Micros the savor of geocaching and maybe the beginning?

[+Too Tall John]

Problem solved.

Not really.

Problem solved.

Your solution solves the problem for you. Don't presume it is a satisfactory solution for everyone. The moment you start presuming that you know why everyone likes or dislikes something that you don't care about, you set yourself up for failure. Sound familiar?

The moment you start presuming that you know why everyone does something that you don't care for, you set yourself up for failure.

Edited September 15, 2010 by Too Tall John

[+sbell111]

Problem solved.

Not really.

Problem solved.

Your solution solves the problem for you. Don't presume it is a satisfactory solution for everyone. The moment you start presuming that you know why everyone likes or dislikes something that you don't care about, you set yourself up for failure. Sound familiar?

The moment you start presuming that you know why everyone does something that you don't care for, you set yourself up for failure.

Post 35 has what you are looking for. Apparently, you missed that in your haste for a 'zinger'. Don'tcha hate it when that happens?

Edited September 15, 2010 by sbell111

[+Too Tall John]

Problem solved.

Not really.

Problem solved. <-- Part of post #35. Your solution doesn't speak to the problem, so it got cut. I read it.

Your solution solves the problem for you. Don't presume it is a satisfactory solution for everyone. The moment you start presuming that you know why everyone likes or dislikes something that you don't care about, you set yourself up for failure. Sound familiar?

The moment you start presuming that you know why everyone does something that you don't care for, you set yourself up for failure.

Post 35 has what you are looking for. Apparently, you missed that in your haste for a 'zinger'. Don'tcha hate it when that happens?

Nope, I read post 35. It did nothing for me. Which, come to think of it, is exactly my point.

 

Just because you think you have the solution doesn't mean that you do.

Edited September 16, 2010 by Too Tall John

[+sbell111]

Problem solved.

Not really.

Problem solved. <-- Part of post #35. Your solution doesn't speak to the problem, so it got cut. I read it.

Your solution solves the problem for you. Don't presume it is a satisfactory solution for everyone. The moment you start presuming that you know why everyone likes or dislikes something that you don't care about, you set yourself up for failure. Sound familiar?

The moment you start presuming that you know why everyone does something that you don't care for, you set yourself up for failure.

Post 35 has what you are looking for. Apparently, you missed that in your haste for a 'zinger'. Don'tcha hate it when that happens?

Nope, I read post 35. It did nothing for me. Which, come to think of it, is exactly my point.

 

Just because you think you have the solution doesn't mean that you do.

It wasn't my solution, it was Lone R's.

 

Further, while it may not solve whatever the heck your problem is, it appears to be a good soution for Lone R's problem as he presented it. (Otherwise, he wouldn't have implemented it.)

[+Castle Mischief]

It wasn't my solution, it was Lone R's.

 

Further, while it may not solve whatever the heck your problem is, it appears to be a good solution for Lone R's problem as he presented it. (Otherwise, he wouldn't have implemented it.)

 

I see where you're going with this, but I think the point is that the "problem" that Lone R presented wasn't that he was finding any micros, but that he was finding leaky micros. Now he doesn't find any micros including ones that he might have enjoyed. So, one problem patched, one problem still unsolved. Unfortunately, there's not a "my container sucks at keeping out the elements" attribute- just like there's not a "caches that person x would enjoy" attribute.

[+Too Tall John]

It wasn't my solution, it was Lone R's.

 

Further, while it may not solve whatever the heck your problem is, it appears to be a good soution for Lone R's problem as he presented it. (Otherwise, he wouldn't have implemented it.)

Hmm...

 

Then I'm really puzzled at why he said "Not Really" to your initial "Problem Solved."

 

Care to take a stab at that one?

[+L0ne.R]

Nope, I read post 35. It did nothing for me. Which, come to think of it, is exactly my point.

 

Just because you think you have the solution doesn't mean that you do.

 

It wasn't my solution, it was Lone R's.

 

Further, while it may not solve whatever the heck your problem is, it appears to be a good solution for Lone R's problem as he presented it. (Otherwise, he wouldn't have implemented it.)

 

Then I explained in post #37 that it was not "problem solved". Filtering micros is not a "good solution", it's what I've got to use because it's the only option available, it has multiple flaws.

[+sbell111]

It wasn't my solution, it was Lone R's.

 

Further, while it may not solve whatever the heck your problem is, it appears to be a good soution for Lone R's problem as he presented it. (Otherwise, he wouldn't have implemented it.)

Hmm...

 

Then I'm really puzzled at why he said "Not Really" to your initial "Problem Solved."

 

Care to take a stab at that one?

I took a 'stab' at that question way up there. ---^

[+sbell111]

Nope, I read post 35. It did nothing for me. Which, come to think of it, is exactly my point.

 

Just because you think you have the solution doesn't mean that you do.

 

It wasn't my solution, it was Lone R's.

 

Further, while it may not solve whatever the heck your problem is, it appears to be a good solution for Lone R's problem as he presented it. (Otherwise, he wouldn't have implemented it.)

 

Then I explained in post #37 that it was not "problem solved". Filtering micros is not a "good solution", it's what I've got to use because it's the only option available, it has multiple flaws.

All solutions have flaws. You chose the simplest solution because the 'regular micro experience' was leaving you grumbly.

 

If you are unhappy with your chosen solution, may I suggest that you implement my easy peasey method that has been discussed over and over and over in these threads that you have participated in?

 

(It should also be noted that since, based on your posts, you do not care for over 95% of all micros, perhaps sorting them all out is truly the best solution for you. Why implement any process that allows for the very few that don't make you grumbly, after all.)

Edited September 17, 2010 by sbell111