SloCachers

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#thirdpartycontent But, then there is this: Geocache Contents Geocache containers include a logsheet or logbook. For all physical caches, there must be a logbook, scroll or other type of log for geocachers to record their visit. That says that there must be a means to record their visit. Doesn't mean it has to be singable with a pen, pencil, etc. If the 'special tool required' attribute is used and it is stated that a laptop is needed , then it should be publishable.

This^^^ Mods? anything to chime in with here?

This. is. all. hearsay. that is what that is Do not EVER edit my post to suit your agenda again. GOT IT? Agreed; that is very poor form. Thank you, Arthur & Trillian, for pointing out the misleading edit. Yes oh powerful overlords of false information!! I will NEVER do that again. Sincerest apologies. Please don't spread FALSE information about people anymore. GOT IT? Here's a great example of a DGS member being snarky, engaging in name-calling, and aggressively butting heads with another geocacher. Fortunately, SloCachers have chosen to engage a moderator. We are equipped with Kevlar flak jackets and a generous supply of Admin bricks. Thanks for helping to prove the points being raised in this discussion. What is there left to do? When you allow harassment to go on for so long, isn't expected that someone is going to be fed up with the blatant disregard for the equal enforcement of the guidelines and finally react?

thanks for singling out the DGS, ... again. This is lifted right off the cache page "Hidden : 06/25/2013". Don't the reviewers have to verify coords? If this was done it would have been shown that the coords were inside a building, which should have prompted further investigation.

Yes. And you may want to double check your emails that you've saved up. One of them mentions that as a condition of having your listing unarchived (after you modified it post-publication to indicate that it would be traveling around), was that virtual logs would not be tolerated and could lead to your cache being archived again, which is exactly what happened. That was sent to us after it was republished, when you mentioned that it was on GS level and we said we were not going to delete the logs because they were not in violation by any definition of GS's Laws. I had no idea that a Lackey could say that, because in their mind it "goes against the spirit of geocaching". So it was archived for not being in violation of the guidelines. We were also never deceptive and explained to you the mixup with the listing (which I have mentioned earlier in this thread). That email was dated 10/10. Your cache was republished on 10/23. So no, it was not sent to you after your cache was republished. The reference you are making says that you couldn't guarantee that the state reviewer would not archive it, if a local whined about it. the next mention was when you contacted us to inform us that someone had whined right to Groundspeak about the cache, at which point we asked you to please put us in touch with the lackey handling the case, or to have them contact us, so that we could argue our case and that didn't happen. So, it was abruptly archived without explanation. Then the appeal was ignored. Thanks Rooney. We look forward to you publishing our future caches.

Yes. And you may want to double check your emails that you've saved up. One of them mentions that as a condition of having your listing unarchived (after you modified it post-publication to indicate that it would be traveling around), was that virtual logs would not be tolerated and could lead to your cache being archived again, which is exactly what happened. That was sent to us after it was republished, when you mentioned that it was on GS level and we said we were not going to delete the logs because they were not in violation by any definition of GS's Laws. I had no idea that a Lackey could say that, because in their mind it "goes against the spirit of geocaching". So it was archived for not being in violation of the guidelines. We were also never deceptive and explained to you the mixup with the listing (which I have mentioned earlier in this thread).

Since when? You do realize that your behavior in this very thread is not helping the DGS's image, right? What is one to do when provoked by self righteous people such as yourself? You have done nothing but lie this entire time, yet you feel smugly superior to everyone and call me out. I am simply responding to you. What is a person to do? I have been truthful since I joined in on this "trash the DGS fest" that you are relentlessly perpetuating.

And this right here is why there are problems. Please explain how your actions here are any different from any DGS member that you claim are bad apples?

this was covered very early on in this thread. The dirtbag moniker comes from the group creators that are/were army service members. That is a term in the army, just the same as a grunt, jar head, flyboy, etc. Thank you for that explanation, but even so - they must be aware of the negative connotations. Pardon my ignorance, but what is the true mission of this group? We are aware of the negativity of our members that have made poor choices. There have been efforts to change this behavior since before we became members. The mission is the same as it has always been, Better caches, Better adventures.

This. is. all. hearsay. that is what that is Do not EVER edit my post to suit your agenda again. GOT IT? Agreed; that is very poor form. Thank you, Arthur & Trillian, for pointing out the misleading edit. Yes oh powerful overlords of false information!! I will NEVER do that again. Sincerest apologies. Please don't spread FALSE information about people anymore. GOT IT?

I think I've posted quite enough about your cache that was logged as found in two different states, yet is somehow has not "moved" in your mind. You appealed, your appeal was denied, your case is closed. Thank you, though, for having the courage to bring your example to the forum. It is a useful example of a pattern of behavior, as noted above in maingray's post. What pattern of behavior? It was stated that we were deceptive. I see no deception according to GS laws, and you have failed to prove any. As for the appeal being closed, there is no mention of that to us. It was simply ignored because it was archived by a lackey that had no viable evidence to prove that it broke the GS Laws. I can do whatever I want with my containers. At no point do they become the property of GS. The entire time that cache was published, it was in place, as is required by the GS Laws you keep referring to. Before publishing and after archival I have the right to choose to do what I want with my container. Any thoughts there, Keystone? The listing that was published is for a cache ostansibly chained to a tree in Bolingbrook, Illinois. That listing was archived because people were logging "found it" logs based on seeing the cache at an event miles away in Illinois, and at an event hundreds of miles away in Las Vegas. It's true that Groundspeak doesn't own your cache container and doesn't control what you do with it. But, Groundspeak does control how a listing page was used on its site. If there were no logs from people who found the cache at places other than next to a tree in Bolingbrook, Illinois, I bet your listing would still be active. Enjoy your special cache container. It sounds very creative. It would have made for a very nice "Lab Cache" at GeocoinFest. That would have been a way to play the game within the rules established by the listing service. is it not GS's law that says, if the logbook is signed, then the cache may be logged online? Also, yes the container went to an event in illinois, ONLY AFTER it was archived. How am I to prevent people from logging it? Still no proof of deception...

this was covered very early on in this thread. The dirtbag moniker comes from the group creators that are/were army service members. That is a term in the army, just the same as a grunt, jar head, flyboy, etc.

This. is. all. hearsay. that is what that is

Personal negative encounter? or a hearsay? also, appreciate the positive review of the members you know.

The question is why "nobody likes the DGS"? Things like that don't occur accidentally or by chance. Most geocachers have never experienced a site ban, let alone have heard it commonly referred to it as "Geojail". Most people do not know anything about the DGS either, but when they open a thread and see a few attacking the Lackeys, what do you think their impressions will be? Sometimes you have to step back and wonder at how you got to where you are. If you behave like a bunch of kids that need discipline, then you are only setting yourself up to be treated like that. Respect is a two way street. Who is your daddy anyhow? Has anyone here had any unpleasant experiences arising from interactions with any DGS member? And who is attacking a lackey unprovoked? The DGS has been getting dumped on in this thread since the beginning. Yes respect is a 2 ways street. Ive had to deal with a lackey once and the respect there sucked. Archive a cache because someone whined about. Then make up some BS about how it is breaking one law and make up another law on the fly and then ignore when that idiotic decision is contested. Tell me how is a lackey to demand respect when they act that way? You have no reason to dislike the DGS if you haven't personally had a negative interaction with a member. I'm not saying you have to like them, but you can't dump on them if you haven't had any personal dealings with them.

Unbelievable, isn't it? Now do you see the position that DGS members and supporters are in? That has been the point since the start of this entire thread. Now it suddenly uncomfortable because some of us are no longer idly standing by.

I think I've posted quite enough about your cache that was logged as found in two different states, yet is somehow has not "moved" in your mind. You appealed, your appeal was denied, your case is closed. Thank you, though, for having the courage to bring your example to the forum. It is a useful example of a pattern of behavior, as noted above in maingray's post. What pattern of behavior? It was stated that we were deceptive. I see no deception according to GS laws, and you have failed to prove any. As for the appeal being closed, there is no mention of that to us. It was simply ignored because it was archived by a lackey that had no viable evidence to prove that it broke the GS Laws. I can do whatever I want with my containers. At no point do they become the property of GS. The entire time that cache was published, it was in place, as is required by the GS Laws you keep referring to. Before publishing and after archival I have the right to choose to do what I want with my container. Any thoughts there, Keystone?

You know, you can believe what you wish. I really don't care. You will not bait me into violating the forum guidelines but outing people who have been banned, as it's a matter between the ones banned and Groundspeak. Arthur & Trillian is behaving correctly and admirably. (And yes, based on his past history, it pains me to say that - but I'm a truly neutral referee!) It is unseemly to name individuals, and far better to have a discussion about the behaviors and actions of those individuals. You will all see this principle reinforced in the near future. People ought to be able to come here and discuss what they've observed in the geocaching world. Nothing good is accomplished by calling someone a liar when they are trying to have a discussion of behaviors they've experienced. So, do stop that. Thanks. wow. Correctly and admirably? I'd love to know how you came up with that! As wallace has said, if this was anyone else, there would be repercussions. But, because it's about the DGS, it's all good to go. Good on you for being a "truly neutral referee" Also, You never did finish proving deception.... what happened? couldn't find the evidence to prove the lackey's point?

I doubt it's an issue of GS playing nice or not; they were likely simply believing the CO. Volunteers are well, human, and Reviewers / Lackeys have to have some faith in the CO's honesty. Sometimes, honesty is they all can rely on. Neither I nor you can prove the intention of this cache, but pocket (aka moving aka event-only) caches are not new, were banned years ago for rampant abuse, and some groups still try and get them through by any means possible (and within businesses..and armchair caches.. and virtuals..etc etc). I've seen many examples and suggestions on Facebook of how to do this. I am the CO. I can prove the intention of this cache. They did not believe us. I understand they are human. There is nothing wrong with making mistakes. When it comes to the lackey, instead of admitting they made a mistake, they are ignoring it and hoping it will go away.

So now that we've determined that Arthur&Trillian are providing false information (lack of evidence, persistent in posting false rumours), can we get them banned for harassing ALL members of the DGS (fellow cachers (whether you like it or not)) ?

You know, you can believe what you wish. I really don't care. You will not bait me into violating the forum guidelines but outing people who have been banned, as it's a matter between the ones banned and Groundspeak. Why are you so worried about it anyway? Is it beyond your ability to imagine that a DGS member would be banned? If so, that's your problem. Three cachers got banned in my area and I gave you two simple ways to find out who they are for yourself. You failing to follow through is not my concern. Frankly, I care less if you or SloCachers think I am lying or not. Given the fact that you don't trust Groundspeak with anything they do, your minds are already made up on the issue. My mind is open on the matter. We as cachers are expected to play nice. Why shouldn't GS be held to the same standards? I'm stating facts about my personal dealings with GS, which if they would just do what they are supposed to do, I would most likely change my position, but until then, I'm not a GS fan.

^^this^^

Since you're obviously familiar with the group, all you have to do is go to the DGS website and see which chapter is in my area, which should be simple enough since it's apparent know generally where I live since you've looked at my profile. You should be hired by GS. You say things and don't back them up. Why should anyone have to go on a "witch hunt" to verify your claims? In a debate, you should present your own facts and the evidence to back up your "facts", which you don't.

Pretty serious accusation there. I assume you can back it up with facts? Unlike you, yes I can. We filed an appeal with Groundspeak. It has been more than 2 weeks since it was filed and we've gotten one response that was enforcing untrue statements and making up "guidelines" just to suit their cause. We rebutted the lackey's argument, and haven't heard back since. What happened? couldn't prove any guidelines were broken? Let's just ignore it. It'll go away.

Actually I do. A few of them just got banned, though, so... GC handles, or its all a lie!