Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MisterEFQ

  1. What they were needing was posted in first post of both the threads they created........
  2. From what I can see the owner hasn't been on since the beginning of June. And no they don't have to post updates for you.
  3. Probably because they didn't know about it. You could have been helpful and provided a link after the 2nd time you posted this to them. http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showforum=23
  4. If anybody posts a TFTC on my caches, do you know what I think? I am glad they thanked me for my cache, and went to find it.
  5. I don't think the OP knows this. Its been shown a few times where he ignored the requirements at a few caches. Virts and webcams. Also all of his notes on the cache page are now deleted. And by his notes he feels the effort he took is reason enough go get a smiley. He was there, he drove 30-40 miles, etc. No I don't think those should be archived at all. Webcam caches are a different breed. We tried to log one once. But the camera was down that day so we looked for a different cache. That's just how those caches go.
  6. I would think they will keep caching the way they want to. If they feel they have done enough to earn their smilie they will log it as a find and take the odd deleted find as an occupational hazard, argue the toss on the cache page (and in this case the forum ) and will soon move on undeterred. My post is in context to this thread. It does not matter how much effort you make, if you do not meet the requirements of a find, it is not a find. Is that better?
  7. No you don't do that. You be honest and post a DNF because you Did Not Find the cache. A smiley means nothing if you didn't find the cache.
  8. I don't understand why people feel they should be allowed a find because of the effort they took. It doesn't matter if the OP walked 5,000 miles, then walked 5,000 more to get to the cache. It is a DNF. Now you got that song in your head. Haha.
  9. Just to be clear, if you own the land (and the tree), you are allowed to place your cache with a nail....right?
  10. I'm hardly perfect, but when I find out that I break a rule in any place in my life, I admit to it. But I'm glad you noticed my rock hard booty. Ive been working out lately. thats some pretty hard talk. hope you got pics to back it up .lol! I believe this would be him. I found another where he's posing with a mule, but I wasn't sure which was which. (ps: I think I know MisterEFQ well enough to post this ) You nailed it!
  11. I'm hardly perfect, but when I find out that I break a rule in any place in my life, I admit to it. But I'm glad you noticed my rock hard booty. Ive been working out lately.
  12. From one of your logs on the cache page: One point I'd like to make about that, is that if HailHoll was very careful to not break any guidelines, there wouldn't be much that this vendetta holder could do about HailHoll's caches, is there? It seems you are a doglover by your pic. maybe you wouldn't feel like that if you memorial cache to your beloved pet was going to get removed because the bottom half was in the ground and all you had to do was lift the lid which to access the cache but apparently it qualified as buried Another grey area lots of caches out there like that but if someone has a bone to pick with you watch out Maybe he wouldn't feel like he had to follow the rules if he placed a cache that broke the rules that was for his favorite dog. What!?!?!? So far this is just complaining that people are getting caught for breaking the rules, and trying to justify it because they don't like the rule. Now you throw a guilt trip on somebody? FFS.
  13. Welcome to the forum. I know what your point is, but most of the forum people in here dont see it. I feel sorry for them. Ugh.
  14. How dare you talk about a nail in a tree in a thread about nails in a tree.
  15. In the title it says: "A Nail in a tree". And you basically just said they do not harm trees. When they can. So be prepared for people do respond.
  16. I agree but the same applies to the nail in the tree, once the cache is removed. Not necessarily. If a copper nail is used, that's a very effective way to kill a tree. Also, the bark of a tree is it's protection against things like diseases. Piercing all the way through the bark is compromising the integrity of that protection, which can eventually lead to the death of the tree. Regardless, as has been mentioned several times already, the guideline is geared more towards maintaining our collective reputation. If land managers find out some caches are nailed to trees, it's entirely possible that they may develop a negative view of geocaching and ban it on their lands. Nobody said anything about a copper nail!! LOL You are are missing the point entirely. A cache nailed to a tree, a micro in the woods, they all cause damage to an area to some extent, therefore breaking the so called guidelines. YES!!! once the cache is removed the damage will repair itself. I'm not saying that its right or wrong. All I'm trying to say is the guidelines are not followed the majority time. You brought up the point he was addressing........... Nails can and do damage trees.
  17. You would get an email if your finds were deleted. If there is another way to check, I don't know how. Hope that helps.
  18. Earlier today, in another thread, you posted this... What's your point? The other post is how people play the game here, I am talking about maintence and ownership responsibility of the c/o. So it's really apples and something completely different like vacuums....sorry if something simple went way over your head. You can play any way you want, but just because you find a light pole doesn't mean you should put a cache there..................
  19. Hi, my name is Doug too. I'm a geocacher. I don't dig power trails. Then again I don't care if people place them either.
  20. Who said they were bad? Who said they were afraid? Who said they were a threat? Who said they were scared?
  21. I sign with boogers when I don't have a pen. They can DNA test it if they don't believe me.
  22. So do you lock yourself inside all day? You are filmed all the time. Do you have a problem with people with photographic memories. What are they doing with those visions of peoples children in there head!?!?!?! You consent to getting your picture taken in public every time you are in public. And nowhere did knowschad demoralize you by pointing you to information. You just took it that way.
  23. Those of you that feel this way had better stay indoors then. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography_and_the_law#Privacy_issues I suppose a "reasonable expectation of privacy" could be expected deep in the woods on public property, but it would be difficult to define when the line had been crossed. I don't think anyone would publish a video of sombody anyway, unless they were caught doing something. Here are a few videos of people caught dumping on camera. The first is from Missouri Department of Natural Resources, and the second is in Camden, NJ. A few people abandoning their dogs were caught also. http://www.courierpostonline.com/videonetwork/1579250375001/People-dump-dogs-trash-in-Camden That was the saddest thing i've seen an a while (I avoid the news). How somebody can just open the door and let a dog out like that is just sick.
  24. If you log a TFTC on my cache, I wouldn't care. I'm just glad you went out and found my cache.
  25. I already sent the reviewer and the cache owner an email. Hopefully it is not archived because the owner hasnt logged in. But if it does, that's how caches go. Its not like its Mingo.....hehehe It will probably get archived. The CO no longer lives in the area and has a history of not responding to Reviewer Notes. Im hoping the reviewer see that it was a false NA and does not archive it. If they do I am just going to hide a cache there myself. It is a great little spot.
  • Create New...