HoPri

Thanks, Markwell, for the information. I assumed that "using" an invalid address would be bad, both for me (do not receive the important stuff (like owner mails)), and for GC.com (bounced mails are annoying). Not speaking of "them" canceling my account... Thanks also for pointing me to the thread that I had looked for but wasn't able to find. It obviously was a clear DNF, although the "cache" was there Let's see whether I can get this filter-thing to work... HoPri

Hi, everybody! Does anybody know a way to temporarily disable the watchlist? Like many others, I'm using a web-based e-mail account. But when I'm a bit longer out of town without a chance to maintain the mailbox, I get an overflow. Mails being bounced, important incoming mails go missing, etc. Of course, I could delete all watches for some weeks - not a nice solution. Of course, I could change the mail address to something invalid - very bad solution. But, of course, I could also ...? - Good solution! Can anybody help? Thanks, your help is appreciated! Cheers, HoPri PS: Wouldn't it be a nice feature to be able to switch watching in general on/off on the watchlist page (like for PQ)?

Very interesting to read and learn about all these milestones in geocaching! Personally, I would find it also interesting to learn who was the first to hit 100 and 1000 finds (and when, of course). 100 must have been an awfully high number of finds at that time...? How many caches had been "available" by then? Given that, it would be also quite interesting to know who and when the first person found 100 caches on one day... I don't have a clue how to find out these dates but the "old-timers" would probably have a memory of the event and could maybe check...? Best regards, HoPri

I guess that the following cache is among the largest caches worldwide. It is a room so that you could trade your sofa... Have a look at the gallery. Das Unten Cache Room Best regards, HoPri

Personally, I'd rather have only those people hide caches who are eager to do so. Because then chances are way better that it will be an interesting cache... BTW, those who don't hide miss a big part of the fun - the rewards from reading the logs that are full of praise of that fantastic cache... ;)

Let's see how it goes with "my" definitions: - start coordinates: Yes, real start coordinates, the parking is really where you should park, no dummy coordinates (check 1 for multi) - can you solve the tasks directly there or do you need preparation in advance: No, no advance preparation required in both cases. Only, that the second version is less specific as to where to find the clues. In this sense, the "puzzle" has become a bit more explicit, at least to my feeling. Hence, check 1 for multi for version 1, version 2 a bit unclear. - does it require complex logic or other lengthy calculation/decoding stuff that could be hard or impossible to do in rain or snow? Don't know for sure but it does not sound like it does. Hence, another check for multi. Personally, I would label your first version "multi" as you give several stages by coordinates (you just don't say in which sequence they have to be addressed but that's ok IMHO) , and the tasks are straight forward to be solved right on the spot (find a sign/plate/clue right there, no complicated reasoning or calculations required). The second version is just a bit more puzzling as you don't give the precise places where one should look for clues. My feeling is that more people would like to see this version labelled "mystery/puzzle". But how life goes: Regardless of your decision, there will be someone who doesn't like it. So, after you've read all the stuff that's been written here and maybe elsewhere, it's best to follow your own intuition. As, in the end, these questions are always quite a matter of preference and personal opinion Make it a cool cache - that's what matters most. Best regards and happy caching! HoPri

All the labelling is not that straight forward - as many threads and discussions prove. Geocaching.com and others like clayjar provide some vaulable guidelines and tools. But they are, due to the required balance between a complex subject and comprehensibility, by far not "waterproof". In the end, the guidelines should not read like some lawer text... That's why I also like the clayjar tool. It makes it a bit easier to rate a cache. Maybe he could come up also with something for cache type! Yes! In the end, the description should be the reference. But then, there are some creative (and nasty) people out there who don't want to tell too much about what you will face... Will this be the ultimate cache? Cheers and happy caching! HoPri

A good and valid question. I guess, that happens if you are on a business trip, maybe without the time of doing a thorough geocaching preparation of your trip in advance. I imagine that you then have a little time to spare and decide on some spontaneous caching. All you have is your GPSr and a PDA with the cache descriptions. Of course, you can read through the complete list of descriptions. But as labels such as type, difficulty, and terrain exist to provide a quick overview, you pre-filter the stuff according to these labels. And, if they are wrong, you end up trying something that can't work out. Bad luck. Exactly. That's why there are guidlines as how to label caches with respect to these issues and not leave it to reading the description alone. You need a certain type of equipment that goes beyond a small flashlight, a compass, or a leatherman? Then the cache better has D=5 as this is the correct label for caches that require special equipment. You come accross a terrain point where you need to climb or abseil? Then the cache better has T=4 or 5. Because this is the label that was created to make such caches easily identifiable. Of course, everything is also in the description. But the labels are there to give quick overviews. And to allow for easy filtering. I agree. But not everybody is capable of carrying a full set of abseil/caving/whatever gear just in case. Why do we have the labels if they are not used properly? Then they become useless. What shall all those handicapped persons say if a T=1 is not really reservrd for handicap accessible? Shall the read each and every description to find out if it says something about the terrain? If all mysteries were labelled as multis that's exactly what you would have to do if you want to avoid standing on some dummy coordinates on some dummy parking lot. Well, that's exactly how I do it and how most other cachers will most certainly also do it. But sometimes it happens that you end up somewhere and think: Oh, I could do a cache. No Internet, no printer. Just your GPSr and hopefully a PDA with cache descriptions. Many people don't even have that. They download waypoints only to their GPSrs. They are screwed if the labels are not used properly. And that's because they are not prepared, just as you say. But why shall we make their life more difficult? We only have to label the caches correctly. Then they filter and go for those caches that can be done without special equipment, without Internet help and without taking the whole afternoon. Best regards, HoPri

I'm sure it will! On the other hand, I know of quite a number of people who are more sensitive with respect to the "correct" labeling (whatever that is ). The main reason is that if you are traveling (e.g. on a business trip) and want to see (e.g. on your PDA) what caches are around, you kind of need to rely on the correct labels. Sure, you can read the descriptions but that's not always feasible for each and every cache in an area. If then a "multi" turns out to be only solvable if you have managed several other caches before (and you only realize this when you look closer into the description once you are at the parking lot and about to start) then you're screwed. Hence, those people are very grateful if everything which does not provide real starting coordinates and which cannot be solved right on the spot is labeled "mystery". Apparently, this would include bonus caches as well. Then they easily know that they can scratch the cache from their list of candidates (and they can do so with a simple filter on the cache type). Best regards, HoPri

Yeah, that's understandable... And I'm glad that there are enough traditionals around here in Germany as well to have a choice. A choice between the tougher ones, which take the whole afternoon, daay or night, and some less time-intensive traditionals, which might provide different challenges. At one time, I'm up for this and at another time I'm rather up that. But I guess that's how it works for most people all over the world. Best regards, HoPri

I agree that it is not much if an issue. But it's interesting to see the different views on this... In my view, a multi cache is characterized by - having multiple (i.e. 1 or more) stages where you find information about the next waypoint and/or the final cache. - The intermediate stages can be everything from simply reading some digits from a sign, over finding a small plate hidden by the cache placer, over finding a micro container with some info, over regularly sized box(es) with further instructions, or whatever... The point is that all tasks have to be (and can be!) solved at the place during the hunt. - Nothing needs to be prepared in advance or is so sophisticated that you cannot do it (at least in principle) "on the fly" during you are there. A puzzle cache, in my book, would be a cache where you have to solve a puzzle BEFORE you can get started. Everything, where you can't just drive and begin the hunt. Once the puzzle is solved it still can turn out to have multiple stages. Or it just can be a traditional cache. A mystery cache could be anything where the cache placer for one reason or the other does not want us to know too much. Obviously, puzzle caches fall into this category, but I also know of caches which are a mixture of traditional with a puzzle and a regular multi: solve the puzzle and then you know where the cache is, or do the hike to find the information in the normal "multi cache way". They would also correctly qualify as mystery in my opinion. Best regards from the land of the multi-caches... I don't know whether official statistics support my observation. But I have the impression that multis (as of my definition) are significantly more frequent in Germany than in the USA...? HoPri Edit: typo

When I "browse" through the profiles of fellow cachers, I notice a manual "my favorites" list quite often. Hence, it seems to be a kind of a "natural desire" to recommend caches in that way. The system that Markwell proposes is really "in sync" with this "natural desire" to say which caches one liked most. It is not rating any silly little cache you came across, it's telling which ones were really great adventures. Currently, one has to look at profiles for the manual lists or extensively read logs to get that information (as far as possible). Markwell's system would provide a "summary" of those logs that say "this one was one of the greatest in my (geocaching) lifetime". It does not require any more effort from the users than many are willing to spend anyway when they create and maintain their private lists - a further important plus. I'm definitely hoping that something along that lines will be implemented in future! HoPri

BTW, via the test feature of pocket queries you need not to wait until the query is executed and sent to you. You get the results in the usual way on the web site, just like the seek function typically provides them. Best regards, HoPri

Leatherman provides great tools, no doubt about that. I have used mine (SuperTool) at various occasions over the years, while caching and while other activities (sailing, hiking, camping). I never go without it on a serious trip. Most of all, they added a corkscrew, eventually (at least to some tools). In the end, the corkscrew inevitably turned out to be the most wanted tool on our camping trips... BTW, Victorinox, the well-known suppliers of Swiss Army Knives, also provide a Multi-Tool. But although the corkscrew is, besides the knife itself, the one feature present in all Victorinox swiss army knives, they forgot it at their multi-tool! What were they thinking? Cheers and happy hunting! HoPri

He is such a lazy guy, isn't he? I bet he's playing with his computers all the time, instead of geocaching... He should take this great web site as an example for himself. There, the web masters rock. Lots of traffic, lots of requests by users, lots of changes, and yet, everything runs quite smoothly. Wonder how THEY do it... Thanks, really appreciated. HoPri

Why remove it? If nothing's wrong with the description or the coordinates (which I assume are OK in your case), then leave it as a challenge. Around here, we have a 5/5 who is now 2 years old and only has 1 find so far. But there will be a big "expedition" of local cachers to go and get it in the near future... I sure hope that it is not disabled until then! A cache that wasn't found for a long time (if ever!) is a great and interesting challenge for many. It just needs time to be discovered as such... Only thing to make sure is that it's known to still exist so that people don't tend to think that the description is a zombie of a cache long gone. Happy hunting! HoPri

I still haven't completely understood what exactly you are looking for. If it is a way to transform found numbers into coordinates in such a way that - if you get a number wrong - then the coordinates shall be way off the correct ones, have a look at the following scheme: Assume that x and y are the found numbers, for example 3 and 4, now sum them up (or multiply, whatever you want), result in the example is 7. Now, the given formula for the coordinates may look like z * [(x+y) mod (x+y+1)], mod being the well-known integer division reminder. In the example, 7 mod 8 is 7, which is then multiplied by z to yield the coordinates (example: z=23, (decimals of the minutes of the) coordinates=23*7=161). If one mistakes x or y by something larger, then the mod ensures that the resulting factor is way off: found y=5 instead of 4, then x+y=8, 8 mod 8 = 0 (instead of 7), and 23*0 = 000. If it is more likely to mistake the figures x,y by something smaller then choose a mod just below the correct result. However, the multiplication with z still ensures in all cases that you get coordinates quite away from the correct ones if you have a wrong x or y. The mod just makes things even worse in case of a mistake into the "wrong" direction. And the scheme works for all coordinates that aren't, by accident, prime. Best regards, Holger

Wow, it really looks like you have a great ride! Cool! Some observations from our experience (the kids (my sister-in-law's) being a bit older), most of which I'm sure you will already know but nevertheless here they are: 1) The trade-up/equal thing is really difficult sometimes, as it had been mentioned before. Normally, we urge the kids to bring several different trading items with them, and then we do some negotiation on the value of the take-out vs. the put-in items. Only for emergencies, we also bring a good trading item so we can fill in just in case the trading wishes of the kids are too particular. In the end, that's better than down-trading or to walk away without trading at all (or having to come back to put in something decent). 2) Some caches are really the poor victims of down-trading, which has also been mentioned before. It's no big fun to look through the mouldy broken left-overs in a damp cache-box. For these cases, we have also something in petto, a small suprise gift. If the disappointment about the actual cache content is just too big, then you can pull it out and say, "look here, take this instead. And we leave your stuff in the box so the next one won't be so disappointed." 3) It is a good idea to have ziplocs with you, so you can give your put-ins a little bit of extra protection against dirt and water. 4) Most of all, and that's what I permanently have to work on: Don't let your personal enthusiasm make you miss the point when your kids are done. After a couple of trips that turn out to be no fun the little ones might loose interest in the whole game. It's better to do several shorter ones and to hear the eager "Where's the next one?" than a tired and bored "When will we there?" every minute on a long hike. Enjoy yourselves! HoPri

Congratulations on this virtual! Not only because you mastered the shoals of getting it approved but as it refers to such a famous and beautiful spot! I don't know when you added the note that it is required to sit at the *waypoint* (and not somewhere else), but you already say so in requirement 1). In my view, there is no "slack" in the requirements that allows to log this cache with a picture taken from some other point. If someone would log a box cache by the words "We weren't actually there but we saw the hiding spot from a distance", it would be no question to cancel the log. I don't see any reason to do it differently here only because it is a virtual. At least not, if your requirements are as clear as they are. Keep your virtual clean! Best regards, HoPri

Albeit I totaly agree that one has to be particularly careful these days, I always wonder how suspicous "our lot" is considered by others? When I'm out and about geocaching, wearing outdoor clothing, stuffed pockets with unknown content, behaving oddly enough by looking or poking around with no apparent reason, I can imagine that *I am* the supect for many. (I'm pleading not guilty! ) When I was checking out a potential cache location in a city park recently, the mothers who were enjoying the sunny afternoon there with their playing children eyed me closely. Being a father of a 20 months old son myself I can fully understand that. A stranger strolling through the bushes, here and there, apparently behaving obviously con-inconspicous. "Shockingly enough, we are now those guys our parents always warned us of." (I did not place the cache there.) Be prudent and be careful, but don't get paranoid. Most people are nice and similarly afraid of the stranger as you are... Enjoy, HoPri

It would, indeed, be nice to see this clearly on a search result page or on the cache description page (where you can at least look at the "last updated" date in the small print at the end). For premium members, there are two work arounds, both with advantages but also some shortcomings: Put those caches you are interested in on your watch list. Then you'll get to see whenever a cache owner posts a note. Which they usually do in case of major changes/corrections. Downside: If you are only interested in the changes you are not interested in seeing all the other logs in your mail inbox you'll get by the watch list... Alternatively, create a pocket query (which you only need to preview instead of having it processed, so they are also useful for paper cachers ) where you check the box "updated in the last 7 days". Then you get only those caches that have been modified. The disadvantage for this method is that you are not told whether it was a major or a minor change. Hope that helps! HoPri

I like this idea. I'll see if I can implement it on the cache image upload page. I hope you can make it work! Especially, as the same problem with uploaded (but unlinked) images also occurs for the printer-friendly pages as well. One has always to double-check whether there is a photo/drawing that you might want to or even must take with you. Best regards, HoPri

Exactly, the 1/1s outnumber the ?/4s or ?/5s by far, right?! And that's were the rating comes into the picture: Looking at a terrain-5-rated cache? Beware! And ask yourself whether you are really prepared to go for it. Legislature cannot replace a person's own self-judgement. We (the geocaching community) should only make sure that anyone reading a cache description finds enough information in the cache details (rating/text/logs) to really assess the risks involved and whether he/she can handle them. Best regards, HoPri

Oh boy, what impressive pictures! We should create a big-size picture calendar out of them to hang on the wall in the living room... ;-) Here are two of mine, both in Daniel Boone National Forest, Red River Gorge/Clifty Wilderness area in Kentucky. Waterfall along Swift Camp Creek Trail: Rock Bridge across Swift Camp Creek, having a particularly mystic atmosphere: Edit: Forgot the cache link. Here it is: GCA7A8 The Only Real Li'l Bridge Cheers, HoPri

First of all, thanks for your reply post. >The mark you were looking for, JZ0339, should be logged as a not found. I came to the same conclusion, but only eventually (I had to edit my log several times...). At first, I was completely convinced that the old one must be gone. But now I agree that one cannot be sure of a destruction unless it is approved by an official or witness. > You saidn in your post that you found the intersection of the roads, but you said nothing of finding (or not finding) the wingwall for the 12 inch culvert that the mark was to be set in. You may want to revisit the site and look again - it may still be there. The culvert was the main feature we looked for, and that we were not able to find, and true, the log is not specific in this respect. I assume that it takes a lot more experience with the interpretation of features mentioned in benchmark descriptions to have a very clear picture of what you really look for. I only recently learned that poles like the one that marks NO8370 are called witness posts... :-O > I did see that they have a website simply called The Hamilton County Engineer's Website in Cincinatti, Ohio. (I also noticed that the Engineer's office has a display of historic surveying equipment.) I also ran across this page when I tried to find information on the new disk. But I found no way to check for a specific 'PID'. But it is an interesting page. > All counties in the nation have a County Surveyor or Engineer that sets and maintains survey control for their county. Most larger cities do also, a good example being shown by the designation of the mark in question. This is very interesting. Do you happen to know what decides whether they are registered in the central NGS database (like most of the Cincinnati BMks seem to be)? Or does the NGS database contain only BMks placed long ago? > Good luck on your hunts. Thanks again, and same to you! Ho from HoPri