jon & miki

I'm just guessing, but if I remember correctly the "nearest" search radius for some of the default searches changed from 100 miles to 50 miles a few weeks back. You might try setting up your search manually.

On our last visit to Myrtle Beach, we particularly enjoyed the Vereen Memorial Garden Cache (well, it's a bit north of Myrtle Beach, but only a half hour's drive or so) and Maclean Park Micro (closer, but still a bit north of town). There are lots of other caches in the area to fit every taste from drivebys to hikes in the state parks - if you post what type of caches you prefer, somebody more local can probably provide some specific and up-to-date suggestions, but it's a fairly cache-rich area and you'll find plenty to hunt of almost any type you like.

Look for any patterns you recognize in the numeric codes - there's at least one section that will give you several letters. Once you have those letters you should be able to take an educated guess at more until you can reason out the entire code. If you still need a hint to get started, you should probably contact the owner directly. Owners of puzzle caches usually spend a good bit of effort setting up the puzzle and wouldn't like to see anything given away on a public forum. I think you'd find "The Code Book" by Simon Singh both interesting and instructive reading. Your local library should have a copy. Good luck.

Sorry that aint the answer - the loading is always done via a macro and nothing has changed there. Then you'd better post the macro and all the settings over on gsak.net. That's where the gurus hang out.

Look at your Load GPX/Loc file settings. You probably do not have the checkbox to delete files after loading set there. The mail processing uses the last active settings of the load dialog box by default.

This thread seems to be veering into the area of whether to log caches online at all, which, while certainly a way to hide stats, was NOT the intent of the original request. The original intent of the thread was to ask TPTB for an option to hide stats and clearly TPTB have seen the request. The general forum folks have had a reasonable period to comment on the original request and to offer alternate ideas. Thanks for your comments and suggestions. I'll close this thread since its intent has been achieved. I hope TPTB will provide this option for all of us. I understand that I am cutting off the opportunity for some personal rebuttal in the vigorous debate, but with the rebuttals and counter-rebuttals flying around, I don't think there will be any "fair" time to close the thread no matter how far off topic it may wander. Perhaps the debate can continue in another thread?

Folks - my original feature request did NOT eliminate the logs' visibility to others or prevent anyone from following a cacher's log trail, but simply removed the current trivially simple access to my caching "score". While I'm happy to see discussions of the merits of the proposal and suggestions for satisfying as many interest groups as possible and statements of support/opposition, I would rather not see this thread hijacked into an argument about the pros and cons of features quite different that the one I am requesting. The same for personal arguments - please start another thread for those (or take it offline). Please?

1. It's time to take the numbers away, Jeremy. 2. The only way to get this game back on track is to take away the motivation for this nonsense. 1. No, it is not. 2. No, that is not the only way. I agree with Quest Master to a certain extent. I'd like to see it as a decision for each cacher to make. For one I would block my stats from the public. I'm the only one that needs to know how many finds I have. I wonder if most folks on all sides of this issue would be satisfied if the website only allowed a cacher to see only their own stats, but if they were able to paste a URL pointing to their personal stats page into their profile if they wanted to (similar to shared bookmarks today)?

That big a change would probably cause a serious firestorm in the forums, but it might be a bit calmer if the URL to a cacher's personal stats could be shared or pasted into their profile if they wanted to share their stats. Kinda like shared bookmarks work today maybe.

Try N44 43.088 W124 03.498, that might be close enough for locating nearby caches. The state park is at N44 43.812 W124 03.397 and I'd guess the campground is within a few tenths of a mile from those coordinates judging from the many loops on the street maps that look like campsites. Maybe a local will be able to do better for you though.

Already done. Huh? Read their profile - the answer is found within.

Then you wouldn't mind if I opted out of having my own personal numbers being publicly visible? (see this thread on a feature request for hiding stats)

I admit my comment about a "few" was somewhat tongue in cheek. I suspect there might be more than a few who would opt out of sharing their summary stats for a variety of reasons. Your point about the (possibly limited) benefit is valid, but it needs to be balanced against the effort involved. I believe that stats were quickly disabled in the past to aid in diagnosing and alleviating performance problems, so I believe/hope the effort might not be so great as to outweigh the benefits to the "opt in"-ers. Besides, as others have posted in other threads, the decline in cache quality is at least partially driven by the hyper-competitive drive to achieve high personal stats and records. After all, a numbers addict can't find a lot of caches unless someone places them, so a numbers person has to place a lot of caches for their friends to find (the old saw about "you scratch my back" applies here, so the effect is doubled). If they're into high find numbers, they don't like to spend much time finding caches, let alone hiding them (I have met folks who have told me they have a rule that they look for a cache a maximum of 2 minutes, and if it's not found, abandon the search and drive to the next). So the kind of low-quality trivial-to-find caches we're concerned about accumulate. And new cachers hunt these first, so are justified in thinking that's what caching is all about. They have been taught by the community's placements that no thought is even desirable, just make a quick copy the wally-world parking lot cache at the next shopping center and that should be good enough. Some have proposed removing the stats altogether to eliminate the possibility of direct competition as a possible remedy for the cache quality problem. I don't think I'd advocate that radical a step, but I would like to separate myself from the "New Numbers Game" and an option to hide my personal stats would allow me and other like-minded folks to do so.

This may not accomplish exactly what you want, but the caches will disappear from your list if you can find someone else to adopt them (I think you'd have to do that before they're archived though).

Please note - my original suggestion does NOT prevent others from seeing my personal logs, not on the cache page, not via email notifications either. The proposal if implemented would not interfere with that aspect of caching in any way. It only removes an individual's personal find count and summary statistics from several trivially accessed places and then only for cachers who wish their stats hidden. Are you seriously suggesting that the entire landscape of the geocaching world could be irretrievably and permanently damaged if a few of us opted out of sharing our summary stats? BTW - per your "modest proposal" in the first paragraph, if it's a concern to you, please feel free to include in your cache description a statement that folks with hidden stats aren't allowed to log your caches. I promise not to knowingly hunt any so marked and will not have my feelings hurt if you delete any that I log in error.

You know, one of the odd things about privacy is that the more you have to explain why you want privacy, the less privacy you have. It seems to me that at least part of the burden of proof in this case falls on whoever feels they have a compelling reason to look at my personal stats. The strongest argument I've heard from anyone claiming a compelling reason to be able to review my personal stats is that they are useful in determining whether a DNF is valid. CR's and others' suggestions address that issue, but it's a pretty weak argument if they only look at the numbers. I certainly wouldn't give much credibility to a DNF on an urban camo-cache by a woods cacher with a hundred wilderness finds - he or she might never have found a camoflauged or nano cache before. Or would you give credibility to the cacher with 160+ event "finds" while only attending 17 events, but only a few finds of physical caches? The cache owner really has to look at the type of finds before judging the quality of a DNF and my original suggestion left the concerned and curious the option of seeing all my logs in a nice list. The weakest argument has been that "I like looking at the stats". I think the right to privacy and concern about misuse of information both trump simple curiousity. Although I think the advocates for complete and public visibility of stats need to justify their position, I recognize that I am advocating and requesting a change to the current status quo, so I will attempt to address the other half of the equation, "Why make a change at all?". Several of the posts above provide valid reasons. I do not think they need to be the same reasons for every cacher, but I will add a few of my own. In my personal case, while I believe the individual statistics are largely meaningless (at best misleading), not everyone shares that belief and therein lies part of the problem. I enjoy going to events to meet other cachers, new and old. I have personally seen numbers cachers putting down newbies with statements like "you don't know anything about geocaching until you've found 1000 caches". Enough of that and newbies start believing that folks with a 1000 finds are somehow better, smarter, smell better or whatever. I prefer not to be judged on my find count, but on my work and contributions to the community. The trivially easy access to my personal statistics makes it much too quick and tempting to judge me on one number alone. In the current hyper-competitive quest for smilies, the credibility of ALL high count cachers is coming into question. And justifiably so. If my "score" is not public, my personal credibility will not be immediately in question simply because I've found more than some magic number of caches. The easy access to my "score" makes the existence of "leader boards" such as CR linked to possible (and probably inevitable). The "leader board" makes it simple to find the active cachers in the state. That information can be (and I believe has been) misused by non-geocachers. There are other reasons I would like to keep my stats private and in the interests of maintaining my privacy, I will keep them so. Other cachers can and perhaps will provide their own reasons, but I firmly believe the burden of proof lies on the ones who believe they have a compelling reason to be able to see my stats when I would prefer to keep them private. *edited for clarity (I hope)*

CR's ideas certainly have merit and I hope will be considered by TPTB. I'm in favor of any approach that facilitates privacy and will actually get implemented by TPTB. Knowing there are lots of things on their to-do list that demand TPTB's time and effort, I'd be glad to accept something less than optimum if it's more quickly and easily implemented.

Because that impacts the usefulness of many of the site tools. You cant get a "all notes that are really finds" PQ. You can't do a search that excludes caches you found but didn't log. You can't tell your PQ to eliminate caches that you have already found but logged as notes. For example, I waste 1, possibly 2 PQs a day because they include caches I've found but haven't logged online. I can then filter out my finds locally, but the point is 30% or more of the load I'm putting on the site is wasted. How's that for starters? Hey, those are all good points. But my feeling actually is that I like the numbers. I like to see mine, and I like to look at others. I sometimes have reasons for wanting to see the numbers that others have racked up. For instance, I introduced my Dad's cousin and his wife to to geocaching, and I like to go check on their progress now and then. They are only one example of many. I am not about to go through people cache logs counting up all their finds to see how many they have. I could be out caching instead. I have a few caches hidden. If someone with four caches tells me its missing, I am not as concerned as I would be if someone with four thousand caches tells me they couldn't find it, even after a half an hour. When it comes down to it, I guess that I just don't like the idea of having the numbers go away because someone else doesn't want their numbers to show. Usually when a reason is given, it's because they feel like the numbers 'force' some kind of competition on them. It's the same kind of reasoning that people use ot suggest that I should stop giving grades to my students, because it forces them to compete with other students--It doesn't, it just makes them push to get to 100% First, please note that I am asking for an option to hide the statistics and only the statistics for one's own finds. The proposal would be to have the default be the same as today (i.e. statistics showing), so your cousin's summary statistics would not be hidden by default (if they choose to hide their stats, well, that would be a family matter). I understand the "DNF" concern and attempted to address it by leaving the profile summary page untouched except for the totals. You can make a quick assessment by simply looking at the variety of types of caches found and even with a cacher's statistics hidden, you can still easily assess the level of experience by simply clicking on the "all cache finds" and/or "all cache hides" links. I'm afraid I don't see the analogy with giving grades to students. Students all cover the same material in a given class, while I'd have a very hard time making the case that finding 100 1/1 film cannisters in wallyworld parking lots is comparable to finding 100 5/5's in the woods (difficulty and terrain are only two examples of relevant statistics NOT shown on the summary page). In the case of grades, the evaluations are usually for the parents and the individual student (and colleges, which have a valid reason for access) and, at least in my experience are not generally posted publicly for the other students in the class or the entire school to view - not at grades 1-12 anyway and certainly not on a open access web page for anyone with a browser and an internet link to see. In the case of geocaching stats, the numbers would still exist (as do grades), the raw numbers could simply not be shared for casual inspection by the entire online world at the owner's option. Even with the stats hidden, with another click or two the inquisitive could still get the same information as before (the "all cache finds" link does give a total record count after all). The curious would just have to look a little harder and maybe actually glance at the quality as well as the quantity of a cacher's finds before making a snap judgement on the basis of a flawed statistic posted as a single number on a cache log entry. Many times the arguments in favor of the statistical summaries come down to "I like seeing them". I would prefer my own to be hidden from casual view. Your curiousity vs my privacy - an old argument in many contexts and lacking a compelliing reason to the contrary, one in which I usually come down in favor of privacy.

I would really like to see a user level option to hide the totals of finds for my login. On the logs on cache description pages, the count could simply be omitted. On the profile "badge", "NA" could be put in place of the numbers. On the profile page, the types of caches found and hidden could be left, but the summary totals by row and column left out. A click on the icons would lead to the logs as it does today, only the summary counts would be omitted. It would be nice if the owner of the login could see their own statistics - I''d prefer that the option only suppress the visibility of totals for other folks than the owner. If there has to be a choice though, I'd rather have the option to suppress the statistics altogether and muddle along without knowing my own numbers. If someone really cares to know the level of another cacher's experience, they would still be able to see the logs as they could today from the profile page to get a feel for the types and quantities found and if sufficiently motivated, the curious could count the logs manually. Heck, it might even save a bit of server load since these numbers would not have to be recalculated each time the cache description and profile pages are recomposed. Any chance for such a feature?

Unless you clear your database with every download, you will wind up with caches that appear to be active but are actually archived. This is a side effect of a pocket query feature that does not include archived caches in the file. When a cache is archived, GSAK never knows about it since the cache description isn't included in the query. The easiest way I know to bypass the problem is to include a term in your filter that omits caches that haven't been updated since your last pocket query. I use 10 days since I update weekly and wanted a few days of slack in case I didn't pick up my queries on time.

Filters are your friend. Whenever you export from GSAK, only the caches included in the current filter are sent out. So, create a new filter that just includes available caches you have not found and that have received a GPX update during the last 10 days (or whatever period suits your pocket query schedule). Save that filter and invoke it just before you export and you're good to go. Best place for getting GSAK help is on the GSAK forums at www.gsak.net. I've found that there are lots of helpful folks there who can answer almost any question I've got very quickly.

I wish there was a per-account option to "hide" stats in such a way that I could see my own stats page but no one else could. That would effectively give folks the choice of opting out of the numbers game.

Since this problem happened to both GPS's at the same time, I'd bet the visible satellites were pretty much in a straight line. at the time of your hunt GPS positional accuracy depends heavily on the geometry of the satellite positions. If all the available satellites are essentially in a straight line or close to, the accuracy of the position will be seriously degraded. The effect can show up in narrow valleys or sometimes on a steep slope when most of the satellites are obscured by the mountain.

You can just clear all the user checkboxes, check the ones you want to delete, then select the delete waypoint menu item and check the appropriate options in the dialog box - one of the options is to delete the "user ticked"boxes.

We get pretty good coverage with a trimode phone (includes analog) on verizon. The worst dead spot I know of is our own living room, otherwise it seems to work pretty well everywhere. Watch out for roaming charges though.