the hermit crabs
-
Posts
2446 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by the hermit crabs
-
-
The logs are not all on the same page, so I cannot search there to find out.
If you go to the trackable's page and click "view map", all of the logs will be on one page. You can search for your username on that page.
-
You logged Watergate to Gjestal twice: 5/5/2011 and 3/21/2011 (or 21/3/2011).
-
I found one where you had to then move on to get the key to unlock it, actually a bunch of about 30 keys and only 1 fit, thankfully we started at the right end!
We found a similar one, a joke cache where stage 1 included a huge keyring with at least 50 keys on it. It weighed a ton, and we couldn't help laughing at the prospect of what lay ahead. There were a few funny intermediate steps, and then the final was an ammo can that had a thick L-shaped piece of metal attached to it, covering the latch, with a padlock.
After trying maybe a dozen of the keys, we had a hunch that proved to be correct: the L-shaped thingy could pivot out of the way, leaving the latch easily accessible, so there was no need to unlock it at all. More laughter all around.
-
Log: I hate caches full of pennies!
I don't
We found a cache once that was very heavy, and we had to burst out laughing when we opened the lid and saw that it held a couple of pounds of pennies. It was so unexpectedly funny.
and pic:
(The pennies weren't an original part of the cache -- they had been left by a previous finder, whose log said "We left a hefty sum of money for whoever wants it. Don't spend it all in one place.")
-
Here's a copy-n-paste of my reply in a similar thread a few years ago:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's something you can try that might make your kids more excited about finding stuff that they might otherwise consider junk:
Does you family celebrate Christmas, or some other holiday around the winter solstice? If so, tell your kids that you are going to have a Caching Tree this year, and all of the ornaments on it will be made from things that you have found in caches. Suddenly, you might find yourself looking at junky items in a whole new light: is it shiny? Is it bright? Does it jingle? Is it the right size to hang on a tree? Who cares if an arm off of this little plastic snowman is missing, this would look great on a tree! A pinecone, obviously picked up off the ground by some thoughtless cacher and dumped into the cache, suddenly becomes a festive decoration.
Then when you get home, help your kids turn them into ornaments: add hooks or ribbons, and attach little tags with the name of the cache and the date you find it. Then this winter, you put them all up, and have contests about who can remember which cache each one came from, and who can remember the details about that cache -- "oh, yeah this was the one with the stream and the little waterfall!" "ooh, we picked up this red fire engine in that cache where I almost fell off the cliff, remember that one?" "We got this rubber ducky at our 100th find!!"
-
you save tracking numbers ?????
and i thought resurecting lost TBs was a little silly.
Yes, I do save tracking numbers.
-
i thought this TOPIC would generate a lot more posts.
i'm guessing that, like me, most cachers don't come to the forums very often.
they come when they have an issue, and once it's 'handled' they're gone until something else pops up.
sound about right?
It's like any other public forum: the 90-9-1 Rule.
But back to your original topic: at first I thought you were talking about people reviving their own dead TBs, which they currently can do if they choose, and many do.
But after reading more of your posts, it sounds like you want to revive other people's bugs? Be careful with that -- I, for one, would be furious if you decided to revive some of mine. I have some that might look dead, but they aren't. In some cases I have told people who liked my bugs that they could keep them, and I don't want them suddenly grabbed and "revived" because some stranger thinks that they deserve to be back out traveling.
not what this stranger had planned at all.
actually, i'm not sure this stranger could do that even if he wanted to, could he?
Sure you could. If you have saved the tracking numbers of every bug you've ever picked up (as many do, including me), and then you look at all your past logged trackables and see that one hasn't been logged in years, you could decide, all on your own, to grab it (since you have the tracking numebr) and then make a replacement for it and send it out. (But don't
)So... if that is not what you have in mind, and since people already have the ability to easily revive their own dead bugs if they so choose, I guess I can see why this topic did not generate the level of interest that you had hoped it would. Those who are interested in this already do it, those who are not interested in it have moved on already.
-
i thought this TOPIC would generate a lot more posts.
i'm guessing that, like me, most cachers don't come to the forums very often.
they come when they have an issue, and once it's 'handled' they're gone until something else pops up.
sound about right?
It's like any other public forum: the 90-9-1 Rule.
But back to your original topic: at first I thought you were talking about people reviving their own dead TBs, which they currently can do if they choose, and many do.
But after reading more of your posts, it sounds like you want to revive other people's bugs? Be careful with that -- I, for one, would be furious if you decided to revive some of mine. I have some that might look dead, but they aren't. In some cases I have told people who liked my bugs that they could keep them, and I don't want them suddenly grabbed and "revived" because some stranger thinks that they deserve to be back out traveling.
-
This video is of the 20 but they will have the same interface.
It's funny; I saw that review a few days ago and it was the first thing that made me think that I wouldn't like the new interface at all
(I can't watch it again to be sure, though; I was motion-sick for hours after seeing it the first time.)I guess I am just used to the button-presses behaving in certain ways, and this one seems to rely a lot more on the click-stick for page-navigation than the HCx does.
But time marches relentlessly onward, and I guess I will be dragged kicking and screaming into the future whether I like it or not.
-
A month or two ago, I dropped my Vista HCx on a stone tile floor. It seemed okay at first -- no broken screen and the unit stayed powered on -- until I noticed that all my maps were gone. Luckily I was able to correct that by just removing and re-inserting the microSD card.
Then I tried to download coordinates from the PC to the GPS with the USB cable, and the unit just sorted of faded for about a second or two, and then shut off. I tried it a few more times, alternating the order that I did things (connecting the cable to the PC first vs GPS first, leaving the GPS powered on during connection or starting with it off and then turning it on later, etc.) After a few tries, it worked, and I was able to download waypoints.
Next time, same thing -- it took several tries to get it to work. But the third time (and every attempt since), it just won't work: the GPS will not turn on or stay on when connected to the PC. (It doesn't "fade" out any more -- the shutoff is instantaneous now.) Just in case, I tried a different PC, different OS (win xp vs win 7), and a different cable. The problem certainly seems to be with the GPS, and appears to be a direct result of being dropped.
I was just going to use this as an excuse to get a new etrex 30, but the more I read about its interface, the less I think I will like it. I'd rather get the HCx back to normal if I could.
So, with that long rambling backstory: does anyone have a suggestion for a solution for this problem, short of sending it to Garmin for repair? Thanks.
-
I like your nanobug idea. The pessimistic part of my brain is saying that it will never last; that people have a hard enough time with the simplest methods of handling a basic bug, so they'll have no idea how to handle this. But the optimistic side is saying that this is just way too cool not to try
I've added it to my watchlist and am hoping for the best.
-
Nanos are micros. No need for an extra size.
This concept has resulted in the downsizing of all larger cache sizes, unfortunately.
Quite a few "smalls" today are pill bottles that can't even hold a geocoin because the opening is too small. But the cache owners won't call them micros, because to them, the nano has become the standard size for a "micro" specification. And because tiny pill bottles have become the new "small", sandwich-size containers are now called "regular".
Love nanos or hate them; it doesn't matter -- having them be their own size might put the other sizes back to where they are supposed to be.
-
Do you think the laminated tags help? What should (and should not) be on them?
They will help to reduce one of the many causes of TB disappearance: the one where someone picks it up and has no idea that it's a TB, or what a TB even is. This might even be the most common cause, so the laminated tag can certainly be worth it.
Unfortunately it won't help with many of the other causes:
- TB is picked up by someone who just stops caching for any number of reasons
- TB lands in the bottom of a caching backpack and is inadvertently forgotten
- TB is in a car that gets stolen, or luggage that gets lost by the airline
- Cacher's child spots the TB and quietly moves it to her toybox
- Cacher's dog eats the TB
- TB is logged into an event and is never heard from again
- TB is placed in a cache which is subsequently run over by a bulldozer and torn to shreds
- TB is placed in a cache which is subsequently stolen and archived
- Malicious cacher steals / collects / tortures / discards TB
- etc.
As for what should go on it: I'm not really crazy about the wording (or the formatting) of the standard "Print Info Sheet" available from the TB's page, so I adapt the text and change the size and shape so that it can fit into a snack-size ziplock. My most recent batch had this for text:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is no ordinary geocaching trade item!"TB name here"is a travel bug, moving from cache to cache.This item is not meant to keep. Please
only take it if you intend to log it on the
geocaching.com web site, and then drop it *** picture of TB here ***
off in another geocache. It's easy!
If you have never done this before,
please see "How to log a Travel Bug" at
geocaching.com/track
My Current Goal:
TB goal here
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(If the TB doesn't really have a goal, I change "My Current Goal" to "About this TB" instead.) I used to attach the laminated tag to the chain, but decided against it this time around; I just put it in a ziplock with the TB. Here are a couple that are ready to go:
- TB is picked up by someone who just stops caching for any number of reasons
-
There must be a 'gazillion' lost TBs/coins out there.
has anyone tried to get some of them tracking #s back into circulation?
I've recently revived a few dozen bugs that have been missing for anywhere between two and five years. I attached the COPY tag to something new, updated the TB page, and off they went.
In some cases, if I had a similar object, I left the TB name and goal the same. Other times I changed it -- sometimes to something related, and sometimes to something completely different. (But in all cases, I left all of the previous logs alone, so no one loses any credit for trackables.) If any renamed bugs had people watching them, they may be a bit confused when they start getting watchlist emails for bugs they've never heard of, but that's not too big an issue.
Here are some of my recent TB reincarnations.
No change in name or goal, but hitchhiker may look different:
April Showers Bring May Flowers
Name & goal changed, but sort of related to missing one:
Bookworm's Mom (replaced "Bookworm")
Sailor Moon in search of Alphonzo (replaced "Alphonzo")
Cannonball Brain's Revenge (replaced "Cannonball Brain")
See what happens when you don't floss? (replaced "Meals on Wheels")
Land Rover vs. Jeep (replaced "Mount Washington (NH) Green Jeep Travel Bug")
Changed to something completely different:
Little Green Watering Can (or is it?)
... and there's plenty more where those came from
-
Even within those heuristics, though, there's some subtlety to the rules that belies the obvious simplicity.
Not just "subtlety" -- I'd say it's more of a complete lack of agreement of what the rules are, or whether there are any rules at all.
There are plenty opinions, though.And it's not just a case of opinions differing in degree; there are some polar opposites. I've heard some people say that they will only log a DNF if they are sure that the cache is missing, because otherwise they consider it a "haven't found it yet" rather than a "did not find." And others are just the opposite: they will only log a DNF if they are sure that the cache really is there, because they don't want to take the (imaginary) blame/shame for a DNF that wasn't their fault.
And even for those that generally agree on what a DNF is, there is no real consensus on when to log it. Here are just a few examples:
- Some just never log DNFs, ever.
- Some will start the searching-for-it "clock" as soon as they press the "Go" button on the GPS, even if they are still miles away. If anything prevents a find -- including such non-caching related events as heavy traffic or a sudden downpour before even parking the car -- it's a DNF.
- Some will log a DNF only if they at least reached the cache site and started searching.
- Some will only log a DNF if they got to the cache site and they feel they gave as thorough a search as they can. If they just did a quick look but came up empty, they might log it as a note instead and plan to come back later when they have more time.
- Some will only log a DNF if they think it will be useful for other cachers. If they're in the middle of the search and, say, get an emergency phone call from their spouse, making them drop everything -- they won't log a DNF on that because it had nothing to do with the cache.
- Any other variation you can think of probably belongs here too.
Perhaps what I didn't say is that, as a novice geocacher, I'm not sure that my DNFs ought to be weighted as highly as those of veterans. (For example, I'm still struggling with micro-in-a-tree caches ... slowly getting better, but they're still much tougher for me than they ought to be.) If I log a DNF after a reasonable search, then go back and find it in one of those "doh!" moments, I feel like the previous DNF is more a reflection on me than the cache hide.
Your DNF is no less valid than anyone else's. Your guess at the reason for a DNF could be very useful to others, though -- if it's because you're still struggling with micros in trees, and note it in your log (if it's not a spolier), then it could be really helpful to someone else in the same boat.
And even if a subsequent find makes you feel like the previous DNF is more a reflection on yourself than on the cache hide -- even that can be helpful. There are a couple of cachers in my area that I seem to have the same "searching style" as -- very often, each of us will DNF a first attempt on certain tricky hides, and then find it on the second try. When I read their logs on a cache I haven't tried yet, and see that they had an initial DNF, it actually makes me feel much better going into it, knowing that if I DNF it's not too surprising or disappointing, and if I happen to find it, it's an unexpected bonus. So even if their DNFs are "a reflection on them," it still helps me.
- Some just never log DNFs, ever.
-
The other reason I delete old DNF reports ... I look at the found-versus-not-found statistics on a given cache as another indicator confirming/contradicting the difficulty rating supplied by the CO. In that case, it seems more reasonable that I should delete a DNF if I find it later.
Your first sentence makes perfect sense to me, but the next one seems to contradict it.
For example, take this cache (where I recently had a DNF). It has a 2-star difficulty rating. There are currently 102 found-it logs and 20 DNF logs.
Some of the finders say that this was their second or third try, but there are no previous DNF logs by them, so the count of 20 DNFs for this cache is actually too low. (I don't know if they logged DNFs originally, or if they follow the practice of deleting DNF logs.)
Which leads me to the conclusion that this cache is under-rated for difficulty: a 2-star should not have this high a level of DNFs or take so many people more than one attempt to find. But if everyone used your reasoning, many of those DNF logs would eventually disappear, making a 2-star rating look reasonable.
-
You might enjoy Milestone Marker, if you aren't prone to hernias.
4 feet tall, 210 pounds, currently in Pennsylvania:
-
Go to the Your Profile tab and select Trackables. That will show your trackable activity for the month. If you click on Discovered It then you'll see the ones you have discovered. Don't know how far back it goes. I've only discovered 1 from what i can see and that was back in March of this year.
This is the quickest way that I know of; and it goes back to "forever." I'm not into discovering trackables and have only a few but mine goes back to 2009.
It does go back to "forever", but you need to know the trackable's name. If all you have is the tracking ID (or if the owner has changed the trackable's name), this quick way won't work, unfortunately.
-
This method should be quicker than your current method of checking every log entry for a trackable, especially if it has many pages of logs:
- go to the trackable's page
- click the "View Map" link
- this will list all of the bug's logs in a single page, so that you don't have to search page-by-page
- a quick CTRL-F of your username should tell you if you've logged it
- go to the trackable's page
-
I've recently started going through all of our dead travel bugs, and releasing new ones on the COPY tags. We've probably re-used about 30 so far, but we still have a bunch of others that haven't been heard from in years. Sometimes, if I have a similar item to attach, I will keep the same name and mission as before; sometimes I change it completely (but never delete the old logs).
Here is a picture of the most recent dozen re-used bugs in the process of getting ready for re-release:
What they all have in common:
- They're small -- caches tend to be smaller these days than they used to be, and it can be hard to find ones big enough to hold regular-sized bugs.
- They are all made of plastic or metal: nothing cloth or paper or wood or anything that will be damaged in a wet cache.
- They are all things that we have found in caches, and thought were interesting enough to trade for, but hopefully not interesting enough to steal. (Although I can imagine a certain type of person being unable to resist "Howdy Kitty".)
- They're small -- caches tend to be smaller these days than they used to be, and it can be hard to find ones big enough to hold regular-sized bugs.
-
Hi
in How do I...?
You might want to read this thread: "What GPS should I buy?".
-
I found a laminated photo in a cache this weekend. On the back was written "help me travel" and an email address where we were requested to send updates on the photo's progress. How many others have found such Pseudo-trackables?
We once found a photograph with a note that it wanted to travel, eventually going to Holland. I turned it into a real travel bug, and after a couple of years it reached its goal. It was definitely one of our best success-stories, travel-bug-wise: here is the original form post and the followup.
edit: we also recently picked up a card from a CandyLand game that is in a race with the other 191 cards from the smae deck, trying to get to the Adirondacks. There was a tracking page for all of the cards, although it hasn't been updated in a few years. I emailed the owner telling him we were had picked it up and where we had dropped it, and he said that he is still following their progress although he hasn't kept up with the webpage.
-
Here is what I think I want in order of importance:
- ...
- Internal compass (so I know which way I'm facing without moving).
- ...
...
Another one that I have my eye on is the eTrex 20, which doesn't appear to be for sale yet.
The eTrex 20 doesn't have the electronic compass. You'd need the eTrex 30 for that.
- ...
-
I just got the 450 myself. Stepping up from the vista hcx.
Actually stepping up isn't the right word, both units have their pros and cons. It took me awhile to get used to the oregon interface, after having gotten used to the vista. Now that I am used to it all it good.
After being happy with our vista hcx for years, I recently dropped it pretty hard and now it shuts off every time I try to connect it to the computer with the download cable. I guess there's a short or something somewhere. In any case, I am far too lazy to be plugging coordinates in by hand, so I'm looking for a new unit.
I haven't been paying attention at all to the new models that have come out in the past few years. I'd like to stick with Garmin, but am just now trying to decide whether I should go for the Oregon, Colorado, Dakota, or some other state (if there are any).
Since you went from the vista hcx to the oregon 450:
- are there any features from the hcx that the 450 doesn't have, and that you really miss?
- are you happy with the choice, or do you wish you had gone for a different model instead?
- how is the reception of the 450 compared to the hcx?
thanks in advance.
)
History of "TFTC" only logs
in General geocaching topics
Posted
Years ago I was starting to notice the trend of terse TFTC-like logs, so I created a cache to basically poke fun of it. This was in 2008. I never did get around to publishing it, but I still find it kind of funny. Since I can't link to an unpublished cache, here are some screenshots of the listing (I tend to get wordy, so it took four screen captures to get it all, sorry):