Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RufusClupea

  1. 5 minutes ago, Keystone said:

    Each Pocket Query is separate.  Editing the old information overwrites it.  Any one pocket query can only be run once per day, so if you're editing one, the earliest it can run is the following day (Seattle time).

    I think what you're saying is that I need to click Create a new Query for each follow-up, but that doesn't seem to follow what's happening.  I CAN edit--as long as I wait for the process to complete.

    Again, waiting seems to work.  I'd do some of this experimenting, but right now the sun is shining, and I'd rather get out and find some of these caches... ;)

  2. 14 minutes ago, on4bam said:

    You do wait until you got the e-mail the PQ is ready, are you? Why not "copy" the PQ and run the original and edited copy. Besides, running the original and then editing and running it again will not work as the system sees the same PQ and will wait 24 hours to run it again.

    I'm not quite following you.  The items edited are Name, Origin, and Radius (overlapping circles to expand/increase the overall area).  I would think those changes would be enough for the system to recognize they are different PQs.  If not, then again, I think that's a bug.  Of course YMMV.

    Anyway, as I said above, from now on I'll wait until the process is complete before proceeding to the next PQ.  The system doesn't seem to have a problem when I do that, so it's apparently NOT seeing the same PQ.

  3. The latter--fill out the form, schedule it to run, then immediately edit the form for the next PQ

    That may be (part of) the problem, but in my mind, that's a bug.  Once a completed form is submitted, I would think that's it, and I should be able to continue/proceed to the next PQ.

  4. Things have gotten stranger...  One of the PQs I ran had one title on the compressed file, but another PQ's titles on the un/de/compressed files within...  I can only guess that something strange is happening when I try to do multiples.

    I guess the solution (for me) is to do one PQ, and wait until the entire process is complete before progressing to the next PQ.  It'll take longer, but I can't see any other fix at this time.

  5. Yes, I've been running PQs successfully.  This aberration has happened several times.  I can't say for sure if it's happened when running just one PQ, but it's happened at least twice when running multiple PQs.

    Yes, the caches are there in preview mode--when they appear on the Active tab (albeit struck through).  Sometimes after submitting, they don't appear at all; they just get lost in the Twilight PQ Zone.

  6. A few times now, I've created PQs, submitted them, and they show up on the Active Pocket Queries tab with a line through them, but nothing on the Pocket Queries Ready for Download tab.  I also get emails notifying me they're available for download, but again--nothing there (they don't appear in the Pocket Queries Ready for Download tab, but do show up on the Active Pocket Queries tab with a line through them.

    This seems to happen if/when I create more than one PQ at a time.

    I also cannot delete the struck-through queries from the Active tab (yes, I'm checking the boxes).

    Is the system buggy, or am I doing something incorrectly, or what?


    PS  I also ran one that showed up on the tabs, but I never got an email notice for it (not that it matters, but again, seems to be a bug(?))

  7. I scanned the forum archives for this topic--found mention, but no real discussion (though I could have missed it).

    Many of us know about this, but for those who may not (and as a reminder to those who do), The Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALB) is threatening the hardwood forests we love (and hide caches in) in the Northeastern US and Southeastern Canada (among others).  Their preferred hosts/food include:  maple, birch, elm, ash, poplar, horsechestnut, and willow, among others.



    Since maples are a preferred host for ALB, the spread of the beetle into the rest of the state would mean devastating impacts to the maple syrup industry through the loss of healthy sugar bush. Maples are also a valuable hardwood for furniture, flooring, and other uses. Larval galleries through the heartwood may degrade the wood enough to make it useless for milling, costing the forest products industry billions of dollars. The larval galleries also compromise the structural integrity of the tree resulting in falling limbs and trunks under heavy rain, snow or wind pressure. Removing these hazard trees in parks and towns would be expensive and have serious impacts on property values and tourism.  -- NYS Department of Environmental Conservation

    Please don't make the mistake of assuming that if the maps don't show them in your vicinity that we need not be concerned or vigilant.  These buggers have wings; they can fly and spread more quickly than we might imagine.  Since the only countermeasure is destroying any infested host, if left unchecked, it could result in widespread wholesale deforestation.

    What can we--as Geocachers--do?  A LOT.  As frequenters/enjoyers of the forests--armed with GPSrs/Smartphones & apps--we are (moreso than the average muggle) the First Line of Defense against these destructive invaders.


    If you believe you have found ALB…

    • Take pictures of the infestation signs as described above (include something for scale such as a coin or ruler).
    • Note the location (intersecting roads, landmarks or GPS coordinates).
    • Contact DEC Forest Health (see below) or your local Partnership for Regional Invasive Species Management (PRISM) by visiting New York Invasive Species Information website (leaves DEC website)
    • Call the ALB tip line at 1-866-702-9938
    • Report the infestation to iMapInvasives (leaves DEC website)  -- Ibid.

    More Pics of ALB (for aid in identification)
    United States Department of Agriculture APHIS -- Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALB)
    NYS DEC -- Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALB)
    Asian Longhorned Beetle: First Line of Defense -- Youtube Video

  8. 58 minutes ago, dprovan said:

    You see it as competitive, so you see it as "keeping score", presumably because you compare your score to other people's scores. I see it as individual, so I see it as tracking my progress. I look at other people's numbers in order to see how much progress they've made, not to compare their progress to my progress.

    Please don't put words in my mouth or thoughts/intentions in my head.  I see it as competitive because there are so many ways of keeping score (among other defining attributes).


    There are logs so we can tell each other about our experience. I don't even understand how logs contribute to any kind of competition unless you see bragging as a significant part of logging.

    So far, I haven't seen a single cache log (the ones that are signed inside the cache--i.e. the ones I'm talking about--not the ones on the cache sheet) that mentions anything about experiences other than a quick "TFTC" or "Great Hide".  The largest category--Micros--don't have room for much--if anything--else.  Their purpose seems to be one of the ways of keeping (or proving) score.


    There's swag because some people like swag. I have even less idea how this has anything to do with being competitive.

    I've seen swag described as souvenirs, items for trade, and rewards for finding a cache.  At least 2 of those qualify as things to accumulate (a way of keeping score,and one of the 3 objectives of games, i.e. race, accumulation, position).


    • Upvote 1
  9. 8 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

    However, there's nothing "wrong" with those who choose to make this a competitive game.

    I think you know that already, and maybe just looking to keep stirring that pot...

    That's what I've been saying right along, because that's what it is--a competitive game--by every definition I'm familiar with.

    Maybe those who insist it's not are just looking to keep stirring the pot...

    Perhaps we should agree to disagree.

    • Upvote 1
  10. 19 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

    You still haven't logged as attending the event.  The two trackables are still in your inventory, so that other cacher hasn't grabbed 'em from you.  Yet.

    Good opportunity to achieve two aims at once.  :)

    Wasn't aware I had/was spoze ta log as attending the event.  OK

  11. 39 minutes ago, dprovan said:

    Yeah, I agree that's irksome, but I try to be more amused than annoyed. Even worse are the hints that would be helpful, but say the opposite of what they mean. "Don't be stumped." Shouldn't that mean it's not in the stump?

    If I saw that particular hint--depending on my knowledge of/experience with that particular CO--I might search the stump first (stumps are actually pretty limited/narrowed down areas to search, IME) and then if unsuccessful, I'd look around to see what else the hint might be hinting at.

    I think I would understand SicilianCyclops' gripe point if he would give an example. :D


  12. 25 minutes ago, arisoft said:

    There is possibility that geocaching is a non-competitive game.

    Wow.  I was tempted to say there is a possibility that monkeys... but I won't.

    If it's non-competitive, then why are there so many ways of keeping score, why are there logs, why is there swag, why are so many people making it about numbers, etc?  ;)

    And perhaps most importantly, what's wrong/the problem with it being competitive?  Is that somehow threatening? :huh::blink:

  13. 40 minutes ago, TahoeJoe said:

    I don't see anything wrong with competition but competition (or perhaps obsession) is primarily  responsible for Power Trails and throw downs which encourage poorly maintained and unimaginative caches. 

    I don't doubt nor disagree with that.  I think we may be in violent agreement. ;)

    • Upvote 1
  14. 1 hour ago, TahoeJoe said:

    I think part of the problem in my area is the cachers that place way too many caches. There is one person in particular that has placed over 800 caches. Cache maintenance on these type of caches is when a reviewer disables the cache due to DNF's.

    That may be the best argument I've seen/heard for limiting the number of caches one may hide.  In my few short weeks GC, I've seen several discussions about prohibiting people from hiding caches until they've found x (or xx or xxx) # of caches.  I haven't seen any discussions about limiting the # of hides (though that could be due to my noobishness... noobisity? <shrug>) though seeing some of these astronomical #s makes me wonder...  To anyone who says they can reasonably maintain several hundred caches... Well... I wouldn't call them a liar, but I might quote a line from The Ghost and the Darkness, "On that I choose to remain dubious." :DB)

    • Upvote 1
  15. 1 hour ago, sholomar said:

    The real question is what goes through the heads of people who do this..

    Better to have one and not need it than to need one and not have it?  :rolleyes:  Hey...ya never know... y'know?  :P

    Or maybe they're just spreading the love...

    1 hour ago, sholomar said:

     I figured geocaching would be an activity that wouldn't attract perverts but I guess I'm wrong. Oh well, I'll learn to accept it. :P

    Oh, you are sooo wrong!  Perversion is an equal opportunity delinquency.

  16. 7 hours ago, arisoft said:

    Well, in that case, unfortinately,  you've already lost this game and it is time to surrender and go forward to an another hobby where you may have better change of winning. There is always someone better that you or me or in this game at any major factor. Instead of sure loss in this "competition", you could start to compare statistics and track your own development which actually means collecting [virtual] items. So called challenge caches are very good instrument for this comparison.The challenge gives you a goal to achieve - not a win. Collecting goods is also in our DNA regardless of whether you have to struggle against someone or not. You may still feel yourself as a winner anytime you find a cache. :)

    I think you may have just lost your own argument to yourself. :huh::blink::D 

    I'M not playing a zero-sum game at the moment.  As I've said before, I got into this (originally) primarily for the exercise (which I badly need) because I loathe mall walking.  After looking into it a bit more, I've discovered other aspects that also appeal to me. Some could be considered competitive; others not. Inherent in almost any pursuit I undertake more than once or twice is competing with myself.  I don't see competition as a bad thing/dirty word; I am a lifelong consummate gamer (consummate when I'm feeling good enough).

  17. 9 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

    For me, "competition" implies there are winners and losers, but about the only thing I can think of in geocaching where there are losers is an FTF race. Mary Hyde isn't a competition - no-one is deprived of a gold coin or a souvenir because I got one. And how are trackables and tours competitive, or even challenges? No-one loses out if I complete a challenge cache, the challenge for anyone else is unaffected whether I complete it or not. Tennis is competitive, cricket is competitive, football is competitive, geocaching isn't.

    What you are describing are "zero-sum" competitions/games,  Not all competitions are zero sum; some/many are "non-zero-sum" competitions, nevertheless it is still competition.  Prisoner's Dilemma is one example.

    Geocaching can be either/both, depending on players' objectives and other factors.

    I'll reiterate; there is nothing wrong with competition, or that geocaching is competitive.  Competition is not a dirty word.

  18. 7 hours ago, TahoeJoe said:

    At first looking at the map of all the caches I thought I had enough caches to keep me busy for months but soon realized the majority were park and grab and poor excuses for what I thought a geocache should represent.

    When I ran my first PQ I thought the same thing--that I'd be busy for months, but after pursuing a few, and then perusing the list, I came to the same conclusion.  So I ran a second PQ, exactly the same as the first, except that I filtered out "Micro" size caches.  I was amazed at the result, so I ran a few more test samples.  Of the samples I ran, ~45% were "Micro"s--caches ostensibly geared toward boosting the numbers of cachers and COs.

    7 hours ago, TahoeJoe said:

    The game is what it is but I'm amused how geocaching is marketed as a treasure hunt when the majority of caches I see are leaky pill bottle with camo tape placed along side the road with little or no thought involved with the creation or placement of the cache. By no stretch of the imagination do I see this as modern day treasure hunting. When I think of geocaching treasure hunting, I think of the treasure as being the journey to the cache as well as where the cache is located and my overall experience from the cache. I'm one who likes a logbook in the cache that I read about others experiences and that I can record my own thoughts. I'm probably a relic from the early days but I don't see playing for the sake of numbers of finds as geocaching. 

    Well, I've been considering myself a relic for a couple years now, but I'm still a noob by my reckoning. :rolleyes:

    I decided when I ran that second PQ that I would no longer (with very few exceptions) bother at all with micros, which leaves me with a bit of a quandry.  The kinds of caches I'd like to be going after are the kind I can no longer safely pursue.  I've gotten myself into trouble a few times now going after caches rated T=1.5 that were actually T=2.5 or even higher.  But it seems the ones I can safely hunt are of that carpy pill bottle/film can type.

    I couldn't care less about the numbers; I got into this for the exercise and mental stimulation.



    • Upvote 1
  19. 10 hours ago, arisoft said:

    Since this is not about competition, but entertainment, ....

    I respectfully disagree.  Everything about geocaching is about competition; if it weren't there wouldn't be logs to sign, whether to journalize (I didn't think it was a word either, but I looked it up, and apparently it is) the adventure or just to declare/prove "Kilroy was There".  It's referred to almost universally as a "game", which by definition is a competition.  There's nothing wrong with that (competition).  Competition is in our DNA; games are simulations of the struggle to survive.  And every new aspect to the game has been about competition--trackables, tours, promotions (e.g.Mary Hyde), not to mention the ubiquitous challenges.

    • Upvote 1
  20. Passed 2 TBs along to another cacher at an event to move them along their objectives (TBs wanted to go west; she was going west).

    Do I need to log those?  If so, how, and how to get them off my inventory?

  21. 11 hours ago, SeattleWayne said:

    People wanna rip on LPC but you know what? When those suckers are at the front by the doors? That cache ain't no joke, and I bet the lot of you just log a Found It! without even bothering to lift the skirt up. 

    I've got admittedly mixed feelings.  The first few I found were LPCs, but the last one contained a hornets nest.  No activity or I would have forgone it; but there wasn't, so I didn't (forgo it).  Got stung, tripped over a curb, lost 6 sq. in. of skin (right down to meat) off my elbow, and sprained my wrist.  I think I'm done with LPCs.

  22. 14 hours ago, Inmountains said:

    What is it?  Where is it?

    We all enjoy the activity of Geocaching and we realize that we all play the game the way that makes it enjoyable for us.  But in my 15 years of Geocaching, I seem to find less and less integrity in it.  And while we can all play the game we like, HOW does a cacher "find" a cache if they are not personally at the cache site?  Why log a geocache on a different day than you found it?  Why replace a geocache just because you can't find it?  AGAIN, let me emphasize that everyone is allowed to play the game any way they want. They can log every cache in the world from their laptop without leaving their basement, but what is the point?  Back in 2003 and 2004, having 1,000 finds was quite the accomplishment.  It meant that one cacher, usually using a Yellow Garmin Etrex, went afield, and using paper printouts, actually found the cache.  I realize technology changes, but going afield, finding a cache and signing the log is Geocaching, in my humble opinion.  The whole idea was to enjoy the HUNT and the FIND!

    As a new geocacher, I find little integrity in it now. 

    I can answer, "Why log a geocache on a different day than you found it?"  Some days I get home so tired I fall asleep before I can log a find.  There have also been times I've simply forgotten about a find until I come across something that reminds me, "Oh yeah, I forgot about that one," which reminds me... :rolleyes:

    I went to my first event last night.  I brought along a couple of TBs to pass along (get rid of).  Several people wanted me to let them see the TBs just so they could copy down the #s and record themselves as having found them (or whatever--I'm new, remember?)  I declined, thinking about something I'd recently read about that practice.  I finally found someone who was traveling in the right direction to advance these TBs along their goals, and I gave them to her.  She immediately threw them down on the table so her "friends" could log them.  Some will disagree, but that's not the way I understood these things to work.  Another reason I want nothing more to do with TBs... ever.

    There happened to be a cache very close to this event.  I couldn't find it (later to find out from folks who'd previously found it that it really was missing).  I was talking to another cacher there who told me, "Go ahead and log it; if it's gone, who's gonna know?"  Answer: I'D know.

    Whether you call it--or blame it on--ethics, "goofiness", entitlement, human nature, situational ethics, or laissez faire gameplay doesn't matter; you'll always find those who'll say it's cheating, those who'll say it's not, and those who'll fall back on "it's just a game."

  • Create New...