Girls Phind Squirrels

Semantics--the nuances of language

Take the young one. You will be surprised. Our youngest was 3 when we started caching. We took her on all of them. We never carried her, walking was expected. Now she is six. She surprises us when we drive by caches we have found in the past and she tells us all about the hunt, she has better trail and geo sense than I do and can hike over 10 kilometres (Canadian miles, lol) without a complaint.

Mr. Dolphin: [ quote name=Harry Dolphin' date='Jul 30 2008, 02:07 PM' post='3579905] Kissy kissy Thank you. Respectfully. Mrs. Squirrels

Why don't you read the whole thread. I did not IGNORE anything, only requested time to get it uploaded when I got back to work and had someone who could help me do this. This was in my original log. I have NEVER not added the appropriate logging requirements to ANY log. Even Mr. Dolphin has admited that I did meet the required logging requirements. IT SHOULD BE CLEAR THAT NEVER WAS THERE ANY INTENTION TO CHEAT OR TO AVOID MEETING HIS REQUIREMENTS. This thread was about having logs deletd. I told my story because I thought is was relevant to the OP. I also thought that there was a more polite way to deal with other cachers that what happened to me. I have graciously accepted Mr. Dolphin's request to kiss and make up because I think he now understands that I had very good intentions right from the start and that just maybe the two of us could have avoided this if the problem had gone this way: Mr. Dophin: by email: "I noted you don't have a picture. Can you explain?" ME: Yes, I am on the road and can't get to the picture which is at work for 3 weeks. Mr. Dolphin: Can you change your log to a note please until you get your picture ME: Can I do that. Will I just be able to change it back. Mr. Dolphin: Yes, ME: Great, I will do that cause I don't want to lose the order of my finds. rather than just deleted my log. I think he understands now what upset me. This was a solution that I did not know about at the time but his educating me in a gentle, less arrogant manner would have avoided problems. The presumptionn you make that I would IGNORE logging requirements is not born out by my profile nor anything else in this thread. The real discussion was "should my log have been deleted without first requesting an explanation or asking me to change it to a note. I Just because uploading images personally causes you "grief" does not give you the special privilege to ignore the Additional Logging Requirements that apply to everyone else. I would suggest ignoring this type of puzzle cache or webcam cache in the future. Congratulations to Mr. Dolphin for rightly sticking to his guns!!

Agreed as long as there was no sarcasm intended. When I first posted to this board it was only my intention to describe my experience. If I had noted your earlier post I would have avoided doing so. At the time of the incident I did not know I could post a note and change to a find later. If you had asked me to proceed in that direction by polite email none of this would ever have occurred. I am even prepared to remove my quotes of your emails in my log should I feel you are sincere. Some of us just like to hike and find things but the vagaries of the techie side of this sport such as downloading coords and uploading images cause us grief. Then, Mrs. Squirrels, we shall kiss and make up. Dolphin never looks for a fight, but does not back down from challenges. So, shall we kiss and make up? Log with required photo was posted, and accepted. I had thought that that was the end of the disagreement. Never tempt dolphins with bait. Dolphins are especially fond of shrimp and salmon.

Mr. Dolphin is just looking for a fight as he was then. Bait not taken.

Sort of, and I have enjoyed the logs of those who have participated. But I also enjoyed the simple find logs. Those people enjoyed my cache just as much as others who did the extra bit. I wouldn't take their find away. I wouldn't even consider setting up a cache that would force me to take their find away. Life is too short.

Actually, no. I expect the owner to know I have good intentions and will honour them. I recently placed a cache that had a logging requirement. The reviewer asked if this was a suggestion or requirement. My reply, I've got better things to do than moniter how others play the game. Oh but then you expect the owner to keep an eye on your log (and eventually on other logs following the same line of action) for three weeks.... or more, depending on each one. Doesn't sound fair to me. Log when you are ready, that's my idea of good sense regarding these episodes.

Thanks Baloo. I just learned something new. I thought the cache owner could change the log because on GC1169 a few weeks back the cache owner indicated that he had done just that. I assumed he meant what he said but I guess he just said he changed the log when in fact he must have asked the poster to do it. If your logging requirements specifically say 72 hours I would note why I couldn't do that. I am not a techie whiz. I don't even know how to get the photos off my camera. For that I need a 10 year old. We often take very long road trips and use internet cafes for logging. Photo requirements do pose a problem although I have never not complied. I like to log on the road because I am notorious for losing paper.

When I want to do that, I log a "note" in the spot where my find will go later, then change that log to a find when I am home and can load my photos. It does preserve the order. I know how to do that now but I didn't then and the much more experienced cache owner summarily deleted the log accompanied by a very arrogant email rather than changing the log (which is an option he has) to a note and sending me a polite email explaining why. Canadian cachers are just so polite and accomodating. They help less experience people. They also realize that there a very few real cheaters out there and that most people will honour good intentions. I realize now that you can't expect the same consideration while travelling in other jurisdictions. Too bad for the rest of the world. Mr. Dolphin is just looking for a fight as he was then. There was no need for him to flame himself. I offered up my experience as another example of what I felt was heavy handedness. I deliberately did not identify him.

Did that got no reply. This is the only time this has ever happened to me. All other geocachers are sensible, considerate and flexible. (At least my experience tells me so.) I would also like to note that he chose to come out of the closet himself. I did not identify him--also a sensible considerate act. Only other time I had a logging issue the owner politely emailed me and I responded. He accepted my response graciously and allowed my log to stand. I met his logging requirements but due to unforseen circumstances it took me three months. Now, isn't he a gem. I didn't expect that much consideration!

I was logging on the road and wanted to maintain the integrity of the order of my finds. My request was perfectly reasonable. You showed lack of consideration. You were as obstructive and unbending (qualities you seem to abhor in others) as you accuse others in many of your postings in the forums. Look in the mirror. You were guilty of most of your own criticisms. And might that have been because you did not fulfill the logging requirement? The requirement is fairly simple "Post your picture (taken by the webcam) here as proof that you were there. This is required to log this cache!" I am not sure what part of this that you did not understand. This is a web cam cache, for goodness sake. I did not 'expect you to return to work THREE WEEKS early to upload the picture.' I do not care when you log it. I do require you to post the picture when you log the cache. Your first three logs did not fulfill the requirement. This was explained to you. This is a webcam cache, for goodness sake.

Last summer I had a cache owner delete my web cam cache log three times because he expected me to return to work THREE WEEKS early to upload the required picture.

Jury's out---But I suspect, although I have not yet tried it, that the new colour scheme will be easier to read off my Blackberry in the field.

Those are usually the same guys who chase a little white ball around the SAME finely manicured lawn weekly. At least my sport takes me to a different place almost every time.

Make sure you put a space between first three and last three. That may be your problem. Just tried it and it works so you have the right code just need the space.

This may be unrelated but I would also like to publicly thank Helen who rescued our west coast vacation when I discovered I had forgot my download cable at home. She very graciously loaned us one of hers. Truly, a special lady! Kathleen

I have bad knees from my teen years. Just started using poles a month ago. Would never go back. I use UrbanPoling hiker edition. I can move a lot faster, am steadier on my feet rock hopping, can check to see if that nice flat place covered in leaves has a rock or a sink hole under it and am learning to identify the sound of pole end hitting plastic in places I am not sure I want to put my hand. I am prone to balance problems and dizziness so the extra points of contact with the ground has enabled me to speed up and find MORE caches.

Do you get a new icon for that?

We had a family case of Lyme disease last year that we picked up caching in New Hampshire. Two weekends ago I pulled over a dozen off the oldest squirrel and several off the others immediately after our first cache attempt of the day which was Binbrook Trio: Final. I am pretty sure they got them there and not at church! lol. We have run into ticks quite a bit in the Brantford area while caching and while visiting a friends country home. I used to pull them off and save them but after our bout with Lyme I did some research and I thought I learned that the Lyme Ticks were very small and these ones are very big. So now we just do full body inspection and pull them off. I make light of it with the kids--A post caching "Tick" removal party is now part of our spring routine.

I would second Time and Tide and also would say that Yarmouth--The Churn (GCX2JE) is an absolute must do. If you can go at sunset--even better. An absolutely awesome--little bit off the beaten track but not too far----location. Also Bunker's Island (GCP9N8) would be great especially during the time when the CAT comes in. Check the times at the visitor centre. We didn't find it but I've been watching it and it is there.

My understanding is that it is not the use of the that is being banned. Just that you will have to pull over and/or enter your coordinates before you drive your car. You may conitinue to "use" them for navigation as long as you don't interact with them while driving. Probably not a bad thing.

Does this mean I can change my cache name back to the one it was originally published with since the intention of the name was to create a "pun" not to solicit business.

Great post

Trash is what concerns me and how it reflects on the community. Guidelines could be changed to read that a cacheowner who has not logged on the site for 12 months and fails to respond to a request from a reviewer within six months will be considered to have abandoned his "property" and then Groundspeak will reserve the right to transfer ownership of that property to another willing cacher. Groundspeak logo is on many of these abandoned caches. They should want to protect their reputation rather than leaving archived, abandoned caches in the woods that will be found and perceived to be trash leaving a black mark on groundspeaks trademark. If a reasonable amount of effort was taken to contact the AWOL cache owner ( I usually go through a 3 month process myself ) there should be no surprise. I e-mail the cache owner via their profile so don't see how the AWOL paying customer would even know about having the cache "taken" from them once it is done. What are you talking about man? I am not faulting Groundspeak for an owner abandoning a cache, I am faulting Groundspeak for introducing policy that prevents a historical cache, with cache page and that history, from continuing on as an active cache once the original cache owner disappears from geocaching. You have been in geocaching long enough to know that every area has favorite caches that have been around for years where the cache owner is out of the game or eventually leaves the game. Active cachers eventually want to adopt that cache, replacing the container ( which they don't own ) yet retaining the history of the cache page. What is the problem with this? By the way, and this is not a question just for CT ... doesn't Groundspeak claim ownership of cache pages? Wasn't this claimed years ago as a result of data-scraping by third party entities?