nthacker66

of course, there is always some loophole an exception given. too bad for a simple cito at a park after a couple of events to show goodwill to the park is considered "event stacking" but this isn't. LOL. Like signal, they just hope around from one meaning of a rule to the next! :-)

LOL. Oh Groundspeak, your subjectivity is laughable at best! http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?tx=69eb8534-b718-4b35-ae3c-a856a55b0874&lat=56.986567&lng=24.071400

here is how a power trail works for me - ignore. *preemptive statement*calm down, i am just having fun all - sheesh!

there is a reason Groundspeak uses a frog as its mascot - because so many on this forum like to split frog hairs when it comes to the GUIDELINES. keep in my kyote, that is all they are is guidelines.

the 5 star terrain geocoin. kayaking.

This is a joke - right? You are taking away some functionality and then sell it as an improvement? The search facility is limited enough as it is without this new restriction. What is the big performance problem here? Is Groundspeak using some toy-database software to handle all the data, or is it simply the aged and ever expanded database scheme which makes effective searching impossible? A 'real' database should not have any problems looking for a string in some 2 million cache titles... Its open source....you get what you pay for.

If that were the case, there would be very few tunnel caches. But in fact, I have been cited many times that the reasons reviewers deny it is because of safety, not trespassing - 150 foot rule is cited for safety often. even if it is on public property.

Yah, I signed up. Didn't get anything. And I never held my breath waiting on it. Chances are, you won't ever get it.

GR caches are just that, on GR's. And most GR are next to busy places, that is whay a GR is there in the first place. Perhaps you don't live near too many backroads like most. Here in NC, we have a few "power trails' that are GRC's and they scare the hell out of me. Very little shoulder to pull off on and it is just a matter of time before someone gets killed doing it. And when that happens, whether here or anywhere else these stupid PT GRC's are, it will expose the game in such a negative light, every state will have to review this and we will lose a large swatch of caching real estate. They may even look into state parks, gameland trails, etc. and so on. Why risk it for, IMO, lame hides just for smileys?

I think it would be wise to let things settle down for a while before hiding or searching for urban hide caches. The last thing the port needs right now is attention. The scenario of of a person hiding or searching for a cache near a trashcan right now or a creative container in an urban area isn't going to end with a LEO and a cacher slapping each others backs and hearty laughing. Everyone is ultra sensitive right now and sadly, there are cachers in this very forums who can't see past their own GPS to realize that now isn't the time. I equate some cachers like gun owners who will rush out just to be spiteful in the face of a tragedy.

I am reminded of this via this post http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=309876 The guideline that you cannot have a cache within 150 feet of a railroad track because it is "unsafe" vs. placing guard rail caches - which you are more likely to get hurt there than at a railroad. i know asking this not to be debated would be a futile and fruitless request.

And that is what I said, having the cito at the ramp (but again, i have seen citos of "clean up the camp site" before) And again the paddle and cookout arent one big long event - bot everyone will want to paddle. so the after paddle, people can come to for that event alone. Again I need to add - this strng of events is very common to others I have seen before. But the bottom line for some of the denials seems odd to me when "we want to avoid stacking events just for smileys" (even though that was not the intention at all)

Btw - not sure how THIS (look in the event page with links to other events) is not considered "stacking" http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=8dbe13b4-137b-46c8-9e7f-1ce3abd7932c

and the cito was one of the events actually denied. of all events, that should be one Groundspeak wants - its good PR.

I have to agree with that assessment. I look at it this way: Is the overall event large or significant enough to warrant splitting it up into multiple parts? As an example, a recent Mega near here attended by 1000 people had 8 satellite events. The paddling event you describe would have 3 satellite events, but I doubt it has anywhere near the scope or attendance of a Mega. Would anyone else be attending the other events along the way, or just the ones paddling? To me, the entire paddling experience would be one event. Perhaps having a CITO the next day would work too, but any more events than that would seem to be for the purpose of simply holding more events (ie. "just for smileys"). No, every event will offer something different for everyone. Not everyone will want to paddle, not everyone will want to camp ut, not everone may want to cookout or have time uring the day and only want the camp fire, and not everyone will be able to be there on the sat, instead show up for breakfast or just do a cito at the park. And that is just it, I have seen a series of events like this in the past and still to this day - so why THIS case was considered "stacking" seems subjective.

Or how this is any different from flash mob events every 1000 feet. Again, seems all very loose and subjective.

The paddle event isnt at same location, but again, I have seen many many events located at the same location as well as citos. And I am not berating anyone. It also seems a subjective rule - such as a before cito breakfast with biscuits at the "parking coords" of a cito site and then the cito site a 1/3 mile away. If "location" is the key concern, that is pretty nitpicky and the loophole very easily overcome. I have seen many multiple event days have "ground zeros" that were nowhere near the actual event. But to wrap it all up saying "no stacking as to avoid multiple smileys" while you have power trals which exist for the purpose of easy smileys, to me simply doesn't make a lot of sense. It just seems contradictory.

The paddle event isnt at same location, but again, I have seen many many events located at the same location as well as citos. And I am not berating anyone.

For that matter, where is the guideline that covers event stacking? The closest I can find covers when stacking is allowed, not when it isn't: I have to wonder, under what circumstances would someone want to "stack events"? Something like an event power trail? Multiple separate short events at the same spot at various times throughout a day? These cases are just non-sensical to me, and I can't think of a good reason to do so. There is in fact a reason I ask this. (Not my events) but a couple of good friends are holding a series of events - the original idea was this - 13 mile river paddle event. Followed by a cookout at the park we pull out at. Then a campout, then in the morning a breakfast event and finally a cito at the site and the ramp. The The cito and the cookout was denied because of "event stacking" which I do not agree with because they stand on their own merits. Not every cacher will want to nor able to attend all events. They were denied on the "event stacking" as it appeared to be set up "just for smileys" Which to me, what do the smileys have to do with the reasoning?

Thanks. But I didnt mention anything about temp caches, so lets keep it on topic please. (BTW, an event *IS* an "actual cache" otherwise it wouldn't count towards your finds, now would it) ;-)

I get the guidelines on stacking events as to avoid those kinds of smileys. But what I don't get is the concept of such vs. power trails - which are clearly designed for just that - a TON of smileys. Just not sure how one smiley differs from another.

Well take whatever you have, let me know please!

Bad hints are bad enough, I get more irritated when people omit attributes that really should be included (such as underground or tree climbs)

Just out of curiosity, I went back through the thread. 6 people, including myself, think that your logs are a bit boastful and you might tone them down a bit, and 4 people think that your logs are absolutely fine. So that's actually 6 to 4 against your view. That said, log however you want. All I wanted to do was point out how some folks might read them. I wasn't trying to bully you--I'm sorry that you felt bullied. I only wanted to show you that others might take a different point of view. Make of it what you will. But 6 to 4 is hardly "a very small minority". In my count I disregarded views of the profile and counted views of the logs only. If you want to get into the numbers, I was also including the people have personally reached out to me who have not posted in this forum. I am not going to go through every post here, but why wouldn't you count profile and log views as one? Because they are not. Your profile is about you. Your cache logs are about your experience with each individual cache. Don't know how many times I can write it, but your cache logs are not supposed to be about other cachers. Stop editorializing about other cachers in your logs and your problem will probably disappear. Is that not your goal? At any rate, I'm done. You can run around with your fingers in your ears humming Naaaaaa all you want. My logs are a reflection of my profile they are one and the same. There is no editorializing. As I said in my last post, this is another example of how people selectively choose information to fit their views. What's really ironic is the fact that I happen to agree with your views on the so called FTF hounds. I placed a cache in an area where the average FTF log is posted five minutes after the Publish notification. My cache was a ten minute walk up a flat, oak canopied trail. It took six days for the FTF. I though that it was ridiculous and it really had me questioning the other cacher's priorities. The thing is, I would never go find a cache in that area and then use my found it log to question and criticize those other cachers. It's simply the wrong platform to do so. I also don't believe that it's fair to the cache owner to use their cache page to advance your agenda. You believe that this is all about your profile. Has it occurred to you that most people probably wouldn't even look at your profile if not for your cache logs? People can say what they wish, but as I said before I am not pushing any sort of agenda. Again, if you look in my profile I do say that people should cache the way that makes them happy and to each their own. As far as the logs and profile thing is concerned that is in reference to this tread. Originally I had asked that people give me their opinions on my profile, but then it evolved into people giving their opinions on my logs as well. Further, someone had posted that more people were against my views in this tread, but they only took into consideration what people thought of my logs. Which for the purposes of this tread is an unfair count. Also as far as people not finding easy caches that happens, but that is a rarity. I don't know about your area, but in my area 99.99% of the time all caches are found well within an hour of them being published. I am still waiting on the cookies for ftfs that i have had. My care-o-meter for ftf's and ftf hounds is buried on zero.

Found a ball perfect mason jar in very good condition on saturday in the gamelands in NC. I rinsed it out in a puddle and its just got some dirt in it in the trunk f my car. I wrote in a previous post i think I had found the remains of a still sit in another gameland in NC. It is not totally uncommon to do so here. But to find a ball mason jar in that good of condition is.