Googling Hrpty Hrrs

Looking good Mousetrap! Nice to see a geocaching article in the local paper. However, why must reporters always get the "buried" treasure thing wrong? And what's a "muggler"?

In the hierarchy of unethical things to do, what you're planning on doing is WAY higher than a cheatsite giving out coordinates. But you will have exacted revenge. That should feel good.

I agree with this completely. Even the most experienced cacher can make an error. That's why I don't understand the following: and I certainly don't understand this: You mean the reviewers are not required to have their caches reviewed by another reviewer? If that's the case it certainly gives credibility to the OP's premise. (which I don't agree with, by the way) If the local community can review caches for one person, why not for other very experienced cachers? If this is true: it seems to reason that ALL caches should be independently checked by another set of eyes, regardless of experience level or title.

You should always trade up, because the next little girl that visits the cache deserves to be just as happy with what she finds. And that's a good philosophy to teach the kids, as well. You might have to buy knick knacks just for them to trade in caches. It's a small price to pay for the pleasure you'll bring your kids AND all the other kids to follow.

That is not a deal designed to reduce tension. A better deal would be a simple 'I said stuff that I'm not proud of, you said stuff, let's let it all go and move on.' Perhaps over a basket of wings at an event. Who said it would reduce tension, and why must it reduce tension? Does this really require an answer? Because having tension over a game is complete immature silliness.

Unfortunately our history includes some pretty harsh comments made by both parties. Attempting to heal the rift is not likely to work. I find caches. Anyone's caches. I honestly didn't think this -- finding the re-located caches again -- was going to be a big deal. But I'm more bothered by the "rules" being applied differently. Oh well... I don't understand. The fact that "harsh comments have been made" makes my advice even more appropriate. Apologize for your part. You can't control how they will react, but you CAN take responsibility for your own actions. You've had pretty harsh comments about CACHING?!?! How silly is that? Do your discussions about politics turn into fisticuffs? Do you have any idea how petty this all sounds?

[bTW -- by quoting my own email communication on this public forum I do NOT give up any of my rights granted by section 106 of the US Copyright Act (17 USC section 106), specifically subsection (1).] I logged the caches at 3:24pm and 3:27pm. I have asked permission of the cache owner to post her emails to public forums, but have not received a reply. But since she herself has posted her own emails to a public forum, the doctrine of implied license applies. So, after reading the above, and ignoring if you can issues such as double finding a cache, the need for new GCIDs, and any personal animosity between the cache owner and I, how do folks feel about the situation? [Heck -- while I was composing the above a whole bunch of posts were made to this thread. Looks like I am in for some interesting reading...] Nothing you've said in this post changes my opinion. Yes, they sound petty, but you have no control over their behavior. The mature way of handling this is either apologize for annoying them and prevent this from being an even bigger problem in the future, or just quit hunting for their caches. If you can put ego to the side, this problem can just go away.

If memory serves me right, this is not the first clash you've had with a fellow cacher that has came to light in the forums. Why do you find yourself in these little conflicts? I just don't get into minor issues with other cachers. But if I did have ongoing issues with a cacher, I wouldn't even look for their caches. They would go on ignore status. But why have an ongoing issue with a cacher? Why not send an email to this cacher and say, "Hey, I'm sorry for (insert whatever the problem is here) I feel silly having ANY kind of squabble about caching, so I really would like to put this behind us. Again, I'M sorry for the grief I'VE caused." One week later log the aforementioned cache. Get on with life. Have no more conflicts with cachers.

OK, now we have two sides. If there was no house, no gate, no driveway and no sign then a lot of us should eat some crow. I'll start. Yuk...I prefer chicken. "If" being the key word. I think the property owner sounds more credible. I mean, how can one look at those pictures and think this isn't private property? Even without parking cords I wouldn't find any fault with this cache owner. I put the logical answer in bold.

There is nothing inappropriate with looking for non night caches at night. I have found lots of caches at night. I have two encunters with LEOs, both time I explained what I was doing and both times they just told me good luck and left. That's two more LEO encounters than I've had while caching. And as evidenced by the OP, they are not always as nice as the ones you experienced. I have caches, like the one mentioned here, that have permission but it is assumed that cachers would hunt during daylight hours. I'm sure the preacher that ok'd the one mentioned here did not envision people creeping around in the woods with flashlights. I guess we could all specify on each cache whether night caching permission is given, but it seems more logical for folks to use common sense about where they are prowling around. I work a lot of nights and I realize that limits caching time for me. I just accept that and hunt when I can. I also like night caching and even own one night cache. I just prefer to hunt for those designed to be hunted at night in areas that are appropriate for it. I also really don't care much for others that hunt all kinds of caches at all times of the night. I would just like: 1.) for them NOT to push for written permission slips for me to have to carry around just because they won't hunt for private property caches during daylight hours and 2.) for them to tell the LEO they're hunting for earthworms or something instead of mentioning geocaches. I'm not one of those slippery-slope, black-eye on geocaching people, but annoying the LEO folks can't be good for the sport on local levels. Plus, it can otherwise endanger perfectly good geocaches. Take your trespassing charge like a man!

Many of these trespassing issues are prefaced by mentioning their encounter with the law happens at night. If you'd have looked for this cache during the day I doubt there ever would have been an incident. There's just very few places out there that you can prowl around after dark with a flashlight that will NOT attract Johnny Law. Rather than making this thread about permission forms, it should be about inappropriately hunting for non-night caches at night.

If the virtual caches are stupid because you don't have to leave your home to log them, what does that make the act of logging them? The point of geocaching is to get you out of your home! Is it really geocaching if you sat in your chair and logged a bunch of locations you never visited? Nein. Doesn't that depend on what your game is? If "their game" has more to do with rapidly increasing the number of smilies on their profile, and not long walks and fresh air, seems they may be accomplishing their version of geocaching.

Well, I spoke too soon. I tried using my other GPS programs today and I also have lost the ability to use the GPS completely. I've never had a single problem with any of them, so I have to give Wherigo the credit. I'll be backing everything up and doing the hard reset tomorrow. I'd be careful downloading this program.

I don't want ANY part of that. I think I'll wait for Wherigo 2.0

bluetooth paired with what? The GPS is built in. So far I've had no luck. Have to reset phone everytime I try to turn the program on.

I'm using a At&T 8925 with built in GPS and Windows Mobile 6. Wherigo just locks up every time I try to start it. Never gets past the logo screen. I thought the idea was cool, though.

That's actually pretty funny.

Travel Bugs are instant angst magnets. Why folks can't just set them free is beyond me. It's downright pathetic to me that grown adults would whine about something as insignificant as a travel bug.

Don't worry about it. Whining about TB's will happen. It's silly, but easily ignored.

Just wondering. If you haven't found the cache, how are sure about all of these details?

I think it's always a good idea to contact your reviewer first when planning an "out of the box" cache. I also agree that there's other stumbling blocks for this cache. After reading your profile, I doubt I'd hunt for your caches.

I don't like the direction this headed. If this thread doesn't develop more angst we're going to have to shut it down.

That's not saying much. Not a bad point. A cache is just one of MANY entertainment/time-wasting activities out there. To say it was "fun compared to that other cache" isn't much of a recommendation. There's a greasy spoon diner near my house that I occasionally stop at to grab a hamburger. They don't have great hamburgers, but it's a local business and I like to support it. It has a sticker on the register that says, "Don't rush me. I work by the hour." There's a group of old regulars sitting in the corner. Ancient Coca-Cola signs adorn the place. Pie sitting under glass on the counter. I guess you could say it's kitschy, and that's why I still go by there from time to time. But still, the hamburgers are not very good. That's a great analogy. That place you describe won't win any awards, but it will survive, and probably thrive, because people like it. You said it yourself: "It's a local business and I like to support it." It probably brings a smile to your face (and it certainly will the next time you go there) just because of its less-than-perfect 'character.' Some folks enjoy that hamburger place because it is simple and easy. Comfortable. It has just the right unsophisticated "feel." Others may grudgingly tolerate it – or maybe even avoid it – because the place is a bit too tacky for them. A third group likes it simply because it is there, and they want something to eat. Some may actually like it because it's such a kitschy kitchen – because it represents the exact opposite of those snooty restaurants where they take themselves way too seriously and call their hamburgers something like "Legacy Medallions of Beef with Sun-Dried Tomato on Baker’s Roll Adorned with Sesame Seed" ... and serve steamed asparagus instead of fries. This in itself is actually kitschy to me: something that clumsily apes some upper-class gourmet experience, yet clearly isn't. Some folks like a gourmet hamburger establishment with all those artistic touches that makes them feel special. Others prefer to savor the personality of a restaurant with fewer pretenses and a bit more of a country or blue-collar feel. A third group doesn’t want to have to think about any of that crap – they just want a friggin’ hamburger. Yes, I like that analogy. I meant the analogy as support for the OP. (hope the admonishment from the mod about angstiness wasn't for that post) I'm trying to become more tolerant and understanding of this hide type rather than just rolling my eyes the next time one pops up. I won't ever love them, but I'll think of this thread and laugh as I sign the log on the next one!

That's not saying much. Not a bad point. A cache is just one of MANY entertainment/time-wasting activities out there. To say it was "fun compared to that other cache" isn't much of a recommendation. There's a greasy spoon diner near my house that I occasionally stop at to grab a hamburger. They don't have great hamburgers, but it's a local business and I like to support it. It has a sticker on the register that says, "Don't rush me. I work by the hour." There's a group of old regulars sitting in the corner. Ancient Coca-Cola signs adorn the place. Pie sitting under glass on the counter. I guess you could say it's kitschy, and that's why I still go by there from time to time. But still, the hamburgers are not very good.

I don't understand. Do "R" rated DVD cases have sharper corners to poke the kids? Surely parents have control over their DVD players, right? Sheesh, I'm tired of having to help police other folk's critters.