MKFmly
-
Posts
271 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by MKFmly
-
-
I'm not sure why this discussion is becoming obtuse. IMHO some differences:
1. New container
2. New camouflage
3. Different satellite constellation (pointing GPSr to a different GZ)
4. Different location (perhaps due to original migrating or CO intentionally moving it) (As an aside, I have sometimes had a hard time finding one of my own caches because of migration.)
5. Different season (perhaps)
6. Different time of day (perhaps)
7. Different lighting conditions (perhaps)
The only thing similar is the drive or walk up to within 12 metres of GZ, the search is different.
It's obtuse because all those noted items can change for the seeker on any given day and are not related to the current cache page.
A little off topic.
A fair number of cachers recoil at the mere thought of double logging a cache, but a new cache page is made for esentially the same cache in essentially the same location then its WIGAS. You can split hairs (or what if) on how much semantic change makes it a "different cache" but based on the OP this is esentially the same cache in the same location.
So? Want me to come along and re-find it? (Adding a duplicate Found It log?) No thanks!Archive it. New listing -new cache to find, I'll pop back!
If it's a New and Improved cache site, it's a new and improved cache, with a new and improved cache listing
-
Went hunting for an unfound cache with my caching partner. Another cacher came upon us whilst we were hunting, but sat back and watched. My caching partner's only FTF. I was second. The other cacher was third.
Although, we agree with the general sentiment above, the situation does not always reduce to an individual accomplishment. Nor, does being first universally translate to one singular entity or person. Obviously, there are differences between a competitive and cooperative effort and an individual and team effort, and how society recognizes these respective efforts as "firsts". Geocaching spans those multiple approaches at times.
In the above example your caching partner was undoubtable the first to find. Were you and your partner in a competition or are you a formal or informal team? If you and your caching partner share a geocaching account how would the FTF be recognized? (i.e. who gets the credit)
Armstrong was undoubtedly the first man to walk on the moon, Armstrong and Aldrin were undoubtedly the first men to walk on the moon. Collins is somewhat lost to history but neither would have been first without his support, however he did not directly participate in the discrete event (walking on the moon).
Who was the first person to win a first tennis doubles chamionship, Stanley Cup, World Series, Superbowl, or FIFA World Cup? The achievement is not as crystal clear as generally presented above, as clearly these events are both a competitive event (two teams) and a cooperative event (within the team).
Unfortunately, concessions are made and semantics observed along the way to recognizing accomplishments.
True there is only one first however that does not correlate with only one person.There is only one first! Except, it seems, in geocaching?As for the OP, we don't subscribe to the "after publish", "GPS use", or any of the other silly semantic nonsense...the OP was the FTF.
Having said that if cachers feel the need to qualify their FTF "claims" with after publish, first to log, first in the group, or whatever we don't lose sleep over it.
-
I know these cachers from events and I have no reason to suspect that they didn't visit the site. They just didn't go prepared to complete the tasks, and that's why I deleted the logs. Visiting the site is not enough.
Seeking the correct answer for the elevation after the fact, through any method, is more acceptable to me than not answering it at all. If they honestly can't figure out how to get the elevation on their iPhone or don't want to go back to the site, figuring out the elevation on a topo map at least shows some initiative.
And that in a nutshell is why ALRs disappeared... the value judegment
-
66,612 now. Since no one else is guessing, I win by default and I get full bragging rights.
Unless someone from GS jumps in to explain what's going on, this thread will continue to wander wherever it wants to go.
(train derailed image here - too lazy to go search for one)
Now 66,621, looks like they're going for 67,000.
Maybe Groundspeak can fork over a premium membership (instead of Roman) to whomever guesses closest to the final number?
69696
-
Groundspeak has set their own precedent by traditionally allowing/supporting the awarding/claiming of souvenirs retroactively. For any cacher to infer/assume that this August souvenir initiative would be any different is a stretch. (As mentioned in a few other threads you can still be proactively/retroactively awarded souvenirs by gaming the logging system, including 10/10/10)
Many cachers do not communicate with the geocaching world the same way (methods, devices, interfaces, etc.). Many cachers get many emails from Groundspeak, many cachers just don't read all of them and many cachers don't consider any of them to be time sensitive...
Understanding that email validation is a peeve, but not necessarily a core issue or relevant here.If they don't log into the site or receive emails, then it's likely they aren't even bothering to pursue souvenirs and probably don't even know about the 'Seven Souvenirs of August' promotion anyway. Also, if they don't receive emails...well then we get into the whole issue of email validation that generally is a whole other issue.Frankly, when I was logging some August caches I did get a disturbing pop up inidating the awarding of souvineers was "closed" (or something like that) but was awarded them anyway. (Note I did log my final qualifing cache at 11:58 local on 31-Aug-14, but never clicked on a link in an email to be awarded the seventh one).
-
Project-GC will also generate a "potential" list of FTFs...
project-gc looks through your logs to find caches you've tagged as FTF using specific tags. Alternatively, you can also bookmark your FTFs and point project-gc to the list.
That is correct however as I indicated it project-gc also does more. Project-gc also generates a list of caches that you potentially "MAY" (or may not) be the FTF on under PROFILE/FORGOTTON FTFS?. You can then validate your FTFs, generate a bookmark list or insert the secret tag in your logs (if inclined to do so).
-
Your reasoning isn't much different from going into a used car dealership, handing over the money for a cheap car and then wondering why they won't let you drive off in the Ferrari. Hey, you paid for a car didn't you?
Great analogy, if I pay for the Ferrari (e.g. Double Premium) I should be able to drive off in it.
-
Because that would make them traditionals.
Sure, that is one perception. Cachers pay for the final locations of PMO caches, why should the others be treated differently?
-
And you don't think that the puzzle owners might be just a little upset at Groundspeak for giving away the locations, as well as making money off of it?
Perhaps the "irony" was overlooked. Groundspeak is in the buisness of "giving away locations".
Today Groundspeak provides the final coordinates for: Traditional Geocaches, Virtual Caches, Letterbox Hybrids, All Event Cache Types, Webcam Caches, Earthcaches, and GPS Adventures Exhibits, and make money off it.
Today Groundspeak provides the final coordinates for: "Premium Member Only" (PMO) Caches (with permission), through premium membership and make money off it.
Notwithstanding, the ethical/moral considerations, the mechanics, and the implied current expectations between the CO and GS, why should mystery caches, multis, and whereigos be treated any different?
+1Hear that muffled "mwahahahahahaha" in the distance?! Oh, that's right, this is a serious discussion. Please continue. -
Project-GC will also generate a "potential" list of FTFs...
-
And you don't think that the puzzle owners might be just a little upset at Groundspeak for giving away the locations, as well as making money off of it?
Is that not the current Groundspeak buisness model? Does it upset other cache owners, evidently not, so why are puzzle cache owners more special?
Back to the OP
At some point the effort and cost of avoiding solving puzzles, exceeds the effort and cost of solving puzzles...
-
The way I see it size is important for two reasons. 1. to know what you are looking for and 2. to know if it will accept trades and TBs. I intentionally put the latter as number two because I believe knowing what size you are searching for is the most important reason for knowing the size. Whether or not it can accept TBs and trades is a secondary matter.
We tend to agree with this.
My definition of "container" is an integrated object where the part that holds the log and any trade items is physically a part of the larger object. For instance a fake rock that is 8" x 8" I would rate as a regular even though the log compartment is micro size. Similarly I would rate an insulated thermos by the size of the outside, not the capacity of the inside.
As search paradigm for a micro, regular, large, etc are different from each other, this instance is where we differ from above definition. If the camouflage (integrated object) significantly changes the size of the container (subject to interpretation) we compromise and would list the "fake rock that is 8" x 8" I would rate as a regular even though the log compartment is micro size" as a micro with a note on the cache page indicating it is a camouflaged micro and choose a size "not chosen" or "other", to indicate a different search paradigm may be needed.
Frankly, employing a "regular" size search paradigm against the described "micro in a fake rock that is 8" x 8" " would be detrimental to our search, rather than helpful. If we know going in that it is a micro and the camo/hide is "non-standard" that helps.
-
Roman is on the right track but the wrong model.
Membership needs to be iTune modeled and you pay per cache download. Puzzles and Multi's come with final coordinates (for a premium fee), Earthcaches come with answers (for a premium fee), and webcams come with photo shopped pics (for a premium fee).
You could also buy proxy finds and logs to get those desirable dated souvenirs...
-
In all fairness, Groundspeak hasn't risen the price of Premium Membership since it first started 12 years ago but have added many more features.
In equal fairness technology and capability has improved many fold as well as technology costs have plummeted, and yet the website and backend database design lag behind...and many users are forced to use creative laborious processes and 3rd party software to meet their needs...
-
It is suprising how many people equate rudeness with honesty...
"found it but really don't know why I bothered, it's not a fun search and not a nice area"These caches are not my cup of tea although others do enjoy them. ThanksNot sure a cache log is the proper place to forward a personal agenda at the expense of other cache owners.
-
You should have simply removed the items, but instead you wanted the cache owner to be punished.
How can I punish someone that doesn´t play the game since 2010?
No JPreto wants the reviewers publicly humiliated and another data point that he is right and reviewers are incompentant and dont enforce rules.
What would JPreto have done if the "3 sterile (sealed) lancets for blood glucose measurement" were not listed on the cache page but still included?
Obviouusly, but there is no opportunity for drama that way...
-
Since it happens so rarely, one would assume that the change is, in fact, a correction that would make those cachers' stats more accurate.
The integrity and accuracy of the cache listing should always take precedence over side games.
What side game are your referring to in this instance?
The logs indicate you need a duino device.
...how pleasing to have a Duino cache close to home to figure it out without having to go out to the 'burbs! Do you have to make arrangements to get the device from whoever has it?Update Coordinates05 Feb 14
N 49° 14.440 W 123° 06.870
Coordinates changed from:
N 49° 14.569 W 123° 06.586
Coordinates changed to:
N 49° 14.440 W 123° 06.870
Distance from original: 1373.3 feet or 418.6 meters.
At the request of the cache owner
05 Feb 14I'm sorry guys, but I had to change this cache to a traditional (see previous logs). One day I hope to learn how to reprogram the puzzle and make a new cache. Thank you for your notes.
The fact that the cache was moved before conversion blows my initial theory out of the water. I was confused from the suggestions you need to make arrangements with the CO (or previous cachers) for the duino device, as that is almost an ALR and would put of many cachers. As to why it was requested and approved only the CO and the reviewer know. I don't buy the cherry picked log from 4wheelin_fool as the sole deciding factor.
-
The issue for Groundspeak is the integrity of the review process. Simply adjusting the "cache type" is outside of the review process and is open for mistakes/abuse. In this case changing from a puzzle to a traditional was straightforward as the cache site (final) was already validated for proximity and permission. Changing to something other than a traditional cache, requires a re-review. That's presumably how this cache was exempted and why the boilerplate answer is archive and resubmit.
-
-
This issue was just identified yesterday and investigation began immediately. It turned out that a change made to the site to support an update to the /mobile page was not supported in IE9 (and perhaps IE8). This caused all JavaScript below the offending call to break in these browsers. The issue has been fixed and you should no longer see these problems.
Not to be a smart aleck or anything but does Groundspeak conduct software regression testing (inclduding browser compatibility)?
Comming from a flight test background it is a little more important that planes still fly, but it is industry best practice.
Regression testing is a type of software testing that seeks to uncover new software bugs, or regressions, in existing functional and non-functional areas of a system after changes such as enhancements, patches or configuration changes, have been made to them.The intent of regression testing is to ensure that changes such as those mentioned above have not introduced new faults. One of the main reasons for regression testing is to determine whether a change in one part of the software affects other parts of the software.
Common methods of regression testing include rerunning previously completed tests and checking whether program behavior has changed and whether previously fixed faults have re-emerged. Regression testing can be performed to test a system efficiently by systematically selecting the appropriate minimum set of tests needed to adequately cover a particular change.
-
Frustratinly, we keep covering the same ground with the same poster, and that inspired and examination of the issue from "generaltional theory" with respect to adult learning. One of the cardinal perspectives I often remind myself is "It's not their fault". "It's not their fault" they are who they are. "It's not their fault" they were raised in different times. "It's not their fault" they have different values.
The world is full-colour, including every shade of gray. Every person is unique, with his or her own interests, quirks and personal preferences about the way things are done.Black-and-white thinkers have a kind of metaphorical colour-blindness. They don’t see the value of the subtle differences most people recognize as important, even crucial to understanding and functionality.
"Black and White" means there is just one rule.There is a schedule with an exact time, it is always the same.
All the rules apply to everybody. There are no exceptions.
There is just one way to do things.
Black and white means things are predictable.
Black and white means things seem fair and are clear.
"Gray areas" means that the rule is sometimes one thing, and sometimes-another thing.
Gray areas are unpredictable, confusing, and seem unfair to "black and white" thinkers.
For people who become confused about "gray areas", it may help to explain in "black and white" terms, "This is a black and white area." Or, "This is a gray area."
It is ”obvious” to a black and white thinker; while it is obvious that it is not obvious to a gray thinker.
Black-or-White thinkers often can only assign two alternative states as the only possibilities, when in fact more possibilities exist.
Also known as the false dilemma, this insidious tactic has the appearance of forming a logical argument, but under closer scrutiny it becomes evident that there are more possibilities than the either/or choice that is presented. Binary, black-or-white thinking doesn’t allow for the many different variables, conditions, and contexts in which there would exist more than just the two possibilities put forth. It frames the argument misleadingly and obscures rational, honest debate.
Example: The Supreme Leader tells the people ALL rule abiders are good while ALL rule breakers are bad.
It's a "gray area" if something is done one way some of the time, and another way at other times.
(Like the retirement of virtual caches and the "grandfathering" of caches in the past that do not meet the guidelines as currently stated)
(Like being driven to play baseball some days, and having to take the bus when there is no one around to drive you at other times.)
It is a "gray area" when different rules apply to different people
(Like a cache owner arranging maintenance with another cacher to replace a missing container, and a cacher leaving a throwdown)
(Like at a party, everyone else can drink, but the person who is doing the driving for the night does not.)
It is a "gray area" if different rules apply at different times of the day or week
(Like pay parking at meters only till 6 p.m. and not on Sunday.)
(Like at work, the hours you work might be different on weekdays and weekends.)
It is a "gray area" if different rules apply at different times of the year
(Like school five days a week, except Spring Break, Christmas, Summer Holidays, and Teacher Discretionary Days.)
It's a "gray area" if something is done one way some of the time, and another way at other times.
-
In another Topic about Throwdowns myself, "tozainamboku" and "cezanne" started to talk about this possibility:
<snip>
Just to resume, these are the conditions:
- 1 geocache
- multiple ending containers (each one with it´s own logbook)
- 1 set of coordinates
Is this possible according to the GeoCaching.com Guidelines, Help Center articles and GeoCaching 101?
Yes, it is possible provided all the other listing requiremets are also met.
-
As pointed out, the explanation is simple: "multiple ending containers in the same coordinates so anybody can log their find."
Imagine a tree, covered with 35mm film cans each one of them carrying a logbook inside! Nice artistic cache!!!!
Many caches employ the above concept, multiple cache containers at the final. The only fundamental difference between your sarcastic (?) suggestion, is cachers have to find the log among the many decoys... e.g. 100 film containers in a water cooler bottle one of which holds the log. 24 MISTs in the same tree with only one log. Instead of making it harder it’s not unreasonable for a cache owner to make it easier and put a log in each of the multiple containers.
-
Here is a great success story about through downs.
A couple of years back, I was planning a hike up a mountain to find a few caches. The CO of one of the caches found out I was heading up, and asked me to replace a missing cache. I graciously accepted his request, and placed a new container where my GPS zeroed out. I logged that cache, and so did another cacher the next day. There was absolutely no drama. Everyone was happy.
The point? There is no single answer that covers all scenarios. Stop trying to make blanket statements like "never leave a through down".
Arguably, that is arranged and approved maintenance not a throwdown,...
Challenge Caches - pre-signing of logs
in General geocaching topics
Posted
What about those cachers who complete challenges without having any intention of signing the physical challenge cache log?