Correct Coordinates

[GOF's Sock Puppet]

As rude as I might sound with a "to heck with that, I'm ignoring this kids caches",

 

Hey now, that kid (one of them anyways) is a GIRL. You would be rude to a weak, helpless, mentally inferior girl? You would brutishly ignore her cute little caches? She thought she was being clever with her soft coords, poor thing. Come on, one of her hides is called "Skurdibbles!". Sure, I don't have a clue what that means either, but who am I to quash her girlish enthusiasms?

 

Yes.

[Mr.Yuck]

As rude as I might sound with a "to heck with that, I'm ignoring this kids caches",

 

Hey now, that kid (one of them anyways) is a GIRL. You would be rude to a weak, helpless, mentally inferior girl? You would brutishly ignore her cute little caches? She thought she was being clever with her soft coords, poor thing. Come on, one of her hides is called "Skurdibbles!". Sure, I don't have a clue what that means either, but who am I to quash her girlish enthusiasms?

 

No, because I didn't mention that one first. But that is one of them, and I see you found the cache and even commented on soft coords. So in 10 years there's never been a local soft coorder to me, now there's two totally independent from each other in a week?

 

Anyone have any suggestions for approaching the first one with unsolicited email advice, without sounding like a meddling know-it-all?

[+orion X]

Intentional soft cords=FAIL

[GOF and Bacall]

As rude as I might sound with a "to heck with that, I'm ignoring this kids caches",

 

Hey now, that kid (one of them anyways) is a GIRL. You would be rude to a weak, helpless, mentally inferior girl? You would brutishly ignore her cute little caches? She thought she was being clever with her soft coords, poor thing. Come on, one of her hides is called "Skurdibbles!". Sure, I don't have a clue what that means either, but who am I to quash her girlish enthusiasms?

 

No, because I didn't mention that one first. But that is one of them, and I see you found the cache and even commented on soft coords. So in 10 years there's never been a local soft coorder to me, now there's two totally independent from each other in a week?

 

Anyone have any suggestions for approaching the first one with unsolicited email advice, without sounding like a meddling know-it-all?

 

Every now and again it takes a meddling know it all. Ask the Mysteries Inc. kids.

[+Markle2k]

Let me put it this way: any self-respecting geocacher with even a modicum of experience puts great pride in seeing the phrase, "coords were spot-on!" in the logs for their caches, and cringes and will run out for another reading if they hear "coords were a bit soft" or something like that. We pride ourselves on providing the very best coordinates possible. Deliberately providing misleading coordinates are a total embarrassment.

I don't always agree with you. When I don't I usually see your point and let others point it out the flaws. Here you are correct in every detail. The whole point of caching is to hide it from muggles. If the camo hides it from less accomplished cachers, so be it. What you shouldn't do is hide it from everybody with bogus info. That's just cache trash.

[Mr.Yuck]

Let me put it this way: any self-respecting geocacher with even a modicum of experience puts great pride in seeing the phrase, "coords were spot-on!" in the logs for their caches, and cringes and will run out for another reading if they hear "coords were a bit soft" or something like that. We pride ourselves on providing the very best coordinates possible. Deliberately providing misleading coordinates are a total embarrassment.

I don't always agree with you. When I don't I usually see your point and let others point it out the flaws. Here you are correct in every detail. The whole point of caching is to hide it from muggles. If the camo hides it from less accomplished cachers, so be it. What you shouldn't do is hide it from everybody with bogus info. That's just cache trash.

 

I also agree 100% with Knowschad's post. However, I don't think I should copy and paste it word for word when I work up to courage to email my local new soft coord posting kid. I will steal the major points from it though. I sure he won't mind.

[+Markle2k]

Let me put it this way: any self-respecting geocacher with even a modicum of experience puts great pride in seeing the phrase, "coords were spot-on!" in the logs for their caches, and cringes and will run out for another reading if they hear "coords were a bit soft" or something like that. We pride ourselves on providing the very best coordinates possible. Deliberately providing misleading coordinates are a total embarrassment.

I don't always agree with you. When I don't I usually see your point and let others point it out the flaws. Here you are correct in every detail. The whole point of caching is to hide it from muggles. If the camo hides it from less accomplished cachers, so be it. What you shouldn't do is hide it from everybody with bogus info. That's just cache trash.

 

I also agree 100% with Knowschad's post. However, I don't think I should copy and paste it word for word when I work up to courage to email my local new soft coord posting kid. I will steal the major points from it though. I sure he won't mind.

I'll just hunh?? here

[knowschad]

Let me put it this way: any self-respecting geocacher with even a modicum of experience puts great pride in seeing the phrase, "coords were spot-on!" in the logs for their caches, and cringes and will run out for another reading if they hear "coords were a bit soft" or something like that. We pride ourselves on providing the very best coordinates possible. Deliberately providing misleading coordinates are a total embarrassment.

I don't always agree with you. When I don't I usually see your point and let others point it out the flaws. Here you are correct in every detail. The whole point of caching is to hide it from muggles. If the camo hides it from less accomplished cachers, so be it. What you shouldn't do is hide it from everybody with bogus info. That's just cache trash.

 

I also agree 100% with Knowschad's post. However, I don't think I should copy and paste it word for word when I work up to courage to email my local new soft coord posting kid. I will steal the major points from it though. I sure he won't mind.

I don't have much to offer, but I did want to point out that you should probably not begin the email with, "Hey, moron!!"

 

[Mr.Yuck]

Let me put it this way: any self-respecting geocacher with even a modicum of experience puts great pride in seeing the phrase, "coords were spot-on!" in the logs for their caches, and cringes and will run out for another reading if they hear "coords were a bit soft" or something like that. We pride ourselves on providing the very best coordinates possible. Deliberately providing misleading coordinates are a total embarrassment.

I don't always agree with you. When I don't I usually see your point and let others point it out the flaws. Here you are correct in every detail. The whole point of caching is to hide it from muggles. If the camo hides it from less accomplished cachers, so be it. What you shouldn't do is hide it from everybody with bogus info. That's just cache trash.

 

I also agree 100% with Knowschad's post. However, I don't think I should copy and paste it word for word when I work up to courage to email my local new soft coord posting kid. I will steal the major points from it though. I sure he won't mind.

I don't have much to offer, but I did want to point out that you should probably not begin the email with, "Hey, moron!!"

 

 

I ain't emailing no one. Good thing I saw this first. This is from the 2nd soft-coorder in my area, a teenaged or college-aged girl via a note posted yesterday to one of her cache page in response to a find log from someone with 3,000 finds who has been caching since 2006. This find log was not in the least bit harsh, but it made it clear that soft coords are a bad idea. And no, you ain't getting no link from me.

 

if you have a problem with the coords being a few feet off then dont look for the cache. im not the only one whos made the coords a few feet off, theres a few cachers who also do this. the cache is in a very obvious spot so i realy dont think its that big of a deal unless your lazy and dont like to actually look for the cache. Iv found caches that have been really really off a few times, even one that was literally 100 feet off..... i would not purposly make the coords off if the cache was hidden rediculously hard.....

[+dakboy]

The only cache I ever encountered with known soft coords had this in the description:

The above coordinates are what I get with my TOMTOM and it will bring you to the correct area, there are only two items on this corner so it should not be hard. If you have a more accurate GPS please let me know what coordinates you get

Somehow, the cache had been out for 10 months before I'd found it, and no one (apparently) sent him better coords. The coords put you in the parking lot about 100 feet from the actual cache.

 

So while I was signing the log, I let my GPSr average a waypoint, and that night I sent the CO the coords I got; that same night, he updated the listing.

[knowschad]

Let me put it this way: any self-respecting geocacher with even a modicum of experience puts great pride in seeing the phrase, "coords were spot-on!" in the logs for their caches, and cringes and will run out for another reading if they hear "coords were a bit soft" or something like that. We pride ourselves on providing the very best coordinates possible. Deliberately providing misleading coordinates are a total embarrassment.

I don't always agree with you. When I don't I usually see your point and let others point it out the flaws. Here you are correct in every detail. The whole point of caching is to hide it from muggles. If the camo hides it from less accomplished cachers, so be it. What you shouldn't do is hide it from everybody with bogus info. That's just cache trash.

 

I also agree 100% with Knowschad's post. However, I don't think I should copy and paste it word for word when I work up to courage to email my local new soft coord posting kid. I will steal the major points from it though. I sure he won't mind.

I don't have much to offer, but I did want to point out that you should probably not begin the email with, "Hey, moron!!"

 

 

I ain't emailing no one. Good thing I saw this first. This is from the 2nd soft-coorder in my area, a teenaged or college-aged girl via a note posted yesterday to one of her cache page in response to a find log from someone with 3,000 finds who has been caching since 2006. This find log was not in the least bit harsh, but it made it clear that soft coords are a bad idea. And no, you ain't getting no link from me.

 

if you have a problem with the coords being a few feet off then dont look for the cache. im not the only one whos made the coords a few feet off, theres a few cachers who also do this. the cache is in a very obvious spot so i realy dont think its that big of a deal unless your lazy and dont like to actually look for the cache. Iv found caches that have been really really off a few times, even one that was literally 100 feet off..... i would not purposly make the coords off if the cache was hidden rediculously hard.....

OK... I hereby withdraw the advice I gave. Starting with "Hey, moron!" may be appropriate, after all.

[knowschad]

Note from the owner of a cache near me after numerous logs mentioning bad coordinates:

 

Cache is still in place and in good shape. Coordinates are dead on but do drift in areas I hide my caches, thus the fun and point of it all right. After all who wants to walk right up to one and find it. I only hide caches where the GPSR drifts because of the surrounding environment, It makes it more interesting and challenging for all.

 

[4wheelin_fool]

And no, you ain't getting no link from me.

 

But why not?

 

 

Which is worse; intentionally soft coords, or armchair Needs Archived logs?

[4wheelin_fool]

Note from the owner of a cache near me after numerous logs mentioning bad coordinates:

 

Cache is still in place and in good shape. Coordinates are dead on but do drift in areas I hide my caches, thus the fun and point of it all right. After all who wants to walk right up to one and find it. I only hide caches where the GPSR drifts because of the surrounding environment, It makes it more interesting and challenging for all.

 

 

You left out

 

However; For those of you just looking to pad your numbers you might want to skip this one, it takes a little bit of thinking and a little time to find. Cache is definitely winter friendly. Thanks to all the previous finders for placing cache exactly back where it was. Remember caching is supposed to be fun and is just a way to get you outside exercising.

 

 

Unfortunately, Google searches do not turn up cache logs, but only old forum threads.

Edited July 2, 2010 by 4wheelin_fool

[GOF's Sock Puppet]

And no, you ain't getting no link from me.

 

But why not?

 

 

Which is worse; intentionally soft coords, or armchair Needs Archived logs?

 

In this case I vote for the soft coordinates. No need to visit a traditional cache that the owner admits is not at the coordinates to know it is in violation of the guidelines.

Edited July 2, 2010 by GOF's Sock Puppet

[GOF's Sock Puppet]

Note from the owner of a cache near me after numerous logs mentioning bad coordinates:

 

Cache is still in place and in good shape. Coordinates are dead on but do drift in areas I hide my caches, thus the fun and point of it all right. After all who wants to walk right up to one and find it. I only hide caches where the GPSR drifts because of the surrounding environment, It makes it more interesting and challenging for all.

 

 

You left out

 

However; For those of you just looking to pad your numbers you might want to skip this one, it takes a little bit of thinking and a little time to find. Cache is definitely winter friendly. Thanks to all the previous finders for placing cache exactly back where it was. Remember caching is supposed to be fun and is just a way to get you outside exercising.

 

 

Unfortunately, Google searches do not turn up cache logs, but only old forum threads.

 

I will say that I see a big difference in the vagaries of the GPS system and the intentionally misreported coordinate.

[+beejay&esskay]

"As usual, the coords are just close enough to make you work a little. " - from a nearby "traditional". (And not posted by a "kid".)

[GOF's Sock Puppet]

"As usual, the coords are just close enough to make you work a little. " - from a nearby "traditional". (And not posted by a "kid".)

 

And what do you think about that?

 

I think that is another good reason for an ignore all hides by this user option.

Edited July 2, 2010 by GOF's Sock Puppet

[4wheelin_fool]

"As usual, the coords are just close enough to make you work a little. " - from a nearby "traditional". (And not posted by a "kid".)

 

And what do you think about that?

 

I think that is another good reason for an ignore all hides by this user option.

 

I think that someone should post the GC#'s, so that the armchair SBA/NA logs can be posted.

[knowschad]

"As usual, the coords are just close enough to make you work a little. " - from a nearby "traditional". (And not posted by a "kid".)

 

And what do you think about that?

 

I think that is another good reason for an ignore all hides by this user option.

 

I think that someone should post the GC#'s, so that the armchair SBA/NA logs can be posted.

Here's ya go!! GC295R4

 

 

 

[AZcachemeister]

If I find a cache that is 50ft or more from the listed coordinates, I usually just mention the "correct" coordinates in my log. I never say that the coordinates are wrong, just that "my GPS read 60 ft off. Folks might want to try these coordinates instead..." or some such safe wording.

 

There is a cache near where I work that is over 100 feet off. Someone got better coordinates by taking multiple readings, averaged over multiple days and posted it in a log. People keep re-posting the info so that new searchers can see it, but it still gets the occasional DNF because someone didn't see the logs before hand. Then they have to make a second trip.

 

Nobody should post bad coords on purpose--I understand that sometimes you just can't get good readings, but don't fudge it on purpose.

 

+1

I'm never certain if my GPSr was off, or perhaps the owner's was.

If the CO is stating the numbers are deliberately off, the reviewer should have another look at the cache page.

[AZcachemeister]

Let me put it this way: any self-respecting geocacher with even a modicum of experience puts great pride in seeing the phrase, "coords were spot-on!" in the logs for their caches, and cringes and will run out for another reading if they hear "coords were a bit soft" or something like that. We pride ourselves on providing the very best coordinates possible. Deliberately providing misleading coordinates are a total embarrassment.

 

AZcachemeister liked this!

Edited July 3, 2010 by AZcachemeister

[Mr.Yuck]

"As usual, the coords are just close enough to make you work a little. " - from a nearby "traditional". (And not posted by a "kid".)

 

And what do you think about that?

 

I think that is another good reason for an ignore all hides by this user option.

 

I think that someone should post the GC#'s, so that the armchair SBA/NA logs can be posted.

Here's ya go!! GC295R4

 

 

 

 

Pretty funny there. I ask anyone to point me to an armchair SBA log that didn't go over like a lead balloon. I know the 4wheelin'fool is just kidding anyways. What I is going to do is find this cache tomorrow (I was going to that neighborhood anyways), and post the following log: "Found after expanding my search, posted coordinates are 40-50 feet off. TNLN, TFTC", all while using the obscure and little known "add a waypoint to this log" feature, where I will post the correct coordinates with my handy dandy Garmin GPS60 series unit. If this results in a log deletion, I will send an email to Frog Central's drama department, and get my log reinstated.

[4wheelin_fool]

"As usual, the coords are just close enough to make you work a little. " - from a nearby "traditional". (And not posted by a "kid".)

 

And what do you think about that?

 

I think that is another good reason for an ignore all hides by this user option.

 

I think that someone should post the GC#'s, so that the armchair SBA/NA logs can be posted.

Here's ya go!! GC295R4

 

 

 

 

Yeah, you almost got me to post a SBA on my own cache but the option was not available in the log type section for some odd reason..

 

 

The coords are fine anyway. It was previously the site of a virtual cache that was archived 6 years ago, but I was able to hide a traditional at.

Edited July 3, 2010 by 4wheelin_fool

[knowschad]

Yeah, you almost got me to post a SBA on my own cache but the option was not available in the log type section for some odd reason..

 

The coords are fine anyway. It was previously the site of a virtual cache that was archived 6 years ago, but I was able to hide a traditional at.

I knew you wouldn't really do it, even if that had been a good link. Of course, now that the link is here, I wonder how many others might try?

 

What was the object at that virtual? I promise I won't try to armchair that one.

[+Take A Hike!]

I have noticed the more I cache the state, the more I learn whose coordinates are "right on", and whose coordinates are off. L ove this topic, cause I have often wondered if some cachers intentionally post bogus coordinates!

[+AlohaBra and MaksMom]

As a CO, I usually use a Garmin...although I have a PN-40. But a lot of newbies have i-Phones or other smart phones which are good in certain area, but not in others. I want people to find my caches...otherwise why bother hiding them???? If it is not within 30 feet, I will DNF...and may not come back if it is not near where I live [i travel around the US...]...just my 2 cents...

[lilnigglz]

i fixed the problem and i still dont understand why you are all making such a big deal out of this. so i made a mistake, and then i fixed it. i think you guys are acting like "kids" and "idiots" and i could care less if you ignore my caches. im not trying to be a "cute little girl" by naming my cache skurdibbles. i dont know how that cache name is even related be being girly. if you were all mature, instead of constantly bashing me, youd email me and tell me what the problem is. sorry i made a mistake but i fixed it and thats all that matters. next time instead of being immature and just plain out RUDE to a new cacher, why don't you try helping them out and letting them know what the problem is and how to fix it.

 

Hey now, that kid (one of them anyways) is a GIRL. You would be rude to a weak, helpless, mentally inferior girl? You would brutishly ignore her cute little caches? She thought she was being clever with her soft coords, poor thing. Come on, one of her hides is called "Skurdibbles!". Sure, I don't have a clue what that means either, but who am I to quash her girlish enthusiasms?

 

this just sounds rude and it doesnt need to be said about me or anybody else. it just makes you guys look like bad people yourselves. Also, not one of you know me personally, and thats just rediculous for you to call anybody weak, helpless and mentally inferior when you dont personally know them. i can bet that half of you are just fat middle aged men who have nothing else to do besides geocache with your fat middle aged boyfriends and sit on the computer talking about geocaching. but i dont know any of you personally, so thats just being stupid to say any of that is even true.

 

so like i said, i dont care if you ignore my caches. no bodies perfect, and since you are all not "kids" it amazes me that you have not understood that yet. next time theres a problem, address it to me personally and in a mature way so it can get fixed. and all of you who have sat here and bashed me, it just makes you and alot of other cachers look bad and like you take this stuff to seriously.

[+KBLAST]

Hi! I'm one of the fat middle aged men you just decided to bash while telling us not to bash you.

 

i fixed the problem and i still dont understand why you are all making such a big deal out of this. so i made a mistake, and then i fixed it. i think you guys are acting like "kids" and "idiots" and i could care less if you ignore my caches. im not trying to be a "cute little girl" by naming my cache skurdibbles. i dont know how that cache name is even related be being girly. if you were all mature, instead of constantly bashing me, youd email me and tell me what the problem is. sorry i made a mistake but i fixed it and thats all that matters. next time instead of being immature and just plain out RUDE to a new cacher, why don't you try helping them out and letting them know what the problem is and how to fix it.

 

Now, I don't know you or the people who were posting about your cache, but I went to your skurdibbles cache and it would appear that multiple times you were told that the coords were off, in the logs, and you responded with a note that implied that your coords were soft on purpose to get us "fat middle aged men" to get out and LOOK for your cache. I don't know you, but I know that you were NOT open to people helping you fix the problem, you were mean and spiteful, so people reacted. This topic is about coords being off purposely and how much we hate it because it doesn't make the hide better, it makes it annoying. Yours just happened to be an example of someone who PURPOSELY made the coordinates off. Don't claim it was a mistake when your note makes it clear it was not.

[DannyCaffeine]

As rude as I might sound with a "to heck with that, I'm ignoring this kids caches",

 

Hey now, that kid (one of them anyways) is a GIRL. You would be rude to a weak, helpless, mentally inferior girl? You would brutishly ignore her cute little caches? She thought she was being clever with her soft coords, poor thing. Come on, one of her hides is called "Skurdibbles!". Sure, I don't have a clue what that means either, but who am I to quash her girlish enthusiasms?

I hope your joking because that is really sexist.

[knowschad]

I just took the time to re-read this thread in its entirety, and I could not find one single thing that called for the rant that you just posted. While the concept of "soft coordinates' was discussed and your cache was pointed out as an example, nobody criticized you as an individual.

 

It was your local reviewer that disabled your cache, not us, and that was because of your own admission, not because of us:

 

From the owner notes it appears that coordinates were deliberately made fuzzy. A traditional cache should be at the posted coords. Deliberately posting bad coords can lead to unintentional damage or wear to the area and confusion to searchers expecting the cache to be at the coords posted. Please adjust the coords to be accurate and then reenable the cache when you have done so. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

 

Your reply here is exceedingly rude, at best, and most likely violates the forum posting guidelines as well.

[Andronicus]

...

Hey now, that kid (one of them anyways) is a GIRL. You would be rude to a weak, helpless, mentally inferior girl? You would brutishly ignore her cute little caches? She thought she was being clever with her soft coords, poor thing. Come on, one of her hides is called "Skurdibbles!". Sure, I don't have a clue what that means either, but who am I to quash her girlish enthusiasms?

 

this just sounds rude and it doesnt need to be said about me or anybody else. ....

I aggree that this was quite rude. But I suspect that it was sarcastic, and not ment to be taken quite so litteraly as you seem to have taken it.

 

Anyway, I am quite supprised to find everyone on the forum to aggree on a topic. maybe we should make a list of topics that all the forum usere aggree on. It wouldn't be very long.

 

Lets see:

 

Soft Coordinates;

Trade up or trade even;

can't come up with anything else right now.

[+Castle Mischief]

i fixed the problem and...

 

I just have one question. How do you pronouce your user name, lilnigglz?

[+Team Smokey]

With all of the caches that I have recently come across where the coordinates were 30+ feet off I would like to see Groundspeak come up with some sort of method whereby if n number of cachers report that the coordinates are off (and list them in their log), the coordinates would automatically be updated by the site (averaging the posted coordinates) . It is obvious that the COs of these caches aren't getting the hint despite all of the logs stating that the coordinates are off.

[+dakboy]

With all of the caches that I have recently come across where the coordinates were 30+ feet off I would like to see Groundspeak come up with some sort of method whereby if n number of cachers report that the coordinates are off (and list them in their log), the coordinates would automatically be updated by the site (averaging the posted coordinates) . It is obvious that the COs of these caches aren't getting the hint despite all of the logs stating that the coordinates are off.

It would be trivial for a single person (or a small, organized group) to screw up a lot of caches by abusing such a feature.

[+Team Smokey]

With all of the caches that I have recently come across where the coordinates were 30+ feet off I would like to see Groundspeak come up with some sort of method whereby if n number of cachers report that the coordinates are off (and list them in their log), the coordinates would automatically be updated by the site (averaging the posted coordinates) . It is obvious that the COs of these caches aren't getting the hint despite all of the logs stating that the coordinates are off.

It would be trivial for a single person (or a small, organized group) to screw up a lot of caches by abusing such a feature.

I did think of that, and while you are most certainly correct, I don't see it happening. I think geocachers in general are good, honest people who wouldn't stoop to such activities. And before the can of worms opens, yes, I know that everyone knows of 'this one cacher', and we don't need to go into that here, but those are few and far between.

[+roziecakes]

I find the cache owner's rant to be extremely uncalled for and rude. It is also just as 'bashing.' I guess this is a good example of why someone might need more finds under their belt before hiding caches. If she had understood the guidelines to begin with, this wouldn't have had to happen.

Edited July 16, 2010 by nymphnsatyr

[+Team Smokey]

I find the cache owner's rant to be extremely uncalled for and rude. It is also just as 'bashing.' I guess this is a good example of why someone might need more finds under their belt before hiding caches. If she had understood the guidelines to begin with, this wouldn't have had to happen.

 

Oh yes, how rude to expect someone to post accurate coordinates.

[+roziecakes]

I find the cache owner's rant to be extremely uncalled for and rude. It is also just as 'bashing.' I guess this is a good example of why someone might need more finds under their belt before hiding caches. If she had understood the guidelines to begin with, this wouldn't have had to happen.

 

Oh yes, how rude to expect someone to post accurate coordinates.

 

I'm not sure if you misunderstood me or not... I was speaking about the person who posted the inaccurate coords, not those who expect accurate coords to be posted.

[+Team Smokey]

I find the cache owner's rant to be extremely uncalled for and rude. It is also just as 'bashing.' I guess this is a good example of why someone might need more finds under their belt before hiding caches. If she had understood the guidelines to begin with, this wouldn't have had to happen.

 

Oh yes, how rude to expect someone to post accurate coordinates.

 

I'm not sure if you misunderstood me or not... I was speaking about the person who posted the inaccurate coords, not those who expect accurate coords to be posted.

 

I did - my apologies.

 

Glad we're on the same page.

 

Wish I had the ol' foot in mouth jpg to go along with it.

Edited July 16, 2010 by Team Smokey

[+roziecakes]

 

I did - my apologies.

 

Glad we're on the same page.

 

Wish I had the ol' foot in mouth jpg to go along with it.

 

No worries! Online communication is sometimes difficult. That's why we can clarify things. It's not a problem. Glad to be on the same page with you as well I like your avatar, by the way.

[4wheelin_fool]

Yeah, you almost got me to post a SBA on my own cache but the option was not available in the log type section for some odd reason..

 

The coords are fine anyway. It was previously the site of a virtual cache that was archived 6 years ago, but I was able to hide a traditional at.

I knew you wouldn't really do it, even if that had been a good link. Of course, now that the link is here, I wonder how many others might try?

 

What was the object at that virtual? I promise I won't try to armchair that one.

 

Aww cmon. You should be able to figure it out by reading the title. What object in the woods would be something unusual for it's location, but an object that a dog would love?

[lilnigglz]

I find the cache owner's rant to be extremely uncalled for and rude. It is also just as 'bashing.' I guess this is a good example of why someone might need more finds under their belt before hiding caches. If she had understood the guidelines to begin with, this wouldn't have had to happen.

 

Im sorry if i sounded rude to you, but i dont think i sounded any more rude then what was posted earlier. im not trying to bash, and if you read over it again, i was not trying to call anybody names or be rude, i was just trying to get my point across. thats why i said something on the lines of it being rude to call people things without knowing them. it just really ticked me off when i was reading the hole part about me trying to be a cute little girly cacher. i dont understand how that related to any of this lol

[+Mother Wolf]

I think the best thing that could be done in response to this thread would be to lock it. It has become quite offense & far from being constructive at this point.

 

HOW ABOUT IT ADMIN. ENOUGH HERE ALREADY!