Tequila

That doesn't explain why the over 90 other caches that have the name Walmart in them have not been touched.

I would be curious to know what, if any, support you received from Groundspeak during the death threat incident. You keep trying to fuel an imaginary fire here. If the volunteers didn't want to do what they were doing, they wouldn't do it. There is absolutely no reason they would even volunteer unless it was something they WANTED to do. They aren't being paid, so what other reason would they be volunteering? You're trying to play Groundspeak against its volunteers. You're hoping for a volunteer to come forward, sobbing about how horrible Groundspeak is, so you can say, "See! Groundspeak is evil!".... I don't think they are going to bite. But by all means, keep fishing. Like they say: The customer comes first in everything we do at Compass!

We did burn the White House once.

Personally, I'd rather they be working on the servers (which is probably what they are doing) and working on the version 2.0 upgrade. I'd be a bit upset if they were in here wasting their time over a ridiculous argument in the forums. God forbid they listen to customers. For as we all know, The customer comes first in everything we do at Compass!

And I have found both of them. One was my first find. Both are great caches. No drive up micros back then.

I would be curious to know what, if any, support you received from Groundspeak during the death threat incident.

I think all of these threads would stop if one thing happened. Someone from Groundspeak stepped up and said: "My name is X and I work for and speak for Groundspeak. We have decided to be more stringent enforcing rules around commercialism as it relates to cache names and descriptions. There will the odd discrepancy in the enforcement and we will deal with those on a case by case basis. Our intention is to treat all players fairly and equitably. Please understand that cache approvers are volunteers and acting as directed by Groundspeak. They are not authorized to make policy. Nor are they authorized to speak on behalf of Groundspeak beyond approving caches." I am appalled at how Groundspeak has let the approvers to take a ton of abuse (some from me) here without stepping in and supporting their volunteers. I am a volunteer with a K9 Search and Rescue group and I know for a fact my team and the police forces we serve would immediately step in and take responsibility for the volunteers doing what they are told to do. Groundspeak doesn't seem to recognize that the players are customers. And as we all know: The customer comes first in everything we do at Compass! My only regret is that there isn't a competitive website where we could take our business and still enjoy the same volume of caches available. But of course, Groundspeak have made that impossible. Reminds me of buying a PC a few years ago and having no choice for the O/S on it. That is my final two cents on this topic.

I think all of these threads would stop if one thing happened. Someone from Groundspeak stepped up and said: "My name is X and I work for and speak for Groundspeak. We have decided to be more stringent enforcing rules around commercialism as it relates to cache names and descriptions. There will the odd discrepancy in the enforcement and we will deal with those on a case by case basis. Our intention is to treat all players fairly and equitably. Please understand that cache approvers are volunteers and acting as directed by Groundspeak. They are not authorized to make policy. Nor are they authorized to speak on behalf of Groundspeak beyond approving caches." I am appalled at how Groundspeak has let the approvers to take a ton of abuse (some from me) here without stepping in and supporting their volunteers. I am a volunteer with a K9 Search and Rescue group and I know for a fact my team and the police forces we serve would immediately step in and take responsibility for the volunteers doing what they are told to do. Groundspeak doesn't seem to recognize that the players are customers. And as we all know: The customer comes first in everything we do at Compass! My only regret is that there isn't a competitive website where we could take our business and still enjoy the same volume of caches available. But of course, Groundspeak have made that impossible. Reminds me of buying a PC a few years ago and having no choice for the O/S on it. That is my final two cents on this topic.

Words that Groundspeak should consider: The customer comes first in everything we do at Compass!

There are over 90 other caches world wide with the word WalMart or Wal-Mart in it. Why are they not being targeted??

Very well said. I found it interesting that several, if not all, Canadian approvers hide behind ghost accounts whereas the American approvers I have had contact with, use their regular caching accounts. I agree the anonymity aspect hurts the process.

You didn't lose your find and your count didn't go down. The cache is gone but pre-existing finds remain. You just can't look at them. Guess again. Yesterday (and currently in my GSAK) I had 118 finds. Now I have 117. I just ran a My Finds PQ and GC11905 shows up. Could the owner of the cache have deleted the logs? No. CacheTech and CacheDrone archived and then retracted them last night. Interesting that the other Walmart caches around the world are untouched.

You didn't lose your find and your count didn't go down. The cache is gone but pre-existing finds remain. You just can't look at them. Guess again. Yesterday (and currently in my GSAK) I had 118 finds. Now I have 117. I still have my find for Walmart Whitby and it got zapped too. Look at your account and select all caches and see if it is there. If not, I would file an appeal with appeals@geocaching.com Point out that there are 94 other walmart caches around the world that didn't get zapped.

You didn't lose your find and your count didn't go down. The cache is gone but pre-existing finds remain. You just can't look at them.

I picked up this little slogan on a website. Thought it was appropriate and maybe Groundspeak could learn from it: The customer comes first in everything we do at Compass!

Some guy named Ted and "Cache-Drone" said to take it to the forums. <--- Quoting the ops original post. Perhaps some guy named Ted would like to chime in? The issue was dealt with and I believe is CLOSED. TPTB said remove the link, the link was removed. CASE CLOSED. What more do you want? Do you want Jeremy himself to waste his time on this issue when he could be dealing with... Oh I don't know.... SERVER ISSUES? If he isn't any better at dealing with this issue than he is dealing with server issues, I now understand why he hasn't waded in. Thanks for clarifying that.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Groundspeak can decide tomorrow to allow a menu to be linked to for an event cache or not. They can allow it for "Bob", but not for "Mary" if they want... If "Bob" feels entitled and comes across like the OP did, I wouldn't allow it either. If "Mary" asked for permission and didn't feel entitled, I would seriously consider allowing it. Groundspeak gets to decide what is allowed and what isn't based on whatever criteria they want to use. The entitlement attitude I'm seeing in this thread is baffling to me. What is more baffling, is the how Groundspeak has left two volunteer cache approvers hung out to dry and take all the flak. After Andy's comment above, I have come to feel sorry for them.

I am guessing they have not spoken to the reviewer. He just disabled three local caches with variations of the word Wal-Mart in the cache name or description. But he is gonna be a busy boy. There are 94 caches world wide that have Wal-Mart or WalMart in their name.

Here is how crazy this is and is gonna get. GC18QQJ has just been disabled because it includes the word Wal-Mart. On the surface, perhaps that makes sense. But it raises many valid questions: (1) Are we unable to hold an event at Wal-Mart? I know it is not an premier location but not totally unrealistic. (2) Does that mean McDonalds, Boston Pizza et. al. are taboo? Where is the line? (3) Assuming we can hold an event at Wal-Mart, does that mean there are different rules for Traditional descriptions and Event descriptions. And the beat goes on.

Can Groundspeak be considered a "reasonable person" given that everyone, except one agitator has replied "Allow the Menu Link"? Just a question, not an opinion. I love how the simple fact that I disagree with the OP makes me an instigator. I honestly believe that the OP went overboard and clearly has an agenda and a large chip to boot. I don't think it should be allowed. What's to keep "ME" as a restaurant owner from having an event at my restaurant and posting my menu to try to solicit business? Apparently they aren't worried about that or they would insist on removing any reference to restaraunts as an event location. The absence of any statement from Groundspeak speaks volumes here. They know they have created a situation they can't explain. And the only way out (banning everything commercial) would kill event caches. And they aren't prepared to do that. Ergo, impasse. Solution - Bury your head in the sand. Hide behind their "business". It is a pity there isn't a viable competitive site to keep them customer focused.

Sure, i'll have a large fry and a medium coke OK Cache-Tech. If one of us posted a comment like this, you would be all over us. So let's see you respond to this guy's obvious sarcasm. A technique he gave someone else flack for using.

As much as I hate to say it, eelow, I think you have brought a dull knife to a gun fight. Groundspeak holds all the cards. The fact that no one (volunteer or paid representative of the organization) has even attempted to answer your question tells me they never will. They can't. They don't have a definitive answer. There are so many contradictions in the enforcement of their "guidelines" that any answer will open another pandora's box of "what about"? Which certainly begs the question of why did they suggest you post to the forum in the first place. The best we can hope for is to have as many cachers as possible post a note here saying "Allow the Menu Link" and hopefully they will see the tidal wave and relent. Let me be the first: ALLOW THE MENU LINK

I stand by my monopoly comments. And what an interesting monopoly it is. We give Groundspeak their product (caches hidden) for free and then turn around and pay them to allow us to find them.

Be careful. Our "friendly" local cache approver is dangerous enough by himself without us feeding him new targets to vent on.