CanUK_TeamFitz

Then read my OP again - the coords for the mystery would be in the TB cache - for people to "find and log."

OK before you get on your horses and prepare to read me my rights... I'm not thinking of creating a real moving geocache. What I'm thinking of is pairing a static 'big brother' geocache as a mystery - with a small (slightly bigger than a micro) TB cache which would contain trade items - and travel itself from cache to cache. Inside the TB cache - coords for the 'big brother' cache would be written, so those who found the 'travelling' TB cache could effectively find and log the real mystery cache. I've seen at least one example of TB containing coords for a mystery in the field - but not as an actual travelling cache - like this. Any thoughts on the idea? I wouldn't put a limit on travel so the travelling cache could go worldwide as far as I'm concerned. I may think of creating a secondary puzzle to get the coordinates in case that happens. What difficulty/terrain rating would you classify it as - obviously not difficult for a local who picks up the travelling TB cache but maybe difficult for someone who finds the travelling cache on the other side of the world who wants to log.

Interesting because I actually have a different take - I see it as my role as CO to provide initial swag (replenish if cache goes missing), regular maintenance, CITO... but I see it as my duty as a cacher to make sure other CO's caches are traded evenly or replenished. As such if we come across a cache that is looking bare, we will leave a few of our own swag items and take nothing. I'll treat our own caches the same - thankfully none of our caches have become completely empty yet. As such I think it is the role of the caching community to trade fairly - it is not my role as CO to continuously stock up on prizes for people to plunder.... Geosanta as you put it. _TeamFitz_ !=

We got our caching licence in Canada and I commented on the comparison of UK swag to Canadian swag when I first got on the forums. There has been a few caches we've found with good swag - but few and far between. It may be that the area we cache when visiting Canada is statistically higher quality than elsewhere... be interesting to see a graph of quality rated by area. Sadly not even the puzzle caches are safe. However I do have a very good idea who, at least one, of the rogue traders are in our area are. Recently during maintenance stops on one of my caches, I was able to see a 'before' and 'after' so to speak. Most of the good trade I had in there was plundered and traded for just 2 less quality used items. It mainly ticks me off because I think of the people who come after who don't get a chance to see and trade for something of value and quality.

If the seeker was just griping then I'd probably ignore it. Since they are threatening to get the cache removed, I'd immediately thank them for bringing the nearby danger to my attention. I'd agree with their sentiment and add that I also was concerned. I'd then remove the 'kids' attribute and replace with 'skull and crossbones' attribute and I'd be sure to paste the following large text on the cache page: That way you're providing a double-entendred warning for other CO's and other cachers can read it how they wish.

#43 If someone cannot refute your point or counter with a successful counter-argument, they will look at your profile and use [number/size/types/member status/length of membership/gallery] against you instead.

Risking the wrath of the Moderatrix to continue this OT jaunt but isn't this the same for Canada and similar colonies? I believe the head of state for Canada is also our HRM.... So I guess Canada is no longer a country either! Dear Canada - Kneel before your colonial masters!

There's no rule, it's not even a guideline. At most it's a suggestion but there's a lot of people who don't even agree with it. Why are you trying to stick to a 'rule' that doesn't exist? If you have a good idea about what you'd like to find, then hide it and commit to maintenance.

Hold on currykev, are you implying _TeamFitz_ are not "serious" cachers! Actually we haven't done this yet and would volunteer lochb, but the other half of _TF_ is occupied on Saturday morning, and she has all but banned me from doing this series without her. Sorry! We're planning to go in June/July if anyone else is around/interested at that time.

Yep, maybe you want to check in with COs before inviting the rest of the world to find their cache without going through the listing site. I'd rather see logs on my cache page than on some exclusive iTard games website that I can't access.

I actually started one of my long explanations that in fact the issue was that the reviewers did not want to be the ones stuck deciding which ALRs were light and fun activities (such as taking a picture wearing a funny hat) and which were over the line (like stabbing someone in the foot or having to hide a cache you wouldn't have hidden otherwise). But as I was summarizing I realized that even if only a few caches with extreme ALRs were submitted, any reviewer who had to deal with just one or two of these would probably come the the conclusion that a few control freaks were pushing the envelop and dealing with just these was tiresome. If you have a light fun activity that can be done at the cache site or when submitting your online log you can still have a request on your cache page. The only change is that you cannot delete someone's Found log just because they didn't do it. Without being able to delete logs, the control freaks have less incentive to ask for some ridiculous or overly burdensome activity. Also, I think it's fair to state that if you want to wear a silly hat and take a picture at a cache then post it in your log - there's nothing stopping you anyway - (you could even make it your own special requirement whenever you go caching). I do stupid stuff all the time for kicks and giggles, sometimes I'm caching, sometimes I'm not, sometimes I take a photo of it too and if there's an OLR we'll try to do it. If you need a CO to post an ALR specifically directing you in something fun to do - and you are regimented about it - you probably don't really know how to have fun and aren't much of a fun person to hang around!

If you're sitting near a window on the flight over, and get the OK from the flight crew, you can power up your receiver on the flight over, which would eliminate the long aquisition time at your destination. [edit = typos] Of course, don't expect the captain the land the plane if you see a quick cache n' dash on some island in the middle of the atlantic on the way over!

Hi softball, I bought my 60CSx secondhand in Canada and brought it back to the UK and it works fine - I even took it to Czech Republic and loaded it with OSM maps. Just remember to stand really still for a really long time when you get off the plane!

Yes, I would mind that. But that's not what Linda did. If someone posted erroneous information about something that you sell, I don't see why you shouldn't get the opportunity to correct this - admittedly you should also mention your interest though. ITA with HH. Imagine you are a maker of Fine Rare Widgets, and FRW are very rare in the UK, in fact only you and a select few shops with no internet presence make FRWs. I'd further stipulate that if you frequented an online forum and someone was enquiring as to where they may get their hands on some FRWs, it would be courtesy to mention you have a shop that sells them. It's not always about advertising by stealth - some merchants are actually doing a valuable service!

Did you actually read the thread? yeah... and at the end of the day, someone pours their heart and soul into a text box on the screen.... gets a smiley. the owner deletes it, and someone cries. For someone who likes to keep a detailed track of their statistics (i.e. smileys), is vested in the boy scouts, cares enough to log images in their gallery you sure are trolling hard. Of course if you're not trolling then I hope you never put a cache out... if someone was to log NM you'd probably just ignore it - you come across like you don't particularly care for geocaching at all. Seems like your forum posts are longer than the last few logs you left on caches you found.

I don't know about you, but I sometimes write very long logs... it's part of our caching experience and it's a unique story - even the DNFs. I sometimes take up to half an hour to write a log. It's certainly not just about the smiley for me - if someone deleted a find after I spent time and effort in not only finding it but logging it with more than just a few words - I'd be slightly peeved.

FYI to those who question why a PM would make a cache PMO... I have 2 caches I have made temporarily PMO after they got filched twice. I make them PMO maybe for the first couple of logs or so, then I remake them free once I am sure any cache maggots who may be browsing the site have moved on. I believe this should really be the only circumstance that you make your cache PMO - I don't believe in this "rewarding premium members" nonsense.

Calm down dear, it's only a forum! Look no-one's saying you don't have an argument - all I was saying is your persistence is admirable but flawed. I understand where you're coming from when you discuss the "concept of showing the CO the "courtesy" of not logging his PMO cache when they are BM's", but this makes it an ALR - for the simple reason that the CO has no leg to stand on by requesting only PM log. If I put a cache out and asked blue-eyed cachers to log it then fine. If I put a cache out then stated ONLY blue-eyed cachers can log it - despite the cache being mine to do as I please, the reviewers would quite rightly refuse to publish the listing because it's an ALR. The onus of courtesy you mention is on the CO, not the seeker. It is courtesy for the CO to allow anyone who writes in the log book, to log online - even if he doesn't like them. Technically - the website allows this Policy-wise - Groundspeak allow this So, since you are not arguing from a matter of Groundspeak policy or technical functionality - all you have left is an argument from courtesy - an ALR - which is expressly not permitted by Groundspeak. Of course the CO is free to delist his cache, and put up a blog or something (which would allow online logs as comments) and then charge people $30 a time to go find it - I doubt he would get as much logs this way but perhaps he's happier to have less logs and be ignored. He'd have total control then and could easily block unpaying loggers. If he wants to list his cache here, then he's got to accept the terms and conditions of this listing site. I am trying to be reasonable with you, I don't think I've called you any names or trashed your points, all I've done is speak from what I know technically and what I know of Groundspeaks policy - I have no intention of entering into a duel with you, I thought maybe I could just slow you down in your tracks before you went too far...... we've all gone too far sometimes.

I think I just realised why you're persisting with your argument - though your persistence is to be admired, your logic and understanding of this website is flawed. I notice you have no hides. I don't know if you've ever hidden a cache and listed it on geocaching.com - maybe you have but going by your profile you are unaware of terms and conditions all COs agree to when submitting a cache. There are 4 checkboxes, 2 are optional, 2 are mandatory: Having not listed a cache with geocaching.com before you probably haven't come across this form. As I stated above - you have the option of making a cache PM/CM only - to "view this cache". Not "log this cache". As I also stated above "back door" is an abstract term for accessing a page or function on the website which is undocumented. IMPORTANT TO NOTE: Undocumented does NOT mean forbidden. If it was forbidden then the BMs who are using this "back door" are essentially hacking the website illegally and it would be up to you to notify Groundspeak if you felt so inclined - and up to Groundspeak to a. ) Close the "back door" and b. ) Report the hackers to the police and have them arrested. Now it's already been proved that Groundspeak a. ) Are aware of the "back door" b. ) Have not closed it c. ) Have stated they will not close it d. ) Have stated they have intentionally left it open and are happy to allow BM to log using it So the final question for you is... is it worth carrying on your stance against such overwhelming evidence? On just a balance of probabilities the premium CO in this case is wrong, let alone a legal perspective. edit: superfluous smileys

When I hide a new cache and fill out an online form to list the cache - I have a choice to tick the following box: Operative words appear to be "view this cache". I note the absense of the word "log" or any wording to the effect of ""Check if you only want Premium and Charter Members to log this cache." The intent of Groundspeak seems clear to me. Where a url can be entered, unless the website owner sets up their .htaccess file and/or backend DB rules specifically to block/redirect specific access that page is publicly viewable and usable. So to be able to claim only PMs may log a PM cache, it is tantamount to those ocassional websites you come across that have a silly EULA which forbids you from viewing or linking to the website without permission - in effect it's like saying you may not look at my house as you walk down the street without my express permission. That is - it's already there, in public, it's publicly available and viewable and you have made no efforts to hide it or prevent it from being available - no law in the land is going to support your claim. Going back to the 'back-door' method. The 'back-door' is actually an abstract term for just another sub directory or webpage on the server. There is no actual documented function in html, php or any other web language that literally reads 'if_cant_get_in_through_front_go_and_try_back_door()' or something like that - like you would a physical house. It's a URL that is available to all members - it's accessible the same way www.geocaching.com/seek is accessible - it's just undocumented - as in - it's not written down or publicised. Once again, all seems pretty clear to me.

I would like to see whichever party gets in devote more resources to the cache-police. They are sorely underfunded and spend far too much time filling in paperwork on the GS forums. Also, the winning party should form a special cache-police investigation unit - SOCA (Serious and Organised Cache Agency) to deal with organised signing of log books by cachers for others that were not present and that sort of thing...

I must say, the responses in this thread have been refreshing in contrast to the 'other' thread (Rome). I had a cache stolen twice so my solution was to change the location slightly but also leave an shocking lighter in there (with a warning on the cache page). Still I think creating a series in honour of GROPE is an even better solution - play the griefers at their own game. Have fun with it - treat it as a side game. I'll be looking out for GROPE if they come to my area - could make the game more interesting. I also agree with NOT banning their account. If they're dumb enough to log then I say let them - and let us have a record of where they operate and how far their reach is. If you play whack-a-mole with their account or IP address, you're only causing yourself more work and more difficulty in tracking their activity. I like GS forums new found sensibility and refrain... hope it lasts!

"We need a return to traditional caches!" "Vote for puzzles caches, don't let the multi's get back in!" "Vote for the party that is tough on DNFs, tough on the causes of DNF" "We need limits on immicroation"

Not being near Manchester, this has little bearing on me, and I'm not emotionally or otherwise invested in the outcome at all. That said... ^^ This is enough reason alone to have a self-policed exclusion zone for caches. Regardless of what you think of government or police policies, or how they enforce them - not to mention the current climate of fear and push to report your neighbours. However Kehotee and Amberel raised some valid and interesting points about the legal basis for 'prevention of geocaches' - if I can call it that. As a layman who has spent much time researching legal statutes and using them as a defence against actions of the local authorities on occassion, I'm very interested in seeing debate on the legal aspect. I'm not saying they would (I'm aware there are cachers who are police officers), but if the police authorities were to begin arbitrarily setting up exclusion zones wherever they felt like it. Specifically and solely targetting the activity of geocaching - using only "prevention of terrorism" as a justification - would there be a legal challenge? And would anyone reviewer or not, be prepared to mount a legal defence to a challenge in court? Treat it as a thought-experiment.

I understand everyone who is making comparisons to other forums... but do you really want this place to become the /b/ of geocaching? I think the comparisons with other forums don't hold up. One reason I can think of is that this forum crosses over with RL - and IRL I notice, a lot of different age groups and backgrounds join in this game - from 8 to 80. Going by the logs I read, not all of those are tech-heads or familiar with the subtle nuances of the intertubes - in fact not all of the FM here are even familiar with the duality of richness and horror that the internet can bring, but they act like they are - it's a very curious and sometimes agonizing thing to watch. Whereas a music band website will feature a certain cross-section of society - all rockers/rappers etc into a certain type of music, just as a automotive forum will have a lot of petrol heads, Geocaching seems to have a wide variety of people from anarchists to republicans, wiccans to hindu's, americans to japanese... it's a much broader cross section of society and not all those cultures or nationalities will recognise the cliquey sarcasm. If people want an example of a sane and friendly forum, check out the Ubuntu forums - always helpful to newbies and very useful providing much information and solutions to common problems. Threads with over-asked questions seem to mostly get ignored - a much nicer way to deal with newbies than to start jabbing them. As I said earlier - lot of testosterone associated with this game that I notice - even from the women.