Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jomarac5

  1. quote: The Leprechauns wrote:Nice cache site, nice cache page, nice twist with the compass. I have faith in the honesty of people. Hopefully the compass won't go missing. If it works out, I'll certainly use this approach again in the future. -----
  2. quote:Originally posted by Ragemanifest:Do you happen to have any kind of links to this vancouver area, or anything regarding those caches? Try here.
  3. Thanks to everyone for your input on this question. I've just had a new cache approved that utilizes a compass for the final leg of a three part multi-cache. We decided to do a bit of a different type of cache as you can see by the description: Watershed Whereabouts II - The Irene Pearce Trail Thanks again. -----
  4. quote: This one is even bigger Indeed it is. But mine lasts a LOT longer -----
  5. The BFL has also been generously given to several Vancouver area night cachers by Team KFWB GPS as well. THIS... is a BFL: -----
  6. I'm considering placing a cache that would require using a compass to locate the final position as it is under a heavily treed canopy. A signal would not be possible anywhere in the immediate proximity of the hiding location. A GPSr would be used to get fairly close to the cache but to find the exact cache location, the finder would have to navigate a trail system using compass bearings and distances (in order to eliminate the possiblity of needless bushwacking). Would such a cache have to be rated a 5 for needing specialized equipment? i.e., a compass? -----
  7. A pocket knife -- but not just any pocket knife. It's an 'Elvis' pocket knife. Thank you. Thank you very much. -----
  8. There are so many good caches in the Vancouver area that it's difficult to narrow it down to one. I have a Top 10% list on my Profile page. These are all worth doing but if I absolutely had to narrow it down to one, it would be a toss up between the Othello Tunnels and Old Tales of a Lumberjack. They're both awesome. -----
  9. quote:Originally posted by canadazuuk: Oh gee whiz man, wow, I totally get it now, this thread was an early April Fools thing right? kuukadanac Nope.
  10. Jeremy, His actions do effect everyone here. He's sending answers to caches without anyone asking for them. He's writing spoilers in his logs. He's calling cachers very unflattering and insulting names. Kind of spoils the fun, don't you think? He deleted at least one note on a cache page that was referenced by another cacher this morning. Kind of makes one wonder why, doesn't it? You indicate that he's not an approver anymore. That's fine. When he was an approver, he threatened more than one person about having their caches approved if they weren't nice to him. Is this acceptable? Is that the kind of person that you want representing your site? He is berating local cachers with his caustic e-mails when he can't find a cache. He's been downright rude and he is a bully. I have not met him personally but I have had a number of e-mail exchanges and a few telephone conversations with him. He tried to bully me on the phone in one instance. So he is not an approver anymore. But he's still disrupting things around here and taking the fun away from others. Perhaps instead of looking at me as the bad guy, you should have a talk with your friend and urge him to change his unpopular attitude. -----
  11. quote: Cache Canucks wrote:If all of this is indeed true, why not simply make your case to TPTB I did. I expressed my concerns to Jeremy regarding the cache that was archived because the guy thought it was too dangerous. Jeremy did not reply to my e-mails. -----
  12. Cache Canucks, There is much more to this than just wasting time. You may want to read my post in the General forum. -----
  13. quote: Mopar wrote:Actually Brian, I'm pretty sure he is. This is true. And in a recent conversation with this guy, he told me "the local people around here need to be nice to me or their caches might not get approved". He can deny this as much as he wants but I'm not the only person that he's said this to. He gets miffed everytime that he can't find a cache -- and sends abusive e-mails to the cache owners telling them that they know nothing about placing a cache. He has contacted several people and criticized their caches before even doing them. He has been responsible for having at least one cache archived because he screamed like a spoiled brat that a cache with a terrain rating of 4.5 was too dangerous. Not only for himself, but for everyone, including those that had previously logged the cache and wrote in their logs expressing what a great cache it was. He screwed up several months back and made a number of bogus logs by faking photographs. He got caught. But several people said that they could forget the incident if he removed all of his fake logs. An opportunity to redeem himself by doing the right thing. He made some gestures towards doing so but went only part way. It's obvious that he learned nothing from that experience. His deception runs deep -- he posted a log for a locationless called Ship out of Water -- the cache requires a ship, but there is no ship here -- the photo was taken in a deceiving manner that looks like there is a ship. It's only a small stern section of what's left of a ship -- the real ship was sunk a year earlier and made into a scuba diving reef! He has posted some pretty severe spoilers on cache logs. On one recent occasion, in what I assume was an attempt to show me how clever he is, he e-mailed me a map with the final location of a multi marked out -- I had not asked for this information and was dissapointed that he had disclosed the cache location to me before I had a chance to do do it for myself. Incidentally, I've worked with Photoshop professionally since the very first version of the program, and from the maps that he had drawn and sent me, he knows enough about photoshop to have faked the previous photos himself. Some of you may be wondering why all this is being brought out -- we're just damned fed up with this guy ruining caching for everyone here. He is an egotist who is constantly creating problems and threatening people. He lies. He talks behind people's backs. He calls people names (everyone with a big flashlight is a 'suckhole'). He frequently sends inflammatory and hurtful e-mails to local cachers. He posts spoilers in his logs. He goes on about how he's the only one around here that contributes anything to caching. He chastizes others when he can't find a cache. He is a bully. How someone with these ethics became an approver for this site is beyond my comprehension. Go ahead Mr.Fakefind, tell them that I'm making all of this up. Tell me again to remove my post and to write something nice about you (really folks, he demanded that I do this -- he made the same demand to someone else as well). You need to humble yourself and stop taking the fun away from others. Either that or just go away all together. There are quite a number of others around here who feel the same way that I do. You're ruining the fun for others and we've had enough. ----- [This message was edited by Jomarac5 on April 01, 2003 at 09:39 AM.]
  14. quote: Markwell wrote:Once you have the page the way you'd like it, click the "Tools" and then "Save Page Preferences". It's not a dynamic thing, it's a default thing. Hey, thanks. That did it. -----
  15. I don't know about the dog and bird part, and I'm no expert on light and radio waves but the rest of this sounds pretty reasonable. Thanks for the lesson Professor Mopar. -----
  16. BeDoggy, Welcome to caching in the Fraser Valley -- we've got quite a number of really great caches here. You are correct -- there is an 'elitist' bunch on these boards. At the least they have convinced themselves that they are elitist. They are the ones that think that because they have more finds than you or I that they know everything that there is to know about caching. They are the ones that think that because you only have ten finds that you know nothing at all (about anything). They are the ones that think that everything should be regulated -- and they know exactly how this should be done. They are the ones that think that this activity is actually important. They are the ones that think they have a right to tell you what is and is not good for you. They are the ones that squawk like a murder of crows when you suggest anything that they don't agree with (as you will see by the replies to this post). They are the ones that take the fun out of caching for others. Fortunately, they are few. I've been caching for four months and have found that the first (and only necessary) rule of caching is not to take the forums too seriously. Doing this will make it easy to continue enjoying this activity. Cache on your own terms and don't let the elitists ruin the fun for you. -----
  17. Not sure where you're looking quote: PDOP's wroteAnybody else notice that the forum moderators are no longer listed? Oops, I spoke out and mistakenly brought up a past forum topic regarding admins that really doesn't directly apply to this discussion about moderators. I have edited out the refence to that post. ----- [This message was edited by Jomarac5 on March 30, 2003 at 10:04 PM.]
  18. So, by the rational expressed by Mopar, there should be no more negative references to people who post thier concerns and opinions when they "only" have ten finds. -----
  19. I clicked on the minus sign to condense a forum category. Then I entered one of the other forums and came back to the main list but the category that I had condensed is now open again. Shouldn't the category remain condensed until I choose to expand it again? I'm also wondering what the "Quick Reply" window is for... seems rather redundant. -----
  20. I liked JamieZ's old avatar with the dorky looking disco dancing guy.
  21. quote:Originally posted by Mopar: I did it to poke a little fun at both you... That's why we have:
  22. quote: Zuuk wrote:That's right Jomarac, I AM THE CACHE COP! Just wait until I get you in my radar... Zuuky, Zuuky, Zuuky, things were going so well, what happened? What triggered this thunderous little flow of off-topic diatribe? Must be the meds again. -----
  23. quote: RobertM wrote:You mean this one? http://www.qrz.com/detail/VA7MRT quote: Canadazuuk wrote:Registered November 2001. 'Treehugger' June 2002, first find. Edited March 18 2003? (next time someone heads out to find this one, do me a favour...) Both you guys are going to be up for promotions Hey Danny, feel like passing out an apology? ----- [This message was edited by Jomarac5 on March 24, 2003 at 12:34 AM.]
  • Create New...