orange

I liked the idea of logging entries on release. Also couldn't the cache find page be modified to show the bugs currently in it. If you picked one up you could check a box next to it and put in the tag number next to check box and your cache log would also be your TB log. Then you could just modify your TB log later.

I would like it if the cache page could have an entry for parking coordinates and that these could also be downloaded for EasyGPS. Maybe use PK#### to go along with the GC####. I always try to give a parking location and many others seem to do this also. But it would be great if that location could get into my GPS as easily as the cache location. Thanks for considering it.

quote:Originally posted by Lazyboy & Mitey Mite: again it's freedom of choice and if you don't like easy caches or ugly caches or caches too close together, then stay away from them. I like every cache I've found. I haven't had a bad experience yet. An easy cache doesn't mean that it isn't an enjoyable cache. I agree it is freedom of choice but if putting stash numbers lead people to put more caches out that aren't significantly different than others then this would be a bad thing IMHO. Example: Easy cache in small park. I have never been to it before or never for geocaching, then I will find it enjoyable. If another cache is put in same park but not at anything significantly new from other location then I would not find this particularly enjoyable but may still find it, just to confirm my thoughts about cache being just a copy of original experience.

quote:Originally posted by BassoonPilot:But I have already visited areas that were,in my opinion, "cached out," having one or two well-thought out caches and several "dump and runs." Some cachers want quality (locations), others quantity (of caches). I agee with BP. I like to visit scenic and new areas or something of interest. That is a good cache to me. Everyone is too hung up on the numbers. If you wanted to remove the finder's number to just the profile it is fine with me. However this number is of most interest to me. It gives perspective when reading find logs. I agree with someone earlier if the stashed count was put on the top of actual cache page then it would give perspective on who hid this cache but it has little use in reading find logs.

quote:Originally posted by Gwho: thats fine. i respect that. how about having the option of choosing the format we prefer? You can choose the current format, I'd take the format I suggested. Keeps everyone happy IMHO. Yes options are good. I wouldn't mine having one email with all the logs and links together. I just like reading that most current log in the email I find it easier.

quote:Originally posted by Gwho: thats fine. i respect that. how about having the option of choosing the format we prefer? You can choose the current format, I'd take the format I suggested. Keeps everyone happy IMHO. Yes options are good. I wouldn't mine having one email with all the logs and links together. I just like reading that most current log in the email I find it easier.

quote:Originally posted by Gwho:Also, is it possible to have one email generated for all the caches that have gotten logs, with a link to them all. rather then an email with the log in it? WUHOO TEAMGWHO! I like getting the logs for things I watch and own with the text from the log in it. I don't always want to follow the link to the real pages. It is quicker to just read the emails. My two cents.

This is a good idea. I know I left a TB at the Watchung Walk a few months ago and it is MIA. I had emailed the owner about it but they havn't changed the bug in anyway. I hate that the cache shows a TB that I left there and I know it is not there. I have thought about grabbing it but then it will show that it is in my hands which is also untrue. But if I could drop it in a MIA or Lost TB cache I would do it.

Congratulations. And it was fun meeting you at the NJ/NY picnic.

Congratulations! And thanks for the geocaching magnet I retrieved from PointPLMD cache near High Point, NJ.

quote:Originally posted by Jeremy Irish: Fixed it. Jeremy Irish Groundspeak - The Language of Location Thanks Jeremy!

Has anyone else noticed that when you upload photo for benchmark it goes outside the grey logged box. Is this a problem with just first log entry? Any one know. See KV6888 for my find.

I see a new disclaimer has been added about private property. This is good since in a previous post I mentioned at least two near me are on the grounds of a Lucent facility, Bell Labs. I know they would not legally want me wandering around looking for benchmarks. Also some are NJ Transit right of way and here too I am not going to go looking for those. Also the ones at the Garden State Toll Plaza. No way I am stopping and being reported on the traffic report.

Some of the ones I read on search page near me are most likely on private property. Two are listed as being on Bell Labs property in the descriptions. I don't think Lucent security is going to let me go searching around their grounds with a digital camera around my neck. Also have seen two posted that are at the toll plaza on the Garden State Parkway. Wonder what the traffic reporter will say about me as I stop my car and get out to look for the metal disk. Some of these should obviously not be looked for.

Okay, I may try this but frankly I don't get the appeal. Looking at some near me I have a good idea where they are. Near the railroad station, on top of the hill, along the railroad tracks. So let me see: I go hunt down this metal disk, or nail, or rock. Which may or may not be there and no one is maintaining it. If I find it I take a picture. I load it up on website and write about my adventure. Or I geocache: I go hunt down this box. I open it up. Gee, this feels like a surprise, what is in there? May be I take something and leave something. I log my visit and see who else has been here. Now I visit a nice park (hopefully). Then I write about my adventure on the website and see how it compares to others. If I stumble on a benchmark I may log them but I'll stick to the fun of geocaching.

I like a cache with a hike which has a scenic view or an enjoyable walk thru the woods. Multi sound fun but I never know for sure how far I am going for. It would be a downer to abandon one after doing a stage or two. My only multi was really done as a two stage single cache and was set-up that way too. (Copper Mine One and Copper Mine Two).

quote:Originally posted by Harrald: Will I be able to get a wheelchair there? The site is right off the end of the parking lot with gravel trails to Brian's area. It is a short distance (maybe 100 feet) but pushing a wheel chair over gravel may not work to well.

I visited the picnic spot when I went to Feargus II on Saturday and it is a nice location off by itself. I believe we will need to spread out to some of the surrounding tables. It is looking like jungle green and I will make it to this event. If so jungle green will be making some macaroni salad to bring. I saw a number of dogs and they were all leashed so it is definitely dog friendly.

I agree hint should scale with difficulty. For a 1 or 2 the hint should help you zero right onto it. Anything above it can just be additional helpful info. quote:Originally posted by BassoonPilot: I like to read the "latest logs" a couple of times a day, and one thing that bothers me is people complaining about coordinates not being precise (meaning, within 5 feet) ... it seems to me a lot of the newer generation of cachers don't want to put any effort into the search at all. For me, that's reason enough for limiting the information in cache descriptions and encrypted clues. I will admit to being a bit of a complainer about the coordinates. I think they should be as accurate as possible. So if I see over 50 foot difference from where I found cache I usually will put my coordinates if the accuracy is indicating less than 25 feet.

I agree hint should scale with difficulty. For a 1 or 2 the hint should help you zero right onto it. Anything above it can just be additional helpful info. quote:Originally posted by BassoonPilot: I like to read the "latest logs" a couple of times a day, and one thing that bothers me is people complaining about coordinates not being precise (meaning, within 5 feet) ... it seems to me a lot of the newer generation of cachers don't want to put any effort into the search at all. For me, that's reason enough for limiting the information in cache descriptions and encrypted clues. I will admit to being a bit of a complainer about the coordinates. I think they should be as accurate as possible. So if I see over 50 foot difference from where I found cache I usually will put my coordinates if the accuracy is indicating less than 25 feet.

Thanks for doing the work, Brian. Right now I don't know if I can make this. But please pencil in the late afternoon / early evening for a possible Part II on July 27. Look for a special event post at the beginning of July.

I personally will not ever hunt a locationless cache. For me the game is to go to the same place that everyone else also visited and not a thousand different places that 1 person went to. I have no problem with virtual or webcam caches because everyone is supposed to go to the same place. However everyone must play by their own rules. quote:Originally posted by smoochnme: A web-cam cache just showed up as being closest to my home coordinates. Now I will never be able to have my first search page as all finds. To top it off, the placer of this cache is from Georgia, Not Pennsylvania! I agree with your thoughts on this. I have seen another post where someone had asked to be able to mark caches that they do not intend to hunt as a "DO NOT SHOW" status. If this feature or a feature to only show the cache types you want to see, then you could still find the first 25 closest.

I personally will not ever hunt a locationless cache. For me the game is to go to the same place that everyone else also visited and not a thousand different places that 1 person went to. I have no problem with virtual or webcam caches because everyone is supposed to go to the same place. However everyone must play by their own rules. quote:Originally posted by smoochnme: A web-cam cache just showed up as being closest to my home coordinates. Now I will never be able to have my first search page as all finds. To top it off, the placer of this cache is from Georgia, Not Pennsylvania! I agree with your thoughts on this. I have seen another post where someone had asked to be able to mark caches that they do not intend to hunt as a "DO NOT SHOW" status. If this feature or a feature to only show the cache types you want to see, then you could still find the first 25 closest.

quote:Originally posted by Irvingdog: All you need is a window seat. I was in Vegas last weekend. Max flight speed, 551.1 MPH, altitude, 31,122. Fun, fun, fun. "hey, what river/city/lake is that". http://www.hunting-pictures.com/members/Irvingdog/boo2.jpg I stand corrected. I will have to get a window seat and try this the next time I fly. Thanks

Unless you are going to open a window and stick your hand out and hold your GPS out there, I don't think it will work. The satellite signals will be too weak to penetrate an airplane skin so your GPS will never acquire any satellites. GPS in aircraft need to have an external antenna.