Jump to content

knowschad

Members
  • Posts

    18989
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by knowschad

  1. How is it an embarrassment to the company? If they fully intended to scam the members and they succeeded how is that an embarrassment? The fact that the caches are not archived, or locked, and can still be logged says to me they fully expected the members to log the caches and they fully intend for the members to clean up after themselves the best they can. I think it is the members that should feel embarrassed. Its either that or they are still working on better mistakes tomorrow, in which case they have made great strides. I am really surprised that Groundspeak hasn't spoken up about this yet.
  2. It is "Rare Earth", not "Earth". Sorry, pet peeve. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.
  3. Good math, but horrible grammar. Sigh... likewise. Mine was funnier funny
  4. Good math, but horrible grammar. Sigh...
  5. Even if you find an adhesive strong enough to hold it to the paint, odds are, you won't be able to remove the velcro yourself when you retire the cache. It is also possible that the glue will hold but the paint will then give way. Apparently the paint in your particular case has proven to be adhered well enough, but in general, gluing to a painted surface isn't advisable in the first place.
  6. Good math, but horrible grammar.
  7. I really don't know what my find count was before I logged that one April Fools cache, but I just deleted my find on the one bogus cache that I logged on the 1st, and my find count did NOT go down. I then logged a find on the black hole earth cache, and my find did NOT go up. Are we certain that they have been adding to our Found It stats? Now, it did add the Mississippi souvenir, and one other thing that I don't know if anyone has mentioned, but it added to my available favorite point count, as well.
  8. Shouldn't be that difficult, they must already have the code to check if a user has earned a souvenir for a country - the one they run every time a new country souvenir is created; so it should be relatively simple to take that same code, and reverse the logic to remove the souvenir if there is no match, From what I've heard (I haven't counted myself) there's only about 5000 people logged these caches so the whole delete logs, delete souvenirs shebang shouldn't take more than a seconds (or a minute or 2 at worst). Yeah, I suppose you're right. Basically it would be (for country-related souvies, anyway): Select from users_logs_table where cache_country is one of list_of_countries_with_souvies and cache_id not one of list_of_bogus_caches (or something like that)
  9. I didnt think about that. I just had a look and they are still there. Will look again later to see if they are gone. Deleting the log will not delete the souvenir. That takes a HQ lackey intervention. A better option might be to leave the logs as they stand, then when (I assume) GS go round and "tidy up" the logs they might (they certainly could) tidy up all the souvenir awards in the same run. Oh, it was quite funny. But can/will GS clean up the mess it made? Hope they have a plan to remove the souvenirs. But, from what I've seen of its programming, I have my doubts. Yup. Easy to delete the logs. Deleting the souvenirs, not so much, since they would not be able to rely simply on the fact that they found one of the April Fools caches to get the souvie. They would have to look through the user's entire history to see if they legitimately earned it before (or since!) logging the April 1 cache. I'm not so sure this was entirely thought out. I hope to be proven wrong.
  10. I didnt think about that. I just had a look and they are still there. Will look again later to see if they are gone. Deleting the log will not delete the souvenir. That takes a HQ lackey intervention. Yup. And coming up with a query that will remove souvenirs that were "earned" by those bogus caches, and *only* by those bogus caches (eg: not "earned" legitimately before or since) sounds like quite a challenge.
  11. Translation: As long as I get my way, who cares about anybody else? Mamma always said that life isn't fair.
  12. Really? You opened a ten+ year old thread to say you cheat (armchair cache) once in awhile? Confession is good for the soul.
  13. Wouldn't it be nice if by 2016, Groundspeak had finally listed to the GSAK users and added some of that functionality to the website and apps?
  14. The real Sapience Trek: (he sometimes can't see houses because of the hair in his eyes) Cute dog! But seriously... insider humor like that doesn't have a place in a serious thread like this, all good intents aside. (I thought Mtn-Man was the origin of that in-joke, though)
  15. "...a place that I don't believe you actually hid the cache." It appears to me that almost all of the angst in this thread was caused by that one phrase. Depending on your side of the fence, it could be taken as a helpful suggestion to recheck coordinates, or it could be taken as a challenge to one's integrity. It doesn't seem to me to have been the latter, but I think that is the way the OP took it. I know the reviewer in question to some degree, and yeah, I think that I might say that he is the toughest reviewer that I have worked with in the sense of having to prove my innocence rather than the reviewer having to prove my guilt (in the very few caches of mine that he has reviewed... I admit to having limited experience). That may be a pain in the butt, but it also is good for the game over-all, so I try to just take a deep breath and deal with it. I've dealt with a number of reviewers, both local and remote, since 2005, and one thing I will say in their defense is that they tend to try very hard on the side of NOT showing favoritism. I think that they learn very early-on how that can turn and bite them.
  16. The property in question is a dog club. Many reviewers are dogs. Quod erat demonstrandum, res ipsa loquitur and all that. Side note: I've been wondering for the past day why the North Dakota Retriever Club is located in Minnesota. Are the dogs expected to retrieve the Club and drag it across the border? >> Many reviewers are dogs. Do you realize how few people actually know what you're talking about anymore with that "reviewer are dogs" thing? I'm sure you're just trying to lighten things up, but if you look at it from the standpoint of a pissed off OP that is looking for some real answer to something that is bothering him, a joke that he doesn't even get about reviewers being dogs is not very helpful. You may want to reconsider using that silly little insider joke next time. Just a thought...
  17. That's not a safe assumption. The NPS leaves geocaching policy decisions to the unit management. Some allow geocaching and some do not, depending on considerations like the mission of the unit, environmental sensitivity and traffic. Perhaps your reviewer knows that this NPS unit never allows geocaches. Any statistics or estimates on how many do vs. how many do not allow them? I know that it does depend on the local management, but it has been my understanding that only very, very few have been allowed. Is my information out of date?
  18. I noticed Groundspeak in using the ® symbol after the word Geocaching. What is the Registration number? From what I understand there was some controversy way back in 2001. Jeremy tried to trademark the word Geocaching and there was some push back from the community. http://forums.Ground...hp?showtopic=11 Yes, I am very concerned about that. There are other geocaching sites out there. Are they going to be slapped with cease and desist letters by Groundspeak lawyers? I sure would like an answer to this question, and I'm very surprised that it isn't raising more eyebrows. Should I start a separate thread about the new registered trademark, or can it be discussed here?
  19. I am in the same boat. I originally purchased the paid app a couple of years ago and that app is the main reason I am currently a paid premier member. The offline lists vastly improved my geocaching experience, to the point that I wanted to further improve the search with pocket queries. I know that without the offline lists, I never would have seen the value of upgrading my membership. I don't want to switch from the classic app. If it is disabled or crippled, I will probably start looking for a suitable third party app. As a former software developer, I seriosuly doubt that this is a money grab. Much more likely is simply that the "Classic" app was a crude, early piece of development that is very difficult to maintain and enhance. They re-wrote from scratch, originally as a beginner's app, and quickly found that they had a much better foundation to build on. That is not at all unusual. I am, however, a bit disgruntled that I paid $10, wich is MUCH MUCH more than the typical paid app (more often $1.99 or $2.99) for something that they are now giving away. Still, not about to lose any sleep over that. More disappointed to see, yet again, promises from Groundspeak about functionality yet to come. Been there, done that, should be a souvenir for that. We'll see, but I'm going to breathe normally while I wait.
  20. No, but I do have access to a calendar, which I studied. I also have access to a calendar and I studied it and learned that June 2016 is less than 3 months away. I think that some of us fail to see your point.
  21. I noticed Groundspeak in using the ® symbol after the word Geocaching. What is the Registration number? From what I understand there was some controversy way back in 2001. Jeremy tried to trademark the word Geocaching and there was some push back from the community. http://forums.Ground...hp?showtopic=11 Yes, I am very concerned about that. There are other geocaching sites out there. Are they going to be slapped with cease and desist letters by Groundspeak lawyers?
  22. It does look like a cool cache. But you're already handicapped by being in Wyoming, and even more by the remote location of your cache. Don't expect to ever see a lot of activity on one like that. But be proud that you didn't simply hide yet another park & grab! Good for you!
  23. More likely, it was some unexploded tennis ball bombs. Check out this video: Thanks for the reminder that there are people like this our there. I can't believe he threw a tennis ball bomb willy nilly down the trail out of sight. He could have killed someone. Not that he would probably care. I suppose anyone coming along the trail would have heard the first couple of explosions and high-tailed it out of there. It's highly unlikely that if the tennis balls were the same devices as in the video, that a geocacher would have set this kind of "trap" since the balls have a wick and need to be set alight. It's more likely that some delinquent left them there to return to later. Photo from the news story:
  24. "“If people are going to leave these objects lying around then it needs to be made clear that it is a toy or use a different shaped object.” You mean, as in using a label saying that it is a geocache?
×
×
  • Create New...