KBI

Are you pulling my leg, or do you truly not understand how an analogy works? I get it. I'd just rather discuss the request at hand. Do you have a way that I can hide my numbers that is new? Or am I still just to ignore it all and play the game your way? That is your choice, my friend. I am merely trying to help. All I have asked -- not demanded, just asked -- is for you to explain why the second option is not acceptable to you. You are free to either (1) offer an explanation as to why ignoring the busybodies is an inadequate solution for you, or (2) ignore my posts. So far you have been unwilling to do either.

It’s all explained in the "Proper Gameplay" section of the Groundspeak Official Geocaching Competition Scoring Rulebook. There are bootleg copies available on the Internet if you know where to look, but they aren’t always up to date. The only valid, authorized rulebooks are the ones supplied by Groundspeak directly to the Referees. It’s all explained in the fine print of the qualification paperwork. You did do the proper paperwork before your semi-final competition trials, didn’t you?

Are you pulling my leg, or do you truly not understand how an analogy works?

Neither am I. Agreed. Nah. Just observant. My observation apparently bothers you, though. Why is that?

Okay. I tried to abandon this discussion, as I could see I that my attempt to help was creating nothing but confusion and hard feelings. But now I see the issue is apparently going to follow me into other threads and other forums, where it absolutely does not belong. So here I am, back again. Here is my take on this conversation: GOF & Bacall: My neighbors have begun having silly competitions to see who cuts their grass the fastest. Cutting grass has nothing to do with speed, of course, but they persist, and now they are making me feel bad by talking and acting as if I am part of their weird twist on lawn maintenance, which is something I used to enjoy. I am therefore requesting that the neighborhood association provide me with a means of concealing my lawn from the street. KBI: Those guys are confused. They are distorting things in a pointless fashion. Why not do as the rest of us do, and simply ignore those ignorant goobers? Your lawn looks fine to me. GOF & Bacall: STOP TELLING ME HOW TO MOW MY LAWN!!!!! Have I left anything out?

Nobody says you have to share my interpretation. If you agree with Flask’s sentiments, I can see why you might disagree with my opinion of her opinion. If you wish to defend her sentiment, then please, don’t let me stop you. ... which is exactly why I disagree with Flask’s lecture. What possible good does it do for her to belittle you in the forums? Why can’t she accept that her preferred version of play is not any better than yours, only different? As you correctly point out, she has every right to belittle her fellow cachers. I also have every right to express my opinion of her opinion. So how is it crass when I do it, but not when she does it?

I don’t see any connection between the two subjects. On one hand, you proposed the addition of a new functionality to the website. I stated no objection to your proposal; I only asked you to explain why you thought it was really necessary in light of a couple of points I made. No offense was intended; I simply made a suggestion that I sincerely meant as an easier option for you to solve your problem. You proceeded to respond several times as if I were fighting you, and never seemed to understand my meaning, so I gave up and exited your thread. Flask, on the other hand, openly belittled her fellow cachers, people I see as having harmless fun. She clearly implied that her way of doing things is the more proper way. She expressed her opinion of those cachers; I expressed my opinion of her opinion. If you see any relevance between those two discussions, and if you believe I have committed an inconsistency for which I should atone, then I would be very interested in hearing your reasoning.

Good answer. I like that suggestion too.

I don’t care what anyone says; sarcasm is always fun. You are correct in observing that I may have misunderstood. Of course, you may have as well. If I misconstrued Flask’s meaning, she is welcome to correct me and explain what she really meant.

it didn't. getting the firstfind is fun. having it advertised is crass. having sex is (i hear) fun. advertising your conquests is crass. i never cease to be amazed at people who write "yay! firstfind!" all over the first page of a logbook, as if having their signature there at the top of the page isn't enough. Translation: "Anyone who doesn't do it the way I would do it is WRONG." I think to imply such a thing in the forums is ... well, crass. Interesting statement. Thank you. I happen to enjoy seeing the congratulatory FTF thingies that appear on many cache pages. It’s cool. When I see those, I see people having a good time. I fully understand it’s all informal and totally non-sanctioned, and I don’t get into it so much myself, but for the most part it’s just good, clean, harmless fun. And I don’t particularly like it when I hear someone try to claim that their own version of harmless, informal fun is somehow more worthy, more correct or more proper that someone else’s harmless, informal fun. "Crass" is a perfect word for those claims.

it didn't. getting the firstfind is fun. having it advertised is crass. having sex is (i hear) fun. advertising your conquests is crass. i never cease to be amazed at people who write "yay! firstfind!" all over the first page of a logbook, as if having their signature there at the top of the page isn't enough. Translation: "Anyone who doesn't do it the way I would do it is WRONG." I think to imply such a thing in the forums is ... well, crass.

It's strange that you were the one trying to irradicate 'whore', but you choose not to respect TPTB's decision to block other words. Nothing strange about that – unless there is a great quote from a leading thinker somewhere that includes the word 'whore.' I don’t recall TAR "trying to irradicate" the use of the word 'whore;' he only objected to the way it gets overused in an all-too-common phrase related to certain Geocachers. And neither did I see him object 100% to political correctness just now either – just the fact that it prevents important quotes from being accurately presented in these forums. Which means your objection amounts to a ... strawman.

I care. I honestly care. I offer what I sincerely intend as a helpful suggestion ... and I get flamed. Screw it. I'm outta here.

I am not telling him he can't do it. In fact, I have made clear statements to the contrary. I am not saying his proposal bothers me. I have made clear statements to the contrary there as well. I am merely asking him why he lets the opinions of others allow him to feel the need to "screen off" his find count. Geez, this is getting tedious. I have said the same thing a dozen different ways now. Is my writing really that ambiguous?

For me it's not the "opinions of those people" that matter at all. It is a desire to not be subjected to the drama that ensues when people look at find counts/post counts/salary information or any other private information and draw conclusions of their own. I have read this portion of your post three times, and I still don’t see any difference between those two concepts. You state that the "opinions of those people" don’t matter to you, but then you go on to explain why they do. If I am missing something feel free to bonk me over the head with it. I have already demonstrated, in this very thread, than I can be pretty dense. Again, maybe I am missing something, but it seems to me that it is the other way around: Ignoring the busybodies is the zero-energy option; worrying about the opinions of those busybodies is the option that requires effort. Maybe someone can convince me otherwise. I'm open-minded. No, it doesn’t. I am only offering a suggestion. I have neither stated nor implied that my suggestion should be forced on anyone. I am only asking G&B, out of nothing but pure curiosity on my part, to explain why he prefers to let those "schmucks" bother him. He is always free to ignore my posts.

Pendantically speaking, my question back would be Why do you care that they care? I am simply trying to help. I care because I care. As I explained before: Worrying about the conclusions others draw about my find count is not something I waste any time over. If G&B could adopt the same policy, there would be no need for his proposal.

Yes, I’m sure it could. I’m not really arguing against it. As you have correctly pointed out, the change you are suggesting would have very little effect on me. If you want the number next to your name to appear as a blank in your cache logs, it really won’t change my caching experience enough to matter. As I tried to say before: I am not against it; I simply see it as unnecessary. No, I guess I really don’t. I am only interested in the reasons why you seem to think you can’t simply ignore those busybodies the way the rest of us do. I am convinced that if I could get you to try doing so, even if it were for just a few days as an experiment, you would see there is no need for your proposal. If it doesn’t work you could always go back to fretting over the opinions of people who don’t deserve the respect you are currently giving them. Why do you care about that? That is my question. I can’t understand why the opinions of those people should matter to you. If you can explain that to me convincingly, I will happily join your cause.

He's not asking to pave over his lawn he's just asking to be screened off i.e. not visible, while mowing his lawn so the neighbors can't compare and compete with his lawn mowing speed. He would rather not be on display. What’s the difference? Fence or asphalt, either way he is trying to hide his lawn from busybodies who do not deserve his attention, much less his respect for their opinion. But just in case he likes your version of my analogy better than mine, allow me to rephrase my question: You wouldn’t screen off your lawn from view just because a few neighbors started competing and trash-talking each other over how fast they can mow, would you? And to help ensure that my analogy is understood, let me ask the same question a different way – multiple choice: A few of your neighbors have begun to compete informally to see who can mow their lawn the fastest. They start giving you a hard time for not keeping up with their arbitrary silliness. Which response is more mature: (1) Throw up a solid wooden fence which completely obscures your lawn from view. (2) Ignore them and enjoy your lawn as you always have.

But that’s just it! You don’t need to take ANY steps! You are already there! Look at me. I have never taken any steps to sidestep the competition aspect of geocaching. Do you see me competing? Do you see me anguishing over the behaviors or comments of others? No, you do not – because I do not participate in those things. Doesn’t that mean, then, that I am already where you wish to be? If so, then why do you need a new feature installed to the website to get you to where you already are? I don’t have anything against those who choose to compete; I just don’t care to participate. Why isn’t that good enough for you? Geocaching is not a competition. There is nothing about Geocaching that inherently lends itself to supporting any kind of meaningful competition. If you give the question at the very bottom of my last post some serious thought, the reason for that will become crystal clear.

It has been said; you just don’t understand it. Or if you do understand it, you’re not letting on. If you really understood what I’ve been trying to say, you would have had a meaningful response to my questions. It isn’t wrong. It is unnecessary. There is a big difference, but either way your question is moot. And I believe your question is inappropriate. If you want the status quo changed, then the burden of proof is on you. I can’t speak for others, but you have not convinced me that the change you propose will do anything for anyone they can’t already do for themselves by simply ignoring the buffoons who make an issue of their numbers. And further, the wording of your question is inaccurate and misleading. Geocaching is not a "game," and the find count is not a "score." Anyone who can grasp that basic truth should have no trouble ignoring the schmucks. Here is another question for you: Any comparison of find counts between any two geocachers for the purpose of competition is completely meaningless. Do you understand what makes that statement true, G&B?

You are correct. My mistake. You did in fact ask for an option, not a ban. In that case, please ignore the parts of my post that are contaminated with my mistaken assumption -- and tell me what you think about my main point, which addresses what I think is a much better way for you to view this issue. In fact, I asked you a couple of direct and very relevant questions: Would you please do me the honor of answering those two questions? I have never had anyone show any interest in what I was eating. At least not past "That looks good. What is it?" Certainly not in any competitive way. And never has anyone counted how many dogs I was eating because there was a dog eating contest in town. People have and do keep track of how many finds I have. I have actually had a user comment on how many finds I had during a conversation on not counting finds. I don't do anything just to keep up with my neighbors. Of course my neighbors are dead and only stick around for a couple of days. Not that hot dogs and neighbors have anything to do with geocaching. I still do not understand why you care if I don't keep score. What advers effect does it have on you? If you don't understand the analogies I presented, or that I am merely trying to help you, then I give up. Good luck.

I probably should. I do so semi-regularly. Letters to elected officials, Letters to the Editor, etc. I might sent in an objection to this one as well. You are right. I feel strongly about this, and should probably send an email to my elected folks in Washington. I guess what set me off is the casual way others in here were ignoring what I see as a blatantly irresponsible givaway of your and my hard-earned tax dollars, and the way they even seemed to want to encourage it. I stated my opinion, and my opinion was followed by wild misrepresentations of my opinion.

And how much of that do you suppose would have been possible if the Defense Department had always been in the habit of giving away its budget in the form of birthday party prizes instead of spending it to recruit and train good folks like yourself? And when people like me stop raising objections when we observe that waste, as you seem to suggest I should do, what do you suppose will happen then? Is it wrong for a citizen like myself to hold his government accountable? As well you should be. Your enthusiasm is praiseworthy ... and I share it. The real shame it that there is not more of it out there. Am I biased and protective when I see someone wasting your – and my – hard earned dollars on silly waste? Ditto. I hear nothing in your point of view that I disagree with ... only a simple breakdown in understanding. When I say this: "I think this $40,000 birthday party giveaway of our tax dollars is very irresponsible. Can anyone convince me otherwise?" Some of you seem to hear this: I HATE THE GOVERNMENT!! THE WHOLE GOVERNMENT!!! I HATE IT I HATE IT I HATE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!! I’m sorry, but I don’t follow the reasoning that connects those two sentiments.

You are correct. My mistake. You did in fact ask for an option, not a ban. In that case, please ignore the parts of my post that are contaminated with my mistaken assumption -- and tell me what you think about my main point, which addresses what I think is a much better way for you to view this issue. In fact, I asked you a couple of direct and very relevant questions: Would you please do me the honor of answering those two questions?

Actually, what he asked for was the choice to pave over HIS lawn and not have the neighborhood association demand that all lawns have grass. You are correct.