Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by infiniteMPG

  1. Not me... I used to work for Klockner Bartelt Incorporated (KBI) and it would just be too freaky hehehehehe
  2. I think every cache owner on this thread would agree with that, including myself. Nor do I see it causing the degradation of geocaching.... Oh no.... too much agreement here
  3. Good point!!! In the untold dozens of log entries I got emailed this past weekend I got several that were finds from the end of last year. People that missed logging one of their finds.... if they were fake, no harm, no foul. Very benign.... except for the purists who seem to have more fun in exposing someone entering fake logs then they do in geocaching. Nope, don't condone fake logs, but still haven't seen an actual example given proving a fake log caused a problem in a regular cache for other cachers.
  4. Not at all. A cache can go missing at any time. You have a better chance of it being there if there's a bunch of finds but the cache has as much a chance of getting muggled after a real log entry as it does after a fake one. And if the cache is missing there is NO WAY to prove it went missing before the last log listing rather then after. And we have searched for caches that were miles out and hadn't been found in almost a year and had a dozen DNF's and we FOUND IT. I don't think many people search for just one cache and if they get a DNF when searching an area it doesn't ruin their day. Still a mute point as if there are no DNF's and the owner determines the cache is missing, there is (once again) NO WAY to prove it went missing before or after the last log entry. When you seek a cache and can't find it and you enter a DNF, do you DEMAND the owner go see if it really is missing? If you DNF a cache then what feedback do you expect? If it is missing and the next couple people DNF it then the owner will probably check it. If it is missing then there's no log book to see if the last one or one hundred log entries were fake.... no proof! This is all congecture and couldn't be proven. I think that Judge Signal would toss that case out if that was the only evidence that fake logs on regular caches cause problems for other cachers.
  5. A vague bogus example that would be impossible to prove even if it ever did happen. (For some reason I am posting this for about the tenth time). If the cache is missing, you have NO LOG BOOK to prove it went missing BEFORE the last person logged it rather then AFTER. It is impossible to prove their log was fake!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This example seems to be the only leg anyone stands on trying to show fake logs cause problems yet it's an example that would be impossible to prove if it happened. Have you even looked for a cache with several previous DNF's that sounded like it had a good chance of not being there? What if the DNF's were FAKE log entires???? How could you prove that????????? So now it's only FIND fake logs that are problems but DNF fake logs are not? And how would you EVER prove a DNF was fake???? And fake DNF logs might keep people from going for an existing cache that's NOT missing. But since you couldn't prove someone DIDN'T find a cache then you'd never prove the log was fake. I think you have a better chance of winning the lottery then seeking a cache that was missing but had a fake log last.
  6. Examples please. Not potentials but examples. Cache numbers. Issues that happened from fake logs. We're supposed to be debating if fake logs degrade geocaching and if no one has any problems, the only thing here is people who "don't like" people entering fake logs. If they look legit and don't cause problems for other cachers, how in the heck can they degrade the game???????????? HUH???? How does the fact it's fake cause a problem? Describe this "problem" that the fake log causes please. Act on them???? HUH???? Someone types in "THTC" and that makes someone "act" differently???? The only example EVER given was a hypothetical assumption that a log entry may of been done prior to a cache disappearing rather then after but this can never be proven so it's all assumption. "May of found a benign fake log".... wow. And what problem did that cause? Okay, so legit cachers enter logs and the last five logs are : 1)TFTH! 2)Nice hide 3)Had fun! 4)TNLN! 5)Thanks for the tour. So how did those make you act differently????? Even a legit finder can enter whatever they want in the listing. They could say FOUND CACHE AND WAS CHAISED AWAY BY LARGE BLACK BEAR. FEAR OF BEING EATEN MADE US JUMP INTO THE RIVER AND SWIM BACK TO OUR CAR. BUT ENJOYED FINDING A TACO BELL AT THE END OF THE RIVER AND THE CHALLUPAS WERE EXCELLENT. Many people don't even read the hints let alone the past logs. Occasionally you can pick up a hint from a log, but if you're relying on them in order to find a cache then you better read them before you leave. That's why the GC website states : Warning. Spoilers may be included in the descriptions or links. over the logs. In other words they might give the hide away but by the same account, don't trust what you read in the logs, just find the dang cache. Sounds to me (again) like the only issue here is people don't like other people entering fake logs. No problems for other cachers so it sure doesn't degrade the game. Might degrade the owner's opinion of cachers if they find out a bunch are fake, but your run of the mill cachers probably would never even know they existed. Have not seen one spec of "problem" caused by fake logs on a regular cache and the ice being walked on trying to push the point is getting thinner by the day. If I happen across a fake log I'll check into it and delete it if it proves to be one. Same goes if I have someone giving away some twist to my hide with too much detail. Same with someone making off color statements. But those are just dealing with cache maintenance and don't degrade the game any more then muggles...
  7. Actually looked that up on the USPS website and it spit this back.... Actual City name in 34714 CLERMONT, FL Not Acceptable CLERMONT SOUTH BRANCH POSTAL, FL Not Acceptable????? Huh?
  8. It's Lake Louisa State Park in Florida which has been around a long time. And it's near Clermont which is a little dinky town without much around. Never know about the postal service but I don't see that as exploding with growth (there is only one earth cache and no regular caches in that whole area).
  9. I don't see where you can search for a cache or do a PQ via street address. Where is this feature at? I know I can do GPS Visualizer and get the coords for a street address, then do a PQ by those coords, but that's a lot to do to get around a zip code that's not listed.
  10. Thank you as that is my point, but I still don't see where anyone has been directly affected by fake logs. I mean other then people just not liking the fact that people cheat and they feel bad because they found out a lot of them do.
  11. The only thing I have seen pointed out is this : 1 - Problems with fake logs on a virtual cache that was archived which is a mute point since virtuals are no longer allowed (possibly becuase of thier vulnerability to that happening) 2 - One example when someone "thinks" someone posted a fake log on a missing cache which someone went after. Which since there is no log book to check, no one can prove the cache didn't disappear AFTER the log entry so this example is based on assumptions. That's it... where's the big problems?
  12. Quit bringing in examples where others do something physically to a cache to affect others... we're speaking about posting a fake log and that is the only thing this thread is about. Does not have anything to do with someone throwing a cache off a cliff or leaving one wide open or putting a spring load trap inside. We're talking about someone posting a find on the website for a cache they didn't physically visit. Unless someone spits up an example of a fake log on a regular cache causing ANY actual problem beyond upsetting the owner because someone's cheating, then the whole thread is referencing a hypothetical situation.
  13. Still yet to see a falsified log actually causing an actual geocaching problem... ever. Just seems like some owners don't like false logs on their cache pages and don't like people cheating, but haven't seen or read anything showing they caused a problem. I don't like seeing people cheat at solitaire. But it hasn't caused a problem. I just don't like cheaters. Would I delete a log I proved was fake? Heck yeah. Will I be doing it to prevent a problem? Nope. I just don't like cheaters.
  14. The whole issue boils down to the question if someone else's pleasure doing geocaching is adversely affected by a falsified log. The anaolgy to golf may be a little off base as golf has variations that ARE competitive and that isn't GC. A better anaolgy would be a bunch of people sitting around playing solitaire. If everyone else in the room pulled an extra card every time they were stumped would it affect your pleasure in playing???? Even if you knew they were doing it and they were open about it and even talked about it???? No way! Nothing they could do with their deck of cards would affect you unless you were concerned about them breaking the rules or drifting from the pure game of solitaire. But how they have fun with it is their business, not yours, unless you think your way to play or the hard line rules way to play is the ONLY way to play and you feel obligated to push your opinion on them. Geocaching is a game played by individuals. There is no relationship between what you do to what the next person does as there is no weighing of results except for people that wish to do that. But they need to know that weighing results is not the pure game of geocaching which is what is being debated here. Just like with solitaire, if you looked over their shoulder or listened to them talk of their experience and based your play on them then you're letting what they do alter your game. Just like reading logs from other users. There are risks involved with GC just like anything else and if anyone could ever "prove" a false log on a regular cache actually caused a problem we'd find you probably have a higher chance of winning the lottery. From what I'm reading people just don't like false logs on their cache pages but that's an owner issue, not a player issue. And this debate is about "playing" the game and not managing it.
  15. The point was that someone who would falsify logs probably isn't the kind of person who would have friends who think honorably enough about them to hold an event on their behalf. Your Uncle cheats at golf and you know he does it, so would you honor him with some award because of a golf score he said he got? Highly doubt it....
  16. Yup, we noticed it's when we're close but sometimes when we move further away and the re-apporach, the arrow seems to lock in one direction and I can walk in circles and if it was point back behind me it will stay behind me even when doing 360-degrees. We also have an old eTrek Vista and it has an electric compass in it and there's a big difference between the two in that respect. In fact I really like the joystick toggle on the Vista as I think Garmin really tripped over there feet with the big rocker pad on the 60C. You try to move left so you push left and the cursor moves left, you push left and the cursor moves left, you push left and the cursor moves UP! HUH???? Does the 76Csx have the same mushy input method? Yes, it all helps
  17. Another problem I get with the 60C is that the direction arrow may be pointing behind me or way off to one side and as I'm walking the numbers are going 75, 50, 25.... etc. So I know I'm heading in the correct direction as the distance is dropping but the arrow may be pointing behind me. Often we just click over and look at the coords rather then the "go to" stuff when it's acting like that. Do you get this stuff with the 76Csx?
  18. Ooops, this orginally started to be a topic if geosenses beat out an accurate GPSr.... guess we drifted. Thanks!
  19. Don't know any events held to honor a cacher people didn't personally know and cache with. Anyone that was deceitful enough to falsify logs would be like that in other phases of their lives and people who knew them would know that. The events I have seen to honor cacher milestones and held to honor honorable people and not just for their numbers. You do not AUTOMATICALLY get these things for reaching some milestone. You get these things from people who know you and know your accomplishments. Someone who armchair caches and has 10,000 finds but never cached WITH anyone would never get a thing. And as far as the people that DID get things like the "Golden Ammo Can" award, how were ALL their finds validated??????? How did the people giving the awards KNOW that those people didn't fake 5% or 25% or some percentage of their finds????? They didn't. They TRUSTED them to be honorable people worthy of recognition. Unless you're validating 100% of the logs then you NEVER will know how honest anyone is and even if you TRIED to validate 100% of the finds, people WILL find away around your checks and balances. Anyone who is geocaching for some pat on the back, some award, or some recognition from someone else is totally missing the boat.....
  20. And so does the Verizon tech support people who run you in circles until you toss your phone at the wall, and so does the Midas repair guy who forgot to tighten 'all' the lug nuts, and so does the Home Depot paint guy who mixed the colors wrong in that last can of paint.... Just the way of the world, not a lot of pride in workmanship. If it's not affecting anyone else's game, not damaging any property or bothering any other 'customers' then I doubt anyone would say a thing. If someone's not taking a penalty drop correctly I don't think ANYONE from the golf course will be rushing up to correct their misapplication of the rules. Once you make any comparison a COMPETITION all bets are off (so to speak). Geocaching is not competitive, it's not comparative, there are no records or rewards. No anlaogy that has anything to do with winning or beating or records or numbers or milestones has anything to do with geocaching.
  21. What's "snow"? hehehehehe Don't get that icon on many Florida caches....
  22. Actually I think hiding (and reading the logs later) is more fun then finding. If I didn't think that I don't think I'd be babysitting my 236 hides. Love the cartoon on your forum name, MY BUTT HURTS. WHAT? hehehehe
  23. As long as they are stationary then on, around and under are fine. Something to keep in mind we have learned from our paddle only caches, be aware that river and water levels change due to tide or rainfall. We have placed caches in and on trees and stumps sticking up out of rivers. When we placed them they were comfortable finds from a kayak. Then when the river got low, people basically had to climb out of their boat and up the stumps to get to them. Oops. Live and learn. But we have several paddle only caches and even some paddle only multi-caches. People love the challenges. We thought the big paddle multi we placed wouldn't be found for a long time but it was found only a couple days after placing. Hard core FTF addicts! Go for it! If it's not allowed, the reviewer will let you know....
  24. Hehehehe.... had a friend that dumped his eTrax Vitsa and bought a MAP 60CSX and then was complaining that caches weren't at the right place. Well, if the persin hiding it doesn't have a high end GPSr then the coords on the webpage aren't correct. What tickles me is people that enter log entries complaining that the cache was 10-feet off from the coords. 10 FEET??? I'd be really happy with 10 feet!
  25. Got my attention with that comment on WAAS. My GPS MAP60C had the WAAS disabled and it took more then 5 minutes for it to lock on when powered up. When seeking a cache it would bounce all over. I mean take us in one direction, 40 feet, 20 feet, then all of a sudden turn 180-degrees and state 65-feet. Then head that way and when you get close swing around 90-degrees and state you're 50-feet away. Really frustrating. When we enable WAAS it was locked on within 30 seconds of powering up (and in the garage still) and it seemed to hold direction and distance closer. So I guess I need to ask.... WAAS enabled or disabled when caching????
  • Create New...