Jump to content

baer2006

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    1158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by baer2006

  1. Yes, we Germans seem particularly susceptible to such pseudo-anglicisms . But anyway, such abandoned sites are quite on topic in a thread about multis with physical stages. Some of the coolest caches I have done were in sich places(*), where you had to roam around to find certain artifacts placed by the CO. Often one find would reveal what to search next, and in the end you received coordinates for the container (which typically was outside the site). Not your classic "walk in the woods" multi, of course . Needless to say, such caches were usually only semi-legal (**), and nowadays it's almost impossible to get something like this past the reviewer (basically, the CO must actually own the site). (*) Including my all-time favorite, GC6Z4NP (**) Technically illegal. But either nobody cared at all, or the worst thing you risked (when someone does care and you are unlucky enough to get caught in the act) was that your name and address are recorded, and you are escorted off the premises. No prosecution, when it's clear that you are "only" playing and not stealing etc.
  2. To me, that doesn't indicate a useless attribute. It indicates careless and/or clueless COs.
  3. Cool, abstract logic - I like nerdy stuff . We can further reduce this to "There is no A, unless there is an A", which is true for any A , incl. A = "reason to do X".
  4. Ok, so I implicitly assumed that deleting the whole AL is a no-go, when even deleting "only" one stage is already discouraged. Interesting. Wasn't aware of this "fine print". Until now I really assumed that the proper way to handle an AL, which has become unplayable (and unfixable), is to turn it permanently "Off", but not delete it. So it looks as if I were wrong. Anyway, I just read the current version of the Builder Guide, and it gives to advice whatsoever what to do in case you want to permanently shut down your AL. A simple short paragraph on this would be nice .
  5. Adventure Labs are not "archived" like geocaches. There are two options to take an AL completely off the map: The owner switches it off: No finds are removed; I know this for a fact The owner outright deletes the AL (which he should never do, and which should indeed be prevented by the server): Finds are reportedly not removed, but I don't have first hand evidence for this.
  6. Oops!! You're right, I apologize. I don't even know how I managed to screw this up . {ETA: I fixed the wrong quote in my posting, which needed some fiddling around in the editing window. }
  7. Yes, they do. Whatever you base your questions on, can change or disappear. And other than with real geocache listings, the AL owner won't ever know about it unless one (non-)finder takes the effort to contact the owner via geocaching.com. There are no DNF/NM logs for AL. This might be a side-line issue, but the pro-AL argument, that they "don't need maintenance" is simply not true.
  8. This! A somewhat related discussion, about "Lab Cache power trails", came up at a GC event today, and one cacher told that there are currently about 100(!) ALs (and counting...), 5 stages each, at the foot of the Atomium in Brussels. Obviously, there are not 500 questions about the Atomium, answerable only on site. Instead, all of the ALs seem to ask 5 questions about Belgium, each AL covering some general topic. So you are supposed to go to the Atomium (and we all know, that you can do that "virtually"), sit down, and do a "Belgium quiz" for the next few hours. This is IMHO utter nonsense, and has nothing to do with geocaching (or "adventures", by any definition of that word). It seems that Groundspeak is handing out AL credits way too generously, because otherwise it would be impossible to create this kind of AL power-trail/geo-art/spam-attack. Many owners don't even try any longer to make ALs as they were intended (or were they?): Lead people to interesting places, where placing a physical cache is hard or impossible.
  9. Multis with physical stages can easily become maintenance nightmares and they get significantly fewer visits than series of traditionals. The third cache I placed was a walk in the forst with 6 stages + final. It's been archived for a while now, but in the end it was almost more maintenance than find logs . Not only muggles (humans and animals), but also forest workers harvesting trees. In the end it's lot of work for the CO, with little "reward" in the form of finders. Such multis were much more popular when I started caching in 2008. What "killed" them IMHO was the cancellation of the "anti-trail guideline" (when I started, it wasn't allowed to publish a trail of traditionals - the reviewer would tell you to place a multi instead).
  10. My first thought was that ignored caches never showed up in PQs, because that's the point of the IL. But then I looked deeper into the issue and found this ... On the page, where you create/edit a PQ, there is a checkbox among the conditions (in the section labeled "That (And)") named "Are not on my ignore list". I had forgotten about this option, but it was selected in all my standard PQs. Now I wondered what would happen when I uncheck it. This would mean that not being on my IL is no longer a criterion to include a cache in the PQ (in other words, caches on the IL will be included). Result: In the line saying "Your pocket query has been modified and currently results in X caches. You can preview the search here.", the number X remained unchanged. I.e., caches on the IL were still not included. When clicking on the preview link in that line, the result also didn't list any ignored caches. When selecting the PQ on the Browse Map, caches from the IL did actually show up! The GPX I got when running the PQ did not contain the ignored caches. This is inconsistent, and #3 is the only case where the checkbox is actually observed. I can only guess, but maybe the OP wants to say that formerly, the checkbox was also observed in other cases, most importantly #4.
  11. Does this even matter in this context? It's perfectly possible to post logs on archived listings.
  12. Given my record of harming myself during geocaching , I should contribute to this thread ... Slipped on a mountain hike, and severely hurt my ankle, resulting in a ligament rupture. But I could walk (slightly limping) back to the car on my own. Needed compression bandages on the foot for a few weeks, so only T1.5 max for me for a while. Had a tiny twig poke my eye while bushwhacking. Hurt like hell, didn't get much better after a few minutes, so I went to an ER for check and treatment - turned out to be a very tiny scratch in the cornea. Got a protective patch for the time it was healing, so I walked around (and geocached) one-eyed for two weeks or so. Didn't affect my DNF rate, which proves that I'm quite a blind cacher anyway ! And the "highlight": Fell off a tree, from about 2 m height. A T4 free-climbing cache, I stood on one of the lowest branches, and hadn't yet located the cache. I was stupid, and tried to move around while at the same time staring into the tree searching the cache. I slipped, and slid off sideways, landing hard on the right side of my body and face. The immediately visible injury was "only" a large cut around the eye, bleeding like hell. Otherwise, I felt more or less good (not dizzy or anything), given the circumstances, so I drove on my own to a nearby hospital ER. They treated the cut, put my head in a scanner, and luckily, the only internal injury was a small crack in the cheekbone (nothing dislodged) and no problems in the brain. When asking the doc, what I should do now while the bone is broken, he only said "Nothing, the bone will heal within a few weeks. Um, no, one thing: Don't fall off a tree again." Good hint , and with this in mind, I continued my caching trip for the day. However, it was only later in the day, that I truly realized how lucky I had been, and that my carelessness could easily have killed me. Also, my wife was not amused at all , and gave me quite a lecture. Psychological recovery from the accident took much longer than the physical one. It took me more than half a year, before I attempted to do a very easy tree climb again. Also, quite a lot of high-T caches now land on my Ignore List instead of my list of finds. Good thing is: Lesson learned, and since then (11 years ago) I didn't have any major geocaching-related mishap .
  13. The thread https://forums.geocaching.com/GC/index.php?/topic/364446-where-to-buy-a-long-telescoping-fishing-rod-with-hook/ looks useful. Seems to depend on the region. They are extremely popular in Germany, quite often as series or even power trails.
  14. The AL Builder Guide says: (Emphasis by me) I would be nice, if removing a locations after the location has been completed at least once, and adding a location after the AL has been completed at least once were actually prevented in the AL builder (and the wording in the builder changed accordingly). The system cannot handle the situation well (writing of a "disruption" of the player experience is IMHO a bit of a euphemism ), and it's not necessary for maintenance purposes at all. When you need to update a location (incl. moving it to a new place), you can still do it. If an AL becomes completely nonviable because of massive changes on site, you can just switch it to "Off".
  15. In non-English speaking countries, AL owners in touristic locations sometimes want to make their AL bilingual - local and English. Then the 1K limit is really a problem.
  16. baer2006

    Wartung

    Ganz wichtig in dem Zusammenhang ist, dass man "Wartung durch Cache-Owner" erst loggt, nachdem man die Wartung tatsächlich durchgeführt hat. Ich habe schon viel zu oft solche "Wartungs-Logs" gelesen mit einem Inhalt der Art "Ich schau bei Gelegenheit mal nach".
  17. I take the liberty to ignore this recommendation of HQ, and change the ratings of my caches as I see fit. I have caches out in the woods since 8+ years, and the terrain can change significantly - from easy going (T1,5) to an overgrown jungle (T2,5) or vice versa. Or a difficult free-climbing tree (T4.5) becomes unsafe, and I relocate the cache to a different tree which may be much easier to climb (T4) or may now require special equipment (T5). If some stats-oriented cacher complains, so what? I have to endure the shenanigans of the stats crowd (e.g. incorrect D/T ratings just to fill grids), so they can just as well endure mine .
  18. I have a PQ (running daily), which gets me all caches (except mysteries) in a radius around my home. Therefore it has the "Event Cache" type checked, which should include Community Celebration Events. However, CCEs are ... - not included in the "Preview" on the website - not included in the actual GPX file generated by the PQ They are included when mapping the PQ, though (including the one's on my Ignore List, which is an old bug).
  19. Like anyone doing a difficult multi or mystery, when reading logs from other cachers, who almost certainly got the final coordinates handed on a silver platter (and sometimes even openly brag about it)? ... cue choir of people chanting "But they are only cheating themselves!"
  20. While the AL you mention is quite obviously designed to be logged without actually visiting the waypoints (using GPS spoofing instead), it's at least possible to go to the locations. Other than, e.g., one of the ALs at MUC airport, where the locations are all in the middle of runway 08R/26L.
  21. This!!! And frankly I don't understand at all why this simple and incredibly useful option isn't implemented, especially since it has been requested again and again. I can't help thinking as a software developer here . The backend obviously has a switch to decide whether to serve the original listing coordinates or the corrected ones (or the backend returns both, and the front end decides - doesn't matter). It can't be so hard to modify that switch so that a user option like "always give me the corrected coords" is taken into account.
  22. For these, you don't need to go to "exotic" countries. In late August, I've been in Malta for a one-week vacation, and did some (limited) caching. The majority of caches I found were almost certainly throwdowns, with bare minimum "containers", which only hold up for a while because Malta is hot and dry in summer.
  23. (Emphasis by me) Yeah, and so what?! Any non-trivial multi is not appealing to the "smiley-count" crowd. Some of the best experiences in my cacher life have been "epic" caches, where I spent many, many hours in the field, sometimes to the point of total physical exhaustion, and the end result was not only one smiley ... but an unforgettable experience! To be honest, I would regard converting such a cache to an AL, with a "find point" for every stage, as a downgrade. - Have greater rewards: Like what? I hope it's not only the find count. - Substantially more visible: Really? A multi in a sea of traditionals stands out at least by its color on the cache map. OTOH, my home area is absolutely swamped by ALs by now, and one more wouldn't stand out at all. - Easier to maintain: Maybe, if the multi has physical stages (but then the AL couldn't really "recreate the experience"). But if the multi has only virtual stages, they are just as easy or difficult to maintain as AL locations. Additionally, for a multi cache, the cachers can post DNF/NM/Notes to alert the CO of possible problems. As long as ALs don't have any such means, I seriously doubt that they are "easy to maintain" in the long run. See also here :
  24. "If you only have a hammer, everything looks like a nail." AL is a new tool, but it for the cache types you mention, it doesn't even come close to being a "replacement": - Multi: There is no way an AL can replace a well-designed multicache. A multi gives you all the creative freedom you want, e.g. show/hide stages in the listing, use any number of stages, use physical stages, give auxiliary waypoints, give a long description with pictures etc. - Virtual: Virtuals can be much more than "go to the location and make a photo". - Wherigo: It always baffles me when someone compares AL to WIG. My only explanation is that those people have never played a creative, non-trivial WIG. - Letterbox Hybrid: What?! The most important feature of an LBH (and actually the only one which defines it) is a stamp in the box. ALs don't even have a box. And if you refer to "letterbox-style" instructions (i.e. find the next stage w/o GPS), this would only be possible, if you keep the location always hidden, even after you have solved the preceding one. And don't get me started on the various general drawbacks of ALs compared to geocaches .
  25. But "Munich Airport" at MUC fits the description of the OP pretty well. The 5 locations are all in the middle of a runway, and are therefore impossible to reach. The geofence must be in the order of 1 - 2 km radius.
×
×
  • Create New...