Confucius' Cat

It's getting that way out here too!

Another good reason boycotts seldom (if ever) work. ...No one in this thread has suggested a boycott. I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up. What thread are YOU referring to? Obviously not this one.

The OP's theory is possible, however, since (s)he's not a premium member, I would guess that those folks who are finding the caches are, and are getting instant notifications. Some PM's even have the instant notification thingy go straight to their cell phones so they don't have to worry about checking E-mails. It wouldn't matter where they were or what they were doing, when a cache got published, they'd get notified. That is a feature well suited for the FTF hounds that are REALLY serious (and perhaps don't have a life?). I tried it once and got so many alerts that it became more of an annoyance than a help. - But that's just me.

To say premium members cannot log a cache is incredibly silly. Once one becomes a premium member and has paid the thirty bucks, it is simply not logical for them to demand a refund in order to downgrade their membership so they can log a certain cache. Then they pony up again afterwards? Totally ridiculous! The best solution for this kind of Barbara Streisand, IMO, would be to make the entire site a PAID MEMBERSHIP ONLY site and perhaps, out of the goodness of GC's heart, offer a one month free trial. The GALL of some people who use the site for free amazes me.

Actually, your local reviewer is probably even more reluctant than most to "spill the beans" on a puzzle since it hit the fan a while back when he accidentally let the cat out of the bag in an attempt to have a hide checked out to see if it was there. In the referenced incident the person the reviewer gave the coordinates to did not attempt to cheat either, but an extremely tangled web got weaved and Indiana cachers lost several puzzles and a GREAT puzzle cache hider quit because of the incident. I would not expect ANY mystery cache final coordinates to come out of OUR local reviewer's 'mouth'- not in a million years.

Another good reason boycotts seldom (if ever) work. This comment reminds me of "religious right" people asking all their listeners not to go see a certain R rated movie. These people don't go to R rated movies generally, SO WHAT if they also don't go to this particular one? They will CERTAINLY miss the business of someone who never did business with them in the first place! I think I'll call their corporate office and give them the name of a good bankruptcy attorney right away!

... MOST of the time. I was approached by a youthy type person the other day asking if I was "taking pictures of 'his girls'," apparently referring to a couple of women sitting on a rock in the middle of the creek who certainly looked like either one of them could have been his mother. (I don't think he had enough 'cubic inches' to do anything about it if I were. ) I suspect the camera thing will most certainly NOT work at a playground... it will surely set off the "Chester the molester" alarm. We live in a strange world. people have been actually prosecuted for taking innocent pictures of kids doing innocent things in public. ONLY way to look for a cache in a playground is BYOK (bring your own kid). One of my favourite ruses is to take a great interest in trees in the cache area and act like I'm inspecting for pests and disease. As has been noted in many past threads on this subject, a clipboard works wonders, and possibly a hardhat and traffic vest. Mostly, I work the ones that are NOT in the public eye. The pretense thing is fun sometimes, but mostly I don't like the risk or the hassle of having to explain my business.

I'll remember your advice next time i set out to catch flies.

What part of this do you not understand people? Perhaps this line in the OP? The OP sho nuff seemed like a call to boycott to me.

Don't answer a question with a question. This "simple answer" ASSUMES that the bicycle was indeed stolen. Anything that involves MOVING the bike or securing it in some way would definitely NOT be what I would want you to do if you found my bike that i simply left in the woods to go somewhere i couldn't take the bike. The "simple answer" is to check back a little later and if it is still there, report it. Bicycles are an interesting item. They are frequently stolen, frequently reported- mostly without reporting serial numbers, thus not positively identifiable- VERY often recovered, but SELDOM returned to their owners. In even comparatively small cities, so many bicycles are stolen and recovered that the police make little if any attempt to identify the owners- ostensibly due to time issues. I have "been there." I was told simply to come to the department every couple of weeks and have a look at the recovered bikes (there are MANY to choose from). Basically, if one of them "looks like yours," they will release it to you.

I am sorry but that is incorrect. This is not the reason they stopped and it was never going to be left up to the local managers. Its official and has not changed since the last time. I check with them every so often. The reviewer is correct. Geocaching.com will not allow caches on the Cracker Barrel restaurant property due to a request from the corporation management. Don't ask me why they decided to not allow caches. I am not at liberty to say. <Monty python voice> But we CAAN play "20 questions," then? </voice> ... we know it wasn't because of people messing with the decorations... I like that one. Two down 18 to go... Is it bigger than a breadbox? ... oops, wrong topic 3/17 Pretty much sums up my opinion of boycotts.

This is pretty much old news and has been discussed to death. If you like their food, eat there, if you don't, don't. You or all of us boycotting them isn't going to make them cry- and all of us WON'T, of that you can be assured. (OBTW I think advocating a boycott is grounds for bannination judging from TPTB reactions in the previous threads )

So true. This thread probably wouldn't exist if the cacher in question just accepted the owner's authority. i doubt it is really possible that the offending cacher does not understand the requirements. Above is the only rational explanation of the events as presented. Ego. (full stop)

in today's society, I would be VERY leery of picking up property and taking it to the police. There is too much potential for misunderstanding, e.g. the owner sees you pick it up and thinks you stole it, a passerby sees you leaving with a purse and thinks you are a purse snatcher, you hand it to a cop and he arrests you for possession of stolen property (actually happened to my brother-in-law), or even the property has been deliberately "abandoned" by the police in a "sting" (entrapment) operation as has been done in NYC. IMO, the days of "getting involved" ended when people, especially the cops, forgot how to tell a "good guy" from a "bad guy." Admittedly this is a tough call at times, but people used to lean toward the "good guy" side. Best to leave it alone and ANONYMOUSLY call the police and tell them where it is unless you are well known to the local establishment. (of course this does not apply if you witness a SERIOUS crime- then by all means GET INVOLVED)

On the surface, this analogy seems right but it is not really congruent to the topic. If, as stated in your analogy, you actually SOLD the house to the friend and then DID NOT list it to the public (since it was already sold) there would be no problem. In the case of the advance coordinates, the "sale" has been made but the FTF possibility is still offered to the public AS IF it was truly available to the public. This would be like taking earnest money from your friend, accepting his contract, and then turning right around and signing a contract with a real estate agent to list the house for sale- without informing the real estate agent OR potential buyers that a contract to purchase the house has already been signed and accepted. i think this would certainly be considered FOUL ("Pahleese" notwithstanding). It would probably be considered criminal. The "I can give information to anyone I please" argument doesn't hold water at all. It always has consequences. In geocaching it is at most irritating to some and will perhaps cause loss of friendship, tarnished reputation in the community, and long forum threads. In 'the real world" it could land one in prison... ferinstance if a government purchasing agent told hisher friend (who happens to be a contractor) what the bid needed to look like to get a "leg up" on a Federal contract. Regarding Briansnat's comment: True. How a cache owner chooses to publish his cache is his business. As i have said before, spoiling the FTF race is not a whopping big deal. But if someone KNOWS that a certain behaviour will cause certain people consternation and they choose to behave in that way anyhow, they are most certainly showing disrespect for that group of people that they are knowingly offending. One CAN choose to offend. That is a basic human right. One can even pretend that what they know will offend will not. I changed my personal policy on logging finds online because a cache owner took me to task for not logging a FTF. Her point was that people would go out seeking the cache expecting that the FTF was possible. My first thought on the subject was "so what, you don't always get FTF anyway... that is an integral part of the FTF game." I came to understand that there is a difference in being simply "a day late and a dollar short" and going on a wild goose chase. I now log FTFs ASAP out of RESPECT for others that play the FTF game. I think people should not give out advance coordinates to their friends (for the purpose of them getting a jump on the FTF) out of RESPECT for the people who play the FTF game. At least if they DO give out the coordinates to their friends, they should note that fact on the cache page... again, out of RESPECT for those who play the FTF game. Granted RESPECT is not mandatory, but it makes life a little nicer in a world where there is precious little of it practised anymore. People that would give their friends advance notice so they can get the FTF, would entertain themselves by shutting doors in the faces of little old ladies- or play golf???.

or from an alternate time line ... *spooky music*

There is no injustice, no discrimination of any type, no corruption of any type, no favoritism being given. Everyone is equally able to find the cache. That is YOUR perception. Obviously the OP and others perceive differently. There is no prize for finding a cache first, <snip> It is simply a game within a game created by a cacher to satisfy his or her own desire for competition. Should I choose not to participate in that game, no harm. No foul. It IS however a very popular game and one well known to the caching community. One may choose not to participate in the game, but befouling of the game for others by giving advance notice to friends will still be PERCEIVED as a "foul" by those that DO choose to play the FTF game. True, the cache owner has the RIGHT to spoil the FTF game if heshe wishes. But is it truly "no foul" if one deliberately does something that heshe knows (or should know) will be PERCEIVED as a foul by many people? I suppose it would be OK to loudly say "nice aces" as you walk by a card table and see three of them them in a player's hand... as long as YOU aren't an active participant in the poker game?

An excellent solution and probably easily implementable.

Nothing wrong with going back to a cache for any reason. Considered bad form to log additional finds though... even if you couldn't remember where it was or the cache has been moved and you had to search all over again. (I have had so much trouble finding a few of my own, I have been tempted to log them as "finds.")

Perhaps so. But damage to the park SHOULD elicit a response by someone of authority at the park- who would have IDENTIFIED hisherself in an open and professional manner.. People of authority do not steal the contents of a cache and then hide behind the anonymity of a free internet account. The lack of contact information on the note is prima-facie evidence of impersonation IMO. To me the irritation of this whole incident is the PRETENSE of authority by the person who (ostensibly) stole the contents and placed the note. It is not a matter of something that a cacher or cachers did wrong that makes them persona non grata in the park. It appears that it simply offended SOMEONE who probably knows that cachers have as much right to use the park as they do but still want to stop an activity that they dislike for some unspecified reason known only to the note placer. In my perception, this is a flea on the tail attempting to wag the dog. That is why I am siding with the cachers. If that is NOT the case, the person who left the note should go back to the cache and put hisher OFFICIAL POLICE business card in it or at least avail hisherself of the option to communicate with the cache owner through the site and arrange to meet with the owner and show him hisher ID card and badge.

I think the problem is that people do not always respond "promptly" to their emails, verily, we could never even agree on what "promptly" would mean. ... You will also have a problem with some cachers not giving the coords to people that they don't like. Didn't I say that?

Exactly. But many times the FTF 'race" IS the only redeeming value to a cache. I don't buy it. GC.com is just a listing site. There is nothing wrong--as in "legal" or "form"--to give folks heads up before the listing is published. If I want to give a friend some heads up while some reviewer is off doing real-world stuff instead of sitting at a computer do hobby stuff then that's my prerogative. It's not "bad form" in the least for that friend to act on that information. True. Not a "rule, not a "law," none of Groundspeak's business as a listing site, your prerogative as the cache owner. But it is nonetheless perceived as "bad form" by many if not most. In any endeavour that is freely offered to the public or a substantial segment thereof "favouritism," whether based on colour of skin, value of portfolio, breeding and pedigree, or just a "bribe" with a glass of beer, is generally considered bad form. It's that "move to the back of the bus" thing that a lot of people fought to abolish and get us past in polite society. It's the artificial "leveling of the playing field" that can only be done by retarding those who are naturally ahead (it is a two-way street). It isn't an Earth shatteringly big deal, but a LOT of people consider it a breath of fresh air to have at least a little "fairness" in this patently unfair world. Therefore they rail against whatever corruption they perceive, no matter how frivolous. I personally believe it is as much "bad form" to boost someone up ahead of others out of mere unmerited favouritism as it is to keep someone down out of bigotry or hatred. i am reminded of an old grade-school line cutting practice (c1960's): The "cool" kids would have their friends "check" behind them as if this made it OK because they weren't going in front of the person in front of them in line. Somehow that made sense to third graders.

It wasn't stated that the "buds" are getting advance information. Perhaps they are just QUICK? Unless your area has very few cachers, I don't buy into "they always get advance info." Not everyone is their "bud." If they are indeed getting advance info, there will be cases when they DON'T... that is your chance. FTFing on advance info is bad form but as Brian said, is quite legal. Just because something is legal does not make it "right."

Correct. Generally the sides of roads and sidewalks and the areas where the poles are set are called "easements" and are actually private property where the owner has given explicit permission (often without any choice) for the limited public use of the land by vehiclular traffic, pedestrians, power lines, cable TV etc. OTHER uses of the easement are under the purview of the property owner like any other private property. There is no "right" to place a cache there (or do anything else) just because the land has SOME public use. Although in many cases no one cares, getting specific permission is the best way to go.

I think the problem is that people do not always respond "promptly" to their emails, verily, we could never even agree on what "promptly" would mean. Because the game is basically an online game, it works best in "automatic" mode. having to wait for interaction with another player detracts from the game because it slows down the completion of the task. Even in the case of virtuals, no interaction with the owner was required to actually FIND the cache. A seeker could simply download the cache page and be off. The true fun of the game being in the actual DOING of the find task, the seeker has essentially accomplished hisher goal even if they cannot log it online for whatever reason. Furthermore, requiring interaction of this sort in order to actually FIND the cache leaves open the possibility that legitimate finders could not complete the mission because of untended emails or simply the additional time delay imposed by requiring interaction with the owner. Consider for example a person who is from out of town and intends to get the final part of a challenge cache and sign the challenge cache log whilst in town for only a short period of time. If heshe had to wait for an email from the owner, especially with the owner only giving out the coordinates AFTER validating the challenge, which my example cacher will not complete till actually arriving in the area, heshe would be SOL. An even more insidious potential is for a cache owner to discriminate unfairly in distribution of the coordinates, e.g. refusing to give the coordinates (or simply not responding) to persons the cache owner dislikes. You just found a cache in every developed country in the civilised world and want to log the challenge, so you send an email to the owner to get the coordinates: *cache owner's thought bubble* "I'm ignoring that one." "If TPTB inquire, I'll say," "I didn't get the email... server must have died." ("serves that bloody beggar right for deleting MY log on his LPC three years ago.") Actually this very type of interaction pretty much terminated my very short "career" on Waymarking. I submitted a "landlocked lighthouse" and was told by the online landlocked lighthouse keeper that it was not really a lighthouse. I pretty much figure if everything you do gets "judged" by some petty dictator, it ain't much worth a flip as a hobby. Geocaching is a game that requires TRUST to even exist. It goes both ways and the ALR owner is expected to judge fairly if their requirements are met while the logger is expected to respect the requirements. Clearly this trust has been broken in this case, but overall I think these things resolve a lot easier by simply being "let die." The bogus log will soon be on page two, then three, then four... and soon few if any will notice or even care. And it REALLY doesn't hurt the legitimate finders AT ALL- they have met the challenge and they know THEIR smiley is legit. An honest man is no less honest if all other men are thieves.