DisQuoi

Some of us don't even know what scripts are ... but we still own Palm Pilots and would like to use them in a convenient way.

quote:Originally posted by Jeremy Irish:We do nightly backups to a remote server and no, I have never lost a cache page for anyone. That was my guess. I'm sure you'll agree that your biggest asset is arguably the data which resides at geocaching.com. If you relied on individuals to back-up their cache descriptions, a catastrophic failure of your system would probably result in a lot of permanent lost caches

This cache warns you that it may be inapropriate for kids. Having seen the movie, I can only assume that it has something to make Ned Beatty more comfortable.

Has anyone ever lost a cache description? Does Jeremey back this stuff up?

I have a fairly new cache that is intended to have a Civil War theme. It's near Fredericksburg, VA. I'd love to place a packet with it.

I live near Washington DC. I have placed one cache near me and two caches in rural Virginia. The problem is that people just don't want to drive too far. I have more fun watching my suburban cache than my rural caches just becasue of the activity level. So as soon as people start hitting my kuntree-caches, I'll place more of them.

I have two caches that each require triangulation ... One can be done using maps and compass Do .. Not .. Seek .. The .. Treasure! The other one requires mathmatical triangulation. You Are The GPS! A GPSr can only determine it's position. It may show you the bearing to a waypoint but this is not the same as an angle. If you provide two points and two distances, the cacher will need to determine which of two solutions is correct. You can solve that by giving him three reference points. You'll find alot on this topic in this recent thread.

Rodness just gave me his old Palm and I've seen the beauty of cache details in my hand. I've never been one to print out cache details since I prefer to "free cache", deciding on the spot which caches to go after. This is perfect. I've since reformated my caches to be more Palm friendly. I certainly hope that some of our membership payment will go toward paying J. to develop this aspect of geocaching.com.

I've placed two very difficult caches. Each requires some fairly difficult geometry and puzzle solving. They're both designed to take at least a good portion of a day if not return trips. In both cases, I offer as much help as is desired, to the point of providing the cache coordinates. FOr this reason, if someone else placed the help I wouldn't mind.

I recently set up You Are The GPS! using a similar idea. I had considered give the distances in miles to 0.001 mi. which is about +/-5 feet. If you give 0.1 mi. you're giving people about +/- 500 feet of possible distance ... which results in a fairly large search area. If the hiding place is very obvious, that could do.

quote:Use the search. A search is appropriate for someone who needs an answer to a question. This poll is obiously not an attempt by Geoffrey to personally become aquainted with everyone's individual container preference. He's providing an opportunity for people to participate that haven't read the forums the week of the thread of the same topic (and there are many on this topic). This question will be asked again and again whether in the form of a poll or not. If you participated before, feel free to ignore it and come up with something fresh and new. Those that just began participating will enjoy the poll. To them, it'll be fresh.

I have only three caches right now. Yesterday I began to register it on "the other" site. But then I realized I'd have two versions of the description which I'd have to maintain. So I stopped. Is it okay to register it there and simply provide a link to the geocaching.com page?

I don't care who places a cache or what might be inside for me. If AOL pays for someone to place a nicely designed cache in an interesting place, I'll judge it on that. However, if I arrived at the coordinates to find a used car lot, I'd be upset.

quote:Originally posted by DisQuoi: quote:Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah: are peaple over using the quote a user stuff? http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI ---------------- 73s from kd7mxi TERRA UTAH USA ---------------- 146.520 simplex frs-1 no pl cb-19 am ----------------- What? But seriously ... but I can't stand people that include long signatures. That's what profiles are for. One quotes to respond to a specific person or statement. Once a thread has 10+ posts, a response to a comment doesn't make sense if the readers don't know what the post is about. Not all posts are responding to the original topic.

quote:Originally posted by DisQuoi: quote:Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah: are peaple over using the quote a user stuff? http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI ---------------- 73s from kd7mxi TERRA UTAH USA ---------------- 146.520 simplex frs-1 no pl cb-19 am ----------------- What? But seriously ... but I can't stand people that include long signatures. That's what profiles are for. One quotes to respond to a specific person or statement. Once a thread has 10+ posts, a response to a comment doesn't make sense if the readers don't know what the post is about. Not all posts are responding to the original topic.

quote:Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah: are peaple over using the quote a user stuff? http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI ---------------- 73s from kd7mxi TERRA UTAH USA ---------------- 146.520 simplex frs-1 no pl cb-19 am ----------------- What? But seriously ... but I can't stand people that include long signatures. That's what profiles are for.

quote:Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah: are peaple over using the quote a user stuff? http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI ---------------- 73s from kd7mxi TERRA UTAH USA ---------------- 146.520 simplex frs-1 no pl cb-19 am ----------------- What? But seriously ... but I can't stand people that include long signatures. That's what profiles are for.

LOL ... is that what they meant? ... I was definately thinking "plane" geometry. There's still some flaws in that logic but it was definately clever if they wre trying to throw people off. Hats off.

quote:Originally posted by Moun10Bike:We have a very similar cache in my area: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=13994. If the activity on this cache is any indication, you should have no trouble finding geocachers able to successfully do the math and find the cache (although some have used methods other than mathematics to find the container). I think that this cache is a very clever use of geometry. It provides three coordinates and you have to derive the coordinates of the center of the circle that passes through each point. But in the hints it says, There are actually TWO points on the earth's surface that are equidistant from the three given points. Fortunately, one of them lies in an ocean, and thus cannot be used by the flatlanders. Is this true? I've always thought that there is only one circle for three given points and one center for a given circle.

In fact, the cache I posted is called "You are the GPS" and the reference points are referred to as "satellites". Also, as I discovered, some were expecting distance and bearing. This would be a very simple calculation. The method of using three "satellites" is very close to the method used by GPSRs. I agree that the satellites in orbit require a three-dimensional analysis but this just wasn't necessary when the satellites lie on the surface of the earth and are only a few miles apart. As for the question of "when will I ever need to know this?" ... as a civil engineer, I used the knowledge daily for years.

I use GPS Utility and like it alot. You can download a trial version and upgrade later if you like it. Besides displaying traks, it can superimpose aerial photos (once calibrated).

quote:Originally posted by bigcall: How long did it take you to set this up? I was fairly skeptical about finding the cache quickly since I thought there would be a sufficient number of minor deviations that would aggregate to at least a 90 ft search radius - I was wrong and now a believer. First, I placed the main cache. I spent an hour or so marking and remarking to ensure that the main cache was as accurate as possible. I also chose a hiding spot that would forgive a little error. For each of the satellites, I spent about a half hour to get decent readings. But that error is eliminated since I calculated the distances (that I provide for you) using the same coordinates that I give in the cache description. However, if you used the coordinates of the satellites that YOU derived, your calculations would be off. I calculated the distances as I placed the satellites (much easier that calculating the intersections). Of course, much more time was spent scouting satellite locations. Originally, I had marked a location along George Washington Parkway, Tyson's Corner, and even Downtown. In the end, I decided to make the driving minimal.

I think my post is delayed for review because I used the N-word. That's okay, I understand. But before it's posted, let me say ... there will be people that put up, cut bait and that get off the pot. But the nature of how this hobby/sport/activity (hortivity) has evolved, there are tremendous barriers to anyone who wants to build a competing database ... no matter if it's an ad hoc community or someone looking to cash in (no pun intended) on all of our idividual efforts. Jeremy's done a great job and god speed to him. But as long as he (as moderator) is willing to let people discuss this ... stop berating people for "complaining". Criminey!

quote:Originally posted by Jake.Hazelip: This is not geocaching. It is geocaching.com, a choice amongst others. So, yes, if you don't like it, go away. Find something that you do like. Yes. It's a choice just like the choice to use Microsoft Windows. (Why does Word keep crashing like that?) ... It's not as simple as "like it or go away". Jeremy successfully built a great database of peoples individual efforts. I'm sure it was fueled by the fact that initially, there weren't enough caches to justify multiple databases (this may be the case now as well). By the time there are enough to justify multiple databases, there are some significant barriers to entry for someone else to create one. Navicache? ... why leave geocaching.com when Navicache may just as well decide to change the structure of it's service like Jeremy did? Alan only sugested that we look at a way to collectively maintain a database. Remember, our real asset is our collective effort in creating and hiding caches for each other, not whether or not you can see who's read your cache description and when (although, that is pretty cool!) ... now why isn't my Excel spreadsheet working?

So ... is a change going to be made?