CondorTrax

So after NNJC members expressed their concern and dissatisfaction with the NNJC officers' methodology and banishment practice, the FB Moderator hit the archive key and deleted the conversation (my wife is an active member and former officer and still has access to NNJC so I could still see what was going on). Seems ironic that they not only archive caches they don't like or are in their way, but do the same when FB conversations (which were very polite) weren't going their way.

Ya kill me. I've been having that run through my head all day. The other one is "Cult of Personality"

I was just informed why I and another NNJC member were banned from the NNJC Facebook site. Keep in mind that all I did was post this thread on that site with no editorial commentary other than "this is interesting reading", or something to that effect". NNJC directive, apparently is to remove any questionable information relating to their activity from appearing. From their FB moderator: "Last week (NNJC President - name redacted) asked me to take over as moderator of the FB page, which I accepted. I also moderate 3 additional forums and another FB page. When accusations and tempers flare, I moderate. When someone tries to flame another I step in to provide a buffer and cool things off. Right now all that the posting and links are doing is to create more dissent and anger. Those who insist on posting the same thing multiple times, after having it deleted, will be removed from this page until they cool off or cooler heads prevail. No personal attacks of any kind will be tolerated." My position: 1. I posted the thread twice. The initial post and then after it disappeared. I suppose that can be considered multiple times. Guilty. 2. The posting was meant to be informative and expressed concern over archiving of caches. 3. No emotion was evident and cooler heads were prevalent. No flaming, no tempers flaring 4. There were no personal attacks of any kind. Clearly, NNJC officers decided I was to be cast out as the bad apple. Interesting.

If the Resource Interpretive Specialist truly wants their Geotrail out there "for park visitors of all ages to discover during my monthly geocaching programs", they could merely list them on a different Geocaching website. That's one thing I don't understand. Should every single cache in a park be made findable and fun for a 5 year old? How about variety? Weathernowcast was asked to archive every one of his hides in the park. Also is it really necessary to start training the young ones to be number hounds so early? I am aware of other caches with micro hating themes being denied as having an agenda, but this series is full of cookie cutter powertrail agenda. There also was no option available for listing the archived caches on another website. This is correct, Weathernowcast was not given the option to list his caches on another website. Archive them, or they become the property of The State Park, take it or leave it. And the president of the NNJC is a known user of alternative Geocaching websites. Does this mean the 1,000 find a year Geocacher land manager is behind the archival demands? That's just speculation, I suppose. No speculation. It's very clearly stated in her note to WNC: "The archiving of GC2JJCE (Xmas Presents for Sue&Barry), GC2JFXX (Xmas Presents for Treequest), GC2JFY6 (Xmas Presents for klizich), and GC2JFXR (Xmas Presents for Briansnat) needs to be completed by Friday, November 28, 2013 to allow enough time for the reviewer process of the new geocaches. You have until the end of the calendar year to remove the actual containers, after which they will become property of KVSP." Along with WNC 4 caches, at least 3 other caches were also force-archived: GC38FF8, GC1ZT3K, GC1R7CG.

This is the sort of creatively diplomatic approach that would have gone a long way. Not too late to have NNJC adopt this for any of their future initiatives.

Glenn, go to the NNJC Facebook site or scroll up to view the commentary made by the NNJC President. He makes it abundantly clear of their tactic, motive and direction.

Whereas up until yesterday I could view the NNJC Facebook site, today I am completely blocked.

At the end of the day, and after going through these posts again, I'm resolved to concluding that a corrupted NNJC will do whatever they want. They have a land manager coercing cachers (re-read the original post if in doubt), a local club President deciding which caches are of quality, revoking memberships of those with dissenting opinions, and ultimately creating an atmosphere where his perspectives are the only one's that count. What's sad and disturbing is that this will be their go- forward practice. Griggstown was one, KVSP is now; which will be next? Which cacher will get the dreaded note "It's come to our attention your cache is in the way of ours. Mine's better, yours suck... it's time for yours to go. If you don't like it, we'll pick up the geo-litter and it becomes ours. Have a nice day. The NNJC Mob - Where we promote quality caching one way or another". You will then be hand held down a trail where all the caches will look and feel the same. Sort of begins to feel like a manufactured and manipulated experience. Not the questionable fun of a Quik Check pine-tree cache followed by a crawl through a drainage culvert ending up with a crawl through a boulder field. Nope, your cache is in the way.... It doesn't comply and must be eliminated. Does that sound like fun? It's coming your way. I was banned from NNJC Facebook for supporting WeatherNowCast. Does that sound like an organization that values input? Ironic because their web site sure seems to propagandize it.

Brilliant, and simple. A parkocrat can force the GC reviewer to archive a cache, but nothing says a GC reviewer can be forced to publish a cache. Right? There's another website out there that likely has no proximity issues with that park. Do you seriously think a reviewer is going to step into this political quagmire? When the caches are submitted, if they meet all the listing guidelines, they will be published. Political? If the reviewer had been notified why the caches were being requested, and knowing the approver, I believe he/she would have been more judicious about granting the OK. Keep in mind that the Prez and Land Manager had to first coerce the archiving so that the area had the appearance of being open. Again, if the local approver was aware of the tactics, the approval may never have occurred. It's about doing the right thing when given a crappy situation. From what I've seen, nothing has yet been officially approved. I don't see the new caches so the local reviewer/approver can still act sending the appropriate message with his/her action.

Are there any other relevant factors that are unknown to me? Because none of this information changes my mind about the situation. Maybe this will help: The President of NNJC, Old Navy and Ranger Lynn, Public Relations/Promotions rep on the NNJC Board (http://www.nnjc.org/officers.html) go to Kittatiny Valley State Park (KVSP) a month or so ago to scout out cache placement for; 1. an Interpretive GeoTrail; and 2. Caching Through The Snow #10 Event (http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=f58fab3a-961a-40d6-8b51-00ddf568faae), both of which will occur simultaneously While they're out exploring they soon realize that several already approved, placed and popular caches will interfere with where they wish to place these new caches. A note goes out informing these COs that they need to retrieve and archive their established caches. One CO sees this as an unnecessary infringement and ignores the request of NNJC. He then subsequently receives a formal note; this time from Park Ranger Lynn essentially forcing him to archive by a certain date or the caches will become the property of KVSP. See the original post above. Why couldn't they find another spot? So, in what capacity do these two interact? Is there a conflict of interest? Who can the CO go to in an effort to express his disappointment? Certainly not an impartial land manager. That individual is conspiring in both capacities, as cacher and land manager, to propel their own agenda rather than the openness which is geocaching. When I started, if you didn't like a cache you either avoided it or logged your opinion. If there wasn't space you found the space by doing the work. Now it appears there's a "special" group that will tell me what a good cache is and will archive my cache if they don't like it. There is precedent with Old Navy where he bullied a puzzle cacher into stop caching altogether. Now he's got the Park Ranger doing the dirty work. This doesn't sound or feel right. John has always taken pride in NNJ goals. From their site: "Our club goals and objectives are to promote Geocaching through public education, develop new, and maintain current partnerships with Land Managers from the NJ state, Counties, Townships and non-profit organizations. Build and develop a strong sense of NNJC community, team approach, open communications with members and land managers. Develop and present a quality geocaching experience for the geocaching community." All very nice goals and objectives. But when in the course of achieving those goals you trample, bulldoze and bully your way through them, they eventually devolve into disappointment and only addressing those that agree with you. My suggestion, partially taken from O'Reviewer's comments above, with respect, would be: 1. Have Ranger Lynn create a separate and distinct GC account where in her capacity as Land Manager/Ranger et. al. it is clearly understood. 2. Have the local GC reviewer not grant approval for the new caches that have trampled the existing placement. Essentially, creating a neutral ground-zero. Sure, the Park Ranger and Old Navy can go ahead and place event caches, but these will not be recognized as official geocaches. Why reward bad or questionable behavior on the part of a local club President and Land Manager?

I tried that. I posted this thread on the NNJC Facebook page. It was deleted so I posted it again. It was also deleted and they revoked my NNJC Facebook membership. If Old Navy doesn't like your cache he'll force-archive it; if he doesn't like your post he'll delete. Back in the day this was called "Cult of Personality". The suggestion made earlier where these relpacement caches are held makes the most sense. Not sure if Cotton Malone or O'Reviewer have the authority to do that, though.

So, making sure the NNJC membership was aware of both sides of the issue, I posted this thread twice (first time it disappeared, go figure). I just went to see of any activity and again it was deleted. As was my membership. Whomever runs their page decided I was a menace and revoked my membership on their site.

From John Neale - President of NNJC Placing a geocache is a privilege not a right. NNJC has been contacted and partnering with many Land Managers to assist with Geocaching programs. Our goals are to work with these land manager to install quality educations geocaches so these managers can utilize their parks for interpretative and educational programs. This benefit many parks goals to bring public awareness into their parks and introduce geocaching. In the last year NNJC has worked with Morris County Park, Duke Farm Foundation, Franklin township and Kittatinny Valley State Park, just to name a few to assist and develop successful programs for many to enjoy. unfortunately, there are times when an existing cache that had been placed in their park must be removed to make room for the Park Managers new program. We must understand all Park Managers have full responsibility and final word on what is placed inside their park. This is a tough situation, by NNJC's partnering with the parks, we have assisted these park managers and reached out to our NJ community on the park managers behalf to ask the CO's to archive their caches. We are fortunate that most of our geocaching community understand that NNJC is making the request on behalf of the park manager. This is to avoid the Park Manager having to contact geocaching HQ to make the official request. The Geocaching policy states: Please note that the list is not exhaustive; there are many reasons why a cache may be disabled or archived. 1.If your cache is reported by the land owner or land manager as being an unwanted intrusion, Groundspeak will respect the wishes of the land owner or manager. In the case of public property, permission can often be obtained from the agency or association that manages the land. Worldwide, there are many such agencies and organizations that regulate geocaching on their managed land. As the cache owner you are responsible for determining who to contact to obtain permission. Even if you are certain that geocaching is permitted on particular public property, ensure that you have followed any and all requirements established by the land owner or land management agency before placing the cache. There may be locations in which cache hides are inappropriate, even though not prohibited by local laws. If Groundspeak is contacted and informed that your cache has been placed inappropriately, your cache may be temporarily disabled or permanently archived. It is unfortunate that some CO's simply do not understand that placing a geocache is a privilege not a right. Months ago NNJC was in discussion with Kittatinny Valley State Park (KVSP) about installing a interpretative and educational program along their main trail, their park is saturated with caches and they felt it was time to take back some controls of the park, also decided it was be an added benefit for KVSP's geocaching program to launch their new educational trail with NNJC's CTTS event. KVSP has advertised this event with the local media to promote their park. NNJC has assisted with this program, and contacted CO's about this new rail and ask on behalf of KVSP to archive their caches. Most have achieved, but one CO refused to abide by the request, it then took more official KVSP park manager's requests to finally have these caches archived by the CO. KVSP had contacted geocaching HQ and they were in the process of archiving the requested caches. unfortunately this individual has now decided to complain and rally geocachers against KVSP and NNJC. NNJC goals have been to promote geocaching for the good of everyone, we are working with many park managers from State, County and Townships all to help promote geocaching programs. With the growth of geocaching and park cache saturation, many parks want to take back control and current caches may have to be removed. Morris County and NJ State are currently working on restrictive and permitting geocaching policies. So please keep in mind when placing a cache or being contacted by a land manager placing a geocache is a privilege not a right, get approval first and if a manager want a cache removed for whatever reason, they have rights. Old Navy "When you go to hide a geocache, think of the reason you are bringing people to that spot. If the only reason is for the geocache, then find a better spot." – briansnat

I posted this thread on the NNJC Facebook page last night. When I visited the page earlier today, it had been removed. Will try again and see what happens.

I also was looking forward to attending the event but will have to pass. When good things are sacrificed for an individual agenda, the satisfaction of participating isn't there any longer. And what I find ironic, is that the cacher who started Caching Through The Snow 10 years ago and who's being honored for starting the event, TRL, would not have descended to this level to create caches.

If left to the discretion of a few, with the majority not objecting,it will happen.

My core issue with this is that we're having caches forcibly archived based on someone elses perspective on what a quality/appropriate cache is all about. That has been, until now, the responsibility of the individual cacher, the approver and the caching community - democratic geocaching, if you will. Now, we're been confronted by a very slippery slope where the President of a local club (NNJC) partners with a land manager (also a cacher) to effectively control a park and unilaterally force archive approved and established caches. And, they're advocating this practice at other parks. Beware this could be coming to a park near you.

Resizing the image did the trick. I defaulted to 640 x 720. Not great but eliminates the secondary picture window from popping up. Thx for your help.

Do you know what the dimensions have to be so that the re-sizer isn't invoked?

I have a few puzzles that involve clicking on a "hot-spot" within an image displayed on the cache listing. Since the latest update seekers cannot click on these hot-spots. Instead, clicking on the image presents the same image on the page without the ability to click on the hot spot. See: Swiss Time for an example. Anyone know if I need to modify the HTML code? Thanks in advance.

The field notes are saved in a file within the GPX subfolder. You'll need to attach the unit to your computer to access that file from within GC.com. Once you access the file and upload it to GC.com, you can then see your field notes and edit them accordingly.

Apologies if this has been addressed. I searched but didn't find the answer. Question: How do I load/import Geocaches into Basecamp so they appear as geocaches vs waypoints? I have Basecamp v3.1.2. Thx in advance.

Just placed my first cache using the chirp. Was published and has some hits already. Listing shows the attribute and alternate method of finding the final for those without compatible GPSr: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...7a-d4a7afce1e89

Here's a new one. I had all my caches on the SD card. When I went to log them as found I could not view them whrn selecting "Found Caches". The screen was blank. However, if the caches are on the unit's main memory they will appear as found. Does that suggest that the caches can only be loaded onto main memory to get full functionality?