NeverSummer
-
Posts
3119 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by NeverSummer
-
-
When I've laminated cards for caches, I've always printed something on standard paper (laserjets are great!) and then laminated. I've never seen it fade, even on outdoor signs I've laminated and posted in the elements.
Can you explain a little more about what you're trying to keep from fading?
Just trying to write out coordinates to a multi. Some don't come with a container.
Gotcha.
As others have said, metal tags work well. I've seen anything from stamped dog tags, to etched pet tags (the kind you get at a pet shop and pay to get engraved by a machine), and then heavy foil with the coords somehow pressed into them with a point and using a soft medium as a backing to get it to take. All of those metal options lasted well in the elements, but can cost money you might not feel ready to spend. The etched tags will run you $5 a piece or so, but sure could make for a lasting tag and an easy theme for the cache.
Otherwise, I recommend the laserjet printing and laminating with a high-mil heat lamination. Make extras just in case you need maintenance runs, and call it good. Replacement could be the cost of doing business...
-
Reading the comments, I'm really wondering how many leaky, dangerous AA/AAA batteries are found in geocaches.
Maybe it's that the times have changed, and people aren't trading for them like they used to? A new set of batteries in a cache didn't last long as a trade item when I started caching, nor when I started caching on this website. And I never saw a set leaking or corroding to the point of fearing a hazard. And then, I would just trash them out...
-
When I've laminated cards for caches, I've always printed something on standard paper (laserjets are great!) and then laminated. I've never seen it fade, even on outdoor signs I've laminated and posted in the elements.
Can you explain a little more about what you're trying to keep from fading?
-
The flip side of this case has been this, personally:
Archived cache. Someone logs a "Found it" a while after archival, saying they "...found it after it was archived...I still had it in my GPS...". Thing is, I know it was gone, because I removed it before they said they had found it. Emails to the owner to clarify went unanswered. Log deleted.
So it all comes down to this: Are owners maintaining their cache listing and location of their hide? Not 100% compliant, we could all agree. If your cache is going to be archived, remove the cache. Done deal. That might mean it "goes missing" and someone finds it long after. Ok, ask that finder about the cache, and the owner goes to remove it after learning it's missing.
Or, they can re-submit a listing for the container, or ask for it to be enabled.
Bottom line is that owners need to take care of their listings and caches.
-
1. Stating that your cache is cross-listed on SecondaryCachingSite.com is bad form; most reviewers do not allow such statements as they are promotional.
What would happen? Would they archive the archived cache?
They could require you to delete the statement or delete it themselves.
What options to reviewers have when ANY guideline is violated in a cache listing?
But what about saying, "Archiving this cache. It is still active as a cache on another website, so please do not remove if you find it after archival on this website. Thank you."?
Rare case, I'm sure, but what's the harm there?
Again, archive the archived cache? Delete a log which helps make it clear that the container still remains, even if it isn't part of Geocaching.com's Geocache listing service anymore?
-
Did anyone notice that the photo for the "SWAG" question has a prominent image of a Travel Bug with a question about trading up or even for items like that?
*slow clap for marketing*
Yeah. That's what I was thinking...
-
I meant that there might be cross-posted GPS-related gamepieces in Georgia, unlike most Geocaches here in Alaska. I was stating the places where I have lived, and the trends I've seen with cross-posting. None of the states or areas I lived in had an epidemic of cross-posted caches, so I'd really say it isn't a worry overall when finding an archived Geocaching.com Geocache. But, still a good idea to check with an owner (if they respond?) and act accordingly.
Personally, I'd still remove the geotrash, as the cache was listed on Geocaching.com and not removed from its location--and the owner could/should state on the cache page on Geocaching.com that it is cross-posted so people might know in the future what it is they are finding, etc.
1. Stating that your cache is cross-listed on SecondaryCachingSite.com is bad form; most reviewers do not allow such statements as they are promotional.
2. There's one less "alternative listing site" than there was yesterday, so the concern is lessened by a significant degree today.
I didn't mean in the listing description. I meant perhaps adding it to their "Archived" log, if it was in fact the owner who archived the listing.
It's just nice to have owners who are clear, responsible, and honest. Just saying...
Edited to clarify.
-
Enjoy. Savannah is a great area.
Does that mean you'll be NeverWinter soon?
Believe me, I thought about my cache handle and the new locale! Moving around from MN to OR to MN to AK since starting with geocaching certainly has kept me in cooler climes!
-
Did anyone else take the new quiz yet? http://www.geocaching.com/blog/2015/08/new-quiz-do-you-know-your-geocaching-manners/
Did anyone notice that the photo for the "SWAG" question has a prominent image of a Travel Bug with a question about trading up or even for items like that?
Anyway...how'd y'all do?
-
A big issue is when you open the Groundspeak Apps (don't know about other geocaching apps, because I haven't used anything else by c:geo, and that was years ago), the GPS hasn't acquired accuracy.
So, if you pop open the app and take the coordinates before the app has time to catch up with the GPS and cell antennas, you'll get horrible coordinates.
Patience is the key, so you have to wait for the phone to "settle down", just as with a handheld GPS unit. I think many people (especially new to GPS technology; those who just expect GPS to "work", i.e.digital-age young adults and children) just turn on the app and think it should be all set to go. The nuance of GPS use isn't familiar to them, so they don't know to wait a bit so triangulation can occur with more accuracy...
-
I do agree that asking if the cache is cross-posted on another service is a good idea before walking off with an archived cache. There's not much of that to worry about up here in Alaska, but I know that it was an emerging issue in Minnesota, Oregon, and North Carolina (and likely in Georgia, where I'm moving to soon).
The other listing sites are really not 'a thing' in my area (metro Atlanta)...so I'm not sure what you mean by that. Around here, the biggest issue seems to be the primary reviewer who actually does his job and clears out abandoned caches (and the folks who don't like when he does that).
So what part of GA are you moving to?
I meant that there might be cross-posted GPS-related gamepieces in Georgia, unlike most Geocaches here in Alaska. I was stating the places where I have lived, and the trends I've seen with cross-posting. None of the states or areas I lived in had an epidemic of cross-posted caches, so I'd really say it isn't a worry overall when finding an archived Geocaching.com Geocache. But, still a good idea to check with an owner (if they respond?) and act accordingly.
Personally, I'd still remove the geotrash, as the cache was listed on Geocaching.com and not removed from its location--and the owner could/should state on the cache page webpage, via "Archived" log on Geocaching.com that it is cross-posted so people might know in the future what it is they are finding, etc.
I'm headed to the Savannah area.
Edited to clarify
-
1. If archived (on any listing service), the cache is out of the game.
2. The box turned into geo litter and should have been taken away by the cache owner, so no find is possible.
However, there is a grey area. If #2 hasn't happened (yet or because the CO doesn't know where it is) and the finder honestly isn't aware of the archiving, then I'd consider it a legal find. Just logging archived virtuals because no physical log is needed is foul play in my book...doesn't hurt anyone, but makes me laugh (again) about the significance of "found it" statistics.
If #2 doesn't happen for a long time, it's bad. There may be a bunch of reasons. Then, local geocachers should offer the CO to help getting the trash out or take action in a reasonable way. Geo litter shouldn't exist.
3. The archived cache is abandoned by the cache owner (shame shame!) but a geocacher, for whatever reason, goes out, finds it, and removes the geolitter, a find is perfectly acceptable in my book.
Yes. But there are some practical problems with that:
• why does the cacher search for the archived cache in the first place? If he knows it's archived, he should respect that. If not, well, then he doesn't even know, it's archived (D'oh!).
• if he didn't know that it's archived, how should he determine it in the field? Internet access isn't everywhere.
• even if he somehow learns on scene, it's archived: how does he know it's not active on another listing platform? Research? Internet access isn't everywhere. Better ask the owner! But that's not always possible on an outdoor trip.
• If he could mail the owner what's up with the cache and what to do, most probably, the reply will not be in time the cacher is still at the hide...
Just taking a cache without respecting CO's possession rights (and duties) because you think it's geo litter is not correct either. Determining this all in the field is very difficult.
Wait... "he should respect that"? Respect what, exactly? An archived cache does not mean anything other than that it should not be there anymore, and that it can't be searched in active caches. If an owner wants their archived cache to be "respected"by not getting any more "Found It!" logs, then they should assure that the cache is gone and logbook can't be signed.
I've found many caches that were left as geotrash by an owner (on purpose, by accident...doesn't matter), and logged the find. If the owner was no longer playing, or made it clear they thought it was gone, I've trashed or recycled containers.
I do agree that asking if the cache is cross-posted on another service is a good idea before walking off with an archived cache. There's not much of that to worry about up here in Alaska, but I know that it was an emerging issue in Minnesota, Oregon, and North Carolina (and likely in Georgia, where I'm moving to soon).
-
In the hobby, that's called being a "Cache Cop", and that will make you very unpopular. Could partially explain why, as you say, most of your correspondences go unanswered. NM logs are there for when you KNOW (or strongly suspect) there's a problem, and NA logs are there for when you KNOW (or strongly suspect) that a cache should be delisted from the site.
We are all cache cops. It isn't derogatory, but for those who get too frustrated with new geocachers or who don't want to take maintenance of their caches and listings seriously.
When someone new makes a "mistake", I would hope the owner has actually gone out and confirmed the cache is missing, rather than assuming it is still there because the last DNF, NM, or NA log came from a "newbie". Even new cachers can get the hang of the game, and we should all be so lucky to keep the same level of scrutiny and objectivity when playing this game as they might have.
To see both sides of the coin, don't be a "pushy" newbie. Be ready to learn, and to communicate with cache owners in a way that makes for a happy resolution. If you insist it is missing via a NA log, you're likely to get some sideways stares from the more experienced crowd. However, there's a chance that the newbie is right, and the cache needs attention. So that's where the flip side is for the cache owner to take a moment and be serious about cache maintenance--go out a check on the cache, restock the swag, sharpen the pencil, drop a new pen, be sure the container is where they intended it to be, etc. And if it's still there and the newbie missed it, offer some help so the new person can learn from the experience.
-
Part of cache ownership is, unfortunately in the case of theft of a container, maintaining the cache listing and site. Groundspeak can't do much about a container walking off, so all you can do is disable your cache(s), perform maintenance, and enable when you have new containers in place.
If you're aware of other caches which were taken, post a Needs Maintenance log to their cache page(s), and notify the owner directly about the context of the situation. Then they also need to maintain their cache listing and site by disabling, replacing, and enabling once it is back in play.
-
Good to know. Had no idea this is "by design". Very interesting!
-
I noticed that, after my newest cache was published, the map view was populating geoaches that were archived when I viewed at certain levels.
I've opted in for Google maps, using Chrome Version 43.0.2357.65 m.
Map, zoom level 12
Map, zoom level 11
Map, zoom level 11 showing archived cache(s)
I've tried logging off and on. Still persists.
-
Around Alaska many call it "pooshki" or "pushki", a Russian-influenced colloquialism for cow parsnip or, in the UK, hogweed. It isn't Queen Anne's Lace at all.
Get the sap on your skin and expose to sunlight, and you've got a nasty rash...yup. Been there, done that.
At least I didn't decide to weed whip it like an unknowing guy in town did, and awoke to find the whole of his face, arms, and legs covered in a rupturing painful and itchy rash.
-
One used to have skin in the game.
Before any of that skin, they had to know that geocaching existed, and which website they wanted to join.
Then the skin... A GPS unit ($-$$$) and an account with a valid email address. The former was needed for most people to play the game (some, yes, didn't use a GPS at all), and the latter to get online at Geocaching.com and to contact other users.
Now you can get an Application on your GPS-enabled smartphone and play. It can be free or paid, but still nowhere near the "skin" you needed to play up until the release of smartphone apps.
It's not about validated accounts, it's about being able to reach someone via a valid and active channel. Email is vastly better for many reasons (not least of which is that we all use it if we want to see logs, get notifications, get the newsletter, and/or communicate). The Message Center is good for many reasons, and answers the question of "how do I reach a new player who does not have a valid email address in their profile?". It doesn't answer much else, unfortunately.
And, as others can attest, using the MC doesn't always get a response from that user. (Neither did/does email...)
The MC is good. Email is good. If the two could be more strongly linked, it would be paramount. Take the good of both, combine them, and we'd have a stronger program. Sadly, as of this moment, it seems the MC is being favored over strengthening the email validation process and incorporating the strengths of an integrated email system.
-
So, you're telling me all geocaches hidden on guard rails, in national parks, in electrical boxes.. Should I go on here... . Have ALL been approved by the landowners/ state/highway trans.? Yeah, ok.
Probably not. I assume most lamppost caches in private parking lots do not have permission (especially those where permission is granted to be in the lot only to shop). I assume most guard rail caches do not have permission from relevant agencies. In California the state parks allow caches only within three feet of designated trails, so I assume most of the ones placed outside of that lack permission. I don't believe that utility companies want people poking around their green boxes. And utility poles are the property of the utility company - I came across a cache yesterday that featured a hole drilled into a utility pole and figured it was a double whammy.
I have even come across approved caches where the description warned against looking for it if you were afraid of encounters with law enforcement (you had to pass through a hole in the fence into a restricted area) or where neither the CO or the reviewer were concerned about a cache placed on posted property. There is even a cache or two that was removed by NPS people but replaced by cachers who liked the spot.
But none of this means anything other than that some people have a loose definition of adequate permission or that they check the box without reading it. Some agencies got tired of it and banned caches in certain areas. As to utility poles, law enforcement once warned me that I should not place a political poster on them because they were private property. So, yes, even if things are a bit loose, it does not mean that you should not want to do better.
And you can bet your...bippy, was it?
...that a cache in a National Park should have had explicit permissions. So, to the OP, this is an opportunity to learn a lesson. There are guidelines we need to follow, and if you find a geocache that breaks the guidelines, you should report it with a "Needs Archived" log. That goes for any guardrail, National Park, or electrical box you come across where there isn't a clear sense that permission was granted.
And, if you report a cache and the owner has permission, or the Reviewer is aware of an existing agreement or policy, they'll simply correct the issue and move on. If an owner gets steamed because someone doubted the permission of the hide, perhaps that owner should consider adding that explicit permission to the cache page as to not draw any more suspicion or confusion from future finders or Land Managers.
-
The best part is that the results of the survey we conducted through the Message Center banner and other usage statistics confirm what we hoped: the overwhelming majority of geocachers use it and like it.
The sentiment quoted above is based on a false assumption - that because someone uses the Message Centre they must like it.
As I stated, that "sentiment" is not based off usage alone - it's also based off the survey results, where the majority of players did express that they would recommend it to a friend and that they thought it would make communication with other players easier. I understand that it may not match the views of some of the players HERE on the forums. And while we take all feedback we get into account, it is a point of fact that the survey provided a sampling size that was MUCH larger than that of the forum participants (one of the main reasons we use other ways to gather this feedback). This is a data-driven statement, not a sentiment based on conjecture.
I will also take this opportunity to state that we are not exploring an "opt-out" to the Message Center. We are also not entertaining the idea of removing the contact-via-email system at this time either.
Survey data is good. Being aware of blind spots in a survey is paramount.
What are the demographics of respondents? What is the reliability of the survey in previous iterations? Who is responding?
Before waving survey statistics in support of a hypothesis, one should really address the basis of the survey and any reliability issues of survey research.
Also, merely using "would recommend to a friend" as a metric of appreciation and continued use is not relatable. Whether or not it might improve communication is related to far more than simply saying people overwhelmingly "like it"; for example, I think that it will improve communication with unvalidated users, and users of the Intro App. But I don't think that it will improve the overall communication in the game because of the myriad of examples presented above about why email is the better choice for how Groundspeak and Geocaching.com do business.
The site was designed around email and notifications and sortability. Now we are left with a "convenience item" which does not help in the grand scheme, but apparently is lauded as a great success because of inappropriate survey result analysis.
My advice? Ask a survey professional to set up a survey that captures the question you are trying to answer more accurately. One can test for reliability on a test group before sending to the masses, and response rate (what was the N for this Message Center survey, anyway?) will need to be included in any discussion or analysis about the validity of the results.
So far this survey process educated guy sees immense piles of reliability and validity issues in the lauded survey results.
...And I'm not just saying this because I don't really like the MC.
Heck, if the MC could be an opt-in, that would be an improvement. If the MC in the Intro App would open a browser to go to the Geocaching.com website, we'd immediately be able to handle the unvalidated email issue (the unvalidated would HAVE to log in and validate to be able to see the message, but you could still have the incoming messages ping the user to know it's there. The user can send messages to owners via the MC on the App, but to read one via the App people should be bumped to a browser window instead of within the App. And then, all MC messages should come with the same process as any other log or notification from Geocaching.com so it can be sorted within personal email accounts.
You see, I think it can improve communication, but the survey didn't capture what I mean when I click that check box on the survey. I would also recommend it, but not for the reasons one might guess based on the invalid and unreliable survey being touted as a big MC Beta win.
-
...and to TheShaw3, we're not trying to be sticks-in-the-mud. The permission guideline is in place for the good of the game as a whole. If land managers find out we're hiding caches on private property without permission, they could ban geocaching on their land. This has already happened in some areas, putting great cache-hiding areas completely off-limits.
It's in everyone's best interest to make sure each cache is allowed to be where it is and to not get on the bad side of land managers.
Edit: Cross-posted. I wonder if that reviewer is aware that utility poles are almost always private? I would think so, but you never know...
So, you're telling me all geocaches hidden on guard rails, in national parks, in electrical boxes.. Should I go on here... . Have ALL been approved by the landowners/ state/highway trans.? Yeah, ok.
Perhaps you may have read a post earlier in this thread about the Two Ponds cache. In that instance, a cache was placed on posted private property. The thread was very long but near the end one particular cacher was expressing a lot of concern over the handling of the cache and the cavalier attitude some had about placing and finding a cache on private property. That geocacher is also a land manager in Alaska that works for an entity that manages hundreds of thousands of acres of land. If you think that you're getting a lot of heat in this thread now, what do you think the response would if you're "I don't care if it's private property" attitude was the straw that broke the camels back and caused this land manager endorse a no-geocaching policy that would essentially prohibit geocaching on hundreds of thousands of acres.
Millions of acres.
And yes, what would happen if another example of a Reviewer and cacher ignoring private property/permission issues came up, and in such quick succession after Two Ponds?
-
This all makes me think....
Why doesn't the Message Center notification within the Intro (free) App simply open the browser to Geocaching.com, and then ask for the user to log in? That way they would HAVE to validate their email address to get their messages, which would also help with a zillion other issues we have seen come up with unvalidated new users.
-
It's clearer and clearer to me that I won't be wanting to the message center. If I get a message through the MC I'm going to respond via e-mail ... if I choose to reply. It's simple. I get an e-mail, I choose to reply, I get a response and the back and forth continues on that one topic until it has run it's course. Next time? New thread, not hashed up by the first one. Just imagine, two folks could communicate on two different topics in overlapping times and they wouldn't be mixed together. E-mail sounds better to me.
I have been getting more summer visits to my Earthcaches. 95% of the answers sent to me have now come from the "Message Center". To reply I email the user; I don't reply using the "Message Center".
The problem I'm having is that there is no obvious link to the user's profile from the MC. There is one, but you have to know to click the profile picture of the user instead of their username at the top. Counter intuitive, if I might say so myself.
So this makes me wonder...is there a link to profiles generated within the Intro App? I use the paid App, so I have no idea how it works in the App format. (Speaking of, one of my peeves about the Apps is that there is no way to link to externally view a player profile, including your own, from with the phone applications.) There really, really should be a link to view profiles...it's how I prefer to contact people, and also helps me with context when someone asks questions about my hides or otherwise.
Being able to "hide" a conversation is nice, but I'd rather be able to view things in a related thread. If there is a general conversation, keep that in one spot. If there is a communication about an Earthcache, I want that in in its own spot. I don't like the "text message" jumble of discussion...and the fact that I can't search it like I can from my personal email account.
So, I continue to reply to users via email. If they choose not to use email to communicate, I can't promise that they'll get the answers they want, or that they'll even see when I might delete a photo or log when answers to my Earthcaches are incorrect, etc.
-
How about something a bit more modern?
How quaintThere is an attribute, sort of. I've used this icon on a few of my remote-cache listings:
Note the retro phone shape; eventually it won't mean anything to anybody.
I still don't think we need this attribute though. Actually, I think the current "[No] Telephone Nearby" attributes are pretty pointless now too.
Just rename the attribute then...? Simple enough to just call the "telephone nearby" attribute "Phone available nearby". That can mean a pay phone or cell phone signal.
But a cell signal isn't enough most of the time to get maps downloaded, caches loaded, or to log a find from the field.
I think that being prepared for when you leave the house to hunt a cache is more important than working out a new attribute, but I also see why some may want to have it. I say, "meh".
...that a cache in a National Park should have had explicit permissions.
Etiquette Quiz
in General geocaching topics
Posted · Edited by NeverSummer
Uh, precisely my point!
There you go. That's more to the point than the batteries being the problem--SWAG is only going to be in as good a condition as the cache container, and the valuation of "equal, greater, or not at all..." as an exchange process.
Cache maintenance is a very important etiquette topic, and container choice as well. If we want to see good SWAG, then we need containers which can handle it (good seals, maintained well, and big enough to hold stuff). Also, we need Groundspeak to realize when they've put a Travel Bug prominently on display for a topic about trade items which need to be "up or evenly" traded...
Edit to snip an OT rant