ArtieD

Basically this...

I am still baffled why this newbie, with not even a month's experience playing the game, feels the need to try to impose his caching morals on everyone else. He seems to have a deep-seated hatred of anything that doesn't conform to his world view of caching and I guess feels the need to try to make everyone else walk in lock step with what he feels is right. I guess the old saying is true: Everyone can geocache...problem is, everyone can geocache. In the end I agree. I find it refreshing that Groundspeak tends to be very careful about guidelines and rules. Good thing, too, or we'd be caching under draconian rules like what's proposed by the OP. No, no. It's pretty much sucks.

Old train/car bridges can be okay if they are not active. I have one on an old railroad bridge that is now a walking trail.

Another possibility would have been for you to read past forum threads on the topic. My favorite alternative: ignoring it and not getting all verklempt over it. And not posting long, whiny new topics about it. What are we up to...14 or 15 new topics that have been discussed one way or another before? We are not UseNet running on 80MB harddrives anymore. Groundspeak has plenty of space for new threads. So what if a topic gets discussed again? Not everybody here is a regular, you know. People get dissed for bumping old threads, and then they get dissed for not. Silly guy. I know what you're doing, you sly goose!

Another possibility would have been for you to read past forum threads on the topic. My favorite alternative: ignoring it and not getting all verklempt over it. And not posting long, whiny new topics about it. What are we up to...14 or 15 new topics that have been discussed one way or another before?

People are allowed to leave whatever they wish as far as swag, as long as it doesn't violate the generally-accepted ideals of improper swag. From the "hiding your geocache" page here: (link). "People of all ages hide and seek caches, so think carefully before placing an item into a cache. Explosives, ammunition, knives, drugs and alcohol should not be placed in a cache. Respect the local laws. Food items are always a bad idea. Animals have better noses than humans, and in some cases caches have been chewed through and destroyed because of food items in a cache. Please do not put food in a cache." There is nothing about literature, cards or anything like that. If you feel THAT strongly about it, specify it on your own cache that you'd prefer people don't put that in your cache. Otherwise, it's up to other cache owners to decide if they want it or not.

Isn't that the alligator infested canal around a castle? Only in Canada. You are talking aboot the moot, 'eh?

Nope. I was a host of a local WWFM event and we were told there would not be one.

Yeah, I am beginning to feel the same way, too. What I find funny is that you seem to try very hard to sound proper and educated yet you put anyone who dares disagree with you on ignore, choosing to dismiss their comments instead of responding to them. I have people in this forum that I vehemently disagree with on a regular basis and I have ignored exactly no one. For someone who's as educated as open-minded you'd like to portray yourself, you sure do hate being challenged, don't you? Quote of the day.

I'd rather not drag this out into a witch hunt for perfectly valid cache. At the risk of seeming impersonal, let's assume I'm unfamiliar with grandfathered virtuals, that I haven't read the rules, and that, yeah this is the cache in question. Not starting a witch hunt. In fact, I'm dismayed that you used a "Virtual" in your post. It's so easy to find exactly what caches you are talking about, I'm stunned that you would do it again, especially with a "virtual". My point was that you describe a Virtual, then turn the discussion to "traditionals". Apples and oranges. Come up with examples of "traditional" caches where the coordinates are inaccurate. Then you will make a better point. You sound like you know an awful lot about geocaching, though. Pretending to be "unaware" of things that have gone on for ages is disingenious. Published coordinates for a "traditional" = GZ = container location. Doesn't matter if the log book is in some sort of container in a container. That has nothing to do with your topic of inaccurate coordinates. B. I agree with this totally, especially the part about the OP being "unaware" of things when he sounds pretty well educated. I get the feeling he's posting more and more just to pull our legs. Why else are there so many topics in such a short amount of time? I also agree that he should use an example of a traditional as well. You can't compare a virtual and a traditional. This whole thread reeks. The honest facts should have been reported right off the bat.

I only check the log if an online log looks really hinky. Other than that, if someone wants to lie about a find, then it's on them.

I am not so much upset but more disgusted that a barely-experienced newbie thinks he has to "suggest" sweeping changes to a game he's barely been playing. I'm not. I rarely trade swag or leave anything. Sage advice from a three week veteran. There is no agenda. Matter of fact, Groundspeak goes to great lengths to prevent agendas. Cache swag is independent of it. You cannot control it and it's not Groundspeak's place to tell cachers what to do in that area. The best policy is to leave it as it is. There is nothing inherently wrong.

He only wants to ban things he doesn't like. That's not seeking to better anything...it's seeking to mold caching into what he thinks it should be. Screw that. I refuse to suffer anyone who thinks they should dictate how the rest of the world caches. I guess you also refuse to suffer yourself, then. He was offering suggestions... he doesn't have the power to ban anything. Don't be so afraid of someone else's opinions. I am not afraid of opinion. I call out ignorant opinion. Difference. Either way, sometimes I think you just like to argue for the sake of arguing...pretty much like a troll. I am sure you'll have a sarcastic or otherwise cute reply to this, so don't leave me hanging...

Quote of the day!

He only wants to ban things he doesn't like. That's not seeking to better anything...it's seeking to mold caching into what he thinks it should be. Screw that. I refuse to suffer anyone who thinks they should dictate how the rest of the world caches.

So if I go to a conference,and I collect a bunch of trinkets from various vendor booths, and I use those trinkets (which display the various vendor names, of course) as trade items, then you think there is something wrong with that? Mmm... Outside of geocaching.com, are you endorsing a particular business, religion or non-profit by placing those trinkets? It would appear not. Game on. Now if you were placing pamphlets on how to buy those trinkets in caches, I might suggest you have an agenda. :drama: Careful... you're gonna get fat! Too late! :drama:

Why are you questioning it? To what end? You've barely wet your toes in the pond that is geocaching, yet you want to change it. Why? For the most part, yes. The game is what you make it. You can choose what caches to do, what swag to take, leave or ignore and you can cache as much or as little as you want. On what? You seem to have it all figured out. One, because leaving those things does not constitute promoting an agenda...it's all in your head. Two, people are free to leave what they like in caches, with the exception of a few kinds of items. Three, I do not have to convince you, because you are not the arbiter of what is acceptable. If you don't like what you see, ignore it, close the lid and find the next cache. The right measure is being in the game long enough to know the ins and outs of the game based on experience. Cache count does not equate to experience, nor does post count. You do not have the experience of finding a variety of caches, which can at least help gain you a better perspective. Sorry, but a guy who's joined three weeks ago and has limited caching experience does not inspire me to take his ideas very seriously.

They seem to be spot on.

So if I go to a conference,and I collect a bunch of trinkets from various vendor booths, and I use those trinkets (which display the various vendor names, of course) as trade items, then you think there is something wrong with that? Mmm... Outside of geocaching.com, are you endorsing a particular business, religion or non-profit by placing those trinkets? It would appear not. Game on. Now if you were placing pamphlets on how to buy those trinkets in caches, I might suggest you have an agenda. :drama:

Much like the debate about what the definition of a "quality" cache is, endorsing a rule change to create a "better" experience fails because there is no one definition of a "better" experience. Like it or not, some people like the McToys and stuff like that. Some people only like high-end swag. Some people like skirt lifters and some like mountain climbing caches. With different kinds of players comes different ideas of what a generally good all around caching experience is about. Stifling the freedom to place whatever swag that floats a cacher's boat is imposing a singular ideal on caching, which is wrong. As long as people follow the basic rules/guidelines/whatever of swag, they should be able to use what they want. Again, you are far too new and inexperienced to be promoting a massive rule change based on a few dozen finds. Come back when you have more experience. Sometimes fresh eyes can see the clearest. ...or not see the forest for the trees.

Much like the debate about what the definition of a "quality" cache is, endorsing a rule change to create a "better" experience fails because there is no one definition of a "better" experience. Like it or not, some people like the McToys and stuff like that. Some people only like high-end swag. Some people like skirt lifters and some like mountain climbing caches. With different kinds of players comes different ideas of what a generally good all around caching experience is about. Stifling the freedom to place whatever swag that floats a cacher's boat is imposing a singular ideal on caching, which is wrong. As long as people follow the basic rules/guidelines/whatever of swag, they should be able to use what they want. Again, you are far too new and inexperienced to be promoting a massive rule change based on a few dozen finds. Come back when you have more experience. Here we go again. What people "like" has to do with popularity, not with what is "better" (or "quality", if you will). Many people "like" McDonald's hamburgers, yet we still look toward things like Michelin stars and James Beard awards when we look for "better" dining. B-grade horror movies are "liked" by many, yet we still have the Academy Awards, the Cannes and Sundance and other Film Festivals and the like to reward the "better" films. In fact, I would submit that popularity is often the direct opposite of quality. Your incorrect opinion is noted. Seriously? You can honestly disagree that there is a difference between popularity and quality? OK. Not worth arguing about it. No, there is a difference. I just choose to not argue with you. It's not worth wasting my time with the intentionally obtuse.

Hmm... I'm only 83% traditional. Guess I'd better get to work on that! (Or is that why I have so many mystery caches?) I'm at 62.8% trad with 18.6% Mysteries and 16% Multi but I mean I see these high %ages trads for new cachers. I read it here too, too much effort for a multi, filter out mysteries... A multi we did had 57 founds in just under 2 years, because of vandalism it was replaced with another mulyi with traditionals along the way, it now has 95 founds in 1 year. Both are the same distance and share the same WPsand yet the newer version is more popular as you get 11 founds instead of just one for the old cache. Fortunately the ingenious WPs of the first multi were incorporated in the second. Man...I am 71.6% Traditional and 11% Mystery. I didn't know my Traditional percentage was that low!

Much like the debate about what the definition of a "quality" cache is, endorsing a rule change to create a "better" experience fails because there is no one definition of a "better" experience. Like it or not, some people like the McToys and stuff like that. Some people only like high-end swag. Some people like skirt lifters and some like mountain climbing caches. With different kinds of players comes different ideas of what a generally good all around caching experience is about. Stifling the freedom to place whatever swag that floats a cacher's boat is imposing a singular ideal on caching, which is wrong. As long as people follow the basic rules/guidelines/whatever of swag, they should be able to use what they want. Again, you are far too new and inexperienced to be promoting a massive rule change based on a few dozen finds. Come back when you have more experience. Here we go again. What people "like" has to do with popularity, not with what is "better" (or "quality", if you will). Many people "like" McDonald's hamburgers, yet we still look toward things like Michelin stars and James Beard awards when we look for "better" dining. B-grade horror movies are "liked" by many, yet we still have the Academy Awards, the Cannes and Sundance and other Film Festivals and the like to reward the "better" films. In fact, I would submit that popularity is often the direct opposite of quality. Your incorrect opinion is noted.