Jomarac5
-
Posts
1448 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Jomarac5
-
-
Geocache is an interesting one from the early days (one of Jeremy's early finds). It's not so much the description of the cache, but the logs and photos. Makes a great short read.
I particularly enjoyed this log:
May 18, 2001 by Jeremy (Jeremy) (100 found)
That's truly unfortunate. It's almost worth making a virtual cache in these areas since it's definitely worth the visit. Check out my link to see some photos of the location. - Jeremy
Good thing he said "almost".
*****
Geo 33D
-
goespotter wrote:
Does this also include forum posts?
What? And deny all of you the entertainment that I provide? Pardon me, but my fans await me...
*****
Geo 97X 114
-
I'll cross post my caches because I think having choices is a good thing and competition generally makes for better customer-oriented services. Perhaps a little business competition will make the people here stand up and see that there are many who have different opinions of where this game should be heading and would like to contribute to that effort.
As Gorak has indicated in his post above, I will also be listing my new caches on the NC site prior to listing them here.
*****
Geo 33E 128 105
-
CO Admin is going to Navicache? I didn't know that.
*****
Geo 94DY
-
Briansnat wrote:
In short, there are two major gripes among the whining brigade. The first is that this website has guidelines for posting a cache and they they can't place any type of cache wherever the heck they please. A second gripe is that these message boards are now moderated and they can't discuss gun laws, exchange cake recipes and call each other nasty names.
That is one persons opinion, and very well may be the opinion of a few others as well, but it is not the opinion of all. In fact, there are many underlying reasons why there are so many problems -- most of them have are related to unfairness exhibited by the admins. The most predominant being that there are many issues regarding the way that people are treated that have NEVER been dealt with properly and these issues continue to fester. Perhaps if those issues were dealt with properly, they would cease to exist.
*****
Geo 45 54
-
pnew wrote:
J5 agrees with CR in saying the site and TPTB are oppressive
Oppressive is a harsh word to use for a free cache listing service
J5 says an example of oppression is the deleting of posts by mods
I agree with CR -- so what? Am I not entitiled to my opinion, as you are to yours?
As for the rest of your post... whatever. I don't agree with you because I don't think you get it. But feel free to think the way you want -- you're entitled to your views.
btw: Your post seemed more like a personal attack than a contribution to this topic.
*****
Geo 17 18F 27
-
Keystone Approver wrote:
let's not let it degenerate into a back-and-forth argument about deleting posts, editing posts and so forth.
OK. But I just have to say I'm just amazed at pnew's ability to read all that is not there between the lines.
As far as CR goes, I always enjoyed his insightful comments and will genuinely miss his posts and hope that we'll see him back here from time to time.
*****
Geo 97S 25
-
pnew wrote:
Saying they were wrong would imply that there is a right.
Are you for real? I asked you if you thought they were all wrong. The opposite of wrong is not always *right*. In this case the opposite would be *correct*. There is a correct way to deal with customers. Yeah, that's right. A correct way. See how that works. People see that something is wrong -- as in not correct -- some of them might even use the word *right* -- and that would not make them wrong. How can you possibly argue that point? See how that makes your argument not quite right? Note that I didn't say you are wrong -- but incorrect sure fits.
I think if these horribly "oppressive" actions were so clear cut you'd be able to easily list them to me and we would easily agree and move on.Ah, yeah, right. Except that those deleted threads are not there any more. You do understand that, right?
Personally, I don't think that deleting posts is right. That would make it wrong. Right?
*****
Geo 51
-
pnew wrote:
editing posts and censoring - yeah it annoying but its not like everyone's posts have been changed to "All hail Jeremy".
Ah... no, they haven't been changed as you suggest. But many of them have been deleted. Yes, gone. Finished. Never to be read again. Like they never existed. I don't see how you can see that as a positive thing.
pnew ote:I'm just not seeing such oppression that drives someone to post a huge diatribe explaining why they "just can't take it anymore" or "are putting it behind them like a bad habit".
If you can't see it, perhaps you are not paying attention to what IS going on. It's pretty obvious from all the postings that there are a LOT of people who CAN see the oppressive actions. Do you really think that they are all wrong?
*****
Geo 113 115
-
Mopar wrote:
Just like I a few minutes ago, when I went to the supermarket. The didn't carry something I wanted. We spent $105 there this trip anyway. Does that give me any say in what products they should stock? Does that give me a right to choose who I want working the checkout, or how many lanes are open? RIGHT?
I don't know where you get your groceries, but where I get mine, if I ask for a particular product and the manager is able to get it through his suppliers, he will bring it in for me (it's a big store, but they know about customer service).
If there is a problem with a person at the checkout having a bad attitude, I'm sure that it wouldn't take more than a few complaints about the person before something positive was done to correct the situation. If there are not enough cashiers to deal with all the customers, the good manager will open additional cashiers to accomodate and please the customer. That's just good business because the store manager understands his customers and wishes to make the experience of being a customer in his store, a good one. You should try shopping for groceries where I shop -- they're great at keeping their customers happy.
Is it the right of the customer to complain if they are not happy? Absolutely is is.
You asked if it's RIGHT? Yes, it is.
*****
Geo 96N 104
-
bug&snake wrote:
There are two issues here I think. One being the ownership of the listings database and the other the representation on geocaching in formal negotiation. While I agree with what you say, it is unfortunate that, in the real world, people tend to distrust the ability of a corporation to be unbiased. It is for this reason that elected governing bodies have come into being - the perception of an unpaid volunteer is easier for most people to see in the same frame as honest and unbiased. The for-profit organization will always be viewed by suspicion as regards private and hidden agendas. (agendas? agendii?)
Can't say I agree with you here. Although there may be some cases where what you say is true, it's my experience that many companies take a VERY responsible approach to dealing with community issues (it's in their best interest to do so).
Perhaps in your world companies are distrusted -- in my world, companies are run by people, and those that run their business with the wants and the needs of people in the forefront, generally fair quite well. Your comment regarding the unpaid volunteer as more honest and unbiased doesn't bode well -- I've seen plenty of volunteers who are little more than inept, heck, some are inept. There are capable people on both sides of the fence and it would be wrong simply to exclude one side because of an unfounded bias.
Personally, for-profit or not-for-profit doesn't matter much to me -- what does matter is who can get the job done the best.
*****
Geo 23
-
Team Jiffy wrote:
However, I believe that guidelines (excepting those concerning safety) should be formed with formal, pro-actively queried community input.
I thought there was a point to this thread before it was so rudely taken off track and there it is -- it's about the caching community. Thank you.
I very much agree with the community input aspect of your suggestion. It's a very good one. Now who could be expected to head such a query with a fair and unbiased perspective...
*****
Geo 95M 105
-
Why do suicides always feel the need to explain their innermost feelings in long winded goodbyes, spatter all over everyone?
You're gone? So be it. Bye, but don't do this hoping we'll miss ya when you're gone.
I agree. You want to go? Go. Whatever. Why do you feel the need to explain your actions to us?
Wow. That sure gave this thread a shot in the arm. Well done.
Hey, I'm alright if you want to express your thoughts on the subject even if they go against the grain. At least you weren't rude about it.
Don't know if I can answer your question adequately, but perhaps it's just because they can. Or maybe they feel an alliance with several personalities on this board and just want to let their online pals know why they're not around anymore. I really don't know. I suppose it could be for one or more of many reasons. It's not my style but hey, who really cares?
*****
Geo 96DFV
-
Some time down the road I feel sure that someone, somewhere, will come up with the time, ability and inclination to get geocaching into the hands of the geocachers in a way that is 'not for profit'. I see from this thread that this might even be underway right now.
Such an organization IS needed, but make no mistake - it is NOT needed to bring down this website. While this site is not/can not be all things to all cachers it is supplying a good service to us all.
The reason that I say such an organization is needed is quite simply that the cachers view points can not be represented to authority (local, state, federal or what ever) by a 'for profit' corporation without the specter of 'vested interest' raising it's head.
I hope that the action groups that are in the embryo stages, and any other that follow, will be working with this site for the foreseeable future. I also hope that they are working, or are willing to work, with each other. We do NOT need multiple governing bodies in competition!
I don't think that it's so much an issue of profit or not for profit entities ruling over caching. Either way can be equally bad. There should not be a problem with anyone making money for services which they work hard at to provide.
It's been said here previously that the answer lies in an open source database of all caches. This would allow anyone to provide services (for pay or not) in a manner that they feel is the way that the majority of people want. People can choose for themselves which service they wish to use. Obviously, whoever is giving people what they want will get the business/memberships and the profits (monetary or otherwise) that come from it. This is truly a situation of the provider providing to those who choose to have their caches served up in whatever manner they feel best. There are many ways that this can be set up so that no one entity commands absolute ownership of the cache listings.
*****
Geo 35
-
Bloencustoms wrote:
I suppose it all boils down to this. Some people believe permission is required no matter what, and others believe that a lack of prohibition implies permission.
There's another group; those who believe that the lack of prohibition does not necessarily imply permission but that there are some things that shouldn't require permission.
Hiking, walking, caching, and other non-invasive human powered activities on public land (excluding ecologically sensitive areas) should not require permission or fees. As a resident and tax payer of our respective countries, it is *our* public land and public means you and me.
*****
Geo 97R 67D
-
RK wrote:
You can criticize GC.com all you want. It's all in how you do it.
Please pass the honey.
*****
Geo 25 29
-
Lapaglia wrote:
Seems that your other thread was closed and you just want to cry or shine about it.
That's not very nice.
*****
Geo 115
-
Wheeee....
*****
Geo 94TY
Edit: added comment
-
lol
Can you say "Kamikaze"?
*****
-
Majormd&PUNditOK, your post reminds me of a situation that happened a week or so ago while on a night caching hunt with Gorak. It appeared that a beaver had decided that it wanted the tree that the cache was placed under, and after removing the tree it left the cache exposed for anyone to see. I placed that cache about three feet away at the base of another tree and covered it up -- and then, as you did, I e-mailed the cache owner to let them know of what took place. They were very appreciative that the cache was moved to a nearby hiding spot and not left lying in the open (the clue still worked fine in the new spot).
I would say that if there is a good reason for moving someone else's cache, it is a prudent to e-mail them about it as soon as possible. I think in most cases, the cache owner will be thankful that you are looking out for the best interest of the cache.
*****
Geo 33H
-
Sorry CO Admin, I didn't see your post until after I posted mine.
Yes, let's get it back on topic.
*****
Geo 97S
-
Gorak wrote:
I know for a fact that J5 is anything but plain.
Thanks Gorak, I try but it seems that some people just misinterpret my playful and fun mannerism.
*****
Geo 101 106
-
JoeGPS wrote:
I may get another 10% warn but Jomarac5 you are plain mean.
Mean? I don't think you know me nearly well enough to make such a statement. Many people tell me how nice I am. What's mean about what I posted?
*****
-
ecofinder2003 wrote:
I hope this clarifies my point for you. Thanks for your comment nonetheless!
Thank you for replying to my post (that used to be there). Yes, it does clarify your point although the ecological aspect alone is quite enough to warrant the stand that your organization is taking. My apologies if I appeared a bit agitated regarding the ever tiring "liability concerns".
Thanks for being open to discussion regarding the placement of caches on HCA land.
*****
Rumor Mill
in General geocaching topics
Posted
I heard that Criminal was the pirate who went by the name "The Captain" and that he's starting up a new pirate website.
*****
Geo 101