the cacher that hid them. This allowed the caches to be slightly different and provide finders a veriaty while hunting. The results looked like this; GC map: NOG logo I share the same opinion. The worst for me is the "" logs. Cacher was too lazy to even type and simply hit a smiley face. Keeping someone inline with the OP topic, I will be disappointed if they totally remove the older hide submission pages and go with the newer one only. When I go out with the boys hiding caches, having to click through a dozen pages would be a pain if I'm logging 2+ hides. The older top down (one page for cache info, one page for attributes) is a lot easier and quicker. If they moved the attributes to the cache info page (in the older format), it would make life easier and possibly find more (senior) cachers using the attributes a bit more.
  24. This coming from someone who has never been to the cache. It was a 5/5 in 2010. Now with a bridge crossing the river, no bushwhacking, if you can hike a distance (no special gear required), it is not a 5 terrain anymore. The top of Ontario is a tourist trap now. Driving the family minivan ~80km on smoother then in town logging roads, biking a gravel road (or driving if you cross the river/bridge) for 10km, and hiking 4km +4km (~4km to summit trail head and just under 4km to tower) is not tough terrain. I do however think it should stay as is to keep the those non-bush savy safe. I don't want to see a cacher from the city assume that a 4 or 4.5 terrain rating in Southern Ontario is the same as a 4-4.5 in the North. There is no cellular coverage, so this could pose an issue for the newer P&G geocaching population. That being said, this thread wasn't about a specific cache. It was more to grab other's opinions as our large play ground is changing. The cache I revisited this past weekend (because I loved the area) just happen to be the fuel behind my OP as it has changed so much. It went from a very tough trek (6.5-7hours bike/hike/bushwhack from the van) to a weekend outting I'll be bringing the family on next summer (now 3.5 hours). If my (will be 4yrs old next year, with autism) son can hike the trip (which he currently can), it is not a Northern Ontario 5 terrain.
×
×
  • Create New...