Search the Community

Sure, what do you want to talk about?

If a wife or girlfriend has ever rolled her eyes when you talk about Benchmarking, you might be interested in this BBC-TV series from a few years back. It centers on a couple of quirky metal detecting hobbyists who take their activity oh so seriously as they roam the scenic countryside around their lovely village. Their search for a big treasure payday more likely turns up a modern one-pound coin or a beer can pull tab than a stash of Saxon gold, and not everyone gets their passionate involvement in detecting business. I'm finding it a refreshing change from nonstop pandemic news. Also, no one does quirky like the Brits. I've been watching on Acorn TV, but it may be available on other platforms, too. Cheers! ArtMan PS: fans of the wonderful 1960s British series The Avengers will want to know that Diana Rigg appears in some of the later shows, but not in the first season.

If you are unsure about the safety of geocachers and other traffic participants make contact to the owner and tell him (or her). It is possible that he (or she) hasn't thoguth about that and maybe will archive the cache or move it to a safer place. If the owner knows a good way to log the cache safely for everyone (!) you might ask him (or her) to write this into the listing. Perhaps adding some trailheads will help. And if the owner doesn't react at all or says "f.... u I don't care" you might log "needs archived" if you still think that it's a dangerous hide. Most geocaches will take the log (+1 point) and stay quiet. Looking away is no solution so get active! The owner is always the first person to talk to....

Here's something I thought I'd never see: An EarthCache Power Trail! I was checking the maps for new caches to hunt this weekend, and I came across a series of ten EarthCaches in one park. The distance between the two furthest is .5 mile. Two are at the exact same coordinates. One of my caching companions loves EarthCaches, so we'll probably hit these ths weekend. (Unless I can talk my caching companions into a series of regulars that I want to find soon...) Ten geologically interesting, and different, lessons in less than a mile? I know the area, and I'm a bit sceptical. Stay tuned for an update after the weekend (if I manage to talk my Geocaching companions into this one...)

The chat archive was always open to anyone from the beginning. You could even become a member of the list with out having to be a member of the OGA. I know because I applied and became a member of the list. That only lasted for about 4 days until I complained to the hosting service that inappropriate content was being posted to the list and the service owners agreed with me. My pay back for this was having my complaint posted in the list and my list membership revoked. Pretty cool, getting booted of a list without a single post to the list. After that a few people starting posting about taking the list private and it looks like it happened. Oddly enough, a few days before this change, some other people complained about something on the list and their complaints were not air to the public that I saw. Seeing as this is not an email, but something posted in the public, I see no problem with adding it here. From: oga-talk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oga-talk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of The Blue Quasar Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 9:46 PM To: oga-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [oga-talk] OGA: Recent postings of copyright material - Please review in its entirety To all participants of OGA-Talk: On Friday May 25th, 2007 a member of the Ontario Geocaching Association (OGA) executive was contacted by a representative from Freelists.org in regard to the following complaint that had been sent to them: Subject: Posting of copyrighted material. Date: Thursday 24 May 2007 15:51 From: kwatson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Members have been posting copyrighted material to the oga-talk list. A few members have subscribed to an on line document that is being mailed to them. As they receive each edition, they are posting it in it's entirety to the talk group. This information is not freely available to the public unless they ask for it directly from the creator. No where in what is being posted is anything that would indicate permission has been given. As part of the subsequent discussions between the OGA and Freelists.org we were advised to remove all identified copyright material from the archives of Freelists.org that were posted by members of OGA that have posted. This action was completed Saturday May 26th. All content of the discussion was removed in accordance with the following documentation as provided by the representative of Freelists.org: (IANAL) Copyright is implicit -- the fact that someone wrote something grants it copyright by default. Fair use allows excerpts of passages provided proper credit is given and other things like use for parody. I believe what they're doing violates the author's copyright since it is a direct copy of the content in its entirety. Again, IANAL, this is just my slightly-informed understanding of copyright law. I believe this presents a problem for FreeLists. I think we should explore removing the content from the archives and preventing it from being posted in the future. n as provided by John Madden (weez@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) If you have any questions regarding this notification, please contact info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I was hoping that Groundspeak would talk about the Blue Switch Day souvenir in today's newsletter. But no newsletter! Edit: I just got the newsletter, almost 2 hours later than usual. Nothing new regarding the souvenir.

Well, Easter is here, and now, this thread ressurects (no pun intended). The time has come to contact all geocachers interested on participating in this research interview. Hope to talk to you all soon! Take care! Shak.

I've found 10 or 20 caches since the lockdown, and not a single one had been touched by anyone within the period that the virus is known to survive on that kind of surface, discounting the remote possibility of a non-cacher finding it and handling it without a corresponding log being entered. With golf, the person you're worried about was there touching that object 5 minutes ago. So I don't consider the risk for geocaching large, although for the run where someone had found the caches the day before, I used gloves just to be sure. But I'm not trying to talk you out of not signing. That's up to you, and I expect most COs will understand if you explain in your find log and don't play games like not climbing a tree but then claiming the find. If you're worried about the CO, you could just log a note: they can't complain about that.

If signing your name is a pointless exercise, how do you feel about actually opening the cache? I mean, if you Found the cache and it's in your hands, you can still talk about it online. For that matter, why even pick it up. Once you see it, you can still talk about it. Right? So just look around for it and once you spot the hiding place you're good to go. Actually, I guess there's no reason to even see the cache. If you're not going to pick it up, or open it, or sign the log, why even bother putting your eyes on it? I think you should be able to find the place you think it's hidden in and then talk about it. You could probably even talk about it without going so far as to get out of your car. Why take the hike, or lift the lamp post skirt, or look under the bushes, etc. These require you to leave the nice cool air conditioned car. Perhaps you could just drive up to where you'd need to get out of your car if you were going to sign the log, and then turn around and go back home. Now that I really think about it, with gas prices so high, and signing being so pointless of an exercise, there's really no good reason to drive all the way out there. I say, since we're playing the game just so we can talk about caches, a lot of information is on the cache page itself, and that should give us enough to talk about. I wish these cache owners would stop being so self righteous and give up the "little man syndrome" about their power, and cut us some slack! My original position was that there are a few RARE instances in which a log cannot or should not be signed and that inasmuch as the cache was still actually found, it is still legitimate to log it as a find, and that is wrong to acuse someone who participates in the game/sport in good will by different personal rules as a being "cheater". That is still my position. Again I sign virtually all logs as a courtesy to the owner. Poking a hole is mushy log to PROVE that I was there is still a pointless excerise to me. By my personal rules, if I FIND the cache and open it, it is a FIND to me and I will log it as such, irrespective of whether the logbook, sheet, or mush-ball is signed. This talk about claiming logs from the car is silliness. I respect that others play by insisting that they must sign the log. All I can say, is that I don't try to tell anyone else how to do anthing, and I would hope others would adopt the same attitude in geocaching and life in general.

I've done a nerd nite talk before, but not on geocaching - though I was thinking about doing that. I'd say it would depend on your slant. You can do a 101-style teaching talk, focusing how it works and how to get started, or you could focus on the fun and adventures you can have while geocaching (sharing your love for it) such that you could inspire more people to look into it themselves But yeah, I'd start off broad - share your best or most talk-worthy experience to grab their attention, then move into why, then how. If you have info about high tech geocaches, I'd definitely include some of those (some German caches, night caching, UV/LED/IR/Beacon types, etc). Attempt a brief technical description of how GPS works, what devices have GPS, and why some brands are better than others. I'd end off tongue in cheek showing samples of the run-of-the-mill stuff that most people hate Good to end on a light note, so you could joke about LPCs perhaps That's how I'd structure it at least. I wouldn't come at it from an 'intro course' slant - in the NN atmosphere it may be apt to focus on entertaining more than educating (because geocaching!), while providing enough info to get started (and definitely inform that you'd be glad to help people get started if they want more info or to try it out themselves!) I only recommend entertain over educate because I see the NN environment as about sharing your passion, what it is you love about what you're talking about But ultimately, it's up to you!

How about getting a few college interns from down the street to help with this excellent idea? Though Siri offline you'll have to talk to Apple.

It took me a minute to figure out what you were talking about because, although it might seem odd, I see little similarity between what a CO does and what the powers that be do. A CO has a lot of say in his cache, but, nevertheless, he has no authority. He's just another person playing a game with his friends, so, yes, of course I agree he should be patient with others, thorough in his explanation, and flexible when he can. As I said, I wish TPTB could be like that, but the fact is that they're just making decisions: yes you can do that or no you can't. In a case like this, there's no explanation: the people promoting virtual logs know full well they're against the guidelines, so there's no need to explain that. There's really no advantage for the powers that be to be nice once they've made a decision after considering all the facts. That's one of the reasons I don't think I could ever be a reviewer. Reveiwers are great. They're always fair and helpful. But we're talking about a situation where all the cards are on the table. There's no possible outcome other than "No". In that situation, I can understand when they see no reason to pretend there's anything to talk about. No, in fact, I don't agree with that statement. This isn't about a matter of opinion whether a guideline can or can't be broken. And, in fact, I think the idea that respect has anything to do with following the rules is absurd. This is simply observing that TPTB have made a decision, so that's that. In this case, I happen to agree with their decision because I don't see the benefit and dislike the precedent, but my purpose here is to support the TPTB's actions once they made the decision regardless of how I feel about their ruling. I can see them being more lenient in the case of a CO allowing a find that doesn't result in a signed log. I haven't seen them mind that in the case of a container that can't be opened, although I'm sure they'd get upset if it went on a while without the container being replaced. So I'm not surprised they're allowing it, but I also won't be surprised if they change their minds after it becomes more obvious this is going on as a matter of course.

A few thoughts : First, unless there is some puzzle on the cache page they need to solve to find the locations of those bits of information, or the information itself is a puzzle, that's probably a multi not a puzzle . Second, practically speaking, why 16 portions of information ? Is that because of the length of the co-ordinate string ? Remember that the first few digits of both latitude and longitude are going to be exactly the same for a huge area, so unless your chosen site is near the border between .for e.g. , 50 north and 51 north, most smart people will skip visiting those predictable digits. A lot of puzzles in my area give a portion of the solution on the page like this N50 0x.xxx W 000 0x.xxx. Third, 16 (or however many) pieces of information are many times (16 ?) more likely to go missing than a single cache container, and in towns those do seem to get muggled easily. If one of your pieces is removed, painted over or whatever, you will need to maintain it. Similarly, you need to be sure your pieces of information are going to stay readable despite fading or water damage (or frost damage, or whatever your climate throws at you, I've not checked to see where you cache ! ) As baer2006 mentions, inbuilt redundancy of some kind reassures cachers that a single missing piece of information will not mean they have to post a DNF , if you can work it in, it's very worthwhile. Fourth, you need to ensure your pieces of information are placed in a way which causes no damage, personally I'd not ever contemplate putting a sticker or marking with paint or pen on someone else's property , or municipal street signs etc. Using a magnet (or magnetic sheet cut to size) or a magnetic fake bolt would mean no risk of damage . You could maybe talk to some property owners in the town, a friendly small shop, cafe, museum or whatever might be happy to have a discreet sign placed in the corner of a window facing out and visible from the street .

Haven't read the whole thread, but wondering if there has been any talk/rumours of extending the first CITO season for this year since many if us are now in lockdown with CITO events cancelled or unable to be published during this time.

That's pretty unrealistic both for me personally and for new cachers (even if they are extrovert and dare to write such notes). In my case, I would not end up with going for the hike with the people I'd like to talk to. If the hike is the official event, then there is at least some effort at least for a while to adapt the pace to slower ones. If I asked for a group hike, certainly not those I'd like to talk to would make an offer as they are so much faster than myself. If the official part of the event is the sitting around at the hut (or somewhere else), the argument will be if someone wants to talk to them, this someone can do that there, but I simply do not enjoy such type of situations. I do not care at all about smileys. My frustration comes from an entirely different direction. Oh, you didn't? There is a big difference between disapproving something/someone and not warmly welcoming it/someone. Also my statement about lame attended logs is not based on disapproving and is a weaker statement. Being someone for whom attended and found it is somehow something of the type mission accomplished (that's why I have chosen to wrote a number of notes for caches where I signed the log book), I cannot help to regard attended logs for a 2 minute visit or a visit to a hiking event without hike as lame. I do not claim to speak for everyone (not even for anyone except myself) and I have often stressed that I belong to a minority. In some cases I wrote about my personal preferences and opinions (and mentioned so) and in some cases I wrote about opinions of others I got to know or felt the need to defend the German geocaching community (sometimes continental European community in other contexts) which consists of many individuals of which only a small number writes arm chair logs. Many of the attacks with respect to German cachers are unfair. I see it as a change and not as a clarification. Apparently you do not understand my point. I will give up.

Nice try. It was an interesting idea, but I agree with GS that it was misguided, so I'm happy they shut it down. I can see why you're upset about them not posting an explanation, but your description makes it clear the caches were published under false pretenses, however noble the intention, and GS usually doesn't react kindly to that. Try something else, and maybe talk it over with GS or come on the forums to discuss it before you decide unilaterally that it justifies pretending to be geocaching when you're actually doing something else. I haven't looked at the recent "virtual event" thread, but I'm guessing that's someone thinking along the same lines, so you might want to check it out.

We joke about attending Skype events in our local WhatsApp group but definitely against the rules. I you need caching talk just organise a group chat. I am sure people are not that desparate for a log.

You could always log a Note with the intention of logging a legitimate Find after signing the Log. Hard to see how HQ would have an issue with a generic Note. Since my experience informs me that HQ usually only gets wind of these things when another User complains, maybe you should invite the person/people in your area that appear to have an issue with this practice to a video chat to talk it over and find some sort of solution. Zoom Happy Hours are becoming quite the thing in my area.

I disabled my cache last week, when I was surprised to see someone had visited it. This is NOT essential activity. Clearly everyone should err on the side of caution and not talk about what is "most likely" while having zero experience in epidemiology. Just stop this reckless behaviour, which is now criminal, at least in the UK. Personally I think it's poor that geocaching.com haven't just turned off the data feed.

One done only a couple years after starting (and the other 2/3rds was a FTF monster), was supposed to be at a kid's "Grandma's house". - "She can't wait to talk to people! ". So apparently we're there for her amusement as well... Six in the morning, 2/3rds searching along a hedge at the sidewalk and finds it. A man comes out, asking her what the #$** is she doing, she tells him, and he directs her next door, where the kid's Grandma lives. The container was given to "Grandma", and now she really had to watch and talk to people, until the kid got outta school. Sheesh...

If 10 DNFs isn't enough for a CO to self-check the cache, then it should be archived, unless it's a high D cache, in which case the NRA wouldn't really be appropriate either. The first step should be a NM to notify the CO that something might be wrong, not jump immediately to a reviewer with a suggested NRA. If no action is forthcoming from the CO, the next step is the NA. There's no need for a separate NRA log in this example because a mechanism exists and should work as it is supposed to but cachers don't want to file the correct logs to get this addressed. In this example you've provided (and assuming the NRA was in place), does that mean you would bypass the NM log (and suggest others do as well) and go directly to a NRA to initiate reviewer action on this cache? If so, then what does that say about the NM log? You've essentially rendered it irrelevant. Also, if the CO doesn't respond to this reviewer action, then the cache is archived. Basically you're asking for the reviewer to disable a cache that has no NM log (because a 10 consecutive DNF cache probably needs a CO check), see if the CO responds, and then archive the cache when they don't. And that's somehow a different process and result than the current NA log we have available now because the implication of the terminology is better and not used out of context? I'm all for changing the name of the log but I honestly can't think of how the process and possible results would differ from how they currently stand or do anything to address the issue of not using the proper logs for needed maintenance and/or reviewer action. I did and there's very little that addresses examples, only most people agreeing with the suggestion of a name change of the NA log to the NRA log. I suggested they keep both (in my initial reply) because there are some cases where immediate action/archival is needed (cache on private property without permission, for example) vs. just the normal progression of an unmaintained cache from NM to NRA. NRA makes much more sense because it applies across the board to every situation but since that hasn't happened, the NA is what we have so that's what we have to use. I still don't think there are any examples that would make sense for a community member to forego the NM log and proceed directly to a NRA log. Most examples (like the 10 consecutive DNFs) should be just as adequately addressed using what we have in place (NM then NA). The problem is that the community is hesitant to use them or refuses to use them. The NRA isn't needed if people file the correct logs and use the established process. The NRA apparently is needed when people choose not to file the correct logs and not use the established process. Creating or renaming a log that asks for reviewer action doesn't address the problem of people not using the correct log types. It doesn't change the process already in place, although if you're going to bypass the needed NM log (in the example you provide) to file the NRA log, then it completely changes the process and renders the NM log irrelevant. It only clarifies the implication of the log being used. This does nothing to address the root of the problem. It's because the community hasn't been "educated" or properly "refreshed" in their proper use. Now that the CHS and reviewers are apparently pro-actively seeking out caches like this particular example, the community doesn't feel like it's a needed action on our parts, despite the fact that it is. Some of it is related to the actions of GS, some of it is related to COs' reactions to NM/NA logs, and some of it is related to the community's hesitancy in their use. All this talk between Bruce and I about NA/NRA is completely irrelevant if the community just follows the protocols laid out for us and files the NM/NA logs and COs get over themselves and realize that it's not some personal attack but instead a plea for them to maintain their cache. They fail to maintain it and it's off the books, as it should be. Like Bruce, I wouldn't have taken action like you did but I would be just as frustrated at the lack of action by the community prior to you. I might have contacted the CO and/or written a note on the cache page but like some (but not others) I prefer to have firsthand knowledge and visit a cache before filing a NM log. I have no issues with following up later (I typically wait 4 weeks/30 days), if no action is taken by the CO, with a NA log. If I didn't file the NM log, I won't file a NA log because I'd prefer to have visited the cache to feel confident in my choice. I'm sure dprovan doesn't feel like that's needed but if a reviewer is going to take action (or is summoned to take action), then I believe they need as much firsthand information as they can get to help make their decision, not someone else acting, in essence, as a reviewer from afar. I don't think it's wrong what they do, although I'd not endorse their actions; I feel it's wrong for me based on how I choose to participate.

When local cachers talk about completing the Fizzy Challenge, or the Jasmer Challenge, or the DeLorme Challenge, or any other challenge, they generally don't talk about finding the challenge cache. They talk about the last cache they found for the challenge itself: the remote cache with a rare difficulty-terrain combination, one of the last surviving caches hidden in a particular month almost 10 years ago, the lonely cache in a remote corner of the state, whatever. That's the finish line. They talk about finding the challenge cache too, but they talk about it as a celebration of competing the challenge. I think the "victory lap" or "awards banquet" analogies work very well. Maybe things are different in your area. Maybe the cachers in your area consider finding the challenge cache itself to be the completion of the challenge. But that isn't what I've observed.

This design proposal looks great! But it's not so important whether Groundspeak will agree with you, these design thing are changeable using Javascript/GM and guys behind GC little helper II will surely be fast. As for the stalker thing someone has mentioned: I am not a stalker as well but me and my friends often visit the Friends page and check out others' new finds (GClh II is very helpful in this) as we like to talk about where we were, what we experienced there, watch the pics etc. The feed will make it much easier for us. Wow, if the feed items only indicated somehow there are images attached to them, that would be something! People who don't want to share their activity with their friends can easily switch it off. One click is all it takes. No need to talk about stalking anymore.

As a RN, I can talk about 16 hour shifts all the time. We get that. It sucks, but its our reality, COVID-19 or not. Also consider, this is not a one size fits all situation. Our policies and protocols within the hospital change several times each day. Yesterday evening we separated a brand new baby from its PUI mother five minutes after birth. Today, we would not do that; they would stay together and mom would wear a mask while breastfeeding. I am 20 miles north of the first Washington state COVID-19 case in Snohomish County and 50 miles north of Seattle. I'm not being negligent. I'm avoiding stores, crowded areas, my nursing conferences have been cancelled, practicing social distancing, etc. I'm following the recommended guidelines AND caring for patients with inadequate PPE, not nearly enough supplies, etc. However, the fresh air part is recommended by State of Emergency declared by the Skagit County Health Department that recommends people getting outside. It's also recommended that kids spend two hours playing outdoors. People who are sick should self-isolate except to seek medical care. People at higher risk of severe illness should self-isolate now. This includes physical isolation from non-household family members, including grandchildren. People at higher risk include people over 60 years of age; people with underlying health conditions including heart disease, lung disease or diabetes; people with weakened immune systems; and pregnant women. Everyoneshould limit activity outside the home to essential activities only. However, outdoor activities such as walking, running, biking, and hiking are encouraged. If you go with another person, maintain 6 feet of distance. So, to answer your question, CITOs ARE good for you, if you are healthy.

Nobody said you could ask for the guidelines to be changed. They just said don't break the guidelines. Wait until the change. Why is that so hard for you to understand. Totem what is it you don't understand that rules never change unless someone brings it up or does something to get them changed I hear you saying that things don't change unless you talk about it, and I understand that. I even agree with you on that. I have been in agreement with you on that the whole time. You don't seem to be able to comprehend what I'm saying. Yes, it is good to talk about things like this. If the guidelines change I might hide one even. Who knows. What I'm trying to say, and you keep ignoring or avoiding it, is that UNTIL the guidelines change stakes are not proper caches. It's that simple. Please don't tell that I'm not willing to talk about this change or that I don't understand about rules changes. When you do you it just prove that you are not listening and that this is not a disscusion, but rather one person holding their breath and throwing a fit because they don't like the way things are now. I am avoiding it because it is a mote question and answer. How do we get the Guidelines changed? we talk about it? we discuss the merits of it. We get noticed by the rule Changers. We all know what you are saying that YES They are illegal now but it does not mean we have to keep mum until someone magically out of the blue, changes the rules. Changing rules is usually an uphill battle and we have to start somewhere and what better place to start then on Groundspeaks Forums. Best of luck, but please understand that you are never going to see this happen. Your efforts might be better utilized creating actual geocache containers. Groundspeak has spent the last six years getting out of the "container-less" cache business. With the exception of Events and Earthcaches, a cache has to have a container and the container has to contain a log. The Chances of Groundspeak doing a complete turn around because someone wants to leave random objects across the landscape and call them caches, and others want to drive around finding them and pretending that they are finding caches, is slim to none. I will take the slim chance as all rules have been known to change