To ban or not to ban LPC's

[+KBI]

Sorry if I misinterepted your post but refering to it as whining, make it feel WRONG to bring it up.

I've read that three times, but I just can't figure out what you're trying to say there. Guess I need some coffee.

Remember saying something about whining and quoting me? You must not be very good at puzzles caches that was a 1/1.

I really am curious what you were trying to say there. I promise. I just can't figure out the grammar. Like I said, I'm sure its just me.

 

No, I don't like the current path of change. I'm more of a "let's think hard about where this going to put us in five years" type of person. At the current rate of growth there's going to come a time where all dense urban areas are going to have a geocache hidden every five hundred feet. If you think this is acceptable then I suppose we've reached a point where we can agree to disagree.

I'm still having trouble understanding exactly what it is you dislike and want to change. Earlier we were talking quality/creativity, but now you're talking about cache density.

 

To answer your implied question: Change your number from 500' to 524 feet, and my answer is: Yes, I think that's acceptable. Groundspeak thinks it's acceptable. As I recall, they also say they reserve the right to control cache density in certain areas by going beyond the 0.1-mile rule. I'm fine with that too. Groundspeak does a pretty good job policing that kind of stuff via its staff of volunteer reviewers.

 

They also do a pretty good job staying out of creativity issues, which, in my opinion, is as it should be.

 

Let's be clear: Are you calling for some kind of cache quality enforcement to be imposed across the board, or aren't you?

I would propose that enforcing the ones in place would be a good start. Be clear: Where do you stand on this issue KBI?

By "ones" I assume you mean "rules." And as far as I know there are currently no rules in place, as you imply, which address the quality or creativity of a cache hide. Which "ones" do you mean?

 

Where do I stand? I'll repeat what I said above: Groundspeak does a pretty good job staying out of creativity issues, which, in my opinion, is as it should be.

 

If that doesn't work, then yes perhaps stricter guidelines or more specific rules should be considered at. One thing place I would start is to reconsider whether "the one size fits all guidelines" for geocaches works. I don't think the LPC and the ammo box in the woods are the same animal.

I agree; they’re not the same animal. Which "one size fits all guidelines" do you mean? Not sure what you're getting at here.

 

You said:

The truth is there is only one group of people that possesses the power to make wholesale changes like this. That would be the Geocachers themselves.

 

As long as there's people that want to find LPCs and PLCs and those caches continue to collect massive amounts of log entires, this is not going to happen in the current GC.com culture. This is about having the will to have a real defintion for a "cache quality" and then finding a way to enforce it.

That sounds pretty clear to me. You're not satisfied with the fact that you have the power to pick and choose the caching experiences you prefer. You clearly want to impose your preference on everybody.

 

Why?

We are speaking on two different levels.

 

I think you are focusing alot on yourself and are concerned that someone is going impose rules that take away the micro caches you want to hunt. You are basically having a discussion on micro level, no pun intended.

I didn't say anything about micros.

[+KBI]

On the other hand, I am speaking about a global direction of geocaching on a macro level. Like Jrr said, we don't even have any LPCs in Hawaii. We have some ingenious micros that I love hunting.

Then what's the problem? Why, then, do you feel the need to control others' behavior? If others are out there enjoying something else you don't happen to prefer, something that isn't even in your neighborhood, than why can't you leave them alone?

 

In sum I see GC.com as a good thing that's in need of a good tweak. You see it as something that is fine the way it is. Some of this status quo you enjoy is only possible because GC.com has evolved into a pretty nice little cache (pun intended) cow is blantantly ignoring the rules that are currently in place. Am I correct in assuming that this is okay with you?

If you're referring to the permission thing, then I'll ask you the same thing I asked Clan Riffster: Are you now suggesting that you would be happy to tolerate the types of caches you currently dislike, if only the owners of such hides could provide indisputable and explicit proof of permission?

 

Hide permission, cache density, cache size, hide creativity. You've hit on a LOT of different elements so far here. Is there anything else bothering you about the way others play the game?

 

I've got a GREAT idea KBI. Let's both get off our okoles (Hawaiian for what you are sitting on) get into our cars, drive past Wally World, and find ourselves a great cache! Instead of a McToy.. let's put something REALLY cool in there. While we are there let's change out every zip lock and clean the container out. Just for good measure, let's hide it back better than we found it and pick up all the trash on the way back.

 

After we do all that, let's both do a lil cache dance and shake the earth.

 

Deal?

Deal. Today, that sounds great.

 

Sometimes that’s exactly what I prefer to do. Sounds good! I’ll bring the snacks.

 

Other times, however, I’m very happy with a simple drive-by that I can enjoy as part of an otherwise mundane round of errands on a busy day.

 

And then there are those frequent times when I find myself in a hotel with no rental car and several hours to kill, and I’m EXTREMELY grateful to have ANY geocache within walking distance of the place where I would have instead been lying around on my okole, in my underwear, watching reruns.

 

So you don’t like finding caches in lamp posts or in parking lots. Fine. There are LOTS of us, however, who sometimes ENJOY those very caches you DESPISE. Why must you try to change the game to fit your arbitrary taste? Why begrudge us our fun? Those caches are so easy to avoid -- why not just avoid them?

 

Whatever happened to ‘live and let live?’

You are confusing me with someone else, I do not DESPISE micros. I said that GC.com should take a good hard look at what is happening and follow the rules they have in place now. Why do you insist on taking what I say and twisting it around like that?

I don't mean to be combative -- really -- but I'm not the one who is confused or twisting words. I did not say that you DESPISE micros. I did not mean to imply that you DESPISE micros. Nowhere in that big chunk of rambling KBI babble you quoted did I use the word "micro." I babble on and on, but I choose my words carefully.

 

It's obvious that there is something out there you strongly dislike. I haven't yet been able to pin down what that is, exactly, but it's really beside the point. What you have made clear, and what really bugs me, is that you feel the need to call for across-the-board wholesale changes to the game -- new rules, and strong enforcement of those rules -- just to "tweak" the game and make all of geocaching conform to the arbitrarily narrow style that you happen to enjoy -- whatever that style happens to be.

 

Again, if I'm wrong about any of that, please correct me.

 

I'm honestly trying to understand your position.

 

With the 'live and let live' question, and in the paragraph before it, I asked what I thought were some very reasonable questions.

 

You chose not to answer any of them.

[+KBI]

Why is that funny?

Oh, the irony....

I'll assume by that response that you cannot, in fact, name anyone who "shouts down those who give even the slightest hint that folks should apply a bit of brain power to their hides"

 

Is there something you want to say, but for some reason you're afraid to say it?

 

Please, C.R., you know very well this is exactly the kind of stuff that gets these threads shut down. I'd really like to debate this topic. I'd like to debate LPC caches with you, if you're interested. If you're not interested in discussing LPC caches, then please don't cause the thread to get locked while others are trying to talk about this.

[Clan Riffster]

Is there something you want to say, but for some reason you're afraid to say it?

Yeah, that's it. I've always been shy.

[Mr.Yuck]

WallMart corporate would roll out the red carpet for caches if they though there was money in it for them to make. Since there is, it's not an impossible scenario. I often end my cache day on a urban micro and then go buy some grub and a drink.

 

Whatever happened to Track in the box going to Wal-Mart corporate to "turn in" geocachers? ...

 

He probably got the same reaction that you and Too Talll John think cachers would get. It's all in your approach. Some people have a better approach than others. Others know they don't have a great approach and use more discression. Most really don't seem to understand the concept.

 

Yeah, I'd probably go to the Wally World manager hoping he'd tell me no.

 

Hey RK, speaking of TITB, how'd ya' miss this one over at Navicache?

[+Outspoken1]

While some cachers here have the very strong opinion that LPC are lame, I have noticed (at least in my area of the country), that LPC are not used that often. When they are used, it is because there really is not another valid location to leave a cache. In my brief caching career I've found some caches that were really lame, some that were terrific hides, some that were humorous and others that were gross or scary. But none of those caches killed me or caused permanent psychological harm. Remember, this is a volunteer sport. Without everyone else participating to place caches, we other cachers would have nothing to find.

 

Have fun, everyone!

Outspoken1

[+cimawr]

Briansnat's post in another thread made me think: So the access panel hide does exist?

 

My second LPC hunt included me digging out a screwdriver and opening up the access panel until I came to my senses .. DNF. This is yet another reason to avoid any type of cache that can be misconstrued and private property being tampered with. Another case in point was my first LPC hunt at a state prison nonetheless. I proceded to bypass the lamp post and go straight for the sprinkler head. When it proved obvious that it WAS a sprinkler head I couldn't get the darn thing back together, so I promptly took my leave. ... The moral to the story: Think before you hide urban micros.

Golly. Do you always tear up the area that you are searching in?

 

I've found a few caches and have never felt the need to take a screwdriver to any piece of equipment. I've also found a few sprinkler head caches. They were all obvious. A quick inspection (without disassembly) determines whether a sprinkler head is real or fake.

 

For some reason, everyone is quick to read your post and jump on the band wagon to ban LPMs. However, you didn't know that either of those caches were LPMs. In fact, you didn't check to see if they were LPMs.

 

The real moral of the story is that we should all use our heads when looking for a cache and not do damage to the area. This is true whether you are looking for a cache in the woods or in the asphalt jungle.

 

What sbell said.

 

Sorry, cache-n-dash, but your post didn't make me think "Gosh, perhaps we should ban caches where somebody might think s/he needs a screwdriver, and mistakenly take apart or destroy private property"; it made me think "Geez, why on earth would anyone take out a screwdriver and do that in the first place??"

 

Even if the caches HAD been hidden where you thought they were, IMO a person exercising common sense and common courtesy** would have refrained from taking apart items such as you describe.

 

**In reference to which, I shall quote my grandmother: "Common sense ain't".

Edited February 11, 2007 by cimawr

[+cimawr]

 

The hint said: "Lift and look...not to hard miss." I feel I did the responsible thing and reported potential problems with this hide. And apparently I'm not alone in thinking this. Posters in this very thread seem dumbfounded that a cache at a Correctional Institute would even exist. So, is it the hiders fault or the finders?

 

Erm.... sorry, again, but I'm not quite understanding how "lift and look, not hard to miss" translates into "take out a screwdriver and disassemble safety equipment on private property".

 

I'm also really not understanding how anyone could read numerous logs saying a cache was easy to find, and leap to the conclusion that an easy find would involve - again - getting out tools and disassembling safety equipment.

[+cimawr]

I don't lighten up if someone plays down the what happened those times. You probably never spoke to someone in person, who survived "it". ...

Now who doesn't know what they're talking about?

 

I never met my maternal grandfather because he died on D-Day. My father-in-law served in Europe and was fortunate to make it back home in one piece.

 

Apologies, sbell, but I believe you're the one a bit off base with this.

 

I don't believe he was referring to speaking to someone who survived WWII, nor to WWII in general; rather, when he said "it", he was referring to the Holocaust and/or Nazi concentration camps - which is what the quote in question refers to.

 

My father is a WWII vet; but growing up with him did not make me personally aware of the reality of the Holocaust.... learning about it in school is not even *remotely* the same as knowing people who directly survived the death camps, or who escaped but lost most of their families - which I did not experience until I was in high school and a bit later.

Have you ever seen a Nazi ID number tattooed on someone's arm, or worked on a day-to-day basis with someone who escaped (he managed to jump out the tiny window of a death train)- and was the only member of his immediate family to live?

 

I have, and I'm sorry, but I have to agree with the OP that geocaching - a game played for fun - does not exactly equate to the sort of situation the quote refers to.

[+DrAwKwArD]

Erm.... sorry, again, but I'm not quite understanding how "lift and look, not hard to miss" translates into "take out a screwdriver and disassemble safety equipment on private property".

 

I'm also really not understanding how anyone could read numerous logs saying a cache was easy to find, and leap to the conclusion that an easy find would involve - again - getting out tools and disassembling safety equipment.

I came down with the flu shortly after my last posting to this thread, so I've only been able to read a few of the latest postings. And I must say, there's some interesting comments from coming from all sides of the debate. Boy, I wish I felt better so I could join in.

 

Two comments, though, I feel I must respond to. cimawr, you're not understanding because you're confusing my first two LPC hunts. The first lamp post hide according to this thread actually was hidden in the access panel. Why there? Perhaps the hider didn't know you could simply lift the skirt, who knows? I obviously thought the same thing. So, while the odds of it being in the panel were low, I feel like I gave it a fair try based on my knowledge of the area.

 

Secondly, the hint you're referring to was not for this cache. It was the LPC that was at the entrance of a Correctional Institution. Lift and look.. could be a sprinkler head too. And as for common sense? Yes, I've learned a lot in 2 1/2 years and close to 300 finds. Another thing I've learned, micros just aren't worth getting all worked up about. And if it looks like a cache placed without permission, it probably is. At least this goes for my corner of the world.

[+cimawr]

 

Secondly, the hint you're referring to was not for this cache. It was the LPC that was at the entrance of a Correctional Institution. Lift and look.. could be a sprinkler head too. And as for common sense? Yes, I've learned a lot in 2 1/2 years and close to 300 finds. Another thing I've learned, micros just aren't worth getting all worked up about. And if it looks like a cache placed without permission, it probably is. At least this goes for my corner of the world.

 

No, I'm not confusing the two caches.

My entire post is referring to your destruction of private property at the prison; again, sorry, but I find it astonishing that anyone - no matter how new to the game - could think that the clue in question translates to "get out tools and take apart safety equipment".

Sorry, but "Lift and look", to me, simply does not translate to "take apart with tools".

 

WRT common sense and time spent caching.... I've been caching for six months, but had I been caching for ONE DAY, I would never have taken out a screwdriver and disassembled a working sprinkler head, regardless of its location - just as, when I had been caching one week, I walked away from a cache that appeared to require unscrewing a small box on a light pole, and would have walked away from one that required unscrewing an access panel.

 

And WRT hiding OR seeking a cache on prison grounds, lack of common sense on the part of the cache hider does not excuse lack of common sense on the part of the cache seeker.

[+KBI]

Have you ever seen a Nazi ID number tattooed on someone's arm, or worked on a day-to-day basis with someone who escaped (he managed to jump out the tiny window of a death train)- and was the only member of his immediate family to live?

 

I have, and I'm sorry, but I have to agree with the OP that geocaching - a game played for fun - does not exactly equate to the sort of situation the quote refers to.

Nobody has tried to equate geocaching with genocide in this thread, at least not that I can tell.

 

The concept: Don't wait until they come for your own personal group before you decide to fight the oppression -- else it might be too late for everybody. All oppression is bad and should be squelched at the earliest sign, no matter who the first victims are.

 

I don't think it does any dishonor to those who suffered in the holocaust when someone applies that hard-learned lesson to modern affairs, no matter how mundane those affairs may be. Quite the contrary, in fact.

 

I think the current drive to stamp out 'less-than-worthy' or 'second class' geocaches is a perfect analogy, and I think it would honor the victims of the holocaust if we could demonstrate that we have learned the lesson for which they paid such a dear price: the lesson that tolerance, as a fundamental principle in everything we do, is critical to the very survival of our civilization.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

It is interesting to watch the deviation in habits and thinking in these threads.

 

Here, the intelligence, common sense and behavior of anyone who would use a screwdriver is called into question, if not outright ridiculed.

 

Yet, another fairly recent thread appears to validate the use of screwdrivers to hide / access caches!

 

How this thread, or even a quote, leads us to geopolitik and genocide is beyond me.

 

Sure, folks will try to promote their personal agenda, we all do.

 

My grandmother often said something that was a running joke but had a strong bit of truth behind it... "The world would be a much better place if folks would just do things my way!"

 

That does not lead to oppression or repression... unless y'all actually DO start doing things my way!

[+Team GeoBlast]

On the other hand, I am speaking about a global direction of geocaching on a macro level. Like Jrr said, we don't even have any LPCs in Hawaii. We have some ingenious micros that I love hunting.

 

Then what's the problem? Why, then, do you feel the need to control others' behavior? If others are out there enjoying something else you don't happen to prefer, something that isn't even in your neighborhood, than why can't you leave them alone?

 

I don't think a free for all will last for as long as we all want it to. That's the problem I see.

 

Again, you are talking about your neighborhood and the things that are good for KBI. I am talking about every city in the US and the general direction of GC.com. I am concerned about the overall direction of GC.com (which seems to wig you out pretty good for some reason) and somehow that equates to me trying to take something away from you and others. Whether you accept it or not, Gc.com does control how the game is played and I feel that is their responsibility. They say you can't bury a cache, promote a commerical enterprise, and so on. They have to or it is will get out of control. I personally see a real possiblity of that. You obviously don't, can we agree on that?

 

In sum I see GC.com as a good thing that's in need of a good tweak. You see it as something that is fine the way it is. Some of this status quo you enjoy is only possible because GC.com has evolved into a pretty nice little cache (pun intended) cow is blantantly ignoring the rules that are currently in place. Am I correct in assuming that this is okay with you?

 

If you're referring to the permission thing, then I'll ask you the same thing I asked Clan Riffster: Are you now suggesting that you would be happy to tolerate the types of caches you currently dislike, if only the owners of such hides could provide indisputable and explicit proof of permission?

 

Absolutely yes. I hope that answered your question clearly enough. Now feel free to answer one of my questions at any time here KBI. Am I correct that it is your position that a Wally World hide should be treated exactly the same as the cache tucked 5 miles back in the forest? How many LPC and PLCs fit into the current established guidelines?

 

Hide permission, cache density, cache size, hide creativity. You've hit on a LOT of different elements so far here. Is there anything else bothering you about the way others play the game?

 

Let me add another thing to your list of things that I don't like. People that insist on arguing about semantics and being so combative in internet forums to such a degree that the conversation goes nowhere. I'm new to this forum but it seems to me that you were already pretty defensive when I found you. I'm sorry for every battle you had to fight before you made this into another one.

 

I like Geocaching and don't despise anything about it, please stop going that direction. Yes, I think it could be better and I also think some current trends are indeed troubling and some change is needed. See, when I care about something I want it to be the best it can be and improved on areas that . Further, I believe strongly that if GC.com doesn't fix it someone will come along and do it better. It's my fear if that happens that all of the people that share the same concerns that I do about the growing number of LPC PLC caches will imgrate to the better mousetrap when it comes around. Then you'll be all alone in Wally World.

 

KBI. I'm dropping the gloves, see if this is within you to do the same. Let's have a discussion. Stop trying to trip me up or twist my words around. I've told you what I think to the best of my ability. Now, what do you think or do you want ask me more about clarifying what I think?

 

I've got a GREAT idea KBI. Let's both get off our okoles (Hawaiian for what you are sitting on) get into our cars, drive past Wally World, and find ourselves a great cache! Instead of a McToy.. let's put something REALLY cool in there. While we are there let's change out every zip lock and clean the container out. Just for good measure, let's hide it back better than we found it and pick up all the trash on the way back.

 

After we do all that, let's both do a lil cache dance and shake the earth.

 

Deal?

Deal. Today, that sounds great.

 

Sometimes that’s exactly what I prefer to do. Sounds good! I’ll bring the snacks.

 

Other times, however, I’m very happy with a simple drive-by that I can enjoy as part of an otherwise mundane round of errands on a busy day.

 

And then there are those frequent times when I find myself in a hotel with no rental car and several hours to kill, and I’m EXTREMELY grateful to have ANY geocache within walking distance of the place where I would have instead been lying around on my okole, in my underwear, watching reruns.

 

So you don’t like finding caches in lamp posts or in parking lots. Fine.

 

No, not fine. I never said that.

 

There are LOTS of us, however, who sometimes ENJOY those very caches you DESPISE.

 

I'm glad you do and so do I when I travel.

 

Why must you try to change the game to fit your arbitrary taste?

 

I'm not sure how else to put this but I'm not the only one that feels this way. Arbitrary is your word. I'm not sure who wronged you in the past and said they wanted to take something away but I never said that was something I was in favor of.

 

Why begrudge us our fun?

 

You mean having a cache on every corner kinda fun? I think it's a matter of time where this is going to cause big problems. Try to think past your own fun for a moment. That is what I am trying to do.

 

Those caches are so easy to avoid -- why not just avoid them?

 

Sigh.

 

I don't have to. I don't have them where I live. For me, at least, I am not having a conversation about ME. How many times do I have to say that I am concerned about the OVERALL direction of GC.com and that goes for every city that is getting saturated with LPCs.

 

Whatever happened to ‘live and let live?’

 

I suppose this is where we part. You think that it's okay to populate very inch of space with a "quick and easy" hide. While it hasn't blown up on GC.com, yet. I don't think things can continue like this.

 

You are confusing me with someone else, I do not DESPISE micros. I said that GC.com should take a good hard look at what is happening and follow the rules they have in place now. Why do you insist on taking what I say and twisting it around like that?

 

I don't mean to be combative -- really --

 

You are not being honest.

 

but I'm not the one who is confused or twisting words. I did not say that you DESPISE micros. I did not mean to imply that you DESPISE micros. Nowhere in that big chunk of rambling KBI babble you quoted did I use the word "micro." I babble on and on, but I choose my words carefully.

 

LPCs and PLCs imply micros. That's the type of caches we were discussing, right? If you want to make this about semantics, then I'm taking my ball and going home.

 

It's obvious that there is something out there you strongly dislike. I haven't yet been able to pin down what that is, exactly, but it's really beside the point. What you have made clear, and what really bugs me, is that you feel the need to call for across-the-board wholesale changes to the game -- new rules, and strong enforcement of those rules -- just to "tweak" the game and make all of geocaching conform to the arbitrarily narrow style that you happen to enjoy -- whatever that style happens to be.

 

Again, if I'm wrong about any of that, please correct me.

 

I've done my best to be clear and I am sorry I'm not getting the job done for you. In one sentence, my position is that geocaching needs to be changed or in the long run there is going to be problems. While I have a list of things that I would change, none of those changes really effect how I play the game as you seem to want to imply. They would just enhance (in my own opinion) the quality and longevity of the game

 

You don't agree? That's cool, it really is. Sorry that bugs so much.

 

I'm honestly trying to understand your position.

 

With the 'live and let live' question, and in the paragraph before it, I asked what I thought were some very reasonable questions.

 

You chose not to answer any of them.

 

I've addressed everything that I could feret out. I am honestly sorry that we don't agree. I'm willing to say that it doesn't make a bad person and you have a right to your own opinion. I'd be happy to hear what you think but if you want to continue to try and twist around my words, I think I will go find a cache instead. .

 

 

 

[+Team GeoBlast]

Why is that funny?

Oh, the irony....

I'll assume by that response that you cannot, in fact, name anyone who "shouts down those who give even the slightest hint that folks should apply a bit of brain power to their hides"

 

Is there something you want to say, but for some reason you're afraid to say it?

 

Please, C.R., you know very well this is exactly the kind of stuff that gets these threads shut down. I'd really like to debate this topic. I'd like to debate LPC caches with you, if you're interested. If you're not interested in discussing LPC caches, then please don't cause the thread to get locked while others are trying to talk about this.

 

Why do I think that you've had a hand in shutting down a thread or two yourself KBI?

[+DrAwKwArD]

No, I'm not confusing the two caches.

My entire post is referring to your destruction of private property at the prison; again, sorry, but I find it astonishing that anyone - no matter how new to the game - could think that the clue in question translates to "get out tools and take apart safety equipment".

Sorry, but "Lift and look", to me, simply does not translate to "take apart with tools".

 

WRT common sense and time spent caching....

 

And WRT hiding OR seeking a cache on prison grounds, lack of common sense on the part of the cache hider does not excuse lack of common sense on the part of the cache seeker.

WRT?

 

Again, the screwdriver WAS NOT USED in any way at the cache you are referring to. Several days before searching for this cache I ran across sprinkler head geocaching containers selling on ebay. And if you still think I'm nuts for unscrewing the sprinkler head, scroll up.

I've been caching for six months, but had I been caching for ONE DAY, I would never have taken out a screwdriver and disassembled a working sprinkler head, regardless of its location - just as, when I had been caching one week, I walked away from a cache that appeared to require unscrewing a small box on a light pole, and would have walked away from one that required unscrewing an access panel.

Sounds like personal preference to me. You probably also live in a fairly saturated area. I get a new cache near me about once every 4-6 months. Am I going to drive there just to say, "Ah shucks, there's a geocaching logo on this fake electric box, but it requires unscrewing.. guess I'll bag it." I don't think so.

[+sbell111]

... I have, and I'm sorry, but I have to agree with the OP that geocaching - a game played for fun - does not exactly equate to the sort of situation the quote refers to.

I did a poor job of explaining my feelings before, I guess. I agree that some people's attempts to eliminate some types of geocache hides do not compare with the Holocaust. However, no one was actually comparing the two, except for GermanSailor. The bit of verbiage that he had issue with was tweaked from a quote regarding the Holocaust, but sufficiently altered to be clearly about geocaching. In my opinion, its use was merely a way to introduce the 'slippery slope' argument. I refuse to accept that no one can use verbiage that could serve to remind anyone of the evil that was (if for no other reason than that by remembering it, we help ensure that it won't happen again).

[+sbell111]

I've been caching for six months, but had I been caching for ONE DAY, I would never have taken out a screwdriver and disassembled a working sprinkler head, regardless of its location - just as, when I had been caching one week, I walked away from a cache that appeared to require unscrewing a small box on a light pole, and would have walked away from one that required unscrewing an access panel.

Sounds like personal preference to me. You probably also live in a fairly saturated area. I get a new cache near me about once every 4-6 months. Am I going to drive there just to say, "Ah shucks, there's a geocaching logo on this fake electric box, but it requires unscrewing.. guess I'll bag it." I don't think so.

There are two problems with that. First, your argument appears to suggest that you will do anything to find a cache, whether right or wrong. After all, you drove a long way. Second, you don't know that the cache is in the electrical box that you are about to disassemble unless you have already determined that it is fake. If you have made that determination, you should certainly go for it. However, in your two example caches, you never made that determination. Honestly, I'm beginning to be concerned for your safety.

[+DrAwKwArD]

There are two problems with that. First, your argument appears to suggest that you will do anything to find a cache, whether right or wrong. After all, you drove a long way. Second, you don't know that the cache is in the electrical box that you are about to disassemble unless you have already determined that it is fake. If you have made that determination, you should certainly go for it. However, in your two example caches, you never made that determination. Honestly, I'm beginning to be concerned for your safety.

Finally, a post I can honestly respond by saying simply, sometimes you just can't win. I think Team Geoblast might know what I'm talking about. How many problems do you have now?

[+sbell111]

There are two problems with that. First, your argument appears to suggest that you will do anything to find a cache, whether right or wrong. After all, you drove a long way. Second, you don't know that the cache is in the electrical box that you are about to disassemble unless you have already determined that it is fake. If you have made that determination, you should certainly go for it. However, in your two example caches, you never made that determination. Honestly, I'm beginning to be concerned for your safety.

Finally, a post I can honestly respond by saying simply, sometimes you just can't win. I think Team Geoblast might know what I'm talking about. How many problems do you have now?

One. I have no idea what you are talking about. Actually, I wouldn't call that a problem.

[+KBI]

Then what's the problem? Why, then, do you feel the need to control others' behavior? If others are out there enjoying something else you don't happen to prefer, something that isn't even in your neighborhood, than why can't you leave them alone?

I don't think a free for all will last for as long as we all want it to. That's the problem I see.

Translation: Other people can’t be trusted to decide for themselves how to cache. I know better that they do how they should be playing the game, therefore it’s up to me, Team GeoBlast, to properly control their behavior.

 

Again, you are talking about your neighborhood and the things that are good for KBI.

Yes, I am. Creative freedom is good for KBI. The freedom to be exactly as good or as lame as you like is good for everybody. The fact that you seem to think you know better that I do what’s good for me is what bothers me. The fact that you want to ENFORCE your preference on me -- and everybody else -- seriously troubles me.

 

I am talking about every city in the US and the general direction of GC.com. I am concerned about the overall direction of GC.com (which seems to wig you out pretty good for some reason) and somehow that equates to me trying to take something away from you and others. Whether you accept it or not, Gc.com does control how the game is played and I feel that is their responsibility. They say you can't bury a cache, promote a commerical enterprise, and so on. They have to or it is will get out of control.

I 100% agree with the way Groundspeak runs the game, partly because they stay out of the way when it comes to the individual creativity level of each cache hide. There are good reasons for them to prohibit buried caches and commercial caches. Those issues have nothing to do with creativity. As long as a cache hide satisfies the basic safety and common sense guidelines that are in place right now (in other words, as long as the cache gets approved), there is no reason for you, I or anyone else to go around claiming that any particular hide is not worthy of existence merely on the basis of lack of inspiration.

 

They have to or it is will get out of control. I personally see a real possiblity of that. You obviously don't, can we agree on that?

That what will get out of control – that your fellow cachers will continue to be free to decide for themselves how interesting to make their hides, or which sub-audience of cachers they want to entertain with them? Sorry, but that just doesn’t sound like a problem to me. It sounds like wonderful, glorious freedom.

 

Now feel free to answer one of my questions at any time here KBI. Am I correct that it is your position that a Wally World hide should be treated exactly the same as the cache tucked 5 miles back in the forest?

Yes. Why shouldn’t it? What, exactly, are you implying?

 

How many LPC and PLCs fit into the current established guidelines?

Um ... all of them? Is this a trick question? Can you link me to the guidelines that address “LPC and PLCs?”

 

I like Geocaching and don't despise anything about it, please stop going that direction. Yes, I think it could be better and I also think some current trends are indeed troubling and some change is needed.

That is a direct contradiction. If there’s nothing here that you dislike, then why do you feel the need to call for changes?

 

See, when I care about something I want it to be the best it can be and improved on areas that . Further, I believe strongly that if GC.com doesn't fix it someone will come along and do it better. It's my fear if that happens that all of the people that share the same concerns that I do about the growing number of LPC PLC caches will imgrate to the better mousetrap when it comes around. Then you'll be all alone in Wally World.

I’m sorry, but I just don’t see that happening.

 

I think you’ve got the right idea, though. If you’re not happy with the way things are at this website and you want to demonstrate how things should be done, you’re always welcome to quit geocaching.com and go create LetTeamGeoBlastTellYouHowToCacheProperly.com.

 

Good luck.

[+KBI]

So you don’t like finding caches in lamp posts or in parking lots. Fine.

No, not fine. I never said that.

Another contradiction. Please make up your mind.

 

Why begrudge us our fun?

You mean having a cache on every corner kinda fun? I think it's a matter of time where this is going to cause big problems.

Big problems? What kind of problems? I don’t see a problem – in fact, I don’t even foresee “a cache on every corner.” I think that’s an unrealistic exaggeration. You’re arguing against a strawman here.

 

Try to think past your own fun for a moment. That is what I am trying to do.

Past my fun to where – to your fun? You want to forcibly modify the game to suit your own preference. Why is my preference any less valid than yours? Why can’t they both stay?

 

Those caches are so easy to avoid -- why not just avoid them?

Sigh.

 

I don't have to. I don't have them where I live. For me, at least, I am not having a conversation about ME. How many times do I have to say that I am concerned about the OVERALL direction of GC.com and that goes for every city that is getting saturated with LPCs.

Yes, you’ve made it quite clear that what you want is to control everyone’s behavior; that you’re not content to manage your own affairs and leave the rest of us alone.

 

In one sentence, my position is that geocaching needs to be changed or in the long run there is going to be problems. While I have a list of things that I would change, none of those changes really effect how I play the game as you seem to want to imply.

No, the changes you insist upon wouldn’t affect how you play the game ... but they might very well have a large and unwelcome affect the way a lot of others play. That doesn’t matter to you though, does it?

 

They would just enhance (in my own opinion) the quality and longevity of the game.

They would enhance the game in your opinion. They would stifle the game in my opinion. When did your opinion become more valid than mine?

[+KBI]

I don't mean to be combative -- really --

You are not being honest.

Yes, I am.

 

If you are going to call me a liar; if your are going to tell me that my posts do not reflect my true and honest intents and opinions, then there’s absolutely no logical point in you and I continuing this discussion, is there?

 

Why would you waste your own time debating a fictitious opinion?

 

If you think I'm nothing but a troll, then why are you even here?

 

I'll say it again: I don't mean to be combative. Really. I have taken absolutely no personal offence to anything you've said here, and I have meant absolutely no personal offence to you (or anyone else) with my statements. As far as I'm concerned this is an academic debate about an issue that is obviously important to both of us, and I prefer to discuss it without any emotional bickering. I made my qualifying statement in the hopes of making that more clear.

 

Handshake?

[Clan Riffster]

All oppression is bad and should be squelched at the earliest sign, no matter who the first victims are.

Wouldn't that qualify as oppression? Free speech is only OK if it's KBI approved?

 

KBI. Stop trying to trip me up or twist my words around.

Team GB, don't hold your breath on that one.

[+KBI]

All oppression is bad and should be squelched at the earliest sign, no matter who the first victims are.

Wouldn't that qualify as oppression?

Fighting oppression itself qualifies as oppression? Well, I suppose the 1944 D-Day invaders could have been seen as oppressors from some theoretical and obscure point of view. Good point, CR.

 

Free speech is only OK if it's KBI approved?

Did I say that? Please explain.

 

That's a contradicition, CR. If anyone has to approve it, then it's not free speech, is it?

 

Have I ever asked to be the approver of anyone's speech? Is this somehow related to the topic?

 

 

 

 

BTW, speaking of the topic: Why won't you answer my questions?

 

First question

 

Second question

[+DrAwKwArD]

As far as I'm concerned this is an academic debate about an issue that is obviously important to both of us, and I prefer to discuss it without any emotional bickering.

Too late for that I'm afraid.

Creative freedom is good for KBI. The freedom to be exactly as good or as lame as you like is good for everybody. The fact that you seem to think you know better that I do what’s good for me is what bothers me. The fact that you want to ENFORCE your preference on me -- and everybody else -- seriously troubles me.

Sounds like emotional bickering to me. Edited February 12, 2007 by cache-n-dash

[+gh patriot]

[Clan Riffster]

Can I get some popcorn before this thread gets locked?

[+KBI]

Creative freedom is good for KBI. The freedom to be exactly as good or as lame as you like is good for everybody. The fact that you seem to think you know better that I do what’s good for me is what bothers me. The fact that you want to ENFORCE your preference on me -- and everybody else -- seriously troubles me.

Sounds like emotional bickering to me.

Oh, I dunno. It sounds purely academic to me -- a statement of principle, not an expression of emotion.

 

Nobody has been able to convince me why folks shouldn't be allowed to make their own caches just as cool or as lame as they see fit, or how the less-inspired caches hurt the game, as so many folks like to regularly claim, or that those caches are "taking over," or why anyone's personal creativity preferences should be forcibly imposed on the entire game in a wholesale manner.

 

Usually when I make a statement like that people suddenly choose to ignore my argument and attack me 'ad hominem' instead -- just like this time.

[+Team GeoBlast]

I don't mean to be combative -- really --

You are not being honest.

Yes, I am.

 

If you are going to call me a liar; if your are going to tell me that my posts do not reflect my true and honest intents and opinions, then there’s absolutely no logical point in you and I continuing this discussion, is there?

 

Why would you waste your own time debating a fictitious opinion?

 

If you think I'm nothing but a troll, then why are you even here?

 

I'll say it again: I don't mean to be combative. Really. I have taken absolutely no personal offence to anything you've said here, and I have meant absolutely no personal offence to you (or anyone else) with my statements. As far as I'm concerned this is an academic debate about an issue that is obviously important to both of us, and I prefer to discuss it without any emotional bickering. I made my qualifying statement in the hopes of making that more clear.

 

Handshake?

 

 

Sure

[+KBI]

Can I get some popcorn before this thread gets locked?

I'll give you some of mine. I don't mind sharing.

 

All you have to do is be brave enough to answer my questions first:

 

First question

 

Second question

 

If you can do it before I have to leave for work in a few hours I'll let you have ALL my popcorn. After that I'll be away from the Internet for a few days. ... and I won't be around to share popcorn.

 

 

Also, since you chose to ignore my PM, I'll post it here:

 

Is there something you want to say, but for some reason you're afraid to say it?

Yeah, that's it. I've always been shy.

 

I like you, CR. It's fun to debate with you ... so seriously now, are you truly trying to get the LPC thread locked?

 

I would really really rather not see that happen, which is why I'm moving this exchange of ours to the PMs.

 

Why can't you just go ahead and say whatever it is you're trying to imply over there?

 

I'd rather argue than bicker. There is a distinct difference, and the Mods know that. What you're doing right now does NOT qualify as debate.

[CoyoteRed]

I like you, CR. It's fun to debate with you...

 

[+KBI]

I like you, CR. It's fun to debate with you...

Confused?

[Clan Riffster]

I'll be away from the Internet for a few days.

And the world rejoiced.

[+sbell111]

I'll be away from the Internet for a few days.

And the world rejoiced.

It took you six hours to come up with a snarky comment?

[+AZBuckeye04]

KBI (and everybody else)-

 

I just picked up on this thread and lets just say it's been a long hour or so of reading. After taking several pain killers to stop my head from ringing, I feel ready to weigh in.

 

First off, you ARE twisting and manipulating Team GeoBlast's (TGB) comments and it is having a negative effect on how I read your other counterpoints. TGB is trying to bring to light something that many cachers are concerned about. Reading his comments it seems to me that he's calling out to the rest of the community to weigh in with their comments/suggestions in hopes that TPTB might take notice. In your rebuttals you often speak very personally toward TGB saying "Yes, you’ve made it quite clear that what you want is to control everyone’s behavior; that you’re not content to manage your own affairs and leave the rest of us alone." I don't believe that TGB wants to manage everyone's caches. I do believe that he wants the caching community and Groundspeak to take a good look at where we are and possibly reevaluate this hobby's guidelines.

 

Whether you are or not, your comments really seem to portray that of an Anarchist. Are you an anarchist KBI? Are you a mostly law abiding citizen or do you think we should just be able to run around and do whatever we want, "as good or as lame as we want"? Do you think that a law requiring you to wear a seatbelt is ridiculous and you should have the right to decide whether you need one or not? What about drinking and driving? Who is the government to take away our fun of getting drunk and then heading out for a cruise around town? Certainly they are only thinking about their well-being, their agenda. They want to take away our fun.

 

And micros are fun right? Urban caching is fun. But the increase of news articles making mention of bomb squads blowing up caches, property owners getting upset and their security guards threatening cachers is cause for alarm. In Arizona we have a "Stupid Persons" Law. Basically if you do something stupid that requires taxpayer dollars, then you're footing the bill. Yearly, during monsoon season, somebody gets the idea to drive their Dodge Neon through 3 feet of water. They quickly stall out and are swept into a wash. If they are lucky enough to survive police and firemen will arrive and lift the vehicle out. Luckily, because of the "Stupid Motorists" Law, my tax money doesn't have to pay for his dumb mistake. The state of Arizona can't keep that guy from driving through 3 feet of water, but they can put laws into place to help prevent such things from happening.

 

Similarly, GC.com does not typically allow caches on highway bridges, near elementary schools, government buildings, airports. When the reviewers look at caches they try their best to determine whether a cache fits into one of these questionable areas, and then they handle it accordingly. In some cases if the cache owner has received explicit permission from the superintendent of a school or if they can show that there is no cause for concern when their cache is within 150 feet of railroad tracks, then their cache will be approved. It's the approval process and the guidelines issued have helped the sport. Have they eliminated the chance for some potentially great cache hides, yeah. But what are a few less caches when the overall safety of everyone is taken into consideration?

 

Caches placed without permission on private property (which does include parking lots) poses a risk to the cache owner and cache seeker. Not only that but the repeated exposure of the public to poor publicity regarding the "illegal" placement of these caches and the perception that the public forms of geocachers could have a negative impact on the sport. Whether it will happen or not places across the country are discussing whether to allow geocaching or not within their jurisdiction. If there is something that we can do to put their minds at ease about caching, I think we should.

 

Currently GC.com has the following to say when it comes to permission for caches:

"By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location."

 

I think what some of us are suggesting is not that we get rid of all LPCs and PLCs, but that an amendment is made to the caching guidelines to better address the placement of caches on private property.

 

I am a big fan of the "Off Your Rocker" series. Growing up we would always stop at Cracker Barrels during long trips so whenever we go on trips now I enjoy doing the same. Being able to find a cache while there is a pleasant bonus. Because of this I maintain a public bookmark list of all caches located at Cracker Barrel restaurants. Often I've seen mention of these caches during discussions of PLC caches that should not be allowed and a lot of assumptions are made about whether or not permission is received. In fact all Cracker Barrel caches have been pre-approved by the Head of Advertising at Cracker Barrel Corporate Headquarters (as long as they are placed within the guidelines set forth by GC.com). They do like it if you let the local manager know of the cache, but atleast if someone is questioned there is a contact person within the company. Unfortunately not everyone that seeks (or even hides) one of these caches is aware of its acceptance. In an effort to promote proper use of the caching guidelines I have been contacting some cache owners of the Cracker Barrel caches and asking them to place a note on their cache pages with the corporate contacts information. Hopefully this will help to let everyone know that it is okay to go searching for these caches, and if they are stopped by someone they will be armed with information to help explain themselves.

 

Would it really be a bad thing for reviewers to request contact information for someone with the authority to approve the cache location? They wouldn't always have to contact the person, but knowing it is available (and has been provided) might help ease the mind of some cachers and of the publics impression of caching. If there are any volunteer reviewers perusing this topic, I would encourage them to chime in. Even if it is against what I've said.

 

My .02 .20 cents worth.

 

Jared of AZBliss02

[+cimawr]

 

WRT?

 

Common Internet acronym/shorthand for "with reference to".

 

 

Again, the screwdriver WAS NOT USED in any way at the cache you are referring to. Several days before searching for this cache I ran across sprinkler head geocaching containers selling on ebay. And if you still think I'm nuts for unscrewing the sprinkler head,

 

 

ah - I think I must have conflated the "unscrewing" to mean that you took it apart with the screwdriver, same as you did with the access plate; an impression enhanced by you saying you'd damaged it.

Also, for some odd reason - probably because 1) I had the flu and 2) I'd just been talking to someone who inspects fire safety equipment (aka sprinkler systems) for a living - I originally had the mental picture of a fire safety sprinkler, not a landscaping watering sprinkler.

 

Sounds like personal preference to me.

 

 

Well yes, I do have a personal preference for using common sense, and for not damaging other people's property, as well as for not screwing around (pun intended, sorry!) with live electrical equipment, if you want to look at it that way. However, that's a GENERAL preference, not just something caching-related.

 

You probably also live in a fairly saturated area. I get a new cache near me about once every 4-6 months. Am I going to drive there just to say, "Ah shucks, there's a geocaching logo on this fake electric box, but it requires unscrewing.. guess I'll bag it." I don't think so.

 

Yes, I live in a fairly saturated area. However, I wasn't aware of that until I'd been caching for several weeks, and it doesn't change the fact that in my first week of caching, I would not have taken out a screwdriver and unscrewed an access plate - nor would I do so now.

Incidentally, I'm not talking in a vacuum; I DID walk away from a cache which appeared to require unscrewing an electrical plate within my first two weeks of caching.

 

And I'm sorry, but I don't buy the argument you appear to be making, e.g. that having less caches available means that it's ok for a cacher to suspend common sense and/or common courtesy.

 

Your last two sentences are, I'm afraid, irrelevant to the discussion - unless you're now saying there were geocaching logos on the access plate and the sprinkler head. Rather obviously, this discussion isn't about cache containers which are clearly marked as such.

[+sbell111]

To ban or not to ban LPC's

Often, people post that they would like to blame LPCs because they are 'lame'. I try to take the position that it is up to me to make sure that I have fun. If I found myself never having fun finding these caches, I would stop looking for them. Unfortunately, I don't have that kind of self-control. Therefore, I tend to look for whatever cache gets in my way. If I'm spending the day geocaching and I find myself not having a good time, I stop geocaching and go find something else to do. This happens from time to time, but generally, I'm pretty successful at keeping myself amused.

 

The reason that I mention all of this is because of something that happened to me on my drive home from work this afternoon. I was on a short stretch of road that had fairly recently installed light poles. I noticed that they were of the type that had liftable skirts. I chuckled as I considered tossing a film can under one when I noticed something else. Perched on top of one of the lights was a rather large owl. He was probably about 18 inches tall. I've never seen one so close to my home before. Stupidly, I didn't take a pic with my cel phone. Instead, I drove home and grabbed my 'real' camera. Of course, he was long gone before I got back.

 

My point is that if you are willing to look around, sometimes coolness is right in front of you eyes.

[+DrAwKwArD]

Well yes, I do have a personal preference for using common sense, and for not damaging other people's property, as well as for not screwing around (pun intended, sorry!) with live electrical equipment, if you want to look at it that way. However, that's a GENERAL preference, not just something caching-related.

I think your beef is actually not with me at all. I once dissassembled a sprinkler head at a poorly-thoughtout cache. True. I once opened an access panel on a lamp post. Again, true. But why beat it to death? Am I the only one who has done these things? Honestly?

 

If you look closely, I'm not taking the opposite side that you are... never have. We both think it's our own responsibility to use common sense when caching. I'm to the point where I won't search for a micro unless I'm passing through a cache area and would have to literally walk by one. Contrary to your opinion, I'm not driving through town with a fully loaded 36-volt dewalt drill just waiting to do damage to another cache. No, your beef is definitely with the cache HIDERS(my original point for this topic) like the one whose cache you refused to find during your first stint of caching.

 

Notice one of your recent bursts of angst:

My entire post is referring to your destruction of private property at the prison; again, sorry, but I find it astonishing that anyone - no matter how new to the game - could think that the clue in question translates to "get out tools and take apart safety equipment".

Sorry, but "Lift and look", to me, simply does not translate to "take apart with tools".

Notice how you've completely bypassed that bit about "private property at the prison." Shouldn't that be the real crime? Yes, I should have done my homework. But, the cache owner? Hindsight doesn't do him a bit of good. He should have stayed home that night.

 

I would suggest taking these comments somewhere they can do some good. The hiders of bad and dangerous caches.

 

Also, for some odd reason - probably because 1) I had the flu

Hey.. me too! I always wondered if these forums were just another breeding ground for germs!

[Mr.Yuck]

I'll be away from the Internet for a few days.

And the world rejoiced.

 

No, just the internet.

[Mushtang]

I'll be away from the Internet for a few days.

And the world rejoiced.

 

No, just the internet.

Either way, it gives him a few more days to dodge KBI's questions.

[Mr.Yuck]

I'll be away from the Internet for a few days.

And the world rejoiced.

 

No, just the internet.

Either way, it gives him a few more days to dodge KBI's questions.

 

Or come up with some really good answers! Hey, I love 2112, how's that for common ground? I'd better say something on topic. Uh, what AZBliss02 said.

[+Ambrosia]

I once dissassembled a sprinkler head at a poorly-thoughtout cache. True. I once opened an access panel on a lamp post. Again, true. But why beat it to death? Am I the only one who has done these things? Honestly?

[Clan Riffster]

It took you six hours to come up with a snarky comment?

Even us ol' fat guys gotta sleep sometime.

 

Either way, it gives him a few more days to dodge KBI's questions.

Never confuse dodging with ignoring.

[+sbell111]

It took you six hours to come up with a snarky comment?

Even us ol' fat guys gotta sleep sometime.

 

Either way, it gives him a few more days to dodge KBI's questions.

Never confuse dodging with ignoring.

Never confuse snarkiness for honest debate.

[+Totem Clan]

True. I once opened an access panel on a lamp post. Again, true. But why beat it to death? Am I the only one who has done these things? Honestly?

 

 

I'm reminded of a new cacher I once met who had more enthusiasm than brains. He unscrewed the access panel on a street light and then began to pull the wires out looking for the cache. BTW it was about thirty feet away under a large flower box. Anyway, he shorts out the light with his tugging; not only that light, but all the lights within a block or two. He's lucky he didn't kill himself.

Edited February 13, 2007 by Totem Clan

[Clan Riffster]

Never confuse snarkiness for honest debate.

Not confused, Brother. For some, snarkiness is all they merit.

 

Back on topic: To ban or not to ban..... Heck, I don't know.

[CoyoteRed]

I'm reminded of a new cacher I once met who had more enthusiasm than brains. He unscrewed the access panel on a street light and then began to pull the wires out looking for the cache. BTW it was about thirty feet away under a large flower box. Anyway, he shorts out the light with his tugging; not only that light, but all the lights within a block or two. He's lucky he didn't kill himself.

 

A good reason to not create the paradigm of putting caches in electrical boxes, bird nests, and a host of other "creative" containers and camouflage.

[+DrAwKwArD]

A good reason to not create the paradigm of putting caches in bird nests and a host of other "creative" containers and camouflage.

Hey, I have a cache in a birds nest. Go figure!

 

Edit: It's not actually an active birds nest of course.

[+Team GeoBlast]

KBI (and everybody else)-

 

I just picked up on this thread and lets just say it's been a long hour or so of reading. After taking several pain killers to stop my head from ringing, I feel ready to weigh in.

 

First off, you ARE twisting and manipulating Team GeoBlast's (TGB) comments and it is having a negative effect on how I read your other counterpoints. TGB is trying to bring to light something that many cachers are concerned about. Reading his comments it seems to me that he's calling out to the rest of the community to weigh in with their comments/suggestions in hopes that TPTB might take notice. In your rebuttals you often speak very personally toward TGB saying "Yes, you’ve made it quite clear that what you want is to control everyone’s behavior; that you’re not content to manage your own affairs and leave the rest of us alone." I don't believe that TGB wants to manage everyone's caches. I do believe that he wants the caching community and Groundspeak to take a good look at where we are and possibly reevaluate this hobby's guidelines.

 

Whether you are or not, your comments really seem to portray that of an Anarchist. Are you an anarchist KBI? Are you a mostly law abiding citizen or do you think we should just be able to run around and do whatever we want, "as good or as lame as we want"? Do you think that a law requiring you to wear a seatbelt is ridiculous and you should have the right to decide whether you need one or not? What about drinking and driving? Who is the government to take away our fun of getting drunk and then heading out for a cruise around town? Certainly they are only thinking about their well-being, their agenda. They want to take away our fun.

 

And micros are fun right? Urban caching is fun. But the increase of news articles making mention of bomb squads blowing up caches, property owners getting upset and their security guards threatening cachers is cause for alarm. In Arizona we have a "Stupid Persons" Law. Basically if you do something stupid that requires taxpayer dollars, then you're footing the bill. Yearly, during monsoon season, somebody gets the idea to drive their Dodge Neon through 3 feet of water. They quickly stall out and are swept into a wash. If they are lucky enough to survive police and firemen will arrive and lift the vehicle out. Luckily, because of the "Stupid Motorists" Law, my tax money doesn't have to pay for his dumb mistake. The state of Arizona can't keep that guy from driving through 3 feet of water, but they can put laws into place to help prevent such things from happening.

 

Similarly, GC.com does not typically allow caches on highway bridges, near elementary schools, government buildings, airports. When the reviewers look at caches they try their best to determine whether a cache fits into one of these questionable areas, and then they handle it accordingly. In some cases if the cache owner has received explicit permission from the superintendent of a school or if they can show that there is no cause for concern when their cache is within 150 feet of railroad tracks, then their cache will be approved. It's the approval process and the guidelines issued have helped the sport. Have they eliminated the chance for some potentially great cache hides, yeah. But what are a few less caches when the overall safety of everyone is taken into consideration?

 

Caches placed without permission on private property (which does include parking lots) poses a risk to the cache owner and cache seeker. Not only that but the repeated exposure of the public to poor publicity regarding the "illegal" placement of these caches and the perception that the public forms of geocachers could have a negative impact on the sport. Whether it will happen or not places across the country are discussing whether to allow geocaching or not within their jurisdiction. If there is something that we can do to put their minds at ease about caching, I think we should.

 

Currently GC.com has the following to say when it comes to permission for caches:

"By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location."

 

I think what some of us are suggesting is not that we get rid of all LPCs and PLCs, but that an amendment is made to the caching guidelines to better address the placement of caches on private property.

 

I am a big fan of the "Off Your Rocker" series. Growing up we would always stop at Cracker Barrels during long trips so whenever we go on trips now I enjoy doing the same. Being able to find a cache while there is a pleasant bonus. Because of this I maintain a public bookmark list of all caches located at Cracker Barrel restaurants. Often I've seen mention of these caches during discussions of PLC caches that should not be allowed and a lot of assumptions are made about whether or not permission is received. In fact all Cracker Barrel caches have been pre-approved by the Head of Advertising at Cracker Barrel Corporate Headquarters (as long as they are placed within the guidelines set forth by GC.com). They do like it if you let the local manager know of the cache, but atleast if someone is questioned there is a contact person within the company. Unfortunately not everyone that seeks (or even hides) one of these caches is aware of its acceptance. In an effort to promote proper use of the caching guidelines I have been contacting some cache owners of the Cracker Barrel caches and asking them to place a note on their cache pages with the corporate contacts information. Hopefully this will help to let everyone know that it is okay to go searching for these caches, and if they are stopped by someone they will be armed with information to help explain themselves.

 

Would it really be a bad thing for reviewers to request contact information for someone with the authority to approve the cache location? They wouldn't always have to contact the person, but knowing it is available (and has been provided) might help ease the mind of some cachers and of the publics impression of caching. If there are any volunteer reviewers perusing this topic, I would encourage them to chime in. Even if it is against what I've said.

 

My .02 .20 cents worth.

 

Jared of AZBliss02

 

Jared - thanks for taking the time to understand what I was trying to say. Agree or disagree I truly appreciate it when someone shows me the respect of doing this.