GeoEVOLUTION Vs. GeoCREATIONISM

[+Team Rat Pack (led by Miss Bi)]

 

edited just to mention it sure has been a fun week!

 

May I join you? They are so busy being right they don't hear anyone else

 

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

So it is your contention that someone who claims to have attended one event several times is being honest and accurate?

Yes, it is my contention that someone who attends an event where Pocket Caches are allowed by the event owner and who then logs Attended once for attending and once for each Pocket Cache he found at the event is being honest and accurate.

 

As to your name calling, it's not so much the exact wording as it is the meaning behind them that you put across.

From wikipedia.org

An innuendo is a figure of speech which indicates an indirect or subtle, usually derogatory implication in expression; an insinuation.

Edited January 25, 2007 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+ReadyOrNot]

Letterboxing is a branch on the geocaching tree. Or vice versa.

 

But letterboxing will NEVER be allowed to be a geocache. Let's not forget the ingredients:

 

1) GPS Coordinates

2) Listed on Geocaching.com

3) Container w/ logbook

 

Even if TPTB made #2 happen, they still lack #1. Virtuals lack #3. Pocket lint lacks #1 & #2. Events lack #3. Webcam caches lack #3. Anyone see the pattern here?

[+ReadyOrNot]

 

edited just to mention it sure has been a fun week!

 

May I join you? They are so busy being right they don't hear anyone else

 

 

It's been a fantastic week thanks!

[+Moose Mob]

<snip>

Like BrianSnat said, it started as finding a regular size box in the woods.

<snip>

I beg to differ. It started as a bucket buried along side the road. The box in the woods was the next stage of evolution.

 

When the bucket was hidden, it was not "Geocaching". It was someone playing around with their GPS. Was there a logbook in the bucket? If I remember correctly, people emailed him when they found it. Geocaching was created with the advent of the website listing service and the guidelines contained therein.

Yes, it had a log book. The game rules were "take something, leave something, sign the log book". I realize that it's a tough pill to swallow, but the roots of geocaching is not an ammo can in the woods.

 

edit: speelin

 

You are missing the whole point of my post. My definition was the point of the post. They did not have "Geocaching.com" as a listing service in the beginning. It wasn't Geocaching in the beginning, although noone can argue that his actions were certainly the basis for Jeremy creating the website. Does anyone know the first geocache listed on geocaching.com? (If it was Dave Ulmer's cache, then I stand corrected)

I think this brings up a valid question. Did geocaching, as we know it today, start with geocaching.com? Or was it Dave Umer's original stash? Or was it when they changed the name from GPS Stash Hunt to geocaching? Some would even argue that you could trace it's roots to the mountain men that shared thier season's supplies with thier trusted neighbors.

[+drat19]

The numbers game is primarily a guy thing. Yep I said it. Women are just (generally, not always) hardwired for a cooperative game VS a competitive one.

I've started my countdown for when the inevitable response on this comment comes in.

 

10...9...8....

[+ReadyOrNot]

The numbers game is primarily a guy thing. Yep I said it. Women are just (generally, not always) hardwired for a cooperative game VS a competitive one.

I've started my countdown for when the inevitable response on this comment comes in.

 

10...9...8....

 

If you believe that women are not as competitive, you've never worked in an environment where two women were applying for the same position. Women can be downright nasty competitive sometimes. Although my wife is very non-competitive and is the sweetest woman on the planet. Guess it depends on the woman

[+BlueDeuce]

The numbers game is primarily a guy thing. Yep I said it. Women are just (generally, not always) hardwired for a cooperative game VS a competitive one.

I've started my countdown for when the inevitable response on this comment comes in.

 

10...9...8....

 

What? The cc word?

[+Criminal]

So it is your contention that someone who claims to have attended one event several times is being honest and accurate?

Yes, it is my contention that someone who attends an event where Pocket Caches are allowed by the event owner and who then logs Attended once for attending and once for each Pocket Cache he found at the event is being honest and accurate.

So a lie told with permission is the truth?

 

Your reasoning (or lack thereof) is fascinating, possibly even bordering on some sort of disorder. You might want to get that checked there Sparky.

[+Team Rat Pack (led by Miss Bi)]

The numbers game is primarily a guy thing. Yep I said it. Women are just (generally, not always) hardwired for a cooperative game VS a competitive one.

I've started my countdown for when the inevitable response on this comment comes in.

 

10...9...8....

 

If you believe that women are not as competitive, you've never worked in an environment where two women were applying for the same position. Women can be downright nasty competitive sometimes. Although my wife is very non-competitive and is the sweetest woman on the planet. Guess it depends on the woman

 

I am not saying women are not competitive in the workplace, I am saying that in GAMES and life in general women will tend to cooperate so that everyone wins VS dancing around saying "I win you lose" . Besides I did add the codicil that I am saying that this is a general rule, not a universal one.

[+ReadyOrNot]

So a lie told with permission is the truth?

 

To a relativist, there is no truth. He believes that morality is relative to his perception. As long as he believes its okay, then it's okay. I'm not sure how you can debate against that.

[+emurock]

 

edited just to mention it sure has been a fun week!

 

May I join you? They are so busy being right they don't hear anyone else

 

I have a fun week as well.

[+Team Rat Pack (led by Miss Bi)]

I swear, you guys come a knocking on my door wearing Khakis, Shirt/Tie, and a Geocaching for Dummies book proclaiming it's some kind of bible I'll promptly tell you where to stick it.

 

Amen!

[+drat19]

The numbers game is primarily a guy thing. Yep I said it. Women are just (generally, not always) hardwired for a cooperative game VS a competitive one.

I've started my countdown for when the inevitable response on this comment comes in.

 

10...9...8....

 

What? The cc word?

That's the one I was waiting for, yep.

[+tozainamboku]

What's the topic of this thread? I says GeoEVOLUTION vs. GeoCREATIONISM but it seem to be about whether or not it's OK to multiple "attended" event logs for pocket caches. I thought that already has its own thread.

[Dinoprophet]

Letterboxing is a branch on the geocaching tree. Or vice versa.

 

But letterboxing will NEVER be allowed to be a geocache. Let's not forget the ingredients:

 

1) GPS Coordinates

2) Listed on Geocaching.com

3) Container w/ logbook

 

Even if TPTB made #2 happen, they still lack #1. Virtuals lack #3. Pocket lint lacks #1 & #2. Events lack #3. Webcam caches lack #3. Anyone see the pattern here?

 

Oh, a monotheist. I and many others will argue against that second point as part of the definition (though it does get the bulk of my burnt sacrifices).

[+ReadyOrNot]

I think this brings up a valid question. Did geocaching, as we know it today, start with geocaching.com? Or was it Dave Umer's original stash? Or was it when they changed the name from GPS Stash Hunt to geocaching? Some would even argue that you could trace it's roots to the mountain men that shared thier season's supplies with thier trusted neighbors.

 

How long has letterboxing been around? I started out letterboxing and found a geocache by mistake, thus prompting a visit to geocaching.com. Since the topic is relative to the rules associated with using geocaching.com as a listing service, I'd have to frame the argument from that perspective.

[+ReadyOrNot]

Letterboxing is a branch on the geocaching tree. Or vice versa.

 

But letterboxing will NEVER be allowed to be a geocache. Let's not forget the ingredients:

 

1) GPS Coordinates

2) Listed on Geocaching.com

3) Container w/ logbook

 

Even if TPTB made #2 happen, they still lack #1. Virtuals lack #3. Pocket lint lacks #1 & #2. Events lack #3. Webcam caches lack #3. Anyone see the pattern here?

 

Oh, a monotheist. I and many others will argue against that second point as part of the definition (though it does get the bulk of my burnt sacrifices).

 

Interesting viewpoint. How is it that a NaviCache or TerraCache can be considered a geocache? A geocache is a cache listed on geocaching.com. The only viable argument that you could make is if the cache was listed using multiple listing services. But to call a cache that is only listed on NaviCache a Geocache doesn't make sense. Could you explain your thinking a little on this one?

 

*EDIT* Do those other website even call their caches "GeoCaches"?

Edited January 25, 2007 by ReadyOrNot

[+ReadyOrNot]

*Multiple Post*

Edited January 25, 2007 by ReadyOrNot

[+MountainMudbug]

Seems to me that in large part geocachers help killed virtuals...... by oversubmitting every (often-referenced) sneaker, historical marker sign, and rotting carcass in the woods.

When a good thing got out of hand, the honchos had to pull the plug. Perhaps it was just a matter of a sooner-or-later type of situation, but the community forced the elimination sooner by going over the top. Abusing the system by tyring to call everything "a virtual". Kinda like trying to call everything "a geocache" and logging it as such on the gc.com website, whether it really fits the gc.com website approval definition of gc.com geocache or not. Over-abusing the logging system can/will eventually have some sort of impact on the website (which is what it boils down to).

 

(Of course the lack of container and logbook were obviously another issue with the demise of virtuals, but that is aside from the site-abuse angle I'm addressing.)

 

Anyway that was part of the so-called "evolution" of geocaching that I wasn't and still am not too thrilled about, with the over to Waymarking, but I can see the need for it because things were apparently getting out of hand.

I can see the potential need for some sort of crackdown in the multi-logging issue, because it sure seems to me some sort of out-of-hand evolutionary mutation.

[Clan Riffster]

I gotta admit I was wrong in my assumptions when I first read the topic. I was sure Criminal would chime in, spewing his particular brand of vitriol by the 10th post. Maybe he couldn't get to a computer? OK, OK, back on topic:

 

I believe that this game, as it exists today, is the result of both ongoing creationism and ongoing evolution. When a player invents a new twist, and that twist is accepted by the community and the Geo Deities, that is successful evolution. When a player creates a twist that is stomped out of existence by the Geo Deities, that is an unsuccessful evolution. When Groundspeak develops a new phase of the game, that would be creationism.

[+Renegade Knight]

....I think this brings up a valid question. Did geocaching, as we know it today, start with geocaching.com? Or was it Dave Umer's original stash? Or was it when they changed the name from GPS Stash Hunt to geocaching? Some would even argue that you could trace it's roots to the mountain men that shared thier season's supplies with thier trusted neighbors.

 

Geocaching like activites have been around for a long time. Letterboxing for example IS virtually identical to geocaching in that you seek hidden things and leave your mark (sign, stamp, doesn't matter really).

 

Geocaching as we know it did evolve from Dave Ulmers first cache. It's like personal computers. There were computers before IBM came along, but computing as we know it evolved from the IBM PC. The right applicatino of a good idea. It wasn't if geocaching would come along it was what form would take the world by storm.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Interesting viewpoint. How is it that a NaviCache or TerraCache can be considered a geocache? A geocache is a cache listed on geocaching.com. The only viable argument that you could make is if the cache was listed using multiple listing services. But to call a cache that is only listed on NaviCache a Geocache doesn't make sense. Could you explain your thinking a little on this one?...

 

Geocaches were first listed in the newsgroups. With your logic how could a cache listed on geocaching.com be a cache if it's not listed where they started?

 

Geocaching.com, Terraching.org, Opencaching.de, geocaching.hu, navicache.com, gpsgames.org, and some ones that didn't make it were all offshoots of that orginal idea that started in the newsgroups.

 

I've taken to calling everthing caches. Geocache, Terracache, Navicache, are all variations of the same thing. A rose by another name.

[Dinoprophet]

*EDIT* Do those other website even call their caches "GeoCaches"?

Navicache.com does, all over their homepage (it appears the full name of the site is "Geocaching With Navicache"), as does Terracaching.net (it refers to "other geocaching sites" on its homepage).

 

And if you take GeoGenesis literally, the term was created long before the website. "At the time the site was launched there were 75 known caches in the world."

[+ReadyOrNot]

*EDIT* Do those other website even call their caches "GeoCaches"?

Navicache.com does, all over their homepage (it appears the full name of the site is "Geocaching With Navicache"), as does Terracaching.net (it refers to "other geocaching sites" on its homepage).

 

And if you take GeoGenesis literally, the term was created long before the website. "At the time the site was launched there were 75 known caches in the world."

 

That's good info to have. I've never really been to those other pages. Why would someone log a terracache or navicache on the geocaching.com website? The ingredients I listed were for a geocaching.com geocache. I stand by the ingredients even though we have a bit of a problem defining terms for this debate.

[Neos2]

The constant attempt to call us liars and cheats because we do something you don't like negates the value of the rest of your arguments that might contain some sense.

So it is your contention that someone who claims to have attended one event several times is being honest and accurate? ...

I've never seen anyone log:

I attended the event

I attended the event

I attended the event

I attended the event

 

I have seen them say:

event cache #1, too cute!

event cache # 3, never saw one like that before

event cache #4, located after walking past it three times!

 

Does it really matter which button they pushed with each log? How many times have we seen someone submit a DNF when they really found a cache, or only post a note? Pusing the wrong button doesn't change the fact that they found the geocache--the button just doesn't match up with the log.

 

Since a physical cache was found, why does this bother you so much, really?

[+briansnat]

I submit that this is incorrect.

 

It is my belief that Jeremy and a few powerful Reviewers killed them because they did not like them.

 

That is in no way natural selection.

 

You do realize that the whole Evolution versus Creation thing is just an analogy right? In the analogy, God=Jeremy/Groundspeak. You stated that Jeremy and a few reviewers (what would they be? Angels? -- okay, a bit thick) killed them. Let's ponder for a moment why geoGod wouldn't like the virtuals....

 

 

Not quite. God, the creator is Dave Ulmer.

 

Jeremy is kind of like the Pope. He made the rules, some people didn't like them and started their own religions (Navicache, Terracache and others). The Groundspeak staff is the College of Cardinals and the reviewers are the priests.

 

Me, I guess I'm just a lowly deacon.

[Trinity's Crew]

From wikipedia.org

An innuendo is a figure of speech which indicates an indirect or subtle, usually derogatory implication in expression; an insinuation.

 

And here all this time I thought innuendo was Italian for suppository.

Edited January 26, 2007 by Trinity's Crew

[+ReadyOrNot]

Does it really matter which button they pushed with each log? How many times have we seen someone submit a DNF when they really found a cache, or only post a note? Pusing the wrong button doesn't change the fact that they found the geocache--the button just doesn't match up with the log.

 

You are implying that they accidently pressed the wrong button. The cases I've seen indicate that they are very well aware of what they are doing. I myself have accidently pressed the "FOUND IT" button, but I didn't accidently press it 20 times.

 

As far as the answer to why it matters, why don't you read the thread.

[+ReadyOrNot]

Me, I guess I'm just a lowly deacon.

 

Dang! And I was hoping to see you in one of those cool hats!

 

[+...The Girl]

From wikipedia.org

An innuendo is a figure of speech which indicates an indirect or subtle, usually derogatory implication in expression; an insinuation.

 

And here all this time I thought innuendo was Italian for suppository.

It's actually a redneck term ...

"Hey, JoeBob! I jes' seen a bird fly innuendo!"

[Trinity's Crew]

From wikipedia.org

An innuendo is a figure of speech which indicates an indirect or subtle, usually derogatory implication in expression; an insinuation.

 

And here all this time I thought innuendo was Italian for suppository.

It's actually a redneck term ...

"Hey, JoeBob! I jes' seen a bird fly innuendo!"

 

Or...

 

Luigi: "Mama whatta you a gonna do with that?"

 

Mama: The doctor a says i gotta put it innuendo."

[Neos2]

Letterboxing is a branch on the geocaching tree. Or vice versa.

 

But letterboxing will NEVER be allowed to be a geocache. Let's not forget the ingredients:

 

1) GPS Coordinates

2) Listed on Geocaching.com

3) Container w/ logbook

Really? No letterboxes on gc?

[+Chuy!]

Ahhh, a topic that I can get behind.

 

Let me enlighten you my loyal Pastafarians:

 

In the beginning, there was matter, anti-matter and carbohydrates.

In my infinite wisdon I created the Earth and everything on it as you now know it.

 

My original disciples were pirates of course. To amuse them I banded together a few extra elements to create Tupperware and placed the first caches in the world for them to find. They did and everybody rejoiced and praised me - as they should have.

 

Later, Dr Atkins was conceived and brought forth his blasphomy upon us. He discovered these caches and made them widely know - and incited a witch-hunt for my followers resulting in a massacre of the pirates and replacement of my caches with lame micros. (As a side effect of killing so many pirates, the global temptertre has risen - see chart below for proof)

 

In summary, I created caching and the original cachers and I should have final say in how it elvolves.

If you are confused about what to do or how geocaching should evolve, just ask yourself: WWFSMD?

 

Can I get a RAmen?

 

- Spaghedeity

 

(*No pirates were harmed in the creation of this post)

 

FSM, I think you'd enjoy this cache.

[Neos2]

Does it really matter which button they pushed with each log? How many times have we seen someone submit a DNF when they really found a cache, or only post a note? Pusing the wrong button doesn't change the fact that they found the geocache--the button just doesn't match up with the log.

 

You are implying that they accidently pressed the wrong button.

No, I was implying nothing of the kind, sorry if you jumped to that conclusion.

The folks that deliberately post a "note" instead of a DNF aren't accidentally choosing it either.

[+Snoogans]

Seems to me that in large part geocachers help killed virtuals...... by oversubmitting every (often-referenced) sneaker, historical marker sign, and rotting carcass in the woods.

When a good thing got out of hand, the honchos had to pull the plug. Perhaps it was just a matter of a sooner-or-later type of situation, but the community forced the elimination sooner by going over the top. Abusing the system by tyring to call everything "a virtual". Kinda like trying to call everything "a geocache" and logging it as such on the gc.com website, whether it really fits the gc.com website approval definition of gc.com geocache or not. Over-abusing the logging system can/will eventually have some sort of impact on the website (which is what it boils down to).

 

(Of course the lack of container and logbook were obviously another issue with the demise of virtuals, but that is aside from the site-abuse angle I'm addressing.)

 

Anyway that was part of the so-called "evolution" of geocaching that I wasn't and still am not too thrilled about, with the over to Waymarking, but I can see the need for it because things were apparently getting out of hand.

I can see the potential need for some sort of crackdown in the multi-logging issue, because it sure seems to me some sort of out-of-hand evolutionary mutation.

 

 

I always pay close attention to those I've often disagreed with, because I usually learn something from them sooner or later.

 

 

Something like this post should have been made early in the pocket cache thread. The OP would have been nice. It's a view I can respect because it doesn't outright set a group of people blindly aside as liars or cheats. It simply addresses a percieved problem.

 

 

Pay attention to the way this was worded those of you who are inclined to down others to set yourself apart from a practice you disagree with. There's nothing in it that I at least can perceive as an attack and I find myself even more infavor of a leveling of the playing field than I was before it was presented in that light.

 

 

Still firmly on the fence though. *lifts toe*

[+Harry Dolphin]

Hmm... Evolution vs Creationism in the same thread? I usually try to avoid the religion based threads...

Myself, I'd compare Virtuals and Locationlesses to the panda bear or the fresh water dolphin. They're very nice critters. They have their own niches in the world. Unfortunately, they're doomed to extinction, despite the best efforts of mankind to keep them extant. (Mankind being the entity that also dooms them to extinction.)

The guard rail micro. I'll compare that to purple loosestrife or hemlock wooly adelgid. When kept in check, they're not bad. But with no checks, they tend to run rampant, and take over the world. The Japanese ladybug keeps hemlock wooly adelgid in check in Japan. How can we keep the guard rail micro under check? Import Japanese lady bugs?

Vacation caches were an offshoot doomed to early extinction.

The evolution of geocaching is an interesting subject to follow. Look at the early, archived caches in your area, and see what the early cache hiders tried to do! (And sometimes got away with!) Many doomed evolutionary offshoots here. (Very interesting early local cacher with no respect for anything.) Hidden on the pedestrian walkway on the major bridge? Buried in the sand dune. In an electrical outlet box? Poor maintenance history. Six or seven never found or logged? Behind fences? But some great places to visit!

[+Sagefox]

Seems to me that in large part geocachers help killed virtuals...... by oversubmitting every (often-referenced) sneaker, historical marker sign, and rotting carcass in the woods.

When a good thing got out of hand, the honchos had to pull the plug...

 

Yep. I agree with that.

[+sun-moon-starz]

I would like to say that I was thinking about Geocaching as an institution in the Sociological sense. See this definition:

 

Institution WIKI

 

The thread topic made me think of the institution of religion and I enjoyed some analogous free-association between geocaching and religion.

 

We all agree that Geocaching must some rules attached to keep it civilized. The actual interpretation of the rules and the factions on one side or the other are essentially the same in their basic idealogy but they love to get into large schisms splitting hairs over what is right.

 

Kinda like the church splitting into different sects fighting over whether to say A-men or Aaaah-men. The basic beliefs are the same, but we as humans are going to get wrapped up in having to be right and someone else having to be wrong.

 

I think that Geocaching is evolving just fine. Since its' creation we have seen the advent of Waymarking, CITO, & I've heard a little bit about the new game Seattle has in the works that has been alluded to on this thread. We have seen locationless come & go, virtuals changed to waymarks and pocket caches nixed. I have hidden good and not-so-good caches, I have found both types as well. I have seen newbies learn from the ground up what a GPSr is and how to use it for geocaching.

 

I have hosted some geocaching events at my home and hidden temporary caches -with coordinates- on my property for cachers to find. I did this in an effort to teach people how to use the GPSr correctly and how to search for some different types of containers in a smaller, more controlled environment. These are very kid and newbie friendly - so if it helps to get more people interested in caching, why do some people want to scream and point and say LIARS! CHEATERS! when cachers log their multiple event finds?

 

If it really isn't about the numbers, why do people get so crazy over them? If allowing one log per geocache listing would end some of the ANGST then so be it, let TPTB do it and lets get back to finding some caches!

 

I think the important thing to remember is that we are fortunate have the ability to play the game that we want to - if I want to spend a day doing a 5 mile hike to find one special cache, attending an event, or doing urban park & grabs, that is my choice. Just because someone tells me that my way is less superior doesn't make me up and quit or make me want to sit and argue on the forums about it.

 

Is it spring yet? I'm ready to cache. Thanks for the thread Snoog, it has been funny. There is caching to be done and we are burning daylight with this crazy detailed dissection.

[+ReadyOrNot]

Really? No letterboxes on gc?

 

A letterbox is not allowed on the site, because a letterbox does not contain GPS coordinates. If someone posts some variation that contains coordinates, I'm sure the reviewers wouldn't mind posting it. Again, it's all about the ingredients. If an ingredient is missing it will not be listed.

 

Can you give me an example of a letterbox that is allowed on the geocaching.com website? You posted a nice picture of a map, but the map didn't have any letterboxes that I could see. Can you please be clear about what you are trying to prove.

 

*EDIT* They may allow some that were grandfathered like the virtuals or webcams, but I guarantee they will not be approved today.

Edited January 26, 2007 by ReadyOrNot

[Pto]

The constant attempt to call us liars and cheats because we do something you don't like negates the value of the rest of your arguments that might contain some sense.

<snip>To select Attended the second time and subsequent times, you have to lie.

If you lie, you ARE a liar.

 

Well, I asked in the other thread, just before it was closed-without an answer - So I will pose this question again to see if you've come up with an answer yet:

 

Tell me who exactly is a cacher "lying to" by logging a mutliple attends to an event?

Its THEIR find/attend count. (so, it would seem they are lying to themselves)

Unless (as Drat19 pointed out earlier) that person tries to use thier stats as some kind of comparison to others, than again, Who is being "lied to" ?

 

And please dont bring up cheating on your wife, lying on your drivers license, being kidnapped or any other far fetched "what if" you can dream up- Its a simple question with a very simple answer-

 

I don't know how you can see anything accurately with such a big chip on your shoulder...

 

Now THAT is funny! Time to clean the Mt Dew off my keyboard before it glues itself together. . . .

[Moun10Bike]

A letterbox is not allowed on the site, because a letterbox does not contain GPS coordinates. If someone posts some variation that contains coordinates, I'm sure the reviewers wouldn't mind posting it. Again, it's all about the ingredients. If an ingredient is missing it will not be listed.

 

That is correct. Geocaching.com will post letterbox hybrids, but not "pure" letterboxes. A letterbox hybrid has all of the features of a pure letterbox - a stamp, clues to lead the seeker to the container, possibly even a crosslisting on a letterbox site - but must also follow the geocache rule of involving precise GPS coordinates. There are of course examples where these rules not followed, but those can be chalked up as mistakes.

[Dinoprophet]

Really? No letterboxes on gc?

 

A letterbox is not allowed on the site, because a letterbox does not contain GPS coordinates. If someone posts some variation that contains coordinates, I'm sure the reviewers wouldn't mind posting it. Again, it's all about the ingredients. If an ingredient is missing it will not be listed.

 

Can you give me an example of a letterbox that is allowed on the geocaching.com website? You posted a nice picture of a map, but the map didn't have any letterboxes that I could see. Can you please be clear about what you are trying to prove.

 

*EDIT* They may allow some that were grandfathered like the virtuals or webcams, but I guarantee they will not be approved today.

Not only will a reviewer not mind posting it, it has its own cache type. But in the strictest sense, you're right, not any letterbox will be listed here. A letterbox that uses coordinates -- one of your ingredients -- will be. Though most of the hybrids I've done only give coordinates for parking. An instance where the game evolved (I'm not sure how necessary this branch was -- I think puzzles would pretty much have covered them).

Edited January 26, 2007 by Dinoprophet

[+ReadyOrNot]

Tell me who exactly is a cacher "lying to" by logging a mutliple attends to an event?

 

Themselves, other cachers, Groundspeak.

[+ReadyOrNot]

(I'm not sure how necessary this branch was -- I think puzzles would pretty much have covered them).

 

Well, the whole stamp thing makes it quite unique. I personally wish there were more letterbox hybrids on the site, because they are very challenging to find. Sorry about the confusion with the terms I was using. When I mentioned letterboxes, I was specifically referring to traditional letterboxes, not the hybrids.

[+Snoogans]

Tell me who exactly is a cacher "lying to" by logging a mutliple attends to an event?

 

Themselves, other cachers, Groundspeak.

 

 

Please DON'T speak for me. I don't consider how another person justifies their stats to themselves as dishonest.

 

 

I've said this before and I'll say it again, I will not hold the ruler I measure up to, to anyone else. Furthermore, if anyone tries to hold their ruler up to me, I'll likely break it and jab 'em with the pointy ends.

[+ReadyOrNot]

Please DON'T speak for me. I don't consider how another person justifies their stats to themselves as dishonest.

 

I went over my post several times and the word "Snoogans" wasn't in there. Wasn't speaking for you. I'm assuming there must be at least one other cacher in the world that agrees with me. I didn't say "ALL CACHERS' did I?

[+mgbmusic]

Having not read all the posts here, I'm lazy, so I'll just chime in -

 

I don't care about the fence. To me, a hunt is a hunt. Some are hard. Some not. Everything in life is going to have purists, from Lamp-post hating cachers, to male-dominated, well everything, to people who hate Italian restaurants because the sauce is never quite right. I fear change as much as the next guy, but if it doesn't directly affect me, then have fun with it. If someone wants to cheat, just to run up the numbers and look impressive at events, fine. Whatever. If people want to plant 1 micro every 529 feet, just so someone else can rack up 7,000 finds in one day, more power to them. Heck, anyone who complains about drive up micros but goes to the McDonalds drive thru to me is somewhat of a hypocrite. Not that I really give a crap, but...

 

I'll hunt anything that's relatively close to where I am. Some hunts I'll enjoy more than others. But I always enjoy the experience. I enjoy the forums - heated as they may become. I enjoyed the event I attended and hope to enjoy more for the people.

 

So I guess I just hopped the fence, and grabbed the micro hiding in the cap on the way over.

 

--MGb

[+Snoogans]

Please DON'T speak for me. I don't consider how another person justifies their stats to themselves as dishonest.

 

I went over my post several times and the word "Snoogans" wasn't in there. Wasn't speaking for you. I'm assuming there must be at least one other cacher in the world that agrees with me. I didn't say "ALL CACHERS' did I?

 

 

Maybe you should have added a qualifier. I.E. SOME other cachers.

 

 

The other way paints too broad a picture. I'm not a mind reader.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

... but I guarantee they will not be approved today.

Interesting word choice. You alluded earlier in this thread to having access to gc's source code, and now you are 'guaranteeing' something won't be approved by them.

 

In a community where anonymity is the order of the day we really don't know if someone speaks with authority or just forcefulness.

 

It's hard to know what voices should be listened to.

 

So, are your allusions to some sort of inside role real?

 

If so I will pay more attention, if not then you shouldn't intimate that you have access and certitude that you don't have.