traildad

If I'm not mistaken you also must have found at least 20 caches and have been a member for at least a week and a half.

A big part of the question is will it still be water proof after each cache finder closes it.

This question made me think about a 3D printer I saw a story about the other day. Probably too expensive for a cache, but the possibilities are huge. http://www.printo3d.com/

I'm saving up, I want to do 911 caches tomorrow.

At first I couldn't believe there was 117 posts for this question. Then I read how it had turned into a debate. I don't know but it seems the CO placed the cache and filled out the cache page in a way that most closely fit his or her needs, wants and desires. Isn't that what all cache hiders do? I can understand someone asking why they did what they did, I don't understand why anyone would say they shouldn't fill or not fill the cache page to suit themselves. Different strokes for different folks in this case.

So where exactly is this. I searched the knowledge base and only get a forum topic about the cancellation of GE KML. Is it something I download from here or from Google? Is it already in my GE? Edit to add: Ok I found it via the other topic where OpinionNate tells us to look on our My Profile page. Thanks Ken

OK. That makes sense. I see that it would be useful for exploring a new area more easily. I wonder how I never heard about it until it disappeared. Thanks Yes you down loaded a kml file and a entery was made on the left panel. When it was active the caches would show up in the view area. Jim Download the KML once. You can then go to any area and, assuming the KML is active, the geocaches in that area will show up (up to 150).

OK so kind of a add on to the GE application. Was it just one KML that would cause GE to show caches where ever you viewed, or do you need one each time you want to look in a different area? Thanks Yes you down loaded a kml file and a entery was made on the left panel. When it was active the caches would show up in the view area. Jim

OK, I think. I wasn't trying to understand the programming behind how it works. I was more trying to find out how to go about using it. Was it like "view map" where we just click a link on the cache page? Was it on the "hide and seek" page as a tool to find caches? Was it in the left panel of the GE application where I could have GE "ask" Groundspeak what if any caches are in the area that was being viewed? No real secret that is hard to unravel. Groundspeak publishes a Network Link http://code.google.com/apis/kml/documentat...l#network_links with a view based refresh. After your view had settled, Earth would send a request to the Groundspeak site with the bounding box of the view window and Groundspeak would send back the KML with the Placemarks in that window. (Or not, depending if your zoom was too far out, your view count had been exceeded, etc.) It's plain ole KML and the mechanisms are very well documented. It's the subject of many sites, a couple of books, and at least one international formal OGC standard. There may be some secret sauce in how the data is prepared, but at a data processing level, it's all very open and well documented. Most of what you see in Google Earth is served in the same way. Most of the layers displayed by Earth in that left panel are plain ole KML. Earth has no code that special cases the Groundspeak site in this path (it does contain code that recognizes PQ's from Groundspeak, courtesy GPSBabel) and Groundspeak writes no code for Earth - it's all just plain data.

Well I assume from the comments about people scrolling the map over 200 times or whatever it was that it is somehow connected to the Frog's database. I can download a pocket querry and put them in GE. It would show the caches but would not be using Groundspeak servers to display the info no matter how many times I scrolled. How did the old, soon to be new, GE KML work. Would there be something on my desktop GE application that would allow it to retrieve caches similar to the way maps on the cache page does it? Or was it something on the Groundspeak site that sends the info to my GE application? Or was there some kind of GE application that you would go to, similar to the way I can click "view map" on a cache page now? Thanks

A little more info would help. How does GE show the caches? Assume I know nothing about how it worked since I never used it.

I have slightly noticed all the hubbub about the lack of Google Earth KML. I have never used it so I am not sure why anyone cares. What is so great that we can't get by downloading them to our GPSr. If I want to cache a new area I find a cache nearby and do a PQ or search off that cache. Since we are getting that feature back again, I thought I would like to know what I am missing. How do you use the feature and what can you only do when it is working?

If it is supposed to be a pocket querry of Groundspeak's cache database I am not sure how that could be done without violating the TOS. Keep in mind that one of the reasons for this particular forum area is for us to make suggestions on how we would like Groundspeak to invest their valuable programmers' time.

Incentives, my dear flask. Incentives. Give them one free smiley for every ten reviews. Its all in the marketing details. Creativity at it's best.

Thank you for participating and for not going off topic to discuss the merits of net flix rating systems. PS It is a good thing Geocaching.com is a perfect system since there is no point is trying to use a flawed system.

Your 2nd point have been made many times. You very well may be right. I am not sure that I agree that you would need a large data sample. Just for the discussion lets say there were 7 cache types. If your survey says you like the first two and the 7th. If the system can find any other cacher that likes for example #2 as you do. The pocket querry would suggest all cache #2 types that they liked. The system could use any other cacher that might hate #2 but likes #7's. All the #7 caches he likes would be in your search. Granted if the number of people that participate was less than ten in any given area then you would quickly run out of new caches if you got any at all.

I think this system would be helpful also. One difference I note that "may" be undesirable, is the public nature of it. Will your fellow geocaching club member feel hurt because his cache is not on your favorites bookmark list?

So no one is suppose to respond? Try re-reading the post. It suggests a new rating/filtering system. I am asking those that respond to discuss the new suggestion rather than my reference to other suggestions and the net flix type system. I don't wish to debate the net flix system. Is that more clear? Sure. Restating it exactly the same way cleared it right up. Thanks for participating. PS Usually when you use the word "exactly" I would expect the words to be kind of a cut and paste from the first explanation. The two posts you quote are clearly not "exactly" the same. Did you want me to explain it in Spanish?

That is one of the good features of this system. If you are happy picking caches to hunt as you already do, you don't have to change anything. Those that are too lazy to take the survey or rate caches are not compelled to participate. Those that don't feel a need to filter for caches they might like, don't need to participate. Of course there will always be the people that say, "I wouldn't use it so it is a bad idea. I can't stand the idea of Groundspeak investing any time into ideas that don't benefit me. Until the web site is perfect for me, no other improvements should be made at all." I believe that enough people would voluntarily participate to allow the system to work. You may not find suggestions for every type of cache you would want to hunt in a new area, but you have a good chance of at least getting some suggestions.

So no one is suppose to respond? Try re-reading the post. It suggests a new rating/filtering system. I am asking those that respond to discuss the new suggestion rather than my reference to other suggestions and the net flix type system. I don't wish to debate the net flix system. Is that more clear?

A recent topic mentioning the Net Flix style of cache rating got me to thinking. I have heard this suggestion before and always thought the short coming was when you were caching out of your area. If you and someone in your town agreed on what was a good cache, you might try others they thought were worthwhile. If you go caching out of town, the system would not know if anyone in that town agreed with you on what a "good" cache was. As I proposed in the other topic maybe we could... Everyone that wants to participate, can fill out a survey about their caching preferences. Then you could rate the caches you find and if you choose, go back and rate caches you already found. The ratings would be invisible to everyone, so no one would get their feelings hurt etc. Then if you want to hunt for caches you might like in your town or across the country, you would do a Pocket Querry for "caches I might like." Other people that agreed with you in the survey would be used to filter the caches. So if you both think park and grabs are the greatest, you would get a list of all the park and grabs that they rated as great. Your PQ would not have any park and grabs that they rated as lousy. The PQ would return a list of caches that someone with your preferences had rated as good caches. This special pocket querry would be available to ALL members. I can imagine that premium members would have more liberal use of it. Maybe limit regular members to fewer results and less frequent use. I hope this topic will not turn into a debate on the pluses and minuses of the Net Flix system or my thoughts about it's usability. Please let's talk about the system that is proposed. Thanks

Yes we have to start somewhere. I have made my own suggestion for a cache rating system a while back. I was more interested in being able to choose caches that would match my preferences, than weeding out "bad" caches. Of course there is NO perfect answer if for no other reason than there are lots of caches already in the field and at least some people that would not help with the system. At least that was one of the reasons given to me, " won't work, we can't expect people to make a few extra mouse clicks, or what about all the caches that haven't been "rated" yet? You might try a search on the forum for cache rating.

So instead, those that wanted to participate, could fill out a questionnaire about their cache preferences. Then those people only could rate caches. The ratings would be invisible, but would be used to return search results for "caches I like" in any certain area. A cache that is rated high by someone who's questionnaire answers were similar to mine, would show up on my search for "caches I would like". Of course the downside being is not all caches would be included.

What terrain difficulty rating would a brand new cache have? A 70 year old might show up with his 5 year old grand daughter to find you have to climb a tree or hike up a steep hill. How could someone rate a cache difficulty if they didn't find it? It might be very easy but their GPSr had them looking in the wrong spot. I think you need to find the cache before you can give an accurate rating of difficulty. When it comes to rating quality that is in the eye of the beholder. You will find that some people love the Netflix system and some don't. People that don't like lamp post caches might give it a low rating even if it was done well. Power Cachers that want to do 500 caches in a day might give a park and grab a five star rating. Now you have to consider what kind of cache the "rater" likes. If you are a power cacher and you know the "rater" is a power cacher then maybe you can agree on the cache. If you don't consider who is doing the rating then you might end up with 100 power cachers that love the cache and 100 others that hate it and the average rating doesn't mean much.