Jump to content

mvhayes1982

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    117
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mvhayes1982

  1. I realize that #1 happens even with long time cachers -- hence my context that I was speaking of the "abandoned cache" problem as a whole -- not just newbie hides. The "Premium Members are the only ones who should be able to hide caches" argument is most likely on the original Schedule of Forum Topics and was about due to come back around. It is, as it always has been, a terrible suggestion. This is a hobby. There are many users who are not premium members who are responsible cachers, who hide outstanding geocaches, and who maintain their hides well. Putting up a financial barrier to this aspect of the game is unwise. And just as you mentioned "happens all the time with long-time cachers", there are plenty of PM users who hide terrible and abandoned geocaches.
  2. I'm happy with the update -- with one exception. I really miss having the "Joined: 25-Nov-11" on my avatar block (and more importantly, the same information for every one else).
  3. This is an interesting idea, one I had not considered before. True - we don't want additional barriers to the hobby. But the other thing to consider here is how to minimize geo-litter. The "abandoned cache" problem is two-fold. 1) You have an un-maintained cache that may go missing or need maintenance, etc and it is a nuisance to other cachers who might be trying to find the cache. 2) If a cache is abandoned, the chance runs that you have a container of some sort out in the world, with no one to pick it up and dispose of it at the end of its life. I'm not sure if a waiting period based on time, rather than number of finds, would be any more palatable or more successful -- but it is something different to consider.
  4. I miss having the "Member since: " date contained in each poster's information box. This is information is quite helpful in understanding where a poster is "coming from" (their history, their knowledge of the hobby). Important context on these forums, imo.
  5. I'm pretty sure that reading through the Guidelines and Help Center articles on "Hiding a Cache" and watching the applicable videos takes 15-20 minutes. No need to reinvent the wheel.
  6. Nowhere is there a "threat" implied or otherwise of your cache being archived, at least by anyone but yourself. So no, there is no reprimand. "...looks like it might..." "...may contain..." "...could be..." "...a few options..." "...if...if...if..." Nope, still don't see any reason to feel insulted with this notification email. Can you highlight the portion that says it's totally okay to ignore the email? I am having trouble spotting that passage. I ignore far more threatening emails than that on a daily basis (Go about a week past your due date with Sprint and see what happens). There is nothing in the email at all that threatens ANY action from Groundspeak, let alone any punitive action towards the cache and/or cache owner. I've read through this thread with fascination --- and to finally get my eyes on the email in question, well... It is quite the disappointment.
  7. I appreciate that. Obviously, you are not one of the people who are not going to change their approach. You don't seem to understand that the entire thing is very confusing. They *just* released a site feature that suggests we can / should use DNFs personally to track aborted attempts and failures. If I have to cancel a search because of conditions I encounter in the field, I would very much like to have that show up on the map so I can easily re-attempt later. I don't see what is so very difficult for you to comprehend about that, even if it doesn't match your process. The weird nag system means I can't do this anymore without causing problems for cache owners. It doesn't negate the fact that, for me, an aborted search attempt is something worth recording as a DNF regardless of what needlessly awful things the forum has to say about that. So again, you people win, no DNFs of any sort from me. I will stop using the site features in a way that was useful to me in order to appease the mob. We really seem to be talking at cross purposes here. I fully agree with your desire to post DNFs when the circumstances seem appropriate and I understand your decision not to log any (although I feel it is a bit extreme, I can't criticise it). I also want to post DNFs when the circumstances seem appropriate and will continue to do so. But I never have, and will not, post DNFs when I haven't made what I feel to be a fair search. Other log types will fill that gap for me. I don't understand what you mean by "You people". Groundspeak have made the decision to send the health score e-mails and I am not in any way connected with Groundspeak. I have no influence over them and I have not contributed in any way to their decision. You have made the decision to stop logging DNFs because you seem to believe that the problem is sufficiently serious to warrant that action. As far as I can tell, there is little evidence regarding the number of e-mails being sent and the impact that they are actually having on Cache owners. Until such evidence comes to light, I will continue to log DNFs as I always have. I too don't understand what needlessly awful things the forum has to say about that or So again, you people win, no DNFs of any sort from me. - I think there was only one person here insisting that DNF's should only be used in very specific circumstances In fact, while I'm too lazy to scroll back to check, I'm fairly sure Narcissa had already made her decision to no longer use DNF's before this thread even started. That one person wasn't insisting on anything. They were pointing out how and why they use dnfs. The reasons were in no way selfish. In fact the whole purpose in adopting their use of dnfs were out of respect for other cache owners and the integrity of the cache itself. The reasons they gave were, at least in their mind, valid weather or not you agree with them. Their whole point was simply to think before you log. I think everyone who has been following this thread knows that's exactly what I believe. Agree or not I only hope they can at least understand the reasons behind it. It seems pretty clear that: 1) in the first quote, you state you aren't insisting on anything. 2) The second quote is a pretty clear demand -- "WE need to clarify what constitutes a DNF" -- and then you go on to assert what, to you, the proper definition of a DNF is. So first you say you aren't insisting on anything, then you offer an insistence on what WE should all clarify a DNF to be. Rather at odds with yourself, it seems.
  8. If it didn't revert to the posted "mystery" coordinates -- that would pretty much kill Geo-Art.
  9. This could easily be one of the lamest posts I've ever seen here in the forums. We have a plethora of posts in how noobies place LAME caches and now if they don't hide a cache they're leaches? Which is it? It's time for some of you to go get a different hobby. I'm just guessing that somebody didn't read through the entire three pages of the thread before declaring it to be among the lamest posts ever in the forum. The above have already been asked and answered, several times over in this thread. I also learned from this thread the differences in usage of commas and periods between the US imperial system and the European metric system.
  10. Ask, and it will be given to you... -Matthew 7:7 This is EXACTLY the image for a geocaching forum jumping the tracks. Job, well done.
  11. I managed to snag all 6 and the Achiever, but it did require one significant change to my caching habits. In nearly three years in the hobby, I had never even considered attending an event. The event that I attended was a small, 10 person gathering or so. A flash mob that turned into an hour+ hangout. Really a good time. I do know that the local geocaching organization saw greatly increased attendance at their monthly dining out event in August. Many of the logs talked about all the new faces. Whether all of those got the other 5 souvenirs, who knows. But I would have to assume that there was at least some correlation between the 7 SoA promotion and the increased event attendance locally.
  12. I see no problem with starting threads to discuss opinions. In fact, that's probably the more common reason to start a thread. I'm a little bit more puzzled about complaining in 14 threads about people having opinions about other people's actions. +1 I can only imagine two reasons for the existence of forums. The sharing of information and the sharing of opinion. I greatly enjoy both. I'm a much "better" geocacher (really, a better community member. Not one thing on here has ever helped me FIND a single cache) because I started coming and lurking about the forums. Also, I'm greatly entertained. The "Speaking Thread" had me in TEARS. Again, there's having an opinion, and there's incessantly starting threads about the same topic. In the interest of sharing opinions, it is legitimate to wonder what, exactly, is so horrendously bothersome about strangers getting little pictures on their profiles that it warrants numerous, slightly different threads. We're not curing cancer here, people. I doubt that bothersome part is the getting pictures on a profile. I think the bothersome part, (I know for me, I dare not speak for anyone else) is the violation of a community norm. As members of society, we expect others to adhere to certain norms. Rule-followers get very uncomfortable, even bothered, when they encounter rule-breakers. Whether the violation of the norm/rule actually affects me in any tangible way is not at all important. I am part of a community that has certain norms, I do my best to adhere to those norms (for myself and the good of the community), and I am indeed bothered when others do not adhere to the same norms. As far as the incessant threads? Maybe JPreto (and I'm sorry to make any assumptions) is just compulsive about a thread sticking to a very narrow topic (no matter how related to another topic it may be).
  13. It is entirely possible, and even likely, that these caches were published for the primary purpose of allowing others to earn these Souvenirs. Myself, I attended my first ever event (in almost 3 years of caching) so that I could earn the Socializer (and thus the Achiever) souvenirs. The event was a flash mob event, hosted by my best friend, published for the sole sake of allowing folks to get the souvenir. Despite a sudden, drenching rain, I was able to spend over an hour talking Geocaching and football (American collegiate version) with 8 or 9 fellow cachers. Two of these are among the most prolific hiders and finders in my area. It was an awesome experience. And it was entirely attributable to the doggoned souvenirs.
  14. I see no problem with starting threads to discuss opinions. In fact, that's probably the more common reason to start a thread. I'm a little bit more puzzled about complaining in 14 threads about people having opinions about other people's actions. +1 I can only imagine two reasons for the existence of forums. The sharing of information and the sharing of opinion. I greatly enjoy both. I'm a much "better" geocacher (really, a better community member. Not one thing on here has ever helped me FIND a single cache) because I started coming and lurking about the forums. Also, I'm greatly entertained. The "Speaking Thread" had me in TEARS.
  15. That CITO event with the phantom attendee - that guy who logged that didn't even need that CITO log for the souvenir, so I'm not sure what was going on. But I suspect that there were more than a few events that were attended through astral projections or something last month for the souvenirs. By the way, I found w WikiHow article about how to perform astral projections. I thought that was hilarious. And in "related articles" there's how to report a UFO sighting. There's also "How to improve your luck", which I might need considering my rather high DNF count. I wonder if the poster believed that the CITO would qualify him for the Socializer badge. I know some made that mistake and later had to find an "actual" qualifying event to get their badge.
  16. "It bothers me" does not mean "It matters." It might bother you, but it doesn't actually matter. You can't change what other people do, but you can change how you react to it. I find it objectionable that you can decree what matters to any other individual. Whether or not something matters to any one person is an incredibly subjective test. For you to declare that something does not matter, not to anyone period, is a tad arrogant.
  17. Does it actually matter? Yes it does... like a Spanish player said in the Spanish Forum: "Geocaching is a game of cheaters" Why does it matter? If someone else wants to have some little images appear on their profiles, who cares? It has no impact on you. You know whether or not you legitimately received the August souvenirs. You have the power to delete false logs on your own caches. Other people's profiles are not your concern. I don't think there's anything wrong with "cheating" mattering to someone else. The profiles are, by definition, PUBLIC profiles. Whether it is geocaching, football, a book reading challenge, work, whatever-- If I legitimately complete an accomplishment and someone else cheats to claim the same accomplishment, that is going to bother me. Bother me enough to come to the forums and call others out? No, that isn't me. But bother me enough that I can empathize with someone who is bothered enough to vent.
  18. Not everyone logs their finds the same day. I sometimes log my finds the same day. I usually log my finds the same week. But sometimes it takes me longer than that. There have been a few that I failed to log for a year or more. This is one thing that I do not understand. (Mind you, I'm not being at all critical here). I started caching nearly three years ago. My best friend purchased a GPS in a Black Friday sale, explained geocaching to me, and I downloaded the $10 Android app that afternoon. I phone cached for a year before being given a GPS for Christmas the next year. I now cache with both my GPS and my phone, depending on the location and how impulsive my caching expedition is. Even when I cache with my phone now, I do not log from my phone. I'd rather take the time to type up a real log on my computer when I get home, than tap out a few characters on my phone in the field. Even so, I'm never more than about 12 hours behind in logging my caches. I've seen notes from folks on caches and posts here in the forum where folks admit to being months and even years behind on logging their caches. That would drive me INSANE! My husband takes tremendous pride in writing lengthy logs for every cache he finds. We're busy people and sometimes he is months behind. He keeps excellent records of his finds, so it's no big deal. If there's something urgent that he notices about a cache, he'll let the cache owner know right away. When we're on vacation, it can be days or weeks before I get around to logging. I have tried to increase the length of my logs (even getting called out by my buddy for the verbosity of the logs on less than stellar caches). I'm really bad at taking notes, other than the ones in my head, so it would be a big deal if I waited a day or two before logging my caches. I also haven't done much caching on vacation (due to a lack of vacations), making it easier to just log my finds when I get home at night. I'm not being at all critical. I just know how crazy it would drive ME if I didn't log promptly.
  19. Where is that in the guidelines? Given that it has nothing to do with placing a geocache, it isn't in there. I personally almost fell out of my chair laughing at Preto's response. Perhaps I gave too much credit for the self-deprecating sarcasm that I picked up, but I really don't think he was being serious.
  20. Not everyone logs their finds the same day. I sometimes log my finds the same day. I usually log my finds the same week. But sometimes it takes me longer than that. There have been a few that I failed to log for a year or more. This is one thing that I do not understand. (Mind you, I'm not being at all critical here). I started caching nearly three years ago. My best friend purchased a GPS in a Black Friday sale, explained geocaching to me, and I downloaded the $10 Android app that afternoon. I phone cached for a year before being given a GPS for Christmas the next year. I now cache with both my GPS and my phone, depending on the location and how impulsive my caching expedition is. Even when I cache with my phone now, I do not log from my phone. I'd rather take the time to type up a real log on my computer when I get home, than tap out a few characters on my phone in the field. Even so, I'm never more than about 12 hours behind in logging my caches. I've seen notes from folks on caches and posts here in the forum where folks admit to being months and even years behind on logging their caches. That would drive me INSANE!
  21. Of course, you would want to replace these details with the information for the local geocacher you actually select. Hope this helps. I read these forums hoping to achieve some balance of education and entertainment. While I rarely post, I just HAVE to give a shout out to Keystone... I haven't laughed that hard in some time. Hopefully everyone appreciates the humor. Thanks for the "smiley" this afternoon.
  22. Anybody know where THIS ONE is coming from? If I had to guess, I'd say that kunarion is talking about the mass logging that is done through programs like GSAK, where a cacher finds a few dozen caches in a day, and they log on EACH one is identical... "Out with BobCacher, JimCacher, and BettyCacher today on a run through Louisville, grabbing challenges, oldies, and a few multis. The day was hot, but our skills were hotter and we found everything we looked for. Thanks for placing these caches for us to find." When Geowoodstock was in Louisville in May 2012, just after I started caching, I found logs like this on ALL KINDS of caches. Makes it very difficult for a new cacher to a) get any clues from logs on WHAT the heck I might have been looking for, and B ) gives the WRONG idea on what (in my opinion now) logging a cache should look like. I still see plenty of logs like this. At this point, I just laugh. edit: to change into B ) ... OOPS
  23. This was the most interesting statement out of the whole thread, for me (which was a very fun look back in time.) Given some of the other recent threads regarding swag (lack of quality and quantity), it is interesting to see that this was predicted from the very top, very near to the beginning.
  24. Let's be clear what we're talking about here. A skirt hide in a parking lot? A stop along the Oklahoma Land Run where the hanger/holder is there but the container is MIA? You bet I'll put in a replacement log and/or cache, it's no sweat off my brow and virtually no investment from me. A tricky/elaborate hide that I can't find? An ammo can in the woods? Don't be absurd, that's not what I said. And yes, if I put a replacement container out so the site is viable again - I'll log it. Kind of pointless not to... I'd reply, but Lone.R has beaten me to it. The guidelines specifically discourage throwdowns to begin with, and go even further to address those who place them despite the guidelines... The original geocacher who placed the throwdown does not have a strong claim to log the geocache online as found.
×
×
  • Create New...