Jump to content

Don_J

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    4995
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Don_J

  1. Interesting idea. I have 246 points in reserve and that number seems to be growing. I have awarded almost 400 favorites, but quite a few are definitively worthy of a ten pointer.
  2. New PQs go to the top of the queue and are run quickly. If you try to run it again, it goes to the bottom of the queue. If you look at your PQ list, you'll see a column labeled "Copy". If you click the icon in that column for a PQ, you get a new PQ with same criteria. You can then edit it to correct the criteria and select today and save it. It goes back to the top of the queue and should run quickly.
  3. An unpublished cache is not part of the game and not part of the database. You don't need to filter it out. It does not show up on the map. Another example, if I find a letterbox that's not listed on GC, I don't expect it to be listed on the GC site. And I don't expect to record my AtlasQuest letterbox finds on the GC site. But if someone lists it on GC and I find it, I expect to be able to include it in my list of found caches. I wasn't addressing that. I was addressing the fact that it's no big deal that I found a cache that I couldn't log online, and I have no need to obsess over the fact that I may have found more caches than my smiley count indicates.
  4. Well, that's my point.. I can find them physically... it's just a shame that my smiley count doesn't equal my correct amount of finds, but rather it is a score that is a sum of how many finds I have of caches that I happen to be qualified for, plus how many virtuals, plus how many events, etc. that winds up being a rather meaningless number showing under your name by your logs. If someone (for this argument, let's assume someone not a geocacher who you're explaining geoaching to) asks you how many finds you have and you answer ("well, I have 271 smileys, which includes 240 traditional caches I have found, plus 12 multi-caches, 16 events I've gone to, 2 webcam caches and 1 Earthcache, but it doesn't include 3 challenge caches that I have logged as a note, but can't 'count' because I haven't completed the requirements of." "Uh, okay, well, how many caches have you actually found?" "255" When you think of how many finds you have do you think of the smiley score, or the actual number of caches that you have found? Which do you think of when you're thinking of milestones? That's my point, I do care about them, but I'd care a lot more if they were an accurate reflection of my amount of finds. Seriously? I found and signed the log on an unpublished cache that I stumbled upon. Years later, it still hasn't been published so I can't log it and get my smiley. What should I do? Obsess over it until I go crazy, or just realize it's part of the game? If this bothers you so much, don't go looking for the challenge caches until you are qualified. It's really that simple. Trying to follow this thread is crazy. So much effort trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
  5. Not a job, of course, but, yes, I think he spends most of this time on it. Sometimes I think he must be doing lots of park&grabs, and I've been there a couple of times to see him drive up, jump out, sign the log, and drive off, all within a minute or two while I'm still deciding which way to head next. But then on another day, I see a log that tells me he hiked a few miles into a park to pick up a new cache. And he sets new caches all the time, and most of them require some walking. So on the one hand, I understand when people question whether it's really possible, but, on the other hand, caching not far from his home, I encounter physical evidence of his exploits all the time, and I've never once seen anything that made me think he was even capable of cheating. I can't imagine working at anything that hard, either, but I can't help but admire him. Several years ago, I was driving my 32' delivery truck down a main road in my home town when I passed four out of town cachers at a GZ of a particularly hard to find cache. I turned the truck around, passed them in the other direction, turned the truck around again and came back. I pulled up and stopped which was putting me off my schedule, but no big deal to me as I figured that I was going to have one of those special geocaching experiences where you run into other cachers in the field. I gave them a hint, and then was quickly dismissed as they were obviously on a mission to find many more caches that day and couldn't be bothered to spend an extra minute even being friendly. I guess that's how you find a 100,000 caches.
  6. and that is whose fault again? the CO? how about if we place the blame on the cretins that steal the ammo cans. as for microcaches....you have to go back to the beginning of geocaching — hide a bucket - find a bucket. hide an ammo can. find an ammo can. in the bucket/can are treasures. take a treasure, leave a treasure. it was a treasure hunt hopefully in areas that are neat to find for whatever reason. a hike into a desert canyon. up a mountain. around the river bend... finding treasure was the fun part. even if the treasure was a homemade sig item. or a coin. or a hot wheels race car. or a book. an action figure - that you can turn into a travel bug. then treasure turned to trash. a cache that was rated as small - as in a small tupperware container - still big enough for a coin, a log book, a pin... became a film canister with no room. maybe for a marble. i see it as a devolution, others who like power trails see it all as an evolution. depends on your point of view i guess. i tried a small power trail or at least a long string of caches pounded into the ground. b.o.r.i.n.g. one was kinda neat. near an old billboard. it was SO cleverly hidden - you couldn't even see its well-camouflaged top in the rest of the garbage. cool. i think i like ammo cans in the wild. or tupperware ... all caches are valid within the paradigm of the seeker. I really like this post!
  7. So in other words you want to see the stuff that's on the cache page? See post #3 for my opinion. Soooo...it's not hard to open the cache page. That's not an argument AGAINST it. Is there any argument AGAINST having this feature? I mean, would you complain if they started doing it? When "notifications" were first introduced, it was stressed that they were not an excuse to not read the cache page. I believe that reading the cache page is important, but I also think that the entire nature of caching has changed since then. Within the last week, a not so local teen had over 20 caches published that I have no intention of ever finding, however, since I have no way of knowing who the cache owner was of these new listings, I pretty much had to open each listing. What would be nice is if I could ignore a user, and it extended to the notifications as well.
  8. "Xtra Hard We Love Caching Nice Ammocan" "Sneezed Near Lock'n'lock, Zipper Caught Balls And Jammed, Fun" Those are actually common acronyms in Toronto which practices a Rob Ford style of caching. Thanks, I think that's exactly what they meant. Except one of them was an Earthcache. I'm going to guess the owner did not receive an email outlining the required "educational task". You know, I really do try not to be a bad guy around here. But do I hide Geocaches for people to do this: dfkdsjl? By the way, that took 15 milliseconds, not the 20 milliseconds I quoted. Was it really that long ago that the worst thing about n00bs was that they didn't know how to log Travel Bugs, and they would type spoilers in their logs? Actually, if I was looking for good caches to find when visiting a new area and saw a bunch of logs like this, I'd probably skip them. There is a GSAK macro that will give a full report, number of logs, min, max and average. Of course, you have to get all of the logs on the caches in your target area. I think that I may start using this method for selecting caches to find while traveling. Also, I've made it clear several times in this forum that I am not a big fan of deleting found logs, and out of almost 8000 logs, I have only had to delete one. If I got a, "dgyrufui", from an invalidated member, it would be an instant "poof".
  9. And in particular look at tozainamboku's reply:[/url] http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=306091&view=findpost&p=5186123 Not sure I like being quoted from an old thread. I may have changed my mind. I shudder at the long glowing logs and favorite points that some challenges get. Maybe I'm an elitist, but I like to think that I enjoy caches that the majority of geocachers have no interest in. I particularly like long hikes with only a few caches to find along the way. We have a couple of challenges here that were presumably put out by like-minded geocachers as a way to get people to take more hikes and enjoy our local mountains. Frankly, I'm a bit annoyed that numbers cachers who are more likely to be out on a power-trail are now competing to complete these challenges. Instead of taking many long hikes, they arrange group hikes with car shuttles to let them cover more ground and find all the required caches in fewer than a dozen weekends. What's more is that there are now caches on this trail every .1 miles (where caches can be placed), including in remote sections where you used to have to hike all day for one cache. And while there used to be mix of regular and small caches with different styles, now 90% of the caches are pill bottles under a pile of rocks. Sure the finders of the challenge write long found logs about how much fun they had on the trail. Compared to the powertrails and urban parking lots these cachers are used to finding, hiking and getting out in nature is going to be a lot more interesting. And I don't begrudge that some of them may even be surprised that they were actually able to put out the physical effort of these hikes. In the old days, I would have written a long log and almost certainly given a favorite point to that lone cache I took all day to hike to. Now, I'm not sure which cache is the original hide. In all likelihood what I'm finding is a throw-down replacement left by one of the cachers who passed here for the challenge cache. In fact the rules for this challenge tend to encourage people to leave throw-downs so they won't have to come back. Pity the poor traditional hider who doesn't want to allow throw-downs; he would be ripped apart in the local forums for interfering with people being able to have the "fun" of completing the challenge. So it may be that others like challenges and that challenges encourage people to try caches they might not otherwise try, but some challenges also have an effect on the people who might prefer a slower paced game. I worry about this but, but not much. All it takes to own/get a Letter Box Hybrid icon is a stamp, yet few people create them. Just an observation. I think the primary bar is the programming cost, such that all units/phones handle a new type, built in to the search functions etc. I support a required attribute. I suspect that so long as challenges have enough restrictions and reviewers are willing to enforce them, we won't have people creating silly challenges just to get an icon. The challenge I referred to above would likely not be published under the current guidelines (though I'm not sure because I've seen others get published that are a bit less difficult to complete but which have similar problems). As it stands now both people who like challenges but don't like puzzles, and people who like puzzle but don't like challenges suffer from them being lumped together. Of course there will always be the other caches that are listed as Unknown, just because this this the catchall for things that aren't traditional or traditional/multi. I'm not sure if the challenges should get the icon or if puzzles (meaning the cache is not at the coordinates) should get the icon. And there is a question of what to do with challenges that are not at the posted coordinates (because there is a puzzle in addition to the challenge, or because it's a grandfathered Delorme challenge where you have to email the owner for the coordinates). Toz, I agree that the challenge you are referring to would not be listed today, simply because it relies on a specific list, however, I have to to take issue with you that the rules of the challenge encourages throwdowns. The Challenge description explicitly states: Unfortunately, throwdowns are inevitably because of our new breed of cachers. When this challenge was created, the idea was to get people to hike the 63 mile trail through our local mountain range, and for the first number of years, that is is exactly what it accomplished. The fact that the pill bottle cachers showed up and filled every single spot, and is likely to fill it again instead of posting a DNF, is a much bigger issue. It's a mentality that none of us ever could have anticipated, and it extends far beyond this particular trail or the related challenge.
  10. But we get forced into the numbers game even though we don't want to. COs don't have the option not to have their cache used for a challenge. Seriously? I agree with most of your comments on this subject, but I think that it's rather silly that one might feel offended because their cache may have been used to qualify for a challenge. For quite some time, I had the only qualifying cache in a remote quad of the LA County Quadrangle Challenge. I was happy that people were going up on the mountain to find it, and most of them were happy to take in the view.
  11. Completely agreed! It's not worth the stress. If it looks interesting or fun, do it. If it's complicated and will upset you, ignore it! I tend to ignore 95% of all puzzle caches. This is where I'm at. I look at every puzzle that is published in my area. Either I get it right off the bat, or I don't. If I get it, I solve it and download it to GSAK so I can look for the actual cache later. If I don't get, I just forget about it. Puzzles are excluded from my regular Pocket Queries.
  12. Were you logged in? Logged in with right account? You should be able to see your own logs. I just tested this and didn't see any problem, except that the Log Deletion email is a bit confusing. It says, "Visit this listing at the below address:", but gives the link to the log, not the listing.
  13. There should be a link to the deleted log in the email. Is there not?
  14. Which makes no sense to me. Actually, it's worse than that. I think it's harmful. I recently archived one of mine upon a request from another cacher who ad a neat cache that would fit in the park. I figured my cache (which was a puzzle) had a nice run and it was time to let somebody else put something in that park. Had I been obsessed with never archiving my caches, I would have denied her what turned out to be a great cache. Having a goal to maintain all your caches? Great. More power to you. Having a goal of never archiving any? Not so much. I didn't say we wouldn't do it just that it would have to be a great cache for us to do so. I have to agree with Fizzy here. Caches do have a life cycle and in most cases, they do not have to last forever. I have a friend that will not give up on a cache and has replaced it nine times. A muggle is on to it and steals it before it can even be found. It's a lesson on futility that he can't seem to learn.
  15. I'm really trying to figure out what the last six posts have to do with the topic?
  16. Might be somewhat off topic but that's exactly why I do read/post in the forums. I see here there are still a few cachers of like mind and that gives me hope that the game might not devolve into Parking for Points. We don't bring the game down... only the profits. "Parking for Points". That is an absolutely great phrase. I hope you don't mind if I adapt it into my signature? I love the quote too. And also the part of seeing a few cachers here that are of like mind regarding the game devolving into parking for points. We are much fewer and far between than you think. For example, I totally busted a 2002 joining couple I know last weekend finding a keyholder on a clothing donation bin in a parking lot. Yikes! I placed a keyholder on a clothing donation bin in a parking lot. Of course it was my job to service that bin on a daily basis, so that particular cache was the best maintained cache in the area. http://coord.info/GC1YPZB
  17. This sounds like when one guy went and got a local SCUBA cache and brought it to shore so the thirty cachers standing there could claim it. Several of those later used that 5/5 find to complete the D/T grid and claim our state's Challenge cache based on it.
  18. heh. I was just trying to form basic points from sample situations. I think if you only look at the numbered items, and not all the wordy extras (as is my wont), it makes sense, and I'd even say they're probably the most common set of personal standards. *shrug* While some of your personal standards probably are shared by most of us, I suspect and/or hope that some of them are not. For example, it appears you'd never claim FTFs for caches you found pre-publication. Based on comments in this thread, I think most of us would happily FTF pre-publication if we accidentally stumbled across (or logically anticipated) a newly hidden cache. I also suspect that most geocachers wouldn't log a "Found It" for unsolved puzzles or uncompleted multis, but maybe I'm a bit naive. While conversations with other geocachers tend to confirm my suspicions, that evidence is far from conclusive. A find on an unsolved puzzle, especially if I haven't solved it but am with cachers that have, really depends on who the CO is. Other cachers got me there and I signed one of Toz's puzzles about five years ago, yet have never logged it online because I can't solve it. He told me that I could, but I know that his puzzles are important to him, so I wont. I found another of his puzzles even though I solved it wrong, but had enough of the coordinates to get me there. I logged that one online. I have had other puzzle cache owners insist that I log their cache even though I didn't solve the puzzle, and I have done so.
  19. Might be somewhat off topic but that's exactly why I do read/post in the forums. I see here there are still a few cachers of like mind and that gives me hope that the game might not devolve into Parking for Points. We don't bring the game down... only the profits. "Parking for Points". That is an absolutely great phrase. I hope you don't mind if I adapt it into my signature?
  20. Sounds way too complicated than it needs to be. Actually, it just sounds like a long list of, "does it feel right". What feels right is going to be different for most of us. As an example, if a tree is 8 feet tall and I'm certain I can climb it, but my friend does and signs my name, I really don't have any problem logging it online. If it's a 30' climb that I know I would never do, I'd ask him to not waste the space on the paper log with my name.
  21. There are far more lame and cheesy things going on out there. I actually wouldn't do what you describe, but I'll say that's only because "Beta Testing" is almost unheard of in my area for whatever reason. You know what was heard of in my area, that I was introduced to VERY early (like by the end of 2003)? The Phone a friend network, which some consider lame and cheesy. I probably didn't look at these forums for the first two years, and had no idea some considered it wrong to call someone who wasn't the cache owner to get a spoiler hint from them. My caching has tailed off considerably over the years, and most of my Geopals know this, but I do in fact still get an occasional call from someone requesting a hint to a cache that isn't mine, as I mutter under my breath to myself, and try to give them as little of a "hint" as possible. This is burned into my memory only because a few months later in the Spring of 2005, we had a gang of then 13 yr. old kids pepper their village with some of the worst hides you've ever seen, even to this day (which is almost hard to believe, but it happened). The ignore list was bestowed upon us with a February 2005 site update. And I'm 95% sure bookmark lists came out with the same update. Since i started in June of '05, I'm pretty sure that those updates came later. I think that I have done the PAF twice, both were in semi remote areas. One was to the CO because my arrow was pointing into deep poison oak and I wanted to ask her that if I could get to it, should I move it. It turned out that my GPSr was pointing to the wrong spot. The other was a very old cache where the CO was long gone. I called the last finder who described where the hanging cache was supposed to be. I found it in the leaf litter below that spot and was able to restore it and it has been found many times since. My favorite PAF story was when I was looking for a friends cache and having trouble locating it, when the phone rang and he told me that he was on the other end of the valley having trouble finding one of my caches. I gave him a hint, determined that his cache was missing, dropped a replacement at his direction and then met a half hour later and teamed up to find some caches.
  22. I would suggest that you both try to attend the Maker Madness event in Lake Forrest, http://coord.info/GC50JHN, or the one in Seal Beach, http://coord.info/GC50N21. Events are a great way to meet established cachers in your area. While I don't know if the OC has an established group on the Internet, I do know that there are many active cachers in the area that do get together for official events and unofficial caching excursions.
  23. The Greasemonkey, GC Little Helper script adds this functionality, but for some reason, it thinks that we have 4000 characters to work with. Are you sure it is 2000?
  24. Different people have different standards for "finding" a cache. I once helped a friend hide a cache along a mountain trail. Searching for the cache at its posted location is an integral part of geocaching to me, so I added this cache to my "Ignore" list rather than log a "Found It." Chalking up another smiley just isn't that important to me. When I geocache with friends, I might not be the person who first spots the cache, but I help search for it. That's acceptable by my standards. I have passed on opportunities to find "pocket" caches that were handed to me at restaurant events. It just doesn't meet my personal standards of "finding" a geocache. My standards are stricter than some peoples' and not as strict as others'. While I understand many of the differences, there are points where I start to roll my eyes and not consider certain activities to be "geocaching." Ditto, all of CanadianRockies replies. A cache i see being hidden or one that i helped hide goes on my ignore list but at the same time, sometimes goes on my watchlist. If i'm with a group of friends, i log the find if i'm actively helping with the search. I won't log found if i'm not within sight of the cache's hiding spot when it is found by the rest of the group. Pocket caches can be fun i suppose but they aren't something i wish to log. Temporary caches won't get logged either. I was basically trained by the local group that if I'm present when a cache is hidden, then I log it as a "beta" find. This can include loading the coordinates into my GPSr, walking away and seeing if the coordinates work with my unit, if the cache cammo is working properly, etc. I've really never known any different. I've since learned that I don't have to "find" ever cache, but Like I said, it's just how it's always been done around here and no one really has an issue with it. Note that this practice came about before there was an Ignore list, so I think it was more about keeping unfound caches off of the map. I have no problem if some have higher standards, and I have no problem if some think that the practice is lame or cheesy. What our group would never do is log such a cache as a FTF, and we do not log the cache online until someone claims a FTF. All of the caches that I have logged like this are well up a mountain trail, and many, I have found again at a later date as I was hiking along and did a courtesy check for the CO. I guess we all have different standards. While the "beta" find doesn't bother me, I won't even consider logging a find on a piece of Velcro, a magnet or a fence post cache that can't be retrieved. That gets a NM log and I'll go back and find it if it gets fixed.
  25. You can also list your found caches on the web site in a single page by using this link. http://www.geocaching.com/my/logs.aspx?s=1&lt=2
×
×
  • Create New...