Pantalaimon
-
Posts
801 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Pantalaimon
-
-
Wait. If you don't post again, its really not your penultimate post.
It's the ultimate post.
So, in order to make the title of this thread correct, I insist you post once more, and then never post again.
-
Warning: I haven't read the above posts.
I once tried to submit a Web Cam cache that I wanted the finder to have general coordinate to, but then find their own way to the spot on location by using the pictures on the web that the web cam had taken.
It was denied because the coordinates weren't spot on for the pictures.
Given more time, I can relate this to your question.
-
I appreciate that reply 4x4, I thought things were spiraling out of control.
But we reigned back in the conversation, and now we're cool.
-
Let's all give Jay and Kendra a call... now that we all have their phone number.
-
... even though you'd obviously like to paint off-roading as one of the world's major destructive sins ...
I'm not sure it was so obvious, especially because it wasn't my intent to "paint" anything. Sorry you perceived it that way. I just don't know how, in my own mind, to equate ATVing with "tread[ing] lightly." Perhaps the fault is mine, I admit, but just because its no different in your mind from "mountain biking, horseback riding, or even hiking, for that matter" because all such activities "leave visible 'evidence' of their existence" doesn't mean it (ATVing) is treading lightly. Again, in my opinion.
Just a difference of opinion. No need to slap on the catch phrase labels to attempt to bolster your argument.
Oh, and on another point, I'd imagine that someone craftier than myself could make a pretty sound argument for preserving land in its "natural state" for the sake of the land itself, and the sake of the creatures that walk on other than two legs. So, in answer to your question about "Otherwise, what are we preserving the land for?," a reasonable person might be able to cite a rational argument other than "So that our children's children have public lands that they can't use either." But, as I would guess a significant majority of geocachers also believe in your "reasonable use" point, I digress.
-
I also "tread lightly" ...
Come on now. Really? "Tread lightly"? In an ATV?
I don't think the term "tread lightly" can be attributed in any way to riding an ATV, anywhere.
-
I thought caches weren't supposed to be buried?
I think the rule is any pointy object used to bury it. I think Impacted would sneak by.
So... as long as I "bury" my cache by slamming it against the ground repeatedly, or by dropping it from a huge height it will be approved?
Got it.
Time to hide my next cache!
-
You're just never wrong, are you?
-
Thread being locked in five... four.... three...
-
No, the OP is not new to caching, but as you say may have been away for a while. He is certainly not a regular forum user either. I do think that your response could have been a bit more tactful tho. Having a mod chime in with the same tone does not help things. Answering the question and then recommending that they read the guidelines would have been much better. It does not seem that this person is a complainer like mention, yet- but that kind of response from members of this community may turn them into one in short order.
Well said.
-
Sure, I COULD have answered the question, but then would he learn anything?
Ah. Well, if you were trying to teach him a lesson, I digress.
-
Not disrespectful at all.
If he followed the directions he would have had his answer already.
I don't know, seemed a tad condescending, and by extension, possibly disrespectful.
How about:
Ka6aru, currently reverse (locationless) caches are not being approved. You can see here (link) for a discussion of the same. Also, please note that the guidelines for submitting a cache (which are required reading for submitting a cache
) speak to the same issue.Seems more diplomatic.
To tell you the truth, however, I'm the pot calling the kettle black. What caught my attention was the (tacit?) sanctioning by the Mod.
-
Doesn't seem worth the headache to me, glad I didn't even attempt one.
Hrrrhghn?
I'm confused as to how hunting Magellan's Cache Her If You Can Caches is anymore of a "headache" for a cacher than any other cache.
-
When you tried to post one, did you read the guidelines for submitting a cache first like it tells you to?
There's some respect for ya.
-
And by someone who's found 174 caches no less...
-
I wouldn't settle for "it should be okay" if I was replacing someone else's cache.
I'd only settle for "there's no friggin way anythings conpromising the integrity of that cache."
S/he must have put a big rock on top. At any rate, looks like its time for a maintenance visit.
-
On a more topical note, I think they should be in the order of the shortest sentence that uses all the letters of the alphabet.
I remember the concent from the book "Ella Minnow Pea", but I can't remember the sentence.
That'll trip em up.
-
Man alive, you're going to maintain 26 stages over 320 miles.
I have trouble reactivating my five stage within 2 mile cache.
You da man.
-
Now you're just teasing us.
-
A most excellent post.
-
I wouldn't mind hearing the story about why "I like girls" was changed to "I like cheese" and then to "Girl references offend me"
That sounds like a fun one.
-
Has anyone else run into this?
I did a search, but I don't see any other threads where anyone else ever complained of a reviewer ...
Seriously, what's wrong with a temp archive in this case?
Edit: I guess the term "temp archive" doesn't make much sense now that I read my post. My point was, what's the problem with archiving it until fixed?
-
I want to ask fellow geocachers whether they think polls are useful.
-
Did the term "girls" offend someone?
Should Micro Have Its Own Type?
in General geocaching topics
Posted · Edited by Pantalaimon
I voted yes... but I thought polls were useless?
Edit: Whoops, I misspoke. They aren't useless, they have "a pointless nature."