jeremyp

It might have been 1000 Mb, but that's not the point. The service I bought gives me unlimited disk space which technically is even bigger than 1,000Gb. The provider has an advert at the bottom of my home web page. In checking the above, I found a bug in the HTML on my index page. When I uploaded the fixed version, the ftp server told me that the file system had 350Gb on it, so that is my real upper limit. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by Slytherin formerly known as kimRobin: That's like saying that John Lennon was just "one of the Beatles" Alex. I'm not quite sure how to read this comment. Do you mean John Lennon/Jim Morrison was just a member of a pop group when in fact it was the Beatles/Doors and you can't be *just* a member of one of those bands, or do you mean that John Lennon/Jim Morrison was in some way superior to the other members of the bands in question? I would argue that while John was probably the best song writer in the Beatles, other people both in and out of the group made equal or more important contributions to their overall success. On the other hand (I admit to being on shakey ground here), Jim was probably not the most creative member of the Doors but it is undeniable that they had no real success after his death. I know a joke about Michael Caine, Jim Morrison and The Beatles but it is not appropriate to publish it in a public forum . ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by Slytherin formerly known as kimRobin: That's like saying that John Lennon was just "one of the Beatles" Alex. I'm not quite sure how to read this comment. Do you mean John Lennon/Jim Morrison was just a member of a pop group when in fact it was the Beatles/Doors and you can't be *just* a member of one of those bands, or do you mean that John Lennon/Jim Morrison was in some way superior to the other members of the bands in question? I would argue that while John was probably the best song writer in the Beatles, other people both in and out of the group made equal or more important contributions to their overall success. On the other hand (I admit to being on shakey ground here), Jim was probably not the most creative member of the Doors but it is undeniable that they had no real success after his death. I know a joke about Michael Caine, Jim Morrison and The Beatles but it is not appropriate to publish it in a public forum . ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

It seems to me that there needs to be an official place in which to collate all the information about where you can plant caches and whose permission you need within the UK. Ideally it would be somewhere on www.geocaching.com, but could - if we can't get the location set up - be on a web site here in the UK. I'd be glad to donate some of my 1000Gb quota, except that the URL will have to start "jeremyp.net". ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by Richard & Beth: (What is really sad is that when the tour guide mentioned Jim Morisson they didn't know that it was him, rather than Will Young that had the first hit with Light My Fire! ) Richard At the risk of starting some sort of flame war, it was the Doors that had the original hit, of which Jim Morrison was merely the lead singer. AFAIK he had no part in writing that particular song (though I may be wrong). Far more upsetting to me, was that when I mentioned to a friend of mine that Will Young had murdered the song (IMHO of course) they disagreed with me. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by Richard & Beth: (What is really sad is that when the tour guide mentioned Jim Morisson they didn't know that it was him, rather than Will Young that had the first hit with Light My Fire! ) Richard At the risk of starting some sort of flame war, it was the Doors that had the original hit, of which Jim Morrison was merely the lead singer. AFAIK he had no part in writing that particular song (though I may be wrong). Far more upsetting to me, was that when I mentioned to a friend of mine that Will Young had murdered the song (IMHO of course) they disagreed with me. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by Tim & June: Thanks for that Jeremy ! Hmm, dunno what happened there, I used the same link as you to work it out, and in spite of it being an american site, the kilometres figure is given before the miles figure. You need to look quite closely to notice. Put it down to bad user interface I agree, your general point still holds. For instance, when you fly across the Atlantic from New York to London, the aeroplane normally flies a long way South of the shortest (great circle) route to take advantage of the prevailing winds. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by Tim & June: Thanks for that Jeremy ! Hmm, dunno what happened there, I used the same link as you to work it out, and in spite of it being an american site, the kilometres figure is given before the miles figure. You need to look quite closely to notice. Put it down to bad user interface I agree, your general point still holds. For instance, when you fly across the Atlantic from New York to London, the aeroplane normally flies a long way South of the shortest (great circle) route to take advantage of the prevailing winds. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by Tim & June: For example, to fly between London and Auckland (New Zealand) involves a stopover at either Los Angeles or Singapore, both routes involve a distances of around 19,250 miles as the crow flies. If a bug is listed as having travelled directly from London to Auckland the distance will be recorded at around 18,330 miles. London and Auckland are only about 11,000 miles apart on the great circle route. They are, however, 18,330 kilometres apart ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by Tim & June: For example, to fly between London and Auckland (New Zealand) involves a stopover at either Los Angeles or Singapore, both routes involve a distances of around 19,250 miles as the crow flies. If a bug is listed as having travelled directly from London to Auckland the distance will be recorded at around 18,330 miles. London and Auckland are only about 11,000 miles apart on the great circle route. They are, however, 18,330 kilometres apart ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

The Equator is 26,000 miles. If it's 9,000 miles from Singapore to the US one way, I think unless both Singapore and the point in the US to which the TB was taken are near a pole, it's quite reasonable that the 9,000 mile route is the shortest. Also, if I choose to go from Reading to Heathrow (a distance of 20 miles approx) the "longest way round" - 25,980 miles - it doesn't mean I didn't do the distance just because there's a shorter route ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

Funnily enough the one at our company did not degenerate into personal attacks - well unless you count vicious attacks on the management . There was a fair amount of seriously bad language which would obviously not be appropriate here. If we were to have an "almost anything goes" thread here, there would have to be some rules. Experience tells me that discussions on this forum do get really out of hand sometimes. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

Funnily enough the one at our company did not degenerate into personal attacks - well unless you count vicious attacks on the management . There was a fair amount of seriously bad language which would obviously not be appropriate here. If we were to have an "almost anything goes" thread here, there would have to be some rules. Experience tells me that discussions on this forum do get really out of hand sometimes. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

There is a registry entry that says "symbol" but I can't seem to make it do anything. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

Is it that bunkers on golf courses are often on private land? ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

Is it that bunkers on golf courses are often on private land? ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by Geo Badger: I like the separate forum idea. I have posted adverts here in the past and got blasted for it and i have learnt not to but i hate the way new people come to the forums sometimes advertising their first cache whatever and get a really rude welcome to the hobby, if there was a section where people could check out the latest additions atleast there would be no excuse for posting here. Not trying to make an argument just stating my views Dan Wilson (Team Dan and Pid) Point 1: The whole point of banning posts of new caches on these forums is to avoid pointless duplication of data. All the information you get from a "checkout my new cache" type post is available on geocaching.com and I believe Rob & Lisa's site has a list of UK caches ordered by date. If everybody posted their new caches to this forum it would soon be swamped with such requests. I suspect Jeremy's answer to "can we have a forum for posting new caches to?" would be "what is the point? We *have* geocaching.com which is for, guess what, advertising caches on" Point 2: There is no excuse for ever being rude to newbies (or anyone) whose only crime is ignorance of the rules. A politely worded reply explaining the rules is all that's needed. Point 3: I like the idea of "Blatent-plug-a-thread" but only because of the name and the concept. We could allow people to outragously plug anything they like on it - not just caches. We have a thread in our company on our internal news server called "bad-attitude" in which anybody is allowed to mouth off about anything without censorship. It's a good way to let off steam, but you need to be thick skinned sometimes to read it. Apologies in advance if this post comes across as rude to anybody, it's not meant to be . ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching [This message was edited by jeremyp on May 31, 2002 at 06:53 AM.]

quote:Originally posted by Geo Badger: I like the separate forum idea. I have posted adverts here in the past and got blasted for it and i have learnt not to but i hate the way new people come to the forums sometimes advertising their first cache whatever and get a really rude welcome to the hobby, if there was a section where people could check out the latest additions atleast there would be no excuse for posting here. Not trying to make an argument just stating my views Dan Wilson (Team Dan and Pid) Point 1: The whole point of banning posts of new caches on these forums is to avoid pointless duplication of data. All the information you get from a "checkout my new cache" type post is available on geocaching.com and I believe Rob & Lisa's site has a list of UK caches ordered by date. If everybody posted their new caches to this forum it would soon be swamped with such requests. I suspect Jeremy's answer to "can we have a forum for posting new caches to?" would be "what is the point? We *have* geocaching.com which is for, guess what, advertising caches on" Point 2: There is no excuse for ever being rude to newbies (or anyone) whose only crime is ignorance of the rules. A politely worded reply explaining the rules is all that's needed. Point 3: I like the idea of "Blatent-plug-a-thread" but only because of the name and the concept. We could allow people to outragously plug anything they like on it - not just caches. We have a thread in our company on our internal news server called "bad-attitude" in which anybody is allowed to mouth off about anything without censorship. It's a good way to let off steam, but you need to be thick skinned sometimes to read it. Apologies in advance if this post comes across as rude to anybody, it's not meant to be . ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching [This message was edited by jeremyp on May 31, 2002 at 06:53 AM.]

I've stopped using IE 5.1 on my Mac and am now using Mozilla 1.0 rc3 which (on the Mac) is actually better (IMHO). ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

You mean any topic that just duplicates the "new caches" information that appears on geocaching.com? I think I totally agree with you on that one. Where I think the cache censorship might go too far is if particular caches would come up naturally in the course of a discussion not designed to advertise a cache. A recent example would be the discussion about thieves breaking into cars at the nearest carpark to "Roman Remains". For that thread, the mention of the cache in question is not gratuitous. I'm not accusing the moderators of having done this - it's more a case of people being aware that they don't have to refer to caches obliquely ("a certain cache near xxxx") or apologise for legitimately mentioning caches ("I'm not trying to advertise my cache but...."). ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

An update on the AWE. Although it's not on maps, it *is* signposted off the A4. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by Chris n Maria: Any more aspiring members out there. I did 5 today to get my total up to 60. I'm very tired as a result and am looking at the next 40 as still quite a steep mountain. Congrats to everybody whose done it. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:I'm sure there are other similar geographical oddities on OS maps as well.**** The AWE at Aldermaston springs to mind. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by dylanhayes: Without wishing offend anybody I might suggest that being seen around major landmarks and sensitive areas with a GPS may not be an entirely sensible thing to do, particular in countries with reputation for over-jealous security. I know this isn't going to cut any ice with a policeman with a big gun, but you could try pointing out that you don't need a GPS receiver to get accurate coordinates of landmarks. Mapsource will do the job without leaving the comfort of your own home. Also, tall buildings will be marked on aviation maps anyway with accurate coordinate (my guess) for obvious reasons. quote:On a similar topic did anybody on the GYCH notice how RAF Fylingdales is now on the OS map, where as previously there was a blank bit on older editions? It's been decommissioned, there's no longer anything secret there. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too. http://www.jeremyp.net/geocaching

quote:Originally posted by JasonW: Don't forget that any that are in Scotland are automatically accessible (unless on restricted Military land) as there's a right to roam there - how civilised. There are other factors to take into account than the legal right of way. I think a grouse moor after 12th August would be an unhealthy place to be. ------- jeremyp The second ten million caches were the worst too.