Jump to content

Temp Caches at events in your state


sweetlife
Followers 3

Recommended Posts

What is the thought process behind this thread?

 

Does it go something like:

"I don't do this, I don't agree with this, I know it doesn't affect me, I know it really has zero effect on me, but I got nothing else to do, so I will write posts discouraging it, after all, people really should cache the way I do!"

 

That's what I get out of it, anyway.

 

I don't skydive, I did it when Uncle made me, but I don't think it's smart or safe if you don't absolutely have to... but I don't try to tell folks they can't do it.

Link to comment

<<snip>>-all the other posts to keep things neat :(

 

I could easily imagine talking to someone someday and hearing them ask me, "Did you do that incredible Treasure Island cache!?"

I would say, "No, I didn't but I'll put it at the top of my list! It sounds like a lot of fun!"

Then they respond, "You can't find it because it's gone. It was only out during that event last month."

"Bummer!" I was I was out of town that week."

Then I would think that it's really too bad that they didn't list the cache because I would have liked to have done it, but I guess listing caches for everyone to find is not important to these people....

Hey,

 

More than likely if a temp cache did have that much excitement I would bet it would have been made into a permanent...and yes I have seen that happen...and no, I would not get a "free" smilely on it just becuse I found it as a temp...I would have to go out and find it and sign that log book just like anyone else.

 

Oh, I should mention...those temps that I have seen go through something like this are never in the same spot they were when they were temps...rarely are they the same container as well...rarely is it the same person placing the permanent that placed the temp.

 

Some of my hidden cachers were just that...a temp at an event...I thought it was a cool location so I placed a cache...and no one got a "free" smilely just becuase they found it as temp earlier...

 

Later,

ArcherDragoon

Link to comment

Jeez people just go GeoCaching and enjoy yourself and quit worrying about how the next guy/gal plays his/her game. This isn't a race, it isn't a contest, there are no prizes for coming in first or logging the most logs, etc. It appears to me that some peoples lives have become personally disinteresting and realize their own satisfaction of their game is lacking so they turn to the next guy and begin judging how others are playing their game. Who cares?

Link to comment

...but I guess listing caches for everyone to find is not important to these people....

:santa::santa::santa: ...I thought we were friends gator... :(:D:(

B) ...I was even looking forward to my jedi training... B)

Edit: I had a really good response AD, but it was only posted here temporarily! :D:D:D Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment

I could easily imagine talking to someone someday and hearing them ask me, "Did you do that incredible Treasure Island cache!?"

I would say, "No, I didn't but I'll put it at the top of my list! It sounds like a lot of fun!"

Then they respond, "You can't find it because it's gone. It was only out during that event last month."

"Bummer!" I was I was out of town that week."

Then I would think that it's really too bad that they didn't list the cache because I would have liked to have done it, but I guess listing caches for everyone to find is not important to these people....

I don't see that as any different than a cache that was archived before you had a chance to find it. I see that no one responded to the comment I made earlier in this thread that in some places, people submit "permanent" caches for an event which get approved and have their own GC numbers. Yet soon after the event - sometimes even the same day - they get disabled and eventually they are archived without ever being re-enabled. True, these were "approved" (i.e., reviewed) unlike a "real" temporary cache so I guess they were OK to log. :D

 

TPTB have made a decision. The decision was that allowing multiple logs to a cache is up to the cache owner. TPTB further stated that there will be no adding of a temp cache log category, changing of the site to allow only one log per cache, creation of a new cache type for temporary caches, etc.

 

Even though these decisions have been made (long ago, I might add), the angst train still chugs down the tracks.

I agree with you that a decision has been made, at least for the time being. Unfortunately, that decision was to pretty much not take any action at all. To be honest though, and no i haven't taken a poll, i have a feeling that more cachers than not, on both sides of the fence, would just like to see a more straightforward decision be made. The decision by tptb to take no action doesn't help in aleviating any of the bickering...

 

I have no doubt at all that the angst train (i like that :( ) would stop dead on the tracks, if tptb ever decided to make a more pronounced ruling...

It seems to me that 'No action required' is a definitive ruling. Clearly, it is not a decision that makes those people who would prefer that the logging of these temporary caches be forbidden, but it is a complete and pronounced decision, in my opinion.

What there isn't a definitive ruling on is what TPTB view as abuse. Since we have seen actions against abuse in the past, even actions against types of logging that seemed to have been accepted prior to action being taken (e.g. Pocket caches) those that would prefer that the logging of these temporary caches be forbidden will continue to hope that one day Jeremy will change his mind about whether this is abuse.
Link to comment

I could easily imagine talking to someone someday and hearing them ask me, "Did you do that incredible Treasure Island cache!?"

I would say, "No, I didn't but I'll put it at the top of my list! It sounds like a lot of fun!"

Then they respond, "You can't find it because it's gone. It was only out during that event last month."

"Bummer!" I was I was out of town that week."

Then I would think that it's really too bad that they didn't list the cache because I would have liked to have done it, but I guess listing caches for everyone to find is not important to these people....

I don't see that as any different than a cache that was archived before you had a chance to find it. I see that no one responded to the comment I made earlier in this thread that in some places, people submit "permanent" caches for an event which get approved and have their own GC numbers. Yet soon after the event - sometimes even the same day - they get disabled and eventually they are archived without ever being re-enabled. True, these were "approved" (i.e., reviewed) unlike a "real" temporary cache so I guess they were OK to log. :(
How many caches are posted and then archived in one day? I've never heard of people doing what you just said. It sounds like you are trying to make a rare exception the rule. The point of Jeremy's comment regarding selfishness is very clear to many of us. If it wasn't selfish then why not just make all caches temporary? By the way, I don't buy that there would be a huge surge in workload. Most people don't hide caches to be temporary. I know it's the last thing that I would want for my caches.
Link to comment

...but I guess listing caches for everyone to find is not important to these people....

:DB):lol: ...I thought we were friends gator... :):):)

:D ...I was even looking forward to my jedi training... :D

Edit: I had a really good response AD, but it was only posted here temporarily! :(:D:D

:santa::santa::santa: I see, I see...anything to get you post count up!!! :(:DB)

 

Nothing but post padding going on ;)

 

Beware...the Dark Side can be tempting...

Link to comment

I could easily imagine talking to someone someday and hearing them ask me, "Did you do that incredible Treasure Island cache!?"

I would say, "No, I didn't but I'll put it at the top of my list! It sounds like a lot of fun!"

Then they respond, "You can't find it because it's gone. It was only out during that event last month."

"Bummer!" I was I was out of town that week."

Then I would think that it's really too bad that they didn't list the cache because I would have liked to have done it, but I guess listing caches for everyone to find is not important to these people....

I don't see that as any different than a cache that was archived before you had a chance to find it. I see that no one responded to the comment I made earlier in this thread that in some places, people submit "permanent" caches for an event which get approved and have their own GC numbers. Yet soon after the event - sometimes even the same day - they get disabled and eventually they are archived without ever being re-enabled. True, these were "approved" (i.e., reviewed) unlike a "real" temporary cache so I guess they were OK to log. :(
How many caches are posted and then archived in one day? I've never heard of people doing what you just said. It sounds like you are trying to make a rare exception the rule. The point of Jeremy's comment regarding selfishness is very clear to many of us. If it wasn't selfish then why not just make all caches temporary? By the way, I don't buy that there would be a huge surge in workload. Most people don't hide caches to be temporary. I know it's the last thing that I would want for my caches.

I wasn't discussing the "selfishness" issue - rather your disappointment that the you couldn't find an 'incredible" cache because it was available only the day of the event. I'm guessing that Jeremy meant "selfishness" just the way you interpret it and not they way sbell111 does. But that does leave me confused. If there is no competition and the points don't matter how can it be selfish to log temporary events? Evidently, the almighty Jeremy may not alway be making consistent statements. Still I guess it is not selfish, to hide a bunch of caches in the area of an event and ask the reviewers not publish a good portion of these until the day of the event, for the purpose on encouraging more "numbers" motivated cachers to come to the event. Sure you intended for these cache to stay in place after the event. But inevitably some go missing right away. You have to expect that when a constant stream of people are looking for a cache, it's more likely to get muggled. Since the purpose of the hide was to lure people to the event, these caches often don't get replaced. I'm not saying that people are hiding temporary caches and lying about them to get them published; but defacto, this happens with many caches that are hidden for events.

Link to comment

...but I guess listing caches for everyone to find is not important to these people....

:DB):lol: ...I thought we were friends gator... :):):D

:D ...I was even looking forward to my jedi training... :D

Edit: I had a really good response AD, but it was only posted here temporarily! :(:D:D

:santa::santa::santa: I see, I see...anything to get you post count up!!! :(:DB)

 

Nothing but post padding going on ;)

 

Beware...the Dark Side can be tempting...

Haha... AD, you even acknowledged earlier that temps violate the cache permanence guideline. That guideline isn't just a senseless rule that we follow for the sake of following of rule. It has some thought behind it. I agree with the guideline that all caches should be hidden with the intent of being available to everyone for the long haul. :)
Link to comment
I disagree. I may not be able to find a terrain 5 cache but I can at least see the listing, temp caches are not listed so I have no idea they were even placed. Being unable to search for or find a cache is far different from not even being told it's there unless you are at that particular event. They are privately placed, privately listed caches, as such they should not be logged on GC.com where they are counted against legit caches.

If you want to log them just include the logs in your one event log, ie:

found temp caches 1 through 17, 20, 22, and 30 today for a total of 20, TFTC's!

Legit and you still get them listed on GC.com, you just don't get 20 smilies. :(

The parts I have highlighted above in bold are the most convincing arguments I have ever seen on this subject. Outstanding rational. Well said. Cpt.Blackbeard, you hit the nail right on the head in my opinion. I now do see them as more of a "private cache" instead of a "temporary cache" after your statements. I say this from a personal perspective and my comments do not reflect in any way the opinion of Groundspeak or with my responsibilities as a reviewer. I would still list a cache that had these since there is nothing in the guidelines regarding them at this time, but as a geocacher I would never log "private caches" in this manner again as a find on the site. (I have way back in the past -- only twice -- once each at two events, including one event that allowed multiple finds but I only logged it once and considered them something of a "multicache" type of find although others logged them multiple times.)

 

Wow, thanks mtn man, that means alot coming from you. :D

 

Archer Dragon, you're a gentleman and a scholar, pleasure talking to you even if we disagree on an item or two.

 

Mudfrog, I think it was you, I agree these threads are interesting, on an average night i only read a half dozen or so "older" threads, and these are the types I like reading. Even when I disagree with someone their reasoning can be quite enlightening to read, showing sides to the issue I hadn't considered before.

Link to comment

...but I guess listing caches for everyone to find is not important to these people....

:DB):lol: ...I thought we were friends gator... :):):D

:D ...I was even looking forward to my jedi training... :D

Edit: I had a really good response AD, but it was only posted here temporarily! :(:D:D

:santa::santa::santa: I see, I see...anything to get you post count up!!! :(:DB)

 

Nothing but post padding going on ;)

 

Beware...the Dark Side can be tempting...

Haha... AD, you even acknowledged earlier that temps violate the cache permanence guideline. That guideline isn't just a senseless rule that we follow for the sake of following of rule. It has some thought behind it. I agree with the guideline that all caches should be hidden with the intent of being available to everyone for the long haul. :)

 

Oh, come on, it was a little funny...wasn't it...I gotta take the opportunity when it presents itself...and I would expect no less from you in return B)

 

...afterall, our back-and-forth banter is all that keeps me sane in these forums at times...

 

Besides, I never said the guidelines were senseless...the guidelines have a place and a purpose. I don't even want to imagine what geocaching would be like without the guidelines in place (and the reviewers...they have a very important place in this entire system). With that said...all temporary caches violate the permanence rule by definition of temporary...I acknowledge that...I never hid the fact that I knew that.

 

Senseless to some...sure...to me...heck no!!!

Edited by ArcherDragoon
Link to comment

The logging of temporary caches as multiple "attended" to the event itself is not a practice I've seen in Florida.

 

Is my memory faulty or were there not quite a lot of event caches at GW4 in FL? And weren't you instrumental in the hosting of that event? I may be wrong, if so please forgive me. :(

 

I know they were at the previous GeoWoodstocks, the Reviewer that created GeoWoodstock is who created the event temp cache and the multi-log idea to start with!

 

I have cached in, I think, without looking, 28 states, held events in at least 3, and attended events in perhaps 12, and there has never been an issue with them, only here in the forums have I ever heard a complaint.

 

I usually hide some at every event, usually as prizes, stocked ammo cans that the FTF gets to keep and everyone else that finds it logs an "attended" note for it. I also have some micros that I hide at events that finders multi-log that I keep for the next event.

 

Everyone's favorite temp cache of mine was Evil Cache, a micro cache I took to every event and hid there. It was found many times at many events over the years. Several of the Groundspeak staff and a good number of Reviewers found it at their impromptu Groundspeak event in TN. Nary a problem or complaint.

 

Then it drew much criticism as a moving cache in the forum frenzy after GW5 in TX, so I made it into a Travel Bug. I still take it to events and hide it, but instead of a smilie for finding it you log it as a TB.

 

Doesn't seem to make any difference in the finder's enjoyment how it's logged.

 

Since this hoopla over them started I have asked every event owner if it is okay for me to hide them and have the event logged multiple times by finders for finding them. No one has ever refused.

 

They are at every event of mine (I've hosted a dozen, maybe 15, events) and they're at most of the Alabama Geocachers Association's events... can't ever recall one where they weren't, in fact.

 

States where I can remember finding them at events: AL, MS, GA, FL, TN, MI, MA, CA, LA, PA and I am sure there were others.

 

As far as 'states that allow it' the game doesn't work that way. Event owners allow it or don't, no one else but the owner has a say in it.

 

My Alabama Geocachers Association, for example, represents all geocachers in Alabama who choose to be part of it (free, www.dixiecachers.com) but we don't make rules about the game, we follow Groundspeak's guidelines like everyone else.

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment

...but I guess listing caches for everyone to find is not important to these people....

:)B) ...I thought we were friends gator... :D:lol:

:( ...I was even looking forward to my jedi training... :D

Edit: I had a really good response AD, but it was only posted here temporarily! ;):)

:D:santa: I see, I see...anything to get you post count up!!! :santa::santa:

 

Nothing but post padding going on :(

 

Beware...the Dark Side can be tempting...

Haha... AD, you even acknowledged earlier that temps violate the cache permanence guideline. That guideline isn't just a senseless rule that we follow for the sake of following of rule. It has some thought behind it. I agree with the guideline that all caches should be hidden with the intent of being available to everyone for the long haul. :D

 

Oh, come on, it was a little funny...wasn't it...I gotta take the opportunity when it presents itself...and I would expect no less from you in return :D

 

...afterall, our back-and-forth banter is all that keeps me sane in these forums at times...

 

Besides, I never said the guidelines were senseless...the guidelines have a place and a purpose. I don't even want to imagine what geocaching would be like without the guidelines in place (and the reviewers...they have a very important place in this entire system). With that said...all temporary caches violate the permanence rule by definition of temporary...I acknowledge that...I never hid the fact that I knew that.

 

Senseless to some...sure...to me...heck no!!!

I laughed AD! B) Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment

 

Nothing but post padding going on :santa:

 

Beware...the Dark Side can be tempting...

 

TFTT

(Thanks For The Thread)

 

TNLNESC

(Took Nothing Left Nothing Except Snarky Comment) :(

:(:D:D

This is what I am talking about...statements like this keep me sane!!!

 

4wheelin saw an opportunity and took it...I love it!!!

 

PS...Are you aware you double posted... :santa:

#163 and #164 are the same :santa: at the time of my post...

Edited by ArcherDragoon
Link to comment

I don't skydive, I did it when Uncle made me, but I don't think it's smart or safe if you don't absolutely have to... but I don't try to tell folks they can't do it.

 

Hey, wait a minute, I gotta disagree with this. I think skydiving is smart, fun and relatively safe. (Oops, OT)

Link to comment
I don't skydive, I did it when Uncle made me, but I don't think it's smart or safe if you don't absolutely have to... but I don't try to tell folks they can't do it.
Sounds like fun to me! :( I'm still trying to find one post in this thread where someone told someone that they "can't do it." Are we both reading the same thread? :D
Link to comment

What is the thought process behind this thread?

 

Does it go something like:

"I don't do this, I don't agree with this, I know it doesn't affect me, I know it really has zero effect on me, but I got nothing else to do, so I will write posts discouraging it, after all, people really should cache the way I do!"

 

That's what I get out of it, anyway.

 

I don't skydive, I did it when Uncle made me, but I don't think it's smart or safe if you don't absolutely have to... but I don't try to tell folks they can't do it.

 

Well, this thread has gone off topic. The OP asked each poster to list their State, say if temps cache are allowed, and if the answer is yes then say if it is acceptable state wide or just locally. Only a few posted complied with the OPs wishes.

 

Hawaii, No

Link to comment
Is my memory faulty or were there not quite a lot of event caches at GW4 in FL? And weren't you instrumental in the hosting of that event? I may be wrong, if so please forgive me

 

Your memory is faulty. It was GW3 in Florida. :( Nope, no event caches at GW3 (which I attended but had nothing to do with hosting) - a fair number of pocket caches, and a mass of moving caches. I believe CCCA brought all of hers. But no temporary caches. At least I wasn't aware of any.

Link to comment
Is my memory faulty or were there not quite a lot of event caches at GW4 in FL? And weren't you instrumental in the hosting of that event? I may be wrong, if so please forgive me

 

Your memory is faulty. It was GW3 in Florida. :D Nope, no event caches at GW3 (which I attended but had nothing to do with hosting) - a fair number of pocket caches, and a mass of moving caches. I believe CCCA brought all of hers. But no temporary caches. At least I wasn't aware of any.

Doh! GW2 was TN, GW3 was FL, right, sorry! GW4 was in TX, GW5 in NC... and I saw pocket caches at all of them, I think, and a pocket cache is a type of temp cache to my untrained mind... I was massing pocket caches in with the others in this discussion, loosely defined as 'unlisted caches that appear only at events and are logged by multi-logging the event page'. :(

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment
'unlisted caches that appear only at events and are logged by multi-logging the event page

 

Well, I'd agree with you on that definition of an a LOTEC - but there wasn't any multi-logging of GW3, at least not by the Floridians. The Floridians logged their various extra smileys to cache pages with their own GCxxxx.

And the moving and pocket caches (that I'm aware of) all had listings. The moving caches were real moving caches, and the pocket caches were listed caches that migrated to the event venue.

 

The event hosts placed nothing without GCxxxx. Just 'cause that's not (wasn't) the Florida caching culture.

 

I'm trying to get back OT here. The OT being LOTECs in your state. Just never caught on here - the pocket cache thing was brought back from Nashville after GW2 I believe (I could be wrong), temps, nope. Odd, given the love of the smiley that's part of caching culture for some - but there you are. By the way, I have zero emotional attachment to judging Other Peoples Numbers. I'm quite certain that if I'd started caching in Wisconsin, that I'd have a huge number of events 'attended'. And I don't care in the slightest whether a cache owner permits multi logging of their cache -event or other. Periodically I even consider placing a cache (it would be an ALR under the current guidelines) with a logging requirement that you MUST log 6 smileys, or some multiple of 6 (12, 18, 24 etc) with no upper limit. Just for the halibut.

Edited by Isonzo Karst
Link to comment
...these temporary event caches have been around ever since the 'permanence' guideline went into effect.
Kind of ironic isn't it? :ph34r:
The one thing obviously led to the other thing. Ummm, that's not what irony means.
It certainly is ironic. Groundspeak asked that all caches be permanent. Following that announcement temporary caches were born! Tell me that you can't see the irony and humor in that?! :unsure::rolleyes:
Groundspeak changed the guidelines to require that all cache listings be 'permanent' for workload reasons. A number of people requested that TPTB reconsider or make some new cache type to allow temporary event caches to be listed. TPTB responded that listing such temporary event caches is 'selfish' (making a reviewer list eleventeen caches, all to go live on one morning and be archived that evening) and that these caches could be logged to the event page, since they are an event activity.

 

Once you consider the history, you quickly see that there is no irony, only logical cause and effect.

You STILL believe that's what Jeremy meant when he said his selfish statement?? Really, sbell....read that again.
No doubt i could have missed it but that is something that i never saw posted. I did see Jeremy's post where he stated and i quote:
Wanting to throw up a bunch of temporary caches so you can log them as a "find" is the height of selfishness, IMO. You are well aware that the "cache" is just a part of the event, like a three legged race.
Pretty black and white if you ask me!
I'm really tired of fighting over this silly point. Feel free to read through the entire thread, rather than to fixate on part of one post that was clearly made after he was fed up with explaining himself over and over again. (Boy, do I know that feeling.)

THERE IT IS!! Thanks Mudfrog!! Black and white and staring right at you!! Gee, not selfish like someone else said....but selfish to put out temps to log as finds is selfish (he also used another S word...)
Link to comment

What is the thought process behind this thread?

 

Does it go something like:

"I don't do this, I don't agree with this, I know it doesn't affect me, I know it really has zero effect on me, but I got nothing else to do, so I will write posts discouraging it, after all, people really should cache the way I do!"

 

That's what I get out of it, anyway.

 

I don't skydive, I did it when Uncle made me, but I don't think it's smart or safe if you don't absolutely have to... but I don't try to tell folks they can't do it.

 

Amen brother. My two cents. If the person putting on the event places temp caches and says you can log them as a find on his event then I'm there. Did I find a cache ? Yes. Did they say I can log it? Yes. What's the confussion? :rolleyes:

Link to comment

What is the thought process behind this thread?

 

Does it go something like:

"I don't do this, I don't agree with this, I know it doesn't affect me, I know it really has zero effect on me, but I got nothing else to do, so I will write posts discouraging it, after all, people really should cache the way I do!"

 

That's what I get out of it, anyway.

 

 

 

More like "I don't do it, I think it's absurd and I have a right to express my opinion".

Link to comment

Well, this thread has gone off topic. The OP asked each poster to list their State, say if temps cache are allowed, and if the answer is yes then say if it is acceptable state wide or just locally. Only a few posted complied with the OPs wishes.

 

Hawaii, No

I am quoting the only post on this entire page that is squarely on-topic. Thanks for the information about Hawaii.

 

Thanks also for clearly defining the topic of this thread. Let's all get back to it. Thanks.

Link to comment
THERE IT IS!! Thanks Mudfrog!! Black and white and staring right at you!! Gee, not selfish like someone else said....but selfish to put out temps to log as finds is selfish (he also used another S word...)
Let's examine your post for just a moment.

 

You state that it is selfish for a person to place a cache for others to find if the cache is not going to be in place for a long period of time and won't have it's own cache page at GC.com.

 

I state that it is selfish to require the reviewers to list a bunch of caches in time for an event, only to have those cache listings archived that same day.

 

Which one of these is selfish?

 

Certainly, hiding a cache isn't selfish. It is taking some action that will bring enjoyment to others. That simply doesn't fit the definition of selfish in any way that I can imagine.

 

What about making the reviewers do a bunch of work to list a cache, only to have the cache page archived that day. That fits the definition, in my opinion. It also fits within the discussion in which the statement was made.

 

BTW, this practice has happened in Tennessee. (Is someone making a map?)

 

edited to add that I was reading the thread when Keystone redirected it. Mea culpa.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

What is the thought process behind this thread?

 

Does it go something like:

"I don't do this, I don't agree with this, I know it doesn't affect me, I know it really has zero effect on me, but I got nothing else to do, so I will write posts discouraging it, after all, people really should cache the way I do!"

 

That's what I get out of it, anyway.

 

I don't skydive, I did it when Uncle made me, but I don't think it's smart or safe if you don't absolutely have to... but I don't try to tell folks they can't do it.

 

Amen brother. My two cents. If the person putting on the event places temp caches and says you can log them as a find on his event then I'm there. Did I find a cache ? Yes. Did they say I can log it? Yes. What's the confussion? :rolleyes:

 

Is it a published cache on GC.com? Does it have it's own GC number? Does it meet all guidelines for a cache?

 

If you answer NO to any of these, I guess you can figure out where the confusion lies!

 

I see absolutely no one saying you CAN'T, I see many wondering WHY though!!

Link to comment
THERE IT IS!! Thanks Mudfrog!! Black and white and staring right at you!! Gee, not selfish like someone else said....but selfish to put out temps to log as finds is selfish (he also used another S word...)
Let's examine your post for just a moment.

 

You state that it is selfish for a cacher to place a cache for others to find if the cache is not going to be in place for a long period of time and won't have it's own cache page at GC.com.

 

I state that it is selfish to require the reviewers to list a bunch of caches in time for an event, only to have those cache listings archived that same day.

 

Which one of these is selfish?

 

Certainly, hiding a cache isn't selfish. It is taking some action that will bring enjoyment to others. That simply doesn't fit the definition of selfish in any way that I can imagine.

 

What about making the reviewers do a bunch of work to list a cache, only to have the cache page archived that day. That fits the definition, in my opinion. It also fits within the discussion in which the statement was made.

Now who's taking the quote out of context??

Link to comment

Well, this thread has gone off topic. The OP asked each poster to list their State, say if temps cache are allowed, and if the answer is yes then say if it is acceptable state wide or just locally. Only a few posted complied with the OPs wishes.

 

Hawaii, No

I am quoting the only post on this entire page that is squarely on-topic. Thanks for the information about Hawaii.

 

Thanks also for clearly defining the topic of this thread. Let's all get back to it. Thanks.

 

Sorry Keystone

 

The OP clearly states we can discuss the temps (or our feelings about them), I thought that's what was being done. I re-read the OP and see it asks to at least include info the OP asked about.

 

Soooo to keep OT....I dislike the idea some think temps are caches which can be logged for a smilie, but we don't see much of it in our area (although I've heard of it a few times).

 

I also disagree with sbell's thinking on what Jeremy said, but that's all good because we don't all have to agree!

 

I wouldn't log temps as an attended and I wouldn't try to stop others...(although I may just see your logging practices as shady...hey, I can have an opinion. You don't like it, don't worry...it's my opinion just like it's your choice. If it truly bothers you, consider stopping the practice that paints you as shady in my eyes...if my opinion of you matters to you). I just find it comical that some would log temps and then be proud of them...even accept awards and accolades for the "accomplishment"! Since TPTB won't do anything to curb the practice (read that NOT as they endorse it since I DOUBT they ENDORSE it, they merely stated they don't care enough to do anything about it), I'll not ask for change....but I will state my opinion!

Link to comment

If you read that whole thread (or even that post in its entirety), the "selfish" bit is clearly about submitted, separate listings for temp caches.

 

Also, in that thread, Jeremy thought multiple logs on events were "stupid" but he didn't care if people did it. He said there are things he considered abuse and worth preventing (I use the past tense because that thread was over two years ago, and I know my opinions on some things have changed in that time).

 

I missed if anyone linked the thread, so here. The comments in question start on page 4.

 

To the OP, I've seen temp caches at events in Michigan, though not recently (only been to one in about three years). I haven't noticed anyone logging an event more than once at Michigan events. But I don't pay that much attention. The OP has seen it in Michigan, but I can drive to about ten different states in the amount of time it would take to drive to that part of the UP, so classifying by state, as has been said, doesn't seem relevant to me.

Edited by Dinoprophet
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...