Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for '길음역텍사스위치오라 카이 인사동 스위츠[Talk:Za31]모든 요구 사항 충족'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Geocaching HQ communications
    • Geocaching HQ communications
  • General geocaching discussions
    • How do I...?
    • General geocaching topics
    • Trackables
    • Geocache types and additional GPS-based gameplay
  • Adventure Lab® Discussions
    • Playing Adventures
    • Creating Adventures
  • Community
    • Geocaching Discussions by Country
  • Bug reports and feature discussions
    • Website
    • Official Geocaching® apps
    • Authorized Developer applications (API)
  • Geocaching and...
    • GPS technology and devices

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Location

  1. If I don't know the state of my cache, when I visit it to see if it's OK, I think that clearly counts as maintenance by most definitions. Certainly OMs can be excessive. As you well know -- it's why you brought it up -- your little library example is silly on the face of it. But if you want to talk definitions, then I claim the person with the little library knows full well that there's unlikely to be any change day-to-day, so the fact that they casually look at the cache site wouldn't count as an act of maintenance. Besides, the point isn't to force COs to post OMs for every visit, rain or shine. The point is that if you visit your cache to check on it, it makes sense to post an OM. Certainly if you don't think it adds any information, you shouldn't bother. I don't know about anyone else, but I just don't like that people think there's some rule about only posting an OM when you physically do something. The log is Owner Maintenance, not Owner Fixed It.
  2. I can understand why some feel the need to share, but I am not one of them, I log as I talk IRL, short and too the point, my wife has compared getting words out of me as like pulling teeth!!
  3. Thanks for the list but could I ask what exactly it means? I assume that it is an either /or list. I am interested purely from a Geocaching point of view and getting as many cache coordinates onto my 20x as I can When you talk about 2000 gpx files, does that mean 2000 caches listed on one GPX file? What does 5000 Geocaches mean? I tried to load 5000 caches on a gpx file from my GSAK to the 20x and I got a message that the maximum number of caches has been exceeded but it didnt tell me what it was. In what format can I get 5000 geocaches on?
  4. Many of the caches I enjoy (and hence hide) are an adventure, with signing the log just the icing on the cake. The golden rule of creative writing is to show, not tell, so I'd much rather see and write logs that talk of glimpses of wildlife, rock-hopping over the stream and falling in the mud than just "it was a fun day, TFTC".
  5. Invest time in not trolling and being snarky. Do you understand the spirit of this game, when it was started? Keep the original spirit of this game alive. And bite your tongue from time to time. Life is short. No need to talk when there is no need to, if you have nothing to contribute, just stay silent. Little man quiet is way better than little man with a big something else Have a great night <3 And the title of the thread is now alive...this is the worst irk....trolls. I just answered, and now some *%@$( is all over me. Part of the sport, I guess. But its not fair. Reported all over the place, and making sure I still get my place and voice even though Dick, well, tried to shoot me down. I am sorry my "numbers" aren't what...you know what? I don't care. Numbers. Whatevers. Might be time for a new sport, other than harrassment
  6. Hi everyone! I just joined today! I'm an avid BookCrosser from Puerto Rico, and had heard lots of BCers talk about geocaching. I love to read, write, sing, and take pictures. I can't wait to start finding geocaches!
  7. I'd be happier if the automated process was eliminated, but I still wouldn't be happy that everyone, including the reviewer, thinks the reviewer is required to scan the database for problems. I certainly agree that, whatever the approach, the reviewer shouldn't be made upset. That's one reason I argue that the reviewer should not be considered responsible for cache quality. It's a little hard to talk about the CHS in this context, since the reviewer would almost certainly be using the CHS, too, but an e-mail from an impersonal robot is much more like Big Brother than a reviewer personally filing a log that he's willing to stand behind even if he is using CHS to justify it. But in the broader view, yes, absolutely, one of the most important reason I hate the idea that reviewers must step in because geocachers won't do it is the fact that reviewers have to risk their incredibly important neutrality by presenting the case against a cache and its owner instead of evaluating cases presented by peers and impartially picking between them. I've never seen anyone react that badly, so I have to take your word that such COs exist and are immune to any reason, but even stipulating this, these COs (or whoever) you're describing strike me as a really huge problem, much bigger than cache quality. So I think it's doubly wrong to deploy robots specifically because you want to leave this problem to fester in a hundred other ways. I'd much rather spend reviewer's times to resolve this kind of personal conflict than have the reviewer clean up a vicious CO's caches, making the unhinged CO especially annoyed with the reviewer, just so that CO can plant new caches and be nasty to even more people. I'd like to hear about that. I assume you don't really mean "abuse" in the technical sense, since that would obviously call for GS intervention and the rapid elimination of the other player. So I assume you mean more like you were given a bad time, and I'm wondering on what grounds the offending party rejected your explanation about why you needed to contribute your input. After all, I'm sure you wouldn't be bringing it up in the context unless the case you presented was cut and dried, since that's the kind of cache we're expecting the algorithm is going to identify, so I'm at a loss imagining how the clear expression of that cut and dried case could result in a response that's abusive, but not so abusive that GS doesn't step in.
  8. I'm not talking about cachers getting bent out of shape. The cachers I talk to are reasonable. If someone logs a DNF and thinks it is likely missing (and so logs NM), they understand that. They don't understand getting an email telling them there may be a problem when the DNFs actually say they never looked for the cache. Nor do they understand that once this happens, even if the cache gets found, the health score won't be fully restored unless they do an OM. I was about to say the same thing, Mark. If a person actually at GZ makes an assessment that the cache might be missing and logs an NM, I'd be happy to go and check because I want my caches to be found and really do want to keep on top of actual problems. There've actually been a couple of situations where my caches have been disturbed that I've wished someone HAD logged an NM as it would've alerted me earlier. Its this alogorithm making totally bizarre calls on caches where blind Freddy could see there's nothing wrong that's got my goat.
  9. I'm not talking about cachers getting bent out of shape. The cachers I talk to are reasonable. If someone logs a DNF and thinks it is likely missing (and so logs NM), they understand that. They don't understand getting an email telling them there may be a problem when the DNFs actually say they never looked for the cache. Nor do they understand that once this happens, even if the cache gets found, the health score won't be fully restored unless they do an OM.
  10. Firstly it's a philosophical point of assigning meaning to DNF logs when that meaning wasn't the intent of the logger. We now have the single click option of adding a boilerplate "the cache might be missing" NM to a DNF log if that's what the DNFer thinks, so why do we have to assign that meaning to all the other DNFs that don't imply a missing cache? This may over time have some repercussions, like discouraging people from logging DNFs if they don't think the cache is missing or discouraging COs from hiding caches that might get more than some unspecified average number of DNFs. Secondly, although the email is couched in "might" and "may", it's still an official email from HQ saying that, in their eyes, your cache has been singled out for special attention, and, with that, the implication that the CO is expected to do something in response to make things right. It even lists their expected responses - visit the cache to fix the problem and log an OM, disable it until you can or archive it. This is backed up by the Help Centre page that says further action might be taken if the cache's health score doesn't improve. How can you improve the score if there's nothing wrong with the cache? It's all well and good to say here that it's a harmless email that can be simply ignored, but that isn't conveyed to those receiving the email who aren't following the forums. And regardless of all the logical arguments saying that it isn't, it still comes across as a slap on the wrist or a wake-up call to an allegedly slack CO. Thirdly, it's the nature of the caches that it's catching, like one of the more recent ones reported here: a D3.5 with no history of NMs, the most recent log a find but a few prior DNFs. The mind boggles as to why this cache was singled out. A D3.5 should be getting a fair number of DNFs, otherwise it'd be a D1 or D1.5, and even if it does, the find should surely clear any implication the DNFs might have meant it was missing. If it were just borderline ones, like a D1.5 that suddenly gets a string of DNFs, then perhaps it could be forgiven, but it's not. The ones I've seen reported are just completely out of left field. It's almost like it's just picking caches at random or specifically targeting higher D/T caches, like the D2/T5 of mine it pinged for just one DNF or the other high D/T caches mentioned a couple of pages back that had only one or two DNFs. Finally, we now know that the CHS is being used for more than just sending out harmless emails. What will it be used for next? HQ have committed resources into creating it so presumably they'll want to maximise their bang for buck. Perhaps, um, there's been some talk recently of blocking negligent COs from creating new caches - will the CHS be part of that? Who knows, and we probably won't even be told if it is.
  11. I thought guidelines are new, so they should have everything needed for placing the cache listed in the document? Beside I got first post reviewer note where is it listed what should I follow to satisfy criteria for cache to be publish. I did follow the exact guidelines and still, there is a problem like I describe it in first post. 1. I'm talking about public city park without accessing (or photograph) restriction. There are some geocaches in the park already. 2. There are no stated restriction about placing cache on playground. 3. Our country is not listed on the Regional Geocaching Policies wiki. 4. Help center is taking virtual cache as grandfathered type of cache, virtual reward cache have it's own guidelines where is also not stated anything about placing cache on playground. 5. And there are still problems with our reviewer even if I follow first four steps. Ok, I can see you have similar thinking (and I do understand your views), but if there is no restriction about accessing or photographing the place in local laws and I stick to guidelines, how can become that a problem? I believe guidelines should be a document where we can find our answers. If there is no statement about issues inside, than that can not become an issue. We can only talk about opinions from this point on. It is better for everyone to make guidelines clear and strictly.
  12. Some reviewers group playgrounds in with schools as an inappropriate cache location, due to concerns about protection of children. This is supported by text in the Help Center: "Avoid areas near schools or playgrounds, where cache hunting behavior may worry parents or school staff." Ordinarily the concern is the suspicious nature of someone poking around in bushes, bending down to peek underneath park benches, etc. In your case, you say you are hiding a virtual cache. If the verification method involves photography, this can also raise suspicion. ("Why are you taking pictures of my grandchild, you dirty old man?") To answer your question, to know where to place a geocache: Talk with the land owner/ land manager Read the listing guidelines Read the Regional Geocaching Policies wiki, linked from the listing guidelines Read the "Hiding a Cache" section of the Help Center, linked from the listing guidelines Contact your reviewer by email or by submitting a cache page (even in draft form)
  13. You're right, I checked it and all worked. Now it's not working again, so I will talk with the developer again later. Strange.
  14. Hello, I am very new to geocaching. I just found a new/unopened DeLorme Earthmate PN-40 in my garage. I have learned that Garmin bought DeLorme and I have already contacted them, but they refused to help (sorry, not our product). I have downloaded the system updates but cannot figure out how to get my computer and geocache.com to "talk" to the GPS and send geocaches. I think I need a plug-in (which is what I contacted Garmin about). I tried to download Garmin's alternative but keep getting a message that I have a Chrome window open (as directed I'm using Internet Explorer) and I know I have no windows open. I also made Garmin a trusted site and tried loading through Firefox. Any suggestions? I'd really like to use this device. Thanks!
  15. So far the new way seems to be to use lists. Save a cache to a list. On the list page you can then download each one individually to the garmin through their supported garmin express software. In a future update they should change their -send to gps - garmin tab to go link to the garmin express software which will work instead of an unsupported plugin, communicator, which probably won't work. Going through the garmin express software seems to be the current way to talk to a garmin gps.
  16. I also do not like distance rules, because for me, the objects of the individual categories are all equivalent. Whether it is 2 or 10 in a certain radius. For this purpose other areas are completely excluded in certain categories. When we talk about the fact that the doves are usually part of a something bigger, I agree with you, for example, in the already mentioned churches. But there are so many categories that are also available in the churches (Town clocks, Belltowers, Signs of History, Doorways of the World, Trigonometric Points, etc.) and have also made it into an independent category. The dove of peace in general already has a story to tell. It is regarded as a symbol of peace, and thus stands for people's desire for peace and a friendly coexistence without war or violence. And that is something important for me. What, for example, has the category "Pikachu Sightings" for a special background?
  17. First of all: Distance rules are always bad from my point of view. If one waymark is already listed, why pass on another (maybe much better) waymark, just because it is too close to the other? If we talk about the category idea in general: I think that most doves of peace will be part of something bigger. Either a peace memorial or a mosaic or a mural or... It will be a mix of various things and I personally wouldn't be interested in that kind of collection. In BK-Hunters example I would rather want to learn something about the cultural centre than to go there and take a picture of that dove of peace. Besides, what should we write in the long description of such a waymark? @ BK-Hunters: How much Information can you give us about this dove of peace? The size, the color, the material,...? Most of them will have no hi(story) to tell. For the same reason I'm also not too enthusiastic about the hourglasses and some other categories, but if you find enough proponents, I wouldn't vote against it.
  18. That seems unnecessarily complicated. To quote Teen Talk Barbie, "Math class is tough! Want to go shopping?" Here's my take.
  19. Well now you know someone who doesn't first talk about about numbers having done the series a few years ago. The first thing I tend to mention is the experience of it being like a marathon, about how it only works if you're with friends who are there for the same reason, and because of that we have many great memories. Does the number come up? Yeah, and inevitably discussion about strategy, but the best thing about that trip for me was not the numbers. It totally was the experience. And the rest of the trip that wasn't just swapping a container every 170m. And for them too. Honestly though, doing a series like that, if you are in it for the numbers, you have to be aware that it's gonna mess up the rest of your stats if you want to get some of the older ratio-style challenge caches. That many traditionals will take quite some time to balance out with non-traditionals. And it heavily weighs your low end DT grid. If anyone cares about that sort of stuff. If not, then memories all the way, man! Great times, with friends. (but even then, the experience itself is still not something everyone might enjoy, and that's just fine )
  20. I must admit, compared to others in this forum, I am pretty inexperienced myself (only 207 finds) and I've only been to 1 event. However, I've been looking at events near me (wishing I could go) for a very long time. And I can tell you what they had planned. - some meet at a nice bicycle or walking trail and do a planned walk/ride. - some reserve a picnic shelter at a park and use the BBQ grill for burgers and food. - some do a CITO (Cash In Trash Out) where they all bring a garbage bag with them and pick up litter in a certain area while they are also looking for geocaches. - some meet at a body of water (lake, river, etc) with canoes, kayaks, rowboats or whatever they've got and do a big paddling convoy - some meet at a pub or winery and taste local beers or wines - some organizers plan way ahead of their event/gathering and hide several caches for the attendees to find (the organizer should commit to maintain these caches for at least several months after the event so other folks can also enjoy them) - some organizers just select a location for their event that already has several caches nearby, and attendees of their event meet up and go find those. At any or all of these meetups, cachers can talk, share stories about caching, the veteran cachers can teach the newbies, those who also participate in the Trackables side game can trade and share their trackables. The thing to remember with event caches is - like any other kind of cache, always get permission from whatever land manager or authority person you need to in order to hold a gathering somewhere. And always submit your event cache enough days ahead of time for the review folks to do their thing, and for the potential attendees to put in on their calendars and show up. *edited to add: I forgot to mention, several geocaching events around here (especially recently) have been centered around watching some big, memorable event such as an eclipse, a meteor shower, or even a city fireworks show.
  21. I'm quite new to geocaching (only 22 smileys so far), but I am crazy about it! There is not a geocaching Meetup in my area yet, but a little bit of interest. I'd love to organize a gathering, but I have some questions. What do you do when you gather with other geocachers? I'd like ours to be family centered as I have a tween and 2 small children. Do you search for caches together? Just meet to talk about geocaching? Some of both? More? I appreciate any input!
  22. Looked at the few I know who talk about their stats and didn't see anything unusual. Number wise, mine, and the other 2/3rds separate account don't have issues either. We usually don't look. Was going to look and see if I might luck out trying help you figure it out on yours, but "This user has elected to not display their detailed statistics" kinda thwarted that...
  23. On a case by case basis, we all need to be concerned about geotrails. Different landowners will feel differently about them. During talk with the State Parks on NJ, Geotrails were a big concern, citing everything from they look bad, are unsafe and cause a liability, on the other hand Delaware wants cache more than 100 ft form the trails as to not create a geo-trail to the cache. Go figure. I remember some time ago someone posted that the Kokopelli trail was visible on aerial images. Recently, this example was pointed out to me. GC30
  24. Hi im only 10yrs old and could really do with some help. I have started geocaching and have got my papa to take me. I would like to hide my own caches but neither me or my papa can work out how to get exact co-ordinates on his iphone. he has an iphone 6s+ if that matters. If there is away or an app, could you explain it to me without any computer talk as i'm only learning about computers at the moment. If not could you recomend a cheap gps unit i could maybe get him to buy me. THANK YOU.
  25. Never thought I looked as a threat to others, but have had way too many issues in quite a few small parks (forget playgrounds...) . I can see it if some idjut putting a cache in a small playground, and issues with " a woman there with two small children", but I've had them move to the other side on trails as well. The folks who say "talk to " or "explain to them" ... well, reality says 911 (and 5-O) is now a couple seconds away... - And in case someone thinks I may look like Quasimodo, I've asked other males, and they have the same problems as well. I just feel that some have become way too fragile at life in general lately, or whipped up in some odd non-existent state of alarm.
×
×
  • Create New...