larryc43230
-
Posts
2256 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by larryc43230
-
-
I got into this discussion with another cacher a few days ago. He agrees with you that the DNF count is the number of DNF logs a cacher has. This is also the easiest thing to count. I was only counting 1 DNF per cache that I still haven't found. I don't feel like a missing cache that I found later after the CO replaced it should count against me, but I just want to go with whatever everyone else is doing.
So is everyone ok going with the DNF pride count = the total of DNF logs created by the user?
This is exactly what I use, and display on my profile page.
As an aside, I always find it amusing when someone discusses whether a DNF "should count against me". Against what, some imaginary scoreboard in the sky? Is there some punishment for admitting too many DNFs, or some reward for never admitting them? This isn't golf, it's geocaching. The only thing that should really matter is whether you're having fun.
--Larry
-
Probably and off subject question but what if a cache was placed and then another placed 540 feet VERTICALLY above the other cache. but would have almost identical coordinates. Would that make an exception????
A few months ago, in my area, a cacher hid a new traditional cache and got it published. After publication, using a series of 50 and 100 foot moves, all in the same direction, he managed to move the cache location to the bottom of an abandoned tower. Which already had an active cache more than a hundred feet up the tower. The reviewer caught the subterfuge (which was even bragged about in the cache description), and promptly archive the new cache. So, no, verticality doesn't count.
--Larry
-
I just ran a test using my Oregon 650. As always, YMMV.
* I deleted all geocaches (pocket queries) from the unit
* I downloaded a pocket query covering an area east of Pittsburgh. The closest cache in this file is 157 miles away from my current location in central Ohio.
* I booted the unit and pressed the "Geocaching" icon. "No results Found. Try Adjusting Search Parameters."
* I never use Filters, but I checked anyway. The unit was set to display all caches, in other words, no filtering.
* I Tried it again, hoping to use the Search by Name feature (it displays as "Spell Search" when it displays).
* The icon that normally appears in the lower right corner (three horizontal lines) doesn't display at all. I can't search by name.
I deleted that pocket query from the unit and reloaded the pocket query I had deleted in the first step (which is centered on my current location) When I booted the unit, the icon reappeared, and I could search by name.
Based on what I'm seeing, the limit applies to name as well as distance. The unit will not display caches more than 100(?) miles away, whether searching by distance or by name.
--Larry
Edited to add that the unit has Software Version 4.30 (the latest as of this writing). In case that makes any difference.
-
I have caches within 60 miles of home loaded on my Oregon 650 at the moment. I just did a search for one that's 59.9 miles away, and the unit found it when I did a spell search.
--Larry
-
Are any of the caches you're looking for more than 100 miles away from your current location? If so, they won't show on the list.
Is it 100 miles with the 600 series? It was 50 miles with the older series.
To the OP : check the map to see if the caches are visible.
To be honest, I'm not sure whether the limit is 50 or 100 miles. There was another thread in the past month or so that claimed 100 miles. Anyone know for sure which it is?
--Larry
-
Thanks for your comments. I am previewing before submitting the pq, and the pq is definitely pulling the caches I want them to pull. It's when I load to my Garmin that only some are showing. I know I can't see them all because I loaded 100 and could see that only 11 were in my list. I will check my filters and see if something is set that shouldn't be, that certaintly sounds like a possibility.
Are any of the caches you're looking for more than 100 miles away from your current location? If so, they won't show on the list.
--Larry
-
You don't have to "deal with" anyone, really. Just find the caches and post innocuous "thank you" logs. Save any commentary for the COs with thicker skin and a sense of humor.
There are a couple of select cache owners in my general area who either 1) make it a point to hide caches which I actively dislike looking for, and therefore will not bother looking for, or 2) are sufficiently cranky or over-sensitive that I simply prefer not to deal with them. In these cases, I don't want their caches cluttering the data I load into my GPSr.
I see no reason to "just find" any cache I wouldn't enjoy finding. I'm a big fan of the Ignore List.
--Larry
-
Does anyone know of a way to add caches to my ignore list based on CO?
If you use GSAK, there's a way to do it.
--Larry
-
Wow, looks like you ran into a real nasty cache owner.
Judging from his log where he found his own cache before archiving it, I can imagine the PM he sent you. 
This cache owner logs a find for his own cache every time he does maintenance, logs a note, or archives a cache. I've never understood that. I get notifications for caches in that area, and I see him do that all the time.
--Larry
-
I have now got any 'official' reply from Garmin Support in relation to my question about not seeing geocaches on my device due to the distance, and it confirms what has now been said here, so for future information here is the reply...
The GPSMAP 64 series can hold up to 4 million geocaches. However, these devices will only display geocaches located within a 100 mile (160 km) radius of the device.
In order to search or view geocaches outside of this radius, utilize the "Search Near" option and select a map point within a 100 mile radius of the geocache you wish to view. The other way to view the geocaches you loaded is to use BaseCamp to view all of them
Hope this helps someone else in the future
Regards
Paul
Thanks for posting this, Hornby-Hunters. The distance limitation is fairly well known (it applies to my Oregon 650 as well as your GPSMAP 64), but there's been some uncertainty about the actual maximum distance involved. Now we know.
--Larry
-
I would like to know what the initials CAD means when someone mentions it in their log. I haven't been able to find it anywhere in the glossary.
Thank You,
I've seen CAD used as an abbreviation for "cache and dash", meaning a fast and easy find.
--Larry
-
That sign is quite common here in Eastern Ontario.
Apparently for good reason, according to this Web page.
---Larry
-
Works fine here, too (Firefox 33.0.2, Windows 7). All the images are displayed correctly.
--Larry
-
The only thing worse than a needlessly bumped thread is a needlessly bumped thread with a really bad spelling error in the title.
Wow, I hadn't even noticed that until now!
Somebody fixed the spelling.
Whoever did that, thank you. It was driving me nuts.
--Larry
-
I just clicked on the link to Garmin Communicator that splashy provided, and I was informed that there was a new version, 4.2.0.0. I installed the new version (after telling Firefox 33.0 that it was safe), then successfully used the "Send to My GPS" function to download a cache to my Oregon 650.
I rarely use the "Send to GPS" method, so the new version might have been available for awhile and I simply wasn't aware of it.
GrateBear, do you have 4.2.0.0 installed? If not, it might be worth a try. If that doesn't work, check your Firefox security settings. It works for me, anyway.
--Larry
-
You can't even see the caches if someone else finds them. I mean if you're looking at their list of finds, it's not even in there.
That aspect has come back to bite me a couple of times. I'll see a forum or Facebook post about a cache that piques my interest, and when I try to look at the cache page I can't find the blasted thing.
--Larry
Then you are looking wrong. Put the cache identifier in Google and you get it.
That is exactly how I track down these things, once the reason for my not finding the cache page using normal methods dawns on me. I have more than 700 caches on my Ignore List right now. I can't remember all of them, and I don't want to.
--Larry
-
If it piques your interest, why did you put it on your ignore list?
For the same reason people slow down to gawk at car accidents?
--Larry
-
You can't even see the caches if someone else finds them. I mean if you're looking at their list of finds, it's not even in there.
That aspect has come back to bite me a couple of times. I'll see a forum or Facebook post about a cache that piques my interest, and when I try to look at the cache page I can't find the blasted thing.
--Larry
-
That was indeed when the bookmark list and ignore list was implemented, a February, 2005 update. Most people don't use it, but the ignore list is nothing more than a bookmark list.
It's a bookmark list with at least two significant differences from all other bookmark lists: You can use it to prevent caches from being included in pocket queries, and the Ignore List can include far more than 1,000 caches, the usual limit for a bookmark list.
--Larry
-
I know there is no way to know who's watching but... I wish I knew why someone was watching this cache page. LOL I also know that newbies are unaware of what to do with trackables. I try to keep my caches up to date on trackables as I know I don't like to go to a cache that supposedly has a trackable and its not in the cache.
It just is bugging me that trackables are coming up missing from that particular cache with 2 people watching it.
I wouldn't actually accuse anyone of stealing the trackables but thought by making it Premium only would stop the newbies and maybe would give me a clue as to who is watching.
baack40, I'm watching a bunch of your caches (but, as it happens, not the one you're having the problem with).
Whenever I visit a cache, regardless of the outcome (a Find or DNF), I put that cache on my Watch List. If I found the cache, I'd like to confirm that the next seeker could find it, too. It's just nice to know that some unseen muggle wasn't watching and made off with the cache or its contents. If I DNFed the cache, I want to read the logs of cachers who come after me. That can (hopefully) tell me whether the cache is still there to be found, and might give me a clue as to where and how to look the next time. LEGO's log of your Rock Stall cache was what inspired me to return and look again. Once the cache has been found by another cacher, it usually goes off my Watch List.
I also have a ton of caches in any of 15 Bookmark Lists that I maintain for various reasons (none of which involve the potential theft of travelers
) . Most of those lists are private, and a cache owner wouldn't have any way of knowing I'm monitoring those caches.I guess the bottom lines are:
1. The fact that someone is Watching a cache says nothing about their reason for watching it.
2. There are quite a few legitimate reasons for someone to Watch a cache.
3. There are plenty of ways to monitor a cache other than using the Watch List or actually visiting the cache page and leaving an entry in the Audit Log.
I've lost more than 120 of my own travelers through mysterious disappearances, so I can feel your pain, but the Web site doesn't really provide any useful tools for dealing with it.
--Larry
-
-
I'm going to go with validated email accounts, for the app and for the website. Every year on the date you joined you'd get an email that congratulated you on whatever anniversary it was and ask you to update and validate your information.
^ ^ ^
This, or at least some way to validate the email accounts of all users.
I don't care one way or the other about collecting icons, virtual caches,webcam caches or lab caches, but I do care about all the (mostly but not all) new cachers who can't be contacted when they (innocently or otherwise) screw up. Geocachers have to have a way to contact other members when things don't go right.
--Larry
-
If a cache owner is proven to have deliberately provided false information regarding permission to place the cache, I would hope that, at minimum, cache reviewers would place that cacher on a "special scrutiny" list to help make sure that doesn't happen again.
--Larry
-
Selling address lists is also something they need to be very careful with. I'm not the only one who uses an email address along the lines of geocaching@mydomain, so if I get anything commercial from anybody other than Groundspeak I know who gave my address away. As it stands I get a particular form of spam to that folder and that folder alone, which primarily consists of emails apparently from young ladies who feel a desire to spend a weekend with me with no obligations (there are a few variations on the theme, but you get the picture).
I have an e-mail address that I created specifically and only for geocaching. I've used that same e-mail address ONLY to register for the geocaching site and the GSAK site. That was more than eight years ago.
With my general-use e-mail account, maybe 30% of the incoming mail is spam of one sort or another. I have never, ever, not even once, received spam mail to my geocaching e-mail account. Groundspeak has never sold that e-mail address to any third party, and no one has succeeded in "stealing" it from either Groundspeak or the folks at GSAK.
If history is any indication, I'm not worried about getting spam from Groundspeak. I vote for mandatory e-mail validation of geocaching accounts.
--Larry
Judging from his log where he found his own cache before archiving it, I can imagine the PM he sent you. 
DNF count in user page... DNF pride!
in General geocaching topics
Posted
It's always fun to "avenge" a DNF, that's part of the thrill of the hunt. Though that term does make it sound a bit more epic than it is.
What I've never understood is what difference it makes whether I have a lot of DNFs or very few DNFs. Maybe I have a lot of DNFs because I go after challenging caches. Maybe I have a lot of DNFs because local cachers are lousy at maintaining their caches and lots of them are actually missing. And maybe I have lots of DNFs because I'm lousy at finding them. Unless all cache hides were created equal (and I can assure you, they're not), comparing DNF counts as part of some made-up competition is completely meaningless.
I include my DNF count in my profile simply because it's just as much a part of my geocaching history as my finds (and some of the stories behind those DNFs are more fun than those behind the finds). I would hope that no one would compare my DNF count or DNF Ratio with theirs or anybody else's. That simply makes no sense to me.
--Larry