Jump to content

New 'Caches in a Day' Record Imminent?


addisonbr
Followers 6

Recommended Posts

How is this, and other power trails that have been discussed here , not a clear violation of the guideline?

 

I'm guessing...

 

Who called it a Sock Puppet account?? NGA is the Nevada Geocaching Association. They have co-hosted an Event in the past with Signal and Groundspeak. I guess this is an officially sanctioned power trail.

Link to comment

What I don't understand is how power trails like this are allowed to be published. The guideline, as someone else posted clearly states:

 

"Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. The ultimate goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area, especially by the same hider. Groundspeak may further restrict cache listings in areas where cache saturation becomes a concern."

 

How is this, and other power trails that have been discussed here , not a clear violation of the guideline?

The phrase "just because you can" gives them an out... there can be many other reasons to hide a power trail than just because they can! If you have any other reason then you're covered under that guideline as written.

Link to comment

"Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. The ultimate goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area, especially by the same hider. Groundspeak may further restrict cache listings in areas where cache saturation becomes a concern."

 

How is this, and other power trails that have been discussed here , not a clear violation of the guideline?

 

First, you guys keep mentioning a record. None has really been established. There was one claimed as something like 400 + caches but that has been long since proven to have been impossible by an individual.

 

Second, the guideline listed is a). worded as a suggestion that I believe is there in case of abuse and <_<. has long since been ignored, at least here in the midwest.

 

Guess for those that see the overwhelming task of ignoring these the new mega PQs will be a blessing.

Link to comment

Agreed, it seems like much more fun to just find them instead.

 

Not really my cup of tea. I don't think I'd have the stamina or the attention span to log them on the website.

So don't!

 

I don't. It's not a requirement, and stats are meaningless, so just go cache and have fun! <_<

 

I find them, sign them and I'm done, no record keeping, no hours spent trying to remember and log the caches.

 

And before anyone jumps in with it, no, I don't 'owe' the CO a log or anything else except my appreciation and proper treatment of his cache. :)

 

I don't think I'm in any danger of these popping up in a PQ in the near future... you know with them being across the country and all. I'm filtering out micros these days anyways. I'm not big into Pokemon caching (gotta find 'em all). Don't take my "cup of tea" comment as anything other than that, I never claimed it was a requirement. If this is the type of caching that you want to do- then more power to you! Have a blast!*

 

 

*I'll pass.

Link to comment

What I don't understand is how power trails like this are allowed to be published. The guideline, as someone else posted clearly states:

 

"Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. The ultimate goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area, especially by the same hider. Groundspeak may further restrict cache listings in areas where cache saturation becomes a concern."

 

How is this, and other power trails that have been discussed here , not a clear violation of the guideline?

The phrase "just because you can" gives them an out... there can be many other reasons to hide a power trail than just because they can! If you have any other reason then you're covered under that guideline as written.

 

What would that reason be... "Just because I wanted to"? <_<

Link to comment

If you look carefully at the satellite images in Google Maps, you'll notice that the overwhelming majority of them have been placed on high-voltage electricity transmission towers. You can tell by the shadows of the towers, the linearity and regularity of the placements, the convenient little access roads that lead to each cache, and the fact that they're all off of Powerline Road.

 

I know I'm not touchin' 'em or anything like 'em.

 

Also, since when does NGA hide caches in California?

Edited by ePeterso2
Link to comment

There certainly is a shortage of film cans some where. Of course the GPSr will be reading screwy under all those power lines.

 

I placed my first cache under a power line almost 9 years ago, it's still there and I doubt if there have been more then a half a dozen in that time complain obut screwy readings

Link to comment
HHHHmmmmm a couple of names come to mind :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
Think Alamogul is there yet?

 

I was thinking of The VK kids EMC and a couple of others that tag along with them :):huh:

I think that Bobcam has used up his vacation for the year already. He's probably doing a big face palm right about now! :lol:

 

Edit: speaking of face-palms, I don't want to screw up the formatting by pasting this huge, but fun face-palm picture here, but I will link to it: (link)

Edited by knowschad
Link to comment

"Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. The ultimate goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area, especially by the same hider. Groundspeak may further restrict cache listings in areas where cache saturation becomes a concern."

 

How is this, and other power trails that have been discussed here , not a clear violation of the guideline?

 

First, you guys keep mentioning a record. None has really been established. There was one claimed as something like 400 + caches but that has been long since proven to have been impossible by an individual.

 

Second, the guideline listed is a). worded as a suggestion that I believe is there in case of abuse and :). has long since been ignored, at least here in the midwest.

 

Guess for those that see the overwhelming task of ignoring these the new mega PQs will be a blessing.

 

Most of the text from NYPaddleCacher's quote from the guidelines is the remants of what they used to say when power trails were not allowed. The phrase "Power Trail" no longer exists in the guidelines.

 

So the sentence "Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can." is being completely ignored. Power trails are allowed, and the floodgates are open world-wide. For example, someone broke Ventura Kid's Denver Airport one day record on a power trail in Denmark. Why is that sentence even still there? I suspect it will be gone next revision.

Link to comment

I have to agree with you, TWU. It is one of the oddest unspoken turnarounds that I have seen here. First, even the term Power Trail was unheard of. Then suddenly, without warning, clusters of caches began to be turned down because they were deemed to be Power Trails. For a while there, questions were buzzing about what exactly constituted a "Power Trail", but it was defined, and the questions settled down.

 

Then all of a sudden, again, with no notice, not only were they being allowed again, but it almost seems that they are being encouraged! HUGE power trails.

 

I really don't care one way or the other, but consistency and communication, and advance notice of these decisions, where possible, would sure be very much appreciated.

Link to comment

I see a bicycling cache trip as the best way to go on this trail. A motor vehicle (aside from a golf cart) would be a pain in the neck.

 

bittsen- I'm back in PDX pretty soon. Anytime after Memorial Day let me know, I'll travel with you to hit all these caches. We can hit up Vegas afterward as a reward.

Link to comment

Based on the guy's hides, there's 535 hides there. But I don't see the point of them. Why would you want to spend an entire day finding a cache every 528 feet? It seems silly.

 

Some people like finding lots of caches in a day. Others prefer a 10 mile hike to that one special one. Many others prefer something in between those two extremes. Good thing we can all find what we like at the same website.

 

Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. The ultimate goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area, especially by the same hider. Groundspeak may further restrict cache listings in areas where cache saturation becomes a concern.

 

:)

 

And some folks feel the need to look down on others who participate differently than they do. :huh:

 

Wait a minute... :lol:

 

Didn't I just do thaaaat?

 

 

 

urkel.jpg

Edited by Snoogans
Link to comment

If you look carefully at the satellite images in Google Maps, you'll notice that the overwhelming majority of them have been placed on high-voltage electricity transmission towers. You can tell by the shadows of the towers, the linearity and regularity of the placements, the convenient little access roads that lead to each cache, and the fact that they're all off of Powerline Road.

 

I know I'm not touchin' 'em or anything like 'em.

 

Also, since when does NGA hide caches in California?

 

Oh, I just looked at about 100. Maybe half appeared to be on Steel towers. And they could be on something near the base of the towers. The alien planet like terrain was annoying my eyes, so I didn't look at any more. :) I'm just wondering where the other ones are. In a desert bush of some sort maybe?

Link to comment

Think anyone doing a significant percentage of this would write a unique log for each one?

 

Why not? A simple perl script for a Travesty Generator could do. Include bits about desert, fire road, blazing sun, water supply and spit it out in random order and you've got unique logs for all of them. :)

Link to comment

I have to agree with you, TWU. It is one of the oddest unspoken turnarounds that I have seen here. First, even the term Power Trail was unheard of. Then suddenly, without warning, clusters of caches began to be turned down because they were deemed to be Power Trails. For a while there, questions were buzzing about what exactly constituted a "Power Trail", but it was defined, and the questions settled down.

 

Then all of a sudden, again, with no notice, not only were they being allowed again, but it almost seems that they are being encouraged! HUGE power trails.

 

I really don't care one way or the other, but consistency and communication, and advance notice of these decisions, where possible, would sure be very much appreciated.

 

That, to me, is the biggest issue here. Try to place a new cache 500' or less from an existing physical and it won't get published because it violates the guidelines.

 

Although some may come up with all sorts of interpretations of "don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can" I fail see how this series and others like it do not violate the spirit of what this guideline is all about.

 

What is a geocaching newbie to think when some guidelines are strictly enforced while others seem to be ignored?

Link to comment

I see a bicycling cache trip as the best way to go on this trail. A motor vehicle (aside from a golf cart) would be a pain in the neck.

 

bittsen- I'm back in PDX pretty soon. Anytime after Memorial Day let me know, I'll travel with you to hit all these caches. We can hit up Vegas afterward as a reward.

If your serious think about the temps during the summer

and a soft top jeep with the doors off would be about the perfect vehicle :)

Link to comment
Think anyone doing a significant percentage of this would write a unique log for each one?
If I had a month or two to find them all, I'd still write unique logs. If I tried to find them all in a few days, though.... well, I might have to write some sort of "Eliza"style logging software first.
Link to comment
Think anyone doing a significant percentage of this would write a unique log for each one?

 

Why not? A simple perl script for a Travesty Generator could do. Include bits about desert, fire road, blazing sun, water supply and spit it out in random order and you've got unique logs for all of them. :)

 

If I had a month or two to find them all, I'd still write unique logs. If I tried to find them all in a few days, though.... well, I might have to write some sort of "Eliza"style logging software first.

I did a quick search and found one resource.

 

http://watchout4snakes.com/CreativityTools...omSentence.aspx

 

I think it can be used to boost my post count as well (before I get banned). Like:

 

Why does a designing powder reach the player? The splendid result studies below the oral indent. A cylinder swims.

 

Anyway, regarding the power trail, it's not high on my list of things to do, but I'll do it if I'm there. Probably not the entire trail though.

Link to comment

Looks painful to me :huh: I did a series of 29 once along a highway and that was enough to give my caching buddy and I both huge headaches :) It might be different if it's a very quiet rural highway but cars zooming by while I cache is not my idea of fun.

 

The cars zooming by are miles away. Quiet rural highway? It's more like tire tracks in the desert. You would have to watch for the rattlesnakes zooming by though.

Link to comment

So someone does 50 and gets bored, goes home and logs 500 or so. Throws in a few DNFs for good measure, would anyone notice? :lol: Is the owner going to check?

 

If one goes missing, wouldn't it be difficult to remember which one? :huh:

 

Why is it called "power trail", or "trail of the gods" if they are all lame microspam? :lol:

 

I would say ignore them, but how do you run a PQ to do that, or how long would it take to put each one on ignore? Spending one minute per page is an 8+ hour task. :)

Link to comment
So someone does 50 and gets bored, goes home and logs 500 or so. Throws in a few DNFs for good measure, would anyone notice? :) Is the owner going to check?

Probably not, but the next person along might notice that the guy before them on the cache page is not signed in on the log. Could prove to be embarrassing.
Link to comment

I feel bad for the local cachers who prefer long hikes in the woods. Now their local PQ's will be all filled up with these cache. :)

 

That is what ignore lists are for.

 

So you gotta spend how many hours tagging them as "Ignore" then confirming it? This is a good reason for an "Ignore All From User xxx" feature.

Link to comment

I would say ignore them, but how do you run a PQ to do that, or how long would it take to put each one on ignore? Spending one minute per page is an 8+ hour task. :)

 

You don't need to ignore any of them. This is the Mojave Desert there really isn't much of anything else out there. A couple PQ's with the correct center point and radius and maybe a correctly parameted CAR and you don't get any of them. This is not along a rails to trails in a cache dense urban area.

Link to comment

I feel bad for the local cachers who prefer long hikes in the woods. Now their local PQ's will be all filled up with these cache. :)

 

That is what ignore lists are for.

 

So you gotta spend how many hours tagging them as "Ignore" then confirming it? This is a good reason for an "Ignore All From User xxx" feature.

 

see this post.

Link to comment

I have to agree with you, TWU. It is one of the oddest unspoken turnarounds that I have seen here. First, even the term Power Trail was unheard of. Then suddenly, without warning, clusters of caches began to be turned down because they were deemed to be Power Trails. For a while there, questions were buzzing about what exactly constituted a "Power Trail", but it was defined, and the questions settled down.

 

Then all of a sudden, again, with no notice, not only were they being allowed again, but it almost seems that they are being encouraged! HUGE power trails.

 

I really don't care one way or the other, but consistency and communication, and advance notice of these decisions, where possible, would sure be very much appreciated.

 

Although some may come up with all sorts of interpretations of "don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can" I fail see how this series and others like it do not violate the spirit of what this guideline is all about.

 

What is a geocaching newbie to think when some guidelines are strictly enforced while others seem to be ignored?

 

I would have to think most regular players and paying customers like you and myself are scratching their heads about how it does not violate the spirit of what that guideline is about. The "all sorts of interpretations" seem to be coming mainly from volunteer reveiwers. :)

 

Oh, I better edit to add the reviewers that have chimed in in both threads have been very consistent with the interpretation. I'm just having a hard time getting it, that's all.

Edited by TheWhiteUrkel
Link to comment

I see a bicycling cache trip as the best way to go on this trail. A motor vehicle (aside from a golf cart) would be a pain in the neck.

 

bittsen- I'm back in PDX pretty soon. Anytime after Memorial Day let me know, I'll travel with you to hit all these caches. We can hit up Vegas afterward as a reward.

If your serious think about the temps during the summer

and a soft top jeep with the doors off would be about the perfect vehicle ;)

Yeah, or maybe motorcycle and LOTs of sunscreen.

 

At first I thought it was doable on a bicycle...not so much now.

Link to comment

Yeah, or maybe motorcycle and LOTs of sunscreen.

 

At first I thought it was doable on a bicycle...not so much now.

I was thinking it would be a BLAST on ATVs!! I've never ridden one, but I might get into it for a trail like that.

I can say with 100% confidence that it would be very easy to do with ATVs. I don't know about "fun" though. Anything can get tedius after many hours.

I had a pair of ATVs. If I still had them I would definately place a few more caches out there and would love to tackle that power trail even if I didn't get them all.

Link to comment

I would say ignore them, but how do you run a PQ to do that, or how long would it take to put each one on ignore? Spending one minute per page is an 8+ hour task. ;)

Do you plan to be caching in the open desert 40-some miles west of Vegas? Ever?

 

If not then ignoring these isn't even an issue for the vast majority of you. :)

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment

I would say ignore them, but how do you run a PQ to do that, or how long would it take to put each one on ignore? Spending one minute per page is an 8+ hour task. ;)

Do you plan to be caching in the open desert 40-some miles west of Vegas? Ever?

 

If not then ignoring these isn't even an issue for the vast majority of you. :)

I currently have 2 PQs. One is a route that goes through that area and the other is just off that route near the PT. So far, I see that it added about 25 or so to my route PQ and had little effect upon the other. Yawn.

 

As has been mentioned, there are numerous ways to avoid some, or all, of the PT when running a PQ. I probably won't pick up any of those caches on the way in or out of Las Vegas; but, if I decide to do so, I can easily run some PQs that will give me those caches.

 

BTW, for all it's desolation, it is a beautiful place to hike. That's from a guy born and raised in the midwest and who dislikd the desert for quite a few years.

Link to comment

I would say ignore them, but how do you run a PQ to do that, or how long would it take to put each one on ignore? Spending one minute per page is an 8+ hour task. ;)

Do you plan to be caching in the open desert 40-some miles west of Vegas? Ever?

 

If not then ignoring these isn't even an issue for the vast majority of you. :)

Sure you can... at least if you use Pocket Queries and GSAK. Set a filter to owner="NGA" and poof! they're gone.
Link to comment

I would say ignore them, but how do you run a PQ to do that, or how long would it take to put each one on ignore? Spending one minute per page is an 8+ hour task. ;)

Do you plan to be caching in the open desert 40-some miles west of Vegas? Ever?

 

If not then ignoring these isn't even an issue for the vast majority of you. :)

Sure you can... at least if you use Pocket Queries and GSAK. Set a filter to owner="NGA" and poof! they're gone.

 

OK so you live in or are visiting the area. You run a PQ of the 500 nearest caches. 490 are the NGA caches. Filter them in GSAK and that doesn't leave you a heck of a lot of caches. That is assuming you have the technical know how to use GSAK. It's an app with steep learning curve for the technologically challenged.

Link to comment

I'd love to pick a spot in the middle, and add a couple more caches. We used to do that to each other in our town. You'd no sooner find them all, when you'd have to hike back out there to find that 'just one more'. ;)

Haha, reminds me of my idea for Angel Island...go there and find them all, and leave a few new ones for the next players. Now the island has about 43 in one square mile. Can we expect to see a few added by you when you make it out there(in Primm)?

Link to comment

I would say ignore them, but how do you run a PQ to do that, or how long would it take to put each one on ignore? Spending one minute per page is an 8+ hour task. ;)

Do you plan to be caching in the open desert 40-some miles west of Vegas? Ever?

 

If not then ignoring these isn't even an issue for the vast majority of you. :)

Sure you can... at least if you use Pocket Queries and GSAK. Set a filter to owner="NGA" and poof! they're gone.

 

OK so you live in or are visiting the area. You run a PQ of the 500 nearest caches. 490 are the NGA caches. Filter them in GSAK and that doesn't leave you a heck of a lot of caches. That is assuming you have the technical know how to use GSAK. It's an app with steep learning curve for the technologically challenged.

PQs are going to be set at 1000 now, so you can still have 500 left. which will cover plenty or ground...besides, you can start the PQ to filter out Micros, which will already remove about 90% or these.

I wouldn't mind seeing the PT attribute made available though.

Link to comment

I want to do this trail! I think it would be a blast. Take some camping gear, and take 3-4 days and just enjoy the trip!!

Sounds like one of the fun ways to attack this one. I wonder what the camping regulations are around there. In fact, you could probably do the hike without camping. Maybe you could hike from Primm to Baker one day, and then past Baker and back the next, then Baker to Primm the last day. It would be quite the challenge in the summer, arranging a support crew(in vehicles) for the hikers would help.

Link to comment

I would say ignore them, but how do you run a PQ to do that, or how long would it take to put each one on ignore? Spending one minute per page is an 8+ hour task. ;)

Do you plan to be caching in the open desert 40-some miles west of Vegas? Ever?

 

If not then ignoring these isn't even an issue for the vast majority of you. :)

Sure you can... at least if you use Pocket Queries and GSAK. Set a filter to owner="NGA" and poof! they're gone.

 

OK so you live in or are visiting the area. You run a PQ of the 500 nearest caches. 490 are the NGA caches. Filter them in GSAK and that doesn't leave you a heck of a lot of caches. That is assuming you have the technical know how to use GSAK. It's an app with steep learning curve for the technologically challenged.

A-yup. I've thought for years that Pocket Queries should have a "Cache Owner is/is not" selection.
Link to comment

I would say ignore them, but how do you run a PQ to do that, or how long would it take to put each one on ignore? Spending one minute per page is an 8+ hour task. ;)

Do you plan to be caching in the open desert 40-some miles west of Vegas? Ever?

 

If not then ignoring these isn't even an issue for the vast majority of you. :mad:

Sure you can... at least if you use Pocket Queries and GSAK. Set a filter to owner="NGA" and poof! they're gone.

 

OK so you live in or are visiting the area. You run a PQ of the 500 nearest caches. 490 are the NGA caches. Filter them in GSAK and that doesn't leave you a heck of a lot of caches. That is assuming you have the technical know how to use GSAK. It's an app with steep learning curve for the technologically challenged.

A-yup. I've thought for years that Pocket Queries should have a "Cache Owner is/is not" selection.

A-yup just goes to show how cache barren the area is.

The power line road is at least 7 miles away from I15 so I don't believe it's going to bother anyone doing a route through there, I know if it was me Id do a Barstow to Vegas and have it set for 1/2 mile to the side, also remember high ground clearance vehicles are recommended.

It's not something the average cacher is going to do. also a little over 4000 ft elevation change :)

Link to comment

 

A-yup just goes to show how cache barren the area is.

The power line road is at least 7 miles away from I15 so I don't believe it's going to bother anyone doing a route through there, I know if it was me Id do a Barstow to Vegas and have it set for 1/2 mile to the side, also remember high ground clearance vehicles are recommended.

It's not something the average cacher is going to do. also a little over 4000 ft elevation change ;)

It passes through some areas where a terrain 3-4.5 can easilly be placed very nearby for those who want the extra challenges.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 6
×
×
  • Create New...