Jump to content

Broncoholics

Banned
  • Posts

    612
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Broncoholics

  1. I was going to stay out of this one but after reading this I need to speak up.

     

    You said you archived Upinyachits Vacation Cache, right? Then you replaced it with What's the Point. I'm following so far?

     

    OK, this is a very important question:

    How much time passed between you archiving Upinyachits Vacation Cache and hiding What's the Point?

     

    The virtual cache was obviously placed in that time correct? If that is the case then the case is closed. You archived the first cache which allowed someone to place another cache close by, then you tried to place another caches with 528 feet of that cache. Yes Upinyachits Vacation Cache was there first but Upinyachits Vacation Cache was archived. Does that sound right Duanne or did I miss something?

     

    I will say this one more time. I archived all of my hidden caches in New York and Co. in a disgruntled moment. They were all sweet caches and the first ones we ever placed. I have done everything in my power to get them listed again. It's just not going to happen. My behavior in the forums sucked the creditability from me.

    I only hurt my wife, because she worked on them, and my kid Casey. His cache In NY hasn't been found in a while. If I could change things I would. During the time my caches were active, there was a lot of logs to read. And we got a lot of people hooked on caching. Those are all my positive points, but they don't count in the forums.

  2. That seems to be the only reason you opened it back up...you even asked Mopar to slap you around, both here and in another thread, so what's your beef? You pegged it there,

     

    There is a point in all this Sparky. You yourself had the flame meter at green for a while until another member took a shot at me. (Mtn-man) Go look for yourself.

     

    I kept my cool all night and by the end, nothing solved nothings changed. Same old know it all posters, same old people.

  3. I would also think that some of the harassing and abusive and profane e-mails that you have sent to various Groundspeak employees and volunteers might be relevant evidence in your trial.

     

     

    It was one admin. that we are talking about and I have the email they sent me too. It goes both ways dude. If you are a lawyer then you would realize I have a lot of evidence that hasn't been brought up. I just can't type that fast.

     

    Facts........Can you tell me why JEREMY, HYDEE, and CO admin, will not answer my pm's or emails? But I can post in the forums.........

  4. Things are getting way too personal in here. If there is no problem with a cache placement, then it should be approved. If there is a problem, then it should not be approved. Letting personal feelings about somebody get in the way of approving a cache is just plain silly. It's either a good cache or it's not. Also, I don't see anything wrong with the name Duane used for the cache either. If it is allowed to be posted in the forums, it should be allowed as a cache name. The same people who visit the geocache site are the same ones who visit the forums, so I don't buy the family values argument. It's obvious that one approver has a different standard than the other. I think there should be a uniform standard to follow and apply it equally across the board and not make up rules as you go along. The geocache itself has nothing to do with how somebody behaves in the forums. If they misbehave in the forums then ban them, but don't ban the cache based on if you like somebody or not.

     

    even better....Thanks

  5. Keystone approver,

     

    Can you take it easy? I understand your dedication to wards GC and all, but the facts I am being treated unfair. I archived my caches in a disgruntled moment, and now there is a million reasons why they won't realist them.

     

    Bottom Conclusion....... Didn't you read Hydee's post?

  6. Once again, I ask for information about the alleged unapproved cache that was allegedly denied because of another cache being planned in the area. I cannot seem to find it any place in Colorado over the past year. I did check each page.

     

    The Runyon Cache (GCHA71) is the one in question about the puzzle thing.

     

    (GC7FAD) Upinyachits Vacation Cache this cache was replaced with what's the point. But what's the point got shot down because of the virtual cache close by. But my original cache Upyachit's vacation cache was placed first.

     

    What ever........... I am tired now :lol: and am sick of trying to get my caches listed. Could it be that GC could be scared I might put a cache note inside and tell members about Navicache? Just my own hypothesis :lol:

  7. Just remember. People go read your past posts and the evidence convicts you. I don't even know and have never talked to you in anyway but after reading a bunch of your threads I think you got what you deserved.

     

    Jeremy told me a while ago, because of my name I have my work cut out for me.

    Does the 1000 different logs from all my hidden caches account for anything. It's kinda like, I can build 100 houses that are perfect. But If I mess one up, people will always remember that one.

     

    :lol:

  8. And if you fail to tell the whole story, then you're wasting bandwidth, time, and oxygen. Spit it out, or lock the thread, Duane. This is getting nowhere fast!

     

    I archived my caches before I read Hydee's pm. Now they won't let an adoption take place with four caches in New York. They also won't list one of my caches because they say a cacher is working on a puzzle cache less then 528 feet from my cache. The puzzle cache isn't even listed and my cache just sits. In New York

    they approved a cache called We $hit You not. Two years later in Co, they won't approve the same cache out here because of the name. I archived Upinyachit's vacation cache and placed a different one in the same spot. They didn't approve it because it was to close to a virtual cache. I can go on and on and on.

     

    D

  9. If you can find some good folks back there to agree to adopt the caches in question, that should get the ball rolling on getting the TBs back in circulation.

     

    My caches were adopted in Dec 2003, just not on this site. There's a lot to this story members don't know about.

  10. And, I read all your posts.

     

    Did you read my jokes back in 2002? LOL :lol:

     

    They are not separate issues Duane. The situation surrounding your hidden caches is a direct result of your behavior. Feel free to explain to us how or why we should separate the two issues.

     

    Hydee, If I have a cache hidden that follows the guidelines, then how is that two separate issues. And how come you always reply to me in the forums, and never my Pm's or emails?

     

    D :lol:

  11. Please don't apply if you are not an open minded and fair person.

     

    OH YEAH...... The case is about GEOCACHES. LOL

     

    Results of what?

     

    Trial for what?

     

    You have been warned 9 times because you cannot follow the guidelines. You were warned in the last topic of yours that had to be closed for a very specific, clearly defined reason. You did exactly the same thing that you were warned about again in less than 24 hours and the topic was closed. Even if there is some sort of "trial", you have shown that you won't abide by the decision anyway. Your past actions show that fact clearly, and you have demonstrated that over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and...

     

    Mtn-man,

    I haven't even stated my case yet. It has to with my hidden caches. My behavior and the forums have nothing to do with this. :lol:

     

    D

  12. If I was to give opening arguments for a situation that requires an open mind, would there be Groundspeak members that would judge all of the facts. Instead of going through Hydee, Jeremy, CO Admin, or any other mods, maybe I could state my case here. I don't want to whine and act like I hate GC, because I don't.

    We just have some differences that need to be worked out. It would be cool if a member could represent Groundspeak and Geocaching.com, because I am sure they would like to represent their side also. We would all have to act like mature adults and cool it with the low blows. My warning level is at 90%, so I don't want to jeopardize suspension again. I will keep my cool while on trial. LOL This would be all in fun and could turn out interesting. Of course both sides would have to agree on the 6 or 12 member jury. Carleenp and Renegade Knight would be prime targets; they always seem to have an open mind.

     

    Would this work? I am all open for suggestions. I know some members absolutely despise me, so they would automatically be disqualified. LOL

     

    Please don't apply if you are not an open minded and fair person.

     

    OH YEAH...... The case is about GEOCACHES. LOL

  13. I am the guy Groundspeak loves to hate. Kinda like a Howard Stern type deal.

     

    One out of my last four caches were approved, and that took six days. The rest of my new hidden caches got shot down. I also just got a warning from Mtn-man, which puts me back to 90%. This is like a Drama on TV "As The Cache Turns".

     

    All I want is to be treated fair. I have enough evidence tp prove I have been discriminated against. If I get banned or suspended from this site, I can guarantee there is going to be consequences to pay. Hydee and Jeremy must realize GEOCACHING plays a big role in my life, and all they do is play with my emotions.

     

    D :D:DB)B)

×
×
  • Create New...