KDotBlueDot

Actually thin gloves work fine with the 450. In the end it really is preference. Greater accuracy means little to me, as once I am 20 feet away, it's time to start looking. I based my decision primarily on the popularity of the oregon units. A great many of the hides in my area are by users of the Oregon and I bought the unit that the have figuring it would give me similar readings to when they hid them.

I have to wait until Canada Day. I heard CO say he will wait at the cache at midnight of every public holiday, to welcome the next finders. So nice of him, I thought.

The very fact that people are debating whether it even matters that there is a CO for a virtual is enough to tell me that they don't even meet a minimal standard as to what makes a cache. What all caches have in common is that they have logging requirements. A virtual should be held to the same standard...therefore, no CO, no cache. Plus 90% of virtuals don't even tip the scale into a one difficulty rating. Show up, do the paperwork, get a find. BUT how do we solve this? Why we integrate (or at least cross-pollinate) the Geocaching and Waymarking sites of course. Virtuals are debatably waymarks, but so what? They are also something that many geocachers like to do as part of their geocaching experiences. I know I do. (still not caches though!) Why aren't the two sites even half decently merged? Is it not logical, that I should be able to use the maps to see geocaches for a certain area, and then switch the view of that SAME MAP to view nearby waymarks? I should be able to plan my experience in a more complete way. No switching sites, no alternative, less than intuitive interface. If I could do this, then I would be all over Waymarking, regardless of whether or not I get a find. Waymarking is a half attempt, if it was better integrated I believe many people would visit and add waymarks as part of their geocaching activities. And for heavy duty waymarkers, both of them, they should be able to see waymarks and then switch views to see nearby caches they might enjoy!

Great responses so far. The only further advice I have, and what I appreciate is when a finder posts unique logs. Something about that particular slice of their adventure. I pride myself on creating unique experiences for the finders, so it's a little underwhelming to see that they blasted the same log for all the caches they found that day. I understand that it takes extra time, but it really does make a CO feel motivated to turn it up a notch on the next hide...so in the long run it will pay off for the finders. Also, a great log keeps CO's informed. If a puzzle was complicated and needed a group effort to solve, say so...this may inform how they create their next Mystery cache. If a container isn't holding up well, say so, politely so the CO doesn't use them again.

I agree with Brendah on that point as well. Available in Winter can often mean, not on the ground and in fact I consider that attribute all year around when I struggle to find a cache. There may be a portion of hiders who don't know better, but if they are using attributes at all on the listing, then I would suggest that would be a small minority or would fall into Brendah's scenario.

There are 'three degrees' of winter friendliness, not two. Caches that HAVE the winter friendly icon, tell me that the cache owner is confident that it IS available. The NOT available icon tells me the cache owner is confident that I won't be able to find it. But the lack of an icon is the cache owner just not knowing, and not willing to guarantee either way. I read it as..."take your chances". Almost every cache owner who adds attributes, considers the question of winter friendliness, but, it's impossible to be able to answer definitively one way or the other in every case, and therefore the missing icon is also telling you something.

I have a mac and I have absolutely no issues. Took some work, but I got what I need together. I use Garmin BaseCamp to save puzzle cache coords, map routes, save tracks, etc. I use MacCaching to review and sort pocket queries and that sort. To load caches from the site all you need to do is install the plug in from the Garmin website. Then when you hit the "send to my gps" you should see your GPS (that is if it's plugged into the computer). If you are attempting to load a query on your Oregon you do, in fact, just drag it into the geocaching folder on the Garmin. Perhaps you are trying to use a loc file? These will only show up as waypoints. I use Gamin Mapinstall and MapManager as well. That pretty much completes my arsenal of tools on the Mac.

When enough people assign points to a particular cache, the method that's used and the reasons they had become irrelevant. Statistics takes over at that point and it becomes an exercise in probabilities. I think you misunderstand statistics. Here's a simple (and somewhat simplified) example. Scenario 1: Everybody assigns points to the caches they think are the smallest. As more and more geocachers assign their favourite points, then, statistically, the more likely it is that the caches with the most points will be the caches that any randomly selected geocacher will think are the smallest. Scenario 2: Everybody assigns points to the caches they think are the biggest. Again, as more geocachers assign their favourite points, then the more likely it is that the caches with the most points will be the caches that any randomly selected geocacher will think are the biggest. Scenario 3: Half the geocachers assign favourite points to the smallest caches and half of them assign favourite points to the biggest caches. What will NOT happen, as the number of voting geocachers grows, is that there will be a convergence on which caches the two groups select. I'll say it again: the methods people use do matter. Certain methods make it more convenient to pick potentially cool caches. A selection algorithm that requires people to read the logs as well as check the favourite ratings, for example, won't be as quick as simply checking the favourite ratings. And some people care about convenience. There's a topic in the general forum that all caches should have parking coordinates to make it more convenient to the finders. And how about all the past topics on how the CO has to put the proper attributes, or rate their cache properly, or put a specific hint, and so on. There's always those who want everything spoon fed to them. So, it appears we now agree that people care about the selection algorithm they use to locate cool caches. I suspect more than a few geocachers like convenience. Pocket queries are a good example. No disagreement from me. But what about those caches that have lots of favourite points? Wouldn't it be nice if the majority of people used similar methods of assigning those points so the numbers were more meaningful? If everyone uses favourite points in completely different ways, then the meaning of those numbers becomes less decipherable. Particularly if the different ways are based on experiences that are unlikely to be shared by others. You are absolutely right, if I was trying to decipher WHY they selected a cache as a favourite, but the favourite points are just a trigger for me to investigate further. I can usually, if not always figure out why a cache was favourited by reading the logs. But the favourites work to intrigue other possible finders. I would like to have a more detailed rating system, but at least this is better than just word of mouth.

The number of favourite votes we receive is one tenth of our find count. The intent is obviously to distribute the points to your top 10% of finds. But no matter what the criteria I use and how many times I go over my history, I can't get rid of the darned things. It's not that I can't figure out my top ten percent, it's that there is a huge chasm between what I enjoyed and what I would consider a standout. Just too much difference between them. I still think, for this reason, a more robust rating system would be better.

MOST of the best caches I have found are newer caches. Some are even urban micros. Geocaching's a measly ten years old and it's tiring hearing about the good old days from people who don't even participate in all aspects of the game. Hide a cache, and show us newbies how it's done.

A numbers hound and someone who worries about statistics are two different things to me as well. A numbers hound does things just to get the numbers, losing sight of the intentions behind the game. "Throwdowns" are symptomatic of a numbers hound. The only difference between the two experiences of finding or not finding a cache is the signature in the log and the aha moment when you spot the cache (LOVE that feeling). Faking the aha moment is just plain strange...it'd be like faking 'that other thing' while alone! Who would you impress?? The only reason to throw down is obviously for the numbers. Someone who counts First to Finds values that statistic...doesn't make them a numbers hound. If they speed, leave a family function or swear and moan when they missed out on the FTF, they are a numbers hound. Going out in the middle of the night to get an ftf is passion...not sleeping the rest of the night if you don't get FTF is a hound. I've said it before, EVERYONE counts something... but it's what you will or won't do to get that number that determines a numbers hound. It's the behaviour of the person not ANY of the numbers associated with that person that determines if they are a hound.

Sounds interesting, but only available to Premium members and money is tight right now. Meh...it's ok, I guess. I am an audit log junky–I wondered why people from all over the US were looking at my cache, so I did some forum snooping. I was surprised to see this one get mentioned. I would be happy to help you out. Email me and I will give you all the deets.

Entirely lame. Someone near me hides caches under several accounts and then logs the caches as found from the alternate accounts. Not sure why one would go to the trouble to deceive...themselves.

That is the absolutely, sickest geo-gadget I have ever seen. I have NO skills in this area, so I can only look on as my jealousy eats at my stomach lining until I taste only bile.

Plans and pulling the trigger are two entirely separate things. The timing of these changes are far more aggressive then I have seen in past months. I base this on the feedback forum where several high profile suggestions sat without response by Groundspeak and then on the same day this launched, suggestions such as API moved to the planned status. If Groundspeak is in no way reacting to OpenCaching then, they are foolish. I don't suggest they are. I DO think they are pulling the trigger on some things faster than they would have, such as the ratings system (which is very remedial, from what I have seen). Don't get me wrong, I believe they are following their own strategic vision, but they ARE reacting to Garmin's presence...not entirely but it has to be a factor.

Yep, the mockup you posted last scratches me where I itch for the most part. I like the idea of having the latest caches near me readily accessible. Seeing friend activity is also a nice touch and would likely increase the use of the friend feature for me. Not sure I need the map right there, but it wouldn't bother me either, and I would probably value it in the long run. My only issue is with the design of the site. Your mockup integrates with the existing design beautifully, but I hope that one day they overhaul the site design. It's very stale and as new things are add to the site it all seems tacked on. When they integrate something like this and enter the 2.0 world of interface design, I also hope they update the look.

Perhaps the sales pitch went something like this.... "We own a sales channel that can support the marketing of this new listing site, giving users a another reason to buy our product. Every GPS will ship with marketing plugs for it as well as an integrated user interface that interfaces with OpenCaching. Even if they don't use this feature it still gives the purchaser one more reason to rationalize their purchase.The site itself will cross-promote our products, services, and new innovations and together, these will make users covet new equipment. We will no longer be beholden to someone else to promote one of the PRIMARY uses of our handheld GPS receivers. And because we own it, the hardware and software will be much more tightly integrated than other sites. New users using other equipment will experience the Garmin BRAND at it's best-- helping users use the technology for their interests. We will be seen as the brand that is the conduit between technology and the real world experiences that technology brings the user. What about other GPS units and Iphone cachers? Well, they won't be iphone cachers long, and when they make the choice to go with a GPS let's make sure that GPS is Garmin. I tell you what...let me launch a BETA site and see what kind of reaction we get from the geocaching community. I predict they will give us the blueprint of features before we even get to the next stage of production. This way there are no wasted dollars guessing. Plus we already have the developers and technology experts in-house! Very little budget will be needed." Yeah, I could make the pitch....EASILY. Especially to an exec team who is- seemingly - sick of playing nice with Groundspeak. Whether or not it will work is one thing, but to question the idea as hair-brained is naive as all heck. Just look at the changes Groundspeak have made since the launch of the BETA (B-E-T-A) and tell me if Groundspeak is dismissing this as readily as some of you folks are. I don't like the idea of competing listings sites, but demonstrating to Groundspeak that they CAN launch an alternative certainly seems to have caught Groundspeak's attention. Perhaps Garmin is using this as leverage to get more input with Groundspeak. But, failing that, they will launch a full-blown alternative and they we will be able to compare apples to apples.

I think we are missing the big picture. To protect our user name we will sign up. To protect the saturation area around our caches many people will upload their hides... that alone will create the inroads they need. Plus it looks like they've been combing these very forums and implemented many features asked for.While "awesomeness" is an unfortunate terminology, it's the cache rating system asked for by many. This is a HUGE pain in the butt, but how else to I protect my area from saturation of other cache hides if I don't upload my hides there? This is a beta site and it's already better in several areas (far worse in others, I realize) than geocaching.com. I wouldn't dismiss it ...just...quite...yet.

Yep, it's a mystery. All the other caches, including the final need to be listed as additional, hidden waypoints though. Only the reviewer will see these. That way the reviewer can see that all the containers meet the saturation rules and also that future caches won't be placed too close to you. Great idea.

Challenges caches have gotten me to move around a bit to find caches to meet the criteria, so while I have only completed one, I really enjoyed the attempt. Challenges with severe date restrictions I always ignore. Not for some moral outrage, but just because I don't have the time to devote to the challenge. I do wish they would hurry up and decide what to do with them, because there is no easy way to identify challenges now, and trying to find them on the site is incredibly tough. I have to rely on trolling bookmarks.

It's simple...make better caches. My PnG's get short logs, my well thought out series get fantastic logs that take me through the finder's adventure with them. I love getting those logs so I started making more involving caches. Now I get 'em a lot and it's really enhanced my experience. They absolutely make my day. I find lots of LPCs. While I have rarely written a TFTC I can understand why someone would write that on my PnGs. I'm not fussed, but boy is it great getting thoughtful logs. I have come to believe that, in some respects, great logs are earned...

We get our Westie-Jack to help find the caches. He has found 3 or 4 for us so far. We started by showing him containers around the house and opening it to reveal a treat. Then when we find a cache we aways palm a treat and pretend to have pulled it from the cache. This keeps him interested, and excited to go caching. As soon as we find a cache he goes bananas because a treat's coming. We have also been working on him nosing or sitting by the container rather than biting it so he won't harm the caches. He has had a bit of success so far, finding the low ones. He's only 6 months old so for that age we are making pretty good progress I think.

All aspects of the cache does not include your opinion of the CO. Your goal now seems to have turned to getting this thread archived. Very slick tactic, but an obvious one. Please stop.

Wow...there goes the subtext. I cannot confirm the validity of any of this, and I don't think I want to. In the end it's just one cache. One smilie. It seems to represent too much to some and has caused a rift. Tequila is NOT the doorman of Shangri-la! He is a CO who's cache you can find or not. In the end ALL finds are based solely on your own integrity, not the COs. If you fudge the requirements and get away with logging the 81 grid, are you REALLY cheating other cachers? I will never qualify, but once I get the grid filled, I will go find it and post a nice note. One less find, but all the sense of accomplishment, by my standards. I won't qualify by Tequila's rules, but I don't cache for him or any other CO. I cache for me. I don't care if someone else cheated on ANY cache or if the CO let them. Why are we worried about who did what or how they logged the find, or solved the puzzle? (BTW, Tequila I really need a hint for "Walls of a Prison"...I am sooooo close...we'll talk). To those who don't qualify, might I suggest going for Fish and KDot's 81 grid for the new kids? (Shameless, aren't I?) I was thinking of starting my own thread to discuss that one, but why put on milkbone underwear in front of a pack of dogs? It's funny...one day this cache will be archived (the way this thread is going that might be TODAY) and all posturing and proof and validity of your accomplishments will be wiped away. Might I suggest we cache for the memories and not the logs?

I am new-ish to geocaching, and my favourite thing about this thread is reading all the history of this cache. What I especially like is all the subtext that always seems to ride shotgun when delivering unbiased comments, and helpful advice! I never thought finding Tupperware in the woods would HAVE subtext so imagine my surprise when my sarcasm quota could be filled while enjoying a nice hike. Better insert a smilie now...that'll throw you all off! On a related note...are we really posting comments just to say that this challenge isn't worth your attention? The irony...oh gawd the irony. My head is gonna explode...must...log...off!