Posts posted by JeepinOregon
It's not their problem, in other words.
What a cop out.
I, for one, would be very thankful for the information. I think posting the NA is worth a shot. If the cache were still active I'd appreciate the log stayed near the top and periodically a note was added to warn people of the asbestos. But you'd have to remind yourself to go in and add a note once every week or 2, which could be too much to ask.
Anyway, what you did was a service to fellow geocachers.
I'm disappointed to see other people behave less honourably than I would have in a similar situation. I like to think the best of people, and it disappoints me when they behave badly, particularly when they are within a group with whom I identify.
Yes. Well said.
...and I have yet to hear/read a compelling argument AGAINST email validation.
Anyone who has belonged to any website forum that has had to implement validated emails before allowing members to post can attest to the immediate reduction of spam from quick-made accounts; now-a-days this is standard practice. I'd wager that anyone with that smart phone and Geocaching App--and quick access to their email--wouldn't mind opening a new window and clicking on the validation link or checking for a validation code. Boom. Bam. Done. It would probably take the Ground$peak server longer to send the validation email than it would the new Geocaching App user to check their email.
Does GS receive What kind of support does GS receive that requires them to report the [growing?] Number of Members (versus the Number of Validated or Active Members, which would probably be significantly different)? A free app, free membership, and no validation requirements sure help those numbers. Are those "locked" accounts still being counted and reported as Members, or are those factored out appropriately?
In this internet day and age it is about the number$ and that means more. That's not necessarily a bad thing but it can be...
New members are needed, sure. Good (active) member retention is also really important for geocaching.
Your thread was moved pursuant to the last two sentences of forum guideline 8.
In other words, Penny Drops, the application you're asking about is not a Groundspeak application; it's not allowed to talk about other unauthorized apps. Your post violates that rule, is considered spam, and so a moderator has kindly moved this thread to an appropriate forum.
edited for: symantics
Most people do not read the description or hint until they have searched and not found it.
Was there a poll?
Unless it's a spur of the moment cache, I read the description, the most recent logs and the hint, first. So do all the other cachers I personally know.
Email validation to achieve an account works perfectly well on almost every other site...With an email verification process and some sort of captcha verification, this kind of thing would be slowed to a trickle overnight. Call me a conspiracy theorist though, I feel that the reason this won't be implemented isn't because "it's more complicated than that", but more because implementing it would slow down the uptake on the precious free intro app that everybody loves so much!
So.....it really could be all about the numbers!
I agree. The lack of validation in this day and age is quite curious.
No worries, Pharisse.
With the influx of these fake accounts/logs and subsequent threads on the forums, this is a good opportunity for established and informed members to show patience and foster good relationships with cachers that are trying to do the right thing...
Considering all this, it would also be nice if Groundspeak actually said something about this and shared their plans for potential proactive--not reactive--solutions. Someone please point me toward an official response if there has been one.
With the influx of these fake accounts/logs and subsequent threads on the forums, this is a good opportunity for established members to show patience and foster good relationships with cachers that are trying to do the right thing...
NGC/PCGS Coin Slabs are about 3.25" high and 2.25" wide. If you look for storage boxes that fit those slabs (check item description or read customer reviews), you'll know what the inner dimensions are (roughly) and whether or not your plastic sleeves will fit. .25" isn't much clearance but it could be enough.
We do not have plans currently to offer the ability to completely delete messages or to block the message center.
This is unfortunate and rather disappointing to hear. I hope this is reconsidered.
This looks cool! I'd love to help...sent Amy an email directly, as the website communication option is not working.
After finding out about this great cointest, I eventually got wind that one of these coins was in the area and I had been on the lookout ever since. And then, when it was dropped in a cache just a mile from the house and my handy-dandy smarter-than-I-am "Smart Phone" alerted me to the drop, I--the Jeep and I, really--made the grab within minutes...being the crazy cacher that I am, I will even admit that I left dinner on the stove as Li'l Monster and I burned rubber to "Prehistoric Cache" (GC15TMR).
This is a way-cool--or "hot," as it were--Geocoin! And what a great cointest!
Super Kudos need to go to MrJiffy for the emotional, psychological, and financial effort that has gone into these coins and this contest. Well done!
Here's a few shots with the coin [#05] and Li'l Monster, my cache-mobile, that puts the Jeep in "JeepinCalifornia!"
Thanks for the fun, MrJiffy!
"Removed find and hide count from friends list"
Looks like a lot of great fixes, but I can't understand "Removed find and hide count from friends list". You have now removed the only useful feature of the Friends List.
Yep, useless otherwise (it seemed to work fine for me before). ...and the Inventory way at the bottom of My Account Page, that's just senseless. Too much scrolling for active cachers... Other than those two things, looks "ok" so far.
EDIT: and the new text coloring, gads! Default, so we can see links visited.
The problem has been resolved (I think)
It appears that there is an error in the code for the new Wherigo cache type. When selected, the PQs wouldn't run. As soon as I deselected that as a type and saved the query, it ran and I got an email within seconds. I sent a follow up to the ticket I opened earlier so they can fix it, but for now don't select Wherigo as a type.
I was waiting close to an hour for a new PQs to run, but was running into the same problem. I read this post, took of the Wherigo caches and they all ran immediately...
If I can, I will always add a new log and/or bag if the cache needs it (but only if there is room: I will never remove an old/used log). If a cache is in dire need of replacement--and If I have an appropriate replacement container--I will change it out if it is in a remote area and it's not visited very often. Either way, of course, an appropriate log is made to inform the owner.
As a cache owner I may naturally be particular about what container I choose to put where, but any fellow cacher helping me out is appreciated.
Also, you can put a Handicapped Icon at the top that connects to a web site and let people rate it....see the 2 sites.
Now that's cool! Thanks!
Nochipra - thank you for reading the post and offering your constructive comments. I already add the attribute to any of my caches that are W'chair accessible.
(sigh) Stir the pot much, Cotati?
It's just a simple question in which I was pleasant, only asking for a simple answer...
My profile is a disshevelled mess- every now and then you run across someones profile that has reall cool personal stats pages attached in their profile. Does anyone have a link or location to help me with my cluttered mess?
You can visit "It's Not About the Numbers" here: http://www.itsnotaboutthenumbers.com/
Or, download "CacheStats" here: http://www.logicweave.com/cachestats.html
I actually use both; each is easy to use: you'll just need to run a "My Finds" Pocket Query from the "Build Pocket Queries" link found on you "My Account" page.
A reviewer won't publish a [particular?] person's caches if they have One Star for Terrain and No attribute suggesting that it is Wheelchair Accessible. In other words, she must have One Star and a "Yes" for W'chair access, or, at least 1.5 Stars if it's not W'chair accessible (but of course, no attribute is required either way if she labels it 1.5+ Terrain Stars).
He explains that unless she wants to put a ["Yes"] Wheelchair attribute, she must bump up the terrain to at least 1.5 Stars. I have no problem with this idea either way, but I thought the Terrain Star Ratings were considered from a Non-Wheelchair point of view--the majority--and hence, the [Wheelchair] Attribute(s) is to aid in further detailing the cache area. I have a few One Star Terrains for which I do not use the W'chair attribute and I have never been asked to do so from this same, or other, reviewers.
This is consistent with this reviewer and particular hider--but isolated to this issue, if you will--and I will further add that this reviewer is always pleasant and hard working - especially for a volunteer!
When this reviewer needs to hold-back on publishing a cache so the Hider can first fix something on the cache page, he does well by always quoting the rule(s) as well as providing a link to the GC.com page that explains it - in these cases, though, he does not.
So is this a "rule" I for which I cannot find documentation, or is there something that I've missed along the way...? I'm just curious.
EDIT: As I've already stated, this is just a curiosity question [motivated from the lack of consistency between reviewer and hider(s)]. This is not an ethical question about whether one should or should not include the attribute in general...
There has been consistent issues of the screens [not] fitting various GPSr models correctly - the Vista Hcx, especially; there have been countless posts about this very issue in the past. But at this cost, it may be worth the gamble.
I'd rather just pay a few bucks more per month and avoid the ads.
Since Groundspeak goes to such great lengths to make sure that caches themselves have no commercial value, advertising on the cache pages seems a little ... I don't know ... just wrong somehow.
I'd pay double to keep the ads away - I really don't need to refinance the home I don't own anyway. At least move the ad so it's below the cache inventory...
As this could turn into a finite topic and hard to find on the forums, I agree. This would be utilized for caching members of my own family, as well.
I like the idea!
If the numbers aren't working, there's not much you can do but post a note online for the cache in which you dropped the bug. You may find out some kind of info in the cache-logs from where you grabbed the bug...?
A very unsafe cache location
in General geocaching topics
Posted · Edited by JeepinOregon
'It's just minimal/unverified exposure.' = All about the numbers?
It sounds like we need a Potential Carcenogenics attribute to go along with the rope and tree climbing.