Jump to content

speaking thread


Followers 8

Recommended Posts

Found my first traveling cache today! Yay! Neat!

 

It was nearby, then left, then returned - very close to two of my caches. Fortunately I heard about it and found it.

 

I can see how things might get crazy if there were a lot of them, but I'm glad that the few that exist are still out there. A bit of extra spice for the sport.

 

I remember our first one in Germany. It took a while for it to settle down in one place long enough to log the find.

 

Thankfully, the coordinates never changed for the puzzle cache (just for the associated travel bug), so it never wreaked havoc with our stats.

 

I wonder if that kind of traveling cache would be allowed under today's rules or if it is banned along with the other traveling caches.

Link to comment

I did bring a GPS. If you'll notice in the dialog, I say that I have the app open because my GPS is on the fritz. For whatever reason, my GPSr decided to freeze up at the summit. My only the other option was to use the app.

 

Irony alert!

First it appeared that the tough trek was made "only" with smartphones. Shocking! Tongues were wagging! :yikes:

 

Then, in the actual field test, it is the *GPSr* that breaks down and the smartphone saves the day. :yikes:

 

I predict this will give the "modern cachers" fuel for the GPSr vs. smartphone debate. :yikes:

 

My take? GPSrs are evolving, and they started off way ahead, but smartphones are evolving faster and catching up to (surpassing?) GPSrs.

Link to comment

I did bring a GPS. If you'll notice in the dialog, I say that I have the app open because my GPS is on the fritz. For whatever reason, my GPSr decided to freeze up at the summit. My only the other option was to use the app.

 

Irony alert!

First it appeared that the tough trek was made "only" with smartphones. Shocking! Tongues were wagging! :yikes:

 

Then, in the actual field test, it is the *GPSr* that breaks down and the smartphone saves the day. :yikes:

 

I predict this will give the "modern cachers" fuel for the GPSr vs. smartphone debate. :yikes:

 

My take? GPSrs are evolving, and they started off way ahead, but smartphones are evolving faster and catching up to (surpassing?) GPSrs.

 

I think people need to decide what best suits their needs. I prefer having separate devices for practical reasons, not because of some Coke vs. Pepsi sentimentality.

 

I have yet to see a smartphone that will handle being bashed against rocks or dropped in swamps, which are both things that happen to my GPS on a regular basis. And I'm not going to put my phone into some ridiculous waterproof case that defeats the entire purpose of having a small, lightweight phone to begin with.

Link to comment

I did bring a GPS. If you'll notice in the dialog, I say that I have the app open because my GPS is on the fritz. For whatever reason, my GPSr decided to freeze up at the summit. My only the other option was to use the app.

 

Irony alert!

First it appeared that the tough trek was made "only" with smartphones. Shocking! Tongues were wagging! :yikes:

 

Then, in the actual field test, it is the *GPSr* that breaks down and the smartphone saves the day. :yikes:

 

I predict this will give the "modern cachers" fuel for the GPSr vs. smartphone debate. :yikes:

 

My take? GPSrs are evolving, and they started off way ahead, but smartphones are evolving faster and catching up to (surpassing?) GPSrs.

 

I think people need to decide what best suits their needs. I prefer having separate devices for practical reasons, not because of some Coke vs. Pepsi sentimentality.

 

I have yet to see a smartphone that will handle being bashed against rocks or dropped in swamps, which are both things that happen to my GPS on a regular basis. And I'm not going to put my phone into some ridiculous waterproof case that defeats the entire purpose of having a small, lightweight phone to begin with.

 

These days I'm attached to both my smartphone and my GPS. I've often had the issue of one or the other not working or capable of doing what I needed.

Link to comment

I did bring a GPS. If you'll notice in the dialog, I say that I have the app open because my GPS is on the fritz. For whatever reason, my GPSr decided to freeze up at the summit. My only the other option was to use the app.

 

Irony alert!

First it appeared that the tough trek was made "only" with smartphones. Shocking! Tongues were wagging! :yikes:

 

Then, in the actual field test, it is the *GPSr* that breaks down and the smartphone saves the day. :yikes:

 

I predict this will give the "modern cachers" fuel for the GPSr vs. smartphone debate. :yikes:

 

My take? GPSrs are evolving, and they started off way ahead, but smartphones are evolving faster and catching up to (surpassing?) GPSrs.

 

I think people need to decide what best suits their needs. I prefer having separate devices for practical reasons, not because of some Coke vs. Pepsi sentimentality.

 

I have yet to see a smartphone that will handle being bashed against rocks or dropped in swamps, which are both things that happen to my GPS on a regular basis. And I'm not going to put my phone into some ridiculous waterproof case that defeats the entire purpose of having a small, lightweight phone to begin with.

 

These days I'm attached to both my smartphone and my GPS. I've often had the issue of one or the other not working or capable of doing what I needed.

 

I'm attached to my smartphone - I need it to be a phone! If I destroy it geocaching, or kill the battery geocaching, it's no use to me.

Link to comment

I did bring a GPS. If you'll notice in the dialog, I say that I have the app open because my GPS is on the fritz. For whatever reason, my GPSr decided to freeze up at the summit. My only the other option was to use the app.

 

Irony alert!

First it appeared that the tough trek was made "only" with smartphones. Shocking! Tongues were wagging! :yikes:

 

Then, in the actual field test, it is the *GPSr* that breaks down and the smartphone saves the day. :yikes:

 

I predict this will give the "modern cachers" fuel for the GPSr vs. smartphone debate. :yikes:

 

My take? GPSrs are evolving, and they started off way ahead, but smartphones are evolving faster and catching up to (surpassing?) GPSrs.

 

I think people need to decide what best suits their needs. I prefer having separate devices for practical reasons, not because of some Coke vs. Pepsi sentimentality.

 

I have yet to see a smartphone that will handle being bashed against rocks or dropped in swamps, which are both things that happen to my GPS on a regular basis. And I'm not going to put my phone into some ridiculous waterproof case that defeats the entire purpose of having a small, lightweight phone to begin with.

 

These days I'm attached to both my smartphone and my GPS. I've often had the issue of one or the other not working or capable of doing what I needed.

 

I'm attached to my smartphone - I need it to be a phone! If I destroy it geocaching, or kill the battery geocaching, it's no use to me.

 

What works for me is:

Lifeproof case.

External battery backup charger.

 

Link to comment

I did bring a GPS. If you'll notice in the dialog, I say that I have the app open because my GPS is on the fritz. For whatever reason, my GPSr decided to freeze up at the summit. My only the other option was to use the app.

 

Irony alert!

First it appeared that the tough trek was made "only" with smartphones. Shocking! Tongues were wagging! :yikes:

 

Then, in the actual field test, it is the *GPSr* that breaks down and the smartphone saves the day. :yikes:

 

I predict this will give the "modern cachers" fuel for the GPSr vs. smartphone debate. :yikes:

 

My take? GPSrs are evolving, and they started off way ahead, but smartphones are evolving faster and catching up to (surpassing?) GPSrs.

 

I think people need to decide what best suits their needs. I prefer having separate devices for practical reasons, not because of some Coke vs. Pepsi sentimentality.

 

I have yet to see a smartphone that will handle being bashed against rocks or dropped in swamps, which are both things that happen to my GPS on a regular basis. And I'm not going to put my phone into some ridiculous waterproof case that defeats the entire purpose of having a small, lightweight phone to begin with.

 

These days I'm attached to both my smartphone and my GPS. I've often had the issue of one or the other not working or capable of doing what I needed.

 

I'm attached to my smartphone - I need it to be a phone! If I destroy it geocaching, or kill the battery geocaching, it's no use to me.

 

What works for me is:

Lifeproof case.

External battery backup charger.

 

Neither works for me. Not interested in encasing my phone in a bulky contraption and carrying extra accessories when I can just use my dedicated GPS to geocache, and use my phone for phoning.

 

Your mileage may vary.

Edited by narcissa
Link to comment

I did bring a GPS. If you'll notice in the dialog, I say that I have the app open because my GPS is on the fritz. For whatever reason, my GPSr decided to freeze up at the summit. My only the other option was to use the app.

 

Irony alert!

First it appeared that the tough trek was made "only" with smartphones. Shocking! Tongues were wagging! :yikes:

 

Then, in the actual field test, it is the *GPSr* that breaks down and the smartphone saves the day. :yikes:

 

I predict this will give the "modern cachers" fuel for the GPSr vs. smartphone debate. :yikes:

 

My take? GPSrs are evolving, and they started off way ahead, but smartphones are evolving faster and catching up to (surpassing?) GPSrs.

 

I think people need to decide what best suits their needs. I prefer having separate devices for practical reasons, not because of some Coke vs. Pepsi sentimentality.

 

I have yet to see a smartphone that will handle being bashed against rocks or dropped in swamps, which are both things that happen to my GPS on a regular basis. And I'm not going to put my phone into some ridiculous waterproof case that defeats the entire purpose of having a small, lightweight phone to begin with.

 

These days I'm attached to both my smartphone and my GPS. I've often had the issue of one or the other not working or capable of doing what I needed.

 

I'm attached to my smartphone - I need it to be a phone! If I destroy it geocaching, or kill the battery geocaching, it's no use to me.

 

What works for me is:

Lifeproof case.

External battery backup charger.

 

Neither works for me. Not interested in encasing my phone in a bulky contraption and carrying extra accessories when I can just use my dedicated GPS to geocache, and use my phone for phoning.

 

Your mileage may vary.

 

Sure, I see how you personally might find it doesn't suit you.

Just putting out the info to perhaps help someone who thinks it's not possible to geocache in the wild with a phone because of ruggedness issues and battery life.

Link to comment

I did bring a GPS. If you'll notice in the dialog, I say that I have the app open because my GPS is on the fritz. For whatever reason, my GPSr decided to freeze up at the summit. My only the other option was to use the app.

 

Irony alert!

First it appeared that the tough trek was made "only" with smartphones. Shocking! Tongues were wagging! :yikes:

 

Then, in the actual field test, it is the *GPSr* that breaks down and the smartphone saves the day. :yikes:

 

I predict this will give the "modern cachers" fuel for the GPSr vs. smartphone debate. :yikes:

 

My take? GPSrs are evolving, and they started off way ahead, but smartphones are evolving faster and catching up to (surpassing?) GPSrs.

 

I think people need to decide what best suits their needs. I prefer having separate devices for practical reasons, not because of some Coke vs. Pepsi sentimentality.

 

I have yet to see a smartphone that will handle being bashed against rocks or dropped in swamps, which are both things that happen to my GPS on a regular basis. And I'm not going to put my phone into some ridiculous waterproof case that defeats the entire purpose of having a small, lightweight phone to begin with.

 

These days I'm attached to both my smartphone and my GPS. I've often had the issue of one or the other not working or capable of doing what I needed.

 

I'm attached to my smartphone - I need it to be a phone! If I destroy it geocaching, or kill the battery geocaching, it's no use to me.

 

What works for me is:

Lifeproof case.

External battery backup charger.

 

Neither works for me. Not interested in encasing my phone in a bulky contraption and carrying extra accessories when I can just use my dedicated GPS to geocache, and use my phone for phoning.

 

Your mileage may vary.

 

Sure, I see how you personally might find it doesn't suit you.

Just putting out the info to perhaps help someone who thinks it's not possible to geocache in the wild with a phone because of ruggedness issues and battery life.

 

I agree with LOne.R. My eyes are at this moment 10 inches from a Lifeproof case. It certainly is not bulky and it has no effect on the use of the phone.

 

Also, many people have insurance on their phones for reasons unrelated to caching.

Link to comment

Using that logic, since many cache owners like to acknowledge FTF, all cache owners should acknowledge FTF, in order to keep the listing as accurate as possible.

Cache owners have some perks and power, but is the power to "acknowledge" (referree?) FTFs one of them?

Link to comment

Using that logic, since many cache owners like to acknowledge FTF, all cache owners should acknowledge FTF, in order to keep the listing as accurate as possible.

Cache owners have some perks and power, but is the power to "acknowledge" (referree?) FTFs one of them?

 

Sure, writing "Congratulations to Whoever for the FTF" on the cache page is definitely acknowledging it. I'm neither for nor against this practice; I did it on my early caches but don't do it anymore.

Link to comment

Using that logic, since many cache owners like to acknowledge FTF, all cache owners should acknowledge FTF, in order to keep the listing as accurate as possible.

Cache owners have some perks and power, but is the power to "acknowledge" (referree?) FTFs one of them?

 

Sure, writing "Congratulations to Whoever for the FTF" on the cache page is definitely acknowledging it. I'm neither for nor against this practice; I did it on my early caches but don't do it anymore.

Same here. It was a debate on who was the "first to find" one of our earthcaches that did it. I was tempted to go back and edit our old caches to take it off those, too, but I was too lazy.

Link to comment

I agree with LOne.R. My eyes are at this moment 10 inches from a Lifeproof case. It certainly is not bulky and it has no effect on the use of the phone.

 

Also, many people have insurance on their phones for reasons unrelated to caching.

 

Those cases do add bulk. And my phone dies very quickly if I use GPS, so it's just not a great option overall. Those portable battery chargers only give me a little extra time, so if I'm out for several hours I'd be out of luck after a few caches AND not able to use my phone. I'd have to carry several of them. It's just easier and more sensible to have a rugged GPS for geocaching and some spare batteries.

 

I think for urban caching and powertrails the needs are different and using a phone is more feasible for those cachers.

Link to comment

I am really irked by a n00b who picked up one of my TBs last July and didn't log it; did mention in his cache log that he took it. "My first travel bug!" Oh, how I cringe when I read those words! Also didn't go caching again (except for 1 cache in December). I reissued the TB and placed it in a cache on Monday. That same day, before I had logged my drop, the n00b grabbed the TB from me and placed it in a cache. Now I have two copies of the same Tb out, one in Colorado and one in New Mexico. GRRR!

 

Aaargh! Another case of duplicate TBs! One in Massachusetts and one in New Mexico.

 

On Jan 12/14 one of my TBs was logged as having been placed in a cache (which has frequent finds) by very experienced cachers. On July 5/14 the CO of that cache stated that the cache was missing and replaced it. At that time, I assumed that any trackables that had been in the cache when it went missing were also missing. However, it looks as though the TB may have been placed a different cache (a puzzle with very few finds) instead (by the experienced cachers) and stayed there until another cacher rescued it yesterday.

 

Meanwhile, under the assumption that the TB had been lost along with the first cache, I had reissued it and the new version was placed in a cache just four weeks previously. Guess I’ll just let both of them travel until one goes missing again.

 

It has happened again! I'm beginning to think that one year is way too soon to be reissuing trackables. Think I'll start waiting a full two years.

 

The original of this one was placed in a cache in Utah on 7/14/12 and not logged out. After no logs on it by 10/12/13 I reissued it and version 2 traveled around for a while, getting to Alaska on 5/3/15. On 7/9/14 the original resurfaced, and it now appears that version 2 has made it from Alaska to Florida.

It was really hard to figure this one out because the person who had the original from 7/9/14 to 7/14/15 logged many pages of visit logs; someone else grabbed version 2 on 3/1/15 and logged over 10 pages of visits before dropping it in Alaska. Then the person who had the original logged Retrieved from the cache in Alaska although they were nowhere near there at the time. So now there’s one in Indiana and one in Florida.

Link to comment

I agree with LOne.R. My eyes are at this moment 10 inches from a Lifeproof case. It certainly is not bulky and it has no effect on the use of the phone.

 

Also, many people have insurance on their phones for reasons unrelated to caching.

 

Those cases do add bulk. And my phone dies very quickly if I use GPS, so it's just not a great option overall. Those portable battery chargers only give me a little extra time, so if I'm out for several hours I'd be out of luck after a few caches AND not able to use my phone. I'd have to carry several of them. It's just easier and more sensible to have a rugged GPS for geocaching and some spare batteries.

 

I think for urban caching and powertrails the needs are different and using a phone is more feasible for those cachers.

 

I rarely do urban caching or powertrails.

I use a soundlogic rechargeable 5600mAh power bank with my iphone. Paid $30 for it. A fully charged power bank, charges up my iphone about 2.5 times before the power bank needs to be recharged.

I also find it really useful when on trips. I like to take photos to document my vacation and sometimes I use Google Maps for walking directions. Those chew up the batteries much faster then the GC app.

Personally, I'm a klutz and would buy a lifeproof case even if I didn't geocache with it. I have dropped my phone on to ceramic floors, cement floors, the driveway, the sidewalk.

Link to comment

I agree with LOne.R. My eyes are at this moment 10 inches from a Lifeproof case. It certainly is not bulky and it has no effect on the use of the phone.

 

Also, many people have insurance on their phones for reasons unrelated to caching.

 

Those cases do add bulk. And my phone dies very quickly if I use GPS, so it's just not a great option overall. Those portable battery chargers only give me a little extra time, so if I'm out for several hours I'd be out of luck after a few caches AND not able to use my phone. I'd have to carry several of them. It's just easier and more sensible to have a rugged GPS for geocaching and some spare batteries.

 

I think for urban caching and powertrails the needs are different and using a phone is more feasible for those cachers.

 

I rarely do urban caching or powertrails.

I use a soundlogic rechargeable 5600mAh power bank with my iphone. Paid $30 for it. A fully charged power bank, charges up my iphone about 2.5 times before the power bank needs to be recharged.

I also find it really useful when on trips. I like to take photos to document my vacation and sometimes I use Google Maps for walking directions. Those chew up the batteries much faster then the GC app.

Personally, I'm a klutz and would buy a lifeproof case even if I didn't geocache with it. I have dropped my phone on to ceramic floors, cement floors, the driveway, the sidewalk.

 

That's great if it works for you and your geocaching style. It's just not a reasonable set-up for me.

 

I use my phone as a phone, and sometimes as an internet device. I need to be able to use it as a phone and as an internet device.

 

I have an attractive phone wallet that protects it from casual bumps and drops. It doesn't need one of those bulky ones for that. I don't want my phone to look like a fish finder.

 

I use my DSLR camera to take photos. I only use my phone as a camera in a pinch. Just like I only use my phone as a GPS when I must.

 

On trips, I have a car/wall charger. I rarely use my phone for taking photos or as a GPS, so I don't need anything else to charge it. I occasionally look at maps to get oriented but I would never use it for turn-by-turn directions.

 

I'll wear out the phone in two or three years *without* geocaching. If I geocached with it, I'd wear it out much sooner than that. I don't want to spend $500 on a new phone every 12 to 18 months. My current phone and my GPS were roughly the same price but my GPS has lasted me years and it's still going.

 

Everyone has their own way of doing things. After ten years of this game I know what my GPS goes through and I know my phone can't stand up to that without inconvenient and bulky add-ons.

Link to comment

Those cases do add bulk. And my phone dies very quickly if I use GPS, so it's just not a great option overall. Those portable battery chargers only give me a little extra time on my phone, so if I'm out for several hours I'd be out of luck after a few caches AND not able to use my phone. I'd have to carry several of them. It's just easier and more sensible for me to have a rugged GPS for geocaching and some spare batteries, and I recommend the practice for anyone who shares my concerns and caching habits.

With the bolded text, that's the non-debate-bait phrasing that I believe everyone can agree with (even if others have their own way to deal with the concerns you have).

 

Everyone has their own way of doing things. After ten years of this game I know what my GPS goes through and I know my phone can't stand up to that without inconvenient and bulky add-ons.

Good, that's excellent for you. For some of us, we are perfectly happy with whatever we desire to use geocaching. This is not a debate about what is better or worse, it is a debate about preferences. If anyone reads someone's opinion like a slam on their own as if they're just wrong, then this debate simply rages on.

These days it's apples and oranges. "Bulky" is subjective. Saying "bulky case" will incite a argumentative response. How about just describing it as a "protective case"? Then we could all be happy. Even though it "adds bulk", to some people it's not "bulky". To you it is.

 

I don't even use a case.

But I do have an external AA battery pack, because I find carrying AA's (sharable with other devices) FAR more convenient both than having two devices, and using a battery pack that you have to recharge to use again. A handful of AA's will keep my phone with power for a full day of active use. And now with the iPhone OS allowing GPS use while in Airplane mode, that saves even more battery power. Ruggedness for me is not a concern because I take extra extra care of my device (whether hiking or over water, or whatever). Some people don't want to put that effort in, and that's fine. Accidents can still happen, and that's a risk I choose to take.

My phone does everything I need it to do, and it's served me in conditions that many people emphatically state smartphones cannot be used for. When someone says that, I already know they're either a] ignorant to the truth (I don't mean that insultingly, just that they don't know (yet) for a fact its capabilities), or b] wilfully obtuse and looking for one-sided debates. The first gang are usually willing to accept someone else's experience and realize that technology is improving and it's now more about preference than technical capability. The latter gang, well they tend to keep threads on this topic going :P

 

It is not "smartphones" vs "GPSrs". There are many models and brands of both, with a wide array of technical capabilities.

Know your model. Know your caching style. Know your budget and usage limitations. Use what suits you best. Recommend it to others, even, but don't take it personally if someone else's use appears to contradict yours. That's all there is to it.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

Those cases do add bulk. And my phone dies very quickly if I use GPS, so it's just not a great option overall. Those portable battery chargers only give me a little extra time on my phone, so if I'm out for several hours I'd be out of luck after a few caches AND not able to use my phone. I'd have to carry several of them. It's just easier and more sensible for me to have a rugged GPS for geocaching and some spare batteries, and I recommend the practice for anyone who shares my concerns and caching habits.

That's the non-debate-bait phrasing that I believe everyone can agree with (even if others have their own way to deal with the concerns you have).

 

Everyone has their own way of doing things. After ten years of this game I know what my GPS goes through and I know my phone can't stand up to that without inconvenient and bulky add-ons.

Good, that's excellent for you. For some of us, we are perfectly happy with whatever we desire to use geocaching. This is not a debate about what is better or worse, it is a debate about preferences. If anyone reads someone's opinion like a slam on their own as if they're just wrong, then this debate simply rages on.

These days it's apples and oranges. "Bulky" is subjective. Saying "bulky case" will incite a argumentative response. How about just describing it as a "protective case"? Then we could all be happy. Even though it "adds bulk", to some people it's not "bulky". To you it is.

 

I don't even use a case.

But I do have an external AA battery pack, because I find carrying AA's (sharable with other devices) FAR more convenient both than having two devices, and using a battery pack that you have to recharge to use again. A handful of AA's will keep my phone with power for a full day of active use. And now with the iPhone OS allowing GPS use while in Airplane mode, that saves even more battery power. Ruggedness for me is not a concern because I take extra extra care of my device (whether hiking or over water, or whatever). Some people don't want to put that effort in, and that's fine. Accidents can still happen, and that's a risk I choose to take.

My phone does everything I need it to do, and it's served me in conditions that many people emphatically state smartphones cannot be used for. When someone says that, I already know they're either a] ignorant to the truth (I don't mean that insultingly, just that they don't know (yet) for a fact its capabilities), or b] wilfully obtuse and looking for one-sided debates. The first gang are usually willing to accept someone else's experience and realize that technology is improving and it's now more about preference than technical capability. The latter gang, well they tend to keep threads on this topic going :P

 

It is not "smartphones" vs "GPSrs". There are many models and brands of both, with a wide array of technical capabilities.

Know your model. Know your caching style. Know your budget and usage limitations. Use what suits you best. Recommend it to others, even, but don't take it personally if someone else's use appears to contradict yours. That's all there is to it.

 

I'd appreciate it if you would change the way you've edited this so it doesn't look like I used your wording in the quoted text.

Link to comment

No one would presume you said that given your original comment exists, and that's why the text changes I pointed out are bolded.

But I'll make that more clear in that comment.

Also, does that mean you disagree with the changes?

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

No one would presume you said that given your original comment exists, and that's why the text changes I pointed out are bolded.

But I'll make that more clear in that comment.

Also, does that mean you disagree with the changes?

 

It means I don't care for the way you've presented the altered text in a quote format. We're done here.

Link to comment

What is everyone’s opinion on easy puzzle caches? Puzzles like, what I call “Rainy Day Puzzles” which are easy to solve but might take some time. To appeal to the general audience of my area I’ve created puzzles that involve puzzles types such as Word Searches, Mazes, and Connect-the-Dots. I’m just curious how others felt about these.

Link to comment

What is everyone’s opinion on easy puzzle caches? Puzzles like, what I call “Rainy Day Puzzles” which are easy to solve but might take some time. To appeal to the general audience of my area I’ve created puzzles that involve puzzles types such as Word Searches, Mazes, and Connect-the-Dots. I’m just curious how others felt about these.

Dyslexic old farts can do easy puzzle caches. Only ones I'll do.

We know of a couple who've been working on a "5" puzzle, with notebooks full of tables and charts.

- Not for me, thanks. :)

Link to comment

What is everyone's opinion on easy puzzle caches? Puzzles like, what I call "Rainy Day Puzzles" which are easy to solve but might take some time. To appeal to the general audience of my area I've created puzzles that involve puzzles types such as Word Searches, Mazes, and Connect-the-Dots. I'm just curious how others felt about these.

 

I like solve-able, easy, general audience, rainy day puzzles. I like those PennyDell variety style puzzles. Nothing to taxing though.

51uM9fWCjwL._SY300_.jpg

 

 

Link to comment

For geocaching, I'd like puzzles having to do with geocaching, GPS, coordinates, orientation and the like.

 

Not about obscure TV/comic series or weird thoughts of some wanna-be evil professor. Endless search engine sessions about someone's famous sport club is not mine, especially if there are flaws in the questions.

 

I may try them, but don't like them much. I appreciate them a bit more, when listing, puzzle, box AND cache location fit together in theme. There are a few. If it has to do with geocaching and it's techniques or location oriented, it would be great. However, those are very rare...

Link to comment

For geocaching, I'd like puzzles having to do with geocaching, GPS, coordinates, orientation and the like.

 

Don't care about what the puzzles are about. In winter they are fun to solve and I don't care if I have to spend a few hours on just one. Most of the time I just learn a lot of stuff looking for answers. Just too bad some get archived before we get to find them (got 85 in the GSAK archived database). Still 185 solved and ready to find with another 29 waiting to be found during our holiday in Australia later this year.

 

TV series, movies, music, special codes, steganography... bring 'm on...

Link to comment

I am really irked by a n00b who picked up one of my TBs last July and didn't log it; did mention in his cache log that he took it. "My first travel bug!" Oh, how I cringe when I read those words! Also didn't go caching again (except for 1 cache in December). I reissued the TB and placed it in a cache on Monday. That same day, before I had logged my drop, the n00b grabbed the TB from me and placed it in a cache. Now I have two copies of the same Tb out, one in Colorado and one in New Mexico. GRRR!

 

Aaargh! Another case of duplicate TBs! One in Massachusetts and one in New Mexico.

 

On Jan 12/14 one of my TBs was logged as having been placed in a cache (which has frequent finds) by very experienced cachers. On July 5/14 the CO of that cache stated that the cache was missing and replaced it. At that time, I assumed that any trackables that had been in the cache when it went missing were also missing. However, it looks as though the TB may have been placed a different cache (a puzzle with very few finds) instead (by the experienced cachers) and stayed there until another cacher rescued it yesterday.

 

Meanwhile, under the assumption that the TB had been lost along with the first cache, I had reissued it and the new version was placed in a cache just four weeks previously. Guess I’ll just let both of them travel until one goes missing again.

 

It has happened again! I'm beginning to think that one year is way too soon to be reissuing trackables. Think I'll start waiting a full two years.

 

The original of this one was placed in a cache in Utah on 7/14/12 and not logged out. After no logs on it by 10/12/13 I reissued it and version 2 traveled around for a while, getting to Alaska on 5/3/15. On 7/9/14 the original resurfaced, and it now appears that version 2 has made it from Alaska to Florida.

It was really hard to figure this one out because the person who had the original from 7/9/14 to 7/14/15 logged many pages of visit logs; someone else grabbed version 2 on 3/1/15 and logged over 10 pages of visits before dropping it in Alaska. Then the person who had the original logged Retrieved from the cache in Alaska although they were nowhere near there at the time. So now there’s one in Indiana and one in Florida.

 

Well, the good news is that your TBs weren't missing... :anitongue:

 

I was going to recommend waiting six months until I saw that it had been a year. That seems pretty reasonable to me. So two years sounds even more so.

 

Though I've come across at least one TB that resurfaced after being missing for a decade...of course, it seems to have vanished with some beginner cachers the day after being put back out in the wild.

Link to comment

I was going to recommend waiting six months until I saw that it had been a year. That seems pretty reasonable to me. So two years sounds even more so.

 

Yeah, these had been 10 months, 16 months, and 15 months from last log to reissuing. The one that had been in an infrequently visited cache, I would not have reissued if it had been correctly logged into that cache; I have another that has been in an infrequently visited cache for almost 2 years (8/20/13).

 

Well, the good news is that your TBs weren't missing... :anitongue:

 

And yes, they were missing, just not permanently.

Link to comment

The point of this thread, as I see it, and I think the OP intended, is to be educational to newcomers, not to be punitive to current cache owners.

Except that most newcomers aren't reading that thread, so at best it is preaching to the choir.

 

Why are you quoting something [without an attribution] posted in a different thread and responding to it here?

 

And you can you know who is reading that thread? I can only see who is posting. Maybe newcomers *are* reading the thread but are afraid to respond after a few people decided to derail the thread into something that the OP did not intend.

 

 

Link to comment

The point of this thread, as I see it, and I think the OP intended, is to be educational to newcomers, not to be punitive to current cache owners.

Except that most newcomers aren't reading that thread, so at best it is preaching to the choir.

 

I was reading this forum within an hour after finding my first geocache.

Link to comment

The point of this thread, as I see it, and I think the OP intended, is to be educational to newcomers, not to be punitive to current cache owners.

Except that most newcomers aren't reading that thread, so at best it is preaching to the choir.

 

Why are you quoting something [without an attribution] posted in a different thread and responding to it here?

 

And you can you know who is reading that thread? I can only see who is posting. Maybe newcomers *are* reading the thread but are afraid to respond after a few people decided to derail the thread into something that the OP did not intend.

 

 

Hear, hear!

Link to comment

The point of this thread, as I see it, and I think the OP intended, is to be educational to newcomers, not to be punitive to current cache owners.

Except that most newcomers aren't reading that thread, so at best it is preaching to the choir.

 

Why are you quoting something [without an attribution] posted in a different thread and responding to it here?

And you can you know who is reading that thread? I can only see who is posting. Maybe newcomers *are* reading the thread but are afraid to respond after a few people decided to derail the thread into something that the OP did not intend.

 

 

Hear, hear!

 

I'll tell ya why I replied here and not there - because I am a model forum citizen, that's why! B)

 

Let me explain. In that thread, one or more mainstays got upset that there was discussion about the value and advisability of the specific topic, rather than simply discussing the topic.

 

Since my comment was along those lines, I graciously raised it here, to prevent any mainstays from having heart palpitations over there. Also, it has a more general discussion value, which is that if showing photos of violations is supposed to instruct new players, how can that be better accomplished? Perhaps by moving the other thread to a different subforum?

Link to comment

The point of this thread, as I see it, and I think the OP intended, is to be educational to newcomers, not to be punitive to current cache owners.

Except that most newcomers aren't reading that thread, so at best it is preaching to the choir.

 

Why are you quoting something [without an attribution] posted in a different thread and responding to it here?

And you can you know who is reading that thread? I can only see who is posting. Maybe newcomers *are* reading the thread but are afraid to respond after a few people decided to derail the thread into something that the OP did not intend.

 

 

Hear, hear!

 

I'll tell ya why I replied here and not there - because I am a model forum citizen, that's why! B)

 

Let me explain. In that thread, one or more mainstays got upset that there was discussion about the value and advisability of the specific topic, rather than simply discussing the topic.

 

Since my comment was along those lines, I graciously raised it here, to prevent any mainstays from having heart palpitations over there. Also, it has a more general discussion value, which is that if showing photos of violations is supposed to instruct new players, how can that be better accomplished? Perhaps by moving the other thread to a different subforum?

 

Really? It had nothing to do with Keystone's warning?

Link to comment
Also, it has a more general discussion value, which is that if showing photos of violations is supposed to instruct new players, how can that be better accomplished?
I think the key would be not to make the thread merely about showing photos of violations (or about describing specific examples of violations). The thread would also need to include discussion of why the example in question is (considered to be) a violation, and discussion about how the example in question could be modified to comply with the current (interpretation of the) guidelines.

 

Perhaps by moving the other thread to a different subforum?
What subforum would that be? The "Getting Started" subforum is for newbies to ask questions, so it doesn't fit. The "How Do I...?" subforum might work if the thread were structured as one person posting an example and asking how to modify it to comply with the guidelines, but seems a poor fit when someone posts both the example and the suggested modifications. I suppose it could be shuffled off into the "Photography" ghetto subforum, but then non-photographic examples would unwelcome, and that would make it less likely for newbies to see it.

 

All in all, I think the "Geocaching Topics" subforum is the best place.

Link to comment

The point of this thread, as I see it, and I think the OP intended, is to be educational to newcomers, not to be punitive to current cache owners.

Except that most newcomers aren't reading that thread, so at best it is preaching to the choir.

 

Why are you quoting something [without an attribution] posted in a different thread and responding to it here?

And you can you know who is reading that thread? I can only see who is posting. Maybe newcomers *are* reading the thread but are afraid to respond after a few people decided to derail the thread into something that the OP did not intend.

 

 

Hear, hear!

 

I'll tell ya why I replied here and not there - because I am a model forum citizen, that's why! B)

 

Let me explain. In that thread, one or more mainstays got upset that there was discussion about the value and advisability of the specific topic, rather than simply discussing the topic.

 

Since my comment was along those lines, I graciously raised it here, to prevent any mainstays from having heart palpitations over there. Also, it has a more general discussion value, which is that if showing photos of violations is supposed to instruct new players, how can that be better accomplished? Perhaps by moving the other thread to a different subforum?

 

Really? It had nothing to do with Keystone's warning?

 

Yes, really! (I dislike the raised-eyebrow "really?", because it questions my integrity.)

 

I actually saw Keystone's post about 3 minutes ago for the first time.

Link to comment

The bigger question about rules and guidelines is to what extent there can be country and regional variations. I understand how an international activity needs uniformity. However, one comment that gave a blanket condemnation of Belgian cachers was over the top, IMO.

 

Didn't bother me. Fact remains that I haven't seen any issues with buried caches since I started this hobby 9.5 years ago. The only problems there sometimes are, are neighbors having problems with increased activity in their quiet neighborhood. That hoes for any kind of cache/tag. GBV goes a long way. B)

 

On the other hand, if a title is "you can't do that' on a discussion forum there's bound to be someone to say "You can". Wouldn't be a discussion forum if there wasn't.

Link to comment

The bigger question about rules and guidelines is to what extent there can be country and regional variations. I understand how an international activity needs uniformity. However, one comment that gave a blanket condemnation of Belgian cachers was over the top, IMO.

 

Didn't bother me. Fact remains that I haven't seen any issues with buried caches since I started this hobby 9.5 years ago.

 

That sort of anecdotal evidence doesn't provide a convincing argument. It's sort of like saying, "I've always made it home safely when I drink and drive, therefore everyone should be allowed to drink and drive".

 

 

On the other hand, if a title is "you can't do that' on a discussion forum there's bound to be someone to say "You can". Wouldn't be a discussion forum if there wasn't.

 

The "you can't to that" in the title simply means that the OP is asking others to show examples of caches which don't comply with the current guidelines. Showing an example of a cache which doesn't comply with the guidelines, but hasn't (yet) caused any problems doesn't mean that "You can". It just means that sometimes "You can get away with it".

 

 

 

Link to comment

The bigger question about rules and guidelines is to what extent there can be country and regional variations. I understand how an international activity needs uniformity. However, one comment that gave a blanket condemnation of Belgian cachers was over the top, IMO.

 

Didn't bother me. Fact remains that I haven't seen any issues with buried caches since I started this hobby 9.5 years ago.

 

That sort of anecdotal evidence doesn't provide a convincing argument. It's sort of like saying, "I've always made it home safely when I drink and drive, therefore everyone should be allowed to drink and drive".

 

 

On the other hand, if a title is "you can't do that' on a discussion forum there's bound to be someone to say "You can". Wouldn't be a discussion forum if there wasn't.

 

The "you can't to that" in the title simply means that the OP is asking others to show examples of caches which don't comply with the current guidelines. Showing an example of a cache which doesn't comply with the guidelines, but hasn't (yet) caused any problems doesn't mean that "You can". It just means that sometimes "You can get away with it".

 

Speaking of regional differences, maybe there are no buried caches in northern New York state because the ground never thaws? ;)

Link to comment

The bigger question about rules and guidelines is to what extent there can be country and regional variations. I understand how an international activity needs uniformity. However, one comment that gave a blanket condemnation of Belgian cachers was over the top, IMO.

 

Didn't bother me. Fact remains that I haven't seen any issues with buried caches since I started this hobby 9.5 years ago. The only problems there sometimes are, are neighbors having problems with increased activity in their quiet neighborhood. That hoes for any kind of cache/tag. GBV goes a long way. B)

 

On the other hand, if a title is "you can't do that' on a discussion forum there's bound to be someone to say "You can". Wouldn't be a discussion forum if there wasn't.

 

Sounds to me like you need to start a thread called "Can, too!" :lol:

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 8
×
×
  • Create New...