Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Beffums

  1. You might want to ask that in the geocoins forums. They seem to know all the tricks of the geocoin trade.
  2. If it's true what they say - that it's all about the journey, and not the destination, then this TB has had a fairly interesting mission. Demokrit hasn't completed it's journey, but it's well on it's way. Demokrit Demokrit's goal is to travel to all 7 continents. It's gone about 50,000 miles so far, and has been in Europe, Asia, Australia, and North America. So, while it might not get that 7th continent, it has a good chance of the other 2. Ironically, it's owner has only this TB, and has only found 24 caches, but he logs in a lot to see how the TB is doing I guess. (It probably helps that the TB is very small, so it fits into most non-micro caches.) (I know not one of my TB's, but none of mine have gone anywhere interesting or completed any cool missions).
  3. Because without any rules people could simply bring several logbooks to the event and put them on a table and say those are temp caches. This happens and examples like this have been bought up in other threads. So with no rules what is the meaning of logging these temp caches? That's exactly what this thread is about - creating a system so that the abuse stops, but without eliminating all temp caches. ** from here on down, this is a general response to the thread, and not to TrailGators in particular Several of the posters who are for this change have even noted that they are willing to adopt the change even if it means that the temp event caches do not count toward your find total. Does this sound like people thinking only of racking up numbers? I agree - there is definite potential for abuse in the system, and if the forums are even slightly correct, there has recently been an upswing in abuse. Well, this thread is an attempt to develop ways to minimize the abuse. Set rules for these caches -- for example, that they must follow all of the regular cache guidelines except the "temporary cache" restriction (or whatever rules are chosen). Right now, there are no rules for temp event caches. They *could* be what TrailGators described (I've never seen anything like that, but I'll admit it's certainly possible). Ok, so how do we prevent that? Just saying "stop having temp event caches" won't work. First, some groups have been told by TPTB that temp event caches are the preferred option. Second, without rules, they've already existed for a long time, so if we continue to have no rules for them... Just saying "ok have them, but you can't log them" isn't satisfying either. First - re-read this thread. Most (of the people supporting temp event caches) say either that they prefer they count, but would be fine with them not counting OR say that they don't care if they count, they just want a way to log them. So, it sounds like it's not just about the smiley - it's about the chance to post the log about the find. Will some people post boring find logs? Yup - I have myself. Guess what - people also post boring found it logs on "normal" caches. But, some people, even when they type in boring logs, just enjoy that process of logging online. They already found the container and signed it. Now they want to post about it. AND, they'd like a system for posting about it, and being able to easily re-find those posts in the future. Right now, we can by re-reading "attended it" logs. Ok, if you don't like that option, then give a viable alternative. If we post as notes, then on our "my account" page, they'd be all mixed up with other notes having nothing to do with cache finds "I stopped by and droipped off a TB today" or "hey - school is out of session so now might be a good time to try for this cache if you've been thinking about it" are things I've posted notes for. Not really the same type of thing - but impossible to quickly sort if both (actual notes and temp event cache finds) are logged identically. edit: typos typos typos -- sorry!
  4. Ummmm, event caches already are being placed. Have been for years! That's true. My point is that if anyone wants credit for them, they should be listed on their own merit for the reasons mentioned above. Even if not listed they have the potential to cause problems even if it's reduced potential due to the short life span. Well, perhaps what you are saying warrents more attention. I don't understand why you feel the risk would increase it event caches were legitimized. Would it be possible that by asking event owners to take offficial responsibility for caches (by checking off the box that says "Yes, I have read the guidelines") there might be decreased problems and improved cache quality? And remember, folks would not be getting credit for "caches found" they would be getting credit (maybe) for "event caches found" ---Listed in a completely separate cluster than the regular caches. I think both the Cheeseheads notion and Team Neos's idea are very good suggestions. It is very difficult to judge from the forums what "the majority" of geocachers think. And, without a well done poll of all individuals with active accounts, we won't know what people overall think on the topic. However, I think we CAN look at peoples logs and see that many geocachers (I'm not saying a majority - just that it's not 1 or 2 people) log multiple attended logs for events. Many areas truly enjoy temporary event caches. This would give a way to organize them. I think by doing this, you could also directly address Renegade Knight's concerns - if I'm reading The Cheeseheads suggestion correctly, these would be cache pages submitted to gc.com. However, I think it's also important for people to realize that it's possible to have a new category added to the guidelines as well - that of temporary event caches (as suggested above). Then, we could have specific rules for their placement. Obviously, it won't work if the "temporary caches are not allowed" clause is enforced for the category of temporary caches -- duh! But, if the concern is a "potential black eye" for the sport/hobby/game/... (please use your preferred term), then the issues should be whether or not the cache is in a place with permission; whether or not the cache has valid contents (i.e., no weapons, etc); things like that. Really - being temporary or permanent isn't going to upset non-cachers if the location has permission. Heck, park rangers, etc, are more likely to be willing to allow temporary caches than permanent ones (as has been noted in way too many threads for me to search out all the links). These suggestions both would allow a popular practice to continue, but would allow TPTB to make sure that the caches in question conform to the essential guidelines. We've already seen that temp event caches will be used -- even if you make it one log per event, they will still be used. This offers a system for tracking them to ensure that we WON'T get a black eye. And, I agree with Team Neos - it would be great if they counted in the find stat, as many clearly like them to count, but I'm not adament about that. I *do* think that most people would prefer for them to show up somewhere - either like benchmarks or on their own tab with the social logs (assuming that that feature "happens"). If these suggestions were adopted, the issue then becomes twofold - 1) do they count toward the find count or not? -- keep in mind that like virtuals, they'd be listed so that anyone who discounts them could "subtract" them from a total; or that they'd be listed, so anyone who counts them could mentally add them to a total - just like some do with finds + benchmark finds currently. 2) what guidelines make sense? -- obviously, the temporary restriction would have to be waived, just like the logbook restriction is waved for virts and the coords and the logbook rules were waived for locationlesses (how do you make that plural by the way - that looks weird!) --- others might argue for the 0.10 mi rule to also be waived; I'm ambivalent about this, but I'm sure the argument can be made for both sides -- other thoughts? and, of course, which idea above makes more sense. I think a lot of that comes down to the decision on social logs though -- if they decide against social logs, then option A looks a lot less likely. If TPTB DO implement social logs, then I see strong merits to both suggestions, and would honestly be perfectly content with either. just my $.02
  5. Beffums


    I think it's June 20th. Not sure on where though. I'll see what I can find... It looks like Camping Hoosiers are the hosts, so maybe a quick e-mail to them could get you the info? edit: to add the who
  6. Beffums


    Congrats Wayne! Deermark, does this mean you are back from vacation and ready to tell us about the next trailmix?
  7. Um, I'd be very afriad of anything on "deermark's toughest" list! His idea of a nice stroll = my idea of a grueling hike. I can't imagine what it would take for him to list it as difficult! However, from the trailmixes, I've learned that Deermark seems to know of all of the caching trails in the area, so any of his bookmark lists would likely be a great place to start.
  8. You might want to try posting this in the regional forums: Northeast (includes VA) forums
  9. yeah, but really - how hard is it to get the TB icon? It also works for trackable(ICONS) coins.!!! Yes, I completely understand it's use for the coins. I'm just confused about doing it to get the TB icon. However, as a TB owner, I've already experienced one plus of the "discovered" log for TB's. One of my TB's has been hanging out in a cache for about a month, and no recent logs had mentioned him. But, yesterday, he was "discovered" in that cache, so while he's not moving, at least I know he's still there and not lost.
  10. yeah, but really - how hard is it to get the TB icon?
  11. if you are only changing it slightly, you can change it when you click "edit listing". Just remember to re-check the boxes at the bottom that you have read the guidelines for listing a cache. I think if you are changing them substantially, that it won't let you - but in that case you can always email the reviewer that published the cache, explain the situation and give them the new coords, and they can update the listing for you if it's still more than .1 mi from other caches, and not at a school and and etc etc.
  12. I think the local reviewer is also able to get rid of the needs maintenance attribute. But, I think currently only the owner and the reviewers can do it. E-mailing the owner (or, if no response, the reviewer) is about the most other cachers can do.
  13. Beffums


    I don't know if I would use it myself, but I would love to read others stories of their caching days. I too would be willing to pay a bit more for a premium membership to have this added.
  14. I think it sounds like an excellent idea, until you add in the dogs on leashes. If your cat is used to be walked on a leash, and is used to being around dogs on leashes, it might not be too bad. But, keep in mind that if it is an outdoor event (I'm assuming so, since you mention bringing the cat), that likely a few cachers will have their dogs there. Is your cat ready for being trapped on a leash in a harness while doggies are all around it? I know that my cats can't handle being in the same room as our puppies, even if the pups are in their crate. Putting the cats on a leash just makes them feel more insecure, so would likely make them less happy to be around dogs. But, my sister's cat grew up with a 95 lb husky and a 200+ pound Akita -- it was totally unfazed by all dogs. She could likely have taken it to an event if she was into geocaching. However, that's not to say it wouldn't have driven the other dogs (and their owners) crazy.
  15. I think his problem is that it is difficult to get the Tags delivered to Germany. So, while he's in the US, he's hoping to set up and drop off a TB, with the goal being to return to Germany. Unfortunately, I think the answer is that there aren't any stores (that I know of) where you can walk in and buy the TB tags. The best I can come up with is if a local Cleveland cacher is willing to give him an address to have them shipped to and he could get them from that cacher while he's in town. But, with only 2 weeks notice, the tags might not get here before he does.
  16. Well, when we are trying to place caches, we make sure that we have found all of the nearby multis first - and that we've written them down or entered them as waypoints into our GPSr. There are several reasons why caches cannot be too close to each other, and most of them apply to all stages of multis/mystery caches as well as to traditionals. Also, you can sometimes make the argument, in a polite note to the reviewer, as to why the points of a particular multi/mystery don't count. So, for example, "I know that Cache Multi has stage 2 at nearby ccords, but for that stage, you are reading information off of a historical marker plaque, and not searching for a cache container. This should reduce the chances of finders being confused between the historical marker and my ammo can hide" (um, just say it better than I did!). One option that I've seen before in the forums is that if you don't have the mid-points for a multi, and aren't able to search it out before you hide your cache, is that you can e-mail the reviewer before posting your listing and ask, "Hey, do you know if these coords are too close to any stage of _____"
  17. Um, do we even know that this was the cache title when it was listed for review? Cache owners can change cache titles without reviewer permission. It is possible that the cache had one title when it was reviewed, that the owner(s) changed it after it was published, and that once GC.com noticed the new name (through this thread), that they had the owners change the title. I agree that the title was in VERY poor taste, but I'm willing to give the reviewer the benefit of the doubt.
  18. Oops - sorry! I had meant Advantix, but apparently having the cat in front of me (and not the dogs) led to a brain switch to Advantage.
  19. sounds like nitroglycerin capsules. no idea where to find them - maybe Ebay? I know that magnetic nanos are sold there (a little smaller - about the size of a pencil eraser, with no where to tie fishing line to), I would expect these are too
  20. You should be able to add it into the "About this item" section if you know html. I think it would look something like... [ url=http://www._____.com ] Insert name of website [ / url ] (minus a few spaces)
  21. simplest answer - if I find a cache with a logbook (or not, in the cases of virtuals, etc), and I feel like I found a physical cache, then I go by the owner's preferences. If they say "this is for one smilie, and this + this is for two smilies" (etc etc) then I would log it as such. My decision is based on physcial caches, not GC#s. So, if somehow one physical cache had 2 GC#'s, I'd only log it for one smilie. If two physical caches have 1 GC#, and if the owner is fine with multiple found logs, then ok. * Fake Finds: No. * Log Finds on My Own Caches: No. (unless adopted the cache - I wouldn't go back and delete a find from before I adopted it) * Log finds when I was with hider while hidden: No - not even several months later, unless it moves and I honestly have to find it. That's what the ignore option is for. * Tried Hard but Could Not Find Cache, But Sure That I Was Near or At Hide Site: No. * Cache Listed Only on Another Site, but Claim Find at GC.COM: No. * Found Cache Missing, and Replaced: Yes, but only if I was 100% sure that I had the cache site correct (i.e., verified by owner) and that the owner wanted it replaced. Hasn't come up * Missing/Owner Permission: Yes, if 100% sure (i.e., verified by owner) that I was at groundzero. But I will not log it as found until the owner has either a) replaced the cache, B ) archived the cache, or c) temporarily disabled the cache. * Mystery or Puzzle Cache w/o Solving: yes, if I felt that I had found the final stage - not if someone said "hey, the last stage to ___ is under that log" (then again, I tend to avoid puzzle caches) *Multi-cache without finding all stages: yes, if I found the final stage; even if I skipped past stage 3 and found stage 4 instead (some multi's have very short gaps between stages!) * Bonus Finds: unsure - as far as I know, we don't have bonus caches in this area. However, my general rule is to go by the cache owners preferences - if they said this is worth a second smilie, I likely would be ok with it. * Moved Cache or Multi-cache With a Newly-Added Stage: Hasn't come up, but it would depend on the cache owners preference - if they state that they are allowing new smilies, then yes. * Pocket Caches - logged on an archived cache: No. * Retirement Caches - logged as an archived cache: No. * Pocket Caches - if logged as a multiple event attended log: Unsure - were there coordiantes involved, or an offset style search, or a puzzle cache style search?? If so, then yes. If it's just saying hi to people and asking if they have a cache in their pocket? No. * Retirement caches - if logged as a mutiple event attended log (is this possible? or am I making up an option): See last line for pocket caches. * Multiple Event Finds: Yes. (if host/hostess says its ok) * Group Finds: Yes. I do almost all of my caching with my husband, and we have separate accounts (and a few different finds between the two of us). Yes, we work together to find the caches, but we still are finding them. * Armchair Caches: I'm fine with others logging them. not interested myself * Locationless: Yes. * Virtuals: Yes. * Events: Yes! * Earthcaches: Yes Yes! my favorite caches were both earthcaches. edit: apparently a) , b ), etc lists make smileys
  22. I believe I saw a thread in the website forum a couple of months ago where Jeremy announced that background music was being disabled. So, older caches will have it until they try to edit the listing, then it will be gone from them as well.
  23. Using GPSBabel and county data available with it, I figured that I have 44 counties with finds. It's actually giving me 45, but the Wander Indiana Micro Traveler is in Allen County (where I've not cached yet), but I found it in Montgomery County. Like Team Shydog, the southwest is rather devoid of finds. Maybe we need to plan a trip in that direction. I'd written to Team Shydog, but I'll offer more broadly here -- I teach at a university, and, well, graduation was yesterday (for HOURS and HOURS -- sigh), and that means that while I still have to work over the summer, my schedule is much more flexible. Anyone wanting to add the southwest corner to their chart, and who would like a tour guide - just let me know. If you hit Evansville, you can *easily* have Vanderberg, Warrick, Posey, and Gibson, and then also add whatever counties you have to cross to get down here. With the beginning of ECO (Evansville area Geocaching Organization) this spring, we also have a few events coming up this summer. Nothin for May, alas, but we have 2 planned for June. We just got started, so no cool webpage, just a yahoo groups listserve, but we're doing well with scheduling so far. Our summer plans include (temptations to cache SW Indiana...): June 3rd - joint meet & greet with River Valley Geocachers at Lake Mauzy (near Morganfield/Sturgis KY), June 17th - potluck meet and greet in Princeton, IN (Gibson county). July and August are fuzzy in my mind - either it was July in Owensboro and August in Jasper, IN or the reverse... There's another tentatively in the works - if I get my butt in gear it'll happen in July in Evansville. See - lots of reasons to come visit this part of the state.
  24. If it wasn't my cache - *I* likely would have opted for the blue frowny (and, to be honest, if someone sent me this pic and said they hadn't signed the log, I would have been fine with them claiming the smiley if they wanted it!). Just because I'm not allergic to them doesn't mean I like them. in your nose?!?! youch!
  • Create New...