Senior Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Thot last won the day on May 1

Thot had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

55 Excellent


About Thot

  • Rank
    Funtime Advisor

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender

Caching Name

  • Opencaching.US

Recent Profile Visitors

1,697 profile views
  1. I've seen at least a couple of these on the back of pickups. Saw one today. It's a little difficult to tell from the picture but the flag is entirely black and white except for the one white stripe that's colored red -- the blue is black and all the reds are black. I assume this is supposed to be a message. Does anyone know what that message is?
  2. Thanks for the info. I believe I can find a place that's within 528 feet. One of the problems is two other caches already overlap into my zone. And I'm guessing if I move into the overlap it may raise flags. My cache was there long before the overlapping ones but those technicalities never influenced Prime Reviewer.
  3. How far can you move a cache before you have to archive it and make a new one?
  4. My Snake Tree cache, the 8th oldest in the Houston area is up for adoption. See latest log.
  5. Current Projects Smash Childhood Cancer OpenZika Help Stop TB FightAIDS@Home Outsmart Ebola Together Mapping Cancer Markers
  6. I'm here to encourage others to join. This is really a chance to participate in something worthwhile that costs you almost nothing. Here's the current roster.
  7. So, is there a local geocaching page I should know about? I'm really sorry to see this website go. It was a place I could get answers to my many questions.
  8. Right, and he gave up his domain too.
  9. You can do that. The history of each bug is on the bugs page. But when you have a hundred bugs and each bug has many actions you have to tediously go to each bug and then hunt through page after page of logs to find the real drops it's more than I'm willing to do. In the old days I wrote programs that would do this automatically but GC changed their website to prevent that. As an example, one of my little found caches has 31 bugs recorded. I took the first one on the list as a random sample. That bug has 165 total actions in its history. If this is typical I would have to go through up to 5000 logs, keeping records along the way, to determine if which bugs were actually placed in the cache.
  10. This is getting spooky. I'm beginning to hear an echo when I come here. When I go to Geocaching, Travelers, Puzzles and maybe others I haven't checked I have the latest topic, maybe going back months. Is this site gradually (or not so gradually) going dark? Where'd everybody go? So anyway, I would like to figure out which Travelers have actually been in one of my caches. It has a lot listed in the history but many/most/almost all have been people dipping bugs, not putting them in the cache. I haven't been able to sort the wheat from the chaff. Anybody know an easy way to tell which travelers were ever actually in a cache?
  11. Am I the only one who didn't know the evince coordinate checker is defunct? I'm having to redo all my puzzle and multi fill in the blank pages.
  12. This a large cache.
  13. My test for a micro is the volume (not shape) of a tennis ball or less. If it's greater than a tennis ball and less than a quart container it's a small. I used to say a two quart container but with size creep and all . . . A large should be a gallon or more. Incidentally, there are so few large containers they were not considered in my study.
  14. To me the first chart is the most meaningful. It shows the change clearly. The chart distinguishing between caches labeled small vs micro has more issues. The small cache designation wasn't adopted until somewhere in 2005 or later. Before that most people called them micros. My earlier data with smalls must have been people who relabeled older caches small once that designation became available. For example, people relabeled caches placed and labeled small in 2003 may have later changed them to small. My data uses when the cache was placed and I can't know if the size was changed later. My observation is there's been size creep over time. Some new cachers are labeling caches small that in prior years would have been labeled micros. I've imagined this may partly be because newer cachers have seen so many of the tiny containers (nanos, Bison tubes, etc.), which didn't use to exist, a large pill bottle seems like it must be a small. My intent was to show the decline of regular (they were called regular for a reason) caches and the second chart muddies that. I omitted 2001 & 2002 because my data's bad back then and geocaching had growing pains with some odd things going on. For what it's worth in 2001 (the first year of caching) 96% were regular caches and 4% micros in my iffy data. Percent of Caches
  15. That's the problem with not getting notices from HGCS, I didn't know about your post 'til just now. Thanks for the kind words Kenny and the rest of you, please SIGN UP!