wcgreen

quote:Originally posted by CreagerStone Family:Is it OK to place a cache in an area you'll probably never visit again? I know cache owners are supposed to look after the cache, but 170 miles away from home is a bit of a jaunt for "maintenance". What you're really asking is "will unknown people sometime in the future carry a new container, cleaning supplies, a new log book, writing implements, Ziploc Bags, and great trade goods to my cache because I'm not willing to?" The answer to that is "maybe--but not likely." If you must place this cache, then watch its log and archive it should it become water-logged, plundered, go missing, etc. When you can make the 170-mile drive, go and fix the cache, then remove it from the archives. wcgreen

quote:Originally posted by Web-ling:Used golf balls are one of my 4-year-old son http://www.geocaching.com/profile/default.asp?A=25993's favorite things to find in a cache. He nearly always trades for them. Which is NOT to say I appreciate people leaving them in caches, however. Today, I did maintenance on my four non-virtual caches. Micro--nothing shabby in it ('way too small for trade items) Trad. cache--said to be overfull by last finder: removed two used golf balls, a loose temporary tattoo, a unwrapped McToy, and a broken pencil with teeth marks. I also consolidated all the plastic kiddie jewelry in a kid's purse (already in cache) Trad. cache: removed a broken toy from one--finder had posted in log that it was from another cache; I think a child placed it both times--and some leaf mound (not a trade item) Trad. cache: nothing shabby but a wide social trail had developed (forget dogs; someone in KY is caching with an elephant), so I moved it. So, after six weeks of letting them be, I had two golf balls and some shabby items. There are no golf courses nearby, so someone is deliberately carrying golf balls to trade/leave when they cache. wcgreen

quote:Originally posted by solohiker:If someone came at you with a giant set of toenail clippers? I would confiscate them. If we let people cache with giant sets of toenail clippers, the terrorists will have won. wcgreen

With Mozilla, those eyes blink twice and stop, leaving me with a picture of a toe with two black gapping holes. It looks like an evil clown and it's really creepy. What's more is I posted a topic last night about them and I can't find any mention of it today. wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

With Mozilla, those eyes blink twice and stop, leaving me with a picture of a toe with two black gapping holes. It looks like an evil clown and it's really creepy. What's more is I posted a topic last night about them and I can't find any mention of it today. wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by travisl:OT: While driving to one of my company's vendor's offices, I discovered I was driving past X-10's headquarters building. It was everything I could do to prevent myself from pulling into their parking lot and throwing a bunch of print ads at their building. X-10's headquarters is one place where I'd happily place an opaque cache that contained a ticking clock.... wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by travisl:OT: While driving to one of my company's vendor's offices, I discovered I was driving past X-10's headquarters building. It was everything I could do to prevent myself from pulling into their parking lot and throwing a bunch of print ads at their building. X-10's headquarters is one place where I'd happily place an opaque cache that contained a ticking clock.... wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by cachew nut:One thing I am curious about is how many cacher's dogs actually do understand that they are looking for a cache and are able to sniff them out? I'm sure that some do, but seriously think that unless your dog is a bloodhound, the dog is mostly there for companionship or protection, and does little to help find the cache. I often take my retriever with me. She can't find the caches that I've set out, let alone anyone else's box. In fact, she can be an annoyance--winding her leash around bushes while I search, darting off after rabbits and squirrels while I try to hold still and read my GPS, and so on. What she provides is companionship. I don't feel alone on a trail with her along and I enjoy her enthusiasm. Whether I find a cache or not, a day in the woods is a great day for her. It reminds me that I should feel that joy, too. wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by Sissy-n-CR: However, if there DID come a time where there is a checkbox to say if the cache is dog friendly, I'd probably routinely check "no." Why? I think it slightly unfair to dogless cachers for dog owners to train dogs to sniff out caches, but most especially, scat on the trail and those who don't mind their mutt "marking" the cache--that's simply disgusting. How many pee-stained caches have you found? Did you test the stains for species origination? There are some very dominant and possessive human cachers, so that might not have been dog urine you smelled.... wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by GoldKey:If the default is Don't Know, then that is exactly what we have now. If they know and want to tell you, they would list it in the description, it would be there. For conveying this type of information, I still think the description is the best place to do it. I will admit that if you wanted to search only for dog friendly caches, having this as a checkbox and seachable field would make this helpful. However, adding more fields to the database are bound to add complexity, so unless a lot of users really want this information presented in this fashion I still think it is unnecessary. I use the the name of the place or its management with this rule of thumb: Preserve = no dogs Owned by the Nature Conservancy (or anything with "Conserv-" in its name) = no dogs Run/owned by the Audobon Society = no dogs Wildlife Sanctuary = no dogs I did a hike (not a cache) at a state preserve; the web site did not mention dogs, but a paper sign thumbtacked to a post in the parking lot forbade their presence. We ignored it (our dog stayed on on the trail and on her leash for that hike), but we had no defense had we been observed by park mgmt. wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by The Leprechauns:*please* tell me that nobody is taking bonsai kittens seriously?????? Barnum was right, y'know. Back when Omni Magazine was still in-print, it ran a series of memos discussing the "manufacture" and marketing of legless cats to apartment dwellers. I remember one covering the necessity of carrying the cat to its letter pan and how best to sell this as a feature.... Wish I could remember the author's name. wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by Marty Fouts:Oh yeah. Find count matters _a lot_ -- which is why my wife was able to double hers from 3 to 6 by _easily_ finding 3 caches that I (230+ finds) was unable to locate at all a few days earlier. And when I say _easily_ I mean in under a minute for each cache. It doesn't matter how smart, talented, and accomplished a man is--his wife always is moreso. That's why we're the "better half". wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by Eeyore and the Shadow:I have been comtemplating putting a cache on a trail that leads to a fovorite fishing spot. The problem is the area is polluted with copper heads. I've been biten by them twice (when i was much younger and hadn't learned how to spot them) and ended up a little off kilter for a few days. But seeing as geocaching is a family sport I wouldn't want to put children into the area where the effect of the poison could be much more serious. Go ahead--just make certain to note the presence of copperheads in the area in terms clear enough for even the most dunderheaded of people: "You--yes, I mean you! There are poisonous snakes near (maybe even on) this cache! Do not attempt this cache barefoot! Do not bring small children to this cache without wrapping them in sheet metal to protect them from snake fangs! Careless people will be bitten!!!" Someone will complain anyway, but you will have warned them.... wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by Eeyore and the Shadow:I have been comtemplating putting a cache on a trail that leads to a fovorite fishing spot. The problem is the area is polluted with copper heads. I've been biten by them twice (when i was much younger and hadn't learned how to spot them) and ended up a little off kilter for a few days. But seeing as geocaching is a family sport I wouldn't want to put children into the area where the effect of the poison could be much more serious. Go ahead--just make certain to note the presence of copperheads in the area in terms clear enough for even the most dunderheaded of people: "You--yes, I mean you! There are poisonous snakes near (maybe even on) this cache! Do not attempt this cache barefoot! Do not bring small children to this cache without wrapping them in sheet metal to protect them from snake fangs! Careless people will be bitten!!!" Someone will complain anyway, but you will have warned them.... wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by Eeyore and the Shadow:I have been comtemplating putting a cache on a trail that leads to a fovorite fishing spot. The problem is the area is polluted with copper heads. I've been biten by them twice (when i was much younger and hadn't learned how to spot them) and ended up a little off kilter for a few days. But seeing as geocaching is a family sport I wouldn't want to put children into the area where the effect of the poison could be much more serious. -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by Eeyore and the Shadow:I have been comtemplating putting a cache on a trail that leads to a fovorite fishing spot. The problem is the area is polluted with copper heads. I've been biten by them twice (when i was much younger and hadn't learned how to spot them) and ended up a little off kilter for a few days. But seeing as geocaching is a family sport I wouldn't want to put children into the area where the effect of the poison could be much more serious. -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by ~erik~: quote: The cache approval process is strictly administrative. Nobody actually visits the cache site to verify its existence. You mean I've been traveling around checking on all these caches for nothing? Well, it has been fun. erik - geocaching.com admin C'mon--'fess up. You were doing it for first pick of the McToys. wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by ApK: It's been said that anyone with a clipboard and a hardhat is able to go anywhere. I can only tell you that they few times I've tried it, it's worked. This is *so* true. Back when I was shepherding five kids through life, I carried a clipboard with a list of who needed to be where when, groceries, homework due, etc. No matter where we were (and however many kids might be tugging on my at the time), people thought I was the one in charge. Give me a big enough clipboard and I can rule the world Now, I rely on my appearance--I look like a normal middled-aged female. No one expects such a person to be scurrying through the underbrush seeking treasure boxes.... wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by ApK: quote:Originally posted by wcgreen:From the Groundspeak Search page: Quick Search: Topics You Posted to with New Posts "Topics to Which You Have Posted New Posts" is correct. "Topics You Posted New Posts To" is shorter. Ooh..I get to argue with a pro... Neither version you give means the same as what the actual wording means. And you are correct. I should have had more coffee before posting. quote:Your two versions would mean that YOU posted new messages to those topics. The actual meaning is SOMEONE posted new message to topics to which you have posted at some time. It could be stated as "Topics to which you've posted which now have new posts." But as that's needlessly wordy and awkward, and one of the rules of editing is to cut out words wherever you can, especially "which," I think the actual wording is swell. ApK I happen to like "which" as a word. It requires a preposition or, if it is used in a clause, commas. Its second use in your effort is incorrect. "Topics to which you posted that have new posts" is grammatical (and better than what I did earlier). wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by ApK: quote:Originally posted by wcgreen:From the Groundspeak Search page: Quick Search: Topics You Posted to with New Posts "Topics to Which You Have Posted New Posts" is correct. "Topics You Posted New Posts To" is shorter. Ooh..I get to argue with a pro... Neither version you give means the same as what the actual wording means. And you are correct. I should have had more coffee before posting. quote:Your two versions would mean that YOU posted new messages to those topics. The actual meaning is SOMEONE posted new message to topics to which you have posted at some time. It could be stated as "Topics to which you've posted which now have new posts." But as that's needlessly wordy and awkward, and one of the rules of editing is to cut out words wherever you can, especially "which," I think the actual wording is swell. ApK I happen to like "which" as a word. It requires a preposition or, if it is used in a clause, commas. Its second use in your effort is incorrect. "Topics to which you posted that have new posts" is grammatical (and better than what I did earlier). wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

From the Groundspeak Search page: Quick Search: Topics You Posted to with New Posts "Topics to Which You Have Posted New Posts" is correct. "Topics You Posted New Posts To" is shorter. wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

There are some features in my area that, for the most part, can be viewed from the road. Since there are dozens of them, each unique and but not really noteworthy enough to be a cache (in my opinion), I'd like to concoct several sets of drive-up virtuals. To get the find, one would have to answer a question about each of the items in the set. Any thoughts on the value of such caches? -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

What first impels you to hide a cache? Is it the perfect hiding place? A set of Tupperware begging to be filled with trinkets? A theme or witty description demanding a cache page of its own? -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com

quote:Originally posted by ApK:I think the best response is a quote from worldtraveler in the original thread: quote:The communication medium here is the written word, and you paint a mental portrait of yourself in the minds of others by the way you use or abuse the medium. The portrait may not be accurate, and you may not care, but your credibility in the minds of others is largely determined by it. Amen. My employment depends on my ability to proofread, write, produce accurate and comprehensible documentation, and assist my team to do the same. I've gotten assignments as a freelance writer from work done for Web pages and I know that professionals in my field(s) read my posts on Usenet and other forums. I strive to use good spelling and grammar in my writing, no matter what and where it is, for I never know who is reading it and if a future paycheck may come from them. wcgreen -- Wendy Chatley Green wcgreen@eudoramail.com