Jomarac5

Who are you referring to? *****

quote: Zuuk wrote:If I had not posted to this thread, would it still be near and dear to your heart? You're scaring me with words like those man -- how would you know what's near and dear to my heart? Perhaps you better get out your little cache police detective kit and check all the images on my cache pages -- maybe they're all there to collect IP addresses. *****

Is there a message on Member Only cache pages that tells the visitor to the page that their user id is being tracked and made available to the cache owner? Sound familiar? Hmmm... *****

quote: Bloencustoms wrote:There is no attempt made to conceal an "image". But what if the image (that nearly everyone assumes is not hosted on another server), is providing the owner of the image exactly the same data in exactly the same manner? Is it different just because that seemingly innoculous image is doing *exactly* the same thing? It's not like that *visible* image has words on it that say "this image is actually hosted on another server and is used to track IP addresses of those who visit this page". Hmmm... *****

quote: Zuuky wrote:Yes it is Why? *****

Last post for me in this ridiculous discussion. You wanted to get my name out here in front of everyone and you did. I don't know what you expected that would produce, but it seems that the result was not what you had hoped for. And now you're resorting to... well... I'm not sure what you're resorting to but it's not looking good on you, that's for sure. It's your thread Zuuk and I no longer wish to participate in it because there doesn't seem to be a point to it. Rant and rave all you want -- perhaps some will still be listening... See ya later alligator. *****

No, really Zuuk, is there a point to this? If so, can you get to it? If not, it appears to be nothing more than a childish vendetta -- and if that's the case, this thread should be closed. Was that last line a threat to my well-being Zuuk? Enough already, you're making yourself look really silly. Ack... ack...... ack......... *****

Ack... ack...... ack......... quote: Zuuk wrote:and then you had the nerve to tell me NOT to phone you, or contact you by e-mail Well, at least that part is true. C'mon Zuuky, is there a point to all this? I can't see where this is even entertaining to anyone anymore. *****

quote: eroyd wrote:More simply put, Zuuk knows your "it" J5 and he's telling on you! So there! Ye gots me Zuuky. Ack... ack...... ack......... Is there a point to all this? Can it be summed up in ten words or less? *****

quote: Zuuk wrote:and when he couldn't handle the 'guilt' anymore, he angrily phoned me up You've got to be kidding? That's really funny. *****

quote: Zuuk wrote:It's just plain deceitful to conceal the images in such a manner, Is it any different that having an image *showing* in plain site on the page? *****

quote: Zuuky wrote:Are we still presuming that if we ignore the pirates, they will go away? Who's we? Have you got worms or something? *****

quote: Zuuk wrote:You have no credible explanation as to why all the lying and misleading took place. Lying? Are you infering that *I* was lying Zuuk? If you are, it needs to be said that I did not lie to anyone. *****

quote: Zuuk wrote:Why do you suppose so many people around the continent don't like the Urchin concept? Ah... maybe because they are confusing it with the pirates who are stealing caches. quote: Here you have a para-site that hates Jeremy and the structure of geocaching.comI can't speak for everyone on the pirate site, but I know that this is not the impression that I get. Hate is a pretty strong word Zuuk, and I don't recall that I've run across anyone who has said that they hate Jeremy, or his website. quote: and you're going out there with your pirate concept come hell or high water... I've actually found that high water works much better for floating ships. quote: You get cachers linking their pages to that site. Whoa there! Where do you get the idea that I got anyone to link to anywhere? quote: And then EVERY ONE OF MY CACHES is listed on the site as being open season. (Yes, I have read your post that 'defends' my caches...) If you read my post, then why are you bringing this up again? I made it very clear that I didn't think that your caches should be touched by anyone. Still don't -- unless of course, we see a Captain Urchin graphic on them. quote: I have read, listened to and understood your 5 points more than a few times. No, I don't think that you have understood them. If you did, you wouldn't be so worked up about all of this. quote: But I guess we love a good pirate story as much as we love to continue on in our old ways.Well, as I've mentioned before, I love a good pirate story. And this one is looking like a pretty darned good one. It could very well become a favourite. Avast Zuuky, it's all an adventure... *****

So much I could say here, but I'll try to keep it short. quote: Zuuk wrote:I give the presentation of the concept an F. It was presented poorly. Haphazard would be a good way of describing it. Roeper:"Hey Roger, what do you think about this new pirate in BC? Where do you think it stands right now" Siskel: Well Richard, it had a couple of minor flaws in the very beginning but they were corrected quickly and in a way that the solutions created a bit more fun to the whole idea -- I like it a lot and give it a big thumbs up." Roeper: I couldn't agree more. But as you know, there's always one or two who will disagree and will dwell on a few minor points but eventually they'll come around and see it for what it is -- good wholesome entertainment. I also give it a big thumbs up." Sorry Zuuk, I don't see where your single F matters a whole lot. quote: Bringing out a pirate-like concept at the height of anti-pirate sentiment didn't give this thing a fighting chance. Fighting chance? I'd say that in many ways it has helped it a great deal. It's shown that what we're doing here is not the same as is being done elsewhere. It's been a good example to a few bad pirates that were doing things in a harmful and destructive way, how to do it better -- in a way that doesn't get people all riled up and is actually fun for cachers and pirates. Why do you suppose so many people around here LIKE the Urchin concept? quote: As for how I would like to see the ideas presented? The forums are a good place to start. This will be a bit difficult for you to grasp, but if every idea and creative concept was introduced through these forums for approval, nothing would ever get done. Everyone would be arguing about every last little detail until there was nothing that even closely resembles the original intent, if anything is left at all. Just look at how the private discussion to name the pirates progressed and finally dwindled into nothingness -- that one really accomplished a lot, eh? quote: Cachers introduce new ideas via their caches all the time. They either catch on, or they don't. Seems like this one caught on pretty well. quote: Having the anti-geofroggers over at the para-site manipulate the game on this site was uncool to say the least. And this has exactly what to do with this particular converstation? ----- You seem to missing a number of crucial points here Zuuk; 1. The cache owner has agreed in advance to allow Captain Urchin to visit the cache. 2. The log book and pencil are left in the cache so those like yourself, who don't wish to participate in the fun and adventure, can log the cache without having to involve themselves in a little harmless diversion to their every day. 3. Leaving cache containers is adding to the game -- we will see some new caches. 4. You may not like what is going on, but nobody is doing anything wrong here. 5. Nobody is doing anything wrong here. Lighten up man -- it's just a game. *****

quote: Woodsters wrote:I had noticed Jomarac5 was MIA here for a little while or at least he wasn't posting as much...guess he was a little busy...lol Actually, I have been pretty busy lately. Unlike some, I do have other things besides these forums to occupy my time. quote: ju66l3r wrote:Personally, I'm still not of the opinion that opt-in need be *necessary* but if that is what it would take to get it to fly better, then I'm definitely all for making it exclusively an opt-in game (as I've also said before). It's very necessary to get permission first. It's a courtesy to people and a matter of respect. Unlike some of the bad pirates, there is no intention of deliberately getting people upset by any of this. Personally, I don't think there is any good reason to go around playing with peoples caches just for the sake of upsetting them -- opting in is not a negative here, far from it, in fact. Obviously, those who don't want to participate in the fun, don't have to, and no one is imposing upon them to do so. The Captain Urchin method of pirating lets cache owners decide for themselves. Quite simple really. [bTW: nice avatar ju66l3r, it's hauntingly familiar ] quote: fizzymagic wrote: (regarding ju66l3r's comment "Personally, I'm still not of the opinion that opt-in need be *necessary*")Exactly why it is so unacceptable. Clearly, the pirate advocates Just Don't Get It. Actually, as is evident here, some pirate advocates *DO* get it. quote: Seneca wrote:I'm prepared to give credit where credit is due. (even if it is to Jomarac5 ) I think the Captain Urchin concept (as explained on the Captain Urchin profile) is great! Good fun, done only with the consent of those who want to play. If they play by those rules, I have no problem with it at all, and I doubt that Geocaching.com would either. I don't plan on flying the Captain Urchin flag (yet) but I look forward to finding a cache that was visited by him. Arrr!!! Hope you find a cache that's been pirated by Captain Urchin real soon. *****

Let me give you my interpretation of this Zuuky. I said what I said. Go back and read it again -- it simply states the cacher (I assume that he is the only one who's caches have gone missing) is quite well known for upsetting others and it is possible that he's ticked off the wrong person. I did not say, or even infer, that the reason for the caches being stolen is justified or that anyone deserves to have their caches stolen. As you well know, I do not condone the stealing of caches for any reason. I could give you a list of at least half a dozen local cachers who have been upset enough that they might do something along this line -- you know who's who and you know the things that have gone on around here. Problem is, that there's so many that have reason to hold a grudge that it would be impossible to even make a quess at who the perpetrator might be. Discrediting people for getting in the way of fun, Zuuk? I don't think so. Those people generally do a good job of that to themselves, without the help of anyone else. ***** edit: typo [This message was edited by Jomarac5 on October 05, 2003 at 09:24 PM.]

One last post and an apology to Seekerbc for the rude way that this thread was highjacked. quote: Zuuky wrote:Been there, done that, old news... Using this as a smaoke smoke screen is pretty lame. You can be interpreted as saying that 'he deserved to have his caches stolen'. (Though I'm pretty confident YOU would never do it.) Interpret things whatever way you want Zuuky. But you are wrong once again. I don't think that anyone *deserves* to have their caches stolen. quote: Okay, so the cat is out of the bag. Not one, but ALL of my caches were referenced on p#####caching.com as being open season. 'Captain Urchin' welcomed me into his crew on that site, and then told me to 'walk the plank' when I didn't. Yes, it is true that Captain Urchin didn't say to 'get' zuuk's caches... but that's not the point. Why allow a para-site to directly influence the game here? Zuuky, where's the cat man? I think you also need to go back to the list of your caches that was posed on p1ratecaching.com and read where Captain Urchin tells the other pirates that you have not included yourself in the pirate concept and urges them to leave your caches alone. Seems that Captain Urchin is on *your* side, when it comes to malicious activities. With respect to p1ratecaching.com influencing the game here -- I'd say that the opposite is true. And if you'd been paying attention to what is really going on instead of stewing in your narrow-minded little tirade, you'd see this. *****

quote: Renegade Knight wrote:Cat's out of the bag. Now people can quit speculating. Really? Just because the good Captain Urchin has been somewhat exposed, the real problem with the US caches that are being stolen still exists. Perhaps your cat is not out of the bag as much as you'd like people to believe? Perhaps you have some insight that you're not sharing about the New Jersey pirate and other pirates who are STEALING caches? *****

quote: Canadazuuk wrote:Cache owner(s) are dummying up about their missing caches. Why give satisfaction to the thieving pirates? It's my understanding that there is only ONE cache owner in Vancouver who's caches are going missing. Perhaps, it has something to do with that cacher? Perhaps, he's been ticking off people for a long time and someone is just fed up with the BS? But then, I don't know for sure and am just guessing. Why don't you just tell us what caches have gone missing Zuuk? As I already mentioned, maybe we can all do something to help catch the perpetrator. quote: Why give satisfaction to the so-called friendly pirates? Ah... perhaps because no one is being harmed, and it's fun? quote: There are people in Vancouver that actually like the game that geocaching.com provides, and don't want the meddling of a para-site ruining things here. What is it about 'permission has been granted from the cache owner' that you don't understand? This is in no way creating problems for those who don't want to participate. If you, as a person who doesn't go along with the friendly pirate idea, come across a cache that has been visited by Urchin, can still find the cache in exactly the same location that the owner put it, and you can still log the cache. Where's the problem Zuuk? Permission has been granted. And what's with this 'para-site' thing that you keep referring to -- Captain Urchin has nothing to do with the operation of that site. Lighten up Zuuk, you might even see that this is fun. *****

quote: Canadazuuk wrote:Jomarac5 is aware of these apparently, as he was told by someone at gc.com. You might wish to ask him. Well, like so much else that you incorrectly quote -- I DO NOT know which caches have gone missing. Yes, someone from Groundspeak told me that a particular cacher in our area has had three caches gone missing but I don't know which caches they are. But you seem to know, why can't you share this information with the rest of us? Perhaps we could do something to help catch the perpetrator. The Captain Urchin pirate concept in Vancouver is flawed only in the respect that some, like yourself, don't get it. *****

quote: NJ Admin wrote:Naybe one of that 11,12,15, or 20 who does not care for his own caches being plundered against the "rules" will post here and clear things up once and for all? What *rules* would you be referring to? *****

quote: Snoogans wrote:Oh, and I agree with J5 that this issue should be allowed to die. Aye. Good advice. But the part about deleting posts could create some heated debate though. *****

Then again, Captain Urchin might be 15 people. Or 20. It's all such a mystery. *****

.