Geofellas

How about setting up a bugzilla "known issues" list or something similar? Trawling through forum postings is not the most efficient way to find this kind of info. Anyway, in case it helps, field testing a cartridge revealed the following bugs on the Colorado I had to work around. These did not manifest themselves in the Emulator. 1) Asking for player input in code that executed as a result of triggering a task's OnClick event displayed the input event screen but there was no "Answer" button to press to actually enter the input. I had to work around by triggering the input request from talking (custom command) to a character instead - the same input then worked just fine. 2) An item's OnClick event would not trigger - I just got the item description. The workaround was to create a custom command. Thanks

OK - always the way - post a question then figure out the answer. I needed to test for CheckValue == nil before displaying the dialog (setting it to 0 in that case) Still not sure why the string compare doesn't work Also if you enter a non numeric, tonumber(input) seems to return either null or 0

I am trying to get a user to input a value into a numeric variable and compare it against the value of another variable. This works fine provided a number is actually input but if the user enters nothing at all (in the emulator), it barfs. Both CheckValue and CorrectCode are numeric. function zinputSecretCode:OnGetInput(input) CheckValue = tonumber(input) if CheckValue == CorrectCode then Wherigo.Dialog{{Text=[[OK - that looks good - ]] .. CheckValue ..[[. Carry on and good luck finding the cache :)]],},} end end So I thought, lets make these string variables instead. But then the compare doesn't return a "true" even when correct (as I have been able to determine is the case with some debug messages). I am also worried about using a numeric variable anyway - what if the user enters a non numeric character?

So why would that be? In other words, is there a reason for not having "Enable Cache" also remove a "Needs Maintenance" attribute if it is there? Seems kind of daft to require 2 logs and if you are enabling your cache you are presumably doing it because you have fixed whatever was the problem with it in the first place.

The original one was a nice, friendly, smiling Signal The 2008 one seems to be baring his teeth and scowling Is there any significance

Tell me if you still think that after you have found GC2B27

So I still need: 1/4 1/4.5 1/5 1.5/4.5 1.5/5 2/4.5 2/5 2.5/4 2.5/4.5 2.5/5 3/4.5 3/5 3.5/2 3.5/4 3.5/4.5 3.5/5 4/4 5/1 5/2.5 5/3 5/3.5 5/4 That's 22 types And a CITO

OK - my 5/5 find is on a cache that I adopted AFTER I had found it. Can I count it since it wasn't my cache when I found it?

California actually Kentucky is where they invented the toothbrush

Hey no fair omitting APE and Webcam caches (but I'm glad you missed out the Wherigo ones). Can I trade my 2 APE (must take a trip to Brazil!!) and 5 webcam finds for a CITO? I did pick up some empty chip packets off the ground once. I like the fact that you feel 82 caches can be found in one hour or less

So - a cache was published, a whole bunch of people found it and joined us at the pub for some good socialising - fun was had by all. A big thank you to all who played the game, but especially to our reviewer CacheDrone who rose above all the flak and showed that he has a good sense of humour. "Laughter is the best medicine" they say. I think "they" are right What can we do next year

Sorry folks - the cache was archived by the reviewer even though we included the text he requested. No April Fools cache this year.

While we stated there would be no event cache we never said there would be no physical cache associated with April 1st 2008. Anyway, in an effort to turn this into something positive we have reluctantly complied with the request and resubmitted the cache. It remains to be seen if this will be satisfactory. I suggest no futher postings are made to this thread until we see how that turns out.

Well - we had a great little cache all set up to go for some April Foolishess but unfortunately the actions of TPTB and their particularly officious approach to cache approval has caused us to decide it is just not worth the hassle any more. We already made one set of changes to try and accomodate their request but apparently that wasn't enough - we're far too busy to deal with all this. I doubt we shall be setting any more caches in the future. Sorry - PM us if you want to join us for a drink in the pub on Tuesday night to commiserate (PM only since, heavens above, it would not be appropriate to actually name a commercial establishment here ).

...we are not planning to host an April Fool's event this year

Exactly. I have resisted jumping in so far but can hold my peace no longer. The issue that kicked this off seems to me to be a bizarrely narrow and unreasonable interpretation and application of an otherwise reasonable rule. It has clearly generated significant negative reaction towards Groundspeak from its constituency outweighing by a long chalk the benefit that the rule was intended to provide in the first place. For heaven's sake allow the link and let's get back to reasonable interpretation and application of the rules such as we used to have in the past. Let's have flexibility applied where appropriate so that geocaching can remain a light, fun activity. I am certainly having second thoughts about placing caches and hosting events in this kind of overly dogmatic environment for fear of the hassle it will bring me should I step even one millimetre out of line (in someone's opinion).

Not police but border guards. I was going for 2 FTFs in Poland, less than 1km from the borders with Russia (the Kaliningrad Oblast) and Lithuania. So here I am, with a UK passport, resident of Canada, driving a car with Latvian plates in the company of a Norwegian who lives in Lithuania and (fortunately for translation purposes) a Pole. We are clearly suspicious characters. You can read more in my log for Between willows

Did he peel them first?

I have enountered this on two occasions. At this cache - "When nature calls" the log was signed by an active cacher who never subsequently logged it on the website. I privately e-mailed them politely to ask if they were planning to do so but they never gave me the courtesy of a reply. In the end I chose not to count it as a personal FTF since it appears that the previous find was intentional. This was a drive up (albeit a long one) so it didn't bug me too much. However, at this cache - "Lättfots lya ", although the log book had been signed it appeared that it was by a chance finder who was not an active geocacher. I felt that they had not been seeking the cache and so felt justified in adding it to my personal count of FTFs. I walked 15km to find this one - it would have really bugged me if it had been someone playing silly games by delaying their log.

Bug: Webcam caches that I have found do not show as having been found by me

Why are "Locationless Caches" included in the Cache Type legend?

While on a business trip to Spain in May 2005 I drove 900km in a day to get 2 FTFs in Portugal and one in Spain. DP3 - Next Stop....Bruçó! Water Mills and Vega de Tera I also drove about 500km in one day earlier this year to get 2 FTFs in Poland and one in Lithuania Between willows Skombobole manor and Ciurlionio Micro My longest HIKE for an FTF was 15km for Lättfots lya in Sweden Two other FTFs that I found as part of multi-hundred km driving days (but the drives were not primarily for the purpose of getting the FTF, they were to find a lot of interesting caches including the FTFs) were Mikawa Lake in Japan and Domaine d'Abbadia. in France

"Couldn't find because I decided not to try!"

Ah - phew Thanks for putting me straight. Now that I understand the issue it gets me thinking that it would be more useful to automatically generate an e-mail saying "Don't forget to attend the Event tomorrow" than to have a section on the "My Accounts" page. Obviously I had never spotted it on the "My Account" page so it evidently wasn't doing its job for me

Agreed - although limiting the notifications of changes to any one log to, say, one per day might be necessary to avoid getting swamped when someone makes a gazillion changes in a short period of time (such as uploading image files, correcting typos, etc.)