My Caches Up For Adoption

May 16, 2006

if anyone from the local area of barrow in furness /cumbria would like to adopt my caches can they please contact me i have just disabled them for the moment to see if anyone wants to claim them but if no intrest within the week i will remove them and archive them.

i have decided to not bother putting out caches ever again due to certain so called geocachers having strong views against me listing them as member only, and as i do caching with my family as enjoyment i feel the minority of cachers who are against member only caches and letting me know this in no uncertain terms by sending me emails have spoilt it for us what a sad life some people live that they cant see everybody has differant opinions on things and they dont repect other peoples opinion you know who you are most of yo you are the ranters on the forums anyway :blink:

May 16, 2006

if anyone from the local area of barrow in furness /cumbria would like to adopt my caches can they please contact me i have just disabled them for the moment to see if anyone wants to claim them but if no intrest within the week i will remove them and archive them.

i have decided to not bother putting out caches ever again due to certain so called geocachers having strong views against me listing them as member only, and as i do caching with my family as enjoyment i feel the minority of cachers who are against member only caches and letting me know this in no uncertain terms by sending me emails have spoilt it for us what a sad life some people live that they cant see everybody has differant opinions on things and they dont repect other peoples opinion you know who you are most of yo you are the ranters on the forums anyway

Wow... I can't believe someone has actually complained to you via email?

It's one thing discussing member only caches on the forum but to go on a direct attack to a specific individual..... there's something wrong there.

May 16, 2006

I think it's very sad that people would resort to sending complaining emails about anything as ultimately trivial as to whether a particular cacher's caches are members only or not.

The ability of people to get uptight about nothing never ceases to amaze me.

1.7k · May 16, 2006

I'm sorry it's come to this. Can I request you leave it for a week and see how you feel then.

Of course it's your decision and if you still want to get your caches adopted so be it. I sincerely hope you will still be able to enjoy finding caches.

May 16, 2006

if anyone from the local area of barrow in furness /cumbria would like to adopt my caches can they please contact me i have just disabled them for the moment to see if anyone wants to claim them but if no intrest within the week i will remove them and archive them.

i have decided to not bother putting out caches ever again due to certain so called geocachers having strong views against me listing them as member only, and as i do caching with my family as enjoyment i feel the minority of cachers who are against member only caches and letting me know this in no uncertain terms by sending me emails have spoilt it for us what a sad life some people live that they cant see everybody has differant opinions on things and they dont repect other peoples opinion you know who you are most of yo you are the ranters on the forums anyway

Wow... I can't believe someone has actually complained to you via email?

It's one thing discussing member only caches on the forum but to go on a direct attack to a specific individual..... there's something wrong there.

exactly i cant belive it either like you say its one thing voiceing your opinions on the forums (isnt that what it is for) well i dont really go on the forums much and dont think i will be again, to me this has spoilt caching for myself and family we will of course still go looking for caches but as to the placeing of caches it a no thankyou from us from now on,all i can say is its the small minded ranters that have spoilt it. :blink:

1.8k · May 16, 2006

While I agree that direct attacks by email on individuals are most unpleasant and should not be made, I fear that by archiving your caches you are playing into the hands of the perpetuaters and depriving the rest of us who respect (though not necessarily agreeing with) your views of some doubtless excellent caches.

I hope you will heed Lactodorum's request to sit back for a few days and reconsider.

May 16, 2006

Name and shame them.......that's what I say.

I was working in Barrow last week, and only went for one cache......failed miserably.....twice.....but, hey-ho, thats how it goes. Time was at a minimum, and with 85 odd miles to travel home each day, I chose an easier cache, and as most in the area were MO caches, I didn't have a lot of choice. This is my loss, not anyone elses.

I don't have a problem with MO caches, that is up to the setter. I don't go for the FTF, and rarely take anything, it's usually TNLN. What I do have a problem with is when people are getting personal and nasty emails, and spoiling their enjoyment. This is not on. I know it doesn't affect me directly, but it does put a damper on things in general.

Just my tuppence worth,

GAZ

May 16, 2006

While I agree that direct attacks by email on individuals are most unpleasant and should not be made, I fear that by archiving your caches you are playing into the hands of the perpetuaters and depriving the rest of us who respect (though not necessarily agreeing with) your views of some doubtless excellent caches.

I hope you will heed Lactodorum's request to sit back for a few days and reconsider.

to be quite honest i have sat back and had a good think about it and i really dont want the hassle i have got from just listing as pmo caches i respect peoples opinions if its either right or wrong what i dont expect is certain cachers who just because they rant on here alot having a rant direct to me i mean my email is there for people to use but it is meant to be used in a good way.

i can only see us now finding caches, i agree with what you are say that yes we are playing into the hands of this element of cachers but i just dont want any bad feeling with people.

we have been members now for a couple of years and just recently it seems as though there is alot of bad feeling expressed in the caching community which looks bad to all who read the forums and i know from a close freind who came caching could not belive how strongly people feel about this what i call a hobby.

and to be honest i agree with him ther is a certain element on here that take it that step to far and with me they have taken that step(i sound like super nanny now ).

thank you for your comments i may ponder a bit longer over this you never know

9.2k · May 16, 2006

"It's only a game, you play it how you want to play it"

If that means when you set a cache, it's 'Members Only' thats fine by me.

My choice to go for the find, or not.

We would place the same criteria on a 'Members Only' cache as any other cache in the area. -Does the cache/area have the "Wow" factor?

-Does it sound like a good hunt, if it's a multi/puzzle cache?

Sorry you feel hounded for placing caches, of any description, and hope (as Lacto says) you take a couple of days to reconsider.

Those of us who have not hidden a cache, rely on those of you that have!

G

May 16, 2006

Name and shame them.......that's what I say.

I was working in Barrow last week, and only went for one cache......failed miserably.....twice.....but, hey-ho, thats how it goes. Time was at a minimum, and with 85 odd miles to travel home each day, I chose an easier cache, and as most in the area were MO caches, I didn't have a lot of choice. This is my loss, not anyone elses.

I don't have a problem with MO caches, that is up to the setter. I don't go for the FTF, and rarely take anything, it's usually TNLN. What I do have a problem with is when people are getting personal and nasty emails, and spoiling their enjoyment. This is not on. I know it doesn't affect me directly, but it does put a damper on things in general.

Just my tuppence worth,

GAZ

thanks gaz

i have thought about naming and shameing them but do 2 wrongs make a right god imagine the stink it would cause if i did name them what would they send me next :blink:

2.2k · May 16, 2006

I'm sorry it's come to this. Can I request you leave it for a week and see how you feel then.

Of course it's your decision and if you still want to get your caches adopted so be it. I sincerely hope you will still be able to enjoy finding caches.

I would go along with this

May 16, 2006

My 2p worth????

Ask them nicely to stop the e-mailling, tell them that you are going to keep the caches as they are, keep the caches as they are.

If they continue, report the abuse, that's what the system is for.

MO caches are legitimate, it's all up to you.

Depending on your mail reading software you could use the 'ignore' feature or have messages from a particular address junked automatically.

May 16, 2006

isn't there a system in place in the received mail from gc.com to report abuse mail? i'm sure there is.

on another note i'm generally dissappointed with the forum of late,just seems to be full of well done posts and rants! hardly constructive for new cachers.oh dear this is turning into a rant!

Edited May 16, 2006 by tteggod trackers

1.9k · May 17, 2006

As others have said please reconsider keeping your caches and don't let anyone wear you down.

2.2k · May 17, 2006

don't let some narrow minded misers dictate to you how to enjoy the hobby how you want to. they want to find the caches then pay out the huge yearly fee like the rest of us...

if they don't want to then fine, i've no problem with them being able to place without being members

wanting cake and to eat it...

report them to tptb and carry on.

reconsider.

May 17, 2006

don't let some narrow minded misers dictate to you how to enjoy the hobby how you want to. they want to find the caches then pay out the huge yearly fee like the rest of us...

This is the bit I just don't get when people rant about how wrong members only caches are.

The yearly fee is so small that I can't even remember what it cost. Is it around £10? £15? something like that.

It's not like there is some *huge* divide between members and premium members. Just stop whinging and pay up! If it cost 100 quid to join then I could understand it.

Edited May 17, 2006 by HooloovooUK

1.7k · May 17, 2006

It is indeed outrageous that you should receive personal abuse for doing something that is perfectly allowable (otherwise why would we be able to?) I too favour the name and shame route, and if you get any more e-mails, then report them, as kb suggests. :wub:

Havin said that, and in order to get the full story ('tis only fair :wub: ) It might be wise to post an example e-mail... Please in no way take this as condoning the actions of our fellow cachers in e-mailing you, but my assumption is that the caches were originally non-MO caches which were transferred to MO caches. This *may* cause problems for ythe few people who have got the details when they were non-MO and go hunting for them, only to try and log them after they are MO caches... :wub:

Obviously, thats just an assumption on my part, but I'm only briefly playing devil's advocate! My opening statement still holds true!

*whispers* please don't flame me...

2.5k · May 17, 2006

If you prefer members only, than so be it. Don't let others ruin it for you and the Paying Members. Bring them back and just let the Wallet Moths suffer.

1.1k · May 17, 2006

Yes - name and shame them!

I just want to add although I do rant on the forum it wasn't me who emailed windywalkers! :wub:

1.7k · May 17, 2006

By all means continue to debate the merits (or otherwise) of Members Only Caches and feel free to criticise them if you want to. However I've had reports (privately) of some less than pleasant e-mails being sent to a number of people. To my mind that is well out of order

The terms of use of this site prohibit the sending of such e-mails and I will not hesitate to suggest to Groundspeak that they investigate if I think this rule is being broken.

At the end of the day there are many thousands of little boxes full of worthless tat out there for us all to try and find. Surely there are enough to keep everyone happy without all this angst.

May 17, 2006

if anyone from the local area of barrow in furness /cumbria would like to adopt my caches can they please contact me i have just disabled them for the moment to see if anyone wants to claim them but if no intrest within the week i will remove them and archive them.

i have decided to not bother putting out caches ever again due to certain so called geocachers having strong views against me listing them as member only, and as i do caching with my family as enjoyment i feel the minority of cachers who are against member only caches and letting me know this in no uncertain terms by sending me emails have spoilt it for us what a sad life some people live that they cant see everybody has differant opinions on things and they dont repect other peoples opinion you know who you are most of yo you are the ranters on the forums anyway

I also say name them and publish what they sent you. In your opening post you say "you know who you are most of yo you are the ranters on the forums anyway". By the absence of posts by certain people, on this topic, we may draw our own conclusions - probably wrongly! Name them!

May 17, 2006

Hi Windywalkers,

As others have said "It's only a game", play how you wish!!! :wub:

I was the subject of an "e-mail attack" some time ago so know exactly how you feel. :wub:

When looking in my in-box I tend to delete 99% of what I receive, works for me :wub: .

Cheers

Nick

3.8k · May 17, 2006

If you're using a 'spam' filter (and who doesn't?) just add their name to the 'black list'. You'll not be bothered by them again.

May 17, 2006

I certainly wouldn't advocate naming the perpetrators on the forums as it would inevitably lead to a slanging match. The best route would be to inform the moderator(s).

6.2k · May 17, 2006

I also say name them and publish what they sent you. In your opening post you say "you know who you are most of yo you are the ranters on the forums anyway". By the absence of posts by certain people, on this topic, we may draw our own conclusions - probably wrongly! Name them!

It wasn't me. I don't send nasty emails (although I might reply to them!) and I'm happy to express my opinions on these forums - without the aid of a sock puppet. I hope you make the right decision regarding your caches. I wonder what would happen if someone adopted them, and then you changed your mind. If they wanted to keep them, could they be 'forced' to give them back..? Best give it more thought before getting rid of them one way or another, so you can be sure there will be no regrets later.

1.5k · May 17, 2006

I am in complete agreement with all those who have expressed dismay that the windywalkers have felt driven to take such action. Having said that, I can completely understand how they feel. It only take a few mean-spirited emails for the gloss, fun, joy etc of our great hobby to be tarnished. The feeling that someone out there is hostile to what you are doing is a 'spoiler' in the truest sense of that word.

I would encourage them, however, to think again, partly because, as someone has already observed, they will be giving in to those who have harassed them, and partly because, by not giving in, they will continue to give much pleasure to the many genuine cachers who have either found their caches, or who will find them in the future.

Edited May 17, 2006 by walkergeoff

2.9k · May 17, 2006

Whoever they are should have the guts to come into this forum to discuss thier obviously strongly held point of view.

May 17, 2006

Wow - some people get a bit carried away with what is supposed to be a fun and enjoyable hobby. To resort to emailing people like this is just unbelievable.

Everyone plays the game differently and that (IMHO) is one of the best things about caching. If someone wants to make their caches Members Only that's totally up to them. I've absolutely no problem at all and would fully support anyone who wants to release a cache in whatever form they wish (as long as it meets the guidelines, which MO caches do).

If I was on the receiving end of these emails I would be reporting them to TPTB in the strongest terms and if normal email was used (as opposed to emailing via GC.com) then I'd be reporting them to their ISP's abuse dept (most of whom take this kind of thing very seriously and will close down someone's account if found abusing email).

Don't let the bar-stewards grind you down as that's exactly what they want to do. Stick them in your ignore filter for emails and carry on putting great caches out that I'm, sure the vast majority of cachers would enjoy.

3.1k · May 17, 2006

My thoughts on this?

It's only a game... but remember that not everyone sees it like this!!

I think I'd certainly sit back and wait a week... I do know of cachers in the area (Ulverston) who are premium members who don't have any of their own caches, but I bet would be willing to take them on...if you REALLY still feel that way, then I'd be happy to let you have their details.

H

2.5k · May 17, 2006

Can I play devils advocate for a minute here?

Whilst I think that sending of abusive emails is uncalled for and out of order and I would condemn such behaviour, I am not sure that a topic on the forums which draws attention to this really helps much either, Is this topic not in itself the sort of thing that we really do not want to see 'advertising' cachers and caching? We also have no idea who emailed you nor what they said and so it is human nature to join up the dots and fill in the blanks with our own set of prejudices... again not terribly helpful.

What I would do if I was windywalkers is this:

1) show the email to a trusted friend to get a second opinion. If it is abusive then report them to Groundspeak for threatening and abusive behaviour. If it's very abusive, perhaps report them to their own ISP as well.

2) if my caches obeyed Groundspeak guidelines and I was happy with them, then leave them as they are. Dont give in to blackmail

3) Move on, do what you enjoy and ignore the idiot minority. It's a sad fact that we bump into such idiots, whatever we do and wherever we go, we should not let them dictate to us and ruin our fun.

May 17, 2006

At the end of the day there are many thousands of little boxes full of worthless tat out there for us all to try and find.

Surely you mean tastefully selected attractive keepsakes, my illusions are shattered :wub: :wub: :wub:

May 17, 2006

Windywalkers, I am sort of on the other side of the argument not being in favour of members only caches and truly believe that the sport requires caches being maintained and the web site to be supported equally to service, and not necessarily by the same people. If I could see my money being used to run the web site alone (after advertising income) then I would have no problem donating a few quid every year, and have considered premium membership just for the reason. Please remember that premium membership is being offered an additional service in a commercial way that I do not want and this is the main reason I have not bothered to date. That being said I respect your view.

As for the email. I do not condone what I have herd, but if I were a cacher who was planning of finding you caches and then suddenly found them unavailable I would be miffed. Is this not just a case of someone loosing there temper and sending an email before giving themselves time to calm down. Perhaps they are now sorry about the email.

Finally I am with Lacto, give yourself a while to think things through.

May 17, 2006

This is the bit I just don't get when people rant about how wrong members only caches are.

The yearly fee is so small that I can't even remember what it cost.

If the yearly cost were only £0.01, they'd still be wrong! There's no need to question whether your idea of cheap is universally acceptable... Geocaching is, and will remain, a free game. Jeremy has committed to that. Subscription Only caches commercialise geocaching by the back door.

Now, servers cost money, so my £0.02 worth would be... Paying £whatever to change your forum title - great idea! Paying £whatever for PQs - yes, I see the need. Corporate sponsorship by Jeep etc - hmmm, I haven't decided yet. Subscription caches - not for me thanks, the fewer the better!

That's just my opinion, out of thousands of others' opinions. I hope I won't be criticised for expressing it, but I just wanted to say that, for me at least, the question of right vs wrong cannot be measured in pounds sterling, or even dollars!

Ian

p.s. Yes, name and shame! I've not seen the emails ('tweren't me!) but it doesn't sound like their publication would be "breaking a confidence", so much as "reporting abuse". Allowing bullies and abusers to thrive because of a stigma against / fear of "telling tales" shouldn't be tolerated in our schools, and it shouldn't be tolerated here!

May 17, 2006

Windywalkers, I am sort of on the other side of the argument not being in favour of members only caches and truly believe that the sport requires caches being maintained and the web site to be supported equally to service, and not necessarily by the same people.

As for the email. I do not condone what I have herd, but if I were a cacher who was planning of finding you caches and then suddenly found them unavailable I would be miffed.

Finally I am with Lacto, give yourself a while to think things through.

Windy walkers,

I am a nearby cacher and will adopt any of your caches, if in a week you still have same intention. Might have to find them first :-) By not owning any caches you will miss out of the bouquets in the email notifications. I look forward to these, especially when a finder gets the reason why I placed the cache.

I was initially miffed at PMO caches, when I started, but as Lacto points out plenty of little boxes out there :-)

I considered asking you why some of your caches had been upgraded to PMO from regular. But it would have been a polite email. And in the end, didn't.

Northern Invaders pointed out at recent Cumbrian cache event, usefulness of Pocket queries, and for that alone I may become a PM, because unlike alistair_uk, I don't have scripting skills ;-(

May 17, 2006

if anyone from the local area of barrow in furness /cumbria would like to adopt my caches can they please contact me i have just disabled them for the moment to see if anyone wants to claim them but if no intrest within the week i will remove them and archive them.

i have decided to not bother putting out caches ever again due to certain so called geocachers having strong views against me listing them as member only, and as i do caching with my family as enjoyment i feel the minority of cachers who are against member only caches and letting me know this in no uncertain terms by sending me emails have spoilt it for us what a sad life some people live that they cant see everybody has differant opinions on things and they dont repect other peoples opinion you know who you are most of yo you are the ranters on the forums anyway

Do what you feel is best!

Don't be bullied by us non-premium members in telling you what to do! (Arn't we like you say just ranters anyway? :wub: )

Just treat the e-mails with the contempt they deserve - DELETE THEM!

Get back out there and enjoy Geocaching! - Ooops thats me being a bully now! :wub:

1.7k · May 17, 2006

In case anyone has missed the point - All the caches concerned fully met the guideline requirements for being listed on Geocaching.com

It is not for any self appointed critic to tell you whether or not your cache is suitable or not, it is for Groundspeak (who own Geocaching.com) to decide. Mostly they do that through local reviewers such as myself although from time to time they do get involved directly.

Although someone may not like the system which allows Members Only Caches, they should recognise that they are perfectly valid caches. If they have any complaints they should address them to Groundspeak not you.

If you want to share any probelm e-mails I am quite willing to try and give an unbiassed and confidential opinion.

May 17, 2006

In case anyone has missed the point - All the caches concerned fully met the guideline requirements for being listed on Geocaching.com

I don't think anyone is saying that they should not be listed and that by doing such you are doing something wrong. I think a better way of summarising the position of many of us is that we object morally to the concept of restricting access to caches because of monetary contributions (or the lack of) and ask (or perhaps politely persuade) others in the UK at least to consider opening there caches up to all. Form my point of view at least the guidelines are not an issue here.

1.5k · May 17, 2006

For information only - what are some of the reasons for setting MO caches?

May 17, 2006

Reflecting on the situation this thread although on topic is not really helping windywalkers and may just be needlessly upsetting further. With than in mind I will be leaving it here.

May 17, 2006

At the end of the day there are many thousands of little boxes full of worthless tat out there for us all to try and find. Surely there are enough to keep everyone happy without all this angst.

:wub: :wub: You have done some of mine then have you? :wub:

I agree with a lot of the previous posts, each to their own, i have no problem with MO caches, but then i am a member so perhaps i look at it from a biased viewpoint.

i have done some of the caches up that way and would ask you to reconsider, think about it.

But more importantly, carry on caching and do whatever makes you happy :wub:

Edited May 17, 2006 by Wadders

May 17, 2006

Is Geocaching a sport or a hobby? It doesn't matter one little bit. We do it for the pleasure we get from visiting places other people want to share with us. Places they have found and like, places they have found and want to guide others to.

I can't imagine anyone setting caches just for the sake of it.

If you place a cache and want to place restrictions on it then thats the placers discression, whether that be MO caches, or placing caches that are unsuitable for bugies etc. Of all the caches I've visited there are fair warnings, ground gets muddy, not suitable for left handed dogs, whatever, etc. But there are plenty of other caches out there that are suitable for wheelchairs, disabled and non paying members.

The narrow mindedness of some people who not only complain, but then abuse somebody who doesn't comply to their attitude horrifies me. What next, just because they don't like pork are they going to send abusive mails to the local Chinese Take Away saying that unless they remove sweet and sour pork from their menu they'll go elsewhere. I know what the reply would be!

This abuse is akin to people that hound, threaten, harass and intimidate people who have a different opinion to their own.

The best way is to ignore them and if the abuse continues then report them. You have my support even though I live the other end of the country and am not likely to be calling on your caches any time soon sadly.

I geocache for pleasure, if I didn't enjoy it I wouldn't do it, nobody has made me hunt for plastic boxes and nobody is going to stop me enjoying it either.

Personally I might just place a cache and make it MO to spite them.

BareClawz

1.1k · May 17, 2006

Personally I might just place a cache and make it MO to spite them.

BareClawz

...and I will continue to place caches with no restrictions that are available to all.

Edited May 17, 2006 by The Golem

May 17, 2006

If you place a cache and want to place restrictions on it then thats the placers discression

That's not entirely true. For example, cachers do not have the discretion to restrict a cache only to people willing to pay someone for the exact coordinates. However worthy that "someone" is. Unless that "someone" is Groundspeak, of course.

3.8k · May 17, 2006

For information only - what are some of the reasons for setting MO caches?

You may find your answer in this ongoing topic.

1.5k · May 17, 2006

For information only - what are some of the reasons for setting MO caches?

You may find your answer in this ongoing topic.

Thanks.

May 17, 2006

The situation the Windywalkers are now in is a victory for the ranting minority,who as been said earlier just can not live and let live,they simply must vociferously force there views upon,(in there mind) the none compliant

I to am in the same boat as the Windywalkers inasmuch as all my caches are M.O,and incidentally they will remain M.O. but I have to say I have not received any of the nasty emails,if I had I may by now well of gone out and placed another dozen M.O caches.

Unlike others who publish private emails at the drop of a hat I think the Windywalkers have shown great restraint in not disclosing the perpatraitor/s.they can be delt with through the proper channels'

Oh sorry if this is the wrong thread but while I'm here. A belated Congratulations to the Windywalkers on reaching 184 caches,I am sure after your period of reflection you will continue with this game and it won't be long before you reach the big 217.

1.1k · May 17, 2006

Hi Mike,

I was going to pm you, achilles and windywalkers as to why you made all your caches MO but I didn't know how to word it without causing offence so I never bothered. I've found a number of your caches, all of which I've enjoyed, but I'm now excluded from finding them - perhaps you could shed a bit of light here as to why you decided to change them?

May 17, 2006

Hi Mike,

I was going to pm you, achilles and windywalkers as to why you made all your caches MO but I didn't know how to word it without causing offence so I never bothered. I've found a number of your caches, all of which I've enjoyed, but I'm now excluded from finding them - perhaps you could shed a bit of light here as to why you decided to change them?

Hi Paul.

I refer you to the post I made on the 10th April,(topic TO PM or not to PM) I can't work out how to select that posting and quote it,you may have missed this topic,after a quick recheck I did not notice a posting from you,but as I stated in the posting I would not make my reasons public.

6.5k · May 17, 2006

don't let some narrow minded misers dictate to you how to enjoy the hobby how you want to. they want to find the caches then pay out the huge yearly fee like the rest of us...

This is the bit I just don't get when people rant about how wrong members only caches are.

The yearly fee is so small that I can't even remember what it cost. Is it around £10? £15? something like that.

It's not like there is some *huge* divide between members and premium members. Just stop whinging and pay up! If it cost 100 quid to join then I could understand it.

This is the bit I don't get about when people rant about the people that rant about member only caches.

Saying 'pay up or shut up' isn't really a response to anyone. Few people that complain about MOCs ever say its about the fee, the few that do are often say something like "I don't see the value so I don't do it" or "I'm just not going to pay, oh well". They've basically already agreed with you.

Most of the complains about MOCs are moral based, such as: "It promotes elitism within the group", "Any fee bases geocaches are wrong/ commerical caches are bad", "the reasons people make MOCs are either not effective or poorly thought out". If you want to respond, shouldn't it be more like 'get over thinking its elitist' or 'get to like commerical caches like the rest of us' or 'X reason is valid because...'.

May 18, 2006

i would just like to say a big thank you to every one who has left messages on this thread and words of support they have left

My Caches Up For Adoption

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment