BigBadger & Li'l SG

Okay, i get it. Fewer choices when it all started meant wider pigeonholes. I incorrectly assumed there were a similar amount of types then. Thanks

Not sure I understand this comment. What do you mean the cache types have changed? If it was a tupperware container under a rock at x and y coord's .. it was and would still be a traditional. And as an afterthought, if types have changed over time, does that not mean that changing of types is still an option? If you moved it 20 feet to accomodate a new park feature such as a new walkway or garden (etc.) that may have interfered with your cache it would become an offset cache, no? and at that point would not you or a reviewer change it's type appropriately? I suppose if you had a hundred or so caches... then it would definitely be a pain to change them as I'm sure they must be altered slightly as time passes.

Point taken. No, you are right.

Everything you state is EXACTLY how I have been thinking ! ! ! To the letter ! ! Are you from a parallel universe?

I can't say that it is common. I can say however, that I have had at least 5 instances out of the 30 or so that I have looked for... that would make it about 16%. Maybe I am incorrect about how to determine the types. I understood "Traditional" as being a container set at the coordinates posted.... no muss, no fuss. I am a little confused as the "Letterbox" type as they have been identical to the "Traditional" ones .... so far. If I go to a "Traditional" and find out that I have to go 40 paces bearing 221°, then 35 meters at 180° ... I would say it is a mystery.... am I wrong? Or, I end up at a comemmorative plaque that has answers to a series of questions, that would be a virtual. Granted, many people have many different perceptions of a given definition. This is very evident in the Terrain and Difficulty ratings. I have no problem with that.

I may be a bit off cuz I was in a bad mood when I wrote this but....... Does it bother anyone else when you go to find a "traditional" cache and it turns out to be a Mystery or Multi or some other type? I know it really makes no difference to some people. But when I'm doing a drive-by cache hunt and I don't have my GPX files on my Palm, and I end up spending 45 minutes looking for a regular ol' cache box that turns out to be the start of a puzzle.... it frustrates the hell outa me Don't get me wrong ! ! I do the other types as well.... Not many mind you because I am still in the learning stages of this hobby. So I am NOT against the other types by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, when in the throes of hunting them down, I prefer them. Ultimately, why not just call it what it actually is when you place the cache? Isn't that why we have "types" to help differentiate them within Pocket Queries, etc?

I wonder if the "lurkers" that may (or May not) be reading these posts are lurking in real life. I mean, I know many people including myself who don't always engage in conversations (around the water cooler or whereever else). As far as I am concerned, if you don't have anything to say, you need say nothing. I DOES bother me though when those who stay quiet during a decision making conversation, start to complain when the decision has been implemented. Yes, I have posted topics that have been razed, chicken stripped, admonished, and even beaten to death. It doesn't bother me, as those who are so close minded that they have to complain about everything ... well... can just go take a long jog on a short pier.

So as it seems there are a LOT of folks who support the idea of a rectangular PQ List with even more ideas than I had originally thought possible. And looking back through older (and other current) forum topic threads, this issue is perpetual. In fact, I see nobody going against the grain directly. And I can truly understand the issue of data raping from potential competitor sites. But I'm sure limitation parameters can prohibit excessive pillaging. So apart from that, what is stopping it from being done?

As mentioned before, I think to define a rectangle would be easiest for both you to program in as well as for users to manipulate. There is one thing that always bothers me about software developers and thier products. That is, the developers get an idea in mind and work their code and new terminology that is usually so far from what the average user can understand that most people never utilize the full potential of the programs. This site is a well mantained site, and the features you have implemented are wonderful. You don't need to be so complicated with new pocket query parameters. Most roads run North South and East West. Rectangles can manage this without issue. Trails obviously run every which way, but then how many caches are there in the middle of the Rocky Mountains or the Olympic Range, etc. .... Rectangles can take care of those areas without getting saturated as well. The grid system for mapping is the best available method to manage mapping, just ask SAR groups, the armed forces, mapping companies.... et al. The biggest problems are that I cannot afford the biggest bestest GPSr unit with the optional memory cards and that the little buggers actually only only 500 and 1000 waypoints!!! It's all Garmin and Magellans fault!!! My 2 bits.

Actually I never thought that I would have been the first to think of it. But I could not find the topic by way of searching forums. As I get more familiar with the overall sites I hope not to duplicate these topics .... unless of course they are of utmost importance (heh heh). My Garmin eTrex Legend C is a cool new toy for me and I am really enjoying the Geocaching so far but I got frustrated with its waypoint limitations. I had tried to do a few PQ's and got areas I have no desire to go to yet and areas that I desired but got no results for .... due to this radius search method. I guess it is partly due to what seems to be a high cache area that I live within. Not too sure about the radius within a rectangle method. I thought it would be more of a top-to bottom approach (ie. dropping anything below the saturation latitude). As the radial centrepoint would not neccesarily have been estalished within a N/S -E/W box Maybe it will become possible in the future...... I will try to finish reading the posted thread links before I post more here. Thanks

Has anyone considered to search by GRID rather than by radius (especially for pocket queries)? All maps are gridded and I dont think I have ever navigated by radius ....... ever. Nothing wrong with radius searches other than the search engine requires more CPU resources to figure it out....... Whereas grid searches would be simpler for the computer and would never have to overlap if several searches in similar areas were made. Another benfit could be more specific areas to choose from like say a rectangular stretch of highway or an odd shaped peninsula without including other land areas and caches. To search (for the few who may not understand what I mean) one would just have to state a North and South Latitude co-ord and an East and West Longitude. Just a thought.

Sheesh, now I'm just getting frustrated. No candy from strangers, no running with scissors, no instructions on how to make a divining rod... It's like you just dont want me to succeed at this geocaching thing ! !

Everyone has offered such good advice so far. Without being condescending, I have had a great week (20 caches) and have inadvertantly included a micros, multi's, a few other-than-traditional and even archived (wow, talk about frustrating). My software is now registered and full featured and I am a nerd-geek-dweeb of the 5th magnitude. I know I'll have more surprises in store as will continue to make mistakes (really small mistakes)...... THIS IS FUN ! ! !

Well, I got one of the 2 I requested..... Not the right one of the 2 but hey, .... Obviously, it's back in shape and it wasn't all my fault..... at least as far as anybody knows it's not my fault..... I'm pretty sure I didn't break the computer.

Thanks Jeremy

As in my other thread Pocket Query Query.. I tried to run my very first one on Friday and have not yet received a thing. Figured it was just me..... until the masses spoke.

I figured that might be the case. So is that the same as checking the "I HAVE FOUND" box within the query parameters? As it is written It seems that the 7-day query may be unique to the check box. I was concerned because if I had created something that I did not exactly want, I might have been stuck with it for 7 days before I could get what I really desired.

Okay.... I am also a bit confuzzled about a sentence in the PQ page - "*The Pocket Query can only run once every 7 days." If you can make up to 40 of them and run it daily, why does it state this?

Well, these replies make total sense. I just wasn't sure about the etiquette. I will definitely continue to keep writing in the logbooks and posting logs with my finds. Obviously the cache owners DO read the posts etc. Thanks for the replies ! !

Is it proper procedure to always leave some words of wisdom, thanks, etc when logging a find of a traditional cache or other type? I ask only as a course of brevity. I notice so many of you very experienced cachers with numbers in the hundreds (or even thousands, wow). And at least one other I know of who never logs a find online or in logbooks. Is there any middle ground here (online speaking) such as just a check mark and date? As a note, I have logged all of mine both in the log book and online and note the appreciation of others who have also logged finds.

Nope.. the only things in my spam filter were a couple of AWESOME deals on how to make my 'unit' longer and thicker........... (now, where's that credit card?) But seriously folks.... it's been almost 30hrs. and no PQ yet. Not much more I can do other than just wait it out... it is Easter weekend and probably pretty busy for the server.

Yes to both of your points. I wasnt sure if it was actually creating something so I did check the page view and I had narrowed my query too much... so unchecked a few boxes and now have a definitive query with results. Waited overnight and still no email. Anything else I might have missed?

I joined the premium membership to help support this site and get Pocket Queries. I am new to the sport and am looking to streamline my method of attack on my somewhat cumbersome bundle of softwares and electronic goodies. I have tried to get the pocket queries based on location, etc. but have not been emailed the zipped .GPX file yet. I know I can look at the query on a web page but then I'm just getting .LOC files, Yes? No? 2 days in a row I have been disappointed to not find the email. I read that they are created with a dedicated machine and sent in order of que... have I misunderstood something? Is there any way to get the file sent immediately? Then sent on a weekly basis as this seems to be the norm.

I should have taken the time to notice the post was in the Getting Started section, and also didn't notice the bit about 5 days. Please be gracious enough to ignore the tone and wording of my previous post. I suggest keeping things simple to start with, and to always read the cache page thorougly before going on a hunt. I have a couple of caches that are pointless if you don't read the cache page and I am sure you will run across caches that for very good reasons, give explicit instructions on how to approach the cache. No Problem JohnX ! ! I have fairly thick skin and run across misunderstanding on a day-to-day basis. I really appreciate all comments regardless of tone. Happy caching ! !

Thanks Adrenalynn. I think what you stated is pretty much what I was gearing towards. Can I assume you use cachemate on your palm? I saw little else for Palm devices... it seems that to be useful I will have to register it... nice that it is so inexpensive.