Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Nice job “bagging” that one. 😉
8) x 1500!
On the Left Side of the Road...8) x 200!
On the Left Side of the Road...Well if you noticed in your recent newsletter from groundspeak this program has…maybe?…gotten off the ground. I never heard back from the Bay Lakes Council on this issue but apparently the BSA and groundspeak have worked something out.
The geocaching info at the BSA site is: http://www.geoscouting.com/gitg.html . There seem to be three threads to this program as it relates to things published on gc.com:
1. Travel bugs that relate to scouting values.
2. Caches hid near Eagle Scout projects, though it’s unclear how you would search for those, and
3. Caches hid as part of the “Treasures of Scouting” caches that are explained here: http://www.geoscouting.com/pdfs/Treasures_of_Scouting.pdfI’m not sure how well developed this program is. The only Treasures of Scouting caches that show up is a single series in Oregon.
Anyone else have any more intel? I suppose this could be moved to the “general” boards.
On the Left Side of the Road...@marc_54140 wrote:
What does a Tour do?
1. Group pooling of solving and hunting. More eyes certainly helps alot!
2. Geocachers getting a change to gab, socialize, etc.
3. Going to lunch!
4. Generally having a good time.You forgot:
5. Provide the puzzle solution to tour attendees who have invested no effort in solving the puzzle.
If I’m wrong on that, I stand corrected, but cache logs would indicate this is the case.
On the Left Side of the Road...@JimandLinda wrote:
Why should a BOD’s position be neutral?
If all BOD’s positions were neutral, nothing would happen.
(Maybe that’s off topic,but it is still a valid question). ❓
I don’t expect their position to be neutral on the issues. Everyone has different opinions and everyone has opinions about other people. But I think there is a big difference between articulating your opinion on an issue and the personal and insulting comments made above which are, unfortunately, not unprecedented.
On the Left Side of the Road...@Zemmy wrote:
With this in mind: I just found 933,000 caches in one day.
I’ll leave the rest for tomorrow
That’s more than 10 per second. I’m beginning to doubt you really accomplished this, unless you’re secretly Santa Claus.
On the Left Side of the Road...Given either the system limitations of gc.com, or the unwillingness of groundspeak to make changes, or both, on this issue, it seems to make the most sense for the community to come up with some sort of rating system on its own, if the feeling is strong enough.
Granted, you won’t be able to do PQs by it, but at least having it there would be something. Ideally it could be something that would allow some level of filtering by users, just like having “WSQ” on a cache allows poeple who don’t like cemetery caches to filter them out, even though there’s no “tombstone” attribute.
And, if the rating system is good enough, and popular enough, market forces will move it into the mainstream, in much the way geochecker (or some derivative thereof) has become SOP on puzzles.
On the Left Side of the Road...Oh come on. You could have kept this at the “I didn’t intend to make this a referendum comment” rather than go into the detail you did.
But instead, you tossed in some prefacing comments about how much you like a particular hider’s caches, only to provide yourself some air cover to let fly a hail of insults that are not only not necessary but, I believe, untrue. “No, really, I think your caches are totally great except for these ones that really suck.” The “nano in a garbage can” comments were sensational and specific, even in their entire context.
Sorry if my comments aren’t “intelligent” enough for you but your post was totally uncalled for. But whatever.
On the Left Side of the Road...Time for a poll…
On the Left Side of the Road...I was thinking the same multiplier could be used for rescues as is used for regular lonelies. Not rescued after a year, x2. After 2 years, x3.
It’s not for lack of interest by LCG players, but rather by distance. And of course lack of interest (or awareness) by the local caching communities in those areas.
On the Left Side of the Road...It comez and gos for me asit has ovr the past severl mnths. Ive simplie disablled the czecher and it doesnt seam to effect the qality of my postes.
On the Left Side of the Road...@zuma wrote:
On the other hand, I have also found S|S puzzles that take you to a nano in a garbage can next to an urban street with coords way off. Nothing unique about that.
Good grief, Zuma!
You cannot possibly include personal insults in two consecutive posts, then toss your hands in the air and say, “Wasn’t me!”
Shameful. 😥
On the Left Side of the Road...@marc_54140 wrote:
I do not believe a puzzle rating system would work, unless you have large numbers of cachers make input to it/them.
For example, rating them 1 to 5, with 5 being the hardest.
If the owners rate them: Owner rates it 2, I look at it and can not figure out what the subject is! I see it as a 5. Who’s answer is correct? This system will require other cachers to ‘know’ the owner in order to judge for themselves what the difficulty of any particular puzzle might be.
When I hiked in Arizona, there was one hiker who rated the hike to the top of the highest mountain as moderate. It started at 10,000 feet, and went to 13,600 feet, over a 2.5 mile trail. Almost everyone else rated it extreme. Depends …………
If cachers rate them: A new puzzle comes out, and the ftf to rates it a 1. Quick and easy. Well, I come plodding along, and again, can not figure it out. Is it a 5 for me? Ok, the average is now 3, based on two inputs.
If you had, say 25 to 50 cachers, making an input to a particular puzzle, a better average would result. But how would you begin to get others to make an entry, when many puzzles might not have that many solvers/finders?
I don’t feel a puzzle system is needed as I said above, but Marc your logic doesn’t seem to make sense, unless you also argue that the CURRENT cache rating system doesn’t work. Because the same subjective rating problem that you illustrated with puzzles, applies to the terrain/difficulty rating example you gave under the existing system. In other words, both are subjective, but that does not mean they would not “work.” 😕
On the Left Side of the Road...@PCFrog wrote:
What the problem I found is there are now some multi caches that are really puzzles. I get the 1st waypoint and read the description to find out that it is a multi cache but you have to solve a puzzle to even ID the next stage.
This has been an issue for some time. The nut of it is that offset multicaches are publishable as multicaches. Most often this seems to come up with cemetery caches, where “multi” means “do some calculations” rather than “find the waypoint.” However, these caches are appropriately published as multicaches.
Ideally you could have different icons for “waypoint multis” versus “offset multis,” but I’d have a better chance of growing another…well, let’s just say it’s not likely to happen.
Regarding a puzzle cache rating system, I don’t think it’s needed, but I can see no downside to it, so it’s worth pursuing if the community feels strongly about it.
On the Left Side of the Road...
FREEEEEEDOM!!!!!! TO NOT SIGN CACHE LOOOOOOOOOOOOGS!!!!!!
On the Left Side of the Road... -
AuthorPosts
