Jump to content

TommyGator

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    71
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TommyGator

  1. Bl4ckH4wkGER, If you already know what is wrong with the PQs,, please disregard. However, if you need assistance in debugging, I have two different runs of the same PQ, obtained 9 and 27 Oct 22, which I'll be glad to send you to compare and analyze. If you want them, please send an email through my profile with return address enabled so I can reply with attachments.
  2. I came to this thread because, all of a sudden, my PQs that I have been running for years are now only providing a fraction of the returns that they were just a month or so ago. I noticed this when I wentr to update a (caches along a route) GPX with a PQ that I have run for years, and the PQ returned only about half of the caches. I have not changed or messed with the PQ, but after filtering out the ones that did update (using GSAK), I was left with a substantial number of un -updated caches that are clearly within the bounds of the PQ selection criteria. Please note that I only used GSAK to do the filtering to determine what was going on. I ran the PQ from the website, then downloaded the result directly to my computer desktop. I then loaded a previous (older) route file into GSAK, loaded the PQ, and found that 94 out of 154 valid, current caches were not contained in the new PQ. My original GPX, containing prior results of the exact same PQ, had 154 caches along the route, and I checked to make sure they were all still valid (i.e., not archived, already found, etc), but the new PQ only contained 60 of those caches. I also noted that the name of the PQ download file was exactly the same as a previous run from yesterday (8380642_Texas_Rt_IN_IL.zip), which also only contained those same 60 caches. I tried another PQ for a different route and had a similar experience. This wasn't happening in July, which was the time prior that I checked these PQs. I've provided the PQ name and have a GPX of the previously downloaded caches that the new PQ didn't contain.
  3. Hugh, Thanks---I wasn't aware of that. Here's the list of my most recent caches with total. The big total on top is 10,908 My 12Kth cache was the W.C.O.G. event cache which I logged at 12,000.. Note that it is listed on top, not five below the 12,005th (which is the one right below it).....but that's another issue. There's also a difference of 4, but I'm aware of that, which is from long ago, probably retracted or "bonus" smilies that were allowed way back when. It would be handy if the "results" on top reflected the actual count. Also note that determining the nth milestone cache from this list is virtually impossible since the Adlab finds are interspersed in the "real" count but not listed in the chronology. I had been depending on my own notes as well as the locked milestone statistics. It was this top banner, along with the lack of 11k and 12k milestones, that caused my belief that something was amiss. Thanks to all who responded and relieved my anxiety.
  4. Now that Adventure Labs seem firmly embedded in the geocaching psyche for many if not most geocachers, isn't it time to include AdLab finds in the "real" find count, because those tallied on our individual profile pages are NOT the same number that appears on our day-to-day find count as displayed with our avatar and on our dashboards? For those who have complained about the 1 vs five (or other stage count) method of counting finds, please bear with me a moment, as my point applies regardless of this issue. At present, the find count published with our avatar and on our dashboards includes AdLabs. The find count on our profile page does not. As a result, our idea of how many finds we have may in no way resemble what GC considers "finds" unless you have taken the time to go to your profile page and see what number they are using, as opposed to the one displayed with our avatar. If you've never done any AdLabs, or you've only done a very small number, these "find totals" won't be much different. However, if you live in an area with LOTS of AdLabs, have taken the time to get involved in Adlabbing, and have well over a thousand AdLab finds as I do, the "find totals" are markedly different. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't routinely take time to click over to my profile page to see how many finds GC credits me with. Maybe you do, but that's a lot of repetitive effort for day-to-day caching, when our find count is so nicely displayed with our avatars and on our dashboards. This thread is about milestones----so what's the issue? Regardless of whether you are a new or experienced cacher, if you've been doing Adlabs, you've included them in our hobby regardless of what some may think about the righteousness of so doing. I can tell you that Adlabs are a popular discussion topic at events in my area and, at least around here, Adlabbing has become integral to what we do as geocachers. Milestones are another way by which we measure progress and experience, and many of us choose specific caches with which to celebrate particular milestones. Some have even involved an event for the purpose of watching an individual attain a particularly difficult cache as a milestone find. Unfortunately, what you think is a milestone find and what GC considers a milestone find can be two different things, and therein is the rub. I'll just give you a personal example: In my daily caching, I noticed I was approaching 12,000 finds and wanted to be sure and do something special for that find. So, I carefully chose a cache, then adapted a geocaching run to ensure that that particular cache was accomplished and logged in the appropriate order. My wife even took pictures. Afterwards, I wanted to see the results of my efforts on my profile milestone page and saw something was amiss. Not only was my 12,000th find not listed, neither was my 11,000th, for which I have a nice engraved memento 11,000-find geocoin sitting in front of me. It took some looking around, but I finally found out that GC doesn't recognize Adlabs in milestones, and as a result, with my well-over 1000 Adlabs, my GC-find count hasn't reached 11,000 yet! Now, I don't know about you, but I've spent a lot of gas money driving to Adlabs, sometimes solely for them. I've put effort into finding them. I've had fun at events discussing them. I've done them at Mega events. In short, Adlabs are part of my geocaching. To ignore all of that effort makes any further milestones based on GC Adlab-less numbers meaningless to me. Milestones celebrate effort and accomplishment. Adlab-less find numbers fall far short on both counts, at least to me. It's not just high-number cachers that have this issue. Newbies who have just gotten into geocaching with their smartphones, and have gotten excited by getting some geocaches under their belts as well as some AdLabs, will likely be dismayed when, after bragging at an event that they finally got 100 caches, they find that GC didn't count any of the Adlabs and the find count that they saw on the app and on the website was just a mirage. My recommendation (that of others may vary)? As far as I can see, Adlabs are now part of geocaching in the minds of geocachers around me and I suspect that is true pretty much in general. GC wove finds into the overall find count they display, and people have become accustomed to that. It is time to count them in the milestone figures as well, especially if we want milestones to mean anything. Thanks for listening.
  5. Rather than use a list to load your GPS, you could download multiple PQs and/or lists to GSAK, which can easily handle thousands of caches, then either send from GSAK directly to your GPS or, as I do, export a GPX file to your computer and then copy it to the appropriate folder on your GPS. You would be limited only by the maximum number of geocaches your GPS can accept. My GPS is limited to 5000 geocaches, but that varies depending on make and model. However, for smartphones, this will not work, as (to the best of my knowledge) the Official App does not provide for the use of GPX files----you have to use lists with the Official App. But, there are other geocaching apps that work quite nicely with GPX files (iPhone & Android). Good luck!
  6. I don't believe many folks would object to linearity if it were used for reasons of safety, for more efficient stage sequencing, or in support of an obvious theme----and a few AdLabs clearly use them for that purpose, as attested by some of the comments in this thread. What frustrates people, though is when linearity has no obvious (to the AdLabber) purpose, or merely to hide bonus coordinates---with the ensuing frustration of needless back-and forth or otherwise inefficient driving. The latter seems to be more prevalent than the former. The elimination of the linearity option would force COs to hide bonus coordinates in a different manner, which has been amply-described in other threads. Of course, the AdLab app could be changed to add a completion screen in which bonus coordinates could be hidden, and that has been repeatedly suggested---but apparently hasn't risen high enough on the change list. Then again, one could hope that COs exercise more care when choosing linearity, and not using it for the mere convenience of hiding bonus coordinates----but that method DOES happen to be the easiest, and ..... well, this thread gives evidence as to how that has been working out. My guess is that bonus caches were probably not part of the original AdLab concept, and instead were the result of ingenious cachers who found the bonus a novel use for AdLabs. The fact that AdLabs are, by design, limited to the app with only basic information (unlike caches, which are individually hosted in great detail on geocaching.com), reinforces this perception. While bonus caches seem clearly important to geocachers, they may be of minimal importance to the AdLab design concept---and hence the frustration.
  7. That's the point. Your GPSr suggests, but the AdLab app selects the next stage automatically and, if you have reason to go elsewhere, you have to override the app's decision. You are very correct that fooling with the phone while driving is a no-no---something the developers should keep in mind, such as in keeping the map screen from timing out and making the map otherwise uncluttered with minimal user enroute interaction.. Ideally, you would set up the map while you are parked, then drive to the next stop using the map. Unfortunately, shortly after getting back in traffic the screen times out. It's up to you what to do then.
  8. That's an issue for me as well. The app chooses the next stage for you and, although it is possible to re-direct to a different stage, the process can be cumbersome. This happens to me a lot when I'm doing an AL in an urban area and notice that, beccause of the roads, traffic, or whatever, it might be more advantageous to drive to a different stage other than the nearest (as the crow flies). I end up having to pull over and park so I can fight with the app to re-direct, then pull back into traffic. It becomes even more fun when the map "times out" while you're driving and you have to poke the app to get it back on.
  9. A clarification: By "enhance my experience," I mean that my experience would have been enhanced if I were to exclaim, "Now that this is AdLab complete, I'm really glad that it was sequential, because it just wouldn't have meant as much to me otherwise." That hasn't happened yet, but there's always hope!
  10. Several responders have stated that linearity is important to their own AdLabs and I believe them. However, of the 240 linear stages I've thus far completed (out of 1,024 total), I can only say that in no cases did the linearity appear (to me) to enhance my experience---at least as far as I noticed. However, I will note that five of them were along an urban one-way street and I guess the linearity was beneficial since I was driving, although I believe I'd have noticed the one-wayness anyhow. Many of the linear AdLabs hid bonus coordinates in one of the stages (usually, but not always, the last stage), and that appeared (to me) the only reason for the linearity---which could have EASILY been avoided and would have eliminated "linear aggravation" had the app provided a "completion message" within which the CO could have hidden the bonus info. I believe this has been mentioned before. I'm all for linearity if there is a no-kidding thematic reason for doing so----but that seems to be a rarity---at least from my experience. Others may differ.
  11. Since you already have an account, I recommend you contact some local cachers and ask for some guidance. You might even get invited to accompany them on a caching run, and maybe make a few geo-friends in the process. Try to attend a local event where you can meet other cachers and discuss/ask anything you like. Geocachers tend to be happy to share advice. To find some other cachers, simply use either the app or geocaching.com to identify a cache near you. The logs for that cache will identify those who have already found it, and odds are that many of those previous finders will be local. Simply click on their name and send them a message. Welcome and good luck!
  12. GSAK solo mostrará sus propias estadísticas. Sin embargo, Project-GC puede mostrarle las estadísticas de otros. Project-GC también es un socio API aprobado de Geocaching.com. https://project-gc.com/ ¡Buena suerte!
  13. If you find yourself with a LOC file and are in a hurry to "transform" it to GPX, GSAK works wonders. Load the LOC file into an empty GSAK database, then use the "Geocaching.com access\Refresh cache data" menu options and refresh the entire database. This causes GSAK to query geocaching.com and will update the database with the "other" GPX data. Then merely export the database as a GPX file and you're done. Good luck.
  14. The way I would do this is to use GSAK (an approved Geocaching API partner). With GSAK, you can easily use the "Get Caches" feature, pulling the bus stop coordinates right off of the GSAK-provided map, and selecting a radius of your choice for each set of coordinates. Far simpler than trying to make a bunch of PQs where you have to externally look up coordinates, then transcribe them to the PQ editor---not to mention having to go back and delete the PQs later, or be limited to ten PQs a day.
  15. Thanks---I'll try that (after, of course, pulling over for safety).
  16. That is correct. I'm referring to the map which shows all the individual stages after the particular AdLab has started. That is the map by which one can drive to an individual stage which, by the way, doesn't seem to pinch apart (i.e., zoom) very easy (at least for me), but that's another issue.
  17. When using the AdLab app to navigate using the app compass, the screen (android for me) does not timeout, and that is good. Unfortunately, the app direction pointer seldom points toward the next stage in any reliable fashion, so I use the map to find my way there. Also, many (if not most) AdLabs involve driving, so having the map displayed is more appropriate---and the screen times out (i.e., goes dark) on its regular global timeout setting, necessitating a button push or screen touch to re-activate it. This is not a good thing to be doing while driving. Yes, I know you can turn off or change the global phone timeout value, but if the app can inhibit the timeout for the compass, it should also inhibit it for the map.
  18. While doing some AdLabs this past week, I noticed that the App (Android for me) now has filters for "Themes." I couldn't help noticing the similarity between "themes" and Waymarking "categories." It will be interesting to see whether AdLab players actually use that filter for anything. I only say that because "theme" hasn't been a driving factor in my AdLabbing, although others may have had a different experience.
  19. Sie können versuchen, Garmin direkt zu kontaktieren. https://support.garmin.com/de-DE/ Die Tasten sind Teil des Gehäuses. Viel Glück
  20. (Same reply in English) The Bonus is not part of the Adventure Lab. It is a separate geocache that is published on geocaching.com that requires the clues or coordinates that the Adventure Lab gives you. Although the Adventure Lab is open to all players, some geocaches on geocaching.com are restricted to Premiun members, and this is determined by the individual geocache owner. You would have to read the description of the Bonus on geocaching.com to determine whether it is Premium or not. Bonus geocaches are not an "official" part of the Adventure Lab App (so far), and are only there if the Adventure Lab owner decided to use the Lab as a place to hide clues for a standard geocache. As a result, you cannot use the Adventure Lab to find the Bonus itself. The Bonus, if there is one, is a real geocache and must meet all geocaching.com requiremnents. That is, it must be an actual container containing a log that you must physically find and sign in order to log it on geocaching.com. After completing the Adventure Lab, you must use a GPS or a separate smartphone App such as the Official Geocaching App to search for the Bonus, using the clues you found in the Adventure Lab. If you find the Bonus cache and sign the log within, you may then log that find on geocaching.com. Hope this helps---Good Luck!
  21. Le bonus ne fait pas partie de l'Adventure Lab. Il s'agit d'une géocache distincte publiée sur geocaching.com qui nécessite les indices ou les coordonnées que l'Adventure Lab vous donne. Bien que l'Adventure Lab soit ouvert à tous les joueurs, certaines géocaches sur geocaching.com sont réservées aux membres Premium, et cela est déterminé par le propriétaire individuel de la géocache. Il faudrait lire la description du Bonus sur geocaching.com pour déterminer s'il est Premium ou non. Les géocaches bonus ne sont pas une partie "officielle" de l'application Adventure Lab (jusqu'à présent), et ne sont là que si le propriétaire d'Adventure Lab a décidé d'utiliser le laboratoire comme un endroit pour cacher des indices pour une géocache standard. Par conséquent, vous ne pouvez pas utiliser l'Adventure Lab pour trouver le bonus lui-même. Le Bonus, s'il y en a un, est une véritable géocache et doit répondre à toutes les exigences de geocaching.com. C'est-à-dire qu'il doit s'agir d'un conteneur réel contenant un journal que vous devez physiquement trouver et signer afin de l'enregistrer sur geocaching.com. Après avoir terminé l'Adventure Lab, vous devez utiliser un GPS ou une application pour smartphone distincte telle que l'application officielle de géocaching pour rechercher le bonus, en utilisant les indices que vous avez trouvés dans l'Adventure Lab. Si vous trouvez la cache bonus et signez le journal à l'intérieur, vous pouvez alors enregistrer cette découverte sur geocaching.com. En espérant que ça aide, bonne chance!
  22. Perhaps a better question to ask is whether anyone (other than GS) actually uses the ratings to make decisions. I pretty much decide which ALs to do by looking at a map full of pins (the default screen). If I look further, it is usually to see whether or not the AL requires lots of driving. I'll usually pass on a long-driver (unless I happen to be going in that direction anyway) in favor of an AL that I can complete in the same area, without regard for rating---but that's just me.
  23. I have recently been using my Android smartphone for geocaching along with my Etrex handheld, and the biggest differencees I've noted have been with the direction pointer and with GPS reception. This is not an exhaustive comparison, just a comment on what I've seen thus far, and have found both to be handy to have while geocaching. I preface these comments with the disclaimer that I've done most of my over 10 years of geocaching with a succession of three Etrex units, and have been well-pleased with the performance of each, differing only in the "bells and whistles" categories. First of all, the "distance to go" function of the smartphone has pretty much mirrored what I read on the handheld, give or take a few feet, and that by itself has made it somewhat reliable for phone-only caching. However, I have noticed that the phone seems more likely to "freeze" at times, and might take a minute or two before re-locking. The handheld has seemed more reliable at maintaining lock, but that's just my perception. More importantly, though, the phone direction pointer/compass has been mostly worthless to me, whereas the handheld pointer/compass has been quite reliable. There have been many times when I've moved towards a cache with the phone distance decreasing and pretty much matching the handheld, but with the phone pointer/compass swinging wildly (sometimes behind me) while the handheld pointed straight and steady toward the area where I've eventually found the cache. On the other hand, I get much better results when phone-only by disregarding the direction pointer/compass and instead rely on the app mapping function along with distance readout. Said another way, even with the compass and pointer swinging wildly, the map (with distance) has been consistently steady in leading me to a cache. Although I use an Android phone, I've discussed this with some who use Iphones and have been told that they use map/distance for the same reason. While handheld is still my first personal choice for geocaching, I also Iike having the phone with me for several reasons: 1) I can use the phone to take a picture of my handheld in documenting an Earthcache or Virtual 2) The phone screen is a whole lot bigger and readable than the handheld (at least, mine anyhow) 3) I can use the phone to access the web while searching around a GZ 4) I have an extra location device in case I get deep in the woods and the batteries on one of the devices play out. 5) I can use the phone to, perhaps, call a friend or CO for assistance. However, the handheld has had advantages of its own: 1) A steady pointer that, at a glance, points me toward a GZ 2) Seems much more tolerant of abuse (i.e., accidentally banging it into things, operating while in the rain, getting mud/dirt on it, etc.) I often wear my handheld on a lanyard around my neck, something I wouldn't do with a smartphone. 3) Only requires a couple of AA batteries in my pocket for backup power. Bottom line: For me, the phone can definitely get the job done and has lots of advantages----but the handheld (so far) is still my primary go-to device. Not saying it's better---just that's how I use them. Others may have their own preferences.
  24. Keep in mind that completion logs are not required with AdLabs. That is, someone may properly visit all the AdLab stages, find and log the Bonus, but never submit an AdLab log. There are many reasons why people might not be comfortable writing their "log in the field," and may not post the completion log until later, or completely forget (or decide not) to do so. As a consequence, a Bonus CO has no way of knowing, for sure, all who have completed the AdLab. Unfortunately, the current AdLab process makes it really difficult to go back afterwards to post a log, especially if you have just completed multiple AdLabs. Unlike "normal" caches where you can enter a GC number and go right to the cache's web page to view/enter/or edit logs, AdLabs involve that you use the app to : 1) First, enter your profile to unhide your completed AdLabs. 2) Scroll across the map and try to find the "pin" for the AdLab(s) you completed. If, with the growing proliferation of AdLabs, you have already completed a bunch of them in that area, this may take some trial and error. a. Of course, you *could* use the "hamburger menu" to get a list of AdLabs---but based on your CURRENT position. If you traveled to get the AdLab and are no longer in that area, this becomes more difficult. 3) Once found, enter or edit the completion log. 4) Go back into your profile to re-hide your completed AdLabs. 5) This, of course, implies that you remembered or noted which particular AdLab you hadn't logged. Unlike "normal" caches, there is no way (to my knowledge) to get a list of your completed AdLab logs. (For "normal" caches, your "normal" logs for the last 30 days are readily available under your profile). It would be nice if, on the list of completed AdLabs under one's profile, one could link to the activity logs.
  25. Unfortunately, you can't contact the CO via the app. You can, however, report a problem to whomever monitors the "Report this Adventure" mailbox. If you don't mind flipping between apps and poking around, you can try to contact a CO through the Official Geocaching App or via the GC website. I have contacted a CO while in the field and had favorable results, even though it took some finagling between apps to do it. However, I was fortunate in that the CO in this instance was actively monitoring his messages and was still an active geocacher. Since AdLabs are quite new, most COs probably fall into this category because AdLabs haven't been around long enough for many people to abandon them. However, as time goes on and AdLab proliferation increases,. this is sure to become a problem. It is well recognized that some COs will sometimes lose interest and walk away from their "normal" caches (or geocaching altogether), so one can expect that some AdLab COs will eventually do likewise. It would be nice to be able to post a note while the AdLab is in progress, particularly if one has encountered a problem at a stage and, as a result, hasn't been able to complete the entire AdLab to be afforded the one lone logging opportunity.
×
×
  • Create New...