Cache Canucks

...cool.

Well, I'd be interested to know what that 'reasoning' is ...I can understand Parks Ontario exhibiting concern for any activity that would involve the placement of physical caches within their areas of responsibility and respect their authority to curtail or ban that part of GC'ing at their discretion. What I can't understand (and would indeed question) is the idea that virtuals are subject to the same type of sanctions. Unless it becomes an internal and voluntary policy adopted by TPTB at GC.com, I don't see how the posting of waypoints for virtuals located on public property in areas that are open to public travel (and the use of GPSrs to navigate to them) can be 'banned' by Parks Ontario. Virtual cache hunting in Provincial Parks is no different than a someone who goes for a 'regular' hike to a predetermined point with a map in his pocket.

I've been away from GC'ing and the GC forums for awhile, so forgive me if I'm not quite up to speed with how this particular subject has evolved over the past few months ...but why the nix'ing of virtuals? Unless things have really changed, a virtual doesn't require the placement or finding of a physical cache, simply the navigation to a specific point of interest (points of interest that are also hiked to by non-GC'ers ...who would appear to do so without attracting similar 'censure' from Parks Ontario). Assuming that virtuals within Provincial Park boundaries would be in areas open to the public anyway, how did using a GPSr and web-posted waypoints to locate them become objectionable? This is like saying that you can't have someone point out to you on a park map where a great vantage point for taking photos is located...

There's several bars down in Ottawa's 'Market' area that are often frequented by single women from the 'over 40' crowd. Prints and scratches are a'plenty ...but as for the other 'sign' that you mentioned, I'd rather not go there.

I'm sure that you probably already did this, but just in case ...did you leave a description of the lost unit along with your contact information with both M&M and the casino (in the event that someone should turn it in)? Also, although a little after-the-fact, did the 76 have an ownership screen as part of its start-up routine (and if it did, had it been completed with your contact info)? If whoever comes across your lost GPSr is honest and there's a trail that can be followed to get it back to you, the chances are probably good that you may see it again ...but if the finder is less than 'above board', you might want to look into whether the loss is covered by your homeowner or travel insurance. For what it's worth, my 14 year old son and I recently spent a night away in a motel. It wasn't until we arrived back home that he discovered that a $20 bill he had been carrying was missing (a good hunk'a cash for a young fella to lose). We pretty much wrote it off as 'MIA' when, to our surprise, the motel called us at home later that same evening to say that housekeeping had found the $20 when making up our room after we had left (they're mailing us the $20 ...less the $5 that I told them to keep and pass along to the housekeeper). There *are* honest people still out there.

For peetz sake. (...not intended as a comment on the topic being discussed or the participants in the discussion, I just couldn't resist the pun.)

Some (many) days, it just doesn't pay to surface and take a peek at the forums. "Down periscope... Dive!... Dive!... Dive!..."

We usually have a pair of Motorola T6220's with us whenever doing anything 'outdoorsy' (they can also monitor the VHF weather band, which is handy in itself). For us, as I expect is the case for most folks, it's a tool to keep in contact with members of our own party more than anything else. If we happen to be cache hunting, we'll use one of the designated GeoCaching channels. (Recently discovered cool use for FRS: Cart-to-Cart driver chat while zipping around the local Go-Cart track [use a handsfree headset] )

I logged a coastal cache in southwestern Washington state earlier this year. In it, some thoughtful soul had seen fit to leave a visibly used Q-Tip. Charming. You wouldn't need to dig too deep in the forums to find similar stories (...many worse) of cache 'trading' practices. As hard as it may be for most of us to imagine anyone with the wherewithal to GeoCache in the first place to - for lack of a better term - 'screw up' the effort that a fellow cacher puts into creating caches, such people are indeed out there. Although it may be of little consolation at the time that you're confronted with a ravaged cache during one of your maintenance visits, sometimes it helps just to remember that things could always be worse. Without straying too far off topic, back in the late 70's I was on a military exercise in the Canadian arctic. It was the dead of winter, temps dipping to -70, and we were sleeping in 5 man tents with little more than small kero fueled heaters for warmth (it was, without any doubt, the coldest I had *ever* been in my life). When we got back home and developed the photos, there was one in particular of the tent that we had lived in (complete with snow-wall windbreak and a white featureless arctic horizon that seemed to stretch on forever in all directions). It was clear to anyone looking at the picture that it had been one cold and desolate place to have spent a week in a tent ...but that was *especially* obvious to someone who had actually *been* there. To make a long story just a little bit longer, I kept a small copy of that photo tacked to the wall near whatever desk I might have had occasion to use during my years in the army that followed. Whenever things may have become a little 'tense' or 'challenging', I would always glance at the photo and remember... ...things could always be worse.

quote:Originally posted by sbell111: quote:Originally posted by canadazuuk:...Paired with a time restriction, some filter or report could be used to identify IP addresses that have created multiple userids... and while they are sitting out their waiting time, someone just turns them off! There are plenty of valid reasons for IP addresses to create multiple userids. I created my niece's profile, for instance. I suppose that if TPTB were to adopt some form of control that involved using IP address 'point of origin' as a filter, they could always send a pro forma email to the *existing* account holder before activating any additional accounts from that same IP address. The pro forma email could simply advise the user of a site policy on 'sock puppets' (and 'trolls' for that matter) and serve notice that it has been noted that more than one user account has been activated from a given IP address; in other words, "...Here's your other account, but we know who you are and - if you don't want to lose your site privilages entirely - don't abuse it...". Before additional accounts are activated, the *existing* account holder could be required to acknowledge the pro forma email and agree to its conditions. Of course, in the event that there is no relationship between the holders of the user accounts (despite the same IP address), that would be an exceptional circumstance that the applicant would be free to take up with TPTB on case-by-case basis. It probably wouldn't stop them all, but it would certainly give most a 'pause for concern' before using a bogus account for ill will. How taxing this would be on TPTB to make happen, I have no idea ...but my guess is that much of the process could be automated.

quote:Originally posted by Jomarac5:"...Besides a lot of windy words, you really haven't contributed a whole lot, have you?..." Gee, I dunno, GeoCaching.com officially adopted a designated FRS channel a few months back ...in large part, the result of a proposal/poll that I intiated here in the 'Canada' forums (which then led directly to several 'General' forum follow-up polls on the same issue). You'll also notice a new item hitting the Groundspeak store shelves in the coming weeks ...a subdued version of the GeoCaching.com cloth logo patch (also the result of a proposal/poll that I initiated). Of course, to keep things on-topic with the business at hand, there was the idea of using virtual caches in Ontario parks as a possible 'work around' (look back earlier in this thread before the 'unpleasantness', I was the one who originally floated that one in this particular discussion). That idea seems to have been fairly well received also. No, I think I'm doing pretty well in the ol' contribution department as a whole ...thanks for trying to keep score though. (My last post in this thread)

quote:Originally posted by Jomarac5:"...I must agree with one point from bystander however, that there are some who act like they have been elected spokesman for this activity -- i.e., Cache Canucks with 9 finds in a year, you really are a very active participant aren't you? You should know that just because you make more than 500 forum posts in that same year doesn't make you an expert on caching -- it makes you a bag of hot air -- and that makes you a good candidate for a government job. Sorry, but I'm getting tired of your holier-than-thou attitude in these forums whenever someone expresses an opinion that you don't agree with..." Frankly, I'm not concerned in the least about what you're 'tired of'. These forums are chock-a-block full of discussions among people with differing opinions, the catalyst for which is often one person taking issue with a point being made by another. If you don't agree with some of the comments that I - or anyone else - may make (or 'how' they're made), oh well, that's life ...you're always free to offer up your own thoughts in response (as we *all* are - regardless of our cache counts). However, if you honestly feel that something has been said which warrants censure on the part of the site admins, just click on the little '!' Report-This-Post icon located in the lower righthand corner of each post - that's what it's there for. The good folks at Groundspeak are a rather level-headed bunch who's judgement can be respected, and I'm sure that if they satisfy themselves that someone has indeed 'crossed the line', they'll be quick to give that person a tap on the shoulder ...but don't expect them to grind any axes for you.

quote:Originally posted by Jomarac5:"...Better be careful Cache Canucks -- you've just broken nearly all the 'rules' of acceptable forum conduct at geocaching.com... You need to read http://ubbx.Groundspeak.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=5726007311&f=4016058331&m=98860645&r=11060945#11060945 and change your childish mannerism -- my guess is that you'll be getting your first warning notice soon..." I'm sure that TPTB would study everything in context (from the very beginning of this thread on down) before casting any judgement.

quote:Originally posted by wicka:"...one last thing if anyone is interested please do a search on cache canucks posts and you will see that he injoys calling people names (bob u called a idiot)..." "...calling people a idiot and other name calling is a MUCH better way to express ones self right CACHE CANUCKS?..." Sorry wicka, I didn't mean to make you feel left out from the name-calling tirades which I "...injoy..." so much ...you're an 'idiot' too. [This message was edited by Cache Canucks on June 16, 2003 at 08:48 PM.]

quote:Originally posted by wicka:"...cache canucks why dont you become a moderator here... cause you shure as heck injoy buggin the **** out of me!!! I am aloud to have my own opinion and i am not "yelling" @ gm100 guy or calling him names or being "rude" to him..." Well, for one thing, when you post in an online forum and type in CAPITAL LETTERS, you *are* considered to be 'yelling'. If you look back at your original post directed at gm100guy, you appeared to have 'yelled' at him twice. As for whether or not you were 'rude' by what you said (yelling notwithstanding), you chose your own words and they clearly speak for themselves ...I won't waste my breath here trying to teach you simple 'table manners'. By the way, next time you ever actually find yourself in a bookstore(...?!), spend $10 on a pocket dictionary.

As an addendum to my previous post... I thought that the tone of wicka's comments had a familiar ring to them, so I took a look at his earlier forum contributions. Sure enough, there it was. Although he edited out his original insults (an encouraging sign in itself I suppose), they were quoted in one of my own posts before he did. Expressing an opinion is one thing, but try to use a little decorum and go easy on the disparaging remarks, huh...?

quote:Originally posted by yorelken:"...And, by the way, wicka can express his opinion if he wishes to. Because he doesn't agree with you doesn't make him wrong..." Whenever I see a post that uses ' ', 'DUMB!!!', and 'crap' all in the space of little more than a paragraph, my guess is that it's probably time someone pulls in their reins just a bit. There's better ways of making your point. It's exchanges like these that leave me to wonder what some folks would be like if you were to ever meet in person and try to engage them in a 'real' conversation. I would like to think that most people wouldn't come off nearly as blunt(rude?) in person as they sometimes do online ...especially if they ever find themselves in the position of having to deal face-to-face with Park staff.

quote:Originally posted by wicka:"...ditto to trimbles trek! Why cant you leave this alone gm100? does it make you feel special? everyone has been telling you to leave it alone and you havnt!!!! I also understand that it was a geocacher who brought this all to the attention to the ontario parks staff!! DUMB!!! if you bring the government into this sport it will cost us all!!! just leave it alone, even when they dont respond you STILL bother. If anyone is going to ruin it for us it will be you. Just go geocaching and stop trying to play "geocaching ombudsman". Who started all this crap in the first place?..." Although I'm sure 'gm100guy' can speak for himself (and no doubt he will)... ...cool your frick'n jets 'wicka'. What was (and still is) being attempted is the *mature* and *responsible* approach to securing the long-term ability to place GeoCaches within Ontario's parks and conservation areas. We all know full well that if things were to continue on as they have, it would only be a matter of time before Park authorities adopt an official policy with regard to GeoCaching (with or without our bringing the activity to their attention). Once such a policy was made, it would be *extremely* difficult to get it changed if it went against us (since someone, somewhere, would have to admit that they made a mistake), so - rather than let such a policy be made in a knowledge vacuum - 'gm100guy' (and others) were making a pre-emptive effort to stack the deck in our favour. Had we at this point been in receipt of a letter from Parks Canada or the Ontario MNR informing us that they had adopted a Pro-GeoCaching policy, you would be applauding 'gm100guy' - not chastising him ...so check your attitude at the door, take a deep breath, and stop shooting from the hip. The current situation over this recent removal incident has yet to be clarified, so lets wait and see how it plays out. It could very well become the catalyst for a formal policy, and that policy could just as easily be in our favour as against us. Either way, 'good show' on the part of 'gm100guy' (and others) for having taken the initiative with their attempt to get this issue as a whole addressed to *all* of our benefit. If things don't tumble in our favour, a No-GeoCaching policy would have inevitably happened anyway ...the authorities didn't need us to bring the activity to their attention for them to know that it was going on. < sheeesh>

Although not a perfect 'fix', in the event that it appears that our Parks' staff *are* going to frown on GeoCaches placed within their areas of responsibility, couldn't 'virtuals' be considered as a possible alternative...? Most of the parks that I've visited in Ontario (of all types) have some form of 'specific site of interest' that would meet the req'ments for a virtual cache (the petroglyphs at Lake Superior Provincial Park for example, or the old mill at Bruces Mill conservation area, just north of Toronto). With physical cache placement in U.S. National Parks having been a no-no for quite some time south of the border, does anyone know if TPTB approve virtuals within those same parks...? Again, not an 'ideal' solution (certainly not as fun as physical caches), but an option that may allow the activity to take place 'above board' where it might otherwise be forbidden. As for the idea of placing physical caches regardless of obtaining Park permission, in the event that one or more of the park services come down with a formal policy against GeoCaching, I think that you'll see caches in those areas treated the same as those for U.S. National Parks ...that is, their placement (or continued use) will not be approved by TPTB - nor should they be, given those circumstances. Mind you, this is all 'worse case'/'doom and gloom' postulation. The situation, once it gets clarified, may not be nearly as bleak as we might be thinking...

quote:Originally posted by Desert Warrior:"...That is nice for the green-country crowd. Perhaps they will then do one in tan-brown for us desert folks. I would buy a few of them for sure..." quote:Originally posted by Mzee & Associates:"...I concur with 'Desert Warrior', Tan/Brown for us desert folks..." Perhaps, if(when!) Groundspeak sees how well the OD patch finally turns out and sells, they'll give the idea of a subdued 'desert' version serious consideration as well (if I were living in your neck of the woods, I'd sure lobby for it!). I think that it really boils down to the demand for an item - that is, the quantity that Groundspeak can reasonably expect to sell - warranting their effort and expense to produce it. Aesthetically, I should think that a subdued 'desert' patch could be just as agreeable to TPTB as the OD version (if done using the same 'with due respect to logo integrity' approach). It's probably just a question of how many people would be interested enough to actually buy them.

quote:Originally posted by carleenp:"...I like the green as it is. If you make it the same as the background (I figure you are going for the lighter one), it would be too "subdued." Also, if you make it the same as a background color, you lose not only contrast for the key feature, but violate the "three color" rule of basic design. Am I missing something? It seems "subdued" yet pleasing to me as is..." The forum discussion over the colours for the proposed subdued design took place months ago, and it's the resulting design from that (rather lengthy) discussion - after being reviewed and approved by the folks at Groundspeak - which Bryan is now working hard towards getting produced. (If we open *that* can of worms again, the thing will never see the light of day... ) [This message was edited by Cache Canucks on June 14, 2003 at 08:12 AM.]

Nice avatar 'embi'...!

quote:Originally posted by TrimblesTrek:"...Unless of course somebody passes this thread along to the forest rangers!!..." My guess is that there's no 'passing along' required. I'm sure that more than a few Parks' staff are quietly sitting on the sidelines and following this type of online forum discussion with some interest (...if you were one, wouldn't you?). But, when you stop to think about it, that should work in our favour ...that is, the more they learn about this activity - and the type of person who participates in it - the greater the odds that they'll realize that the threat(?) posed by GeoCaching to park land is much ado about nothing. ...or that's my theory at least.

Folks, I just received a note from Bryan at Groundspeak and had a pleasant chat with him on the phone. After several back-and-forths with the supplier to get the correct colours for the subdued logo patch nailed down, it would appear that Bryan is now but one step away from seeing him (the supplier) 'get it right'. The latest attempt (see picture below) would have been perfect, if only the lime green detailing had instead been done in the same olive-drab used in the background. Bryan tells me that he'll have the supplier make the correction and - hopefully - we'll soon see the long awaited subdued patch available for sale.

...these might also be handy for hiding that spare house key in your flower bed.