Teasel

quote:Originally posted by Team Blitz:but if it's more than that (eg looking for clues on the way) then the time taken is a lot harder to guess... ...and if it's one of your particularly evil multicaches with clues like "at the last cache, you should have spotted...", well, better take a tent and a sleeping bag just in case! GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

Maybe (for non-fiendish caches at least) we should say how long it took us to find the cache in each of our logs? This does have the advantage that it'd include all the actual finding of the cache, and also that you could get more than one opinion on each cache. I'm sure that, with lightweight shoes on, I could probably do my most difficult cache in about 20mins, but I'd advise visitors to leave themselves a little longer. GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by WeightMan:Are there any caches nearby? Without the proper coordinates it is a bit harder to tell. You can search for UK caches by town name using the GeocacheUK search page. Alternatively, if you prefer something more visual, try the interactive map GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by Renegade Knight:Does that group have a purpose in life? Very much so! While we geocachers are passionate about our hobby, many of the MAs regard ancient monuments as sacred sites to be religiously protected. quote:Agreed. Please, PLEASE ignore them! Certainly if you've got nothing constructive to say to the MAs, or you have no respect for their position, then say nothing! A flame war could lead to trashing of caches or, worse, ancient monuments. The HCC rules state no caches near SAMs. I'm currently trying to get the English Heritage SAM database onto G:UK, so we can more easily obey this rule. But if we accept as geocachers that SAMs should be protected, then why not also protect the other ancient monuments which do not (yet?) have statutory protection? The TMAs have gone to a lot of effort to catalogue the UKs heritage and I believe both sides can benefit from a little cooperation. I for one would like to see more dialog between the two groups. GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community. [This message was edited by Teasel on August 05, 2003 at 04:49 PM.]

I do hope you continue caching and also that we'll see you back as a GC.com moderator someday soon. You've been around longer than 'most anyone else and have weathered many-a-storm before. As for the "several folks" you suggest are happy at the end-results of Icenians expressing his opposition to GAGB, I personally can think of none. And though I've expressed reservations about the way GAGB was announced to the world, don't think for a minute that you'd not have had one of my votes for the GAGB committee! I'm sure many others feel the same. GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by The Land Ranger:Take for example, one family in Hampshire. The full names of the family are easy to put together, A quick look in the phone directory I'm sure would reveal their address, I just checked on the web and was successful. Foolishly, even the name of their house is in their profile. Just visiting that teams profile will reveal a lot of information about their caching habits. Tempting as it is to dismiss this out of hand as a troll, I'd like to ask what extra value a handy summary of the GC.com logs would actually be to a thief? From various sources around the internet, you have deduced the cachers' full names, their address including house name and their phone number. You also know how many caches, on average, they find each week. From G:UK, you have deduced that they like to go geocaching in Hampshire, especially at the weekend. Ummm, well, that wasn't guessable at all was it?! Do they go out first thing in the morning, for a stroll after lunch, or are they night cachers? You can't tell. I'm still unclear as to what added value the thief gets from the G:UK graphs. If you genuinely feel it is dangerous to enter the date you found a cache, why not instead enter the date you logged it? That way you're sure to be at home when the thieves strike! GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by Dan Wilson:never mind, i have sort of realised that the stats page goes by an entire place and doesn't account for different parts of places. It used to, yes, and it still falls back to that method for new caches if all else fails (eg the problem with Seasider's cache). However, I've recently changed things to get the county off this map (438KB png file). The cache is plotted onto this map and the colour tells me what county it's in. There's room for improvement, as the county borders are quite thick (eg the problem with Hornet's cache), but it's better than the old method which used to work on an incomplete and inaccurate postcode database. GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

It's a combination of problems... First off, the counties are (deliberately!) the pre-1995 versions, so none of this unitary authority nonsense! The problem with the "Lock, Stock" cache is that my program to determine counties (a bit of a cludge involving an accurately coloured-in version of the map on the OS site) hasn't been running automatically I've just run it manually and will get it scheduled to run every time the database is updated. Thanks for the heads-up! There are a few caches which are confusingly named (eg this one is in Bucks, not Herts), but that doesn't explain why this one is listed in Bucks as it's definitely in Herts! Guess I've got a bit of debugging to do... (Though this cache is less than a mile from the county border so I may have to do these manually if my source map is not accurate enough) (Edited so that both examples were by the same cacher to avoid embarassment!) GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community. [This message was edited by Teasel on July 27, 2003 at 12:36 PM.]

The main difference, as I understand it, is that geolutins are free to create. Instead of purchasing a dogtag from Groundspeak, you visit the geolutins website, get a tracking number from there. You then add this number to the traveller in any way you wish. Naturally, Groundspeak are not enthusiastic about this, which is why any posts mentioning geolutins are first sent to the moderators for approval. [EDIT]My mistake! The restriction seems to have been lifted GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by Bill D (wwh):Put BR in square brackets. It needs whatsit-thingy, not html. Now I have a single line with a couple of [bR] tags GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

Yum yum, more stats! Has anyone worked out how to add line breaks into their profiles? Our occupation used to be three lines long, now it's a single line with a couple of <BR> tags. GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by Tim & June:Teasel, I do hope you did not _deliberately_ ignore my posts http://ubbx.Groundspeak.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=5726007311&f=6616058331&m=22860243 where I said I would "ask for definitive answer from those above" and where I posted the response to that query. Also Eric (pretty much the top GC.com Admin) posted his clarification too. Since the full guidelines, perhaps wisely, are not written down for any country, of course it is wrong for me to have suggested that they are UK only. However, the rules do seem to allow event caches to be organised events specifically intended for the discussion of geocaching by geocachers. Eric's counter-examples were all about events which were either nothing to do with geocaching, or were impromtu, unorganised events. The many examples listed by Wood Smoke suggest that the interpretation of guidelines is more relaxed in the US, and this thread suggests that this is still the case with Slytherin listing many more. Whether this is the UK setting higher standards, or UK only rules is really just a matter of spin. Anyway, this is getting way off-topic! With regard to containers like the one shown on the geocaching.com home page, I'd say they're OK in any country, so long as they're placed in an appropriate location. GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

Yes I know, sorry it's so awkward! It was never particularly nice, but since geocaching.com added session cookies to their pages, it's become far worse. I'll see if I can work something out, but I'm not sure what... GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

As an aside, does anyone find it useful to be emailed the results of pocket queries, or would everyone be happier to download them straight from the web? The reason I ask is that I may soon have to make all downloads on G:UK available only to premium members of geocaching.com. Whilst this is, of course, most unwelcome, one possible silver lining is that I'm hoping they'll agree that I can provide online GPX downloads. (I've also got friendlier search and view pages lined up!) So, do I need to think about how to regularly email these files out (and all the email registration kerfuffle that'd entail), or would people just prefer to download what they want, when they want it? GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

Sounds good to me! I love attending the Southern cache events but the bit in the middle (the roadworks on the M1; there are always roadworks on the M1 ) is less than welcome. It'd be great to have something right here on my doorstep and meet up with some local cachers. If there's anything we can do to help, let us know. GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

I voted yes, as a blanket ban seems plain silly, but I have reservations. Having witnessed the accidental starting of a heather fire and then battled for over an hour with a dozen others to beat it out again, I can assure you that a thoughtlessly placed glass cache would be quite capable of destroying large areas of countryside and possibly risking both lives and property. However, caches should not be placed thoughtlessly, and we have the cache approvers as a final sanity check. So my GBP0.02 worth is let's not invent ourselves another new UK-only rule (like the UK ban on event caches without physical caches, and a possible UK ban on knives in caches), but let's think about the consequences of what we do and act responsibly. GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

Jayne and I will be there. Happy to help out wherever we're needed (will probably need to spend a bit of time manning the G:UK stall, but would like to do other stuff too). GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

Hi! Jayne's managed to get the weekend off work and the in-laws have agreed to babysit David for us, so we can make it to the event after all Is it too late to get camping passes? We'd definitely like to camp on Sat night (2 adults, one tent, one car), and Friday night too, if we can both get a half day off work. Cheers, Ian GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by The Land Ranger:"curiouser" Invalid word ? A search of 739 on-line dictionaries cold not find this word. It should be in there... between brillig and toves. I guess MCL was so much surprised, that for the moment he quite forgot how to speak good English! ps you forgot a u there GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by washboy:I don't understand how he could edit his profile without being logged-in. Surely, he couldn't login if his user-id is "disabled"? I think his account is only disabled because the email address is invalid. It'd be silly of GC.com not to allow disabled users to edit their profiles because, otherwise, how could they change their email addresses? I'm not aware of any way that you can truly delete yourself from GC.com (such an option could play havoc with database integrity), though I expect the admins have a way to lock someone out. GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by Pharisee:Guess it must be a lot easier now. Not really! If you want super-accurate positioning, you still need to install your own base station on top of one of the OS's passive stations (that's what they're there for!). Or you can use the OS's active stations. These are not actually transmitters, they're merely base stations which continuously save their corrections onto a website so that people don't need to buy their own kit. They cover the UK such that you're never more than 100Km from one. There used to be transmitted Differential GPS around the entrances to some harbours but I imagine this, and the Virgin radio corrections, probably died a death once SA was switched off. GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

Wow, congratulations!!! How long before you hit four figures then? GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by wing-co: quote:Originally posted by jeremyp:EGNOS/WAAS does not transmit positional data only corrections due to atmosphere etc. So you lose a couple of channels (which could be tracking more birds) so that you get more confidence in your EPE. An interesting trade-off... I think most of the time I'd rather have extra sats. I thought the corrections transmitted by EGNOS meant that position is much more accurate. So while the exact distance to the EGNOS sats can't be determined by the GPS, the signals they transmit allow the GPS to more accurately determine the distance to the other sats it's tracking, and hence improve both positional accuracy, and confidence in the EPE. 'Course, my trusty old GPS12MAP doesn't do WAAS, so it's all wishful thinking for me GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by Team Blitz: quote:What's wrong with the GC.com UK admins? How does a landowner contact them? I think what they really need is a phone number to call Agreed, but I think the best person to contact would be the cache owner. Failing that would be the GC.com cache approvers, who have the ability to chase up the problem and the power to archive the cache if necessary. Contacting an association spokesperson would be a distant third choice to me. ('Course, in reality, they could all be the same person ) quote:Originally posted by Team Blitz: quote:What's wrong with the current set of UK rules? Problem: where are they written down? At the moment they are simply NOT available. You may also find that certain landowners might wish to impose extra rules and a national organisation's web site would be an excellent place to list this info. Agreed. We need a web page to list UK rules. Surely the best place for this would be GC.com? That's where the caches are approved, after all. We don't need to form an association simply to provide a repository of information about UK geocaching. However, looking back at the relative timing of various events, the apparently hurried nature of the GAGB launch, and Moss Trooper's cryptic comment in the Navic*che forum, then maybe what you say actually ties together some loose threads. But I had far greater hopes and expectations of GAGB than just being a(nother) UK geocaching information website. GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.

quote:Originally posted by Team Blitz:A better wording of that would be: If an association starts negotiating new rules with large landowners, then there's a real possibility that, across the majority of the UK, people will only be able to place caches if they _adhere to the guidelines issued by _ the association. Yes, that would be a far better wording , and I'd have no problems with that whatsoever. Quite the opposite! I just worry that mine might be the more accurate wording... quote:From the minutes of a meeting about a possible New Zealand association:DOC desire to work with only one organisation representing geocaching in NZ. They suggest that people who want to geocache, must be members of the society. This dictates that the society should limit geocache information to members only, and have moderation control over caches. Unlike in NZ, we are not yet at the point where we have to consider this sort of concession in order that our sport may survive. It would be foolish to pretend that negotiating with large land owners does not carry large dangers, and foolish to argue that it does not carry large potential benefits. This is a good argument for forming an association, as we can ensure that the people doing the talking are both good diplomats, and representative of the bulk of geocachers. However, I do not feel that the issues of ending up with members-only caching have been properly addressed. Which, if any, of these would / should represent the association's position?: - We will never negotiate members-only geocaching - We will never negotiate members-only cache placing - We prefer rules-based caching, but would negotiate members-only, if it opened up new areas in which we could gain official permission to cache - Members-only caching is a good idea because it keeps land owners happy - Why the fuss? You have to be a member of GC.com anyway! What's another membership requirement added to the list? quote:you may find that certain cache-listing sites would <snip> INSIST that you are a member of the association.... that is the right of any organisation, if they so choose. If GC.com exercised their right to insist that I was a member of the UK association, then "people will only be able to place caches if they're a member of the association" and we're back to my,(worse!) wording again GeocacheUK - resources for the UK Geocaching community.