Rockin Roddy
-
Posts
8943 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Rockin Roddy
-
-
Hey Roddy, would you please stop distracting Keystone. He needs to get back to publishing caches in his queue. We all know he can't do two things at once.
Sorry Cheech!!
Waiting on a publication??ETA: I think you undersetimate the ability of our friend, Mr Keystone. Although we seem to be at odds here, I have high confidence in the man!!
-
Are you saying it's OK to call someone a liar in public and that this is how the situation should have been handled?
If a company is convinced that the customer is lying, and if it is acting in the best interests of its other customers, then ... yes.
Officials have confirmed for us that this is the case.
If you insist otherwise, then you are calling those officials liars.
So why is it okay when you do it but not when they do it?
With all due respect KBI, it seems to me that you are simply trying to get a rise.
Being a person who OWNS a business, a golf course which deals with the public every day, I can tell you that calling someone a liar is NOT good business practice. I don't care if the person lied or otherwise. If the person did, you had better be ready to show proof if you already publically called them out OR you'd best not title them the liar at all. Since other customers will be taking note of how the situation is handled, you might want to make sure you do it right, or at least try to make it right afterwards should you have erred.
I'm done with your "liar" comments, sir. This is the last I will comment to you if all you're going to do is go in circles.
And an FYI...convinced and being able to prove something are two different things. I am convinced that TPTB didn't do a thorough investigation...can I prove it?
-
I got a good chuckle from a friend this AM. She wants to go on a trip across 10 states and is leaving tonight or tomorrow, I think. So, she waits until last night to run PQs for all the areas along the route, she works and works and then she emails me in a perplexed and upset state of mind. She can't get CR to work, she can't load the PQs. She has maybe used it once, if that in her almost a year of owning the PN-40, she doesn't cache much and really only bought the unit because I bought one (IMHO). She thinks she remembers using the CR and it working, but...
Well, I tried to talk her through it a few dozen times (keeping in mind, she's the techy one, I'm tech illiterate), then I suggest that she simply load via T8. She's really harried by now, her emails are showing signs of stress, but I try my best to help anyways....all while doing the very steps I am outlining to her in my emails. After a dozen more emails saying she can't find T8 on her computer and that the disc is in the drive etc, I am about ready to give up and go caching or jump off a cliff or ANYTHING besides try to reason with the now irate friend.
After a whole lot more, I decide to simply ask her to switch to T7 and go from there? Nope, she can't find that on her computer either. Now, I'm about to scream at the top of my lungs and have done so a few times already, but being the friend I am, I calm and try to figure her problem out.
She's trying to use the REGIONAL MAPS disc thinking it's T8. No matter what I tell her, she simply replies the same....T8 won't open, there's no way to open it and I have the disc in. I tell you, I laughed and laughed. Even after explaining it a few more times, she doesn't get it. She's now heading to the store to buy a Garmin OR because she saw another friend use hers...OK! That should solve the problem. Now, imagine this if you will...a new GPS in the hands of a basically GPS ignorant woman who is already worked into a frenzy. Should be some great times for her and her husband on that trip!
I have no idea why her CR isn't working, truly I'm not sure whether it is or not! But, I can tell you that trying to figure out a program (T8) that you don't even have loaded onto your computer is going to give you nightmares for some time to come.
I guess I just wanted to share that, not really on-topic much. But, the moral is, don't wait until the last second to attempt something you're not familiar with, listen to people who know what they're doing and CALL TECH SUPPORT while they are open AND without waiting until it's too late to better your situation!! And for crying out loud, realize the precut map discs are NOT the T8 program!
UPDATE: Seems she got it working. CR now works fine, she figured out the need to load T8 with the right disc and they are on their way to MO.
-
Superfly says he checked the cache, and that it was there.
Nomex then archived the cache, stating there was nothing there.
Ever since, folks have been correctly interpreting Nomex’s log as calling Superfly a liar.
I can confirm that there is no existing or new guideline saying that reviewers ought to be seeking out difficult unfound caches and archiving them.Nomex made the right decision with the cache being discussed here. If he was wrong, he would have been overruled.Therefore, from this point forward, anyone who says Nomex made up a fictitious guideline, or that the cache in question shouldn’t have been archived, or that Groundspeak handled the archival improperly ...
... is calling Keystone a liar.
I'm just sayin'.
Just because you claim something over and over again for 19 pages doesn't make it true.... And yes, GS DID handle it improperly, why do you think we've discussed this for 19 pages? The whole issue was handled badly, calling someone a liar even indirectly in public should never be ta business practice.Saying otherwise is calling MANY of us in here liars....
just saying.
I'm just saying...
And I'm just saying I'll disagree. Are you saying it's OK to call someone a liar in public and that this is how the situation should have been handled? Are you saying this is good business practice?
Nevermind, I believe we've covered that for 19 pages. Obviously, you've not been swayed and even more obvious, you're not swaying me.
-
Never really had much use for the compass because you always had to recalibrate it alot. (Magellan Meridian platinum)
I had a MeriPlat and the only time recalibration was needed was when swapping out batteries. That's inherent in any electronic compass.
That's about the only time I calibrate as well with the PN!
-
Superfly says he checked the cache, and that it was there.
Nomex then archived the cache, stating there was nothing there.
Ever since, folks have been correctly interpreting Nomex’s log as calling Superfly a liar.
I can confirm that there is no existing or new guideline saying that reviewers ought to be seeking out difficult unfound caches and archiving them.Nomex made the right decision with the cache being discussed here. If he was wrong, he would have been overruled.Therefore, from this point forward, anyone who says Nomex made up a fictitious guideline, or that the cache in question shouldn’t have been archived, or that Groundspeak handled the archival improperly ...
... is calling Keystone a liar.
I'm just sayin'.
With all due respect, please, you're not exactly the one we'd like to hear from and, since you don't know what my intent is, please don't pretend to know what my comments mean. And yes, GS DID handle it improperly, why do you think we've discussed this for 19 pages?
The whole issue was handled badly, calling someone a liar even indirectly in public should never be ta business practice.Saying otherwise is calling MANY of us in here liars....
just saying.
-
So long as we're quoting Keystone posts this morning, here's another one. Really, the questions have been answered. If there's a need to hear it from your local reviewer, write them an e-mail.
I can confirm that there is no existing or new guideline saying that reviewers ought to be seeking out difficult unfound caches and archiving them.
THANKS Keystone, that is a little bit more reassuring! I was more wishing the upper brass would also step up and make a statement, but.......
I'm not saying some mods and reviewers aren't watching, and believe me, I very much appreciate you, MM, all the mods and all of the volunteers behind the scenes.
-
And again, I state that I don't want anything more than an assurance we're being heard here, it would be the least we could get after 19 pages of discussion which they have left to rage and now slowly die. An assurance I can place a nice difficult hide and not worry it will be archived should I make it too hard.
You mean like this?
In yet another insightful post, Toz captures the sort of decision making that reviewers go through every day. We have to make judgements all the time based on the state of the record and the owner's reaction (or lack of response). Here's an example from today where I was proven right in not archiving a cache in response to insistent cries to do so. Likewise, Nomex made the right decision with the cache being discussed here. If he was wrong, he would have been overruled.That post appeared on page 18. (Bolding mine.)
Sorry, that doesn't quite say what I asked. It merely states what Miss Jenn said, we stand behind Nomex.
-
Im still wondering after 19 pages of this . . .
I need to adjust my display options because I'm up to 47 pages. Not too bad for a discussion about decisions concerning Tupperware - or a molded facade to a stone brick. So to help get us to 1000 posts . . .
Well, please, let's not turn a serious (to me) discussion into an attempt to reach a milstone!
I don't think Trippy is still a reviewer, I could be mistaken though. At any rate, I don't think it would have mattered who archived, if it was handled as it was in this situation, it would still have caused an "outrage". I know and trust each and every reviewer from MI (not saying I don't trust Nomex or Miss Jenn, mind you), I have to believe there'd have been a bit different approach in their handling of this (not saying anything bad about Nomex, just saying the local reviewers would likely have worked harder to not get us to this point). I can understand their wanting to bow out of this storm too, if this is indeed what happened (I wouldn't doubt it one bit), they have to deal with us on a pretty regular basis!!
And again, I state that I don't want anything more than an assurance we're being heard here, it would be the least we could get after 19 pages of discussion which they have left to rage and now slowly die. An assurance I can place a nice difficult hide and not worry it will be archived should I make it too hard.
As for the comment earlier about why making a difficult hide? While some of you like to play the numbers games, some like to merely have fun etc, some find pleasure in creating the hard to find caches and watching as people try to make the find. I myself want my hides found, I give hints when asked and such, but, we do like to make them look! Anyone who's ever searched for some of our hides knows we're a bit sneaky with our hides, even though we basically use just natural camo. I would be fairly irked to the point of not likely bothering to place another hide should one of mine get archived in the fashion we saw here...
-
My TWR Dortmunt 2007 geocoin is missing from the list!
It is the : TB1DYVE
Can I ask something?
Can I give for adoption one of my coins of TWR first race? By that way maybe someone eho is not in the list can enter too! It will be a pay forward thing too.... I will just ask not to change the TWR from the title and the missions part "to spread bike awareness"!
That would be a very nice gesture, my friend!! Please do!!
You emailed me as well, since these coins are not in a race, I see no reason why not. Nikos asked if he could adopt in some older coins which have never traveled, he wants to enter them in the new release. I am all for this as long as the nales are changed to follow TWR guidelines!! This goes for ANYONE, you can change over UP TO 10 coins (two entries in the release drawing) from your old and untraveled coins you own OR if you adopt!!
I must ask though, if you are going to trickle in your entries (which is FINE!!!), PLEASE keep them in a list which is updated whenever you place a new coin into the release. In other words, if you release one now, start a list which you can then either edit or simply add onto, and keep that list updated whenever you release more. This will help us keep track!! And, I kow this is more work for Maine Family (my apologies, my friend), but can we keep the new release separated until after the release? The coins could still be added as links in the lists, but just a separate list (doesn't even need to be linkable) would help so I know which are in the release? Hey, better yet, just the names of the entered and how many entries would work fine!! I could try to keep track of that on my own!!
-
Greetings fellow cacher. My user name on GC'ing is [removed]. I am a Goldwing rider and came across your profile while surfing the pages on a sleepless night. I was touched by your profile and I usually never read them. It is my belief I was brought to your page for a reason. I'm sure you don't mind but I sent the following email to just about everyone on my contact list in memory and honor of your friend. If this email makes it to one person who looks one more time because of it and avoids an accident, then Amen. Your friend I am sure misses you also and I bet you make him proud every day. I hope my email contacts spread this around Seattle and beyond for you guys. Ride safe, cache on. Doug.
--- On Sat, 11/21/09, [removed]
wrote:
From: [removed]
Subject: Geocachers profile that lost a friend
To:
Date: Saturday, November 21, 2009, 5:56 AM
As some of you may know, and some of you I'm sending this to probably not, I have become an avid Geocacher. I came across this Geocachers profile and had to pass it along because it touched me, saddened me, and I myself am also a rider. Please, look twice out there............life is not just yours.
Doug doesn't know it yet, but his message also touched my heart, I rarely read my own profile since it is still very painful, I was brought to tears this AM. I will be inviting Doug to join us in here and, I see he's from Seattle...I am hoping we can meet up at GW VIII!
ETA...I know my saying this is still very painful might surprise some of you, maybe even make you wonder? Believe me, I have been very much troubled by this still, it haunts me. I hate to admit this, I don't like telling of my weakness, but I have been deeply depressed for some time now, it is very hard to shake. I sleep very little, I find it hard to concentrate. Losing a dear friend is one of the most painful things I have ever dealt with, combine that with the terminal illness of my dad and our financial woes...well, life has been draining at times. With the help of everyone here, with the help of some good friends nearby and with some good news lately (not much mind you), I am slowly rising, I feel better today and will strive to pull myself up more tomorrow!
I don't tell you guys this to bring you down, I don't want sympathy (please, no...)...I just want you all to know that you need to take care of yourselves and watch for signs of depression...it's a *&)(&(*^). I feel for each and every one of you who have dealt with a tragedy of any kind, this can really tax the soul. Keep your heads up and know there's friends you can talk to at any time...I'm ALWAYS here, my friends!!
-
I just picked up the PN-40 and I have to say I'm less then thrilled. The rechargeable battery last about 25 minutes tops. I have not yet tried it with regular batteries but one of the things that attracted me to the unit was the fact that it was rechargeable.
The second aspect it the software that DeLorme sells called Cacheregister. It crashed my computer every time I try to load it. Repeated emails to DeLorme have got me NOTHING. I'm now having to work with American Express to get my money back because they will not respond.
On the good side the accuracy is far better than my Garmin.
Have you tried calling them? It seems like you haven't.
The battery should have lasted 4-6 hours unless of course you have the backlight on all the time. Can't answer for CacheRegistrar.
I get around 8 hours of continual usage, but yes, you definitely have a bad battery.
Cache Reagister is the greatest thing out there, I completely love that app!!
I too would try calling them on Monday and seeing what can be done, I am certain they'll get you going!
-
Hard cache and sockpuppet account at the same time. Log your own finds once every 18 months, or whatever time span fits in the 'too hard to exist' rule.
If you're trying to have bragging rights that you've made your cache so hard that nobody can find it, it doesn't do you much good to log find with a sock puppet account just so it doesn't get archived.
I don't believe there is any hidden guideline that says you can't have a very difficult to find cache. But GeoGeeBee has a point. If the cache is so hard that it never gets found what is the point (other than the owner's braggadocio).
I don't know, I seem to recall returning 4 times to a small town a few hours away just to attempt a particularly hard cache. We almost had first to find! Sometimes, it's fun just to go and get aggrevated!
-
Hard cache and sockpuppet account at the same time. Log your own finds once every 18 months, or whatever time span fits in the 'too hard to exist' rule.
-
However, in this case, I think it's clear from reading the thread that GS does have additional evidence/information that they are choosing not to share with us. This cache was not archived solely because of the length of time without being found, or the number of DNFs during that time.
Or we assume this at least. For all we know, they may have. For all we know, they may have taken the word of a local. We don't know and likely never will...
-
The level of proof for archiving a cache is not the same as the proof required in a court of law to send a criminal to prison - or even the proof required in a court of law to win a judgment in a civil suit. The level of proof for archiving is very small. In some cases, reviewer may feel it is in the the interest of the game to archive a cache immediately when a problem is alleged. Even if a cache is archived, it can be unarchived if the cache owner presents evidence that the cache meets all guidelines. In most situations the cache owner is given an opportunity to correct the alleged problems with the cache before it is archived. If the cache owner feels there is no problem to correct, the proper thing to do is to contact the reviewer to present evidence that there is no problem and not ignore the request to fix the problem or post on the cache page that you've checked your cache and there is no problem. In some cases checking the cache and posting on the cache page is enough evidence. I thinks that may be part of the issue here. If the reviewers trusted SF then his enable log would have sufficed - he checked and there was a cache still there to be found. However it seems there were reasons for not fully trusting this cache owner. Had he contacted Nomex or had taken a different approach when appealing the decision, he probably would have been given the opportunity to offer proof that there was a cache. Instead he made the assumption that because there was a cache in place and it had been approved, it could not be archived without someone actually proving there was no cache. There is no way to prove the non-existence of a cache. There is only the evidence that we have that no matter how difficult someone tries to make a cache, some geocacher is likely to figure it out eventually and find it. Certainly some caches might be very difficult so that they are not found after at least 27 searches over a period of two years, but hese are going to be very rare. It may be that Groundspeak and the reviewers have in mind some maximum number of DNFs that can be posted before they consider that evidence that a cache is not there. It may be that they only acted because they had some other evidence. That doesn't really matter.
Nomex's post was confusing to Super Fly. He thought it would be sufficient to simply post that he checked and the cache was in place. There was no indication that Nomex was looking for further evidence that the caches was there. So when Nomex archived the cache, Super Fly was upset. His action was to accuse Nomex of acting without proof in archiving his cache rather than in ask what evidence he could offer to show the cache was there. So his appeal was denied, as Nomex acted within the standards that Grounspeak sets for archiving caches. Now Super Fly, still had another opportunity to ask what evidence he could present to show the cache was there. Instead, in anger, he removes the cache and throws away the camouflage that he says he worked so hard on. This could all be true. Or it can be seen as additional evidence that the cache was never there. It doesn't really matter.
Ideally this incident could be used as learning experience, both for cache owners and for the reviewers/Groundspeak. Cache owners need to ask questions when a reviewer posts a note on their cache page indicating there is a problem. Find out what the reviewer wants you to do to correct the problem. Reviewers can try to be more explicit in their notes and realize that the cache owner has a different set of evidence about the cache's condition and might be confused as to what needs to be done to correct a problem that is not apparent from their point of view.
I have most always liked your lengthy, yet educating posts, sir. This one is no different!
I agree, it could have been handled better by both sides and will likely have to just hope this doesn't become more of the norm. I would like to think a cache should be allowed to exist as long as it follows the guidelines...placement included.I, of course, have never wanted any kind of action taken against Nomex or anyone else, but it would be nice to know that our concerns are being heard!
-
Mushtang, you're either purposely acting like you don't understand OR you simply can't figure it out. Either way, I believe my post is MORE than clear enough for anyone to read and understand it. Oh well, I'll try once more and then you're on your own...
KBI said that the CO is guilty because of past history and his cache archival was his own fault. I asked if that would also be true for a rapist accused falsely, should he simply be considered guilty and executed? Is it getting clearer for you?
And no, I don't think the CO got any kind of "trial" at all. It appears to me (without any other info added) that the cache was archived even as the CO adamently professed his innocence (or, that the cache was there).
-
If the property was yours, you could do just that. If you had permission to place the post, you could do just that. Using existing fence posts, with permission, is OK as well. Most people don't bother to obtain permission ofr those fence post cap hides, this is a bad idea, you should get permission if it's not your property!
I guess I had assumed the permission thing had already been granted in my own case. But the OP's situation is such that the discussion is on whether the cache is "buried". It is not. It is in a hollow stump, and above the ground.
Now if the OP's cache issue was solely a permission issue, then yes. I can agree with the (temporary) archival. Permission to place a cache is of utmost importance.
-edited for grammar.
If the hider dug a hole to place the end of that pole into, then it is technically buried regardless of whether the container is below ground or not. It's not a hollow stump, it's a telephone pole which appears to have been partially buried to make it stationary. A simple solution would be to just put it on the ground and build up dirt around the base to give the appearance of it being buried.
-
Hmmm probably she had experienses, she is now in paradise and she is afraid that everything is just a dream, or she is really afraid that you will leave and let her alone.....
I am wondering is someone throw her on the streets when she was a kitten (not born as a stray), and.....
She's a few months or so old, so I would guess someone either abandoned her or she became lost.
-
OK, maybe I'm not seeing something here, but the way I see it is that the cache ITSELF is not buried. The cache is the green lock n lock with the Geocache sticker on the side. The cache is placed in a hollow stump post. The hollow post is partially buried, yes. But the cache isn't. Probably a good majority of that post is above ground. The cache itself is above ground. The cache is NOT buried.
If this type of hide is a no no, then shouldn't all LPC's be archived? Every one of those light poles had a shovel or pointy object used to dig a hole, the concrete forms placed, concrete poured, and the pole attached to it. The cache itself is in the skirt, it isn't buried. And, perhaps even more closely related to this, every micro-in-a-fence-post-cap cache should be archived. Every one of those fence posts had a shovel or pointy object used to dig a hole, and the fence post put in that hole.
Seriously, what's the difference here? Not trying to be combative, just seriously curious and trying to understand the "guidelines", as I have contemplated a similar hide in our area sometime in the future.
If the issue is ME personally "burying" the post, what if I hired a contractor to do it for me? Then I come by a couple weeks later... Oh, lookie here, here is a stump post with a hole in it!!! Looks like a great place for a cache!!!!
--Question asked by Dad of 6 FB. Mom of 6 has nothing to do with my twisted mind.
If the property was yours, you could do just that. If you had permission to place the post, you could do just that. Using existing fence posts, with permission, is OK as well. Most people don't bother to obtain permission ofr those fence post cap hides, this is a bad idea, you should get permission if it's not your property!
-
That is a very well thought out rebuttal. You make some very interesting points and have given me a lot to think about. My hat is off to you sir! Job well done.
You ummm...did read my post, right?
I believe that's where the phrase, "Round up the usual suspects", is from.
Wow, that's a FAR leap to make, isn't it? Let's use that in another situation:If things are as you portray them in your hypothesis, then Superfy created his own problems. If his reputation – the direct result of all the past choices he has made – got a guideline-compliant cache of his archived, (a cache that most likely wouldn't have ended up archived had it been placed by an average cache owner), then no, Superfly is not a victim of Groundspeak. He is a victim of his own history of poor decisions.A guy who is known to be a rapist (from past crimes which he went to prison for) is walking down the street when BAM, the cops tackle him and arrest him. Seems a rape and murder were committed close to where he lives? No real proof, just hearsay and the past history of this person. Should we simply make the leap that, since he has done this before, he should be guilty? Maybe just skip the whole process of a trial and execute? I mean, he did this in the past, he surely brought this on himself...he's a victim of his own history of poor decisions?
I know it's apples and oranges in many ways, but that's the basic statement you're making.
If someone has a known history of being a rapist, and one was committed recently, why wouldn't you want to detain him for questioning first? Seems like a great idea to me.
People that are against this are probably also against "profiling".
I would have needed to make a rebuttal had you followed along and given me a reason to. Since you can't seem to follow along, we're not talking about just detaining him, did you not see that I said we'd just skip the trial etc etc? In my situation, you'd simply say he's guilty and execute, much like it appears happened with the cache in question. Without knowing anything else, it appears Nomex took the word of the accusers and archived.
So, if this is how "profiling" works, then I guess you're right on target.
-
I've seen this type of hide done many times and each time, the bottom was just covered with natural camo (in this case, the loose dirt around it could be piled up around the bottom). No need to bury or attach anything else.
-
congrats gatoulis ......
i am glad everyone was paying attention. i actually caught the clue but i am a little slow at reading this thread again. you know kids and after school activities keep me busy.
buckle up for safety
There'll be plenty of chances, just keep PAYING ATTENTION!!
Man, talk about affection!! I took a shower a few minutes ago, was only gone like maybe 20 minutes tops. I get back to my chair here and Silly can't stop crawling on my lap, loving up to me! Must have been worried I was going to leave her??
-
Roddy I did include the battery specs for the Colorado too.
During our week out deer hunting, yes some days I would pull the "tree stand card" and just need the GPSr to get me to-&-from the stand. Yep no need to keep the thing running while sitting in the stand.. but I will periodically get up & do some travelling then stop again. Do I want to keep remembering to turn the GPSr on/off each time? Ok I could,,, it would improve battery life but that would also give me a badly broken track log of my day
..other days I pull the "flush card" and will be waundering all over the place, sometimes with dogs. The GPS needs to be working the whole day,, and the GPSr I use needs to function as requred on the worst-case-scenerio day, right? Even if I did stop mid-day and swapped batteries, wouldn't that also break up my track log? Sorry, pass on that.
And, we ride ATVs hauling small trailers to the camp site. Like I said, no opportunity to recharge batteries..
I find it hard to believe you'd forget to turn the unit back on before moving on, but I suppose it is possible. Also possible you could be walking in circles if you don't know the area, but that's neither here nor there. Are you saying you'd have a break if the batteries were replaced? Why? Would you be walking for long time not realizing the battery died? And, if sitting in a stand, how would the track be broken at all even if turned off? Unless you need time stamped data of where you sat and how long? I'm having trouble following this as well. Also, wouldn't you have to break it into a few tracks for such a long week of continual usage anyway?
I'll ask you this, how many batteries would you need to carry for teh Garmins then? If carrying a few spare pairs is a problem, wouldn't the problem still be there with the Garmins? Do the Garmin batteries never die, or would you also have breaks in track when needing to change them out? If you don't like carrying a few spare batteries, couldn't you hook up a cig adaptor to one of the ATVs...I know I have in the past for spotlight usage, so this shouldn't be a problem and is a quick fix.
Like TL said, there's choices for every use...and there's even practical solutions for most...if one thinks about it!
Waiting on a publication??
Rogue Reviewer?
in General geocaching topics
Posted
Seems fairly obvious to me that some of us are still concerned? Truly, you don;t need to visit this thread if you wish not to!