Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by maldar

  1. quote:
    Originally posted by The Leprechauns:

    There are a dozen or so posts saying "I liked it better the old way." Well, fine... let the site crash and burn like it has the past couple of weekends. Do you not understand? This update was moved quickly into production to keep the website from dying under its own weight. The nearest caches page, with all the customizing for caches you've found, hidden, etc., was the biggest single drain on the hamsters that power the server, according to TPTB.


    I am sure that some tweaking can occur to address legitimate comments. But "change it back to the way it used to be" is not a legitimate comment.


    I'm very happy on my slow dialup connection to see a site that loads quickly, with some neat new search features. I look forward to future improvements as the new geocaching.com is rolled out.



    Some mornings, it just doesn't pay to chew through the leather straps. - Emo Phillips


    First: Sorry that you have dialup.


    Second: Crashes are do to the fact that the servers are inadequate for the site. The servers needed upgrading not the website. By upgrading the servers one could retain the old site and also add more functionality to the searches. By doing what is being done know just puts off the inevitable for a year, 2 at the most. New servers would have solved the problems now. This is a short term fix and we are faced with a major disaster if this sport keeps growing at the current rate. I have seen too many places die because they don't bite the bullet and make the changes that are needed, but instead only do quick fixes to solve long-term problems.



  2. I liked it the old way better. Atleaset from searching from my coords on my cache page. Speed? Who cares about speed? I have broadband. The only thing I want back is the map to show what I have found and not found. That was do back in late May; now it's late June. I also agree that my cache page searches need to have the check box mark for caches I own. Better yet, separate the caches like they use to be, founds on the bottom. Or even totally better; find the old back-up tapes and reinstall the old system. Don't fix what is not broken. They do that where I work all the time and it hinders customer service. I should know as that is the department that I work in and all "improvements" ever do is slow down service. I see not real speed increases with what we have now compared to what there was before. What we had before was much better for the eyes. Maybe you should offer different webpages for different user connection speeds like other sites. Text only for dial-up and grapic intensive for people with broadband, dsl, or T lines. I do that for one of the sites I operate.



  3. quote:
    Originally posted by -=(GEO)=-:

    That I usually don't trade with regular caches. I cache mostly for the pleasure of the hunt and virtuals don't seem to present much of a challenge when MapQuest leads you right to it.




    Take my Cloud's Rest VC. Sure you all you have to do is get to the top Of the summit of Cloud's Rest in Yosimite, and there is no item or log book. The reward is the view, not to mention the exercise. Depending on the may you climb to the top can be easy or hard, but worth the time to do.


    I also like the VC caches that take you to a historical marker. History is the best teacher. Now if only the government would learn that.



  4. quote:
    It's not the disappointment I mind but the waste of my time. If there were a way (and in some cases of good moving caches, there is a way) to indicate that the cache has moved so I don't spend 30 minutes looking around for something that isn't there, I would have less of a problem with them.


    You are right about a way to indicate that the cache has been moved. I have done 2 traveling caches. The first had biodegratable markers with a number that a searcher could use to log the find if they missed it. The second was a micro traveling cache and was not capable of holding a marker. The use of popsicle sticks as markers is recommended, and as my last post on this topic read, Post a not to the cache page when you leave to search for the cache. Readers should give the poster 24hrs to post a find and then consider the cache fair game.



  5. quote:
    Originally posted by Don&Betty:

    Remember, I hope, these caches may remain in place for years, maybe many years. Why not! Therefore they had better be pretty well hidden, in places pretty well off and out of sight of the trails, so they won't be stumbled onto by the geomuggles.


    As geocachers become experienced, they learn to sense where to look for really well hidden caches. So, well hidden caches shouldn't be a problem, but a rewarding challenge, for them.


    Also, I personally prefer puzzle caches that require some preliminary easy chair "activity" to determine the coordinates, as well as the activity of going out there to find the cache.


    And, since it's a GPS game, multi-leg caches provide more activity in the use of the GPS than does a cache having a single set of coordinates just "given" in the listing.


    On the other hand, I like these multi legs to be prominent and of known description so I'm not always looking for a needle in a haystack. Leave that for the cache itself if at all.


    Let me just say that Don from Don&Betty has to be one of the most evil cachers out there. His caches are the most difficult I have tried, although Don, Doc Ott is giving you a run for the money. If anyone is in the Jackson, Michigan area I suggest trying their caches.



  6. I like the VCs I have gone out on. If I don't like a cache I don't do it. If you don't like a cache don't do it. Leave the VCs for the cachers that like them. I can see that there have been many repeats of a theme. Cache creators should look at the current list to see if a theme has been done before, I can also say the same thing for TBs. How many 50 state TBs have there been. No, just leave it to those that like them. Maybe GC.com should look into a way for people to filter out the caches that they don't want to do by type of cache and cache size. This would make for more effective searches. I would like to be able to view only the caches I have not done, currently I have to skip ahead 3 pages, or is there a way to filter that out?



  7. quote:
    Originally posted by jackbear:

    hmmm...not sure if everyone is trading equal valued items here. Sounds like this cache is getting filled with McToys!


    Perhaps if it was "keys and title" to the car, and you traded your own car keys and title, it would be a "trade" and not "grand theft auto."


    Any lawyers out there?





    Don't fair trades only apply to what you take out of the cache? Then would not just a couple old keys and a piece of paper suffice? What are the keys really worth, depending on the design $20 or so, and a piece of paper <$.01? icon_biggrin.gif What a great first finders prize. Now take my TB Home Again Cache, where you trade one TB for another TB. What about a cache located at a dealership, Trade you car for another car? That may be interesting.



  8. I agree with you umc. Don't search for it if you don't want the headache. I personnally like the fact that I could miss a cache. It is only the same pain as not being able to find a taditional cache because it was stolen. Maybe a new icon to represent traveling caches from the rest would help. Just don't do the cache if you cannot handle disappointment.


    Another thing that helps and what I did, but the cache owner deleted not to long after, is to post a note on the cache page telling people that you are on the way out the door to go look for the cache. This way others that are interested can be spared the time of missing the cache..



  9. quote:
    These 2 are really already part of the Terrain rating of the cache and are factored in using the Geocache Rating System linked from the "hide a cache" form. Even then, its very subjective. I've turned several easy 1/1 caches into 1/4 caches by trying to take the shortest distance instead of the path of least resistance. I've also turned 4 star terrain caches into 1 star by finding an easy way to access the cache that the hider didn't know about. BTW, that cache was quickly archived, since the hider's intent was to place a hard cache. His next caches were TRUE 4.5 terrain caches!


    I know what you mean, but in the experiances that I listed, the ratings for both were understated. Now since then one of the caches have been updated, but the other has not. The "bushwaching" example I gave still states: "There is no trail to the cache but the hike is a relatively brush-free 2 1/2 mile round trip if you start at the correct point. (see hint) The elevation gain is about 300 feet." We tried this one right after we backpacked Yosemite for 3 days. If "relatively brush-free" means most of the brush is 2 1/2 to 3 feet tall, then I quess that the description is correct. Now that cache was placed in the fall and I tried it the summer after so the growth may be less in September than it is in June, but not by much. To this date my brother and I are the only ones that have attempted this cache and posted. We plan to try again the next time I'm out in CA.


    After reading this list some more I think that people feel that most of us want to create a new form that has 100 new checkboxes to read and fill-out. What I'm working on is a 1/2 page outline on what people should consider when placing a cache report. New ratings or symbols are not what we need. If there is a hunters parking area give the coords so peoples cars can be safely off the road. Should people take a specific trail head, don't list it as the only thing in the hints. That has happened to me, I decoded a hint that told me where I could get a map of the park and what trail to take. Well, I was already at the coords and having trouble locating the cache and there was nothing about the cache location in the hint.



  10. Here is my say on some of this.


    Fee required
    , I have made the switch to plastic and normally carry $10 or less on me.


    Parking Coords
    , this can be good or bad. For example: One time coords ere given and I spent close to an hour driving around a lake trying to find the correct street to get to the corrds and never found them. I decided to park in the spot I first thought about before that hour and I was only ten minutes away for the cache. On the other side of that story is what happened recently were the only legal parking was a mile away from the cache and I spent ~45 mins before I realized that.


    , Ever bushwack up a steep incline covered with "foxtails" that embed themselves into your clothing and try to burrow into your skin. I have and I gave up on that one. "Nice easy climb" my butt.


    , Time is relative, just like up is relative in space. Distance on the other hand is useful. Most of use know how fast we can walk, alone or with a caching buddy. I think that the average cache is no longer that 1 mile round trip. Anything else should be described in the description. I had one that was 2 miles round trip and half that was bushwacking. The description said nothing about the length or bushwacking, but it did mention what a great place the park is to take the family. Anyone ever cache with children? I have and the one I was with likes the outdoors, but would not have liked this cache.


    That is all for now, but I shall return.






  • Create New...