Don_J

Hi Folks, I lost Internet access to my community in late October, but I am finally back. One of the first logs that I read is Rocky Peak, which is the second oldest cache in Ventura Co, CA This guy put himself through the ringer to achieve a Challenge cache that most of us locals can't even think of because we own sedans and not trucks.

Yes. Yes. First, I think the seeker should offer to pay for it. If they don't offer, then personally, I wouldn't ask them to. Whether or not the CO should ask them depends entirely on the container, as some are destined to get broken quickly anyway. You did the right thing by admitting it and apologizing. However apologies are only words, and actions speak louder. If it was a crappy container, I probably would not want to pay anything, but would anyhow. Unfortunately there are plenty that would just walk away and not say anything at all. I wouldn't say the seeker should be responsible for unintended damage to a container. Depending on just what the container is I think there are many situations when the hider should put it down to experience and think of how their cache will look and how people will interact with it. I remember caching with a friend, and hearing a crunch. It turned out the hider had hidden a polystyrene (styrofoam for US readers) fake rock under a small pile of leaves. Not surprisingly when it wasn't visible people didn't take any care not to step on it, so one of the first finders pretty much destroyed it. I certainly wouldn't offer to pay for another one - it was a badly thought out hide in a silly position. If the cache looked like a piece of trash left lying around the CO should perhaps be thankful that the cache survived the process at all and wasn't rounded up and thrown in the trash by a well meaning cacher who logged a DNF but did a bit of CITO while they were there. All true. A ground level cache should be made to survive pokes with hiking sticks as well as being stepped on. While I don't think that a seeker should be held accountable by the cache owner for damage, they should accept the responsibility for their own actions and offer to pay, depending on the circumstances. There is a difference here. Accountability should be offered to, but not demanded from. Some are lousy designs, while having the seeker offering to pay would be the best thing, but having the cache owner asking to pay would not. Emphasis on the underlined. From the log, "I finally took one more look and decided I was going to open it one way or another. I did but sadly damaged the container in doing so." I think that once you have made that decision, you've pretty much bought the cache.

No.

What browser are you using? I'm getting a blank popup window using FF 31.0 with Windows 7 Pro.

Just to note, Toz and I have have spent many miles on the trail, as well as hours at our local meet and greets. We have great debates as we we don't always have the same opinions of what we read on these forums. I posted before reading Tos's last post, and was surprised that we basically made the same point. He did a better job, in my opinion.

Yeah, by sucking so badly nobody would care even a little bit about challenge caches. Not a good way to solve the problem. My solution is to make any new challenge caches true mystery caches, in which the posted coordinates are not correct and there is some trivial puzzle to solve to get the correct ones. Thus, nobody who finds the cache could possibly not have read the cache page, and the whole issue is moot. And, for your information, no, the entire point of geocaching is not to give people as many meaningless finds as you can possibly cram down their throats. By making Challenge caches true mysteries/puzzles, (most of what I can't solve), you exclude me from doing the Challenge, or at least logging that particular cache. But, that is okay with me. I have learned long ago that I don't have to log every cache that has been placed. If I choose to find your Challenge cache that is placed at the posted coordinates without completing the actual challenge, I'll post a note and thank you for the experience, however, I would hate to complete a Challenge and then not be able to log my accomplishment because the puzzle was too hard for me to solve. I have no hopes of ever completing a Fizzy Challenge, yet If I am ever up in the area, I would love to hike to the original cache, find it and log a note thanking the owner for the experience. It's the entire idea that I have to be rewarded by another point for everything that I do in this game that puts me off, especially since most caches have a free point sitting .1mi away. As a side note, I have complained for years about mystery caches, mostly because of a local cacher that has placed several difficult puzzles. My concern has always been that I can't solve them, don't know where they are and am reluctant to hide caches in the same areas. The reaction to my complaints has always been, "If you don't like puzzles, don't seek them", or, "we all play the game our own way, blah, blah, blah". I am simply befuddled as to why people feel that even though the guidelines say that Challenge Caches have special considerations, that are different from the normal guidelines for other physically caches, they feel that they have a right to log them even though they haven't met those considerations. Of course, the simplest solution is to create a separate cache type and icon. It should have been done long ago.

Create a new PQ for your area and under Attribute to include, click the second icon twice, (dog). This will put a red slash across the icon, meaning that your new PQ will only contain caches where the cache owner has indicated that dogs are not allowed. Go to gsak.net and download and install the program, then start GSAK on the Tools menu, choose Options, then the advanced tab. On the top right corner, make sure that "also check for patches" is checked. Back on the Tools menu, choose, "Check for newer version of GSAK", and allow it to install the latest stable patch. Restart GSAK and on the Geocaching.com menu, choose "Update User Information...", check both of the boxes and OKAY. Back to the Geocaching.com menu, choose, "Get another access token" and follow the prompts to log onto Geocaching.com. This grants GSAK access to the web site. Again on the Geocaching.com menu, choose "Download Pocket Queries...", select the PQ that you created for no dogs and just leave all of the settings at their default. You should now have a database filled with caches that do not allow dogs. Last step is back on the Geocaching.com menu, choose, "Add to Bookmark List...", select Ignore list and "all in current filter". Finally, set up your basic PQ's on Geocaching.com to exclude caches on your ignore list As time passes and new caches get placed, you may need to run the no dogs PQ, download it to GSAK and push it back to your Ignore list. Edit to add, while this may sound complicated, steps 2-6 only need to be done once.

Don J, I would really appreciate step by step instructions. GSAK is still new for me. It's late, but I'll try to put something together tomorrow afternoon.

Unfortunately, Walt is correct. This can't be done in bulk on the web site, but it is a simple process with GSAK. I can give step by step instructions if the interest still exists.

The games that are played for Challenge Caches are amusing. "Find ten caches that have the word "copper" in their name". The next day, cacher "A" places three urban micros with the the word "copper" in their name, cacher "B", who is their best friend FTFs all of them as well as the challenge. Unfortunately, I don't see the word "integrity" anywhere in the guidelines.

Subject starts with "New " and Body contains "Published by: " didn’t work? I'll try it, thanks.

I say it again, in case it was missed. Lackeys, please, please, please consider putting a [NEW] tag in the subject line for new cache notifications. All of my filters started working again when you reverted to the other bracketed tags, but I simply can't get the new cache notifications to filter in their current configuration.

DUH! Instead of testing in on several devices, perhaps they should have tested it it on several customers. Groundspeak seems to live for the moment where they can spring this great surprises on on us. More times then not, it's a total flop. It seems that marketing is way ahead of engineering. I read these forums right before I go to sleep, then I dream of Dilbert.

I read the earlier post about those that lived near the Canadian border that complained about this and really didn't understand the issues. Now that I have not been so consumed with with work, it's clear. While not on an International border, i live one mile away from a mountain range that separates me from the next valley, an area that I am nor really concerned about. I have a "Local Activity" notification set up and used to simply delete anything that said 2 mi N/W, or greater, because I knew it was on the other side of the mountain. Now, if I'm not sure what cache it it is, I have to open it in my browser.

For me this was one of the things that led me to believe people like me just aren't the target market any more. I don't want to use a smartphone to just ask "what's near me right now", I want to go out for the day and go places where I want to use something more rugged than a smartphone. I want to save my smartphone batteries in case I need to make a phone call, rather than running them down with endless searches for "what's next" and liking each cache on faceache within a nanosecond of finding it. If Groundspeak wants to leave their long-standing customers behind because they'd rather geocaching was a smartphone game than a game played with anything containing a GPS that's their call. Personally I think it will drive geocaching even further into the lowest-common-denominator than it has already gone, but it's not my company. It certainly doesn't give me any reason to consider reactivating my now defunct premium membership. I know that we have been at odds on many, many issues, but I am in total agreement here. I'm really starting to wonder about my signature line. It seems like soon, it may just be a smartphone game, and nothing else. Of course, the one day wonders are not going to be hiding a lot of caches, and the ones that they do hide will map out onto their neighbors roofs, so the business model seems flawed.

As an experienced cacher and GC.com web site user, I'm not used to posting questions in this forum. I usually answer the questions. Since the Notification system changed, I simply cannot find a way to have new caches filter into my "New" folder in my Windows Live Mail Client. Regardless of the criteria that I choose for my filter, the notification messages for new caches remain in my Inbox. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I'll leave the commentary to the new system to the other forums, and would appreciate that others do as well.

How can I do this?

Added cache owner to the email. Personally, I think it's easier to read. Not sure why folks think it's more difficult. That's like asking a guy in a wheelchair why he is having trouble walking up the stairs. I suffer from low grade red/green color blindness. A small light green font on a white background is very hard to read. Your attitude is offensive to me+. FWIW, when I'm driving, I only know to go or stop by the position of of the light on the signal. From 1000' back, I can not discern the color being displayed. WTF? Offensive? Your being "offended" is absurd to me. Light green font? I don't know what YOU are seeing, but I am seeing a dark brown/almost black font on a pale beige background. High contrast. I'm using the Windows Live Mail client, and seeing a tiny light green font on a white background. (Actually, I'm barely seeing it).

Since no has chimed in a week. Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that new Challenge have to allow, (the underlined), under the newest guidelines. Older challenges rules are grandfathered in.

What areas will you be visiting? I'm sure some of us can direct you the right forum, or maybe help you though PM. If you are coming to Los Angeles, I can offer several options.

I haven't, but the real question is why does Groundspeak depend on third party apps and scripts to make their site useable? Seems like they would have enough pride to provide a useful product that their users and customers like. But apparently I have missed an important memo somewhere along the line. I have to throw a +1 to this. (I think the first time I have down this on the forum). I have no problem using GSAK to manipulate the data that Groundspeak provides, but having to use scripts on the web site to revert "improvements" is frustrating. The "grey icons" were horrible as every icon looked exactly the same to me. Thank God for the Lil Devil's script. It saved Geocaching for me. I'm not sure what's going to happen now.

Why should it concern Groundspeak what we think? When you enjoy a 99.9%+ market share you can afford not to have the slightest concerns about your service or how your users perceive you. The reason why your company is concerned is there are probably six or seven others that would like your customers business and would like the opportunity to please your customers. Until some alternate site gains traction and until Groundspeak understands they might lose their position nothing is going to change. Until Teddy Roosevelt had a conversation with J.D. Rockefeller he was not concerned about his business practices or what the folks that wanted to buy kerosene thought. I totally agree with you. Our company is the largest in the industry. They do have competitors, so they do every thing in their power to retain their customers and to have their customers recommend them to their friends and associates, as new customers. At this point, I have no desire to recruit new cachers and recommend that they become premium members. Changing our submittable form. Changing the notifications. No Feedback. I think I need to change my signature. It's now just a smartphone game.

I just listed the main advantages as I see them a few posts above, so you're confirming a suspicion I'm starting to have that people affected negatively are so emotionally wrapped up in this, they can't see the good side even when it's laid out in front of them. I think HTML in e-mail is the sign of simplistic thinking and a desire for control, but at least I can see the advantages, too. Kinda surprised to hear you say this change is so bad for the disabled. Normally HTML puts the text in an environment where there are more tools available for adjusting the display to suit the viewer. Irf I adjust my email client to make these email comfortable, it breaks all of my other emails, so it becomes necessary to adjust it back. It seems silly that I should have to change me setting to read Groundspeak mail, then change it back to read all of my other mail.

Added cache owner to the email. Personally, I think it's easier to read. Not sure why folks think it's more difficult. That's like asking a guy in a wheelchair why he is having trouble walking up the stairs. I suffer from low grade red/green color blindness. A small light green font on a white background is very hard to read. Your attitude is offensive to me+. FWIW, when I'm driving, I only know to go or stop by the position of of the light on the signal. From 1000' back, I can not discern the color being displayed.

I think 95% of the people think it's a big improvement because I'm impartial, so I see what ways it's a big improvement. You asked, so I tried to explain it to you, but you're wrapped up in how it's failed you, you can't see the advantages even now that I've pointed them out to you. Can you please explain the improvements? No one else on this forum, including the Lackeys can seem to do so.