Kouros

quote:Originally posted by Pooter:ps you're wrong - Monkey, indeed. Then what the chuff is it? Paranoid must be a clue, but I can't figure it. Doesn't look like Marvin (of the Android variety) and nothing else is ringing any bells. This'll bake my noodle for a good few hours at least. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

Is your Avatar "Monkey", from that cult Japanese TV series? (Sometimes called Monkey Magic) I'd forgotten about that show. quote:that the effete, namby-pamby southern toff clique That's a bit below the belt and more than a little unjust. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

Depends if you follow through, and what position you were in at the time. I've seen cachers leave because they were offended, usually by some common-sense guideline like "no food in caches." Them leaving does no harm whatsoever, and the game could probably do very well without them. But recently, I've also seen all the UK admins leave within hours of one another, because of the attitude of some local cachers towards them, and the work that they had done to promote caching over here. Them leaving was probably a uniquely perfect form of protest, because right now the cachers that caused them to leave will all too readily realise what damage they have caused. The only problem is that the game is also irrepairably damaged for everyone else too. Not that I blame them, though. The vitriol they received was beyond what the admins should go through. Today the UK has lost three good moderating teams in such a scenario, and we are all very much about to feel the repurcussions. So, yes, leaving the game (or at least, your admin-ship) can be a remarkable form of protest. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

I add my voice to that. But at the same time, we've had a kick in the teeth. Perhaps we need it to realise what we were missing, and the huge amount of work that went on behind the scenes. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

I am sad to see the admins leave, but I cannot deny the fact that I am not surprised. We have lost today the bonds that hold Geocaching in the UK together. Some may scoff at that remark, but they would be surprised at how much damage has been done by this loss. This is a sad day. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

Why does this feel like the party that ends early after the drunken row? I'm sorry to see you go Moss. Please reconsider. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

My sincerest thanks to all Admins, past and present. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by TheCat:Before this goes any further. GeocacheUK.com was not set up to hold talks with land owners etc as we dont see it in our remit to obtain permission for the placement of caches. Sorry Mark, I was just using it as an example, I know that's not what GC:UK is all about. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

Just think - your kid is the new Generation. Imagine what influence he could have on others in the future. You should be proud of yourself. Seems like you're raising a good kid there. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

My favourite film with a GPS in was My Little Eye. Except in the film, they called it a Locator, and used it to connect to the Internet. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by Rockratgirl:How can you explain that many people have already or are currently in negotiations with local landowners/Councils? Why can those of us happy to do this not continue? This is how Geocaching was intended. Not subsidiary groups for this, that and the other. No reason why they shouldn't carry on, as far as I can see. But for those land owners who would prefer to speak to a central body, who do they turn to? US based GC.com? Semi-Commercial GC:UK? Or an independent volunteer group, which promotes the sport because they are a part of it, and has local representatives that can talk to them personally, on a one to one basis? ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by Pooter:And in Scotland, you can throw all that stuff away. There are no public rights of way and no law of trespass, as you know it in England. The devolved Government of Scotland is also in the process of passing a law of “right to roam” in the countryside. What a good idea! D'ya think anywhere in these fair lands will take note of that success? I would hold my breath, but I'm rather partial to staying alive. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by Mudplugger:But if no-one wants to do it, What then ? If Icenians was willing to stand, I would support them. They have a very strong opinion, and I think that is needed. GAGB needs the naysayers involved, working alongside the yessirs, in order to help shape it. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by Icenians:So if I have a footpath across my field the council can say to GAGB go ahead and put plastic boxes on it! What rubbish! The landowners permission not the council that cuts the brambles in the lane. And would you prefer to deal with each Land Owner on an individual basis (considering how many there are), or, follow HCC guidelines if those guidelines would allow Geocaching to be seen as a legitmate use of the right of way? If it is (and I will readily admit I am theorising here) then Geocaching would be seen as an appropriate activity on the right of way, as long as it doesn't affect the Land surrounding it. After all, it's not surprising, especially since Geocaching does far less damage than say, Green-Lane driving, which is allowed on Byways Open To All Traffic. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by Icenians: quote:Originally posted by Kouros:I remember once (not so long ago, in fact) mentioning that those who support you are often more silent than those who are critical - and it seems that this is true, and sadly to all our detriment. Sorry, are you looking at a different poll than me? The current poll is a poll for T&J to guage whether they stay involved in GAGB. It does not speak for the other members. They said that. Now the idea of the poll was for those for the GAGB as it currently stood, those against, and those that don't care. I would suggest you check the results because when I last looked the yes camp were winning. When did I say that comment had anything to do with the poll? It was more of a general observation. Every now and then, T&J get criticised for their very good work, and those who support them keep quiet. quote:I couldn't agree more with Omally when he says about GAGB quote:therefore if anyone reading this who doesn't like what has been put on offer: why not stand for election yourself and make that change? Somebody really isn't reading what I say. If I join an association I don't want I become a member and have to follow the rules. If I don't become a member of the GAGB, they still claim to represent me as I am a geocacher. I cannot win that as the GAGB currently stands. I don't think this is particularly difficult to understand. Then make the change. You (and other people) have noted that the association is all-encompassing, and it probably shouldn't be (at least not without the consent of all Geocachers, which would be impossible). At the moment, it's still a blank canvas. It can still be adapted. Yet it's also still got all the opportunity in the world to do some good , yet people are happily spitting on it, which isn't helping. People have responded (really quite rudely) to Phil Allen, which isn't constructive either, and was actually quite offensive (For example, someone claimed that he didn't even exist!). Some statements (on both sides of the argument) have been completely out of order. Hell, someone (on whatever side it was) felt it necessary to try to swing the vote of the poll by voting under different ID's. Blow these arguments for a game of Soldiers. Actually, stuff the game of soldiers too. I'm off caching instead. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by Rockratgirl:Great replies! There is a cache in West Yorkshire where a farmer yells at Geocacher's for parking their cars on his road. Its not a private road, he just don't like it! You're not me, by any chance are you? These parallels are getting uncanny. My dad was walking down a road a few months back (I say road, but it was a private road, with houses down the side that led to a farm. It was also a Public Right of Way (a footpath) that was signed as such from all entrances. The occupant of one of the houses came out and shouted at him for "having the gall to walk down here." Obviously, my dad was somewhat surprised, and tired to explain it was a public right of way. It took a short walk to the signpost (about a hundred foot away) to convince the occupant otherwise. We think he might have only just moved in, and had been wrongly informed of the rights of way down the road. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote: quote:What about the otherwise thoroughly suitable caches that are placed on CC land? Should they all be removed? If they don't have permission then they shouldn't be there anywhere. True - but you are proposing not even trying to get HCC on side. quote: quote:According to http://www.hants.gov.uk/scrmxn/c10869.html the HCC owns 3000miles of Footpaths, bridleways, RUPPs and BOATs in Hampshire. Do they own the land these paths etc run through or do they just mantain it all? Most public paths I go on have pretty signs put up by the council but the farmer still owns the land. From the first paragraph of the page that I linked to: "This Panel is charged by the Recreation Committee with recording, protecting and maintaining nearly 3,000 miles (4,800 kms) of footpaths, bridleways, roads used as public paths (RUPPs) and byways open to all traffic (BOATs)." They are therefore Maintained by HCC, but they would also have a large say in what is allowed to be there. quote: quote:The vast majority of caching you could do in Hampshire will make use of these rights of way in one form or another. The permission needed from the council is whether the cache can be placed on their land not whether I can walk on a right of way (I can) to get to it. No, but the caches that are on these rights of way? I know a large percentage of caches I've done have been on these footpaths. quote: quote:Councils are not people we want to work against, but rather _with_. Then join the council and change it from there. Then you can represent your council not mine! I'm sorry - but that makes no sense. We are in a position to work with the council from here. We are getting something from them, not they from us. We should be willing to give a little, to gain a lot. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

I remember once (not so long ago, in fact) mentioning that those who support you are often more silent than those who are critical - and it seems that this is true, and sadly to all our detriment. I couldn't agree more with Omally when he says about GAGB quote:therefore if anyone reading this who doesn't like what has been put on offer: why not stand for election yourself and make that change? It seems that is now more true than it ever has been. To any that didn't agree - this is your chance to do things differently. Tim and June, thank you for the amount of effort that you have put into the game. I am sure that people (myself included) don't realise how much effort has been required on your part. I hope that your work with HCC will not be in vain. I am sad that you are leaving the public face of the game, but I am not surprised. I hope you reconsider, but if you don't, I only trust that I will meet you in the field again someday. I have enjoyed hunting your caches, and I will thoroughly enjoy the others other the next months, and hopefully years. Thank you for all your work. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by Icenians:I meant the bit about us not realising that CC's like to work with an organisation. My bad, that is, if you do realise that CC's would respect such a central body. quote:CC's don't own the country just a small part. They don't want your cache, find somewhere that does! And what happens when "somewhere else" finds that Geocaching isn't supported by the local council because we are unco-operative, and don't listen to their requests when we want to use their land? What about the otherwise thoroughly suitable caches that are placed on CC land? Should they all be removed? According to this site the HCC owns 3000miles of Footpaths, bridleways, RUPPs and BOATs in Hampshire. The vast majority of caching you could do in Hampshire will make use of these rights of way in one form or another. That's just Hampshire County Council. Extend that across the whole of the UK. Councils are not people we want to work against, but rather with. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by Icenians: quote:Originally posted by Kouros:but don't realise how much organisations like yours would respect such an association. Where on earth do you get that idea from! From the statement, by HCC at the top of this thread that... quote:That trust can only be achieved through an organisation that formally adopts the guidelines and has a membership structure that ensures that guidelines are adopted by individuals who place caches. and also quote:and so I would implore you to make the best of forming an organisation, and using that formal mechansim to develop a strong relationship with landowners and their agents. I haven't just plucked this opinion from thin air. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by Countryside Manager HCC:As a land manager, with professional interest in GPS, I have followed the development of Geocaching in this country over the past few months, and have begun to liaise with some members of the geocaching community. <snip> Thank you for getting in contact with all of us here. I am sure we are all glad that you have taken the time and effort to speak to us. I have said before that I think guidelines are a good idea, as is GAGB, because although we as individuals know how to conduct ourselves in the countryside, we all know that others don't. We have to respect the landowners requests, and if that means having a body that can help negotiate those requests, that's a fantastic idea, and I welcome it. I hope an agreement will come into place. I wouldn't like to see caching die an untimely death, especially after so many people have put in so much work. A lot of people feel very strongly against the issue, but a lot of the arguments appear to be on very technical issues (the name, the way a few pieces have been worded etc.) but don't realise how much organisations like yours would respect such an association. In response to RockRatgirl - I don't see in what way the organisation would be run in the South of England - it's already been stated that representatives suitable to the position would be elected, and I can't see how a Winchester cacher would be elected to be a rep for Argyll - It wouldn't happen. But feelings are running very high at the moment. Feelings that I hope we can all move on from. I hope that we will move on from this position to help secure Geocaching as a recognised outdoor activity, and once again, I thank you for having your interest in us. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by Teasel: quote:Originally posted by Kouros:A few weeks ago, I came across a footpath that had a painted sign hung over the stile saying "Footpath Closed" - at the time, I did what you did, and walked it anyway, as it wasn't currently being ploughed. Notices calculated to deter you from using a public right of way are, unsurprisingly, illegal! I'm not sure about PPs. Can they be closed at the landowner's whim? (ie does PP status protect walkers from paths being closed, or protect landowners from their path being decalared public, or a bit of both?) I thought the sign was illegal (which is why I did what RockRatgirl did, and walked it anyway). I must admit I am also intrigued as to whether PP's are able to be closed as and when the land owner chooses. I can't see the benefit of allowing walkers to traipse across your land if the farmer gets no reward. Do land owners who choose to open up a PP get any form of payment from the council? Oh, and RockRatGirl (if you're still reading this) if it was in part my comment that you are reffering to as critical, it wasn't intended that way, but rather as a statement of agreement - I too had been in the same situation, which is why I found it "interesting". ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

quote:Originally posted by Rockratgirl:Recently, we found a footpath which was not being maintained by the farmer and he was actually using the whole of his field for crops, rather than leaving a path through. The stile (crossing point between field boundaries) was also in disrepair. Even when the footpath is not being maintained, it is important we walk these routes - to keep them accessible to all. On that ocassion we walked the perimeter of the field (to avoid trampling crops) but another time we will walk straight across, as we are trespassing by walking the perimeter! Interesting. A few weeks ago, I came across a footpath that had a painted sign hung over the stile saying "Footpath Closed" - at the time, I did what you did, and walked it anyway, as it wasn't currently being ploughed. I must check to see if it was a public footpath, or a Permissive Path, though. I'll feel guilty if it's a PP, to be fair, but I remember being a little put out, at the time, as the sign was up halfway down a path, rather than at the start of it. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

You know, that's not a bad idea... not a bad idea at all... Hmm, ASCII Union Flag anyone? St. George Cross might be a little easier... ------ An it harm none, do what ye will

Although I support the group in theory, I do agree that GAGB should acknowledge the other databases, and I think that the way in which it describes itself could be worded better. Perhaps something along the lines of "The Geocaching Union of Great Britain and Ireland"? That way, there it would reflect that Eire is not a part of the Empire (and makes no presumptions as such), does not pretend that it is an over-arching body that speaks for all cachers, whether or not they are a part of it, yet still has an air of authority, which it must have. Just a thought, which too has its own faults, no doubt, so feel free to point them out. ------ An it harm none, do what ye will