Jump to content

Electric Shavers Busted!!!

jeff35080

By jeff35080
in Benchmarking

Followers 0

Recommended Posts

BeachBum22

BeachBum22

Posted
Posted

So now what do we do, put him in Geocaching Prison for 25 to life? icon_razz.gif

 

Reading that discussion makes me wonder. I thought the guy was on an airline crew - steward or pilot maybe. I have friends that travel all over the place that work for the airlines. So it's not a crime to travel in the U.S.

 

Also was suggested that the admin people dump him off the site. With a site like this, the reality is you can't get rid of anybody. If they want to come back, they'll be back in 3 minutes with a different Yahoo email address and a different Geocaching nickname.

 

As somebody else suggested here, maybe he's only looking for benchmarks that were previously 'found' because he doesn't have but a day or two off to go looking and he'd like to find some. Official rules - No Pictures Required.

 

But really, what's it matter? There are no stats, there are no leaders, there are no winners. If, in fact, the guy is totally bogus, who is he cheating but himself?

 

Do we have enuff evidence to arrest him? I doubt it.

Link to comment
BeachBum22

BeachBum22

Posted
Posted

Opps, I forgot the other option. Maybe the guy is totally clueless. I was when I first got here but then I made a pest of myself here until I figured out how things work.

 

I like looking at the gallery pictures. Every so often it seems like I see somebody logging a 'find' that isn't really a find - it's a RM and not the benchmark, or it's inside an area where you can see if from a long distance away but can't get close to it, or it's gone and not there anymore.

 

I like to think that the people who are logging these as 'found' aren't Geocaching Criminals, they are just clueless, like I was for a while.

Link to comment
reepicheep

+reepicheep

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by BeachBum22:

<snip>

Also was suggested that the admin people dump him off the site. With a site like this, the reality is you can't get rid of anybody. If they want to come back, they'll be back in 3 minutes with a different Yahoo email address and a different Geocaching nickname.

<snip>

 

Jeremy is on top of those things. They can check IP addresses and if he is DSL or Cable Modem with a static address, they will ban it.

If they are DHCP and the only user from an IP address range, they can block that too.

 

Now dial-up or traveling alot and accessing from hotels is another story.

 

Kenneth

Link to comment
berryzang

+berryzang

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by smenzel:

Reminds me a bit of someone who logged a bunch of Benchmarks I was thinking of searching but didn't attach any photos to their logs. I thought it kind of strange that the person would log the find but not include any images -- or even any info specific to the benchmark in their log.

 

I've been doing that lately. Been stopping when I see them on the side of the road and I don't have my camera. But there are only a few of those too.

 

Big Red Dog

Geocaching Fool

Link to comment
jeff35080

+jeff35080

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Public humiliation is not necessary or appropriate use of the forums.

 

If you cheat then admit it on the forums, you have opened yourself up to humiliation.

 

Of course, odds are that this thread will get locked, but nevertheless, Electric Shavers did admit in the General Forum that they have been cheating with Travel Bugs.... if they cheat with Travel Bugs, then odds are they will cheat with other aspects of the "geogames" that we all enjoy.

 

Granted, it is entirely possible that all of their finds are totally legit, but they are the ones that have admitted, in public, that they have cheated. Of course, no one really keeps score (well, some of us enjoy friendly competition and motivation) but if we are all going to play these games, we should all play by the same rules, even if we are all on the honor system.

 

Regardless of if this thread gets locked, Electric Shavers did admit on the General Forum that they have cheated with Travel Bugs. Where there's smoke, there's usually fire....

 

Jeff

http://www.StarsFellOnAlabama.com

http://www.NotAChance.com

If you hide it, they will come....

Link to comment
Green Toad

+Green Toad

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by BeachBum22:

So now what do we do, put him in Geocaching Prison for 25 to life? icon_razz.gif

 

...

 

As somebody else suggested here, maybe he's only looking for benchmarks that were previously 'found' because he doesn't have but a day or two off to go looking and he'd like to find some. Official rules - No Pictures Required.

 

But really, what's it matter? There are no stats, there are no leaders, there are no winners. If, in fact, the guy is totally bogus, who is he cheating but himself?

 

This is a perfect reason why stats will never be implemented on this site. Its just too easy to cheat.

 

I, too, have no problem (or a lesser problem) with ES loggin benchmarks that have been previously found; although I feel it is unethical. The truly unethical thing to do is log finds for BMs/caches that have not been previously found; this will lead to people believing that they actually exist when they may not!

 

-Stroh

 

-Technology...I have no idea what I would do without my GPSr, my TiVo, or my Computer with a broadband connection. I guess I would spend more time with my wife! icon_smile.gif

Link to comment
Colorado Papa

+Colorado Papa

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by BeachBum22:

... when I first got here but then I made a pest of myself here until I figured out how things work.

I'm still trying to figure out how things work. Guidelines are still in the gray area.

 

quote:
Every so often it seems like I see somebody logging a 'find' that isn't really a find - it's a RM and not the benchmark, or it's inside an area where you can see if from a long distance away but can't get close to it, or it's gone and not there anymore.

 

I like to think that the people who are logging these as 'found' aren't Geocaching Criminals, they are just clueless, like I was for a while.

 

I plead guilty. I emailed Deb Brown and she replied as follows:

 

Deb,

Can you clarify the meaning of DESTROYED? The wording in the guidelines leaves a question about the degree of destroyed.

 

1. Disk with designation is missing even if mount and pin still exists.

2. Disk and pin are missing even if mounting hole exists.

3. Disk, pin and mount have been totally damaged, unearthed or destroyed.

 

I have been using all the above guidelines. Am I wrong to be using #1 and/or #2?

Her reply:

 

All are "destroyed" except number 1. In that case, use the POOR/DISTURBED code and in the text portion of the form describe it's condition.

 

Thanks,

deb

 

Based on her input, I went back and changed NOT FOUND to FOUND for those that had only the disk missing but the pin was still in place. But maybe my wording was unclear since a pin is used in some BMs with a ring around it. Perhaps I should have asked about disk broken off the mounting shaft?

 

Of course the safest way to handle it would to be to ignore the site if it doesn't have a disk and don't make any log. But who is that going to help?

 

1950 Surveyor

Link to comment
GEO*Trailblazer 1

+GEO*Trailblazer 1

Posted
Posted

What about towers and tanks.....

The footings are still there and the (point) 100 + - foot up is still there is it destroyed or is the terminology just made hard to understand,to me if you find evidence of the mark it should be a workable point still.

The mark itself may not be in good condition or removed but the Long. and Latt. is still the same.

 

WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS

*GEOTRYAGAIN*

TAKE PRIDE IN AMERICA

http://www.doi.gov/news/front_current.html

1803-2003

"LOUSIANA PURCHASE"

http://www.lapurchase.org

"LEWIS AND CLARK EXPADITION"

http://lewisclark.geog.missouri.edu/index

 

Arkansas Missouri Geocachrs Association

http://www.ARK-MOGeocachersAssociatoin@msnusers.com

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ark-Mo-Geocachers

Link to comment
Colorado Papa

+Colorado Papa

Posted
Posted

quote:
I like looking at the gallery pictures. Every so often it seems like I see somebody logging a 'find' that isn't really a find - it's a RM and not the benchmark
Does this mean we should not submit pictures of reference and azimuth marks even if they have their own PID? I don't think so. Example FB0414 DAVIS AZ.

On the other hand, some PIDs are for only the BM and do not include the RMs or AZMs. But if they are found, then submit the pictures.

 

1950 Surveyor

Link to comment
BeachBum22

BeachBum22

Posted
Posted

quote:
I plead guilty. I emailed Deb Brown .....

 

I think part of the confusion about found/not found/destroyed/whatever stems from the fact that the NGS definitions of the above don't match the Geocaching web sites definitions.

 

A missing disc with the stem still in place may constitute a "found" for NGS purposes, but this web site says:

 

"You can log Found it! if you see the marker and know that it is the correct marker. If the marker is a survey disk, you must read the disk. The designation (its name) stamped on it must match the Designation in the description."

 

Since you can't read the disc if it's not there, then my interpretation would be that it's not a Geochaching.Com "find" if the disc is gone and only the stem remains.

 

I bring this up a)not because I think anybody should change any logs b)not because I'm at all concerned about who logs what or how many, but because the discussion gets confusing due to the fact that some people are speaking in terms of NGS finds and others in terms of GC finds.

 

Maybe we need a "comparison" page NGS vs. GC, or maybe two different discussions. An NGS REPORTS forum might solve some of the confusion.

 

BeachBum22

http://www.benchmarkhunting.com

Link to comment
GeckoGeek

+GeckoGeek

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by GEO*Trailblazer 1:

What about towers and tanks.....

The footings are still there and the (point) 100 + - foot up is still there is it destroyed or is the terminology just made hard to understand,to me if you find evidence of the mark it should be a workable point still.

 

Unless the footings where the reference point, it's considered destroyed. Otherwise you have to make too many assumptions about how the tower was constructed. Keep in mind we're talking about accuracy within a inch or so - not within 100 feet.

Link to comment
BeachBum22

BeachBum22

Posted
Posted

quote:
Unless the footings where the reference point, it's considered destroyed. Otherwise you have to make too many assumptions about how the tower was constructed. Keep in mind we're talking about accuracy within a inch or so - not within 100 feet.

 

If a surveyor in 1935 picked a water tower as a benchmark, I'd guess he probably picked it because because it was high and he could see it from far away, not because it had pretty footings. If he was impressed by the footings, he probably would have drilled a hole and stuck one of those disc things in it......

 

BeachBum22

http://www.benchmarkhunting.com

Link to comment
beejay&esskay

+beejay&esskay

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by BeachBum22:

A missing disc with the stem still in place may constitute a "found" for NGS purposes, but this web site says:

 

"You can log Found it! if you see the marker and know that it is the correct marker. If the marker is a survey disk, you must read the disk. The designation (its name) stamped on it must match the Designation in the description."

 

Since you can't read the disc if it's not there, then my interpretation would be that it's not a Geochaching.Com "find" if the disc is gone and only the stem remains.

 

BeachBum22

http://www.benchmarkhunting.com

 

I hate to argue with Deb about what constitutes a find, but I can't understand why she would want amateurs saying it was found if the disk was not present. How can we know we actually found the right spot? Couldn't we be finding something that had been replaced by a RESET and mistakenly reported finding the RESET in poor/disturbed condition?

 

Now I understand she makes up the rules, but I'm not comfortable reporting to NGS a find if I can't read the disk. I'm too afraid I've made a mistake.

Link to comment
BeachBum22

BeachBum22

Posted
Posted

quote:
I hate to argue with Deb about what constitutes a find, but I can't understand why she would want amateurs saying it was found if the disk was not present.

 

I don't think Deb is here, but you could probably argue with Dave and he could relay it. icon_razz.gif

 

If you do some reading in this forum, I think you'll find that the "disc is missing but mark still usable" theory comes from the fact that a surveyor can still use the center of the stem for his purposes, and I think you'll read that the NGS leans in favor of not reporting things destroyed unless there is very solid proof that they really are destroyed.

 

quote:
Now I understand she makes up the rules, but I'm not comfortable reporting to NGS a find if I can't read the disk. I'm too afraid I've made a mistake.

 

I thought Dave made up the rules. Right Dave?

 

I'm not comfortable reporting anything to the NGS, because I'm not a professional. I would have to guess that the web site with the report form was originally intended to be used by professionals. Maybe after I've found five hundred benchmarks and feel that I have a solid understanding of the subject, then I'll feel comfortable enough to report things to the NGS.

 

I also don't think it's a good idea to encourage everyone who uses the benchmark hunting section of this web site to make reports to the NGS, because all of us (me included) don't have a firm understanding of what we are looking for and what information the NGS really needs or wants. If they get swamped with useless information, that's not much "help" at all.....

 

The process probably isn't automated - a real person has to spend real time to review everything that's submitted before it gets included in the NGS database.

 

If you are "not comfortable" reporting things to the NGS, maybe that's an indication that you should join me in the Clueless Club and not report anything to them at all. icon_cool.gif

 

I also doubt that the intention of adding benchmark hunting to the GC web site was to encourage us all to report to the NGS - it was probably just to give us another reason to go play with the GPS.

 

BeachBum22

http://www.benchmarkhunting.com

Link to comment
GeckoGeek

+GeckoGeek

Posted
Posted

quote:
I hate to argue with Deb about what constitutes a find, but I can't understand why she would want amateurs saying it was found if the disk was not present. How can we know we actually found the right spot?
First of all, she didn't. She only said that a station in that condition was not destroyed.

quote:

I'm not comfortable reporting anything to the NGS, because I'm not a professional. I would have to guess that the web site with the report form was originally intended to be used by professionals.

If you’re not comfortable, then don’t. But if you’ve found the disk and it’s clearly stamped right, then you’ve found it. That’s a “no doubter” in anyone’s book. And if the NGS shows it hasn’t been visited in 10 years, log it so others know it still exits.

 

You’re also assuming the pros know what they are doing. I’ve already destroyed 5 marks just by point out to Deb the contents of the log.

Link to comment
Colorado Papa

+Colorado Papa

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by BeachBum22:

I think part of the confusion about found/not found/destroyed/whatever stems from the fact that the NGS definitions of the above don't match the Geocaching web sites definitions.

Then Geocache should add another category so that we are all on the same page.
quote:
I'm not comfortable reporting anything to the NGS, because I'm not a professional. I would have to guess that the web site with the report form was originally intended to be used by professionals.

Posted by BeachBum22

Don't worry about "professional". I consider this group at least as good if not better than the US Power Squadron who makes reports to NGS without a thorough search. I've located about half a dozen "skulls" that were reported by them as NOT FOUND which indicates to me they are far from being professionals.

 

1950 Surveyor

 

[This message was edited by Colorado Papa on September 12, 2003 at 06:05 AM.]

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
Followers 0
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...