Earthcache owner is banned

[+EscapeFromFlatland]

The owner of several earthcaches that I completed this weekend is currently banned and on the cacher's profile, the following is logged:

"The "send message" feature is disabled because this user is currently banned."

 

If I can't email answers to the CO to complete and log the caches, should I just mark all the earthcaches for Needs Archived?

Edited July 11, 2010 by bramasoleiowa

[GOF's Sock Puppet]

The owner of several earthcaches that I completed this weekend is currently banned and on the cacher's profile, the following is logged:

"The "send message" feature is disabled because this user is currently banned."

 

If I can't email answers to the CO to complete and log the caches, should I just mark all the earthcaches for Needs Archived?

 

It is possible that this is not a permanent situation. Just log them. Or possibly contact the reviewer. They may have more information.

[jholly]

The owner of several earthcaches that I completed this weekend is currently banned and on the cacher's profile, the following is logged:

"The "send message" feature is disabled because this user is currently banned."

 

If I can't email answers to the CO to complete and log the caches, should I just mark all the earthcaches for Needs Archived?

 

I'll go with the puppet. Log it, take the smiley and move on. Nothing to see here, move on.

[+Chrysalides]

I'm with the cartoon Martian.

[Keystone]

Studying your recent finds, I checked the profile for the owner of the earthcache you found most recently. on the profile details, Groundspeak added the following:

To geocachers from Groundspeak:

11 Feb 2010

Please go ahead and log caches that you have legitimately found. The cache owner can do appropriate maintenance and log verification after the ban period is terminated.

This should answer your question.

 

I am moving your thread out of the Geocaching Topics forum over to the Earthcache forum.

[+lachupa]

I know who you're talking about. I was going to do one of his and wasn't sure what was going on.

 

any idea how long he's going to be on super secret time out?

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

I know who you're talking about. I was going to do one of his and wasn't sure what was going on.

 

any idea how long he's going to be on super secret time out?

 

According to the ruling, the ban will last until Feb. 2011. Most of us appreciate what he has done for earthcaching and anxiously await his return.

At the moment, he is helping to protect this Country by serving in the Mideast in the good old US Army. Hopefully. he will be back to both geocaching and to the USA.

P.S. Welcome to geocaching and above all, welcome to earthcaching! We are especially proud that your very first EC find was one of ours! Thanks and maybe someday we will meet on the trail!

Edited July 13, 2010 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+TerraViators]

If he is on active duty, then he is not actually banned, right? Is this an actual punitive measure or really bad semantics? Also, what gets a user banned? Sounds ridiculous.

[+Touchstone]

Also, what gets a user banned? Sounds ridiculous.

 

Most of the ones that I've heard about were because of some obvious violation of the Terms of Use of the site.

 

I don't know the circumstances in this particular case, but I wish the cache owner well and hope he stays safe during his tour.

[+geoaware]

Also, what gets a user banned? Sounds ridiculous.

 

Most of the ones that I've heard about were because of some obvious violation of the Terms of Use of the site.

 

I don't know the circumstances in this particular case, but I wish the cache owner well and hope he stays safe during his tour.

 

Also, for EarthCaches.....

 

You can also get a black mark against your name for falsifying permissions or claiming you have received permission to place and EC when you have have not. Please be warned - we check!

 

You can also get a black mark for being rude of land managers (we have had complaints about cachers), being rude to other cachers and reviewers either by phone, email or in these forums.

 

It is a game...and you are expected to play by the rules, be polite to others and have fun.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Also, what gets a user banned? Sounds ridiculous.

 

Most of the ones that I've heard about were because of some obvious violation of the Terms of Use of the site.

 

I don't know the circumstances in this particular case, but I wish the cache owner well and hope he stays safe during his tour.

 

Also, for EarthCaches.....

 

You can also get a black mark against your name for falsifying permissions or claiming you have received permission to place and EC when you have have not. Please be warned - we check!

 

You can also get a black mark for being rude of land managers (we have had complaints about cachers), being rude to other cachers and reviewers either by phone, email or in these forums.

 

It is a game...and you are expected to play by the rules, be polite to others and have fun.

 

I certainly assume and hope you are not implying this is the applicable with the "particular case"! Also, please define a "black mark". It would further help to have "rude" defined. Sometimes, folks are overly sensitive! I am sorry but your terms of "black mark and rude" are vague and are hard to use as guidelines. It leaves the door far too open for selective application. Cachers should not be in the position of being manners police.

Thanks Touchstone for the well wishes for our fellow cacher.

P.S. Please put a disclaimer that your remarks are not aimed at the banned cacher because folks posting on this forum have been warned not to discuss specific cases and that's all we want. Thanks a lot.

Edited July 18, 2010 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+Kabuthunk]

Also, please define a "black mark". It would further help to have "rude" defined. Sometimes, folks are overly sensitive! I am sorry but your terms of "black mark and rude" are vague and are hard to use as guidelines. It leaves the door far too open for selective application.

Just feel I should kinda comment on this, knowing all too well very similar situations. It applies in many other fields, and I'm almost 100% certain it would in geocaching, too. When you get rules that are way too overly specific, there WILL be people who will exploit the specificness of it, and will blatantly skirt the rules by finding loopholes, and then be more than happy to point out when they're yelled at that they are not breaking the rules. When you go the extremely specific route, then it's just a race between the people who love abusing the system vs. t he system, constantly having to update the rules to accommodate the jerks. Basically, it's a ridiculously massive waste of time and effort on everyone's part trying to keep the jerks from deliberately setting out to ruin things as much as they can for everyone else.

 

And don't think said jerks don't exist in geocaching. They're friggin' everywhere.

 

Thankfully, geocaching isn't as strict as other fields, and have rules (ie: the vague terms you spoke of) that are flexible so that it can be a judgement call as opposed to something on a very specific list.

 

Thus, I'm by far on the side of Groundspeak in regards to their rule system as a whole. A general rule of thumb to go by in geocaching, as well as virtually anywhere else in life... is "Don't be a prick". It'll keep you out of trouble 99.9% of the time. Yes, that's vague as well. If you actually have to ask yourself "Is this a prickish thing to do" before doing something, then the answer is "Yes". Unfortunately as the saying goes, 'common sense is anything but'... thus the need for rules to begin with, and people get caught unawares. But that's life. Learn from it and continue on.

 

EDIT: Don't take this post as me bashing the person banned at the start of the topic... I have no clue who that is, or anything about it. I'm commenting on the concept of the specificness of rules as a whole.

Edited July 18, 2010 by Kabuthunk

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Also, please define a "black mark". It would further help to have "rude" defined. Sometimes, folks are overly sensitive! I am sorry but your terms of "black mark and rude" are vague and are hard to use as guidelines. It leaves the door far too open for selective application.

Just feel I should kinda comment on this, knowing all too well very similar situations. It applies in many other fields, and I'm almost 100% certain it would in geocaching, too. When you get rules that are way too overly specific, there WILL be people who will exploit the specificness of it, and will blatantly skirt the rules by finding loopholes, and then be more than happy to point out when they're yelled at that they are not breaking the rules. When you go the extremely specific route, then it's just a race between the people who love abusing the system vs. t he system, constantly having to update the rules to accommodate the jerks. Basically, it's a ridiculously massive waste of time and effort on everyone's part trying to keep the jerks from deliberately setting out to ruin things as much as they can for everyone else.

 

And don't think said jerks don't exist in geocaching. They're friggin' everywhere.

 

Thankfully, geocaching isn't as strict as other fields, and have rules (ie: the vague terms you spoke of) that are flexible so that it can be a judgement call as opposed to something on a very specific list.

 

Thus, I'm by far on the side of Groundspeak in regards to their rule system as a whole. A general rule of thumb to go by in geocaching, as well as virtually anywhere else in life... is "Don't be a prick". It'll keep you out of trouble 99.9% of the time. Yes, that's vague as well. If you actually have to ask yourself "Is this a prickish thing to do" before doing something, then the answer is "Yes". Unfortunately as the saying goes, 'common sense is anything but'... thus the need for rules to begin with, and people get caught unawares. But that's life. Learn from it and continue on.

 

EDIT: Don't take this post as me bashing the person banned at the start of the topic... I have no clue who that is, or anything about it. I'm commenting on the concept of the specificness of rules as a whole.

 

Your points are well taken but I was not referring to the Groundspeak guidelines. Those guidelines are well written and very specific. Quite the opposite of vague and illdefined terms. Here is an example of the GS posting guidelines:

 

"(a) Upload, post or otherwise transmit any content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortuous, defamatory, slanderous, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, embarrassing, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable to any other person or entity."

Thanks.

[+geoaware]

Also, what gets a user banned? Sounds ridiculous.

 

Most of the ones that I've heard about were because of some obvious violation of the Terms of Use of the site.

 

I don't know the circumstances in this particular case, but I wish the cache owner well and hope he stays safe during his tour.

 

Also, for EarthCaches.....

 

You can also get a black mark against your name for falsifying permissions or claiming you have received permission to place and EC when you have have not. Please be warned - we check!

 

You can also get a black mark for being rude of land managers (we have had complaints about cachers), being rude to other cachers and reviewers either by phone, email or in these forums.

 

It is a game...and you are expected to play by the rules, be polite to others and have fun.

 

I certainly assume and hope you are not implying this is the applicable with the "particular case"! Also, please define a "black mark". It would further help to have "rude" defined. Sometimes, folks are overly sensitive! I am sorry but your terms of "black mark and rude" are vague and are hard to use as guidelines. It leaves the door far too open for selective application. Cachers should not be in the position of being manners police.

Thanks Touchstone for the well wishes for our fellow cacher.

P.S. Please put a disclaimer that your remarks are not aimed at the banned cacher because folks posting on this forum have been warned not to discuss specific cases and that's all we want. Thanks a lot.

 

Rude = " Upload, post or otherwise transmit any content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortuous, defamatory, slanderous, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, embarrassing, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable to any other person or entity."

 

black mark = The EarthCache review team will report your behaviors to Groundspeak and urge them to act under their guidelines.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

 

Rude = " Upload, post or otherwise transmit any content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortuous, defamatory, slanderous, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, embarrassing, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable to any other person or entity."

 

black mark = The EarthCache review team will report your behaviors to Groundspeak and urge them to act under their guidelines.

 

WOW, that's some definition! All this time I thought rude meant not saying thank you or not holding the door open for someone. Now we know and thanks for clearing it up!

Edited July 19, 2010 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+TerraViators]

 

Rude = " Upload, post or otherwise transmit any content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortuous, defamatory, slanderous, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, embarrassing, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable to any other person or entity."

 

black mark = The EarthCache review team will report your behaviors to Groundspeak and urge them to act under their guidelines.

 

WOW, that's some definition! All this time I thought rude meant not saying thank you or not holding the door open for someone. Now we know and thanks for clearing it up!

hehehe. I love sarcasm.