+2happy2gether Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 Latest article from the world of geocaching Quote Link to comment
+northernpenguin Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 Police now want to talk to the geocacher with the nickname "Red Suspenders" who they believe planted the cache. Big Box store micro placers take note. I really doubt they want to congradulate the cache owner for a clever hide. Quote Link to comment
+Keith Watson Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 (edited) I wonder if the mall owerner will search all their properties for caches and ask that they be removed? Edited April 14, 2008 by Keith Watson Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 I wonder if the mall owerner will search all their properties for caches and ask that they be removed? I had a cache behind a Costco at one time. They had these suspicious looking boxes behind the store marked "Poison". Strange. I wonder if they would blow those up? Quote Link to comment
+GreyingJay Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 Well, the article is right. These things are supposed to be placed with permission from the property owner. Any lamp skirt micro or tube-in-the-woods-behind-a-big-box is 99% likely to be in violation of these terms. The cache reviewers really should start clamping down on this before the police get totally fed up with us. You can guess how I feel about these urban, no-hike, "nothing but a log book" caches designed to test the limits of how "stealthy" you can be. Quote Link to comment
+Keith Watson Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 Well, the article is right. These things are supposed to be placed with permission from the property owner. Any lamp skirt micro or tube-in-the-woods-behind-a-big-box is 99% likely to be in violation of these terms. The cache reviewers really should start clamping down on this before the police get totally fed up with us. You can guess how I feel about these urban, no-hike, "nothing but a log book" caches designed to test the limits of how "stealthy" you can be. That’s it boys and girls, back to the woods. I hope the trails and conservation authorities are ready for the high traffic surge. Quote Link to comment
+GreyingJay Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 That's it boys and girls, back to the woods. I hope the trails and conservation authorities are ready for the high traffic surge. Heh. Well, the point stands. If you really want to place an urban skirt-lifter, OK, fine. But get permission to do so (if they'll let you!) so it's kosher. I think that would solve a lot of problems -- fewer issues with police and "suspicious activity" and fewer lame caches, as you'd have to find ways of justifying them to the property owner. No more nano containers hidden beside trash dumpsters. And, honestly, I would be much more open-minded about searching around said trash dumpster for a cache if I knew that the proprietor OK'd its placement. So even "lame" hides become somewhat less lame. Everybody wins! Quote Link to comment
+Keith Watson Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 That's it boys and girls, back to the woods. I hope the trails and conservation authorities are ready for the high traffic surge. Heh. Well, the point stands. If you really want to place an urban skirt-lifter, OK, fine. But get permission to do so (if they'll let you!) so it's kosher. I think that would solve a lot of problems -- fewer issues with police and "suspicious activity" and fewer lame caches, as you'd have to find ways of justifying them to the property owner. No more nano containers hidden beside trash dumpsters. And, honestly, I would be much more open-minded about searching around said trash dumpster for a cache if I knew that the proprietor OK'd its placement. So even "lame" hides become somewhat less lame. Everybody wins! As I posted in another thread. Getting permission does not guarantee your cache doesn't get blown up. Even when you get permission from the police. Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 ...But get permission to do so (if they'll let you!) so it's kosher. I think that would solve a lot of problems -- fewer issues with police and "suspicious activity" ... It solves some issues but does nothing for the suspicious activity and police or being called in. Permission is a non issue for that venue. Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted April 15, 2008 Share Posted April 15, 2008 (edited) That's it boys and girls, back to the woods. I hope the trails and conservation authorities are ready for the high traffic surge. Heh. Well, the point stands. If you really want to place an urban skirt-lifter, OK, fine. But get permission to do so (if they'll let you!) so it's kosher. I think that would solve a lot of problems -- fewer issues with police and "suspicious activity" and fewer lame caches, as you'd have to find ways of justifying them to the property owner. No more nano containers hidden beside trash dumpsters. And, honestly, I would be much more open-minded about searching around said trash dumpster for a cache if I knew that the proprietor OK'd its placement. So even "lame" hides become somewhat less lame. Everybody wins! Like this? Unfortunately, the elaborate cache description didn't tell seekers to be "stealthy" in the Wally World parking lot. I do agree with RK and KW though. Just because you get permission from one person in management doesn't mean another person might disagree totally with a cache, or not know about it, and call the police. Edited April 15, 2008 by TheWhiteUrkel Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.