BWidget
+Premium Members-
Posts
169 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by BWidget
-
Can you add the SFV Geocachers to the list. It's in the thread as post #24 http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=160996&view=findpost&p=4323863 Thanks.
-
When I travel I usually limit my caches to traditional caches that are 2/2 or less in D/T, and virtuals. I don't want to spend too much time looking for a cache and then come up empty. I am also usually with other family members that don't have quite the same addiction as I do.
-
I also get an error when I submit it as a PQ. Also, my existing route PQ gets the same error when I edit it without changing a thing and select Save.
-
Geocaching Organizations in the West and Southwest
BWidget replied to Hemlock's topic in West and Southwest
San Fernando Valley Geocachers Since the SoCal Geocachers board has kind of gone downhill, a few of us decided to create more localized forums. Anyone and everyone is welcome to join. -
http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=236639
-
Glad you could see the problem. So, if I delete the 'bad' logs and re-enter them (earlier in the day ) for that day, would that fix it also?
-
That's not very active anymore.
-
When I import my 'My Finds' query into GSAK some dates do not match the dates on my profile. I've also seen the same non-match when uploading the file to mygeocachingprofile.com. I'm assuming it's an issue on geocaching.com since more than one site lists the inconsistency. On the following image I have used RED lines to show the mismatched dates and GREEN lines to show the matching dates. The dates listed on my profile page are correct. Is there a secondary date field in the database that is not in sync? Anything I can do to fix this?
-
I too am having problems getting my PQ's sent. I need these today as I need another set tomorrow before I go on vacation.
-
I will be coming to GW VII from Los Angeles.
-
My apologies, I now see my mistake. I was not talking about you, but a reviewer.
-
What exactly was I trying to preach? I said that I thought the review process needed change, not that people should not have their 'own' pages for their coins. I also stated earlier that I had an unpublished cache that a reviewer recently archived. Examples of why we need to check against disabled caches: Awaiting a land manager permit (this can take months, such as for a Pennsylvania State Forest) Timing the release of a "Tribute" cache for when the honoree reaches 1,000 finds Timing the release of 10 caches, hidden over three weeks, to be published on the day of an event cache Owner does a "coordinate check" and goes to hide the cache two weeks later after getting an OK for the spot There are many other examples. We see these week-in and week-out. Imagine you were the hider in one of the above examples. Would you like it if someone swooped in and stole your spot with a hastily planted cache in the nature center's parking lot that messed up your elaborate multi that you were almost ready to submit? A quick check shows this person has geocoins in unlisted caches also. Practice what you preach.
-
They check against cache listings that were never 'checked' as 'Yes, this cache is currently active'? Sounds like the procedure could use some modifications.
-
I had an unpublished cache that I put my coins into, but just recently a reviewer archived it. Sure it's still accesable by me, just takes a few more clicks to get to.
-
Create a post in the Regional forums.
-
Wow that's great. I hope you'll be keeping a blog that we all can follow.
-
They are trackable at the same site mentioned, but the site still doesn't seem to be working. That is exactly what I picked up ( I tried to post a pic but it was all "pixelly") Thanks.
-
The first year the California geocoins came out were not trackable on Geocaching.com. These were the 2004 coins.
-
I just returned from a Mediterranean cruise and got at least one cache in every country we visited.
-
As always, everyone plays it their way. If I never log a find when I was there when the cache was hidden, then I would have a lot of local unfound by me caches. For cache hides where I accompanied the owner when the cache was placed, I won't ever log the cache as a find. It just doesn't seem right to me to log it as a find, since I helped place it.
-
I didn't say the ones with the hider claimed FtF. I'm saying the true FtF cacher might not find a clean log sheet. ????????If they were there when it was hidden how did they FIND IT???????? Its first to find. Not first to sign the log.
-
Not always true. There may be Alhpa of Beta tester signatures on the log. These are the cachers that were with the hider when it was hidden.
-
Seems to be up and running now.