Jump to content

pppingme

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    1235
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by pppingme

  1. It sounds like you are describing an event, specifically you say "kick off"
  2. As everyone is saying, GSAK is probably the best answer, but I would tell you to use the %SMART tag in GSAK, then you get a 6 character short name, too short to get the full name in, but it gives you enough that you will probably recognize the name, where just stripping the gc code leaves what amounts to random characters with no meaning for most people.
  3. thats wierd that you're seeing it like that, I am seeing cjfarf, I can pull up his page, and visit his three finds, and it shows as cjfarf on those pages as well, the only place I see "rick-o-shay" is in the text of one of his logs. Either way, this definitely appears to be a site issue and not a c:geo issue. After all, if the site can't show it right, how can a 3rd party app expect to work right?
  4. On top right of the cache page there is an "edit attributes" link.
  5. Over all, I'd say its frowned on so no, but I think there are two scenario's where its acceptable. 1 - If its a cache that you have adopted, and you've never found it in the past, after all, you've never found it, so you probably have no significant knowledge or experience about how its hidden. 2 - If its a challenge (I mean a real challenge, not this new stuff floating around), such as a delorme challenge, county challenge, those type of caches, because the real goal in those is completing the challenge, not finding the final.
  6. Poor programming and poor database usage won't usually be fixed long term by throwing more hardware at it. Most likely, something in the update last week, went untested, and is now hitting the database harder than expected. Its not likely that there are significantly more users now than there were a couple weeks ago, and at that time the site didn't dog down as bad.
  7. What you're asking doesn't have anything to do with c:geo. You don't have to do anything to make it show up, once you log a couple caches, there may be a delay, but it will show up. It just doesn't show when its zero, looks like you just logged 3 caches, so give it time if its not there.
  8. You're supposed to moved the slider in Photoshop until you can't read the text you're blurring. Why blur the log to start with? I don't get it. Some cache pages are formatted wrong and cause wacky issues, but this one doesn't seem to be.
  9. So how is something that hasn't cause a problem for ten years all of a sudden causing the site to be slow? It couldn't possibly be all those changes that no one likes that were made last week.
  10. Since PQ's are typically loaded into another app/device/something else, there's usually no need to sort a pq in any order. If you are planning your route with any type of mapping program (s&t, google earth, the map on your gps etc), then that program will show them visually. If you are driving along your router and just hit the nearest option on your gps, then you get the closest caches. Either way, its probably good to get that visual look, just because a cache happens to be near a route, doesn't mean its a typical vacation or easy cache you typically think about along a route, if you're route happens to go through some otherwise very rough terrain that you have to go around for miles to even enter the area, its probably not one you would grab if you're doing the along a route thing. I'm curious how you are trying to use it, maybe based on that, better suggestions can be made.
  11. 1000 is just the max that pq will return, since both pq's and bookmarks are limited to 1000, there's no real issue here. Unless something is broken, the pq will return only whats in the bookmark. You can preview the PQ and you will only see the 20 to 40 that you have in the bookmark.
  12. Don't forget, Groundspeak treats the USA as 51 states, Washington DC is treated as a state from their perspective.
  13. PM's offer no security. They still show up in nearest listings, and from there its extremely easy to figure out the coordinates. The only thing missing is the text on the cache page.
  14. Some people just aren't "wordy", the fact that they took time out to find your cache should be a reward in itself.
  15. Do you know what chipset is in your usb/serial adapter? A lot of the "cheaper" ones exhibit all sorts of strange problems like this. I don't recall the name off the top of my head, but there is one particular chipset that seems to work very well. The adapters that use it tend to be on the more expensive side though.
  16. Yet neither one of them charge me $30/year. Your argument is self defeating.
  17. PQ's just don't get that complicated. Have you looked at GSAK? It would be pretty easy to do this with GSAK, and a short macro (and there is a ton of support on the GSAK site, if you aren't comfortable writing a macro to do this, I bet someone over there would put one together for you).
  18. You can set a date range for any PQ. So if you are looking for June of 2009, just set the start date to Jun 1, 2009, and the end date to Jun 30, 2009. Its almost all the way down on on the bottom of the page.
  19. If you have GSAK, thats the easiest way, you can sort the column "Fcount" and it will show how many finds you have on each cache.
  20. I use Vista on a couple computers and have never had this issue, I do however use a standards compliant browser, Firefox. I've not heard of this being a big problem, only a few rumblers, even with IE, you might try the basics first like clearing both your cache and cookies then try to login.
  21. Yet all these earth-caches that claim the earth is millions of years old (its not, its 6,000 years old) or bring up the subject of evolution (which has been debunked many times) aren't pushing an agenda?
  22. Why does it make sense? I can find dozens of caches that the owner doesn't seem to have a valid email or whatever, some for a year or longer, and the caches don't get touched until there is a problem with the cache itself, usually by someone logging a needs archived on it. The surprising thing on this one is how quickly it seems to have been done, and gs is stating its "automatic".
  23. I don't know, but I can probably point to a dozen or more cachers that aren't active anymore, and the caches remain active until there is an issue with the cache itself and then someone finally logs a needs archived.
  24. So are caches that are in perfectly good shape now being eliminated by gs? I realize this one is only disabled, but all that means is the local reviewer will probably archive it after a while.
×
×
  • Create New...