Jump to content

Algonquin Bound

+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Algonquin Bound

  1. Aw, c'mon! You're just teasing, aren't you, CA? You're just trying to goad me into doing it this weekend, aren't ya?
  2. You seem to have missed my second point, above.
  3. St. Catharines...... "Welland.... without the glitter!"
  4. A Much easier way: Since you said you made the document in Word, simply choose "File", "Save As Web Document", using the same filename, but with the .htm extension. Now click on "View" and "HTML Source". Now - "Edit", "Select All", "Copy" and paste that into the "Long Description box. Good luck!
  5. A 10-year-old boy from Burlington was killed yesterday, on a school trip at the Royal Botanical Gardens. Apparently, the class was walking on the North Shore trails at Cootes Paradise, when a tree fell on the child, killing him. It seems likely the tree was blown over by the wind. Be cautious out there. We tend to take a walk in the woods for granted, but we must be aware that there are potential dangers like this. On my way home from work, I looked over in that area and considered going for a hike along that trail! Very, very sad.
  6. Where did you hear about the Oak Lake incident? Google doesn't find anything.
  7. Two things: apparently BQ's don't actually sleep, they just ferment... then foment when you're from Burlington... Welland, St. Catharines, Niagara Falls, Niagara On The Lake, Thorold and a few of those Port thingies, are all one town! No offense!
  8. Actually, having said all that, I might add that the caution exists on both sides, therefore it might be prudent if Jeremy or Cache-Tech might jump in here and officially endorse Cache-Agent as bona fide. I'm guessing if she weren't, though, that Cache-Tech WOULD have jumped in and closed the thread very quickly. Things that don't belong don't last long around here. Still.... the reasurrance would be nice.
  9. Fear... justifiably so, given some of the crap that is written about reviewers. Some of these spurned cache-hiders sound downright violent. One should also expect a reasonable amount of impartiality from both the reviewers and the submitters, due to the anonymity. I am all for it. I am as curious as everyone else, but I can't see any reason for them not to be anonymous. I see more benefits than harm.
  10. Algonquin Bound


    The survey worked for me. The questions or statements were obviously written by someone who has spent far too much time in the beaurocracy! They should be fired - point blank. Due to the vague nature of the wording, in most cases where there was a blank text box, I simply pasted, "I think the hobby of geocaching should be supported & encouraged in these areas." I doubt that any of this will make any difference to anything, since the statements are so wide and non-committal! Weird stuff.
  11. Most of the caches I have encountered, largely in the Golden Horseshoe area of southern Ontario, are definitely winter-friendly. In fact, I don't think I could come up with one that isn't winter-friendly. As my friend TT says, "Bite your tongue!" I don't think there are too many cachers around here who don't go out in the winter. We think those people are weird. Take Flick, for example. No really... take Flick. I think even he goes out for the odd one over the winter, just to feed his habit. Otherwise we would all go mad and there would be some kind of mass rebellion. Personally, I started late last year, so a lot of my caching was done over the past winter and I loved every minute of it. Did my share of digging, or clawing through snowbanks, but more often than not, came up with the goods. Anyway, it's only September. Go find a bunch, then hide a bunch and if you get really bored over the winter, you can go and look for your own. Have fun.
  12. Actually, there is a cache on cache lake, yet I keep hearing this comment. The cache is cleverly titled Cache Squared, and threw me for a loop in the winter. I found it easily this summer, though, and was shocked that I had missed it, even in the snow!
  13. Just in case any other Canadians are wondering, since many only visit THIS forum, the GC.COM site is undergoing maintenance tonight. Read about it here.
  14. I grabbed it! Will move along very soon.
  15. That's strange, Thorin! I just read the cache description and I didn't see anything about a multi-tru..... Oh... Wait a minute! I see! You DECRYPT the hints before you even go looking for caches!!! That must be lots of fun.
  16. I'm not sure what is more irresponsible. The moron trying to tire the cub by dunking it in the water, ought to be locked up for a very long time and should have some serious parole restrictions when he is released. That said, I think it is just as irresponsible to advise people on a public forum that bears are cute and cuddly and that you should try to pet the cubs, especially when their mother is there. Wild animals are wild animals and should be treated with respect, dignity and some measure of caution. They are unpredictable. Any attempt, for example, to "pet" the mother who watched as this idiot dunked her poor little screaming cub, might be ill-advised. Leave them alone and admire them from a safe and respectable distance. Chances are, they will return the favour.
  17. Like Rogue Monkey, I suspect that media will cover the hobby, whether we like it or not. My preference? I think that Geocaching is already becoming diluted with too many cachers and too many bad caches, i.e. caches clearly placed only to increase numbers, since there is no reason to take someone to the area and no challenge. I'd love it if we could all keep it as "our little secret", but that is obviously not realistic. Yes, I found out about it on TV and yes, I am being selfish, but I kinda wish we could put a lid on it now. With some background in writing, I have often considered writing articles promoting geocaching, but the truth is that I don't want to promote it. This is really crazy, because if I don't write it, someone else will. Maybe I will still do it, but my heart is still torn. Who knows?
  18. Took the words right out of my fingers, GM!
  19. MJDJ, thank you for such a measured and considered response to my post. I certainly respect that. I'm pleased that you chose not to retaliate. We could only respond to what you posted, so if there was more, we cannot respond to that. What is perhaps most important here, is that you have shown that you can calmly respond to what you think are reasonable observations and objections. Why not use this approach on the approver? It seems to me that you might STILL stand a chance of having this very cache approved, by simply addressing the questions and concerns of the approver. Maybe just start from scratch and say, "What can I do to make this cache approval work for both of us?" Honestly, as a bystander with no vested interest in either party, his requests and questions (from what you posted) did not seem accusatory or unreasonable. Yes, I am very often naive and far too optimistic, but sometimes, by acting that way, things work out for the best. Be positive, polite and respectful and usually you will get the same in return.
  20. Adding "Teams" of reviewers would further complicate the process, instead of simplifying it. In the current process, if there is a problem, question or discrepancy with a cache, it is my understanding that the approver will ask the cache submitter for further details or clarification, as the approver in the previous thread did of MJDJ. My response, instead of reacting in anger or feeling that I had been insulted, would be to politely reply, answering questions and clearing up discrepancies. Having read all the posted correspondence in that previous thread, it seems to me that the only name-calling and personal grudge-holding going on was AT the approver, rather than FROM the approver. Why not look over the questions with objective eyes, assuming that the approver knows nothing about you personally and is simply trying to make sure that the cache is worthy of approval? In our area, we had a cache placed by someone who has caches, literally, all over the world. At some point, he must have convinced someone that this was okay and that because he travels SO much, he could maintain them all. After months of DNFs and neither the cache owner, nor his local contact (if he had one), checking on it, the cache was finally archived. If I fly to Los Angeles for a meeting every Monday, it would be reasonable for me to place a cache there, knowing that I could easily maintain it. However, it would be reasonable for the approver to question how I could maintain the cache, had I not told him that I fly there once a week. It would be irresponsible for him to approve it without asking me. When submitting a cache, WE must bear in mind that the approver was not with us when we placed it, cannot see the plan to maintain it inside our minds and has likely never been in the area. He doesn't know that our cousin lives across the street and has agreed to check on our cache if there are problems, unless we tell him. ALL the information must be supplied by the submitter and if we err by omission, we need to clear up any questions. So... as Scouter John said in his original post, "Geocaching is supposed to be a light, fun activity, not a platform for an agenda." Just as we assume that anyone finding the cache will respect our request not to remove it, or pillage it, or destroy it, or steal the contents, or trade a nickel for the log book, we must assume that the approvers are also on our side. They are not perfect either, so I am sure some mistakes have been made, but I think they are, more often than not, honest mistakes. As Scouter John also said, "...having been to the location personally I would have the best judgement as to what type of cache would work...". This MAY be true, but the approver cannot know that unless you make it clear to them. There might be situations where the approver DOES have a better handle on it than the submitter. I might not know, for example, that the City of Yellowknife (for whatever reason) has banned physical caches ONLY in the southern portion of Central Park. As responsible geocache-loving bureaucrats, however, they have notified the regional cache approver and he DOES know about this strange exception, so he will point this out to me, probably suggesting that I move my cache to the northern part of the park. That's all. Cache-on!
  21. Just noticed that both the OGA & Golden Horseshoe sites seem to be down. It has been some time since I accessed either, so if the addresses have changed, would someone post the new ones? Or... if you KNOW the sites are down, please confirm. Thanks.
  • Create New...