Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
@marc_54140 wrote:
Liar’s cache.
I’m so gullible…I didn’t even consider that possibility. I guess I never learn (Gauntlet).
I do try to be original (yet brief) for most of my logs but caches along a power trail (and a series like Battleship) fall victim to the “unless it’s really over the top good, it doesn’t get special recognition” clause. But to all those who do log creatively I salute and thank you. I have two locals who write the best logs and I love when they visit my caches…I thanked one of them this past week via an email for his wit and expressed thanks for his visiting my caches.
@benny7210 wrote:
Sounds to me like another ALR.
Yep this is an ALR alright. By my understanding of the new rules, he cannot delete your find based on its being a cut and paste log alone.
That is one big bone….imagine the barbecue one could have had.
@Mister Greenthumb wrote:
@Lostby7 wrote:
http://www.fox6now.com/news/witi-100210-illinois-earthquake,0,2094995.story
It’s your FAULT for having that new EC published.
I don’t think it was MY FAULT, but I was kinda hoping someone would tie it to the Waukesha Fault (to make my EC listing a little more interesting). Turns out most earthquakes unless they are on the major known faults are never assigned to a particular “named” fault.
From the USGS:
Earthquakes everywhere occur on faults within bedrock, usually miles deep. Most of the region’s bedrock was formed as several generations of mountains rose and were eroded down again over the last billion or so years.
At well-studied plate boundaries like the San Andreas fault system in California, often scientists can determine the name of the specific fault that is responsible for an earthquake. In contrast, east of the Rocky Mountains this is rarely the case. All parts of this vast region are far from the nearest plate boundaries, which, for the U.S., are to the east in the center of the Atlantic Ocean, to the south in the Caribbean Sea, and to the west in California and offshore from Washington and Oregon. The region is laced with known faults but numerous smaller or deeply buried faults remain undetected. Even most of the known faults are poorly located at earthquake depths. Accordingly, few earthquakes east of the Rockies can be linked to named faults. It is difficult to determine if a known fault is still active and could slip and cause an earthquake. In most areas east of the Rockies, the best guide to earthquake hazards is the earthquakes themselves.
I was kinda awake around that time but with all the plows and such who’s to tell what was an Earthquake and what was a city employee.
@marc_54140 wrote:
I do not remember ever seeing in the ‘rules’ that you are required to write an essay on your found It log.
Ya but I like a nice log on my caches and think its only fair to log the way I’d like to be logged….I could sure do better.
@Lostby7 wrote:
@AstroD-Team wrote:
I used to have a single sheet of paper with all the cache names on it including GC and hint if I think I will need it. Then off I went taking notes along the way…
Um, note of improvement to self………. condense down to a single sheet of paper………………..LOL.
…to be honest, it was a bit of work to get the list made but I felt pretty guilty about “wasting” paper. Now with the Oregon I do not log as many personal logs as I used to cuz I bring no paper and normally go for lots of finds in a day of cachin…I do feel bad about not logging as many personal logs, so here is my official apology for any cut and pastes I have made in the last year…@AstroD-Team wrote:
I also make a print out of all the caches, to help keep tally and more importantly, make notes so when I log the cache later, I have something unique to say about each one.
Yikes that’s a lot of paper. Before I went Oregon (paperless) I used to have a single sheet of paper with all the cache names on it including GC and hint if I think I will need it. Then off I went taking notes along the way…
@marc_54140 wrote:
The WI record is held by Zuma, Honeybunnies, Benny7210 and myself – 235.
Did a lot of planning, and picked a route that had a large number of caches close together. Done in IL.
I’m still waiting for my invite in the mail for the team attempt to take down this record….
welcome…
@SammyClaws wrote:
Who has the toilet seat travel bug? Last time I saw it, POC had it…
last I saw of it it was in the hands of pharmgirl…but that was some time ago…
Submitted one over an hour ago…still waiting…
@gotta run wrote:
They’re not taking up any valuable caching real estate because proximity guidelines don’t come into play (or at least didn’t the last time I checked). And that’s just my opinion.
There has been one “change” to the EC rules. Now the EC review team has the option to deny EC listings if another EC listing is “too close” and shares the same subject matter. I was under the impression that this ruling always existed but apparently not as they (the EC rule-making folks) pointed it out as a new rule. The two listings in question would today be harder to get published so close together (assuming they share the same topic; I didn’t look to see if that was the case).
And no the ECs will not come into play against any physical caches proximity rules.
Ah found the written new rule:
EarthCaches should highlight a unique feature. EarthCaches that duplicate existing EarthCache information about the site or related sites may be rejected. EarthCaches should be developed to provide a unique experience to the visitor to the region. Multiple EarthCaches on the same feature should be avoided and content rather than proximity will be the guiding principle.
-
AuthorPosts
