Damaxx

Thanks for passing this on. Very cool. I've never looked for Iridium flares before finding out about this here. We plugged in our coordinates from our GPS and it worked perfectly. Saw our first tonight. It was exactly in the sky where we expected. It was listed as only -2 Mag, but was much brighter than I expected. Noticed that mentioned a few times in this thread. Can't wait to see a -8 Mag! Damaxx

Thanks for passing this on. Very cool. I've never looked for Iridium flares before finding out about this here. We plugged in our coordinates from our GPS and it worked perfectly. Saw our first tonight. It was exactly in the sky where we expected. It was listed as only -2 Mag, but was much brighter than I expected. Noticed that mentioned a few times in this thread. Can't wait to see a -8 Mag! Damaxx

Here's the URL to the article. I this link doesn't work for some reason, from the main page at http://www.nypost.com you can type in the word "geocaching" without the quotes in the search field at left. This will take you to the link page for the article. http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nypost/index.html?ts=1030040441 Also, you can only read a few short paragraphs free of charge. To get the entire article, they'll want $2.95 from you. That's why I didn't place the URL in my original post. Damaxx quote:Originally posted by BrianSnat:Does anybody have the URL for this article? I went to the Post's website, but couldn't find anyting. "Life is a daring adventure, or it is nothing" - Helen Keller

crr003, I think your answer - quoted here, was the most succinct and perhaps one of the best. Now I'll be less succinct and mention some of the other points made which I thought ought to be considered in any solution or choice on this matter. Great initial post, btw. 1. possibility of tresspassing 2. potential hazards 3. possibility of hider making it longer or shorter than it needs to be. 4. so what, it's ultimately up to the cache hider Oh, and off topic... Kudos to bigeddy for using the word, "quixotic" in a post. Damaxx quote:Originally posted by crr003:If the coords for parking aren't there, someone will complain. If they are there someone will complain (it seems). Put them there and one group is satisfied and the other group can ignore them.

Hey, welcome aboard, C.B.!! As I mentioned earlier, it certainly was a positive article, and I'm sure you're not the only one who jumped on the bandwagon because of it. Although you acted rather quickly by already ording a GPS. That's great. I also have feeling you're right about this being a freelance article. Hehe, he's probably reading this now. Can't wait to see your article. Give us a heads up when it comes along, won't you? Damaxx quote:Originally posted by C.B.:Regardless of the way the Post article was written, it was enough for me to hit geocaching.com, become interested and order a GPS. If you believe the old adage that it's a success if even one person becomes interested, then it succeeded. Also, it so happens that I'm a newspaper editor in NYC and I intend to put together another story on geocaching to highlight my own experiences. An aside, I'm pretty sure the Post article was written by a freelance columnist. CB

sbell, you hit on serveral good points that i didn't cover well. thanks. i particularly like the idea of going to a known cache if one happens to have a reporter tagging along. makes sense. In the article to which I was referring, the author *was* the geocacher, not someone he interviewed. i think he had a good experience, but not a great one, necessarily, in the hunt he mentions in the article. It's certainly a positive article about geocaching; don't get me wrong. I was just being picky about the parts I didn't like. When I see the words, "prize, booty, and treasure" in the same article (as was the case here), I just wonder what non-cachers are thinking. The more people get in their minds that something of monetary value is hidden in caches, the worse off we all are, I think. In this author's defense, he clarifies a bit by saying that the "...treasure can be anything from a rubber snake or a roll of film to a secret sign left behind." That helps, and it's responsible journalism. He also refers to the items as "baubles". That's good, too. It's just that the buzzwords I mentioned above are what stick with people, not "rubber snake". Look, I know much of this is semantics, but with regulations in place in some states, (including my own), other limitations likely down the road, I do think it's worth nitpicking sometimes about how this game is represented. I enjoy it that much. Damaxx

I'm usually pleased to see the game publicized, but I do like to see it well-described and represented. Page 48 of yesterday's (Aug. 20) NY Post had an article that tried to play on the excitement of the thrill of the hunt in geocaching, but it missed the mark a bit, IMHO. Most of it was just fine, but lines like the following one might be misleading. "Baubles are hidden all over the world, but there's no way of knowing the nature of the prize until you find it." First, this and other parts of the article imply that it's all about the *prize*. That's not always the case. Second, this makes it sound like you have no idea what type of cache you're searching for and that the contents are entirely secret. With many caches listing original contents, and many people logging what they took and left, one often can know *the nature of the prize*. Sure, there's often a surprise or two in the cache, agreed, but I don't think that's how this article came off. I did like that the author relayed an actual experience of his in finding a cache, but it implied that the listing of the cache did not let him know that it was a virtual cache. Maybe that's the actual case, but I doubt it. He was thoroughly surprised to find no real cache there. Maybe the cache hider intended that - maybe. "No gold, no jewels, not even a CD - just the thrill of the chase." You were expecting rough-cut diamonds, maybe? Damaxx

Bravo. Cool stuff! I think I'll share this one with the Mrs., too.