Jump to content

ePeterso2

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    266
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ePeterso2

  1. I completely disagree with the subject of this thread. It should be "With whom do you disagree?"
  2. You find them under the cache type "Unknown cache". Well, that's just ... nonintuitive.
  3. Because the Pocket Query editing form is missing a checkbox for "Mystery/Puzzle" caches. It has all other cache types ... I assume this omission was an oversight. I mean, you can create a PQ for Project A.P.E. caches but not for puzzles? C'mon ;-) I noticed this the other day and was kinda annoyed by it, since I was searching *for* mystery/puzzle caches! -eP
  4. I have one exactly like that, and I asked the local reviewer how to classify one of these before I submitted it for review. She described her interpretation this way: If the container is at the posted coordinates and the cache hunter can solve the puzzle on the site using nothing more than information provided on the cache description page (plus any other information found at the site), then it's just a difficult traditional cache. If the container is not at the posted coordinates, or the cache hunter will not be able to solve the puzzle at the site with the cache description page (where the cacher may have to do research on the internet, for example), then it's a puzzle cache. Your mileage may vary with your local reviewer.
  5. Aren't caches that require you to contact the owner for the true coords a violation of the placement guidelines? What kinds of issues do you have getting those approved? -eP
  6. When I first started, I used to delete my DNFs when I finally found the cache. I was obsessive about trying to find every single cache I went after, so I'd use my DNFs as a list of work I needed to finish. I stopped relatively soon after that, when I discovered bookmarks and when I came to the realization that I just wasn't going to find every single cache I set out to find. Now I just mark caches on my Want To Find list instead of deleting the DNFs. Still lets me accomplish the same thing but without skewing the history of the caches I attempt.
  7. A good example of why DNFs are important to the cache hider came up for me today. I had the following logs for one of my caches (a 3-mile 7-stage multi (6 virtual plus a real final)): found, found, DNF, DNF, found, found. And I had visited the final stage twice in that time frame. I was puzzled by the DNFs - the information on the virtuals was supposed to be the relatively hard-to-collect part, the final stage was supposed to be a gimme. When I heard a verbal DNF from another cacher who hadn't logged it, I began to suspect something might be odd. I went back and checked the final coords and found that I was off by 40 feet. The ones who had actually found it were just dilligent enough in their searching to come across it ... either that, or they experienced the same GPS errors I did by pure luck. Nobody ever said that the final coordinates seemed a bit off. So even a few DNFs mixed in with finds can be useful information.
  8. I used to log one DNF for each serious attempt I made on a cache. But there was one cache where I ended up logging 4 or 5 DNFs in a row, with no other attempts by any other cachers logged in between mine. I thought that would be unfair to the cache owner ... if you didn't read the logs carefully, you might think there were 4 or 5 different cachers that failed, as opposed to one blind stupid one. To prevent that situation in the future, if I've already logged a DNF I won't log another DNF until someone else has logged a find. And as a cache owner, I agree with the other posters - I *need* people to log DNFs to tell me when I need to go fix something.
  9. Speaking as someone who just had a 3-stage multi approved, stages of a multi do not need to be 528 feet apart. All stages of a single multi cache need to be 528' from any waypoints or stages of any other cache. They can be closer than that within a single multi. However, the reviewer said that stages of a single multi *should* be at least 100' apart to account for GPS errors, so that a person looking for one won't find the other. I would move the final stage as long as you're maintaining the same cache, I wouldn't see any reason to archive and start over. -eP
  10. Someone's brother's friend who knew this guy who used to cache but gave all his stuff to this lady down the street told me that if you have a team account and not all of the members of the team are present for the FTF, then you have to send the FTF prize to a random person that posted in THIS VERY THREAD. Or so I've been told.
  11. The point is to irritate people like you and me. They're just trolling for attention they can't seem to get otherwise. My theory is that such people had parents that never took them to Broadway musicals when they were young.
  12. Ooo! I've got the attribute icon ready to roll out ... -eP
  13. I found the poster of the above message And her sister. And her daughter. Today.
  14. There's a land-based ammo can high in the crotch of a tree near me that's started to come apart due to heavy rust. Its lid no longer stays seated and the gasket is ineffective. I can't imagine one underwater would fare better, but I hope it does.
  15. I've got a similar situation here ... the same few folks always seem to be the FTF. One workaround would be to leave a small but reasonable prize for the first to find. Then, when it's discovered and logged, head on out and leave a better prize for the second to find. And if the FTF addicts catch on to that scheme, then mix it up ... drop the good prize after some random single-digit number of finds have been logged. Or just wait until the chronic FTFers have logged it, then drop the prize. Or just mail the chronic FTFers independently of any cache publication and ask them to leave the FTF prize for a new finder. -eP
  16. Aww, I was just starting to get to like him.
  17. This is going into a cache I'm about to place as an FTF prize. On the cheap, scratch-off lottery tickets are always a good prize. So are gift cards to coffee shops and gas stations.
  18. Chillin' at Frost Park is probably the toughest one I found. Despite many logged and unlogged attempts, it was six months before someone finally found it. The second person to find it got a hint from the first. Four months after that, I was the third one to sign the log. In retrospect, it's really kind of silly that it took so long ... it's just a needle in a haystack. What made it so rewarding to finally find was that it had defeated so many of the local caching community.
  19. On another unrelated site I frequent, users have the ability to change the capitalization of their names. I could change my name and become ePETerSo2 or ePeteRsO2 or ePEtERSo2 or epetersO2, just for fun. But I could never be ePeterso1 or ePeterso22. This works because all of the player-name searches are case insensitive, just as they seem to be here when doing a username lookup. However, that works only because there is also a player ID number that's fixed and acts as a key to the player table. I don't know how the database here is structured, but if your user name is the primary key (instead of some invisible internal number), then allowing capitalization changes might be impractical or impossible.
  20. I would respond to his requests with progressively more and more incorrect hints
  21. The first cache I ever placed is one of these ... stage 1 is a plaque, stage 2 is a decon box. And the plaque is located at the entrance to the area of the park in which it's hidden. This log entry sums it up: I'm drawing up a plan for an 11-stage multi in a nearby park that is designed as an endurance test to see who really wants to find it. It will be clearly marked and described as such (although since it will be a puzzle cache, that in itself will keep most casual cachers away). This thread has really helped me with the design ... both with ideas for things to include as well as to eliminate stages and mini-puzzles that would be excessively irritating. -eP
  22. The day that waymarks and geocaches appear side-by-side in the result of a single query will be the day that threads like this cease to exist. I haven't seen the thread, but I'm willing to bet that TPTB have already thought about this and are working on it.
  23. I really hate it when folks post spoilers in logs for caches I've hidden. I mean, if I find a sneaky location that requires a high reach in a target-rich environment with good hiding places high and low, it irks me to have someone come along and say in their log "Good thing I'm 7 feet tall or I would never have found this one!" or "Glad I bring an extension ladder with me at all times!" GRRRRRRRRRRRR. Okay, I'm done now.
×
×
  • Create New...