jeremyp
-
Posts
851 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by jeremyp
-
-
I didn't know TB advertising was off-limits as well as cache advertising. Anyway, the moderators have declared their policy, so we should let them decide as to whether this is acceptable.
That's what they're there for.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Slytherin formerly known as kimRobin:True enough Jeremy, but don't forget that Harold's team were tired after a hard away match against Chelsea and that's why they lost. And of course it didn't help whem someone told him to keep his eye on an arrow that coming his way.
And he would have won against William if his forwards hadn't been a bit too eager and got caught in the Normans offside trap.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
If we've been trying for 1,000 years to keep them out, then the attempt failed only 64 years after we started.
Since then it's usually been a case of us trying to get in to France or stay in (Napolean excepted of course).I don't think the cache is going to stay there long. The user seems to be deactivated.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
If we've been trying for 1,000 years to keep them out, then the attempt failed only 64 years after we started.
Since then it's usually been a case of us trying to get in to France or stay in (Napolean excepted of course).I don't think the cache is going to stay there long. The user seems to be deactivated.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
I saw that about Minesota. I'm waiting for "remove fragment of map to the west of the River Severn because the inhabitants have no sense of humour"
Ha, ha if anybody tries to flame me for being racist it'll just prove my point
Seriously though, the release notes seem to be automatically generated from their change control system otherwise each set would not have the comment "change version number from 4.0.x to 4.0.x+1"
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
I saw that about Minesota. I'm waiting for "remove fragment of map to the west of the River Severn because the inhabitants have no sense of humour"
Ha, ha if anybody tries to flame me for being racist it'll just prove my point
Seriously though, the release notes seem to be automatically generated from their change control system otherwise each set would not have the comment "change version number from 4.0.x to 4.0.x+1"
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
I've read the release notes and it seems like a maintenance upgrade. There's quite a long list of bug fixes (since 4.06) so it's probably worth getting.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
quote:
Originally posted by dylanhayes:I happened to note a locationless cache based on the idea of canal locks:
http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=25354
From a narrow boat you should be able to find one which scores well by the criteria listed there ;-)
Hmmm, if I read it correctly I could log this cache for every lock I visit in the UK which seems a little unfair - I could get my cache total pretty high, pretty quickly.
I also note that the only log on it should technically be disqualified as the cache text specifically mentions locks in Britain and the one that is logged is in Indiana.
I've always been a bit uneasy about locationless caches. I could use them to rack up my caches hidden total this way as well e.g. on the same lines as the Lock cache I've thought up the following:
Post boxes in Britain
Telephone boxes in Britain
Pubs in Britain called "The Dog and Duck"
Sports stadia in Britain
Zoos in Britain
Airports in Britain
etc etc.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
Garmin have pdf versions of their manuals on their web site. Try this URL http://www.garmin.com/support/userManual.html
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
Garmin have pdf versions of their manuals on their web site. Try this URL http://www.garmin.com/support/userManual.html
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
You'll definitely need to get permission from Carlton to publish an AVI of the film on the Internet.
I'm looking forward to seeing it since didn't realise it was on last night.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
I was caching in London yesterday when I heard a massive cheer from somewhere, I think Ireland had just equalised.
I can't believe you were caching on Saturday though unless you're not English.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
I'm not entirely sure what's involved in verifying a cache, but if it was my job, I'd check the location to make sure it's not obviously silly e.g. 1,000 miles from land, on the South runway at Heathrow etc. I'd probably also run a check to see if there are any other caches at the same coordinates or nearby. I suspect if there were they might look into things more deeply including sending an e-mail to the owner of the existing cache. In fact in your case, if the text of your page says "This replaces cache GCxyz" I would definitely send an e-mail to the original owner. So it's probably being delayed while they wait for a reply to say "yes that's OK".
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
It might be a bug hotel, but it's still a cache. Normal rules should apply (IMHO).
Maybe travel bugs don't move as quickly because people a) don't visit the cache as often as a normal one or
don't take the bugs because by definition they (the bugs) are expecting to go abroad somewhere. It's one thing to take a bug from a normal cache because, if all else fails, you can put it back in another normal cache just up the road. People probably only take TBs from bug hotels if they know they (the people) are going somewhere exotic in the near future.-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
I had some thoughts about this whole issue in the bath this morning (I find it a good place for thinking).
The landowner issue is obviously a problem, but then it always has been. OTOH the programme may improve access rights on some land - some landowners, on seeing how harmless the sport is, may actually relax their attitude to caching.
I do not believe the trashing issue will ever be a major problem. There will always be a certain level of trashing as vandals discover caches by accident. However, I don't believe we will ever have gangs of trashers systematically roaming the countryside trashing caches.
The reason for this is that it takes a lot of equipment to discover the average cache. You need an Internet connection, a GPS receiver and some form of independent transport. One or other of these will exclude many people likely to trash caches, for instance no teenage kid is going to own a car and very few people of any age have a GPS receiver.
Once you have the equipment, you need to put a lot of effort in to find the cache. Typically I do about an hour's preparation (selecting caches, route planning, printing, downloading data to GPS etc) before even leaving the house. The actual cache hunt will usually involve at least two hours driving and then there is the approach on foot and the looking for each cache. I average about three caches per hunt and I'm usually pretty tired by the time I get back. I think, if you're the kind of person that gets a kick out of destroying other people's fun, the dedication required to keep this up would soon lose its attraction and you'd go back to vandalising telephone boxes.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
I somehow wished you hadn't found out how to do it
.Didn't I see you in a bank the other day?
No comments about pots, kettles, the colour black, glasshouses or stones please.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
I somehow wished you hadn't found out how to do it
.Didn't I see you in a bank the other day?
No comments about pots, kettles, the colour black, glasshouses or stones please.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
quote:
Originally posted by el10t:Except that there is a systematic error here - the 4 degrees is always in the same direction. You could be 9 degrees out.
[This message was edited by el10t on June 13, 2002 at 02:31 PM.]
True, but when geocaching, I would ague that even a 10 degree error is not a real problem. In fact, the only thing you need is the arrow that tells you where to walk next. The position that the N on the compass ring points to is irrelevant and the arrow would have to be much more than 10 degrees out for you not to get closer to the cache when you walk in that direction.
The basic eTrex relies on knowing which way you were moving to give you a bearing and yet owners of eTrexes still seem to find caches.
BTW I'm exactly half as old as the number of caches I have done.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
The eTrex range electronic compasses have a published accuracy of +/- 5 degrees. Since the variation of magnetic to true Northin the UK is only about 4 degrees, it's not really worth the effort of worrying about which setting to use. I have left mine on the default which I think is true North and it works for me.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
Firstly, I am not a lawyer, which is my way of saying you can't sue me if anything I say below turns out to be horribly wrong.
Northumbrian's comments about tresspassing are totally on the ball. Tresspassers cannot be prosecuted, they can only be sued. Even then they can only be sued for the damage that they do. So you have to ask yourself "how much damage is caused by me leaving this plastic box under this bush?" It's not your responsibility if cache seekers later trash the area looking for it - there are plenty of warnings about respecting the environment all over the web site.
The trouble is that when you describe geocaching to the average landowner they will have visions of hordes of people digging up their land all over the place. We know that this is not reality. Let's be honest, the very existence of a path implies serious environmental damage by hordes of people. Geocaching has a tiny impact on the environment compared with many other open air pursuits.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
Firstly, I am not a lawyer, which is my way of saying you can't sue me if anything I say below turns out to be horribly wrong.
Northumbrian's comments about tresspassing are totally on the ball. Tresspassers cannot be prosecuted, they can only be sued. Even then they can only be sued for the damage that they do. So you have to ask yourself "how much damage is caused by me leaving this plastic box under this bush?" It's not your responsibility if cache seekers later trash the area looking for it - there are plenty of warnings about respecting the environment all over the web site.
The trouble is that when you describe geocaching to the average landowner they will have visions of hordes of people digging up their land all over the place. We know that this is not reality. Let's be honest, the very existence of a path implies serious environmental damage by hordes of people. Geocaching has a tiny impact on the environment compared with many other open air pursuits.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
Yes, it is Farnborough in Hampshire. I recommend the Cluedo series as a start. Then you can do Tombraider 1. In fact, if you have a car, there are a lot of caches in reasonable distance of Farnborough.
The Airshow "on the continent" is Paris and Farnborough is not the only airshow in the UK.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
quote:
Originally posted by chuffer:Hmmm...
Could you be refering to bandwidth, not disk space.
Chris
Supanames don't limit bandwidth either, although they do ban mp3s and mpegs.
1000 Gb of bandwidth would be extremely impressive
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
-
quote:
Originally posted by chuffer:Hmmm...
Could you be refering to bandwidth, not disk space.
Chris
Supanames don't limit bandwidth either, although they do ban mp3s and mpegs.
1000 Gb of bandwidth would be extremely impressive
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
don't take the bugs because by definition they (the bugs) are expecting to go abroad somewhere. It's one thing to take a bug from a normal cache because, if all else fails, you can put it back in another normal cache just up the road. People probably only take TBs from bug hotels if they know they (the people) are going somewhere exotic in the near future.
Stinging Nettles and Caches...
in United Kingdom and Ireland
Posted
Nah. It's all part of the fun
Coping with stinging nettles is minor compared to some countries where you might encounter nasty poisonous things like snakes.
OTOH I recommend you and Dan check out Watermeads Wetlands 1 and take a strimmer with you.
-------
jeremyp
The second ten million caches were the worst too.
http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching