ePeterso2
-
Posts
266 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by ePeterso2
-
-
US state quarters. Especially ones I don't already have.
-
the Pocket Query editing form is missing a checkbox for "Mystery/Puzzle" caches
You find them under the cache type "Unknown cache".
Well, that's just ... nonintuitive.
-
Why can't you filter out puzzles?
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
-
How would you classfy a cache at the posted coordinate but had to solve a puzzle to get the combination to the lock on the container?
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.
-
In fact, because of this phenomenon of not reading cache listing pages, more and more owners of extreme caches -- including myself -- are taking the extra precautionay step of not listing the acutal cache starting coordinates as the primary coordinates listed at the top of the cache listing page (and blindly downloaded to GPSrs by mass-download programs) and rather either burying the actual coordinates in text form in the text body of of the description or even posting prerequisite screening requirements for seeking the cche, where those who meet the requirements must contact the cache owner to obtain the true cache coordinates.
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
-
I didn't know you could change a post from "not found" to "found". Anyone have any thoughts on this approach? I'm sending it again to the folks who have caches placed.
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
That's why caches, and stages of a multi, should be 528 feet apart.
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
-
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.
-
It just seems pointless, I mean what is the point...
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.
-
I know the mantra repeated by the numbers hounds. "If you don't like them, don't search for them". Well until Groundspeak develops a pocket query selection option for lousy caches so I can weed these out, I reserve the right to complain about them.
Ooo! I've got the attribute icon ready to roll out ...
-eP
-
Double-post deleted.
-
I found an e-trex gps at a cache one time. Checked who had been there before me and contated them and asked if they lost anything at the cache site. They didn't know it had been lost and now we cache together from time to time.
I found the poster of the above message
And her sister. And her daughter. Today. -
It's a doubled up, heavy duty Ziplock, inside a Lock-n-Lock, inside an ammo can. Not sure how it will do over time.
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.
-
The only time I have left an FTF "Prize" it was a fully stocked small cache.
In our area the same couple of cachers get about 90% of the FTFs.
I like these guys, but if I want to give them something I'll just hand it to tem in person.
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
-
Other posters are free to carry on this discussion without further contributions from the OP.
Aww, I was just starting to get to like him.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
My Complaint d'Jour:
When someone going for FTF on my new puzzle cache sends me 14 diffrent e-mails asking for clues and updating me on his progress, even though the page says "NO HINTS UNTIL FTF!"
I would respond to his requests with progressively more and more incorrect hints
-
I like the 2-stage idea when desiring to show folks what used to be called a virtual - a place where you can't put a cache at all or where you have to resort to a micro, then send them on to an ammo can final.
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:
Usually I hate multi-caches. I hate the idea of finding a half dozen caches and only getting credit for one. But I don't mind this kind. Not too far out of the way and just enough work to keep it interesting. Good multi if you ask me.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
-
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.
-
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.
And her sister. And her daughter. Today.
Who Do You Agree With?
in General geocaching topics
Posted
I completely disagree with the subject of this thread. It should be "With whom do you disagree?"