DisQuoi

I work for a large consulting company ("delivering results that endure"). Ocassionally they throw you a nice plaque for a job well done ... it usually comes with a gift certificate worth about $50 redeemable at the company store. I've used three of these such occasions to "purchase" a fossil watch, a cool cross pen, and a pull-over jacket. I've placed them in three different caches of mine with specific instruction that the finder need not trade for them ... that they are finder's prizes. In most cases, people have left nicer than normal trade items but nothing you don't occasionally see in caches anyway. I wouldn't expect people to trade up for such items, especially because they have my employer's name on them and I didn't pay for them myself.

I still get a laugh at reading how so many people here feel cheated by this kind of behavior. If I walked past someone cheating at solitaire or having a chat with himself using two PCs, I'd laugh and maybe shake my head ... I wouldn't get upset. Despite the geocaching.com intoduction ("geocaching is an entertaining adventure game ...") I do not think of it as a game. It's a pass-time that requires little to no interaction with others. I find it a wise decision on Jeremy's part not to include a statistics page on the site. If you want to compare yourself against others, you'll have to go to a third-party site like Dan Miller's. Cheating? No ... Padding? Yes ... So what?

Does anyone worry about liability? Clearly there is some history about people being fined (or jailed?) for cache-placement related activity. With discussions about land managers saying no but winking to cover their collective asses ... are our asses uncovered?

quote:Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy:Just what we needed. Another bandwidth sink for geocaching.com. This may be true but I don't understand how. Without using something like this, I will still manually peform the same downloads ... it just takes me much longer. I can only download 25 at a time so I have to spend half an hour doing the same thing that this does in a few seconds. Is there really more burden than when I do it manually?

quote:Originally posted by DisQuoi:I'm able to download all of the caches in Virginia and I like the resulting utility. But what I would really like is the "100 miles from home" part to work. (Can I quote myself?) I figured out that the options will not allow me to use the "W" toggle. It kept defaulting to "E" which made for incorrect home coordinates. To get around the problem, I set the home coordinates to the correct "W" setting, updated the download settings, then ran the download. When I open the options again, it's reverted to "E" but at least I got my results.

What a great tool! I'm having problems getting it to work, though. I have set my home point but when I try to download I gett the following messages: CONNECTING TO GEOCACHING.COM ... LOGGING IN ... REQUESTING START OF LIST ... ERROR: PAGE RANGE DOESN'T EXIST I'm able to download all of the caches in Virginia and I like the resulting utility. But what I would really like is the "100 miles from home" part to work.

quote:Originally posted by BrianSnat:This website has no requirement to obtain permission to place a Geocache, unless its on private land. They only ask that you contact the land manager to find out what their policy is. To hide a new geocache in your area... Please make sure to obtain permission from the landowner or land manager prior to placing your geocache. Source: http://www.geocaching.com/hideseek/ What's unclear about this? If the cache placer had permission, he should present this to the managers who asked Ski3pin to remove the caches in question. Is the problem that she didn't ask the cache placer first? Would you expect the land manager to ask first? As a fellow geocacher, I think it would have been the polite thing to do. If, in fact, permission was granted by the proper authority to place the cache, it would be nice to have a chance to present it prior to removal. However, assuming that she was asked to remove these caches (as she claims), I support the removal of the caches. Also, no need to throw names. We are adults.

From Ski3pin: "I can understand [Tahoeberne's] anger, but I believe we probably share some pretty solid common ground and that is the belief that Wilderness is indeed a pretty special place. The Wilderness Act of 1964 describes the qualities that define Wilderness and the various regulations and rules that our land mangers come up with are put in place to help preserve those special qualities. On the surface, I’d probably agree with you about what does a geocache hurt and what’s the big deal. It is kind of a little issue in the big picture. But here’s the rub, how do we choose which rules to bend? And if we bend this one, how about the people who like wood fires, should they be able to bend that rule? Or how about the snowmobilers who say they never touch the ground because they are on top of the snow and therefore do no damage? This is how I handle this decision-making dilemma. I go back to a habit I have learned from many years of backcountry travel: err on the side of caution. Therefore, if there’s a question about the appropriateness of placing geocaches and meeting the spirit of Wilderness regulations, I say geocaches should not be in designated Wilderness. And, on top of this, we are blessed living in such a great area that gives us so many neat places outside of Wilderness to put geocaches. This way we don’t even have to push the issue, especially since it’s such a small issue. Thanks for the reminder to help clean up and watch what we do to protect Wilderness. We can never be reminded too much to do that. I am an Eldorado National Forest volunteer. I am lucky enough to be able to help the Forest with all kinds of projects, large and small. As part of this volunteer work I was asked to pick up geocaches placed in the Wilderness when I was in their vicinity. I have done that and turned them in to the USFS folks. The owners of the geocaches have been notified about where they can pick up their geocaches. I hope I have clearly stated my argument and shown respect for your different viewpoint." (I have added the bold) If she was asked by the Forest Management, I'd say she is authorized to perform this service. If the cache placer has some kind of permission to have placed the cache (a stated requirement by Jeremy's policy), then those in forest management need to communicate between themselves better.

1) If you only consider what's in it for you, you wouldn't bother placing caches, you'd just find others people's and you'd probably come to geocaching.com. 2) While reaching the most people is a point, so is encouraging competition between sites (any site that attempts to bring value) so that both will tend to become better. Anyone who argues that there's no reason to go anywhere but here needs to take a basic course in economics to understand the term "monopoly" and "barriers to entrance" ... and perhaps "taking what's fed to you".

There several more interesting demos on the same web site. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/index.pl Click on "Applet Thumbnails"

Things might be different if the bulk of the value (cache descriptions created by you and me) were stored such that any creative person could draw upon them. If this was the case, someone would use the site that appeals to them the most. But as it is, every cache found at any given web site is stored ON THAT WEB SITE's servers. The result is that people tend to hide and seek caches using the most popular site (this one). It's analogous to someone trying to produce software to compete with Microsoft Word ®. A six year old could come up with a better word processor but when everyone else uses Word, it's much too inconvenient to use anything else. Fortunately for us, Jeremy continues to maintain and improve this web site despite a hearty momentum that will continue to be an obstacle difficult to overcome by similar services (unlike Microsoft which now continues to sell crap).

Things might be different if the bulk of the value (cache descriptions created by you and me) were stored such that any creative person could draw upon them. If this was the case, someone would use the site that appeals to them the most. But as it is, every cache found at any given web site is stored ON THAT WEB SITE's servers. The result is that people tend to hide and seek caches using the most popular site (this one). It's analogous to someone trying to produce software to compete with Microsoft Word ®. A six year old could come up with a better word processor but when everyone else uses Word, it's much too inconvenient to use anything else. Fortunately for us, Jeremy continues to maintain and improve this web site despite a hearty momentum that will continue to be an obstacle difficult to overcome by similar services (unlike Microsoft which now continues to sell crap).

Thanks, Jamie. I needed to know I wasn't having a nightmare here. Can someone who represents geocaching.com please chime in and reconcile this thread with the policy of the site? Are virtual caches excluded from the requirement to have permission from the parks? ... and if no permission was sought in the first place, does a request from teh park (in writing) warrant removal or should we "take it to the Supreme Court"?

Thanks, Jamie. I needed to know I wasn't having a nightmare here. Can someone who represents geocaching.com please chime in and reconcile this thread with the policy of the site? Are virtual caches excluded from the requirement to have permission from the parks? ... and if no permission was sought in the first place, does a request from teh park (in writing) warrant removal or should we "take it to the Supreme Court"?

quote:Originally posted by fizzymagic:I understand your point that land managers should attempt to protect their lands, but I don't follow your logic to the conclusion that we should immediately accede to any request from a land manager to remove a virtual cache from managed land. This is what worries me. You are not alone in this thinking. It seems people feel entitled to place a cache wherever they want. If someone questions the placement, they feel empowered to keep it in place at risk of giving up freedom. I view removing unwelcome virtual caches as a public relations policy. When I say that in America, everyone has a right to be a d**k, I mean no disrespect. My point is that no one will stop you from encouraging "bushwhackers" from clearing cat tails from a wetland to reach a tupperware container, but if those who are responsible for the cat tails ask you to stop, it's better for everyone that you do stop. If you disagree with the request, by all means, challenge it by arranging a meeting with the person and present your case ... they'll present theirs. This thread makes me sad. I have a feeling that the majority of the posts here do not represent the general geocaching attitude. If I'm wrong about that, I'll have to reconsider my involvement.

quote:Originally posted by fizzymagic:I understand your point that land managers should attempt to protect their lands, but I don't follow your logic to the conclusion that we should immediately accede to any request from a land manager to remove a virtual cache from managed land. This is what worries me. You are not alone in this thinking. It seems people feel entitled to place a cache wherever they want. If someone questions the placement, they feel empowered to keep it in place at risk of giving up freedom. I view removing unwelcome virtual caches as a public relations policy. When I say that in America, everyone has a right to be a d**k, I mean no disrespect. My point is that no one will stop you from encouraging "bushwhackers" from clearing cat tails from a wetland to reach a tupperware container, but if those who are responsible for the cat tails ask you to stop, it's better for everyone that you do stop. If you disagree with the request, by all means, challenge it by arranging a meeting with the person and present your case ... they'll present theirs. This thread makes me sad. I have a feeling that the majority of the posts here do not represent the general geocaching attitude. If I'm wrong about that, I'll have to reconsider my involvement.

To all who insist on that to remove a virtual cache because a park manager asked you to: No one in a Smokey-the-Bear outfit is coming to your house with a gun. No government agency is splicing into your internet cable to brain wash you. No black vans are jamming your GPS. It was a request from someone who has to answer to those tax payers who pay their salary to ensure that the land is managed in a safe and responsible manner. Please read the letter and ask yourself what she is saying ... "At this time, we have had no formal request from geocachers requesting permission to place cache's (virtual or traditional) on our properties which is a concern to us as well. We would appreciate your removing the coordinates for the virtual caches at the Devil's Backbone Open Space from your website." No one has exceeded their authority. I ask my self this ... WWJD? What Would Jeremy Do? I would expect him to remove the cache listing upon reading this land manager's email. Or at least hear what he has to say about it. ... or would he be violating you as well? In America, everyone has a right to be a d**k.

To all who insist on that to remove a virtual cache because a park manager asked you to: No one in a Smokey-the-Bear outfit is coming to your house with a gun. No government agency is splicing into your internet cable to brain wash you. No black vans are jamming your GPS. It was a request from someone who has to answer to those tax payers who pay their salary to ensure that the land is managed in a safe and responsible manner. Please read the letter and ask yourself what she is saying ... "At this time, we have had no formal request from geocachers requesting permission to place cache's (virtual or traditional) on our properties which is a concern to us as well. We would appreciate your removing the coordinates for the virtual caches at the Devil's Backbone Open Space from your website." No one has exceeded their authority. I ask my self this ... WWJD? What Would Jeremy Do? I would expect him to remove the cache listing upon reading this land manager's email. Or at least hear what he has to say about it. ... or would he be violating you as well? In America, everyone has a right to be a d**k.

quote:Originally posted by Bushwhacker:Are you ready for a good line of govermental *ull*hit! This is the letter I received from the county this afternoon. Unfortunately many of us have the same mind set and attitude that led you to call that letter bull*hit when it comes to this activity in general. Meegan Flenniken's job is to protect the park from abuse and damage. Perhaps "Bushwhacker" is a bit to indicative of the way geocachers think. Singing that is land is "my land" does not give us the right to damage a park owned by the local or federal government. Is the land on which your house stands my land? In regards to virtual coordinates ... I hope you don't try to play the part of Jack Freedom by refusing to remove the cache listing. That behavior is what caused the problem in the first place ... placing without permission. If you want to exercise your freedom, vote for a county commissioner who agrees with your views.

quote:Originally posted by Bushwhacker:Are you ready for a good line of govermental *ull*hit! This is the letter I received from the county this afternoon. Unfortunately many of us have the same mind set and attitude that led you to call that letter bull*hit when it comes to this activity in general. Meegan Flenniken's job is to protect the park from abuse and damage. Perhaps "Bushwhacker" is a bit to indicative of the way geocachers think. Singing that is land is "my land" does not give us the right to damage a park owned by the local or federal government. Is the land on which your house stands my land? In regards to virtual coordinates ... I hope you don't try to play the part of Jack Freedom by refusing to remove the cache listing. That behavior is what caused the problem in the first place ... placing without permission. If you want to exercise your freedom, vote for a county commissioner who agrees with your views.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0826geocache26.html

111 days so far since the last visit

quote:Originally posted by Bluespreacher:As a group we have to keep our act clean so as not to attract official attention. This strategy of game-play was okay when there were only 5,000 or 10,000 caches hidden. But we are approaching 30,000 world-wide and the density of caches in the Washington DC area will no longer permit stealthy means of play. Official attention is already had. If I were placing a cache in Switz City Indiana, being sneaky would be a valid strategy. But if you want to think long-term, consider introducing this to land managers while it's "innocent" and you may have a proponent when you need one.

There are some parks in my area that charge an entry fee. It may seem like a "parking fee" but more likely than not, it's a way for the park to bring in revenue to pay for maintenance. If you're not willing to support the parks, stick to caches that are on the side of the road or near land fills. Sneak in if you want, I guess everyone else can pay a little more so you don't have to. Public Parks that require an entry fee are not commercial caches ... no risk of that. If you think it is commercial, feel free not to hunt it. If the coordinates are in a Park (just look on a map) assume that there might be a fee.

quote:Originally posted by The Leprechauns:"lawyer brain" oxy moron?