Adrenalynn
-
Posts
277 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Adrenalynn
-
-
Leave out the snakebite kit. The only purpose they have is to slit your wrists if you can't make it back to the hospital in time... Other than that, a great list!
-
I talked to United Rental earlier today and they can drop off a Deer 330C/LC, 72,000lb excavator, with optional extension arm, at the state park tonight. If someone just happened to use it to bury a container, that wouldn't be my fault, right?
It only gives that person 27' of dig-depth though. Still, if someone were to create an artificial cave pitch with it, it'd be a 5/5 right in the middle of town! Why go looking for creative hides? Micros are so a thing of the past for me!
It is quite exciting, you have to admit.
[edit to add picture]
-
At 478ft away - I'd resubmit it. Tell your reviewer you think it's 500ft away. 22ft of error in your GPS is reasonable. Then the reviewer will assume 30ft of error off of your 500ft is reasonable. Voila! 530ft.
It's become obvious to me that the guidelines are hardly even that. If there's any question, just make stuff up and odds-on are, it's good to go.
Except that her reviewer is reading & posting to this thread.
Seriously, though, my comment is a carry-over from another thread. I don't actually believe my post to be the case in most instances. I think, just like people in general, some reviewers are more susceptible to bulls...pucky than are others.
-
My first cache has been out long enough, I feel ok about posting it. I'd say it was "moderately evil":
-
THAT is an awesome graphic!
-
CTKayak, I hope you're still reading this thread:
I mean what I'm about to say in the nicest most "sisterly" way, ok? And, yes, it's unsolicited:
Grow some spine, girl!
The only place you don't belong is the place you think you don't belong. The more nervous about it you are - the less you need to show it! I know Vinny ThePsychoShrink will back me on this...
Take a deep breath and ask yourself what the worst possible outcome could be from this event. I bet the answer is that he could heckle you. Have you seen that before? Sure. It's called rejection. Prepare for it. It's not new... Then let it go.
Just know what you're getting in to, and then play it. It's all just a game! You're not going to get hurt, even!
Anyway - unsolicted advice...
-
At 478ft away - I'd resubmit it. Tell your reviewer you think it's 500ft away. 22ft of error in your GPS is reasonable. Then the reviewer will assume 30ft of error off of your 500ft is reasonable. Voila! 530ft.
It's become obvious to me that the guidelines are hardly even that. If there's any question, just make stuff up and odds-on are, it's good to go.
-
Wandat - you are a classic troll. And not a very creative one at that.
-
The battery life for the explorist 400, 500 and 600 has a maximun time of 14 hours, this is more time than most geocachers are going to be in the field, Very few geocachers are going to be out more than 14 hours at a time.
14hrs isn't, with the backlight on.
I get about 12hrs on my Garmin eMap normally. About 4hrs with the backlight. And that's not continuous use by any stretch.
I ran a test on my 9 month old exp 500
6:00AM disconnected from battery charger backlight on high
9:58AM battery meter showing approx. 40 to 45% left
1:05PM low battery warning comes on
1:34PM 500 shuts down backlight on high for full test
The battery meter seems to show more usage during the first 3 hrs or so
I ran a test a a few weeks before the one above using med backlight and low backlight and got a little over 14 hrs of use
from the 500
there are 3 settings for the backlight bright, medium, and low, there is no off for the backlight on the explorist
That seems consistant with my observations on the eMap. The eMap gives a LOT less warning on the battery low state, however. About half the time to shutdown.
-
I'm not cranky at all! I jazzed because: A) the rules have been clarified and
it opens up thousands of great hides where I can go "find" a hole that is the perfect size and shape for my container.Heck, I'm thinking I might just be able to find a hole I can bury whats-their-face's 40' container in. In fact, I could find one that's 42' deep in the middle of a state park, and make a 5/5 abseil cache! Imagine the possibilities with the heavy construction equipment my company has! My company could go make a hole at 2am, and then I could find it at 7am.
So, no, you get me wrong. I'm not at all cranky, I'm really excited!
[edit to turn off emoticons]
-
Cool! Good on you!
I'm gettin' out the pick and shovel to go make some holes I don't intend to put caches into today.
-
Can I ask an off topic (to this) question
?? Well I did make the thread.. . Does anyone actually think the forum post numbers tells how well you are at caching 
? and the number of finds, I can understand they could... but how many people actually spends time day in day out looking into all the rules, regulations and such? I have a lot of time on my hands, being a stay at home mom of two and they play on their own alot, so i come here and read.... maybe not just this site (the forums and the caching information, plus the cacherU site etc etc), but other stuff as well (LOVE useless information).... I'm getting where I read everything more then once now.... Gotta get a new time killer.... Gotta say right now that I'm glad we didn't really "burn" each other, much.... Anywho Headed to bed soon (hopefully) 
, tomorrow's errands day so I will be on late... Cache (err umm Catch) ya'll tomorrow (Friday) sometime! 
Since you asked:
My time varies. I have a rather well developed memory. If I see someone once, it's there forever, so I don't have to dig out rules and such frequently...
I do feel the more caches you've found, the more experience you have with different types of hides and finds and the challenges they present.
-
My FTF driving mix:
- Right Now
- Africa
- Hold On Loosely
- Total Eclipse Of The Heart
- Send Me An Angel
- Hotel California (orig)
- Seven Bridges Road
- Radar Love
- Danger Zone
- Learning to Fly
- Can't drive (55)
- Brothers in Arms
- I want to know what love is
- Everybody wants to rule the world
-
Then let's just simply do this: I'll leave it now. Point over-made. You go see what your reviewer says about a buried cache, and we'll just run with that! 'fair' enough?
-
ok, call me stupid if you'd like
but how can you be sure:
is acurate <sp?who cares?> enough to even use? How do WE know you didn't modify it to help your point??? it is clearly DIFFERENT from the original picture as to the relationship of the ammo can and the hole
Simple, really. A person can acquire the same tools, or similar tools, and reproduce (or not!) my results. If not, then we'll need to explore why they were not reproducible.
That's peer-review. Prehaps the science teacher, whilst wasting your time [see prior postings], happened to mention it in passing once or twice?
[edited to add:] The relationship and scale of hole to can was unmodified. You can simply overlay it upon the first to confirm. We can take this further if scavok confirms the particular caliber of ammo can in the picture as it will then give a scale-reference once we get the calipers out and measure some features. Further, a barrel correction was imposed (a test that is acceptable in a US Federal court of law) to correct for lens dispersion.
--------------------------
..[clip]...but CSI style software to measure cache photos is a little nuts in my humble opinion.
Sorry, I thought my forum title spelled out a warning or two to that effect?
I think the cache should be removed, but email to the ower and the approver in the area should have been enough
Actually, what started all this was my terribly simple reply in the original thread that [to effect] "it looks buried to me" and "should be archived, IMHO" (possible paraphrase - been a few days now)
-
can anyone tell me how to place pine bark (that fell off the old pine tree in my back yard
) onto a plastic (rather small) container that has a screwon lid where youcan't see any of it????Spray it brown first to match with plastic enamel (I like American Heritage Plastic Enamel when painting our cameras), then use a silicon-based adhesive?
-
Man talk about being blunt, you missed the point entirely. (i made a funny)
YES, A SHOVEL DUG THE HOLE, THE HOLE (DUG BY A SHOVEL) WAS NOT DUG (YES, DUG BY A SHOVEL) FOR THE PURPOSE OF HIDING THE CACHE (WHICH IS IN A HOLE, DUG BY A SHOVEL FOR A SEPARATE PURPOSE).
And maybe you didn't even see the picture? There is no dirt on top of it at all, just some dead grass. Is camo not allowed now???
I'm sorry, I must have missed "for the purpose of..." in the rules.
So if I go out and dig a hole for the purpose of digging a hole, then come back tomorrow and put a cache in it - well, as far as the land managers (and Ground Speak) are concerned - that's quite all right, correct?
After all, I dug it for the purpose of digging it. I decided later to put a cache in it.
I appreciate the clarification of the intent of the posted rules! Thanks!
Hey N/P. I guess if you like digging (yourself into) holes....
Hmm. Nope. I just rechecked and "purpose of" hadn't magically appeared in "Off-limit (Physical) Caches"
-
The cut lines look pretty clean to me. There are multiple skeletals for each that can be sampled.
Seems like a lot of work just to prove someone's lying about a cache.
I'm not proving anything. I'm just presenting my findings, and responding to the examination there-of.
Now, where was I: Oh - if it were 2" on the front breadth of the can, then the can would be visible in the picture. Very little material is hanging over. Unless the material was removed from the hidden-vs-visible photos.
-
impressive, does it take into consideration all the grass that is hanging off of the sides of the hole? Make sure you see how much is hanging off the side of the can which just barely overlaps that grass around the hole, it is actually a couple inches difference on all sides.
Since you like it techinical...
ammo can is roughly 12 x 6 = 72 square inches
We'll say 2 inches to be conservative in space around the can in the hole which means adding 4 inches to each dimension
16x10=160 square inches.
So really you say its close in size, I say the hole is more than twice the size of the can.
Yeah, actually I rejected features smaller than the breadth of the hole.
And I'm not seeing 2" on each side of that can. The straw draping the sides of the can spreads across the bed as it's put back into its hole.
-
That picture does not clearly show the dimensions of the hole due to all the straw.
Could the hole had been dug during the hiding of this cache? Yes, certainly.
Have you, or better yet, can you, prove this as fact?
No, on both accounts.
The cut lines look pretty clean to me. There are multiple skeletals for each that can be sampled.
-
****here troll troll troll, where ya at??? aw THER YOU ARE!****
Who's the troll? I'm posting technical data and you're name calling.
[edit corrected to make plural since it is multiples there-of now. . .]
aw didn't realize it was made before you got your reply done.... Not sure who the troll is hmmm lets think.... I guess in a way i could be.... depends on how ya look at it i guess
Would you say you are "sowing discord"? I'd suggest a peek at the Troll-O-Meter
-
Man talk about being blunt, you missed the point entirely. (i made a funny)
YES, A SHOVEL DUG THE HOLE, THE HOLE (DUG BY A SHOVEL) WAS NOT DUG (YES, DUG BY A SHOVEL) FOR THE PURPOSE OF HIDING THE CACHE (WHICH IS IN A HOLE, DUG BY A SHOVEL FOR A SEPARATE PURPOSE).
And maybe you didn't even see the picture? There is no dirt on top of it at all, just some dead grass. Is camo not allowed now???
I'm sorry, I must have missed "for the purpose of..." in the rules.
So if I go out and dig a hole for the purpose of digging a hole, then come back tomorrow and put a cache in it - well, as far as the land managers (and Ground Speak) are concerned - that's quite all right, correct?
After all, I dug it for the purpose of digging it. I decided later to put a cache in it.
I appreciate the clarification of the intent of the posted rules! Thanks!
-
****here troll troll troll, where ya at??? aw THER YOU ARE!****
Who's the troll? I'm posting technical data and you're name calling.
[edit corrected to make plural since it is multiples there-of now. . .]
-
I may have missed that last sentence in his reply. I need to go back and look.
it opens up thousands of great hides where I can go "find" a hole that is the perfect size and shape for my container.
?? Well I did make the thread.. 
? and the number of finds, I can understand they could... but how many people actually spends time day in day out looking into all the rules, regulations and such? I have a lot of time on my hands, being a stay at home mom of two and they play on their own alot, so i come here and read.... maybe not just this site (the forums and the caching information, plus the cacherU site etc etc), but other stuff as well (LOVE useless information).... I'm getting where I read everything more then once now.... Gotta get a new time killer.... Gotta say right now that I'm glad we didn't really "burn" each other, much.... Anywho Headed to bed soon (hopefully) 
, tomorrow's errands day so I will be on late... Cache (err umm Catch) ya'll tomorrow (Friday) sometime! 
Continued From Ccc
in General geocaching topics
Posted
Actually, I was curious when I saw it there, so I had to ask. I was actually picking up some stuff for the CITO tomorrow that I couldn't steal from the office 'cause it was in use.
It's suprisingly reasonable. I won't post price 'cause I'm sure it based on our rental volume, but still...