Jump to content

addisonbr

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    1772
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by addisonbr

  1. Yes, I always have the first two boxes checked. The only box I never check is the one about sending a friend request.
  2. This problem (for me) seems to have reared its head again. I was trying to send about a dozen notifications today to people that I was marking their TBs as missing (my monthly housecleaning), and I got a message that the system seems to be incredibly displeased with me: This feels more final and serious to the messages I usually get. Normally, after I've sent a small handful I simply get a message to take a break and come back later, so I do. And I got one of those today. But after coming back and sending out a few more notices, now I got this like perma-block. For how long am I in the doghouse, does anyone know? What is a session? Am I doing something that Groundspeak would prefer I not do (notifying cache owners that their bugs have gone missing)? Thanks for any guidance.
  3. Yeah, I just meant as a term that has a positive vibe, I think 'open' is cool. I respond positively to it anyway. But to your main point, none of that changes the fact that someone else was using it though.
  4. I actually disagree with the latter part; as a fan of opensource and etc. I think it's a great and positive name. But... it was already being used by other people. You're completely right about the alienation. I never quite understood that move.
  5. The Malice Box by Martin Langfield is quite clearly written by a cacher. It doesn't mention geocaching per se, but the protagonist does a lot of geocaching-like stuff.
  6. There's also the rare / old placement date. Not a lot of caches left placed in 2000 or with four-digit waypoint numbers (GC92). From what I have observed, those tend to get a lot of favorites points as well.
  7. It's a concern, even if the fake sprinkler head is nowhere near real sprinkler heads. There is a cache hidden in a local park that is not a fake sprinkler head (it's a standard bison tube, although it's hidden very deviously). But there is a real sprinkler head nearby. On my first attempt I wound up partially disassembling the real sprinkler head before realizing my mistake. I've kept it on my watchlist since and it's happened multiple times since then. I'm not sure what the solution is, really. But I have noticed what you suspected - fake sprinkler heads in one location seem to affect real sprinkler heads in totally different locations.
  8. I think you might be overstating my response just a bit. I'm just pointing out that I didn't see anything on the cache page saying that the caches are restricted access. If, when I got there and paid my admission I was handed literature that says that I'm not allowed in that part of the park, that would certainly change things. I see here a situation where there are a ton of opportunities for failure that may have worked together. If what you're saying is true, that there are caches that are listed here in a park (or a section of a park) that is not actually open to the public, I really do think that the CO should edit the cache page to reflect this. It doesn't absolve any FTF hounds who break the law. But as a CO I think there is a responsibility to mention things like "This cache has been placed in a restricted area that the public is not allowed to access without express pre-approved permission." FTF hounds who willfully ignore the law are wrong. But CO's should still post when their caches are located in strictly restricted areas that the public isn't allowed to access. Long after the FTF hounds have moved on to the next publication, there will still be other cachers who rely on the cache page for important information like this. What does it hurt the CO to include it?
  9. This is what I saw on the first one I clicked on: I didn't see anything about "event-only" or "restricted access". I might have made the (apparent) mistake of going for this cache outside of the associated event. I don't even have events on my notifications, so would never have known that non-event-goers weren't welcome until the angry emails started rolling in.
  10. You've got to get the word out to all cachers somehow, to not go yet. That's what the listing page's first sentence does. I don't know if you're referring to these specific caches, or other caches you've seen in the past... and I don't know if these caches had their descriptions edited in the last few hours. But I didn't see the leading sentence you're referring to?
  11. I always thought that the advantage dedicated units was also due to having much bigger antennas. But I'm not that well versed in this stuff.
  12. Challenge caches are "Unknown" cache types with no puzzle. Bonus caches that require finding other caches first to obtain the coordinates to the final are "Unknown" cache types with no puzzle. (They are similar to challenge caches but can be slightly different in a lawyerly way.) Standard caches that had ALR's, back when ALR's used to be allowed, were listed as "Unknown" cache types and usually did not have puzzles. Traveling caches may no longer be listed, but many of the grandfathered traveling caches are listed as "Unknown" cache types with no puzzle. There might be others. Of what I listed above, only Challenge and Bonus caches might not have some sort of puzzle attached. Challenge caches are an exception to the ALR prohibition and Bonus caches are sometimes puzzles but sometimes multi caches dressed up as blue question marks.
  13. Mine have become Mapquest maps, but there is still a link to Google Maps.
  14. Yes, exactly. It's just a list of people who have actively uploaded their stats there.
  15. Very cool guy and I have no doubt that number is real. He helped me out with a puzzle hunt I was putting on for kids by hand-delivering 1000 europennies to me while he was briefly in New York. Couldn't be a nicer guy.
  16. If I am caching with someone - i.e., we meet up ahead of time and head to GZ together - I will generally co-FTF any finds we make as a team. If I see other folks at GZ, I will generally not co-FTF something if I didn't find it first. If I do find it first I don't mind if other people claim a co-FTF on it. Doesn't make my froot loops taste any worse the next morning.
  17. It's not obvious to me why this thread would get locked - what am I not following?
  18. 63 found within a mile of my apartment... and counting
  19. The waypoints for the first bunches of caches that were bulk imported into Groundspeak's servers were input to the system not by date but by state order, starting with states in the Pacific Northwest and then moving across the rest of the country. The dates for the earliest caches can often be established by examining the old posts to the usenet forums, before there was a Groundspeak (it may surprise some new folks that geocaching existed before Groundspeak did, and people advertised their caches on usenet and on mailing lists.) For those who like geocaching history (I count myself firmly among them) it can be fun to go through that old, public-domain data. Here is a post that pretty much establishes Mingo's existence on May 11th 2000: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.geo.satellite-nav/browse_thread/thread/5482bb5ab0e5080f/987e67d70a04562d?lnk=gst
  20. I currently do Option Two, by necessity. But usually the bookmark list I'm deleting isn't something that has outlived its usefulness as a long-ago-completed-challenge, but something else that is interesting to me. I don't currently have any challenge BM's, but I'm at my 40-list limit... I had to delete one the other day. Yes, this is a first-world problem.
  21. Interesting, and politely stated. Does that mean that your challenge is effectively a PMO cache? Are there no compromises you would allow, no communication from a cacher that might indicate successful navigation of the challenge other than a bookmark list?
×
×
  • Create New...