Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Docapi

  1. Just so we can get in context:


    APPROVER's archive note:


    I'm afraid I'm unable to list your event. The general rule for events is that they need to be submitted *at least* 2 weeks prior to the event date (as noted in the guidelines). At certain times, it may be a full 3 days before a reviewer is able to look at a cache submission. This, combined with the fact that new cache notices are only sent out once a week, means that it may be a full 10 days before the information about the event is distributed via email. And since a lot of people don't check their email every day, or only have access to email at work, the time frame can be even longer.

    Because of this, it's necessary for people to submit events in enough time to ensure that a significant number of people can be made aware of it. While it may be possible to directly notify a few people about it, events are meant to be open to everyone, so there needs to be enough time for people to find out about it through normal channels.


    I feel that this is a very valid reason for not approving the event. Since it was submitted only 5 days befor the event, and it takes up to 10 days for the listing to be sent out, that means that the listing would not be sent out for up to 5 days after the event is over.


    Only the people at the other event would know about it before it happens, so the argument that "many people were denied the opportunity because, without a cache listing, they weren't aware of it" is invalid, because they likely wouldn't have known about it either way unless thay were part of the group at the previous event.


    Also, in the Texas thread I see the approver being called "pompous a**" Pompous" (again) "annoying" and compared to the "soup Nazi" and accused of "thumping the Geo-Bible"


    His offense? using the term "clique" and refusing to approve an event that is well beyond the time limit for approval, and the listing would likely not come out until after the event was over.


    Now, I don't know the history with this approver, and it sounds like there have been a lot of problems in the past, but as an unbiased outsider, as far as this particular case goes, I think y'all need to get a grip.

  2. I didn't notice the City Select V7 returning to the update page until Friday night.  So, I'll have to wait till Monday to call Garmin. 


    I was just curious if anyone has called Garmin to see if they will give you a free or discounted update if you loaded close to the 6/1 date.  I loaded around 5/20, so I'm not guaranteed a free update.  But I'm hoping I can get a break.  Anyone have any luck with this?



    I e-mailed customer service, since I had unlocked mine on May 30- 2 days before the release date. They mailed me back and told me that I would get the upgrade for free.

  3. If you look on the Garmin site you will see that the release date is 6/1/2005. That means if you just bought v6, you should be entitled to a free update.

    Aw, man- youve got to be kidding me!


    I just checked the properties on my v6:


    Created: Monday, May 30, 2005, 9:52:29 PM


    26 hours!!! :rolleyes:

  4. The 300 was the same thing as the GPS Pioneer. They were, if I remember right, 2 channel receivers.


    The 315 was their first 12 channel receiver. It was also called a 320, same thing but geared towards avaiation.


    With the 315/320 they also went to .mmm instead of .mm, and with firmware upgrades you could get it to read out in feet once you got closer than .01 miles.

  5. Hey Thot on your page with cheaperthendirt they have 6 for 20$. On army.net like you said 10 for 22$ so 4 more for 2$ more and cheaperthendirt dosn't sell them any more

    The 10 for $22 is just the shipping charge. The cans are $3.98 each. So just over 6 bucks apiece.

  6. Why is that not stated EXPLICITLY in the guidelines.


    Because if they had to specifically state every possible scenario that a person might possibly come up with in an effort to circumvent the guidelines, then the guidelines would end up being so long and detailed that nobody would bother reading it.


    Sure, you can take any rule or guideline and twist it around enough to make it seem to be something different than it is, but that doesn't mean that anybody else is going to fall for it.


    The guidelines are written at face value- read them that way any you won't have any problems.


    I gotta ask- you aren't a defense attorney, are you? :D

  7. If I understand right, you are talking about a 2 step multi where the first stage would have the Coordinates to the final. The final would move around, and the coordinates would be updated in the first stage.


    This cache was not a "traveling cache" having a permanent starting point anchor.


    I guess that I would look at it that since the 2nd stage that would actually have to be logged, then that is the actual cache, therefore the cache would be a traveling cache.


    Also, I beleive I have seen it stated on several occasions that each step of a multi has to fit the guidelines. In this case, the second step would not meet the guidelines because it is moving.

  8. And how does this prevent you, or even the police, from going to my profile, or anyones profile, and clicking on the Send Message link? Would the police NOT knock on door in a neighborhood to search for a suspect just because they didn't know the phone number?



    What good would sending an E-mail to an anonymous username do until you know who the real person is behind that username? All sending an e-mail would do is alert the "suspect" that the police are looking for him.


    Also you are not as anonymous as you think on the Internet. Unless you exclusively use public terminals you can be located by authorities. I imagine it would take some time to track down someone that way, but it can be done.


    Exactly, it would take some time, that is why they said they are looking for the person responsible. Until they find the person that is what they are doing.


    I can't remeber finding a cache where either the name or the GC# wasn't on either the log book or cache info page or on the cache itself. I've sure there are caches out there without any ID but they are rare, at least where I have cached.


    I have never see a cache with the cache owner's real name or personal contact info other than E-mail addresses, usually just their username, and maybe an E-mail address. Until they have an actual name and home address, they don't know who it is.

  9. That may be the case, but at least your butt will be covered if it happens.


    If it happens, and the police track you down, it would be a whole lot better for you if you are able to say "I had permission- call so and so and they will tell you they gave me permission to place the cache there" That is a whole lot better than "Nobody told me I couldn't put it there"


    If you have permission, you have done your part. You can't help if the person that gave you permission failed to let the rest of the staff know about it.

  10. Geocachers don't bury their caches—they're always above ground to keep the environment safe.


    At least they got that part right for a change.


    I have seen caches that got stolen by muggles referred to as being muggled. If I remember right, that is how the term was first used, later on being caught by non-cachers was also referred to as being muggled.


    The article was about specifically using pocket PC's as GPS'es, not GPS in general, so in the context of the article they were accurate by saying you could use an integrated device.



    I type too slow!

  11. OK, here is the entire paragraph-



    Contact was made with the Maryland Fire Marshals Office and information was given by a Bomb Squad Technician, who advised the following information. "Firearm Ammo when subjected to extreme heat and fire expands with a minor explosion which separates the bullet from the casing causing the bang or pop noise. Because this explosion occurs in an open environment where there is no compression and/or directed propellant, this is considered a low hazard situation. However, if the ammo is in a closed container where the force is contained or directed, portions of the shell, casing, container may be propelled short distances. Shotgun shells, which generally have a plastic case are most likely to melt prior to the explosion and the contained shot are generally released and the powder charge explosion is generally harmless." The technician advised that 20-30 ft should be a safe distance.


    The same technician that made the quote that you are using to support your theory made the recomendation. Those were his words- regardless of wheteher is was a direct quote or not.


    I once worked in a maximum security jail unit. Standard contraband training for all staff included a discussion question: "What is more dangerous in a jail/prison setting - a contraband gun without ammunition, or contraband ammunition without a gun?"


    When I had my training, the same question came up, with the same answer. It is relatively easy to make a device to fire the ammunition- a lot tougher to make the ammunition itself. We were shown some of the "zip" guns that had been found in the system- pretty amazing what they can come up with.

  12. You only posted the parts of that report that support your opinion- here are some more quotes from the same report:


    The technician advised that 20-30 ft should be a safe distance.



    That was the next sentence after your quote.


    Firefighters should not be stationed in close proximity to any potential sites which may contain ammunition unless necessary.


    From the conclusions listed at the end of the report.


    I agree that without something (like a gun, but not neccesarily an actual gun) to direct the force in one direction, the range and potential danger are reduced, but any explosion is dangerous. Look at all the people hurt by fireworks every year- and those are cased in paper, not brass.

  • Create New...