Jump to content

Kodak's4

+Charter Members
  • Posts

    214
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kodak's4

  1. quote:Originally posted by bubble_luscious: quote:Originally posted by Kodak's4:This whole idea of using pi as a key to unlocking something sounds irrational to me. Whoaa Kodak's4. It is called a game. Chill. There's a set of numbers that can be represented as ratios of integers. Examples would be 22/7, or 1/4, or 27 (aka 27/1), or 98239846247/17743718728. Such numbers are called 'rational numbers' There's a set of numbers which cannot be represented as a ratio of integers. Examples would be sqrt(2), and pi. Get it? Pi is an irrational number. It's a joke. I posted it because I thought it was 'kinda funny'. There are two kinds of jokes - funny ones and the other kind. I guess this was the other kind. Sorry.
  2. quote:Originally posted by Pantalaimon:So... I hid a cache recently, and I have a problem with the first find. Now, I don't want to get into specifics (although I know it won't take people long to reseach what I'm talking about) but I hid a cache where you have to do some research to find numbers to plug into several calculations to find the coordinates for the cache. (Make sense?) Well, the first finder didn't do the calculations, s/he just went to the parking coordinates and looked around within the distance I indicated on the web page. Well, to me, this defeats the whole purpose of the cache. I wanted people to HAVE to do the calculations. I suppose I could have hidden it better, or in a more difficult spot, or put the coordinates on the web page further away, but that would have defeated the purpose for me. I wanted a semi-hard cache to figure out where the coords are, but an easy cache to find once you had the coords. Now I'm disillusioned. Advice? (Besides "Quit whining sissy" or "It's your own fault" or "I blame the Geocaching lord.") Thanks. Pan Cachito ergo sum. I Geocache, therefore I am. I've hidden several puzzle caches. On every one, people have found them using techniques other than what I envisioned when I designed the puzzle. Rather than thinking of this as a problem to be solved, I view it as part of the fun. Human ingenuity is amazing. It's delightful to me that people think of creative ways of solving problems that I hadn't even dreamed of. There was a local cache which required solving a puzzle that involved several equations to get the coordinates. The design of the equations constrained the possible solutions. I wrote a little (very little) computer program that used brute force to calculate all the possible solutions and emit them in a .loc file that I loaded into ExpertGPS. I looked at the map, and realized that half of them were in the water. Several more were in clearly implausible locations (e.g. middle of the freeway). In the end, there were only two really likely candidates. There's NO WAY to make people do the calculations. If they can do some of the calculations and guess, they may do that. Or, as you observed, they may just ignore all that work and see if they can find it by guessing, as they did. It's all part of the game between hiders and seekers. If you make the puzzle hard enough, or even just too tedious, people will try to find a way around rather than through. The problem lies with your own expectations. I don't think you're whining, and I don't think you're a sissy. I just think that if you expect that people will always attack the problem the way you envisioned, you're working counter to a rather delighful aspect of human nature and you're pretty much guaranteed to be disappointed.
  3. quote:Originally posted by fractal:I've discovered something about our favorite little number... Apparently it's the key to unlocking something... http://img.Groundspeak.com/cache/12985_3600.jpg Teaser this weekend.. Cache in the near future.. -fractal -=-=-=-=-=-=- N 45? 30.ish W 122? 58.ish This whole idea of using pi as a key to unlocking something sounds irrational to me.
  4. quote:Originally posted by L.O.S.T. Mutant_KJ: Any suggestions? Thanks. Alien with an Attitude L.O.S.T. Member #14 **Tread Lightly** Two suggestions: 1. Come to the WSGA meeting Tuesday night and you'll have a chance to connect with a huge bunch of very friendly local geocachers. 2. If you can't make it to the meeting, drop me an email. I'd be happy to get together with you and go along while you hunt for either the ones you've been stumped on, or some other local caches. After you've found a couple, you'll find it's much, much easier. Don't give up, though. Even the best geocachers get stumped some of the time. Once you get the hang of it, you'll find it's mostly a matter of knowing what to look for. -Paul
  5. quote:Originally posted by WingWriter:I am very new to geocaching, but I have already noticed anomalies in GPS readings specific to the brand/model used. Why not provide a box for GPS brand/model used to mark a cache site on each cache page? This would give those of us who own both Garmin and Magellan units an opportunity to adjust accordingly when seeking extremely precise coordinates. I fully recognize that GPS performance can be greatly affected by a multitude of factors (weather, satellite position, WAAS acquisition, etc), but I would bet that many GPS users have noticed brand/model consistencies when comparing GPS readings. I can't say I've noticed brand/model consistencies when comparing GPS readings at all. I've found a considerable number of caches with perfect coordinates, and not surprisingly, the people hiding them used a variety of different GPS units to get the coordinates. Likewise, I've found a fair number of caches with really horribly inaccurate coordinates, and have observed NO correlation between a particular model of GPSr and bad coordinates. What I DO notice a strong correlation with, though, is the operator of the GPS unit. Some folks consistently provide coordinates that can be counted on. Other folks consistently provide coordinates which are frustratingly inaccurate. It may be there is some systematic relationship between GPSr model/manufacturer and coordinate accuracy, but in my experience, that correlation is very, very, very small compared to the effect of the operator of the unit. The effect of the operator is so strong that I actually started tracking how close the coordinates were to the cache, just so that I could start tracking who provided 'good' coordinates and who didn't. But the bookkeeping overhead was too high to keep it up for long.
  6. quote:Originally posted by NWMOoutdoorsman:I'm now ready to buy a new Magellan Meridian and I'm looking for the best place to get a unit. Should I look on eBay or other online stores? The local Wal-Mart wants $198 for one and I know I can do better on that price. I'm not sure of all the places so maybe people could post up some shops where I can look and compare prices. Thanks! I've ordered two GPS units from www.tvnav.com and been very pleased with both price and service. They were really great about answering questions about various units via email. Heck, they were even super friendly on the phone!
  7. quote:Originally posted by Criminal:On Sunday afternoon, at 5:37pm to be exact, there will be a 2.1’ low tide at the Tacoma Narrows bridge. This is about the lowest low tide I’ve seen in a while. Anyone interested in meeting under the bridge round about 4pm or so, drop me an email and we’ll try to capture some of the elusive benchmarks that lie below the water most times. I’ll only have about two hours or so to hunt them so I plan to be quick and dirty. EDIT: Change to Sunday http://fp1.centurytel.net/Criminal_Page/ Other good low tide times coming up: 2/24 5:56 pm (sunset is at 5:48 tide is lowest at -0.2 feet 3/23 3:13pm -0.9 feet 4/19 2:02pm -2.4 feet (!) 5/17 12:53pm -3.6 feet (Wow!) 6/15 12:36pm -3.9 feet (double wow!) All at the Tacoma Narrows Bridge.
  8. quote:Originally posted by EraSeek:Makes you wonder what the ''H'' is going on in the heads of the so-called Eco-terrorists when they 'spike' trees, doesn't it! A staple won't hurt a tree, but it wouldn't look none to pretty. http://img.Groundspeak.com/user/4497_300.jpg I'm pretty sure that what's going on in the heads of someone spiking a tree is the image of a high speed saw blade hitting the spike and shattering, sending small sharp bits of metal flying at high speed through the equipment and also through the soft delicate bodies of the mill workers, causing horrific destruction and injury. But maybe there's some aspect of tree spiking that I'm not seeing. Stapling a note is actually a bad idea, not because of tree damage but because it's clearly visible to non-geocachers. The odds that the note would survive past the first viewing are exactly zero. My big problem with the idea is this: out of 400 something caches I've searched for, there have been perhaps 4 or 5 that were no longer there. Of those 4 or 5, every single one had vanished but the cache hider was unaware the cache was missing. So unless you convince the cache plunderer to leave a tombstone, I just don't see them as solving a big problem. On the other side, out of the caches I've hidden, I've had to archive one. I've several times temporarily deactivated caches, and then reactivated them after checking on the cache or fixing a problem. I could put a tombstone at the archived cache location, but it's a multicache. Do I put a tombstone at the first waypoint? At all four waypoints? For a temporarily deactivated cache, do I put a tombstone in place when I deactivate the cache? Because if I have to go to the spot to put up a tombstone, I'll be fixing the cache. In one case, I've deactivated two caches because a river flooding has made them inaccessible. That means that a tombstone would be inaccessible, too. Even worse, a number of times people have (wrongly) concluded the cache was missing when they just couldn't find it. Now, if they decided to help out by leaving a tombstone, I'd have to go out to the cache to dismantle the tombstone, instead of just using email to find out they hadn't searched in the right spot. It's bad enough with people hitting the 'this cache should be archived' button without good cause; having people marking the cache location in the field without good cause could generate mass confusion, especially if the cache is remote (and hard to maintain) or if the cache owner isn't notified. The upshot is that if I'm searching for a cache, finding a tombstone might indicate the cache is gone, or it might not. If the tombstone was placed by the cache owner, then it's probably reliable, but I expect that anyone responsible enough to place a tombstone will also indicate the cache is gone on the web site. If it wasn't placed by the cache owner, the tombstone is probably unreliable. I've found perhaps a dozen caches where people had posted logs saying they thought the cache was gone when it was still there. I've found one cache where the cache owner said it was gone when it was still there! I like the idea of tombstones, but I just don't see a practical way to make it work better than just marking the cache as missing on the website and then urging people to check the website before searching. When the only way to get cache listings was to print them on paper, this was a hassle. With pocket queries, folks can get the most up to date info with very little hassle, so there's very little excuse for working from a cache description that's more than a few days old.
  9. quote:Originally posted by EraSeek:Renegade Knight (from Idaho I think) brought up a question on another post that makes sense. Maybe posting this on the NW board can get everyone in the same boat. When a cache is removed or plundered and no longer there (for sure) the spot should be marked with a sign that it is gone. Kind of like the parallel sticks rule (something is close by). The idea was a teepee of sticks or a rock cairn. I'm thinking an _''X''_ of anything, rocks, sticks, whatever. This would be a help to those still looking for archived caches. What do you think? http://img.Groundspeak.com/user/4497_300.jpg I like the idea of some sort of standardized 'tombstone' for caches, which would alert cachers that the cache they're seeking has passed on to that big ammo can in the sky. But are you advocating that each time we archive a cache, we go out and leave a tombstone? Or were you planning on getting the cache plunderers to handle that task? It might be good to have several accepted tombstones. Stick teepees sound good, as do rock cairns. Or even a 'the cache is gone' note stapled to a tree.
  10. quote:Originally posted by hwhaler:I recently purchased a Titan 3 external antenna. I got it mostly for the car since because of the GPS orientation in the holder the antenna doesn't always point optimally out the window. I guess I was expecting much greater reception with the Titan 3 but it doesn't seem as strong as I thought it would be. I have it placed on the dashboard towards the windshield so it should be able to look straight up with a clear view. Anybody else have a Titan 3 and can share their experience? I have a Titan 3. One thing I've noticed about it (and other external, amplified patch antennas, too) is that they work MUCH better when they have a ground plane. Much better. Even a small ground plane is better than none. Try this - stick the Titan 3 to the roof of the car, or on the hood of the car. I'll bet that you'll see quite a difference. I carry around a smaller ground plane for use away from the car - it's a medium sized soup can lid. -Paul
  11. I have to confess... I'm a DNF junkie. Ok, I'd like to think I'm a DNF connoisseur, but I'm really just a junkie. I love reading DNFs. I love'em because they ALWAYS have a story. A regular log might say "Well, I found it in the last place I looked. TNLN, thanks for the fun hunt." And a DNF might read quote: "I was trying to squeeze in one last cache before I had to jet off to pick up Greg from camp. I arrived at the parking with just a short time to find the cache. Walking toward the cache and reading the logs, I read LucyandRickie's log. I looked up just in time to have a forceful encounter with the hazard they mention. Ouch! I invented a couple of new words and used some of my older ones in some very witty and inventive new ways. At the cache site, I looked and looked, but the brain cloud and the headache must have kept me from finding it. Alas, I ran out of time before I ran out of patience, and I had to leave before finding the cache. At least I didn't clip my head again on the way out..." Am I the only one who finds DNF logs to be considerably more entertaining on the average than the found logs? I guess it's just a personality defect on my part. But truly, I consider the DNFs to be a part of the history of the cache, just as much as the found logs. I hate it when people delete their DNFs when they finally find the cache. I hate it when people don't log DNFs at all. I think we should all wear our DNFs proudly, the way warriors of old bragged about their battle scars. And I agree that it's a bummer that DNFs and notes scroll logs off (I use PQs too). But the solution to that is to have PQs include ALL the logs, not to change our logging behavior.
  12. I'd question whether restricting the first week of a caches life to 'members only' is an advantage for the members or a penalty. When I first started geocaching, I was pretty gung ho to be first to the cache. Ah, the thrill of firsties! After a while, I realized that perhaps 40% of the caches have some problem when first posted (typically bad coordinates but sometimes other things) which preclude finding the cache or make it much, much harder. These days, I often wait until a few other people have 'shaken the bugs out' before I head out. It saves banging my head against the startup problem, and it makes caching a much more pleasant experience. (but, perhaps, less challenging) In my mind, restricting who can search for all caches for the first week just means I'd end up waiting longer for the bugs to be worked out, and I'd view that as a penalty, not a bonus In any case, even if I were still actively going for 'firsties', I don't see restricting the caches for the first week as an advantage. What's the thrill of getting there first when you know that a bunch of the competitors have been hobbled? No challenge, no thrill. No thrill, I view that as a penalty.
  13. quote:Originally posted by oregone: My policy (usually) is to never post private emails on the forums. You're right: it's pretty rude, and i've called others on it before. But the reason i decided to post this latest one is because i thought it was genuinely funny. Reading it over again, i'm STILL of the opinion that it was written to make me (and now, all of us) laugh. You seem to be saying it's bad to be rude, but it's just fine to be rude when Oregone thinks it's genuinely funny. I'm sorry, that's an argument I don't follow. I'm curious. Did you think it was genuinely funny, but that it wouldn't be funny if you trimmed the person's name from the email before posting it? Since you left the name and email link in the email, it sure looks like you got the email, and you figured "Hey, I can probably humiliate this guy by just posting this in the NW forum, where all my goofy friends will all get a chance to make posts saying 'yuck, yuck, yuck, another narrow-minded prig'. And wouldn't that be fun? These people with moral standards, they're such easy targets, and they hardly ever shoot back!" quote:Now c'mon. This isn't the general forums, kodak. We're all friends. Are you saying that you're friends with the person who sent you the email? That's not the impression I got. I don't see that person wading into this discussion to correct my impression, either. Maybe what you meant was "All of us who think this sort of post is funny are friends, and since we actively ridicule everyone else and drive them out of the forum, the ones who are still here are all friends." I don't find your logs offensive, I just find them boring. Go ahead and post whatever logs you like - until someone holds a gun to my head and forces me to read them, I don't see much harm in them. But publicly posting a private email just to get a laugh by humiliating someone you disagree with - I think that's offensive, I think it tends to limit who's going to participate in this forum, and I think that's a bad thing.
  14. quote:Originally posted by poksal:Ok, I would like definitive answers on which GPSr to get for my motor coach. Please provide accurate information based on your actual experience. (not necessarily in a motor coach) … (but, PLEASE refrain from third person hear say) My family traveled heavily for four years in motor coaches, crossing North America four times, hitting US state except Hawaii and every Canadian province except Newfoundland. The first two years, we used a Garmin GPS 40 (back in the bad old days of selective availability). The GPS 40 was a pretty primitive unit by today's standards but was still an assist. We supplemented the GPS 40 with a Toshiba laptop running Delorme MapExpert (the predecessor to Street Atlas) and Delorme Map'n'Go, as well as Microsoft Streets. The patch antenna on the GPS 40 got rotten reception inside the coach, so we installed an amplified Garmin external antenna, which worked great. Those two years were spent driving without a toad, in a 34 foot coach. The next two years we used a Garmin GPS III, which includes a primitive basemap. Again, we augmented it with Delorme software (a series of different versions of StreetAtlas and Map-n-go.) on the Toshiba laptop. The GPS III got fine reception so we didn't use an external antenna. Those two years we pulled a toad, and it was really nice to be able to just grab the GPS and put it in the toad. Of those four years, I think we actually hooked the laptop to the GPSR three or four times. It's just too hard to read the screen, fiddle with the controls, etc. over the road, and the info is just not presented well. To really use a laptop, you need a copilot, and if you have another person, then you don't really need the laptop. Based on that experience, if I were repeating those travels (oh, please, let me repeat them some day!) I would with no hesitation at all use either a StreetPilot or a GPS V. If you plan to travel widely, you will need some computer to let you download different map sections into the unit. My call would be to buy a StreetPilot, whatever the very nicest one is, with the very best display. I cannot express how much stress we could have avoided if we had had autorouting, and advance warning of turns, ESPECIALLY driving a 40' coach and pulling a toad. I don't know of ANY other GPS receivers except the aftermarket car navigation units that could touch either a SP or a GPS V in terms of offering the feature set you will find useful, and I expect that you'd find that the aftermarket car units are not price competitive even to a SP III and an inexpensive laptop. Final note: I would not consider doing any extensive traveling in a coach without a mapping GPS (with autorouting) especially if pulling a toad. It's just so nice to be able to drive down a street, knowing it's not a dead end that will force you to stop, unhook the dinghy, turn it all around, and then drive out.
  15. quote:Originally posted by sparklehorse:Or maybe he just thought it was funny, which it is. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. There's only one reason to include the guy's geocaching name in the posted email - to publicly humiliate him. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Sometimes a post that seems to be intended solely to humiliate someone is just a post intended to humiliate someone. I understand that you think publicly humiliating people is funny. I'm sorry, I disagree. I think it's pretty sick. I have a pretty well developed sense of humor; but this isn't some sophisticated form of humor, here, this is infantile bullying.
  16. quote:Originally posted by oregone:I just wanted to share this with y'all: That's the full email. He or she didn't say which geocaching log they were offended by. I get these emails all the time, but this is the first time that they weren't specific about what offended them. I just think it's kinda funny. all rights reserved, all wrongs reversed Well, you sure taught him a lesson. Of course, the lesson you were probably trying to teach him was that he's a narrow minded oversensitive prig, and thus a suitable target for public humiliation, and the lesson you actually taught him (and the rest of us) is that you are the sort of person who would happily seek to humiliate someone by posting private email in a public forum - something most people consider pretty rude. Wow! It seems you have met with success unexpected in common hours! Most of us have learned the difference between being witty and doing something rude, obnoxious, and vulgar to see if you can provoke someone, anyone into laughing at you. Maybe it's time for you to see if you have the intelligence and talent you need to graduate to being witty.
  17. If I search for it, and don't find it, then I post a DNF. If everyone did this, people would feel a lot less anxiety about it, because EVERYONE gets stumped some of the time. It's part of the game.
  18. quote:Originally posted by Grimlock:I'm trying to complete http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=12627 cache. Basically, you convert your username to latitude or longitude coordinates and get a partner to go to those coords and snap a pic of your GPS showing the coords. Also, we both get credit for doing the cache. I think this latitude is near the Seattle area: 47 46.56x N (where x is any number between 0 and 9). My username is Grimlock and that translates to 47 46.56_ (the last digit is left empty to allow flexibility). The longitude does not matter. Can someone help? Grimlock The specified latitude lies just a few miles north of my home. I'd be happy to partner up and take the photo for you.
  19. quote: What I'm trying to get at is where the line is. We prohibit caches along active railroad tracks. How is the middle of an active road different? Why? I AM NOT ASKING RHETORICALLY. I want to understand. I would say the difference is that placing caches too close to active railroad tracks is against the law, whereas hiding a cache at a cattle guard on a public road probably isn't. Right now, some friends and I are making plans to log a cache that's up in a tree. Quite literally, perhaps 45 feet up. Naturally, getting up to the cache could easily be dangerous. Our response to this danger is not to say the cache should be archived, but instead make plans to eliminate or reduce the danger (e.g. belay the person climbing). What is it about this particular cache that makes it impossible to mitigate the danger? Could you post people on the road on each side of the cattle guard, to warn approaching traffic? Light a traffic flare and put it on the road on each side, some distance away, to warn the drivers something's up? From other posts, it seems like a simple way to mitigate the danger is to simply search for the cache when there's no heavy traffic going past the spot.
  20. quote:Originally posted by Mr. Snazz:I want to spray paint a few ammo boxes for caches that I'll be placing, and was curious if any of you have tips/suggestions. Specifically, type of paint to use (brand name, etc), pre-paint prep, and anything else that you know on the subject I've tried several different paints, including Rustoleum, cheapo store brand, and Krylon. I think the Krylon camo ultraflat paints work best. Acetone will take the yellow lettering off with far less hassle than sanding it off, using a wire brush, etc. Just beware of the fumes. If the can is not all banged up or rusted, I don't prime it. If it is scratched or rusted, I wire brush the rust off and then prime it before the final paint. I like to paint the inside of the can with either flat white or aluminum paint. It makes it much easier to see what the heck is in the can when you open it up, much nicer and it only takes a moment.
  21. quote:Originally posted by airman730: I'm looking for new ideas and innovations for this great sport. You can either spout regualations like any brainless moron, or you can add to the conversation. Please choose which..... "Not all who wander are lost..." -Tolkien Maybe you are looking for new ideas and innovations for this great sport, I can't tell. But your idea (put a cache in a bar) not only isn't new or innovative, it's been discussed before and soundly rejected for a variety of reasons. And if your response to people telling you this is to call them 'brainless morons' simply because they don't like your idea, you're not seeking a conversation on the subject, you're seeking a bunch of brainless morons who blithely accept your ideas and respond with unreasoning adulation. In other words, you might well be 21 years old, but you still need to grow up. Get out there and do it, and stop insulting people.
  22. quote:Originally posted by Mopar: I think we the hiders need a complete set of guidelines to follow, prominently displayed on the website. The admins need to follow those guidelines when approving caches, not their personal likes or dislikes for a certain type of cache. I know the cache approvers often have a huge amount of caches to review every day, but if they are overworked, then it's time to add more. I'm sure plenty of experienced cachers here would be happy to give a little extra back to the site by reviewing local caches. I agree, and I disagree, and I agree, and then I disagree again. First, I agree that the 'guidelines' need to be tightened up so that there's a more definitive set of criteria. But I disagree that approval of caches should be based on some inflexible application of a set of rules - I'd prefer to believe that the volunteer admins do try hard to exercise their best judgement, and I think that's better than blind adherence to any set of rules we might come up with. And I agree that admins ought to follow the consensus guidelines rather than their own personal preferences. But, while it's not disagreeing with anything written above, I'll point out that, at some level, it's always going to boil down to a personal judgement on the part of the reviewer, so there are limits to this. That's just the way it is, and while we might not like it, short of just allowing ALL caches that are submitted (a very bad idea) there's no way around it. And, I'll point out that there are two complaints - (a) lack of consistency in applying rules and ( problems caused by too much work spread across too few volunteers - and you can either have consistency, or you can add volunteers. Virtually everyone who is currently champing at the bit to be an admin is doing so because they have a personal agenda - they disagree with the current loose 'guidelines' and if they were admins, they'd do things differently. So adding more volunteers will make things worse, not better. The way to get better consistency is to (a) have a more clearly defined set of guidelines, and take steps to make sure it's enforced. If a particular volunteer admin keeps approving virtual caches that don't meet the guidelines, then perhaps they should be 'unvolunteered'. Maybe approval should be done on a multi-admin basis, where it takes more than one admin to get a cache approved - perhaps one local and one non-local admin. -Paul
  23. quote:Originally posted by Team StitchesOnQuilts: On the other hand, that sort of proves the point. The person who got yelled at wasn't the kind of person to come and tear up fences and destroy foliage. He was a reasonable person who just accidentally went the wrong way. Your posting shows one possible reason for the landowner to get his knickers in a twist, but I honestly don't think the original poster was a vandal. Treating him like one seems a little over the top. Shannah There are lots of reasons why the landowner might view someone who just walks onto the property as ripping him off. Suppose he sells hunting rights to people, and thought they were poaching? Suppose he'd had people wandering through and harvesting stuff (one of the common trespasses in the PNW where I live is people hunting for mushrooms). Maybe he'd spotted someone poaching and also spotted a similar vehicle to the one he blocked in. Maybe someone has been trapping on his land and he thought the trespasser was checking the trap line. Maybe someone dumped a trash on his land and a similar vehicle was spotted nearby. I could go on like this for hours. The point is there are LOTS of excellent reasons why the landowner might have been very upset, and it's impossible to know if he had a real reason or he was just in a bad mood. But calling the landowner a jerk just because he defended his property rights is just way out of line. There are just too many legitimate reasons for the landowner to be plenty angry for that.
×
×
  • Create New...