svladcjelli

you should have a free streaming copy of the film, it can only help your cause

Waymarking.com is unused, I would not bother posting something there. No one else seems to log finds there either. The community at large does not use it, so it is useless to the community. Earthcaches ARE virtual caches, no logbook to sign. The 'exam' part, I have yet to see one that requires actual knowledge or research, basically a pic of you there is all that is needed. There is no reason to have moved virtuals off. They were put in boring spots? Kinda like most of the caches we now go find? If gc.com were only consistent and could explain why they do what they do, these issues would not bother me at all. It p|ss3s me off that people think it is perfectly fine for gc.com to do whatever they want, dadgum the users. This sport is nothing without the users, it is a social network, one that depends on users for ALL content. gc.com does very little, they maintain a website and database, the critical thing is the amount of users they snagged. I think they have done a reasonable job of the technical side, but ignoring user wishes and just doing whatever you want when you depend on your users so entirely is just not good for the sport, for the users, or for the company doing it. We are all volunteers making this site what it is (and many of us even pay for that privilege). Treat your volunteers with respect, and listen to them.

Totally agree about decrypting in JS being hard. But one of the alternate shades of gray is to send the hint both encrypted and decrypted, and use JS to reveal one or the other. This should be just as easy as refreshing the entire page. In fact, this should make it easy to encrypt/decrypt all encryptable text on the page at once. Not only would it be faster than refreshing, it would in some cases be faster than the previous JS implementation (which sometimes ran for many seconds when someone put many paragraphs into the hint). Easier AND faster. Edward Umm decrypting this text in javascript is absolutely simple and it is so ridiculous this is even being discussed as a 'problem'. Some of us know the reality of this sort of thing.

people arguing ratings systems don't work obviously have not seen the "web2.0" revolution happening. After a hundred people vote on something, anomalous results tend to get flattened out and a consensus appears. Ratings are a no-brainer afaic.

have you seen this? http://sigitem.com/ If you wanted your own, it could be done pretty easily in something like drupal... I am building a caching site on top of drupal atm.

cough *use linux* cough

DNF does NOT mean cache needs the owner to go check on it, there is a whole other type of log for that. Multiple DNFs should be (and in reality are) commonplace. There are a ton of reasons one could not make it to a cache site, any of which could be interesting to the next person or to the owner, and which at least tell a story. The problem is that people do now filter by too many DNFs since the other shall-not-be-named logtype is underused by some and abused by others. For me, if 3+ experienced cachers have DNF'd and say they have actively searched, if I don't find it, I will very likely drop the NM-bomb.

Hiked alot in bear country, and had a few encounters. Be smart, be aware of what is around you, and you will be fine. Doesn't stop me for a second, and I carry no protection with me. I do tend to be talking while walking, as well as making plenty of hiking noise, I doubt I could surprise anything hanging around in the woods.

for all those saying you will not log DNFs if you cannot search for cache due to poison ivy, wrong side of river, muggles, fallen trees or closed roads... This is exactly the kind of info I WANT as a searcher! I don't want to wade through poison ivy, or at least I would like to know so I can suit up properly... If there are tons of muggles, maybe I should go at night, or wear a fake moustache... DNFs are as much for searchers after you as for owners. Especially nowadays with everyone just logging 'tftc' on finds, it seems the good info usually (almost always) comes from DNFs (which in my area are few and far between).

in Montreal, Canada, guess we are lucky! 5m = 454 10m = 1262 15m = 2108 20m = 3204 25m = 3630 I have alot left to find lol

Good point, in the case I am thinking of, the residence is onsite, and the bedroom would be less than 100m from cache site. I ain't gonna police anyone, just won't go.

guess I really want to minimize encounters with property owners, so this was the major reason for asking. I will avoid church caches unless it explicitly states permission was sought and granted.

I always log them, but have never seen anyone ask cachers to log them in the cache description, maybe that is the first thing to try...

gives me hope, but not much I gotta stick with the TBs instead of geocoins, TBs only seem to go missing when the whole cache goes away.

so, part 2, do I just ignore caches which are on church property and say nothing about permission, or do I report them, or ask if permission was granted? I know our reviewer has seen and approved them, so perhaps the hider had permission, but it is not indicated anywhere. I won't go find them, but tons of other people do. I don't want to be 'that guy' really, and don't care too much beyond the fact it could be a black eye for gc.com in general if a problem happened, and also that it seems a slippery slope, let them be hidden there, schools as well (there are a few in my area, which do not specifically say permission was granted), why not just hide them anywhere you want? If I feel a place is private property, or if I am not sure even, I usually turn around.

What do you think? Is a church property a valid place to hide a cache without approval of the 'owners'? Are there owners? From my perspective churches are not public property, but caches are regularly hidden on church property with no note claiming permission. I personally have a problem tramping on church property without knowing the legality of my movements. I tried to find something in the cache hiding guidelines, but I can't even see the section about getting permission for caches on private property (?)... In fact all I see (at http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx) is "By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location.", which seems slightly less stern than the last time I checked them.

couple of things to try: - gpsbabel can do the transfer... I just checked and you can find it in synaptic package manager if you are running the current ubuntu (gutsy 7.10) -you could try running gsak in WINE. You will need to install wine. I run gsak in virtualbox personally and do the transfer through that, but on the eeepc this would be pretty slow. I have an eeepc as well, like it alot so far. I run ubuntu on it too If I were you I would export the gpx to html or other format, upload waypoints to garmin, and consult against html pages when necessary. Pretty much what I have done with pda and laptops running linux for a while now. Oh ya, I have a 60cx. Eeerie.

1. They don't test new code before launching it? No QA, load tests, etc etc ad nauseum? 2. What am I paying for again? 3. They have no throttles? They can not selectively disable parts of the page under heavy load? 4. Why is there not a boatload of servers running this? Don't say cost, lots of free websites have far more traffic and calculations, and we pay a nice fee for this ($11/yr MORE than flickr, and think about the processing power, storage and BW behind that). 5. 60 second+ page load times are untenable. I will lightly speculate that the code chosen to write the web app is at least partly to blame. It makes GC.com look like an amateur wrote it, and now, even if they have the best sys admins and net admins, they simply cannot keep this hog running properly. I don't mean this as an insult, and I guess you are pretty much stuck with it now, but I bet lots of folks wish they had thought through the architecture more before launch. I won't even start on security, but I have grave doubts about the sanctity of our personal info, perhaps people should keep this in mind.

be careful with those chanterelles... http://www.nemf.org/files/lincoff/beginner..._lookalike.html Deadly poisonous look alikes out there..

aqueous level maintainer in national level foodstuffs industry. ok, I fill people's water glasses at a restaurant sometimes I webmaster things too...

all I can say is you will feel you knew nothing about rechargeables after you get one of these http://www.amazon.com/Maha-Powerex-MH-C900...r/dp/B000NLUSLM Bring all your batteries back to full capacity, I think the unit paid for itself in the first month by enabling me to see which batteries were really toast, and which needed refreshing. You will instantly be a battery expert. PS: Maha batteries are excellent as well...

WTH happens to a geocoin listed in an event? One of my coins is listed as being 'in' an event that happened 2 weeks ago, where is this actual coin? WTF is happening with this, it is a joke. I will never, ever, log an event (or a cache not listed on gc.com) as a 'found'. This is really really sad, I feel bad for you all who have done this.

Huh, I just found a crappy cache award the other day and emailed the person who dropped it to tell them they did not log it into cache... then as I am examining it, I see there is no tracking number... Guess I need to find a really crappy cache to put it in! How do these stay in rotation though? I imagine most people would just keep it if they saw there is no tracking (people keep my coins anyways that are obviously trackable).

Start carrying a pen I have forced myself to make this something I must have, camera, gps, pen, ok let's go. Pictures I think are ok, but making any sort of mark is best. I have sometimes left cash (twonie) as well as taking a pic and marking somehow, then mentioned it all in my log I have returned to caches just to sign them.

you know what is awesome? He logged this as a FIND.