Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking
-
Posts
1677 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking
-
-
There are many Cachers that can't take 12 mile hikes into the woods to find caches. Nano's, Micros could be looked at as the ADA"s influence on Caching.
Oh not so lol. I do not have a single nano hidden. I try and place regular and small caches when possible. I even had a large cache. Im handicapped.
If only we could ignore them. But to do so we need to ignore all the rest of the micro caches along with the unlisted size.
I enjoy some nano hides, but I agree with this. It should be a new size category so folks can ignore them if they wish. Or just so we know what we are hunting for. A nano is something I leave for days when Mike caches with me, not when Im out on my own.
-
Its not the font size for me. Its the color scheme. And the vast s p a c i n g.
-
I dont think greed is why people cache. I think folks cache because its just fun.
-
Ive noticed that since these changes have been made, the emails coming to me from my watchlist and owned caches have drastically decreased. So much so that I wondered if it was a bug and they were not being emailed out. Ive verified that it wasnt a bug. That tells me that folks are caching less since this came out.
-
My pet peeve, it is spelled cemetery, not cemetary!
Is that a pet cemetery peeve?
Sorry I had to do it.
-
I find myself having to scroll around a lot now. After looking over a lot of caches, my arm aches lol.
My main complaint though is that the logs on the cache page are just too glaring bright. Far too much white space too. It is too visually hard on me. I like to read cache pages and this is a definite minus. The colors on the cache listings when you pull up a lot of caches are too similar in shading and tend to blur as well as be glaring bright. Visually the site is annoying.
If going back to the way it was color wise isnt an option, would it be possible to have 2 skin options? That way, those who like the new color scheme can keep it, and those who do not can have the old color scheme. Everyone is happy then.
Gotta say one thing I like. The google geocaching map is now wider. Prior to this update, the map was only about 3 inches across. Now its substantially larger. Thank you for that lol.
-
The decision on My vs. Your thing came down from the top, though, so there's little that I can do about that right now. I think the community just needs to continue to make it clear that they don't like it!
Dont like it.
But if I had to choose, I would rather the color issue be fixed first than the your/my thing. The colors are not conducive to perusing the cache pages when Im bored at home.
-
Violations which I would deem minor won't get more than a cursory chuckle. Glaring violations will get a note to my local reviewer.
Pretty much sums up how I feel. The glaring violations (for me) need to be something that could cause issues with local organizations/ governments that could get caching banned for us or cause someone either serious injury or unwanted law enforcement attention or cause damage to sensitive environments etc.
Mostly I try not to report anything lol. We already have a local "caching cop" in our area. I do not want to be like that.
-
Over the years, I have reported a few caches that violate guidelines, only because they could cause problems with the community in general and affect our ability to geocache in the future. For instance, someone placed a cache in an area that had signs posted proclaiming that it was a habitat sensitive area and we should not leave the trail. The cache was quite a bit off the trail. I reported that cache. The reviewer disabled the cache and contacted the owner.
I once contacted a cache owner about his cache and was told by him essentially "trespassing is part of the fun". The cache was placed in an old train engine behind a locked fence with prominent no trespassing signs, within sight of a police station. Like that wasnt going to attract unwanted attention. I gave up a FTF on that cache too. I let it go for awhile and then contacted this site. The cache was archived and the cache owner created a new cache blasting 2 other teams who had also contacted him about his cache lol. Its a lot easier to just contact the reviewer.
-
January 1, 2010. Despite having 1456 finds to our credit, after a family barbecue we opted to hit a road that had 6 caches on it. We found only 1. I logged 5 DNFs that day. Each one of them has been found a day or so later. Should I be embarrassed? Probably lol, yet we logged them. Ive accepted that there are times when we stink at caching and need to log the DNF. We had fun and met another cacher that day so all is well.
-
It is visually harder to read than the previous version.
-
Sorry, but I need to say this. Im squinting now when I look at the cache page logs or listings of caches. The new color scheme is just too glaring bright. Under the older system, it was easy to read. Under this system, it isnt. At least not for my older eyes. I hope this will be considered in future upgrades.
-
Since we are on this subject, DNF logs with generic wording that doesnt explain the hunt doesnt help either. Saying things like "I found what looks like an empty container", or "the tree near ground zero appears to have been heavily pruned" etc helps a lot in determining if a cache is likely still there or not. Even posting "I tried to look but got too hungry and gave up quickly", pretty much tells me the cache is probably still there. Posting "nope" as the log entry doesnt give the cache owner or subsequent seekers any idea of whether or not the cache is really gone or not.
-
My mistake. What n3prz is asking for is help, and everyone begins attacking him.
It is your mistake. He was asking for help in a manner that is expressly against the guidelines. He wasn't "attacked". People explained to him why he was wrong. That's all.
You're taking that out of context. "My mistake" was believing that all geocachers are good people.
Geocachers are people. and there are always good and bad in any group of people. Mostly Ive seen good cachers, but Ive encountered a few iffy ones too.
-
They are sending you to cold spots lol.
Seems to me, the deep south would be the place to go. Small states, warmer temps.
-
Some of us are happily married.
Mike likes caching as much as I do. He doesnt do the online part of it, but he enjoys the hunt.
are you saying that those of us who have a spouse that doesn't like geocaching aren't happily married?
Not at all. I was referring to this post (seen below), in which the member made a bit of a dig at marriage in general. I probably should have quoted his post in my original post to avoid any confusion.
i wish i had a spouse! lol
No, no you don't!!!
Don't wish for such nonsense!!
NOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!
-
I have an earthcache in South Mountain Park, the second or third earthcache placed in the state (I placed the first 3 earthcaches in Arizona before they became popular). At the time, I had to get permission from the city and park to place the cache. I got the impression that they were fine with all geocaching activity in their park system. They knew all about geocaching and had no hesitation in granting permission for the earthcache.
-
-
I was just in south mountain park this weekend. As an almost native arizonan, and one in phoenix for many years, Ive seen spider trails there long before geocaching was even around. Please dont get the caches there eliminated because of your agenda. South Mountain park, and phoenix parks in general have a good relationship with geocaching. Please dont ruin it for us.
-
Some of us are happily married.
Mike likes caching as much as I do. He doesnt do the online part of it, but he enjoys the hunt.
Hmmm... last time I talk to Mike, I was getting a different story.
(as I step back to watch the fireworks)
Tsk. Trying to cause trouble in a marriage.
Fortunately I know Mike better than that lol.
-
Some of us are happily married.
Mike likes caching as much as I do. He doesnt do the online part of it, but he enjoys the hunt.
-
What would a "DNF challenge" consist of? You've got me curious! (If it's anything to do with getting lots of DNFs, this might be a challenge I can excel at!)
DNF Challenge, where you need 100 DNFs logged in order to find it.
Edited to add, the DNFs logged are not on that cache lol.
-
Because $30 is pretty cheap for entertainment that we manage to somehow participate in every day.
-
In Arizona, there was a group of people who felt that no one at all should be allowed to sully use a particular area of land adjacent to homes. They banned geocaching early on despite local efforts. They wont be happy until no one can hike or otherwise enjoy the land ... except for the few who had the large enough income to buy homes adjacent to the land.
With any human activity, there is the potential for noticable effects. Those spider trails you complain about were there prior to geocaching too, and will likely continue to be created even if geocaching was banned there. Its human nature to find another route. At least geocachers have a good sense of caring for the environment in things like cito etc.
GC.com website VISUAL feedback thread
in Website
Posted
As a handicapped person, I need to read the cache pages first to see if it is likely I can get to the cache. Downloading coordinates alone is worthless to me.