FranticFreddy

Does this mean that the BCGA (and the mysterious GC.com representative) will no longer be in sole control of the talks?

Good letter and an excellent response from BC Parks. Sounds like jrav should also be representing the cachers in BC.

It's a mistake that you don't intend to be involved with the BCGA. If you were involved, I'm sure that there would be something substantial for members. You strike me as the leader type and a good positive role model. You should reconsider. I would support you. The BCGA needs people like you.

That's too bad. I'll bet that you could be a big help to this situation. It's nice to know that you are setting a good example for the cachers in BC by placing responsible caches. I've been reading about this issue here and at other discussion places, and it's becoming more and more obvious to me that there are problems in the province with regard to a unified voice. I have to question the reluctance of the BCGA directors to share information regarding the progress and intentions of the BCGA and their vision of an acceptable settlement. Are the BC Parks people aware of this discussion thread? If they are, they must be wondering what the heck is going on with the volatile personalities. If they are not aware of what's going on here, they should be. It seems very obvious that the BCGA is not operating in the best interests of the people that it has been elected to represent. There seems to be an awful lot going on that is not proper.

You seem to have a lot of good ideas and opinions about this parks thingy. Maybe you should be on the committee to resolve this issue.

Who is Bob? And why do people seem to be against him being involved in these talks?