salmoned
Members-
Posts
193 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by salmoned
-
Trading is trading, not cheating. If you want to pick up and bring home every piece-of-trash cache or TB you find, you're not cheating or stealing. For those who think it is stealing, everyone who CITOs on public property or picks up and takes home a rock is stealing by the same reasoning. The concepts of cheating and stealing are matters of opinion, not fact, in this game. Furthermore, they don't add anything of value.
-
Okay, considering the possibility of someone accessing the reviewer notes (per the thread on pre-published finds), the offer is withdrawn. Who'da thunk it?
-
Obnoxious Tb Log
salmoned replied to stickmonkey and stickmonkey jr's topic in General geocaching topics
Apparently, GC.com and I both think you are completely wrong. If you look at the top of a TB page it clearly states OWNER: insert cachers name. It is not owned by whomever currently has it in their hands and they DO NOT have the right to do whatever they please with it. A TB is meant to move from cache to cache either following the specified goal of the owner or move randomly with no specific goal. The general INTENT is for it to travel, not for anyone who finds it to do whatever they want with it. Under your argument, the mailman can do whatever he wants with my letter after I've mailed it, simply because it's out of my possession and control. Should he throw away mail addressed to groups he finds reprehensible? I OWN the travel bug. I've asked other cachers to kindly move it to caches for me for my amusement. I could understand it a lot better if the TB itself had offensive writing or pictures. Throwing out a TB that simply represents an organization or an ideology you disagree with is the heigth of intolerance and arrogance. You're arguing my point. The cache page and the TB page may indeed be the property of the owner. The cache itself (which GC.com has usually never even seen) and the TB itself are not. Even so, GC.com can remove either page at it's convenience, so ownership is only conditional. If the OP wants to exert ownership rights over this 'supposedly' stolen TB, he can sue. If not, what good is the claim to ownership? Saying the TB was stolen doesn't MAKE it stolen. I find these accusations ridiculous and petty. BTW, condemning someone who hasn't been represented is the height of ignorance and arrogance. -
How about a link to the cache? The log is equally meaningless.
-
I find this comment incomprehensible. More information is necessary for consideration. Yes, I was spouting the official line. I've contacted a number of land managers, public and private, where there are existing caches and none had ever been contacted by the cache hiders. I, on the other hand, have received permission of some sort (sometimes unofficial) for every placement. C'est la vie.
-
Wait a minute, you're playing a little loose here. EVERY cache requires permission from a land owner/manager, not just those on private property. So, when a cache is posted, it is ASSUMED to have permission for it's location(s).
-
Obnoxious Tb Log
salmoned replied to stickmonkey and stickmonkey jr's topic in General geocaching topics
Yes, a tip is not a gift, but I have never given a tip, only presumed tips that were inadvertantly left and I fully expected to have returned. So, actually they were stealing from me! However, since I have never pressed for prosecution, the point is moot. Get it? Cache cop - Exactly! Who interprets and enforces the guidelines? Each of us as individuals whenever we encounter and recognize a breach. In Hawaii, we have no regulating body to provide such functions. I cannot determine what may be considered outside the guidelines to anyone else, nor can you. We are each independent operators in a game effectively without special judicial recourse or precedence. I hope others act responsibly, I try to do likewise. I don't rush to judge. -
Obnoxious Tb Log
salmoned replied to stickmonkey and stickmonkey jr's topic in General geocaching topics
Who are you to say why the TB was removed? Nothing heretofore suggests anything unhonorable was intended. Certainly, there was an opinionated log, but that didn't imply the TB would not be moved along. Only when the log was deleted did anything develop along that line. I don't know to what you refer concerning my 'recent trouble'. I have had no trouble. None at all. If you have a TB that is your property, don't leave in it in a cache for me to find, because when I have it, it's mine to keep or destroy or use or give away as I see fit. Also, if it's damaged or lost while in my possession or in one of my caches - you lose, not I. I do not reimburse supposed owners. Nor am I reimbursed for my supposed losses. -
Obnoxious Tb Log
salmoned replied to stickmonkey and stickmonkey jr's topic in General geocaching topics
When you give someone a gift, you make it clear that it's a gift by wrapping it, maybe adding a card or at least telling them "hey...this is for you". Travelbugs don't fall into this category...far from it. They have an expressed and written goal for the geocacher that finds it to follow. I've released a number of my geocoins into the wild. Most of them have a goal to travel from cache to cache. A few of them have a goal to "find their way into a geocachers coin collection", those coins are gifts...the others are not. There are 12 points in the scout law. The first is "Trustworthy". It's appropriate to mention here because every TB thats released depends on the cachers that find it to honor the trust bestowed by the TB owner. Perhaps if GeoMaine took the time to learn what scouting actually teaches instead of repeating some sound bites, this wouldn't even be being discussed here. I have never left a note to a waiter or a maid, "this is for you", nor have I wrapped any [presumed] tip and also I have never had a [presumed] tip returned. Some TBs have goals, others do not. Either way, if I find anything I consider inappropriate in a cache, I remove it. The limits are set by my conscience, as is true for everyone having one. You may not tolerate pornography, I may not tolerate knives or drugs. In any case, each of us makes the determination as individuals - and suffer the consequences as individuals, if any. If drugs are found in a cache, is the 'owner' liable? -
Obnoxious Tb Log
salmoned replied to stickmonkey and stickmonkey jr's topic in General geocaching topics
The prisons are full of people who agree with you: "They left their car parked on the street, so it wasn't thiers anymore and I had every right to take it". Ha ha, true, but how many prisoners are there for stealing a cache or TB? -
Obnoxious Tb Log
salmoned replied to stickmonkey and stickmonkey jr's topic in General geocaching topics
So tell me, what is it about a compass with a TB tag that makes it hard to 'abide'? What you propose is tantamount to stealing and would not be tolerated by the community. The loss of likely dozens of TBs and caches are 'tolerated' every day by the community. To think of them as 'stolen' is extreme and extremely painful. Why adopt such an attitude? If you are willing to prosecute for the return of your 'property' - okay. Otherwise, 'gift' it. People don't belong in this activity if they are so possessive and/or bitter. As for the log, yes, you have the power to delete, but that power must be matched with consideration - the same consideration you ask of others. Remember, activating and 'freeing' the TB is a solicitation for logs without prejudice as to content. -
Obnoxious Tb Log
salmoned replied to stickmonkey and stickmonkey jr's topic in General geocaching topics
If you borrow your neighbor's lawn mower, does he not still own it? The week before last, I went on a business trip. On the morning that I checked out, I was in the hotel's gathering area, eating my complimentary chow. During which, I was making a few changes to my schedule and making some notes on my PDA. Stupidly, I left my PDA on the table when I left. The hotel shipped it to me a few days later. You see, it was still my property, even though I left it behind. That smeone sent it back doesn't 'prove' it was still yours (or even ever yours). It only proves that someone assumed it was yours - something someone else may not have done. In any case, I doubt they sent back the ten dollars you left 'for the maid'. -
Obnoxious Tb Log
salmoned replied to stickmonkey and stickmonkey jr's topic in General geocaching topics
True, but it IS only a game and the rules are what we make of them. If I cannot abide a TB or cache, I will not hesitate to remove it. We each have personal 'rules' that supercede anything in this 'game'. I find it a bit silly for those who 'want' geocaching to be above religion or politics - people die for those things - what can be above that? By assuming the 'gift', personal suffering will be minimized. I believe it the best attitude for this activity. -
Obnoxious Tb Log
salmoned replied to stickmonkey and stickmonkey jr's topic in General geocaching topics
Well, you may disagree with my opinion, but if you want to claim ownership, it behooves you to retain possession. Leaving your things out for others to 'play with' will eventually lead to a loss. If I find your ten dollar bill on the street, even with your name and phone number on it, I, like many, will not seek to return it. -
Obnoxious Tb Log
salmoned replied to stickmonkey and stickmonkey jr's topic in General geocaching topics
Hello all! My opinion hasn't been reflected here yet, so I'll add my 2 cents. TBs, like geocaches, are GIFTS. They are not personal property. You don't own a ten dollar bill after you've given it away (or spent it). Groundspeak doesn't own the geocaches or TBs either. Certainly, we all like to see our gifts appreciated and long-lived, but if not, c'est la vie! -
No such thing as "too literal", "hide it better than you found it" is an open invitation...
-
Yes, the fact that it 'only takes one' is one of the more intriguing aspects of this activity, IMHO. It insures civility and mutual respect. Geocaching is not for everybody.
-
I have one good reason why I haven't included those other caches - they are not overtly posted with "No Trespassing" signs. Yes, they are on property still titled to the US government, but without the signs, the case is weakened. Also, they are on property that was previously base housing (now leveled), with no known hazards. I have previously commented on all 3 caches (in one of my deleted posts), but focused on this one, as it is the most egregious violation. Geoblast, if you really need an answer to that question here it is - for the umpteenth time - The cache violates the rules in a manner prejudicial to the geocaching activity. I hope you got it this time...
-
I am appalled anyone could see any lack of appreciation in this discussion. Appreciation has been enumerated many times. It was good while it lasted, time to go...
-
Why? Your questions appear off-topic and personal in nature.
-
Well, let's see... The cache owner claimed there were no signs for weeks, even proved it with "photos" (falsehood #1). However, now he admits there are signs, but they are old, when they are not, that is, the signs may be old, but the posting of them in this location is not (falsehood #2). The cache owner implied permission was obtained by removing the disable (falsehood #3). Et cetera... Now, the cache owner claims this is not an area where munitions have been stored - My ship stored pyrotechnic munitions here while in drydock at Pearl Harbor (nuclear munitions were stored elsewhere). You, Geoblast, on the other hand, proclaimed your previous post would be your last. So what we have here is a bunch of prevaricators ignoring the truth for their own ends, and putting geocaching at risk in the process. This is the part you just fail to understand, it's not me, it's not the cache owner, it's the cache! That's the problem. Dblnaknak, all you need show is your permission for placement, it's that easy! BTW, those red areas are not state-owned lands, else my property is actually owned by the state, as well as 100's of other home owners'. Answer to question: Guess!
-
Yes, it appears to reduce to timing and a "perception of breach of trust". Even if the timing issue fails to resolve, the perception among peers is sufficient to foment dismissal in this volunteer situation.
-
True, but you can judge for yourself the validity of the statement, having before you all the information necessary. DNFs are not a slur on anyone's character either, yet why are so few willing...?
-
1. I bear no ill-will towards any cachers, local or national. I checked the tax map key before taking any action on this cache. I didn't post a link to it because it's readily accessed information. 2. I never found the cache, I couldn't move myself to disobey the signs. The signs border the roadside, the cache is located between two of them (there are 4 or more). The owner has admitted the signs are there, after weeks of denying their existence, by telling seekers to ignore them in his listing. I'm not posting photos of the signs, because they have now been stipulated by all parties. 3. Geoblast, the areas that have been leased have the leasees listed as owners in the tax map key, otherwise who would pay the taxes due? Certainly not the United States of America! Your adamant ignorance of reality is astounding (No, that's not a slur, just a statement of fact). 4. Anyone who takes a 6 year old newspaper article as a better source of information than the current tax map key - I feel sorry for your lack of wisdom. 5. I thank those who have thought enough of this issue to investigate the details. A cache on state or local land only affects the state or local area, a cache on federal property affects geocachers on a national level. Since no reasonable action prevailed when I brought this matter to local attention, I brought it here for discussion. 6. I don't know if this parcel is now owned by the US government or not, having not seen the actual and current deed. However, I believe enough doubt exists that the cache should be moved to a location without 'issues'. Addendum - I am most disturbed by the fact that the cache owner has knowingly deceived the reviewer and the caching community by claiming no signs were posted - even providing photos (which showed the signs edge-on) as proof. If this were an isolated incident... well, better to avoid further controversy, eh?
-
Again, if the title to the property is held in the name of the United States of America, as indicated in the 'tax map key' records, then the new signs should be respected, if not by the hoi polloi, then at least by Groundspeak. Need more be said?