Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for '경기출장안마,고령집창촌[katalk:ZA32]200%보장 전지역 모두 출장가능'.

  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Geocaching HQ Communications
    • Announcements
    • Release Notes
    • User Insights
  • General Geocaching Discussions
    • Getting Started
    • How Do I...?
    • Geocaching Topics
    • Geocache Types and Additional GPS Based Gameplay
  • Community
    • Geocaching Discussions by Country
  • Trackables
    • Travel Bugs
    • Geocoins
  • Bug Reports and Feature Discussions
    • Website
    • Geocaching® iPhone App
    • Geocaching® Android App
  • Geocaching and...
    • GPS/API/Technology
    • Education
    • Hiking/Backpacking
    • Photography
    • Design

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start




Found 28788 results

  1. That's semantics, but it's hard to argue that averaging is not beneficial to improving accuracy. Let's run a simulation as an example. Take a random number. Say 57 value = 57 We have a hypothetical GPS device that isn't very accurate. In fact, that device can only tell you the coordinates to value within 50 places. It will return a value randomly anywhere between 7 and 107. Not very accurate at all. Now, let's take 200 random readings of "value" where the results can wildly range from 7 to 107 and average them together. If we run this simulation multiple times (just for fun!)... 57.020301980532984 56.60828961934022 58.36645537356805 Now, let's take a "precision" device. that gives us coordinates to within 15 feet and grab a single value that we think looks accurate. 70 66 52 My personal experience shows GPS averaging gives more accurate coordinates than trying to pick out a single reading. Is it possible that a single reading can be more accurate than the average? Yes, it can, but most of the time, it probably won't be as good as an average of many samples taken.
  2. Add me to the wishful thinking queue. I thought I'd read that the new hosting laws would not be backdated? But they have, in a seemingly random manner. Like others on here, I've been hosting images and other files on my own website since 2010. I had fears about the Jan2020 release, but on checking quite a few of my puzzles, whatever I'd done to the images had stayed intact. The recent removal of the image proxies, without notice. (I get global emails telling me what souvenirs I can collect, so why not tell everyone the image hosting rules are changing, again.) I now have 200+ puzzles to redo. On my caches, the line seems to stop on 22May2014. I had 2 caches published that day, one of them still has the image proxy, and on the other it has been removed. No sense to it at all.
  3. I'm trying to edit my notification distance to pick up newly published caches in my neighboring communities. My original distance was 80 kilometers, I'm trying to update it to 200 or 250 kilometers. I enter the new distance and then select edit notification, I get an instant message on screen that it has been updated but it remains at 80 kilometers. I even tried deleting the notification and then creating a new one and it still stays at 80 kilometers, its like it has a memory of 80 and won't save anything else. Tried this a least a dozen times over the past couple of months thinking maybe it was just a bug and may have been fixed. Nope.
  4. Unless it's accurate for any cache, I don't recommend it. There are some places where the satellite imagery is intentionally skewed but hundreds of feet. I found a few caches in that area, one of which appeared on the map to be in the middle of a lake (it was a good 100' from the shore). Although not the problem that it used to, there used to be a lot of places in the world (this isn't just a game played in urban/suburban America) where the resolution was so poor it was difficult to even identify features on the map as a building. There also was an issue of cloud cover completely obscuring what one would see on the ground. This is an old image be it shows an area in Costa Rica (in a rain forest) where a cache was placed. The coordinates were actually pretty accurate but were about 30 feet from a 200' steep drop into a river bed.
  5. Wenn der andere Owner geschrieben hat, wird er doch auch eine Entfernung angegeben haben, oder? Ich würde vermutlich erstmal antworten mit der ermittelten Entfernung, und ihn fragen warum er meint dass es da Probleme wie Verwechslungsgefahr o.ä. geben könnte. Ich habe schon mal einen Cache um ein paar Meter verschoben damit ein anderer Owner seinen neuen Cache an der Wunschposition ausbringen konnte - aber auch da gabe es keine Verwechslungsgefahr. Im schlimmsten Fall muss man eben in beiden Listings schreiben warum jetzt nicht hier, sondern da zu suchen ist. Aber selbst dann sollten mehr als 200 m Abstand noch genug sein. Ergänzung: Die sind ja auch beide noch an unterschiedlichen Seiten der B2. Also keine Verwechslungsgefahr.
  6. That's exactly what I'm saying. So out of 3,000 caches found, not a single one meets your standards? Get off your high horse. It doesn't have to literally be your favorite, they votes to tell other cachers which ones are the best of the 3,000. If you haven't found one favorite in the last 3,000 (ratio) then you sure as hell aren't gonna suddenly find 300 in a row that you deem worthy, so what's the point of saving them? But hey, I'm just a peasant with 200 finds. It would sure be nice to have some more votes on the thousands of caches around me so I can visit the the better crappy caches over the worse crappy caches on my way to 300 finds.
  7. Hallo, Die gesperrte Fläche ist erstmal der Bereich um einen Geocache, in dem du keinen anderen Cache legen kannst also die 161Meter. D.h. Wenn jetzt auf der Karte 2 Tradis in einem 200 Meter Abstand gelegt wurden und um beide wird diese rote Sperrfläche von 161 Meter gezogen, dann überschneiden sich zwar die roten Kreise, die Caches sind aber trotzdem weit genug auseinander. So zumindest verstehe ich das (falls nicht kann mich ja jemand verbessern ). Grüße Qmm
  8. Hallo, sorry für meinen absichtlich provokativen Titel. Ich kenne mich in der Natur meiner Region sehr gut aus und hätte ein paar absolut unbekannte, geniale Locations und entsprechend spannende Cache-Ideen dafür. Nun ist es so, dass in einigen Fällen nur wenige Meter entfernt solche "hirnlosen" Dosen von jemandem "versteckt" wurden, der auf die sehenswerte Landschaft keinerlei Rücksicht genommen hat, sich offenbar auch weder auskennt noch damit beschäftigt und vielmehr ein so großartiges Ziel verfolgt, beispielsweise ein riesiges, nur am Rechner sichtbares Ei aus 200 Dosen in der Landschaft zu platzieren. Nun könnte man natürlich sagen, jeder wie er mag. Allerdings lautet die Geocaching-Überregel doch "Denke darüber nach, warum Du Leute an einen Ort führst, wenn Du einen Geocache versteckst. Wenn der Geocache der einzige Grund ist, finde einen besseren Ort." Natürlich interessiert das die Massendosenverteiler nicht die Bohne. Vermutlich wurden von der Community schon öfter Versuche gestartet, das komplette Zumüllen der Landschaft auszuhebeln. Woran scheitert das? Können oder wollen die Betreiber des Spiels nicht gegen das Brechen dieser eigentlich elementaren Grundregel vorgehen? Mir ist natürlich schon klar, dass ein "sehenswerter" Ort sehr subjektiv ist. Aber ein Kreis, der sich aus zahllosen Baumstümpfen, Straßenschildern und Leitplankenpfosten ergibt, legt ja relativ eindeutig den Schluss nahe, dass es hier nicht um den Baumstumpf geht... Vermutlich wurde das unter den Forums-Usern schon oft und ausführlich diskutiert, aber ich habe leider keinen entsprechenden Thread gefunden. Cheers Jörg
  9. I just looks 15 is the most in one day for me. While on vacation all traditional puzzle caches. I need the passwords from 10 in 2 counties to complete the challenge. We did 7 the next day covering 250 miles to finish a series. Also stopped for lunch went shopping and visited a second hand store. In my 20 mile drive to work there's a cache every mile a few park and grabs some puzzles and a couple multis. I get two or three a week during my drive. Usually when my daughter or wife are with. I've had to call the CO on acouple I couldn't figure them out. Most are 200 to 500 feet from the road in a tree row. I'm not chasing any numbers so I do at my pace.
  10. Hier liest man ja aber genauso - bzw. sogar deutlich öfters -, dass der schnöde PETling des Powertrails (der da nur liegt, weil die letzte Dose schon wieder 180 Meter her ist) auch die tollen Locations blockiert. Und der wird ganz oft gefunden, also mit welchem Argument werden wir den los? Für mich ist "Cache wird oft/selten gefunden" weder ein Qualitätsmerkmal noch wird daraus eine Daseinsberechtigung abgeleitet. individueller einfacher Tradi an einer tollen Location mit großer Dose Powertrail-Caches Hardcore-Cache mit T5-Einlagen Stadt-Multi D5-Knobel-Mystery Leitplanken-Micro ...... Das ist für mich alles Geocachen und die Abwechselung finde ich toll. Und da ich einzelne davon nicht mag, mache ich sie halt einfach nicht. Liegenlassen muss man halt lernen und genug Hardcore-Caches bewundere ich auch nur aus der Ferne.... Irgendwie toll ist das sicher trotzdem und dann bin ich traurig, dass ich das nicht kann. Aber deswegen darf der doch trotzdem andere Cacher erfreuen. Und - ganz ehrlich - ich glaube, der Hardcore-Cache erfreut mehr Cacher als die Filmdose mit nassem Logbuch an der Leitplanke; auch wenn der zweite Cache öfters gefunden wird. Der eine Cache hat halt 200 Finder, von denen 199 den Cache halt machen, weil er da ist, und sich über den ungepflegten Zustand auslassen. Der andere Cache hat 3 Finder, die auch Jahre später noch davon schwärmen. Meine Entscheidung ist klar - Quantität ist nicht alles.
  11. Sometimes people find the final cache accidentally, or check likely looking places. I have found several this way. At least three times I have been checking out a suitable hide to leave another cache in (not all for this site) and found it already occupied. I reached into a metal sculpture, and said to my friend, "This would make a nice hide" and felt a magnetic cache already there..."Just like this one," I said, pulling it out. The cache for a puzzle. We logged it. Another I was with a friend looking for a place to hide a cache and he picked up some rocks to show that would be a nice hide, and low and behold, there was already a cache there. It was the final for a series of caches, where each cache gives a clue to the final. Well, we logged the final first. I wrote in my log, that now I had found the final first, I would find the other caches, and did. Recently, I found the final to another cache that similarly to the previous cache, you find several caches that give clues to the final. I was a beginner when I found most of the pre caches and didn't know about collecting the clues, so hadn't. Also, this was an old series, and many of the original caches had gone missing and been archived, so when I accidentally found the final recently (still in good condition), while checking out hides to hide another cache in, I was thrilled. Finally I could log the final, of which I had found most of the previous caches, years ago. Also, sometimes I have just checked suitable hides to see if a cache is hiding there, and found puzzle and multicaches that way. A couple of times I was out walking and spotted caches accidentally. Walking across a field I found a cache lying out in the open. It turned out to be 200 metres from where it was supposed to be. That was a traditional, but I found a puzzle cache also out in the open, while walking through woodland on the way to another cache (which I didn't find). I signed the puzzle cache and re-hid it. These examples explain some finds. Then of course, there are the internet sites, (which I have never used), and didn't know they existed until told here.
  12. Looking at the html element your are right. It used to be 350 but it has been reduced to 200. But when you want to upload a new image it still says that the ideal resolution is 790px by 350px or larger. And the preview you are getting is of the old image resolution, not of the new one
  13. Hallo LueKai, du musst gar nichts weiter angeben, aber genau deine Beispiele sind gar nicht so eindeutig mit "musst du nicht" zu beantworten. Ob es sechs oder acht Meter sind, ist mir egal, und ich freue mich, wenn es mal 20 Meter sind. Aber ich wüsste schon gerne, ob ich die Big-Shot mitschleppen soll, deswegen wäre es schon sinnig, wenn ich das mit den 20 Metern wüsste. Das könnte dann sinnvoll sein, wenn die Äste wirklich nur Fliegengewichte aushalten. Der 200-kg-Cacher weiß, dass ihn nicht alle Äste tragen - ich habe da auch so einen Multi - aber wenn der 50-kg-Owner einen Cache auslegt, bei dem sich bei ihm die Äste biegen, wäre das eine gute Angabe. Keine Angabe, dann gehe ich zum Beispiel beim T4 von einem soliden Baum mit dicken Ästen aus. Wenn der Cache sich explizit an Kinder ab 10 wendet, weil jüngere ihn nicht verstehen und vielleicht von manchen Elementen erschreckt werden können, dann wäre das gut. Oder andersherum, wenn der Spielplatz-Cache an lauter Spielplätzen vorbeiführt, die nur bis 8 Jahre spannend sind, dann ist es doof, wenn sich die Familie mit älteren Kindern vor Ort ärgert. Wenn es jede Standardlampe tut, dann nein. Wenn aber die Reflektoren so weit auseinander liegen, dass man 500+ Lumen braucht, dann bitte ja. Oder wenn es aus gewissen Gründen unbedingt die Stirnlampe sein muss. Für mich ist die Quintessenz: Die Attribute helfen und vereinfachen vieles. Aber sie ersetzen nicht alles. Und im Zweifelsfall ergänze ich im Listing. Ein einfaches Beispiel: Ich finde "takes less than one hour" (Uhren-Attirbut) bei einem Multi aussagekräftig und ob der nun 15 oder 45 Minuten dauert, kann man sicher auch den Logs entnehmen. "Takes more than one hour" (durchgestrichene Uhr) ist aber sehr unspezifisch und ich hätte schon gerne ein Gefühl, ob das nunn 2 Stunden oder 8 sind, die der Owner einplant. Und wenn er es nicht einschätzen möchte, schreibt er "plant einige Stunden ein", "plant gut eine Stunde ein", "plant 8 Stunden ein, ggf. etwas mehr oder weniger", "die Betatester haben 4 Stunden gebraucht" oder, oder - da wird ihn keiner auf die genaue Zeit festnageln, aber es ist eben doch eine sehr hilfreiche Zusatzinfo zur Orientierung. Und das geht nur mit Text, nicht mit dem Bild. Herzliche Grüße Jochen
  14. I had the same problem with all my 200 puzzle caches. Completely random missing photos from user to user. It was mainly using Google Chrome and even then it depended on how up to date the browser was to whether it rejected the host site. So some people saw them and some didn't .... It's all as a result of the changes made to hosting images since 15th September. Although GC HQ say pre 15th caches will work OK it's not actually true. My problem was solved by ensuring my web server had SSL installed. I enabled SSL and installed the free certificate and voila all the photos reappeared. Since 15th Sept I am using Dropbox to host my photos ( which is much easier.) and changed my links from http// to https// I'm still using my web server but only for HTML/CCS/Javascript code NOT for images. All very very annoying and time consuming to resolve .... John
  15. I sent out two high-end TBs, now long gone, working miniature fishing reel, and a solid miniature of a v-twin motor. The other 2/3rds sent out around a dozen coins, all long gone too. - It didn't take us long to figure that's a losing side-hobby, especially when you're talking coins. Two promotion Trackables went missing shortly after they were placed. Another two promotion Trackables are supposedly still sitting in the caches I first placed them in, one a year ago, the other two... The other 2/3rds now has TBs, and 280 coins activated in her collection, and around another 200 unactivated. I now have "our" sig coins, so have over 300 unactivated ... a lotta sets (the AT n stuff...), and around 200 sig coins. I've been placing sig coins in caches, as an incentive to get folks to walk, or hand a newb one at an event. - I'd rather give them away, than find some maggot stole them...
  16. That's odd, all my caching friends in UK say the images are back ? I really don't want to edit 200 + caches if possible. All my caches post 15th are using dropbox and //https ;-)
  17. The reviewers are volunteers and have other real-world stuff to keep them busy too. Here we have one reviewer for the whole state (New South Wales, Australia) and he generally clears the pending queue twice a week, with a recent average of about 200 new caches a month. I imagine that while there are some that would be pretty straightforward that immediately tick all the boxes of the things they check, there would also be plenty of others that require more work. Non-traditional cache types have a lot more things for the reviewers to check, for example, particularly challenge caches.
  18. I fully appreciate that from 15th Sept we should use an authorised host, my lastest cache uses Dropbox which is fine. However I have been putting out puzzle caches for 3 years now and I don't want to move all the images of nearly 200 puzzle caches. The 15th Sept post clearly says :- Quote. This change will only apply to new cache and trackable pages. You can continue editing existing cache and trackable pages as before, even if they contain images that are hosted on third-party servers. So what have GC done to ruin all my historic caches ? John
  19. Thanks for testing them. Yes they are historic caches published before 15th Sept ruling, about 200 of them. John
  20. Can anyone at GC HQ help me. I have 200 cache puzzles with no images since this 15th September update ...... Only happens on Google Chrome , Ok on other browsers but most people use Chrome. Need help desperately .... John
  21. Oh no ..... I've lost the images on all 200 of my caches now !!!!! What is going on ? My old caches should not be effected ... This change will only apply to new cache and trackable pages. You can continue editing existing cache and trackable pages as before, even if they contain images that are hosted on third-party servers.
  22. I've been caching for 6 years.... so can't comment on 10 years ago - I do get the impression from reading logs from caches from 7-10 years ago, that at least in this area, there were more highly active players then than now, with FTF races and a higher turnover of hides. There has been a decline in no of finds overall from my notification inbox, which shows total logs for the 80km radius from my home, purging on a 7d cycle. Previously there would be 800-1000+ emails in there, now maybe 200-500, with short term peaks at souvenir times.... If your area has broken/missing caches, log needs maintenance logs to get them fixed/removed. Cache publication here is rarely longer than 3-4 days, I hid one on Sunday and it published yesterday, which is average, but I've had them publish in 10 minutes and 5-6 days too.... and - welcome!
  23. Which do you think will happen first? Alamogul reaching 200,000 finds or mondou2 passing Alamogul?
  24. We know of a few folks who'd place a cache 200 feet apart or closer if they could. On some lengthy rail trails, off n on the bike every 528' is already a pain-in-the-can. Closer, just put on those hiking boots... At one time there were quite a few folks asking for much more than the 528' because of this nondescript cache placement "just because I can" silliness.
  25. Finally after many years, King Pellinore breaks the 200 caches found barrier. He found his first cache in 08/25/2001 and quickly became one of NJ's top cachers. Petering out at the end of 2006, his long hiatus (until 2019) was broken by a single find in 2013 of https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC3A1QK_block-head He has been getting around a bit, adding states to his geocaching collection. Who knows, he might even place another cache!
  • Create New...