Jump to content

Ed_S

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    297
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ed_S

  1. In what way, exactly, have you been affected by someone falsely claiming a find on a cache? Did you go search for a cache that wasn't there because one Found log appeared after a dozen DNFs and no indication of Owner Maintenance? Even if you did that, isn't searching for caches what you planned to do anyway? Whose experience is more important? Please don't make this a "tinkling contest" - to me, MY experience is the most important. To you, YOURS is. It's the cache owner's responsibility to "ensure the integrity of their listing" is it? Do you run right out after every single logging of all your caches, to make sure all online logs have a corresponding signature in the log book? Please. Bottom line here - you cache your way, and I'll cache mine. Blah blah blah, "Integrity of the cache" blah blah blah. When I started caching, approvers would question you if you wanted to hide a micro where they thought a larger cache might fit. They wouldn't let you place a cache under any roadway bridge.. They wouldn't let you create what they considered a power trail. Now, the new and improved caching experience allows micros - nanos even - in the woods where you could hide a city bus. They approve caches that are just a piece of litter tossed along a road, along with all the other litter there. Power trails are encouraged, so much so that they've been created by people simply tossing a 35mm film can out the car window every 528 feet. Those things affect how I cache. Someone claiming a find from their recliner doesn't affect me in the least. Let me set the record straight here. I said what I said about a fake "Found" not affecting my caching day, from the standpoint of finding caches. NOT being a cache owner. I'll say it again - if someone claims a find from the comfort of their recliner in their living room, it has no bearing whatever on my caching experience. I'm still going to look for it, yes, even with a bunch of DNFs, if I think I might be able to find it. I have made such finds in the past, after the locals all DNFed the cache. Am I that good? That lucky? I'd go with lucky, but if it twists your tighty whities, then yes, I'm that good. I'm also done responding to attacks that are off on a tangent from what I actually said. This has been beaten to death. You're (the Royal You, not you personally) not going to make me change how I cache. Save your noise.
  2. I agree, hence my assertion that whether someone else fakes a find has no bearing on my enjoyment of the activity. You are a cacher after my own heart. Quality over quantity.
  3. It all started when I commented that if someone chose to sit in their living room and just log a hundred caches online as "found" that in no way affected my experience searching for caches. It ties to "longevity" when you also know I started caching in 2001 and have seen a lot of things happen, and a lot of things change, over the years. But "cheating" has been going on ever since people for whom caching is all about the numbers discovered Geocaching. Possibly even before that. There's no way to stop them. My apologies for allowing myself to be dragged off on a tangent.
  4. Along those lines, there has been the occasional cache in the past that I would have given more than one Favorite point if I could have.
  5. I agree it's frustrating when someone runs right out and fills an area with caches, especially if they're lame, uninspired "micro in the woods" type caches. But as others have said, it's pretty much "first come, first served." Before we had instant notification of new caches, for the FTF-hogs to grab up, a lot of people enjoyed the very real possibility that they might snag a FTF. I see the day coming when we can reserve cache locations where new trails or parks or other cache locations are slated to become available in the future. So I'm putting in my reservation for the entirety of Olympus Mons, on Mars, so I can put out caches there once it's open for Geocaching!
  6. Because you're insisting that I do my geocaching according to your rules, not my rules. You're presenting your way of caching as the one and only "right" way to do it. You're insisting that my way is "wrong."
  7. In what way have you personally been affected? If a cache has 37 Found logs and one of them is by a cheater who didn't actually find it, how did that affect you? If a cache has a dozen DNFs, including some by people with thousands of finds, and one person with three finds to their name logs it as Found, how does that affect you? Again - so what? Did you see that there were multiple DNFs, no indication of owner maintenance, and one newbie claims to have found it? Then you knew what you were getting into when you chose to look for that cache. Is there any one of us who hasn't failed to find a cache that actually is there? You're acting like one Found log in the midst of several DNFs guarantees that it's there and is able to be found. I own a cache or two that are not considered appropriate for newbies, and I see DNFs on them. I don't run right out and check on it with every DNF. I intended the caches to be hard to find, and they are. As for resetting the cache health score - oh, come on! You're really grasping at straws trying to prove I"m wrong. Or at least that's how it appears to me.
  8. You're trying to skew the discussion. From the standpoint of a cacher deciding on which caches he or she wants to hit on a given day, the cheater in question makes no impact. To the cache owner, whose viewpoint you're trying to introduce to this discussion, yes, you might want to remove the cheater's Found Log. But I'll say it again - whether someone cheated logging a cache, whether it's there or not, makes not one iota of difference to anyone else looking for the cache. And you're off on a tangent about those who mark caches that aren't there as found - what about the majority of cheaters, who mark active caches as found, without finding them? The only way to discover their cheating is to compare the cache log against the online log. Stop nit-picking and trying to argue, and go find an ammo can in the woods!
  9. That's my point - you know this cacher, or at least know of her. So you don't take as gospel that anything she marks as found is really there, if there are DNFs all around her "find." She has no credibility in the geocaching community. Her cheating does not impact your caching experience.
  10. You're reading too much into it. I don't condone cheating (I thought I made that clear) but if I'm heading out to find a bunch of caches - no other qualifications, no bunch of DNFs and a cheater marks it found, none of that stuff - then if one of the dozens of "finds" was claimed by someone who didn't actually find it, does that change in any way how I'm going to approach finding the cache?
  11. When I see cachers with several thousand finds claiming DNFs, then one cacher with 25 finds logs a find, but there's no owner's note showing cache maintenance, I don't take that as confirmation that the cache is there. I call that doing due diligence. I agree, people should be honest and shouldn't 'cheat' but if that's how they want to conduct themselves, it's a reflection on them. The locals pretty much know who's legit and who's faking numbers. And who has a bazillion finds, all of them lamp post skirts and guardrails.
  12. Seems to vary, but many of the ones who are still active seem to have started around 2008 - 2013 or thereabouts. That's how I feel - if someone wanted to sit in their living room and mark a hundred caches as "found" in one day, that doesn't impact my enjoyment of caching. I'm not competing with anyone else, other than the competition of finding something someone hid. And 20 years ago, the approvers wouldn't let you put a micro in the woods - they'd ask if there was some reason you weren't putting a larger cache container out there. Anybody can hide a nano so it's almost impossible to find out in the woods. Make me work for an ammo can (remember those?) and you'll earn my respect.
  13. I found my first cache in October of 2001, when a friend came to visit and told me about this new hobby that had started on the West Coast (he's in Oregon). There was a time when I found every cache in a 30 mile radius of my house in the Youngstown OH area. But I began to prefer quality to quantity. And I grew to dislike urban micros, or any micro hidden in a high-muggle area. So I don't look for them. Geo-friends and I would plan a day of caching somewhere and skip over the caches we didn't care for. So, as coachstahly said above, there are plenty of caches out there, but the ones left are the ones I don't care for. I've moved to Amarillo Tx recently, and most of the caches around here are of the urban micro variety. Those can be fun if you're with a group, but I'm disappointed that the geocaching community here seems pretty unfriendly - I've tried to start conversations with one or two local cachers, online, and either had my question answered, then been ignored, or just outright ignored. So I cache alone, and pick and choose caches in parks, cemeteries, and others that sound like the kinds I like to do. I can see the day coming when there won't be any new ones I care to do within reasonable driving distance.
  14. Max and 99, and K13, thank you!
  15. Keystone! How ya been? Long time, no see! And I moved to Amarillo TX, so it might be longer before I see you at an event or something. Anyway, I DNF'ed a cache down here, and, not knowing any better, used the Geocaching mail to send the approver a message saying I believed the cache is MIA. I mentioned it was last found in 2018 and the owner hasn't been active since 2009. Here's the cache: https://coord.info/GC15CG6 What's odd is that I don't see any way for me to report this cache as "needs archived." Is it because I already logged it and didn't mark it at that time? Or am I simply not seeing the link to "needs archived?"
  16. This entire subject can be summarized in one sentence: You cache your way, and I'll cache mine.
  17. The subscription people have been known to "jump the gun" when it comes to renewal dates. Last summer, my wife and I were on vacation IN EUROPE, and I received an email telling me my premium membership was going to end in a couple weeks if I didn't renew. I'd have been home before the actual cutoff date, so I didn't think much about it. The next day, I was going to hit a couple caches, and discovered my premium membership had already been terminated. Emails were exchanged, but I never did get a satisfactory answer as to what happened. "This is how we do it" is apparently their default answer. I had to renew my premium membership right then and there, if I wanted to use the features, even though my cutoff date was still a couple weeks away. And when I did renew, I found I had indeed been terminated - I got a "Welcome to Premium Membership" form letter email. So try again when you're near the end of the reduced price period, and see what happens.
  18. I'm retired now, which is the ultimate job for having time to cache! But before I retired, I was a career firefighter. We work 24 hours on duty followed by 48 hours off. I started caching before everyone had smart phones with apps that let them know the instant a new cache in their area came out - you had to watch the cache maps and pages. I had over 100 FTFs before the modern technology changed that aspect of the game. But firefighting is a great job for caching. I got off duty at 8 am and while the "nine to fivers" were slogging away, I was out finding caches.
  19. I use GSAK (Geocaching Swiss Army Knife) as a place to send PQs. From there, I can send to MapSource, to my nuvi, to my eTrex Venture, and so on.GSAK offers a lot of features. Used to be, you could try it for free, and if you kept using it, after 30 days you'd start to get a nag screen that lasted longer and longer every time you used the program, until you paid for it. I thought that was sensible - you could try it and see if you liked it. I don't know if they still offer that deal or not - if they do, it's worth checking into. Can't you put a name on your PQ when you create it? I do.
  20. Some people leave geocaching. Nothing novel there: people leave hobbies all the time. Some people cite reason X. That's just anecdotal evidence. Most people leave geocaching, just as most people leave other hobbies as well. Indeed, over my time caching I have seen a lot of fanatic cachers come and go. In my experience, with a few notable exceptions (*cough* alamogul *cough*) the most fanatical cachers tend to burn out after about 3-5 years. A more interesting question is whether Groundspeak's apparent focus on generating new cachers rather than retaining existing ones is best for the hobby. In my admittedly narrow view, I think it's not, but I am hardly a disinterested bystander, so I don't take my own opinion very seriously. I'm with ya. In all facets of your statement. I'd like to toss another reason for leaving Geocaching into the mix: Overzealous and/or inconsistent rule enforcement. I've heard both neophyte and veteran cachers make this complaint, and cite this as a reason for their losing interest in Caching. I have to say, among the reasons listed in the OP, I'd never heard anyone complain that there were only a few cachers in their area, and that those cachers were elitist snobs. As someone who has taken a day and gone back over caches I've already found so that I could help new cachers get comfortable with caching, it's incomprehensible to me that someone would be that much of a jerk. When you can help new cachers learn, the new cachers don't make so many of the faux pas that everyone complains about.
  21. Have you tried the local government? Who do THEY think owns it? Who pays taxes (or who has signed the appropriate paperwork)? The Zoning office, if there is one, would be a good place to start. SOMEONE must have a legal claim to the land - otherwise, you could simply claim it for yourself, build yourself a house on it, and so on. I'm not suggesting you do that, but as I say, SOMEONE owns it. Does the college have any paperwork, or can you find any newspaper clips or other records, pertaining to the donation of the land to the state? There must be records somewhere.
  22. Many thanks - will try it!
  23. Here's a question I'm sure has come up in the past, but I can't locate any discussion on it. I was using a nuvi550 to navigate to caches when planning a day caching trip. (I use one of the eTrex handhelds for the actual caching) GSAK info goes to MapSource, I create the route, and send it all directly to the 550. The display on the 550 is starting to fail, so I picked up a new nuvi67LM. I've had to figure out BaseCamp and Express, as MapSource doesn't work with the 67. And GSAK doesn't appear to work with the 67. I could send waypoints directly to the 550 from GSAK. GSAK does not recognize the 67. So, here's what works for me: I do the pocket query and put it in GSAK. I export to MapSource. I can either save the waypoints or use them to create the route in MapSource, as if I were still using the 550. Then I open BaseCamp and import the file I saved from MapSource. If it's the route, the route loads from BaseCamp into the 67. If there are more than 29 waypoints, it automatically splits the route into however many 29-waypoint segments are needed. If I've saved just the waypoints, I can create the route in BaseCamp, and load it into the 67. My question is, isn't there a more streamlined way to load a route into the 67? Or should I be glad I found a way to make it work at all?
×
×
  • Create New...