Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for '부산출장마사지,해운대동해출장만남【Talk:ZA32】'.

  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • 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

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Location

Found 27797 results

  1. Perhaps I am the only one but I do not like this idea at all. I remember that for a long time lab caches were connected to mega events, too, and with any big event there were several temporary lab caches waiting for the event participants. [I haven't done any of these as I don't like mega events too much. I prefer the smaller ones where you can talk to anybody of the visitors.] Shouldn't the idea of visiting a mega event be to visit the event, take part in the given attractions, workshops, .... and to have fun at the event? Whenever there are temporary caches just listed for this event the main idea shifts to collecting points, making everything just a statistics thing (especially with such rare icons as webcam caches)!? That is not my idea of events. I have to admit that I do not like the idea of any temporary caches at all. Caches should be listed for a longer time in any case. If you want to connect these what about a smaller version: Groundspeak may allow mega (or giga only?!) event owners to put out one (1) webcam cache. Not a temporary but a permanent one. That way the number of webcam caches would slowly (!) encrease again. The event owners may publish those up to one month after the event so it is more like a thank you for hosting a big event than a statistic thing for the event itself. Jochen
  2. I wouldn't consider travelling anywhere at present, unless it was for an important reason, such as medical. Europe is having a surge in Covid. Fine to talk about future trips in years to come, but to talk about a trip this year appears to be living in an alternative universe, where there is no Covid. As for myself, I don't know when I will be able to travel overseas next (our borders are closed); maybe not even next year, unless the few remaining Covid caches in Australia (I think about 15 new cases today) can be eradicated and we can make a bubble with NZ and perhaps some Pacific Islands. Even some state borders are closed to cross border visits. My last new country was PNG in February.
  3. Might not be hiking, but boating. I'd like to rent a small boat with 5ph motor to access a few T5 caches on small islands just off the coast, or in bays on the coast that are only accessible by boat. Renting the boat is not a problem. My big worry is: is this possible alone or do I need a cache buddy? I'm not quite sure how to make sure the boat doesn't leave without me. The water right at the coast will be too shallow for using an anchor I guess. And there are no piers. So how do people do this? This is one of the caches I'd love to do: https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC3NFR8_rabbit-island Some images suggest that it's possible to tie the boat to something on shore (out of wind and protected of course). Please talk me through this. Also, what kind of knot would I need? The boat is an Adria 500, similar to the small motor boat on the second image page. I already watched a few videos on how to start a boat with outboarder, gears (if it has any at all) and how to moor in a harbour. The departure harbour is not busy at all, thus this will be easy enough I guess. Anything else I need to know?
  4. I'd examine the logs for systemic mis-spellings, peanut butter and consistent use of 'baby-talk'. If no real evidence exists that the baby is the one doing the typing, then it's probably OK. On the other hand, I once had a GF who talked like a two-year-old all the time, so maybe it's not indicative of anything.
  5. Best wishes with your podcast! That sounds like fun. Earlier this year I tried my hand at livestream interviews, not as a podcast, but as part of my geocaching YouTube channel "Geo Elmo Geocaching". Covid was keeping us indoors and I couldn't do any filming for my regular short films; I had never done anything like that before. It was a lot of fun but a lot of work, I interviewed two lackeys, a geocoin designer, and the geocacher with the highest number of finds. I really enjoyed talking to each of them. After my last interview I decided to get back to doing short films instead; that's what I really love doing. That's cool that you got Moun10Bike to be on your show, he would be fun to talk to.
  6. Hi all, A couple of geocaching video creators from New Zealand recently shared an interesting talk about the events leading up to Selective Availability being disabled. I thought it was really interesting and wanted to share it here. From the video description: "This Cache Walk is a talk by Jason Kim from the National Coordination Office for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation and Timing, Washington, D.C. He talks about turning off the Selected Availability (SA) feature in 2000 which increased the GPS accuracy to the public allowing the game of geocaching to begin." I hope you enjoy this.
  7. I realize that this post is several years old, but: From the site of the Mass rock in Cork From the site of the Mass rock in Armagh 'If the stones could talk'
  8. Why would they need to hide geocaches to battleship the finals? They could just use the saturation checker without actually submitting any caches for review. This is not the first time this topic has come up. Here is one of Keystone's replies to one of the earlier threads: So, suppose I tell you that your proposed location is 110m northwest of the final coordinates for "Cacher Conundrum," a five-star puzzle cache that only four people have ever solved and logged in the past three years. Armed with that intelligence, you track down the container and sign the log at the same time when you move your cache to a spot that's 162m away. What do I get for being helpful? A flaming email from the CO of "Cacher Conundrum," who also posts to three Facebook groups, and files a complaint with Geocaching HQ that I gave away secret information and ruined the puzzle cache. Having had that happen to us enough times, reviewers nowadays are constrained to be less forthcoming with details. Depending on your reviewer, you may get a hint, like "you are less than 161m from "Cacher Conundrum," GCABCDE, or you may get a hint that you should strongly consider moving to the southeast, or you may not get any guidance at all. So, that's how come. In a world where people hack lab caches and share the final coordinates of puzzle caches in Facebook groups, the inevitable outcome of such a feature would be to spoil every puzzle cache, multicache and Wherigo cache, plus a fair percentage of letterbox hybrid caches. There are people who like placing and finding these cache types. Geocaching.com has chosen not to alienate them by ruining the ability to keep the actual locations a secret. "But all I need is a distance and direction," you might say. So, the cheater simply enters enough coordinates into the planner tool to permit them to hone in on the actual location through triangulation. Think that can't happen? Talk to the travel bug stalkers who watch for drops of trackables in unpublished caches so they can figure out the locations and log a pre-publication "FTF." Talk to the group of cachers who hid traditionals in every conceivable spot within two miles of a 5-star puzzle, knowing they'd eventually "battleship" their way to a hit, and then they could do a scorched earth hunt within that area. I foiled them by publishing their cache even though it was 200 feet away from the puzzle final. Reviewers are smart humans*, you see, and that is better than an automated system. *Many reviewers are dogs.
  9. A true D1 cache should be fairly rare, as a true T1 is. It should most be limited to large, impossible to miss hides like five-gallon buckets, an ammo can uncovered on the back side of a prominent tree, or really obvious Virtuals (take a photo of yourself with the lighthouse). I think COs tend to underrate Difficulty. I think that using the number of DNFs as a hurdle for D-rating would help bring some clarity to an otherwise vague rating system. I emphasis hurdle, as in a minimum bar to clear, but not the only factor. T-rating is actually remarkably clear in most instances, with specified ratings for distance, trail surface, climbing, and wading. Given that we can accept... A. a tree climbing cache in a paved parking lot is T4ish B. a handicap-accessible cache on a level, paved trail but 5 miles from the nearest trailhead is not T1 ...then why can we not accept that D1 getting DNFs is problematic? That's the point. To make a vague, inconsistent system closer to being black and white, even if will never get all the way there. To bring order to chaos. The log types are few and finite so they need to be used somewhat consistently. The inconsistency of D/T ratings and Find vs DNF is a problem to be solved. The way you talk we might as well dispense with Finds and DNFs entirely, and instead everyone should use Notes.
  10. If you don't need the vicar in the zone after the player talks to him, you could move the vicar to the next zone as the first command when you talk to him. If you still need him around in the current zone, you should be able to disable the command, at which point the player app is supposed to be smart enough to recognize there isn't an object in that zone anymore that has that command. If that's not the case--it really depends on how the player app handles things--disabling the command and then toggling the zone's enabled state should do the trick. So: - On Talk() - - Disable Talk command - - Set zone.Enabled = false - - Set zone.Enabled = true - - Do things for Talk
  11. During the review process, we look at two things when a fee is involved. First, is it a commercial fee or not? Second, is it a reasonable fee? For the first part, it can't be a for-profit entity - if it is, Groundspeak would have to allow it. But national/state/county/municipal park fees are allowed, and so are non-profit entities such as the Nature Conservancy, botanic gardens, and museums. For the second part, reviewers have discretion as to what might be a "reasonable" fee in their area. Since you're in Florida, unless you're planning or discussing a cache outside of your normal commute, I'm your local geoaware. I'm happy to discuss specifics if we're talking about an existing or potential earthcache in the SE USA. Or we can talk it here, up to you.
  12. Spitballing, I wonder how hard it would be to rig up some type of 3D-printed "funky" case, the guts of an old smartphone for brains and something like the LiPo battery out of an RC car for power? Though the next person to pick it up wouldn't be too happy about the long charge time. The phone would only need to be smart enough to run the logging software, so older hardware running some flavour of Linux could do it. I wonder how hard it would be to make it "talk" to the person that picks it up, make a bit interactive? Maybe have a single, big button in the middle and when someone pushes that, it "wakes up" until it detects no motion, no signal, or some other variables to denote "stop paying attention and go back to sleep".. I don't think I have the smarts to do something of this caliber, but would be kind of cool to do. I wonder if it would have better results than poor hitchBOT did, travelling in geocaching circles rather than the general public?
  13. Please can you advise how to shut off the talk to command for each zone. I am doing a Church Wherigo and I want the vicar to pop up at each question point. As such he is in zone 1, has a talk to command, asks a question, gives commands to move on or retry if answer wrong or right. I am stuck at the next bit, as in how do I turn off the talk to, or attribute it to one zone only so I can do a further talk to at zone 2...
  14. When I first started in 2010, throwdowns were fairly normal in my area. Yes, it was mainly experienced cachers, but that's more because they carried supplies, not because they got huge numbers from dropping replacement caches. Over the next few years, opinion turned against throwdowns, so now it's pretty rare for a replacement to be placed without getting in touch with the CO. In short, I think this is a cultural thing that varies from place to place and over time. I suggest you talk it over with whoever you think dropped the throwdown. Maybe you can change their minds about whether they're really being as helpful as they think they are.
  15. OK. I'll confess to keeping all of my DNFs in a separate GSAK (yes, Windows) database. There, it is easy to see which ones are already found afterward (they show up in yellow) so that they can be quickly found and deleted in two simple steps, or are archived (they show up red with black line through them) so that those can be deleted as well. What remains are the ones that I still need to go out and find. For Windows users... As you may have noticed, GSAK comes up here all the time as a solution to particular problems. It is also said that there is a steep learning curve for GSAK. That kind of comment is both untrue and true. Everything depends upon just how extensively you want to delve into the possibilities. You will probably never use all of the blades on this Swiss Army Knife. Most of the things we talk about here, the OP's request being an example, can be learned in about 10 minutes. Creating and loading a GSAK database with caches is pretty trivial. Learning the searching/filtering options most used is as well. OTOH, if you can do your own programming, you can make it dance and sing and recite poetry if you like. I have built a macro that downloads all of the caches in the area from gc.com, compares my unfounds to my caching friend's, adds in my solved puzzles, excludes 'problem' caches, and builds unique POI files for my TomTom of everything. Yes, it can take some time to prepare something like that, but it's not something anyone need learn how to do for the kind of basic problem the OP is trying to solve here. There are also all kinds of macros already written by other users (that are shared on the GSAK site) to perform some common (and quite uncommon) tasks that only need to be downloaded and run by the new user to benefit from other users' prior experience. I would encourage anyone with a Windows box consider this tool as a potential friend for geocaching. It's being offered for free by the author at this point, and contains no advertising, so no one is going to profit from my recommendation except the new user.
  16. Well, we've got that (the mention) now! Honestly, if you'd talk with Clyde, you'd have a better picture of how ugly the situation actually is. And if you didn't pick up on it here or elsewhere, understand that Clyde's ability to contribute to the current project is pretty limited. Fortunately, he's got a couple of people helping. I've also spent some time porting code for a living (I used to do printer firmware development, and all emulations had to be ported to different platforms), and it's only after having a better understanding of how GSAK was built that I suggest that moving it to another platform would be a train wreck for anyone trying to tackle it.
  17. For anyone interested there have been a couple podcasts this week about Wherigo. The first one is put out by Groundspeak and gives a little information about the development of Wherigo. Although the part about Wherigo is pretty short, it still gives some interesting history about the team who created Wherigo. https://www.geocaching.com/blog/podcast/episode-31-jen-smith/ The second video is a tutorial/template for creating a simple Wherigo with URWIGO. Enjoy!
  18. What else do you expect when you talk about a new PT, be it made of ALs or real caches? The numbers crowd falls all over itself from excitement. Quite a while ago, in a German FB group someone mentioned there is a new Mega-PT in southern France - more than 5000 caches (which is absolutely huge for Europe). A lot of people liked that, and many were like "We MUST do this ASAP!!!!!". So, of course you get "wows and yays" for an AL-PT(*). I'm still not convinced that it's a good idea, though . (*) I just noticed that "ALPT" are the first four letters of the German word "Alptraum", an alternate spelling (less common but valid) of "Albtraum", which means "nightmare" !
  19. We did talk a while but I didn't ask to be 'joined FTF" and he didn't. The reason? It's not important. When meeting other cachers we always have talks about each other's caching experiences and more importantly about nice caches. When meeting cachers along a series though we tend to wait a while so others can enjoy finding the containers themselves or if we are on our bikes we try to get ahead far enough. Nope. But I see a "team" as people who know each other and make arrangements beforehand, not people who accidentally meet at a cache and "team up" to be FTF. Besides, did I miss a memo? Is there something to be won? (besides FTF )
  20. Again, just because it works that way in your neck of the woods does NOT mean that it works that way everywhere. Just as terrain ratings differ based on the general topographical features one area has that others do not, there are various ways that FTFs are determined. You believe it's a black and white, clearcut determination, whereby only one person is entitled to the FTF. There are many of us here who have pointed out that while this is certainly a possibility (and one that is valid), it's not the ONLY way to determine who may or may not lay claim to the FTF and that a group of cachers, regardless of whether or not they know each other, can discuss it and come to some arrangement that each cacher can abide by. Sometimes that may mean a singular FTF and other times it may mean a shared FTF. We're not asking you to change your determination of who may claim a FTF. We're only pointing out that cachers in other areas have come up with some other solution that appears to work and co-exist within each others' manner of playing. If it happens not to work, then it reverts to the manner in which you play, which is perfectly fine as well. The fact that it didn't even come up seems a bit odd to me as, at least in my area, cachers tend to be talkative when running into other cachers, even if we don't know each other, be it at events or at a cache. We realize we're part of a community and socialize as such, which typically means that a P&G can turn into a 5-10 minute meet and greet. It doesn't always happen that way but more often than not, it does. Having managed quite a few FTFs, I can only think of one time when another cacher (or group of cachers) didn't talk about the FTF. There used to be 4 of us that were serious FTF seekers during my first couple of years of caching and we'd continuously run into each other at newly published caches or just miss out running into each other. Each time we did actually meet up at a newly published cache, we discussed who was going to claim the FTF if it was found with more than one of us at GZ. The longer this went on, the more it changed to a shared FTF style of play, except when the other cacher requested they be the one to claim the FTF (for whatever reason). I (and hopefully the others who feel as I do) am NOT telling you that you need to change your style of play. What we hope you realize is that your way isn't the only way and that both styles can co-exist. Logically, it may not make any sense to you but for those of us who choose to play this way, we're fine with this determination of whether or not we are willing to share a FTF. Beats? Are you trying to win something here? We're discussing various methods of determining how cachers rectify FTFs and throwing out, in essence, two different variations of how cachers determine who gets to claim the FTF. Your way is certainly a valid way. No one here is really disputing that (at least I don't think so). Since it's not a recognized thing by GS and there are no guidelines that specify exactly how a FTF is awarded (first to put hands on it, first to find it [someone else may have unknowingly touched it without realizing it was the cache], first to sign the log), we are left to our own devices and those of us who feel like a shared FTF is a valid decision are comfortable with that decision, assuming everyone else at the cache is fine with it as well. If not everyone agrees, then we arrive at some consensus that allows a singular FTF and that's usually the one who pulls it from the hiding spot, although I can think of one instance when it was the first person that actually saw it but was unable to retrieve it due to physical limitations.
  21. I'm working on my AL; a tour of wineries near me, in our Valley. At a socially distanced event in a park in June, (the first in months!) talk turned to AL's - turns out another gal was also working on highlighting our Valley - we did have a couple of the same spots on our list! We decided to focus each a bit differently, as I'll do all wineries, and she will focus on fruit, olive oil and some of the other things produced by local farmers - the bounty in our Valley. And we compared our locations so that they are all different. She will have a winery on her list, I will have 5 and will not include the one she is using for her AL. Without the in person event and actually talking with people, Neither of us would have known the other was working the same locations. It was good we could cooperate and make each one unique! I need to get mine done and out there before someone else does one first!
  22. Yeah, I'm tempted to do just that. I'm holding an event as I've held off hosting an evening since sometime in February. Would be nice to talk to other cachers again. I'm sure people will show up, but if not then I likely won't log it as it just feels wrong.
  23. I don't see any problem here considering the finds of the last week. The cacher was in South Africa (vacation I think) and found some caches that were recently found by others and the owners are still active as well. Then (s)he returned and made finds in california which seems possible, too. The number of caches found isn't too big - and if someone wanted to boost the staristics (s)he could do better: find more caches, find more countries, find more of the rare icons (and not so many traditional caches) .... So maybe all the bad logs have been deleted but from that what remails I can't see anything that proves your (bad) claim (so I am not sure if I like what you do here). I think it would be fair to inform the cacher that we are discussing about her/him so that (s)he can give her/his own version of the story. We shouldn't talk behind the back of someone as long as there isn't any evidence..... Jochen
  24. You can talk about that topic here: https://forums.geocaching.com/GC/index.php?/topic/358303-release-notes-website-attribute-search-filters-august-31-2020/&tab=comments#comment-5851476
×
×
  • Create New...