It would be nice if the geocache page let you know a if cell phone signal available

[+Wekiva]

I'm getting ready to go backpacking this weekend in the Ocala National Forest in Florida. I'd love to do some geocaching but an not sure if there will be cell phone signal where we'll be. From what I understand cell signal is spotty in this area. I was thinking it would be nice if there was a way for people to let others know if a cell signal is available on the geocache's info page. Obviously there are different carriers that would complicate it a bit. But I'm assuming as smart phones become more common that more and more are using them to geocache.

[+NeverSummer]

I'm getting ready to go backpacking this weekend in the Ocala National Forest in Florida. I'd love to do some geocaching but an not sure if there will be cell phone signal where we'll be. From what I understand cell signal is spotty in this area. I was thinking it would be nice if there was a way for people to let others know if a cell signal is available on the geocache's info page. Obviously there are different carriers that would complicate it a bit. But I'm assuming as smart phones become more common that more and more are using them to geocache.

Two ways around this:

1. Use a handheld GPS unit

2. Use your caching app to open a saved Pocket Query, and also save maps for the area you'll be in that might not have cellular phone signals

 

Finding a way to know if there is a cell signal is not as important as simply knowing that, until the fall from the sky, GPS satellites will interface with your GPS unit and GPS chip on your cellphone. Creating a way to know that there is a cell signal will depend on your carrier (as you mentioned), and also if the cache owner bothers to look at their cell to know that there is a signal there when they placed it.

 

Best bet for cell signal information is to consult your carrier before you travel. That goes for general travel, as well as geocaching outings.

[+K13]

Use your phone in airplane mode after saving the caches you intend to find....no cell signal needed. (Or just use a GPSr)

There is an area near me (counties large) which has cell service, but it is not compatible with my Verizon phone. I use the above method when caching by phone there. Or I use my Oregon.

 

As a cache owner with a couple of hides where phone signal can be sketchy, I can't see how I could accommodate your idea.

[+Tassie_Boy]

Use your phone in airplane mode after saving the caches you intend to find....no cell signal needed. (Or just use a GPSr)

There is an area near me (counties large) which has cell service, but it is not compatible with my Verizon phone. I use the above method when caching by phone there. Or I use my Oregon.

 

As a cache owner with a couple of hides where phone signal can be sketchy, I can't see how I could accommodate your idea.

 

As a CO about the only option you have is to write it out in letters in the description BUT if GS were looking for ideas for new attributes then this could be one. Obviously differences between companies may complicate things as the OP says but would give a pretty good idea.

[+Shinook & White Juan]

Maybe it could be added as an attribute.

[+Pinkpiggy7]

In the area where we have a few caches, 2 of the local carriers have partial coverage, the other 3 have none.

 

And even where there is coverage I can move 10 feet one direction and have full coverage or zero coverage.

 

It would get to complicated trying to list all the cariers (for an area), and how would the average Joe know which carier covers what areas.

[+FourFunKiwis]

Use your phone in airplane mode after saving the caches you intend to find....no cell signal needed. (Or just use a GPSr)There is an area near me (counties large) which has cell service, but it is not compatible with my Verizon phone. I use the above method when caching by phone there. Or I use my Oregon.As a cache owner with a couple of hides where phone signal can be sketchy, I can't see how I could accommodate your idea.

 

This. I went geocaching yesterday in a area I knew had no coverage, with an iPhone. I saved the caches and it was as good as gold.

[+Wekiva]

Making it an attribute was what I was thinking...but then again you'd have to add an attribute for each carrier which isn't practical. I need to look into saving the caches in the phone. I haven't tried that yet.

Edited January 15, 2015 by Wekiva

[+WarNinjas]

We decided to go on a trip just to geocache. It was our first one. We could have picked anywhere. Wouldn't you know I pick a place that had no cell phone service! What we ended up doing was going to the motel with the wifi and saving all the local caches for a area that we thought we might be heading for that day. Still was a pain but it worked out and was a great trip.

 

As far as the attribute I don't think you would need to get so specific as to what carriers and all. Just a general "some phones may have coverage issues" If your phone ends up working there all the better but it would alert cachers that there might be a problem.

Just like the Dangerous animal attribute. Just because that attribute is on the page doesn't mean you will run into a mountain lion but just that it is a possibility.

[+niraD]

I've gone geocaching in areas where some people have service and others don't, depending on their providers. And sometimes coverage changes, so I guess we'd have to update our cache descriptions.

 

Besides, can you really trust the coverage information provided if you don't know what provider the CO uses? I can tell you whether I have coverage with my provider, but I have no idea whether anyone else will have coverage.

[+worstcaster]

You probably have experience backpacking, but just throwing this out there for safety. Make sure you have a way to navigate back from the cache, in case the battery in your phone dies. A map of the area and a compass is a good thing to bring with you.

[+redsox_mark]

I understand the desire, but given

 

- Different carriers

- Constantly changing situation (carriers upgrade their network)

- Attributes are optional anyways

 

I don't think adding an attribute will be much help. Best to assume if you are in a remote location you may not have signal. (Or you may have voice but not data services).

[+narcissa]

Assume that it isn't, and get a proper GPS.

[+coachstahly]

Having done some caching there (western side), it was in and out all day long. I'm on Sprint, if that offers you any assistance.

[+ras_oscar]

For verizon use this

http://vzwmap.verizonwireless.com/dotcom/coveragelocator/default.aspx?requestfrom=webagent

 

For sprint use this

http://coverage.sprint.com/IMPACT.jsp

 

For TMobile use this

http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage.html

Edited January 15, 2015 by ras_oscar

[+Viajero Perdido]

There is an attribute, sort of. I've used this icon on a few of my remote-cache listings:

 

Note the retro phone shape; eventually it won't mean anything to anybody.

[+JL_HSTRE]

Nice idea but not feasible due to the different networks having different coverage, which can also vary by phone.

 

Always assume no reliable coverage in rural areas, especially like the ONF.

[+thebruce0]

I think this was the best argument:

As far as the attribute I don't think you would need to get so specific as to what carriers and all. Just a general "some phones may have coverage issues" If your phone ends up working there all the better but it would alert cachers that there might be a problem. Just like the Dangerous animal attribute. Just because that attribute is on the page doesn't mean you will run into a mountain lion but just that it is a possibility.

 

For safety issues, just like dangerous animals, or falling rocks, or other hazards, an icon for 'spotty cell coverage' could be beneficial -- not even regarding strict gps use: remember smartphone gps still works without cell reception (iphone at least).

It's more like a concern to serve as a reminder - "Hey, you're going somewhere that's known to have questionable cell reception - if there's an emergency, you may not be able to call out, depending on your provider, so be prepared!"

Edited January 15, 2015 by thebruce0

[cezanne]

It's more like a concern to serve as a reminder - "Hey, you're going somewhere that's known to have questionable cell reception - if there's an emergency, you may not be able to call out, depending on your provider, so be prepared!"

 

But if such an attribute existed, many complaints would arrive in cases where it is not set. I need to admit that I do not know whether there is spotty coverage at one of my caches - I never used my phone there.

[+thebruce0]

It's more like a concern to serve as a reminder - "Hey, you're going somewhere that's known to have questionable cell reception - if there's an emergency, you may not be able to call out, depending on your provider, so be prepared!"

 

But if such an attribute existed, many complaints would arrive in cases where it is not set. I need to admit that I do not know whether there is spotty coverage at one of my caches - I never used my phone there.

 

The same can be said for any of the existing hazard attributes. Your point?

[+MountainWoods]

Perhaps an attribute that there is no water fountain for 5 miles in any direction.

And an attribute that there are unsecured rocks that can roll under your feet at the cache location.

And an attribute that there are snakes in the area.

And an attribute that it can get down to 0 degrees F during the winter at the cache location.

And an attribute that ........

 

Anyone for a cup of McDonald's coffee?

[+doc73]

Perhaps an attribute that there is no water fountain for 5 miles in any direction.

And an attribute that there are unsecured rocks that can roll under your feet at the cache location.

And an attribute that there are snakes in the area.

And an attribute that it can get down to 0 degrees F during the winter at the cache location.

And an attribute that ........

 

Anyone for a cup of McDonald's coffee?

 

Would that need the "is very hot" attribute to avoid potential burns?

[+Ladybug Kids]

I couldn't tell you if cell signal is available at any of my remote cache locations because when I go into the backcountry, my phone is turned off and sealed in a dry bag so in the unlikely event that I really need it and I have cell service, I will have a full battery available. Also, signal availability is dependent on carrier and cell phone model/brand. I've been in situations where I had no bars on a peak and my colleagues had four bars and vice-versa. As a result, I'd be reluctant to use the attribute even if it was available.

[+Scratch Ankle]

It isn't just the different carriers that affect the availability of a signal being present. There is a difference in whether you have a prepaid plan or a contract. Prepaid plans do not have the same coverage as a contract plan does. I had this pointed out to me by a guy at a Verizon store who knew I was only interested in information on their prepaid plans. He told me that if I was not interested in a contract plan he could not recommend their prepaid plan because "the coverage sucks". This guy works on commission by the way.

 

The other factor is what phone you have. Some phones have better reception than others. A coworker on the same plan but with a different phone had a half strength signal where I had none.

 

My son had a Straight Talk (prepaid) phone using ATT cell towers. He had no coverage in the home in was living in in a major city and was only 3 miles or so from one of the ATT towers. Combination of both the phone and the prepaid plan.

[+Chief301]

There is an attribute, sort of. I've used this icon on a few of my remote-cache listings:

 

Note the retro phone shape; eventually it won't mean anything to anybody.

 

How quaint

[+lamoracke]

Even if you had such an attribute, T Mobile would likely not have reception. Some carriers have it in places where others do not. I suppose an attribute for lack of ANY cell signal would have some tiny value but I cant imagine it being accurate. If I go far from the city, I do not figure I have cell reception guaranteed.

[7rxc]

Attribute or simply a note on the page... the real question is do people even look at pages before going out? When you go to log is a bit late in my book.

Sometimes I wonder why they promote page creation and then discourage people from going to see it.

 

Doug 7rxc

[+doc73]

Attribute or simply a note on the page... the real question is do people even look at pages before going out? When you go to log is a bit late in my book.

Sometimes I wonder why they promote page creation and then discourage people from going to see it.

 

Doug 7rxc

 

Good point, I rarely visit the actual cache page unless I am planning a hunt ahead of time or it specifically requires the visit. Usually I whip out the app, query the local caches and put the location into my Garmin. I rarely look at the attributes or much else but the size / type (hate lamp skirt caches and micros in the middle of the woods) and sometimes the last few logs to make sure it is even there!

[+SwineFlew]

Maybe it could be added as an attribute.

No.. The problem is... there are too many carriers and some area are worse than other.

[+wmpastor]

Maybe it could be added as an attribute.

No.. The problem is... there are too many carriers and some area are worse than other.

Yes, a bit vague and imprecise. And generally people can figure out where service is iffy - like in the wilderness.

 

Of course, some of the other attributes can be a bit fuzzy also....

[+redsox_mark]

The attributes are a bit bizarre in the choice of which ones have both positive and negative options. If you look at the ones which are "Facilities" (which includes "telephone nearby"), they all have a yes and no option, except public transportation. For some reason, you can say there IS public transportation, but you can't say there ISN'T.

 

For "Hazards", the only one with a negative option is "Poison plants". So you can say there are no Poison plants (though how can you be sure?), but you can't say "no thorns".

 

Anyway - with the cellphone coverage, the positive version seems the least useful. If the cache owner has coverage, it doesn't mean others will have coverage.

 

The negative version - ie. no cell coverage - could be useful I suppose, to indicate there might be issues with coverage. Though only as useful of course as any attribute, as they are not required.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

It's more like a concern to serve as a reminder - "Hey, you're going somewhere that's known to have questionable cell reception - if there's an emergency, you may not be able to call out, depending on your provider, so be prepared!"

 

But if such an attribute existed, many complaints would arrive in cases where it is not set. I need to admit that I do not know whether there is spotty coverage at one of my caches - I never used my phone there.

 

It doesn't have to be perfect. Even if a small number of cache owners use it, and it helps prevent geocachers getting into trouble, that's better than not having the warning at all.

[cezanne]

But if such an attribute existed, many complaints would arrive in cases where it is not set. I need to admit that I do not know whether there is spotty coverage at one of my caches - I never used my phone there.

 

It doesn't have to be perfect. Even if a small number of cache owners use it, and it helps prevent geocachers getting into trouble, that's better than not having the warning at all.

 

I'm not sure that it would help in that regard or whether it would happen more often that cachers rely on that coverage should be available if the attribute is not set for a cache which has other attributes which are chosen carefully.

 

Among the newer caches too many assume that everyone brings along a mobile phone which is turned on to whichever place they go. For some of them it is probably not within what they can imagine that some cache hiders have no idea whatsoever whether cell phones work in the areas where they have hidden their caches.

 

 

Cezanne

[+geodarts]

Perhaps an attribute that there is no water fountain for 5 miles in any direction.

And an attribute that there are unsecured rocks that can roll under your feet at the cache location.

And an attribute that there are snakes in the area.

And an attribute that it can get down to 0 degrees F during the winter at the cache location.

And an attribute that ........

 

Anyone for a cup of McDonald's coffee?

 

Indeed. If you need an attribute to remind you that you may need to be prepared in case you can't call out, you probably should not be going there. I trust people will check the maps to see that my cache might involve a hike, to think about where they are going so they know to carry water, to recognize that they might see a snake, not to do it under adverse conditions . . . and to know that the area may not have cell phone service. I have been surprised when certain areas have had coverage, but if I am going to want to cache in an area where coverage is spotty, I will prepare for that just as I will want to bring whatever else I might need. At least with the app I use, offline caching is seamless as long as I have checked to see if I might be interested in any cache before going to an area where I suspect coverage might be a problem.

 

But then I think the proliferation in attributes have rendered them all but useless.

[+Mudfrog]

I couldn't tell you if cell signal is available at any of my remote cache locations because when I go into the backcountry, my phone is turned off and sealed in a dry bag so in the unlikely event that I really need it and I have cell service, I will have a full battery available. Also, signal availability is dependent on carrier and cell phone model/brand. I've been in situations where I had no bars on a peak and my colleagues had four bars and vice-versa. As a result, I'd be reluctant to use the attribute even if it was available.

 

Yep! I wouldn't even think to check my phone to see if it had signal when placing a cache. Imo, there is enough handholding already with geocaching so i wouldn't utilize an attribute even if there was one. Part of the fun for me is the making of preparations for each outing. Whether it's a single cache two blocks from home or a caching trip around the world, proper preparations need to be made. I carry my phone most everywhere i go but i would never rely on it for hiding or finding caches.

 

Gpsr units, even paperless ones, are just too cheap these days. Again, imo, they are more reliable, have longer battery life, and are more rugged than most phones.

[+GeoLog81]

There could be the attribute 'limited mobile network' but most people won't probably use that attribute, or it won't be reliable.

 

The fact that I have the signal doesn't mean you'll have the signal in the same place, if you use other network. The coverage varies immensely.

 

Also, not everyone checks if the mobile network is available when they place the cache, so they won't be able to set that attribute correctly.

 

The fact that your phone shows the network doesn't mean you'll be able to call, so anyone would have to make test call.

[+thebruce0]

Perhaps an attribute that there is no water fountain for 5 miles in any direction.

And an attribute that there are unsecured rocks that can roll under your feet at the cache location.

And an attribute that there are snakes in the area.

And an attribute that it can get down to 0 degrees F during the winter at the cache location.

And an attribute that ........

 

Anyone for a cup of McDonald's coffee?

I don't disagree with your sentiment. But it's a judgement call.

You see, someone proposes a concern/idea, and it's either accepted or not. I'm sure the same question was asked for each of the current hazard attributes. "Well what about this, and that? Those should get attributes too!" Obviously they chose for each which deserved to be an attribute and which didn't, as proposed.

 

Even if you had such an attribute, T Mobile would likely not have reception. Some carriers have it in places where others do not. I suppose an attribute for lack of ANY cell signal would have some tiny value but I cant imagine it being accurate. If I go far from the city, I do not figure I have cell reception guaranteed.

The attribute doesn't mean "There is no cell reception here", it means "Cell reception may be spotty", just like "Falling rocks" doesn't mean there ARE falling rocks, just that there may be falling rocks (due to posted warnings or observations from previous visitors or the CO themselves), so proceed with caution.

 

Attribute or simply a note on the page... the real question is do people even look at pages before going out? When you go to log is a bit late in my book.

Sometimes I wonder why they promote page creation and then discourage people from going to see it.

Heh, well this is an argument against attributes altogether! Why even have them if (some) people don't look at them? Not really an argument.

That said, there's a local puzzle cache that tries to teach people not to forget to read the cache page!

 

Also, not everyone checks if the mobile network is available when they place the cache, so they won't be able to set that attribute correctly.

And not everyone uses the other attributes appropriately. I've often found caches where "hey, this attribute should be on there!" (most definitely!) -- or sometimes a definitely inappropriate attribute was applied that shouldn't be (*ahem* scuba). Many COs don't even apply attributes at all - whether on principle or because they forgot or didn't know; sometimes they may add them after the fact when someone points it out.

 

Attributes are never a guarantee, they are a guide for those who care to use them (applying them or reading them). Arguing for/against the validity of attributes based on their use in concept isn't really an argument; it's applicable across the board, and we already have them so that's been answered.

Edited January 16, 2015 by thebruce0

[Pup Patrol]

We wouldn't know if there is any signal near our caches, because we don't have any sort of mobile device.

 

We have one phone, and it sits in our house, because that's what it does.

 

Cell signal? That's up to the finder to discover, not the cache owner.

 

What if the cache owner does use this proposed attribute, and the individual seekers don't get a signal? Do they then blame the cache owner? Perhaps post a silly "needs maintenance" log?

 

It's too bad that this game has turned so much into a phone game that people would actually expect this sort of information on a geocache page.

 

 

 

B.

[+cerberus1]

We wouldn't know if there is any signal near our caches, because we don't have any sort of mobile device.

 

We have one phone, and it sits in our house, because that's what it does.

 

Cell signal? That's up to the finder to discover, not the cache owner.

 

What if the cache owner does use this proposed attribute, and the individual seekers don't get a signal? Do they then blame the cache owner? Perhaps post a silly "needs maintenance" log?

 

It's too bad that this game has turned so much into a phone game that people would actually expect this sort of information on a geocache page.

 

 

 

B.

Even this old fart has a rugby (gave up the windows sorta-smart phone).

I understand what you're saying though.

Forum complaints of "He said there'd be service aannnd there wasn't (stomping foot...)" would seem ridiculous to me too.

I don't recall COs being asked to let others know that heavy tree cover might knock out signal on lower-end GPSrs.

- Folks understood that it might be an issue with the device.

If you're using a phone, you should already be aware of the possibilities.

[+thebruce0]

We wouldn't know if there is any signal near our caches, because we don't have any sort of mobile device.

Then don't use the attribute.

Or watch for others' comments regarding the attribute.

Just like you might with any other attribute.

And if you don't, then ignore it altogether.

 

We have one phone, and it sits in our house, because that's what it does.

Ok.

 

Cell signal? That's up to the finder to discover, not the cache owner.

Snakes? I didn't see any when I placed it, so no attribute. That's up to the finder to discover, not the owner.

 

mmm.... no. It's your prerogative to decide whether to make use of the attribute or not. That's as far as your responsibility goes. That doesn't mean you HAVE to use attributes. But the attributes are there precisely so the owners can take a proactive roll in guiding finders to hazards and additional info about the area - if they wish to.

 

What if the cache owner does use this proposed attribute, and the individual seekers don't get a signal? Do they then blame the cache owner? Perhaps post a silly "needs maintenance" log?

...what if the owner "does use this proposed attribute" (ie, 'spotty cell reception') "and the individual seekers don't get a signal" ? ... then, the attribute was accurate...? Why would the CO be blamed (justifiably) for adding an accurate attribute?

 

It's too bad that this game has turned so much into a phone game that people would actually expect this sort of information on a geocache page.

I just... I can't fathom you could be serious about that comment.

 

Lack of information doesn't mean negative information. Putting information on the listing is only ever a Good Thing. Why would you blast people for desiring to put relevant, informative, especially cautionary information on the cache listing, for everyone to make use of, not just "phone game people"? By your argument you should be advocating the removal of attributes in their entirety! I mean, anyone with common sense would understand risks anywhere they go, right? c'mon, enough elephant hurling here. Per the OP, this is about the proposal for the creation of an attribute (hazard) indicating spotty cell reception.

 

Really, I couldn't care less if the attribute is created or not. I saw good argument for it when I read into the thread, so I support the idea, but there's gotta be good arguments against it; not generic, typical, device debates and broad Attribute concept criticism...

[+wmpastor]

Putting information on the listing is only ever a Good Thing.

Generally correct, and it *may* be a good idea for cell coverage (although I doubt it since that's not a clear yes-no situation in many cases).

 

However, at a certain point, *too much information* crowds the page and makes it harder to see what is actually important.

 

C'mon, if the cache is anywhere near a fair-sized town or city in the US, there's coverage. If you're in the Everglades, the western desert, the thinly-inhabited areas near Canada, there's not a guarantee of coverage. The best place to see a map of cell phone coverage is not on the cache listing, it's on your particular carrier's web site.

[+thebruce0]

Putting information on the listing is only ever a Good Thing.

Generally correct, and it *may* be a good idea for cell coverage (although I doubt it since that's not a clear yes-no situation in many cases).

And no one ever implied the attribute was saying all-or-nothing. No one can guarantee 100% coverage, anywhere, nor 0%, unless they've tested every possible available carrier. Riiight. Again, the attribute only means there's a greater possibility at the location that cell reception may be shoddy. Just as with most any other hazard warning attribute.

 

I mean geez, of all the caches I've found having the Ticks attribute, I've only ever found one tick. On my backpack. Ever. Doesn't mean the ticks hazard attribute is irrelevant. It's informative, because maybe if I see the attribute I'll dress accordingly - whether or not I'd have come away with a tick otherwise. It's only ever an additive tidbit of informative, never bad to have available for use.

 

However, at a certain point, *too much information* crowds the page and makes it harder to see what is actually important.

Oh, for sure! But that argument means you wouldn't be in support of any new attribute. Because it implies just one more attribute would be 'too much information'.

 

C'mon, if the cache is anywhere near a fair-sized town or city in the US, there's coverage. If you're in the Everglades, the western desert, the thinly-inhabited areas near Canada, there's not a guarantee of coverage.

C'mon, if you're caching near a cliff edge, there's risk of falling rocks; if you're in the city, there's probably no chance of it. (so why is there even an attribute for that?)

 

Of course certain contexts and environments render certain attributes irrelevant. But that's not the point either.

Edited January 16, 2015 by thebruce0

[+edscott]

It's more like a concern to serve as a reminder - "Hey, you're going somewhere that's known to have questionable cell reception - if there's an emergency, you may not be able to call out, depending on your provider, so be prepared!"

 

But if such an attribute existed, many complaints would arrive in cases where it is not set. I need to admit that I do not know whether there is spotty coverage at one of my caches - I never used my phone there.

 

The same can be said for any of the existing hazard attributes. Your point?

 

No phone is a hazard?

[+Tassie_Boy]

We wouldn't know if there is any signal near our caches, because we don't have any sort of mobile device.

 

We have one phone, and it sits in our house, because that's what it does.

 

Cell signal? That's up to the finder to discover, not the cache owner.

 

What if the cache owner does use this proposed attribute, and the individual seekers don't get a signal? Do they then blame the cache owner? Perhaps post a silly "needs maintenance" log?

 

It's too bad that this game has turned so much into a phone game that people would actually expect this sort of information on a geocache page.

 

If it Doesn't affect you then don't use it. Do you tick all the other attributes that apply for your caches anyway? I mean ALL? If you don't know then skip over that one just like you probably skip over the one that declares whether or not there's a loo nearby.

 

And Yes many people use a Phone to Geocache. They are small enough to fit in a pocket, are something that many have anyway, pick up the same information that Handheld units (isn't that a stupid term) do AND compared to many dedicated GPS units I've used, Phones are often more user friendly. Get Over It, It's part of the way the game is played.

If you're such a purist then put down the GPS and whip out the maps, I can't stand it when people complain they need an easier way to load GCs onto their GPS. Keep A map with you at all times and just write them on by Hand!! !!

[+Trucker Lee]

Cellular service varies by the carrier and even the phone one has. I don't see this working very well.

[+thebruce0]

But if such an attribute existed, many complaints would arrive in cases where it is not set. I need to admit that I do not know whether there is spotty coverage at one of my caches - I never used my phone there.

The same can be said for any of the existing hazard attributes. Your point?

No phone is a hazard?

In the case of an emergency, if one was not aware that cell reception may be spotty, then yes, no cell reception (not 'no phone') may be considered a hazard, at least by attribute category. To some. Obviously not everyone because clearly some people just don't care.

Again, I'm not saying there "must" be this attribute, I'm just saying I understand and can support the arguments for it more than against it.

To some, watching for thorns, ticks and snakes given certain environments is just common sense - nonetheless there are attributes available for COs to warn cachers of them when searching for their cache.

 

Cellular service varies by the carrier and even the phone one has. I don't see this working very well.

Please read up in the thread as this point keeps getting mentioned as if for the first time - it's not about "no" service for all carriers, it's about spotty service, regardless of carrier. If there's been known instances of bad reception - any carrier - then the CO would have the ability to apply the attribute (and users would be able to filter for/against the attribute) just as everyone can with other hazards (none of which are guarantees, but cautions).

Edited January 19, 2015 by thebruce0

[+Student Camper]

This game started out and is still based on the use of a GPSr, even if you use one of the many variations of the phones available, it is still a GPSr game.

Just get a GPSr, even the low end units work well. They don't care if you have a cell signal or not and will work almost anywhere. they cost near nothing to operate, no cell or data plans, just batteries once a week and many will use rechargeable batteries.

 

I have a phone and a GPSr, The GPSr doesn't disturb my peace and quiet.

[+wmpastor]

Oh, for sure! But that argument means you wouldn't be in support of any new attribute.

Nope - wrong! I *am* in favor of attributes. I'm just not in favor of *your pet attribute*, cell phone coverage. Dubious and ever-changing. Not worth the paper it's printed on, IMO!

[+wmpastor]

Cellular service varies by the carrier and even the phone one has. I don't see this working very well.

The cell coverage attribute proponents will continue typing posts until their thumbs are sore, but it ain't gonna happen. First, it's a half-baked idea - IMHO, of course - & second, i've heard that changes happen veeeery sloooooowly around here!

Edited January 20, 2015 by wmpastor

[+thebruce0]

Oh, for sure! But that argument means you wouldn't be in support of any new attribute.

Nope - wrong! I *am* in favor of attributes.

..."However, at a certain point, *too much information* crowds the page and makes it harder to see what is actually important."

That's a generic statement about "information". So no, THAT statement means you would not be in support of any new attribute.

It's quite obvious you don't care for a spotty cell reception attribute, but you haven't made a convincing argument as to why, so to each his own.

 

The cell coverage attribute proponents will continue typing posts until their thumbs are sore, but it ain't gonna happen.

*sigh* It always seems to be the deniers that want to shut out discussion about new ideas, just because they don't like them, eh?

 

First, it's a half-baked idea - IMHO, of course

Like I said, I don't care if it's applied or not, but the arguments for it, IMHO, are much stronger than the arguments against it. Cell provider differences and device debates aren't arguments against the issue the attribute intends to address.

 

second, i've heard that changes happen veeeery sloooooowly around here!

Indeed they do! Another reason why reasonable discussions eventually turn into dead horse beating ;P

And it takes at least two people to keep an argument raging, dude.