thebruce0

Nice. Does that include cache D/T's as found, or current?

Meh, bookmark beauty's in the eye of the bookmarker

not really, as you agree to do it by someone else's rules. smile.gif True. It's a personal challenge, taken up between you and the person putting out the challenge. That's all.

Exactly And mine - http://www.geocaching.com/bookmarks/view.a...b9-bb5e6de5df8b This. And this.

Good point. What would solve this? An option to view a cache's original rating. This doesn't help for minor adjustments post-publish, unless it were perhaps the rating after 1 week maybe. But another idea I had that would be a very good addition, I think, to GC.com would be to add the D/T rating to cache logs, as at the time of the log. If ratings change over time, I'm sure that history is maintained in their massive database - if you post a log for 2 months ago, GC can still look up the D/T as at that date. It would be backwards compatible - all stats generators can still use D/T as it's reported now, and updates can use find logs' D/T ratings for more accuracy. That would have the same effect as the 'lock listing' ability in gsak, since the d/t for logs will/should never change even if the cache listing does. Stat generation would remain static. Stats for challenges could use the D/T of the find logs. It's a minor addition that would only add to statistical capabilities, and reduce arguments and debates about CO rights and ethics of D/T alterations and all that... it may not have been an issue when geocaching was young, but now that challenges are abundant, date restrictions and grid challenges, heck even just statistics on profile pages (which can change dramatically right now just with an owner or two updating a rating). I think statistics should have always used ratings stored with the find logs, not the current cache stats. tl;dr: Seems like a conflict here - COs are allowed to update ratings, but cachers can generate statistics based on cache ratings through their entire caching history. Something's broken. Historic stats should not change. The easiest, and smoothest way for that to happen is simply to store the cache rating with any log that's posted to a cache. Dated logs can pull the rating as it was at that date based on the rating history for the cache.

On proofs: Ideally, they should have a summary of the qualifying caches' stats on the day they were found, for the record. * Bookmark lists allow you to customize the bookmark names, and due to changing ratings, I recommend adding the D/T into each bookmark name. Then if something changes, it can be taken up with the owner - it's the finder's word vs the CO's. But yes, bookmark lists can be removed, so that's not a definitive 'proof'. * One could post an image of the grid, ideally including the list of caches by D/T. Sure the image can be generated or 'shopped, but that would be word of honour, and a 'proof' that would remain static and not likely removed by the finder for lack of profile space (like the bookmark list limit). * Of course the easiest may be just providing the full 81+ cache list with D/T ratings in the find description. Any way you cut it, there's no static 'proof' that will last in perpetuity for future finders to verify. And really, it's not up to the finders to verify past finders' logs. It's really up to the CO alone. And then it comes back to - what do you care if you someone else logs a find on the challenge cache, which you don't think is legitimate? How is it unfair? It's not a competition, it's a personal goal. The only real complaint I see as legitimate is when a cache owner changes their cache rating, and I've already found or will soon find, the cache for the grid at the old combo. In which case, any of the above 'proofs' would help support my defense about whether the cache qualifies when I found it. I don't care if someone else can't use the cache in the future, or if now someone else can with the new D/T. What does it matter to me? Maybe I find it, then the D/T changes to another combo I need, but I can't log another find. Well, I likely already have a candidate cache for the new D/T anyway, so I could find that or switch which D/T they fill, so again - what does it matter to me? Ultimately, it's a personal challenge, and as the life of T81 draws to a close, it'll get easier for the CO to maintain a list of "qualifying" caches and changed D/T's (based on raised disputes or concerns). If I'm about to go for a cache D/T I need and it's changed, I could dispute whether I can still use it, and it's up to the CO to decide (based subjectively, of course, on the legitimacy of said cache's D/T alteration). That could go one way or the other on a case by case basis. tl;dr: To anyone who's already found T81 - why do you care so much about how the challenge is carried out in these final days? To anyone who owns qualifying caches people still want and you're (legitimately) altering the D/T regularly, then for the context of this challenge cache and fairness and peace, I say: choose a single D/T combo for use in T81, or negotiate perhaps two qualifying D/T combos. Make it easy. Simple. Fair. I don't see why this has to be such a big deal. But that's just me... Also, this:

Just doing a bit of looking around again to see if iPhone is supported now, and found a local cache listing recommended software for supported devices, including iphone. So to answer your question madmomma, here's the list they supplied: Garmin Colorado, Oregon units, Smartphones: PocketPC/Windows Mobile (Official Player), Android (WhereYouGo), Blackberry/J2ME (OpenWiG) and iPhone (PiGo) Does that help you out a bit about smartphones? As for which smartphone is better? *shrug* personal preference. I'll stand by iPhone though, and I'll be playing around with PiGo this weekend, excitedly

I'm also of the mind that unique creative caches are a dime a dozen. I think to be creative now you need to think less about the physical container, and more about the location, but mostly and most importantly - the experience through locating and finding it. Being original these days in standard cache hides is next to impossible. The only aspect of geocaching that will never run out of potential is journey to the cache. To me, creative caches are the ones that tell some kind of story, or offer some kind of experience - from viewing the cache page, to signing the log. I actually wrote an article on geocaching and what makes them a huge draw for amazing experiences, at 4DFiction | Telling stories with tupperware and ammo cans While creative hides can be fun, to me the best caches are the memorable ones, the ones that provide a fun experience or story that'll stick with you; ones that you tell your friends about, and that people from around the world want to find (even if it's just an adventurous physical trek to GZ). At this point it's not even so much about the rating any more. GC's also blogged a couple of creative caches that are about experience, not the container or contents. That's what I like to see

Finally got the log up. Man, hard to keep it under 4000 characters hehe Thanks for the great time. Sorry I had to cut festivities short, it was a tight schedule. Hope the Lime Diet Cokes weren't too warm or shook up the bottles were from Atlanta... haven't found them here at all, let alone 2L bottles. A worthy challenge my friend! But I think I may be drinking it occasionally now. It's not too bad =) Great to see ye again Chuck. I'm sure we'll cross paths again many times in the future

Does Saturday morning work for everyone who was planning to go?

CITO: Done. T81: Complete.

Hah, no, assuming intrepidca is willing to hold off on his T81 find until the 21st, then he and I will be arriving together to sign the log Awesome! The more the merrier On August 21st, we must party with Tequila.

So, after August 19th, do we want to plan some big get-together for a mass signing of Tequila 81? I'd love to meet up with some of y'all and celebrate. hehe I've got my FTF, my T81 qualification will be complete this coming Saturday with the CITO, and the next week is our local CREW event. After that T81 will be my #700. What's everyone doing on the 21st?

I don't think that event qualifies as a C(ache)ITO Yes. I will be there. Now just to log a great FTF before the CREW event hehe

I am of course not referring to accomplishing consecutive non-find days, but rather the difficulty of, say, forcing yourself consistently to walk past easy grabs, or going to cache events just to chat, visiting many caches but not logging them, resisting temptations for FTFs, all of that... I mean, in theory, for consecutive non-finds, all you'd need to do would be to quit caching (cold turkey or not). But while "actively caching", forcing yourself to not log caches is or can be just torture (and, of course, YMMV)

I don't believe you But then I'd wager it's quite subjective.

Inception?

... well it may be mid-late august by the time I get to this one. To have T81 hit on my #700, I have my final caches lined up: * FTF for August * local CREW event * CITO * T81 The event is August 19th. If I get a CITO before that (which may be the case), then T81 will be, hopefully, VERY shortly after the event You think it's a challenge to log a cache every day? Try forcing yourself NOT to find a cache any day.

Well, this was an epic weekend... Logged Where/when/what in Ottawa, and nabbed 7 of my 8 remaining Fizzy caches. D2.0 will be logged either Tuesday or next Monday. I am now aiming to have T81 for #700. My final matrix cache will be logged Wednesday, hopefully, in Atlanta. Then... Then... the elusive CITO! argh! My goal is to make every cache up to 700 count. I'm now at 693, which leaves me room for Fizzy 2.0, one cache to -complete- the DT Bingo matrix (the 2nd to do so after Skyecat I believe), the last T81 combo, one more local CREW event (August, presuming I don't get a CITO before then), the CITO, and T81. That leaves one cache buffer. There are a whole bunch of challenges I can still log, so I'm not sure which gets that last spot... Completion of T81 with the least finds is definitely out, but just to be able to complete it, let alone without a personal vehicle.. well, it can't happen without teamwork and friends. I'm aiming to have each find up to 700 and T81 to be significant. I'm going for the "epicest" T81 completion I have to say, HUGE thanks to Entogeek and Skyecat for letting me tag along to Ottawa this weekend. We grabbed a few caches, and I passed on a bunch, but my main goal was WWW, and they graciously let me stop over at my folks' place in Prescott to spend some quality visitation time with them. That was seriously an amazing thing they did. And then the next day, the geek drove me around to log those 7 fizzy's and the Ontario bingo. Brad seriously deserves an award or recognition for being an amazing guy. Now if only I can find a lime diet coke... Ah, the road to 700... I can taste the epic flavour already!

Which is why I said... etc... This was defense as to why attributes shouldn't just be created because it's 'nice' info to see. Only the most important or significant or practical or useful properties of a cache, imo, should be made attributes, otherwise it should be in the description or as notes in previous finders' logs.

it's two clicks versus one. in my book that is worse. Then click once on the link on the left.(actually, there is another, little known, link to the Geocaching.com Google map, and that is in the light blue box that contains the coordinates for the cache... just to the right of where is gives the name of the state and country the cache is hidden in: So... there are THREE ways to get to that map. But they're just dancing around the main issue here! They're just posers, they're not the real thing. The map WANTS to be clicked. They've taken away its right to be clicked to open a new map. It's simply unfair. Don't accept those knock-off substitutes.

Yes, attributes shouldn't be used (primarily) as descriptive of the cache - that's what the description's for. Yes, they can be useful for that for things like the hazards or details that could either be assumed or whatnot, but attributes are MOST useful for filtering. Things like plant hazards are good for people who have to avoid certain things for health concerns, or moral or safety or accessibility concerns, etc, etc. They're not meant just for informational purposes. So I agree, really only the most significant 'properties' of a cache are feasible as attributes. Not for convenience, but practicality in sorting and searching.

This is my take on the concern...

it's two clicks versus one. in my book that is worse. Perhaps they see the "move mouse left" as a requirement as well. Presuming one begins with eyes viewing the map, not only does one have to move one's eyes to the left, but one must also move the mouse pointer to the left, navigate to the correct link, and then click. With the map it was just one click. Or, thankfully now one can click the icon, and without having to move one's eyes very much, a new link appears right there to be clicked. So the icon on the map is actually better, faster, and easier than the self-explanatory text link to the left. It also helps combat carpal tunnel syndrome, requiring less mouse movement. ...Please don't mame me, people who want the old map back! =P srsly, I'm kidding

There's always the backup options... ..contact the co ..read past logs ..if it looks like it's a significant trip, prepare for a significant trip. I mean, the only time I can see unexpectedly getting looped into a far broader cache trip than planned is if the first stage or step or whatever leads to more unexpectedly. A multicache I prepare for more work and time by default. I take the cache description to heart, and if still uncertain read past logs to see what others thought. An overnight attribute might be useful, but requiring time or length with the cache seems redundant and unnecessary, imo. If it could be a concern with a cache, it should be sufficiently discernable or explained in the cache description, or through past logs. And if not, then I presume it's not a time consuming cache, else I'd complain to the owner after finding out that it is my 2p