JL_HSTRE
-
Posts
2995 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by JL_HSTRE
-
-
I've heard of COs who change the Hidden Date whenever they replace or move the container. They're rare and they're wrong.
-
2
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Sottiwotti said:
I often do not award ALs five stars, but I would still recommend it. An AL doesn't have to be perfect to be enjoyable
The checkbox isn't "recommended"; it's "highly recommend."
-
6 hours ago, Captain_Cookie said:
Please note however that the "highly recommend checkbox" will only appear if a Premium member awards an Adventure five stars. If a Premium member awards an Adventure with a less than five-star rating, the checkbox will not appear.
That's a good limitation, but an inadequate one. AL average ratings show the vast majority of cachers are giving almost every Lab five stars.
-
.png)
4
-
-
20 hours ago, Pup Patrol said:
If they don't like to sign logbooks, I can't see how they would be interested in doing the required work to properly log an Earthcache.
Depends on why they don't like signing.
I usually like Earthcaches because I can learn something.
I often don't care for signing logs because the containers are often dirty and contents often wet/moldy. Sometimes the contents are completely ruined. Even dry logs are sometimes a nuisance because they're wedged in or hard to get rolled up tight enough to fit back in. I will sign the log whenever practical to do so, but don't fret it when the condition of the log makes that impractical or unpleasant.
As I've said before, I'd be happy to play a geocaching variant that was quality-oriented and entirely virtual yet tied to specific locations.
12 hours ago, MNTA said:My daughter usually refuses to touch the contents of most caches. She likes to find them and is really good at the tough ones to spot but that is it. Add spiders or spiders webs, mold, mildew slime nope no thank you. Even as a toddler she used popsicle sticks to finger paint.
In complete seriousness: that amount of "ick aversion" from a very young age could be a symptom of a sensory processing disorder.
-
Is this like Favorites where you can only give the accolade to 1 in 10?
Or can Finders highly recommend every Lab they complete? Because if so then you haven't solved the problem.
-
2
-
.png)
1
-
-
6 hours ago, arisoft said:
In this case, I suggest hunting down Adventure Lab Caches. They are designed for users who are not interested in signing logbooks, but visiting interesting places.
Also Virtuals and Earthcaches.
-
On 3/20/2024 at 9:44 PM, SFTX said:
- Option: require completion of a (traditional, virtual, etc) cache to start the Adventure Lab
- Option: allow completely hiding the Adventure from view until the player finishes another Lab (or traditional, virtual, etc Geocache)
This is basically daisy chaining, which is prohibited for geocaches and has been for a long time.
The closest thing is Bonus Caches, which can only go one level deep and require multiple caches. Even then a bonus cache can be located with partial coordinates plus deduction (or other means) then logged.
As is, requiring completion of AL steps in a specific order is frequently more of a nuisance to the seeker.
Ultimately, other than the stages within single multistage cache you can't force seekers to follow your series or story in the order you want them to. Much like the description of a Traditional, which can be very interesting and educational, you can't force seekers to participate in what is essentially an ALR. You can make it clear how people who want to follow the story in order can do so, but they can chose not to.
-
1
-
On 3/13/2024 at 10:54 PM, Keystone said:
Adventures don't go through a review process
It's become very apparent they need to.
I understand Groundspeak's likely thinking: there's no physical container so what's the worst that could happen?
The lesson for Groundspeak, and everyone else, is that if people can then some of them will, no matter how much they shouldn't, even if breaks the rules. The only way to stop them is sufficient enforcement. The plethora of play-anywhere ALs has made that very apparent.
-
1
-
.png)
1
-
1
-
-
Ruined container.
Clearly inactive CO.
Ignored NM.
If I notice such a situation I will CITO and NA.
-
1
-
-
23 hours ago, niraD said:
I never "pre-sign" challenge caches, so I never find myself in this situation. The only caches I search for are the ones I can log a Find for.
That's mostly my policy. Tracking a bunch of partially qualified challenges is a bit of a nuisance.
That said there are some Challenges I will sign for geographical reasons (finding all the other nearby caches) or because I'm close to qualifying.
If it's a challenge I'm unlikely to ever qualify for, such as streaks or countries, then I will skip it.
23 hours ago, Vooruit! said:There are / have been reviewers out there that do not agree with this
Challenge requirements changed many years ago. It used to be a CO could disallow pre-signing or limit qualifying finds to those published before the Challenge. Neither restriction is allowed anymore.
-
1
-
-
On 3/17/2024 at 4:44 PM, cerberus1 said:
simply having a ziplock bag with the log inside and behind the magnet constitutes a "container".
It shouldn't, at least not for geocaching purposes.
-
2
-
-
On 3/18/2024 at 4:39 PM, Arcane_Artificer said:
this confused me as I had checked that there was no caches in the area on the app while searching for a location for the hide.
I then hoped on project-GC to check if there was a disabled/archived cache there, but there was nothing.
Disabled caches will show on the website map, though maybe not in the app, at least without changing the default settings. The app is a tool for finding caches, not for placing them.
Archived caches don't affect placement of new listings.
-
7 hours ago, The_Jumping_Pig said:
I find it dumb that just a stamp completly overrides the cache type.
If Groundspeak had to do it all over again I'm pretty sure LBH type would not exist at all. There would instead be an Attribute for having an ink stamp in the cache. But LBHs precede Attributes and the realization of the better implementation came far too late to be used.
-
14 hours ago, arisoft said:
Here the normal is a real Letterbox (with clues) and if the cache is at the posted coordinates it is told clearly in the description.
How do they meet the GPS requirement Guideline?
-
1
-
-
Out of 200+ LBH Finds, I can only remember one that wasn't at the posted coordinates.
I agree that a puzzle LBH should clearly spell that out at the top of the description.
-
1
-
-
In Florida the NFs don't require explicit permission.
They have the advantage of lots of free access public land, but lots of problems with reckless hunters, parties, offroading, and illegal dumping. Plus parts are periodically logged, destroying the caches within.
-
9 hours ago, 173Carver said:
hides that are the log bookless A/C vent covers I mentioned before (you just sign the vent itself, generally on the internal or concave side of it).
Can someone post a photo of one of these? I've never heard of such a cache and I'm having difficulty imagining it.
-
1
-
-
How many caches are we talking about? How many DNFs on each cache? By how experienced of a seeker(s)? Do the DNFs offer any indication of why the cache might be gone (ex: area had a fire, tree fell down, flood, rockslide) or evidence that the container is gone (ex: hint is very clear, attachment without a container, impression in ground from an ammo can)?
-
On 2/24/2024 at 3:28 PM, ErewashPaddler said:
Possible suggestions, then, to keep the game fresh....
3. Continue to give out new credits by whatever system Groundspeak choose - but make the system transparent, and don't ignore those C.O.'s who already have four or five successful Ad Labs?
Define "successful."
If people actually left meaningful ratings on ALs then high ratings could be rewarded, but as it stands the ratings variance between a really cool and a really dull AL is minimal because most players give 5 stars to every AL.
Number of Finds is largely just a measure of location. The best AL in a small GA town will have far fewer finds than the worst AL in New York City.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 2/28/2024 at 7:42 PM, FoundOneThong said:
is this just a description for the reviewer?
Anything you want to tell the Reviewer goes in a Reviewer Note. There's a field for that when creating the cache listing then you can add logs to the unpublished cache page with the type Reviewer Note. All Reviewer Notes are automatically archived upon publication so other cachers don't see them but Reviewers can see then for reference.
-
18 hours ago, lserick said:
All very funny. Locking Russia out of Geocaching is a statement that the community could make. I can see there's no interest. Enjoy your caches.
Businesses should stick to business and stay out of politics.
I'm in favor of temporarily suspending geocaching in war zones for safety reasons, but considering how things were handled in Iraq that's unlikely to ever happen
-
1
-
-
Send the coordinates where you found it to your Reviewer who can tell you of it's archived, unpublished, or a multi/mystery final.
-
2
-
-
Germany has a longstanding reputation for having a disproportionate number of armchair cachers.
Most European countries have much less restrictive private property / trespassing laws than the USA. There is also a larger urban exploration scene in Germany than America. Thus I get the impression there are a lot of caches that couldn't exist in America because they take you places that would be illegal here but aren't illegal in Europe.
I imagine power trails are much more common in the USA than most other countries because we're much more automobile-centric.
-
At this point COs should probably not put links on their cache page unless absolutely necessary, such as for solving a puzzle or accessing a third-party geochecker or as part of a permission requirement. Pretty much any information link, no matter how innocuous, will run afoul of either commercial or agenda Guidelines.
-
1
-
.png)
.png)
.png)
Hidden date changed?
in General geocaching topics
Posted
These examples, while reasonable, raise some questions about what the Hidden Date is supposed to reflect.
Seeme to me like it should be the date the physical container was originally placed or the date the listing was originally published. Probably the latter, since that data that could be set automatically by the publication process.