woodsters

Eraseek, it was a question of others opinion on the matter. I posted my opinion, it may come as a suggestion if they want to take it that way. There was nothing saying that I wanted to start an alliance of time limits or anything. It was an opinion of concern for the future of caching. Right on the front page of Geocaching it states "There are also plenty of people to help answer your questions in the online forums." I had a question and I asked it. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

Mtn man, let me show you what you quoted earlier at the top of page 4 of what I had earleir said: "In other words, I'm going home to Augusta, Georgia in a few weeks for vacation, hopefully. I live over 1000 miles away and it would be absurd for me to own a cache so far away even though I can't maintain it. What if there was a place, where I could post a message looking for members in the Augusta, Georgia area to take this cache that I want to place there? I see a "what if". My whole thing as part of the Augusta Georgia part was hypothetical. I've stated that to you numerous times, whether or not you read it and understood it that way the first time. For at least the 3rd time if not more, IT WAS HYPOTHETICAL. quote:Why don't you put the full explaination down. There was no need for a repost of the full extent of his post. You posted it up above and Jeremy posted it in the same thread, if people will read hte whole thread, then they know what the full extent of his message said. You know what it said. The IF word that he used was in context that IF a person places a cache on vacation, not that it was an IF IT WAS ALLOWED. If it is posted that no vacations caches will be allowed along with FULL length of his message then that would be great. It doesn't matter where the person is from, or how far away they live. That has been proven. You still are going to get bad caches, and people not doing what they are supposed to do. Not everyone is going to follow the rules and you can expect that those situations are going to happen. As a maintainer you will have to deal with those as they come and happen. I'm not saying it's a good thing, it's just a part of what happened and will happen, even though it's a waste of your time. Even if you say in set stone that it has to be a certain way, people are going to do it another or sneak something past you. As far as you are covering the bases that is great. I don't blame you, but don't try to interpret what one says as something differently. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

quote:Originally posted by Mopar: OMG! Have you already forgot about the vacation thread you are so fond of? No, I doubt it! So you already know there are rules against placing that cache 500 miles away, unless you can maintain it. I'm truly startying to agree with the others, your posts are making less and less sense, and your opinion is like a revolving door; whatever works for the moment. I don't think you understand was what said. From the exerpt you quoted, Bloen stated that one should not place caches 500 miles away when they have room in their hometown. I stated that there are no rules that state someone can not place a cache 500 miles away as you referred from the vacation cache thread. I also stated that if it was their private property that it would be something different as they are the land owner and can say whether or not a cache is allowed. A land owner of private property has the right to allow one person to place a cache and not another. quote:Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:hehe bloen, but not on virtuals...as virtuals require no physical, on location, maintenance other than to check that the virtual is still there. But then my opinion is virtuals are in a totally different category than physical caches with containers. quote: From Mopar: They still require the owner to verify the virtual location is still there, and more importantly (and I guess if you would actuually READ those dadgum guidelines that all the other experienced cachers except for you have spent years hammering out, you might know this), the hider of a virtual cache has the responsibility to maintain the integrity of the logs. That means they have to read the emails with the verification answers, and delete any logs that are wrong, or are never verified. Personally, I think maintaining a virtual, especially a popular one, is A LOT more work then visiting my physical caches every few months. I have read the guidelines, did you read and understand MY remark? I had said no physical, on location maintenance except to make sure that it is still there. Of course there will be an online log and emails to answer, but my remark was referring to actual physically going to a virtual. I might also add to this that depending on the virtual that you would need to check the surrondings to make sure that traffic is not impacting the environment. But since virtuals are of "an existing landmark, such as a tombstone or statue" then it is highly unlikely that there will be any more impact that what is caused by normal traffic in the area. Of course some situations will be different and the placer should use better judgement on physically checking on it more often. Also note that people have and stil ldo place virtuals when away from their homes, even the more "experienced" cachers on here.... Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

Gert, they (minis) weren't moving caches, were they? Did they have 6 digits that were aplhanumeric that could of been a cache code? lol...couldn't resist. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

hehe bloen, but not on virtuals...as virtuals require no physical, on location, maintenance other than to check that the virtual is still there. But then my opinion is virtuals are in a totally different category than physical caches with containers. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

We can partly agree, I disagree that one should have to use the forums. As many people don't care for them. If the forums were a specific set of ammendments and just that, then it would be better. But if someone was searching the subject "vacation cache", then they will see 4 pages of opinions, disagreements, cheap shots and personal attacks with very little information. Now if there was a section of the forum that Jeremy made as "read only", and he posted ammendments to the guidelines, then I would have no problem with that. There should just be a statement on the guidelines page that states to check that forum for more up to date guidelines. But like any other guidelines, rules, or regulations, once you make a major change to something, then ammendments need to be done away with on that subject and that subject needs to be re-written. But that is my opinion. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

Not a diver either, but love the idea. I think she said that the antenna would be floating on top of the water, with basically a line (reel) to the unit that the diver would have with them. Sounds like a good idea as well as a sonar type of system you mentioned Bloen. Sure was an ingenuitive idea! Another thought is that buoy that the antenna is attached too can act as a marker that there's a diver there for boats in the area. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

LOL Bloen, you are tight it is your viewpoint and whether I or anyone else agrees or disagrees makes no difference. Jeremy made reference to Vacation caches and not out of area caches. I have no immediate plans to place a vacation or out of area cache or one locally for that matter. The point I started this all with was that there is nothing to say you can't. I have no problem if they said all caches have to be within 10 miles of your residence. Put it there in the guidelines. The guidelines said no vacation caches, which is a broad statement that can confuse and interfere with someone who wants to place a cache somewhere as a vacation cache was not defined. Jeremy fixed that on this thread, but until it gets changed on the guidelines then many people will not be aware of it. Rules are easy to follow. But when you leave an area open for question, people will question it. It's better to question it up front. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

quote:Originally posted by The Falcon:The DNR or whoever is putting time limits so the area doesn't get to trodden by cachers, from what I've read in here, and it does make sense. Yes, they should be happy people are interested in nature, but those groups are often more reactive than pro-active. It is "their land", though, so we have to work with them. IMHO, cache in/trash out and courteous caching can help them see that we're on the same side. ===== It is the tale, not he who tells it." That is my thoughts about it as well. But it brought up the thought in my idea of time limited caches. There are some great caches out there that have been out there a couple years and are very useful. But there are many that go without visits or very few visits. Perhaps a reason could be, that while it may fall within the guidelines, that it was not in the best spot or it contains a lot of junk in it. People follow others on the cache pages. When someone reads it was a great place or cache, then others will want to go and find it. Better yet, rather than a time limit on all caches, what about a time limit on caches that see no or very few visitors over a certain amount of time? Should they become archived and allow someone else to place one there?(not saying that someone elses cache will be any better, but gives a chance) Or perhaps there could be a notice placed on a caches page when that time comes that it will be archived and the area will be open for a new cache. People can put a watch on it or keep an eye. The cache goes archived, then there is a time limit (1 month or so)that if someone else doesn't take that spot, then the first cache owner can place their cache back there if they wish to do so. They may be frustrated with no visitors previosuly and not wish to place one back there at all and look for a new spot for it. It's not necessarily a problem now, but could become one down the road. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

quote:Originally posted by BloenCustoms:Excellent suggestion, Verboten. As to the cache density reaching a point where there is a cache every .01 miles, and a new player can't place one... think how upset he would be if there were a couple of good spots taken up by caches placed by someone 500 miles away, who HAS room in their hometown. http://angelfire.com/pro/bloen/images/eyes.GIF "The fertilizer has hit the ventilator" But there are no rules against it. As there are none for you to go and place one in theirs. It would be one thing if it were your property, then you would have a say-so. They may not be aware of that room in their hometown or it's not a place where they want to place one. The idea I threw up here, was in reference to fast growth of the sport. People already complain about so much of us newbies on here as it is. Imagine all the ones that don't post, or ones that don't bother with the forums. One day there will be very few place to place caches. Sure some along the way will get archived, but if every cache placer had the idea that theirs should be there forever, then the only places left will be in peoples yards. Especially those who don't live in big urban areas. It may never get to that point. But it will become more difficult for people to place caches near them or in their own localities. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

In reference to rules, laws and guidelines you are correct Bloencustoms. They do cover most of the situations. But, they are appended time to time to cover situations as they happen. When the thread first started, there was controversy over placing a cache "out of area" (I like that term) and being able to maintain it. There is nothing to defined or written that gives specifics about it. I think it has been covered, to the dismay of those who disagree, that out of area caches can be placed as long as they are placed correctly and maintained. And as Jeremy stated in his post here, it is now ok to place a cache on vacation as long as the "land owner has agreed to maintain it". So with that being said, should the new guidleline say that vacation caches are ok? Or should the line that says no vacation caches be removed? Or should there be an ammendment made on it or have it updated that defines what Jeremy stated? I can imagine many people don't bother to come on to the forums at all. As they don't care to. But when they want to place a cache they go to those guidelines and faqs to get their answers and not the forums. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

Good point geopug. There is a cache locally that I won't bother to go and try to find due to the decsriptions that people make on the cache page. Actually it hasn't been visited in over 8 months and it's rated a low rating of no more than a 2/1.5 and may be lower than that. People remark as they feel they are on private property or they had to cross private property kind of throws up a red flag to me and obvious many others, as there are only a handful of finds there and the time that has passed since people find. Perhaps one of those who found it, should of questioned it. Also should a person who owns a cache make a remark on the cache page when they go to maintain it? I think it's a good practice, but the cache I referred to has no remarks as such and keeps me from going after it as well. Especially when there has been such a long time of no find there. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

Don't letterbox, but I agree with you about Yahoo groups. Yahoo groups have their purposes, but I think that the people needed to have a plan especially when things grow. I use Ikonboard. Of course you have to pay for your own space that includes bandwidth and all. If it's a free thing and they don't take in money to cover things, then it won't be worth their trouble to consider something like that. Things on my site are not automated with exception of course of the message board and my classifieds, but there is another person who has a website that usesa different type of forum software. Actually it has nothing to do with the forum software, but they can code out ASP pages. They have a campground submission script that they wrote themselves that people can post campgrounds that they know of and visit. It's automatic and goes right into the system. Do they verify anything with them as the approvers do here with caches? Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

Ok Breaktrack, I'll bite on this one as I like to discuss things. Whether they are in reference to my thread that I started that you remarked on or in general reference. Just because someone is newer than others and haven't been around for a long time does not mean that they have opinions or as Verboten put it "lofty ideas". I would imagine that the whole thing started with newcomers suggesting ideas to help fine tune to the point of where it is now. Many businesses have "suggestion boxes". Do they require that you work there or shop there for a certain amount of time before you can submit a suggestion or idea? I haven't come across one that stated that. Just because one has not done something, does't mean they don't have an idea to better it. It also doesn't mean that one can question something that is not written in stone or that is not defined. For example, what is considered a newbie? Ones definition of that is different than anothers. Of course if remarks on what their definition is, then there will be some people who agree with them, there will be many who don't and have their own idea. Since you are in Law Enforcement then you will understand such definitions, especially when you use them every day in your career. Theres a reason for them and there may be some that even you don't agree with, but they are there for a reason, but when there is no defintion of something, then it is open and people can not dictate otherwise on it. The whole forum has become a turf thing. Kind of like Hawaiian surfers, "The beach is our beach, it's for locals only". some one like myself comes in that is talkative and likes to discuss things gets bashed for it. Then you get the ole' "wait till you've done it or wait till you've got more numbers on the board", especially when ones dictates that as credibility. People cache when they can. I've been on board, just over a month, I have 12 finds. I think that is pretty decent. I don't have the chance to do it much during the week. Sometimes I get lucky and can. And even then on the weekends I don't get the chance to do a whole bunch as I have a family and there are other things to tend to. There are many others (not all) that point fingers at "newbie" numbers, when in fact the newbie is caching more on an average than the person pointing the finger. Then there are those that point fingers about placing caches, when a good portion, if not most of their caches are archived. Ok, I haven't placed one, does that mean I don't know how to or that I can't? Does it meant that it takes a brain surgeon to maintain one? Then they attack personally and talk about credibility. Newbies are people too and have just as much right to post what they want and how often they want. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

It was a question of opinion. I guess I should of made it a poll huh? Thanks for your viewpoint on the subject Verboten. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

Welch, it has nothing to do with searching or researching. It has to do with discussion. There may be many people like me who have come aboard lately or even those who have been around a while that miss such things and never thought about it and it does spark an interest. As stated before, if everyone did "research" and used the search feature, then there would be no discussion on geocaching here, with the exception of "why did my cache get archived?" or "how many have you found?". Mtn-man, see you've read that wrong. I stated "what if"? That topic you quoted was on the point of finding a person to maintain a cache that was not in registered before doing any such thing. That had to do with finding someone to ensure that the cache is maintained and more or less helping someone out who don't know where to place a cache in that area, perhaps a local as so many people were insisting at the time that needed to own the cache. It was a question and hypothetical at that. You are correct Mopar did state that and I acknowledged that, but I received responses from others that dictated otherwise and have taken pride in attacking one personally. While it does not affect me personal, I will not accept it. As far as approvers go, I did and do give credit. I know that you do the best of what you can do with what you are given. People do make mistakes, just as Coast Cachers did and they acknowledged that. Yes I have read what Jeremey stated and have used it several times in this topic. Mopar: A: That is why one should know and research the facts ahead of time before placing any cache. B: That is why you check ahead of time with the website and can use things like topozone to plot out other caches in the system. If by chance you do overlook something, then that is for the approvers to overlook. C: I can see your point on this, but there may be instances that there are no caches within an area or there may be a few caches in an area, but that may not appeal to someone (i.e. virtual, multis, puzzles, etc.). All in all, it appears that the last few people that have posted do agree that: 1) Care should be given when searching and researching to place a cache. 2) There are no limits on the distance of where a cache can be placed. 3) Caches placed should be properly maintained. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

See post below Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com [This message was edited by Woodsters Outdoors on July 06, 2003 at 05:45 AM.]

Not at all, but I know who you were referring too...just making light of the subject.... Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

Why? Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

Yes I did read it, but when I did it confused me when you said 'red flag' message goes to the contact address. I thought that a contact address was the person who owns/maintains the cache. My bad, if I misunderstood it. So the approver who initially approved the cache is not necessarily the person who gets contacted on a TCSBA? Just trying to understand the grasp of what happens when am user flags a TCSBA. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

Alright Welch, now I stated it was only an argument to the person who didn't agree or lets say doesn't agree with the mission of the discussion...lol Also like someones tagline says, "I've never learned anything from a man I agree with". Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

quote:Originally posted by welch:Nope, read Mtn-man's reply. How would it know what approver to go to?? http://brillig.com/geocaching/http://img.Groundspeak.com/user/22008_1700.gif http://www.gpgeocaching.com/ That's why I was asking, I wasn't sure if the approver was made as the contact as posted in another message up above and it did confuse me a bit. I was also thinking that perhaps the system sends an email to the approver of that cache when someone marks it as TCSBA. That's why I asked, I didn't know. So after it goes to special que, then who handles it? Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

We were close on 1 no find. We have 12 finds. We had our children with us (one almost a 2 yr old). We got down to within a 100 ft of a cache , but it was on top of a big hill. We knew it was up there, but the only way up was by a very steep grade, through briars, and lots of brush. The mosquitos were eating us up, we decided to come back for it with just my 12 yr old son and I and repellent. We found it easily pnce we made it up the hill, we were tore up, but at least it was not a did not find. Now our very first one, was rated very easy. But, it was actually one of the harder ones. Tree coverage through the GPS all out of whack and the cache was about 75-100 ft off the trail. Not heavy bushwacking, but more than we thought of one rated at a 1/1. It was very well hidden too, one of the best. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

And yet I still receive more email from him....go figure....respond here Bassoonpilot. Now I get accused of not using the search option....hmmm yep I could of used it, but I didn't, get over it. Bassoon I will accept the fact that you agree about out of area caches, as you just stated it. If you stated it before, then fine we agree on something. But don't attack me personally, my business, or take cheapshots and sucker punches. If you don't like the fact that I have posted something that was already talked about, then don't read it, don't particiapte in it and move one. If you feel obligated to respond, then respond with your opinion on the topic and not attack something personally that has nothing to do with the topic or discussion of the thread. As far as your #2 and the time limits, that is another thread and was a question for others opinions. It was nothing to do research on. It was to get others viewpoints. AS stated before, don't read it. The topic is self explanatory. All i'm interested in is posting as often as possible? Are you me, do you know what i'm interested in? I'm interested in discussion, which takes posting messages. Unlike you and others, I have not stated a thing about numbers and do not hold the lack of or over abundance of #'s against anyone. And sorry, not I do not feel embarassed, what is there to be embarassed about? I'm not embarassed about sending an email to someone and telling them not to respond because their email was beign filtered. I'm not embarassed because I sent a second email and not posted a reply to the topic. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com

Thanks Alan2, I normally wouldn't of posted an email on the forum, but if you are going to block me from responding to you privately, then it will end up on the forum. There was no reason to even send me the email. It could of been kept on the forum, but if you are going to go off of the forum and try to "suckerpunch" me, then be prepared for it to be displayed back on the forum where it should of been. Brian Wood Woodsters Outdoors http://www.woodsters.com