Zhanna

Hmm ... between the beer drinking and the daydreaming, it's no wonder we see some errors on the datasheets! (from an eBay auction; listed here: 1944 Schlitz Beer Surveyor Dream Girl Ad for at least a few more hours.) Zhanna

Yes, thanks! I should have mentioned that. I must've looked at it about 10 times before I figured out the meaning of "SF". Zhanna

Sure, Patty, that sounds like a fine idea. I'm still working with those USGS reports myself and hope to make the 1986 recovery reports available soon. But for anyone who'd like a sneak peek ... Palo Alto, San Jose, and Yosemite USGS Benchmark Descriptions Zhanna

I understand your point, but my point is that if Geocaching.com is going to provide a link from the benchmark page to the official datasheet anyway, as they always have, they should link to the most current version of the datasheet. Do you think that merely reading the newer recoveries by geocachers will encourage too many uninformed people to submit official recoveries? That danger may exist, but it's not a reason to make important data more difficult to find. I'm not advocating any quick and easy method of submitting official recoveries. Zhanna

I think you mean something like this: http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/ds_mark.prl?PidBox=XXyyyy (Replace XXyyyy with the PID.) As others have pointed out in the past, I'm “not entirely familiar with what's involved” in running a site such as this one, but I think it should be relatively simple to provide this link, with the proper PID inserted, on each benchmark page. The current GC.com benchmark database is out of date and this would provide a simple way for those of us who are more serious about hunting benchmarks to obtain the most current NGS record for a particular mark. As it is now, I only use GC.com to obtain the PIDs of marks nearest to a particular cache, or to another benchmark; for this purpose, GC.com works great. But for the official mark data itself—which I agree is invaluable—I end up clicking over to the NGS site anyway. A direct link would be very convenient. Zhanna

I've turned the PIDs into clickable links, so it should now be much simpler to obtain the datasheets. Zhanna

I don't care much about the other forums, but I found myself missing the intelligent conversation and informative posts here in Benchmark Hunting. I'm happy to have this connection again! Zhanna

<blushing>Thanks, R.</blushing> It was a lot of fun to create that cache, and I'm glad that everyone seems to enjoy it. The instant feedback is great, too! I have to recommend Rich's Archbald Pothole and Valley View as outstanding additions to any list of Pennsylvania caches. They're built around fun and innovative puzzles, and as usual they lead us to interesting new places. Zhanna

We had snow on October 2. ~Zhanna~

Yes, DustyJacket has done a terrific job with a similar project. Check out his Photos of Witness Posts and Survey Marks page. Zhanna

quote:Originally posted by RogBarn:Zhanna has graciously offered space to host the list. If fact, she has them up but I don't have the address here, it will have to wait until Monday unless she sees this and posts it herself. I see it now (just got in after a day of benchmark hunting). Here are the new URLs: Airway Beacons (East) Airway Beacons (West) As Roger mentioned, we're working on cleaning up some little inconsistencies and making the list more user-friendly, but no matter what changes are made the URLs should remain the same. It's my pleasure to host the list! Zhanna

quote:Originally posted by Jeremy:Yes, the original image will not be resized or modified if the uploaded image is under 125k. Thank you! This simple solution is what we've been asking for all along. The higher filesize limit and the removal of restrictions on the dimensions will be greatly appreciated by those of us who care about the quality of our photos. Thanks for listening and addressing this issue. Zhanna

quote:Originally posted by Jeremy (Admin): quote:Originally posted by CYBret:Giving this topic a bump. I still haven't seen any word on adding our webpage urls to our cache logs. Is this feature just plain gone or will it be coming back? It's gone. Jeremy Irish Groundspeak - The Language of Location Would you mind elaborating? Why is it gone? Thanks. Zhanna

Yes, and I was just about to ask the same question. The thumbnail images themselves don't show up, and the links to the benchmark pages return the “This page cannot be displayed” error. Furthermore, try searching (from the main benchmark page) for one of the PIDs with a missing gallery image. I've done this for several marks, and on none of the pages did I see the benchmark hunter's log! Am I missing something, or have recently-entered logs been lost somehow? I have at least 15 more logs to enter, but I'm not going to attempt to upload any of them until this is addressed and fixed. Zhanna

Rich, I agree with you. After much deliberation I decided to use the same criterion when logging HU1397. I couldn't care less about the numbers themselves, but we should get credit for all our successful recoveries, including those cases in which we were the first to positively identify a station that no longer exists. Zhanna

Thank you, R, for stating so succintly what you and I have been discussing for some time now. These are issues that really need to be addressed soon. More of us are hunting benchmarks, and our work is being taken more seriously by the NGS. Without some attention to the details—get rid of the "skull" bug, update the database, develop a consistent standard for logging these marks (not necessarily one that's in line with the Geocaching found/not found paradigm)—we're all going to look as amateurish as the U.S. Power Squadron. I'd like to be proud to use the GEOCAC contributor code on official recovery reports I do submit, but unless some things change around here, I'll continue to submit reports as an individual. Zhanna P.S. Even though you did seem to have remarkable powers on Friday, it's true that a blind man (or woman—even me! ) could've located that disk with a minimum of searching!

quote:Originally posted by Colorado Papa:I was refering to the 700,000 +/- figure and the founds on the main page that does not include benchmarks with skulls. Ah, I see. Thank you, CP! Zhanna

Maybe he means something like these: 1 USCG 2 USCG 3 USCG Are these Coast Guard marks? Or does USCG stand for something else? ~Zhanna~

quote:Originally posted by Colorado Papa:Unfortunately, the finding of these BMs do not add into the found totals as the destroyed ones don't subtract. Could you please clarify this? I have found one "skull" benchmark, and as far as I know it has contributed to my current find total. Or am I misunderstanding your statement? Thanks, Zhanna

That's simply amazing! I don't know how you do it. Congrats ... ~Zhanna~

Funny, you took the words right out of my mouth. (I was just about to make an announcement about this terrific achievement.) Congratulations, R. You deserve it more than anyone. Thanks for giving so much to this game, and for everything else. I'm so honored I was there to share your 100th First Find with you. May you have 1000 more (if you wish ). ~Zhanna~ ps Yeah, celebrating's great ... but so is sleeping!!!

Congratulations, guys!!! You've shown a lot of intelligence, spirit and class in all of your geocaching activities. We need more cachers like you! Best of luck on your next 100, and beyond ... Zhanna

Way to go! Looks like you picked some excellent cache hunts for this important milestone. Congratulations, and keep having fun! Zhanna

quote:Originally posted by evergreenhiker!: quote:Originally posted by Brian - Team A.I.:CCCooperAgency doesn't really count, since it's a number of people logging finds under the same account. If it were a one or two person team, that might be different. Brian Team A.I. Didn't know that. Couldn't see how one person could get so many finds...makes sense now. Here we go again, indeed. Why can't we applaud their determination, ability and enthusiasm, rather than try to bring them down to a level that you feel is humanly possible, that makes you feel good about yourself. I don't see the solo cachers complaining about the families, who under this logic should have a much easier time racking up the finds since they bring more eyes and legs to the hunt (and no, this is not an invitation to start complaining). If numbers are that important, then create a joint account with friends in other states or even other countries. Find all the caches in the world! I'm sure the resulting experience will not be anywhere near as satisfying as that of a family who spends their time together and has found an activity they can all enjoy, and excel at. No, maybe it's not "normal". I do hope that this doesn't develop into a true obsession for any of them, but that's not for me to judge or condemn. All I know is that high achievers are not usually what the majority considers "normal." Luckily for all of us, they usually don't care. Zhanna

quote:Originally posted by Buzz_Lightfoot: Eco-nuts and anti-eco-nuts are just that, nuts. The truth lies somewhere between the extremes. The difficulty is having the wisdom to determine truth from fanaticism. I don't disagree, and I'm sure than many of us, especially those who have studied the sciences, do have the wisdom to determine what is true. I wanted only to provide another viewpoint. Thanks for your input! Zhanna