Jump to content

Bookmark lists, attributes, PQs, and pain...


ClayJar
Followers 4

Recommended Posts

Okay, let's see here... is this thing on?... Anyway...

 

Due to the rampant abuse of the "Requires Scuba Gear" attribute, I maintain a public bookmark list which alerts my fellow scubacachers when they are viewing a cache which appears to be among the abusers. Not all the abuse is intentional, of course, and the better hiders have been quite willing to remove the attribute from their non-scuba caches. In order to be sure I do not have a cache tagged as abusing the attribute after the hider has removed it (or relocated the cache to an appropriate wet location :(), I have to look at each and every cache on the bookmark list every update (which I attempt to do weekly).

 

There ought to be an easier way!

 

A bookmark list PQ doesn't include any reference to attributes, so I can't use that to tell which ones to remove. Obviously, a "normal" PQ with the "Requires Scuba Gear" attribute selected won't tell me which caches are on the abuse list. There's also no way to add attribute-based filters onto a bookmark list PQ. (If there were, I could just have a PQ for "caches on the bookmark list, excluding those with the attribute", which would tell me directly which caches have been most graciously corrected by their hiders.)

 

Is there any PQ-fu that I don't know that could help me? (Or is there any plan in the works to add references to the attributes to the GPX files? Surely, attributes have been around long enough to figure that out, eh?) I really didn't want to have to write an entire system and consume even more PQs just to handle this, but is that what I'm going to have to do?

 

 

(Incidentally, if anyone wonders why I say "rampant abuse", given that over 71% of the caches listed as "Requires Scuba Gear" don't even get your feet wet, it should be obvious. :( )

Link to comment

I just PQed for caches with the scuba attribute within 100 miles of my home coords. I was hoping that there was a GSAK filter I could use - but alas, no go.

 

I see only one of the 18 that actually requires a snorkel or scuba gear, quite a number in areas where there's good diving, but accessing the cache doesn't require it. And maybe half where the scuba attribute is totally bogus. Annoying. We get a lot of snowmobile attribute in Florida, very helpful.

Link to comment

Ah, yes, I remember this list.

 

I call it the "Scarlet Letter" list. Interesting how only 27 (57%) out of 47 users found the list useful.

 

Thanks for appointing yourself "Attribute Cop" and marring so many webpages with the appearance of your "Bookmark List" text. Oh, and thanks for also ruining a number of cache puzzles and themes (like "liar" themes). Way to go.

 

MrW.

Link to comment

A bookmark list PQ doesn't include any reference to attributes

 

Even "normal" PQs lack any reference to attributes. That has bitten me several times out on geocaching trips. It should be rather easy to add a <Groundspeak:attributes>1,17,42</Groundspeak:attributes> tag to the GPXes.

Link to comment

In order to be sure I do not have a cache tagged as abusing the attribute after the hider has removed it (or relocated the cache to an appropriate wet location :(), I have to look at each and every cache on the bookmark list every update (which I attempt to do weekly).

 

A bookmark list PQ doesn't include any reference to attributes, so I can't use that to tell which ones to remove.

 

If I understand your problem, you need to be able to compare two different pocket queries: one with the scuba attribute set (S) and one from the bookmark PQ (:( and find anything in the B PQ that is not in the S pocket query.

 

GeoQO can do this for you if you wish. Catch me on IRC if you want to try it.

 

(in short, to list all caches in B that are not in S:

 geoqo -i B.gpx S.gpx
 geoqo -s 'set:import:S' -m setattr:scuba=1 --save
 geoqo -s 'set:import:B&&attr:scuba=-' -l

... GeoQO needs a way to do it without setting an attribute and only using SET filters, but it isn't possible at the moment)

Link to comment

Ah, yes, I remember this list.

 

I call it the "Scarlet Letter" list. Interesting how only 27 (57%) out of 47 users found the list useful.

 

Thanks for appointing yourself "Attribute Cop" and marring so many webpages with the appearance of your "Bookmark List" text. Oh, and thanks for also ruining a number of cache puzzles and themes (like "liar" themes). Way to go.

 

MrW.

 

yes, it's a good thing that this service is being provided. keep up the good work! way to go. it's nice that everyone here is in agreement.

 

i do not understand why anyone uses false attributes. it would certainly toast my buns to drive a couple of hundred miles to find an incorrectly rated cache.

 

real scubacaches are hard to come by, and scubagear isn't all that easy to lug around. so when you go out with the intent to scubacache, there'd better be a dive when you get there.

 

as for "marring pages", is it just bookmarks you don't like that ruin the look, or all bookmarks? i don't like stupid FTF list bookmarks on my cache pages, but i can't describe them as "marring" the page any mre than any other list.

 

and i would be interested to see even one puzzle that's ruined by the simple knowledge that diving isn't necessary. "hmm.", i say to myself, amazed. "it turns out the scubagear is unnecessary. therefore i deduce that the cache must be... here! puzzle solved!"

 

as for liars' caches, any cache that purposely represents itself in a fashion that will cause people to be inconvenienced is an outrage and deserves exposure. if you do not wish to give finders information about the correct attributes, simply do not use attributes.

Link to comment

and the better hiders have been quite willing to remove the attribute from their non-scuba caches.

 

Better hiders :(

 

Boy, somehow I missed the part of the attribute page that made me swear on my mothers grave that all the attributes I selected were bonified and certified.

 

Seriously, I guess everyone is entitled to obsess about something!

 

Deane

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

Link to comment

 

Boy, somehow I missed the part of the attribute page that made me swear on my mothers grave that all the attributes I selected were bonified and certified.

 

i'm sorry. i have this obsessive-compulsive thing about grammar and i can't let this one go. i hope you will take it in the spirit of one who might tell you that you have lipstick on your teeth.

 

i am not certain what it is you mean to say with the word "bonified". the best i can come up with is "bona fide" which is usually mispronounced as "bonified" or something like it. its proper pronunciation is much closer to "bona feeday" and it is latin for "in good faith".

 

there. i'm sorry if this causes you discomfort. i also know from experience that any attempt on my part to let it slide by unnoticed would only result in a day of perseverating and stress. yes, i know they have medications to help with that.

 

even despite medication, i still spend time looking up proper grammar conventions.

 

...recreationally.

 

all right, the thing with the ellipsis there was a stretch, but i think it conveyed the timing of the sentence. (and sentence fragment.)

 

that's all for me.

Link to comment
... and scubagear isn't all that easy to lug around. ...
How is it hard to lug around? Doesn't it just sit in the gear bag in the trunk of your car or back of your SUV? Now if you were walking to the cache from your home, I could see how lugging that stuff could be a real handle. :rolleyes:
Link to comment
... and scubagear isn't all that easy to lug around. ...
How is it hard to lug around? Doesn't it just sit in the gear bag in the trunk of your car or back of your SUV? Now if you were walking to the cache from your home, I could see how lugging that stuff could be a real handle. :rolleyes:

 

it's probably just a little more than lugging skis. i don't leave ski equipment in my car. my diving firiends don't leave their diving gear in their cars. and diving equipment has to me safety checked. it requires some preparation.

Link to comment
... and scubagear isn't all that easy to lug around. ...
How is it hard to lug around? Doesn't it just sit in the gear bag in the trunk of your car or back of your SUV? Now if you were walking to the cache from your home, I could see how lugging that stuff could be a real handle. :rolleyes:
it's probably just a little more than lugging skis. i don't leave ski equipment in my car. my diving firiends don't leave their diving gear in their cars. and diving equipment has to me safety checked. it requires some preparation.
I didn't figure that you left it in the car. I assumed that you kept it in the house and set it in the car as you were leaving. Either way...
Link to comment
Thanks for appointing yourself "Attribute Cop" and marring so many webpages with the appearance of your "Bookmark List" text. Oh, and thanks for also ruining a number of cache puzzles and themes (like "liar" themes). Way to go.
Hmm... either you're a scubacacher and you're actually grateful for the crap I willingly put up with to help you (and you're being sarcastic about the other half), or you're one of the poor, misguided souls who gets upset at the guy who points out that the emporer not only has no clothes but also that he's tone deaf and rather less funny than he thinks he is. I suppose I should take it as the former.

 

You're quite welcome. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

and the better hiders have been quite willing to remove the attribute from their non-scuba caches.

 

Better hiders :rolleyes:

 

Boy, somehow I missed the part of the attribute page that made me swear on my mothers grave that all the attributes I selected were bonified and certified.

I pondered over what word to use there to indicate a distinction between the hiders who, upon finding that the "scuba gear required" attribute is actually watched and meaningful, decide that they will be gracious enough to not pollute that one attribute. It would be wrong to say "smarter", "nicer", "more intelligent", or anything like that. There are plenty of very smart, very nice, and very intelligent cache hiders who also don't care a bit about the fact that they are hurting the ability of scubacachers to use the attribute to find the very few scubacaches there really are out there.

 

"Better" isn't the right word, either. I suppose, now that I've been continuing to think about it, "more considerate" would have been a more appropriate fit. My apologies for not having come up with that earlier.

 

So, the more considerate hiders have been willing to remove the attribute from their non-scuba caches (including a guy who asked if it would help us if he merely switched to an equally humorous incorrect attribute instead of the scuba one -- I said that sounded like a fine idea). Then there are people with 13 parched dry land caches (including one on a mountaintop) that abuse the attribute apparently out of spite. I'm certainly tempted to think of them as "bad cachers", although perhaps they're just misguided.

Link to comment

How much time did you put into 'pollute'? :P

Not much at all. I'm somewhat familiar with the word:
To make less suitable for an activity, especially by the introduction of unwanted factors: The stadium lights polluted the sky around the observatory.
The labelling of non-scubacaches as "requires scuba gear" makes the attribute less suitable for the use for which it was intended, and it does so "by the introduction of unwanted factors", even.

 

You're not going to tell me next that scubacachers want to find irrelevant dryland caches when they search via the attribute, are you? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
How much time did you put into 'pollute'? :P
Not much at all. I'm somewhat familiar with the word:
To make less suitable for an activity, especially by the introduction of unwanted factors: The stadium lights polluted the sky around the observatory.
The labelling of non-scubacaches as "requires scuba gear" makes the attribute less suitable for the use for which it was intended, and it does so "by the introduction of unwanted factors", even.

 

You're not going to tell me next that scubacachers want to find irrelevant dryland caches when they search via the attribute, are you? :rolleyes:

No, but I might suggest that an occasional wrong attribute is not an emergency.
Link to comment
No, but I might suggest that an occasional wrong attribute is not an emergency.
I don't recall anyone saying it was an emergency.

 

A wet diaper isn't going to kill a kid, but there's no reason to let him sit there in it, eh? Both that and the misuse of the scuba attribute are things I think would be better off changed. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
... and scubagear isn't all that easy to lug around. ...
How is it hard to lug around? Doesn't it just sit in the gear bag in the trunk of your car or back of your SUV? Now if you were walking to the cache from your home, I could see how lugging that stuff could be a real handle. :rolleyes:
it's probably just a little more than lugging skis. i don't leave ski equipment in my car. my diving firiends don't leave their diving gear in their cars. and diving equipment has to me safety checked. it requires some preparation.
I didn't figure that you left it in the car. I assumed that you kept it in the house and set it in the car as you were leaving. Either way...

Let's see...

tank(s) safety checked and filled

regulator hose safety checked

fins (2)

wet suit, short or long john style if in anything but tropical waters

BC vest

mask

snorkel

diving knife

miscellaneous gear

 

Yah... it's a bit of a pain to "just toss" this into the car to discover it's a liar's cache.

Edited by TotemLake
Link to comment
... and scubagear isn't all that easy to lug around. ...
How is it hard to lug around? Doesn't it just sit in the gear bag in the trunk of your car or back of your SUV? Now if you were walking to the cache from your home, I could see how lugging that stuff could be a real handle. :rolleyes:
it's probably just a little more than lugging skis. i don't leave ski equipment in my car. my diving firiends don't leave their diving gear in their cars. and diving equipment has to me safety checked. it requires some preparation.
I didn't figure that you left it in the car. I assumed that you kept it in the house and set it in the car as you were leaving. Either way...
Let's see...

tank(s) safety checked and filled

regulator hose safety checked

fins (2)

wet suit, short or long john style if in anything but tropical waters

BC vest

mask

snorkel

diving knife

miscellaneous gear

 

Yah... it's a bit of a pain to "just toss" this into the car to discover it's a liar's cache.

It's been a while since I've been wet and I'll admit that readiness and portability was likely never part of the OP's issue, but isn't most of that stuff bagged and ready to go? Aren't you just left with making sure that you have air and that your regulator is in proper working order? The latter something that you do just before making the dive, so it wouldn't be an issue if there was no water. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
It's been a while since I've been wet and I'll admit that readiness and portability was likely never part of the OP's issue, but isn't most of that stuff bagged and ready to go? Aren't you just left with making sure that you have air and that your regulator is in proper working order? The latter something that you do just before making the dive, so it wouldn't be an issue if there was no water.
I had to search through pages and pages of falsely tagged caches to find a scubacache when I wanted to dive one. I had to drive over 750 miles to get to the nearest one. Obviously, there was a lot more care to be taken in checking and packing gear than if it were just another cache.

 

Scubacachers have to spend significant effort planning and executing their scubacache hunts. People polluting the "requires scuba gear" attribute space only make it that much more trouble, and for what? So Joe Cacher can have a pretty little icon on their page? If Joe wants a pretty little icon, I'd be happy to *PAY* someone to design a *really* nice one.

 

In fact, I'll pay my own money to have two new icons created, one for "I like pretty icons!" (perhaps a pink My Little Pony?) and second for "This cache is a lie, so laugh!" I'll also buy Jeremy, hydee, or whomever a steak dinner (be reasonable), a pair of earplugs (each), and a Hallmark condolence card (for the grief they may suffer), and all they need to do is declare that the "scuba gear required" cache attribute *means* *something*.

 

I'm all for people having fun, enjoying themselves, and being creative in cache hides and descriptions. What I'm not content with is for people to make life harder for no good reason at all.

Edited by ClayJar
Link to comment

I'm all for people having fun, enjoying themselves, and being creative in cache hides and descriptions. What I'm not content with is for people to make life harder for no good reason at all.

 

Since you feel the need to mark everyone's page with your Scarlet Letter bookmark list, and in the process ruin a number of fun liar's caches, I'm going to go add Scuba required to all my caches. Have fun adding them to your list. I guess the fact that the caches are atop mountains with no water around won't matter much to you.

 

MrW.

Link to comment

I've kind of been following the thread and went both ways on this until someone mentioned what it takes to get things ready to scuba. I have dived and know it isn't just a matter of walking out the door.

 

That said, I enjoy a good liar's cache, however mis-using the attributes I have not seen before. Grant it, I think the attributes are for the most part useless (IMHO) I can see someone using them for scuba and they become useful. Most do i through the description and ratings.

 

Anyone can set up any bookmark they want. While Clayjar still would have had to drive a long distance to get to the nearest one and, yes, he could go through the maps to find out if water was even near-by, why should he have to go to all that trouble? Doing it once or twice may have been funny, but, come on, get a little more creative with the humor. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

i think people are missing this point: people who scubacache aren't heading out the door with diving gear just in case their cacing day includes a dive. if this were true it wouldn't be an issue. the thing is that you have to INTEND to go scubacaching and then you assemble your gear. yes, it's probably bagged and prepared, but tossing your dive bags into the truck isn't remotely like tossing in your camelbak and leatherman.

 

it is a small and reasonable request to ask that scubacaches (or caches that require technical climbing gear) be labeled correctly.

 

imagine this: you decide to do a climbing cache. you have your own harness, but no ropes. you enlist the help of a non-caching friend and you expect to spend the day climbing because that's what the cache attributes tell you you can expect. you and your friend show up and there's nothing to climb. the cache owner thinks this is very funny.

 

the cache owner is an idiot.

 

if you like liar's caches, there's no reason you can't have everyone tell lies about the cache WHILE USING CORRECT ATTRIBUTES or even no attributes at all. at the very least these things should not advertise need of specialized gear, since people will go out of their way to have the gear available. if you make me load up my boat i expect to use it.

 

don't tell me to bring my boat (ropes, scubagear, etc.) if i don't need it or can't use it. i can think of some caches for which you don't strictly NEED the special equipment, but you can at least reasonably use it.

 

maybe some impoverished souls are deeee-lighted to find that the five-star cache they spent all week planning for doesn't require that they get out of the car, thereby enabling them to sign more micro logs in magnetic guardrail key cases.

 

for some people geocaching isn't about number whoring. for some people it's like a guidebook. it's about the adventure of finding out where the hider is taking you. there are people who will choose to go to one cache adventure in the day, and they rely on attributes to help them make a selection.

 

sometimes i want a stupid guardrail micro. sometimes i like to get as many caches in a day as i can. sometimes i want to take a whole day and really enjoy a mountain, lake, park, whatever. the only thing i really want is for a cache to be correctly categorized so i can make an informed decision. if you want me to have to be surprised, don't give me attributes. the simple absence of attributes signals to me to expect anything.

Link to comment
... and scubagear isn't all that easy to lug around. ...
How is it hard to lug around? Doesn't it just sit in the gear bag in the trunk of your car or back of your SUV? Now if you were walking to the cache from your home, I could see how lugging that stuff could be a real handle. :rolleyes:
it's probably just a little more than lugging skis. i don't leave ski equipment in my car. my diving firiends don't leave their diving gear in their cars. and diving equipment has to me safety checked. it requires some preparation.
I didn't figure that you left it in the car. I assumed that you kept it in the house and set it in the car as you were leaving. Either way...
Let's see...

tank(s) safety checked and filled

regulator hose safety checked

fins (2)

wet suit, short or long john style if in anything but tropical waters

BC vest

mask

snorkel

diving knife

miscellaneous gear

 

Yah... it's a bit of a pain to "just toss" this into the car to discover it's a liar's cache.

It's been a while since I've been wet and I'll admit that readiness and portability was likely never part of the OP's issue, but isn't most of that stuff bagged and ready to go? Aren't you just left with making sure that you have air and that your regulator is in proper working order? The latter something that you do just before making the dive, so it wouldn't be an issue if there was no water.

Not if you're diving a lot. You do have to air it out and make sure it stays mold free.

 

(sorry for the side discussion... go on back to your regularly scheduled channel)

Link to comment
... and scubagear isn't all that easy to lug around. ...
How is it hard to lug around? Doesn't it just sit in the gear bag in the trunk of your car or back of your SUV? Now if you were walking to the cache from your home, I could see how lugging that stuff could be a real handle. :rolleyes:
it's probably just a little more than lugging skis. i don't leave ski equipment in my car. my diving firiends don't leave their diving gear in their cars. and diving equipment has to me safety checked. it requires some preparation.
I didn't figure that you left it in the car. I assumed that you kept it in the house and set it in the car as you were leaving. Either way...
Let's see...

tank(s) safety checked and filled

regulator hose safety checked

fins (2)

wet suit, short or long john style if in anything but tropical waters

BC vest

mask

snorkel

diving knife

miscellaneous gear

 

Yah... it's a bit of a pain to "just toss" this into the car to discover it's a liar's cache.

It's been a while since I've been wet and I'll admit that readiness and portability was likely never part of the OP's issue, but isn't most of that stuff bagged and ready to go? Aren't you just left with making sure that you have air and that your regulator is in proper working order? The latter something that you do just before making the dive, so it wouldn't be an issue if there was no water.

First, you are assuming all divers own all their own equipment. Since it is so expensive, many do not. So you have the added expense and hassle of renting gear. Granted, nobody is planning a dive based just on the attribute, but that's the rub. The whole idea of the attributes is to help people plan what caches they do or don't want to do. Using bogus attributes dilutes (as well as pollutes) the usefulness of attributes for what they were intended. Some might even say willful misrepresentation is an abuse of the site's resources, and we know where that usually leads.

 

I'm all for people having fun, enjoying themselves, and being creative in cache hides and descriptions. What I'm not content with is for people to make life harder for no good reason at all.

 

Since you feel the need to mark everyone's page with your Scarlet Letter bookmark list, and in the process ruin a number of fun liar's caches, I'm going to go add Scuba required to all my caches. Have fun adding them to your list. I guess the fact that the caches are atop mountains with no water around won't matter much to you.

 

MrW.

To me, this sounds like being a vindictive wisearse, as well as misuse of the site's resources.

Besides, you would potentially be cutting down visitors to your caches. Many cachers regularly filter out attributes they don't want to do. I regularly filter out attributes I am not interested in, so I can get more caches I *am* interested in doing included in my 500 cache PQ limit. For example, if I'm not bringing my 'yak, I don't bother getting "boat required" caches in my PQ.

Link to comment

i think people are missing this point: people who scubacache aren't heading out the door with diving gear just in case their cacing day includes a dive. if this were true it wouldn't be an issue. the thing is that you have to INTEND to go scubacaching and then you assemble your gear. yes, it's probably bagged and prepared, but tossing your dive bags into the truck isn't remotely like tossing in your camelbak and leatherman.

 

it is a small and reasonable request to ask that scubacaches (or caches that require technical climbing gear) be labeled correctly.

 

imagine this: you decide to do a climbing cache. you have your own harness, but no ropes. you enlist the help of a non-caching friend and you expect to spend the day climbing because that's what the cache attributes tell you you can expect. you and your friend show up and there's nothing to climb. the cache owner thinks this is very funny.

 

the cache owner is an idiot.

 

if you like liar's caches, there's no reason you can't have everyone tell lies about the cache WHILE USING CORRECT ATTRIBUTES or even no attributes at all. at the very least these things should not advertise need of specialized gear, since people will go out of their way to have the gear available. if you make me load up my boat i expect to use it.

 

don't tell me to bring my boat (ropes, scubagear, etc.) if i don't need it or can't use it. i can think of some caches for which you don't strictly NEED the special equipment, but you can at least reasonably use it.

 

maybe some impoverished souls are deeee-lighted to find that the five-star cache they spent all week planning for doesn't require that they get out of the car, thereby enabling them to sign more micro logs in magnetic guardrail key cases.

 

for some people geocaching isn't about number whoring. for some people it's like a guidebook. it's about the adventure of finding out where the hider is taking you. there are people who will choose to go to one cache adventure in the day, and they rely on attributes to help them make a selection.

 

sometimes i want a stupid guardrail micro. sometimes i like to get as many caches in a day as i can. sometimes i want to take a whole day and really enjoy a mountain, lake, park, whatever. the only thing i really want is for a cache to be correctly categorized so i can make an informed decision. if you want me to have to be surprised, don't give me attributes. the simple absence of attributes signals to me to expect anything.

 

Well put, Flask. More then once I've heard of cachers spending weeks or months of prep, and a considerable amount of money on gear and travel to attempt what is described as an extreme challenge, only to find when they get there it's really a parking lot micro.

Link to comment

I had said:

 

 

... GeoQO needs a way to do it without setting an attribute and only using SET filters, but it isn't possible at the moment)

 

But it turns out it is implemented and I should read my own documentation... You can search for all caches in set A and not in set B using a well placed minus sign:

 

 geoqo -i bookmarked.gpx withscubaflag.gpx
 geoqo -s 'set:import:bookmarked&&set:-import:withscubaflag' -l

 

But... I think you're having more fun with politics instead ;-)

Link to comment

I had said:

 

 

... GeoQO needs a way to do it without setting an attribute and only using SET filters, but it isn't possible at the moment)

 

But it turns out it is implemented and I should read my own documentation... You can search for all caches in set A and not in set B using a well placed minus sign:

 

 geoqo -i bookmarked.gpx withscubaflag.gpx
 geoqo -s 'set:import:bookmarked&&set:-import:withscubaflag' -l

 

But... I think you're having more fun with politics instead ;-)

 

i think the question is not whether you can filter for attributes, but if and whether false attributes should be flagged at the very least, and changed at best.

Link to comment

By the way, I'd like to thank the hiders who updated their caches this week to remove the "requires scuba gear" attribute from their non-scubacaches. I was quite happy to get to remove *13* caches from the list.

 

I also edited the bookmark list title to thank them as well. Maybe it'll help some of the other hiders to do the polite thing. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Due to the rampant abuse of the "Requires Scuba Gear" attribute, I maintain a public bookmark list which alerts my fellow scubacachers when they are viewing a cache which appears to be among the abusers.

Great...another useless bookmark to clutter the cache pages. FTF lists, quadrangle challenge, and my caches lists aren't enough?

 

Where is the option to ignore useless bookmark lists? :wub:

 

Seriously, why should we be forced to look at bookmark lists on a cache page? Seems like if a geocacher has the ability to share a bookmark list and announce it to the world, we should have the ability to ignore them or at least hide the lists. You know, like a pulldown box you click on to show the bookmark lists if you want to view them but they stay hidden normally.

 

Think about it, of the last several cache pages you've seen with bookmark lists shown, how many were actually useful to somebody other then the bookmark owner?

 

I hope I don't get banned from the forums for voicing my opinion like Mr & Mrs Wisearse did. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Banned again? :wub:

They've got to learn to stop voicing their opinion...unless it aligns correctly with the guidelines. :wub:

 

I have no scuba gear, but I do know how to Scuba Dive (I rent the gear).

I know that renting the gear seems risky to some, but I rarely go diving.

...and since I also don't hike to the top of mountains to find geocaches that have attributes of "scuba", I have no opinion on this subject.

 

Actually, I never even noticed that there are attributes on the cache pages... really! I didn't!

 

But I only have 9999 finds, so maybe after I get a little more experience I'll notice those things.

 

...and what's a bookmark list anyways?.... oh nevermind. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

 

Boy, somehow I missed the part of the attribute page that made me swear on my mothers grave that all the attributes I selected were bonified and certified.

 

i'm sorry. i have this obsessive-compulsive thing about grammar and i can't let this one go. i hope you will take it in the spirit of one who might tell you that you have lipstick on your teeth.

 

i am not certain what it is you mean to say with the word "bonified". the best i can come up with is "bona fide" which is usually mispronounced as "bonified" or something like it. its proper pronunciation is much closer to "bona feeday" and it is latin for "in good faith".

 

there. i'm sorry if this causes you discomfort. i also know from experience that any attempt on my part to let it slide by unnoticed would only result in a day of perseverating and stress. yes, i know they have medications to help with that.

 

even despite medication, i still spend time looking up proper grammar conventions.

 

...recreationally.

 

all right, the thing with the ellipsis there was a stretch, but i think it conveyed the timing of the sentence. (and sentence fragment.)

 

that's all for me.

 

Just curious... if you have an "obsessive-compulsive thing" about grammer, well, then why do you start every sentence with a lower-case letter?

Link to comment

 

Boy, somehow I missed the part of the attribute page that made me swear on my mothers grave that all the attributes I selected were bonified and certified.

 

i'm sorry. i have this obsessive-compulsive thing about grammar and i can't let this one go. i hope you will take it in the spirit of one who might tell you that you have lipstick on your teeth.

 

i am not certain what it is you mean to say with the word "bonified". the best i can come up with is "bona fide" which is usually mispronounced as "bonified" or something like it. its proper pronunciation is much closer to "bona feeday" and it is latin for "in good faith".

 

there. i'm sorry if this causes you discomfort. i also know from experience that any attempt on my part to let it slide by unnoticed would only result in a day of perseverating and stress. yes, i know they have medications to help with that.

 

even despite medication, i still spend time looking up proper grammar conventions.

 

...recreationally.

 

all right, the thing with the ellipsis there was a stretch, but i think it conveyed the timing of the sentence. (and sentence fragment.)

 

that's all for me.

 

Just curious... if you have an "obsessive-compulsive thing" about grammer, well, then why do you start every sentence with a lower-case letter?

 

uh, it's "grammAr". while i take great pains to form sentences that while not necessarily strictly within the guidelines for proper american usage, i almost completely omit capital letters. it isn't because i don't know where they go; it's born almost entirely from the fact that i have severe right/left coordination problems and typing is wicked hard for me even without having to mess with the shift keys.

 

aside from that i guess you could say it's a style choice and by the same token it's probably true that a person might make a style choice to appear illiterate and ignorant but usually i like to think that people are doing the best they can.

Link to comment
i think people are missing this point: people who scubacache aren't heading out the door with diving gear just in case their cacing day includes a dive. if this were true it wouldn't be an issue. the thing is that you have to INTEND to go scubacaching and then you assemble your gear. yes, it's probably bagged and prepared, but tossing your dive bags into the truck isn't remotely like tossing in your camelbak and leatherman....
Given that it is that much work, why not click on a map link to verify the presence of water?

 

This just seams like a ton of angst over a tiny issue.

Link to comment
... Seriously, why should we be forced to look at bookmark lists on a cache page? Seems like if a geocacher has the ability to share a bookmark list and announce it to the world, we should have the ability to ignore them or at least hide the lists. You know, like a pulldown box you click on to show the bookmark lists if you want to view them but they stay hidden normally.

 

Think about it, of the last several cache pages you've seen with bookmark lists shown, how many were actually useful to somebody other then the bookmark owner?

Agreed. More and more, we see bookmark lists used as a way to ridicule others. It's lame. The cache owner should be able to decide whether a bookmark list shows on his cache page.
Link to comment
i think people are missing this point: people who scubacache aren't heading out the door with diving gear just in case their cacing day includes a dive. if this were true it wouldn't be an issue. the thing is that you have to INTEND to go scubacaching and then you assemble your gear. yes, it's probably bagged and prepared, but tossing your dive bags into the truck isn't remotely like tossing in your camelbak and leatherman....
Given that it is that much work, why not click on a map link to verify the presence of water?

 

This just seams like a ton of angst over a tiny issue.

 

there isn't really a lot of angst, except for that one guy who got all angry and sarcastic over clayjar's bookmark list. i can think of some scenarios for which clicking on the map might not present useful information about whether it really is a scubacache. making an argument in favor of correct use of attributes or at the very least refraining from abuse of attributes does not really qualify as angst.

 

and while you may consider it to be a tiny issue, apparently some people feel strongly about it and it probably isn't fair to dismiss their concerns out of hand.

 

i, for instance, do not give two hoots about travel bugs heading toward their stated goals. other people care passionately about it and i wouldn't for a second call their concerns tiny, nor their position angsty. it['s just a simple courtesy. it doesn't cost me a thing.

Link to comment
... Seriously, why should we be forced to look at bookmark lists on a cache page? Seems like if a geocacher has the ability to share a bookmark list and announce it to the world, we should have the ability to ignore them or at least hide the lists. You know, like a pulldown box you click on to show the bookmark lists if you want to view them but they stay hidden normally.

 

Think about it, of the last several cache pages you've seen with bookmark lists shown, how many were actually useful to somebody other then the bookmark owner?

Agreed. More and more, we see bookmark lists used as a way to ridicule others. It's lame. The cache owner should be able to decide whether a bookmark list shows on his cache page.

 

if i as a cache owner have the opportunity to remove bookmark lists from my pages, i will remove ALL of them. there are a few i don't care for, but there's no good reason beside my own personal preference. so in the interest of being fair, i would simply remove them all.

 

so before you advocate a thing like that, consider how someone like me might change your thinking.

Link to comment
Given that it is that much work, why not click on a map link to verify the presence of water?

 

This just seams like a ton of angst over a tiny issue.

The issue is not whether any given cache requires scuba gear. You are correct in your assumption that it's usually trivial for me to pull up the Google Maps link on a single cache to see that the attribute cannot apply. Rather, the issue is that scubacachers are actually searching via the attribute to try to *find* the few scubacaches out there to go after. Is it really too much to ask for hiders not to require scubacachers to slog through pages of dry caches, checking each one for the presence of water, in order to finally find one that they can actually dive? (Frankly, it's not only time consuming, but it's also quite frustrating.)

 

I doubt anyone does searches for, say, caches with "drinking water nearby". That's just a nicely informative attribute. Conversely, people *are* trying to use the "requires scuba gear" attribute to find scubacaches. Do you not understand this distinction, or do you disagree with it? If the former, I'll try to elucidate; if the latter, I suppose there would be no point.

Link to comment
... Seriously, why should we be forced to look at bookmark lists on a cache page? Seems like if a geocacher has the ability to share a bookmark list and announce it to the world, we should have the ability to ignore them or at least hide the lists. You know, like a pulldown box you click on to show the bookmark lists if you want to view them but they stay hidden normally.

 

Think about it, of the last several cache pages you've seen with bookmark lists shown, how many were actually useful to somebody other then the bookmark owner?

Agreed. More and more, we see bookmark lists used as a way to ridicule others. It's lame. The cache owner should be able to decide whether a bookmark list shows on his cache page.
if i as a cache owner have the opportunity to remove bookmark lists from my pages, i will remove ALL of them. there are a few i don't care for, but there's no good reason beside my own personal preference. so in the interest of being fair, i would simply remove them all.

 

so before you advocate a thing like that, consider how someone like me might change your thinking.

I don't know why your decision would bother me, in the least.
Link to comment
Given that it is that much work, why not click on a map link to verify the presence of water?

 

This just seams like a ton of angst over a tiny issue.

The issue is not whether any given cache requires scuba gear. You are correct in your assumption that it's usually trivial for me to pull up the Google Maps link on a single cache to see that the attribute cannot apply. Rather, the issue is that scubacachers are actually searching via the attribute to try to *find* the few scubacaches out there to go after. Is it really too much to ask for hiders not to require scubacachers to slog through pages of dry caches, checking each one for the presence of water, in order to finally find one that they can actually dive? (Frankly, it's not only time consuming, but it's also quite frustrating.)...
On the other hand, if we look at your level of work now compared to a few years ago when you were practically begging for the attribute, we would come to the conclusion that the extra work of checking a map on a relatively few cache pages is not that big of a deal.
Link to comment
Given that it is that much work, why not click on a map link to verify the presence of water?

 

This just seams like a ton of angst over a tiny issue.

The issue is not whether any given cache requires scuba gear. You are correct in your assumption that it's usually trivial for me to pull up the Google Maps link on a single cache to see that the attribute cannot apply. Rather, the issue is that scubacachers are actually searching via the attribute to try to *find* the few scubacaches out there to go after. Is it really too much to ask for hiders not to require scubacachers to slog through pages of dry caches, checking each one for the presence of water, in order to finally find one that they can actually dive? (Frankly, it's not only time consuming, but it's also quite frustrating.)...
On the other hand, if we look at your level of work now compared to a few years ago when you were practically begging for the attribute, we would come to the conclusion that the extra work of checking a map on a relatively few cache pages is not that big of a deal.

:rolleyes:

 

Congratulations, you have me completely at a loss for words.

 

(Oh, except, perhaps, to note that your logic completely fails to support item two of the creed on your profile. It's hardly helping to say life was utter crap for scubacachers before, so it shouldn't bother them that life is only a pain now. :wub:)

Edited by ClayJar
Link to comment
Given that it is that much work, why not click on a map link to verify the presence of water?

 

This just seams like a ton of angst over a tiny issue.

The issue is not whether any given cache requires scuba gear. You are correct in your assumption that it's usually trivial for me to pull up the Google Maps link on a single cache to see that the attribute cannot apply. Rather, the issue is that scubacachers are actually searching via the attribute to try to *find* the few scubacaches out there to go after. Is it really too much to ask for hiders not to require scubacachers to slog through pages of dry caches, checking each one for the presence of water, in order to finally find one that they can actually dive? (Frankly, it's not only time consuming, but it's also quite frustrating.)...
On the other hand, if we look at your level of work now compared to a few years ago when you were practically begging for the attribute, we would come to the conclusion that the extra work of checking a map on a relatively few cache pages is not that big of a deal.

:rolleyes:

 

Congratulations, you have me completely at a loss for words.

 

(Oh, except, perhaps, to note that your logic completely fails to support item two of the creed on your profile. It's hardly helping to say life was utter crap for scubacachers before, so it shouldn't bother them that life is only a pain now. :wub:)

#2 is 'Try to make the game fun for others.' It is not to blindly go along with every snarky request.

Link to comment
[quote name='sbell111' post='2729988'

 

so before you advocate a thing like that, consider how someone like me might change your thinking.

I don't know why your decision would bother me, in the least.

 

well, of course in practice it will matter not one bit to you. what if it becomes a common practice and someone like me removes your bookmark list from a cache page just because?

Link to comment

They really don't impact one way or another, so the lists should remain on the pages.

 

If removing them does become a consideration, they should make the bookmark lists searchable. Right now they are only useful if they are on the page. Someone finds this cache and wants to go to or avoid similar caches, the bookmark is right there to click on.

Link to comment
so before you advocate a thing like that, consider how someone like me might change your thinking.
I don't know why your decision would bother me, in the least.
well, of course in practice it will matter not one bit to you. what if it becomes a common practice and someone like me removes your bookmark list from a cache page just because?
As you stated. In practice, it would matter not one bit to me. If someone wanted to know what caches were on my bookmark list, he/she could easily access that list from my profile.
Link to comment

As you stated. In practice, it would matter not one bit to me. If someone wanted to know what caches were on my bookmark list, he/she could easily access that list from my profile.

 

i think the only thing that concerns me here is that it smells a bit like this:

 

it doesn't affect me at all whether you get robbed, so i'm just dandy with it.

 

i think it's important for us to be able to discuss things that are important to members of the community without trivializing their requests. it could very well be that standard practice goes to using attributes in what some people believe is a wrong way. there can and should be thougthful discussion, but while half of the discussion is taken up by reasons why people who feel strongly shouldn't (see about discussion by non-divers about why divers shouldn't mind the extra work), it's not anything like a blanaced conversation.

Link to comment
As you stated. In practice, it would matter not one bit to me. If someone wanted to know what caches were on my bookmark list, he/she could easily access that list from my profile.
i think the only thing that concerns me here is that it smells a bit like this:

 

it doesn't affect me at all whether you get robbed, so i'm just dandy with it.

 

i think it's important for us to be able to discuss things that are important to members of the community without trivializing their requests. it could very well be that standard practice goes to using attributes in what some people believe is a wrong way. there can and should be thougthful discussion, but while half of the discussion is taken up by reasons why people who feel strongly shouldn't (see about discussion by non-divers about why divers shouldn't mind the extra work), it's not anything like a blanaced conversation.

First, you exaggerate this issues importance by comparing it to getting robbed. Second, I suspect that the resistance to the OP's request has to do with the OP's snarkiness.

 

Edited to fix yet another typo.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

Due to the rampant abuse of the "Requires Scuba Gear" attribute, I maintain a public bookmark list which alerts my fellow scubacachers when they are viewing a cache which appears to be among the abusers.

Great...another useless bookmark to clutter the cache pages. FTF lists, quadrangle challenge, and my caches lists aren't enough?

 

Where is the option to ignore useless bookmark lists? :wub:

 

Seriously, why should we be forced to look at bookmark lists on a cache page? Seems like if a geocacher has the ability to share a bookmark list and announce it to the world, we should have the ability to ignore them or at least hide the lists. You know, like a pulldown box you click on to show the bookmark lists if you want to view them but they stay hidden normally.

 

Think about it, of the last several cache pages you've seen with bookmark lists shown, how many were actually useful to somebody other then the bookmark owner?

 

I hope I don't get banned from the forums for voicing my opinion like Mr & Mrs Wisearse did. :rolleyes:

 

That just shows a very narrow point of view. I have Hike of the Month bookmarks that has generated interest with the local community. I generated those boomarks at the suggestion of another player because of the similar names of locations in different states and it would help to do a quick check to see if this is something they can join in on.

 

Just because it doesn't interest you doesn't mean it doesn't have a following of players that can appreciate it.

 

That being said, I support the idea of a reader's option to hide the bookmarks. It doesn't bother me one bit you might miss something you might enjoy.

Edited by TotemLake
Link to comment

Okay, sbell111, twice you've called me snarky, but I have trouble seeing that. Do you mean snarky as in "rudely sarcastic or disrespectful; snide" or snarky as in "irritable or short-tempered; irascible"?

 

I don't see how I was rudely sarcastic, as I attempted to convey something that is a significant burden to me in an attempt to find a less burdensome solution. Although the root cause is attribute misuse, the problem was technical.

 

As for being irascible, I'll admit I used the "mad" smiley in a parenthetical at the end, but I also used the big grin smiley earlier. I can ask a mod to edit the former out if it causes such grief; I'd put it there just because a "frustrated at an intractable situation" smiley has apparently never been created. I have a feeling that you could find a much more "irritable or short-tempered" poster on this thread without too much effort.

 

Anyway, please explain where you're finding the snarkiness so I can be more careful in the future. It's been quite a while since I was driven off the forums by reading too many flamers, lamers, and trolls; I certainly don't want to do anything that will have the level-headed members of the forums thinking I'm one of the jerks.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 4
×
×
  • Create New...