Jump to content

Non-PM Trying To Log PMO Cache As FTF; Sheesh.


WebChimp
Followers 4

Recommended Posts

So, come on... are ya gonna give the poor guy his find :laughing: ?

 

It's not going to happen. After all, according to the comments in this thread, I'm an obstinant, immature, boring, anal rententive, ridiculus, spiteful, power tripping, rigid, fanatical, pinhead, dick who doesn't care about starving people.

 

Seriously, to fully understand this particular situation, you would need to be familiar with the friendly kidding that has been going on in Mississippi concerning PMO caches for a long time. Also, the theme of the cache came into play.

 

The truly ridiculus thing about this is that the cacher has now attempted to log the cache over forty times, with each log receiving the same fate - my delete key - and he has yet to get the message!

 

In the spirit of the search,

Mark aka Push.

Link to comment

It seems to me that people are either in need of being in total control of everything in their life, or they have no control in their daily life and therefore use geocaching as a way to exert power. Either way, let the poor guy have his control and go find another cache to log. (YES, you were FTF and whether it's online or not it is so, unless of course he went out and ripped out your FTF log in the book, which he may very well have done.)

Link to comment
When I introduced my cousin to caching, I looked up the nearest cache on my GPSr and took her to it. She had a blast hunting for the container, and we hunted for a few more caches after that one. When I got home, I got an email from her saying she couldn't log that first cache because it was for PMO. Shame on me for taking her to it? I had no way of knowing it was a PMO cache until I got home. Not everyone prints out cache pages before searching.

Not everyone blames the cache owner for their own failure to check out the description before the hunt. You know better than that, Saxy. You're not a victim. You chose to hunt that cache without having read up on it first.

 

 

How did we resolve it? I sent a friendly email to the cache owner explaining what happened. He changed the cache to regular long enough for her to log it. She did find it, after all, and should get credit for doing so.

That sounds like a good resolution. If I were the owner I would have done the same thing for you. Nice work, and tell your cousing "Welcome to Geocaching" for me! :laughing:

Link to comment
So, come on... are ya gonna give the poor guy his find :laughing: ?
It's not going to happen. After all, according to the comments in this thread, I'm an obstinant, immature, boring, anal rententive, ridiculus, spiteful, power tripping, rigid, fanatical, pinhead, dick who doesn't care about starving people.

Welcome to the club. You're in good company! :unsure:

Link to comment
So, come on... are ya gonna give the poor guy his find :laughing: ?
It's not going to happen. After all, according to the comments in this thread, I'm an obstinant, immature, boring, anal rententive, ridiculus, spiteful, power tripping, rigid, fanatical, pinhead, dick who doesn't care about starving people.

Welcome to the club. You're in good company! :unsure:

 

*** Biting tongue so hard it bleeds a little ***

Link to comment

Boy, one of the things I would be afraid of if I ticked someone off by deleting their logs (justified or not) was that their next course of action would be to delete my cache.

 

I mean, the person making the log obviously knows where it is so even if this was some 50 mile multi, they can just go right to it and do with it as they wish.

 

Seems like the kind of angry thing an angry person might do.

Link to comment

The truly ridiculus thing about this is that the cacher has now attempted to log the cache over forty times, with each log receiving the same fate - my delete key - and he has yet to get the message!

As I see it, the truly ridiculous thing about this is that the cacher has now attempted to log the cache over forty times, with each log receiving the same fate - your delete key - and YOU have yet to get the message.

 

He found the friggin' cache. His name is in the log book. As I asked before...how is that NOT a find? :laughing:

Link to comment

The truly ridiculus thing about this is that the cacher has now attempted to log the cache over forty times, with each log receiving the same fate - my delete key - and he has yet to get the message!

As I see it, the truly ridiculous thing about this is that the cacher has now attempted to log the cache over forty times, with each log receiving the same fate - your delete key - and YOU have yet to get the message.

 

He found the friggin' cache. His name is in the log book. As I asked before...how is that NOT a find? :unsure:

 

I agree. Even if a muggle found the cache, they would be FTF so long as they are the first signature in the logbook. If you deleted their find, then you have served as a fine :laughing: ambassador to geocaching...

 

Bill STILL says that was a pinheaded thing to do.

Link to comment

Interesting question.

At the time the cache was listed, did it have a note in the description declaring that non-PM finds will be deleted?

 

No, it did not. I went back and looked at the listing, and the only limitation the listing showed was PMO.

 

I get the idea (and this is an assumption on my part) the owner had the impression that making it PMO meant only PMs could log it until the the PMO status was removed.

 

Had the listing specified "non-PM logs will be deleted", would it have carried any weight? (This is a question I'm asking for myself. I'm still learning.)

 

The owner of the cache decides what logs get deleted and which ones do not. I personally would have given up after the first time of getting my log deleted. If the cache page specifically stated that members only could log it, then where is the argument exactly?

 

Just curious how is the non PM able to read the description ?

Link to comment
...It is true that PMOCs were not implemented as a marketing strategy, or to keep the best caches for members only, or for other silly logging requirements right ?????
As I recall, they were implemented after many people posted that they wanted them.
The cache owner is a bozo.
So we are just calling each other names now? If that's the case, I think sbell111 is a bozo. :laughing:
We're not just calling people names. We're also giving our opinions on the specific issue.

 

BTW, my wife would agree with you, sometimes.

Link to comment
Just curious how is the non PM able to read the description ?
A non PM can see the cache page. They just won't see the coordinates or maps. Similar to what you would see if you look at a cache page but aren't logged onto the website.

Actually, non-PMs can't see the page at all, I don't think. My point was that this individual was hunting with his PM friends when he found the cache. They were able to see the page.

 

Either way, what if I was hunting for your cache with my non-PM wife? Would you allow my find but not hers?

Link to comment
So, come on... are ya gonna give the poor guy his find :unsure: ?

 

It's not going to happen. After all, according to the comments in this thread, I'm an obstinant, immature, boring, anal rententive, ridiculus, spiteful, power tripping, rigid, fanatical, pinhead, dick who doesn't care about starving people.

 

Seriously, to fully understand this particular situation, you would need to be familiar with the friendly kidding that has been going on in Mississippi concerning PMO caches for a long time. Also, the theme of the cache came into play.

 

The truly ridiculus thing about this is that the cacher has now attempted to log the cache over forty times, with each log receiving the same fate - my delete key - and he has yet to get the message!

 

In the spirit of the search,

Mark aka Push.

Well, as you know from my previus posts, I regularly allow non-PMs to log our PMO caches the few times that such a situation occurs (and it occurs very rarely.) However, in your case, there are factors which many observers may be quite ignorant of, namely the karmic factor. You see, I visited the Akashic Records Room in the Akashic Library this morning, where all records of all life in alll of God's Universe are stored, and I did some research on this matter. I discovered that you (the cache owner) and the non-PM finder have actually been chronically and consistently engaged in various tug-of-war "battles" for over 1,344,561 incarnations/lifetimes over 806,204 years. It all started when you were both blue-green cyanobacteria (aka slime algae, fighting over a piece of debris in the bottom of a boiling volcanic mudpot almost a million years ago, in the Paleolithic era. And then, as you each evolved through various forms, the disputes continued: you tussled with each other over earthworms during your lifetimes as a chicken, you tussled over snacking on choice pieces of deer poop when you were both incarnated as hound dogs, and you tussled over a hottie slinky female street cat when you were each incarnated as male alley cats in London five hundred years ago. And now that you are both incarnated as human beings in the 21st century, you are continuing your tussles, but this time over a geocache find. What is salient and important to note here is that this tussling is not being done by each of you largely by conscious choice, but rather it the tussling is happening largely only because you are each being driven by deep and ancient karmic issues, dating back almost a milllion years, and thus there are deep and ancient memories driving each of you. Thus, you are each victims here of nearly a million years of accumulated karmic history and residue, and you each largely have no choice but to continue to tussle, as you are each driven by massive karmic forces. And this is what I learned in reading your karmic history in the Akashic Records Room this morning.

 

Huh? You ask what is my point, and how is this relevant to the matter at hand? Oh... I forget... did I have a point?... huh...?

 

 

 

 

:D;):D:(:laughing::D

Link to comment

It's not going to happen. After all, according to the comments in this thread, I'm an obstinant, immature, boring, anal rententive, ridiculus, spiteful, power tripping, rigid, fanatical, pinhead, dick who doesn't care about starving people.

 

Archive, lock. Problem solved.

Link to comment
So, come on... are ya gonna give the poor guy his find :D ?

 

It's not going to happen. After all, according to the comments in this thread, I'm an obstinant, immature, boring, anal rententive, ridiculus, spiteful, power tripping, rigid, fanatical, pinhead, dick who doesn't care about starving people.

 

Seriously, to fully understand this particular situation, you would need to be familiar with the friendly kidding that has been going on in Mississippi concerning PMO caches for a long time. Also, the theme of the cache came into play.

 

The truly ridiculus thing about this is that the cacher has now attempted to log the cache over forty times, with each log receiving the same fate - my delete key - and he has yet to get the message!

 

In the spirit of the search,

Mark aka Push.

Well, as you know from my previus posts, I regularly allow non-PMs to log our PMO caches the few times that such a situation occurs (and it occurs very rarely.) However, in your case, there are factors which many observers may be quite ignorant of, namely the karmic factor. You see, I visited the Akashic Records Room in the Akashic Library this morning, where all records of all life in alll of God's Universe are stored, and I did some research on this matter. I discovered that you (the cache owner) and the non-PM finder have actually been chronically and consistently engaged in various tug-of-war "battles" for over 1,344,561 incarnations/lifetimes over 806,204 years. It all started when you were both blue-green cyanobacteria (aka slime algae, fighting over a piece of debris in the bottom of a boiling volcanic mudpot almost a million years ago, in the Paleolithic era. And then, as you each evolved through various forms, the disputes continued: you tussled with each other over earthworms during your lifetimes as a chicken, you tussled over snacking on choice pieces of deer poop when you were both incarnated as hound dogs, and you tussled over a hottie slinky female street cat when you were each incarnated as male alley cats in London five hundred years ago. And now that you are both incarnated as human beings in the 21st century, you are continuing your tussles, but this time over a geocache find. What is salient and important to note here is that this tussling is not being done by each of you largely by conscious choice, but rather it the tussling is happening largely only because you are each being driven by deep and ancient karmic issues, dating back almost a milllion years, and thus there are deep and ancient memories driving each of you. Thus, you are each victims here of nearly a million years of accumulated karmic history and residue, and you each largely have no choice but to continue to tussle, as you are each driven by massive karmic forces. And this is what I learned in reading your karmic history in the Akashic Records Room this morning.

 

Huh? You ask what is my point, and how is this relevant to the matter at hand? Oh... I forget... did I have a point?... huh...?

 

:(;):D:D:D;)

:laughing::D:unsure:

Link to comment

amagrud found The Starkville Mafia's Six Mile Flat (Traditional Cache)

at 9/14/2006

 

Log Date: 9/14/2006

[:laughing:][:D][:unsure:][;)] WOO HOO!!!! FTF!!!! [:D][:D][:(][;)]

 

This was a group effort, but I still claim to be FTF on this cache, and

everyone in the group should also. Not2Shabby was the only one nearby

when I found it (probably because she is the only one that will put up

with me) so I had to show everyone where I found it. I also took a great

FTF prize - a hug from El Ka-Bong's younger daughter when they said

goodby and headed home.

 

This was a fun cache and the highlight of a fun night. A great deal of

thanks go to Sneaky_Pete, gonnafindit, and El Ka-Bong for helping make

this one of the most fun cache runs I have ever done, it was great

meeting you and your families. Also, T4TC! [:D][:D][:D][:D]

 

Cmon, let him have the find!

Link to comment
When I introduced my cousin to caching, I looked up the nearest cache on my GPSr and took her to it. She had a blast hunting for the container, and we hunted for a few more caches after that one. When I got home, I got an email from her saying she couldn't log that first cache because it was for PMO. Shame on me for taking her to it? I had no way of knowing it was a PMO cache until I got home. Not everyone prints out cache pages before searching.

Not everyone blames the cache owner for their own failure to check out the description before the hunt. You know better than that, Saxy. You're not a victim. You chose to hunt that cache without having read up on it first.

This isn't entirely fair. While I agree that it is extremely important to read the cache description, I think it's pretty safe to assume that many PMs use GSAK with CacheMate or some equivalent to download cache descriptions, coords, hints, etc... and while these programs will give you the cache description along with lots of other good info, they don't seem to flag or specify PMO caches. So, it is very possible for a PM to take a non-PM caching and, even after reading every word of the cache description, still not know it was a PMO cache. The only way for a cache owner to be 100% covered on this issue is to add the PMO stipulation directly to their cache description (which Pushmataha has now done with his own cache, but hadn't at the time of the find in question....) It isn't right to assume that every PM will go through every cache in their PQ right there on the GC.com website-- that would kind of defeat the point of being a PM! :laughing:

 

EDIT: is the PMO info even included in the .gpx files that GC.com sends in PQs? Since only PMs can recieve PQs, TPTB may not have even thought to include that info....

Edited by Cache Heads
Link to comment

I've said it ever since the PMO cache idea surfaced that it was not good for the caching community as a whole. All the other PM features is fine for the $30 fee. If I wanted them, I would pay the $30. I don't. But.....I do like to find and log all caches I find.

Link to comment
(Pushmataha @ Oct 3 2006, 11:30 PM) *

 

It's not going to happen. After all, according to the comments in this thread, I'm an obstinant, immature, boring, anal rententive, ridiculus, spiteful, power tripping, rigid, fanatical, pinhead, dick who doesn't care about starving people.

I think Robert Burns said it best: "O would some power the giftie gie us to see ourselves as others see us." (What a gift it is to see ourselves as others see us)
Link to comment

ok to answer the original question, the first finder of this cache is in fact a non premium member.

He was invited on a caching trip, I assume by a premium member and he happened to be the one to make the find. The cache owner does however have a right not to award a "first to find prize" to a nonpremium member.

 

If I had multiple cache logins in my family group, I wouldn't nesscessarily have a premium membership on all of them, for these reason Jeremy has provided the back door method of logging a pmo cache.

 

The last situation would be a chance finding. I assume that if I gave coordinates and the name of the cache to the cache owner, that he would allow the find even though I wasn't a premium member. I would be no different than a muggle finding the cache. However, I wouldn't push the issue.

 

In this situation, the cache owner should allow the log of the nonpremium member to stand. If he doesn't, the premium member of the finder group can log the fact of the true first finder in his log. However the childlishness of the cache owner, properly won't even allow this

Link to comment

I've said it ever since the PMO cache idea surfaced that it was not good for the caching community as a whole. All the other PM features is fine for the $30 fee. If I wanted them, I would pay the $30. I don't. But.....I do like to find and log all caches I find.

 

Well now I'm confused Ron. What about your premium member alias, geoplanet? :D

Link to comment

SUp3rFM & Cruella Posted Today, 07:42 AM

If the cache is for PM ONLY, then it's only for PM. Simple as that.

 

It's like driving an 18 wheeler on a road to cars only. The authorities wouldn't care if the truck driver was there because he was driving along with some friends driving smaller cars...

 

In the case of a road designated for cars only, that road is also engineered for cars, not trucks. In the case of your cache, unless it is on private land, it is in the public domain. The basic requirements for logging a cache is signing the log, if one does that he is entitled to a smiley even if he finds it by chance, (finding the final of a multi without finding all the intermediates). If I knowingly found a pmo, I probaly wouldn't trade for the "high quality swag" , but I would probaly take a tb, very few have a goal of pmo caches only.

Link to comment

This is yet another instance where I believe if you found it, you should be able to log it.

 

It's not as if TPTB have not said anything about it. It was referenced earlier in this thread there is a loophole that they are aware of and choose to do nothing about for good reason. I think it's clear in this instance where the issue stands.

 

Whether PM or not, if you find it you should be able to log it if you know how.

Link to comment

This is yet another instance where I believe if you found it, you should be able to log it.

 

It's not as if TPTB have not said anything about it. It was referenced earlier in this thread there is a loophole that they are aware of and choose to do nothing about for good reason. I think it's clear in this instance where the issue stands.

 

Whether PM or not, if you find it you should be able to log it if you know how.

 

I agree. I hunt caches with my wife and it really doesn't make sense for both of us to shell out the money for a membership. What am I supposed to do if we encounter a MOC, say "Sorry honey, you have to stand over there, you can't look for this one."? We're a team and of course we're both gonna search. If she finds it, this website left a backdoor open so she can log it. It was left open just for a situation such as this.

 

As a cache owner, a while ago I had made a bunch of my caches MOC to help thwart a cache pirate. I wasn't aware of the back door then, so if anybody asked, I would make it available so non members could log, then I would set it back to MOC when they were done. I felt that since they found the cache it was their right to log it.

 

I really don't see the big deal. I place caches to be found. If someone finds it, it would be awfully petty of me to tell him he can't log it because of a technicality.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

This is yet another instance where I believe if you found it, you should be able to log it.

 

It's not as if TPTB have not said anything about it. It was referenced earlier in this thread there is a loophole that they are aware of and choose to do nothing about for good reason. I think it's clear in this instance where the issue stands.

 

Whether PM or not, if you find it you should be able to log it if you know how.

I agree! :D

Link to comment

I've said it ever since the PMO cache idea surfaced that it was not good for the caching community as a whole. All the other PM features is fine for the $30 fee. If I wanted them, I would pay the $30. I don't. But.....I do like to find and log all caches I find.

 

Well now I'm confused Ron. What about your premium member alias, geoplanet? :D

 

Will the real geoplanet please stand up. This is a real interesting twist caused by a feature of the PMO's. It seems that the PMO cache owner gets notified of everyone who views the cache page. I promise, I'm not geoplanet. I'm Ronbo and I love to ronbo caches. Might want to check with the Mississippi Bounty Hunter??? I hope Mississippi doesn't get a bad image in the caching community from this thread. We are the Hospitality State and welcome all to come caching in Mississippi.

 

With Kindest Regards,

 

Ron Willett aka Ronbo

Link to comment

I figured I'd get a few replies on this topic, and that would be that. Silly me.

 

When I wrote the original question on this topic, I left out all the other circumstances of the situation, so the basic scenario would be addressed. Other circumstances? Yes, there were several, but they didn't really play into the question I wanted addressed, which was "Can a non-PM log FTF on a PMO cache listing?".

 

I've learned a few things from this thread.

 

First, I learned that, in most opinions, a non-PM can log a PMO cache as FTF (or second, or third, etc.) if he was actually the first one to find it. This seems to be the bulk of most opinions.

 

Second, if a cache owner puts other stipulations in the cache listing, those stipulations should be respected.

 

Third, a lot of the forum users here are quick to call names and cast aspersion on the character of others. Rather than give a yes or no answer, folks were ready to either hang the owner or canonize him. Same goes for the cache finder, most folks were ready to either drag him over the coals or build a shrine to his poor, mistreated soul. Sheesh, y'all. Neither's appropriate.

 

Some of y'all are all a lot more inflamed and worked up over this than the two folks actually involved. They've got a personal 'back and forth' thing going on, and maybe each is just waiting to see which outlasts the other. I think that's probably the case.

 

I did see a situation here, though, that raised the initial question I asked, and I asked it for my own benefit. I want to make sure my future cache hides are handled they way I'll think they'll be handled, and I wanted to make sure I had a good reading on what the general population thinks a PMO listing means.

 

Thanks for your answers and your consideration.

 

Please consider this can of worms officially, permanently,and most decidedly closed.

 

Happy trails..............

Link to comment

I have mixed feelings on this. The angle i look at it from is that everyone should become a member in the first place. Yes, i know, i've seen all the excuses but when it comes down to it, there isn't a soul out there who shouldn't want to ante up the poultry little $30 ($3 a month) when they use the services of the site. Of course GC.com doesn't require it so i guess there will always be those who take advantage and ride for free.

 

On the same token i don't care for MOCs either. However, they are sometimes listed and i figured they are usually put out when there is a problem with cache pirates and the sort. I never thought about them being intended to keep good cachers away. There are just too many times when a non-premium member might come across the cache and therefore cause a problem, at least with cache owners who are sticklers.

 

We are a friendly bunch down here and go caching in groups regularly. I'm sure there are times when non PMs tag along and i'd sure be disappointed if we ever encountered the same scenario as the OP above. Luckily, there are very few MOCs (actually i don't know of any) down this way so hopefully we won't ever hear of or encounter something this silly... :D

 

The finder in the original post may not have been a paying member at the time but the plain truth is, he was FTF! :D

Link to comment

...Some of y'all are all a lot more inflamed and worked up over this than the two folks actually involved. They've got a personal 'back and forth' thing going on, and maybe each is just waiting to see which outlasts the other. I think that's probably the case.....

 

I suspected that all along. What you posted was factually correct, but the "spirit" of what was happening could not be communicated through the forums easily. Things are not as they appear. :D

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment
...It is true that PMOCs were not implemented as a marketing strategy, or to keep the best caches for members only, or for other silly logging requirements right ?????
As I recall, they were implemented after many people posted that they wanted them.

Yes, but for what reason did the many people request the feature ?

Link to comment
...It is true that PMOCs were not implemented as a marketing strategy, or to keep the best caches for members only, or for other silly logging requirements right ?????
As I recall, they were implemented after many people posted that they wanted them.
Yes, but for what reason did the many people request the feature ?

As I recall it was because some areas had people stealing caches.

Link to comment

I have mixed feelings on this. The angle i look at it from is that everyone should become a member in the first place. Yes, i know, i've seen all the excuses but when it comes down to it, there isn't a soul out there who shouldn't want to ante up the poultry little $30 ($3 a month) when they use the services of the site. Of course GC.com doesn't require it so i guess there will always be those who take advantage and ride for free.

While I agree that premium membership package is a good value for thirty dollars a year that is really only true from the perspective of the individual.

 

A couple might want some of the features that are available for each person, although many couples usually do most of their together, and may not need two sets of PQs and so forth. Even so, I'd venture to guess that a lot of couples do pay the $60 membership fees for both individuals, for a variety of reasons--support gc, be able to get more PQs, etc. Plenty of others have looked at the fee and their use of the site and felt that they were better off spending that money other ways (putting out caches or purchasing cache supplies such as stickers etc. There are many ways to "support" gc without paying for a membership).

 

However, a family of five or ten wouldn't feel the same way --$150 or $300 would not be a paultry amount, and doesn't seem like as good a value--especially when you consider that only one or two of those individuals are usually wage-earners, and the rest are usually dependent children. Since the children aren't going to go caching without Mom and/or Dad, they certainly don't need their own set of PQs--I can't fathom the family that would need 25 PQs a day. They'll probably hide the caches together most often as well, so they'll really need very few of the features to fully enjoy geocaching--and they could certainly use the money for other purposes that would better benefit geocaching. Even a single adult parent (one income) with two small children would have no need of most of the extra features. All they really need is the ability for their non-member family members to log the rare PM cache.

 

GC recognizes this, and has kicked around the idea of a family account--you know, so much for the main account and a dollar or two more for the ability to access PQs and log additional logs under that account. That way, folks could share the premium features such as PQs but ante up just a tiny bit more to account for the extra storage on the server. The last I heard, figuring out how to connect all the account holders to one main account was the sticking point. In the meanwhile, allowing family members to log PM caches when they are with a paying family member is one of the reasons that loophole is allowed to continue to exist.

Link to comment

<snip>

Third, a lot of the forum users here are quick to call names and cast aspersion on the character of others. Rather than give a yes or no answer, folks were ready to either hang the owner or canonize him. Same goes for the cache finder, most folks were ready to either drag him over the coals or build a shrine to his poor, mistreated soul. Sheesh, y'all. Neither's appropriate.

 

You asked for opinions on the situation, you got opinions on the situation. If some people reacted more strongly than you anticipated, maybe it was because they felt strongly about it. I think it's wrong to delete a log because the finder wasn't a PM.

 

Just because the cache owner has the power to do what he wants with his cache page, it doesn't mean that he should abuse the power.

Link to comment

The people who took the non-member looking for that cache were wrong to do so. Whether or not the cache is labeled as a PM only cache in third party software has no relevance. Ignorance of the status is not an excuse.

The posts that say 'if a muggle had found the cache then he would have been the first to find' are completely specious. The muggle would not have been looking for it and his 'find' is only a find in the muggle frame of relevance - not in the cacher frame.

If the cache placer has decided on a requirement for logging the cache then that is his right and that is how it is. There are plenty threads to be found in these forums supporting the right to place 'requirements' in a listing.

For the above reasons I believe that this thread is really about how posters feel about the question of PMO caches.

I have not decided what I think on that subject and, right now, I don't think I will ever place a PMO cache. However, like standing up for free speech, I may not like what you say (do in your cache listing) but I will stand up for your right to say it (place the cache).....

A lot of this is a grey area anyhow as regards group caching. Is there a real difference between a casual group of friends caching together (some PM's some not) and a so called caching 'team' with a single membership? I feel that the guiderules regarding team caching are open to abuse anyhow but that is a subject for a different thread.

 

Oh look! It's the bottom line..... What should I say here? OK - In the grand scheme of things, and since 'everyone wins and the points don't matter', I am not even going to post this. Oh, sorry, wrong key, oh well.....

Link to comment

Pushmataha, I respectfuly submit the following:

 

"Just because you have the right to do something, does not mean it is right to do it."

 

Give the guy his find.

 

Everyone else:

I submit that we should make a rule change. No more cache owners deleting the find logs of others without a valid, specific reason, a list of which should be posted in the guidelines.

Link to comment

I've never liked the PMOC's very well. I view it as a negative feature, and without any great benefit in most cases.

 

This weekend I plan to do several PMOC caches, so if they have any redeeming qualities I will have the chance to see it. So far the PMOC's I have done were not that impressive, and I didn't see any benefit in not letting everyone hunt them.

 

To me this thread is just more evidence that the PMOC is a poorly thought out feature among an otherwise excellent package for paying members. I'd be all for seeing it changed or removed.

Link to comment
...If the cache placer has decided on a requirement for logging the cache then that is his right and that is how it is. ...

I completely agree with you. Sort of.

 

The problem is that the cache owner did not communicate his requirement prior to the initial deleting of the log.

 

I realize that many people will say that the requirement is self-evident since it was a PMO cache. However, many PMO owners have weighed in and stated that they would accept such a log as a matter of course. Because of this, I do not believe that the requirement is self-evident and feel that the log should not have been deleted because the requirement could not have been known prior.

Link to comment
So, come on... are ya gonna give the poor guy his find :D ?

 

It's not going to happen. After all, according to the comments in this thread, I'm an obstinant, immature, boring, anal rententive, ridiculus, spiteful, power tripping, rigid, fanatical, pinhead, dick who doesn't care about starving people.

 

Seriously, to fully understand this particular situation, you would need to be familiar with the friendly kidding that has been going on in Mississippi concerning PMO caches for a long time. Also, the theme of the cache came into play.

 

The truly ridiculus thing about this is that the cacher has now attempted to log the cache over forty times, with each log receiving the same fate - my delete key - and he has yet to get the message!

 

In the spirit of the search,

Mark aka Push.

Well, as you know from my previus posts, I regularly allow non-PMs to log our PMO caches the few times that such a situation occurs (and it occurs very rarely.) However, in your case, there are factors which many observers may be quite ignorant of, namely the karmic factor. You see, I visited the Akashic Records Room in the Akashic Library this morning, where all records of all life in alll of God's Universe are stored, and I did some research on this matter. I discovered that you (the cache owner) and the non-PM finder have actually been chronically and consistently engaged in various tug-of-war "battles" for over 1,344,561 incarnations/lifetimes over 806,204 years. It all started when you were both blue-green cyanobacteria (aka slime algae, fighting over a piece of debris in the bottom of a boiling volcanic mudpot almost a million years ago, in the Paleolithic era. And then, as you each evolved through various forms, the disputes continued: you tussled with each other over earthworms during your lifetimes as a chicken, you tussled over snacking on choice pieces of deer poop when you were both incarnated as hound dogs, and you tussled over a hottie slinky female street cat when you were each incarnated as male alley cats in London five hundred years ago. And now that you are both incarnated as human beings in the 21st century, you are continuing your tussles, but this time over a geocache find. What is salient and important to note here is that this tussling is not being done by each of you largely by conscious choice, but rather it the tussling is happening largely only because you are each being driven by deep and ancient karmic issues, dating back almost a milllion years, and thus there are deep and ancient memories driving each of you. Thus, you are each victims here of nearly a million years of accumulated karmic history and residue, and you each largely have no choice but to continue to tussle, as you are each driven by massive karmic forces. And this is what I learned in reading your karmic history in the Akashic Records Room this morning.

 

Huh? You ask what is my point, and how is this relevant to the matter at hand? Oh... I forget... did I have a point?... huh...?

 

 

 

 

:D:D:D:D:D:D

 

As a believer in the Bible's account of a literal 6-day creation, I find myself wanting to take offense at your evolutionary bias. Furthermore, reincarnation is a myth!! I should be highly offended by your post and report it to TPTB!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe I will, after I stop laughing!! Vinny, you must write a geocaching book! I will buy it! I might even climb a tall pylon to get it!!

 

 

Oh yeah - on topic - give the guy his find and move on with it.

Link to comment
So, come on... are ya gonna give the poor guy his find :D ?

 

It's not going to happen. After all, according to the comments in this thread, I'm an obstinant, immature, boring, anal rententive, ridiculus, spiteful, power tripping, rigid, fanatical, pinhead, dick who doesn't care about starving people.

 

Seriously, to fully understand this particular situation, you would need to be familiar with the friendly kidding that has been going on in Mississippi concerning PMO caches for a long time. Also, the theme of the cache came into play.

 

The truly ridiculus thing about this is that the cacher has now attempted to log the cache over forty times, with each log receiving the same fate - my delete key - and he has yet to get the message!

 

In the spirit of the search,

Mark aka Push.

Well, as you know from my previus posts, I regularly allow non-PMs to log our PMO caches the few times that such a situation occurs (and it occurs very rarely.) However, in your case, there are factors which many observers may be quite ignorant of, namely the karmic factor. You see, I visited the Akashic Records Room in the Akashic Library this morning, where all records of all life in alll of God's Universe are stored, and I did some research on this matter. I discovered that you (the cache owner) and the non-PM finder have actually been chronically and consistently engaged in various tug-of-war "battles" for over 1,344,561 incarnations/lifetimes over 806,204 years. It all started when you were both blue-green cyanobacteria (aka slime algae, fighting over a piece of debris in the bottom of a boiling volcanic mudpot almost a million years ago, in the Paleolithic era. And then, as you each evolved through various forms, the disputes continued: you tussled with each other over earthworms during your lifetimes as a chicken, you tussled over snacking on choice pieces of deer poop when you were both incarnated as hound dogs, and you tussled over a hottie slinky female street cat when you were each incarnated as male alley cats in London five hundred years ago. And now that you are both incarnated as human beings in the 21st century, you are continuing your tussles, but this time over a geocache find. What is salient and important to note here is that this tussling is not being done by each of you largely by conscious choice, but rather it the tussling is happening largely only because you are each being driven by deep and ancient karmic issues, dating back almost a milllion years, and thus there are deep and ancient memories driving each of you. Thus, you are each victims here of nearly a million years of accumulated karmic history and residue, and you each largely have no choice but to continue to tussle, as you are each driven by massive karmic forces. And this is what I learned in reading your karmic history in the Akashic Records Room this morning.

 

Huh? You ask what is my point, and how is this relevant to the matter at hand? Oh... I forget... did I have a point?... huh...?

 

 

:D:D:D:lol::lol::D

As a believer in the Bible's account of a literal 6-day creation, I find myself wanting to take offense at your evolutionary bias. Furthermore, reincarnation is a myth!! I should be highly offended by your post and report it to TPTB!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Maybe I will, after I stop laughing!! Vinny, you must write a geocaching book! I will buy it! I might even climb a tall pylon to get it!!

 

Oh yeah - on topic - give the guy his find and move on with it.

:lol::lol::D;)B):D

 

Glad you enjoyed it!

 

:D

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 4
×
×
  • Create New...