Jump to content

niraD

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    14365
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by niraD

  1. 3 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

    The whole discussion could be avoided if Groundspeak would make the D/T rating stick to the log entry.  If I log a specific rating it should stay, regardless if the listing is changed later on.

    Fundamentally, difficulty and terrain ratings are communication tools, a way for the CO to communicate the general nature of the geocaching experience to potential seekers. They are not prizes that finders earn.

     

    Yeah, I get that some geocachers keep track of such statistics and actually seek out caches with certain difficulty-terrain combinations. But if Groundspeak starts making the difficulty-terrain rating "stick" to the log entry, what else? Do they make the attributes "stick" because there are challenges based on attributes? Do they make the cache size "stick" because there are challenges based on cache sizes? How about the cache name, the "placed by" field, the state/province, the county, etc.?

     

    I think a better approach would be for the handful of people who care about such things to keep track of them on their own.

    • Upvote 1
    • Helpful 1
  2. 1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:
    1 hour ago, niraD said:

    If only cache listings had an owner, who was assigned the responsibility for deciding such things.

    Oh for sure, but that's not enough to make discussion threads like this moot.

    Absolutely.

     

    If we were discussing what a CO can or cannot change, that would be easy. The CO can change whatever he/she wants, except for things Groundspeak won't let a CO change (e.g., the cache type), changes that violate the guidelines (e.g., agendas or commercial content), or or changes that violate the TOU (e.g., IP violations or other illegal content).

     

    But if we're discussing what a CO should or should not change, that's a judgement call. We can argue until we're blue in the face, and people will disagree. And ultimately, the CO will still be the only one who gets to make that judgement call.

  3. 3 hours ago, Unit473L said:

    It's possible they may have done the ET Highway - that one is a few thousand caches that can be done in a day or two.

    They may have done the ET highway and similar numbers trails, but that alone isn't how anyone gets a find count above 100k. There just aren't enough numbers trails out there. If you hit 100k, then most of that has to be regular caches. Lots and lots and lots of regular caches.

     

    And a find count above 100k also requires a lot of travel, because you would quickly deplete even the most heavily saturated local area at that rate.

     

    2 hours ago, Wacka said:

    I know the #1 geocacher and yes, he finds them all. As soon as he signs the log, he is on his way to the next cache, walking  or walking to the car to the next one.

    Sounds about right. I've never gone geocaching with him (or with anyone else with a find count above 100k), but I know people who have gone geocaching with him. They said that it was very hard to keep up with him. He moves quickly. He finds caches quickly. He signs quickly. And then he's moving quickly to the next cache. He doesn't go geocaching every day, but when he does go geocaching, he finds a LOT of caches.

    • Helpful 1
  4. 4 hours ago, colleda said:

    Nothing sad about, it just a personal preference, unless one realy doesn't have any friends but I suspect unit had his tougue firmly in his cheek.

    Maybe this forum really needs a "Tongue in cheek" response... :cool:

  5. 7 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

    There will always be someone who manages to do it otherwise.

    One of the elevated caches I've found suggested that the cache could be done either way, and that he was torn between rating it T5 for those who climbed to the cache or rating it D5 for those who used tools to retrieve the cache while standing firmly on the almost-wheelchair-accessible ground below (T1.5). IIRC, he compromised and rated it around 3/3 as an average of 5/1 and 1/5.

  6. 8 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

    Also, a 1T should not be up in the rafters of a building.

    FWIW, I've seen elevated caches with low terrain ratings and high difficulty ratings (and possibly the "Special tool required" attribute) because the CO expected seekers to stay safely on the ground, and to retrieve (and replace) the cache using some technique other than climbing to it.

    • Upvote 1
  7. 2 hours ago, GLC said:

    I felt like odd man out this weekend since I slowed everyone down because I wanted to lay hands on the cache before claiming it.

    I've gone geocaching with people who wanted to sign every log personally. That was fine. Once everyone had spotted the hide (or given up), the last person retrieved the cache, signed for everyone (either writing everyone's names, or writing a team name to save space on the log sheet), handed the log to the person who wanted to sign himself, retrieved the log, and replaced the cache. Then we continued our hike.

     

    Playing this way (sometimes called "Huckle Buckle Beanstalk style") is slower than declaring victory for everyone once anyone in the group spots the hide (sometimes called "Three Musketeers style"). So what? The point isn't to increment your find count. The point is to have fun searching for geocaches.

    • Upvote 1
  8. 9 hours ago, GLC said:

    When you are in a group, is it okay to claim the find if you weren't with the group that found and signed the actual log?

    "Armchair logging by any other name would stink as sour."

     

    9 hours ago, GLC said:

    It seems that I was in the minority in feeling that leapfrogging was okay but being 3 streets over isn't.

    What's the difference? Either way, you weren't with the group that found the cache.

    • Upvote 1
  9. 50 minutes ago, ChriBli said:

    Or could the idea be to gradually remove support for special characters until people just give up and change their usernames?

    That might be Groundspeak's intent. Or perhaps they figure that current users with special characters in their names are used to the bugs and glitches those special characters cause, but they don't want to deal with complaints from new users who choose names with special characters. Or perhaps something else. After all, I am not a lackey, and I don't even play one on TV.

  10. 56 minutes ago, Tim'n'Marion said:

    Just a question about searching for caches not found by a user in filters, why is the name graham&linda or even Pebbles&Co not recognised? When trying to plan a day out to find caches not found by a small group this is so useful when it is working.

    Usernames with special characters are grandfathered. You can't create a new username with those kind of characters. In theory, the code for the geocaching.com website could support such usernames perfectly. In practice, such usernames cause problems, and can no longer be created.

  11. 2 hours ago, DarkZen_EvilCowPie said:

    Do list them as Traditional or Mystery?

    I wouldn't list a field puzzle as a traditional cache. Doing so almost guarantees that it will be discovered by geocachers who just want to find the container, sign the log, and move on. Not all of them will react well when they discover that a field puzzle is required to open the container or access the log, even if the cache is located at the posted coordinates.

    • Surprised 2
    • Helpful 2
  12. 2 hours ago, BigFurryMonster said:

    W3W has 3x3 meter boxes. Accuracy north-south would be 3.00m (that is, one unit represents that distance).

    Coords of the form DD MM.MMM` are accurate to 1.85m (north-south), and (except near the equator) less than that west-east.

    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..

  13. 9 hours ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

    It's not about giving the one being honored the thrill of the FTF, it's like letting the one whose birthday it is get the first piece of cake.

    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.

    • Funny 1
    • Surprised 1
  14. 1 hour ago, Andy324 said:

    Started this with my niece who I'm now homeschooling and we just made our first stop at a place but couldn't find it anywhere. It was said to be an easy one and I can see lots of activity but we couldn't find anything anywhere. What are we even looking for?

    A common recommendation for beginners is to stick with small small.gif size, regular regular.gif size, and large large.gif size caches. Until you're more experienced, avoid micro micro.gif 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 stars2.gif. 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 2.gif caches, which will be at the published coordinates. Multi-caches 3.gif or mystery/puzzle caches 8.gif 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:

    • Helpful 2
  15. 6 hours ago, Tassvargen said:

    Danke niraD, bei mir funktioniert es nun so: 

     

    [GC7413G](https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC7413G_diretissima-xxii-beatenberg-niederhorn)

     

    Cachergrüsse, Tassvargen

    Ah, thanks. I was doing it backwards:

     

    [https://coord.info/GCZXNA](Happy Birthday!) does not work

     

    [Happy Birthday!](https://coord.info/GCZXNA) does work

  16. On 2/19/2019 at 9:33 AM, niraD said:

    And of course, the "friendly email" still does not offer an option for what to do when the email is a false positive. :(

    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?

    • Funny 2
  17. 1 hour ago, Desertal said:

    This is more a question than a new topic. Got official message to archive cache due to a DNF or two. So felt pressured to archive. Got a request from cacher he had found and would like to get his well deserved  Smiley Find! On eventually making time to do the maintenance found all in order and original container snuggly in position.!?

    Is it possible to activate again?  

    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:

    Quote

    Archiving a geocache is meant to be a permanent action. Only community volunteer reviewers and Geocaching HQ can unarchive caches. This is done only in rare circumstances and only if the cache meets the current geocaching guidelines.

     

    If a cache is archived by a reviewer or staff for lack of maintenance, it will not be unarchived.

     

    Caches will not be unarchived for the purposes of adoption.

     

    If you accidentally archive your cache, contact the reviewer who originally published your cache page or another local reviewer. Make sure to explain why your cache should be unarchived. Provide the GC code.

     

    • Upvote 1
  18. 45 minutes ago, Desertal said:

    While on a Geocaching adventure trip in remote areas, mountainous, forest or desert trail walks etc... you pass by a cache that has a couple of DNF`s and has not been found for a long time. Not possible to contact CO  for various reasons eg. no comms, no answer etc.. after thorough search do you claim a FIND and help with the maintenance by replacing container and log sheet then message CO later hoping to get an answer.? or is more correct to just DNF and move on knowing that due to remote position, maintenance will definitely not be done any time in the near future?

    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".

    • Upvote 4
  19. 2 hours ago, Tassvargen said:

    Hallo zusammen, wie kann in einem Logbericht einen GC-Code einfügen als Link?

     

    Courtesy of Google Translate:

    2 hours ago, Tassvargen said:

    Hello everyone, how can I insert a GC code as a link in a log report?

     

    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.

  20. 9 hours ago, Ed_S said:

    This topic, as they seem to do here, has strayed off into "What-If Land" - we all know the tiny magnetic cylindrical cache container that holds a rolled log a quarter inch (6 mm if you prefer) wide. That's the nano to which I referred, and it's the one that comes to mind when someone mentions "nano."

    I think you're referring to these:

    image.png.ad413246a06ff9bca5be02e45ac93f05.png

    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.

    • Upvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...