The Rat

My cache Eschew Obfuscation (dead link not included) has been found by corporate security and confiscated. Anyone waiting for an opportunity to go back and log should avoid the area. I will try to retrieve the cache and place it elsewhere nearby. I cannot log on the cache page because Groundspeak has apparently taken it offline, so I am posting this here. I know of at least one cacher who told me they were planning to go back.

In the first 20 days only one finder, then in the last two days there have been three. A very interesting cache, especially the way it has turned out to be solved. Where there's a will there's a way. I know lots of other trite sayings, too. Travel Long Distances

quote:Originally posted by kablooey:I try not to set out extremely difficult puzzles. Dizzying Lengths is difficult, but most of the others are easy, once you figure out what you need to do. I don't know how easy The Amazing Race is. The first stage was pretty tricky to get to when I did it, and I never did find the Fast Forward cache. There are some who would dispute how difficult your puzzles are. As for Amazing Race, I just finished the next-to-last (I hope) leg. The cache was temporarily disabled when I started it last February due to construction at the airport, but I didn't really have that much trouble with the first stage. There have been a lot fo problems after that. The FF wasn't there when I went either, and the coordinates were off by at least 30 feet (I had an 11-satellite lock so the my GPS was steady, and I checked it later by satellite photograph once I figured out where the FF was.) The coordinates at the next stage (EE) were also off, and the distance given in the Low Detour that I just finished today was also wrong according to my GPS, so I am not confidant of the accuracy of the whole thing. In something like this where following directions precisely is important, it is essential that the info given is accurate. I guess we'll find out whether the cache can still be completed soon. I'll be going for the final stage in the next two or three weeks.

On a different topic, I still have the problem that I keep getting logged out. I will be shown as logged in on the main page and on the My Cache page, but when I do the filtered search, or go to a specific cache page, I am shown as logged out. I click the link to log in, and every time at first it just shows the the same page with me logged out. If I click the log in link a second time it then takes me to the log in page. I always check the Remember Me box, but it doesn't seem to help, even though I have cookies enabled. This all started when they changed the website to the new format. Does anybody else have this problem, or, more importantly, know how to solve it?

I was just examining the logs on the caches I've placed. I see that the easiest ones have the most, which is to be expected, but the spread isn't as great as I would have thought. The logs range from approximately 3 per month on the hard puzzle caches to 10 per month. The longest stretch one of my caches has gone since the last find is 78 days, and that, surprisingly, is a virtual, so that you really can't get a DNF unless you just don't do the quiz. I'm curious how other cache owners' experiences compare in log frequency, or general success, by however it is measured, especially the puzzle caches. Kablooey? Marky & Joani?

Go ahead and flame me if I'm too far off topic, but does anybody remember the Tex Murphy computer games? They are/were remarkably geocaching-like, especially the first one. The graphics were crude by today's gamer standards, although they got a lot better in the later ones. You had a hovercar and went around solving puzzles, questioning people, etc. in order to get the coordinates to further sites that you then searched for small items like keys, etc. The searching screen was sort of bizarre in the rendering, but you could raise or lower yourself to look down into objects on high shelves, etc. They actually had a story line and decent acting. Most of the game was video sequences using real actors. I think the games are still available, but the original company doesn't exist. Access software was bought out by Microsoft (boo hiss - where's Pepper?) which only wanted its golf product and dropped the Tex Murphy line. IMHO it was the best computer game series ever. It held much of the same appeal as caching, so if anyone is laid up and misses the sport, I recommend getting a hold of one to occupy you during recovery. The two final titles were The Pandora Directive and Overseer, as I recall. They play on a regular Windows PC. Although the first game had some bloodless shootouts with bad guys, the games were almost entirely non-violent, yet full of action and interaction. If anybody knows of any computer games that still have that kind of feel to them, please let me know. I haven't seen anything other than the Myst/Riven/Myst III games since them that are anywhere close. Those had the puzzle solving but almost no interaction with other characters. Today's games are just race and crash or shoot and splat exercises for illiterate juveniles.

quote:Originally posted by LilDevil:You have to be logged in to see the hidden/found status. Also, from My Cache Page, under Search for nearest caches from your home coordinates, you can click on 'filter finds' and it will only show caches you haven't found. Good luck clearing you first page now! I hadn't noticed the filter finds feature. Maybe that's why I have so many DNF's. I'm trying to catch kablooey in that department and making great progress, too. Anyway, that's what I needed. But I notice that now the site keeps logging me out. I was logged into the forums but not to the geocaching.com site at the same time. This didn't used to happen. Thanks to all who pointed me to what was right in front of my nose.

What's the deal with this new format for the Nearest To list? The first time I saw it, there were little boxes showing whether or not I had found the cache, but the list is no longer sorted by unfound/found/hidden status. This is really bad. Tonight when I looked, the little boxes were gone, too, so all I had to go by is the cache and owner name. Some of them I haven't paid any attention to for 10 months and I'm not even sure of the name. I really don't like this. Is there a customer satisfaction survey going on anywhere? Chat or forum about this? I don't see it on this board or any link on the main page. Does anybody else have strong feelings? I would like to get some feedback en masse to Groundspeak if there are others out there with the same problems I have with it. I want to be able to see at a glance just the unfound unowned caches nearby. I can't do that any more. At the very least I'd like the boxes back and the owned caches should have checked, not unchecked, boxes. I'm surprised no one is commenting by now.

quote:Originally posted by TeamJiffy:Hey Rat (boy do I feel uncomfortable calling you that!), Congratulations on your 200th find! -Fy, and Jif too Thank you. I didn't even realize it was 200 until after I logged and saw the cache page, so I had to edit the log. Thanks too for the nudge on Little Pictures, but mostly for the fine puzzle caches. You and kabloo, PhilippeGPS and Componenx, fizzymagic and Lamneth keep me going. I haven't gotten to scrollofMapping's contributions yet, so I guess I haven't exhausted all geocaching has to offer just yet. I really should get up in the mountains more, too.

quote:Originally posted by kablooey:That is kind of odd. You tried clicking on http://www.bluescollectibles.com/geocaching/sjlittlepics.html link above? I just tried it here from work, and it functions okay for me. I don't really have any friends; so my private club is kind of small. No, when I click on that link, it works. I clicked on the link on the geocaching.com web page for this cache right under your name that says User's Web Page. I assume that if someone wanted to see what caches you have placed recently (or in the past) they would click on that page, not the one for just one specific cache. I don't see the point in listing as the public URL on your profile a page that requires some special permission. It's rather like putting out a Welcome mat and then siccing your dog on anybody who rings your doorbell. If you want to open up your caches to the public, I would think you would remove the need for a password or cookie of some kind. That's sort of the point of the Internet in general and the WWW in particular. Here's the error message: You are not authorized to view this page HTTP Error 403 - Forbidden Internet Explorer

quote:Originally posted by TeamJiffy:One thing everyone should know: the new approver (he/she/them) understands that puzzle caches don’t give the real coordinates. Being clueful in this manner, this(these) new approver(s) is(are) bright enough to say “please give the real coordinates.” If you don’t do this, then your cache approval will be needlessly delayed. -Jif This raises another important point about having an alternate method of posting new caches. The reason the GC.com approver needs the real coordinates is not just to determine whether it is close to anothercache, but whether it is dangerous (near RR tracks, etc.) This is obviously for liability reasons. While we all resent the constraints of this sort imposed by our tort law, reality demands it. An alternate posting method would inevitably draw cache placers who cannot get the cache placed due to a dangerous aspect. I can guarantee you that the first time someone gets splattered by a train, or, worse from a liability standpoint falls off a cliff and gets crippled while geocaching, whoever advertised the cache, as well as the cache owner, will get sued. Presumably GC.com has insurance. Does anybody else reading this board? I happen to feel that the relatively minimal risk involved in geocaching is part of the fun, and we might all think that a cacher is responsible for his/her own safety, but the law doesn't see it that way. The Contra Costa County Transit District was just held liable for many millions for doing nothing more than placing a bus stop by a street. A pedestrian crossed in a marked crosswalk, the first two cars stopped, but the third rear-ended them and knocked car 1 into her. The crosswalk wasn't controlled by the district but it was held liable (Supreme Court upheld verdict) for giving the person a motive to cross the street there. I know, I defend against this stuff for a living.

quote:Originally posted by kablooey:I don't intend it to be exclusionary or privileged in any way. In fact, if it's just my caches, I'll probably add a link to each of my cache pages, allowing people to sign up for notification of my new caches. Well, this seems odd. I tried to go to your web site and my browser told me I didn't have permission to access the site. There was no link or instruction on how to get permission. I assumed it was a private club for friends of Blue.

quote:Originally posted by kablooey: I brought this topic up (dangling preposition) because one cacher asked for a better way of being notified about my new caches. With cache approvals taking as long as 48 hours (or longer...how long did Black Adder take to get approved?...it was placed 5/31, I don't remember seeing it yesterday), I've been listing some of my caches independent of the approval system. This puts the FTF hunter at the whims of the creator rather a website's volunteer worker. Of course, the website may decide not to list some or any or all of my caches in the future. It wasn't necessarily my intention to create a system that would track the listing of all new Bay Area caches. Yes, Black Adder took several days to get approved, and that is perhaps a bit annoying. Howver, that is still faster than the approvals for my first few caches, which always took a week a more, even when there were no questions from the approver or any problems with the placement. As for faster notification, I assume people have figured out how to find the (approved) caches placed by another member. For those who need a walkthrough, go to the Hide & Seek a Cache page, search for caches found by that member, when that comes up, click on the profile link for that user (located in his log). When that comes up, there is a link showing the number of caches owned and placed by the member, in x/y format. Click on the one for caches owned and that brings up a Nearest Caches page with just that user's owned caches. Bookmark that page, and then all you have to do is go to your bookmark whenever you want to see if kablooey (or whoever) has placed anything you didn't know about. It's also a handy way just to see what kind of caches the person has placed before - important for puzzle caches. Now if I could just use this to tell me what's going on in Little Pictures. I'm stumped at the moment.

quote:Originally posted by kablooey:Actually, now that I think a little more about it, I'm surprised that people claim that Yahoo Groups! is a spam magnet. I guess I should run a little test with a unique email address. I thought it was nearly impossible to find out the email addresses of people on a Yahoo Groups mailing list unless you're the list owner. Not if you buy them directly from Yahoo. Yahoo doesn't promise to keep the e-mail addresses private, and they certainly don't. Besides, there is always packet sniffing among other techniques. I would like a mechanism to be notified of new caches promptly by e-mail, but I have to wonder about setting up another system - Yahoo Groups, separate server or whatever - for this purpose. At some point you start to compete with geocaching.com. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, but what if the new caches aren't approved by Jeremy/hemlock et al? Or approved a week later? By the time the general public (i.e. non-users of the alternate system) find out, the cache will have been signed by the "insiders" and it will seem like a clique system - insiders get all the FTFs. If the alternate system is widely promoted and and is free, and the general public joins, then you have a system that requires a lot of management, and also competes directly with geocaching.com. Despite the autocratic nature of Jeremy's world, there is something democratic about the way new caches are done now. At any given time, with a little luck someone can do a search and be the first one to see a newly approved cache nearby and get the FTF. Not telling the owner when his or her cache is approved prevents them from telling their buddies and creating a class system of insiders and outsiders, at least to some extent. I'm not totally opposed to the idea. I just think it needs to be carefully thought out to avoid either dumping a lot of work on some local volunteer or polarizing people, or both. I also consider this to be the most thought-provoking thread we've had on this board in a long time.

quote:Originally posted by beckerbuns: I like this idea. I would subscribe. Yahoogroups is good, but I'd make it a private group (not listed on the website) and just advertise the link here. I get a TON of spam sent to "groupname-owner@yahoogroups.com" for the public groups I own. A note of warning about Yahoo Groups. I joined another group there about a year ago. They required an e-mail address, so I gave them one (one I had left over from a business I no longer use). Within 3 or 4 months the spam deluge hit, and I get maybe 20 spams a day there, and nothing else. The group itself got trashed - all records/messages/members lost. Yahoo said it was hackers, and couldn't be restored. The group died but the spam lives on. That e-mail address is toast, and I wouldn't join another Yahoo Group for any reason. Yahoo sells its subscribers' e-mail addresses, and doesn't make any bones about it. The "free" service is paid for by advertisers who want your address. I also don't see the need to have a group for purposes of new cache notification. This can be done automatically by e-mail through pocket queries and by website just by inputting the zip code or coordinates on the Hide and Seek a cache page. If the point is to get instant notification (more often than the daily pocket queries), then the Yahoo Group wouldn't serve that purpose, since there is no connection between when a cache gets approved and the group. It would only work for those caches the owner chooses to e-mail the group about. They can, and sometimes do, do that here on this board, so I don't see the advantage. I'm sympathetic with the idea of finding a way everybody can get quick and equal access to the new cache approvals, but I think that has to be done through geocaching.com. Even the cache owner doesn't know when his/her cache has been approved. A voluntary group is going to be too hit-and-miss to be of much use, I think. This is all just my humble opinion, of course.

quote:Originally posted by TeamJiffy:_Yay!_ We just finished our first month with 100 or more caches - 101 in May. And my wife thinks I'm obsessive about this sport. Congratulations.

For those of you who saw and gave up on Operation Futari back when it was originally posted, and are no longer watching it, it is now much easier. The first two stages became inaccessible, so I redid it to be just the final stage. The current posted coordinates are the correct final location, so all you have to do is go there and read the end of the story. The story is now shorter and easier to read, too, since I took the graphic with the code sheet off. There is no need since there is no Japanese language or decrypting to be dealt with. I was also successful in retrieving the cache container for VTA Quiz from the construction area, so it is fully accessible, too.

quote:Originally posted by Woof!:Where'd everyone go? Yeah, it's been real quiet on the board lately. I suspect there will be a spate of postings soon, though, because of the 3-day weekend with good weather. I think there were a lot of finds out there, and I know there were a lot of new caches placed in the last week. There were five placed within five miles of my house. Also, the tough puzzle caches have been getting some workouts. I managed five level 4 or higher caches today, and TeamJiffy just logged K3 Gang. I saw several other recent logs on the sheets for the ones I solved, too. Totals will be jumping.

I have been getting so many requests for hints that I just added a bit more in the way of clues for K3 Gang

quote:Originally posted by montythemule: I think now I should have taken the cache for safekeeping and re-hid it later and taken new coordinates. The Sunnyvale Gardeners are a very efficient crew apparently. I have been having a related problem: horrible luck with my own caches going missing or being wrecked. In the last month 9 of my 13 caches have disappeared, been destroyed, needed moving, been fenced in for construction, or otherwise needed major attention - some of them twice. In one case the destruction was obviously vandalism caused intentionally by a geocacher. I realize now that choosing a good location and container are important. Pick something/someplace that will stay dry even in a downpour, will not be removed by gardeners or other service workers, and is virtually impossible to discover unless in possession of specific cache info. Use plastic bags (Ziploc, etc.) for the inside stuff. I'm going to stay away from foliage as much as possible in future placements. Has anybody else had such bad luck lately or am I just cursed?

I just downloaded by pocket query file that normally shows the 150 closest files I haven't found, but today the file only had 3 caches listed. I had already cleared my GPSr's memory, and overwritten the previous download file. Fortunately I did have a backup from a few days earlier, so I could reload everything that wasn't newer than that. Has anybody else had this problem? Is it a one-time thing? I checked the pocket query generator page, and all the criteria are right, but I could delete it and redo it if that helps. Any recommendations would be much appreciated. See you at the picnic. uh... ze picnic.

So will The K3 Gang: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=66178 Since no one has found this, or even logged a failed attempt, in the first week, I have added some more clues. Maybe someone will have some bragging rights come picnic time.

When it rains it pours - and other cliches. For weeks it seemed like there were few new caches placed and very little activity on this forum, compared to past periods. Then, all of a sudden, the Nearest To list, at least in the South Bay, just flooded with new caches. The Trolley series provides a bunch, but even without those, quite a few new ones showed up. And on the forum we filled up half a page or so in a day. What is it - when the weather is too bad to go out caching (if that's possible) do we just post and coast?

I just mailed to my daughter in Edinburgh a Travel Bug that wants to reach Europe. If anyone is kind enough to do a favor and contact her to place the bug in a cache there, please e-mail me. She is young, single, and good-looking, if that helps motivate. I will not be looking for replies on this board, so please e-mail me directly. I hope it ends up not needing an epitaph, but I figured some kind UK T-BUG fan might be willing to shepherd this one.

I just mailed to my daughter in Edinburgh a Travel Bug that wants to reach Europe. If anyone is kind enough to do a favor and contact her to place the bug in a cache there, please e-mail me. She is yourng, single, and good-looking, if that helps motivate. I will not be looking for replies on this board, so please e-mail me directly.