Re: [Az-Geocaching] Re: Not Found or Not Looked For?

Top Page
Attachments:
Message as email
+ (text/plain)
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Brian Casteel
Date:  
To: listserv
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Re: Not Found or Not Looked For?
I stopped in the area the day it was approved, but circled the parking lot
on foot once just looking the area over and left. My 3 year-old was in tow,
and as Blunder stated, it's not easy to look for a difficult to find cache
with a small child with you. Besides the fact that at mid-morning there was
MUCH too much foot traffic and I didn't feel like attracting the kind of
attention that it would attract. I'm not sure what to expect from AJ PD,
but didn't feel like finding out either.

I should note that I had 9' accuracy the entire time I was in the parking
lot without a hint that I was losing satellite due to structural
interference. :)

Brian
Team A.I.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Sparks" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 11:40 AM
Subject: [Az-Geocaching] Re: Not Found or Not Looked For?


> Team Evil Fish wrote:
>
> yet you expect
>
> We had a great time swapping stories and hope everyone took note of the
> _TRUE_ coordinates where we placed our flag. If yours wasn't in the same
> _CORRECT_ place, we expect you to make a note in the description, the next
> time you hide a cache, describing the amount of offset from our _TRUE_
> coordinates to aid us in our future searches
>
>
> - Regan, you didn't really take any of that seriously, did you?
>
>
> Then you wrote:
>
> Consider the Chandler Mini cache it was and is still a true original
> Traditional cache the coords take you to the spot then you have to figure
> out where it is hidden the coords took you to within acceptable GPS error
> and frustrated many cachers without being braggadocios
>
>
> - I'm not sure how this is even relevant? Especially considering
> Chandler Mini ''went missing'' 6 months ago and was archived 3 months ago.
>
> In my description, I wrote:
>
> The posted coordinates are approximate, as I had to interpolate from two
> positions where I could get a good signal. ...
>
> At least I had the decency to let people know, beforehand, that you
> can't just stand at the cache and expect 100% accuracy with your GPS,
> because of nearby structures that can, and most likely will, interfere
> with a satellite signal.
>
> -- Sprocket
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Az-Geocaching mailing list
> To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
> http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
>
> Arizona's Geocaching Resource
> http://www.azgeocaching.com
>