Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by MrFRjr

  1. Just to provide some counter balance - I'm not having any issues with Windows Vista Home on IE or Windows XP with Firefox.


    Love the new maps - sorry guys.

    ???? I don't believe it! These maps suck!!!

    Thank you for saying exactly what I've been wanting to say for a while.

  2. I think the Google Maps are great.

    Really ??!!

    Are you serious? They are so bad and in some ways useless or unuseable. The old maps worked fine. You could wizz around without waiting forever for the maps to refresh, it wouldn't lock up, you could access cache pages in a reasonable amount of time. You could easily build a bookmark list. The cache list on the side of the page didn't have the caches listed in a totally random order. It only listed 20(?) caches at a time but the others were just a click away. I think GC.com should be embarrassed of these maps. I thought updates were supposed to improve things, not...... well, you know. :(:(:grin::lol::lol:

  3. I think having so many caches on the map at one time really bogs things down. Once you zoom out a couple clicks, the maps become unusable. I liked it better with just 20 at a time because the maps moved so much better. Plus it's not like you couldn't get the rest of the caches on the map. They were just a click away.

  4. I think my cache GC16BTQ

    shows perfectly one of my problems with the new maps - anyone just from the map want to tell me where it is???

    Is this comment in jest? Zoom out and you can see it is in the Atlantic just off the Scotland coast.


    It get's stuck on "requesting geocaches..."............ For me at least

  5. If you can let us know what it was that you liked about the old maps, we can try to make these better


    :laughing: Elias

    The old maps allowed me to see which caches are on one of my bookmark lists.

    I prefer using the bookmark list instead of the regular PQ and the old maps made it very handy to do it.

    Now I think I'll have to open each cache page to see if they're on my list. :laughing: or re-bookmark everything in an area to make sure I have everything.

  6. <snippage>


    Thank you to the people at Groundspeak who are trying to fix the slow service. Best of luck in making the transfer! Here's hoping that it all goes off without a hitch :lol:

    I have met Jeremy and a number of the lackeys and I can assure you that they are as a group totally unsympathetic to the plight of the downtrodden I'm almost positive I've heard Jeremy say "Well, let them eat cake."

    Sounds like he needs some competition.

  7. The whining is thick in here.

    30 bucks is a bargain-but we could charge a whining surcharge...Or a poor sport penality.

    I think I just go back to reading logs.


    Yes,30 bucks is a good/fair price for what you get....when you get it.

    If someone gives you something for free but it doesn't work,is that a good deal?

    I don't think the 30 bucks is the issue here, the issue is a malfunctioning site.

    It's like having a Rolls Royce that leaves you stranded once a week,get it fixed and you're stylin' but as it is,it's a pile.

  8. Is this issue really being addressed with any urgency? :sad::(:ph34r:

    I think the fact that Jeremy hasn't been in the forums at all for several weeks speaks volumes. It tells me that he is working hard to fix the problem.


    Would you rather have TPTB sitting around spending their time apologizing in the forum, or working on fixing the problem?


    I would much rather have TPTB fixing than sitting

  9. This is getting really bad. Do I have to wait until Monday to log my finds because the site can't handle the load?!! Then what happens when Monday fills up?

    It's been going on for quite a while now.

    Is this issue really being addressed with any urgency? :(:ph34r::sad:

  10. How many PQs do you have saved on your PQ page?


    I have many, but haven't quite reached the limit of 40 . . . although I have in the past when preparing for a road trip.


    You are entitled to run five PQs per day . . . although I rarely run that many.

    Woo hoo!! Figured it out.

    I had 40 due to me not having the queries deleted after running.

    So I manually deleted them and now I'll check the "delete after running once" box/bubble and see how that works.

    Confidence is high!! :anitongue:

  11. I tried to submit a PQ today and got this


    "You have reached the maximum number of Pocket Queries for this account."


    I haven't been doing much GCing lately so this is a surprise to me. Now that I think about it,I tried to PQ a week or 2 ago and I got the same thing.

    I'm going to be needing a PQ in less than a week so if someone could help me solve this issue, I would be very appreciative.


  12. Wow, this thread is like a final exam question for training new forum moderators.


    I'm going to use my "boot people out of the thread" technique. The following posters may post elsewhere but not in this thread anymore:


    jerrytcher - Godwin's Law violation

    MrFRjr - apologist for Godwin's Law violation

    FishPOET - personal attack / respect violation

    ShowStop - off topic violation


    Those remaining in the thread are welcome to discuss the use and misuse of the scuba attribute in a respectful manner.

    I would think I was more in agreement with Jerr than an apologist ;)
  13. I've kind of been following the thread and went both ways on this until someone mentioned what it takes to get things ready to scuba. I have dived and know it isn't just a matter of walking out the door.


    That said, I enjoy a good liar's cache, however mis-using the attributes I have not seen before. Grant it, I think the attributes are for the most part useless (IMHO) I can see someone using them for scuba and they become useful. Most do i through the description and ratings.


    Anyone can set up any bookmark they want. While Clayjar still would have had to drive a long distance to get to the nearest one and, yes, he could go through the maps to find out if water was even near-by, why should he have to go to all that trouble? Doing it once or twice may have been funny, but, come on, get a little more creative with the humor. :rolleyes:


    Of course, it takes about 30 seconds to read the cache page, check the map for water at the cache site, AND email the owner to double check the attribute. If I was going to plan a whole day and journey around a cache or two, I would CERTAINLY confirm the attributes, scuba or any other. Common Sense should prevail, not attribute nazis


    huh. amazing that godwin's law took so long to kick in.


    let's see...


    people who want the attributes to be listed correctly; the people who brought you death camps. yeah, those seem roughly equivalent. good job on that one. nice piece of reasoning.


    First of all I sure most people know what someone means when they say ----nazi. They're not talking about WWII Germans.

    Secondly, Jerrytcher is right in that with google earth and other programs, it's not too hard to doublecheck the validity of some attributes.

    " If I was going to plan a whole day and journey around a cache or two, I would CERTAINLY confirm the attributes, scuba or any other. Common Sense should prevail"

    I agree. Do your homework.

    Remember, Proper prior planning prevents poor performance.

  • Create New...