Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for '수원출장마사지,서천샵수위[Talk:za32]한국 최고의 여행 마사지'.

  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Geocaching HQ communications
    • Announcements
    • Release Notes
  • General geocaching discussions
    • Getting started
    • How do I...?
    • Geocaching topics
    • Geocache types and additional GPS-based gameplay
  • Adventure Lab® Discussions
    • Play Adventure Lab®
    • Create an Adventure Lab®
  • 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

  1. We have to do that frequently here for certain CO's caches. One of our locals who is great at being VERY persistent for an FTF has provided us coordinates in his logs as much as 100' from GZ (yes, GZ is where something blows up, not where it's aimed), and for that, we are always very appreciative. That said, it would nice for our FTF hounds if they weren't searching half a planet for certain CO's caches all the time. Until someone does post alternates, everyone is being treated to the un-fun. Somewhere over in the "irks" thread, I know we've had people talk about COs who don't take a hint from the logs and recheck and update coordinates when they see this sort of thing. I was surprised when GCHQ removed the tick box and input field to readily note alternate coordinates, the location in the log entry was always up top and predictable that way -- but most of us are still pretty diligent about noting them somewhere in our log entries if they're far enough out, or the site requires it to avoid needle/haystack situations.
  2. If a previous finder looked with a new cacher and couldn't find your cache, I'd take notice and go look. I would also ask them not to log an NA on a cache. IMO in general a NM log should precede a NA log, and some time should be gives between the NM and the NA. If the CO doesn't address the NM after either some time or some DNFs, then an NA is warranted. Obviously there are caveats, like if there was an immediate need to remove the cache (property owner doesn't want it there, etc.). I recently logged an NA on a multicache in which the last unassisted find was four years ago; two years ago there were finds but the finders needed to message the CO for help with a missing stage that subsequently wasn't fixed. A year ago a NM was posted for a missing stage 1, but the CO didn't respond nor has the CO logged into the site in years. So I logged an NA. After some time, a reviewer posted a Temporary Disable, and after more time with no response, archived the cache. As far as Cache Health Scores, I don't know why forumites here worry about it so much. I've never heard it discussed anywhere but here, not on social media nor events or between geo-talk with other geocachers. If (gasp!) I got a CHS notification, I'd just address it. No big deal. I recently had a DNF on a cache that I wouldn't expect to be muggled, but guess what, it was! So I replaced it and logged an OM log.
  3. Are you referring to the "frisbee rule", where people assume that if other hobbies are allowed, this hobby "must be" allowed too ? We took months at meetings until a township would talk to us about this hobby (asking for permission...), and were very restricted on what they'd allow. Within weeks people who never bothered to ask placed caches there too. Some in sensitive areas we were told to stay away from. - We knew they never bothered because the park told us to take our carp and leave, and they don't allow caching there now. When we ask for permission, we know who we talked to, and provide that info. Sometimes we write it on the cache page too. Some areas here have an open, "other use" policy, and the Reviewers are aware of some of them. PA Game Lands is one. - The other 2/3rds and another cacher actual made sure that this hobby was included in "other uses" in one area. It wasn't clear before... IIRC, providing a name & phone number happens when enough people have tried to skirt the "ask for permission" thing, embarrassing a Reviewer or two. One locally has to do that now, after getting caught with a cache clearly on an area that needed a permit, but the coordinates were on the other side of a tiny brook, in an "other use" property.
  4. 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
  5. 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.
  6. Hello Very new to all this but I'm completely hooked already! I've hidden a cache near my house. Today, when I was sweeping the drive, a treasure hunter came for the cache. When she'd logged the stash she came over to talk to me about the gadget I was using to get the weeds out of my drive. Should I have mentioned that it was my cache??? I wanted to but didn't know what the etiquette was.
  7. 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.
  8. I don't think there's a need to skip over the identity of the person/category leader in question here. He's not an ogre, nor a mean and vindictive or vengeful person, just cantankerous, as many of us are becoming. For some reason he's just unwilling to come and say "Hi". I feel no antipathy toward him and I suspect that most people here feel likewise. They'd rather just have the opportunity to understand his point of view. I believe he's here, listening and watching right now. What say Possum Man? Could you come and talk to these people? Keith Addendum: OOPS!! I have been apprised that the Possum Man may not "come and talk to these people". Displaying my ignorance here. My apologies to all, including the Possum Man. OH CRAP - I've done it again. How do I get rid of the stuff below?!?!
  9. Girl Talk Going It Alone —Can You Solo Safely? by By Tamia Nelson Good article as a reminder for women.
  10. 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'
  11. 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.
  12. My assumption was that reviewers might only do this when they happen to know the exact location, e.g. probably not all that often. I don't really know how much responsibility any individual reviewer has to enforce any particular rule, so I perhaps wouldn't go there. Well no, I was assuming the multi was blocking large area, as that was the premise. (somewhere between a single waypoint and an entire town) Addressed in my premise: "unobtainable to most cachers for a reason that isn't related to the location (e.g. a run-of-the-mill T5 tree climb near a waterfall) ". There's also been talk of "dumbing down" things, which I haven't perhaps properly addressed after that premise, but I did mean unobtainable in a fairly literal sense here. The argument wasn't for popularity at all costs, and that wouldn't be an argument I could ever see myself supporting. Take your example puzzle cache, almost anyone can go look some letters in a sign if they choose to; it's just that some don't want to. But the skill and gear for T5 climbing or scuba diving, or the intelligence/domain-specific knowledge required for certain types of puzzle present a barrier that can't be overcome by simple choice. In fact there's probably a very finite set of people in any area that can ever do those caches. The few hour hikes and boat caches that don't require an actual seaworthy boat and skill fall somewhere in the grey area in my mind. I'm still healthy enough to do that kind of thing fairly effortlessly, and I kinda like doing them, so I might easily come to think that anyone could. But that might be biased. It will but the reviewer wouldn't normally even know what the container is. So what was the scenario you imagined that this would come up in? I imagined a perhaps inexperienced CO asking the reviewer, typically a more experienced cacher, if their container of choice was fine, and getting an answer like "that container type has the following known issues: [...] so it might be a good idea to consider something else if those issues apply to your hiding place." I'm getting the idea that you think reviewers shouldn't be able to talk about this kind of thing at all, so I thought it relevant to point out that the example you chose is something reviewers were arguably meant to enforce at one point. E.g. that the "allowed topics" can change. Of course now that it's been agreed that PTs are ok, individual reviewers have to stick to that. If that's trivially possible, then I guess the location isn't completely blocked. I guess I'm assuming either the reviewer would notice that and not ask, or the CO would notice that and point it out in their response to the reviewer and that would be the end of it. I own a multi, the last time I found a multi was today. But my premise to this was "Ignoring remote locations for a while, is there any merit to this type of targeting of unpopular caches in otherwise busy caching areas?" And I said I have not decided what my own opinion on this is, but acknowledged that I'd play the devil's advocate if need be. So if you'd like to discuss this further, could you perhaps do it without making it be about me personally? I was taking "leaving almost no space for anyone else" to entail that there in fact is someone else. From this response, and your many others, I understand this generally doesn't seem to be the case in your area. So if these were the rules and I were a reviewer in your area, I probably wouldn't think they apply. (As a side note, that kind of location would have been great use of one of the new virtual caches.)
  13. 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.
  14. 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?
  15. Here is the message I received, I'm not available, so I thought I put it out there. Please reply if you contact Michelle, so she doesn't get hammered. ______________________________ Does your brother know of an avid geocacher that would like to give a brief 10 minute talk about geocaching and travel bugs…possibly including a few personal stories? If so, do you mind passing their info to me and I’ll forward to Doug, please? The time commitment would be on 4/12 from 4pm for 10 minutes and they could stay until 6pm when the event is over or only stay for 10-15 minutes. Thanks so much!! J Michelle Michelle Watson College of Technology and Innovation 6049 S. Backus Mall, Sutton Rm 301L Mesa, AZ 85212 (480) 727-1881 phone
  16. In the last few months I haven't been keeping up on the latest changes. I see that now deleting a bug log does result in sending the logger an email. What else am I missing? What else do the TB forum support people want to talk about? (without having it pinned)
  17. I have been looking into a lightweight shealter for sometime now. I have first of all been trying to decide between using a hammock or staying with a tent. I have been reading a lot on a hammock forum and those people think people who sleep on the ground are crazy due to increased comfort and decreased weight of a hammock. I was not completly sold on the hammock idea as my main shealter so I bought and ENO doublnest with a stand to put in my back room to play with. Well it has only been a few days and I am having fun with the hammock and still trying to find the sweet spot. Only time will tell but I'm only 40/60 about hammock/tent. Part of it is living in AZ some of the camping I do there is not a tree in sight. Just wondering for those of you who use tents why not make the switch to hammocks?
  18. Thanks to the hard work of VE7WCC and VE7ROX you now can check in to the geocaching talk net through Echolink and participate in the net not just monitor. So come one and all to check in Thurday evening 6:30 PST to join in the fun. You can come in on Ref 9000 as always or through Echolink #243326. Andy and I tested it to night and it works great! Hope to see all those that don't have Ref access join us. 73, Dave KCØUYK
  19. 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.
  20. marsik123

    Swedish talk

    Hej! I am swedish and would like to know more words and phrases!
  21. 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.
  22. We've all had good times caching. A memorable day, a record setting PT run, or finding the perfect spot for a perfect cache by accident. What about the other side of the coin? Lets share our failure days/puzzles/hides.... whatever. I'm really hoping this thread doesn't turn into any sort of negative attack thread, please lets just keep it to our own (or our groups) failure days, and lets keep it fun. Over the last several days, I've been planning a trip for today. Trying to figure out where to go, find somebody to go with me, figure out which caches, etc... I decided on Bodega Bay, CA. 15-20 caches planned, two of which are some of the oldest in California. My son and I were going to spend a special day at the ocean, caching, and just relaxing. That was before I was up all night with stuff flying out of both ends of me like I was Linda Blair. Very, very uncool. Your turn....
  23. 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.
  24. So I'm getting ready to hide a few new caches and decided to use a .30 cal ammo can and a decon container for two of them. There is a small military surplus dealer in town so I stopped by to pick some up. I hadn't been there for three years but the last time I was there .30 cal ammo cans were $6.99 and decon containers were about three or four bucks. So I went in and asked for a decon container and they guy asked me weather I wanted the regular one or the geocache version. I ask what the difference is and he says the geocache version just has a note pad and a pencil in it. I ask about price and he says $10 for a regular and $30 for a geocache!!! I think my jaw hit the counter top. I didn't even bother to ask about ammo can prices but I did notice a couple of .30 cal cans sitting on the floor with price tags of $24.99! Don't think I'll be going back there again.
×
×
  • Create New...