Retcon
-
Posts
146 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Retcon
-
-
It's the only way I'll exercise
I can't sit on a stationary bike for more than 10 minutes (Though I can ride my bike to work for 40 minutes. I can't wait until it's warm enough). I can't walk around the block (Wwll, I can. But I don't like to. It's boring and you see the same stuff every time).But I can hike around a lake or through a park or up a hill to find a cache. It's fun and I don't realize how much work it is *becuase* it's fun. When I get home I feel tired and happy and accomplished. And my gut's smaller than it was this time last year.
-
That would be sweet.
Of course, premium members can use pocket queries to dump them all into GSAK. GSAK allows you to set a centre point and show each cache's distance from that point. You can then sort them by placed date.
(Today, the answer to every question will be 'pocket queries'.
)Why do it simply if it can be done more complicated.
Why should they program every single possible query type if what you want can be done another way?
-
What have you gained, except another increment in the meaningless number displayed on this web site after your name?
You say that like it's not enough.
-
Clearly, you are not going to be happy with any answer I give you. Rather than continuing to go around and around, I'm going to go cast some rocks.The bottom line is that you never came up with any "common" and "plausible" reasons that people would ignore 1/1 urban caches.While I'm gone, your welcome to check out the uses given by other posters to this thread such as Mr T, Retcon, Neos, and B&BD. I think Retcon even gave a version of the 'France' usage in his list.
If that isn't satisfying to you, you could always go back and take a look at the other threads that have requested this feature. Perhaps you will find uses there that you approve of.
Clarification: While I said that it was remotely possible that many people are ignoring your cache not because it's a stinking pile of geotrash, but instead for some unrelated reason, it's far more likley that a cache with a large number of ignores (compared to nearby caches) needs some TLC.
Note, in the case of the England/France thing, or the bay mentioned in some other thread, *all* caches in the area would have inflated ignore counts. If every cache in the area has 5 ignores, the average ignore for the area is 5. Someone who ignores based on location (other side of the bay) inflate the average along with the specific counts, so it doesn't make any cache stand out as a potential problem.
As an aside, what is so wrong with listing something negative? I mean, come on, are we not adults? This makes me think of when I was in grade school and they gave out ribbons for 17th place so everybody got a ribbon. If your cache totally sucks, I *want* you to know it. If my cache totally sucks, I surely want to know it so I can try harder. If the only feedback I get is flowery goodness, how can I improve?
-
If you could figure out GC.COM's GC naming scheme, you could endlessly query near-future schema assignments for the whole world, then filter for your proximity coords, then stay up 24 hours a day.......
No, just make it play a really loud sound file to wake you up. It'd be like the Ghostbusters. Alarm goes off, you and your friends jump out of bed, slide down a pole, get in your geomobile and are off!
-
Ahhhh why don't you go over France and ignore some caches in England...
As worthless as an ignore count.
A watchlist count would be worthless. It would only tell you which people love getting tons of email and also which people haven't learned to use bookmarks yet...
I suspect that that is not going to happen for the same reason as it hasn't happened with the watch list.You need to be intuitive sometimes. Once the feature was added, it could also be added as a PQ filter or just added to the GPX file where I could create a custom filter in GSAK that takes out any 1/1 caches that were on X people's ignore lists. I'd have to experiment with X to see what value worked best.Edited to add that it probably won't happen also because it concentrates on the negative, rather than the positive.
Was there any purpose at all to this post?
It made me laugh, is that purpose enough?
No, probably not.
-
The little orange rectangle next to a post on the main forum page is a link that will take you to the next post you haven't read.
-
I try to log at least something about each cache I go to. When I started, all my logs were of the TNLNTFTC because I simply didn't know any better. These days, TNLN implies your cache was lame
Sometimes, especially when you do several caches in a row, it's hard to remember which cache was which. They run together in your mind. I'd take notes, but in the winter it's hard enough holding the pen long enough to sign the logbook, little alone take personal notes.
I would suspect that most of the short loggers are people who don't also hide caches. That's just a guess, but I expect it's true. When you have a cache of your own (I presume, I don't have any yet) I suspect you realize the worth of longer logs, and therefore make them yourself.
-
You're looking at it all wrong. On one singular cache the numbers don't mean anything. Let's play a different game that matches the real world better.Let's play a game. Say you have a cache--nothing special, just an ammo box in the woods, average woodsy terrain and hide difficulty that has been there for two years with 200 finds.
50 people are watching it and 50 people are ignoring it. What does that 'tell' you?
*snip the rest for berevity*
Say you have 20 caches. They're nothing special, just ammo boxes in the woods, average woodsy terrain and hide difficulty, some a bit harder some a bit easier, of various sizes. They've all been around for a year or two and each have between 100 and 300 finds.
19 of them have about 5 watching and 5 ignoring. 1 of them has 1 watching and 25 ignoring.
What does that tell you?
It tells me that people MAY NOT like that cache. It tells me to critically look at it and see if it's possibly bad. Perhaps its not. Perhaps it's just fine. But perhaps it's too close to a playground, or a nursery school. Perhaps they put a busy gas station in next door. Or perhaps it's on the other side of a big body of water and people are ignoring it to keep it off their list (In which case, I can safely say it's okay). The information, however, was useful in that it caused me to think about the viability of my hide. Which, I think, cannot be bad.
-
Seeing a short log could indicate to you that your cache isn't very good. It could also indicate to you that the person who logged it was busy, or never logs anything.
I think therefore we should remove being able to view logs. They don't give us any solid information about our caches, so are useless.
-
Last month, I "found" a cache. It was a micro in the woods (but a good hide. Proof I don't hate micros en masse, but only certain ones) and where it was had filled with water, and then that water had frozen. It was about 10-20 degrees Farenheit, and had been for about a month. Short of a blow torch, I wasn't getting that cache. But, I could see it. In fact, I could even *touch* part of it. But I couldn't actually retrieve it or sign the log.
I logged it as a find, and have no qualms about it. I logged in that find that I couldn't sign the log, and why. The owner then verified this in another log. Personally I think we both fulfilled our obligations.
-
You don't have to use PayPal.
Just go here and use your credit card.
http://store.Groundspeak.com/ProductInfo.a...uctid=GSPANNUAL
Just be aware that credit card payments are handled by a human, so if you enter your information on a weekend, you'll have to wait until Monday for your account to be upgraded.
Something to be aware of
Which explains why I'm still a basic member after ordering the "upgrade" (oops, forgot to renew, even though they sent me the email
) a couple hours ago.I feel so naked without the premium membership.
-
If I had 30 caches out there, and 29 of them were being ignored by 3 people each (on average, say), and 1 of them was being ignored by 137 people.... I think that information would be useful.
-
I think that's a great idea. In fact, I think reviewers should be able to see the number too.
-
if found to be a sport, can we get it in the Olympics?
Yes, right after NASCAR.
-
They won't fit under a lamp post's skirt.
No, seriously, there are no drawbacks that I can think of to using an ammo box for a cache, so long as it'll fit where you're putting it. If it mentions that it's holding explosives you may want to paint over that.
-
Some of you guys are really grasping at straws.....Oops, I was going to add one other note. Not every hide in a parking lot is a LPC. So how can you "spot" it before you find it. There was one I was sure was going to be a LPC, but it was very different camo hide at a lamp post.
No, just an observation that not all hides are what they may seem to be when you first approach. Jumping to the conclusion that it's a LPC - and then skipping it - makes you miss those creative hides you want.
So, the only way to find out if you'll like a cache is to find it.
And the moment you find it is the moment it doesn't matter any more if you will like it or not.
-
And I think the website should list an approximate size. I hate going to find a cache and not know what I'm looking for.
-
After my last post, I checked and our reviewer has posted telling them to fix it or lose it (Though he/she was much nicer about it
) so no worries there. It's a great park with tons of trails and *no* other caches in it. I'm a bit geoexcited. I should start planning more in earnest. -
Cool. So I should jump in there and make it soon
-
So, it all comes down to what sucks more. I can see how different people would have different feelings on that matter. Personally, I couldn't care less if someone "cheated" and got to the end without doing the intervening 5 stages. Even if they logged that they did so, so long as someone else (and preferably many someone elses) logged how great and creative those 5 stages were.
Locally, there's an unavailable multi in a large park, and I'd like to place my not-yet-finalized multi in that same park, but i can't even *do* the other multi to check where the waypoints are. Knowing it's there is making me gunshy though. Do unavailable (not archived) caches still hold their area?
-
OK, what about part 2... How much did it hurt them, you, or Geocaching as a whole? It can't up their numbers much, as they could just go to the parking lot across the street and grab that lamp post cache. They put a *ton* of work into it so they're not exactly being lazy, and they're not keeping anybody else from finding the cache so they're not hurting anything. It's like cheating at solitaire. Go ahead, you're only ruining the game for yourself, and if you enjoy it more... Maybe you're *not* ruining the game for yourself.I believe the flood-control idea (ie, you can only do one per hour, and if you do, say, 5 in a day you can't do any more until you talk to your reviewer) will stop all potential cheating, and it's the simplest idea to implement other than just simply letting people make as many reqests as possible.
Incidentally, is there really that much fear that someone will abuse this to get multis, and if someone does, is it really that big a deal?
Fine, just create sock puppet accounts to get around the flood control limit. Or, if it's a premium member only feature, get together with a few of your friends to crack that nasty puzzle cache.
If you think this is a theoretical argument, I've got a great story for you. *SNIP FOR SPACE* (I like the story
)And in the meantime, my 6 stage multi doesn't have to go through another revision
(Note: I don't have a 6 stage multi going through revisions)
-
I believe the flood-control idea (ie, you can only do one per hour, and if you do, say, 5 in a day you can't do any more until you talk to your reviewer) will stop all potential cheating, and it's the simplest idea to implement other than just simply letting people make as many reqests as possible.
Incidentally, is there really that much fear that someone will abuse this to get multis, and if someone does, is it really that big a deal?
-
I personally haven't gone more than maybe 10-20 miles for a cache. I scrapped a 15-mile journey this past weekend (due to weather, assuredly not distance) which will likely, next weekend, be among the longer trips specifically to cache.
I see no reason at all to go after a cache that is hundreds of miles away. *Maybe* if I could form some sort of vacation around it, but that's doubtful. Fitting caching into an otherwise noncaching vacation, sure. I'm going on a cruise in November and you can be sure the laptop and gps are coming along.
I can't sit on a stationary bike for more than 10 minutes (Though I can ride my bike to work for 40 minutes. I can't wait until it's warm enough). I can't walk around the block (Wwll, I can. But I don't like to. It's boring and you see the same stuff every time).
)
) a couple hours ago.
To DNF or not?
in General geocaching topics
Posted
Other than the irreperable harm it'll do to the (failed) cacher's poor little emo life? No.