Jump to content

Ed_S

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    297
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ed_S

  1. I'd include a pic of a strange scene I encountered while caching, but I can't get the pic to upload. I don't see a way to load from My Pictures, although I see two different ways to load one from the internet.
  2. It's true that nobody has died as a result of these unasked-for changes. But every time someone seen as one of the "powers that be" gives a flippant, insulting answer like that, a little piece of our enjoyment of geocaching dies. I could say a lot more, but to what end?
  3. Comment removed - nothing that hasn't already been said. Yay for inspired, clever camo!! Boo to Needles in a Haystack!!
  4. Comment removed - as I read further, I see there's nothing new that my comment would have added.
  5. Why on Earth do so many of you generate a PQ to list caches you've already found? You don't need to generate a PQ to do that.
  6. I've heard of people using notifications as a way to manually filter caches. Essentially, when they see a notification for a cache they might be interested in, they add that listing to a bookmark list. That way, they review each potential cache only once (when they receive the notification), and they don't even need to bother ignoring or filtering caches. If it's on the bookmark list, then they though it was interesting when they first saw it. If not, then they never see the listing again. It isn't the way I play (I've never used notifications), but it is a way that some play. And it has nothing to do with the FTF hunt. Okay. I've never heard of anyone doing it that way, but I'll accept that some people might. But I'd have to observe that if being inundated with a thousand new cache posts is objectionable to those players, perhaps the reasonable solution for everyone is that those individuals who filter at the email level modify their way of doing things, and leave the other 99% alone. I don't think it's any more complicated than the "ugly baby" issue. No one wants to hear that their baby is ugly. And the volunteer reviewers certainly don't want to be in the business of telling people that their babies are ugly. Back when caching was new, and there weren't caches every 528 feet, all across the country, the rules were different than they are today. You used to not be allowed to create a power trail. I know cachers who were denied permission to place caches because the approver was concerned that they were creating a PT. You used to not be allowed to place caches under ANY bridge that had vehicle traffic on it. Approvers back in the day were called Reviewers, and, in the very early days, they actually did review caches they were approving. To be fair, their workload was a lot less than it is today. But if the rules said No Micros In The Woods, and that rule had stayed intact into present times, there'd be a whole lot less complaining about junk caches taking spaces that a better cache could occupy. If the rule that said No Power Trails had stayed intact, there'd be a whole lot less complaining about junk caches clogging notifications, pocket queries, etc. I will say that if telling someone their baby is ugly is part of the job, and someone doesn't want to do that part, or any other part of the job, they shouldn't have taken the job. Approvers have no problem denying permission when someone wants to place a cache too near another cache. Or in any other way that violates the current rules. We have one approver locally to whom physical barriers that make it impossible to go from one cache directly to the next are not a good enough reason to give a 50' variance on the 528' rule for a cache. If the rules still said No Micros In The Woods, they'd be enforced. And to all those who think difficult hides of tiny caches in the woods are somehow clever, I say any moron can hide a nano in the woods that's all but impossible to find. I've found nanos wired to pine tree branches. Want to impress someone? Hide an ammo can they can't find. THAT takes skill and talent. But it also takes effort.
  7. Does this, in any way, affect you and how you geocache? No? Then why do you care? If you're going to ask a question about how someone geocaches, perhaps you might let them answer it themselves. The fact that someone found 521 caches in a day might not directly affect someone else but the fact that a power trail which allows someone to log 521 caches in a day exists can impact other cacher in many ways. Until such time as someone forces me to find and log a power trail, the existence of the power trail does not, in any way, affect me. You even admitted it - it does not directly affect anyone else. The fact that a power trail does or does not exist affects cachers only as much as they allow it to affect them. It the past few years it seems that many (most in some areas) geocachers want to turn every aspect of geocaching into a competition. Despite the fact we are told "you can play the game any way you want", the power caching mentality that is fostered by large power trails like this often leads other power trails and small "cache series". For those that don't want to play the numbers game, even if we don't play that game we get: - hundreds of email notification of new caches we have no intention of finding. I'm not bothered by those. I don't get them. I have over a hundred FTFs, most of them from back before we had all this instant notification. Is there another reason for instant notification of new caches, other than the FTF hunt? I don't see any. Turn it off. You have that situation in any heavily cached area - PT or not. If you don't want too many caches, you can pick and choose them in small pocket queries - there's no need to download 1000 caches when you only intend to find a dozen or two. This works for me. If it doesn't work for you, figure out a way that does. Use filters. I will say I'm with you regarding the clogging of quality locations with zero-quality, zero-thought (insert favorite cusswords) micros in the woods. When I started caching, the approvers would ask you why you were putting a micro in an area where one could hide a larger cache. I have my thoughts as to why that changed, but I won't air them publicly. We're getting off the subject. As we apparently agree, it's possible to have an area congested with lousy caches whether they form a PT or not. If you look at my numbers, versus the years I've been caching, you'll realize I go for quality over quantity. Yes, I go on caching trips with friends, and I do the easy ones they want, too. But that doesn't make me indiscriminate. And I still say, as was my original point, that if you (the Royal "you" - not you personally) decide to cheat and/or pad your numbers, that in no way affects how I geocache. Creating power trails, loading up prime areas with crap caches, and so on, are a tangent to the original comments. But if I still want to be so choosy that I want to find only Regular, Difficulty 3 and Terrain 2.5 caches, I can.
  8. I've been fortunate in that I've never had any of my caches vandalized in this way. I have, however, found caches in that condition. I was glad it was me, and not a family with young children just learning about caching, who found them. If it happens once, chances are pretty good it's the random act of some inbred halfwit moron. If it happens more than once, it's on purpose.
  9. Does this, in any way, affect you and how you geocache? No? Then why do you care? The geocaching community knows who cheats, who does nothing but lamppost skirt caches, who's in it for the numbers and who's in it for another reason (the challenge, the hike/scenery, the socialization, etc.) Worry about your own reputation - don't get caught up in someone else playing the game in a way you don't like. Now if someone's damaging or stealing caches, that's another matter.
  10. Thanks for the replies. My wife has a business conference in Warsaw, Poland, and I'm tagging along. Some of the caches there have English translations on the page, but many do not. I was curious if there was a way to see cache pages in the language of my choice without having to go to a translator app or program. Now I know. Many thanks!
  11. Is there a way to translate cache pages into another language? I have the opportunity to visit a country where English is not spoken, and being a typical American, I don't speak any other languages. With all the clever computer people out there, I'm surprised there's not an "auto-translate" function somewhere.
  12. You're as old as I am, geocaching-wise. I'll bet you remember sitting there writing a paragraph or two in the cache log, too. Now, you're lucky if you get anything more than "TNLN" if you even get that. Caching has changed a lot over the years. I'm not so convinced it's all changed for the better.
  13. So you miss the ammo cans and the creative hides, and dislike micros. Well an ammo can is no more creative than a bison tube. Everything else being equal, there is absolutely no difference other than size. It the container, how you bought it, just dropped where it fits. Maybe that place is the top of a mountain, maybe it's near a historic building, but the hide itself is the same. You say bigger is better, others say smaller is better. I just payed $20 for an ammo can, and I'm not sure it's going to be ammo cache. I can get 6 or 7 bison tube for the price of one ammo can that will more than likely go missing. What can I do with the can? Put it down. Maybe put it in a hollow log. What can I do with a micro? Put it inside a hockey puck near the arena. Put it in a toy dinosaur near a place they found a fossil. Put it in a bat, hang it from a tree for a night cache. Are you saying those aren't as creative as an ammo can at the base of a tree? Yes, I think caches should be more creative or in cool locations, but size doesn't equal a cool cache, or a cool location. Bison tubes are great! (my post said ammo cans or similar) I'm just done with the abundance of micros. Why use a micro in the middle of a forest when you can use something bigger and more creative. One of my favorite forest cache containers was a fake branch on the ground. Most micros (not all) are just a quick inexpensive way to place a cache. I'm assuming this is not unique in my area. That's my experience as well. There are some notable exceptions - one local cacher hid 50 micros along the trails of a nearby park. They were hidden as a previous poster described - in toys or other objects. The name of the cache gave you a hint as to the object you were looking for. But I don't define those as micros, because the container you're looking for is the size of a small, at least. You want to impress your fellow cachers? Hide an ammo can or other regular sized container so nobody, or only a few, can find it. Anybody can hide a thimble in a forest. That doesn't take any thought or skill.
  14. This may have already been said (I'm just starting to wade through this thread) but I go to the map page when I'm deciding where I want to go caching. I can see how close together they are, not only urban/rural but with one click I can see the terrain. With another click I see a satellite view. And I go back, as does the OP and some others here, to a time when the approvers would ask you why you wanted to put a micro where a full-sized cache would fit. I think that should have remained the policy. But I know others disagree. As long as I can play the game my way, and they can play it their way, we should all get along, right?
  15. There is one point brought up in this thread that some folks could benefit from. That is, a lone person, especially a lone adult male, lurking in the bushes around a playground full of kiddies, is the sort of thing that panicky mommies will call the cops on in a heartbeat. BUT - give that same man in the same circumstances a dog, and nobody looks twice. If you feel self-conscious looking for caches, do something to make yourself blend in.
  16. I have c:geo in my (Android) phone, and I've had it and my Garmin Venture HC side by side. By and large, the Garmin is more accurate, but not always. It depends on which device is having a better day, satellite-viewing-wise. And, some geo-programs require calibrating the GPS in the phone. I've found if I rotate my phone through all three axes (axisses?) that allows it to better figure out where it is.
  17. Hey, I just was fussing with Dropbox and Geosphere, and out of curiousity I clicked on the Download Now link in the email of my PQ. To my surprise, this generated what I needed to allow Geosphere to open my PQ!! Thank you!
  18. We're getting off the subject, here. I was asked what changed with th is new system, and in what way was loading my PQ into wherever I want it to go more cumbersome now than it used to be. I told how. And, YOU GUYS might be able to download, import, and all that. I said somewhere above, I am NOT a computer savant, by any means. I don't intuit what steps need to be done, and if it's not in plain English with commonly-used terms, I don't have a clue what it's talking about. I have a way that works for me. I don't like this new way as well as the old way, but I can make it work. I'm now dropping back into obscurity, generating small PQs and going caching as time permits - maybe I'll grab 50 in a day, or maybe I'll only load 10 or 20 caches into my various devices and only find 3/4 of them. (Frankly, I can't begin to fathom who needs a thousand caches, automatically generated and sent, several times a week. To me, if bandwidth is the issue, THAT's what I'd change/cut.)
  19. There are two links. One says "View Result". The other says "Download Now". Yes, I did notice that. "View Results" gives me a list of the caches in my PQ. "Download Now" I can have "Open With" my GSAK. But my iPod wouldn't send it to Geosphere. Hence Dropbox.
  20. It seems like it would be a simple matter for the author of Geosphere to update his software to handle the new way of doing things. Maybe he's already working on it. Has anyone posted in the Geosphere forums to ask? Perhaps this caught him unawares, too.
  21. You can't click on the link in your email to open it in a browser on the iPod Touch? I don't have an iPod Touch, someone may be able to answer this better. No. I don't have that zip file any more. The email contains a link which, when clicked, opens a list of the caches in my PQ. Not at all helpful. It's the same thing as on my PC.
  22. ...but since you bring it up, who ever said change simply for the sake of change was a good or worthy thing? He didn't say that. He asked if you're opposed to change because it is a change. Totally different topic. I thought my reply was close enough, but you seem to be asking one of those "when did you stop beating your wife?" questions. I'm not resistant to change when there's a good reason for the change. I am opposed to change when it's of the "hey, look what I just learned how to do!" variety. If it was needed, why keep that fact secret? I know I may not do things like millions of other cachers do, but there are a significant number who do something similar to what I do (did): My PQ resulted in an email that contained a zipped gpx file. If I clicked on that, it opened in GSAK. Just like that. I could use GSAK to load my GPS, or to export the caches to Mapsource, and I could generate a route to drive from cache to cache. If I wanted that gpx file in my Geosphere app in my iPod Touch, I used its wi-fi to access my email, and I opened that same zip file in Geosphere. No muss, no fuss. Literally one-click. That's how this is "breaking the way I do things." I'm still able to get the gpx file to GSAK, but Geosphere worked via that emailed zip file. In this case, as far as anyone not in the inner sanctum knew, things were going well. No major bugs or glitches. No need for the sudden removal of what worked just fine and the replacement of it with something that requires figuring out a whole new set of workarounds. In my personal case, I got a dropbox account, so I have what used to be one step loading now taking about a half dozen, but at least I can get my measly little PQs into my iPod Touch and Geosphere. That doesn't mean I'm happy about having to figure a new way of doing things, and having it simply dumped in my lap. What's so bad about PQs as zip files in emails? And why could nobody give the millions of paying customers the simple courtesy of letting us know this was in the works? If it's a wasted bandwidth issue, why take it out on the small users? Why not leave PQs in emails available for (picking an arbitrary number) 50 caches or less per PQ? I found my own work-around. I learned how to use drop-box. Understand, I don't live in front of a computer keyboard. I don't intuit how things work when they're explained in techno-jargon gibberish. I just want to go find a few caches - I don't want to have to keep figuring out how to reinvent the wheel. The OP edited his post a day after he wrote it, so it says "the heck with it - I'll go back to printing cache pages on paper, and manually entering coordinates in my GPS." I wonder how many of the huge majority of cachers who don't participate on Groundspeak will feel the same?
  23. •• Yes. I cache occasionally, as do most geocachers. I pick a location and create a PQ for it. I have no need to load a thousand caches, because I won't get to a tenth of them, and probably not a twentieth of them. Again, like most cachers, I use a hand held GPS and another device for the "paperless" aspect. Zip files loaded right into the Geosphere program I use on my iPod Touch. This new way refuses to connect with Geosphere. So yes, it is more difficult. •• •• It's because the functionality has been greatly reduced, but since you bring it up, who ever said change simply for the sake of change was a good or worthy thing? And as has been mentioned by others, what's wrong with asking us paying members before you arbitrarily change things? •• •• Then if wasted bandwidth is the problem, eliminate the scheduled auto-send feature and let those who don't request a thousand caches so they can go hunt for 20 or 40 alone. Ed _S. (began caching in 2001)
  24. SaidCache, I found my first cache in October 2001. I remember when the approvers wouldn't let you put a micro in the woods - they'd ask why you weren't putting a real cache in that spot, or if there wasn't a spot nearby that could hide a regular cache. And what really frosts me is when the hider of the micro in the woods has to gloat and brag about what a tough hide it is. Hello! You hid a thimble in a place where a bus might be overlooked, and you're proud of making it "tough"?? That doesn't take any skill or talent or ability at all. Why not step up your game and hide a real cache? A couple other things: I remember when you weren't allowed to put caches under any vehicle bridges. I remember when you weren't allowed to create a power trail. I do not think allowing these things has improved geocaching.
  25. Heathens!!! Proper whisky doesn't have an E before the Y !!!! I'll drink to that!!
×
×
  • Create New...