LonelyCache

Here's my thoughts on what areas The LonelyCache Project will cover initially and some reasons why. This is not set in stone and may change, but it is my current thinking.

To start, I see the LCP fully covering the following states and no more:

• Arizona
• Colorodo
• Nevada
• New Mexico
• Utah

Comparing this to the DGP, this does not include regions in California (Death Valley, Mojave, Salton Sea), Texas (Trans-Pecos), and Mexico. Cachewise, the biggest hit will be in CA, where there were 3233 caches (30,282 CPs) the last time DGP was updated, followed by TX where there were 508 (4997 CPs), and then Mexico where there were 298 (22,015 CPs).

Here's some of the reasons why:

• Initially, this area includes close to 100,000 caches. I'd like to get a handle on how well the system runs at this level for awhile. What resources it is using, how it is taxing the servers, etc. before expanding.
• Until some sort of region capability is added, I'd like to keep whole states. Leader boards for a partial state just seem a bit hokey.
• Whole states are a lot simpler to deal with than partial states, especially for setting up pocket queries.
• Texas is too big to include all of it to start. Currently it has close to 52,000 caches.
• California is way too big to include all of it to start. Currently it has close to 103,000 caches.
• All of Mexico could easily be added (it has less than 2000 caches), however I hesitate to make this international to start. Also, initially, I'd like to keep the LCP within the boundaries of the DGP.

I agree that it should start with what you suggest. It's more than I had hoped for. Your'e doing the work so make it easy on yourself.

I concur

Those 5 states would be an excellent choice for starters.

Sounds like a good plan to me.

Sounds good to me too.

Corfman Clan wrote: [*]All of Mexico could easily be added (it has less than 2000 caches), however I hesitate to make this international to start. Also, initially, I'd like to keep the LCP within the boundaries of the DGP.[/list]

I spent some considerable time and effort to get to Mexico looking for and finding a couple top 10 and even a #1 cache (at the time). I would like to see it included in the LCP, as it WAS included in the DGP boundary. I understand that it is not currently a good time to get down there, but I am confident that it will be again, and to anyone that has been into Mexico they can't argue that it is all about lonely caches.

cdsoccer7 wrote:I spent some considerable time and effort to get to Mexico looking for and finding a couple top 10 and even a #1 cache (at the time). I would like to see it included in the LCP, as it WAS included in the DGP boundary. I understand that it is not currently a good time to get down there, but I am confident that it will be again, and to anyone that has been into Mexico they can't argue that it is all about lonely caches.

I'd like to be clear that this area is only meant as the inital area of coverage. My hope is to have the LCP cover all of the DGP and more.

Thank You for the clarification. That area sounds nice then...INITIALLY. Thanks for all the hard work and keeping us up to speed.