Jump to content

D-cachers

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by D-cachers

  1. Team C...I appreciate your comments. We have been engaged just a little longer than you (Jun 04 vs Sep 04) and are aware of the historical bias/posturing associated with the issue of virtuals. I agree that there are some out there that should never have been approved...and the responsibility for that lies with the reviewer/approver. If it doesn't pass the common sense test...don't approve it. Deal with the complaints and press on. When it comes down to it...my 10 yr old son simply wants to be able to geocache with me...in the woods, on the trails, in the fields...and an occasional virtual...looking for the owner to let him know he got it right. How often does GC.com take that into consideration when contemplating the virtues of virtual caching...thats my .02...
  2. Based on your previous posts, this is essentially the response I expected...and here is mine: 1. What is the harm of having virtuals on GC.com? Server space? The numbers issue? 2. Less educational? You are partially right...but the experience of submitting answers to a virtual "owner" and then looking for a response (hopefully one will come) that verifies you were correct, gives a sense of accomplishment for kids. As a father, I appreciate...and value...that. 3. I prefer to use one site. I don't have the time/opportunity to camp out on the internet to work through different sites...I pay GC.com and would like to do everything on this one site...simply my preference... I know this is an old issue...but I still find it disappointing that there is significant double-speak on certain issues with the caching community. The phrase "each to each's own" when it comes to how people cache...as long as there is no harm done...has been applied to discussions on micros vs traditionals, numbers vs "the experience", ec...so why not virtuals. If you must have hard and fast policies/rules...they should be focused on things that truly go against the most fundamental requirements of geocaching....such as pocket caches, the recent team "record" in Dallas, etc...where the basic action of going to a specific location and finding the "target" didn't even happen... So...what IS the harm of new virtuals still being allowed? I just don't get it...
  3. I don't post often...but as a family guy...I have to comment... Geocaching is marketed/geared, at least partially, as a family activity. Virtuals truly add a learning opportunity for the kids...and they get a kick out of finding answers and logging on-line. Simply for those reasons, virtuals should continue to be an option on GC.com. The numbers issue shouldn't matter...those that are in it for the numbers will get an "ego boost" as they watch their numbers climb...and those that aren't in it for the numbers won't care. Regarding using others sites...as a paying member of GC.com, I want to use this website for all my geocaching needs...
  4. Congrats!! Now you get to work on "badges"....you know...like...ticks, scrapes, cuts, bruises, chigger bites, poison ivy, skeeter bites, etc.....the list goes on!!
  5. Here is a great example of how Geocaching can continue to flourish...by working on the local/state level... Several months ago, at the Oklahoma Geocachers Morning Meeting, we had two representatives from the state park service presenting info to us on how we (Geocachers) and them (Parks) can work together....by US (Geocachers) using their lands and resources. In particular, we talked about increasing cache placement on state park lands (thats right...I said cache placement!), using state parks for annual geocaching events, and finding ways to support programs the park service is trying to publicize. There you go. We'll see what happens...
  6. Howdy from OK... Given the lengthy time since the log...I would just e-mail the individual and let him/her know what you have discovered. Leave it up to the individual to decide which action to take. Either way, what is the "cost?" You take the high road...and the cacher has to decide which decision to make.
  7. I checked in through most of the week as I was interested in two things: 1. What was the "friendliness" quotient? -- On a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being utopia..lots of love)...I felt it was about an 8.5...not a lot of fireworks...but a little feistiness here and there. Normally I'd give the forums about a 6...with most of that score coming from a handful of folks... 2. Which regulars would really just blow off the "regular-free week" and chime in anyway? -- I was surprised to see a few regulars that I thought would play the game (stay away)...but after reading this thread I see that at least one or two of them forgot. Of course, there were several who said that nothing could come between them and the "life-giving forums"...and they stuck to their word It was nice to see lots of new names as topic starters or posters. It was also interesting to see at least one person who must have started a couple dozen topics in less than 48 hours It was eventually addressed by a regular...but I think it would have been dealt with a little quicker if everyone was online Finally...I saw a few questions out there in the Getting Started section that went unanswered a little longer. But, overall...things didn't change a whole lot...
  8. One other little piece of info...I use a triple suction mount for my Magellan...and in addition to rough roads occassionally knocking it off, cold/freezing temps also inhibit the suction cups from being flexible enough to hold. Warm air from the defroster eventually does help...but it can be aggravating when your GPSr suddenly falls down onto the dash Of course, this is only useful info for those of us who are crazy enough to go out in those temps
  9. Howdy from OK...I find this line of discussion very interesting. It seems to me that the key coord location that should be at least .10 mile from another cache is the final cache location of a multi-stage. Of course, as a cache owner, you should do the research and be familiar with caches in that area and make sure you aren't placing one of the multi stages on top of another cache. Now that I have said that, I just did a multi where the final location shocked me as it was within approx. 50 feet of another traditional cache. Hmmmm....
  10. Well...if the OP was serious about this question...I'm just thinking about the work and time involved to go back in and log 250 finds. I can hardly find time to log the handful of caches that I find. I can't help but wonder why go through the trouble. What the heck, instead of spending a couple hours at the computer...just go caching...
  11. DaveA...did you read anything else in my post...? I find it interesting when you place a thought out post and all you get back is a one line dissection... Just wondering
  12. Strawman perhaps...but...part of this discussion has been dealing with various issues that influence/contribute to biased perceptions...by TC and forum posters...
  13. Face it...GC.com is the "Microsoft" of the caching world...if you choose to be pro-GC.com, you'll be just fine. Those folks that are anti-establishment (i.e. anti-GC.com) probably lean towards being that way anyway...regardless what the issue is. I find it interesting to see posters out there with 1,000s of posts...who give you, ED, a hard time about being pro-GC.com. The fact that they are on here everyday...posting away, is evidence of where GC.com sits in the caching world. Brings to mind the old adage about biting the hand that feeds you...
  14. HELLO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Anyone out there?????? Hey..this is pretty nice... I feel strong and confident....not intimated at all!!
  15. Thanks for the input on this topic. I basically got the responses I expected. Numbers, stats, rankings....probably impossible to have a credible system in a community that is so divided on their value or importance. I'll just keep on caching...time to close it down.
  16. I agree that the tar and feather approach wouldn't go over so well Since we all essentially agree that there is nothing that can be done when it comes to enforce ethical behavior...does it make you wonder why the Cacher's Code was developed? (insert devil's advocate stance) The sun is shining...its freezing outside...but, I think its time to go caching!!
  17. Brian...you hit the proverbial nail on the head... When I pulled up the thread you posted, a great example is the cache that went missing for a year (Jar with lid and two nail holes) and people kept logging finds even when all they ended up finding was a couple holes in a piece of wood. A couple dozen cachers did that until it was finally archived. I'm just thinking that the cache community should make a clear statement that this won't be tolerated...and again, it should be a part of the Cacher's Code...
  18. As I woke up this morning, I realized that one of the reasons issues like this intrigue me is because our geocaching world is a real paradox... Most folks seem to make a point of logging smilies...their numbers show up on their profile...waiting for someone else to check it out. That's the reason for profiles right?? For others to see. Then, most of those same folks say that they only care about their numbers...and not where anyone else is in the rankings. If thats the case, then why don't they log notes (to give feedback to the cache owner, which I agree is a critical component to sustaining this game) instead of smilies. To keep track of their own numbers, they can use a notebook, Excel, GSAK, etc... It just doesn't match up... Look at the listings on Keenpeople...lots of folks do care... Don't get me wrong...there is such a thing as healthy, fun competition...and I think that is where 99% of us fit...
  19. I agree that a policy on this subject is not practical...but most of the "policies" in the Code are theoretically not practical (i.e.enforceable)either. I admit that I wish I had submitted a recommendation to the Code that would have incorporated the issue of honest logging. It very well would have been shot down...but, hey, I would have had my say...
  20. To be clear...I am not worrying about the folks that "cheat" the system...I'm not active enough where it would matter. I simply wondered why there is a prevalent attitude of "you do your thing, I'll do mine" when it comes to logging finds. The fact is that lots of folks (thousands) in this community do log their finds on databases like Keenpeople. On those lists, its clear that the top 25 or so in each state (the ones I looked at) were staying current. With that said, and assuming that the top dogs are old timers, big players in their respective communities...why isn't there a greater intolerance for cheaters...?? Cacher's Code...would something like honesty and integrity, in regards to documenting finds, find a place there?
  21. Brian..RK..other regulars...do you think more can be done by the community as a whole to make it clear that when you impact others, its wrong and it won't be tolerated? Realize as well that lots of folks get hurt by padded numbers...theres lots of ways to look at this...
  22. You know...I wasn't thinking about those types of logs. You are right...I see those fairly frequently. "Found the magnets...found the lid...etc." I wonder how many of those logs are deleted by the cache owner? The reality is that stats play a part in geocaching, and we all should set a standard that will give accuracy a chance...and make it clear that the standard is real..and that we aren't going to just say "Its okay
  23. I basically agree with you..."if you don't value something...you probably don't really care"...my question is.. Why doesn't the caching community value honesty in reporting? Respecting the cache owner's rights, cache integrity, etc...all of these are known expectations. Even referenced in the code. Why isn't reporting honesty a hotter topic...a clear expectation so that when someone asks "Can I log my own event?" there should be a consistent response of "No...that is not fair and right." Instead you hear half "No" and half "who cares"...
×
×
  • Create New...