Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Yes, thanks.
[This message has been edited by Cathunter (edited 04-02-2006).]
While this is great news in your case, I wonder what it means in the bigger picture picture of things?
The park could have implemented a policy based off what that particular park manager knows?
Perhaps all the parks now are using a policy that was implemented without finalizing that policy with the board members who had been working with the DNR?
The big question at this point would be whether all park managers have been directed to work with geocachers or is it at their option?
Thanks for the invite!
I won’t be able to make it, but I would appreciate it if you would spread the word there about the Rock Island Getaway event.
It’s only a short boat ride from Escanaba.
I’m amused…. It wasn’t all that long ago when there were no websites maintaining stats.
Milestones were posted here on the boards by caching partners or friends who new each other and were watching each other’s find counts by looking at their geocaching.com profile.
Milestones announcements seemed to mean something beyond a number then… they were personal things, shared with other cachers who we felt a bond to. Unless you have experienced it, it might be hard to understand.
I kept one of those in a jar until it went through it’s transformation.
Ended up looking kind of like Bec’s Badger!
.
.
[This message has been edited by Cathunter (edited 03-09-2006).]
Everyone has their own idea of what would be acceptable in taking on the expense of holding an event. I would never plan to hold an event without in turn planning to bear the burden of those fees.
Once the event is in progress, make the attendees aware of what the cost of the event was. Historically, in every case I have seen the attendees took it upon themselves to donate towards the cause. This violates no rule and makes good sense.
In any case, the common thinking should be that if one cannot afford to bear the expense related to holding an event, they should look to share the costs with another willing assistant or find alternative ways to reduce or eliminate the expense.
My biggest upgrade was going from having no GPS to having one. Thanks to uploadable detailed maps, I barely go anywhere without my GPS. Seeing little ponds and back roads on the screen as I am driving around has led to many great discoveries I would have never experienced otherwise.
A few weeks ago I drove to a waypoint in downtown Chicago. (I fear driving in downtown Chicago.) I drove to the front door of the location just as if I had been there a hundred times before. I would have never even attempted this without detailed maps in a GPS.
I don’t use auto-routing. To many times it led me on a route that was less than ideal.
I don’t use the electronic compass- calibration is a pain and doesn’t last.
Color screen is nice, but does nothing to help hunt caches.
Not at all what I meant… my fault.
When I view someone’s web page I am viewing it as they intended.
If I were to copy data from their website and post it up on my own without their approval, I don’t feel I would be doing the right thing.
Opinions may vary.
[This message has been edited by Cathunter (edited 02-26-2006).]
I’m not against it, I’m just pointing out that is has never been approved that I am aware of.
Our “recent finds” pages mines data from the site too. Every time Groundspeak updates their website, the “recent finds” page, Brew’s Stats page, and everyone elses comes crashing down and needs to have mods done to make it all work again. If we had some open communication with Groundspeak, much of the trouble might be circumvented.
Grabbing data off other people’s servers without their authorization borders on being a crime.
quote:
Originally posted by MajorBrat:
Even if there were a running total of “Wisconsin’s best caches,” it would still be a popularity contest. The more visits it has, the better off the chances are it will be listed. One cacher may absolutely love the cache, and another may wish they had never gone there. See…still a popularity contest.
MB
I know how you love for people to pick apart your posts, so I will grab this paragraph.
I think COTM was started to “reward” people for setting up caches that the our active geocachers found the most enjoyable. It’s hard to be fair when the majority of the caches and cachers are centered in less than 1/3rd of the state, but we have had some COTM’s out of these boundries, which is a great thing. You are right in that the more traffic a good cache generates, the more likely it will be nominated. Does this make it the “most popular”? I think not.
I have long supported the idea of a cache rating system that is based on quality.
It has already been determined through these forums that the quality of a cache is judged primarily by location, and secondarily, by the method of the hide. If someone were to set up a system that would allow cachers to “score” (say for example 1 to 5 stars)each cache based on these assets, then an average could be published based on the number of finders.
By averaging, everything is placed on an even keel, irregardless of traffic. The only weakness I see in this is during the first few finds. The greater number of finds that the cache has seen, the more meaningful it’s score would be.KeenPeople.com has developed such a rating system. Unfortunately it can only be implemented by each cache owner and it lacks a centralized list of rated caches, making it fairly useless.
Before any such thing could ever take place, we would need to get permission from Groundspeak to mine the data from their site.
After what has happened to Buxley, I am under the impression that they don’t care much for the idea.
quote:
Originally posted by djwini:
i’ve never used the point or arc filter. can you give easy instructions on usage?
http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=101714&view=findpost&p=1558228
I too think that COTM is a fine thing, but has proven to be limited in purpose.
The idea of an ongoing tally would be an asset in that it would serve as a sort of “cache rating system” whereas caches would continue to generate notice over an extended time period.
With any such system, nomination should be limited to geocachers with a certain amount of experience. Every cache is great when you are a newbie.
Garmin Etrex Legend offers great functionality in the $150 range. Of course, the detailed maps come at an additional price. I have seen the unit packaged with the topo map CD for $199.
If you don’t mind spending the extra money, stepping up to the color model also gets you increased battery life. Color is nice, but does nothing to help you find caches.
Can’t imagine why- there are 20 caches within 50 miles of you.
It’s warm there- I’m very jealous!
-
AuthorPosts
