CamoCacher

As far as I am concerned only 2 of the listings apply: 6. The owner should describe the hunt experience honestly when asked or even when not asked if a group is making a special trip 7. All caches should be rated appropriately.

I'm sorry I am not you and hold nothing against you or any of the other cachers that were there but even you admited you were pissed off about the truth in the beginning so then you can see how others might be too. Which indicates to me that you also did not know when you departed for your journey that this was a liar's cache - is that correct?

that's to bad it would have been nice to read.

I thought it was a big lie in return for a request for a big lie. 100% right. If you read the log by Esko it describes how one of our members got hurt (all a lie per the owners request to make up a story about your adventure). In the end we decided to say she died at the hospital of the injuries. Ohhh... Thank you for explaining that! Somehow, with all the other dramas swirling around this cache and the related issues, I totally missed that, and had thought that perhaps there was a growing feud between MN and MI cachers over the fact that MI cache hiders were wantonly assassinating MN cachers. Thanks for explaining it -- I appreciate your assistance! And, I am sorry to hear that you had a bad time at the MI tall tale cache. I have deliberately sought several well-crafted top-notch tall tale caches (in one case flying thousands of miles to do so), and personally, I have enjoyed each of them immensely. In other cases, some other tall tale caches much closer to home have not impressed me much at all, and I have deliberately chosen to skip them. For me, it has to do with level of craftmanship, love and care which goes into these caches which makes the difference, same as with any other cache. And, of course, on a related note, we now are witnessing the bizarre spectacle of rumors being circulated that all of our Psycho Urban Caches (click for list and links) and Psycho Backcountry Caches (click for list and links) are really tall tale caches. It seems that someone on these forums named Vinny, who has been masquerading as the "owner" of these caches, has taken upon himself (itself?) to announce on one of the threads that these Psycho caches are all hoaxes crafted by an advertising agency in Miami, Florida and an advertising copywriting shop in Cincinnati, Ohio, and that even many of the geo accounts of so-called "finders" of these Psycho caches are outright hoaxes, either sock puppet acccounts or hoax accounts operated by little old ladies in nursing homes. Let me tell you, we live in a sick world if people can make accusations such as that! Worse, the world would be even sicker if those accusations turn out to be true! I am sure they can be quite fun and really if we had known the truth right up front we wouldn't have had the issue we have. Speaking for my SO and I we would not have made a specific trip to the cache to get it if the truth had been known, I would not have hosted an event for it either. The dog wouldn't have had to be kenneled (he has a seizure disorder so being away from home is hard for him and we do it only on very few occaions) The time and expense that went along with it would have been used elesewhere. In fact the time and money would have been put into our own county caches in which we have spent many hours and money traveling our own state getting to know differnet areas, do different types of cache and really having fun. It's been great for our dog, us, and a few other cachers who have gone out with us.

I thought it was a big lie in return for a request for a big lie. 100% right. If you read the log by Esko it describes how one of our members got hurt (all a lie per the owners request to make up a story about your adventure). In the end we decided to say she died at the hospital of the injuries.

I'm guilty of doing that from time to time. Everyone makes mistakes. Thanks for understanding Thanks for answering my questions. The picture is a bit more focused. No problem

Actually no. I've dusted it up with LO in the past over her remarks about Jacksonville caches and cachers. I know who I'm dealing with. However, in this case I'm not impartial. I can't argue with you point by point, because I believe neither side is being totally forthcoming, but such is nearly always the case in forum disputes. One side lets fly with just enough truth to rally the villagers to get out their torches and pitchforks. In this case, I guess I'm the fair maiden who wishes to protect the monster. This is the point where your misinformation tactics become plain as day. Please quote me from anywhere on this thread where I have said ANY such thing. I believe I said: All I did was ask you a question to see where exactly you stood, up until now you have defended LO vigerously in this thread, now your stance is more clear to me, I am sorry i should have put a question mark there instead of a period. I can only put myself in the cache owner's shoe's to answer. In the situation outlined, had it been my cache, no one would have left home without knowing the truth. However, I now suspect that the group would have only gone down by a couple of members and we wouldn't be on our third page of the second round of this argument. (Word to the wise for all of you out there who are planning a liar's cache.) And therein lies the problem the owner, LO, did not in any way shape or forum inform this group of the truth of this cache. Hmmmm, someone must have. When I was reading the article, I focused on the word "plucky," and remembered reading it in the original thread about this situation. "Plucky" isn't a adjective you see every day. Certain people (especially writers) tend to reuse them often though. You could give me three original, unpublished, pages by any two different authors and Stephen King and just about anyone familiar with the works of SK would pick out the page authored by him. I certainly could. I believe the qoute is taken from the website itself because I know who said the word and we both are corious as to how the article was written. Sorry, I'll spare you the adjectives I have in response to that. Adult to adult, you could have asked to speak to her privately. Excuses for not behaving like an adult don't cut it when it has gone this far. From what I gather just from reading, you had another chance to confront her the next day and instead stood her up. So, there were two missed chances. Just a few questions.... How many folks were in your group? It's unclear, was there more than 1 group? How many actually share the hard feelings described? Did anyone defy the percieved group dynamic and actually enjoy the trip? There were 6 in the original group, 1 drove down the next day after knowing the truth because he plans on making a real gauntlet and wanted to check this one out. All but the 2 had hard feelings that I know of, one that didn't was the one who knew the truth coming down, the second I never actaully asked him how how felt one way or another but I suspent he may be the one that helped with the article because of how I recieved the info that this discussion was out here and about the article. There were 4 females in the original group, 2 males, and 1 male that joined us. Other then the experience with this specific cache and this specific cache owner the trip was fine, tho not one we probably would have made at that time if we had known the truth. Several were planning on making that cache a milestone instead they used other caches. In fact out of the whole trip the best caches which another MN cacher puts us onto after we talked to them about the cache in question (they had done it already and got an earful for not informing us of the truth. The difference is they apologized and wished they had informed us.) was the Twin Bluffs Series.

Really? On which side has it gone too far if even on their own local forum they're tired of hearing about it? In just a few days this whole mess will be two months old. Maybe the cache owner should have done MORE to prepare them. Maybe they should have asked MORE questions and tried other sources, or I dunno, looked at a map. Convince me that a couple car loads worth of ADULTS could ALL be that naive. I don't buy it one bit. We have yet to see PROOF of deceit on the cache owner's part, yet some will take the claims of those who cry most loudly at face value. Being an ADULT, I'm always suspicious of those who cry most loudly. What I see is a group of ADULTS who wanted something to get good and mad about and then to stay mad for whatever reason floated them. They admittedly had an opportunity to confront the cache owner in person and DIDN'T. They CHOSE to sit seething. Hmmm why? They pressured the archival of their scapegoat's cache through mass e-mail and multiple forum threads on several geocaching sites and it wasn't enough. TWO MONTHS later they drag the issue into the press. Who has gone too far? Righteous wrath is an oxymoron. I keep flashing on Pulp Fiction about this whole thang: Can't say it hasn't been entertaining though. Snoogans I think it may be you that is snowballed by the owner of this cache. Sorry but true. First off it's a multi folks looking at the map may or may not tell you ANYTHING and yes we did look at the starting point which was a public access area net to a river with a LARGE open area to the south, some really decebt hills to the north, a swampy area south, and island on the west side of said river. After asking the owner the thought was that the coords could potentally send us to another area for the actaul adventure. Snoogans we asked a few others we knew about the cache and they assured us it was real, still not being convinced Lil Otter was then contacted. So are you saying that you believe Lil Otter was upfront and totally truthful and told us that the cache was a fake. Say we had not asked any specific question do you feel that an owner of such a cache who does KNOW (the event page proves that) that a group is coming out for her cahce and she KNOWS its a fake doesn't have any duty to come out and tell the truth beforehand, even if she had not been contacted as she was? Actually Snoogans most of us had moved on tho we still get asked about the cache and situation. Speaking for the 2 that have been the most vocal about this whole thing in the past, neither of us went to the paper or had anything else to do with the writing of the article. Why didn't we confront her in person, well because there were oh about a handful of other cachers there and because at that point we were to angry to talk to her civil about it. I'm sorry but other the groudspeak or our own forums (2) there were no other forums and both were legit places to talk about our experiences esp in my case. The instructions in Lil Otters own cache was to be able to claim a find you must not reveal the truth, well folks I never even attempted to claim a find on the cache therefor I was never held to that agreement. As for Mass emails wha'ever. I emailed people in MN and MN only (from our own 2 forums) who I knew were going to take on the trek. I explained that they could go but not to make a big deal out of it and that the cache was a fake and it was a 1 stage Regular. After Lil Otter sent the email out that she did that and only then did we go public to our own forums and later followed to Groundspeak. If people emailed her becasue of the truth either in support or against that is the risk you take as an owner of any cache and esp a liar's cache.

Another way to protect privacy would have been to remove all the IP addys in the headers. In fact, the headers themselves were unnecessary. Oh I did not know to remove the IP's. Thanks

Ummm, you might want to reread the thread and links. The cache owner was contacted and ensured the group that the cache was the real deal. Unless the accusing parties want to show some proof, it's ALL hearsay. Including this: I was in contact with the cache owner when this first blew up and they refused to defend themselves publicly, but insisted those claims were false. I have the email and NO I won't post it. Hearsay. I am sorry i don't have all the emails that went back and forth but here is one for you: >From: " >To: " >CC: >Subject: Re: [GEO] bflentje contacting The Lil Otter from Geocaching.com >Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:50:03 -0600 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from smtp.myclearwave.net ([63.109.97.44]) by bay0-mc12-f6.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2444); Mon, 13 Nov 2006 15:50:56 -0800 >Received: from cwmail1.myclearwave.net (cwmail1.mcyelarwave.net [10.10.100.10])by smtp.myclearwave.net (Spam Firewall) with ESMTPid 6B57B170F7F; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:50:24 -0600 (CST) >Received: from HP (at235.myclearwave.net [72.2.210.235] (may be forged))by cwmail1.myclearwave.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with SMTP id kADNo7CC032208;Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:50:23 -0600 >X-Message-Info: LsUYwwHHNt3660MmjhEvYg2f34OAemlK3oXsmRrh6gU= >X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1163461824-35e700380000-hfTUuY >X-Barracuda-URL: http://10.10.100.15:8000/cgi-bin/mark.cgi >X-Barracuda-Connect: cwmail1.mcyelarwave.net[10.10.100.10] >X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1163461824 >References: <BAY118-F205C34E2E1C3888D513AE3C0F40@phx.gbl> >X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [GEO] bflentje contacting The Lil Otter from Geocaching.com >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 >X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by ClearWave Mail Firewall at myclearwave.net >X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.26 >X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.26 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=5.0 KILL_LEVEL=7.0 tests=HTML_FONT_BIG >X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.02, rules version 3.0.25924Rule breakdown below pts rule name description---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------0.26 HTML_FONT_BIG BODY: HTML tag for a big font size SNIP Can someone point out where LO deceived anyone in these emails? I'm getting a headache trying to read through it all and figure out who said what. All I see is bickering in the aftermath. BTW- Little Otter posted the email she sent to me. That is exactly what I was talking about in the post I quoted. I'm sorry i don't have the very first email that I sent her. I know one question that was asked was something like: How long does it take the average cacher to do the cache. (The reasoning was so we could set a time to make sure we could all be heading home in a decent enough time to go to work on Monday.) The response was something like: I can't tell you how long but I would bring some extra caches in case it doesn't take you long. (BTW it takes the average cacher about 5 mins to find the ammo can in the pile of concrete rubble at the side of a boat launch in which there is not much hiding spots). Now could that possibly say it doesn't take long - maybe but maybe not. This weekend we did the LAIR cache in which the article has a photo. I once again emailed the owner regarding the cache, the terrain and if it was dog friendly, etc. It's a 3 hour drive for us. I got a pleasant and lengthy and very informative email. He told me alot and also said if we were 50 like him it might take 2 hours to do. Our group, which was 3 of us from the Gauntlet trip got to the cache and signed in about 30-45 mins and then spent another hour exploring and taking photos. and then any easier route back in about 15 mins. So different people with different skills esp on a 4 terrain could take differnt amounts of time and was a legit answer had the cache been real. Edited to add: This email was sent before we set up the event because we were still discussing things and getting details arranged before putting up the event post.

The reasoning behind my not speaking out about this publically was because of my concerns about a MN/WI border squabble.. I have asked all those that responded to them in a disrespectful manner to follow my lead and not do any personal attacks. I will state plainly that I did not lie to them.. the only email I got prior to their visit was an invite to their event and to the gathering they planned. I was never informed that they came JUST to do the Gauntlet. Below is my email I wrote to Snoogans which is mentioned above.. I also wrote to thank others that were assisting them. [11/17/06 - Greetings Snoogans, Thank you so much for your efforts to mentor/help those Gals from MN understand that it was not mean spirited sport on the Liar's cache they are talking about.. They've been hammering me all week both publically and privately.. even mass email to others to hammer me in emails as well as to put on the cache page that one of their group DIED ( I had to delete that log )but was swamped again with emails to handle.. I had (for their arrival).. two others (one was the Wisconsin Geo President) there to play host/hostess to the area's best (tough) caches.. but the MN group went to the cache a day early.. even though they created the meet time on Sunday 7am.. the 3 of us (Hosts) were there standing in 20 degree weather waiting for them.. they blew us off... so missed out on all the fun/attention we give to the out of state visitors.. They did other caches on the way to and from on their trip.. even talking about getting a hotel with a waterpark to swim etc.. I won't publically correct all their errors.. it'll only turn into a fight.. because everything I've done has been twisted so far.. so I wash my hands of trying to explain that we were there to "ENJOY" and bond with them .. not a PRANK.. etc.. to laugh at them.. I just hope that one day they'll realize that they could have enjoyed their trip/adventure without turning it into a personal attack upon me. http://www.mngca.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t...c&start=120 It's just getting to me and it's been a long week of handling all this mess.. just glad they are behaving on this forum.. When I hear of out-of-staters coming into this area.. I offer camping in my yard.. etc.. I go all out to cancel all I would have done so I am freed up during those days that they are in the area.. Please understand that I am NOT sitting there "laughing" at them.. but all that do the Gauntlet become an elite group called the Gauntlet "survivors".. (not my doing but named by the others that have done it).. we even talk alot of having 'survivor' gatherings.. we have been having a blast.. many that already do the Gauntlet return when they see a group massing.. it's a constant 'good time'.. But I think that if these gals hadn't snuck to the Gauntlet (unfair advantage to the others that were to show up the next day) and would have waited til their 7am Sunday 'meet'.. everything would have been so different.. and they would have had great memories etc..or if I was a 'cute' male.. not a female.. it could have been different.. hard to say what really riled them the most. But we did have fun at the pre-Gauntlet event the night before.. just wished they'd have actually spoke how ticked off they were.. not all this behind the scenes drama and email mass attack.. death logs etc.. Hard times.. long week.. but I'm glad that they are beginning to understand about liar caches. Thanks again for helping them realize...and allowing me to explain a bit.. ~The Lil Otter p.s . I never lied to them or misled them.. but because I am not publically correcting them.. things are getting more warped about how they wish to see me.. I'm just a cacher that has 2.5yr old 'fun' cache which is done with good intentions.. But nothing I could say or do made a difference with the chips on their shoulders. ] end of email My cache was located in the top vacation spot in the midwest... surrounded by Rocky Arbor, Mirror Lake, Devil's Lake, Buckhorn, Roche-A-Cri State Parks.. all located within 30 miles of the cache. I came prepared with a listing of all the caches within the area. At last I now can publically thank JoGPS's cache for giving me the idea of my Gauntlet's format.. I would just hope that now after almost 2 months of problems that these gals would finally think that they have 'won'.. My cache is archived.. When I asked CamoCacher etc to cease with the petty attacks/pranks.. she plainly stated in email "You repead what you sowed." ~The Lil Otter ps.. I do not enjoy being pulled into public forums where bashing takes place.. so please refrain from any personal attacks.. I'm sorry did the event not indicate that we were coming for YOUR cache? I'm sorry the event in which was posted, you were invited to and is called The MN Purple Invasion of "The Gauntlet" Hmmm went a day early, yep to check out the first stage of a MULTI (which it is not) and check out the area, now if we'd know the truth A) we probably wouldn't have made an event or gone to the cache but if we had so decided to still make the trip the outcome would be different and no one would have gone to the "first" stage early only to find out the truth. Blew you off - you were told we probably wouldn't be there and a phone call that morning a few minutes after 7am told you we would not be there and to go one with the cachers who did not go the night before. Your sex has nothing to do it with, I could care less or could any of our group. excuse me the qoute you put is not in response to that....what you wrote is that the "a cacher died" post what was worng and my response to you (after CCing Jeremy from Groundspeak into the discussion which i have yet to figure out why you did but wha'ever) is that your cache requests that we basically make the logs bigger better and wild which we did and you didn't like and I stated you "reap what you sow." By the way this has nothing to do with winning nor did any of the GIRLs have anything to do with the writing of the article.

I don't have a specific problem with liar's caches. Creating a cache that requests that the finders create a wacky tale sounds like big fun. However, I think the ratings should be in the ball park. (Lately, nearly every time I type 'the' it comes out as 'teh'. It's very irritating.) I agree with SBell111 I also don't have a problem with them as long as it isn't so subtle or to have wrong info such as terrain/difficulty and if asked questions about the cache if the owners are honest. Heck even one step further when you know a specific event is being done for a cache because of its difficulty an honest owner would email the host and explain the truth and request it be kept secret and if others are known to be planning a trip that they email the owner first.

No It was a joke (except for the bit about New Jersey. That's the truth.) Why do people not like Jersey?

No

BTW I didn't know about the article until recently and after it was already started for publishing so don't know who helped the author write the article from our group nor as far as I know do i know Lisa. BTW the 400 is actually misconstrued a bit. I spent over 400.00 between hotel, gas (I drive a big truck), kenneling my dog, a trip to meet with 2 other cachers to plan, and then the food on the trip.

The reviewers were contacted and nothing was done. What would you have had them do? Minor changes such as terrain and difficulty and a hint as a disclaimer as to the truth. Up until this cache I had never come across a Liar's cache and only asked the original questions because someone suggested it to me to confirm the cache was real.

Ummm, you might want to reread the thread and links. The cache owner was contacted and ensured the group that the cache was the real deal. Unless the accusing parties want to show some proof, it's ALL hearsay. Including this: I was in contact with the cache owner when this first blew up and they refused to defend themselves publicly, but insisted those claims were false. I have the email and NO I won't post it. Hearsay. I am sorry i don't have all the emails that went back and forth but here is one for you: >From: " >To: " >CC: >Subject: Re: [GEO] bflentje contacting The Lil Otter from Geocaching.com >Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:50:03 -0600 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from smtp.myclearwave.net ([63.109.97.44]) by bay0-mc12-f6.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2444); Mon, 13 Nov 2006 15:50:56 -0800 >Received: from cwmail1.myclearwave.net (cwmail1.mcyelarwave.net [10.10.100.10])by smtp.myclearwave.net (Spam Firewall) with ESMTPid 6B57B170F7F; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:50:24 -0600 (CST) >Received: from HP (at235.myclearwave.net [72.2.210.235] (may be forged))by cwmail1.myclearwave.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with SMTP id kADNo7CC032208;Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:50:23 -0600 >X-Message-Info: LsUYwwHHNt3660MmjhEvYg2f34OAemlK3oXsmRrh6gU= >X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1163461824-35e700380000-hfTUuY >X-Barracuda-URL: http://10.10.100.15:8000/cgi-bin/mark.cgi >X-Barracuda-Connect: cwmail1.mcyelarwave.net[10.10.100.10] >X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1163461824 >References: <BAY118-F205C34E2E1C3888D513AE3C0F40@phx.gbl> >X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [GEO] bflentje contacting The Lil Otter from Geocaching.com >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 >X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by ClearWave Mail Firewall at myclearwave.net >X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.26 >X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.26 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=5.0 KILL_LEVEL=7.0 tests=HTML_FONT_BIG >X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.02, rules version 3.0.25924Rule breakdown below pts rule name description---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------0.26 HTML_FONT_BIG BODY: HTML tag for a big font size >Return-Path: >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Nov 2006 23:50:56.0513 (UTC) FILETIME=[8FEA7710:01C7077E] > >Hello, > Finally the truth is becoming known. Yes all involved have an investment in time. My time so far is 15 hours. Face the truth , sometime somebody was going to spill the beans. > > To complain that we weren't at the send off, oh, come on, keeping the joke up has stopped. Make it a puzzle. Lil Otter, you created the cache and schedule you own time. Coming to the send off is your choice, we didn't ask for you to be there. Just like our time, you didn't ask that we plan the trip and event. That is our responsibility. > > The bad form for the cache started with it being created and approved. (copied from earlier email p.s. please feel free to pass this email on to those you know have received the mass email reference to the "Gauntlet" so that they too can see the bad form involved was NOT on the WISCONSIN side but on the MINNESOTA side..) > > One of the stated purposes of the cache is bonding. Yes, we had a great time at Twin Bluffs! > >Accordiongal/Jean > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Saundra Urbacke > To: > Cc: > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 2:07 PM > Subject: Re: [GEO] bflentje contacting The Lil Otter from Geocaching.com > > > First off let me make it CLEAR that only I have emailed and I am behind it all. HOW DARE YOU PUT OUT A FRIGGING cache like this. Trust me I went to my reviewer about this crap. This team from MN told you we propbalby would not be there and to go on without us as we had found it and we had one with a bad back who may or may not be up to the task of getting up in the am at 7am. > > Second several of us have LOTS of money into your friggin joke of a cache. Between the food, the gas, the dogs kenneling, I alone have over 300.00 so no it's not some inoccent little thing. Nor do I plan on letting you set up other MN Cachers who are looking for a true challange. When I go for a 4.0 cache that is what I expect. Thank goodness for the Twin bluffs Cache in the New Lisbeon Area which could fufill this desire. > > This would be one thing IF we were in the area and a special trip and $$ were not invested. The polite thing to do would have been for YOU to email me and let me know the truth behind this cache so we would not have wasted our time or money. > > You sat there Sat night talking about how great YOU are and the QUALITY of your CACHES and how you take people place they would eant to be and RIPPING on others who hide less then worthy caches. I'm sorry tell me what is so interesting about a PUBLIC Boat landing in which the neighbors are very UNHAPPY about the cache. > > Third you called Red Devil at the site a few minutes after 700 in which she told you we would not be out there. > > Several of the emailed cachers are very THANKFUL and happy that they are not making the same mistake we did. They'll do the cache but not as a special trip or save for a milestone like many on our trip did. > > GeoPink was not asked tho his time is appreciated to host us nor was Coastagal, that is SOMETHING you all CHOOSE to do on your own with no expectation from the MN group. > > BTW I and GeckoOne will not be posting a FIND on this cache and therefore are not required to fufill keeping the secret! > > > > > > > Always feel free to let your dreams run free. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > From: > To: > CC: > Subject: Re: [GEO] bflentje contacting The Lil Otter from Geocaching.com > Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 13:19:44 EST > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Received: from imo-m20.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.1]) by bay0-mc2-f17.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2444); Mon, 13 Nov 2006 10:22:00 -0800 > Received: from by imo-m20.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r7.6.) id y.c10.9950eb0 (48600);Mon, 13 Nov 2006 13:19:45 -0500 (EST) > > > In a message dated 11/13/2006 11:11:18 A.M. Central Standard Time, writes: > In regards to The Gauntlet.. Let the Games Begin!! > > Nice scam. If it wasn't so far away I'd think the idea was really cool. > > But don't worry, your secret is safe with me. > > Regards. > > Bart > > > Greetings Bart, > > I realize that accordiongal (perhaps others) are mass mailing emails to many.. > > I feel sad that the MN group organized by CamoCacher felt so put out that they blew off their scheduled meet at the Gauntlet and let us there standing in the cold for an hr + at 7am in the morning... I'd call it bad form on what they did and are doing now... but thank you for understanding that only these cachers found fault in this cache and decided to ruin it for other MN's (IL cachers that drive just as far enjoyed becoming part of the Gauntlet survivors group).... secret emails seem like a childish way to ruin a cache... why not just publicly post their mind and force me to close the cache.. > > By the way.. this cache was created in 3/21/2004 won "Cache of the Month" in May 2005, and "Cache of the Year 2005".. > > Here's the behind the scene's time/effort that went into hosting these last visitors.. > > GeoPink Travel Time to Host the visitors from Minnesota... 6 hrs. > GeoPink Time at event: 3.5 hrs > GeoPink time at Gauntlet sendoff: 1.5 hrs > Total time - Host to the Minnesota events that they setup... 11 hrs. > (GeoPink is Wisconsin's Geocaching Assoc. President) > > Coastiegirl04 Travel Time to assist with hosting the visitors from Minnesota.. 5 hrs. > Coastiegirl04 Time at event: 4 hrs > Coastiegirl04 time at Gauntlet sendoff: 1.5 hrs > Total time - assistant hostess to the Minnesota events that they setup... 10.5 hrs > Plus she grouped with one of the cachers that showed up for the 7am Sunday Gauntlet and spent Sunday caching with him. > > The Lil Otter Travel time to both events: 2.5 hrs. > The Lil Otter time at event: 3.5 hrs > The Lil Otter time at Gauntlet sendoff: 1.5 hrs. > Total time - Hostess to the Minnesota events that they setup.. 7.5 hrs. > > Usually the hosts/hostess' put in extra time with grouping after the Gauntlet to be guides to the area's best caches/challenges i.e. Devil's Lake toughies as well as other major hiking experiences.. (all these people have already done the cache before so no special "point" gained for all their time and effort) > > If they would have planned their attack of the Gauntlet in warmer weather I would have offered up my backyard for free camping.. (done many times before) I could not offer up my HOME to so many... which would be understandable. But I did offer up camping for the weekend to this group. > > I have never had to deal with this type of "game" in which backstabbing goes on because most realize it's not a PRANK but a way to bond with all the cachers before them that did the Gauntlet.. I'm so sorry that they ruined it for you by spreading private emails and playing "bad" sport... As quoted from a survivor of the Gauntlet "The best part of The Gauntlet is going through the motions of planning, getting all the gear set, taking pictures in the parking lot, etc." I'm sorry that the one(s) that leaked the information now ruined that for others. > > ~The Lil Otter > > p.s. please feel free to pass this email on to those you know have received the mass email reference to the "Gauntlet" so that they too can see the bad form involved was NOT on the WISCONSIN side but on the MINNESOTA side.. > > c.c. All named in above email so they deserve to receive this email > GeoPink (Wisconsin's Geocaching President and Host that weekend) > CoastieGirl104 (assistant hostess that weekend) > The Lil Otter (Hostess that weekend and owner of the cache) > CamoCacher (Organized Saturday night event and Gauntlet 7am Sunday gathering) > AccordianGal > > > > >Call it hearsay if you want. I deleted out the emails for all involved for privacy.

Well, to me, this matter of "tal tale" caches is a matter of personal opinion and preference. I happen to like well-designed and well-executed tall tale caches myself. However, having said that, I happen to firmly believe, as I have stated before, that a tall tale cache must be categorized by the owner only as a mystery/puzzle (aka "?" or riddle) cache, due to the special additional logging requirements. I do NOT like seeing tall tale caches categorized as traditional or multi-stage caches; I feel that this can cross the line of being too misleading. As I mentioned above, I happen to like such caches when they have been very well-crafted by their creator and particularly if the early finders helped to build the myth and turn it into a really fun tale, with just the right amount of silliness and impossibility. Some of my favorite caches have been tall tale caches. In fact, judging by the content of some past threads on this topic of tall tale caches, much as seems to be true for several well-known high-volume posters on this forum. It is also true that in some cases, I have traveled long distances just to tackle such tale caches, knowing that they were tall tale caches. And, two other well-known tall tale caches located between 300 and 900 miles from my home are still high on my "want to do" list, and I will get to them someday. On the other hand, there are some tall tale caches that, to me, are just kinda silly and boring (or is a better word banal?) and, even though they may be located in my area, I simply choose to ignore them. So, for me, it all comes down to a matter of personal preference, just as some of us love guardrail and lamppost skirt urban micros and some hate them, and some of us love bacon and eggs for breakfast while others will only eat grits with fried grasshoppers and butter for breakfast. What kinda amazes me in the case cited by the OP is that it appears that both the author of the news article and the team of finders cited chose such an extreme response as that of publicly "exposing" the tall tale nature of the cache. To me, this sounds very judgemental and rather fundamentalist and extreme, and I could personally only remotely justify such a response if there had been some very serious deception involved, with no hints as to the true nature of the cache, and/or if the cache had been miscategorized as a traditional or multi instead of as a puzzle/riddle cache (the latter to indicate the additional requirements.) Much as wimseyguy pointed out in his earlier post cited above, it has been my experience that it is ALWAYS possible to discern if a cache is a tall tale cache, even if the owner has miscategorized it as a traditional or multi. However, we live in an era of fast food, power caching, grab and go caches, fast fixes and sound bites, and I notice with some dismay that more and more cachers nowadays are choosing to seek caches without first carefully reading the cache listing page, and instead they just blindly forge ahead using only the waypoint coordinates which some generic mass-download program generically dumped into their GPSr from the gc.com site. This type of casual "blind" is of particular concern to me as the owner of a number of extreme terrain caches that could easily get a seeker killed if they did not know what they were getting into. In that vein, Snoogans shared a great cautionary tale here about 10 months ago about some ill-prepared seekers -- who had never read the cache listing page -- of one of his extreme cachers who blundered onto posted private property and were almost killed. Likewise, from my vantage point here, I have witnessed my share of bizarre misdventures because a cacher failed to read the cache listing page for an extreme cache. In fact, because of this phenomenon of not reading cache listing pages, more and more owners of extreme caches -- including myself -- are taking the extra precautionay step of not listing the acutal cache starting coordinates as the primary coordinates listed at the top of the cache listing page (and blindly downloaded to GPSrs by mass-download programs) and rather either burying the actual coordinates in text form in the text body of of the description or even posting prerequisite screening requirements for seeking the cche, where those who meet the requirements must contact the cache owner to obtain the true cache coordinates. In closing, allow me to repeat: I have never seen, and I have never heard of, a tall tale cache whhose true nature would not become immediately obvious to any intelligent geocacher if they were to read the cache listing page and the previous logs carefully, and if they were to exercise other nominal due diligence such as looking at the maps and the topo maps linked from the cache listing page. As to the outing of the cache it was actually in an email from the owner that if we were so unhappy at the expereince why don't we publicly out the cache. That is what we did at her suggestion. Since the owner had been contacted before hand about the cache and choose, knowing we were driving so far would have expenses of a overnight stay AND built an event out of this, decet was certainly involved and is what set this particular group off when it came to this cache. After we found out the truth several phone calls were made to cachers who were plannign to drive out EARLY the next morning to tell them the truth. When everyone meet the owner that night all were polite even through the owners speech about how the qaulity caches had gone down hill, how she couldn't cache anymore because of it, how many look up to her and she is a mentor to other cachers. Lets say this just fueled the fire of this groups anger and YES the owner KNEw at that poimt we had already found it.

The owner was contacted and never let on the truth which is what trully PISSED off our group.

The reviewers were contacted and nothing was done.

Yes I was one of those MN. Personnally I won't ever do a cache by this placer because of the BAD taste it left in our mouth. Not sinister but wrong, might have been a good joke if all the money that was put into doing this cache and the excitment of the group to take on a challenge esp since the owner was contacted, new we were coming and actaully made an event out of the cache which turned out to be a lie.

Anyone know what cache this was? The Gauntlet. I am one of the MN that did this cache and was not happy.

Spent only because of the one cache.

Yep an event was held for a group find. Ya' know CC, you and the OP didn't really do a very good job of explaining what happened here. By going into yours and her user stats, combined with a couple of comments made here, I was able to figure it out, but I'll bet you I'm the only one I think this is one of the most interesting, and open to debate stories I've ever seen in these forums! And in my opinion, a practical joke was played on a bunch of strangers from the internet, and a bunch of strangers who spent a lot of money on food and lodging, only to be disappointed. I'd have hoped the cache owner, or another local would have pulled the event host aside and said "PSSSST, this cache is sort of over-rated" (without going into the whole story of a liar's cache.) But then again, I don't want to be any more responsible for "outing" this particular liars cache then I already am. So I think I'm going to hit the eject button right about now You lost me totally.....What didn't we fully explain or what di we leave out?

Yep an event was held for a group find.