Jump to content

Rockin Roddy

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    8943
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Rockin Roddy

  1. The phrase "put up or shut up" comes to mind.

     

    It sure does...and if you're not willing to put up, please do the latter. I am about tired of playing your games, my friend. If you want to carry on personal conversations about what you think I should or shouldn't answer, you may PM me, but I don't feel I have a need to jump through your hoops.

     

    As I said, play your games all you wish, but don't think you can bully me into playing along.

    Since you have gone on and on about how you think the reviewer should have handled it better, I've given you an opportunity to prove your point and maybe win a few people over to your side.

     

    The fact that you have refused to participate in this exercise says volumes about your true motives, in my opinion.

     

     

    DON'T be lazy, if you want the info you seem to demand, I have stated several times I POSTED IT PREVIOUSLY. Do yourself a favor and look it up if you are really interested in what I said...otherwise this is merely more bullying and harrassing. Other than that, I am done with your bullying attitude, your calling me a liar and your attempts to smear me. We don't agree....get over it, my friend. But don't pretend I am your child who must answer to your every whim.

    First, stop calling me your friend. You're not acting like a friend, so doing so just makes you look disingenuous.

     

    Second, we have never gone down this road before. You have never stated how you would have handled the interaction based on how it might really go down. You certainly have never roleplayed this particular simulation before.

     

    My friend, maybe you should step back and check out your posting practices...I don't see anything friendly about that one bit!

     

    Second, you asked me to play your game, I denied. I'm not in the mood for your spin tactics and the twist game. Do you think bullying me is going to change my mind? I have stated exactly what you desire, LOOK IT UP OR GIVE IT UP. either way, I'm done playing your games! Have a nice day, my friend!

  2. The phrase "put up or shut up" comes to mind.

     

    It sure does...and if you're not willing to put up, please do the latter. I am about tired of playing your games, my friend. If you want to carry on personal conversations about what you think I should or shouldn't answer, you may PM me, but I don't feel I have a need to jump through your hoops.

     

    As I said, play your games all you wish, but don't think you can bully me into playing along.

    Since you have gone on and on about how you think the reviewer should have handled it better, I've given you an opportunity to prove your point and maybe win a few people over to your side.

     

    The fact that you have refused to participate in this exercise says volumes about your true motives, in my opinion.

     

     

    DON'T be lazy, if you want the info you seem to demand, I have stated several times I POSTED IT PREVIOUSLY. Do yourself a favor and look it up if you are really interested in what I said...otherwise this is merely more bullying and harrassing. Other than that, I am done with your bullying attitude, your calling me a liar and your attempts to smear me. We don't agree....get over it, my friend. But don't pretend I am your child who must answer to your every whim.

     

    Truly, your refusal to look it up only tells me you're not interested in what I said...so I wonder why you continue to badger?

  3. I'll say one thing, I am amazed to meet a community of people who have never, ever in their lifetimes broken a rule, been somewhere they shouldn't and followed the direction of every sign they have ever read.

     

    Truly, those people are worthy of throwing the first stone, and branding anyone who has ever so much as stepped on the grass when they were told not to, or gone through a hole in a fence, a CRIMINAL.

     

    I'm sure glad, as a mere lowly criminal, to be amongst such fine individuals and perfect model citizens of society.

     

    Snarkiness aside...what's your point? Are you saying all must be perfect before asking for simple following of laws so that caching doesn't get a black eye? Are you saying that, since no one is perfect, we'd better to just go ahead and break any law we feel like? I must not be able to follow your train of thought.

     

    When ysomeone purposely and willfully break a law for a GAME, how does that speak to ytheir character? If a GAME is so important you feel the need to break laws....

  4. Caches are frequently listed with bad coords.
    I thought my comment was acknowledging that. You know. An indication that you could be right on that point. I thought I could communicate better than that, but I'll work on it.

    However a subsequent post MIGHT indicate coordinates are not the issue.

    I apologize. I had gotten so use to Mr Snarkipants' back and forth that I read sarcasm into your post when it wasn't there.

     

    You can always change your attack debate practices so you aren't that Mr snarkipants if it bothers you.

  5. The phrase "put up or shut up" comes to mind.

     

    It sure does...and if you're not willing to put up, please do the latter. I am about tired of playing your games, my friend. If you want to carry on personal conversations about what you think I should or shouldn't answer, you may PM me, but I don't feel I have a need to jump through your hoops.

     

    As I said, play your games all you wish, but don't think you can bully me into playing along.

  6. We'll get to how you would end it in a bit. How would you start?

     

    I believe I have posted how I would handle this a few times, please feel free to check and post it when you come across it! :angry:

    You have stated that they did it wrong. I am merely asking you to roleplay a way that you think would be better. Why are you unwilling to do this?

     

    Apparently this is not an isolated event. A local cache only a couple of days old was just disabled because no one was finding it.

     

    GC21D5M

    That cache wasn't archived. It was disabled.

     

    It's not unheard of for a new cache that has lots of DNFs to need some maintenance from the cache owner. Perhaps the coords are bad. Perhaps it is no longer there. All the cache owner has to do is ceck up on it and make sure that the cache page info is good.

     

    The cache owner (or spouse) DID check on it and stated that it was still in place.

    Great. Let's see what happens.

    Lets see. They checked it TODAY. but they must be lying. Right? Let's just archive it.

     

    I must add, the only thing you said that makes me wonder is: "Perhaps the coords are bad."

    Caches are frequently listed with bad coords.

     

    And no, I don't wish to play these games with you, my friend. Play on your own and see how that works! :unsure:

  7.  

    Question: I would like to know, however it can be asked, why is it that any of what has happened between this cache owner and Groundspeak has you so concerned if the chances of it happening to anyone else are so remote?

     

     

    I am not so much concerned with the hows of this situation, but how handled. I have said this many times now. I don't consider this to be such an impact that the world is caving on us as some like to sensationalize it, I consider it a bad handled siytuation which I hope would be handled better if the situation arises.

     

    I would like to know that, if one of my caches were questioned, it would be investigated thoroughly and not rely upon hearsay as the deciding point though, that would also be nice!

    Let's do some roleplaying. You be the reviewer. I'll be a cache owner. Someone contacted you and told you that I told them that my cache didn't exist. They asked you to protect their privacy.

     

    How would you handle it?

     

    It certainly wouldn't end with me calling the CO a liar on the cache page.

  8. Apparently this is not an isolated event. A local cache only a couple of days old was just disabled because no one was finding it.

     

    GC21D5M

    Lotta bricks on that wall... :lol:

    Sorry to interrupt again, but how many of us following this thread would have been on that wall like butter on popcorn?

    :angry::unsure:

  9. An owner cannot be laid off.

     

    Hummmm....seems I have been every year for the last 30 years. I'd have to say your statement is incorrect.

    I'd put forth that this very statement means that you are not an owner.

    Sorry Roddy, but I think you are busted on this one! :angry:

     

    If it was on any other topic or in any other thread it wouldn't matter... but in this one it goes against everything that you've asked of Groundpeak.

     

    And again, you are both WRONG! If you have ANY proof to back your claims, please provide. You guys neither one have even a hint as to my business, not a clue, yet you'd like to call me a liar....

     

    Maybe you'd best to get your facts straight before publically calling someone a liar...sound familiar? It might even interest you to know I have solid PROOF I am a co-owner of the course....but then, facts and proof don't seem to mean much to you two, does it?

    Keep in mind that I like you, I like your reputation, I enjoyed meeting you at GeoCoinFest and hope to again, so this is NOT personal and I am certainly not out to make you look bad, and I am not calling you a liar. I am saying that based on the posts that you presented it does not sound to me like you "own" the business.

     

    Again, this would be relevant in no other thread but one where you are questioning the motives, integrity and behavior of another, or stating that as a business owner you would have handled it differently.

     

    I hope that we can disagree without being disagreeable. :unsure:

     

    Not a problem there, I echo your sentiments. However, you are mistaken, simple as this. As I said, you are free to prove otherwise, I'm not going to do that for you. You made the statement, you'll have to back it if you can.

  10. You're making statements not backed by the facts. I never said anything about how I'd handle it fitting into how I feel THEY should handle it...and I believe my posts would support this.

    Back in the early days of this thread you stated repeatedly how a business 'should' have handled this and how you as a business owner would have handled it.

     

    Anywho, with this new cache incident I mentioned in post 1473 I am beginning to wonder if this is a new policy and if Groundspeak should 'handle it' with an explanation.

     

    And again TAR, I never said how I'd handle it is how they should. I'd say either put up or....

  11. Apparently this is not an isolated event. A local cache only a couple of days old was just disabled because no one was finding it.

     

    GC21D5M

     

    WOW....anyone still think this is an one and out situation? Anyone need more reason to wonder? Got this one on my watchlist!

  12. An owner cannot be laid off.

     

    Hummmm....seems I have been every year for the last 30 years. I'd have to say your statement is incorrect.

    I'd put forth that this very statement means that you are not an owner.

    Sorry Roddy, but I think you are busted on this one! :angry:

     

    If it was on any other topic or in any other thread it wouldn't matter... but in this one it goes against everything that you've asked of Groundpeak.

     

    And again, you are both WRONG! If you have ANY proof to back your claims, please provide. You guys neither one have even a hint as to my business, not a clue, yet you'd like to call me a liar....

     

    Maybe you'd best to get your facts straight before publically calling someone a liar...sound familiar? It might even interest you to know I have solid PROOF I am a co-owner of the course....but then, facts and proof don't seem to mean much to you two, does it?

  13. We all handle things differently of course...
    :angry:

    How can you say that after railing on for 30 pages about how this was handled? :unsure:

    Honestly, Ed, plain and simple.
    So you're okay with the fact that we all handle things differently, but this one was handled differently than you would have, but that's not okay?

     

    I'm lost! :lol:

    I think it's clear what the problem is. There a HUGE difference between handling differently and handling BADLY.
    It was handled badly IN YOUR OPINION.

     

    Your opinion stems from how you think you would have handled it.

     

    The problem with this is that you don't have all the facts. None of us probably ever will. Until you have the facts, your OPINION on how this should have been handled is just that, an OPINION. Not a FACT.

     

    I think what TAR is getting at is that what you seem to be saying is that it's ok to have different ways of handling something as long as it is YOUR WAY.

     

    Edit: Speeling

     

    You're making statements not backed by the facts. I never said anything about how I'd handle it fitting into how I feel THEY should handle it...and I believe my posts would support this.

  14.  

    You have no clue what I support, please don't pretend you do. What I DO support is OBEYING THE LAW...simple. And I believe I already told you I'd delete any log stating illegal actions were taken. Since I'm not an LEO, what else would you like me to do?

     

    I suppose you'd like me to applaud you for "coming clean"? HARDLY. I'd applaud you if you acted responsibly, that would be worthy of applause as opposed to "coming clean". I don't make a habit of applauding criminals.

     

    You're right, that comment should have been directed to briansnat; my apologies.

    You said you you delete any postings when you know the finder broke rules to do it. Great! That's exactly what I'm asking for. Unless anyone has any better ideas...

     

    Back off. I don't care about your applause. I wasn't coming clean. But I am man enough to say it straight about what I do, good or bad, rather then cowardly hide behind lies or cover ups. I suppose you want everyone to believe that you never speed. If you do, even once in a while, then by your thinking, your just as much a criminal. :angry:

     

    Posting it in the log could lead to an owner seeing it and causing problems for the cache owner, this is why I will delete any logs even hinting of after hours finds. Man enough to come clean...just don't do it would be much better. Enough of these logs seen by a landowner could lead to bigger problems. I know how much work went into the MiGO/DNR/State Parks deal, it was a long and hard process which now benefits all cachers. With my work with a local state park, I have built a lasting relationship which has allowed use of their lands, use of their pavilions and a yearly camp/cache event (and this is just in my local park, this happens all across Michigan)...I'd hate to see a few lawbreakers come in and ruin that for everyone.

     

    This isn't about me, what I do has no bearing on the topic at hand, but I hardly said I was a saint, my friend!

  15. Are you now saying we had better all be good little sheep and never oh never question anything?

     

    Nope.

     

    And again, PLEASE don't tell me what I should worry about. It's just not your call.

     

    It is true, you will have to decide what to worry about. But isn't it also true that if you bring those worries here they are likely to draw comments?

     

    Edit to repair quote.

     

    Oh, just that we'd better not complain about what we question?? :angry:

     

    Yep, and when you bring your comments here, I hope you realize you'll get replies.

  16. We all handle things differently of course...

    :angry:

    How can you say that after railing on for 30 pages about how this was handled? :unsure:

     

    Honestly, Ed, plain and simple.

    So you're okay with the fact that we all handle things differently, but this one was handled differently than you would have, but that's not okay?

     

    I'm lost! :lol:

     

    I think it's clear what the problem is. There a HUGE difference between handling differently and handling BADLY.

  17. While you can only search addresses by blocks, if you're on the computer first, you can get door to door directioons from the TOPO 8 software with very little effort. Works like a charm and is easily transfered.

     

    As for routing...while it is generally slow at calculating, I find it to be quite adequate for all my routing needs. I've used it to take me around town and hundreds of miles from home, no worries. While it does have it's problems, I wouldn't let those problems stop me from buying the unit. Having owned a Garmin OR 300, I can tell you my experiences with both are very similar as far as road accuracy goes.

     

    These are my opinions, ymmv!

  18. I am not so much concerned with the hows of this situation, but how handled.

     

    O.K. Thanks. My question was, for the most part, intended to address this exact point. Sorry I didn't get that across.

     

    I don't consider this to be such an impact that the world is caving on us... ...I consider it a bad handled situation which I hope would be handled better if the situation arises.

     

    Do you feel that GS has not gotten that message yet from this topic so far?

     

    I would like to think so, but if the many posts which still believe otherwise is an indicator....

     

    I would like to know that, if one of my caches were questioned, it would be investigated thoroughly and not rely upon hearsay as the deciding point though, that would also be nice!

     

    Do you believe there is evidence that GS will handle future questionable cache situations in an unfair manner save for possibly one or two per year, or so?

     

    Is that not enough?

     

    Thanks, again.

     

    And that would be my question too. Is it not enough that GS has a very good record of treating people fairly over the past ten years?

     

    Can they have a perfect record and still maintain order in this game which has existed quite nicely with very few rules? I don't expect that of them. I am very pleased with the game management so far.

     

    I do get concerned when people jump down GS's throats for what I consider to be misunderstood points of contention. Almost always, in the past, when "the other side" of a story is presented the emotional whamy of a topic dies off. In this case we can't have the other side so it seems a bit pointless to me that folks keep trying to get at it and then when knowing they can't have it turn the big guns on GS.

     

    In the unrealistic-to-me condition that some think GS needs a kick in the pants, well, didn't they get that on the first page?

     

    I do get quite concerned for the volunteer reviewers when they get slammed for their actions, usually by folks who don't have both sides of the story. They donate far too many hours to their work to be treated unfairly on these pages.

     

    And, almost above all, I think it is unnecessary for folks to be concerned about things that are never likely to happen to them or anyone they know.

     

    This is where I stand on this topic. Nothing I have read over 30 pages has changed my opinion of GS and reviewer action. What has affected me is the "snarky" comment and I have taken that to heart.

     

    :angry:

     

    I am amazed how you feel the need to "protect" the PTB from a thread in the forums, as if this thread is somehow vile and malicious and harmful to them. I find it somewhat comical that you feel you need to champion for the reviewers who seem quite capable of handling and even dishing out abuse quite nicely without your help...and yes Lep, I STILL feel you owe me a couple apologies!

     

    Your "hidden" anger in that post seems less than sincere to me, it's almost as if you think we're going to buy that line or two and just fold camp and go home with our tails between our legs and apologies on our lips. You're acting as if this thread is somehow defaming and degrading to the PTB and the mods...where?? Are you now saying we had better all be good little sheep and never oh never question anything? And if we do make that unthinkable act of questioning TPTB, we'd surely best keep it to what? 2 pages at most? :unsure:

     

    Sorry, didn't do much to move me. Maybe you missed the SEVERAL times I have posted my admiration, respect and appreciation for all you mentioned? :lol:

     

    And again, PLEASE don't tell me what I should worry about. It's just not your call.

  19.  

    You seriously lost me. Are you saying you PURPOSELY break the law and then "come clean" so you can sleep better at night? :angry: Wouldn't it be easier and better to just NOT break the law so you don't have to "come clean"? Wow!!

     

    No, my friend. The owner didn't break the law, that's what those who go into closed places do. It's definitely NOT back on the owner...

     

    Thats what I said; I knowingly broke the rules and owned up to it.

    That's better then breaking the rules and covering it up. Which, of the two, is what you support

     

    No one said the owner broke the law.

    So back to the point: it is on the owner if they don't delete logs that they knww were gained by breaking the laws. The only reason not to is because the want the found-my-cache stat or they don't have the guts, too afraid someone will get made at them.

     

    Simple in my opinion. Going in the park after hours is bad form and could result in areas being closed off to our game.

     

    ...

     

    I have a cache in a park that has No Dogs Allowed signs posted prominently. Over the 7+ years it has been out the cache has had about a half dozen people post logs where they mentioned seeing the sign, but brought their dog along anyway.

     

    ...

     

    Did you delete the logs?

     

    I don't delete legit found it logs. I asked the loggers to alter them to remove the references to breaking the rules. They all complied, usually accompanied by an apology (though it wasn't me who was owed the apology).

     

    The hypocrisy…

     

    So you don't hold the law breakers accountable. Instead you request that they cover it up. Why?

     

    Simple in my opinion. Going in the park after hours is bad form and could result in areas being closed off to our game.

     

    ...

     

    Breaking the rules is bad enough. Boasting about it in a log that the entire world can see is asinine.

     

    ...

     

     

    Could be also that it takes more guts to post and take the ridicule then not say anything at all. As in, 'hey I did this, I'm owning up to it, judge me as you will.'

     

    Often what is attributed to guts is simply stupidity. Some may say it takes guts to have a friend shoot a beer can off your head with a .22. Others will call doing so incredibly dumb.

     

    Jeopardizing the future of geocaching for everybody in your area so you can own up to your own cluelessness simply compounds the stupidity.

     

    Yea, thats true. But not in this case.

     

    You're implying that I broke the rules just to own up. Your being silly and I'm starting to not listen to you

     

    You have no clue what I support, please don't pretend you do. What I DO support is OBEYING THE LAW...simple. And I believe I already told you I'd delete any log stating illegal actions were taken. Since I'm not an LEO, what else would you like me to do?

     

    I suppose you'd like me to applaud you for "coming clean"? HARDLY. I'd applaud you if you acted responsibly, that would be worthy of applause as opposed to "coming clean". I don't make a habit of applauding criminals.

  20.  

    Question: I would like to know, however it can be asked, why is it that any of what has happened between this cache owner and Groundspeak has you so concerned if the chances of it happening to anyone else are so remote?

     

     

    I am not so much concerned with the hows of this situation, but how handled. I have said this many times now. I don't consider this to be such an impact that the world is caving on us as some like to sensationalize it, I consider it a bad handled siytuation which I hope would be handled better if the situation arises.

     

    I would like to know that, if one of my caches were questioned, it would be investigated thoroughly and not rely upon hearsay as the deciding point though, that would also be nice!

    Since you really don't know what happened how can you say this? It might be that GS had way more that hearsay info. Do you have proof to the contrary. I doubt you have proof. So you are for sure convicting GS based totally on hearsay. All your accusations are based on hearsay.

     

    Do you really think GS is going to have reviewers visit all caches in question. The standard you hold them to has to be rooted in the reality of the game we are playing. Otherwise the framework of the game falls apart. The game is not being played in the imaginary world where everyone is 100.000% honest and infallible with perfect integrity. Some are dishonest. Some misread or misunderstand guidelines. The human equation on both sides make it impossible to resolve all situations that may arise, in a "perfect" way.

     

    I don't recall claiming this was fact, I do believe this to be the case though. Do you have proof to discredit my belief?

     

    I believe most of us realize this isn't an ordinary "problem cache". I do think, if you're going to make such a claim as to call the CO a liar, you should go to extraordinary lengths to make sure you are right. Hey, if it were me, I would not only want to know, I would be taking appropriate actions. If I suspected the claims made to be true, I would make sure I could prove it beyond a doubt and then hand out a MUCH stiffer punishment. I would also make sure it was known what happened and that similar situations wuld be handled likewise. We all handle things differently of course...

  21. I am not so much concerned with the hows of this situation, but how handled.

     

    O.K. Thanks. My question was, for the most part, intended to address this exact point. Sorry I didn't get that across.

     

    I don't consider this to be such an impact that the world is caving on us... ...I consider it a bad handled situation which I hope would be handled better if the situation arises.

     

    Do you feel that GS has not gotten that message yet from this topic so far?

     

    I would like to think so, but if the many posts which still believe otherwise is an indicator....

     

    I would like to know that, if one of my caches were questioned, it would be investigated thoroughly and not rely upon hearsay as the deciding point though, that would also be nice!

     

    Do you believe there is evidence that GS will handle future questionable cache situations in an unfair manner save for possibly one or two per year, or so?

     

    Is that not enough?

  22.  

    Question: I would like to know, however it can be asked, why is it that any of what has happened between this cache owner and Groundspeak has you so concerned if the chances of it happening to anyone else are so remote?

     

     

    I am not so much concerned with the hows of this situation, but how handled. I have said this many times now. I don't consider this to be such an impact that the world is caving on us as some like to sensationalize it, I consider it a bad handled siytuation which I hope would be handled better if the situation arises.

     

    I would like to know that, if one of my caches were questioned, it would be investigated thoroughly and not rely upon hearsay as the deciding point though, that would also be nice!

×
×
  • Create New...