Browse Groups

• I ve tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don t seem to fit. There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a
Message 1 of 12 , May 29, 2012
View Source
I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit. There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree. For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it. I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze. To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache. That's more of a puzzle. How to get it down from the tree.
• OTOH, a terrain 3.5 or 4 tells me I have to CLIMB the tree (or arch, or whathaveyou)Many of those hides are easy to spot from below (even whilst backflipping
Message 1 of 12 , May 29, 2012
View Source
OTOH, a terrain 3.5 or 4 tells me I have to CLIMB the tree (or arch, or whathaveyou)
Many of those hides are easy to spot from below (even whilst backflipping off a median planter), therefore justifiably only 1.5s or 2s.
I could use a lot of things to simplify any tough terrain, but they all have hints -- subjective as they may be -- to where to be looking for the cache.
And, well, to get a bike into a tree, that's a BIG push!!!!

LOL

So. Rule of thumb when *I* am setting ratings:

Difficulty - trickiness of the hide. If it's a straightforward hide atop a lamppost, it's still a 1. If it's an electric plate flush against the top of that lamppost, it's a 4... or a bolt in the top of that lampost, maybe even a 5
Terrain -- 1 -- wheelchair access. We learned a lot about this when Semper Q was on wheels. Not only does the chair have to get to GZ, but the person in the chair has to reach/retrieve the cache from that chair (e.g. NOT on the ground). So most simple caches are really 1.5s, we learned.  And on from there. 4 means a tough climb (whether up someone's shoulders or whatever). 5 means it requires special gear. For example, Spring Loaded for Waterweasel & I was probably a 3 as far as exertion -- but because it needed fins and mask/goggles (if not snorkle) to do realistically, it's a 5. Hubbard Glacier Earthcache. We viewed it from the veranda of our stateroom. Hardly any physical effort at all. But because it required a boat or a helecopter, it's a 5 Terrain.

Yes, for some a 4 or 5 terrain is a lot easier than for others. For some a 3 terrain is next to impossible. So you also need to know the Cache Owner's prejudice & capability. OTOH, these ratings tell this cacher quite a lot about what to expect and how to look for the cache. Even though they're all over the place. Well, for that matter, so are cache sizes. These days I'm seeing smalls regularly classified as regulars and a waterproof match case or altoids tin (micros when we started), as smalls. Suppose we need Micro, Mini Micro, and You have GOT to be kidding/How did you get a LOG in there?!?

This is all my subjective take, based on how I've learned to play (and thus calibrate) the game. So there are certain people like TreyB & the Outlaw who are likely to blame for my point of view. LOL.

BarbJ - terrain is a composite of the entire journey to the cache, every speedbump counts imho - Tygress

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "busybeetoni" <tfbrown@...>
To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Rating a cache
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 18:44:28 -0000

I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit.  There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree.  For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it.  I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze.  To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache.  That's more of a puzzle.  How to get it down from the tree.

------------------------------------

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
CentralTexasGeocachers-digest@yahoogroups.com
CentralTexasGeocachers-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
consumerproducts.com
• Well, I had a lot of great thoughts when I first read this email on my phone, but as usual, the Tygress summed them up quite nicely before I could get to a
Message 1 of 12 , May 29, 2012
View Source
Well, I had a lot of great thoughts when I first read this email on my phone, but as usual, the Tygress summed them up quite nicely before I could get to a computer to type up a response. ;)

To me, difficulty is how hard is it to FIND the cache once you arrive and terrain is how hard is it to GET TO the cache location.

In the tree example, yes, the walk to the cache was probably a 1-1.5, but that last little bit raises the difficulty.  When you arrived at ground zero, the cache was in a mostly obvious hiding place, so it warrants a low difficulty rating.

If that was my hide, I'd probably mention something in the description that I rated it a 3 overall, but only because the last bit of terrain will make retrieving the cache harder than the walk there.

Kevin
KoosKoos

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 3:58 PM, gumbietygress@... wrote:

OTOH, a terrain 3.5 or 4 tells me I have to CLIMB the tree (or arch, or whathaveyou)
Many of those hides are easy to spot from below (even whilst backflipping off a median planter), therefore justifiably only 1.5s or 2s.
I could use a lot of things to simplify any tough terrain, but they all have hints -- subjective as they may be -- to where to be looking for the cache.
And, well, to get a bike into a tree, that's a BIG push!!!!

LOL

So. Rule of thumb when *I* am setting ratings:

Difficulty - trickiness of the hide. If it's a straightforward hide atop a lamppost, it's still a 1. If it's an electric plate flush against the top of that lamppost, it's a 4... or a bolt in the top of that lampost, maybe even a 5
Terrain -- 1 -- wheelchair access. We learned a lot about this when Semper Q was on wheels. Not only does the chair have to get to GZ, but the person in the chair has to reach/retrieve the cache from that chair (e.g. NOT on the ground). So most simple caches are really 1.5s, we learned.  And on from there. 4 means a tough climb (whether up someone's shoulders or whatever). 5 means it requires special gear. For example, Spring Loaded for Waterweasel & I was probably a 3 as far as exertion -- but because it needed fins and mask/goggles (if not snorkle) to do realistically, it's a 5. Hubbard Glacier Earthcache. We viewed it from the veranda of our stateroom. Hardly any physical effort at all. But because it required a boat or a helecopter, it's a 5 Terrain.

Yes, for some a 4 or 5 terrain is a lot easier than for others. For some a 3 terrain is next to impossible. So you also need to know the Cache Owner's prejudice & capability. OTOH, these ratings tell this cacher quite a lot about what to expect and how to look for the cache. Even though they're all over the place. Well, for that matter, so are cache sizes. These days I'm seeing smalls regularly classified as regulars and a waterproof match case or altoids tin (micros when we started), as smalls. Suppose we need Micro, Mini Micro, and You have GOT to be kidding/How did you get a LOG in there?!?

This is all my subjective take, based on how I've learned to play (and thus calibrate) the game. So there are certain people like TreyB & the Outlaw who are likely to blame for my point of view. LOL.

BarbJ - terrain is a composite of the entire journey to the cache, every speedbump counts imho - Tygress

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "busybeetoni" <tfbrown@...>
To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Rating a cache
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 18:44:28 -0000

I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit.  There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree.  For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it.  I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze.  To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache.  That's more of a puzzle.  How to get it down from the tree.

------------------------------------

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
CentralTexasGeocachers-digest@yahoogroups.com
CentralTexasGeocachers-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
consumerproducts.com

• Thanks!!!!! That clears it up.
Message 1 of 12 , May 30, 2012
View Source
Thanks!!!!! That clears it up.

--- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "gumbietygress@..." <gumbietygress@...> wrote:
>
> OTOH, a terrain 3.5 or 4 tells me I have to CLIMB the tree (or arch, or whathaveyou)Many of those hides are easy to spot from below (even whilst backflipping off a median planter), therefore justifiably only 1.5s or 2s.I could use a lot of things to simplify any tough terrain, but they all have hints -- subjective as they may be -- to where to be looking for the cache.And, well, to get a bike into a tree, that's a BIG push!!!! LOL So. Rule of thumb when *I* am setting ratings: Difficulty - trickiness of the hide. If it's a straightforward hide atop a lamppost, it's still a 1. If it's an electric plate flush against the top of that lamppost, it's a 4... or a bolt in the top of that lampost, maybe even a 5Terrain -- 1 -- wheelchair access. We learned a lot about this when Semper Q was on wheels. Not only does the chair have to get to GZ, but the person in the chair has to reach/retrieve the cache from that chair (e.g. NOT on the ground). So most simple caches are really 1.5s, we learned. And on from there. 4 means a tough climb (whether up someone's shoulders or whatever). 5 means it requires special gear. For example, Spring Loaded for Waterweasel & I was probably a 3 as far as exertion -- but because it needed fins and mask/goggles (if not snorkle) to do realistically, it's a 5. Hubbard Glacier Earthcache. We viewed it from the veranda of our stateroom. Hardly any physical effort at all. But because it required a boat or a helecopter, it's a 5 Terrain. Yes, for some a 4 or 5 terrain is a lot easier than for others. For some a 3 terrain is next to impossible. So you also need to know the Cache Owner's prejudice & capability. OTOH, these ratings tell this cacher quite a lot about what to expect and how to look for the cache. Even though they're all over the place. Well, for that matter, so are cache sizes. These days I'm seeing smalls regularly classified as regulars and a waterproof match case or altoids tin (micros when we started), as smalls. Suppose we need Micro, Mini Micro, and You have GOT to be kidding/How did you get a LOG in there?!? This is all my subjective take, based on how I've learned to play (and thus calibrate) the game. So there are certain people like TreyB & the Outlaw who are likely to blame for my point of view. LOL. BarbJ - terrain is a composite of the entire journey to the cache, every speedbump counts imho - Tygress
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "busybeetoni" <tfbrown@...>
> To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Rating a cache
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 18:44:28 -0000
>
> I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit. There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree. For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it. I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze. To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache. That's more of a puzzle. How to get it down from the tree.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
> The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4fc538987355c1c57fb9st03vuc
>
• You re welcome.Again, this is personal opinion based on CenTex caching. Cache hides and ratings tend to have very regional flavors. OTOH, we mostly find with
Message 1 of 12 , May 30, 2012
View Source
You're welcome.
Again, this is personal opinion based on CenTex caching. Cache hides and ratings tend to have very regional flavors. OTOH, we mostly find with this attitude, so it sorta works! =smile=

BarbJ = just a rule of a particular thumb = Tygress

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "busybeetoni" <tfbrown@...>
To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: Rating a cache
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 11:57:28 -0000

Thanks!!!!!  That clears it up.

--- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "gumbietygress@..." <gumbietygress@...> wrote:
>
> OTOH, a terrain 3.5 or 4 tells me I have to CLIMB the tree (or arch, or whathaveyou)Many of those hides are easy to spot from below (even whilst backflipping off a median planter), therefore justifiably only 1.5s or 2s.I could use a lot of things to simplify any tough terrain, but they all have hints -- subjective as they may be -- to where to be looking for the cache.And, well, to get a bike into a tree, that's a BIG push!!!! LOL So. Rule of thumb when *I* am setting ratings: Difficulty - trickiness of the hide. If it's a straightforward hide atop a lamppost, it's still a 1. If it's an electric plate flush against the top of that lamppost, it's a 4... or a bolt in the top of that lampost, maybe even a 5Terrain -- 1 -- wheelchair access. We learned a lot about this when Semper Q was on wheels. Not only does the chair have to get to GZ, but the person in the chair has to reach/retrieve the cache from that chair (e.g. NOT on the ground). So most simple caches are really 1.5s, we learned.  And on from there. 4 means a tough climb (whether up someone's shoulders or whatever). 5 means it requires special gear. For example, Spring Loaded for Waterweasel & I was probably a 3 as far as exertion -- but because it needed fins and mask/goggles (if not snorkle) to do realistically, it's a 5. Hubbard Glacier Earthcache. We viewed it from the veranda of our stateroom. Hardly any physical effort at all. But because it required a boat or a helecopter, it's a 5 Terrain. Yes, for some a 4 or 5 terrain is a lot easier than for others. For some a 3 terrain is next to impossible. So you also need to know the Cache Owner's prejudice & capability. OTOH, these ratings tell this cacher quite a lot about what to expect and how to look for the cache. Even though they're all over the place. Well, for that matter, so are cache sizes. These days I'm seeing smalls regularly classified as regulars and a waterproof match case or altoids tin (micros when we started), as smalls. Suppose we need Micro, Mini Micro, and You have GOT to be kidding/How did you get a LOG in there?!? This is all my subjective take, based on how I've learned to play (and thus calibrate) the game. So there are certain people like TreyB & the Outlaw who are likely to blame for my point of view. LOL. BarbJ - terrain is a composite of the entire journey to the cache, every speedbump counts imho - Tygress
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "busybeetoni" <tfbrown@...>
> To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Rating a cache
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 18:44:28 -0000
>
> I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit.  There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree.  For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it.  I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze.  To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache.  That's more of a puzzle.  How to get it down from the tree.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
> The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4fc538987355c1c57fb9st03vuc
>

------------------------------------

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
CentralTexasGeocachers-digest@yahoogroups.com
CentralTexasGeocachers-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
consumerproducts.com
• Barb- I gotta say it again - I may not always agree with you ( though I can t ever actually remember doing so) but I do so love to read your take on
Message 1 of 12 , May 30, 2012
View Source
Barb- I gotta say it again - I may not always agree with you ( though I can't ever actually remember doing so) but I do so love to read your take on things....

Totavi ( Anne)

--- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "gumbietygress@..." <gumbietygress@...> wrote:
>
> You're welcome.Again, this is personal opinion based on CenTex caching. Cache hides and ratings tend to have very regional flavors. OTOH, we mostly find with this attitude, so it sorta works! =smile= BarbJ = just a rule of a particular thumb = Tygress
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "busybeetoni" <tfbrown@...>
> To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: Rating a cache
> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 11:57:28 -0000
>
> Thanks!!!!! That clears it up.
>
> --- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "gumbietygress@" <gumbietygress@> wrote:
> >
> > OTOH, a terrain 3.5 or 4 tells me I have to CLIMB the tree (or arch, or whathaveyou)Many of those hides are easy to spot from below (even whilst backflipping off a median planter), therefore justifiably only 1.5s or 2s.I could use a lot of things to simplify any tough terrain, but they all have hints -- subjective as they may be -- to where to be looking for the cache.And, well, to get a bike into a tree, that's a BIG push!!!! LOL So. Rule of thumb when *I* am setting ratings: Difficulty - trickiness of the hide. If it's a straightforward hide atop a lamppost, it's still a 1. If it's an electric plate flush against the top of that lamppost, it's a 4... or a bolt in the top of that lampost, maybe even a 5Terrain -- 1 -- wheelchair access. We learned a lot about this when Semper Q was on wheels. Not only does the chair have to get to GZ, but the person in the chair has to reach/retrieve the cache from that chair (e.g. NOT on the ground). So most simple caches are really 1.5s, we learned. And on from there. 4 means a tough climb (whether up someone's shoulders or whatever). 5 means it requires special gear. For example, Spring Loaded for Waterweasel & I was probably a 3 as far as exertion -- but because it needed fins and mask/goggles (if not snorkle) to do realistically, it's a 5. Hubbard Glacier Earthcache. We viewed it from the veranda of our stateroom. Hardly any physical effort at all. But because it required a boat or a helecopter, it's a 5 Terrain. Yes, for some a 4 or 5 terrain is a lot easier than for others. For some a 3 terrain is next to impossible. So you also need to know the Cache Owner's prejudice & capability. OTOH, these ratings tell this cacher quite a lot about what to expect and how to look for the cache. Even though they're all over the place. Well, for that matter, so are cache sizes. These days I'm seeing smalls regularly classified as regulars and a waterproof match case or altoids tin (micros when we started), as smalls. Suppose we need Micro, Mini Micro, and You have GOT to be kidding/How did you get a LOG in there?!? This is all my subjective take, based on how I've learned to play (and thus calibrate) the game. So there are certain people like TreyB & the Outlaw who are likely to blame for my point of view. LOL. BarbJ - terrain is a composite of the entire journey to the cache, every speedbump counts imho - Tygress
> >
> > ---------- Original Message ----------
> > From: "busybeetoni" <tfbrown@>
> > To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Rating a cache
> > Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 18:44:28 -0000
> >
> > I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit. There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree. For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it. I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze. To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache. That's more of a puzzle. How to get it down from the tree.
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
> > The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
> > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4fc538987355c1c57fb9st03vuc
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
> The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4fc6122d2f02b1c9f68ast03vuc
>
• Thank you, Anne....I *do* try to differentiate between my subjective and objective opinions. Most, being opinion, are the former. Ergo: automatically attach In
Message 1 of 12 , May 30, 2012
View Source
Thank you, Anne....
I *do* try to differentiate between my subjective and objective opinions. Most, being opinion, are the former. Ergo: automatically attach In My Humble Opinion / Your Mileage May Differ.
So while I may sound definite, there are no stone carving utensils attached to my PC!

'Best!

BarbJ/Tygress

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Anne" <rockslide@...>
To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: Rating a cache
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 12:34:28 -0000

Barb- I gotta say it again   - I may not always agree with you ( though I can't ever actually remember doing so) but I do so love to read your take on things....

Totavi ( Anne)

--- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "gumbietygress@..." <gumbietygress@...> wrote:
>
> You're welcome.Again, this is personal opinion based on CenTex caching. Cache hides and ratings tend to have very regional flavors. OTOH, we mostly find with this attitude, so it sorta works! =smile= BarbJ = just a rule of a particular thumb = Tygress
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "busybeetoni" <tfbrown@...>
> To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: Rating a cache
> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 11:57:28 -0000
>
> Thanks!!!!!  That clears it up.
>
> --- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "gumbietygress@" <gumbietygress@> wrote:
> >
> > OTOH, a terrain 3.5 or 4 tells me I have to CLIMB the tree (or arch, or whathaveyou)Many of those hides are easy to spot from below (even whilst backflipping off a median planter), therefore justifiably only 1.5s or 2s.I could use a lot of things to simplify any tough terrain, but they all have hints -- subjective as they may be -- to where to be looking for the cache.And, well, to get a bike into a tree, that's a BIG push!!!! LOL So. Rule of thumb when *I* am setting ratings: Difficulty - trickiness of the hide. If it's a straightforward hide atop a lamppost, it's still a 1. If it's an electric plate flush against the top of that lamppost, it's a 4... or a bolt in the top of that lampost, maybe even a 5Terrain -- 1 -- wheelchair access. We learned a lot about this when Semper Q was on wheels. Not only does the chair have to get to GZ, but the person in the chair has to reach/retrieve the cache from that chair (e.g. NOT on the ground). So most simple caches are really 1.5s, we learned.  And on from there. 4 means a tough climb (whether up someone's shoulders or whatever). 5 means it requires special gear. For example, Spring Loaded for Waterweasel & I was probably a 3 as far as exertion -- but because it needed fins and mask/goggles (if not snorkle) to do realistically, it's a 5. Hubbard Glacier Earthcache. We viewed it from the veranda of our stateroom. Hardly any physical effort at all. But because it required a boat or a helecopter, it's a 5 Terrain. Yes, for some a 4 or 5 terrain is a lot easier than for others. For some a 3 terrain is next to impossible. So you also need to know the Cache Owner's prejudice & capability. OTOH, these ratings tell this cacher quite a lot about what to expect and how to look for the cache. Even though they're all over the place. Well, for that matter, so are cache sizes. These days I'm seeing smalls regularly classified as regulars and a waterproof match case or altoids tin (micros when we started), as smalls. Suppose we need Micro, Mini Micro, and You have GOT to be kidding/How did you get a LOG in there?!? This is all my subjective take, based on how I've learned to play (and thus calibrate) the game. So there are certain people like TreyB & the Outlaw who are likely to blame for my point of view. LOL. BarbJ - terrain is a composite of the entire journey to the cache, every speedbump counts imho - Tygress
> >
> > ---------- Original Message ----------
> > From: "busybeetoni" <tfbrown@>
> > To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Rating a cache
> > Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 18:44:28 -0000
> >
> > I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit.  There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree.  For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it.  I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze.  To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache.  That's more of a puzzle.  How to get it down from the tree.
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
> > The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
> > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4fc538987355c1c57fb9st03vuc
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
> The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4fc6122d2f02b1c9f68ast03vuc
>

------------------------------------

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
CentralTexasGeocachers-digest@yahoogroups.com
CentralTexasGeocachers-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
consumerproducts.com
• there is a climb tree attribute icon that can be added to cache pages ... -- ... Bill a.k.a ZionZR2 512-789-1469
Message 1 of 12 , May 31, 2012
View Source
there is a climb tree attribute icon that can be added to cache pages

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:44 PM, busybeetoni wrote:

I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit. There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree. For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it. I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze. To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache. That's more of a puzzle. How to get it down from the tree.

--
><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Bill
a.k.a ZionZR2
512-789-1469
<>< <>< <>< <>< <><
• However, attributes are not downloaded onto my Oregon. So for paperless caching, it s useless for me.T/D numbers, however, are part of the picture. BarbJ -
Message 1 of 12 , May 31, 2012
View Source
However, attributes are not downloaded onto my Oregon. So for paperless caching, it's useless for me.
T/D numbers, however, are part of the picture.

BarbJ - Photographic hints are pretty much useless to me, too, when in the field - Tygress

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Bill Ellis <zionzr2@...>
To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Rating a cache
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 20:07:12 -0500

there is a climb tree attribute icon that can be added to cache pages

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:44 PM, busybeetoni wrote:

I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit. There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree. For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it. I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze. To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache. That's more of a puzzle. How to get it down from the tree.

--
><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Bill
a.k.a ZionZR2
512-789-1469
<>< <>< <>< <>< <><

____________________________________________________________
Refinance for 2.00%/3.092% APR
Loans under 729K usually qualify for US GOV backed refinance programs
theeasyloansite.com
• As an FYI, if you use GSAK you can have a list of attributes on your Oregon (and some other Garmins) by using this macro: (see #7 on the Jan. 31 post.)
Message 1 of 12 , Jun 1, 2012
View Source
As an FYI, if you use GSAK you can have a list of attributes on your Oregon (and some other Garmins) by using this macro: (see #7 on the Jan. 31 post.)
http://gsak.net/board/index.php?showtopic=7745&st=20&#entry97225

Also, it takes a bit more effort, but there are now ways to get spoiler photos loaded onto the Oregon x50, Dakota, Montana, GPSMap 62/78 and eTrex 20,30 as seen in #25 here:
http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Geocaching#FAQ-GC25.%29%20How%20do%20I%20access%20spoiler%20photos%20for%20a%20geocache?

Brent (BANDA)

--- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "gumbietygress@..." <gumbietygress@...> wrote:
>
> However, attributes are not downloaded onto my Oregon. So for paperless caching, it's useless for me.T/D numbers, however, are part of the picture. BarbJ - Photographic hints are pretty much useless to me, too, when in the field - Tygress
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: Bill Ellis <zionzr2@...>
> To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Rating a cache
> Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 20:07:12 -0500
>
>
>
>
>
> there is a climb tree attribute icon that can be added to cache pages
>
>
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:44 PM, busybeetoni <tfbrown@...> wrote:
> �I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit. There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree. For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it. I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze. To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache. That's more of a puzzle. How to get it down from the tree.
>
>
>
>
> --
> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
> Bill
> a.k.a ZionZR2
> 512-789-1469
> <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Refinance for 2.00%/3.092% APR
> Loans under 729K usually qualify for US GOV backed refinance programs
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4fc827ce872601d99b6fst04vuc
>
• Yeah, maybe. But for many people (me at present -- I m weird, but not unique), we re not that interested in being technical. Not dissing GSAK, it s just that I
Message 1 of 12 , Jun 1, 2012
View Source
Yeah, maybe. But for many people (me at present -- I'm weird, but not unique), we're not that interested in being technical. Not dissing GSAK, it's just that I have too much on my plate already than to suss out an interface, even if it is fantastically useful. I have technophile friends for that. But they're loading for CSs
And, well, "some Garmins" ...

Just because some use it, it's still reasonable to use the other elements (like T/D), is all I'm saying.  I barely look at attributes on the cache page -- and have to remind myself to set them. =shrug=

As for loading spoiler pictures: pffft. I'm having enough trouble with data stream. (And I'm the only Oregon in the group.) Just suggesting, as COs we need to think beyond our own devices and tech savvy. Some of us just want to find things.... as streamlined as possible.

barbj - learned to put earthcache questions up front because they truncate - tygress

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "banda_geocacher" <banda@...>
To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: Rating a cache
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 12:37:18 -0000

As an FYI, if you use GSAK you can have a list of attributes on your Oregon (and some other Garmins) by using this macro: (see #7 on the Jan. 31 post.)
http://gsak.net/board/index.php?showtopic=7745&st=20&#entry97225

Also, it takes a bit more effort, but there are now ways to get spoiler photos loaded onto the Oregon x50, Dakota, Montana, GPSMap 62/78 and eTrex 20,30 as seen in #25 here:
http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Geocaching#FAQ-GC25.%29%20How%20do%20I%20access%20spoiler%20photos%20for%20a%20geocache?

Brent (BANDA)

--- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "gumbietygress@..." <gumbietygress@...> wrote:
>
> However, attributes are not downloaded onto my Oregon. So for paperless caching, it's useless for me.T/D numbers, however, are part of the picture. BarbJ - Photographic hints are pretty much useless to me, too, when in the field - Tygress
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: Bill Ellis <zionzr2@...>
> To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Rating a cache
> Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 20:07:12 -0500
>
>
>
>
>
> there is a climb tree attribute icon that can be added to cache pages
>
>
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:44 PM, busybeetoni <tfbrown@...> wrote:
> &#65533;I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit. There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree. For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it. I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze. To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache. That's more of a puzzle. How to get it down from the tree.
>
>
>
>
> --
> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
> Bill
> a.k.a ZionZR2
> 512-789-1469
> <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Refinance for 2.00%/3.092% APR
> Loans under 729K usually qualify for US GOV backed refinance programs
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4fc827ce872601d99b6fst04vuc
>

------------------------------------

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
CentralTexasGeocachers-digest@yahoogroups.com
CentralTexasGeocachers-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
consumerproducts.com
• I m sorry.I m not in my right mind at present -- and my left mind is none too stable. All you were sayin is that the technology is there for those who want to
Message 1 of 12 , Jun 1, 2012
View Source
I'm sorry.
I'm not in my right mind at present -- and my left mind is none too stable.

All you were sayin is that the technology is there for those who want to take advantage of it, and I go off on platform awareness.
Too many years battling developers with cutting edge equipment.

It IS cool that we have more fun than a tricorder almost at our fingertips.

Thanks for the pointer.

BarbJ (But still, be mindful when writing cache pages, there are still people out there using yellow eTrexes) Tygress

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "gumbietygress@..." <gumbietygress@...>
To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: Rating a cache
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 12:53:18 GMT

Yeah, maybe. But for many people (me at present -- I'm weird, but not unique), we're not that interested in being technical. Not dissing GSAK, it's just that I have too much on my plate already than to suss out an interface, even if it is fantastically useful. I have technophile friends for that. But they're loading for CSs
And, well, "some Garmins" ...

Just because some use it, it's still reasonable to use the other elements (like T/D), is all I'm saying.  I barely look at attributes on the cache page -- and have to remind myself to set them. =shrug=

As for loading spoiler pictures: pffft. I'm having enough trouble with data stream. (And I'm the only Oregon in the group.) Just suggesting, as COs we need to think beyond our own devices and tech savvy. Some of us just want to find things.... as streamlined as possible.

barbj - learned to put earthcache questions up front because they truncate - tygress

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "banda_geocacher" <banda@...>
To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: Rating a cache
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 12:37:18 -0000

As an FYI, if you use GSAK you can have a list of attributes on your Oregon (and some other Garmins) by using this macro: (see #7 on the Jan. 31 post.)
http://gsak.net/board/index.php?showtopic=7745&st=20&#entry97225

Also, it takes a bit more effort, but there are now ways to get spoiler photos loaded onto the Oregon x50, Dakota, Montana, GPSMap 62/78 and eTrex 20,30 as seen in #25 here:
http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Geocaching#FAQ-GC25.%29%20How%20do%20I%20access%20spoiler%20photos%20for%20a%20geocache?

Brent (BANDA)

--- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "gumbietygress@..." <gumbietygress@...> wrote:
>
> However, attributes are not downloaded onto my Oregon. So for paperless caching, it's useless for me.T/D numbers, however, are part of the picture. BarbJ - Photographic hints are pretty much useless to me, too, when in the field - Tygress
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: Bill Ellis <zionzr2@...>
> To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Rating a cache
> Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 20:07:12 -0500
>
>
>
>
>
> there is a climb tree attribute icon that can be added to cache pages
>
>
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:44 PM, busybeetoni <tfbrown@...> wrote:
> &#65533;I've tried using the rating scale guidelines, but some things just don't seem to fit. There is nothing in there about how to rate one when you put it in a tree. For terrain, it talks about slopes and whether you could ride a bicycle or push it. I've seen ratings where it's a 1.5/3 because the cache is up a tree, yet the walk to the tree is a breeze. To me, that rating is backwards because the difficulty isn't the journey there, the hard part is actually getting the cache. That's more of a puzzle. How to get it down from the tree.
>
>
>
>
> --
> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
> Bill
> a.k.a ZionZR2
> 512-789-1469
> <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Refinance for 2.00%/3.092% APR
> Loans under 729K usually qualify for US GOV backed refinance programs
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4fc827ce872601d99b6fst04vuc
>

------------------------------------

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
CentralTexasGeocachers-digest@yahoogroups.com
CentralTexasGeocachers-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
consumerproducts.com
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
• Changes have not been saved
Press OK to abandon changes or Cancel to continue editing
• Your browser is not supported
Kindly note that Groups does not support 7.0 or earlier versions of Internet Explorer. We recommend upgrading to the latest Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, or Firefox. If you are using IE 9 or later, make sure you turn off Compatibility View.