New Caches Old Numbers

[+Night Stalker]

There are a finite amount of numbers that are available to new caches. There are also a large number of archived caches. What does everyone think about recycling these older numbers for new caches. It could be set up so that an email would be sent to the cache hider asking for permission first. I know that I have 4 archived caches and I know of many others.

[+Hemlock]

OOOHHH COOL!! Another dead horse beating! I'll make popcorn!

[+IV_Warrior]

Jeremy has said before that he doesn't like this idea. If/when we run out of numbers, a new numbering scheme will be devised, like the last time we ran out of numbers.

[+Hemlock]

Here's where he said that.

[+Renegade Knight]

OOOHHH COOL!! Another dead horse beating! I'll make popcorn!

That wasn't helpful.

 

Back on topic:

 

To re-use old numbers you would need to change the number of archived caches, or save them on another system entirely so they are not duplicating the re-used numbers. We need to keep the old cache pages for posterity (In my opinion) or why the heck are we logging all of these things?

[+briansnat]

There are a finite amount of numbers that are available to new caches. There are also a large number of archived caches. What does everyone think about recycling these older numbers for new caches. It could be set up so that an email would be sent to the cache hider asking for permission first. I know that I have 4 archived caches and I know of many others.

Not a good idea. How would we look up archived caches if you give the numbers to new caches? I'm sure a solution could be programmed, but is it really worth the effort?

[+CompuCash]

I read in a previous thread similar to this that we have a base 32 number system now - not sure how that works as 26 letters and 10 numbers come out at 36 - maybe they dropped I (eye) and O (oh) too much like one and zero - and something else too ??

 

Now - 32 to the 4th power (4 positions) is 1,048,576 ---

 

Now I don't know how fast we are eating up caches in this system, but over a million should last a while.

 

a fifth position (GC12345) would net out at 33,554,432

 

33.5 million ought to last us a while after that!

 

Edited August 2, 2004 by CompuCash

[+cachew nut]

They should be sorted by color rather than by number.

[+Amazingracer]

26 + 10 = 36 True

Which makes sense, since we are in fact on Base 36 Hexadecimal System.

[+IV_Warrior]

I read in a previous thread similar to this that we have a base 32 number system now - not sure how that works as 26 letters and 10 numbers come out at 36 - maybe they dropped I (eye) and O (oh) too much like one and zero - and something else too ??

They dropped a few, to eliminate the certain 4-letter words from showing up as cache #'s.

[+Pear Head]

a fifth position (GC12345) would net out at 33,554,432

 

33.5 million ought to last us a while after that!

The idea of a 6 letter ID is due to the fact that many GPS units will only handle waypoints of 6 letters max. To me it would make sense that when we exhaust the GCxxxx waypoints that we start into the GDxxxx waypoints, same way we went from GCFxxx into GCGxxx... So what if it doesn't start with GC?

[+CompuCash]

a fifth position (GC12345) would net out at 33,554,432

 

33.5 million ought to last us a while after that!

The idea of a 6 letter ID is due to the fact that many GPS units will only handle waypoints of 6 letters max. To me it would make sense that when we exhaust the GCxxxx waypoints that we start into the GDxxxx waypoints, same way we went from GCFxxx into GCGxxx... So what if it doesn't start with GC?

 

Yer right of course - fegot 'bout that -

 

That sounds like a plan - just like license plates (depending on where you live of course!)

Edited August 2, 2004 by CompuCash

[+Team Perks]

a fifth position (GC12345) would net out at 33,554,432

 

33.5 million ought to last us a while after that!

The idea of a 6 letter ID is due to the fact that many GPS units will only handle waypoints of 6 letters max. To me it would make sense that when we exhaust the GCxxxx waypoints that we start into the GDxxxx waypoints, same way we went from GCFxxx into GCGxxx... So what if it doesn't start with GC?

Nonsense! The obvious solution is to require everyone to upgrade their GPSr's to units that are capable of reading more than six digits.

[+The Leprechauns]

a fifth position (GC12345) would net out at 33,554,432

 

33.5 million ought to last us a while after that!

The idea of a 6 letter ID is due to the fact that many GPS units will only handle waypoints of 6 letters max. To me it would make sense that when we exhaust the GCxxxx waypoints that we start into the GDxxxx waypoints, same way we went from GCFxxx into GCGxxx... So what if it doesn't start with GC?

ummmm GD is a prefix already in use for another popular GPS activity... geo-dashing. And GE is trademarked. And GF already has a meaning. I could go on....

[+Team Perks]

ummmm GD is a prefix already in use for another popular GPS activity... geo-dashing.  And GE is trademarked.  And GF already has a meaning.  I could go on....

Well nobody says you have to stick with normal alphanumeric characters...there are plenty more ASCII characters to choose from.

 

Just imagine trying to enter GCאַ▒♀₣ into your GPSr...

[+The Leprechauns]

I think I found that cache. That's located at 122 degrees North latitude, correct?

[+CompuCash]

GC has a meaning of course -

 

but who says once we exceed the current issue, that we have to keep that prefix?

 

what is wrong with going to GA GB GD or just going to GD - at this point who says the prefix has to mean something?

 

Edited August 2, 2004 by CompuCash

[+The Leprechauns]

Well, like I said before, GD is a prefix that's already being used by the geo-dashers. It would be rude to move from GC to GD if and when the current pool of numbers is exhausted.

 

When this topic surfaces, another common response is that it is pretty important to maintain the consistency of the "Gee See Number." When trying to pinpoint which cache is being talked about in an e-mail, forum post or conversation, it's common to ask "what is the GC number?" It is a convenient shorthand.