MKFmly
-
Posts
271 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by MKFmly
-
-
What I would have a problem with is if I had a puzzle that had been solved only three times in four months, to then start getting ten finds a week on it because someone who solved it decided to share the answer.
Why limit it to "puzzles", is it not the same issue if someone who found a traditional cache, then shared the D4.5 awesome camo and hide details (making it a 1.5)?
As a cache hider you can only control how you envision your cache to be enjoyed and found. After it's published all bets are off...
-
It seems that my opinion of logging trackables quickly and accurately is in the minority..
That is perhaps not the best take away.
Every poster values quick and accurate logs, the dissenting opinion is with the methods choosen to express and impliment it.
From the OP (and even now) it clearly seems "quick" is valued much more than "accurate"... otherwise with some patience ... this thread would not have started ...
-
There already is a review and multi-step appeal process in place.
I knew this would come up. Upon an appeal to Groundspeak the basic assumption is that the reviewer made and error. An appeal process is an adversarial process that pits the hider vs the reviewer. Obviously, that is not conducive to an unbiased neutral and successful process.
It's impossible to expect that any two reviewers are going to draw the exact line in the sand when it comes to such matters...Different communities have different sensibilities towards such things.Hence the need for Groundspeak to support their volunteers reviewers and to set the standard and assume this small role themselves. The reviewers then have access to the corporate knowledge of the "group" that deals with all the "non-family friendly" issues: consistency and Groundspeak's ethics, morals, and values are assured.
-
With all due respect to Justice Potter Stewart but to purloin and modify his popular phrase...
I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["non-family friendly"]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it...The definition of non-family friendly simply should reflect the ethics, morals, and values of Groundspeak, and not their volunteer’s individual "interpretation of them". It would seem prudent for Groundspeak to have a "non-family friendly" cache review board that their volunteer reviewers could access, refer to, or transfer the listing in the rare occurance a cache was to be denied based on that concern.
-
Cachers geocache, for a variety of reasons and motivations. Trying to pigeon hole and restrict cachers to one single motivator, and then making assessments (and often value judgements) from that single perspective is simplistic, inaccurate, and absurd. Motivations for all cachers vary along a spectrum, drift and change over time, and are more complex and coupled than "it’s all about the smiley" or "it’s not about the numbers".
That bothers me too. This is a geocaching site first, not a puzzle site first. The emphasis should be on the final product, the geocache… And now, with challenge caches, stats are the all important aspect of the game, not the geocache.
Geocaching is a journey; from initial research (PQ’s) or serendipity (Geocaching live app), to the trip to the cache, to the hunt at ground zero, the eventual find (or not), signing the log book (or not), and recording your adventure (and/or achievement) online.
A geocache is simply a destination, a means to and end and not the end itself. Elevating this “final product” to the pinnacle is not the essence of geocaching and to focus on it exclusively is detrimental to the game (although quite popular in the forums).
There are many paths that lead to a geocache. Arguably, for some the physical path is the primary reward as is the experience to getting to ground zero. For some the technological path (Wherigo, intercache, chirp, etc.) is the primary reward. For others the mental path (puzzle solving, letterbox, and multiple waypoints) is the primary reward. For some it is the social interaction (family fun) or the meditator (solace, stress reliever) that is the primary reward. For others it is the collection of experiences and achievements that is the primary reward. The beauty of Geocaching is any one cache offers a variety of these paths.
The smiley is rarely or never the raison d'être for geocachers or geocaching. The “found it” logs are simply an online continuous record of your adventure(s). You get to write own “Geocaching Adventures” first hand, by choosing the paths to your destinations. How can it get any better than that?
To allow others to narrow motivations and limit and choose paths and destinations (based on their own motivators), is not keeping within the spirit of Geocaching.
Challenge caches offer an opportunity (not a requirement) to challenge yourself, to keep the game fresh, and to gain experiences that you may want to try, to explore caches (and areas) you may not have considered or encountered before to further author your own Geocaching Adventure.
-
Off Topic but technically, it can be argued that Henry the VIII had two wives (or four if if you're a catholic).
Henry's fourth marriage to Anne of Cleves was annulled. This is very different from divorce. Legally, it means the marriage never took place.These were two grounds for the annulment. Anne and Henry Never Consummated the marriage. Refusal or inability to consummate a mariage is still grounds for annulmant today.
In addition, Anne was already betrothed to Francis, Duke of Lorraine when she married Henry. At that time, the formal act of betrothal was a legal bar to marrying someone else.
All parties agreed no legal marriage had taken place. So that leaves five.
The Pope declared Henry's second marriage to Anne Boleyn illegal, because the King was still married to his first wife, Catherine of Aragon.
Henry, as head of the new Church of England, declared in turn that his marriage was invalid on the legal ground that a man could not sleep with his brother's widow. The King cited the Old Testament, which he claimed as 'God's Law', whether the Pope liked it or not.
Depending on whether you believe the Pope or the King, this brings it down to either four or three marriages.
Henry annulled his marriage to Anne Boleyn just before he had her executed for adultery. This was somewhat illogical: if the marriage had never existed, Anne could hardly be accused of betraying it.
He did the same with his fifth wife, Catherine Howard. All the evidence suggests she was unfaithful to him before and during their marriage. This time, Henry passed a special act making it treasonable for a queen to commit adultery. Once again, he also had the marriage annuled.
So that makes four annulments, and only two incontestably legal marriages.
Apart from Henry's last wife, Catherine Parr (who outlived him), the lady who got off lightest was Anne of Cleves. After their Annulment, the King showered her with gifts and the official title of 'beloved sister'. She visited court often, swapping cooks,recipes,and household gadgets with the man who had never been her husband.
-
A DNF for a hint. Fair trade or bad form?
bad form
As discussed many times informative logs (including DNF's) have some value to the cache owner and others. TFTC is (arguably) looked down upon as a fairly lame log. Requiring/Encouraging "DNF, may I have a hint now?" logs further defeat a CO's anticipation/expectation of good cache specific logs and does nothing for a cache page history.
-
I just want to point out what the guidelines say, and that it's not a matter of opinion.
Of course it's always a matter of opinion as shown in this thread.The guidelines and the cache submission page show/provide some examples to illustrate cache sizes. However, to employ an interpretation of that illustration as "the" size is nonsense.
Given the volume guideline the OP container at 1.78 liters is clearly almost twice the minimum size of a regular. Further, given the variety of ammo cans cachers encounter they can range from 4.8 liters (five times minimum size of regular) to 29.5 liters (that are clearly a large) so a broad "ammo cans are the minimum for regular" perspective does not necessarily apply.
-
Check out www.project-gc.com there are many tools, statistics (your own) and for caches, cacher profiles, lists, and it even has the GSAK badgegen built in (Profile - Profile Stats - Badgegen tab).
-
The online log is there to record YOUR experience, share your experience with your future self, share your experience with the cache owners, and share it with future cachers, past cachers, and "interested" cachers. Do not limit yourself.
This article (likely quoted many times) can help most cachers organize their thoughts, find some key points to write about, and overall make a better online log even if you are not a "writer". http://geocacher-u.com/?page_id=13
Using the 4 T's above and evolving to the style/structure Briansnat eloquently outlines below seems a sound log strategy however long they may be.
As much as I enjoy longer logs I can see how some people might be annoyed by long cut and paste logs. I admit to doing some cutting and pasting during a day of caching, usually the first paragraph of the log describing the day and who I'm with. But the subsequent paragraph are always unique to each cache.
The implication that a long cut and paste log is the same as a "TFTC" can be true, however some thought, organization, and effort was put into that long cut and paste log which cannot be said for most "TFTC"'s. Once posted the long log (even a cut and paste) is a much more valuable record of your experience viewed in the isolation of cache visits and time.
Although, sometimes hints and clues are mentioned in logs that is not the raison d'etre. The scanning of logs for clues can be fruitful sometimes however the potential for them being in the last five or last ten logs is small. Further the possibility of the long log preventing someone from "finding" a clue in those five or ten is much less than that. Research and/or preplanning can overcome those difficulties or one can write a long pertinent log for the DNF.
-
The layout/style of this cache http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=704e9f08-2c27-4627-8cdc-98c1ce461854 could be used for inspiration to choose your own adventure.
-
Although it lags behind, Project GC (http://project-gc.com/) will also provide that info under profile/find bad logs.
-
I began working with military GPS in 1994 and did a fair amount of aircraft testing. Using survey grade GPSr's we needed to do a significant amount of pre-mission planning (satellite coverage and constellation) in addition to post processing for cm level accuracies.
Needless to say the pre-SA off handhelds I saw were fairly useless units and wildly inaccurate. I did hear about geocaching in 2000 but did not consider hunting Tupperware in the bush (based on the handheld's accuracy) an enjoyable experience. Fast forward to 2009, when the Mrs read an article in “Our Canada” magazine and wanted to try it. I tried to dissuade her but she persisted. So after purchasing a relatively good handheld GPSr we went for our first hunt on Father's day that year and the family was hooked.
The “game” allows such a wide variety of motivations and experiences to the participants that the game continuously renews itself. Our motivation can include any and all “approaches” to the game. The one ethos we stick to is we need to have fun and play it our way.
I discovered this article online that explained some of the motivations of cachers, http://wing.comp.nus.edu.sg/~forecite/services/omnipage/thang/CHI08pdf/p1177-ohara.pdf.
Armed with that knowledge you can avoid most of the “angst” present in the forums as well as the righteousness (open and hidden) that my way is better than your way. As they say if you’re not having fun you’re doing it the wrong way.
Motivations for Caching
Social WalkingOne of the primary motivations for doing a geocache was because it created an opportunity to get out and walk. In this respect it is important to think about the activity not simply as a destination or a find. Rather, an integral part of the experience is the getting there. An important question then is why people simply didn’t just go on a walk. What is significant is how caching was used by people to give a walk a sense of purpose. This sense of purpose helped motivate participants to walk and engage in physical activity and without which they would be less inclined to go.
To get out as a family and have and adventure was our first and primary motivation.
Since starting geocaching we have been to more small towns, back roads, and "off the beaten path areas" when engaged on our travels that the trip there is fun and not just a race to get from Point A to Point B as fast as possible.Discovering and Exploring PlacesA key motivation underlying participation was its use as away of discovering new places to go. In this respect, it was not so much the finding of a cache that was primary motivation but where it led to as a consequence of doing this treasure hunt.
You may discover from reading the forums that the only people that worry "about the numbers" are the people who say "its not about the numbers". Although not driven by numbers, it is nice to see your acomplishments grow. But having said that we only compete against ourselves, setting and striving for goals, milestones, or "challenge caches" is motivating.CollectingAs an activity, geocaching was more than just the sum of the individual caching experiences. For many of the participants, there was a “collecting” ethos that was a
significant part of the experience. The geocaching web sitekeeps a record of all the different caches a particular cacheror caching team have done. Their “collection” of cache finds as a whole was a demonstrable record of what they have achieved. Building this up was an important and ongoing driver for continued participation. Participants mentioned that they would not want to give this up visible sense of achievement. In this respect we cannot look for motivational and behavioural factors simply within the context of an isolated geocache experience. The significance and meaning of the next cache is dependent upon the context of what they have already collected andachieved.
Profile and statisticsPart of the value of these collecting practices within geocaching comes from being immersed within the social context of the geocaching community. As discussed in thesocial psychology literature on collecting, a person’s collection becomes bound up with doing identity work [15].Consequently, there was value not simply in these collecting achievements per se but how they came to be represented to others. With this in mind, it is important to consider the ways this was enabled through the on-line environment and how this inextricably tied the location-based experience with accompanying on-line behaviour.
Challenge: individual and social aspectsFor many participants, one of the key driving factors for ongoing participation was that geocaching provided a number of sources of challenge.
“I mean it’s a terrific challenge to be able to find it. I suppose that is it – it’s a challenge. I don’t like to be beaten. The longest we have spent looking is about an hour and a half and I don’t like to give up until I have found it.”
This is in line with the claims made in [18] about the location-based technologies providing value not simply by making it easy to get information at the right place and time but also by making it difficult. As we can see from the above quote, there was a sense that participants did not want to be beaten and will spend what on the face of it seems
rather an irrational amount of time trying to locate the cache. But this gives a sense of the commitment to the challenge and level of motivation. Others spoke of how they would
reluctantly give up on a particular occasion, but would often revisit the site again in an attempt to try again.
For the Puzzle Caches there was also the additional challenge of solving problems to discover the particular coordinates for the cache. What was significant about these puzzles was they required a large amount of time investment to solve them and much of this work occurs away from the cache site. Because of this distribution of the experience away from the actual cache location, participants would sometimes email the cache owners to confirm that they had correctly solved the puzzle before embarking on a long journey to actually find the cache. This extension of the experience beyond the cache site was also an important part of how people maintained participation in the activity even when not convenient to be out and about.
-
Did a reconnaissance for a possible cache last night and noted co-ords as given via c:geo compass on phone. Google Maps disagrees by .004 and .001 (urban cache, site easily spotted on satellite view) - so I'll go with Google I think!
Please take note that Google satellite imagery is often misaligned with the real world. Using the Google application as a substitute for surveying in your cache location is asking for trouble (use a GPSr not a phone). Satellite imagery is great for getting “close coordinates” for your initial cache page setup but is not appropriate for surveying.
-
After pressing submit on the "Geocahe" log there is no connection to the TB except going to each "dipped TB" and editing the entry.
What would be useful is to have the the "Geocache" log entry automatically (or by choice individual opt in or out) cross posted to the TB log. That way loggers would be encouraged (and forced to go an extra step or two) to perhaps personalize each TB visit a little more...
In that way the TB owner at least gets the minor benifit of that "geocache" log and can stay up on the progress.
Having said that, as everyone know some logs are short and tedious and may not be an improvment over nothing.
-
Hi all,
Is there a way to find Wherigo Caches using only CacheSense on my Blackberry? (my regular GPS is not paperless)
Thanks,
Nat Sherman
Give OpenWIG a try on the BB. I have used it to sucsessfully find the only WIG in our area but it was a little buggy then hopefully better now.
Of course it's always a matter of opinion as shown in this thread.
Puzzles for Geocaching
in General geocaching topics
Posted
OT
In a poorly worded attempt to broaden the perspective (TopShelfRob - cachers ruining puzzles), it becomes clear that "potential poor" cacher behaviour may "ruin" ANY cache experience for cache owners (and possibly seekers) as better stated by NYPaddleCacher.
As cache owners we do not contol who seeks our caches or what they do with the info they gain on the journey. One can quite rightly "have a problem" with "potential poor" behaviour, but to use that as an excuse to not produce puzzles, or other "creative" caches is detrimental to the game. This type of cacher exists but to such a low proportion it is unreasonable to allow their "potential poor" behaviour to affect anyones hides.