What's the Beef about PREMIUM MEMBERS ONLY caches?

[+buttaskotch]

I too was a premium member prior to finding my first cache, heck it was before m GPSr arrived (via Woot-where I had read about Gecocaching).

While I am an elitest in most areas of my life, I think the PMO caches are ok, but not always necessary.

I can see a point to PMO caches, it limits people from coming on as a new, non PM and perhaps disrupting a cache just "because," I doubt many would buy a PM to screw with us cachers & the game.

 

The OP did start off the post in a snippy way, but I think they were just feeling a bit beleaguered.

I have seen other OPs that have started their threads with a similar negative fashion and didn't receive quite the same tongue lashing.

To OP

Dude, just calm down, some folks like to get peeved just because they are having a bad day. Let that person know, how the scout troop can log the cache. Done and overwith. Its not worth the anguish you are feeling.

[+rjb43nh]

Rockin Roddy-"THANK YOU!! Ever stop to think it may just be your ATTITUDE? And I'm not assuming a thing, I made this impression from the few rude posts you've made."

BINGO! The only thing I would add is that the impression isn't limited to the few rude posts, or even to their posts in this thread. I see a pattern here.....

[+wimseyguy]

Other than the occasion discussion in these forums, I'm not aware that there is any Beef about PMO caches. I have 2 of my 30some listed as PM's simply because I want to. No one around here has ever complained to me or anyone else I know about it.

I think the OP just felt like stirring a pot today.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

There goes that ol' assuming thing again. You made up your own story right here and assume we have some kind of dispute with this person ! Guess What ?? WE DON'T !! Don't know him,never met him,never spoke to him. Maybe HE'S the one with the problem, ever think of that? I told you once already, WE KNOW WHO TRASHED OUR CACHE !! So don't say we're assuming we know. I'll say it again,WE KNOW WHO TRASHED OUR CACHE. Ok, is that understood ? Does anybody ask for facts around here? Let me answer my own question....NO !!

 

I'll bite: what facts do you have that support your assumption that a particular cacher trashed your cache?

[Clan Riffster]

A few intemperate thoughts from the ol' fat crippled guy with the smelly hat:

 

I'm rather impressed with the degree of civility found in most of the posts to this thread. There are only a few that stand out as being incredibly rude, which I will address accordingly.

if you wanna hunt our caches you have to pay for a premium membership. If you're one that has a problem with that, don't hunt our caches it's that simple.

It's been my belief that PMOing a cache should be reserved for unique circumstances. Many folks opine that making caches PMOs is elitist and standoffish, and for the most part, I disagree. If there's a reasonable reason to make a cache a PMO, I don't see it as elitist. However, when someone takes this course simply because they can, I do see the snobbery leaking out. Just my opinion though...

 

Yea thanks but guess what ? You TOTALLY missed the point. Next.....

I didn't think you could get ruder than your opening salvo, but you managed with that one. You came to the forums ranting, and someone offered some fairly sound advice. You blew them off. This kinda sets the tone for how others will approach you, if they know how you respond to courteous assistance.

 

What happened was shocking and OBVIOUSLY some other cacher was responsible as this cache is in no way, shape or form, muggleable !

What twist of logic could possibly lead anyone to think that any cache is unmuggleable? That's just silly. Any cache, any where, can be found by muggles. The person who originally hid the cache found that spot, probably without divine inspiration. What drew them to that locale? Whatever led them to hide a cache there could just as easily lead a muggle to the same spot. I would argue that there is a high probability that any cache, surviving for more than a year, has been seen by at least one muggle. Increase the time line by a factor of 8, as is the case with this one, and the odds go up exponentially. Out of everyone who could be a suspect, (I.e: everyone who has visited that park in the last 8 years), the subset I would be least likely to suspect being capable of such an act would be geocachers. Seems kinda paranoid, but if that's your thing, roll with it.

 

The audit log showed us who was responsible

Unless Jeremy has significantly tweaked the audit log, I think it will only show you who visited the cache page, and how many times they viewed it.

I don't recall a feature that provides reliable evidence of vandalism.

 

We know who trashed our cache

No, you don't. You know who looked at your cache page. You have no clue who trashed your cache. Everything you've invented has been assumptions.

Thankfully, you haven't resorted to naming names, so you've so far manage to dodge any slander issues.

 

WE KNOW WHO TRASHED OUR CACHE. OK, is that understood ? Does anybody ask for facts around here?

OK, I'll start a new trend. I'll ask for facts. How do you know who trashed your cache? What evidence can you present?

Not looking for names, just methods.

 

"Dear Self, Stay away from forums."

Probably a good idea, at least until you learn to play well with others.

[Mr.Yuck]

There goes that ol' assuming thing again. You made up your own story right here and assume we have some kind of dispute with this person ! Guess What ?? WE DON'T !! Don't know him,never met him,never spoke to him. Maybe HE'S the one with the problem, ever think of that? I told you once already, WE KNOW WHO TRASHED OUR CACHE !! So don't say we're assuming we know. I'll say it again,WE KNOW WHO TRASHED OUR CACHE. Ok, is that understood ? Does anybody ask for facts around here? Let me answer my own question....NO !!

 

I'll bite: what facts do you have that support your assumption that a particular cacher trashed your cache?

 

I agree with COD, there are no facts. But I'm afraid that's pretty much the reason MOC's were created, and the "purpose" of the audit log. The audit log is evil, I don't like it.

[CoyoteRed]

We have every right to have this cache PMO.

Yes, you have the ability to make any cache listing a Members Only Cache when you pay Groundspeak your $30 annual fee. The problem is, IMHO, making a original cache you adopted MOC is not being a good steward.

 

None of your stated reasons make sense to make it MOC. "Because I wanna" would make more sense.

 

Also, no need for a litany of things you did to secure the cache. Don't feel like the Lone Ranger as many of us have been there, done that. We've got some cabled down, too. We've lost older caches. We've helped others with older caches. We've adopted caches and ended up having to archive. Sometimes it's better to let some caches go.

 

It seems as though you're claiming to keep the cache for prosperity sake. It's good to keep ancient caches around--as long as they stay viable. However, what you've done instead is change the cache into something else. At present the cache in question is not the cache you originally found or the cache found by others many years ago. Now, non-PMs who did find the cache can't go back and look at the cache they had the right to see before. They can't see its history. You've shut them out. In short, your efforts to protect the cache has, instead, damaged it.

 

Personally, I think it would have been better to archive the original cache and place your own MOC. A "Tribute to..." cache would be better, IMHO, than doing what you did. Take it for what it's worth as I have no dog in this fight, just an opinion.

[CoyoteRed]

But I'm afraid that's pretty much the reason MOC's were created, and the "purpose" of the audit log. The audit log is evil, I don't like it.

I had someone accuse me of looking at their cache page once. "Huh?" I hadn't looked.

 

Oh, wait. I did look at the page. I was trying to look up their profile so I could send a message and didn't know the name well enough to look up from the email page. I knew a cache name, though. I searched for the cache by keyword, found the cache, and as soon as the cache page came up I clicked on the profile link. I never did scroll down. The audit log lists those accounts that requested the cache listing page, nothing more.

 

With the hint encryption thingie broken, simply displaying the hint would cause another hit. Again when displaying all logs. Maybe even other things that have nothing to do with destroying a cache. ( I don't know as I don't use the audit log because we don't make our caches MOC. )

[+sbell111]

I had planned an incredibly long post which commented on many earlier posts in this thread, but then I realized that many of my points were already made. Therefore, I will first say that I agree with the posts made by Toz and CR (umm, both CRs).

 

That being said, a couple things still bug me. Here they are, in any order:

Memberships only cost eight cents per day. Anyone can afford that.

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

ALL of our caches are PMO and they always will be. If you're one that has a problem with that, don't hunt our caches it's that simple.

 

True story...We have one cacher in our area, premium member, who was taking a group of scouts out to a particular park where we own a cache, one of the oldest in the state, that we adopted last year. ...

 

She bashed us and our old cache,(which by the way, deserves respect wether you hate our guts or not)...

You recently adopted the cache. You argue that it deserves the respect of others because of it's age. However, you fail to respect the creator of that cache by recognizing him on the cache page. Instead, as CR pointed out, you have significantly altered the cache from how it's creator intended by both moving it and restricting the cache page to premium members.

The scouts didn't log it !! What did she do? Did she tell the scouts,"Wait here while I go get this one. You can't because you don't have a premium account?" C'mon !! If I started a thread like that I would NEVER,EVER in a million years hunt that cache but if I did, I would've at least paid the 30 bucks for the scouts to get a premium membership so they could've hunted it and logged it too !

Even though it's been explained to you, I'm not sure that you understand that making a cache 'PMO' does not forbid regular members from finding and logging it. It merely stops them from seeing the cache page.

"Other circumstances," is exactly why Saw Wee Kee is PMO now ! We found our 8 year old cache trashed to the max, all the swag/camera stolen AND 2 TB's and a Geocoin were swiped too. We were horrified to find it the way we did. I'm not lying when I tell you I cried. I stood there and cried. We were beside ourselves. Who would do this to an old cache?

The culprit no longer visits the cache page. Why he doesn't is nobody's business, he just doesn't. He made himself obvious by visiting the cache page, obviously oblivious to the audit log, 278 times in a 2 week period after he trashed our cache AND stole $20 worth of brand new swag AND our $7 disposable camera AND 2 bugs and an old Geocoin that belong to other people,which by the way, we had to write to them and break the bad news that their travelres were STOLEN !!

You've lost me.

 

On one hand, you state that the cache must be PMO to keep non-premium members from stealing it. You then state that you know who it was because they are on the audit log. Of course, only premium members can be on an audit log, so you know that your problem is not from regular members. You also know that 1) an audit log isn't proof of theft and 2) there are a number of ways to access your cache's info that don't show on the audit log.

... She was all offended and pissed off because the scouts wouldn't be able to log our cache or that's how she made it seem. This person started a thread,(gonil.org..."Thoughts on Premium Members Only Caches), about her disgust with PMO caches and pretty much named us and DID name our cache. ...

Do you see any irony in starting a forum thread complaining that someone complained about you in a forum thread?

... As for the link to our local organization that was posted...we don't go there to defend ourselves anymore because the organization is a click that does not welcome anyone who doesn't agree or share the same opinion and the one with the biggest mouth threatened to kill our dog. ...

It's 'clique'. Misspelling it happens to be one of my personal pet peaves, as is very long rambling rants and run-on sentences.

I had someone accuse me of looking at their cache page once. "Huh?" I hadn't looked.

 

Oh, wait. I did look at the page. I was trying to look up their profile so I could send a message and didn't know the name well enough to look up from the email page. I knew a cache name, though. I searched for the cache by keyword, found the cache, and as soon as the cache page came up I clicked on the profile link. ...

Pretty much the same thing happened to me once.

 

I have a habit of pulling up caches in an area by pulling up a nearby cache that I have previously found and then clicking on the nearest link. It just so happened that the most memorable cache in a local area (and my favorite in that area) happened to be owned by a cacher who I had had a pretty public falling out with (long since resolved). What I didn't realize was that 1) the cache was PMO (when you are a premium member, you typically don't notice this and 2) the cache had had a problem with a local maggot.

 

Since I 1) didn't get along with the owner, 2) was on the audit log several times, and 3) had already found the cache so didn't have any obvious reasons for viewing the cache page, some people tried to argue that I was responsible for it's going missing. I suspect that the only thing that saved my reputation was the fact that I was documented as being out of state during the times that it was determined that some of the pillaging happened.

 

The problem with the audit log is that it allows people to 'know' that someone did something without having any real proof and without ever allowing the accused party a chance to defend himself.

Edited February 10, 2009 by sbell111

[+Frank Broughton]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

Edited February 10, 2009 by Frank Broughton

[+Vater_Araignee]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

Hey if somebody cant come up with the 8.24¢ a day because $30.00 at once is to much, they are given the option to pay 10.98¢ because $10.00 is easier to come up with.

[+Renegade Knight]

...we have every right to make them PMO if we want to !!...

 

Yes you do.

Others have every right to say how much they hate PMO and tell you they think they are elitist. Many of them are actually a member of the forum elite. Pretty funny if you ask me but that's neither here nor there.

 

You just need to know the facts.

Fact, it's your choice to make PMO.

Fact, others won't like this.

Fact, it will limit the number of cachers who can see and find your cache.

Fact, where you have problem cachers it will tend to lessen the problems.

Fact, a determined problem child can tward PMO but they have to spend brain power and time to do it.

 

There are other facts. Just be aware of them, how they match what you are trying to acomplish and then go forward with what works best for you.

 

Oh, some of those facts others may speculate are false. Oh well, they are based on my real world experinece and not my speculation.

Edited February 10, 2009 by Renegade Knight

[+OienLabs]

I find a cache placed by a non PM.

Is it right that I then place a (PMO) cache not available to this cacher?

That is the beef.

 

I have only one PMOC and that was set about 2 secs. before archiving, in hope of probably denying a maggot to see what happend.

[+sbell111]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

I can only imagine that you aren't opening your mind up to the possibility that for some people, there is no 'extra money' in the weekly budget. I know that when I was in college, for instance, I didn't have any extra cash to pay for premium memberships for internet sites. (Of course, they didn't exist back then, but that's beside the point.)

[+sbell111]

I had intended to make one more comment related to the OP:

 

The odds that your caches are going to be vandalized greatly increases if people think you are a jerk.

[+Rockin Roddy]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

I can only imagine that you aren't opening your mind up to the possibility that for some people, there is no 'extra money' in the weekly budget. I know that when I was in college, for instance, I didn't have any extra cash to pay for premium memberships for internet sites. (Of course, they didn't exist back then, but that's beside the point.)

 

The haves often forget about the have nots.

[knowschad]

Subscriber Only Caches on private property, fine.

 

Subscriber Only Caches on public property, wrong.

 

If I were to plant a tree on public property should I then be able to charge you to enjoy it's shade?

 

No, but if you were to plant a tree in a State Park, the park would still charge me to enjoy its shade.

[+Team Black-Cat]

The CO won't visit the local forums anymore because the members there disagree with the CO. The CO mentions where "we don't particularly care for the owner" of a cache. The CO responds to a perfectly ON TOPIC reply with a backhand. It's not hard to see a pattern forming here...

 

I had every intention of not posting, but one thing said by the OP really grabbed me shook me really hard.

 

We don't care if our cache/caches sit for a year without being hunted because eventually there will be sane cachers who'll hunt em'

 

This seems to say that anyone who ignores the CO's caches as they request is NOT sane. OK then!!! The word elitist has been thrown around this thread quit a bit. I originally diagreed with that assesment and even agreed somewhat with what the CO was saying, if not the way it was being said. Now it seems to me that the CO really doesn't care WHAT anyone else thinks if it differs from their line of thinking. While this in itself isn't that unusual around here, the CO seems to take this to the extreme. One might suggest a hobby that doesn't require as much interaction with others.

 

Call me crazy, but I won't be looking for any of your caches next time we're in the area. Not because I feel unworthy, and not because I have any opinion on PMO caches, but simply because I would hate to be wrongfully blamed for trashing one of your caches simply because I looked at the cache page too many times.

[+Mudfrog]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

I can only imagine that you aren't opening your mind up to the possibility that for some people, there is no 'extra money' in the weekly budget. I know that when I was in college, for instance, I didn't have any extra cash to pay for premium memberships for internet sites. (Of course, they didn't exist back then, but that's beside the point.)

 

The haves often forget about the have nots.

 

I guess i am a "have" but i haven't forgotten about the "have nots". The way i see it, if a "have not" cannot afford to pay $30, then that "have not" pretty much needs to put geocaching on the back burner and focus more of their attention on getting themselves in better financial shape.

 

It's a personal choice as to whether a person chooses to pay for premium services of this or any other site. However, a person that doesn't pay, needs to understand, and not complain, that they do not get all the benefits that paying members do. There should be no beef at all with pmocs since the website allows them. If a person does feel the need to complain, then that person needs to take it up with the website.

 

My personal choice right now is to not place any pmocs because i want everyone who is interested in geocaching to have the opportunity to find our caches. New people who aren't sure whether they want to pursue our hobby come to mind. I do however, reserve the right to place a pmoc if circumstances change or i just simply change my mind for any reason...

[+Renegade Knight]

I find a cache placed by a non PM.

Is it right that I then place a (PMO) cache not available to this cacher?

That is the beef....

 

If you find a cache placed by a non PM and enjoyed it and wrote up a nice log you have just paid that non PM because of the enjoyment they will get from your log. You can do more for them, but don't need too. You were done at the log.

 

PMO doesn't ever enter into the picture because finding a cache doesn't mean you have to place your own in return. PMO lives and dies on it's own merit, as does the reverse (Non PMO cache).

[+Renegade Knight]

...The haves often forget about the have nots.

They can come caching with me.

[rapriebe]

I'm brand new to the sport of geocaching and I've found this discussion interesting. I had looked through a few cache listings and seen the PM designation, but there weren't enough to get excited about around here, so I just ignored it. Now that I've read this thread, I see that it can be an issue to some on both sides of the argument.

 

I think it's wrong of the OP to just automatically make every hide a PMO. In my opinion, there should be a good reason for giving a cache that tag, not just paranoia. If I set up a cache in a location where I feel that it would be a great hide, but at the same time I sort of want to limit the number of visitors due to environmental concerns, or just to avoid destroying the solitude, then I might make it a PMO. I have a couple of ideas for this summer, and the beauty of one location is the relative solitude that goes with the incredible view in an area that is otherwise well traveled.

 

But just a general cache in a more common area should be available to anyone who wants to try and find it. Making everything a PMO just because you can is unfair to the majority of cachers who are respectful of the hide and of the CO, but who are now left out either because of the owner's paranoia, or because of their snobbery.

[joecool3443]

As I understand it the MOC feature was added as a way to twart cache pirates, and that's all. If someone got their panties in a wad over the fact that all my new puzzles are MOCs I'd just roll my eyes and wonder why they're trying to do something about the MOCs and not doing anything about the taxes we're paying, the world of hurt Obama is about to put us in, or anything that's actually important. If they came to me upset about not being able to log their finds I'd be happy to point out how they could do it using the approved backdoor method, but if they posted forum threads bashing me and my caches and acted like a jerk I'd just ignore them.

 

I, for one, enjoy checking out the audit logs to get an idea of how many people are looking at my cache page as opposed to the few that are able to solve the puzzles and find the caches. I know PQ viewers aren't tracked, but I can still get a general idea.

 

Sorry to get off topic but this post irked me. This is a large diverse group that comes from many different backgrounds. So please keep such comments about politics to yourself.

Thank You

[+Rockin Roddy]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

I can only imagine that you aren't opening your mind up to the possibility that for some people, there is no 'extra money' in the weekly budget. I know that when I was in college, for instance, I didn't have any extra cash to pay for premium memberships for internet sites. (Of course, they didn't exist back then, but that's beside the point.)

 

The haves often forget about the have nots.

 

I guess i am a "have" but i haven't forgotten about the "have nots". The way i see it, if a "have not" cannot afford to pay $30, then that "have not" pretty much needs to put geocaching on the back burner and focus more of their attention on getting themselves in better financial shape.

 

It's a personal choice as to whether a person chooses to pay for premium services of this or any other site. However, a person that doesn't pay, needs to understand, and not complain, that they do not get all the benefits that paying members do. There should be no beef at all with pmocs since the website allows them. If a person does feel the need to complain, then that person needs to take it up with the website.

 

My personal choice right now is to not place any pmocs because i want everyone who is interested in geocaching to have the opportunity to find our caches. New people who aren't sure whether they want to pursue our hobby come to mind. I do however, reserve the right to place a pmoc if circumstances change or i just simply change my mind for any reason...

 

Yep....stop caching. In fact, if you're not able to pay that $30 for a membership, you shouldn't even be allowed to have ANY fun, you should be concentrating more time worrying about your life. Those who are too poor to have that extra $30 should stop any life whatsoever and work. How dare families decide to enjoy themselves and cache for free. How dare anyone with a money problem feel they're entitled to enjoy themselves and forget the real world for a little while, they shouldn't be escaping, they should be working...24/7 if that's what it takes!

 

Oh, you mean some people can't change the situation they're in?? Some are on a fixed income and can't work due to health issues (issues which are bettered by a nice walk in the park or such???). Some families are making by, but can't justify that $30 expenditure...maybe you should consider all scenarios before judging others.

 

I am saddened by your comment and outlook. Again, the haves forget the have nots!

[Neos2]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

So I take it we can presume that Mrs Frank Broughton and all eight of the young Broughtons are premium members, since that is such a frivolous amount of money. And every one of you needs their own full set of PQs, too, right?

[+Mudfrog]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

I can only imagine that you aren't opening your mind up to the possibility that for some people, there is no 'extra money' in the weekly budget. I know that when I was in college, for instance, I didn't have any extra cash to pay for premium memberships for internet sites. (Of course, they didn't exist back then, but that's beside the point.)

 

The haves often forget about the have nots.

 

I guess i am a "have" but i haven't forgotten about the "have nots". The way i see it, if a "have not" cannot afford to pay $30, then that "have not" pretty much needs to put geocaching on the back burner and focus more of their attention on getting themselves in better financial shape.

 

It's a personal choice as to whether a person chooses to pay for premium services of this or any other site. However, a person that doesn't pay, needs to understand, and not complain, that they do not get all the benefits that paying members do. There should be no beef at all with pmocs since the website allows them. If a person does feel the need to complain, then that person needs to take it up with the website.

 

My personal choice right now is to not place any pmocs because i want everyone who is interested in geocaching to have the opportunity to find our caches. New people who aren't sure whether they want to pursue our hobby come to mind. I do however, reserve the right to place a pmoc if circumstances change or i just simply change my mind for any reason...

 

Yep....stop caching. In fact, if you're not able to pay that $30 for a membership, you shouldn't even be allowed to have ANY fun, you should be concentrating more time worrying about your life. Those who are too poor to have that extra $30 should stop any life whatsoever and work. How dare families decide to enjoy themselves and cache for free. How dare anyone with a money problem feel they're entitled to enjoy themselves and forget the real world for a little while, they shouldn't be escaping, they should be working...24/7 if that's what it takes!

 

Oh, you mean some people can't change the situation they're in?? Some are on a fixed income and can't work due to health issues (issues which are bettered by a nice walk in the park or such???). Some families are making by, but can't justify that $30 expenditure...maybe you should consider all scenarios before judging others.

 

I am saddened by your comment and outlook. Again, the haves forget the have nots!

 

You're reading more into my statement than i said. I did not and would never imply that a person should stop having fun. Still, i believe that there are things a person can do to help themselves if they find themselves in this predicament. It wouldn't matter if i was on a fixed income, had health issues, was laid off, etc,,, the first and logical step for me would be to curtail some of the fun and find ways to better my situation.

[+TrailGators]

As I understand it the MOC feature was added as a way to twart cache pirates, and that's all. If someone got their panties in a wad over the fact that all my new puzzles are MOCs I'd just roll my eyes and wonder why they're trying to do something about the MOCs and not doing anything about the taxes we're paying, the world of hurt Obama is about to put us in, or anything that's actually important. If they came to me upset about not being able to log their finds I'd be happy to point out how they could do it using the approved backdoor method, but if they posted forum threads bashing me and my caches and acted like a jerk I'd just ignore them.

 

I, for one, enjoy checking out the audit logs to get an idea of how many people are looking at my cache page as opposed to the few that are able to solve the puzzles and find the caches. I know PQ viewers aren't tracked, but I can still get a general idea.

Hey Mushtang, I agree with everything you just said.

[Clan Riffster]

I think I did too... Scary, huh?

[Dinoprophet]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

I can only imagine that you aren't opening your mind up to the possibility that for some people, there is no 'extra money' in the weekly budget. I know that when I was in college, for instance, I didn't have any extra cash to pay for premium memberships for internet sites. (Of course, they didn't exist back then, but that's beside the point.)

 

The haves often forget about the have nots.

 

I guess i am a "have" but i haven't forgotten about the "have nots". The way i see it, if a "have not" cannot afford to pay $30, then that "have not" pretty much needs to put geocaching on the back burner and focus more of their attention on getting themselves in better financial shape.

 

It's a personal choice as to whether a person chooses to pay for premium services of this or any other site. However, a person that doesn't pay, needs to understand, and not complain, that they do not get all the benefits that paying members do. There should be no beef at all with pmocs since the website allows them. If a person does feel the need to complain, then that person needs to take it up with the website.

 

My personal choice right now is to not place any pmocs because i want everyone who is interested in geocaching to have the opportunity to find our caches. New people who aren't sure whether they want to pursue our hobby come to mind. I do however, reserve the right to place a pmoc if circumstances change or i just simply change my mind for any reason...

 

Yep....stop caching. In fact, if you're not able to pay that $30 for a membership, you shouldn't even be allowed to have ANY fun, you should be concentrating more time worrying about your life. Those who are too poor to have that extra $30 should stop any life whatsoever and work. How dare families decide to enjoy themselves and cache for free. How dare anyone with a money problem feel they're entitled to enjoy themselves and forget the real world for a little while, they shouldn't be escaping, they should be working...24/7 if that's what it takes!

 

Oh, you mean some people can't change the situation they're in?? Some are on a fixed income and can't work due to health issues (issues which are bettered by a nice walk in the park or such???). Some families are making by, but can't justify that $30 expenditure...maybe you should consider all scenarios before judging others.

 

I am saddened by your comment and outlook. Again, the haves forget the have nots!

 

You're reading more into my statement than i said. I did not and would never imply that a person should stop having fun. Still, i believe that there are things a person can do to help themselves if they find themselves in this predicament. It wouldn't matter if i was on a fixed income, had health issues, was laid off, etc,,, the first and logical step for me would be to curtail some of the fun and find ways to better my situation.

Why does the fun that is curtailed have to be the essentially-free fun of geocaching?

[+Rockin Roddy]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

I can only imagine that you aren't opening your mind up to the possibility that for some people, there is no 'extra money' in the weekly budget. I know that when I was in college, for instance, I didn't have any extra cash to pay for premium memberships for internet sites. (Of course, they didn't exist back then, but that's beside the point.)

 

The haves often forget about the have nots.

 

I guess i am a "have" but i haven't forgotten about the "have nots". The way i see it, if a "have not" cannot afford to pay $30, then that "have not" pretty much needs to put geocaching on the back burner and focus more of their attention on getting themselves in better financial shape.

 

It's a personal choice as to whether a person chooses to pay for premium services of this or any other site. However, a person that doesn't pay, needs to understand, and not complain, that they do not get all the benefits that paying members do. There should be no beef at all with pmocs since the website allows them. If a person does feel the need to complain, then that person needs to take it up with the website.

 

My personal choice right now is to not place any pmocs because i want everyone who is interested in geocaching to have the opportunity to find our caches. New people who aren't sure whether they want to pursue our hobby come to mind. I do however, reserve the right to place a pmoc if circumstances change or i just simply change my mind for any reason...

 

Yep....stop caching. In fact, if you're not able to pay that $30 for a membership, you shouldn't even be allowed to have ANY fun, you should be concentrating more time worrying about your life. Those who are too poor to have that extra $30 should stop any life whatsoever and work. How dare families decide to enjoy themselves and cache for free. How dare anyone with a money problem feel they're entitled to enjoy themselves and forget the real world for a little while, they shouldn't be escaping, they should be working...24/7 if that's what it takes!

 

Oh, you mean some people can't change the situation they're in?? Some are on a fixed income and can't work due to health issues (issues which are bettered by a nice walk in the park or such???). Some families are making by, but can't justify that $30 expenditure...maybe you should consider all scenarios before judging others.

 

I am saddened by your comment and outlook. Again, the haves forget the have nots!

 

You're reading more into my statement than i said. I did not and would never imply that a person should stop having fun. Still, i believe that there are things a person can do to help themselves if they find themselves in this predicament. It wouldn't matter if i was on a fixed income, had health issues, was laid off, etc,,, the first and logical step for me would be to curtail some of the fun and find ways to better my situation.

Why does the fun that is curtailed have to be the essentially-free fun of geocaching?

 

I'll go a step further and ask why some think that, if a person is having money troubles, they need to be told to try to better their lives. Must be those with money troubles not only shouldn't be having fun, they aren't bright enough to try to help themselves? I can tell you this, some people do their very best and still find themselves with money woes (the divorced Dad or Mom who is looking for a cheap way to entertain the kids is a good example).

 

Living in Michigan, I can imagine a number of other examples, and I have a lot of compassion for those who are feeling the money crunch...I am one of those feeling the crunch!

[+Vater_Araignee]

I'll go a step further and ask why some think that, if a person is having money troubles, they need to be told to try to better their lives. Must be those with money troubles not only shouldn't be having fun, they aren't bright enough to try to help themselves? I can tell you this, some people do their very best and still find themselves with money woes (the divorced Dad or Mom who is looking for a cheap way to entertain the kids is a good example).

 

Living in Michigan, I can imagine a number of other examples, and I have a lot of compassion for those who are feeling the money crunch...I am one of those feeling the crunch!

*Holing up his hand pointing to a spot saying* "I live here"

Lost my job of 10 years to foreign manufacturing, there are no automotive jobs to be had in Michigan. I cant find any IG welding jobs in here and the jobs I can find for welding out of state pay so low as to make moving cost prohibitive. The only jobs here that are available for 35 year old high school graduates are clerking jobs and most of them wont let you work full time or only want kids because they are easier to screw.

Between 20 hours a week as a clerk and 25 stuffing envelops plus the occasional magic show, I still collect Under Employment and it is not enough.

 

Go to collage? I considered that option because I qualify to have about 4 years worth payed, pass of fail, and would love to be a plant tissue culture technician but having two kids myself means I cant work and go to school. My wife could work but the cost of daycare is higher than what she could make.

I'm also a cigarette addict and wile I have reduced my spending I find myself unable to quit. When I was employed as a welder My insurance company would not pay for me to try any medication to help but charged me higher rates because I smoke. Now I don't qualify for any medical coverage.

 

Whine whine busting my *** whine whine breaking my whine whine heart attack whine whine aneurysm whine whine early grave whine whine whine whine I want a Vizsla whine whine whine whine

 

I think I am entitled to have some fun, Hell I'm entitled to have MORE fun than some rich old money dirt bag jerk with more than enough but wants more.

Yet I don't expect that my fun be completely free and I don't begrudge those that can have slightly more fun because they have some spare choe considering that they help fund my free activity.

 

I have said it before, there are many easy things one can do to get the money it only takes some determination.

 

Heck, in 89 caches I have found exactly $7.53. I only took pennies because I collect them.

I like keeping track of how much money I see, but had I taken it all then I would only need to find $2.47 to pay for a three month PM.

[+Mudfrog]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

I can only imagine that you aren't opening your mind up to the possibility that for some people, there is no 'extra money' in the weekly budget. I know that when I was in college, for instance, I didn't have any extra cash to pay for premium memberships for internet sites. (Of course, they didn't exist back then, but that's beside the point.)

 

The haves often forget about the have nots.

 

I guess i am a "have" but i haven't forgotten about the "have nots". The way i see it, if a "have not" cannot afford to pay $30, then that "have not" pretty much needs to put geocaching on the back burner and focus more of their attention on getting themselves in better financial shape.

 

It's a personal choice as to whether a person chooses to pay for premium services of this or any other site. However, a person that doesn't pay, needs to understand, and not complain, that they do not get all the benefits that paying members do. There should be no beef at all with pmocs since the website allows them. If a person does feel the need to complain, then that person needs to take it up with the website.

 

My personal choice right now is to not place any pmocs because i want everyone who is interested in geocaching to have the opportunity to find our caches. New people who aren't sure whether they want to pursue our hobby come to mind. I do however, reserve the right to place a pmoc if circumstances change or i just simply change my mind for any reason...

 

Yep....stop caching. In fact, if you're not able to pay that $30 for a membership, you shouldn't even be allowed to have ANY fun, you should be concentrating more time worrying about your life. Those who are too poor to have that extra $30 should stop any life whatsoever and work. How dare families decide to enjoy themselves and cache for free. How dare anyone with a money problem feel they're entitled to enjoy themselves and forget the real world for a little while, they shouldn't be escaping, they should be working...24/7 if that's what it takes!

 

Oh, you mean some people can't change the situation they're in?? Some are on a fixed income and can't work due to health issues (issues which are bettered by a nice walk in the park or such???). Some families are making by, but can't justify that $30 expenditure...maybe you should consider all scenarios before judging others.

 

I am saddened by your comment and outlook. Again, the haves forget the have nots!

 

You're reading more into my statement than i said. I did not and would never imply that a person should stop having fun. Still, i believe that there are things a person can do to help themselves if they find themselves in this predicament. It wouldn't matter if i was on a fixed income, had health issues, was laid off, etc,,, the first and logical step for me would be to curtail some of the fun and find ways to better my situation.

Why does the fun that is curtailed have to be the essentially-free fun of geocaching?

 

I'll go a step further and ask why some think that, if a person is having money troubles, they need to be told to try to better their lives. Must be those with money troubles not only shouldn't be having fun, they aren't bright enough to try to help themselves? I can tell you this, some people do their very best and still find themselves with money woes (the divorced Dad or Mom who is looking for a cheap way to entertain the kids is a good example).

 

Living in Michigan, I can imagine a number of other examples, and I have a lot of compassion for those who are feeling the money crunch...I am one of those feeling the crunch!

 

I guess i'm coming across wrong,, I haven't looked up the definition of curtail so it may not have been a good word to use. I don't think people should ever have to totally give up the fun things in life.

 

Believe me, i am feeling the money crunch as well. This is why i feel that a person needs to slow down on some of the fun. I'm doing that right now with geocaching and other fun things that i enjoy. For example, i like getting ftfs but i can't justify spending the money to go out to try for them right now. (very few come up that are within walking or bicycling distance so they aren't free). Same thing with a premium membership. If money is too tight when that renewal comes up, i'm not going to renew. But at the same time, i'm not gonna complain about pmocs. The way i see it, the money i would spend on those things needs to be spent on the more serious things in life.

 

Free geocaching is great, when you can find it, but still, in moderation. There is lots of fun to be had for free but imo, a person needs to slow down on those and concentrate more of their time and effort working to help their situation.

[Mushtang]

Hey Mushtang, I agree with everything you just said.

I think I did too... Scary, huh?

It was bound to happen sooner or later.

[+Kit Fox]

Hey Mushtang, I agree with everything you just said.

I think I did too... Scary, huh?

It was bound to happen sooner or later.

 

Even I agree with everything you posted, what is the world coming to?

 

I have some puzzle caches where one cacher has viewed the page in excess of 500 times.

[Clan Riffster]

I have some puzzle caches where one cacher has viewed the page in excess of 500 times.

Look at the bright side. If that cache ever gets trashed, you'll know who did it.

[+sbell111]

I have some puzzle caches where one cacher has viewed the page in excess of 500 times.

How many times did they steal the cache? Edited February 11, 2009 by sbell111

[+Vater_Araignee]

I have some puzzle caches where one cacher has viewed the page in excess of 500 times.

How many times did they steal the cache?

I didn't think you would make a distrustful statement like that even in jest!

[Clan Riffster]

Ya know, just a casual observation, but somewhere in this mess the OP was seemingly upset because we, (the collective we according to him/her), hadn't asked for facts, and, (since they elected not to provide any), were forced to rely on assumptions. At post 56 or so I recognized the error of my ways and asked for specific facts. All I've heard from them since then is the sound of crickets. I reckon since they don't want to provide any facts, I'll have to go back to my assumptions.

[+Singletree Expedition]

If I were to plant a tree on public property should I then be able to charge you to enjoy it's shade?

 

No, but if you were to plant a tree in a State Park, the park would still charge me to enjoy its shade.

Unless the park is in Tennessee, in which case there would be no charge. We have over 50 State Parks and no admission required. ...good to know if you're coming to GW7.

 

As far as "Premium Only" goes, it's not a factor for us in targetting a cache. And we've been known to use it temporarily on a couple of our own caches simply to gauge interest.

[+Vater_Araignee]

Ya know, just a casual observation, but somewhere in this mess the OP was seemingly upset because we, (the collective we according to him/her), hadn't asked for facts, and, (since they elected not to provide any), were forced to rely on assumptions. At post 56 or so I recognized the error of my ways and asked for specific facts. All I've heard from them since then is the sound of crickets. I reckon since they don't want to provide any facts, I'll have to go back to my assumptions.

May hap they took your advice?

 

"Dear Self, Stay away from forums."

Probably a good idea, at least until you learn to play well with others.

[+Frank Broughton]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

I can only imagine that you aren't opening your mind up to the possibility that for some people, there is no 'extra money' in the weekly budget. I know that when I was in college, for instance, I didn't have any extra cash to pay for premium memberships for internet sites. (Of course, they didn't exist back then, but that's beside the point.)

 

I stand by what I said. $30 dollars a year is NOTHING. One can find that laying on the ground in almost any city in the USA.

 

But yes, I can appreciate that money is tight at times for people. The credit mentality we have in America (well the world) has finally caught up with us.We have seen nothing yet. And, I am just trying to fit in here on this forum, seems pulling each others chains is the thing to do - no?

 

Frank

www.ZoarValley.us

[+Frank Broughton]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

I can only imagine that you aren't opening your mind up to the possibility that for some people, there is no 'extra money' in the weekly budget. I know that when I was in college, for instance, I didn't have any extra cash to pay for premium memberships for internet sites. (Of course, they didn't exist back then, but that's beside the point.)

 

The haves often forget about the have nots.

 

If one is suggesting I am a have, they are mistaken. I live by Matthew 6:33. My income was below the poverty level in America but it was plenty to pay all my bills, get another vehicle last year, pay my mortgage on time and have some left over for playing games - like geocaching

 

Riches are not always money.

[+Rockin Roddy]

The problem with this logic is that it's still a payment of thirty dollars at one time. That may be too much frivilous cost to be absorbed by a strained budget. Jeremy realized this when he stated that the game will never be pay-for-play (along with the smart business reasons for not making it pay-only).

 

I agree with most everything you said but I strongly disagree that $30 a year is a strain to anyone who has the tag "USA" in their profile. I spend more than that in toilet paper a month in my house (8 kids)

I can only imagine that you aren't opening your mind up to the possibility that for some people, there is no 'extra money' in the weekly budget. I know that when I was in college, for instance, I didn't have any extra cash to pay for premium memberships for internet sites. (Of course, they didn't exist back then, but that's beside the point.)

 

The haves often forget about the have nots.

 

I guess i am a "have" but i haven't forgotten about the "have nots". The way i see it, if a "have not" cannot afford to pay $30, then that "have not" pretty much needs to put geocaching on the back burner and focus more of their attention on getting themselves in better financial shape.

 

It's a personal choice as to whether a person chooses to pay for premium services of this or any other site. However, a person that doesn't pay, needs to understand, and not complain, that they do not get all the benefits that paying members do. There should be no beef at all with pmocs since the website allows them. If a person does feel the need to complain, then that person needs to take it up with the website.

 

My personal choice right now is to not place any pmocs because i want everyone who is interested in geocaching to have the opportunity to find our caches. New people who aren't sure whether they want to pursue our hobby come to mind. I do however, reserve the right to place a pmoc if circumstances change or i just simply change my mind for any reason...

 

Yep....stop caching. In fact, if you're not able to pay that $30 for a membership, you shouldn't even be allowed to have ANY fun, you should be concentrating more time worrying about your life. Those who are too poor to have that extra $30 should stop any life whatsoever and work. How dare families decide to enjoy themselves and cache for free. How dare anyone with a money problem feel they're entitled to enjoy themselves and forget the real world for a little while, they shouldn't be escaping, they should be working...24/7 if that's what it takes!

 

Oh, you mean some people can't change the situation they're in?? Some are on a fixed income and can't work due to health issues (issues which are bettered by a nice walk in the park or such???). Some families are making by, but can't justify that $30 expenditure...maybe you should consider all scenarios before judging others.

 

I am saddened by your comment and outlook. Again, the haves forget the have nots!

 

You're reading more into my statement than i said. I did not and would never imply that a person should stop having fun. Still, i believe that there are things a person can do to help themselves if they find themselves in this predicament. It wouldn't matter if i was on a fixed income, had health issues, was laid off, etc,,, the first and logical step for me would be to curtail some of the fun and find ways to better my situation.

Why does the fun that is curtailed have to be the essentially-free fun of geocaching?

 

I'll go a step further and ask why some think that, if a person is having money troubles, they need to be told to try to better their lives. Must be those with money troubles not only shouldn't be having fun, they aren't bright enough to try to help themselves? I can tell you this, some people do their very best and still find themselves with money woes (the divorced Dad or Mom who is looking for a cheap way to entertain the kids is a good example).

 

Living in Michigan, I can imagine a number of other examples, and I have a lot of compassion for those who are feeling the money crunch...I am one of those feeling the crunch!

 

I guess i'm coming across wrong,, I haven't looked up the definition of curtail so it may not have been a good word to use. I don't think people should ever have to totally give up the fun things in life.

 

Believe me, i am feeling the money crunch as well. This is why i feel that a person needs to slow down on some of the fun. I'm doing that right now with geocaching and other fun things that i enjoy. For example, i like getting ftfs but i can't justify spending the money to go out to try for them right now. (very few come up that are within walking or bicycling distance so they aren't free). Same thing with a premium membership. If money is too tight when that renewal comes up, i'm not going to renew. But at the same time, i'm not gonna complain about pmocs. The way i see it, the money i would spend on those things needs to be spent on the more serious things in life.

 

Free geocaching is great, when you can find it, but still, in moderation. There is lots of fun to be had for free but imo, a person needs to slow down on those and concentrate more of their time and effort working to help their situation.

 

I hope you traded fairly or up...

[Mr.Yuck]

Hey Mushtang, I agree with everything you just said.

I think I did too... Scary, huh?

It was bound to happen sooner or later.

 

Even I agree with everything you posted, what is the world coming to?

 

I have some puzzle caches where one cacher has viewed the page in excess of 500 times.

 

I still disagree with him. Where's my stimulus check?

[+Vater_Araignee]

Hey Mushtang, I agree with everything you just said.

I think I did too... Scary, huh?

It was bound to happen sooner or later.

 

Even I agree with everything you posted, what is the world coming to?

 

I have some puzzle caches where one cacher has viewed the page in excess of 500 times.

 

I still disagree with him. Where's my stimulus check?

That'll pay for more than a few years worth of PM.

[Mushtang]

Hey Mushtang, I agree with everything you just said.

I think I did too... Scary, huh?

It was bound to happen sooner or later.

Even I agree with everything you posted, what is the world coming to?

 

I have some puzzle caches where one cacher has viewed the page in excess of 500 times.

I still disagree with him. Where's my stimulus check?

Sorry, the Dems don't think allowing you to decide how to spend the money you earned is going to stimulate the economy, so you won't be getting a check. They're passing a ginormous pork spending bill to pay back other Dems for electing their American (Idol) President, and creating projects to "stimulate the economy".

 

Nevermind that when the projects are completed in a year or two those jobs are going away again, and the economy will still be in the toilet.

 

On the bright side, we can expect

, right?

 

I still think MOCs are a good idea for those that are trying to protect their caches from a local cache pirate that doesn't spend the money for a membership, or for those that want to use the Audit Logs to get a rough idea of how many people are viewing the cache page.

Edited February 11, 2009 by Mushtang

[Mr.Yuck]

Hey Mushtang, I agree with everything you just said.

I think I did too... Scary, huh?

It was bound to happen sooner or later.

Even I agree with everything you posted, what is the world coming to?

 

I have some puzzle caches where one cacher has viewed the page in excess of 500 times.

I still disagree with him. Where's my stimulus check?

Sorry, the Dems don't think allowing you to decide how to spend the money you earned is going to stimulate the economy, so you won't be getting a check. They're passing a ginormous pork spending bill to pay back other Dems for electing their American (Idol) President, and creating projects to "stimulate the economy".

 

I know I won't be getting a check, just trying to be funny. The Geddy Lee jokes are getting old.

 

I'd better say something on-topic too, and kind of agreeing with what KitFox said. There's a college student cacher in my area who is well-known to area MOC owners for having hundreds of page views, and often gets ribbed for it. And I'm sure he's never stolen a cache. At least I don't think he has.

[+Frank Broughton]

Hey Mushtang, I agree with everything you just said.

I think I did too... Scary, huh?

It was bound to happen sooner or later.

Even I agree with everything you posted, what is the world coming to?

 

I have some puzzle caches where one cacher has viewed the page in excess of 500 times.

I still disagree with him. Where's my stimulus check?

Sorry, the Dems don't think allowing you to decide how to spend the money you earned is going to stimulate the economy, so you won't be getting a check. They're passing a ginormous pork spending bill to pay back other Dems for electing their American (Idol) President, and creating projects to "stimulate the economy".

 

I know I won't be getting a check, just trying to be funny. The Geddy Lee jokes are getting old.

 

I'd better say something on-topic too, and kind of agreeing with what KitFox said. There's a college student cacher in my area who is well-known to area MOC owners for having hundreds of page views, and often gets ribbed for it. And I'm sure he's never stolen a cache. At least I don't think he has.

 

 

I'm getting a check. Mr. Schumer told me so...

 

I bet I am in trouble I look at cache pages often. I have notification set up when a cache is found in my area to email me. I often go to the page of certain caches to glean what I can before deciding what area to attack. With 1,000 plus unfound caches in I'm looking for ones that have been found recently. Will the MOC owners turn me into the cache spy FBI now?

[+wimseyguy]

Sheesh, now we've got religion and politics cluttering up a perfectly good forum discussion. Can't we get back to the real geocaching topic the OP wanted to talk about? "Why doesn't anyone want to come out and play with me and my toys the way I want to play?" or something like that.

[+Frank Broughton]

Sheesh, now we've got religion and politics cluttering up a perfectly good forum discussion. Can't we get back to the real geocaching topic the OP wanted to talk about? "Why doesn't anyone want to come out and play with me and my toys the way I want to play?" or something like that.

 

Cluttering up - hardly! One reference address mentioned and that is religion - not even an "activist judge" would agree with that one.

 

Perfectly good is debatable too.... to what standards are you saying perfectly good?

 

BTW the OP is long gone....