BeachBuddies

quote:Originally posted by welch:If your trying to find out what other cachers think about Locationless caches, why post a poll about Cachless caches? I should have written "cacheless" there, as I did in the title of the poll. This isn't meant to be a scientific, definitive study Welch. I just thought it was an interesting topic for discussion. And polls are kind of fun.

quote:Originally posted by welch:Did you know Locationless caches (scagenger type caches), are not being approved, until the 'new' gc.com site comes online. At which time locationless caches will have their own section (or so I've heard).(paragraph #1) Yes, I had heard a little about that. I tried to post a locationless cache a while back, and it was archived at the time. I have not heard many detail about what the changes will be. I think having a separate area for locationless caches will be a good thing. quote: welch: And this would be like the 'hiding' of the benchmarks (one of the poll choices). I'm not very familiar with benchmarks yet. I'll check it out, thanks. quote: welch:Do you realize that gc.com is currently (or its what is claimed) not approving Virtuals if a phyisical could be placed there? (paragraph #3) I knew they were getting more strict about it. That's probably good. Though, like you, I hope it's more of a guideline than a hard-and-fast rule. quote: welch:"So, which direction do you think geocaching.com should take?" Im not sure what your asking?... I'm really just trying to do a survey to find out how geocachers feel about locationless caches. I'm not trying to decide (or even influence) the future of geocaching.com. Just wondering if there's a consensus among most cachers. But it is a difficult topic to cover in a single poll. There's so much variety, even within the single category of locationless caches.

By "cacheless" caches, I mean to include those which do not have any item(s) concealed by the person who registered them. Generally, this means locationless caches and virtual caches. I would not include logbook-only caches in this category. I'm not sure what "logless" caches are, but if they have a hidden cache (just without a logbook), then I would not consider those "cacheless" either.

It seems that the biggest ongoing controversy related to geocaching is whether "cacheless" caches should be part of geocaching.com. First, let me say I think there are some clever and interesting locationless caches out there. For example, "Where's in a Name?". That cache requires cooperation with another cacher, probably in another country. An interesting way to meet people. Virtual caches are a bit more problematic. In almost all cases, a virtual cache could be replaced with a multi-cache (using something at the site of the virtual cache to lead to a real cache). I have done a few virtual caches, and they were at fun spots that I'm glad I now know about. However, they would have been better IMHO if they lead to a real cache. None of the ones I have done *had* to be just virtual. There's also benchmarking, confluence points, letter-boxing, and other similar related hobbies. So, which direction do you think geocaching.com should take? What are your thoughts on cacheless caches? [This message was edited by BeachBuddies on June 01, 2003 at 09:21 AM.]

Personally, I really like the Letterbox concept. Take a stamp, leave a stamp. If you don't know what Letterboxing is, check out: http://www.letterboxing.org/ The only "hard" part is making your own stamps (and that would probably be fun too, if I had any talent :-) I wish more caches did that sort of thing -- because I like the GPS/hike aspect of geocaching better than the clue-following of letterboxing. They're both quite fun though. -BeachBuddies Yes I'm lost, but at least I know my coordinates!

Will do, thanks for the tip Team Piggy. -BB Yes I'm lost, but at least I know my coordinates!

Thanks for the tip. My PDA is dead at the moment, but I'm in the market for a new one (probably a cell phone / PDA combo). Sounds like a great tool, I'll check it out as soon as I get a chance. -Beach Buddies Yes I'm lost, but at least I know my coordinates!

I just noticed Rockhampton is pretty close too, so if that works for you, let me know. Thanks so much!

Anyone live near or making a trip to Alice Springs? That seems to be my best hope of posting for this Locationless Cache. If you don't know what I'm talking about, check out this link. Lots of fun. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=12627 I need someone to get a picture (with GPS showing coordinates) anywhere along 23 22.42S, which is just a little bit north of Alice Springs. We both get to log a find :-) -J (Beach Buddies) ps. Guangdong province in China works too (23N), but I don't think anyone will be making a trip there for me for a while.

I'll e-mail the caches I know of that are currently classified as "Traditional", and ask them to re-classify as "Multi". Searching in the wrong/posted spot isn't a issue for me -- I always read everthing I can about the cache; I have enough trouble finding them in the right spot :-) But I have noticed several posts from seekers who just downloaded the waypoints, and then went looking (usually as targets of opportunity as they drive nearby). However, I do really like to solve the offset puzzle caches (more than the other type of multi-caches), so it would be great if there were a way to search for those. Sounds like attributes (if hiders use them) will work for me. Thanks. -Beach Buddies ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ The BeachBuddies ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I think it would be great if you could add a new icon for "offset" caches. Right now, there's no easy way to distinguish these, and people end up looking for caches at the wrong location. Virtual caches are different, and the "unknown" cache icon is not quite appropriate either. Here's my suggestion for an icon: Offset Cache icon Thanks! -The Beach Buddies

Hi -- I have Magellan Meridian Platinum, and would like to get some software that lets me move data from the GPS to my PC. I expected this to be bundled with the GPS, but apparently not. Specifically, I would like to transfer my track history points. Can anyone suggest a solution? Thanks! -J