Netless Caching / Root Logs

[crtrue]

I'm plotting a little adventure, so to speak, where I'm going to leave home and basically travel and work my way around the United States, and I was trying to think up ways to visit caches in areas I hit without always having to find an internet connection to work from.

 

I call it a root log, and basically what it does, essentially, is list the coordinates for other nearby root logs. In other words, by finding root logs from other root logs, you could make your way across an area by a series of waypoints established at other locations, without a need for an area search online.

 

Useless in its own accord, since you can move across the United States without waypoints, but the idea here is that root logs can have additional coordinates to smaller logs, ones that list Geocaches (obviously not going to be the most up-to-date list, but can list, say, some of the grander or more interesting caches), places to check out (think waymarkings), and stuff like that. When you're done, you simply move on to the next root log, find information about the local area from the log, and go from there.

 

Obviously the log would need to be in a secure location, as losing too many root logs in one area could be obnoxious to anyone making their way across the country using them. They would also need to be maintained moreso than your average geocache, since any form of vandalism could send an unsuspecting individual on the wrong path (no system is perfect in this respect, so this isn't a problem solely of the root log system).

 

Outside of that, though, I think it's a pretty neat idea and am curious about feedback. I might place an experimental root log here in Myrtle Beach soon, and if anyone lives within 100 miles, I welcome them to comment and help in placing another log. Also, if someone finds an Achille's Heel in this whole system, I also welcome them to point it out -- I'm not on a power trip about this becoming the next GPS fad, I just want to see if this could work.

[+sbell111]

I'm not sure I understand. People would go online to find the physical location of 'root logs'. They would then go to those locations to find cache information?

 

Unless I misunderstand, I prefer public internet access and pocket queries.

[crtrue]

I'm not sure I understand. People would go online to find the physical location of 'root logs'. They would then go to those locations to find cache information?

 

Unless I misunderstand, I prefer public internet access and pocket queries.

 

The point I should have made clearer is that you only need to get online one time, to find a nearby root log. Root logs lead to other logs, which lead to more, and so on. Think of the Internet for an example -- a series of interconnected servers with no real "head", leading to one another.

 

Root logs lead to other root logs and lesser logs that detail local caches, points of interest, etc.

 

Public internet access and pocket queries are nice, but not always available. A root log could be at an Interstate rest stop, something you're not likely to find in Nowhere, Alabama.

 

I should mention that I'm not trying to compete with pocket queries and public access, but just provide an alternative to those who just want to stick to their GPSr.

[+Miragee]

When I was traveling, I found WiFi access in the parking lots of some motels and at little coffee houses and even a second-hand shop. It really wasn't difficult for me to get updates to my PQs for the area I was heading towards. Using PQs and the filtering capabilities of GSAK, I could "refresh" the caches in my GPSr regularly.

[+d-town cachers]

i kinda understand what you are getting at...i think. and i think it would be a good idea if i could figure out exactly how you plan on keeping the root logs updated and stocked. and my question is, what are you looking at when you find this log? is it just a list of coords to the next root log? and then would it have another section with caches within 20 miles or so? and for that matter, how would you determine which cahces make it into the log?

 

lots of questions, but i like the idea. mostly because i'm still paper caching, and i don't have a laptop or remote access. this is right up my alley! i guess i just need more info to really understand....

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

I'm not sure I understand. People would go online to find the physical location of 'root logs'. They would then go to those locations to find cache information?

 

Unless I misunderstand, I prefer public internet access and pocket queries.

 

The point I should have made clearer is that you only need to get online one time, to find a nearby root log. Root logs lead to other logs, which lead to more, and so on. Think of the Internet for an example -- a series of interconnected servers with no real "head", leading to one another.

 

Root logs lead to other root logs and lesser logs that detail local caches, points of interest, etc.

 

Public internet access and pocket queries are nice, but not always available. A root log could be at an Interstate rest stop, something you're not likely to find in Nowhere, Alabama.

 

I should mention that I'm not trying to compete with pocket queries and public access, but just provide an alternative to those who just want to stick to their GPSr.

Phew! This sounds like a lot of work! Not only would each root log need frequent updating for local caches, but if the depository is to contain the contents (i.e., text) of the cache listing page, along with D/T rating, attributes, log entries, it would be massive and would need a lot of work to maintain. Sounds like a lot of work just to avoid using the Internet, considering that Internet access is ubiquitous nowadays. Even when I have traveled and stayed in "poor"villages in Southern India and Western Nicaragua, and even when I have visited the wild and wooly state of West Virginia, and gosh, even during my recent stay in primitive Santa Monica, CA, I have always found ready Internet access, even though I never carry a laptop or other type of PC with me.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Lots of issues, if I understand your concept, the biggest of course is that listing data belongs to Groundspeak and can't be published without their permission.

[+SGT red jeep]

When I was traveling, I found WiFi access in the parking lots of some motels and at little coffee houses and even a second-hand shop. It really wasn't difficult for me to get updates to my PQs for the area I was heading towards. Using PQs and the filtering capabilities of GSAK, I could "refresh" the caches in my GPSr regularly.

I've been supprised at how well this works. Fire up the laptop in some small rural town miles from nowhere and find I have a strong signal.

Before I got a laptop though, I would stop in at the local library to access the internet and do a quick search for nearby caches. Jot down the coords and anything in the discription I thought worth while before speeding out to search. Some motels even have a computer for guests to use.

I can see where the OP is going with the root log but a well thought out series of querys for the cities you plan on stopping at would be better and a lot less work for some local person who has to upkeep the dang thing. Can't see wanting to be the volunteer trying to upkeep something that the computer does remarkably better at.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Lots of issues, if I understand your concept, the biggest of course is that listing data belongs to Groundspeak and can't be published without their permission.

 

This too is an excellent and relevant point! What really perplexes me, though, is why someone would wish to do by hand and on paper something that is so much more easily and gracefully done by use of a PC and the Internet. This entire proposition reminds me of a recent encounter with one of my spacey New Age friends, a mechanical engineer by profession. Last time I visited his home city in the Midwest while on a consulting job, while we were having lunch together at a nice ethnic restaurant, at one point during our meal, he leaned forward toward me and advised me in a conspiratorial whisper that I (as a geocacher) had better be prepared to come up with a system to record locations of all caches in the USA on regional paper acrhives if I wanted to "preserve the sport after the end of civilization as we know it..." He went on to tell me that between the ravages of the collapse of civilzation due to Peak Oil (i.e., depletion of usable petroleum reserves) and due also to "the coming earth changes", pretty soon the Internet would come to an end and there would be no electricity with which to power PCs. Thus, in light of this impending dom (at least in his own fevered mind) his advice to me was to back up all geocache listings in paper archives with copies located in each region of the country. My wise and well-reasoned response to his thesis was to burp at him from across the table. sigh!

[+d-town cachers]

well, i guess it's fun to be in the minority sometimes. so i'm the only one who likes this idea?? maybe i better rethink my rethinking. the only other thing i would say is that just because a compuetr CAN do something, and do it fast and efficiently, doesn't mean we can't look for other alternatives. if gc.com would not allow something like that becasue of listing rights, well then, thats too bad. but not doing something just because a compuetr can is a pretty lame excuse not to do something. hey, my computer can make electronic music that is far better than me playing my guitar...but i won't stop just because there's an easier way. i guess that's my only gripe....talking down an idea just because it's difficult. that's all. and i still don't fully understand the scope of this project, but i like anything that challenges the all-powerful pc.

Edited April 10, 2007 by d-town cachers

[crtrue]

I don't really agree with the implication that because there is a better way, that there shouldn't be a rougher alternative. Yes, you can always leech WiFi, find your local coordinates, plug them in, etc -- but why bother when a simple, semi-permanent marker or log can point the way from your exact location?

 

From reading the above comments, I have come to realize that the markers (I'm using that term because I'm not sure a paper log would be the best thing for long-term coordination) would probably need to be minimalistic, at best. It would have information on other root logs and designated, impermanent or semi-permanent spots -- no Geocaches, since those could be archived at a moment's notice, not to mention the legal war it would entail, according to the above.

 

I guess the point of this is escape -- hopping on a bike with a little GPSr and just going, without a map or a laptop, and just following the logs from spot to spot, seeing what they tell you and so on. Perhaps the markers could be worked around with the local community, with a logbook or the like at a tourist info center that you can ask to sign (just one idea, mind you).

 

I'm trying to stay optimistic and adapt this to reality -- keep the criticism coming!

[+sbell111]

well, i guess it's fun to be in the minority sometimes. so i'm the only one who likes this idea?? maybe i better rethink my rethinking. the only other thing i would say is that just because a compuetr CAN do something, and do it fast and efficiently, doesn't mean we can't look for other alternatives. if gc.com would not allow something like that becasue of listing rights, well then, thats too bad. but not doing something just because a compuetr can is a pretty lame excuse not to do something. hey, my computer can make electronic music that is far better than me playing my guitar...but i won't stop just because there's an easier way. i guess that's my only gripe....talking down an idea just because it's difficult. that's all. and i still don't fully understand the scope of this project, but i like anything that challenges the all-powerful pc.

I totally agree with you. If something can be done better without a computer, we shouldn't use a computer. This idea doesn't appear to be one of those things.

[+sbell111]

I don't really agree with the implication that because there is a better way, that there shouldn't be a rougher alternative. Yes, you can always leech WiFi, find your local coordinates, plug them in, etc -- but why bother when a simple, semi-permanent marker or log can point the way from your exact location?

 

From reading the above comments, I have come to realize that the markers (I'm using that term because I'm not sure a paper log would be the best thing for long-term coordination) would probably need to be minimalistic, at best. It would have information on other root logs and designated, impermanent or semi-permanent spots -- no Geocaches, since those could be archived at a moment's notice, not to mention the legal war it would entail, according to the above.

 

I guess the point of this is escape -- hopping on a bike with a little GPSr and just going, without a map or a laptop, and just following the logs from spot to spot, seeing what they tell you and so on. Perhaps the markers could be worked around with the local community, with a logbook or the like at a tourist info center that you can ask to sign (just one idea, mind you).

 

I'm trying to stay optimistic and adapt this to reality -- keep the criticism coming!

Now I'm really confused. Are you proposing an entirely new game?

[+CSpenceFLY]

Lots of issues, if I understand your concept, the biggest of course is that listing data belongs to Groundspeak and can't be published without their permission.

 

This too is an excellent and relevant point! What really perplexes me, though, is why someone would wish to do by hand and on paper something that is so much more easily and gracefully done by use of a PC and the Internet. This entire proposition reminds me of a recent encounter with one of my spacey New Age friends, a mechanical engineer by profession. Last time I visited his home city in the Midwest while on a consulting job, while we were having lunch together at a nice ethnic restaurant, at one point during our meal, he leaned forward toward me and advised me in a conspiratorial whisper that I (as a geocacher) had better be prepared to come up with a system to record locations of all caches in the USA on regional paper acrhives if I wanted to "preserve the sport after the end of civilization as we know it..." He went on to tell me that between the ravages of the collapse of civilzation due to Peak Oil (i.e., depletion of usable petroleum reserves) and due also to "the coming earth changes", pretty soon the Internet would come to an end and there would be no electricity with which to power PCs. Thus, in light of this impending dom (at least in his own fevered mind) his advice to me was to back up all geocache listings in paper archives with copies located in each region of the country. My wise and well-reasoned response to his thesis was to burp at him from across the table. sigh!

 

If all of that comes to pass I think my geocaching will be the least of my worries.After all how the hell am I going to skydive with no fuel.

Edited April 10, 2007 by CSpenceFLY

[+globalgirl]

I guess the point of this is escape -- hopping on a bike with a little GPSr and just going, without a map or a laptop, and just following the logs from spot to spot, seeing what they tell you and so on. Perhaps the markers could be worked around with the local community, with a logbook or the like at a tourist info center that you can ask to sign (just one idea, mind you).

 

I'm trying to stay optimistic and adapt this to reality -- keep the criticism coming!

Clearly the notion needs some tweaking, but I applaud your verve in brainstorming/thinking-outside-the-box. Kinda like the experiential difference between... taking a tour bus to Machu Picchu vs. whacking your merry way through the jungle with a machete (ah, now that'd be MY way to do it!)

 

Indeed, you may well be onto something. I mean, such creative thinking once - why, once plopped the 1st Original Stash!

[+d-town cachers]

well, i guess it's fun to be in the minority sometimes. so i'm the only one who likes this idea?? maybe i better rethink my rethinking. the only other thing i would say is that just because a compuetr CAN do something, and do it fast and efficiently, doesn't mean we can't look for other alternatives. if gc.com would not allow something like that becasue of listing rights, well then, thats too bad. but not doing something just because a compuetr can is a pretty lame excuse not to do something. hey, my computer can make electronic music that is far better than me playing my guitar...but i won't stop just because there's an easier way. i guess that's my only gripe....talking down an idea just because it's difficult. that's all. and i still don't fully understand the scope of this project, but i like anything that challenges the all-powerful pc.

I totally agree with you. If something can be done better without a computer, we shouldn't use a computer. This idea doesn't appear to be one of those things.

 

that is the opposite of what i was trying to say. what i was trying to say is, just because a computer is really good at doing things, doesn't mean we should rely entirely on the computer. does that make sense? or maybe you were being sarcastic and got my point all along! either way...a little less reliance on technology could be a good thing in my opinion.

[+sbell111]

well, i guess it's fun to be in the minority sometimes. so i'm the only one who likes this idea?? maybe i better rethink my rethinking. the only other thing i would say is that just because a compuetr CAN do something, and do it fast and efficiently, doesn't mean we can't look for other alternatives. if gc.com would not allow something like that becasue of listing rights, well then, thats too bad. but not doing something just because a compuetr can is a pretty lame excuse not to do something. hey, my computer can make electronic music that is far better than me playing my guitar...but i won't stop just because there's an easier way. i guess that's my only gripe....talking down an idea just because it's difficult. that's all. and i still don't fully understand the scope of this project, but i like anything that challenges the all-powerful pc.

I totally agree with you. If something can be done better without a computer, we shouldn't use a computer. This idea doesn't appear to be one of those things.

that is the opposite of what i was trying to say. what i was trying to say is, just because a computer is really good at doing things, doesn't mean we should rely entirely on the computer. does that make sense? or maybe you were being sarcastic and got my point all along! either way...a little less reliance on technology could be a good thing in my opinion.

I agree with that as much as I believe that we should toss our GPSrs in favor of astrolabes and sextants.

[Dinoprophet]

Lots of issues, if I understand your concept, the biggest of course is that listing data belongs to Groundspeak and can't be published without their permission.

 

Actually:

 

All comments, articles, tutorials, screenshots, pictures, graphics, tools, downloads, and all other materials submitted to Groundspeak in connection with the Site or available through the Site (collectively, “Submissions”) remain the property and copyright of the original author.

 

So you'd need not Groundspeak's permission, but each owner's, which is an even bigger deal (and that's for just the data; if you copied the formatting or other site-specific stuff, you'd also need Groundspeak's).

Edited April 10, 2007 by Dinoprophet

[+d-town cachers]

so what happens to people who get so used to caching with gps, pda, pocket query, all the balls and whistles. then they get outside to some beautiful park, the batteries in the pda die, so they can't read their cache pages and then they spend so much time trying to recoup that the gps dies, on and on and on. ok, so maybe that's an exageration, but i firmly believe that technology is a bane. use it sparingly and to the best of our advantage. anything beyond that makes us lazy....thus i think this idea has some merit.

Edited April 10, 2007 by d-town cachers

[+sbell111]

so what happens to people who get so used to caching with gps, pda, pocket query, all the balls and whistles. then they get outside to some beautiful park, the batteries in the pda die, so they can't read their cache pages and then they spend so much time trying to recoup that the gps dies, on and on and on. ok, so maybe that's an exageration, but i firmly believe that technology is a bane. use it sparingly and to the best of our advantage. anything beyond that makes us lazy....thus i think this idea has some merit.

It only takes one time for that to happen before you remember to always have spares.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

OK, your argument against relying on computers has some validity in some areas.

 

As a member of the Amateur Radio Service (ham radio) community whose motto is "When all else fails" I stay equipped and prepared to take care of my family and community when disaster strikes.

 

In every deployment I have made computers and related technology did fail and we were among the few, if not the only, folks who could communicate and organize recovery activities.

 

Geocaching, however, does not rise to the level of an activity for which analog or manual systems need be created as backup!

 

Men with hand-drawn maps and donkeys have hunted treasure throughout history, and that system works just as well today as it did then!

 

Should the power grid fail, the interet melt down, telecommunications systems die, and you STILL want to go geocaching, man you got my respect - that's dedication to the game!

 

Load your a** with maps and head on out!

 

As far as the game you are proposing - I don't get it!

 

This idea reminds me of a cacher friend who refuses to use the directional arrow and distance-to-target features of her gps. She carries a printout of the cache listing and watches her current location on the gps, wandering around until the current location coordinates match those on the page!

 

Yeah, just because a technology is there doesn't mean that you have to use it. Just ask the Amish.

Edited April 10, 2007 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+ADKcachers]

Lots of issues, if I understand your concept, the biggest of course is that listing data belongs to Groundspeak and can't be published without their permission.

 

This too is an excellent and relevant point! What really perplexes me, though, is why someone would wish to do by hand and on paper something that is so much more easily and gracefully done by use of a PC and the Internet. This entire proposition reminds me of a recent encounter with one of my spacey New Age friends, a mechanical engineer by profession. Last time I visited his home city in the Midwest while on a consulting job, while we were having lunch together at a nice ethnic restaurant, at one point during our meal, he leaned forward toward me and advised me in a conspiratorial whisper that I (as a geocacher) had better be prepared to come up with a system to record locations of all caches in the USA on regional paper acrhives if I wanted to "preserve the sport after the end of civilization as we know it..." He went on to tell me that between the ravages of the collapse of civilzation due to Peak Oil (i.e., depletion of usable petroleum reserves) and due also to "the coming earth changes", pretty soon the Internet would come to an end and there would be no electricity with which to power PCs. Thus, in light of this impending dom (at least in his own fevered mind) his advice to me was to back up all geocache listings in paper archives with copies located in each region of the country. My wise and well-reasoned response to his thesis was to burp at him from across the table. sigh!

 

Won't we be too busy hunting and making clothes to geocache? Are there solar powered GPSr's yet?

[+sbell111]

Lots of issues, if I understand your concept, the biggest of course is that listing data belongs to Groundspeak and can't be published without their permission.

This too is an excellent and relevant point! What really perplexes me, though, is why someone would wish to do by hand and on paper something that is so much more easily and gracefully done by use of a PC and the Internet. This entire proposition reminds me of a recent encounter with one of my spacey New Age friends, a mechanical engineer by profession. Last time I visited his home city in the Midwest while on a consulting job, while we were having lunch together at a nice ethnic restaurant, at one point during our meal, he leaned forward toward me and advised me in a conspiratorial whisper that I (as a geocacher) had better be prepared to come up with a system to record locations of all caches in the USA on regional paper acrhives if I wanted to "preserve the sport after the end of civilization as we know it..." He went on to tell me that between the ravages of the collapse of civilzation due to Peak Oil (i.e., depletion of usable petroleum reserves) and due also to "the coming earth changes", pretty soon the Internet would come to an end and there would be no electricity with which to power PCs. Thus, in light of this impending dom (at least in his own fevered mind) his advice to me was to back up all geocache listings in paper archives with copies located in each region of the country. My wise and well-reasoned response to his thesis was to burp at him from across the table. sigh!

Won't we be too busy hunting and making clothes to geocache? Are there solar powered GPSr's yet?

I'm sure that all the GPS satellites and receivers will be rendered useless by the electromagnetic pulses and ionizing radiation.

[+Renegade Knight]

Lots of issues, if I understand your concept, the biggest of course is that listing data belongs to Groundspeak and can't be published without their permission.

 

Actually:

 

All comments, articles, tutorials, screenshots, pictures, graphics, tools, downloads, and all other materials submitted to Groundspeak in connection with the Site or available through the Site (collectively, “Submissions”) remain the property and copyright of the original author.

 

So you'd need not Groundspeak's permission, but each owner's, which is an even bigger deal (and that's for just the data; if you copied the formatting or other site-specific stuff, you'd also need Groundspeak's).

 

Actually: (I love that word, may daughter loves it even more).

 

You do not own your listing just the info used to generate it. What you do own is your cache, but not it's coordinates. Coordinates are public domain after a fashion.

So if you pirated the listing for your root log, yeah maybe you have an issue.

If all you provide are coordinates to a cache, or add your own listing embelishments, it's a non issue.

 

Back on topic.

 

There is potential here. It's just a matter of evolution. When it's evolved you would have a niche.

Edited April 10, 2007 by Renegade Knight

[+Renegade Knight]

... Just ask the Amish.

 

Reminds me of the Amish Virus. Delivered via a hand written note.

 

"Your computer has been infected by the Amish Virus. Please go to your computer, delete all your data and reformat your drives. Thank you for your cooperation."

[+d-town cachers]

don't listen to the haters cr! i think if you have an idea, try to develope it a little more, and maybe make it a little easier to understand the concept. then go with it. whether people think they will like it or not. just goes back to the "if you don't like it, ignore it". i also think maybe some people are afraid to admit that without their computer (insert cell phone, pda, game-boy) they would be lost. and i argue, that's when we are truly NOT lost!!

[Dinoprophet]

Actually: (I love that word, may daughter loves it even more).

I know I use it too much; thanks for letting me know that it shows.

 

You do not own your listing just the info used to generate it. What you do own is your cache, but not it's coordinates. Coordinates are public domain after a fashion.

So if you pirated the listing for your root log, yeah maybe you have an issue.

If all you provide are coordinates to a cache, or add your own listing embelishments, it's a non issue.

That's how I read it too, and I'm sure it would be fine for most traditional and multicaches (IANAL). Where you might have trouble is with caches that have required info on the cache page and therefore need to copy them verbatim.

 

I'm not trying to muddy the waters, but I take a CYA stance on most things. So if it were me setting one of these up, I would ask the owners, even though I can't imagine a cacher not wanting additional publicity for their cache.

 

Back on topic.

 

There is potential here. It's just a matter of evolution. When it's evolved you would have a niche.

I agree that it's an interesting idea. I'm not convinced of its usefulness as it is, but I think it's worth discussing further and finding where the value may lie.

[+Jennifer&Dean]

Sounds like some of the old letterboxing stories I heard when we first started caching. Each letterbox would have clues to other boxes in them, and some boxes could only be found if you had found a series of letterboxes. That way, you could be out in the field letterboxing, get to a box, read the clues for other nearby boxes, and then go find them as well. From those other boxes you would get more clues to more boxes. Basically, there was no one place you could find out about all the letterboxes in the world, you had to actually be out there finding them in order to find out about other ones.

I have seen this done at geocaches where the owner places the coordinates for a few nearby caches in the front of the logbook so people who find their cache may decide to go find the other ones. I have also seen these linkings done on cache pages where folks say "If you are gonna find my cache, try these other ones nearby as well and gives links to the cache pages". The biggest issue- when caches get archived, these links have to be removed so they do not confuse people.

 

While an interesting way to think about playing the game, I am gonna recommend that you download a bunch of routes across the country, along roads you may be traveling on, and load those caches into your GPS. If you only do searches along the routes you may travel, you should be able to get a decent number of caches to potentially run across along the way.

-J

[+boda]

don't listen to the haters cr! i think if you have an idea, try to develope it a little more, and maybe make it a little easier to understand the concept. then go with it. whether people think they will like it or not. just goes back to the "if you don't like it, ignore it". i also think maybe some people are afraid to admit that without their computer (insert cell phone, pda, game-boy) they would be lost. and i argue, that's when we are truly NOT lost!!

 

Good post with the BIG exception of the word "haters."

 

I think we would find it a cumbersome system to maintain - but go for it anyway.

 

It just seems to me that if someone started this years ago, eventually someone would computerize it and make it popular. They might even call it "Geocaching."

 

As I said, go for it - I'd give it a try.

[+d-town cachers]

where i come from, haters is a term of endearment!!

 

It just seems to me that if someone started this years ago, eventually someone would computerize it and make it popular. They might even call it "Geocaching."

 

that's funny stuff, but i tend to agree. however, isn't that exactly the point. geocaching, but without the aid of the internet? unless i am totally missing the point...which is completely possible!

[+boda]

where i come from, haters is a term of endearment!!

 

It just seems to me that if someone started this years ago, eventually someone would computerize it and make it popular. They might even call it "Geocaching."

 

that's funny stuff, but i tend to agree. however, isn't that exactly the point. geocaching, but without the aid of the internet? unless i am totally missing the point...which is completely possible!

 

Wow - I wouldn't want to hear how you address your spouse!!!

 

It would be interesting to see how this would work, but I envision something very difficult to manage. I'm not really trying to be negative - but I have worked with similar types of systems in the past, and the computer just plain made it workable.

 

I wish crtrue the best.

[+Muddy Chris]

I like it. I'd host one here in Northern Indiana.

 

Makes more sense to me than the slew of PQ's I have to be on top of. List of 100 or so root logs, hop on the bike and go ... no need to plan where you will be going so you can do PQ's ahead of time. I like it.

 

Chris

[+Muddy Chris]

This idea reminds me of a cacher friend who refuses to use the directional arrow and distance-to-target features of her gps. She carries a printout of the cache listing and watches her current location on the gps, wandering around until the current location coordinates match those on the page!

 

That's not how you are supposed to do it? I often find the cache while others are still watching the goofy arrow.

 

Chris

[crtrue]

I like it. I'd host one here in Northern Indiana.

 

Makes more sense to me than the slew of PQ's I have to be on top of. List of 100 or so root logs, hop on the bike and go ... no need to plan where you will be going so you can do PQ's ahead of time. I like it.

 

Chris

 

This is more in the spirit of what I'm aiming for. I'm sorry if I'm changing what it is I'm suggesting with each post, but I'm trying to adapt this into something that can work -- my attitudes as to what this might be change with each post!

 

At the heart, it's simply a series of linking physical markers. That's it. From there, one would add information to these markers in some form. As to what, and how, that's really up in the air. Caches would be the most logical choice, but legal logistics are still a problem.

 

Again, I'm not really sure where I'm going with this. It's starting to sound more like hiking trail markers, only interconnecting with GPS coordinates and spread about the entire country / world.

[+d-town cachers]

so let me throw out a scenario, and tell me if it sounds right.

 

so geojoe gets up and decides to go on a long day trip. he takes gps, water, and flea-bag. then hits the trail.

 

he finds 1 root-log, which then gives him a whole list of close, medium, and far root-logs. he then chooses which one to hit, and goes there. and so on, until he decides he's bored. is that kinda what you had in mind?

[crtrue]

so let me throw out a scenario, and tell me if it sounds right.

 

so geojoe gets up and decides to go on a long day trip. he takes gps, water, and flea-bag. then hits the trail.

 

he finds 1 root-log, which then gives him a whole list of close, medium, and far root-logs. he then chooses which one to hit, and goes there. and so on, until he decides he's bored. is that kinda what you had in mind?

 

At essence, yes. That's the backbone of it, though -- the frosting on this cake here is that each marker should have information on other non-marker spots, either caches, interesting points of view, or whatnot.

[+d-town cachers]

so would these root-logs be published caches, or would they be more like letterboxes, with no cache page here at gc? either way, one at major entrance points to each state could be possible, which would contain coords to other roots. almost like a phone tree. kinda?

[+Muddy Chris]

I would think that they could be traditional caches on a bookmark list and would contain a list of coordinates to a few interesting local caches. They could be placed regionally by active cachers and would simply give you a plan if you found yourself in an area where you had no info for whatever reason ... lazy, no PDA, your cache printouts blew away in a tornado ... whatever. I don't always plan my trips ... I often just take off and go so this is quite interesting to me. I think it could follow the loose format that governs this entire hobby ... so long as you can get coordinates to an interesting spot or two or ten in an unfamiliar area.

 

Chris