Team Shredded Bark
-
Posts
51 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Team Shredded Bark
-
-
Against my better judgment, I'll throw my 2 cents in here.
I don't think it is useful to attempt to justify a virtual by demeaning "lame" traditional caches--that is an apples-to-oranges comparison. (This is not to say that I don't think there are lame traditional caches out there, just that it has no real relevance to the discussion of virtuals.)
I also think that this issue is very emotionally charged because, as Tahoe and Sons pointed out, this specific memorial is particularly poignant and painful for a lot of us because of the ultimate sacrifices happening right now.
That said, and not to in any way denigrate or trivialize the sacrifices being made, that fact does not really have a bearing regarding the guidelines for a virtual. This sort of historical memorial to troops killed in action is, sadly, all too common throughout the country and the world.
I also think that the loss of our young men and women is so recent and painful that we cannot really have a balanced perspective on the historical significance of this sort of memorial. It may also be that this sort of emotionally-charged memorial cannot be made into any kind of cache without trivializing it.
John
Team Shredded Bark
-
[snip...] But one writer was very correct about which way you attack the cache. When I placed one of my caches I walked in on a nice hard packed lightly hilled trail that I had no trouble at all with walking with a cane - shade and all. The 'short way' in comes down 6 to 800 feet of very steep loose gravelled trail cut by a buldozer recently - in the hot sun.
I described this on my cache page. Some chose to take the short way - one person came the short way - did a dnf - came back the next day the easy way and found it. I also state that the difficulty was generated by clayjar - and if I decide to adjust it then I will report what cj said in my description.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Also, I find that it can be very useful to use the cache ratings in
reverse--if I am scrambling up 3.5 terrain on a cache rated only 1.5,
I know I must not be on the preferred approach.
By the same token, if I find no obvious hiding spots near the
coordinates of a difficulty 1 cache, I know that expanding my search
area is more likely to help than looking for a more-sneaky camouflage
job.
John
Team Shredded Bark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQPWJHkcrpacku1SeEQJz5wCgq4q0tsmm/v4M6RAlwk86UYXzTpsAoLcn
nGxADProjS9A6h6kgaLnui+a
=nryT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I've been trying to avoid posting to this thread, but I can't resist
making a few points:
1: I suspect that inappropriate log deletion is (sadly) more common
than we think, but not that many people bother posting it to the GC
fora. As one example, a geocaching friend of mine mentioned in his
"found" log that a cache was area where hunting was occurring and was
he uncomfortable about that fact. He didn't request or suggest
archiving, just provided a heads-up to other cachers in his log. The
cache owner deleted his log with no notification or comment, either
for political reasons (my friend is also a vegitarian, which is
implied by his geocaching handle), or because he felt it was a
criticism of the cache itself (both
inappropriate reasons, IMHO).
B: I disagree with the rational for never logging online (although I
understand it). I think it is unfair to the cache owner, who deserve
a report on their cache's condition, and an idea of visitor numbers
to ascertain environmental impact.
III: Team Lightfoot, your photographic proof of RamJetta's visit was
priceless. You ROCK!
d: For someone whose cache sticker and username openly advocates
smoking weed, Underscore_420 is remarkably un-mellow.
John
Team Shredded Bark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQO68DUcrpacku1SeEQInlgCdFuJu6IaEOMhUoXaUS9j2C2KuABMAn2AA
0ir5weAlfGitjBAs3RBUQmEp
=8TxQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I feel that the participants in this thread are actually discussing
two completely separate issues, and that most if not all of the
disagreement expressed is a result of confusing the two different
issues as if they were one.
Issue 1: Is GC.com responsible (legally, morally, or
otherwise) for physically removing caches marked "archived" that have
not been dealt with by the cache owner? ("dealt with" defined as the
cache remains removed if appropriate, cache relocated, confirmed
missing, or listed elsewhere, and the owner has posted a note as to
the physical cache's unltimate disposition.)
I think the answer is probably "no." As mentioned earlier in the
thread, it is a listing service, and they are not likely to be
legally liable for the physical caches, which they don't own.
Issue B: Is it A Good Idea for GC.com to remove, or at
least assist and encourage removal, of archived caches?
I think the answer to Issue B is "yes" because it is good for
geocaching as a whole in terms of public and land-manager perception.
It doesn't matter that the relative geotrash percentage versus the
total of all litter is negligible. People, and particularly land
managers, who find what appears to be abandoned litter in their park
with "geocaching.com" written on it are going to think poorly of both
the Web site and geocaching as a whole.
This perception problem is likely to ultimately result in fewer
places being available for geocaching.
Currently, there are informal programs on a regional basis to
"rescue" archived caches in this manner. Ideally, the owner or a
rescuer should post a note to the archived cache confirming its
removal or final physical status. But as noted earlier, many cache
seekers are not members of regional organizations, or even read the
gc.com fora.
Please note that I am referring only to abandoned caches whose owners
have not retrieved them after some time and contact attempts. I think
"listed on N-caching.com" is a perfectly appropriate final status.
So, in closing, I think it could be useful if GC.com provided some
sort of direct interface or status to reflect this, perhaps "archived
and retrieved" or something to that effect, just to make it easier.
Sure, give people props via stats for "rescued" caches (something
that is done informally on MiGO's site now). This would make it
easier for cache seekers to become aware of the geotrash issue, and
encourage them to do something about it.
John
Team Shredded Bark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQO2SSEcrpacku1SeEQJLCgCcCx1/E/XmUDNAJ/iCR+AsiZVDxSUAnio4
KwdxMCx7y91BhQ2b0AlA8YrN
=JFIo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
This was near the final stage of Clinton River Trail Walk cache
Oddities:
A) We have no alligators in Michigan.
It was at the edge of a relatively remote location along a river, unlikely to be seen by anyone, except perhaps fishermen and geocachers. -
[...]
Things to note... OSX has crashed more than WinXP in my expereience.
[...]
I regularly use 2 Macs running OS X (work and home). The home Mac would crash (Kernel Panic) once or twice per week. The Work mac would never (and I mean never) crash.
Long story/short: I eventually traced it to a bad RAM DIMM. OS X really exercises the RAM with virtual memory management, and is very sensitive to faulty RAM. Consider testing (which didn't initially reveal the problem for me) or as a test replacing the RAM in your Mac with high-quality brand-name RAM, and see if the crashing goes away.
It did for me. Both Macs I use never crash with heavy use.
-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I use exclusively Mac with my Meridian Plat. Yes, it is true that,
like with Garmin, the native GPS software (MapSend and the firmware
upload utilities in my case) will only run in a Windows environment,
which means VirtualPC. It runs fine for me under VirtualPC 5. No
reason to wait for 7.
However, I only have to run VPC when I am creating and uploading
maps, or updating the firmware. Neither of these happen very often,
since I have all maps covering my usual travel areas already in the
GPS on a 256 Megabyte SD card.
For day-to-day waypoint and route management, I use
MacGPS Pro, which I highly
recommend, It is OSX native, recently added support for Magellan (as
well as Garmin), and works great. The email support is also very
good. You can use it with a wide variety of free and purchased
digital maps, and essentually get all features except routing. Most
cool (for me) is the fact that it's Waypoint, track, and route file
formats are editable text files, which I have used to script a custom
GPX database solution using FileMaker Pro database and FMsync to
jFile on my Palm. But I digress.
I have also used and like
MagWayMan Magellan
Waypoint Manager, a Mac OS X native GPS software geared toward
geocaching.
I also really like Mac
SimpleGPS. It is essentially EasyGPS for Mac OSX, and works
well.
Finally, Unix tools such as GPSBabel (which is a very powerful GPS
format conversion tool) work under OSX, albet it command-line mode.
So, don't be afraid to go Mac. It can work with your GPS, and the
other advantages (My two OS X systems never crash, and I mean NEVER)
far outweigh the disadvantages, in my opinion.
John
Team Shredded Bark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQKO3TUcrpacku1SeEQJ4VgCgqsSQFg5w15lRNmyVUhqXK5gvpEsAn15D
eRzd8ZaU6LZdje+XDz4qUMNU
=Mwwl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Re: DOS versus the Blue Screen of Death:
My Mac (OS X) here at work has never crashed.
I leave it running 24-7, use it hard all day, and I have only
rebooted when required after installing system updates. Yes, the
occasional application hangs or unexpectedly quits (usually MS Office
for Mac, ahem) but it has never brought down the system--you just
kill the app that hung go on as if nothing happened.
My home Mac did have 1 to 2 crashes per week (well, they're called
"Kernel Panics" but they are the functional equivalent of the Blue
Screen of Death), until I figured out that it had a bad (generic) RAM
DIMM. I replaced it with (more expensive) Kingston RAM and now it
never crashes either.
It's the stingy one who pays the most.
Having used Windows and earlier versions of the Mac OS before, I
probably would have accepted 1 crash per week as normal and perfectly
acceptable if I hadn't seen the rock-steady performance of the work
Mac.
I believe this rock-solid system stability is a direct result of it
being Unix under the hood.
My point? We should demand better from our computers and software. We
should all buy Macs, if only to spur Microsoft to do a better job. It
is possible to design and build a stable system.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQKJ2OEcrpacku1SeEQKnmACdFtNYQmNyOfKfGGLBliNMBQcKdY4An1ZF
I6KV/p4PzxuYxwiQiKBzLrIY
=VKTn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
[snip]
Since I was having so much trouble with it, I decided rather than go straight to the SD card from the program, I would create several regions and save the image files to my hard drive. This worked pretty well....or so I thought. I created an image for Missouri and Minnesota and then tried to upload them to my SD card direct from my hard drive. When I finished and went to the database menu on my gps, the only region I had was Missouri. No Minnesota and Iowa disappeared.
I'm getting frustrated here. Is there anyone who's had some experience with this software that could give me some tips on creating regions on my hard drive and then uploading them to an SD card successfully?? Any help would be greatly appreciated!!!
Thanks,
Hawkfan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
You mention that you "went to the database menu" on the GPS, and it
only showed one region.
That would be normal--with Direct Route (unlike earlier mapsend
products) only one region can be active at a time. This is apparently
because DR can only generate routes within the same region.
You would need to go to the "Card Utilities" Menu, and select "Change
Maps" then select the "Detail Map" field to switch to the other state
regions.
If you want to route among all three states, you'd need to get them
into a single region.
Hope that helps,
John
Team Shredded Bark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2
iQA/AwUBQKJgQkcrpacku1SeEQLlIwCgsmHJea+PmoFVdkM+1XtAiCfSsiYAoPLL
jmC/20aBOSA95W2IFsMNJQJY
=XbrR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
Probably the most annoying feature is to have the light turn on when the alarm goes. The least they could do is provide an indicator so that you can tell when it is off or on. I'm hating the battery drain during bright days when I can't tell if I managed to turn the light off or not.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I also find the auto-lighting alarm mildly irritating.
If you hold the Meridian to your ear, you can hear a slight
whine/buzz when the backlight is on. It gets slightly louder on the
bright setting. I have used this technique many times on bright days
to determine if the backlight is on and shut it off.
I hope that people who see my manoeuvre think I am using a cell
phone.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2
iQA/AwUBQJqX3Ucrpacku1SeEQLq1gCdF61uNIcEs7+kkU6tZNGHZWkI7zwAnR+m
g6zHJARaMG5kiCGjS4Kfnd/A
=7Fge
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
Just curious--what was the rating for that cache, Blaylockgang?
It's difficult to get a feel for the situation and weigh the hider's comment without knowing the rating.
For example, I know that the Clayjar guidelines indicate that a 3 difficulty "could take up a good portion of an afternoon" for an experienced finder, and a 4 "May require multiple days / trips to complete."
My point here is that the difficulty rating seems to cover the entire gamut from "In plain sight" to "ground-penetrating radar required to find cache." The rating system is so you, the seeker, can decide which kind of caches you want to hunt according to the circumstances and your preferences. I have gone after some 4 difficulty hides, and even found a couple. Yes, they took a few trips. I have also enjoyed some 1s at lunch-break from work.
So my opinion is that, assuming a cache is rated reasonably well (within a half-star or so), no one should be complaining that it is too well hidden. The fact that one could have fit a full-size cache doesn't mean it is wrong to hide a micro. Simply avoid the 4-stars if you don't want to take multiple trips to find the cache.
John
Team Shredded Bark
-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Just wanted to comment on a couple of earlier issues posted:
A) Airline Rules: It seems that they are loosening up. For example, a
couple of years ago I checked and Northwest did NOT have GPS on their
approved list. However, I personally asked the individual captains of
my flights and they okayed GPS use. This year, I sent an email to
Northwest citing the rule book page for approved devices, and got a
response that GPS use was OK with them at cruising altitude (when
other electronics are allowed). I printed that email and took it with
me on my trip. Of course, it is always up to the captain. I only
explicitly ask the captain to use it if GPS use is prohibited by the
airline in general. So far, the flight crew has always allowed it. If
it isn't prohibited in general by airline policy, I feel free to use
the GPS without asking (but of course, I would turn it off if ordered
by the flight crew, in accordance with federal law)
Barometer/altimeter readings: My understanding is that GPSaltitude, while not as accurate as GPS 2D position coordinates, is
still more accurate than barometric altimeters in general. My
Meriplat has a barometer, and the "weather" screen shows the pressure
adjusted for sea level (it requires a 3D fix to record pressure so it
can know how far above sea level you are). It turns out being in a
pressurized cabin at 39,000 feet really messes that up: it showed
something like 70inHg--way higher than reality, of course.
C) Course: There are apparently specified air corridors that might
explain the curve of TEAM 360's track. I noticed on flights between
Ft. Myers and Detroit that in both directions we appeared to fly
almost directly over Atlanta and then adjust course at that point
toward the final destination (instead of a direct straight path
between the destinations, which would have tracked further east). I
assume that this is due to Air Traffic Control issues. The curves
could also have to do with the projection of the map, however.
John
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQG2zE0crpacku1SeEQKfUgCfQRR06dqZDRsZOCXp8364Cfkm3ScAnAkD
x3ZAm6TQYrHYSl+pZBa9vDRV
=HQtf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
[...]If a cache is placed in an area with so many people that it's impossible to retrieve/hide it without being seen, then we just get on with it and be seen. If a muggle's going to get it, they're going to get it. The hider should have been more careful![...]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I have to respectfully take issue with your reasoning here.
Logging a find isn't simply a matter of finding the cache and being
able to physically get to it. You have to be able to retrieve the
cache and sign the log book WITHOUT COMPROMISING THE CACHE. That's
part of the challenge of geocaching.
There have been a few occasions where I have given up on a cache
because of the risk of compromising the cache location, sometime even
after spotting the cache. Of those, there have been several that I
rethought and came back either at a less busy time or with a better
strategy for not being spotted. There have been plenty of examples of
good tactics in this thread. Here is
Some caches are hard to get to for other reasons (mountaintops) and
some because they are in a busy location. If you don't like that sort
of cache, then don't hunt that kind; there are plenty of others out
there. And if, in fact, there is a problem with retrieving the cache
unobserved (or at least unnoticed) I feel you should leave it alone
and log a not found or a note with an explanation. I don't think it's
fair to blame the hider's choice of location as an excuse for being
careless and possibly compromising their cache.
John
Team Shredded Bark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQB6DLkcrpacku1SeEQKfigCePr6To1Im1saTWm0UMhB/u6rZmrwAoOxb
/UiuTKgQj1j/fCpd7cY0a9PR
=RLS5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
"I looked for it and I found it
Miles Standish proud: Congratulate me"
--R.E.M., "Begin the Begin"
"Stay off that highway: word is it's not so safe
The grasses that hide the green-backs,
the amber waves of gain again
the amber waves of gain
Green grow the rushes go
Green grow the rushes go
Green grow the rushes go
The compass points the workers home"
--R.E.M., "Green Grow the Rushes"
"We're all doing fine beneath the satellites."
--Rhythm Corps, "Life Beneath the Satellites"
And of course:
--
"I saw two shooting stars last night,
I wished on them--but they were only satellites!
Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care."
--Billy Bragg, "A New England"
-
I signed the petition. I also wanted to note a couple of good, ongoing third-party efforts on software: MacSimpleGPS and Magellan Waypoint Manager.
In addition, Mac OS X's Unix underbelly means you can (with some initial effort) run GPSbabel and other utilities.
I agree that more OEM and third-party support is sorely needed.
JCR
--
"I saw two shooting stars last night,
I wished on them--but they were only satellites!
Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care."
--Billy Bragg, "A New England"
[This message was edited by Team Shredded Bark on August 11, 2003 at 12:32 PM.]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Kanto:By Stunod's information, and by http://marian.creighton.edu/~joruth/CROP.html, they are 888878.842331894 meters away from each other. I didn't find a vector for it...like pointing to a city or country?
The vector could only be South (180 degrees).
--
"I saw two shooting stars last night,
I wished on them--but they were only satellites!
Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care."
--Billy Bragg, "A New England"
-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Little Nasty is currently rated as a 5/1.
I agree that if it is in poison ivy the terrain rating should be
higher. Of course, that is assuming that you were looking in the
correct place (your log mentions that you were having signal
problems).
It also looks from your logs you made a total of three trips to the
cache on two seperate days. A 4 difficulty rating indicates that
finding may require multiple trips, so I would think a 5 could easily
require more than three trips.
Your logs also indicate that you spent over an hour each on two of
those trips. Let's assume that you put in over an hour on all three
attempts, say five hours total. A difficulty rating of 2 indicates
that an experienced finder would take up to 30 minutes to find the
cache, and a 3 should require "a good portion of an afternoon," so I
would suppose that a 5 should take significantly more time than it
appears you have put in on this cache so far.
I'm not trying to tell you how to hunt for caches. If you don't feel
this cache is worth any more of your time, I personally don't think
any less of you for your decision. What I don't understand is why you
think the rating is inappropriate. They way I read the ratings, a 5
should be nearly impossible even for experienced cachers. I agree
that this probably isn't a "family friendly" cache, most 5's probably
require a longer attention span than most kids (and maybe most
adults) have.
John
Team Shredded Bark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.1
Comment: Keys at http://www.jcrdesign.com/keys.html
iQA/AwUBPu6Qp0crpacku1SeEQKprgCgwe+KloiUKX86v37vvtLgyoARBBAAoKlv
e9Ho5WfIgf3CGR2kvBrYLDLN
=0nIH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
"I saw two shooting stars last night,
I wished on them--but they were only satellites!
Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care."
--Billy Bragg, "A New England"
-
quote:
Originally posted by Cadwalader & the Golden Horde:Part of the problem with the current rating system is that the definitions do not cover some extreme cases. Many caches are rated 4 or 5 and can still be found with a reasonable amount of effort.
If everyone else enjoys looking for caches that are essentially impossible to find, then perhaps we need a different dfinition of the sport/game.
I suppose that depends on your definition of "reasonable." In your original post, you seemed to indicate that requiring multiple trips was unreasonable, yet that is part of the standard description of a 4-star cache. I would argue that multiple trips are therefore reasonable for a 4-star and 5-star cache. I would assume that a 5-star cache requires an extreme amount of effort to find. Again, because that's in the description.
Extreme should be reasonable, on a 5-star.
--
"I saw two shooting stars last night,
I wished on them--but they were only satellites!
Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care."
--Billy Bragg, "A New England"
-
I am a little puzzled by your post. Why would we need a separate rating to indicate difficult caches? I thought that was what the standard ratings for difficulty and terrain were for.
I recommend avoiding caches rated 4 difficulty, if you aren't interested in making multiple trips. I believe that's part of the definition for a 4 difficulty rating.
--
"I saw two shooting stars last night,
I wished on them--but they were only satellites!
Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care."
--Billy Bragg, "A New England"
-
The thumbnail map at the top of the page for our Rouge Booth cache GCBC64 is showing New Zealand. Not really unusual, except the cache is in Michigan. The coordinates, state name, and larger map are all correct. Not a huge deal, It's kinda funny, actually.
My theory is that a modification to the site programming reversed the sign of the coordinates. My cache is near 42N and 83W (or 42 -083), while 42S 83E (or -42 083) is off the coast of New Zealand.
And here I always thought I was digging to CHINA! It was New Zealand all along.
John
--
"I saw two shooting stars last night,
I wished on them--but they were only satellites!
Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care."
--Billy Bragg, "A New England"
[This message was edited by Team Shredded Bark on June 12, 2003 at 10:36 AM.]
-
quote:
Seriously though, here in Detroit Michigan, I have not heard much about West Nile Virus in the news, so hopefully they are eradicating the problem. Probably has been put on the back burner due to other news stories recently. I may get the Deep Woods OFF, for future warm weather caching.Not to add to the irrational panic, but a Team Shredded Bark co-worker lost her mother recently, and the autopsy results just came back last week as West Nile. I don't know other details (age, other health complications, whatever) but West Nile is clearly back in our area. It just isn't suffering from the media frenzy of last year.
Let's keep it in perspective: the odds of getting West Nile are very small, it's much more likely that I will die in a car accident while driving to a geocache. (Maybe I should walk?) West Nile isn't going to affect my geocaching, but I am certainly a little more fastidious about coating the team in DEET.
JCR
--
"I saw two shooting stars last night,
I wished on them--but they were only satellites!
Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care."
--Billy Bragg, "A New England"
-
I take an initial reading and make a waypoint at the potential cache location. I let it "average" for a couple minutes. Then, I take a little walk, maybe a couple hundred feet away, come back and make a second waypoint.
Then, on another day (the next day or several days later, doesn't matter) I go take another reading, again letting it average for a few minutes. If the coordinates are off by much (more than 20 feet or so) I come back a third day.
Then, I plot out the points graphically on paper (using the GPS distances from waypoint to waypoint and a protractor) and plot a point in the middle of the spread. You could also do this with Mapsend or whatever software your GPS can use.
Also, I check to make sure that the GPS is telling me I have a pretty good fix (20ft EPE or less) when I record the waypoints. If reception was particularly poor, I would come back another time. I use a Magellan Meriplat.
--
"I saw two shooting stars last night,
I wished on them--but they were only satellites!
Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care."
--Billy Bragg, "A New England"
[This message was edited by Team Shredded Bark on May 30, 2003 at 01:10 PM.]
-
I hate mowing.
Seriously, I changed to a team name after discovering that my wife and 4-year-old like caching, too. They don't always accompany me, however, especially on those lunchtime caches. The team count really reflects caches that I have been present for. So it isn't really a good indicator of how many caches my wife has found.
I gotta go with the previous poster who said "who cares?" It's all pretty much on the honor system anyway.
I have a geocolleague who logs family finds as a team, and his own finds separately under his own ID. The problem is, he still has to (double?) log team finds under his own ID in order to get them off his "unfound caches" list. So that method is imperfect as well.
--
"I saw two shooting stars last night,
I wished on them--but they were only satellites!
Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care."
--Billy Bragg, "A New England"
-
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
This ROCKS.
So far, it isn't parsing out the .GPX description field (although it
does it correctly for .LOCs). I get the waypoint Names, coordinates,
etc. but no description or comment fields. I'm using the OS9 version.
Not a complaint, just a bug report--I understand that this is a first
beta.
Thanks immensely!
John
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.1
Comment: Keys at http://www.jcrdesign.com/keys.html
iQA/AwUBPq/kGUcrpacku1SeEQLD8wCcC4LnhagZAVkOpw1MhydQ50YwoTQAoNoF
XQvPPAF7Eew7ERsZ/Nl7SXC2
=A61L
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
"I saw two shooting stars last night,
I wished on them--but they were only satellites!
Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care."
--Billy Bragg, "A New England"
It was at the edge of a relatively remote location along a river, unlikely to be seen by anyone, except perhaps fishermen and geocachers.
Barometer/altimeter readings: My understanding is that GPS
Paper Trail Or Pda
in General geocaching topics
Posted
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Actually, for me it was the gigantic size of the three-ring binder
that finally pushed me over the edge to (almost completely)
paperless. All those dead trees. I do occasionally print out aerial
photos of unfamiliar areas, especially when traveling.
I use a Mac, and I have a "Folder Actions" script set up that unzips
the Geocaching .zip files on arrival, converts them to CacheMate
format via GPSBabel, and sends them to the Palm for upload the next
hotsync. It also FTPs a copy so I can download updates to the Palm on
the road if I want. I have a separate script that I run manually to
format and upload the latest waypoints to my Magellan Platinum, via a
FileMaker database and MacGPS Pro.
I use the Filemaker database to track my historical cache finds, and
it gets synced to jFile on the Palm. It was a solution I rolled
myself before CacheMate came along.
If any Mac users out there are interested, I would be happy to send
you the info and scripts.
John
Team Shredded Bark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.1
iQA/AwUBQkw3i0crpacku1SeEQLfzACdFTHXI2F3NGT/raOxfAl65QYYZ9IAn2kR
lNqhyV4UEb5ivenYRoDWN/bv
=VU9r
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----