Jomarac5

Perhaps the poll questions should have also included an option for: - Ban users who create sock puppet accounts. I certainly agree with Zuuk that sock puppets waste a lot of everyones time. And it's a bit obvious who some of the sock puppet creators are from the responses in this thread. I don't think the delayed time restrictions are the answer but the admins can certainly find out easily enough if someone is a sock puppet and send an e-mail off to the offending accounts. I think Cache Canucks has suggested the best remedy so far. Another possible solution would be to make paid membership mandatory -- I'll bet there'd be a lot fewer sock puppets if everyone had to pay 30 bucks to create one. My biggest gripe about sock puppets is that they definitely take away from the discussion. It's rather frustrating when you've got good dialogue going and someone who is obviously a sock puppet steps in and creates a disturbance. It also does nothing to encourage new members to post to the forums, especially when sock puppets tend to flame people. As for someone hiding behind a sock puppet veil because they are afraid to say something any other way -- if you are afraid to stand behind what you say then maybe it doesn't need to be said at all. Sorry, sbell111, using your example, if a cache is lame then either say so or don't say anything and live with it. If I visit a cache that I think is lame, I DON"T say it was a good cache. You don't need to be rude and say that it was a pile of crap either -- but if everyone visiting the cache leaves a log of only three or four words, it's an indication that people are not having a pleasurable experience and the owner should get the message. Sock puppets show a lack of self respect, lack of a valid opinion, and are cowardly. Plain and simple. *****

I'll bet that Jeremy is just thrilled about this topic. *****

You can use html to add a picture to your page without being a paid member. I've got one on mine. *****

Interesting topic. There's also stickouflage -- numerous short sticks placed on top of a cache. Usually, the sticks are all placed parallel to each other and are very noticable from quite a distance. I've found many caches that use a combination of barkouflage and stickouflage. To a lesser extent, I've also come across several caches that use the leafouflage technique and often wonder how effective the hide will be once the decaying process begins. Grassouflage can sometimes be quite effective in certain instances and rockouflage caches are definitely the most difficult to locate. I even came across one cache that used the very rare asphaultouflage method near the side of a paved walkway. Most of the caches that I've found were by noticing an area that looks suspiciously contrived. *****

quote: Eeyore and Shadow wrote:If they were equiped to stay in the wood considerably longer then there were isn't it possible they miscalculated the time it would take and should have told thier keepers that the would be gone another day or two? Being equipped for much longer than the anticipated length of your journey is the prudent approach when in the wilderness. If they had only taken enough provisions for the intended duration that would have proven to have been a mistake. They did the right thing by being prepared for a period longer than their intended duration. quote: BassoonPilot wrote:I was under the impression that we could all learn a great deal from the experiences (positive and negative) of others. And we have learned that by being prepared, and doing the right things in the event of a needed rescue is a good thing. quote: BassoonPilot wrote:Personally, I'm not interested in knowing who the parties are; the need for facts from their POV was introduced by whoever said the news story was wildly inaccurate. And then they clarified the erroneous inaccuracies of the media article by stating the facts. The need was met. quote:BassoonPilot wrote: I also disagree with your suggestion that "these guys are being dragged through the mud." I never said that they were "being dragged through the mud", only that to do so will serve no useful purpose. quote:BassoonPilot wrote: Most of the items I've read in this thread mention their preparedness, presence of mind and the ultimate wisdom of their actions. I would term that "respectful." And there's the rub, isn't it? The lesson learned from this is that cool presence of mind, and being prepared are what saved this situation from becoming tragic. Yes, mentioning these things is respectful. Pushing it beyond that, is not. quote: But I also agree that if no new information is forthcoming, then the thread has outlived its usefulness.I agree. Thanks. *****

quote: BassoonPilot wrote:The lesson I learned from this thread is that both sides of the story want to limit and "spin" the facts to their advantage. No disrespect intended, but I don't think so. I certainly have no advantage to gain -- I don't know any of those who were involved. I just think these guys' privacy should be respected. It's like the when something tragic happens to someone and reporters are all over it trying to sensationalize the event. Seems that this is the same case here. Wait until something like this happens to you -- I'll bet you won't want to be answering a lot of frivilous questions. Why is it so important to formulate any opinion here? Why is it so important to have every little detail? To what end? What makes anyone think they have a right to ask any questions? This is not an inquisition. Where does this end... when the names of those involved are divulged? And what's the point of that? It's obvious that uncontrollable circumstances got these fellows into an unfavourable situation and the use of good judgement got them out of it. There's the learned lesson. End of story. Show some respect here and let this thread go, there's no more value in it. Pushing this further is just showing how much disrespect some people have for the privacy of others. Dragging these guys through the mud is not going to accomplish anything other than giving someone some sort of perverse satisfaction knowing that they've embarrased someone more than is necessary. This is one thread that would have been better not started in the first place. *****

quote: Canadazuuk wrote:As for a pub night, did I miss a thread? See this thread. ***** There are three kinds of people in the world; those that make things happen, those that watch things happen, and those that wonder what happened.

Very cool. Sounds like it would be a fun cache. *****

Got me curious. I'd like know what it is. ***** [This message was edited by Jomarac5 on June 21, 2003 at 01:25 AM.]

quote: Zartimus wrote:Hey, what about obviously-fudged up photos done with photoshop? Maybe a different catagory <grin>.. Gee... I can think of a couple of really good names for that category. cache-potato, I think your idea is a really great one. *****

quote: Vacman wrote:The end. Thank you. I agree. *****

Seneca, this is certainly a completely different perspective from the barrage of questions that you asked above. Sounds like you're changing your query in an attempt to backpedal. Enough already. OK? Leave this alone and show these fellows a bit of respect. You can learn all you need from what has already been posted. *****

Don't pull your caches. I've done three of them already (and attempted another one but didn't find it) and plan to do more of yours in the near future. If you pull your caches you'll just be prolonging anything from taking hold in the valley. I've noticed quite a few new names coming from the valley over the past few weeks. There are more people out your way getting involved. Be patient. It will come. As you know, I placed a cache at Lindeman Lake and don't expect too many to visit it because it is away from the mainstream. I've also placed two caches in the Langley area that I thought would get more traffic but visits to them have been sparse. I'm quite content to leave them though as I know they are in good locations and they will get visited eventually. Regarding a pub night in the valley -- it might be difficult to arrange something at this point since there are not a lot of cachers in the valley yet (and you can't expect that everyone that is in the valley will read these forums). Perhaps a better solution is to go to the pub night that Team Giblert is organizing in Vancouver and try to persuade some of the 'city folks' to make their way out to the valley to do some of the good caches that are there. Don't get discouraged -- caching is fairly new in the valley but it will take off -- and you'll have your caches already set up in some of the better locations. *****

quote: Seneca wrote:I believe we have information from "the source", just not enough of it to enable us to form an opinion (or more importantly to determine what lesson if any we can learn from this). This kind of thing can happen to any of us. I was not being judgmental. I was only asking for more information (which incidently, has not been forthcoming). The lesson learned here is to do what is expected from SAR when you are in need of a rescue (and as the article and jrav mentioned, they did just that and were located quickly). I don't understand why you feel the need to push this. You say that you're not being judgemental but it's obvious from the questions you posted above that you are attempting just that. The parties involved are home safe and really that is all that matters. Obviously, they made an error in judgement (be it weather, terrain, or whatever) and found themselves in a position where they could not make it back at their anticipated return time. It happens. There is no sense in dragging these guys through the mud. They acted appropriately when they realized that they were not going to make their return time. They're home, safe and warm, and no one died. A little common sense tells you that all is well and there is no need to push the issue. Try putting yourself in their shoes and don't cause these guys any more embarrassment than they have already experienced. You're a bright guy -- leave this alone and show these fellows a bit of respect. You can learn all you need from what has already been posted. ***** [This message was edited by Jomarac5 on June 20, 2003 at 03:35 AM.]

quote: Canadazuuk wrote:No, I'm just breathing in your second hand air, sir. And yet another intelligent (?) response... it must be the meds. I guess I'd have to vote "people are pretty much the same as they ever were." *****

quote: Canadazuuk wrote:who gives a rats butt Now there's a really intelligent response. Is this your contribution to the 'soap opera' element of the forums Zuuky, or are you off of your meds again? *****

quote: Mopar wrote:So, then this log is truthful? C'mon Mopar, let it go already. *****

Time to let this one go folks. This is one thread that's outlived its usefullness. Someone shut this down. Please. *****

How do you titillate an ocelot? . . . . . . . You oscillate its t*ts a lot. *****

quote: TrimblesTrek wrote:Sheesh... let's just ignore the post above shall we?! I tried... I really did. quote: I wrote:Sorry, but I'm getting tired of your holier-than-thou attitude... quote: Then Cache Canucks wrote: Frankly, I'm not concerned in the least about what you're 'tired of'... Typical response from someone who spends excessive amounts of time yammering on the forums rather than learning about what this activity is really about by actually doing it, and then has the audacity to come off as an authority and speak on behalf of others. Besides a lot of windy words, you really haven't contributed a whole lot, have you? Nuff said about this. Either you get it or you don't. ----- Back to the topic... I think the real issue here is that these parks belong to us. Should we really have to sneak around and come up with covert methods of hiding caches in areas that we have every right as citizens to access. It's our land. As I've mentioned previously, we should keep the government agencies out of this as long as possible. I believe it's inevitable that they will eventually find out about this activity but until then, if we keep placing caches responsibly and monitor their impact on the environment (moving the location when necessary), continue caching in and trashing out, and continue to participate in other benificial ways (like getting Scouts, Guides, and other youth groups involved) it will be much easier to argue the positive aspects of caching. I think the key here is to cache responsibly, and to build up an arsenal of caching-positive attributes that can be used when the time is necessary to speak out against these government controls. Collectively, we can make a difference. *****

quote: Bystander wrote:The rest should find a hobby in which they are actually interested in participating, and stop cluttering this geocaching forum with extraneous commentary. You mean like you yourself have done? And to make it worse, you hide behind the veil of a sock puppet. Next time you make a post, lose the fake identity before stepping up to the plate (and also get your facts straight before you do). 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. Regarding the parks problem. I think the best way is to avoid government involvement as long as possible. Perhaps there has been some involvement that was initiated by the Ontario parks people and that will need to be dealt with (thanks Gm100guy and DonnaG) but let's not initiate anything anywhere else. The government has a way of screwing up whatever they put their noses in. Please don't lead them to our province. *****

quote: Rex_Gordon wrote:I realize that it's going to take me quite some time to regain a positive status on these boards, and I am going to try my best to remain of open mind at all times. Resistance is futile. Your biological and techological distinctives will be added to the collective. You must cease thinking that you can entertain independent opinions. You will be assimilated. Sheesh. *****

quote: Cache Canucks wrote: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. Better be careful Cache Canucks -- you've just broken nearly all the 'rules' of acceptable forum conduct at geocaching.com... You need to read this authorative post from Jeremy and change your childish mannerism -- my guess is that you'll be getting your first warning notice soon... *****

quote: Jeremy wrote:McDonalds Happy Meal toys, Disney keychains, etc. don't actively endorse McDonalds or Disney... I'll bet that the advertising agencies that McDonalds and Disney hire would argue that these items actively endorse their products (and do a darned good job of it).

quote: wvbackpacker wrote:It's cyberspace dude, who cares what people say about you? Chances are you'll never meet them. In most instances this is probably true. There are those however, that have never heard the expression "a bear never sh*ts in its own forest". *****