Pengy&Tigger

I'm trying to change the email address on our account, however the validation emails are not being sent out. I've tried with two different email addresses and neither works. I've also tried to resend the validation emails but that doesn't work either. Other emails get through to both email addresses and there is nothing in any spam folders etc. I have changed the email address on my daughter's account tonight and that worked fine (different email address to mine). and that validation email arrived in seconds. The only problem I can think of is the age-old one of having an ampersand in our username (my daughter's account does not). Any ideas?

then it wouldn't be published. That seems reasonable to me. It does seem reasonable. Sadly it doesn't answer the original question about having to organise an extra venue if people don't want to take part in the activity already organised.

As it happens, in the case of the cache concerned, the first 'needs maintenance' was posted a few weeks ago, not months on end. Since the cache hasn't been linked on the forum, it's easy to assume it has indeed been abandoned for months on end, which simply isn't the case. There are many caches out there with needs maintenance logs going back further than this one. If it wasn't for someone wanting to place a new cache there wouldn't even be a discussion about it here.

The owner of that cache is the daughter of another cacher who has had a fair bit going on recently. The fact that the owner hasn't logged in since April shouldn't be an indication that the cache is abandoned.

I think the key to whether something is 'open to all' or not depends on whether a restriction is placed on attendees by the organiser, rather than a potential attendee themselves. So, if for example a camping event was organised where the site was only available to camping and caravanning club members, that would mean it wasn't open to all. Another example would be if someone was organising an event and only wanted people they knew to attend - similarly that would not be open to all. If an event has no such restriction, but someone decides they don't like whatever activity is involved, it is still open to them - they have made the personal choice not to go. This would apply to any event whether it be camping, going to a pub, swinging from some trees etc. Of course the organiser could allow people to log for just turning up for 5 minutes or organising an alternative venue, but they shouldn't be obliged to do so, especially if it involves a significant amount of additional organising. Practically speaking, the reviewers probably need to come up with some definition of 'open to all' which would be the key to deciding these things. There seems to be enough opinions on this for the current guideline interpretation to be reviewed.

I though the 'balls need collecting' comment was directed at me to be honest. I did say on the thread that if he didn't want campers finding his caches he could always take his ball home by temping his caches for the duration of the event. For the record, it wasn't me who sent webrat any message. All my opinions have been expressed on the thread concerned.

I must say I'm mystified as to why anyone would be sending abusive messages to someone. I thought it was a good natured exchange of opinions (for once!), and can't really see anyone on there who feels so strongly about their opinion that they might send abuse to others with the opposing view. I really can't understand how anyone could get worked up about this.

They are not being penalised if they CHOOSE not to camp. Just like I'm not being penalised if I CHOOSE not to go to a pub. In both cases, events are open to all, you make the CHOICE whether to go or not. I'm not sure what being a placer of local caches has to do with it. Surely you put out caches to be found? If you're not happy with campers finding your caches, you could always take your ball home by temping them a few days before the event.

Nobody is forced to do anything they don't want to do. You can choose not to go, just like you can choose whether to go to a pub event. I have camped at 2 events within 5 miles of my home and will be doing so again this weekend. I don't feel 'forced', I just count myself lucky that I don't have to travel as far as some folks do. By the same token, if a campsite owner does not want visitors on site, is it 'quite selfish' for someone to expect a second venue to be organised just so that they can get a smiley?

We recently cancelled plans to attend an event in a pub. On that occasion we were skint and couldn't really justify the cost of the fuel to get there as well as drinks (landlords do expect you to buy a drink in a pub). On this occasion the expense involved meant that the event was not open to us, though I have no complaint about this. I'm not sure how this differs from a camping event, where someone may not have a tent (which could be bought for a few quid), or the means to pay for a night camping. It's 'open to all' in exactly the same way as a pub event. If the organiser of a camping event has to find a site which allows visitors for free, does that mean the organiser of a pub event should find a pub where the landlord doesn't expect people to buy a drink?

I'm confused. You think it's good that Groundspeak is commercial by accepting payments for advertising and not allowing it free? I was under the impression that you thought commercialism was a bad thing.

nothing to see here

I see you were happy enough with the commercialism to pick up two free garmin geocoins. Do you think they would have been available if the site had not been commercial?

Fair or unfair, the rules have been made clear. Groundspeak own the website and make the rules - it really is that simple. mentioning charities over and over again when the rules have been made clear is not going to 'resolve any issues'. Groundspeak is a company, who charge for advertising from commercial and charitable organisations. Is it fair on these organisations who pay, if some are allowed free advertising (for example charities or people's own printing businesses)?

Feel free to help yourself to some of that cheese further up. You might need it to soak up the excess of whine.

Precisely. The rules haven't changed, charities are still not allowed to be mentioned. The fact that the charity still keeps getting mentioned again and again in this thread ("Is it because I mentioned ****?") makes me think this is yet another stirring thread.

Oh and here's some cheese to go with all the whine

Does this really need digging up over and over again?

You can place a cache near the fake co-ords, but not the real ones. As for finding out where they actually are, I'd go about contacting the owner of the caches. Explain that you want to place a traditional cache and give rough co-ords of where you wish to place it. Ask the owner of the caches if that would be near any of theirs. Your other option is to solve the puzzles, but I'm guessing that would be more time consuming.

They can only have a separate icon because they are a different category. It's not possible to have different icons yet have them all in the same POI category. I guess you have to decide what's more important to you - having different icons or not having that extra step of selecting the category when navigating. If you want to go back to one category you can always select 'Single icon for all waypoints'. For me personally, I'd rather have the icons. When driving past an unplanned cache, we know not to bother stopping if it's a multi or puzzle on the screen. Edit - when you navigate you could always select 'Any POI category' rather than selecting the cache type, and searching that way. However, it doesn't bring up a list of nearest POIs like selecting a category does.

I can't help thinking it would have been more polite for the OP to wait until those concerned had made the announcement on the forum themselves, rather than posting it in an 'I know something you don't know' fashion.

If they are archived, sign the log and remove the cache as it is simply geolitter. If it's temporarily unavailable and in good condition let the owner know so they can reactivate the page. It could have been temped for any number of reasons (wet cache, site temporarily inaccessible at the time etc), so it's good to let the owner know that everything is now fine.

If you don't require special accomodations that's a good solution. It's how pubs work already. I've been to an event where this happened. The pub wasn't expecting a large group so there were no spare tables and the pub simply could not accomodate the people who turned up. Most of the meet was held in the car park of the pub in the end.

We got turned down by The Black Dog in Belmont (I'm sure the OP knows of it). The funny thing is that I had asked because I knew that some bikers held meets there, so I assumed the landlord would be up for it. The reason I was turned down was that they had just taken over running the pub, and were trying to make it a bit more upmarket. The idea of a load of people trooping in off the moors didnt appeal. I should point out for those not local to here, that this particular village is conveniently nestled between several local moors, so I don't know what customers they were aiming for exactly

With all due respect, this is the UK forum, so if the D word is not offensive in the UK, who is the courtesy owed to?