Unacceptable Cache Hides - In Your Opinion

[+sbell111]

[+SG One]

Caches in peoples front yards that were placed without permition bug me. One of these was hidden on a stop sign in somones front yard. The instructions said to reach it from the street inorder to stay off private property. I went to go check this one out. When I saw the home owner and decided to talk to him. It turned out this poor fellow and thought that people were trying to vandalize or steel the sign. I explained the situation and he seemed ok with it, but this should have been done by the hider.

[+Sioneva]

The only caches I have had a problem with are those that are placed too high for me to reach. I am only 5' tall and have found a few where the comments indicate that they are placed high up or that a previous finder had problems reaching it and had to come back with someone tall. That kind of bums me out so I have to avoid those or drag my anti-caching husband with me as my team is comprised of short women.

 

Hint: ammo cans can double as stepstools. I know this from personal experience.

[+Buggheart]

The only caches I have had a problem with are those that are placed too high for me to reach. I am only 5' tall and have found a few where the comments indicate that they are placed high up or that a previous finder had problems reaching it and had to come back with someone tall. That kind of bums me out so I have to avoid those or drag my anti-caching husband with me as my team is comprised of short women.

 

Hint: ammo cans can double as stepstools. I know this from personal experience.

Great tip! Thanks. Only that would mean that I have to walk around with an ammo can on me at all times Maybe I should just wear a nice pair if KISS boots or something. Yeah, my luck I'd twist my ankle and end up laying there in the woods as snake bait.

[+Sioneva]

The only caches I have had a problem with are those that are placed too high for me to reach. I am only 5' tall and have found a few where the comments indicate that they are placed high up or that a previous finder had problems reaching it and had to come back with someone tall. That kind of bums me out so I have to avoid those or drag my anti-caching husband with me as my team is comprised of short women.

 

Hint: ammo cans can double as stepstools. I know this from personal experience.

Great tip! Thanks. Only that would mean that I have to walk around with an ammo can on me at all times Maybe I should just wear a nice pair if KISS boots or something. Yeah, my luck I'd twist my ankle and end up laying there in the woods as snake bait.

 

KISS = Keep It Short, Stupid?

 

Oh. Yeah. I did fall off the ammo can, to the endless amusement of my caching buddy Cachephrase.

 

But on the plus side... I got the cache!

[+Buggheart]

The only caches I have had a problem with are those that are placed too high for me to reach. I am only 5' tall and have found a few where the comments indicate that they are placed high up or that a previous finder had problems reaching it and had to come back with someone tall. That kind of bums me out so I have to avoid those or drag my anti-caching husband with me as my team is comprised of short women.

 

Hint: ammo cans can double as stepstools. I know this from personal experience.

Great tip! Thanks. Only that would mean that I have to walk around with an ammo can on me at all times Maybe I should just wear a nice pair if KISS boots or something. Yeah, my luck I'd twist my ankle and end up laying there in the woods as snake bait.

 

KISS = Keep It Short, Stupid?

 

Oh. Yeah. I did fall off the ammo can, to the endless amusement of my caching buddy Cachephrase.

 

But on the plus side... I got the cache!

 

Ha! No, KISS as in the band who wears (or used to wear anyway) those thick-soled shoes that would make me about 5 inches taller.

[Clan Riffster]

Hint: ammo cans can double as stepstools. I know this from personal experience.

That reminds me of an urban micro I found. The retrieval took two coolers, a giant ammo can and a pair of 50 cal ammo cans stacked upon each other.

This put my feet about 5' off the ground, and my head in the rafters. Made me wish I had a ladder.

[+Wild Thing 73]

If a cache placement meets the Guideline criteria and is published....it is acceptable ....period...an unexceptable cache hide/placement is only in your personal mind....Happy searching for all published caches.

[digitalosh]

This thread had definitely made me rethink my bear trap cache idea.

 

- Elle

 

LOL!

[digitalosh]

Let's all stop nannying eachother here

 

Re: Electrical Boxes - I don't know much, but if I saw wires I would close the box and walk away. Last time I checked people do have to open these boxes, that's not the dangerous part. Regardless, every action has a consequence. I could just as easily decide to investigate. If I get an electrical shock or die, it's because I am an idiot. Is it the problem of the person who hid the cache? No. Is it my problem? yes. Is it my responsibility? YES!

 

Re: Trespassing - Again. Hider took a risk hiding it there. That was of his/her own volition, and if he/she gets caught, I don't pay the consequence. If I trespass to procure said cache and get caught, it was, once again, of my own volition and I pay the consequences. Even if I don't get caught, I broke the law. If I were to feel guilty about that, it is the direct consequence of my actions, not those of the hider

 

Re: Sprinkler heads - I think you're getting the idea. If I'm tearing up the ground looking for the cache, it's my problem. If someone hides something in a sprinkler head that isn't theirs and they get caught, their problem.

 

Re: Fire Hydrants - If you hide it there, you're probably breaking the law. There are consequences. If I search there and break something, I am most definitely breaking the law. There are consequences.

 

The point of my post: Let's stop arguing about unacceptable caches. If they passed review, they are acceptable. By definition. If they are in a place you consider to be unacceptable, IN YOUR OPINION, then don't open them.

 

DISCLAIMER: I am not ENDORSING any of the abovementioned hides. In fact, I think some of them are plain stupid. But THEY ARE ACCEPTABLE BY DEFINITION. If they slipped through the cracks and are reported, then they are, at least while posted on the site, acceptable.

[+Rockin Roddy]

I thought caches placed on or made to resemble electrical equipment were not within the current guidelines.

Really? I hadn't heard that. I'll have to go re-read the guidelines since they may have been changed since I've read them last. It's been a while since I've hidden one.

 

Or do you have a quote handy?

 

http://forums.iowageocachers.org/viewtopic.php?t=820

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 6:43 pm Post subject: No caches that simulate electrical equipment

IowaAdmin

I recently turned down a new geocache listing because the cache was on or near electrical equipment. That owner then wrote to me to tell me about 4 other similar geocaches that were approved. So I looked at each listing and archived each of them. This policy is endorsed by Groundspeak and most approvers. It's unsafe to make a geocache look like part of electrical equipment, whether or not the nearby equipment is actually "live." It may encourage some geocachers -- including children -- to open "live" equipment. So even though you can buy these types of containers on eBay sites, please don't submit them for approval. They are simply not a good idea and may lead to tragic consequences in the future.

 

Some have said that the IowaAdmin went over the line using his own judgement...what I see is that he is backed up by GS (read the part I boldened). I haven't ever seen this before, but I APPLAUD the GS PTB for realizing this!!

[Keystone]

The quoted statement is in error.

[+Rockin Roddy]

The quoted statement is in error.

 

Please elaborate!

[Keystone]

You quoted an outdated statement which Iowa Admin has publicly retracted through a post in these Forums. I believe he also removed the statement from his reviewer blog.

[+iPhone3Gcacher]

I think if it were up to alot of peope in this thread every container would be a bright orange 5 gallon bucket, camoed with one woodchip, and placed in a field.

[Mushtang]

You quoted an outdated statement which Iowa Admin has publicly retracted through a post in these Forums. I believe he also removed the statement from his reviewer blog.

I APPLAUD the Iowa Admin for realizing this!!

[+Rockin Roddy]

You quoted an outdated statement which Iowa Admin has publicly retracted through a post in these Forums. I believe he also removed the statement from his reviewer blog.

I APPLAUD the Iowa Admin for realizing this!!

 

I APPLAUD IowaAdmin for realizing that these are potentially dangerous and for speaking his mind on the matters! I can only assume from this that the GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines. Sad, but that's likely the case!

[+Star*Hopper]

Hint: ammo cans can double as stepstools. I know this from personal experience.

That reminds me of an urban micro I found. The retrieval took two coolers, a giant ammo can and a pair of 50 cal ammo cans stacked upon each other.

This put my feet about 5' off the ground, and my head in the rafters. Made me wish I had a ladder.

 

WHAT!?!? You guyz don't carry a 20' extension ladder in your TOTT-Kit??

And you call yourselves 'Geocachers'?? Sheez.....talk about unprepared!! I'll bet you don't even tote a machete!

 

~*

[Mushtang]

You quoted an outdated statement which Iowa Admin has publicly retracted through a post in these Forums. I believe he also removed the statement from his reviewer blog.

I APPLAUD the Iowa Admin for realizing this!!

I APPLAUD IowaAdmin for realizing that these are potentially dangerous and for speaking his mind on the matters! I can only assume from this that the GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines. Sad, but that's likely the case!

It's sad that IA has to follow guidelines? Interesting.

 

Actually I think it's more accurate that the GS PTB have already realized that the potential for danger is much lower than the potential for dangers with other things, so they don't worry about it either.

 

They'd probably save more lives, and prevent more injuries, if they outlawed riding motorcycles while geocaching. The risk of getting killed while riding one of those things is WAY higher than by touching the outside of electrical transformers and lamp posts!

 

Or maybe they're waiting for at least one verifiable case of a cacher actually being harmed while looking for a cache on an electrical transformer or lamp post?

 

This conversation sounds familiar....

[+Rockin Roddy]

You quoted an outdated statement which Iowa Admin has publicly retracted through a post in these Forums. I believe he also removed the statement from his reviewer blog.

I APPLAUD the Iowa Admin for realizing this!!

I APPLAUD IowaAdmin for realizing that these are potentially dangerous and for speaking his mind on the matters! I can only assume from this that the GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines. Sad, but that's likely the case!

It's sad that IA has to follow guidelines? Interesting.

 

Actually I think it's more accurate that the GS PTB have already realized that the potential for danger is much lower than the potential for dangers with other things, so they don't worry about it either.

 

They'd probably save more lives, and prevent more injuries, if they outlawed riding motorcycles while geocaching. The risk of getting killed while riding one of those things is WAY higher than by touching the outside of electrical transformers and lamp posts!

 

Or maybe they're waiting for at least one verifiable case of a cacher actually being harmed while looking for a cache on an electrical transformer or lamp post?

 

This conversation sounds familiar....

 

Play your games if you wish, you'll not bait me in. Motorcycles...why not PM me if you'd like to discuss this.

 

My comment said nothing about it being sad AI had to follow guidelines, stop putting words in my mouth please!

[Mushtang]

My comment said nothing about it being sad AI had to follow guidelines, stop putting words in my mouth please!

You're right. My bad. I re-read your post several times, and nowhere did I see the following words:

I can only assume from this that the GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines. Sad, but that's likely the case!

Please accept my apology for putting words in your mouth.

[+Rockin Roddy]

My comment said nothing about it being sad AI had to follow guidelines, stop putting words in my mouth please!

You're right. My bad. I re-read your post several times, and nowhere did I see the following words:

I can only assume from this that the GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines. Sad, but that's likely the case!

Please accept my apology for putting words in your mouth.

 

Apology accepted!

 

Sad, but that's likely the case (in other words, GS PTB have yet to realize the dangers).

 

But I'm betting you already understood this...right? Maybe you should try reading it as it's meant and not how you'd like it to mean!

[+fizzymagic]

My comment said nothing about it being sad AI had to follow guidelines, stop putting words in my mouth please!

You're right. My bad. I re-read your post several times, and nowhere did I see the following words:

I can only assume from this that the GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines. Sad, but that's likely the case!

Please accept my apology for putting words in your mouth.

 

Those of us who are able to competently parse and read English understand that the phrase beginning with "sad" refers to the opinion that TPTB have not yet realized something. The clause about following the guidelines was simply a reminder that even though the guidelines are perhaps not well considered, we are still bound to follow them. In no way did the poster ever imply that in general it is sad that one must follow guidelines, which is what you interpreted.

 

The poster may not have expressed his thoughts in the most felicitous manner, but the meaning was quite clear.

 

There are exactly two possible explanations for your misreading. One is that you are not able to competently parse and understand English. The other is that your misinterpretation is intentional, and was used to try to score rhetorical points. If the former is the case, I recommend that you not engage in debate in this forum until you have obtained some supplemental education. If it is the latter, then I suggest you not engage in debate in this forum until you can do so honestly.

 

But, of course, those are just suggestions.

[+Rockin Roddy]

My comment said nothing about it being sad AI had to follow guidelines, stop putting words in my mouth please!

You're right. My bad. I re-read your post several times, and nowhere did I see the following words:

I can only assume from this that the GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines. Sad, but that's likely the case!

Please accept my apology for putting words in your mouth.

 

Those of us who are able to competently parse and read English understand that the phrase beginning with "sad" refers to the opinion that TPTB have not yet realized something. The clause about following the guidelines was simply a reminder that even though the guidelines are perhaps not well considered, we are still bound to follow them. In no way did the poster ever imply that in general it is sad that one must follow guidelines, which is what you interpreted.

 

The poster may not have expressed his thoughts in the most felicitous manner, but the meaning was quite clear.

 

There are exactly two possible explanations for your misreading. One is that you are not able to competently parse and understand English. The other is that your misinterpretation is intentional, and was used to try to score rhetorical points. If the former is the case, I recommend that you not engage in debate in this forum until you have obtained some supplemental education. If it is the latter, then I suggest you not engage in debate in this forum until you can do so honestly.

 

But, of course, those are just suggestions.

 

THANKS Fizzy...I do have a slow mind and sometimes don't form my comments clearly, but I thought this one was crystal clear. You have affirmed this.

 

Also, I always assumed the second option with Mushtang, but you might be right. Maybe he doesn't understand what is read and I was shooting over his head (even with my slower thought ability)? Maybe I've misjudged him all along??

[+TrailGators]

My comment said nothing about it being sad AI had to follow guidelines, stop putting words in my mouth please!

You're right. My bad. I re-read your post several times, and nowhere did I see the following words:

I can only assume from this that the GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines. Sad, but that's likely the case!

Please accept my apology for putting words in your mouth.

 

Those of us who are able to competently parse and read English understand that the phrase beginning with "sad" refers to the opinion that TPTB have not yet realized something. The clause about following the guidelines was simply a reminder that even though the guidelines are perhaps not well considered, we are still bound to follow them. In no way did the poster ever imply that in general it is sad that one must follow guidelines, which is what you interpreted.

 

The poster may not have expressed his thoughts in the most felicitous manner, but the meaning was quite clear.

 

There are exactly two possible explanations for your misreading. One is that you are not able to competently parse and understand English. The other is that your misinterpretation is intentional, and was used to try to score rhetorical points. If the former is the case, I recommend that you not engage in debate in this forum until you have obtained some supplemental education. If it is the latter, then I suggest you not engage in debate in this forum until you can do so honestly.

 

But, of course, those are just suggestions.

 

THANKS Fizzy...I do have a slow mind and sometimes don't form my comments clearly, but I thought this one was crystal clear. You have affirmed this.

 

Also, I always assumed the second option with Mushtang, but you might be right. Maybe he doesn't understand what is read and I was shooting over his head (even with my slower thought ability)? Maybe I've misjudged him all along??

I had no problem interpreting your comment, Roddy. Fizzy nailed it. The same thing has happened to me countless with both him and his brother. I am also curious if the reason they constantly do that is #1 or #2. Edited January 4, 2009 by TrailGators

[+geomann1]

Just because something is not specifically excluded by the guidelines does not make it a good idea or absolves one of personal responsibility to do the right thing. Clearly, messing around with electrical equipment, sprinkler heads, etc. is not a bright idea, so why place caches that would encourage irresponsible activities? "Because I can get away with it" is hardly an intelligent or moral basis for living ones life. These types of caches are certainly not new, so one is really not being clever in placing these types of caches. Frankly, I just don't see the point.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Just because something is not specifically excluded by the guidelines does not make it a good idea or absolves one of personal responsibility to do the right thing. Clearly, messing around with electrical equipment, sprinkler heads, etc. is not a bright idea, so why place caches that would encourage irresponsible activities? "Because I can get away with it" is hardly an intelligent or moral basis for living ones life. These types of caches are certainly not new, so one is really not being clever in placing these types of caches. Frankly, I just don't see the point.

 

I absolutely agree and THANKS for the post!! But, better get ready for the shelling!!

[+TrailGators]

Just because something is not specifically excluded by the guidelines does not make it a good idea or absolves one of personal responsibility to do the right thing. Clearly, messing around with electrical equipment, sprinkler heads, etc. is not a bright idea, so why place caches that would encourage irresponsible activities? "Because I can get away with it" is hardly an intelligent or moral basis for living ones life. These types of caches are certainly not new, so one is really not being clever in placing these types of caches. Frankly, I just don't see the point.

 

I agree.

[Mushtang]

There are exactly two possible explanations for your misreading. One is that you are not able to competently parse and understand English. The other is that your misinterpretation is intentional, and was used to try to score rhetorical points. If the former is the case, I recommend that you not engage in debate in this forum until you have obtained some supplemental education. If it is the latter, then I suggest you not engage in debate in this forum until you can do so honestly.

Oh NO! FizzyMagic is suggesting that I not post in these forums because he didn't like what I had to say. Whatever shall I do? (sniff sniff)

 

[+Rockin Roddy]

There are exactly two possible explanations for your misreading. One is that you are not able to competently parse and understand English. The other is that your misinterpretation is intentional, and was used to try to score rhetorical points. If the former is the case, I recommend that you not engage in debate in this forum until you have obtained some supplemental education. If it is the latter, then I suggest you not engage in debate in this forum until you can do so honestly.

Oh NO! FizzyMagic is suggesting that I not post in these forums because he didn't like what I had to say. Whatever shall I do? (sniff sniff)

 

 

Where did it say that in that post?? I don't see that, and I've read it several times! Are you having problems reading this comment too? I read it to say you were either in need of education or purposely mis-characterizing my words...no where does it say he dislikes what you said.

 

Another hide I dislike is the birdhouse cache. These are bad for caching and for birds as well!! Another one of those caches that people think is sneaky, but it's actually old and overused, which makes it bad for birds. And heaven forbid someone hides one of these where a landowner cares...then caching gets a black eye!

Edited January 4, 2009 by Rockin Roddy

[+LostMontanan]

This thread reminds me of the time I attempted to have a cache published but got turned down because it could become a terrorist target. It was near a golf course, and there is a huge water tower painted like a tee and a golf ball on top. The cache was hidden at the base of the tower. Our ever diligent reviewer said it wasn't allowed as the tower could become a terrorist target....ROFLMAO!

[+Rockin Roddy]

This thread reminds me of the time I attempted to have a cache published but got turned down because it could become a terrorist target. It was near a golf course, and there is a huge water tower painted like a tee and a golf ball on top. The cache was hidden at the base of the tower. Our ever diligent reviewer said it wasn't allowed as the tower could become a terrorist target....ROFLMAO!

 

Well, yeah. Because someone might see a cacher go after the find, then might think bomb. Same with bridges, Govt buildings etc. Makes perfect sense to me, a sound call!

[+fizzymagic]

Oh NO! FizzyMagic is suggesting that I not post in these forums because he didn't like what I had to say. Whatever shall I do? (sniff sniff)

 

I offered no opinion on the content of your post. Once again, anyone who can parse written English would know that. My opinion had only to do with your inability to {correctly, honestly} interpret another's post.

 

Ironic that you were not {able, willing} to correctly parse my post.

 

Simple question: is it (1) you think you are correctly interpreting other peoples' words (in which case you have a serious language deficit), or (2) you know perfectly well you are twisting their words to your own purpose?

Edited January 4, 2009 by fizzymagic

[+Rockin Roddy]

Oh NO! FizzyMagic is suggesting that I not post in these forums because he didn't like what I had to say. Whatever shall I do? (sniff sniff)

 

I offered no opinion on the content of your post. Once again, anyone who can parse written English would know that. My opinion had only to do with your inability to {correctly, honestly} interpret another's post.

 

Ironic that you were not {able, willing} to correctly parse my post.

 

Simple question: is it (1) you think you are correctly interpreting other peoples' words (in which case you have a serious language deficit), or (2) you know perfectly well you are twisting their words to your own purpose?

 

OH OH, I think I know this one...pick me pick me!

[+BlueDeuce]

Die thread, die.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Die thread, die.

 

[+LostMontanan]

Well, yeah. Because someone might see a cacher go after the find, then might think bomb. Same with bridges, Govt buildings etc. Makes perfect sense to me, a sound call!

 

Well I guess the whole "common sense" thing doesn't apply here.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Actually, it does. That's why the cache was denied! You're talking about a water supply for a city, right? Think water tampering or a bomb.

Edited January 5, 2009 by Rockin Roddy

[+BlueDeuce]

Die thread, die.

 

 

[+BlueDeuce]

Die thread, die.

 

 

[cmoorberg]

This isn't exactly dangerous, but I hate to search for caches hidden in childrens playgrounds. If there are any parent to child muggles around I get the feeling that they think I am a creep kidnapper or something. This happened to me a couple of weeks ago so I just skipped it to avoid any awkward feelings by the parents.

[+Mredria]

This isn't exactly dangerous, but I hate to search for caches hidden in childrens playgrounds. If there are any parent to child muggles around I get the feeling that they think I am a creep kidnapper or something. This happened to me a couple of weeks ago so I just skipped it to avoid any awkward feelings by the parents.

 

Bring a dog. For some reason people find you less threatening if you have a dog.

Then again I have a corgi (refer to avatar) and no one can ever think they're threatening.

What kind of kidnapper has a corgi? None.

[+LostMontanan]

This isn't exactly dangerous, but I hate to search for caches hidden in childrens playgrounds. If there are any parent to child muggles around I get the feeling that they think I am a creep kidnapper or something. This happened to me a couple of weeks ago so I just skipped it to avoid any awkward feelings by the parents.

 

We heard ya...

[+Rockin Roddy]

This isn't exactly dangerous, but I hate to search for caches hidden in childrens playgrounds. If there are any parent to child muggles around I get the feeling that they think I am a creep kidnapper or something. This happened to me a couple of weeks ago so I just skipped it to avoid any awkward feelings by the parents.

 

Bring a dog. For some reason people find you less threatening if you have a dog.

Then again I have a corgi (refer to avatar) and no one can ever think they're threatening.

What kind of kidnapper has a corgi? None.

 

I do like this idea, but it isn't useful to us non-pet cachers. I don't have much trouble doing these caches though, just act like you belong and it's not a problem. It's when people try to act stealthy when they look suspicious! If the cache is on or very near play equipment, try coming back early in the morning or late in the evening (assuming there's hours of operation for the park).

 

A friend has a cute little fluffy dog and the ladies flock it everywhere he goes...a good way to meet the ladies, but might be problematic when it comes to caching!!

[+edscott]

This isn't exactly dangerous, but I hate to search for caches hidden in childrens playgrounds. If there are any parent to child muggles around I get the feeling that they think I am a creep kidnapper or something. This happened to me a couple of weeks ago so I just skipped it to avoid any awkward feelings by the parents.

 

We heard ya...

 

Offer to babysit a kid for a day and take him along to do all the playground caches in your area.

[+edscott]

and to answer the original question.. any cache where this would be an appropriate warning.

[Mushtang]

Oh NO! FizzyMagic is suggesting that I not post in these forums because he didn't like what I had to say. Whatever shall I do? (sniff sniff)

 

I offered no opinion on the content of your post. Once again, anyone who can parse written English would know that. My opinion had only to do with your inability to {correctly, honestly} interpret another's post.

 

Ironic that you were not {able, willing} to correctly parse my post.

 

Simple question: is it (1) you think you are correctly interpreting other peoples' words (in which case you have a serious language deficit), or (2) you know perfectly well you are twisting their words to your own purpose?

It seems even more obvious to me that Fizzy, Rockin Roddy, and Trailgators are all stuck on the off-topic subject of what my post may or may not have meant, simply to lead away from my original on-topic point that caches hidden on these electrical devices are not as dangerous as folks are trying to say.

 

There's no logic in getting so worked up over a risk that hasn't hurt any cachers (or if it has, the numbers are so low that they're off the radar), and not getting worked up AT ALL over risks that have hurt lots of cachers.

[+sbell111]

My comment said nothing about it being sad AI had to follow guidelines, stop putting words in my mouth please!

You're right. My bad. I re-read your post several times, and nowhere did I see the following words:

I can only assume from this that the GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines. Sad, but that's likely the case!

Please accept my apology for putting words in your mouth.

Those of us who are able to competently parse and read English understand that the phrase beginning with "sad" refers to the opinion that TPTB have not yet realized something. The clause about following the guidelines was simply a reminder that even though the guidelines are perhaps not well considered, we are still bound to follow them. In no way did the poster ever imply that in general it is sad that one must follow guidelines, which is what you interpreted.

 

The poster may not have expressed his thoughts in the most felicitous manner, but the meaning was quite clear.

 

There are exactly two possible explanations for your misreading. One is that you are not able to competently parse and understand English. The other is that your misinterpretation is intentional, and was used to try to score rhetorical points. If the former is the case, I recommend that you not engage in debate in this forum until you have obtained some supplemental education. If it is the latter, then I suggest you not engage in debate in this forum until you can do so honestly.

 

But, of course, those are just suggestions.

THANKS Fizzy...I do have a slow mind and sometimes don't form my comments clearly, but I thought this one was crystal clear. You have affirmed this.

 

Also, I always assumed the second option with Mushtang, but you might be right. Maybe he doesn't understand what is read and I was shooting over his head (even with my slower thought ability)? Maybe I've misjudged him all along??

Fizzy, you are awesome with the math stuff, but apparently you are having trouble with written communications. In Roddy's post, 'that' refers to the issue described in the previous sentence. That sentence described two issues (note the use of the word 'and'). Those issues were 'GS PTB have yet to realize this' and 'IA has to follow their guidelines'. Therefore, we are forced to take away from that post that Roddy believes that it is sad that GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines.

 

Don't beat yourself up about this. written communications are hard. You still rock on the math stuff.

Just because something is not specifically excluded by the guidelines does not make it a good idea or absolves one of personal responsibility to do the right thing. Clearly, messing around with electrical equipment, sprinkler heads, etc. is not a bright idea, so why place caches that would encourage irresponsible activities? "Because I can get away with it" is hardly an intelligent or moral basis for living ones life. These types of caches are certainly not new, so one is really not being clever in placing these types of caches. Frankly, I just don't see the point.

The beauty of the plan is that as a finder you can decide which caches are worth finding and which aren't. Sort them out of your files however you wish, but remember that you can abort a cache hunt at any moment. If you get to ground zero and find that you aren't enjoying yourself, go do something else. Edited January 5, 2009 by sbell111

[+Rockin Roddy]

My comment said nothing about it being sad AI had to follow guidelines, stop putting words in my mouth please!

You're right. My bad. I re-read your post several times, and nowhere did I see the following words:

I can only assume from this that the GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines. Sad, but that's likely the case!

Please accept my apology for putting words in your mouth.

Those of us who are able to competently parse and read English understand that the phrase beginning with "sad" refers to the opinion that TPTB have not yet realized something. The clause about following the guidelines was simply a reminder that even though the guidelines are perhaps not well considered, we are still bound to follow them. In no way did the poster ever imply that in general it is sad that one must follow guidelines, which is what you interpreted.

 

The poster may not have expressed his thoughts in the most felicitous manner, but the meaning was quite clear.

 

There are exactly two possible explanations for your misreading. One is that you are not able to competently parse and understand English. The other is that your misinterpretation is intentional, and was used to try to score rhetorical points. If the former is the case, I recommend that you not engage in debate in this forum until you have obtained some supplemental education. If it is the latter, then I suggest you not engage in debate in this forum until you can do so honestly.

 

But, of course, those are just suggestions.

THANKS Fizzy...I do have a slow mind and sometimes don't form my comments clearly, but I thought this one was crystal clear. You have affirmed this.

 

Also, I always assumed the second option with Mushtang, but you might be right. Maybe he doesn't understand what is read and I was shooting over his head (even with my slower thought ability)? Maybe I've misjudged him all along??

Fizzy, you are awesome with the math stuff, but apparently you are having trouble with written communications. In Roddy's post, 'that' refers to the issue described in the previous sentence. That sentence described two issues (note the use of the word 'and'). Those issues were 'GS PTB have yet to realize this' and 'IA has to follow their guidelines'. Therefore, we are forced to take away from that post that Roddy believes that it is sad that GS PTB have yet to realize this and IA has to follow their guidelines.

 

Don't beat yourself up about this. written communications are hard. You still rock on the math stuff.

Just because something is not specifically excluded by the guidelines does not make it a good idea or absolves one of personal responsibility to do the right thing. Clearly, messing around with electrical equipment, sprinkler heads, etc. is not a bright idea, so why place caches that would encourage irresponsible activities? "Because I can get away with it" is hardly an intelligent or moral basis for living ones life. These types of caches are certainly not new, so one is really not being clever in placing these types of caches. Frankly, I just don't see the point.

The beauty of the plan is that as a finder you can decide which caches are worth finding and which aren't. Sort them out of your files however you wish, but remember that you can abort a cache hunt at any moment. If you get to ground zero and find that you aren't enjoying yourself, go do something else.

 

You know sbell, I was going to add that you were another that liked to play the twist game, but I thought better of naming someone without need, THANKS for outing yourself like this! You are just as much one to take a comment and twist it to fit into your little argument, another reason I have little respect for your arguments. You and Mushtang (and one other that'll likely chime in sooner or later) have aboslutely no credibility in my eyes, you want to make up things when you have nothing better to argue! You guys LOVE to put words in others' mouths and then claim against logic that we actually did say that! You'll snip and clip comments, leaving out the parts which won't fit your side, then say we made that statement...too funny, but it's an everyday occurance!

 

Funny, it's always you guys...

 

I pointed out exactly what I said right before Fizzy made the exact same point of it, funny how he can read it (as well as everyone else BUT you guys), yet you come here and accuse me of saying things like this! You guys play the same old game time after time after time and have lost all credibility and respect in my eyes!! Maybe you should stick to just arguing the points and STOP putting words in peoples' mouths?? Or can't you make an argument worth even trying to defend without this game you guys like to play??

 

Or, is it possible you too have problems reading what is put in front of you?? Am I shooting over your head too??

[+Rockin Roddy]

The beauty of the plan is that as a finder you can decide which caches are worth finding and which aren't. Sort them out of your files however you wish, but remember that you can abort a cache hunt at any moment. If you get to ground zero and find that you aren't enjoying yourself, go do something else.

 

Last point before I simply ignore you...as most people know, MANY will NOT just walk away from a cache once there. MANY have the mentality of "if the hider placed it, it must be OK" and make illogical assumptions that some things are safer because the owner said so! Many think they HAVE to find the cache (evidenced by all those who methodically erradicate EVERY SINGLE CACHE from their area) So, when finding a cache like an electric box, they have been trained to assume that OTHER hides (which might only be NEAR an electric box or such equipment) are safe and start opening stuff they shouldn't (and normally wouldn't if not for the reward of a smiley)! We've all seen it done, we've all heard about it being done (sprinkler head cache...the ground was all torn up or someone else finds a sprinkler has been damaged, electric box had the door ripped open etc), yet you still try to say it doesn't happen??

 

I guess you'll champion these hides until someone gets hurt? I'd rather let people know of the dangers (because we all know some don't understand the dangers) than let them get hurt. Lastly, you guys feel it only right that those not smart enough learn the hard way...brilliant!! Too bad tht some of those "not smart enough" hapen to be kids...let them learn the hard way too??