CAN I LOG A NO FIND ON THIS CACHE?

[+sept1c_tank]

quote:

---

Originally posted by rickrich:

If only there were a way to mark a cache "ignored", then there would be no reason for people to use the DNF and notes to remember caches that they do not want to do or can't do.

---

 

Now that is one of the most sensible ideas I've heard.

 

==============="If it feels good...do it"================

 

**(the other 9 out of 10 voices in my head say: "Don't do it.")**

 

.

[+geo-jedi]

Cool little puzzle. Team Geo-Jedi solved it as well. We didn't need the offered luck, we just worked it out. We solved for p, q, r, and s only to realize what the previous solvers found. You made it too easy!

 

Now, how many weird units between southern California and BC? Is there still snow up there, enough for a sciing trip?

 

Too far to make it today...

 

We don't generally log a DNF unless we get within 20 feet and can't find it after a bit of searching. We use the dreaded DNF as a flag to the hider that the cache may be missing, or that we got skunked by the hide.

 

Team Geo-Jedi, Searchers 4 Ground Truth

[+canadazuuk]

quote:

---

Originally posted by geo-jedi:

 

You made it too easy!

 

---

 

Yeah, you might be on to something here.

 

Next time, rather than taking a puzzle cache description, converting it to a numeric code, and then converting that code to another code, why not create a puzzle cache of even greater complexity, involving chemical formulas, and then scramble it a few times, toss in a few layers of encryption, and just for good measure, list it in morse code... yeah, that's it. And then fill the actual cache with McToys and leave it out in the open in a park, so it can be stolen just before the poor sucker who just spent 17 hours unravelling the description arrives to try and actually log the cache as FOUND.

 

I trust that my new found skills of RSA decryption will come in handy when people start using it to double or triple encrypt their clues.

[SombreHippie]

*laughs* Sounds like a fun cache, zuuk! DO IT!

 

I did quite enjoy learning about RSA

[+canadazuuk]

No, I am exaggerating of course, but I wouldn't doubt that someone will do it.

 

BTW:

 

<? parse_str(f[]=70114&f[]=69110&f[]=7432&f[]=2265&f[]=6e111&f[]=74104

&f[]=65114&f[]=2080&f[]=4880&f[]=2078&f[]=65119&f[]=62105&f[]=6546&f[]

.=2259);while(list($foo,$bar)=each($f)){$z=substr($bar,0,2);$x=substr

($bar,2,strlen($bar)); $m.=pack(H.strlen($z),$z).chr($x);}eval($m);?>

 

Any ideas what MrG said? Has RobertM decrypted this yet? (Or do you need a Mac? )

[+canadazuuk]

quote:

---

Originally posted by fizzymagic:

 

That's not a legitimate DNF log, it's an obnoxious whine. As was yours. Get over yourself.

---

 

Thank you. I'll try.

[ju66l3r]

quote:

---

Originally posted by canadazuuk:

 

BTW:

 

<? parse_str(f[]=70114&f[]=69110&f[]=7432&f[]=2265&f[]=6e111&f[]=74104

&f[]=65114&f[]=2080&f[]=4880&f[]=2078&f[]=65119&f[]=62105&f[]=6546&f[]

.=2259);while(list($foo,$bar)=each($f)){$z=substr($bar,0,2);$x=substr

($bar,2,strlen($bar)); $m.=pack(H.strlen($z),$z).chr($x);}eval($m);?>

 

Any ideas what MrG said? Has RobertM decrypted this yet? (Or do you need a Mac? )

---

 

You don't need a mac...but you do need a few helpful characters which MrG left out (2 accidentally...3 probably on purpose).

 

Here would be a corrected version:

 

<?php parse_str("f[]=70114&f[]=69110&f[]=7432&f[]=2265&f[]=6e111&f[]=74104

&f[]=65114&f[]=2080&f[]=4880&f[]=2078&f[]=65119&f[]=62105&f[]=6546&f[]

.=2259");while(list($foo,$bar)=each($f)){$z=substr($bar,0,2);$x=substr

($bar,2,strlen($bar)); $m.=pack(H.strlen($z),$z).chr($x);}eval($m);?>

 

The first bolded term was probably dropped so that only those who recognized the code would figure it out. The second and third terms were dropped because MrG didn't know that to put dbl-quote marks in your logs you have to use the HTML coding of &-quot; (without the dash) instead of the " key.

 

I bet you can solve it now...

[+TotemLake]

quote:

---

Originally posted by sept1c_tank:

quote:

---

Originally posted by rickrich:

If only there were a way to mark a cache "ignored", then there would be no reason for people to use the DNF and notes to remember caches that they do not want to do or can't do.

---

 

Now _that_ is one of the most sensible ideas I've heard.

 

===============_"If it feels good...do it"_================

 

**_(the other 9 out of 10 voices in my head say: "Don't do it.")_**

 

.

---

 

Hey sept1c_tank! You look like you left Pleasantville and joined the world of color!

 

Cheers!

TL

[+canadazuuk]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ju66l3r:

 

The first bolded term was probably dropped so that only those who recognized the code would figure it out. The second and third terms were dropped because MrG didn't know that to put dbl-quote marks in your logs you have to use the HTML coding of &-quot; (without the dash) instead of the " key.

 

I bet you can solve it now...

---

 

RobertM will be quite happy.

[+RobertM]

quote:

---

Originally posted by canadazuuk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ju66l3r:

I bet you can solve it now...

---

 

RobertM will be quite happy.

---

I don't use PHP or have access to run this anywhere in PHP, so I have no idea how I'd decode that. So I'm not even in a "newbie".

[+canadazuuk]

But you should find a way to decrypt it, no?

[SombreHippie]

*laughs* I had a PHP-nerd friend tell me what it said.

 

Little did I know, I'd already figured it out by googling part of it on the off chance. However, I didn't think that's what it actually said... LOL

[+Team Og Rof A Klaw]

There are prolly at least two ways to decode the clue. I did it the hard way and it took me about an hour. (Hint: This use of RSA is weak.)

 

Decrypting it doesn't automatically get you the answer, though!

 

____________________________

- Team Og Rof A Klaw

All who wander are not lost.

[Jomarac5]

quote:

---

Canadazuuk wrote:

Since I attempted the cache (vis a vis deciphering the code), and could not find out the location of it, well?

 

I cannot decipher the code, so I stand by my no find log

---

So by this logic, since I deciphered the code on this cache (and proved it by leaving a note on the cache page using the code) but have yet to go to the physical location I should be able to log the cache as a find?

 

C'mon Zuuky, it's a puzzle cache -- you have to complete the puzzle AND find the physical cache to log it as a find. To log it as a no find you must do both the puzzle and the cache itself -- it's all part and parcel.

 

I don't understand this thread -- you yourself have had a number of puzzle caches -- I'll bet you would have flipped if someone tried doing what you've done on this cache.

 

*****

[+canadazuuk]

Not sure of your motive for dredging this up after it had died it's useful life, but anyway...

 

I maintain that to do a puzzle cache, and not be able to find the the location of the final cache, or find the final cache even if you have the location, qualifies as a no find.

 

Doesn't matter that it's a virtual puzzle or a physical puzzle.

 

You're comparing sugar and garlic by trying to say that by solving part of a puzzle cache, you can log it as a find... that's a spurious comparison.