Jump to content

unacceptable cache description


Followers 7

Recommended Posts

I have actually found the cache in question and I had absolutely no problem with the description of the cache or the cache placement. In fact, the cache is definately in a better place than some other AGT caches that are in the series. I also think the cache is a lot better than some of the other caches in that part of Pennsylvania. I can't tell you how many caches that I have found lately where the owner has neglected to take care of their cache or that the caches were placed in some pretty bad locations. So I hope things get worked out with this cache and thank you Seedpicker for placing the cache in the first place.

Edited by spelldog
Link to comment

Here is a sample of what might be considered a PC compromise on the wording of the cache description. If you feel comfortable with it, feel free to use it, colors and all.

 

"I Personally would like to thank all those who served before, currently serving and those who will serve in the future. Diety's speed to you! Thank-you for our FREEDOM!

 

This organization (seen here at this cache) was chartered by Congress in 1919 as a patriotic, mutual-help, war-time veterans organization. A community-service organization which now numbers nearly 3 million members -- men and women -- in nearly 15,000 Organizational Posts worldwide. These Posts are organized into 55 Departments -- one each for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, France, Mexico, and the Philippines."

 

John & Shirley

Link to comment

snip...

 

 

Could you explain the difference between cache pages, both to me are creating an awareness/educating oneself for/about each organization? And to my eye, appear to be presented in the same nature. :laughing: Both give history/background on each organization and there respective purpose while honoring someone near and dear to them?

 

So my conclusion is that by creating "Awareness" there is an Agenda for both caches, therefore according to gc.com "NO" Agenda guidelines, both caches need updated or archived.

 

Which I think is unnecessary would be a grave injustice to all those involved....

 

Steel City Babes

 

Please keep us posted on the outcome, I find this interesting.

That is correct both caches should be reworded to avoid the appearance of promoting an agenda. They are both in violation of the guidelines. Changes can be made to the wording in each case to bring them into compliance.

 

Maybe it would be easier if I gave another example:

 

 

This cache is placed in honor of my girlfriend. On August 8, 2007 my girlfriend was raped on her way to find a cache.

 

This cache is placed at the Los Angeles branch of Planned Parenthood. After my girlfriend was raped, the police took her here for treatement. The doctor and nurses treated her with respect while collecting evidence that the police were able to use to catch the rapist. They also offered her Levonorgestrel (PlanB) to prevent an unwanted pregnacy. My girlfriend is doing much better but she doesn't cache solo any more.

 

This cache doesn't solicit money for Planned Parenthood. It doesn't take a position on whether PlanB is a legitimate treatment for rape victims or is an abortion pill. Yet I bet many people supporting the OP cache would insist that this cache be archived for promoting an agenda.

 

I see nothing wrong with any of the caches you mentioned however, to me this example again brings awareness/Agenda to Planned Parenthood and PlanB(don't know much about,but I am sure if I was raped I might.) It also brings to the table the controversial issue of abortion (Agenda?). It does shed some light on the dangers of geocaching - :rolleyes: Once again as another post mentioned it is splitting hairs...

 

Steel City Babes

Link to comment

I'll be watching this thread to see how it plays out before I decide to become a premium member. I wouldn't want to support a site where political correctness has run amok.

 

I don't blame you. I'm also watching this thread closely to see what happens because it could very well affect my membership as well.

Link to comment

Hmmmm rewording you say....

 

---

This cache is placed in honor of my children who are serving in the US Armed Forces. I am proud of what they are doing and want to thank all who have served or are serving.

 

The American Legion was chartered by Congress in 1919 as a patriotic, mutual-help, war-time veterans organization. A community-service organization which now numbers nearly 3 million members -- men and women -- in nearly 15,000 American Legion Posts worldwide. These Posts are organized into 55 Departments -- one each for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, France, Mexico, and the Philippines.

 

God speed to you all!

 

That reads better. By separating the 2 sentences, the history of the legion does not imply endorsement of the first sentence.

 

That was sarcasm or something right? Are we really going to start into splitting hairs on perceptions of wording like that?

 

I don't know - ask Groundspeak.

Link to comment
This cache is placed in honor of my girlfriend. On August 8, 2007 my girlfriend was raped on her way to find a cache.

 

This cache is placed at the Los Angeles branch of Planned Parenthood. After my girlfriend was raped, the police took her here for treatement. The doctor and nurses treated her with respect while collecting evidence that the police were able to use to catch the rapist. They also offered her Levonorgestrel (PlanB) to prevent an unwanted pregnacy. My girlfriend is doing much better but she doesn't cache solo any more.

 

Actually, the people who agree with the OP would say that this is NOT an agenda and should remain in place; however, if re-reviewed someone may say "well, this is a promotion for Planned Parenthood and the use of Levonogestrel" - so, to those who are supporting the OP it reads as "this is what happened to my girlfriend and we are thankful this organization exists" and would receive no hassle. The individual forcing the re-review and request to change words would see it as an agenda.

Edited by Carbon_n_kids
Link to comment

The steps for escalation, as I've seen them posted in this thread seem to indicate that the final review is posting it to the forums for the community to speak on.

That was my error. The final review is not the forums.

 

According to the guidelines, once the reviewer has denied and it's been taken to the private reviewer forum and denied, it can be taken to the forums for public input. This public review cannot automatically overrule the reviewers, however. Once it has been discussed on the forums, it can be appealed to TPTB at the appeal@ email address.

Link to comment

Here is a sample of what might be considered a PC compromise on the wording of the cache description. If you feel comfortable with it, feel free to use it, colors and all.

 

"I Personally would like to thank all those who served before, currently serving and those who will serve in the future. Diety's speed to you! Thank-you for our FREEDOM!

 

This organization (seen here at this cache) was chartered by Congress in 1919 as a patriotic, mutual-help, war-time veterans organization. A community-service organization which now numbers nearly 3 million members -- men and women -- in nearly 15,000 Organizational Posts worldwide. These Posts are organized into 55 Departments -- one each for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, France, Mexico, and the Philippines."

 

John & Shirley

 

Which diety would that be then? isnt God Speed a very old and comon phrase to wish someone a safe journey? I know of no other word that can be put there that in common usage preserves the meaning.

Link to comment

Its not that the passage is offensive. It's not political correctness run amok. It's just that the reviewer felt that the cache was promoting an agenda. That isn't allowed, no matter how worthy the agenda is. Of course there is nothing wrong at all with supporting our fighting men and women in this country, but a cache listing is not the place to do it.

 

The thing is that if you allow one worthy agenda, the next person comes along with his worthy agenda. Then you get into a debate as to what is worthy. I know most Americans support our men and women in uniform, but there are some who don't. What if they want equal time and try to publish a cache that is critical of the troops?

 

I agree with the listing guidelines. Let's keep this a light and fun game and keep all agendas out of it. If you want to declare your support for the troops, put a bumper sticker on your car, a sign on your lawn, donate money to a charity that cares for the families of our fallen heroes. Whatever. There are many ways to demonstrate your support outside of a geocache listing.

 

Not a getting started issue so moving to the general forum

 

 

Or maybe it's that the lame reviewer is promoting an agenda????? Only thing I can think of. You know how many Pro-troop caches I've seen in my travels?? Hundreds, if not dozens and dozens.

Link to comment

I'll be watching this thread to see how it plays out before I decide to become a premium member. I wouldn't want to support a site where political correctness has run amok.

 

I don't blame you. I'm also watching this thread closely to see what happens because it could very well affect my membership as well.

 

I suspect that the outcome of this situation could affect a lot of premium mebership purchase/renewals.

Link to comment

Its not that the passage is offensive. It's not political correctness run amok. It's just that the reviewer felt that the cache was promoting an agenda. That isn't allowed, no matter how worthy the agenda is. Of course there is nothing wrong at all with supporting our fighting men and women in this country, but a cache listing is not the place to do it.

 

The thing is that if you allow one worthy agenda, the next person comes along with his worthy agenda. Then you get into a debate as to what is worthy. I know most Americans support our men and women in uniform, but there are some who don't. What if they want equal time and try to publish a cache that is critical of the troops?

 

I agree with the listing guidelines. Let's keep this a light and fun game and keep all agendas out of it. If you want to declare your support for the troops, put a bumper sticker on your car, a sign on your lawn, donate money to a charity that cares for the families of our fallen heroes. Whatever. There are many ways to demonstrate your support outside of a geocache listing.

 

Not a getting started issue so moving to the general forum

 

 

Or maybe it's that the lame reviewer is promoting an agenda????? Only thing I can think of. You know how many Pro-troop caches I've seen in my travels?? Hundreds, if not dozens and dozens.

 

Maybe because there are so many military related geocachers...

Link to comment

Here is a sample of what might be considered a PC compromise on the wording of the cache description. If you feel comfortable with it, feel free to use it, colors and all.

 

"I Personally would like to thank all those who served before, currently serving and those who will serve in the future. Diety's speed to you! Thank-you for our FREEDOM!

 

This organization (seen here at this cache) was chartered by Congress in 1919 as a patriotic, mutual-help, war-time veterans organization. A community-service organization which now numbers nearly 3 million members -- men and women -- in nearly 15,000 Organizational Posts worldwide. These Posts are organized into 55 Departments -- one each for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, France, Mexico, and the Philippines."

 

John & Shirley

 

Which diety would that be then? isnt God Speed a very old and comon phrase to wish someone a safe journey? I know of no other word that can be put there that in common usage preserves the meaning.

 

Oh, God speed refers back to when God was on his high school track team... he was really fast!

 

just kidding LOL *looks for lightening*

Link to comment

Ok... im fustrated... placed a cache for the AGT series in our area. Had quiet a time getting my discription cleared by the reveiwer because i stated "support our troops". over several emails and lots of changes, i got it cleared for service... unreluctantly removing my wording.

 

a few months go by tons of cachers comments in appreciation to my caches and now i am being re- reviewed again asking me to take out any/all wording relating to the american legion and its history.. (site which cache is located).. this will leave almost no description. This issue came up after i had ONE cacher tell me my cache was lame and a poor excuse for "thanking a vet". (pghlooking)

 

so i looked up keyword... legion on geocache and found three pages of american legion caches and several worded EXACTLY like mine... Why is mine so targeted? one trouble making cacher? so if i dont take it out within 24 hrs.. i will have my cache pulled. I have been a long time member but am ready to PULL my membership over this..

 

I think this is crap! im not supporting any agenda, or even suggesting anyone joins the legion.. Just tring to honor my two children serving. my cache is gc16hm9 sibling soldiers II.

 

Can anyone help me?

 

Sorry I cannot offer any advice but I do think that is an outrage that your cache is being pulled over this subject!!!!!!! :laughing:

 

I am very thankful for the men and women serving our country. In fact there is a particular cache in my area I have been putting on hold because I want to trade something of importance for my gratitude.

 

Again, I am outraged. This is a shame.

Link to comment
Once it has been discussed on the forums, it can be appealed to TPTB at the appeal@ email address.

 

Well, then get to it...you have my support (whatever that may be worth).

 

I normally agree with TPTB when someone comes to the boards "complaining." But in this case, I don't see how the description is pushing an agenda any more than placing ANY cache pushes some agenda.

Link to comment

Now i hope we dont make this an privacy issue... none of these emails had confidencial attatched to them... not to much i know you put out on the net is private.. emails are admissable in court as evidence.. I am not tring to get the moderator in trouble, but i want to know if this issue is from Groundspeak or a cacher who doesnt care what he carlessly says to another cacher. then goes a step furthur to interfere in someone eles life without regard. I am not ashamed of anything i ever put up on the geo page or am tring to hide anything... all emails are attatched word for word... cut an pasted... i didnt edit anything to make them look bad or to make me look better. why should Groundspeak hide? . since when is this geocachers " log everything online" I think the pghlooking has a big enough ego to carry him thru. He isnt worried.. especially if he is friends with his moderator... i dont want nothing hidden ... i want to the bottom of this! lies and deception are not of my habit! my only intention with this forum was to appeal to help so i dont lose the essance of my cache... ... i mide as well scrap it then!

Wow is all I can say. I have received several emails informing me about this thread. I won't post them out of courtesy to those people. :laughing: Where to begin.

 

First I logged the cache honestly. I stand behind every word I wrote. You want the bitter truth? The cache was discusssed by several of us and concluded to be easily in our top 10 lamest caches. An ammo can sitting under the corner of a bar where you actually sit on the steps to the bar to retrieve it and sign it. You can do a check on the cache by travelling down the road at 35 MPH and see the can. It is lazy and uninspiring. The worst part about it is the fact this is on the list of caches to promote the trails and area of the county. It does nothing of the sorts. I logged it as nicely as I could. I left the area, to which I dorove to to find these caches promoting the area, and left with major disappointment. I know the AGT can't personally go out and check every one of these caches and have to rely on people hiding them in a manner that promotes the area, but this one was horrible.

 

The owner took it upon herself to email me with her attitude. I thought this was rather strange as I could care less what someone logs in their cache. It is their opinion and they are entitled to it. She decided it was her place to try to show me the merits of her cache and how I was unpatriotic for not liking the cache. I am sorry but I do not take this lightly. I served my country proudly and have the right to my opinions. The cache doesn't have to be some 5 star terrain job, but use some common sense and stop being so lazy. You are attracting cachers from other areas and other states, and this is what you want to be known for?

 

I know talking, debating, or attacking with the FACTS would much harder, but wouldn't be nearly as fun as this witch hunt is for some of you. I have been accused of quit a bit of things in the thread by alot of people who have no clue what they are talking about. For staters, my conversations about cache ended when I hit repy to the owner. I didn't report it for anything or tell a reviewer anything about it. I am sure Keystone can back me up on that. I could care less about this cache other than the lame image it gives to that area. I thought the wasted time logging the cache was all I was going to have to deal with. Little did I know it would result in an owner crying about it to the general community, flinging accussations about a relationship between the reviewer and myself, and have a bunch of people jumping on the moving bandwagon.

 

Quite a few of you should be ashamed at going off on someone when you have only one side of the story.

Link to comment

Let me preface my comments by saying that my dad was in the US Navy for 32 years and is still involved with many military matters. I have many friends who are currently in the military or have had military service in the past. I am a staunch supporter of them and of their efforts and their service as well as that of all members of all branches of the military. I work on a regular basis with volunteer groups from various Navy ships home ported here.

 

However, the bolded part of this statement that the cache owner says in on the cache page "Both of my children are currently serving in the U.S. Army and this is a tribute to them, their bravery and sevice to our country. Both of my children are currently serving in the U.S. Army and this is a tribute to them, their bravery and sevice to our country. I would like to thank all those who served before, currently serving and those who will serve in the future. God's speed to you! Thank-you for our FREEDOM! !" is clearly, in my opinion an agenda.

 

It doesn't just say "I'm proud of my children." I goes beyond that. Whether we agree with the sentiment isn't part of the issue according to the cache guidelines. It's still an agenda.

 

Also, just for correctness of grammar, the word is "Godspeed". One word with no 's after God. Perhaps that might ease those concerned about the God part, if anyone is/was.

Link to comment

I see nothing wrong with the wording. I have found caches that have descriptions of historical events, and this is a description of the history of the legion. As for supporting the troops, it pains me to think that anyone living in this country would be anything but grateful to those men and women who serve.

Link to comment
... First I logged the cache honestly. I stand behind every word I wrote. You want the bitter truth? The cache was discusssed by several of us and concluded to be easily in our top 10 lamest caches. An ammo can sitting under the corner of a bar where you actually sit on the steps to the bar to retrieve it and sign it. You can do a check on the cache by travelling down the road at 35 MPH and see the can. It is lazy and uninspiring. The worst part about it is the fact this is on the list of caches to promote the trails and area of the county. It does nothing of the sorts. I logged it as nicely as I could. I left the area, to which I dorove to to find these caches promoting the area, and left with major disappointment. I know the AGT can't personally go out and check every one of these caches and have to rely on people hiding them in a manner that promotes the area, but this one was horrible.

 

The owner took it upon herself to email me with her attitude. I thought this was rather strange ...

You logged the cache with attitude and then were surprised that you got attitude back.

 

Huh.

Link to comment
Wow is all I can say. I have received several emails informing me about this thread. I won't post them out of courtesy to those people. Where to begin.

 

I'm not trying to be rude here. But if you read the entire thread....it's really not about you.

 

The OP could have been wrong about your comment starting a re-review of the cache. I think that was the only reason it was added.

 

But at this point, the OP has bigger fish to fry (the whole "agenda" issue...you might have noticed it).

 

No big deal....it's just not really about you anymore. So, Godspeed!

Link to comment

I just ran across this thread, and frankly, I'm appalled! Since there seems to be no other agenda than honouring vets, children and the Legion, what's to worry about?

 

The reviewer may or may not be a flag waving supporter of the constitution of your great United States. He/she may or may not support your troops. The problem arises when he/she singles out a cache listing that appears to be no different than so many others that have been allowed to stand the test of time.

 

BTW, I am a Canadian vet (1969-1973), and if I'm ever in your area, I would be proud to put a signature in your log book.

Link to comment
... First I logged the cache honestly. I stand behind every word I wrote. You want the bitter truth? The cache was discusssed by several of us and concluded to be easily in our top 10 lamest caches. An ammo can sitting under the corner of a bar where you actually sit on the steps to the bar to retrieve it and sign it. You can do a check on the cache by travelling down the road at 35 MPH and see the can. It is lazy and uninspiring. The worst part about it is the fact this is on the list of caches to promote the trails and area of the county. It does nothing of the sorts. I logged it as nicely as I could. I left the area, to which I dorove to to find these caches promoting the area, and left with major disappointment. I know the AGT can't personally go out and check every one of these caches and have to rely on people hiding them in a manner that promotes the area, but this one was horrible.

 

The owner took it upon herself to email me with her attitude. I thought this was rather strange ...

You logged the cache with attitude and then were surprised that you got attitude back.

 

Huh.

Actually I am surprised someone is going to take their time to try to convince me my opinons are wrong. It was my opinion and still is. The cache sucks. Emailing me about it won't change that, and shouldn't.

 

You have to take the good with the bad when you are a cache owner. But then again this is what is coming to with all the fluff logs people put out there. Logs have gotten to be a joke. Few people tend to be honest anymore because they don't want to hurt someone's feelings, and by doing that, the quality of caches digresses. If you don't like my cache, then log it so. I don't care. It is your opinion and you are entitled to it. If I were to email you about it, it would be to find a way to improve it based on feedback, not try to change the feedback to fit what I wanted.

Link to comment
... First I logged the cache honestly. I stand behind every word I wrote. You want the bitter truth? The cache was discusssed by several of us and concluded to be easily in our top 10 lamest caches. An ammo can sitting under the corner of a bar where you actually sit on the steps to the bar to retrieve it and sign it. You can do a check on the cache by travelling down the road at 35 MPH and see the can. It is lazy and uninspiring. The worst part about it is the fact this is on the list of caches to promote the trails and area of the county. It does nothing of the sorts. I logged it as nicely as I could. I left the area, to which I dorove to to find these caches promoting the area, and left with major disappointment. I know the AGT can't personally go out and check every one of these caches and have to rely on people hiding them in a manner that promotes the area, but this one was horrible.

 

The owner took it upon herself to email me with her attitude. I thought this was rather strange ...

You logged the cache with attitude and then were surprised that you got attitude back.

 

Huh.

 

Amen! I am amazed when people log nasty comments and think they are being "honest". From where I stand it just looks like they're being rude.

 

Also, anyone who could find an agenda in the wording on this cache page has a serious agenda themselves.

Edited by Trinity's Crew
Link to comment
Wow is all I can say. I have received several emails informing me about this thread. I won't post them out of courtesy to those people. Where to begin.

 

I'm not trying to be rude here. But if you read the entire thread....it's really not about you.

 

The OP could have been wrong about your comment starting a re-review of the cache. I think that was the only reason it was added.

 

But at this point, the OP has bigger fish to fry (the whole "agenda" issue...you might have noticed it).

 

No big deal....it's just not really about you anymore. So, Godspeed!

I just got home and have seen my name and words pasted over three seperate pages, so forgive me if I think this thread has a little to do with me. The OP seems to think I am the reason her cache is in trouble, to which I knew nothing about till this thread. If the topic has moved on so be it, but when someone people have taken shots at me, pasted emails from me, and make accussations about me, shouldn't I have a moment to post a reply about this and state my side when I get a chance? Sorry if not everyone will agree with the timeline, but this was the first chance I got.

 

I shouldn't have had to post at all since the point of her thread appears to be about the agenda and the reviewers so I am not even clear why my name, log, or emails are on this thread anyhow. Other than I didn't like the cache.

Link to comment

Hmmmm rewording you say....

 

---

This cache is placed in honor of my children who are serving in the US Armed Forces. I am proud of what they are doing and want to thank all who have served or are serving.

 

The American Legion was chartered by Congress in 1919 as a patriotic, mutual-help, war-time veterans organization. A community-service organization which now numbers nearly 3 million members -- men and women -- in nearly 15,000 American Legion Posts worldwide. These Posts are organized into 55 Departments -- one each for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, France, Mexico, and the Philippines.

 

God speed to you all!

 

That reads better. By separating the 2 sentences, the history of the legion does not imply endorsement of the first sentence.

 

That was sarcasm or something right? Are we really going to start into splitting hairs on perceptions of wording like that?

Sarcasm? :laughing:

 

No, it actually does read better. By separating the history and the CO comments, the history of the legion does not run into the cachers personal comments.

 

Although, I don't see any problem with the original wording, I can see how someone else could read it quickly and think there was something else to it.

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment
... First I logged the cache honestly. I stand behind every word I wrote. You want the bitter truth? The cache was discusssed by several of us and concluded to be easily in our top 10 lamest caches. An ammo can sitting under the corner of a bar where you actually sit on the steps to the bar to retrieve it and sign it. You can do a check on the cache by travelling down the road at 35 MPH and see the can. It is lazy and uninspiring. The worst part about it is the fact this is on the list of caches to promote the trails and area of the county. It does nothing of the sorts. I logged it as nicely as I could. I left the area, to which I dorove to to find these caches promoting the area, and left with major disappointment. I know the AGT can't personally go out and check every one of these caches and have to rely on people hiding them in a manner that promotes the area, but this one was horrible.

 

The owner took it upon herself to email me with her attitude. I thought this was rather strange ...

You logged the cache with attitude and then were surprised that you got attitude back.

 

Huh.

 

Amen! I am amazed when people log nasty comments and think they are being "honest". From where I stand it just looks like they're being rude.

 

Also, anyone who could find an agenda in the wording on this cache page has a serious agenda themselves.

I started a thread in off topic about this kind of behavior . I like the Idea of this cache , But if I didnt I would go find some of the thousands of others . Political not political agenda no agenda . Dont take offence to the cache just go to another one .

Thousand of US vets have died all over the world protecting the rights of those who now choose to hate the USA . Those who choose to be offended by such a insignificant thing will quickly find something else to be offended by . Dont give up geocaching because of a few who are offended . : :laughing:

Link to comment

Without sugar-coating it, this absolutely stinks.

 

There is NOTHING wrong with this cache, the placement (I have found it), or the wording on the page.

 

Absolutely nothing.

 

I would consider pulling my premium membership as well. This is an affront. I am not a political person, nor am I supportive of military actions of any kind (except in defense of ourselves, and Iraq ain't that, IMHO). But I am supportive of this person's cache, wording, and idea.

 

This is an example of the people at GS.com taking things WAY too seriously. WAY too seriously.

 

Some reviewers, and some people that have problems with this cache, it's placement, or its wording, have way too much time on their hands and way too little to do. They can publish a cache that directly violates the rules (the one requiring eating inside a business), and until the great outcry that if an exception was granted, it was a bad decision...if not, it was something that slipped through the cracks, it got through. When the outcry happened, it "quietly" disappeared (like retracted, not even just archived).

 

Why not explain this a little more clearly what the specific problem with this is, and go with the public opinion on it?

 

Or... just do whatever you want... that's how things around here seem to work. We just get told "if you don't like it, go somewhere else". Great business model.

Link to comment

So, If I say the cache has an agenda does that mean I hate veterans?

 

(checks batteries in the irony meter)

Not necessarily, but I would have to ask what you thought the agenda was. My point is that I don't see any obvious agenda on the cache page. If you find one you may have some sort of ax to grind.

Link to comment

"Both of my children are currently serving in the U.S. Army and this is a tribute to them, their bravery and sevice to our country. I would like to thank all those who served before, currently serving and those who will serve in the future. God's speed to you! Thank-you for our FREEDOM!"

 

I think this is the only part of the page that needs revising.

 

Either way, I don't really see anything wrong with what pglooking said in his log. Just stating his experience at the cache. Whats the big deal?

Link to comment

Now i hope we dont make this an privacy issue... none of these emails had confidencial attatched to them... not to much i know you put out on the net is private.. emails are admissable in court as evidence.. I am not tring to get the moderator in trouble, but i want to know if this issue is from Groundspeak or a cacher who doesnt care what he carlessly says to another cacher. then goes a step furthur to interfere in someone eles life without regard. I am not ashamed of anything i ever put up on the geo page or am tring to hide anything... all emails are attatched word for word... cut an pasted... i didnt edit anything to make them look bad or to make me look better. why should Groundspeak hide? . since when is this geocachers " log everything online" I think the pghlooking has a big enough ego to carry him thru. He isnt worried.. especially if he is friends with his moderator... i dont want nothing hidden ... i want to the bottom of this! lies and deception are not of my habit! my only intention with this forum was to appeal to help so i dont lose the essance of my cache... ... i mide as well scrap it then!

Wow is all I can say. I have received several emails informing me about this thread. I won't post them out of courtesy to those people. :laughing: Where to begin.

 

First I logged the cache honestly. I stand behind every word I wrote. You want the bitter truth? The cache was discusssed by several of us and concluded to be easily in our top 10 lamest caches. An ammo can sitting under the corner of a bar where you actually sit on the steps to the bar to retrieve it and sign it. You can do a check on the cache by travelling down the road at 35 MPH and see the can. It is lazy and uninspiring. The worst part about it is the fact this is on the list of caches to promote the trails and area of the county. It does nothing of the sorts. I logged it as nicely as I could. I left the area, to which I dorove to to find these caches promoting the area, and left with major disappointment. I know the AGT can't personally go out and check every one of these caches and have to rely on people hiding them in a manner that promotes the area, but this one was horrible.

 

The owner took it upon herself to email me with her attitude. I thought this was rather strange as I could care less what someone logs in their cache. It is their opinion and they are entitled to it. She decided it was her place to try to show me the merits of her cache and how I was unpatriotic for not liking the cache. I am sorry but I do not take this lightly. I served my country proudly and have the right to my opinions. The cache doesn't have to be some 5 star terrain job, but use some common sense and stop being so lazy. You are attracting cachers from other areas and other states, and this is what you want to be known for?

 

I know talking, debating, or attacking with the FACTS would much harder, but wouldn't be nearly as fun as this witch hunt is for some of you. I have been accused of quit a bit of things in the thread by alot of people who have no clue what they are talking about. For staters, my conversations about cache ended when I hit repy to the owner. I didn't report it for anything or tell a reviewer anything about it. I am sure Keystone can back me up on that. I could care less about this cache other than the lame image it gives to that area. I thought the wasted time logging the cache was all I was going to have to deal with. Little did I know it would result in an owner crying about it to the general community, flinging accussations about a relationship between the reviewer and myself, and have a bunch of people jumping on the moving bandwagon.

 

Quite a few of you should be ashamed at going off on someone when you have only one side of the story.

 

You have the right to your opinion. Others have the right to theirs. If I don't like LPC's (which I do), I don't slam every one I find because I don't like it. If you don't like the cache, you shouldn't have gone and gotten it. If you were that disappointed to see it driving by at 35 MPH, you should have kept going 35 MPH - not taken the time to slam someone who put the time and effort and expense into putting it out and maintaining it.

 

And that's just my opinion. Which I am entitled to. Read the line in my sig-file starting with "Hunt what you like..." - it definitely applies here.

Link to comment

I am discusted with what has happened to the OP. :laughing: The "agenda" I see is with the reviewer for singling out the cache owner. If this is breaking the guideines set forth by GC.com then many, many other cache are in violation too. I've spent some time reading other cache descriptions and there are so many that are like in content. I will pull my membership if this(lack of volunteer reviewer accountability) is allowed to persist by the GC.com company. So please keep me informed.

 

I think in this case the reviewer needs to be reviewed.

 

I support Geocaching!

Link to comment

Also, it looks like a lot of people have found your cache since him. He isn't neccessarily the person who emailed TPTB, just b/c he was the one who complained about the cache..

 

Some people who disagree with the cache will post an SBA and some people will privately email the reviewer while logging the cache "tftc, tnln" to avoid just this kind of conflict.

Not sure where the "your" cache comes into play.

 

Meaning a lot of people found it since him, any one of them could have contacted the reviewer, I don't know that his log and correspondance neccessarily have anything to do with the cache being re-reviewed.

 

Actually I believe the reviewer said that in his email "That request came from another cacher and another reviewer."

 

I'd think that someone who wouldn't be afraid to say what he thinks in his log, wouldn't be afraid to post an SBA saying why anyway.

 

Ok, the "your" was confusing...since it wasn't my cache, but I see you were using the term generically.

 

My point is merely that no one should ever assume e-mail correspondence is private. And, there is far cry difference from what is e-mailed in this exchange versus what a more polite intentioned person would be trying to avoid versus logging their frustration.

 

Frankly, judging by the content of the e-mail, I don't feel sorry for someone that gets rewarded with that posted publicly. Just my opinion.

Likewise, a more polite intentioned person might try to avoid "rewarding" somebody by posting it publicly.

 

If you choose to make that character judgment then so be it...it doesn't invalidate my point.

Edited by egami
Link to comment

I have read this thread after receiving several messages about it.

 

The only thing that troubles me are the suggestions that the reviewer is pursuing his own personal agenda in regards to this cache. That is not the case, and I thank those few posters who noted this. The reviewers are under very clear instructions not to publish "Support our Troops" caches -- even the mere mention of those words is enough to flag a cache and hold it until it's fixed. I've lost count of how many "agenda" caches I've handled. Add to the "Support our Troops" caches all the disease awareness caches and religious-themed caches, and it's quite a bit of work. The number of replies to this thread rather proves the point -- it is a subject that promotes emotional responses, none of which have anything to do with GPS receivers.

 

Enforcing the "no agenda" guideline has absolutely nothing to do with my personal feelings. As it happens, I am a supporter of US military policies, a committed Christian, and a member of a family directly affected by a number of scary diseases. That doesn't matter. It's Groundspeak's site, and they'd like it to stay free of social, political and religious agendas. They're little boxes in the woods, not platforms. I can talk about politics at a politics website and I can talk about religion with my prayer group. But if I want to be a volunteer for Groundspeak, I need to follow their instructions. A reviewer who is adamantly opposed to the war should take the same approach to a "Support our Troops" cache, and an agnostic reviewer should deal with a religious-themed cache the same way that I do.

 

If some other caches with agendas have slipped through, or been edited after being published, that doesn't justify listing the next one to come through the review process.

 

Please stop calling the reviewer names or suggesting that he's pursuing some sort of personal vendetta against this or any similarly-themed cache. I would have handled it the same way. Thank you.

Link to comment

From Webster...

 

agenda

 

3 entries found.

 

Main Entry:

 

Pronunciation:

\ə-ˈjen-də\

Function:

noun

Etymology:

Latin, neuter plural of agendum, gerundive of agere

Date:

1871

 

1 : a list or outline of things to be considered or done <agendas of faculty meetings

 

2 : an underlying often ideological plan or program <a political agenda>

— agen·da·less Listen to the pronunciation of agendaless \-də-ləs\ adjective

 

I agree with the OP.

 

God Bless you!

 

I disagree with pghlooking. God Bless you, too!

 

I would welcome some commentary from the reviewer in question, as well as a lackey or two.

Link to comment

I have read this thread after receiving several messages about it.

 

The only thing that troubles me are the suggestions that the reviewer is pursuing his own personal agenda in regards to this cache. That is not the case, and I thank those few posters who noted this. The reviewers are under very clear instructions not to publish "Support our Troops" caches -- even the mere mention of those words is enough to flag a cache and hold it until it's fixed. I've lost count of how many "agenda" caches I've handled. Add to the "Support our Troops" caches all the disease awareness caches and religious-themed caches, and it's quite a bit of work. The number of replies to this thread rather proves the point -- it is a subject that promotes emotional responses, none of which have anything to do with GPS receivers.

 

Enforcing the "no agenda" guideline has absolutely nothing to do with my personal feelings. As it happens, I am a supporter of US military policies, a committed Christian, and a member of a family directly affected by a number of scary diseases. That doesn't matter. It's Groundspeak's site, and they'd like it to stay free of social, political and religious agendas. They're little boxes in the woods, not platforms. I can talk about politics at a politics website and I can talk about religion with my prayer group. But if I want to be a volunteer for Groundspeak, I need to follow their instructions. A reviewer who is adamantly opposed to the war should take the same approach to a "Support our Troops" cache, and an agnostic reviewer should deal with a religious-themed cache the same way that I do.

 

If some other caches with agendas have slipped through, or been edited after being published, that doesn't justify listing the next one to come through the review process.

 

Please stop calling the reviewer names or suggesting that he's pursuing some sort of personal vendetta against this or any similarly-themed cache. I would have handled it the same way. Thank you.

 

I actually agree with you, technically (but I think there are other violations if you take it that far). I've contemplated tossing out the suggestion that what if this was a cache description that said "don't support the troops" just to make a counter-point, but decided against it for fear of someone misinterpreting the point and my actual support of the military.

 

However, on the other hand, I think there has to be a way you can still do a tribute to cache without crossing the "agenda" line. Or do you not see it that way? Because ultimately that is the line that is in question it seems.

Edited by egami
Link to comment

Sorry, but it seems that this is selective enforcement of the guidelines. What is wrong with someone wishing the troops well? No one is asking you to thanks them/us. No one is asking you to solicit the American Legion. There are plenty of caches that have "thank you" text as part of the description and I don't feel that they push an agenda, and neither does this one. I say let it stand as is and would even support (can I say that here) a worldwide series thanking their local men and women that place their lives on the line, be it Military, Police, Fire, etc, so that we can feel secure in our everyday lives.

 

logo_phpBB.gif

Link to comment

So, If I say the cache has an agenda does that mean I hate veterans?

 

(checks batteries in the irony meter)

Not necessarily, but I would have to ask what you thought the agenda was. My point is that I don't see any obvious agenda on the cache page. If you find one you may have some sort of ax to grind.

 

uhmm, veterans?

Link to comment

I just ran across this thread, and frankly, I'm appalled! Since there seems to be no other agenda than honouring vets, children and the Legion, what's to worry about?

 

What's to worry about? The cache, as currently posted (in my opinion, of course) has an agenda supporting The American Legion. This is an organization with a political agenda. A rather strange political agenda, I might add, which is to the right of Rush Limbaugh on most social issues, but yet supports continued, and increased government spending on veteran's issues. Basically, it's one big political action committee, without official PAC status. I speak as a card carrying 9 year member, who receives their monthly magazine (an issue of which is within sight as I type this).

 

I've seen plenty o' "caches with an agenda" come up in these forums. I would say comply with the reviewers request, and go through the appeal process.

Link to comment

So, If I say the cache has an agenda does that mean I hate veterans?

 

(checks batteries in the irony meter)

Not necessarily, but I would have to ask what you thought the agenda was. My point is that I don't see any obvious agenda on the cache page. If you find one you may have some sort of ax to grind.

 

uhmm, veterans?

uhmm, I did a VERY brief search and found LOTS of caches that thank our police, fire, and rescue forces. I don't really see an agenda with any of these caches, any more than I do with the cache in question. Perhaps you do. Or perhaps you are only offended by caches that thank veterans. Only you know the answer to that.

Link to comment

If some other caches with agendas have slipped through, or been edited after being published, that doesn't justify listing the next one to come through the review process.

 

We are not talking about approval - this cache has been up and running for a while. We are talking about selectively going back and 'deleting' caches that might offend some poor soul.

And, they are relatively easy to find. Why purge the one. Let's be fair and purge them all.

It is certainly not fair to single out this one "support the troops" cache.

Plugging in "support" generates 51 other caches and the first ones on the list are 3 different "Support Our Troops" caches.

Plugging in "troops" brings up 35 caches (granted some of them are duplicates of the first).

"God" gets 0 hits, but "Buddah" has 3.

"Agenda" brings up 3 more.

"Political" brings up another 12

 

I put it to you that you would be very hard pressed to actually create a cache page that does not support some sort of agenda. Even my one measly cache asks you to feed the ducks and fish.

 

"The Sunshine Canyon Landfill, operated by Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI), has been handling the solid waste disposal needs of Los Angeles City and County for more than 50 years. It is a state of the art urban landfill that meets or exceeds all state and federal safety regulations for solid waste disposal, water quality, and air quality. It's location near the junction of the I-5 and 210 Freeways makes it covenient for trucks coming from all over the county, avoiding long trips to more rural locations."

Advertises for BFI, promotes sending trash to landfills instead of recycling. Way out? That is about the same logic that is being applied to the OP's cache.

Edited by Airhead-kb
Link to comment

So, If I say the cache has an agenda does that mean I hate veterans?

 

(checks batteries in the irony meter)

Not necessarily, but I would have to ask what you thought the agenda was. My point is that I don't see any obvious agenda on the cache page. If you find one you may have some sort of ax to grind.

 

uhmm, veterans?

uhmm, I did a VERY brief search and found LOTS of caches that thank our police, fire, and rescue forces. I don't really see an agenda with any of these caches, any more than I do with the cache in question. Perhaps you do. Or perhaps you are only offended by caches that thank veterans. Only you know the answer to that.

 

I think the right answer is the war. It's too close to the line of the war in Iraq. And, despite being for our troops, I can see where those who don't support the war, or our troops, generally view it as such. It is somewhat subjective.

 

That's why I'd like an answer from Keystone or a mod. Where is the line exactly? The truth is it's gray a bit if you look at what's actively enforced. I mean, technically you can make a lot of caches an agenda if you wanted to take it to that level.

 

So, if this cache is too close to the line then what is the proper way to recognize and support the troops now in Iraq with a cache. Because let's face it...if this were a WW2 memorial, there wouldn't have been an issue raised.

Link to comment

I have a question.

 

By "supporting" an "agenda," do we mean "fundraising" or just raising awareness?

 

I had a cache denied because we were having a food/coat/blanket-drive for a local soup-kitchen and homeless shelter.

 

I reworded and had no problem (raised a ton of food and clothing for the cause, too!)

 

From what I can see, there is no request for anything other than awareness.

Link to comment

Now i hope we dont make this an privacy issue... none of these emails had confidencial attatched to them... not to much i know you put out on the net is private.. emails are admissable in court as evidence.. I am not tring to get the moderator in trouble, but i want to know if this issue is from Groundspeak or a cacher who doesnt care what he carlessly says to another cacher. then goes a step furthur to interfere in someone eles life without regard. I am not ashamed of anything i ever put up on the geo page or am tring to hide anything... all emails are attatched word for word... cut an pasted... i didnt edit anything to make them look bad or to make me look better. why should Groundspeak hide? . since when is this geocachers " log everything online" I think the pghlooking has a big enough ego to carry him thru. He isnt worried.. especially if he is friends with his moderator... i dont want nothing hidden ... i want to the bottom of this! lies and deception are not of my habit! my only intention with this forum was to appeal to help so i dont lose the essance of my cache... ... i mide as well scrap it then!

Wow is all I can say. I have received several emails informing me about this thread. I won't post them out of courtesy to those people. :laughing: Where to begin.

 

First I logged the cache honestly. I stand behind every word I wrote. You want the bitter truth? The cache was discusssed by several of us and concluded to be easily in our top 10 lamest caches. An ammo can sitting under the corner of a bar where you actually sit on the steps to the bar to retrieve it and sign it. You can do a check on the cache by travelling down the road at 35 MPH and see the can. It is lazy and uninspiring. The worst part about it is the fact this is on the list of caches to promote the trails and area of the county. It does nothing of the sorts. I logged it as nicely as I could. I left the area, to which I dorove to to find these caches promoting the area, and left with major disappointment. I know the AGT can't personally go out and check every one of these caches and have to rely on people hiding them in a manner that promotes the area, but this one was horrible.

 

The owner took it upon herself to email me with her attitude. I thought this was rather strange as I could care less what someone logs in their cache. It is their opinion and they are entitled to it. She decided it was her place to try to show me the merits of her cache and how I was unpatriotic for not liking the cache. I am sorry but I do not take this lightly. I served my country proudly and have the right to my opinions. The cache doesn't have to be some 5 star terrain job, but use some common sense and stop being so lazy. You are attracting cachers from other areas and other states, and this is what you want to be known for?

 

I know talking, debating, or attacking with the FACTS would much harder, but wouldn't be nearly as fun as this witch hunt is for some of you. I have been accused of quit a bit of things in the thread by alot of people who have no clue what they are talking about. For staters, my conversations about cache ended when I hit repy to the owner. I didn't report it for anything or tell a reviewer anything about it. I am sure Keystone can back me up on that. I could care less about this cache other than the lame image it gives to that area. I thought the wasted time logging the cache was all I was going to have to deal with. Little did I know it would result in an owner crying about it to the general community, flinging accussations about a relationship between the reviewer and myself, and have a bunch of people jumping on the moving bandwagon.

 

Quite a few of you should be ashamed at going off on someone when you have only one side of the story.

 

Sorry but the inclusion of your name seems to be relevant to the discussion here. Though you may be innocent of the accusation, it is rather suspect that it happened after the nasty response to the OP's email. And as for the OP wanting to explain her reason for placing the cache and try to sway your bleak, and quite rude may I add, opinion in your log, it is human nature to do so as you well know. I noticed that someone left a rather disheartening comment on one of YOUR caches and that you too took the time to write the cacher. Though I am not sure what your email exchange was like, I am sure it was much more polite than the one between you and the OP.

 

v/r

O-Mega

Link to comment

So, If I say the cache has an agenda does that mean I hate veterans?

 

(checks batteries in the irony meter)

Not necessarily, but I would have to ask what you thought the agenda was. My point is that I don't see any obvious agenda on the cache page. If you find one you may have some sort of ax to grind.

 

uhmm, veterans?

uhmm, I did a VERY brief search and found LOTS of caches that thank our police, fire, and rescue forces. I don't really see an agenda with any of these caches, any more than I do with the cache in question. Perhaps you do. Or perhaps you are only offended by caches that thank veterans. Only you know the answer to that.

 

I think the right answer is the war. It's too close to the line of the war in Iraq. And, despite being for our troops, I can see where those who don't support the war, or our troops, generally view it as such. It is somewhat subjective.

 

That's why I'd like an answer from Keystone or a mod. Where is the line exactly? The truth is it's gray a bit if you look at what's actively enforced. I mean, technically you can make a lot of caches an agenda if you wanted to take it to that level.

 

So, if this cache is too close to the line then what is the proper way to recognize and support the troops now in Iraq with a cache. Because let's face it...if this were a WW2 memorial, there wouldn't have been an issue raised.

I think the right answer (for Blue Deuce) is the one he gave. He didn't say, "uhmm the war?" Even if he did, the cache doesn't mention the war. It thanks our military for doing a mostly thankless job.

Link to comment

I think the right answer (for Blue Deuce) is the one he gave. He didn't say, "uhmm the war?" Even if he did, the cache doesn't mention the war. It thanks our military for doing a mostly thankless job.

 

I am sorry you took my reply as being corrective of his opinion.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 7
×
×
  • Create New...