+Beds Clangers Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 (edited) Hi all, Just like to say thanks to you all but as of this moment, I've given up caching. If anyone would like to know the reason then they should contact me directly. Kind Regards to everyone Nick Edited October 7, 2006 by Beds Clangers
+Dorsetgal & GeoDog Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 Sorry to read this and see all your caches disabled, I hope the problem gets resolved soon.
Vanya1 Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 We are sorry to hear of all this Nick I have sent you an email.
+davy boy Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 Hi all, Just like to say thanks to you all but as of this moment, I've given up caching. Think most of you will know the reason and please do NOT make any public comment. Kind Regards to everyone Nick Don't let the b------- wear you down! What happened to the origional thread???????????????????
+doctor scotland Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 (edited) Maybe we could have another topic titled - 'Just what the F**k is the world coming to?' Having read the previous thread regarding this, that's all i'm gonna say! email has been sent in support of Beds Clangers and wishing good luck. Edited October 6, 2006 by doctor scotland
+The Mighty Shark Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 We are with you all the way Nick. Email sent.
+badger Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 You are not alone... As you know Nick, I've already been in touch by email. Matt
+MartyBartfast Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Sorry to hear that, I hope the situation gets sorted out for you. Martyn.
Lactodorum Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 For a number of reasons I will not go into I was asked to take certain actions. I'm sorry if this has caused confusion or concern but I cannot elaborate. I am personally sorry that Beds Clangers have been forced into the current sitation.
+Alboy Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 I'm sorry when anyone gives up, I hope it's not for long. I would be very concerned if someone had forced you into this action, as opposed to you taking a principled stand on something. I don't know what the reasons are, particularly if it is "wrong" and we can do something about it, but maybe its just best to let sleeping dogs lie? Hope you are back soon, whatever the reasons.
+Bumbling Fools Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Firstly, my personal support must go to Beds Clangers at this time. In respect of "please do NOT make any public comment.", I shall bite my tongue on most of what I would like to say. However, I must say that this has implications for us all, and I for one don't want any outcome "swept under the carpet". We already seen one thread deleted - will this one go the same way? Will whatever may have happened happen again, but to someone else? I can appreciate that this isn't the time or the place for such information to be known, but I feel TPTB need to know an issue such as this can't be withheld from its members (at such time as is appropriate). After all, without the Geocachers themselves, there is no Geocaching.
+wizard1974uk Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Surely sooner or a later a statement has to come out when the time is right?
+Bill D (wwh) Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Bumbling Fools wrote:I must say that this has implications for us all, and I for one don't want any outcome "swept under the carpet". We already seen one thread deleted - will this one go the same way? Will whatever may have happened happen again, but to someone else? I can appreciate that this isn't the time or the place for such information to be known, but I feel TPTB need to know an issue such as this can't be withheld from its members (at such time as is appropriate) There are good reasons for everything here. Bear with TPTB.
alistair_uk Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Reading between the lines I am working on the presumption that you have asked people not to make public comment because of subjudicy legislation. If this is the case that I can go as far as to ask when and where the case will be herd. I may want to come. I will also wish you the best and state that I hope in time you will feel able to return to Geocaching.
+Mr'D Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 I said this yesterday, before the previous thread regarding this subject was closed. I am soooo very close to disabling all my caches. TPTB need to reassure us!
Lactodorum Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 I said this yesterday, before the previous thread regarding this subject was closed. I am soooo very close to disabling all my caches. TPTB need to reassure us! TPTB are not in a position to comment. However I am not disabling any of my personal caches and I see no reason why any one else would need to do so. OK?
+Matrix Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 (edited) Edited by Matrix Edited October 7, 2006 by Matrix
+Mr'D Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 TPTB are not in a position to comment. However I am not disabling any of my personal caches and I see no reason why any one else would need to do so. OK? Peter that was not the response I expected. I seek reassurance and guidance that, as a cache layer, I can rely on Groundspeak's disclaimer that I can successfully defend any litigation for injury damages made against me. If not then we all need to include our own disclaimer on our cache pages. There must be many UK cache-layers out there who seek guidance. Jon
+Johnmelad Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Hi all, Just like to say thanks to you all but as of this moment, I've given up caching. Think most of you will know the reason and please do NOT make any public comment. Kind Regards to everyone Nick Is this tread about someone claiming compensation for having an accident?
+Birders Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Johnmelad.... Gawd knows. Looks like one of those threads that only certain people know about so why it's on a public forum we don't understand. If it's a very serious matter which could affect all of us then at least some basic details should be given. Nothing has to be said to disclose precise details but please don't keep us all in the dark with this 007-stuff.
+Pieman Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 I seek reassurance and guidance that, as a cache layer, I can rely on Groundspeak's disclaimer that I can successfully defend any litigation for injury damages made against me. I think the answer to that is you can't rely on it because it refers to Groundspeak not to you, but then putting a disclaimer on your own cache pages won't protect you from negligence anyway. I don't think anyone is going to give you reassurance beyond the fact that if you have acted reasonably there is little likelihood that you will ever lose a legal case but that does not protect you from some looney/ cynical moneygrabber/ person with grievance against you, from mounting a spurious case in the hope that you may settle out of court because of all the heartache that they can cause. Most of the time people surprise you by being nicer than you expect, unfortunately there are people who are the exceptions to the rule.
+walkergeoff and wife Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 The disclaimer has this line: Cache seekers assume all risks involved in seeking a cache. (My emphasis). Surely all risks means all risks, since using the website to get details of a cache requres an acceptance of this disclaimer?
Lactodorum Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 TPTB are not in a position to comment. However I am not disabling any of my personal caches and I see no reason why any one else would need to do so. OK? Peter that was not the response I expected. I seek reassurance and guidance that, as a cache layer, I can rely on Groundspeak's disclaimer that I can successfully defend any litigation for injury damages made against me. If not then we all need to include our own disclaimer on our cache pages. There must be many UK cache-layers out there who seek guidance. Jon Sorry Jon, I can't give you what you want. My role as a volunteer at Geocaching.com is to review caches for publication against the published and various locally accepted guidelines. To answer your question would require me to be a lawyer which I most certainly am not ! To reiterate, I am keeping all my caches active and will certainly be considering placing more.
+Captain Gore-tex Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 I agree with Birders, having missed the last thread related to this I am mystified as to what is happening. If someone knows but feels unable to post in public any chance of a PM?
+dino-irl Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Claim for compensation something to do with an accident/injury at a cache site. Disgust was aired here in another thread which had to be removed for undisclosed reasons. This is a follow-up to that thread. There's no intention to keep anyone in the dark but once legals get involved everyone needs to keep their nose clean and Groundspeak probably decided the other thread was in danger of inflaming the situation.
+Bill D (wwh) Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 (edited) For those of you who're asking for further details, may I refer you to the original post in this thread. Nick has said there that if anyone wants to know more they can contact him directly. Edit: I am keeping all my caches, and will certainly be placing more (when I get round to it!). I know the details, and I have no concerns at all. Edited October 7, 2006 by Bill D (wwh)
+Beds Clangers Posted October 7, 2006 Author Posted October 7, 2006 All, I fully understand that there is a lot of confusion regarding my original post. The reason I made this post was to try and explain why the previous post had vanished. If you contact me directly I'll explain all but I cannot get into a public debate with anyone. Apologies, for the confusion I have caused, but in trying to resolve a problem I seem to have created another one. I'm man enough to say "SORRY" Nick
+Mr'D Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Sorry Jon, I can't give you what you want. My role as a volunteer at Geocaching.com is to review caches for publication against the published and various locally accepted guidelines. This post is a general comment in relation to this topic. Peter I don't expect you personally to give such assurance. Your own role in the UK caching fraternity is, I am sure, highly revered and respected. My laying of caches was done so I could put something back into the sport for the benefit of others. If the sport cannot give me something back in the way of reassurance that I won't be sued then what's the point? Why bother laying caches?... just find others caches and don't run the risk of being sued! The sport will soon die. Groundspeak - please give us reassurance that we can defend such litigation! Jon
+dino-irl Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 No offence intended but I think you're mad if you think an organisation based in the US can give such a blanket guarantee across the whole world. Reading between the lines of what Lacto and Bill D (as a committee member of GAGB) have said I don't think anyone needs to worry. This is an isolated event (I think I remember Beds Clanger saying it was the first time in 6+ years of geocaching) and I doubt very much if it'll happen again. IMO it's some scumbag chancing his/her arm for a quick buck and I doubt if they'll get too far! The point a lot of people seem to be missing is that for one cacher the spirit of geocaching has been ruined so much that he has decided to pack it all in.
Master Mariner Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 I saw the other thread, prior to its removal, so will not comment on it. I may be missing something but isn't caching like everything else in life, whether placing or seeking caches, you look at it, evaluate it then either go for it or forget it. The negative attitude of withdrawing caches, because litigation may become an issue, is sad. It's almost the same as putting barriers up at the perimeter of your property to stop someone coming on to it in case they trip and injure themselves - you wouldn't do it so why withdraw caches? If it is a concern, why not get third party liability insurance? I appreciate that this may have caused upset to the cache setter(s) involved but would ask them to reconsider the withdrawl of caches and think of the pleasure that this pastime has given them and ask others, considering the same thing, to look at their life and see what other risks they have created or are at risk from both in their private and professional lives. Use the cottonwool to clean up the blood from bramble scratches - don't wrap yourselves up in it! I don't consider it a "black day" but, then again, my glass is always half full.
Da Rubber Chicken Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Sorry to here that you have given up the mad world of Geocaching for what ever reasons they are, I don't Know! But by looking at the the posts on this thread it seems that you are b****ing about a certain cacher, ok I don't mind the odd fight but not in the forums please! It is supposed to be a family and friendly forum im not trying to be annoying im just saying do it else where! Anyways hope you lot sort it out soon because it would be a shame to see any geocachers leave this hectic sport! Keep it real Da Rubber Chicken!
+Stuey Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 DRC, you grabbed the wrong end of the stick mate. Can I politely suggest you retract your comments.....
Da Rubber Chicken Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Okay maybe I dont know the whole story but thats the vibe im getting from this thred and yes stuey I would glady retract my comments but theres one problem I dont know what it means!! Ha!
+wizard1974uk Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Okay maybe I dont know the whole story but thats the vibe im getting from this thred and yes stuey I would glady retract my comments but theres one problem I dont know what it means!!Ha! It means take back the comments you have made, that is all I'm going to say.
+kewfriend Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 I come back with FewKinder from a nice day's caching and read this thread. Hmmmmmph. I am pleased that BC has merely disabled rather than archived so the door is open and everything can return to normal, By the way did BC mean 'personnel' or 'personal' as the reason? BC has 1600+ cache finds to his credit and I've certainly followed him round Berks more than once. He's a good chap and I'll welcome him back anytime and follow him around again anytime. All we all need is a sense of proportion, a small dose of common sense, and common fun, friendship and purpose. Hey - its only a bit of tupperware ..... or a cuddly toy with a dog tag .... xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx
+Mr'D Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 Chaps please keep on topic. My point is that if someone trips up over a twig in pursuit of our cache we run the risk of being sued. Whilst Groundspeak publish their own disclaimer on each and every webpage, it does not appear to cover the cache-layers's liability... or does it? Should the wording be amended or need we include our own discalimer (however effective it may be) on our webpages? Jon
+Captain Gore-tex Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 My two penny worth... Keep in in perspective. We all run the risk of litigation every time we jump in a car and drive down a road with other road users and pedestrians. If we mess up we pay for it, either through insurance if it is an accident or through the criminal courts if it is negligent or (in a few cases) intentional. It is just the same in loads of other leisure activities, golf, scuba diving, rock climbing etc etc. If someone wants to sue over putting a plastic box in a tree, under a rock, in a cave or anywhere else for that matter, good luck to them, can't envisage too many judges taking it too seriously. Where is the intention to harm or negligence, particularly where others have found and logged a find without issue? Its a bit like saying that coastal footpath is too close to the coast so there is a risk of falling off. There are a few caches in the SW that are in caves you wouldnt catch me in for all the moun10bike coins in the world so guess what, I don't go in them. If some people find it difficult to make this type of choice I don't envisage them making compelling witnesses for the crown. Whatever next, suing Garmin for common repetitive strain injury due to the saturation (I wish) of caches in Bristol?
+The Spokes Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 I cannot see where tripping over a twig or banging ones head against a tree would cause worries. Plastic cannot cause damage but those ammo cans could very easily. Now that would be the Cache setters responsibility would it not. A sharp edge, a trapped finger. I could see that a small child could get his finger in the way of a closing lid at the hinged end of an ammo can and the leverage would be like a guillotine. I had a bad cut which was more like a ripped out chunk of skin from exactly this type of thing very painful and messy. Where would the blame lie? I think I know the answer. I could see a claim in this type of case being successful against the cache setter, and some would claim rightly so especially if it involved a small child.
+Pieman Posted October 8, 2006 Posted October 8, 2006 I cannot see where tripping over a twig or banging ones head against a tree would cause worries. Plastic cannot cause damage but those ammo cans could very easily. Now that would be the Cache setters responsibility would it not. A sharp edge, a trapped finger. I could see that a small child could get his finger in the way of a closing lid at the hinged end of an ammo can and the leverage would be like a guillotine. I had a bad cut which was more like a ripped out chunk of skin from exactly this type of thing very painful and messy. Where would the blame lie? I think I know the answer. I could see a claim in this type of case being successful against the cache setter, and some would claim rightly so especially if it involved a small child. I very much doubt it and I would certainly hope it wouldn't be the cause of successful litigation. Allowing a child to sit in a car is far more dangerous as there is much more chance of them doing damage by trapping their hands in the door. It is incumbent of what is the vast majority of reasonable people in society to not stop behaving normally because there is a faint chance they will be the victim of an unreasonable claim.
nobby.nobbs Posted October 8, 2006 Posted October 8, 2006 from how i see it this is about the only way a cacher setter could be deemed liable. ie if the container itself caused an injury that could have been avoided if the container was not there. you would still need to prove that the setter was negligent in leaving the box or for the thing that caused the injury..ie maybe not maintaining the cache and letting it get rusty and sharp edges.... but as for the travelling to the cache. well we are all responsible for our own actions and we choose to get to where we are going, if the track looks too dangerous then turn around no one is forcing you.
+bear&fox Posted October 8, 2006 Posted October 8, 2006 This is madness. Hopefully sanity will prevail. We're in your support camp for this one. bear&fox South Africa
+MJB58 Posted October 8, 2006 Posted October 8, 2006 This is madness. Hopefully sanity will prevail. We're in your support camp for this one. bear&fox South Africa Yes we certainly are. We are all responsible for ourselves and walking in the countryside can sometimes be dangerous. There are all sorts of things left lying about in the countryside by all sorts of people. I would say that it would be very difficult to prove who had left the cache there in the first place. Also there have been loads of discussions about what has been left INSIDE the cache box. At the end of the day though it would be down to proof. And this is a difficult thing to do. It would actually require someone to actually stand up and say yes it was me. I've read all sorts of things in the cache log pages including people changing the box because the previous one was damaged.
Lactodorum Posted October 8, 2006 Posted October 8, 2006 Hi folks, can I beg your indulgence please? I have decied to close this particular thread now that everyone has had an opportunity to comment. If you want to continue the discussion about liability issues please do so in the Disclaimer? thread. I have been in contact with Beds Clangers and I am happy that their caches will remain disabled rather than archived for the time being. Thanks.
Recommended Posts