Jump to content

MKFmly

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    271
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by MKFmly

  1. If I got into the hobby today, I can't imagine I'd waste money on a dedicated GPS. I still use my old Garmen 450 for nostalgia purposes, but I'm sure that the tech in my iPhone 6 is far superior. And if it's an urban cache, I'll only consider the phone, as it's so easy to pull up the satellite image to zoom in.

     

    The tech is far superior, however there is still physics.

     

    The electronics to correlate the satellite signals has gotten a lot better. But phones don't have much room for a proper GPS antenna, so their ability to detect the signals in marginal conditions tends to be worse. And new GPS units use the same tech as new phones. So comparing a new Garmin 64 to a iPhone, the Garmin will still win.

    BINGO

     

    The only drawback of a phone I have ever seen is GPS sensitivity. Under heavy tree cover, a phone will crap out before a good handheld GPSr.

     

    However, have you looked at my "downtown accuracy" event results. The phones dramatically outperformed handhelds.

     

    this part is odd to me. you've stated that trees are problematic, but then started that phones are better in cities. do you have an explanation for this?

     

    Trees block the signal. Large buildings cause multipath reflections. Different problem.

    Both situations suffer from both problems to a degree although as stated the dominate problem is different for each. In tree cover there is reduction of signal availability as well as some multi-path issues resulting in loss of signal, loss of track, and loss of accuracy. In urban canyons multi-path errors can be far greater.

     

    Cell phones can oft times be seen to outperform in urban areas as they get assisted positional data over the cell network to augment GPS positions. The technological downside of phone based GPS is often antenna design and capability.

  2. "Groundspeak are now making all logins (tokens) expire after 90 days, when this happens you just need to reauthorize the application"

     

    I can't provide step by step instructions as I don't run your AP (but encountered the same issue with a similar app that was solved as per below)

     

    Check your in app settings (Geocaching Live?) then "Deauthorize" your account and back all the way out of the app.

     

    Reopen the app and "Reauthorize" your (Geocaching Live?) account in the app settings and all should be well.

  3. I didn't see it as "complaining" about the work involved in checking logs/answers but more as doing the extra work involved to filter out the logs where people didn't visit the EC.

     

    I believe that GS should remove souvenirs if the logs on which they were awarded are proven fake and are deleted. As things are now you could spend a day logging caches for which souvenirs are available and even delete your own logs afterwards and still keep all souvenirs. That makes souvenirs worthless.

     

    BTW, I've done (found) one of Searchjaunt's ECs and the answers are not so difficult that founds have to be faked (date or answers) and it was a nice area on top of that.

     

    I create ECs because I want to share the geological value of an area. Creating an EC is already a long process, because I want to make sure that the people can learn from it. On top it needs to comply to a lot of (unwritten) rules of the reviewer, which doesn't make it easier. But it gives a good feeling when one can share something where somebody would otherwise walk by.

     

    I don't mind the work afterwards at all, in the contrary, as long as the log is legit. After all, the purpose of the IEC day is to put ECs and their geological value in the picture.

     

    But the souvenir degrades an EC to an LPC or effortless throw away cache. It's really unimaginable what one does (or tries to do) in order to get that souvenir. Besides the people not understanding what ECs are about or take the time/effort to do it properly, it attracts a lot of cheating (in all it forms). One gets away with it, since the souvenir remains when a non legit logs is deleted.

     

    If they simply stated "On a souvenir day the number of my EC logs naturally goes up, however there is often an increase of logs that don't pass muster most likely due to the promotion. Therefore souvenirs are bad..." (Correlation does not equal causation?) Most of us here probably would have even have been interested in the raw numbers too (xx logs, yy passed, zz didn't) to appreciate the scale of the problem. My EC (0, 0, 0) so the complete opposite experience.

     

    It's complaining when you talk about the time you took to review logs, when you evaluate your time as worthless, and when you ruminate on others "motivations" for a souvenir in relation to your expectations for your cache...

     

    It's all a matter of perspective in my view caches should provide an experience. As a CO (or an EC CO) those experiences are designed so that cachers enjoy the area, the cache, the container, and/or may learn something. However, once you publish that experience I have no control over how cachers choose to approach that experience nor what they get out of it.

  4. BINGO

     

    The only drawback of a phone I have ever seen is GPS sensitivity. Under heavy tree cover, a phone will crap out before a good handheld GPSr.

     

    However, have you looked at my "downtown accuracy" event results. The phones dramatically outperformed handhelds.

    Looks like a great event and nice to have some actual data. It would have been nice if you had recorded the phones with everything on as well as radio off/gps only mode. The "Wi-Fi/cell triangulation" adjustments are designed to augment/improve the phones positioning...

  5. [

    I was Sunday busy from 9AM till 11PM in responding the souvenir hunters claiming their visit. Since I spent a lot of time and energy in creating the EC, I do the same for the (so-called) visits.

    Many don't seem to expect that and aren't happy when they have been exposed as non legit.

    But at the end, they win after all - and all work is worthless - since the souvenir isn't deleted together with the log.

     

    Why do you own caches then?

     

    Wrong question. Why do people fake logs/dates?

     

    That's a separate issue, logs have to be reviewed regardless... the awarding of a souvenir is immaterial to the situation.

     

    Here is a cache owner essentially complaining about the amount of "work" they spent reviewing log entries for many hours. That's a part of cache ownership...

     

    Their secondary objective was to "expose" the "non-legit" logs. That's also a part of cache ownership...

     

    Based on tone and word choice there is obviously a little confirmation bias and the cache owner seems to value their responsibilities as "worthless" against not being able to deny someone a souvenir...

  6. I was Sunday busy from 9AM till 11PM in responding the souvenir hunters claiming their visit. Since I spent a lot of time and energy in creating the EC, I do the same for the (so-called) visits.

    Many don't seem to expect that and aren't happy when they have been exposed as non legit.

    But at the end, they win after all - and all work is worthless - since the souvenir isn't deleted together with the log.

    Why do you own caches then?

  7. Anyway, never mind that. Let's stick to the topic: I get a notification that you changed your log. I ask you what the change is. Do you equate that to demanding justification?

    I have already stated that it's my log not the CO's, I am the Log Owner (LO).

     

    As a CO it is certainly legitimate to be curious as to what changes were made; if that curiosity led a CO to use online tools to find the difference(s) then so be it, if that curiosity led a CO to contact the LO asking what the changes were that's being a "Mrs Kravitz" (google it if you don't get the reference), and if that nosiness led a CO to contact the LO asking them why it was changed (implying justification is required) then that is inappropriate.

     

    I get it, it's akin to a personal sliding value judgement much like the point where we choose to be offended.

  8. ohgood

     

    Question (for the cell phone expert).

     

    Since regulations require a cell phone to be able to dial 911 (even without a plan) and potentially give the phones location, how does that reconcile with "Airplane" mode and "Radios Off"?

     

    Airplane mode turns off the transmitters. GPS is not a radio but a receiver. You can hunt for caches in Airplane mode as long as you have downloaded the maps for the area you are in.

    Thanks Walt, my question was specifically how does the requirement for phones to dial 911 work in airplane mode. ohgood answered in post #27.

  9. There are often questions of this type.

     

    We generally seem to have this expectation that anything we track online be updated instantaneously. As noted above, it often takes time to work through the system and even longer if using 3rd party tracking. Batch process, server load balancing, API calls all have to be managed and when the data sets are large it takes time.

  10. All GPS units are accurate enough to get you to the location to find the cache. However, not all caches are meant to be found easily no matter how accurate the coords are.

     

    Even if they came out and made geocache units accurate within 2 inches, you would still not find all of them because the person who placed the cache might have their coordinates off by 30 or more feet. Might even cause more DNFs

    It's assumed and accepted that GPSrs and phones are accurate enough for geocaching (in this thread), the OP was interested in accuracy and response times hence the discussion.

  11. Now I'm not sure what you're saying. Demanding a justification is significantly different than being nosy. Is there a difference between nosy and curious? Aren't they allowed to be curious? Why would someone be upset that the CO took an interest in their log? Isn't that the point? Didn't you change the log for the benefit of the people that might read it?

     

    (And what's wrong with calling someone back that refuses to identify themselves? I don't know why anyone would bother, but if they did, I can't see how the calling party could be upset that they were called back. It's not as if you can tell it's a misdial.)

    Fair enough, I have clouded the issue. I never stated anyone was not allowed to be curious. Yes, although most would argue that they are the same; curious (positive connation) and nosey (negative connotation) are different. Yes you are allowed to be curious why some random phone number is on your call display. Cold calling a random phone number from your call display is nosey. If the random caller knows you or there is an important issue the calling party may leave a message or call back. I pretty much screen all my calls so I would never answer a random call back in the first place...

  12. It's somewhat by design although it does leave room to be exploited and there are legitimate situations where it might happen as noted above.

     

    I think we were awarded one of the road trip souvenirs for a recently submitted log (Indeed, 2015 road trip "put on your thinking cap" awarded 11-Sep-16), as we are still trying to piece together a holiday caching trip from last summer because we lost our good notes (Montana, Idaho, Washington (HQ), Oregon (Tribute Plaque)).

  13. That cache is placed near that certain town in Austria. Its owner probably isn't trying to offend people, create sensationalism, or push moral boundaries. Here in the USA, the owner knows exactly what the initials usually correspond to and that they will be offensive to some. It's obvious to see that this didn't matter to him since he stretched his imagination getting the initials to even work. Capitalizing the T in winter,, :rolleyes:

    Ah, so we can give CO's a pass based on our own perceptions of whether they are "trying to offend", great! That's pretty much why the caches in question got a pass from me even though I waffled a fair bit...

  14. I don't think that conversation about my logs is stupid, I think it's stupid to justify for the change of a log - at least in most cases.

    OK. I assumed COs were just asking you about the changes. If the COs are demanding you justify your changes, then that would indeed be stupid, although I'd just ignore them rather than engaging in a conversation about it.

    It's your log not theirs, no justification needed for changing it...

     

    Those COs are just nosey, they likely check their call display and call back the "unrecognised" numbers to query why they phoned, when it was a miss-dial.

  15. If I didn't give a cache a thorough search (maybe just not too happy with a mediocre location...), I'll leave a note instead of a dnf.

    ^^

     

    (ran out of time, weather, access issue, did not get to ground zero, didn't get answers, stage of multi, many others...)

  16. The answer to your question is already available in the Forum Guidelines:

     

    10. We generally do not allow surveys to be conducted in the Groundspeak forums.

     

    I don't know the history behind that ruling, but my guess is that after 15 years of running a Forum, they kind of know what works and what doesn't.

    After running a Forum for 15 years with a early 2000's paradigm and data point, Groundspeak can't envision anything else...

     

    FTFY

  17. It is quite appropriate that Groundspeak set their own etiquette, decorum, and moral "standards" through the terms of service and the volunteer reviewers. Anyone can still hold themselves to a higher standard. In the age of talking points, shock talk, and political correctness pushback, it would be nice for all to remember it's not a crime to be truthful while also being polite, good natured, and respectful of the audience.

     

    Appreciating that the modern lexicon changes (now quite rapidly) and that we generally relate the root words of wtf to the contested definition, the acronym has assumed a much less contentious connotation although maybe not as tame as "H E double hockey sticks". As a 3 letter acronym it has very little "expletive" power.

     

    The related cache pages appear quite honest and straight forward, with only a few "WinTer Friendly" notes and that appears to be the intent of the series, to challenge/generate interest in winter friendly caching.

  18. Why so much hate over an icon? They could have changed it to a purple elephant and it would still mean the same thing. Its only a digital image. What it means hasn't changed.

    Symbology is important because the symbol provides the meaning and context not the other way around. The fact that "a purple elephant" represents "favourite" to the same degree "a blue heart" does is irrelevant if neither represents "favourite" to the observer. (I would assume most wouldn't appreciate a swastika or a KKK symbol to represent "favourites").

     

    At the end of the day for most people "Favourite" does not equate to love (as symbolised by a blue heart). The erosion of symbolic power and the quantification/commercialization of friendships are part of the issue, mainly brought about through social media platforms. "Your my favourite Mom", does not ring quite as powerful as "I love you, Mom" and the difference is intuitively obvious.

     

    But why even bother changing it in the first place? Just another change that is needless, doesn't fit well, and that no one asked for.

    True, how that ever got past the staff (brainstorming) meeting stage and got assigned scant resources is beyond me...
  19. I would suggest not to minimize the process but expand it as successful implementation likely does not hinge on minimising GS involvement and a space in the db.

     

    Have a status box with "Submitted", "Approved", "Returned" (Need clarification/info) associated with the log entry.

     

    Rather than emailing the cache owner, submit the answers through a separate restricted/hidden log file (much like a hybrid travel bug/reviewer log) accessible by the CO.

  20. With all due respect in terms of Wherigo, I wish someone would just make a darn decision about its future and be done with it. If there's ANY chance of Wherigo's being disconnected from the geocaching.com website, I want to stop wasting my time learning the concepts and building cartridges.

    As I mentioned above "geo-location adventures" are a niche waiting to happen and properly supported Wherigo's (or an alternative) could easily lead the way.

     

    Wherigo's integration with GPSr's is unnecessary as the handheld GPSr market shrinks and the Mobile market takes over. Wherigo's recognition/integration with geocaching is entirely arbitrary and could be easily supported outside of Groundspeak (think Letterbox-Hybrids).

  21. GS isn't being judged differently. I complain about any company that becomes popular with a superior customer focus and then turns around to cash in on that reputation by switching their focus to ad revenue. Not that complaining helps, of course.

    Fair enough, but "Let's call it what it is" and "just another gimmick to bribe people into advertising Groundspeak's product" rather implied a more than standard negative connotation/judgement to me...

     

    Overall, it seems a basic (poor?) marketing attempt to encourage current customers to be proxy sellers, at least give us a free months premium time if the "friends" extend/sign up for PM...

×
×
  • Create New...