Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for '������������ 1���2���,�����������������������������Talk:za32��������� ��������� ������ ���������'.

  • 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
    • Play Adventure Lab®
    • Create an Adventure Lab®
  • 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. Hi all, I was asked to do a "Nerd Nite" talk- a ~30min talk on a nerdy topic, usually to an audience of 20-30 somethings, at a bar over beers on a Friday night- about geocaching. This isn't for two months, so I have time to prepare! But I was wondering, has anyone given such a talk before for the general public about geocaching, and if so are there any resources for writing one? Obviously, the first part I know has to be a general explanation about how geocaching works, and I have a mess of pictures from my adventures in exotic destinations where I found geocaches (like Tibet and Argentina), so was thinking one or two anecdotes from there. I was also thinking of highlighting one or two local caches that I think are cool, but don't want to pick ones that are too easy to find if you just want to vandalize them... luckily here in Amsterdam we have one or two "by boat" geocaches under bridges, so one of those might be cool to show. But hey, these are just some ideas I'm tossing around, and I'm happy to hear any others folks might have. Thanks all!
  2. Avast! Got me event on the calendar and the port authorities notified to expect a band of hardies to drop anchor on the 19th of September. Anything going elsewhere?
  3. Everyone, Say what you need to say! Its 2:00!!
  4. The definition of "game" in general is oft debated. I don't think there will be any consensus here But I primarily refer to this as a hobby. Occasionally a game. Depends on context I think. If I'm talking about stats, my mind may jump to game. If I'm talking about the fun and adventure, usually hobby. A game doesn't have to be competitive, or necessarily even have win/lose conditions. Some may even call some hobbies games, depending on their motive for 'doing' the hobby (could building and selling crafts be considered a game to some? *shrug*) I don't think the label is as important as how we promote the activity and talk it up.
  5. how many ticks have you gotten this year? I haven't gotten one since I was a child, but I'm thinking it will be the end of that trend soon.
  6. My opinion? Let's talk about extremes. If we (theoretically!) excluded all the categories mentioned above, I don't know if I will ever find a waymark for this category. If we include all of them, we will have a lot of crosspostings, but we will also have a category with a lot of fine art on a grave and won't miss any great pieces of art, just because it also represents his/her hobby/occupation or the deceased is a Dead Poet. So, I guess we need something in between. Maybe we should think about it that way: Is the category to be ex- or included also an art category or not? For example: One of my Out of Place Graves is a wonderful piece of art (in my humble opinion). Not sure, if it will create a "wow" for everyone, but let's just pretend that it does. Would you post that one in "Out of Place Graves" or "Funerary Art"? One is an art category, and the other lists graves that are not on a cemetery (artful or not). IMHO there is no reason for preventing a crossposting in that situation. I would understand, if a grave artwork was posted in two different art categories. F.e. "Funerary Art" and "Relief Art Sculptures". In the bottom of my heart I would even allow crossposting in 2 art categories, but that is most likely just my opinion. What I really would like to clarify: Are we talking about "figurative" art to compensate, what the Figurative Public Sculpture category denies (= animals and humans) or are we also considering f.e. abstract art? I posted a photo of the grave of Hedy Lamarr in this thread on July 28, 2017, but received no feedback. PS: Don't worry, I won't shoot you. I don't even own a gun.
  7. OK, so I am working up preliminary areas where Funerary Art could be found. Up front I will say I am not religious, so I have not been raised in any religious tradition (calm down, I am not going to talk about religion). Therefore, I am not familiar at what types of tombs/stones/art on final resting places would be found in places of worship. Most of the locations I am finding are related to Christian churches and burial traditions. If anyone can help with other religions/burial traditions, I would be quite grateful. Remember, the reason this category is getting up and rolling is that Figurative does not accept Funerary Sculptures. We are not trying to create a redundant category and there are many categories that deal with markers for the deceased. The thrust of the category is funerary art, not final resting places or type of monument for the deceased. This category recognizes that most of the sculptures would be found in a cemetery. However, there are other burial locations that may include sculptures that are funerary in nature, such as churches, cathedrals (bigger church), mausoleums and some burial locations that were owned by the deceased (family burial locations). Are there other locations common in other faiths/burial traditions I am missing? (Help please.) Any comments/thoughts on what should/shouldn't be accepted and why. Here are some locations where Funerary Art could be found. Should the category accept/decline from these various locations and styles of burial for the deceased: Sculpture/Artwork found on a headstone, columbarium, crypt, tombstone, mausoleum, ledger grave marker, cenotaph, tomb, effigies, church monument, cadaver monument, .... ? I know some of these have their own categories. Any of these that are related to s specific burial of an individual would not be accepted in Figurative. Figurative only accepts monuments that are, in essence, honoring all the deceased. Figurative does not accept pieces of a specific ('known") individual--that goes in Statues of Historic/Religious Figures. Just looking for comments/thoughts on what should/shouldn't be accepted and why. Existing Waymark Categories (I probably missed some) that need to be considered to be included/excluded: Death Mask Gravestones Broken Column Headstones Occupational/Hobby Grave Stones Woodmen of the World Grave Markers/Monuments Headstones of Centenarians **Veteran Memorials (Many categories - Specific wars and general categories) Homemade Tombstones Graves Mentioning a Cause of Death Out of Place Graves Statues of Historic Figures Statues of Religious Figures Dead Poets Society Zinc Headstones Mausoleum Relief Art (I am contacting Relief Art to verify if they accept/reject relief funerary art) Figurative Public Sculpture Sphinx Sculptures Equestrian Statues Epic Beings Lions, Bears, ... Pet Cemeteries (**There are many categories that honor the resting places of Veterans. For my convenience, I am grouping them into this overall term.) I am not against cross-posting and NOT suggesting all the above should be excluded. Remember the goal of this category is to highlight the art of the memorial - not the final resting place of the deceased. Members are concerned about the premise of the "Wow" factor as to what the category is wishing for. There is concern that the criteria may be too subjective (though there are many categories with 'wow' factor, this is not new). The reason for that idea of "Wow" is that, for instance, there are many headstones with little lambs (for the tragic loss of a child), or fingers pointing upwards, etc. Would a size criteria help (ex., roughly over 3 ft/1m square)? The piece must not be mass produced-it need to be a unique piece. How would members like to see this phrased/defined? Please don't get bogged down in format for title, etc. Right now, we need to best define what the category is trying to highlight and thus clearly define the types of sculptures/art the category is looking for. And I know there are always exceptions when a Waymarker finds something so magnificent we did not anticipate that. Again, I am just thinking aloud and looking for input. Please don't shoot the writer [grin]. Take care, Outspoken1 (Sandy)
  8. The one playground I went to was in a state park, and no one around. It turned out to be a magnetic altoids tin under the front of the slide. Moms with jogging kid-carriers are the worst, and I even hear the angsty talk on phones on rails to trails, and small local parks by moms... Sheesh... - I could imagine what it'd be like if santa in camo was found on his back under the slide by one...
  9. The only real way is enforcing the minimal rules which can be verified (typically that's HQ and the TOU for the website), and finding some way promote values and ethics where not verifiable. Promote positivity in the game, community, aspects that people enjoy the most which negatively affect people the least. Talk down practices that make things worse off for people, or which promote competitive behaviour (where not everyone involved has opted in), and promote benefits of it in an effort to help people have overall great experiences, and encourage people to realize it's an individualistic hobby and not take offense when people do things differently or enjoy different aspects of it... It's really not an easy system to make "work for everybody" - and it never will. All we can do is help to try to make it a great hobby for as many people as possible.
  10. The obvious answer is that it's up to the CO of the challenge cache. But unless they're pretty clear about it -- and I've never seen that -- I'd assume it's just find logs. I wouldn't expect a problem, but, worst case, I'd be ready to try to talk the CO into accepting my finds if he initially rejects them. (I don't think I've actually run into enough caches in this state to cause me a problem in achieving a clear success at the challenge. What keeps happening to me is that I far exceed the requirement by the time I get around to signing the challenge cache log even when there's an initial period where I have to work towards that goal. Once I started looking for unfound caches, I couldn't stop myself.) My reaction to your question is that this is a good reason not to call them "lonely" precisely because it opens up this ambiguity: a CO's or previous finder's visit means they're not lonely, right? "Unfound" is more accurate, but not as cute. I think "unloved" works here: someone that can't find a friend might be called "unloved" even though their parents love them. The first few challenges I saw of this type used the terms "recovered" and "neglected", but those have fallen out of favor. I always liked those terms better, but I don't think they're any better at making it obvious CO visits don't count. Indeed, "neglected" kinda implies even more strongly than "lonely" that the CO hasn't visited.
  11. I know what you mean, but happily in this case I don't have to question the veracity of the claim because the solution remains the same: the person that's so sure this is happening can go talk to the people. explaining how silly they look to people that recognize the obvious subterfuge. If the person making the claim is really blowing smoke about how much evidence there is, then they can decide for themselves whether to initiate a conversation that might make them look petty for accusing someone of doing something they didn't do. If I was that sure, I'd just say, "FTF@8am. Ignoring the signatures from before the cache was hidden." Oh, wait. They sign the log in the middle? Obviously they don't intend to claim FTF, so I'd just take FTF without commenting on it. If I saw this in my area, I'd assume they were people that were there when the CO hid the cache and are planning on claiming the find after the FTF. I consider that kind of "finding while hiding" a little silly, but it doesn't sound to me as if they're trying to block you from claiming FTF.
  12. That's pitiful, both for the seekers and the CO, but I don't see why it matters to you. Sure, I'd talk to them all to try to figure out why they're wasting their effort that way instead of having fun finding caches, but there's no way to prevent it and every reason to think anything you try to do to prevent it will only have the effect of making it hard on people that are actually geocaching. Worry more about other people that are playing the same game you are and worry less about people playing some stupid game that makes no sense.
  13. My estimate is that if your rule had been in effect for the last few years, I would have at least 10 times fewer caches in my area, and they wouldn't be anywhere near as good as the ones I have now. Why would I think that's better? I'd much rather have my experienced COs who have hidden hundreds of high quality caches than a smattering of caches by people who, by law, don't have the experience from hiding even 10 caches. If the prolific COs really did "shut out" others, then I might at least listen to you, but I'm seen them do no such thing. The high volume COs in my area hide hundreds of caches because they easily find hundreds of places to hide caches, and there are thousands more places after that for anyone else to use. If caches aren't being maintained, then they should be archived. In my area, the caches hidden by the high volume COs are the best maintained. It's much more common with a CO with 10 or fewer caches to neglect their hides. But, in any case, they should be archived because they aren't being maintained, not forbidden in advance because your faulty logic predicts that they won't be maintained at some point in the undefined future. In other words, my experience contradicts every single one of your assertions. So please, please, if you really are experiencing those problems, please look for ways to fix it in your local community. And, in fact, that's the obvious place to start anyway: if someone's dominating your area with crappy caches, talk to them. Work with them to make more areas available for other COs to hide caches. Treat them as the friends they should be, the friends you're playing this game with, the friends hiding so many caches for you to find. You're acting as if they're impersonal powers inflicting this situation on you for their own evil ends that you can't discuss with them. My guess is that they're just filling a vacuum and would welcome anyone volunteering to plant their own caches.
  14. Well, I'm not really seeing that. I admit, it's hard to read the OP's combative responses, but I think he's making valid points about the few examples being raised being less than convincing because of other possible scenarios which would look identical to the seeker without involving any incorrect logs. As I read these examples, they tend to clump in 2 classes. The first is fake finds that are clearly an anomalies, so anyone seeing it would discount it. The other class is fake finds followed by a missing cache, and I don't really don't understand how the person reporting the "impact" determined the fake find was fake. The other example we've seen is a throwdown where the real problem that impacted people was the throwdown, not the fake find. It doesn't help that many of the examples are imagining impacts, including a few that show successful searches that involved no fake logs, but "it could have happened! I claim that's one reason the discussion has slipped over from imaginary impacts to imaginary solutions involving COs deleting logs when the OP wants to talk about whether the incorrect logs are a problem to begin with, not how the problem can be solved. Admittedly, the OP tends to reject examples instead of discussing the degree the fake log really did impact the poster in light of other events we all accept as part of geocaching which could easily lead to exactly the same experience. That makes it hard to follow the discussion, but it's more of a rhetorical failure than a logical fallacy.
  15. This puzzle cache was a 5 difficulty and went unfound for a couple of years. It was eventually found, and has since been archived. I have what I believe are the right coords. Any one know what the GC number was, and anyone know anyone who found it, who I can bounce my coords off of, and talk about how they solved it? I have picture of the puzzle, it was a short story, with the coords buried in it.
  16. It does feel like you redefining what "fake log" you want to talk about: A - fake find when dropping a throwdown? B - fake find after series of DNFs? C - fake find amongst real find logs? D - all of the above?
  17. People drop throwdowns all the time. Can you, just this once, forget about the cache owner and approach this from the standpoint of my OP, which I've repeated endlessly to figurative deaf ears, evidently? If you want to talk about what the cache owner should do (in your opinion) then start your own thread.
  18. "We just unveiled a new catalogue system that allows to you search for all sorts of unique media at our library, as well as all of our partnered libraries across the country!" "Great! How can I use it?" "Sorry, it's for staff only. You'll have to go talk to a librarian at the front desk to perform a search." "What...?!" "You're more than welcome to go flick through the index card cabinet, though!" --- (somewhat true story) This is a ridiculous leap backwards by HQ. Luckily it looks like https://gcutils.de/lab2gpx/ still works?
  19. This. Specifically, ngs.infocenter@... will be the people you need to talk to.
  20. My problem with this is that the situation would be exactly the same if the cache was really there, but you just can't find it. Your argument would make it seem reasonable to say a legitimate find log also wastes your time and money. But this has a simple solution that I'd use for reasons not related to fake logs: if I DNFed a cache that was a significant effort to get to, and then someone else found it, before I spent the time and money to go back, I'd talk to the person that found it. I'd be assuming they really did find it and be asking to gather information about how I could have missed it, but if it turned out to be a fake find, that would surely come out in the conversation.
  21. There is a lot of seemingly well-intended chit-chat here, but 90% of this thread is off topic. Please try to offer something helpful to the OP and not just chastise them. That generation of GPS required a driver provided by Garmin to work. I think it's this guy: https://www8.garmin.com/support/download_details.jsp?id=591 This driver is required for any software, whether Basecamp, EasyGPS, or GPSBabel to work with that hardware on Windows. Please confirm it's installed. The suggestion to try GPSBabel has merit because I think every error condition it (that isn't a crash...of which we have none reported for years) has an error message associated with it. That said, we either get packets or we don't and we can either talk to the driver above or we can't so we can really only recommend kind of hand-wavy things like rotating USB ports, different cables, cleaning the gunk out of the USB connector etc. Good luck
  22. It's because the Wherigo Foundation site is an alternate listing service. It was supposed to demonstrate to Groundspeak what we were intending to do with Wherigo so we could run Wherigo for Groundspeak, free of charge for everyone involved. The other Wherigo player apps and builders are on Groundspeak's ban list because of the same reason: they're an alternate to something else--their PocketPC app and their builder, respectively. Though I worked to get community work officially recognized, those at the top of Groundspeak never communicated any of their verbal support to those enforcing Groundspeak's guidelines. Throughout Wherigo's lifetime, regardless of individual intentions at the company, Groundspeak's apparent attitude has always felt one of apathy and passive hostility towards anyone attempting to make their product more accessible to the community. I coined the term "the Wherigo Foundation is Fight Club". They've always told their reviewers not to allow any mention of the Wherigo Foundation or other non-Groundspeak Wherigo applications in cache listings. It's just that the reviewers aren't consistent with each other that caches in some areas were published and others not. Part of the partnership agreement I was reviewing did state that, if the Wherigo Foundation site were to be discontinued, all cartridge files would be provided to Groundspeak for dispersal to community members. I was planning to do that, anyway, so that was fine. There was one other clause I haven't before talked openly about. Suffice it to say, the way I interpreted it, if I ever walked away from Wherigo and did not transition its running to others, the entire game would come to an end. I did not like that Wherigo would then seem to rely on one person's continued health, existence, and interest. The partnership agreement never panned out because Groundspeak took too long in replying, which further showed their apathy (I'd say nine months, several times, classifies as too long, regardless of how patient you are--while waiting for one such reply, I had a house built and moved into it). An odd quirk to all this is this Wherigo forum. Why can we openly talk about these applications? The answer is a combination of me and Groundspeak's apathy. Back when matejcik and charlenni first presented their applications, the forum rule was that moderators needed to clear through Groundspeak talk of new applications. So, as the moderator, I hid the threads and sought approval. Groundspeak did not reply for a month, so I unhid the thread. When that second application was announced, I hid the thread again and asked Groundspeak. I again didn't hear a reply and unhid the thread. Later, I did get a reply, saying it was fine and that there wasn't anyone at Groundspeak who could speak for authorizing these, so that's why it took so long. I asked, then, for something no other moderator has: the authority to make these decisions on my own. It was granted. Ever since then, so long as something wasn't commercial, I allowed it. Now, mind you, Groundspeak's employees have definitely changed since then, so no one there remembers that this responsibility was delegated, so would likely take it away. Another odd footnote is Wherigo\\kit. I am able to use Groundspeak's API for authentication, which does require approval and a review. More recently, when I had to submit an updated overview of this application, I was asked by someone at Groundspeak if I wanted Kit to appear in the list of official Groundspeak partners. I guffawed, pointing out that Groundspeak's reviewers do not allow caches to be published if they mention Kit, the Wherigo Foundation, or any other application, so listing Kit as an official Groundspeak partner would thoroughly confuse the situation, so Groundspeak should really consider its stance on the matter. This was about two years ago. Finally, something that irritates me. Groundspeak allows cachers to mention GSAK and Project GC in their cache listings. Both are commercial applications--GSAK was up until recently and Project GC pushes a subscription model. Groundspeak also allows mention of other commercial applications in cache listings. But, yet, when it comes to everything the community has done to help Groundspeak with Wherigo--and everything we have has always been free, with the individual developer shouldering 100% of the continued cost--Groundspeak has this as their official position. And, believe me, there are ongoing costs. I average about $200/month for hosting, storage, SSL/TLS license, and domain registrations between Kit, the Wherigo Foundation site, DevOps/TFS, and the staging areas I use when publishing. I could decrease the cost by doing a shared hosting plan, I suppose. I suppose I could have still continued to create things. But there comes a time when one needs a solid support group to provide feedback and motivation. I don't have that. And you'd figure people in my own area would be really supportive of my endeavors, be it Wherigo or having found almost 95K caches. They're not. There's a distinct anti-Wherigo feeling in my area. There have been some that would like it if I quit geocaching altogether. So, no support there. One can continue only so long against the flow and apathy before exhausting oneself. So, later, my job became the beneficiary of some of my free time. I worked uncompensated overtime 300 hours last year and 400 hours this year (and no time off). You'd think they'd be grateful, but instead I get managers telling me they're not asking me to work extra hours and they're apathetic about all the things I'm doing to fix their aging application single-handedly. No encouragement, no support, no appreciation from there. Sigh. So, anyway, that's my view on the matter. There are always other sides to it, though I've tried to be neutral.
  23. I'm sure all geocoincollectors saw this coin before. I like it very much and because there is such a great description of the designer Chris Mackey I think it is worth it, to open a thread. I know for sure that there are the following versions: - LE Antique Copper - LE Antique Silver You can get them in several shops, so just google for the coin Here is the official description: International Talk Like a Pirate Day is celebrated annually on September 19th. It is a day where speaking pirate is not only acceptable, but encouraged. This detailed coin commemorates this special day and will be available for a limited time only. This coin was designed by Christian A. Mackey and measures 2 in. in diameter. What is the meaning behind this design? Glad you asked... The pirate skull side... •The skull with mouth open of course is the pirate talking, but the patch on the right eye is courtesy of "One-eyed Willie" from the Goonies movie. •The symbol on the patch is the crucifix found stamped on dozens of different "doubloon" coins during the reign of the pirate age. •In latin on the left from bottom to top is "Talk Like (a) Pirate" and on the right is 9/19/2013 for this year. •1995 is the infamous year upon which the holiday began after an injury during a raquetball game. •The Spear/Hourglass/Heart symbols were used by a bunch of the most notorious pirates in history and each had various meanings. Most commonly the spear was a symbol of imminent attack, the hourglass was a warning to enemy ships to not try to stall for time, and the heart was a symbol of warning that no quarter would be given and all put to death if surrender was not complete and immediate. •The S.-B. within the speaking pirate skull is a tribute to Summers and Baur who began to promote the idea for a holiday. •The odd raised elipses on the edge of the coin were a common design element in all the coins regardless of origin in that particular era. The Crest side... •Cache on crown - Cache is King •The pillars are the infamous Pillars of Hercules depicted on coinage of the era representing the old world and the new. •Plus Vltra - latin inscription for Further Beyond and denoted new discoveries in a newly discovered hemisphere of the world. •The floating crown was a symbol of oversight of the new colonies from the government back home. •The 8 and R on the pillars indicates 8 Reales and what led to the coins being called "Pieces of Eight" where coins would be commonly cut into 8 equal pieces like a pizza during trades. •Signal and Yelling man are self explanatory •Spreading laurel in the background is symbol of victory and growth in the new world. •The fleur de lis (lilly flower) was a common european symbol of royalty. •The Latin on left - "Explore the World" and "Share the Experience" from the Groundspeak homepage. •The S at the bottom is commonly the City of Origin for the coin and this case would be Seattle. •The Dahlia is the official symbol of Seattle, The City of Flowers. •The shield center crest is the GPS signal lightning bolts (normally the three crosses of the holy trinity on a doubloon).
  24. my old lady has never enjoyed anything I do(well she does enjoy shooting as much as me and her son does). she won't ride the Harley.she hates the hot rod cars I have built in the past. says they make her feel like she left her guts in the road when we take off!!! I tried to explain geocaching to her and got that deer in the head lights look(she doesn't enjoy deer hunting either like I do). I loaded her and my 3 year old daughter up in the car and took off. she was getting into it by the second cache!!!! hey i'm 40. she's 38 I think!!!! I don't keep up with years on her. i'd trade her in if I did. well me and campdogg took her 10 year old boy and my daughter with us the other day. each of them loved it. I think I got chiggers, but still loved it!!!! this is something that friends can do or a family. it is honest clean fun. i'm a locomotive engineer for the railroad and stay in Chattanooga more than I do my own home. I just picked up two gps units that have geocaching made into them. one for home and one for Chattanooga!!! that's right i'll be doing it all over the place!!! i'm planning on getting some travel bugs because there are a few places I want to send them if people will honestly help out!!! I live in the east and want to send some out west. sterg's, golden gate bridge, mount rushmore, you get the ideal. im enjoying this with family and friends. I live in Kentucky, but I work with guys from Chattanooga, Georgia, and Alabama that are geocachiers!!! we are going to start finding these things in a 4 state area!!! got to love this!!
  25. There's probably a good reason why not, but I would like it to look like this: There's been some talk in these forums about issues with the notification emails. Perhaps having it look like this would help:
×
×
  • Create New...