fizzymagic

Well, I'm off to VA for the next week. Y'all hide a bunch of caches for me while I'm gone, hear?

It was kind of a kick. Of course, none of the shops in question were actually open. I think that this one is harder in many ways than my IQ Test caches because you have to make several assumptions in order to come up with the right answer. What is interesting is that I tended to guess correctly, which never happens when I am searching for one of Ron's caches! Apparently HotFoot and I think more or less alike. I'll be interested to hear how other people do on it.

It was kind of a kick. Of course, none of the shops in question were actually open. I think that this one is harder in many ways than my IQ Test caches because you have to make several assumptions in order to come up with the right answer. What is interesting is that I tended to guess correctly, which never happens when I am searching for one of Ron's caches! Apparently HotFoot and I think more or less alike. I'll be interested to hear how other people do on it.

Ron, I sent you the Perl script. Hope it is useful. Everyone is so quiet tonight. I wonder if it's exhaustion from the first day of school?

Ron, I sent you the Perl script. Hope it is useful. Everyone is so quiet tonight. I wonder if it's exhaustion from the first day of school?

You can always have my Perl script! Or, if you want, you can send me a .loc file and I'll turn it into an Excel spreadsheet for you. On another note... I was thinking about your thought that doing geocaches in strange places would result in looking at your Etrex instead of the scenery. I have found exactly the opposite. Last week while I was in Maine I saw some of the most spectacular country possible while geocaching. In fact, we found two great parks near my brother's house that he didn't even know about. And that's saying something if you know my brother! Anyway, the point is that geocaching done right can enhance a visit to a new place rather than detract from it.

You can always have my Perl script! Or, if you want, you can send me a .loc file and I'll turn it into an Excel spreadsheet for you. On another note... I was thinking about your thought that doing geocaches in strange places would result in looking at your Etrex instead of the scenery. I have found exactly the opposite. Last week while I was in Maine I saw some of the most spectacular country possible while geocaching. In fact, we found two great parks near my brother's house that he didn't even know about. And that's saying something if you know my brother! Anyway, the point is that geocaching done right can enhance a visit to a new place rather than detract from it.

Ron... I didn't enter most of the data by hand. I generated a Pocket Query and used the .loc files to generate most of the data automatically. I did have to enter the dates and states by hand. If you just wait a little, geocaching.com will be updating their result format to the new GPX format. It is a much more detailed XML format than the current .loc files (which are also XML). I've already written a Perl script that parses the XML in the .loc files; it will be easy to update once the GPX files become available. At that point, you (or I, for you) will be able to generate the Excel spreadsheet in question completely automatically, and you can play with the data to your heart's content!

Ron... I didn't enter most of the data by hand. I generated a Pocket Query and used the .loc files to generate most of the data automatically. I did have to enter the dates and states by hand. If you just wait a little, geocaching.com will be updating their result format to the new GPX format. It is a much more detailed XML format than the current .loc files (which are also XML). I've already written a Perl script that parses the XML in the .loc files; it will be easy to update once the GPX files become available. At that point, you (or I, for you) will be able to generate the Excel spreadsheet in question completely automatically, and you can play with the data to your heart's content!

But 22 of those were virtual caches in Washington DC, done in 2 days of intense geocaching.

After all the talk about different cache types, I did an amusing thing this weekend. I generated a spreadsheet of all the caches I have found, and got a summary how many of each cache type I've done, and where. It's not hard to do using Excel pivot tables. Let's see if it works: My stats as of 9/1/2002 Interesting, huh? Using the pivot tables, you can answer all kinds of questions, like how many caches you found in each month, how many on each day of the week, etc. With a little more work, I'll be able to calculate how far they are from me and other distance-replated things. Yeah, I know. I need to get a life. Personally, it is my goal to have finds in as many states as possible. 7 down, 44 to go (because DC is counted). I'm also hoping to find caches in other countries this fall. That seems to me to be more stylish than having tons of finds near home, but that's just my opinion. [This message was edited by fizzymagic on September 02, 2002 at 11:10 PM.]

After all the talk about different cache types, I did an amusing thing this weekend. I generated a spreadsheet of all the caches I have found, and got a summary how many of each cache type I've done, and where. It's not hard to do using Excel pivot tables. Let's see if it works: My stats as of 9/1/2002 Interesting, huh? Using the pivot tables, you can answer all kinds of questions, like how many caches you found in each month, how many on each day of the week, etc. With a little more work, I'll be able to calculate how far they are from me and other distance-replated things. Yeah, I know. I need to get a life. Personally, it is my goal to have finds in as many states as possible. 7 down, 44 to go (because DC is counted). I'm also hoping to find caches in other countries this fall. That seems to me to be more stylish than having tons of finds near home, but that's just my opinion. [This message was edited by fizzymagic on September 02, 2002 at 11:10 PM.]

quote:Originally posted by SuperGenius: I'm wondering if the caches are still in place or if he has removed them and plans on placing them in new spots. As far as I know, they are still there. I think he just inactivated them to keep the hordes off, which is quite responsible. I'm going to try to talk him into re-activating Shaken, Not Stirred and Bluebird's Delight where they are, as I think both spots are pretty immune to environmental damage, but I have a feeling that he'll move Joaquin's Stash, even though it is the best-hidden of them all. He mentioned something about wanting to put out better containers, which is also admirable. I'll let you know anything else I find out.

I have written a Perl script that turns geocaching.com .loc files into g7towin-compatible .csv files and also SA-compatible .txt files. g7towin (which is an excellent freeware program) worked with versions of Street Atlas up to version 9 (I don't know about the Road Warrior version) but doesn't work with SA 2003, which is a big disappointment for me. It will automatically send the waypoints to SA and plot them on a map with the text size, color, and position you choose. One particularly cool feature of g7towin is that as you open new files, it keeps adding the waypoints to its current list, which means you can put several .loc files into a single g7towin file. Very convenient. If g7towin doesn't work, then you can directly import the .txt files I generate into SA, and they display nicely. Right now I am importing them as mapnotes, because, as far as I can tell, there is no way to change the text position for a labeled symbol in SA 2003, and I often want to move the text around to make it work better. The downside is that you have to have Perl loaded onto your computer, and the Perl script also uses an XML parsing package that might not be installed by default by the ActiveState Perl installation program, which means you have to install it yourself. But Perl is also free, and if you want to give it a try, let me know and I'll send it on.

I got in touch with the guy who owns the three currently-inactive caches on Pleasanton Ridge. He wants to re-activate them, but is concerned that they should be moved because of the volume of traffic. Anyway, if all goes well they should be re-activated soon. So don't go placing any new caches too close!

The problem is that there aren't very many nearby caches that neither of us has done. Hippo would be OK, I guess. I'm trying to save a lot of the hiking caches for the cooler weather, so I have something to look forward to this fall and winter! But for this, I'd go for it!

quote:Originally posted by DisQuoi:You are not alone in this thinking. It seems people feel entitled to place a cache wherever they want. Whoa there, boy! I do not believe that we are entitled to put virtual caches anywhere we want! Please do not place words in my mouth! I am one of the only people I know who has (a) asked for permission to place virtual caches, and ( chosen to not place a virtual cache after asking permission. Each case must be taken on its merits. Here are a few examples of the range of possibilities: A land manager responsible for a park asks for removal of a physical cache. A land manager asks for removal of a virtual cache that is located in a portion of the park that is closed to the general public. A land manager of an off-road park asks for removal of a virtual cache for safety reasons. --- Here's where I draw my line --- A land manager asks for removal of a virtual cache from a portion of the park that is accessible to (and meant to be used by) the general public. Some lackey at the EPA decides that geocaching is contributing to global warming and requests that all caches of every type be removed from Federal lands. Somebody at the World Wildlife Federation decides geocaching is a threat to the environment and issues a press release demanding that all caches be removed worldwide. Joe Wacko from Arkansas decides that geocaching is attracting evil aliens to the planet and writes a letter to the editor asking that all geocaches be removed from everywhere. If you insist on making this an all-or-nothing issue, then you would be forced to draw your line below the last example. But it's not an all-or-nothing issue, and judgment is required. For this particular case, in which a land manager asked (in a very snotty way, I might add) that a virtual cache be removed from a spot that is accessible to the general public, I feel that acceding to the request is inappropriate. But please do not characterize my position (or that of anyone else in this thread) as advocating placing virtual caches wherever we d*mn well please. I also do not advocate ignoring the requests from land managers; I agree with DisQuoi that a dialog with them is the best thing. It's possible that, after further discussion, both parties would agree that removing the cache is the best thing, and then I would advocate its removal. My position is that in this case, removing the cache before undertaking a dialog would not be appropriate. Just for the sake of information: can anyone cite a case in which a virtual cache was removed from a park at the request of authorities, who then after discussion decided it was OK after all and allowed it to be reinstated? From my experience with bureaucrats, I am willing to bet that this has never happened. [This message was edited by fizzymagic on August 31, 2002 at 10:47 AM.]

quote:Originally posted by DisQuoi:You are not alone in this thinking. It seems people feel entitled to place a cache wherever they want. Whoa there, boy! I do not believe that we are entitled to put virtual caches anywhere we want! Please do not place words in my mouth! I am one of the only people I know who has (a) asked for permission to place virtual caches, and ( chosen to not place a virtual cache after asking permission. Each case must be taken on its merits. Here are a few examples of the range of possibilities: A land manager responsible for a park asks for removal of a physical cache. A land manager asks for removal of a virtual cache that is located in a portion of the park that is closed to the general public. A land manager of an off-road park asks for removal of a virtual cache for safety reasons. --- Here's where I draw my line --- A land manager asks for removal of a virtual cache from a portion of the park that is accessible to (and meant to be used by) the general public. Some lackey at the EPA decides that geocaching is contributing to global warming and requests that all caches of every type be removed from Federal lands. Somebody at the World Wildlife Federation decides geocaching is a threat to the environment and issues a press release demanding that all caches be removed worldwide. Joe Wacko from Arkansas decides that geocaching is attracting evil aliens to the planet and writes a letter to the editor asking that all geocaches be removed from everywhere. If you insist on making this an all-or-nothing issue, then you would be forced to draw your line below the last example. But it's not an all-or-nothing issue, and judgment is required. For this particular case, in which a land manager asked (in a very snotty way, I might add) that a virtual cache be removed from a spot that is accessible to the general public, I feel that acceding to the request is inappropriate. But please do not characterize my position (or that of anyone else in this thread) as advocating placing virtual caches wherever we d*mn well please. I also do not advocate ignoring the requests from land managers; I agree with DisQuoi that a dialog with them is the best thing. It's possible that, after further discussion, both parties would agree that removing the cache is the best thing, and then I would advocate its removal. My position is that in this case, removing the cache before undertaking a dialog would not be appropriate. Just for the sake of information: can anyone cite a case in which a virtual cache was removed from a park at the request of authorities, who then after discussion decided it was OK after all and allowed it to be reinstated? From my experience with bureaucrats, I am willing to bet that this has never happened. [This message was edited by fizzymagic on August 31, 2002 at 10:47 AM.]

quote:Originally posted by DisQuoi: In America, everyone has a right to be a d**k. Disquoi, I know you are an excellent cacher, and I respect your opinion, even if I disagree. I don't think namecalling will contribute to a productive discussion. I understand your point that land managers should attempt to protect their lands, but I don't follow your logic to the conclusion that we should immediately accede to any request from a land manager to remove a virtual cache from managed land. Most of these land managers have a mandate to protect the land while still keeping it open for public use. Demanding (or requesting) the removal of virtual caches is a very different thing from prohibiting off-road vehicles, for example. I would have no problem with a park manager choosing to step up enforcement of on-trail policies, or something equivalent. What bothers me is the idea that they can (or should) prohibit publication of coordinates that lie in their jurisdiction based only on the fear that such a publication might lead to damage.

quote:Originally posted by DisQuoi: In America, everyone has a right to be a d**k. Disquoi, I know you are an excellent cacher, and I respect your opinion, even if I disagree. I don't think namecalling will contribute to a productive discussion. I understand your point that land managers should attempt to protect their lands, but I don't follow your logic to the conclusion that we should immediately accede to any request from a land manager to remove a virtual cache from managed land. Most of these land managers have a mandate to protect the land while still keeping it open for public use. Demanding (or requesting) the removal of virtual caches is a very different thing from prohibiting off-road vehicles, for example. I would have no problem with a park manager choosing to step up enforcement of on-trail policies, or something equivalent. What bothers me is the idea that they can (or should) prohibit publication of coordinates that lie in their jurisdiction based only on the fear that such a publication might lead to damage.

We care, you know, even if we're not as active as these guys. Yesterday I read a post in the Forums by a guy who has done most of his geocaching in Las Trampas. He is sufficiently worried about rattlesnakes that he wears rolled-up newspapers under his pants legs! Wow. Did you get the TB from Pokey? I am going to Virginia at the end of next week, and that one looked like it needs to go that way, so I was thinking about making the climb to get it. But if you did, then maybe I don't have to!

We care, you know, even if we're not as active as these guys. Yesterday I read a post in the Forums by a guy who has done most of his geocaching in Las Trampas. He is sufficiently worried about rattlesnakes that he wears rolled-up newspapers under his pants legs! Wow. Did you get the TB from Pokey? I am going to Virginia at the end of next week, and that one looked like it needs to go that way, so I was thinking about making the climb to get it. But if you did, then maybe I don't have to!

There must have been a large increase in the number of automated programs sucking down data in the past couple of weeks. As it is, the maps are basically unusable. I know there was a big to-do with Buxley in the distant past over a related issue, but I see his maps are still going strong. Is there any way that you can enforce some kind of throttling to keep the automated data suckers from ruining the performance for the rest of us? For example, limiting DB queries to 1 per second, or something like that? Or will people just come from multiple IP addresses? My idea for how to fix it is to replicate the database to a server that is dedicated to automated queries only, and to prohibit automated queries on the main DB. Given that you're using SQL Server, that ought to be fairly straightforward. But, of course, I am no expert...

quote:Originally posted by DisQuoi: Meegan Flenniken's job is to protect the park from abuse and damage... The end does not justify the means. Government employees (of which I am, indirectly, one) have a responsibility to ensure that they do not exceed their statutory authority when doing their jobs. Police, for example, have the job of enforcing the laws, but they must be very careful to do that in accordance with the Constitution. Likewise, land managers may have the job of protecting their parks, but they cannot violate the law in doing so. Demanding the removal of virtual caches is clearly beyond the scope of their authority, and I think it sets a bad precedent for geocachers to accede to such a demand.

quote:Originally posted by DisQuoi: Meegan Flenniken's job is to protect the park from abuse and damage... The end does not justify the means. Government employees (of which I am, indirectly, one) have a responsibility to ensure that they do not exceed their statutory authority when doing their jobs. Police, for example, have the job of enforcing the laws, but they must be very careful to do that in accordance with the Constitution. Likewise, land managers may have the job of protecting their parks, but they cannot violate the law in doing so. Demanding the removal of virtual caches is clearly beyond the scope of their authority, and I think it sets a bad precedent for geocachers to accede to such a demand.