Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by barefootjeff

  1. Around here FTFs are a bit like snail racing. On one of my fairly recent hides (GC8JGWN), FTF was claimed a day after publication and 2TF rolled up almost two months later. A similar thing happened on a cache last year near Wondabyne railway station (one of the Sidetracked series) where I claimed FTF the day after publication and it was six weeks before anyone else came along. Admittedly I had a head start by living just one stop away, but even so I don't think our trains are that slow.
  2. Could they be Liesegang rings? We see them in the sandstone around here. Here's an example I found online which sort of matches your description:
  3. This. Computers often use lazy writes, where data is written to a holding buffer in memory rather than going directly to the device. This has quite a few advantages, as writes to physical drives, particularly the old mechanical ones, are quite slow, so the buffer's contents could be slowly written out to the device in the background while the user got on with other things. It also allows multiple writes to be consolidated into one. The problem is with removable drives, if the device is unplugged before the buffer is flushed out, you end up with empty files on the device. I've heard that, in Windows 10, lazy writes are disabled on removable drives, but I can't vouch for the accuracy of that, and in any case it's still good practice to always eject the device from the operating system before unplugging it, just to be sure everything that was meant to be written actually got written.
  4. Go to labs.geocaching.com then click on the down-arrow box to thr right of your username. That should then show you if you have any credits and, if you do, clicking on My Adventures will take you to the builder. There are detailed instructions on how to use it in the Help Centre.
  5. Although I haven't done anything quite as remote as the ones Goldenwattle referred to, my own experience of more remoteish caches is that they are mostly older ones from the first decade of caching with owners who are no longer active. Then it boils down to a choice between doing some minor repairs (maybe replacing a cracked Sistema, for example) or logging NMs/NAs and ultimately leaving the region devoid of caches. Even in my own region, there are few people hiding bushland caches these days. In the last five years, well over half the T3+ caches on the Central Coast were either placed by me or were part of the geoart trail in the Watagan Mountains created for the 2018 Oz Geomuster mega.
  6. The PQ filters don't allow you to type in a date, they provide drop-down lists to select month, day and year. Maybe this would be a better way to do it on the Search page, but it's old-fashioned and doesn't look snazzy enough I suppose.
  7. Yeah, if you want all the difficulty, terrain or attribute values, you have to select none of them. But with the cache type and size options, you have to select all of them. Makes sense???
  8. This thread started off in the context of a terrain 4.5 cache and whether being defeated by its terrain before reaching GZ ought to be valid DNF. Such a cache is unlikely to be getting hundreds of logs a day, if it's typical of the T4.5s around here it'd be doing well to get one log a year. If the CO can't be bothered reading that one log if it happens to be a DNF before deciding to spend the day venturing out there with a replacement cache, well...
  9. Nup, it's not my style to log an NA while the current throwdown is still there and being found (and I doubt the reviewer would accept such an NA anyway, given that there's a container and a logbook there that's being found with no outstanding NMs on the listing). I'll just keep it on my watchlist and if it goes missing again before I'm too old I might do something.
  10. Here's a bit of a story that's my take on "remote cache maintenance". Back in 2012, someone who's no longer in the country placed a cache not far from my home. In 2015, six months after its previous find, I attempted it but, in spite of doing a fairly thorough search of the many possible hiding places there, couldn't spot it and so logged a DNF. There was another DNF a few months after mine and then, a month or so after that, someone dropped a throwdown near where they thought the cache might have been and claimed a find. That worked until 2018 when someone logged a DNFand two years later another cacher dropped a throwdown somewhere near where they thought the original throwdown might have been and they too logged a find. It's since had three more finds, two of whom thanked the most recent throwdowner and gave it an FP. But what are they finding? A throwdown that replaced a throwdown, neither of which were likely to have been in the same hiding place as the original or borne much resemblence to it. It's a bit like the woodsman's favourite old axe with three new heads and two new handles. If that throwdown-throwdown goes missing again and if someone (perhaps me) gets in quick enough with an NA before it becomes a throwdown replacing a throwdown replacing a throwdown replacing a long lost cache, I wouldn't mind hiding a new cache there as it's an interesting spot to explore. But until then it remains a listing owned by someone on the other side of the planet and a container that no-one seems interested in maintaining once it's been dropped and that all-important smiley claimed.
  11. My caches don't get many finds relative to my visits so I generally only post an OM log if I've actually fixed something, otherwise the cache page just fills up with my logs. I noticed this on a cache a few years back when, over an eighteen month period, the only logs were my OMs which all pretty much said the same thing, that I'd cleared away the leaf litter from around the first waypoint: I'm mindful that anyone using PQs only gets to see the five most recent logs and I don't want them all to be OMs from me saying everything's fine.
  12. If you go into your Settings then select Preferences, there's a checkbox right at the bottom that selects showing search results directly on the map. If you uncheck that, you'll then get a list of caches a player owns on their profile which includes their archived caches.
  13. Yeah, usually there's a scrunched-up torn baggie enclosing a scrunched-up wet logsheet and squeezed into the Eclipse tin's rusting remains, leaving little room for anything else. But there's not that much more room for typical trackable attachments in this decon container which the HQ's shop lists under "Larger Containers" and which measures as a tad over 100ml: It does have room for this multi-page stapled logbook and a pencil though, so I really wouldn't consider it a micro. The line has to be drawn somewhere and 100ml seems to be as good a spot for it as any.
  14. Yes, but the Eclipse tin is also clearly bigger than the bison tube. The examples on the cache submission page are just that, examples of what someone thought were "typical" containers in each size category. The mint tin is somewhere between their typical micro and typical small but it doesn't say which. A TB tag, or even several, will fit easily inside an Eclipse tin. I really prefer the objective definitions in the Help Centre, ie. less than100ml is a micro, 100ml to 1 litre is a small, etc. An Eclipse tin has a volume of about 60ml so is categorically a micro by that rule.
  15. I disagree. While the examples and images are fine if you actually have one of the things shown (a bison tube for a micro or a small tupperware box for a small), they don't help for anything else that might be bigger than one but smaller than the other, such as an Eclipse tin. I'd wager that many of the Eclipse tins listed as smalls happen because on the cache submission page they look closer to the size of the tupperware than the bison tube. Those images don't tell you where the boundaries are between the different sizes.
  16. Perhaps I've led a sheltered life, but the 20 large-rated caches I've found have, from memory and photos, been genuine large containers (apart from one which was an Earthcache). They were a mix of buckets, large boxes, long PVC tubes (maybe half a metre or more by 20cm diameter) and a couple of what I could best describe as small cubby-houses, almost big enough for me to crawl inside. Likewise the regulars I've found have nearly all been ammo cans or the larger (1 litre plus) Sistemas. The only micros I see listed as smalls with any sort of regularity are Eclipse mint tins but with those the incorrect size listing is the least of their problems. On the other hand I don't encounter many nanos in the places I do most of my caching, maybe a couple of dozen in my eight years of playing, and most of those were on trips to Sydney. Having a nano size category could be handy but two difficulties I see would be applying it retrospectively (maybe not a problem in the longer term as most nanos tend to have a fiarly short lifespan) and compatibility with dedicated GPS receivers that wouldn't recognise the new size category.
  17. That page on the website used to show the full activity logs. This is a recent change.
  18. Yeah, that page used to show the content of the logs but now it only lists the names and dates: I guess it's another step down the path to making AL activity invisible to owners.
  19. The trouble is the COs won't know about your edited logs as they only get notified when you submit the original.
  20. As far as I know, new Garmins still have a bunch of pre-installed caches on them, many now defunct. Take a look in the Garmin\GPX folder of your device to see if there are any gpx files in there other than ones you've added. You can also take a look in your pocket query GPX files to see if any of the archived caches are in them. The gpx files are just text files so you can view them in any text editor (for example Notepad on Windows). Just search for GCXK9D (or any other archived GC code) and you'll quickly see if it's in there or not.
  21. A special case, yes, but I have three caches hidden in a national park where one of the parks service's rules is no swag or trackables. Should these be listed as micros even though they clearly aren't? When I go out caching, my goal is to find the cache, not somewhere to dump a load of swag. I want the size rating to indicate how big the thing is I'm looking for so I can narrow down the range of places I have to search at GZ. If it's listed as a micro, I'm going to be focusing on places someone is likely to poke a micro into, like a knot-hole in a tree or small honeycombing in a rock, rather than the larger hiding places like a deep rock cavity or a tree stump, especially if it has a low D rating. I'm not interested in swag and rarely have trackables to drop, so insisting the size rating be based on those makes it useless to me. Here's another one of mine: If I filled it with water it would hold a few hundred millilitres so I've listed it as a small. The logbook is rolled into a cylinder, put inside a small plastic bag along with the pencil and pushed into the crocodile's mouth. No room for swag or even a trackable, but I'm not going to change it to a micro because that would make it too hard to find. Anyway, it's not in a place where someone is likely to bring young kids looking to swap toys, it's meant for cachers who want to take on the interesting hike through the wetlands and get a bit of an idea of how big the thing is they're looking for so they can find it, sign the logbook and get back to civilisation before the tide comes in.
  22. Yes, I agree. This is one of my novelty caches: The wombat is hollow and has an internal volume of several litres, but to protect the logbook from moisture and dirt I've added an internal 380ml Sistema that slips inside it: I've listed it as a regular as that's the size of the object I placed there. I don't consider the wombat as camo as it's not meant to camouflage the cache, quite the opposite in fact as the Sistema just sitting by itself would be a lot harder to spot. The wombat is the cache and the Sistema is just an extra layer of protection for the log. If someone had a trackable that wouldn't fit inside the Sistema, they could always just put it loose inside the wombat, but leaving trackables there probably isn't a good idea since the cache is pretty remote (a 6km hike each way) and has only had one finder this year, so anything left there won't do much travelling. Furthermore, having it listed as a regular limits the number of potential hiding places to be searched, particularly as the area around GZ has become increasingly overgrown and there are just way too many places where you could potentially hide a small.
  23. Also, if the caches you are getting notifications for are on your Watchlist, you can find that down near the bottom of the left hand column on your Dashboard.
  24. The "5076747" is your player ID. You then need to convert that to base 31 (the GC-code <> GC-id tool in the Geocaching Toolbox can do that, just remove the GC prefix you get and replace it with PR) which in your case gives 5Y6HZ. Going to https://coord.info/PR5Y6HZ does indeed go to your profile.
  • Create New...