Any New Pod Caches / Audio Caaches Published

July 10, 2007

What are their ID#'s...I want to check out how they did them.

July 10, 2007

I think I seem to recall seeing something recently that said these kind of caches are not allowed cause they don't meet the guidelines.

July 10, 2007

This was approved the day before the new rules...and is supposed to also meet the new requirements too....an alternate way to do the cache besides downloading an audio file.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...47-f2c5a8f8447f

But...I want to see something "Actually" published since then to make sure.

July 10, 2007

It takes some time to make a multi-stage cache and then to make and mix audio files. So, before I go thru the trouble...I want to see something current that was published.

5.3k · July 11, 2007

I think I seem to recall seeing something recently that said these kind of caches are not allowed cause they don't meet the guidelines.

Ooh! This is my chance to say "I TOLD YOU SO!"

And I did. Here.

Took considerably less time than the couple of years I predicted, too. In fact, less than 5 months.

There's a lesson here. I'm going to call it Fizzy's Rule:

Any geocaching "guideline," no matter how seemingly innocuous, will eventually be interpreted in the strictest possible manner and become an ironclad rule.

July 11, 2007

***Ooh! This is my chance to say "I TOLD YOU SO!"***

I was working on a Multi-Stage Night Podcache....I already got park approval to put up reflectors in trees and a cache in the park. I got Audacity and made and Mixed the audio files for the introduction and stages...and then the new rule came out and will prevent that unless I type out a transcript of the audio files so they can be read (an alternate method)...which would also be a TXT file that would have to be opened to read (downloading of data).

So, I'm not going to waste more time on this cache...just to find out that it won't get approved. I guess I'll just go put a MICRO under some lamp skirt instead.

1.2k · July 11, 2007

I'm curious about this too. I was in the process of creating a Audio based cache, but shelved the idea do to some confusion of the "new" guidelines.

Relating to the thread the Fizzy pointed out.

I though it was obvious that any cache that forced the user to click through to another site or download a program from another site wouldn't be approved. However, in my area of caches there have been about a half a dozen cache where the only way to solve the cache was to surf to an external website.

I'm very confused.

2.5k · July 12, 2007

***Ooh! This is my chance to say "I TOLD YOU SO!"***

I was working on a Multi-Stage Night Podcache....I already got park approval to put up reflectors in trees and a cache in the park. I got Audacity and made and Mixed the audio files for the introduction and stages...and then the new rule came out and will prevent that unless I type out a transcript of the audio files so they can be read (an alternate method)...which would also be a TXT file that would have to be opened to read (downloading of data).

So, I'm not going to waste more time on this cache...just to find out that it won't get approved. I guess I'll just go put a MICRO under some lamp skirt instead.

Can I ask for clarification for what it is you want to do, please? The example cache you posted in this thread was not a multi cache. You say you want to create a multi cache.

In the example cache, a cacher could choose to not plug in the coords, but instead use a series of audio clues to find the cache.

You really want to make a purely audio cache, but have learned that you can't because cachers shouldn't have to upload executables or get the information from any website that makes them log in and provide information (i.e. start an account). Do we agree so far?

Here's where I get lost, I think. Why can't you do the same thing the other person did, but make it two ways:

In the traditional version of the multi, the person goes to the starting coords, gets a written clue to the next stage and continues to go to all the stages, getting written clues along the way. Written on a piece of paper inside the cache, or perhaps actually printed onto the cache, etc. (Nothing to upload, download, copy to disc, log in to, or open and run).

OR

The cachers could use the alternate audio path: Get the audio file (and the print out of the audi, too, if they like) and do the stages the way you laid out in the audio.

And I do have one more question. In the example you give, and apprently in your vision, people have to go to a link, and click on that link to open a text page. Why? I mean, why not just link them to the actual text already visible as a complete webpage? They teach people like me NOT to click on those kinds of links.

5.3k · July 12, 2007

You really want to make a purely audio cache, but have learned that you can't because cachers shouldn't have to upload executables or get the information from any website that makes them log in and provide information (i.e. start an account). Do we agree so far?

Nope.

An audio cache does not require a cacher to "upload" (you actually meant download) any executable or log in to any website.

Sorry. Thanks for playing.

July 12, 2007

***Here's where I get lost, I think. Why can't you do the same thing the other person did, but make it two ways:

In the traditional version of the multi, the person goes to the starting coords, gets a written clue to the next stage and continues to go to all the stages, getting written clues along the way. Written on a piece of paper inside the cache, or perhaps actually printed onto the cache, etc. (Nothing to upload, download, copy to disc, log in to, or open and run)***

That is the regular way...OK (I have one of those out there...normal stuff)

***The cachers could use the alternate audio path: Get the audio file (and the print out of the audi, too, if they like) and do the stages the way you laid out in the audio. ***

Ok, but you have to store the text file / audio file somewhere for people to download.

***And I do have one more question. In the example you give, and apprently in your vision, people have to go to a link, and click on that link to open a text page. Why?***

Like I said above, the people have to get the text file / audio file from somewhere. If you look at the properties of the example cache's links I mentioned further up...you will see the links go to another site for the downloads.

***I mean, why not just link them to the actual text already visible as a complete webpage?***

If it was a complete webpage with the text already visible on it...you would not have to link to the text file. But lets just say we did that for the text...Now, where do people get the audio file from?

***They teach people like me NOT to click on those kinds of links.***

But, I bet you surf the web clicking on links...loading up your computer with cookies and spyware.

7.2k · July 12, 2007

I'm confused as to why you can't put the transcript directly on the cache page. I believe the text limit was upped to some massive amount like 65K.

...and encrypt it with an autokey cipher. What? It's breakable. Besides, Vigenère ciphers have become almost trivial to break with all of the tools out there. Most samples can be broken in well less than an hour. The autokey is bit harder.

There you go. Two independent paths. One just easier than the other.

Why this would not be approved I don't know as the encrypted text alone would likely get approved as long as you inserted the required GPS use element.

July 12, 2007

Thanks for that link...I'll read it more tonight.

The GPS element is no problem.

2.5k · July 12, 2007

...***I mean, why not just link them to the actual text already visible as a complete webpage?***
If it was a complete webpage with the text already visible on it...you would not have to link to the text file. But lets just say we did that for the text...Now, where do people get the audio file from?

I find it a bit disconcerting quoting you responding to me when you haven't quoted me the "usual" way. It makes it hard to see who made various comments. So I changed my original comments to color.

First, one thing I don't really understand is why you need the text of the audio. Did a reviewer tell some other cache owner to do that? Did the cache owner provide it as a courtesy because the audio isn't as clear as it should be?

If it's just there as a courtesy, why can't you just add it as an image on the cache page? Write it out in whatever text program you care to, copy it using print screen and throw it in some imaging software and turn it into a file that GC recognizes.

I'm guessing your answer is "It's too loooong"--so then, why not treat it as CR suggested? I don't think you'd even need to encrypt it--unless you just want to make it slightly difficult to get the directions just for fun. Just tell people the script to the audio file can be found at the bottom of the cache description.

Now, where do people get the audio file from?

Why do they need to get the audio and the text of script from the same place?

Or are you just not sure how you can get the audio to them? From the looks of the cache you provided as an example Sound Advice it doesn't seem to be a problem to send people off to get the .wav file --as long as you have also provided them a way to get the cache without having to go get the .wav file.

***They teach people like me NOT to click on those kinds of links.***

But, I bet you surf the web clicking on links...loading up your computer with cookies and spyware.

I do, but I also use various tools to block most of them, and other various tools to get rid of the few that slip through from sites that I've given additional permissions. I don't click on links that are obvious downloads of executables, and if I manage to try to click on one that takes me to something like that, I get a nice little message from my anti-virus program that I'm about to do something potentially stupid.

The cache you provided as an example has two links in it:

One that goes to a .WAV file with a 540.8 KB download called Sound Advice

and

One that goes to a 2.0KB rich text file with the same name.

I'm sure the person who created those files just put them in the same storage place because it was handy, but my only point is there isn't any real need to make people download a rich text file. I'm sure it's perfectly innocent, but I wasn't going to click on the link to find out because I don't know that person and I don't know that file storage company.

I'm not being hateful...I'm just trying to understand what you want to do, and help you get it done. This may help everyone understand the purpose behind these guidelines. Your potential audience includes people like me, and people that have even less comfort with computers, as well as people who can make a computer from scratch over dinner.

I think of myself as slightly above average as far as sense of ease with computers. I don't know all the terminology, but I know how to "do" some things beyond simple email and IMs and web-surfing. I belong to listserves and I do various forums. I play a few role playing and first person shooter games. I've put software programs on my computer and I've uninstalled a few, too. I've installed and uninstalled hardware like zip drives, more memory etc.

I have massive numbers of webpages I created for my classes at school; some of them are interactive and allow students to fill in blanks and submit responses directly to me, but none of them force anyone to run anything or "open" anything other than the next page. None of the public ones require any special programs to open them (I do have some that are only available "in house" and those do require special programs--but they can only be accessed from the school computers and the school tech helped me make those so he wouldn't have any headaches with them).

I do that on purpose, because they teach people like me, that aren't very computer saavy, not to click on hotlinks that involve executables. I know that folks that know more about computers laugh at people like me, but face it, if a little linky like that 'did something' to your computer, you would know what to do to fix it. If it 'did something' to my computer, I'd have to unhook all the spaghetti on the back of my tower and haul it off to my computer guy.

You've already done the technical work for this cache. It seems to me that all you need to add is the "traditional" way to do it, and send it to your reviewer.

2.5k · July 12, 2007

You really want to make a purely audio cache, but have learned that you can't because cachers shouldn't have to upload executables or get the information from any website that makes them log in and provide information (i.e. start an account). Do we agree so far?

Nope.

An audio cache does not require a cacher to "upload" (you actually meant download) any executable or log in to any website.

Sorry. Thanks for playing.

That's really cute, the way you humiliated me in front of everyone....but it makes a good point. I'm probably the target audience that GURU4HIRE is dealing with on this cache. He wants people to try a new kind of cache but he has to deal with GC and people like me. I know enough to be careful, but not enough to say I know what I'm doing.

I have an iPod, and I'd probably want to try a cache like his the way he really intends. But before I did, I have to learn more about how safe it is, because I don't want to mess up my really cool custom built computer by clicking on a link from some stanger.

I know how much I know about computers and computer safety, I have no idea how much he knows. I have to say, it makes me uncomfortable that he doesn't use the built-in quote system on this forum, which seems a simple thing to me. And I don't say that to be snarky--I have big gaps in what I know about computers, and other areas where I am fairly adept. How do I know where someone else's gaps lay?

What if he doesn't know how to safely create an audio file to upload. What if his reviewer doesn't know how to check that?

July 12, 2007

***First, one thing I don't really understand is why you need the text of the audio. Did a reviewer tell some other cache owner to do that? Did the cache owner provide it as a courtesy because the audio isn't as clear as it should be?***

Yes....because of the new rules...there has to be an alternate way to do the cache. If you look at sound advice, you don't even need a GPS to do the cache...which I thought was required. However, it was explained to me that the text and audio files were alternate ways to do the cache...that people could download if they wanted.

As of Feb 2007, there are NEW rules...here is the part that affects people if they want to create a Pod / Audio Cache.

***In the interest of file security, caches that require the downloading, installing or running of data and/or executables may not be published.***

The link I gave for "Sound Advice" was published Jan 31, 2007....a day before the new rules.

***You've already done the technical work for this cache. It seems to me that all you need to add is the "traditional" way to do it, and send it to your reviewer.***

I might add the Traditional way as the "Alternate method". Search for PodCaches and you will see a number of them approved and listed here. They all involve downloading Wav and MP3 files that people can take with them and play when they are looking for the cache. They give you clues when in the "Field"...but all before Feb 2007.

HOWEVER

As of February 2007, you are not allowed to do this anymore...because of the above new rule.

***I'm probably the target audience that GURU4HIRE is dealing with on this cache. He wants people to try a new kind of cache but he has to deal with GC and people like me. I know enough to be careful, but not enough to say I know what I'm doing. ***

Yes, YOU are the target audience that I am dealing with...no problem there. I'm sure others have your concerns too.

July 12, 2007

Anyway...I'll work on this...with GPS and the Alternate Text, Audio and maybe an MP4 video file where they can walk with me to the cache....and see if I can get this Multi-Stage Night Cache approved.

Edited July 12, 2007 by GURU4HIRE

July 20, 2007

Keep us posted. I've been thinking about a podcache, too, but I want to make sure I won't just be spinning my wheels.

2.5k · July 20, 2007

***First, one thing I don't really understand is why you need the text of the audio. Did a reviewer tell some other cache owner to do that? Did the cache owner provide it as a courtesy because the audio isn't as clear as it should be?***

Yes....because of the new rules...there has to be an alternate way to do the cache. If you look at sound advice, you don't even need a GPS to do the cache...which I thought was required. However, it was explained to me that the text and audio files were alternate ways to do the cache...that people could download if they wanted.

If you look at sound advice the coords for the cache are right there where they always are. You can go to the cache using the coordinates just like any traditional cache. Just put your coords in the GPS and hit "goto"

Or

you can use the alternate audio method

Is it possible that you are making this harder than it needs to be? Why can't you just make the cache the way you want (and also provide the true coords for those who don't want to get involved in the audio so it will be published)? Am I missing something?

July 23, 2007

***Why can't you just make the cache the way you want (and also provide the true coords for those who don't want to get involved in the audio so it will be published)? Am I missing something?***

Yea...if I give you the true coordinates....then it ain't a puzzle/mystery cache anymore.

2.5k · July 23, 2007

***Why can't you just make the cache the way you want (and also provide the true coords for those who don't want to get involved in the audio so it will be published)? Am I missing something?***

Yea...if I give you the true coordinates....then it ain't a puzzle/mystery cache anymore.

Well, it would be for the people who went the audio route.

My understanding of the cache you gave as an example was that the people who used the audio file ignored the final coordinates that were given and just used the audio file. Apparently some of them also loaded the final cords and used them as a backup in case they couldn't follow the audio file. And of course some people weren't interested in the audio file at all, and they just loaded the cords and went to the cache.

Please tell me if I am following you correctly:

1) Ultimately, you would like folks to have to use an audio file on an iPod to get to the final coordinates.

2) The cache won't get published if there isn't a way to do it without downloading the audio file

3) You don't want to provide the coordinates for the final stage so it could just be loaded into a gps and found without the audio file by some people

It isn't clear to me if your audio files takes them to various containers (stages of the cache) along the way or not, but it does seem that you want them to go a particular route (Not asking you to give away your secrets, just trying to get a clear picture of what you have in mind).

So could you have the first set of coordinates serve two purposes:

1) to get folks to the starting point for the audio file and

2) to get other people (who won't use the audio file for whatever reason) to the first stage of a two-stage multicache.

The people doing the cache as a regular multicache would go to the starting cords, get some information from that spot that would allow them to go find the second (final) stage of the multicache.

The people doing the audio file directions would ignore the information for the two-part multi and begin their audio adventure at the first stage. Their final would be different than the two-stage multi final location.

It means an extra final stage to create, but it would mean that you wouldn't have to publish the final coordinates for the audio cache. Would that satisfy your reviewer?

Edited July 23, 2007 by Neos2

July 23, 2007

***The people doing the cache as a regular multicache would go to the starting cords, get some information from that spot that would allow them to go find the second (final) stage of the multicache.

The people doing the audio file directions would ignore the information for the two-part multi and begin their audio adventure at the first stage. Their final would be different than the two-stage multi final location. ***

Well, thats another idea...and I appreciate your comments.

I will try to do both the audio and text transcripts. Either way they would have to decipher the starting coordinates (voice or text). The coordinates to each of the following stages would be calculated in the field on the clues that they see...so either way (voice or text), they would not have to ignore anything...they could either read or listen to what steps they have to do in order to get the next GPS coordinates.

I know that others are interested in setting up something similar and I guess I will be the Guinea Pig and see what I can do to get something approved...and if approved...it could be informational for others. In a previous thread, I was given some ideas by a couple moderators what would / would not be allowed to pass the new 02/2007 rules. It seemed to focus on an "Alternate" method to a file / data download.

I'll keep you posted.

Any New Pod Caches / Audio Caaches Published

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation