Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by NotNutts

  1. I don't like most urban micros either, but I agree with several other posters--to each his own. Besides, there have been a few (very few) that I enjoyed. Usually it takes a creative/conscientious hider. Edited for spelling fun
  2. I use the Frisbee rule when placing my caches. It may not be the best way, but I hate cutting red tape, especially when its silly. I don't (except when I first started) put caches on PRIVATE property, though. I'm pretty sure he's not trolling--it seems a legit concern. If I fed him so be it. A bit of angst, maybe, but not trolling.
  3. Micro Spew, pocket caches, and debates on abortion and the acceptability of gay cruising will cause robots to rise up against Groundspeak on high, bringing an end to the sport as we know it next week. On July 4th, we fight back...
  4. We've decided on lake of the Ozarks for our family vacation. We'll be staying at the military campground on the lake. Thanks for your inputs in the other thread. Now, with all the caches around there, what are the must-do ones???
  5. The first cache I did, a few years ago, was a four stage multi through an abandoned Rockefeller estate, including stages at a boat house, stables, rail station, and the mansion itself. What I didn't take into account was that it was now part of Ft Bragg, even though the area was open to the public. It was never approved. I asked TPTB on Bragg for permission, but they never returned my e-mails. It's too bad, because it would have been a great cache, but rules are rules. If I'd have checked the rules and/or asked if they'd make an exception before I did the work, it'd have saved me a lot of time. So I guess what I'm saying is I feel your pain, but the reviewer was just doing his job properly.
  6. I'm going to have to agree with this guy...even after church!!! I don't worry much about stats, but I admit I will sometimes check out people's stats/profiles, just to get an idea about the person. Its not too hard to decipher/psychoanalyze peoples finds. For instance, looking at my stats, it's easy to tell I'm a family type cacher--heavy on full-size easy caches. Also, digging further, you might notice I have an OCD-type urge to clear every cache near my home, regardless of type. Numbers/icon Hos are easy to spot. Tree huggers generally are too. Then there is the psycho-cacher, who scales cliffs and scuba-dives for caches. Your stats tell me you are a numbers-type cacher who travels, and hits every nearby cache, regardless of type. My vote would be to leave the system pretty much the way it is, but I wouldn't care much if the stats went away.
  7. We've decided on lake of the Ozarks. We'll be staying at the military campground on the lake. Thanks for your inputs. Now, with all the caches around there, what are the must-do ones???
  8. R or N, I probably agree with you more than you know. I too am a pro-life Christian. Still, the way you went about your argument was inflammatory--more likely to anger people (Who are showing Christ-like compassion toward one of God's creations) than to change any minds. God's grace, and indignation, is big enough for the ducks and the babies. You sell Him short, as well as the posters. Now let me take my bag of micro's and toss one in every parking lot I can find... Oh, and...
  9. The only way I know of searching by address is using google earth. You can punch in your home co-ords and go from there, though. The only way I know of adjusting the size of the search area is using Pocket Queries, a premium member feature. As far as asking permission, the official and best answer is yes, always ask permission. I usually use the Frisbee rule, however. The Frisbee rule was created in the forums, and states that any place you wouldn't need permission to play Frisbee, you shouldn't need permission to place a cache. The whole permission thing is a contentious issue in the forums, however, so beware.
  10. How about this one: Mississippi road trip. It runs 580 miles, covering most of MS.
  11. Actually, I wouldn't mention a thing about the interior courtyard. That could be one tricky cache! Imagine doing laps around the hospital, then trying to keep your bearing while walking around those crazy hospital corridors.
  12. Kind of like a pimp, right? Maybe 'pusher' or 'candy man' would be better. GC supplies the needles and helps us prepare the smack. We supply the drugs, do the injecting, and ...OK, this comparison is getting disturbing.
  13. Wrong. First, he didn't say Groundspeak gave the smile. He said it comes from Groundspeak when the appropriate log is written. There is a huge difference. Don't twist words like the trolls here. Second, smilies are not the cache owner's to give away, either. The cache owner only makes sure those who write a Found It log has actually found the cache. Nothing more. Denying legitimate logs is just as wrong as allowing bogus finds. This argue doesn't fly either. This very same argument could be used on a caches in inappropriate places, illegal caches, or any other cache that is bad for the hobby. It could have been used on moving caches, buried caches, code word caches, or whatever. Ignoring caches doesn't make the problem go away. It's the same reason unavailable caches aren't hidden in the Nearest Caches list. Nope, not buying it. Notice you said cache owner . An owner can do anything he wants with his stuff, within the bounds of the law, and for the games sake, the game's rules. Since nothing specifically prohibits logging requirements, it's allowed. Not liking it doesn't make it so. In fact, here's a quote from the Groundspeak GC Listing requirements/guidelines "The cache owner will assume all responsibility of their cache listings. The responsibility of your listing includes quality control of posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements ." I'd say this makes logging requirements well within the rules. As to the comparison between logging requirements and inappropriate/illegal caches, this is whats called a faulty analogy. The difference is the legality of the cache, and I explained that above. You can't compare legally listed caches with illegal ones, no matter how much you dislike the idea. Don't confuse your opinions with the rules.
  14. This is where I think some of the misunderstanding creeps in. If I found KBI's cache and logged the find on the site, I don't believe that I'm expecting KBI to "give me a smiley". I just get it. It's a geocaching.com rule that if you find the box and sign the log, then you have the right to log a "found it" and get the smiley. KBI may act as referee for the cache (as far as the geocaching.com rules and guidelines are concerned), and remove my log if he finds that it's false or breaks the rules: but that's all. I'm a member of geocaching.com, and will abide by these simple rules (no logbook found = no smiley, logbook found = smiley). Otherwise it would be like playing an official league football (er, "soccer" ) fixture where the referee declares that he will disallow any goal scored in the game unless the scorer performs a somersault afterwards. No, if I score a legitimate goal, according to the rules (of what is another artificial pastime), then the referee has no power to strike the goal from the record. Even if he hired the pitch, arranged the transport, and made it clear that he would insist on the somersault "rule". Ideally (and I know that this probably isn't practical), deletion of logs should only take place via a third party (moderator), when the cache owner can demonstrate that the log entry breaks the rules and guidelines. I've placed 42 caches, and have never felt the need to delete any logs (so far). HH HH - I think you have clearly expressed what a lot of us feel. The smilie comes from Groundspeak when we submit a find log. Groundspeak's stated requirement is find it/sign the log. The cache master should not take away a Groundspeak smilie because we didn't jump through his hoops. However, the cache is the cache-owner's property. He's expected to maintain it. He also created the web page listing it. I don't think it's Groundspeak's smilie to give away--it's the owner's. GS is more of a listing agent. That's why reviewers are not called approvers. If you don't like the logging requirement, don't do it and ignore the cache. The right to a smilie is not in the bill of rights.
  15. Wellllll, I got both of my dogs chipped and I was thinking it would be wayyy cool to have a 5 star difficulty multi cache where ya gotta find me at an event and scan my butt with one of those chip readers that vets and animal shelters have......onlyyyyy the chip would transmit the coords to the final cache insted of a tracking code. Cooool huh? You can steal my idea if ya want..... It would be cooler if it were J-Lo's butt. I have to admit I've scanned that butt once or twice.
  16. As an career military SrNCO, one thing I can detect is whining. Seriously, think about it. KBI and others (even the father-son guy, though that may be a bit far) took the time, effort, and money (maybe not much, but so what!) to plan and place a cache. All he asks is a poem. You have the choice of ignoring or sucking it up and doing it. It's too bad Jeremy isn't reading the thread anymore, because the red tape icon is a good idea. Other than that, my response (were it my cache) would be either 'suck it up', or if I felt really salty, 'I'll call the waaambulance... waa, waa, I don't want to write a poem!!!'.
  17. Don't worry about these guys, they're harmless. You just hit on one of the issues that set off crotchety old cachers. Talking about urban micros in the forums is kinda like standing up in the middle of the sermon at church and spouting off Carlin's 7 dirty words.
  18. Well said. All the 'offending" being done tells me the tracts are doing their job. Maybe I will start leaving some! It seems that some folks misunderstand some basic Christian doctrine. The Bible teaches we are all (including Christians) sinners. This is in comparison to a perfect God. I believe that if anyone searches themselves, they'd find this true. How is this more offensive than a 'nobody's perfekt!' bumper sticker. Being 'saved' is just means not going to hell, not that you're perfect. Basic Christian doctrine states that to be saved, you need to: A- Admit you're a sinner (not perfekt) B- believe Jesus died for your sins C- Confess your sins (imperfekshuns) to him and ask him into your life I realize this whole idea really gets under people's skin. Thats one more reason why I believe it. P.S.- Auntieweasel- I enjoyed your website, despite our apparent philosophical differences. While your sarcastic sense of humor sometimes comes across as condescending in the forums, it was hilarious on your website. BTW, I was kind-of raised by hippies, too. I remember my mom and her friend cracking up when I asked her why her cigarette smelled funny!
  19. Well, I haven't seen that stuff in a cache. I have seen healing crystals, ankhs, GLAAD pins, political propaganda , das kapital and lots of other stuff advocating agendas/points of view. None of these offended me, although I disagreed with many of the ideas expressed/represented. Are tracts (regardless of viewpoint expressed) good swag? I say no, but the ones I've seen don't offend me. If I found one of your satanic tracts in a cache, I'd trade a cross for it, say a prayer for you, and trash it at first opportunity. I wouldn't try to prohibit you from leaving them.
  20. I finally managed to get some leave, and decided to take the family camping next month. I'm looking for a place with some caches, but cache count/quality is only one consideration. I'm looking for nice campgrounds, fishing, and other stuff for my kids (5 & 7) to do. Here are the places I'm considering. If you've been there, let me know what you thought. Also, if you have any other suggestions, let me know. I live in the 62225 area. Here's my list: Lake of the Ozarks-kinda far, but I hear it's nice, plus the military has a rec area there (I M USAF) LORA Land between the Lakes-also kinda far, but beautiful, I hear. Cheap fishing licenses, lotsa caches LBL Washington County conservation Area, Nashville, IL-Close to home, uncrowded Cons area Let me know what you think
  21. And, as it turns out, the actor was a secret Italian. If it were me, I'd be more offended by an ill-mannered nutjob discrediting my religion than an ill-mannered nutjob discrediting someone else's, but you'll have to make that decision for yourself. You're right, what you said probably should offend me, but as a lifelong heathen (<--just a joke-poking fun at myself) and a rather recent convert, I think I can understand your point of view, without taking offense.
  22. So, if you don't believe, it's a waste; if you do believe, it's a waste. Doesn't waste make Jesus sad? Or is that Gaia? And "burn in hell for all eternity"? No, I think that's the Indian from those old commercials (you dated yourself(oops, I dated myself, too)). But OP didn't say 'waste', 'offend' was the word.
  23. For the record, I am a Christian. However I don't leave caches in tracts (a bit off subject, but I do leave cross necklaces and pins--would those be offensive?). I agree, there are better ways to evangelize. However, I don't see how tracts are "invasive and obtrusive", with the rare exception when a cache has been packed full of them. With all due respect, if you are offended by a piece of paper that says something like 'accept Jesus or burn', maybe you have the problem. If you don't believe, it's just words. If you do believe, then you're not going to 'burn'. I understand offense at remarks denigrating women, homosexuals, African-Americans etc., but to my knowledge, these tracts belittle no-one. Besides, banning tracts would be a step in the wrong direction. The Nazis started out banning a few offensive titles too.<--not calling anyone a Nazi, just making a point tink, tink
  24. Here we stand, The United States of The Offended. God help us if we offend someone's delicate sensibilities with a cache title. If I were offended by your cache, titled "Fear This: Cynophobia", due to the tounge in cheek way you present the cache page, to whit; "Growling, snarling beasts with massive jaws and gleaming yellow eyes, hackles raised as they wait for some flinch of weakness to attack. Cujo. The bane of postmen worldwide. This cache will bring you face to face with your fear. Be warned: you will see dogs. Quite possibly lots of them. All running loose and unrestrained. You may want to bring one of those little plastic bags to clean up after yourself.", would you change the name? I didn't think so. I guess it's politically correct to make light of folks who fear dogs, but not politically correct to make fun of folks who practice an alternative lifestyle. Maybe we need more rules. Yeah, that's the ticket. More rules. Good post. And I agree, no more rules. I just don't want to explain to my 5 yr old the correlation between F.A.G.S. and sticking a stick in the back end of something--at least not on someone else's terms. I'd rather explain to my kids (which I have) about homosexuality at home. Granted, I could ignore the cache, but this is supposed to be a family thing. Aren't there enough R-rated activities? Let's keep Geocaching G rated, or at least PG-13.
  • Create New...