Jump to content

J the Goat

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    1394
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by J the Goat

  1. Yup, those crossed my mind too. Although, instead of showing the actual stars, they could just put the color coded number on the screen. That would eliminate the clutter and it would fit on your screen. I like seeing the stars though, they're pretty
  2. As I was toasting my bagels for breakfast this morning, a thought occurred to me. I'll start by making it very clear that this is not a complaint, suggestion, or anything that causes me any sort of angst, I was just curious. Does anyone know why we use 5 star ratings with half stars instead of a 10 star rating system without half stars? Anyone know the official reasons? Want to speculate? I think that if there were a 10 star system, you'd get people asking for a rating between 3 and 4, even though essentially that would be like asking for a rating between 3 and 3.5 right now. I dunno, just struck me as interesting this morning.
  3. There are 33,000 McDonald's. If you ate 3 meals a day for just over 30 years, you'd have eaten at them all. There are 1,740,710 active caches according to GC.com. To find all the caches out there in the same 30 year time frame, you'd need to find 159 caches a day for that same 30 years. Consistently finding 159 caches in a day might be impossible, but so is your heart surviving 30 years of "McFood". Think of all the swag that would come with that :laughing:
  4. Not relevant huh? Then how d' y' feel about this? We've got forests too! You know, sort of. Note to Self: That oughta learn 'im. Ahhh! Geez, don't do that... Okay Duke, I'll keep you updated via this thread. Miss ya buddy
  5. :laughing: :laughing: I would have loved to see you trying to open that can. That's great
  6. Not always true, only one of my caches has a sticker on it that identifies it as a geocache. I should label them, but I generally dont. The idea of throwdowns is funny to me. Funny in a shake my head and facepalm sort of way usually...
  7. Harry Dolphin has named the bears that like to chew on his caches. It's pretty funny to read some of his cache logs. I've never had one chewed on, but it's pretty common.
  8. It seems to me that it is always the person that didn't get the FTF complaining about ones that did for whatever reason, with lots of details left out of the post, and we here are trying to wade through the situation, to really find out what happened. There are always 2 sides to the story, we are only hearing one. You turned around you made the choice to not go after the FTF so live with it. If NOT getting the FTF bothers you that much, that you have to come on a forum and complain about it, looking for sympathy I would suggest that you find a different facet of the Geocaching game that does not get you so upset. If you can't handle heat stay away from the fire. JMO Failed comprehension? No where in that post did anyone express displeasure for not getting a FTF. They were expressing their surprise that someone would risk a confrontation with a gunman simply to get a FTF. I find it hard to believe that you still haven't figured out that not everyone shares your compulsion for FTFs. Instead of actually reading the words in the message, you simply wrote it off as another complaint about FTF'ers and responded as expected. This exactly.
  9. I'd log the locations. Maybe the containers were switched, or mislabled in the first place. Or maybe not, but you don't know either way. Log the locations and NM logs and call it a day
  10. Very nice Now you just have to find a way to lug that thing 2 miles up a mountain. Where does that ammo can go?
  11. I would approach these examples as situations where it wouldn't be reasonable to assume that adequate permission is in place - NOT as an issue of safety. In the rattlesnake den example, it's well known that front yard caches need permission because it's private property. I would only publish after being assured that the rattlesnakes have given permission. :laughing: :laughing: Thanks Keystone, next to my coffee that's exactly what I needed this morning.
  12. I'd be willing to bet the reviewer had no opinion on your friend either way, and that suggestion seems a bit out of line. As far as a screw in the tree, to my knowledge that's never been okay. I think I've heard of caches being archived for things like that in the past, as it should be. There are other ways to secure caches to trees. If I get the gist of your post, your friend had fence post caches archived by a reviewer based on the new defacement wording that were glued inside fencepost caps? That's an interesting interpretation, one I hadn't thought of with the new update. It doesn't matter to me much either way, as I don't hide caches like that and don't actively search for them either, but I can see where it's going to twist up a whole department store section full of knickers if it's enforced on a large scale.
  13. I'm actually going to agree (on some level) with the OP. Homeless encampments have no business being cache locations for a multitude of reasons. I know, if you don't feel comfortable don't look. Some places just aren't appropriate for caches either way. The area may have changed over time, changing the location from a spot that's alright for a cache to a spot that isn't. You have two courses of action, neither of which will gaurentee any action. Notify the CO and suggest the issues that have arisen make the area a bad one for a cache. The other one is an NA log to alert the reviewer, however if the cache still fits within the guidelines I'd be surprised of a reviewer will do much about it. (That's not meant to sound as if they should and they wont) Unfortunately, caches end up places they shouldn't. The NM log you posted will alert people in the future about the issues with the cache and will allow them to make their own decisions about hunting the cache.
  14. My big one is the people who don't answer when I call their cell phone but when I send a text immediately afterwards (leaving a message of sorts) they text me right back. On occasion it's situation appropriate, but I have friends who just won't answer their phones. Drives me nuts.
  15. That may be, but he smells bad and sweats a lot.
  16. If you have the ability to borrow a dedicated GPSr, I'd go that route. Battery life is better, and you can see if it's a model you like.
  17. Having the information on the Magellan will depend on which model you have. I don't know anything about Magellan, so I don't know which ones will display the information, sorry. As far as the finds showing up on the website when you connect the device to the computer, as far as I know there isn't a functionality that allows you to do that. You still have to log the caches seperately. If I'm wrong, I'm sure somebody will pipe up and letcha know. Welcome to the addiction
  18. Oh, and I didn't mean to ignore the OP, that's quite the vehicle to use for some caching. I've got one or two they might be able to do that with, do they take requests? :laughing:
  19. That's a tremendous picture. Looks like a great cache, too bad it had to go.
  20. That is very cool! It also looks way too small for my giant, fat head :laughing:
  21. This is just plain wrong. According to this, any jacktard can claim an attended on any event. Period. No need to sign the logbook as proof of attendance? Redonkulous! 'Oh, I came in through the back door and I was only there for five minutes 'cause I had to go see me mum in hospital. I guess you didn't notice I was there, but I was!' I agree, the event log was essentially the only requirement before, now that that's gone there's no way to keep anyone from logging any event cache they decide want to say they attended. Is there a reason for this?
×
×
  • Create New...