Jump to content

niraD

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    14351
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by niraD

  1. And under ideal conditions, a consumer GPS device will be accurate to about 3m (10ft). The precision provided by W3W is fine for geocaching, given the accuracy consumer GPS devices provide..
  2. Then the CO should "serve the first piece of cake" to the honoree by providing the cache info to the honoree before everyone else. I've found a series like this, where the CO said that the honoree had already found the caches, but that STF (second to find) was available.
  3. Exactly. What the OP proposes is really a cache with an Additional Logging Requirement (ALR), which hasn't been allowed for years.
  4. A common recommendation for beginners is to stick with small size, regular size, and large size caches. Until you're more experienced, avoid micro size caches, some of which are smaller than most beginners can imagine (sometimes called "nanos"). Save those for later, after you have some experience. Also, stick with caches that have a difficulty rating of no more than 2 stars . Save the more difficult ones for later. You may also want to choose caches with easy terrain ratings. (The difficulty rating tells you how hard it is to find the cache once you get there. The terrain rating tells you how hard it is to get there.) And it is often best to start with traditional caches, which will be at the published coordinates. Multi-caches or mystery/puzzle caches or other cache types can require more work just to figure out where the container is located. However, some "easy" caches have low difficulty ratings because they're in the "usual spots". Experienced geocachers will know to search the "usual spots" right away, but new geocachers will have to learn about the "usual spots" before those caches will be easy for them to find. Under ideal conditions, a consumer GPSr will be accurate to about 3m (10ft). That applies both to your device, and to the cache owner’s device, so you may find the container 5-6m (16-20ft) from ground zero under ideal conditions. Under less than ideal conditions, both GPSr readings can be much less accurate. Once you get within that distance of ground zero, put your device away and look around for places where a container could be hidden. Where would you hide something? Do you notice anything unusual? Is anything too new, too old, too organized (e.g., UPS: an Unnatural Pile of Sticks/Stones), too symmetrical, not quite the right color or shape, etc.? Don’t look only on the ground; the cache may be knee-level, waist-level, eye-level, or overhead. How might the container be secured in place? With magnets? With a hook? With string? With fishing line? With something else? Does anything move when you touch it? (Be careful when touching things though.) Go ahead and read the cache's additional hints (if provided), and read the past logs and look at any photos in the cache's image gallery. They may help you understand what you're looking for, and how/where it may be hidden. It may also help to look at some of the cache containers available online. For example, check out the cache containers sold by Groundspeak. Also, take a look at the Pictures - Cool Cache Containers (CCC's) thread in the forums, and check out some geocaching videos on YouTube. See also: How to hone your Geo-Senses (blog post)
  5. Ah, thanks. I was doing it backwards: [https://coord.info/GCZXNA](Happy Birthday!) does not work [Happy Birthday!](https://coord.info/GCZXNA) does work
  6. Here's another example of the "friendly email" pressuring a CO to archive a cache that was perfectly fine. When is Groundspeak going to edit the text of the "friendly email" to avoid pressuring COs to archive caches that don't need to be archived?
  7. Maybe. Maybe not. You can give it a try, but you may need to post a new listing. From the Help Center article Archive or unarchive a geocache:
  8. I'll add a weatherproof log sheet or make other minor repairs as a favor to the CO, but I won't do anything major, and if I didn't fix the root problem (e.g., the leaking container that caused the log to get soaked), then I still post a NM log. And I certainly won't leave a throwdown as you described. For reference, see the Help Center article Respond to "throwdowns".
  9. Courtesy of Google Translate: In theory, you could use the Markdown formatting described in the Help Center article Format cache and trackable logs. In practice, Groundspeak seems to have broken this feature. I just tried to create a link in a log and it doesn't work right now.
  10. I think you're referring to these: I first heard those called "blinkers" or "blinkies" because they were originally made by removing the watch batteries from blinking LED jewelry and putting a rolled-up strip of paper in the battery compartment as a log. But there are a few other containers listed on the Nano Cache page of Groundspeak's online store, and I would consider any of them to be a nano-cache as well. Plus there are other containers I've seen used for nano-caches that aren't available from Groundspeak's online store.
  11. So many choices, so little time: Dumb as a box of rocks. Dumb as a doorknob. Dumb as a bag of hammers. Dumb as a brick. Dumb as a post. Dumb as a stump. Stupid as a mud crab. Stupid as a donkey. Stupid as a lamp post. Thick as a bowl of oatmeal. Dull as a brush. Dull as a dishwasher. Dull as a doornail. Brainless as a chimpanzee. Simple as a pie. Simple as a pimple. ...
  12. And a 35mm film canister can hold small trackables and trinkets, but is arguably the definitive micro-size container.
  13. Examples are great, especially if they use common container types rather than vague objects. It would also be nice if the Groundspeak store listed the geocache sizes that are appropriate for all the containers they sell. But specific volumes give a clear line for containers that aren't included as examples.
  14. You mean writing implement vs no writing implement? Sorry, but I don't understand how that plays into it at all. The new system would be a simple change from the current one, just adding 10ml as the dividing line between nano and micro: nano: 10ml or less micro: 10 - 100ml small: 100ml - 1000ml (1L) regular: 1 - 20L large: 20L or more
  15. We already have a definition. From the Help Center article Cache container sizes, "If a micro cache is less than 10 milliliters, it’s often called a nano cache."
  16. True, but if the CO wants to provide an indication, then that can be in the cache description (e.g., "a regular-size object, but there is only room for the log sheet").
  17. Whether you drill a boulder or stump of your own and bring it to the site, or whether you drill an existing boulder or stump (WITH PERMISSION), I think what matters is whether finding the "host" object reveals that you've found the geocache, or whether you need to find the micro-size container within the "host" object before you know that you've found the geocache.
  18. If the "host" object really is camouflage, then I agree with you. If I find the "host" object and don't know that I've found the cache, then I'm really looking for the micro-size container, not the "host" object. In that case, listing it as micro makes more sense. But sometimes it's obvious that the "host" object is the cache, but the actual container inside is micro-size. I'm looking for a larger object with a micro-size container, so listing it as other makes more sense. I don't think it matters how "firmly" attached the container is to the "host" object. A tree stump with a bison tube is still pretty much the same regardless of whether the bison tube has been epoxied into a hole, or whether the bison tube can slide in and out of the hole.
  19. When I find the larger "host" (the concrete bear or the concrete stone), will I know that I have found the cache? Or will I have to find the micro-size container hidden inside the host before I know that I have found the cache? If I'm looking for the larger host, but the actual container is micro-size, then I would list it as Other. If I'm looking for the micro-size container, and finding the larger host doesn't reveal that I've found the cache, then I would list it as Micro.
  20. I expect the CHS to be around for a while myself. But supposedly the algorithms have been updated, and will continue to be updated. Most geocachers are completely unaware of the CHS and its interpretation of what logs may or may not mean. They aren't going to change the way they log to suit the CHS. If the CHS is going to become more aligned with the way geocachers actually post logs, then the change must come from the CHS algorithms because the majority of geocachers are not going to change.
  21. If the CHS system can't deal with the way people actually post logs, then the CHS system needs to be fixed. Most people will not change the way they post logs to suit the CHS system's limitations.
  22. I look up their profiles on geocaching.com and send them individual email. Then I wait until they reply with their email address before I send email to multiple recipients. Or, if they all let geocaching.com show their email addresses on their profiles, then I can skip all that and just send email to multiple recipients.
  23. If you want to have a second conversation with that cache (e.g., about a different topic), then oh HECK no!! And so on. I find the email works so well for conversations with geocachers that I see no need to use the Message Center with all it's limitations.
×
×
  • Create New...