TeamVE

Sounds like he needs a verbal Markwelling.....

quote:Originally posted by leatherman:Cool avitar! I felt like jousting with windmills Yeah, I know, some people don't read anything, but generally that means we have to put the information out there even more... (Like having the overhead stop lights, the roadside lights and an annuciator about 2 blocks back down the road)

Yeah, I'm assuming that to have hidden a cache that he filled out the "report a new cache" form. (That's what "http://www.geocaching.com/hide/report.asp" is)

He obviously read this page, which clearly states: "prior to submitting a cache for approval please review the geocache guidelines posted here and be sure your cache complies."

quote:Originally posted by leatherman:I introduced a friend to GEO. He's rounding a hundred finds, and he has never read the rules. So what. How many caches has he Hidden? What we're talking about is publish more details to the unwritten 'rules' of cache approval. It may be that most geo-searchers may not really have read the rules, but I would think that most people contemplating hiding a cache have at least read the instructions. I know that a number of cache placers in this area have recently had problems getting saome caches approved, especially around the time we had an area event cache. As for the 'overwhelming number' of caches for the approvers to process: Think about it - If people have a chance to read some of these 'rules' that the approvers have aggreed upon but havn't published, then there would be less emailing back and forth with the cache placers trying to get the caches into 'compliance' before approval. Published rules = Streamlined approval I agree that there will always be judgement calls, but for some of these items like "caches can't be too close together" it would be a lot easier to deal with if you could find it in the guidelines instead of after you've gotten the cache together, placed out in the world and waiting for the approval process...

A deleted log may be the case. However, I'm pretty sure that "Finding" the same bug repeadedly does not get counted as multiple finds

Welch, I believe that CacheCrazies is talking to glisher.

Planet, You might want to check this one out for inspiration: Lena's Place

There's one listed on the 'Links' page of the website. There you can find the Palm Hint Decoder Which works OK, but I prefer to use the Pocket Query Generator (Available to premium members) which returns a searchable eBook that you can put on your Palm. The decrypted hints are linked in an appendix.

But as far as the forums go isn't it: "The sport where Markwell is the search engine"

Well, let's see: Markwell found a cache found by relatives I've gone geocaching with (but not to that cache). Does that make mine a 1.75? Actually, I found a TB released by Markwell so it should probably be 0.75.....

I agree with SquirrelNut. The point of travel bugs is to be tracked in their travels. If it were my travel bug, I'd like to hear about all the caches in between that the bug has been to (but not necessarily in) instead of just having it pop up far away with just a log of "Visited lots of caches on my drive here, but here's where I dropped it."

quote:Originally posted by mrplug:If anyone comes across one of the tags for the bug, please post the number here so that anyone who wants to can log a note to the bug and help the Minnesota group stay in the top 10. 1. Before you open your mouth, check your facts. The bug is no longer associated with the group. Unfortunately CB-GPSr's can't do much else about it since the PHYSICAL bug tags are already in circulation. It will be interesting to watch how they spread out though. I wonder how far they'll get. 2. You want to sink to the level that you ACCUSED other people of being at? The only person who has called for a general dissemination of the number in a method other than encountering the travel bug(lets) has been you ---------------------------- "The number you have reached is imaginary, please rotate your phone 90 degrees and try again"

Hey Glisher, before you go flying off the handle, maybe you should check out the bug, and perhaps you might want to read some of the other forum threads like This. If you can come up the with supposed "RULE" that the bug is supposed to be breaking, PLEASE let us know since nobody else has been able to point one out for the past two weeks. Otherwise, get a life. Maybe you could even start logging your supposed finds on the website since you care so much about statistics. After all, logging finds on the website IS the idea of the PURE SPORT since that's what you're so hot on my trollish friend. So, shut up until you've got something better to say for a {L}user with 0 finds, 0 placed, 0 travel bug owned, 0 travel bugs found and 0 contributed to this activity.

You forgot the Society to Prevent Urban Sprawl. They always manage to get a sign up whenever there's road work being done... "End Constuction"

Actually, I think he was shooting at the horse she was leading (which was brown), not the white one she was on: Story: Hunter Charged If you want an even better 'Long Shot': How about a hunter shooting a state trooper in a moving car? State Trooper Shot by Hunter

Also slightly off topic, but in the same vein: If you want to give a reference to a Travel Bug, look in the upper left corner of the TB page where it says: Released:... Origin:... There's a third line that reads "Use TBnnnn to reference this Travel Bug." If you type that into the TB line (the same place you'd type the tracking number) that will take you to the Bug's page. So instead of "nnnnnnn", insert TB2194 to reference Vinnie

quote:Originally posted by Web-ling: My proposal would to have a score determined by multiplying the number of finders by the number of caches. This would seriously hurt the scores of "personal TB's" and TBs that never actually travel, while giving TB's with 15 different caches and 15 different finders a much larger score. I like that idea. There might need to be some milage factor involved as well to filter out cache clues like Nutria & the Wyle clones. Something like Finders X Caches X Log10(Mileage) Using the base 10 logarithm of the mileage would help tone down the advantage of high mile bugs that havn't changed hands. -------- (Examples: Log10(10) = 1, Log10(100)=2, Log10(1000) = 3) [This message was edited by Team VE on November 19, 2002 at 12:53 PM.]

That was the concept I was thinking of... Part of what I'm contemplating is (maybe) setting it up so that I keep the McGraveyard stocked with somthing respectable to take as a memento... And then as cache maintenance I'd move the McToys to Playland I have a button press & a printer so I can make custom printed buttons (2 1/2 or 3 inch varieties)... Something like a first finder button, but more along the lines of "I buried a McToy"

I've got an idea for a cache (or two) that I'd like to get some opinions on: a Children's Cache Cluster The idea is to create a small cluster of maybe 3 fairly easy cache's that would be fun for the smaller geocacher's to find. The point would be to have it so they could actually hunt for a couple of caches, not necessarily in any sequence, without having to be piled back into the car/stroller/conveyance. I could do it as a multicache, but I have a reason for wanting to separate the cache pages a little... One of the cache's that I'd like to include would be a "Happy Meal Haven" (Or "Happy Meal Graveyard") where people could move those happy meal toys to and keep them out of other caches. Then, the kids who would actually like and keep the toys can come and get them.... Comments?

I'm not sold on WAAS yet. I use the plain old yellow Garmin eTrex and it often seems like it holds the lock better than my brother-in-law's new eTrex Venture with WAAS. Accurracy is nice, but if you can't hold a lock that doesn't matter much

Good Idea! I still have 2 TB's that I haven't created yet... Now I can log his mileage and pass him thru Geocache's just like Tabitha!

quote:Originally posted by MikeandRenn:Is there any way to put something more on the first page of the site to encourage individuals to not keep the TB's. The problem is: What should we put? If email is being ignored and they aren't geocaching, something on the website isn't going to do much good. In the case of ACTIVE bug hunters, something could be done. Perhaps something like adding a profile statistic to make the count "Travel Bugs Owned/Found/Holding". At least that way, people could see who's logging and hoarding TB's

I noticed a post that I missed: quote:Originally posted by The Leprechauns: You've now attempted in two VERY creative ways to rebut this. First, there's your new "rule" that, for any forum thread that is not responded to for a week or more, this means that the premise is now settled in favor of the practice called into question, and there is no more controversy. That's quite interesting. I'll have to go back and post to every thread where I disagree with any of the prior posts, just to let everyone know that it's still an issue, at least to me. If nobody's arguing about it any more is it a controversy? or is it a dead issue? If I ignore any more posts in this thread, please feel free to imagine the debate continuing.... Everybody else can feel free to look at the discussion as ended. quote:Second, the use of "statistics" to support your position on the outcome of the poll is truly creative. I'll never need to vote in another poll. I'll just visit the thread to show my thoughts, or simply remain a member to be included in the total count. Statitistics are statistics and they always lie. A statistic is useless unless you know what it based on. My favorite has always been the cell phone service that advertised quote:"9 out of 10 people* prefer our cell phone service to any other." ... * (Of our current customers) i.e. We've only got a 90% customer satisfaction rating, and we're proud of it The point was that most people didn't care. So feel free to keep not voting if what you want to express is the fact that you don't care.

I agree VIEWS isn't a great measure (see my note on the poll), but in the absence of anything better, it'll have to do. I'm not saying the bug isn't "lame". I'm saying it is as legitimate as any other travel bug that people have paid to create. I disagree with people who style themselves as self appointed "Geo-Cops" who feel that they have the right to decide what is and isn't a legitimate travel bug. Especially "Cops" who aren't paying members of this webiste and who don't own any travel bugs of their own. Let's apply "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" The bug is legitimate. The statistics are broke. If you care that much, ask Jeremy to fix them.