Jump to content

knowschad

Members
  • Posts

    18989
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by knowschad

  1. First as stated I am going to return and sign the log.

     

    According to the rules of geocaching, of which there are only three, according to this: https://www.geocaching.com/guide/ I technically did not violate any rules. The log in question is NOT a logbook, but a very small piece of rolled up paper. The rule in question states: "Write about your find in the cache logbook." There is no logbook to write about the find in.

     

    I was on your side up until now. dry.gif

     

    I only bring this up because people keep citing the rules. Well What rules are they citing? Their own, their version or interpretation of the rules from the geocahce web site or the actual rules as stated on the geocache web site? I did look, within the web site, to see if there is an expansion on the three listed rules, did not find any.

     

    Of course they are citing their own interpretation of the rules or guidelines. What else can anybody ever do? But like the Bible or the Constitution (speaking for the U.S.) some interpret it rigidly and some interpret it loosely. That's people for you.

     

    No, there is no "expansion", but in the real world, Groundspeak does not make all of the rules. The people do. And most real-life geocachers are more flexible. Groundspeak has had to attempt to nail some things down because of various types of conflicts, but if you go to events, get to know other geocachers, make some friends in the caching community... you're not gonna see the drama that you see here.

     

    I used to be a rule monger for Dungeons and Dragons in the 1980's, back in the day. Some were black and white and there was no question nor were they open to interpretation. Others were a so called gray area. I was pretty lenient so long as the spirit of the rules were followed.

     

    Does Groundspeak only run the forums, the web site and the app or do they operate the geocaching hobby as a whole?

     

    Groundspeak runs the web site and hosts the forums. They also are the ultimate arbiters when it comes to logging disputes and geocache listings on their site. I think they would also like to think that they operate the geocaching hobby as a whole, but that really isn't the case. Geocachers, both the hiders and the finders, ultimately operate independently when it comes to local or regional norms. Once again, I would urge you... no, STRONGLY urge you, to attend some events and get to know the real people behind this hobby.

  2. A person can contract Hepatitis from dry blood.

     

    Which type? How?

     

    Try a little Google Fu:

     

    Hepatitis C virus dried on inanimate surfaces can remain infectious for up to six weeks

     

    Dried spots of blood contaminated with hepatitis C virus (HCV) can remain infectious for up to six weeks at normal room temperatures, research published in the online edition of the Journal of Infectious Diseases shows. Commercially available antiseptics reduced the infectivity of the blood spots, but only when used at recommended concentrations.

     

    And

     

    Inactivation and Survival of Hepatitis C Virus on Inanimate Surface - See more at: http://hepatitiscnew...h.yimJ64UA.dpuf

  3. I think some may have missed the point of this discussion.

     

    No, you just don't understand about the biological risks of blood.

     

    But at the same time I am not going to purposely expose myself to a potential bio-hazard such as blood on, about or in a geocache. I will continue to participate in this hobby but if I come across a cache that appears to have blood in it I will avoid exposing myself to the blood as much as possible, do whatever is necessary to decontaminate myself if I came into direct contact with it, this includes sanitizing my exposed skin and up to and including going to a doctor if I show symptoms of an illness after the fact.

     

    Wow. Just wow.

     

    BTW: you either ARE a germophobe or you don't understand the transmission of blood-borne illnesses. I am guessing the latter. My recommendation is that you educate yourself.

     

    I'm not an expert on such things. Would you mind elaborating and educating and enlightening the rest of us? Thanks.

  4. First as stated I am going to return and sign the log.

     

    According to the rules of geocaching, of which there are only three, according to this: https://www.geocaching.com/guide/ I technically did not violate any rules. The log in question is NOT a logbook, but a very small piece of rolled up paper. The rule in question states: "Write about your find in the cache logbook." There is no logbook to write about the find in.

     

    I was on your side up until now. dry.gif

     

    I only bring this up because people keep citing the rules. Well What rules are they citing? Their own, their version or interpretation of the rules from the geocahce web site or the actual rules as stated on the geocache web site? I did look, within the web site, to see if there is an expansion on the three listed rules, did not find any.

     

    Of course they are citing their own interpretation of the rules or guidelines. What else can anybody ever do? But like the Bible or the Constitution (speaking for the U.S.) some interpret it rigidly and some interpret it loosely. That's people for you.

     

    No, there is no "expansion", but in the real world, Groundspeak does not make all of the rules. The people do. And most real-life geocachers are more flexible. Groundspeak has had to attempt to nail some things down because of various types of conflicts, but if you go to events, get to know other geocachers, make some friends in the caching community... you're not gonna see the drama that you see here.

  5. First as stated I am going to return and sign the log.

     

    According to the rules of geocaching, of which there are only three, according to this: https://www.geocaching.com/guide/ I technically did not violate any rules. The log in question is NOT a logbook, but a very small piece of rolled up paper. The rule in question states: "Write about your find in the cache logbook." There is no logbook to write about the find in.

     

    I was on your side up until now. dry.gif

  6. What is up with some coming across as scolding me like I am a child for logging the found cache through the app but not signing it at the time? I think that is a bit much. Is this group that uptight about things like this?

     

    There have been many issues with people falsely logging caches. Signatures in the logbook are the only way a cache owner can verify you were there. People are sensitive about this.

     

    It's best practice, when joining a forum, to peruse older posts to familiarize yourself with the common issues. When you jump right in without checking, you risk inflaming long-standing arguments that really have nothing to do with your immediate concern.

     

    You'll find that the beginner section of the forum tends to be a little gentler toward new cachers asking these 101-level questions.

     

    I beg to differ with your advice to search for existing threads. I fail to see why that is any better than starting a new thread, and certainly fail to see why starting a new thread should cause anybody to be rude in their responses. Its 2016. I think we can let go of much of the 1980's Usenet netiquette.

     

    I have allowed "no pencil" logging on some of my caches, and I have lost pens on my way to the cache, and even (gasp!) forgotten to bring a pen with me, yet claimed the find and got no flak from the CO. I would not say that it is common here, but it is certainly something that we understand can happen to anybody.

  7. I think we have all done it to some extent, although some will make a smudge or other mark with a twig and mud, or yes... I've even heard about blood being used. Being able to, one way or another, prove that you had the log in your hand goes a long way towards the cache owner excepting your claim.

     

    HOWEVER... this should, by far, be the exception, not the rule! Allowing it too often will erode the integrity of the game, allowing arm chair logging and other such cheats. So... use it with care and realize that the cache owner is the one who will decide if you can keep your find or not.

  8. The ultimate "micro" (microwave) cache:

     

    As viewed when approaching from a nearby trail:

    c77d27c5-b2aa-4bc2-b469-71b123a8a0d6_l.jpg

     

    A closer look:

    af251181-4b78-4d63-938c-b8bc06688354_l.jpg

     

    A view from the "back" side:

    8d6733e3-e195-4103-ad3b-f4ae695e1177_l.jpg

     

    Mostly hand-sawed (which took like forever) with fasteners assembled from inside to be invisible. This started as a 17" diameter log, 26" in length, weighing well over 100 lbs green. Final cache is still estimated around 50 lbs (with working innards of the microwave removed). I hauled it to the forest with help of an appliance hand truck. There's a few seams which are larger than I'd like, but definitely nothing obvious from a distance. Also notice that it's plugged into an electrical outlet in a dead stump. There's more details inside once the door is opened, but that's a surprise that I'm not going to share here.

     

    Believe it or not, there is actually a thread here somewhere about a very similar cache that was blown up by a bomb squad. I kid you not. It even had the fake outlet.

    • Upvote 1
  9. Got it. Like I said, I will know better next year and will not be hosting a geocaching 101 event. Not knowing the minutia of these rules is becoming increasingly frustrating.

     

    My point about CITO events is that they apparently can be associated with outside preexisting events and even corporately (not grounspeak) sponsored.

     

    I hear that you are frustrated with trying to 2nd guess the requirements, but I do think that you need to set the CITO argument aside. CITO is one (THE one?) officially sanctioned agenda, and even that takes place only within a CITO event. You would still probably have a tough time posting a regular geocache that tried to get people to pick up trash on their way to the find.

     

    I think that its great that you are trying to help, but think that you could stand to slow your breathing down a bit and try to understand what you are being taught here instead of throwing baby out with the bathwater.

  10. Actually, their legalese isn't really about the situation at hand, anyway. The 6 year old is not using the site at all. She is simply finding caches. Her parents set up her account, and her parents log her finds. There really is nothing to even argue about here, and to post the TOS in this situation is about as silly and useless as I can fathom.

    Your point is bang on. But I would go on to say that since she's not really logging her own finds, they shouldn't pretend she's an independent cacher. It's not that it's terrible or hurts anyone else, it's just that, if they think it through, they'll likely realize it's not really doing anything interesting that having a single team account wouldn't do better, even if the "team" account is just Dad's account.

     

    Thanks for acknowledging the validity of my point. However, I would not agree that they "should not pretend" anything. From the sounds of it, she is still the one doing the searching (most likely with some "hot" and "cold" hints, I'd guess). But what harm does it do to play that sort of game with your kid? It is parental bonding of the best kind.

     

    What I find much sillier is when parents hide a cache, create the cache page, and do everything, but then title it as though it was their 2 year old's first hide. I've seen a lot of those, with nobody complaining (except that more often than not, it also seems to be the parent's first hide, and they almost always use a margarine tub for the container :lol:)

  11. Give me a break!

    To the OP, what you're doing is just fine. Keep it up!

    Many of the other posters in this thread, with their legalism, need to get out more.

     

    Actually, their legalese isn't really about the situation at hand, anyway. The 6 year old is not using the site at all. She is simply finding caches. Her parents set up her account, and her parents log her finds. There really is nothing to even argue about here, and to post the TOS in this situation is about as silly and useless as I can fathom.

  12. Wow. I wasnt trying to break rules or anything. Just trying to have something productive and fun to do with my daughter. My daughter doesnt log in. I do all her logging for her. She has friend on there, but are people we know or have met, and they want to check her find progress. I often take pics with her and the cache for proof if ever a question.

     

    I surely was not trying to spark any kind of debate or anything.

     

    Sorry for the issue with the question

     

    I'm joining this thread late, and haven't read it all yet, but I sure hope that it has been explained to you by now that your question was perfectly OK, and that what you are doing with your daughter is an excellent family building activity. Keep doing what you're doing.

  13. This one is a plastic box of sorts that is buried in the ground, the ammo box is inside. There is a green plastic lid that covers the container that is flush with the ground.

     

    With permission, that hide is legal. It probably doesn't have permission,but there is nothing wrong with the hide per se.

     

    In reality that hide is not legal. That is a utility access box. Either cable or power, you can see that the CO has placed rocks

    on top of whatever is in that box. There was a box just like that in my yard where I used to live a few years ago.

    Utility company was pissed when it looked like some kids opened it. Current Federal law unlawfull to access utility access boxes of any type.

    I have even seen a sign to that effect by an access box.

     

    I'd be more concerned about the hand grenade markings left on the side of the box. I can just imagine a muggle or worker lifting the lid on their box to find an ammo can "full of hand grenades" stashed inside.

  14. If a cache is submitted to me for review from a CO who lives a long distance away, I read the cache description to spot statements like what was quoted in the above post. Distant caches require an adequate maintenance plan before I will publish them. An adequate maintenance plan could be, for example, "I travel through this town on business once each week, as shown by my 200 cache finds in this county" or "my parents live in this town and have agreed to look out for this cache."

     

    Asking other geocachers to replace logsheets or containers is not a maintenance plan. It's not prohibited if it happens on its own, but that cannot replace the cache owner's responsibiliity. I am glad that the local reviewer for the territory where that cache was placed has disabled the listing.

    Sorry about bumping an old post, but I found yours quite interesting, and wanted to ask you how that applies to the power trails where even missing containers are being replaced by the seekers, at the owner's request. Is what you wrote simply your own quideline, or is it something that applies to all reviewers?

     

    [Edit: My question is off-topic. Perhaps it can be answered in another thread rather than interrupt this one]

  15. There are two different caches being discussed in this thread. A large bison described by a paranoid muggle as a "grenade" and an unknown container described as a "pipe bomb." I think TahoeJoe is confusing the two.

    I was referring to Basildon park put on lockdown after dog walker finds toy grenade and calls police. The camo and string coming out of the top of the cache makes it look questionable. If it were my cache I would have picked a more discrete container.

     

    Ooooh! I apologize... I bumped a thread from February to host my new bomb scare story. You were responding to an older post. Sorry about the confusion.

  16. Looks like a pipe bomb to me especially if the geocaching sticker was facing the backside and the cache was not hidden out of sight. I think that's a risk you take placing a cache in a well traveled urban area. Perhaps the CO should have used Hello Kitty stickers on the cache instead of army camo.

    You have seen it? Did you find the cache, or have you seen pictures?

     

    I agree with Keystone that I have also seen "pipe bomb" caches that sure didn't look much like a pipe bomb to my understanding of what a pipe bomb should look like. In fact, I was LTF on one cache that got blown up. It was a pill bottle hung from a tree by a piece of bailing wire. It was reported that it looked like it had a fuse.

  17. The area where the pipe was found was on school property but far away from buildings, and there was never any threat to students, Stewart said."

     

    The cache in question was easy to find: http://coord.info/GC2T1KJ

    Thanks for the link, knowschad.

     

    Studying that cache and its archived pre-publication reviewer notes, it's easy to tell that the cache was in a park that adjoins the school campus, called "Buhl North Park." If you open the Google maps link and use street view, you will see the park's entrance sign. That's where the cache was hidden.

     

    I was very happy to see an extensive pre-publication dialogue between the reviewer and the cache owner about caches "near" school property. The reviewer even linked to other examples where caches at or near schools have led to bomb squad callouts. I guess he has another example for his form letter. In any event the cache owner was comfortable proceeding with publication and said they chose an area far away from where children might be playing or congregating.

     

    I thought it was a good attitude of the police department:

     

    “Great practice for Twin Falls bomb squad and a safe ending for all,” Stewart said.

     

    I was sorry to see that there were no photographs in the gallery that might have showed what the container looked like.

  18. This just in:

     

    Buhl, Idaho: http://magicvalley.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/update-buhl-bomb-was-geocache-police-say/article_bb86d640-d03f-5000-b5de-0e8e03945e96.html

     

    In part (bolding mine):

     

    "While finding a geocache can often be challenging or adventurous, a Buhl city crew stumbled upon the geocache by accident about 1:15 p.m. Wednesday while grading a parking lot on the south side of Sawtooth Avenue, Stewart said. They reported it to police because it looked like a pipe bomb.It looked so realistic,” said Buhl Police Sgt. Bill Deetz.

     

    The area where the pipe was found was on school property but far away from buildings, and there was never any threat to students, Stewart said."

     

    The cache in question was easy to find: http://coord.info/GC2T1KJ

  19. So...maybe a silly question...

    When it says "state must prove criminal intent"...and the lock and cache are technically someone else's property...well, could the case be made for criminal intent?

     

    But then I guess that would mean all geocachers are criminals by the fact that we are all opening and invading other peoples' property... :ph34r:

     

    I am not a lawyer, (but I'll bet some of you are!) but I suspect that that would only be used when the police had suspicion of burglary already and needed something to make it stick. I seriously doubt you would be charged if you explained the situation clearly.

  20. There used to be a multi around here where you had to get a key (the keys floated around from cache to cache, or cacher to cacher), use it to retrieve a second key that was in a box, and then use that key to open the final cache.

     

    It doesn't work for lock-picking, but it would be a way to use these cool containers.

     

    I guess for lock-picking, you could provide the tools for lock-picking and make it a remote cache like someone else said. It's not foolproof but it would probably reduce the chance that someone will do something terrible to it.

     

    There was one around here that used TWO keys, each one a travel bug, to open the ammo box. The problem came when cachers would take the TBs out of the area. Fun while it lasted, though.

  21. Those are nice containers, but I'm not sure how many geocachers can use a lock pick of have burglary tools as part of their TOTT. :rolleyes:

     

    Looks like here in Virginia posession of picks can be considered evidence of criminal intent.

     

    They will.

     

    There was a time when few, if any, of our local cachers carried long poles with them. Now that is commonplace.

×
×
  • Create New...