Jump to content

brslk

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    978
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by brslk

  1. I fully understand multiple. There are some of us here who know how to track an IP, and what to do about them. Its not hard to track multiple IP's ya know.

    Since you won't believe me...

     

    http://kalsey.com/2004/02/why_ip_banning_is_useless/

    http://letupdate.com/ban-ip-address/

     

    If they have posted 200 times, that's 200 banned IP addresses. I guess you have to hope one of them isn't yours, huh. If it was, you would be kicking and screaming asking why GC would just ban an IP address like that.

     

    I will let this go. I dont want to derail this thread anymore. I just know what we would do on the boards I was a Global Mod for.

     

    No... if you have information to add I would be pleased to read it.

  2. Here is the quote from the reviewer note on the cache:

     

    IowaAdmin: "Since this is a the same location as your previous cache, you should request that the previous cache be reactivated, since there is no reason to start a new cache here other than to whip up a first-to-find frenzy"

     

    and the other cache:

     

    IowaAdmin: "Same story as your other cache -- no reason for this to be a new cache because it's not a new location."

     

    I really don't care if any of you believe that there is more to this. That is it. My friend is not hiding anything. There is no more to it. I know the location, I know the hider he is a very close friend and I telling you there is no more to this...this is the only message that has been exchanged between the reviewer and the cacher.

     

    @knowschad, this is not one of the people you are probably thinking of.

     

    StaticTank

     

    Ummm what the cache reviewer said there has little to do with a "FTF frenzy"

     

    Thanks for finally posting the rest of the story.

  3. And now the next five cachers are annoyed with *you* for gobbing up their "last 5 logs" on their paperless device. :D

    The log was on an event cache so I doubt that the next 5 cachers are going to give a rats rear end what I wrote. Besides that, I added other complimentary mumbo jumbo to the log before the smart aleck "signature"

     

    Ah, then it probably doesn't matter, then. Still think it's overboard absurd, though.

     

    I agree... If you don't like what someone does why try to outdo them at their own game. :D

  4. StaticTank-

    “There is a certain reviewer who is claiming that some new hides will cause a FTF frenzy.”

     

    He [the reviewer] has some stubborn policies that don't seem to align with what other reviewers do.

     

    I don't want to give away who the reviewer or the cache owner is……

     

    I just like to post it here to see what the general caching population thinks.

    So you want the geocaching community to give an opinion on a cache apparently (or not) denied by an experienced reviewer you admit to having issues with and you're unwilling to give any more "facts" or innuendoes.

     

    What I think is: if it walks like a troll and smells like a troll........

     

    I REALLY wish people would stop calling troll. It's rude and in most cases unfounded.

     

    Just because you don't agree with someones post does not make them a troll.

     

    :D

  5.  

    Micro aluminum pill bottle caches, small caches, caches inside magnetic bolts, caches inside bolts mounted to sign posts, small tiny vials in holes, hidden tobacco cans with magnets, waterproof match containers, the blank outlet box cover trick, Im getting just downright evil with some of my placements.

     

    Am I nuts?

     

    I just feel like giving back to the sport in appreciation for my new obsession.

    Yeah...but why don't you focus more on quality...like something that can fit trade items and travelers. I don't usually say so, but goin hog wild with micros is the ruination of the game. Thanks for the help. I just love it when I visit an area abd I can't find a regular Ccahe within 2 moles of where I am. My mom was visiting from TN and I couldn't even take her when we went to visit her mom, bacause all there were was Micros. Great Job.

     

    I plan to change my first geocache to a giant cache, a 5 gallon bucket! loaded with goodies.

     

    Put a can of beans and a book in there :D

  6. ...if Groundspeak was aware of the problem and disregarded it, I would go after them, too. Not to mention the property owner.

    So, if I attempted a radically dangerous cache, like one of the Vinnie & Sue Psycho Urban Cache series, well beyond my physical abilities, would you sue Groundspeak if I were killed or seriously injured in my hunt? Make them pay for my stupidity? Or is there some point where I should bear the consequences of my own idiotic acts? :laughing:

     

    Apples to mangos?

     

    Yes you and your lawyer would most probably sue Vinnie & Sue but mostly you would sue Groundspeak as they are the ones most likely to pay.

     

    I am not saying this is right or fair but the legal system is never fair or right.

     

    Look at it this way... If a woman can sue Mc Donalds for her coffee being too hot when she spilled it on her lap... you don't think Groundspeak could be held liable for the things they list?

     

    A disclaimer is as good as the paper it is written on.

     

    Perhaps even less as it becomes used paper...

  7. This is very simple, I will cut and paste the listing guideline then you tell me if the guideline reflects the actual state that prevails...

     

    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.

     

    Clearly that guideline isn't true.

     

    If the cache placer is not the responsible party then who is, who controls the listing on a day to day basis? Who decides case by case, day by day what will be allowed on the cache page?

     

    According to the guideline it is supposed to be the cache placer but it isn't, is it?

     

    I still think it is a great thing that Groundspeak has done. It is nice to know that any lawyer can demonstrate clearly that Groundspeak does not allow cache placers to be responsible for the cache listing. The cache listing is the invitation, not the cache.

     

    This website is simply a listing service, the Yellow Pages of geocaching. They don't own a cache or listing any more than the Yellow Pages owns the business being advertised. They do have control over what caches they choose to list, the same way the Yellow Pages control the businesses they will list. The Yellow Pages have their requirements. Try to place an ad for for an obviously illegal endeavor. It will probably be rejected. Try to place an ad with profanity, and it will not see print. They have their guidelines and GC.com has theirs.

     

    Suppose you place a Yellow Page ad and they find out later that you don't serve black people, or that your business is really a house of prostitution, they can pull your ad because it doesn't meet their listing criteria.

     

    So no, GC.com does not own your cache or listing. You can take your listing elsewhere. They just decide whether or not they choose to present it.

     

    Do the yellow pages retain control after things are published? no

     

    Does the yellow pages have the power to remove an ad once it is posted? no

     

    The yellow pages has the power and the immunity because is it a yearly publication that cannot be changed until the next year.

     

    Apples to Peas

     

    When you make this kind of comparison though between a website, and the yellow pages I must agree that you compare two separate things. Take Websites that let people create trails for other people to hike outdoors. Those trails can be very dangerous, just as a true 5/5 GeoCache can be. The website hosting the trail information would not be held liable if someone was to get hurt following that trail. I could be wrong. If you would like I can contact an old Prof of mine, and ask him about it. He knows a lot of people who work with this kind of stuff.

     

    Please do. I would like to hear (read) what he would have to say about it. :laughing:

  8. This is very simple, I will cut and paste the listing guideline then you tell me if the guideline reflects the actual state that prevails...

     

    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.

     

    Clearly that guideline isn't true.

     

    If the cache placer is not the responsible party then who is, who controls the listing on a day to day basis? Who decides case by case, day by day what will be allowed on the cache page?

     

    According to the guideline it is supposed to be the cache placer but it isn't, is it?

     

    I still think it is a great thing that Groundspeak has done. It is nice to know that any lawyer can demonstrate clearly that Groundspeak does not allow cache placers to be responsible for the cache listing. The cache listing is the invitation, not the cache.

     

    This website is simply a listing service, the Yellow Pages of geocaching. They don't own a cache or listing any more than the Yellow Pages owns the business being advertised. They do have control over what caches they choose to list, the same way the Yellow Pages control the businesses they will list. The Yellow Pages have their requirements. Try to place an ad for for an obviously illegal endeavor. It will probably be rejected. Try to place an ad with profanity, and it will not see print. They have their guidelines and GC.com has theirs.

     

    Suppose you place a Yellow Page ad and they find out later that you don't serve black people, or that your business is really a house of prostitution, they can pull your ad because it doesn't meet their listing criteria.

     

    So no, GC.com does not own your cache or listing. You can take your listing elsewhere. They just decide whether or not they choose to present it.

     

    Do the yellow pages retain control after things are published? no

     

    Does the yellow pages have the power to remove an ad once it is posted? no

     

    The yellow pages has the power and the immunity because is it a yearly publication that cannot be changed until the next year.

     

    Apples to Peas

  9. For me, there is a pretty clear line between the physical world, and the virtual world.

    Groundspeak expects me to maintain the connection between my bit(s) {caches} in the physical world and their representation(s) in their virtual (online) world.

    Certain protocols and requirements are in place to prevent certain obvious (and not so obvious) problems for all involved.

    My responsibility only extends as far as my desire to maintain a presence in the virtual world provided by Groundspeak.

    I can choose to give Groundspeak the finger, and list my caches on my own site (or someone else's) any time I disagree with their policies.

    If I fail to live up to Groundspeak's expectations, they can ban me from accessing the site.

     

    Seems fair enough to me...

     

    And that has nothing to do with the liability that Groundspeak can be held responsible.

     

    I can create all sorts of disclaimers that say I am not responsible if someone does something but in the end the law and lawyers argue over what is legal and who is responsible.

     

    I do believe (and I am no lawyer but my wife is and I have asked her) that all parties including Groundspeak and the cache placer would both be sued.

     

    In all probability Groundspeak would be the one that ended up paying.

     

    If I create a website that lists dangerous places and allow others to add to it... I am held responsible.

     

    Groundspeak has made it clear that they are not here to promote safety or to protect others.

     

    user beware but this may bite them in the arse someday.

     

    Disclaimers mean little in a court of law.

  10. I am working on a very special geocache series that will go along with some guerrilla art that Ive done around my city. It has been very well recieved and even made the local news once but it is completely anonymous. Im hoping to keep that anonymity up especially with my caching friends but If they see it as a cahce by me then I will be linked to it. So is it EVER okay to have a sock puppet account (for example if your local reviewer knows its you) or wilI have to give up the idea or give up my identity?

    I'm guessing that by "guerrilla art" you're referring to unauthorized graffiti. It's possible the local reviewer might have concerns about linking geocaching with an illegal activity. Maybe, maybe not. If authorized art, that could be an interesting series.

     

    I suppose that depends on your definition of graffiti. Some people believe that billboards are graffiti. Without giving too much away in the event people in my area are in these forums, I can tell you that it does not destroy ANY property and can EASILY be removed without ANY damage to the location.

     

    I tend to define graffiti as people spray painting things without permission.

    I tend to define billboards as paid for space to place an advertisement.

     

    I dislike them both.

  11. So as far as the owner is concerned i either have a legitimate find or i dont.

     

    The cache owner really is the only one concerned, or should be.

     

    I know Groundspeak is trying to develop a policy that works for everyone but push really hasn't come to shove yet and won't until a large liability lawsuit is in the works. I do believe it is only a matter of time before someone gets themselves killed while attempting to retrieve a cache and a lawsuit is launched. At that point in time the issue of real ownership will be decided.

     

    The Groundspeak guidelines are very clear.

    The cache owner assumes all responsibility of the listing.

     

    If the person suing was suing on behalf of someone who died while trying to retrieve one of my caches I would be happy to point out that Groundspeak asserts control over listings whenever they so choose so that ultimately they are the real owner, not me, I am either the responsible party or I am not.

    The guidelines say that they "request" I stop deleting logs based on ALR's which is fine, they can request all they want. As soon as they decide who can log my cache and how it can be logged then it is their cache.

    I am pleased if they have actually done this, taken control of a cache and forced the owner to accept the terms they dictate. If their actions clearly assert that they own the cache then it doesn't matter what they print in the listing agreement. If they control the listing then I am not the owner and cannot be hled liable for accidents that occur when people seek the cache, Groundspeak is liable.

     

    If they can assert full control over the cache listing when they choose to do so and they have done that when they wanted to then clearly the words in the listing agreement are just lip service and they are the real owners of every cache, not just mine.

     

    There really is no getting around the word all in the listing agreement. All covers everything, including the logs.

     

    ^That.

  12. There will come a day when, like Groundspeak, you won't care about FTF or FTL.

     

    It is a very liberating feeling.

     

    Ive never cared about FTF's but I recently got my first one. I don't feel motivated to go for more.

    There are a lot of people who do care and feel motivated to go for them.

     

    Perhaps I should post this in the predictions thread but I believe Groundspeak will care about this aspect of Geocaching.

     

    I predict... hmm... in about ten years or less there will be a separate log option that acknowledges FTF's.

  13. You could open up a new account for your GPS. Then when it goes on holiday it can log it's own finds.

    Hey, you could even set it up as a competition to see who could find the most caches, but if you do that you could find your GPS stops playing ball when you are hunting, and starts sending you hundreds of feet off target on purpose.

    It pays not to give these devices too much status or independence, they only get above themselves.

     

     

    As long as the GPSr can sign the log book i see no problem

     

    If dogs (not talking about the one with glasses but regular dogs) can have accounts I don't see why a GPS couldn't have it's own account.

    Actually that could be really cool if you got a used GPS that had it's own account you could see where it had been before you got it.

     

    I like that idea! Use it like a travel bug only the person that finds it uses it to find a cache, leaves it in that cache and logs it on the GPS'r's own account.

  14. I always found it funny when people complain about the cost in man hours for police or fire response when we aren't getting paid anymore to respond to that scene than a fender bender. The only way it would cost more is if reserves or off duty were called in. Of course using the x-ray would be an extra expense, but everybody else is still getting paid the same.

     

    Exactly. And if they used an x-ray device I would assume they already had it and didn't just purchase one for this one instance thus costing them several thousand dollars.

     

    I may be wrong.

  15. The wife and I only eat a full breakfast on weekends. When we first started dating I would cook it when at my house and she would when at her house.

     

    After about 6 years of dating we got marred married and I sold my home and moved into her home.

     

    I enjoyed her making breakfast every weekend. Until she decided that me expecting breakfast cooked for me every weekend was not cool.

     

    This relates because when you have the house (cache), you do the cooking (maintenance).

     

    Or maybe I am just hungry and thinking of bacon...

×
×
  • Create New...