Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by IGJoe

  1. Those are awesome. I was just in Jax last weekend and would have tried to find one if I had seen this. I'll be back sooner than later and I'll be looking to add one to my collection then. Edit: Ok, you just started doing this so there would have been no chance to get one a week ago. I'll still be shadowing some of your finds in the next few weeks.
  2. If they did call before they did their publicity stunt, they were more responsible than some. LEO acted appropriatly in Seattle (no big deal) and Boston (very big deal). You are correct that you should remain vigulant. We all pretty much agree on what you said here. Reading your prior post though I'm not sure what your larger point is? Arresting and prosecuting the Boston guys is ok?, letting the Seattle guys off the hook is ok? My mistake was thinking this thread was about the incident in Boston thus I was speaking of what happened in Boston. So yes, the Boston artists were irresponsible and the Boston LEO acted appropriately. I'm glad to read the Boston LEO did not dismiss a potential threat simply because it didn't conform the way we think terrorist should behave. Since you asked about what I think of prosecuting I'll tell you. The artists who put up the signs should be prosecuted for any laws they violated. Boston will have a hard time making a bomb hoax stick in court but I'm sure they've violated more laws than simple littering.
  3. So basically you agree with just about everyone who posted before. Really? This is the 3rd page of thread where people are agreeing with each other? Thats truly amazing and possbily a first on the Groundspeak forums. I presume its ok for me to state my 'basic agreement with just about everyone' since we are on the 3rd page and over 130 posts. Everyone else has been agreeing so I hope its ok I do as well Is it, is that OK?
  4. If you're really unclear on my point I'll clarify: The sign makers were irresponsible LEO acted appropriately Ignoring things just because it doesn't match previous terror attempts and profiles is negligent I hope that helps. If you were simply trying to bait me into an arguement of slippery slopes, I'm not biting.
  5. how does that disclaimer go .... past performance is not a garauntee of future results Hopefully terrorists aren't listening and picking up on the idea that if thier bombs are blinky and cutesy they can sit in plain site for days on end. How many times had mutiple planes been simultaneously highjacked and flown into skyscapers prior to 9/11? Did we all stand around saying 'Oh you wacky guys! You got us on that one. We're coming after ya but before we do we have to say kudos on your originality' Its fine to sit with the perfect vision of hindsight and proclaim the harmlessness of intent. There's a lot of discussion of intent, however I see intent very clearly. These signs were intentionally placed in high traffic areas which, by no coincidence, are also terrorist targets. The problem is thier ignorance caught up with them but that is suppossed to be excused because it wasn't thier intent? Whether the terrorists have won because we've let the govt usurp our rights to violate local ordinances for the purpose of ecclectic advertising may be debatable however I more concerned about letting them know we're still asleep at the wheel.
  6. I've been mulling over the idea of having custom colored dice printed with a portion of the geocaching.com logo (yellow die with the Groundspeak man, orange die with the flag, blue & green dice with the dashes) so when you put the 4 together you have the color logo on dice. Only the '1' side of the die would have the printed image so they are still perfectly usable. Doing the printing is not cheap so I'm considering giving them out in pairs instead of quartets. That way it makes it a little more challenging to get the set. Naturally, I would put them in a baggies with a card indicating who they're from and encouraging people to get the other half of the set. Hopefully I'll be able to get it done for the spring caching season
  7. Given my choice I would take useful hints or no hints. If I can't have that I wish we could at least do away with hints that the hider possibly thought were useful but in-fact are no good what-so-ever. I usually make a point to politely post that I didn't understand the hint or that it was too cryptic to help when that situation occurs. Having a cutesy 'no help here' is preferred over a hint that references that the cache is near a tennis court ... a court thats 60 ft away from the wooded area that holds the cache.
  8. Can we refer to people who leave food in a cache as hammugglers? I keep trying to use 'Marvin' instead of 'muggle' but I keep forgetting and use 'Murphy' or 'Martin' instead ... don't know why it just happens that way.
  9. I think every visit/attempt to find the cache deserves its own Did Not Find entry .... I think thats why they call them DNF's I'm not really clear on why people like to use notes and other such mechanations, It not like there's an ISAT ( I Suck At This) entry type If there was an ISAT I'd probably have to apply it to more of my Finds as DNF's considering my history of making a hunt as difficult as possible ... and I'm certain I wouldn't be alone
  10. A lot bickering and then some hair splitting between what is legal regardless of whether its proper. IMO opinion this is an important topic and if its discussed ad nauseum then it must show a consensus is badly needed regarding how to handle the situation. If it was me I would: Not hunt it if it was questionable - I'll brave most terrain and cache hazards EXCEPT questionable property ownership. I won't even do caches in a persons yard even if permission is explicitly posted, but thats just me. Post my concerns in the log as a note or a DNF - good for you for doing that though I may have been more explicit Email the cache owner - another good move Advise your local reviewer - if the owner doesn't respond or if they do admit they didnt have permission and dont correct themselves Thats as far as I would go. I dont think I would contact the land owner because I'm not that comfortable with strangers, but again, that just me. The cache near a mailbox would definately set me over the edge considering tampering with the mail and mailboxes is a federal offense and a LOT OF PEOPLE are very paranoid about thier mail.
  11. Even though this is not my topic I'm glad to see bonus caches are an accepted practice. I've been planning a tough mutli (4/4) with a 'special equipment' bonus stage at the end. The reason I'm going the bonus stage route is 1) The bonus was going to be the final and hardest stage but there wasn't room for the type of container I wanted. Doing your swag swapping before the end of the hunt or having a final stage thats easier than a previous one just seemed anti-climactic. 2) someone put an easy cache near my planned final and I cant avoid violating the proximity rule. I'm hoping to have wooden coins made and send to anyone who successfully completes the bonus stage as an incentive to go the extra mile.
  12. I think trying to maintain a ratio is slanted an ultimately flawed. I may cache over a very large area (multiple states) but I wouldn't hide outside of 20 miles (or whatever range you feel is reasonable to 'properly' maintain). To go one step further, I would prefer someone wait until they have at least 50 or more under thier belt before hiding thier first. I think it would allow someone to decide if they are committed to the sport/hobby and it gives them more experience on types of hides, camo techniques, how to utilize a locations, etc, etc. New cachers do bring creativity that is VERY VERY welcome but a little experience goes a long way in making those new caches more successful. I have over 130 finds but only 1 hide. That may be low to some people but I have at least 2 others planned and I refuse to put them out until I can set them up properly. I would stop caching before I set something out just to alleviate guilt over a find/hide ratio.
  13. 2004 Wrangler Unlimited ARB front & rear bumper 8000lb winch 31's & lift are hopefully coming soon
  14. Boardgamegeek.com (an authority website for people who like to play various games) gave it 5 out of 10 stars but remember that they are being very objective about the game and its mechanics, not the subject matter. First to Find The website also has information about Geoclues but no ranking or reviews. Geoclues
  15. I dont like 'muggle' either and never use it, except to express my distaste at the term. I certainly wouldn't use it when explaining caching because then you're highlighting the idea that "you're not one of us" to the person you hope to interest in caching. I think its rather corny and shows a lack of originality on the part of our community to borrow such an obvious comparision from such a popular source....... but thats just me. If we don't agree on Marvin then maybe we could go with Millicent as in Millicent Bystander.
  16. Personally I would love it and it would make my list of all-time favorites. Problem is people who have no sense of humor SEEM (based on some previous posts in this and other related threads) to have no sense of responsibility when it comes to destroying other people's property (in this case intellectual property). That said, if it were my cache I would find a noisemaker that is loud but not obnoxious or 'piercing'. I would also place it in a secluded area where the finder would not attract a lot of attention. Lastly I would be careful about the way its listed on the cache page. Warning people about what is going to happen kinda ruins the surprise and makes it rather pointless.
  17. Normally I wouldnt delete an online log just because the cache log was not signed but FTF status is different. Questioning the cacher doesnt really prove anything, FTF can ONLY really be verified by the 1st person to sign the log.
  18. Well I apologize for your apology. Your comments on the creative uses of antidepressants as effective treatement for anxiety inclined wildlife is a humorous take on the application of a medication. It makes no reflection on the users who take the medicine as perscribed. I thought it was funny and I wasn't laughing at people who use it. Back to topic : Personally I would not be concerned that others have 'startled' deer, in fact I would take that as a sign of success if it was my cache. Seeing wildlife while caching is a rare and valued occassion for most cachers. In my limited experience deer 'usually' don't run very far and would rarely bolt into open ground such as roadway when startled by a hiker. Furthermore I would not be overly concerned about broken branches and such. Mother Nature is very hearty and I think the human race shows great conciet in our belief that the earth needs us to save it. Yes I realize we do damage the earth but my comments about 'we are a part of the ecosystem' are aimed at getting people to realize they don't damage nature by being in it and interacting with it. Nature will assimilate and utilize your presence whether we realize it or not.
  19. People are going to have an impact on the area however I think most people forget that we are a part of (not above) the ecosystem when we are in it. If we only hide caches where humans/cachers will not affect the area we are going to be left with nothing but lamppost micros.
  20. Anyone know the oldest active caches in GA? Feeel free to chime in with other southeat senior caches as well.
  21. Here's my entry. Shaved my head (for the first itme ever) as a part of bet. Imagine my surprise to find this underneath all that hair.
  22. BACK on topic, AGAIN! Log that a cache is lame? No, that's rude. If you dont' have anything nice to say then just say TFTC and be done with it. Be aware of the hider and ignore his hides if it becomes a pattern. Log that a cache has container/area/hide problems? Absolutely. I've logged (in a DNF) that a cache was too close to private property for my taste. However that same cache did have a clever concept and I made sure I mentioned that too. As for my cache (and hopefully my future ones) I would much rather get your real opinion than find out you didn't like it and we're simply 'being polite'.
  23. decrypted or encrypted .... I've really been resisting PQ's and downloading into my GPSr (cause I really like doing things the hard way) but if it will download the decrypted hint I may have to give in
  24. As a newbie I hope you're NOT using the pointer. Until you become familiar with how and when your GPSr jumps around you may find it much easier to use the map instead. At least thats the way it went for me. And remember to look for the cache, not the spot that your GPSr says is 0ft from the co-ords of the cache. I know that sounds super simplistic but I still have to remind myself.
  25. Personally, I try to only hunt caches that are on 'public-use' land, regardless if that land is privately held or not. I cannot stand caches that are on private-use property or put you in questionable proximity to private-use land. I won't do caches that people have hidden in thier yard, no matter how explicit the permission is. Therefore I don't hunt them, sorry if that response is too reasonable. Recently I hunted a cache that was in an undetermind wooded area between a bank and a residential neighborhood. So here I am in the woods behind someone's house tromping through bushes only a few feet from property markers. I have to ask myself 'would I want complete strangers periodically trolling the woods out my backdoor?' I didn't like it so I left, logged my DNF and let that be the end of it.
  • Create New...