scorpio_dark
-
Posts
101 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by scorpio_dark
-
-
I confess to cut and pasting logs, for the bigger count days. We're not journalists, after all, we're cachers, but we do try and remember something about each cache.
I completely agree with the sentiment that the more inspired caches, that can't really be done as part of a large cache run, do get the more inspired logs.
What I think about this topic may be skewed . . . as I am a journalist
<CLIP>
The big problem is that laziness breeds laziness. If other geocachers see copy/paste logs, then they assume its OK for them to do the same. I will often thank people for writing unique logs on my caches and even scorn those that post annoying copy/paste logs. If somebody doesn't tell them what they are doing is disrespectful and lazy, they might never get a clue.
So I try to go individual on all logs unless that are CnP placements such as Team GPSaxophone brought up. BTW, if you're ever in or near the Springs, look up Sax's hides!!!!
I actually do put some major effort into loggin a cache if I loved it or even liked it and did few that day/weekend. It's nice to hear back from CO's that appreciate the effort too. Or maybe they all hate what I write and just wanted their dang CnP?!
-
EDIT: Parts of the following exerpts have been bolded and such to help them standout.
Here is the reviewer's reasoning for archiving the cache:
"I'm sorry, but unless you want to relocate this outside the building, I'm afraid I can't publish this. The placement of this inside the lobby can only be seen as a way to promote the Humane Society. As noted in the guidelines, "caches perceived to be posted for religious, political, charitable or social agendas are not permitted. Geocaching is supposed to be a light, fun activity, not a platform for an agenda." While you say "Visitors to the cache do not need to involve the staff in their visit", that's most likely going to happen whether or not the cachers wants it. "
Looks like the reviewer sees it being in the building as the promotion of the humane society.
I find it strange to worry about staff becoming involved because I think all that a staff member will say is: "May I help you." And a cacher will have the opportunity to tell them about geocaching. OR did I mistakenly type in "hermit-cachers.com"
And there is a direct point that I support noobs. So some for and some against and you throw this out:
I guess from what I'm seeing here I should just ditch this cache entirely.
But I'm angry.
<CLIP>
I have to go to the expense of placing the cache and then find out I can't place the cache.
I do all this after I have ASKED in the forums how to go about doing it and taken that advice.
I am sorry I bought a premium membership. I wish I could get my money back. I am sorry I bought TBs from geocaching.com and wish I could get THAT money back. And right now I don't regard caching as a fun activity. In fact, I am seriously considering removing the three other caches I've placed and having them archived because I don't feel like bothering with them anymore.
Not trying to troll BigCatMomma, just making an observation: You seem to be getting really dramatic over the whole thing. If it's stressing you that much, maybe find another hobby like working at an animal rescue.
I have to go to the expense of placing the cache and then find out I can't place the cache.
OR, e-mail the reviewer before all that time and expense.
I'm sorry to see you unhappy. I learned a few months back in the forums that it was more about the game and less about being right (although that can be fun to debate).
I think it speaks for itself, but okay: The first line here screams PRETTY PLEASE; TAKE THIS AS CONSTRUCTIVE AND NOT THE WAY YOU GO ON TO TAKE IT.
Well, first of all let me say that the original idea of the cache has been scrapped. And how I agree with so many of you that the idea is the sport. So the whole thing has been modified greatly.
<CLIP>
Someone suggested that perhaps I should take up something other than geocaching, and I'd like to respond to that person's comments. I took a four-hour hiatus to cool down after those remarks, but still feel they need responding to. As a relatively new cacher (note I've only been a member since 4 July), I found your remarks to be, shall we say, contrary to the whole idea of a "sport" to begin with. It smacks of cronyism: this is our group, you stay out. It was immature, and it certainly doesn't make me want to associate with you, nor with your group if indeed that is the group's feeling. (I don't get that impression, but who knows? I could be wrong.) In that regard you are very right: perhaps I should take up something other than geocaching, and indeed I am part of another sport that actively promotes itself and does everything it can to make newcomers feel welcome and even help them improve in their participation in the sport. I have never had that sense as someone new to geocaching. Geocaching as a sport is NOT my first love as a recreational activity, nor do I suspect it will take over that position. Regardless, I don't think telling newcomers to simply buzz off is a way for any group to promote itself. Unless, of course, you want to watch your sport die off as each of you does so.
<CLIP>
Take another four hours.
SO it really seems that your . . . .stuff was directed at me. I don't usually respond to that . . . . stuff but you use the newcomer defense which I fully support.
When a little kid says I'm gonna take my ball and go home, they should leave the field or not say it at all. After seeing your continuance and your direct flaming of the response, it stinks as a cheap move for sympathy.
I truly don't want to see people unhappy playing this game/sport/hobby which you said you were and indicated that you wanted to take your ball and go home. I have friends who do different things than I do that make them individually more happy, but we can still walk our dogs together and have a beer on the weekends maybe . . . . And looks like you missed that there was another option suggested in the same post about talking to your reviewer to augment your fun. That meant instead of leaving.
BTW, it may seem hairy at times, but please use to quote tool when targeting individuals in your posts. It either let's us know who one is reverse-trolling or not as the case may be. Also watch the use of uncommon big words for us cronyistic fools who only befriend and promote immature college dropouts!!!
(Please take that as a joke. Whether your original choice of words were meant as an insult or not, I smiled.)So, I guess among your choices are: 1)take the semi-emotional responses here and boil some more, 2) Create a big application process for cachers to hunt your caches so that you can directly filter them as you have your forum responders or 3)retract your statements and invite all geocachers to enjoy your caches. Of course you seem rather creative and pretty smart so I'm sure you'll find your own way. Enjoy the sport/game/hobby and I'm taking my ball home for now to play with someone else. Still love the cache (EDIT: TravelBug) idea BTW. Animals rock and should be supported
You can ask yourselves what I may have learned from this.
Nope. You told me allllll about it
-
I didn't see a fence in your picture. Is it a low fence that you can step over, but would work to keep vehicles out?
Couple of people have said that. The picture is just of the sign and captioned (EDIT:titled) that way. . . It's not meant to depict the whole situation -sorry to confuse. The fence is 5' high all the way around. The cachers apparently must make access by crawling under.
Also, lots of public areas have short sections of fence with gates at roads to keep unauthorized vehicles out, but pedestrians can just walk around.
Um, yeah. I'd be kinda dumb to not just walk 5' feet to the left or whatever. -Or to lift my leg up and over a foot or so
As for the "Stay on Trails", that looks like a standard sign. So the guy probably just grabbed a few off the top of the stack in the maintenance shed and put them up without checking to see if there were any actual trails on the property.
I absolutely agree, but then the CO could have researched the situation and said as much, right?
-
Not trying to troll BigCatMomma, just making an observation: You seem to be getting really dramatic over the whole thing. If it's stressing you that much, maybe find another hobby like working at an animal rescue.
I have to go to the expense of placing the cache and then find out I can't place the cache.
OR, e-mail the reviewer before all that time and expense.
I'm sorry to see you unhappy. I learned a few months back in the forums that it was more about the game and less about being right (although that can be fun to debate).
-
I would like to set up a series of TBs that would travel back "home" for a charitable cause. Specifically, I want them to travel to my local Humane Society shelter, and with each one that returns I would make a donation to the shelter (and then send the bug back out on its mission). I see this as a fun way to combine caching with my desire to support this charitable cause.
As was pointed out by many in that original thread, your cache very clearly has an agenda.
Looks like the cache itself may support an agenda carried by her TB's, but the cache description I read doesn't seem to have one. While I guess the TB agenda could be grounds for dismissing the cache (and I may personally agree), does a reviewer have that power? Well, you could note the " . . platform for an agenda part" of the reviewers cited guideline.
Your point works in my mind . . . BUT, the reviewer is not on that point in the letter that was sent:
Here is the reviewer's reasoning for archiving the cache:
"I'm sorry, but unless you want to relocate this outside the building, I'm afraid I can't publish this. The placement of this inside the lobby can only be seen as a way to promote the Humane Society. As noted in the guidelines, "caches perceived to be posted for religious, political, charitable or social agendas are not permitted. Geocaching is supposed to be a light, fun activity, not a platform for an agenda." While you say "Visitors to the cache do not need to involve the staff in their visit", that's most likely going to happen whether or not the cachers wants it. "
Looks like the reviewer sees it being in the building as the promotion of the humane society.
I find it strange to worry about staff becoming involved because I think all that a staff member will say is: "May I help you." And a cacher will have the opportunity to tell them about geocaching. OR did I mistakenly type in "hermit-cachers.com"
-
Wow, that's a long post.
I think that your cache listing as posted is clear. Doesn't sound like a humane society promo to me. Also it makes sense with your pet related plans.
I am wondering what stops you from putting it outside as they requested? Not saying you should, but thinking you could.
If the reviewer won't turn the decision around, might I suggest a dog park or something? I know it's not quite what you were after, but just a thought.
EDIT: Ah! Going back to read I see why you don't want it to be outside. But isn't no food a rule in any case, whether the individual cache owner solves it or not?
-
Thanks to all the responders so far. Learning a couple of things. For instance, I didn't know that notes don't leave e-mail alerts. (I'd prefer an e-mail alert too.)
I'm confused. You talk about locked gates but you hunted the cache. How did you get on the other side of said locked gates?
If the answer is "I walked thirty over to the gate that was open" then I wouldn't worry about it.
If entered by climbing the fence, crawling under/through the fence then I agree with your NM log but in your own words...
Usually fences are meant to keep people out as far as I know. . .
You're the second to point that out. You are both, of course, absolutely right. I went ahead and crawled under the fence basing the action on blind trust of the CO and reference to the previous logs where people had crawled. But it still itched at me. To me the needs maintenance wasn't a suggestion to the CO of "Oh you're wrong!!!!' as much as it was a request of, "Please clarify the circumstances, because I feel bad having possibly gone into a preserve of sorts or otherwise trespassed." Probably a bit self-serving as I did indeed post it after having hunted, myself. But I also wanted to help out other cachers.
-
It appears to me from the cache page and from the picture you posted with your log that the area is freely available to enjoy. I can't comment on the locked gates as they are not shown in your photo.
Personally, if I had concerns such as yours with a cache that had been active for nearly a year I would have contacted the owner via email rather than posting a needs maintenance log on the cache. You *think* there may be an issue but you really do not know since you seem to have conflicting information. Public access signs and locked gates do seem to be conflicting. Yet you chose to hunt the cache and post your "found it" log. I don't understand why you would choose to enter an area that you felt was off limits to get your smilie and then felt compelled to post a "needs maintenance" log.
No online logs for two months do not seem to have any bearing. Perhaps no one searched for it?
Thanks for the feedback! I'm won't argue each detail involved with a choice to say something about it. You have some valid points, But the conflicting information is the exact reason for the maintenance request . . . or e-mail as you suggest. Thanks again!
-
So I went to a cache with a cool name and an interesting placement on a recent trip to Albuquerque. The placement is in a City Open Space designated so by postings all around. I drove all the way around the perimeter and saw two entry points that were padlocked and a fence around the entire thing.
Usually fences are meant to keep people out as far as I know. . . . . so there were alot of questions and other cachers have avoided this one for 2 months. I posted a needs maintenance because it seemed that an aspect of the cache DID need maintenance.
From other cachers and cache owners I want to know if they's like to learn about issues through their cache by maintenance postings or if it hurts their feelings (honestly). Also, was the tresspassing issue unclear in my post? I would hate to have a LEO on my butt in that situation . . .
Mines of Moria - GC1GKWF (Please don't bother the cache owner. I'm not posting this to flame them.)
-
I was wondering which geocaches they were. It looks like they may have been some smalls and micros planted along the side (or inside) Patty Jewitt Golf Course. GC1D40P and GC1EAJ4 may have been encountered and GCW02K Teed Off Sounds like the one that police described to the news on-scene.
That KKTV reporter sure needs to work on her research though. She sounded plain dumb and was even messing up non-geocaching related phrases. But I am hard on newsies, being one myself.
I haven't been caching in a while, but this reminded me to go out and enjoy.
-
Why all the humor-impaired responses?
Are there really those of you out there that have never been aggravated by chasing a nano in a field of rocks with the posted coordinates 60 feet off, or some other not well thought out or otherwise uncarefully or badly placed cache?
I'm sure the author wrote it after running into a string of those, and meant it to be taken in a spirit of cynical humor .
The following is copied from a post by a user on the nmgeocaching.com forums:
--------------------------------------------------------------
<snip>
Cache Name: <snip> Almost everyone sees the world exactly the same way you do; if they don't, they should learn to have a sense of humor . . . <snip>
There were some funny parts and some very valid points. I got a kick out of the Difficulty guideline. But . . . .
This may have been meant to be taken in a certain light. However, to others this looks like a troll topic.
EDIT: And I am on the fence here. Not making an accusation of the OP in this forum.
-
<snip>
It's perfectly fine to keep your FTF, with one exception that I can think of...
If you knew going into the cache that it was in clear violation and probably should be archived and you FTF'd anyways....well then you shouldn't have even logged it in the first place, but if you did log it then I think in good faith you should delete your find.
Cache away.....
If I placed a cache and the person who claimed the find then turned around and got it archived, I wouldn't wait for him to delete their log, I would do it for them. If they thought something was wrong with the cache or location then they should of stopped looking for it and contacted me to tell me their concerns. That is the right way of doing it instead of running and telling "mom".
I agree that you should really contact the owner before loggin an SBA. But if you found the cache (and yes there is a description of "a find"), then you're entitled to logging the find. Someone who deletes a log for vindication is being petty. Many have been a part of that group before, my self included.
If someone has exerted the effort to make a find, they may not know the issue that tells them it SBA until they FIND it. (Of course with snakes, that's a "duh". Don't stick around if you don't feel comfortable.) But there are plenty of other concerns (e.g. environmental issue, commercialism, discovery of existence on private property-without permission -on the way out, etc.) where a find would have been made and then a new observation of guideline infractions afterward.
EDIT: Spelling and Grammar.
-
Cool! Thanks for the heads up on that.
-
I have seen on sites to buy items that there is rattlesnakes that are fake in the strike position. Is this really a good idea since there are people of all ages. I would hope that Geocaching would remove any posting of things that can give an elderly person a heart attack
I've suggested before that there should be kidcaching.com or some such. Now I guess we need to add geri-caching.com or pacemakercaching.com?
But for a real answer to the OP. Yes, IMO it's a fine idea.
<snip> I would hope that anything that could potentially frighten a cacher away from the sport would be ranked with an appropriate difficutly level. I would consider a snake cache to be no less than a 3. I wouldn't take my 5 year old on a 3 difficulty cache. If I went out on a 1/1 and my child was frightened away from the sport I'd be a little ticked off. While I think such caches are cool and fun, they need to be given an appropriate rating . . <snip>
(Sounds like another blip on the need for kid-caches listings.) No, difficulty is difficulty as in puzzling issues. Not difficulty caused by a frightening event.
and maybe even a hint of the potential fright.
I see where this is appropriate. My first thought was
whatever. But that's where I need to allow for the fact that this is for all -
When I worked for Wally World, we had enough trouble with those sleeves getting stolen that I think anyone lifting one for a cache would attract an undue amount of attention.
History in the making! The first ever forum reference to PSMs (Plastic Sleeve Micros).I've found a "Small" just outside the front doors of a Wal Mart. It is hidden on top of one of the concrete & steel posts that keep cars off the sidewalks, covered by a bright orange round-topped sleeve over the post. Check your local Wal Mart next time you are there, those plastic sleeves lift up!I'm going to find a spot now and pioneer the "Something Up My Sleeve" series.
Not to mention the many discussions about hiding caches on a commercial property, including this current one, and if it is actually ok to do in the first place.
It's okay, I was being facetious, though no one can blame you for thinking the idea was serious. Hopefully others will heed your warning.
Some years ago when I worked at's Sam's club, a co-worker hid his drug stash under one
! A Plastic sleeves cache would be fun if in was in a lesser traveled area like this particular one was. -
and after this incedent with the bomb squad ....
"Preliminary reports indicated the package was a device used in a "geocaching" game often played by adults and Boy Scouts."
"Adults and Boy Scouts?"
Rick McDonald, Plano Police spokesperson said individuals playing the game will receive some kind of reward based on the amount of navigation systems they find.
"Receive a what based on the amount of what they find?"
Yup, that thar re-porter done did hisself some sho 'nuff bodacious research.
Before everyone decides to burn the reporter in effigy you missed the next sentence which read:
Sounds like an accurate description to me.According to GPSgames.org, “geocaching is a game in which players hide objects that other players use GPS receivers to find … Traditionally, the hidden object is a waterproof container with a log book and various inexpensive prizes. Finders are encouraged to take something, leave something, and sign the log.” Look again. That quote goes in between the other two sentences . . . The layman will become confused by the quote of the officer that is placed after to fairly well-done description. And as a former radio news anchor and a current photo journalist who also happens to like geocaching; I'd like to see the positive promotion of the hobby instead of the last words of an article making people think we be even weirder than we already be!<EDIT: And I just looked at the byline. Two reporters did all that . . . (wow)>
Your missing the main point here, Wal-Mart(commercial business) + private property x bomb squad = possible phone call from Wal-Mart legal department.
Nope, didn't miss it. Just noted something else since the private property equation gets old after about 1000 discussions and stories about bomb squads . . . . ..
Discussion board . . . -
According to Officer David Tilley, Plano Police spokesperson, preliminary reports indicated the package was a device used in a “geocaching” game often played by adults and Boy Scouts.
Let's be fair to the reporter, it was what the police said. I think everyone spent about as much time on this story as appropriate, almost none lol
Yes, it is what the police said. But if the mission of the news is to inform the public, then the reporter did not do the job well
. Now that Google is so everpresent, there is no forgiving not utilizing it. If you look up "GPS game" on google, geocaching.com comes up real quick and would give the reporter all that they need. I work in news and this reporter would be flamed eternally if they have reports like this in their record
.EDIT: And even the website that the reporter cites in their article should have clarified things. It is the job of the reporter to hammer out the facts and statements they include. Basically in news we still tell you what we're going to tell you, tell you it, and then review what we told you (and/or give you a resource for more.) Just like in essays. It's the job of the reporter to clarify the subject.
On original topic: I have only found Altoid tins and match-holders at Wally World so far thank goodness!
-
Hi, As far as ratings go I feel it's all in Eye of The Behoder ONE POINT FIVE a lot of folks contact me and say this should be 2 / 3 OH WEll.... Yeah I'd probably go for the lesser rating too if it was in the rocks compared to a fake rock among the rocks.
-
Speaking stricly from the picture and the cache description (and hint), I think you've done well. I ran it through the rating system too and got the same result.
IMHO, the difficulty indicates the ability to figure out the 'puzzle' or the way it was hidden. If someone decided to utlize the hint with their GPSr, I think one can readily surmise that it's likely a fake rock or at least in the rock stack.
Someone could probably argue to move it to a 2.5 and I might be inclined to listen. But no, I think you're right on. Nice hide! I'll try to get over there to search when I head out that way next Spring.
-
I agree in most cases that it is all part of the hunt. But I think that the hider should note if parking is particularly difficult or intended to be "part of the hide". I'm not saying tell us where to park, but just note that it's difficult for those who would just rather not deal . . .
Also there are other exceptions that should be noted: 1)Special parking rules such as "Obvious parking closed from 'this time' to 'that time' and no available parking on street" (I encountered that issue late last night) 2)"Be careful of parking at the obvious choice, LEO is watching" etc.
<EDIT for clarity>
-
Whatever...
You taunt my dog and it breaks it's logchain to get you, I blame YOU!! Sure the zoo will get a lot of grief over this because of the mistake made on the fence...is it possible an electrician could make a "fatal" mistake while installing or maintaining one of those boxes.....hmmmmm, I suppose it IS possible! Is it possible a little furry critter sneaks in and makes mincemeat of the wiring...maybe!And you're right this didn't start as a safety or permission issue, it progressed to that...
Duh, because your dog is not on display in an exhibitionary environment.
And if the kid entered the fence area, then the comparison would be to some idiot opening up an electrical box that says NO! And the fatal mistake comparison couldn't work in this case.
SBell provided a balanced example (needed in a comparison/contrast). You are attacking it from one side and assuming the facts in the case. Statements have been made and retracted on both theories. So we can't draw just one comparison or the other.
-
Regarding your lion analogy, I don't think it fits. A better one would be if a person climbed over a fence separating a tiger enclosure and taunted the cat until the cat climbed the barrier and diced him. If the person stayed outside the fence and teased the cat, the zoo would be totally wrong. However, if the person entered an area that he wasn't supposed to go in, he would be seen by the cat as entering the feline's domain. At that point, he becomes food and gets what he gets.
Similiarly, the danger of getting electrocuted from placing or removing a magnetic key safe from one of these items approaches zero. The danger would rise to 100% if a geocacher broke one of them open, but the chance of that happening also approaches zero.
Thanks Sbell! The words I was just ready to write, but more kind and eloquent.
-
That blanket statement won't quite fly. Yes a shock from a transformer that has the ability to distribute 4160 volts through a person definately has the ability to kill one. It won't always happen that way. Just like lighting won't always kill. Yes that amount of voltage that ALL hits one's heart should stop it dead, but many 'freak' incidents occur. Of course I am not suggesting that someone would come out of a shock 'just fine' either.
4160 volts is usually run through 4/0 shielded cable, and it can safely handle 200 amps. 200 amps will kill regardless of what you think. If if doesn't kill you instantly, it will kill you within a few days from the "microwave effect" of your internals being cooked. I spent a week on a crime scene with high voltage electritions what do I know?
<<<EDIT: Even more Non-constructive bickering and rude comments deleted>>>
Yes now that we're talking amps. There you go. . . . . Yay for you, but that's not what you said initially. Adding conditions afterward is all well and good. Volts and amps are not synonymous or even quite like Fahrenheit or Celsius temperatures (measuring the same things differently). Don't even know why I care, so I'll quit . . .Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah . . .. Too wordy . . . too nerdy . . . not worth arguing with a self-proven genius . . . Going to go cache before work.
-
Please don't put a cache in such a box. Here's one reason why:
http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/lofiversi...hp?t129586.html
This also applies to non-live electrical equipment, because it only encourages geocachers to open all such boxes.
I was waiting for that article to be cited again. Bottom line is this is the millionth (not literal) thread on caches placed near electrical equipment. Usually these develop into 'educated' folks appealing to others 'common sense' et cetera to not place these caches. And others scoffing at the 'paranoid' forum population.
1 - Electrical equipment is dangerous.
2 - A shock at any voltage can kill you (not arguing likelihood here)
3 - You need permission to place on other's property and likely will not get it from a commercial or consumer-owned utility.
4 - There are two (and in some jurisdictions, three) codes that regulate additions or adjustments to electrical equipment that serves a residential or commericial consumer. These codes only make it legal to place electrical geocaches in certain situations.
If it's fake I say more power to you. I don't fully invest into this 'following the herd' argument that people like to tout here. Common sense needs to be taken on the part of the finder too.
Have fun!
whatever. But that's where I need to allow for the fact that this is for all 
! A Plastic sleeves cache would be fun if in was in a lesser traveled area like this particular one was.
Hi, As far as ratings go I feel it's all in Eye of The Behoder 
You taunt my dog and it breaks it's logchain to get you, I blame YOU!! Sure the zoo will get a lot of grief over this because of the mistake made on the fence...is it possible an electrician could make a "fatal" mistake while installing or maintaining one of those boxes.....hmmmmm, I suppose it IS possible! Is it possible a little furry critter sneaks in and makes mincemeat of the wiring...maybe!
Copy and Pasted logs
in General geocaching topics
Posted · Edited by scorpio_dark
Hey tell me if I am redundant to someone else's post or a feature that already exists . . .
I think it would be great to have a "featured logs" option for cache pages. Something that allows the CO to pick their favorite logs to top the charts or to have other cachers vote on (+ or -)? There could be the option to view them chronologically (traditionally) or by rating!
That way, IMO, COs could 'reward' cachers for good logs without making what some may feel is akward contact. Also, it can stop all those uninspired logs from bumping the greats!!
EDIT: spelling