Jump to content

Unique Virtual too special to be Archived?


SwineFlew
Followers 7

Recommended Posts

Some of the posts in this thread was very well thought out and they voice their opinion(s)in a civil manner even I disagree with them strongly. The rest, I am not sure sure how I can say it so its best to leave that unsaid. dry.gif

 

I picked that cache because I want to see if those "special" caches get better treatment over some not so special caches when all caches are to been treated the same under the guideline.

 

I am sure GS uses that cache part of their sale pitch when they are asked where all the caches are. I dont think they will archived it, however, the guideline said the CO have to be on GC every month to keep that virtual alive. So let see if they will follow the guideline they wrote out for all of us to follow. If they wanna play wishy washing, thats fine with me.

 

You my friend are finding out what I already know. I call it the Golden Rule. If Groundspeak wanted us to police this site they would give us a badge. I'm a guilty party of posting NA's on ownerless caches. I also let a family member use my IP address to post NA logs on ownerless caches with THEIR account, which is now locked because of all the trouble it started. I requested the account to be locked because it looked like a sock puppet account from my IP address. I was also told that there were 9 more accounts connected, but when I asked, it became a "privacy issue". My IP address correct?

I don't think that what you did was random, you knew it would make some users mad. Now you see how nasty this "family sport" is. I don't think that we can find a better site than what we have here. I am a user on that other site too. When we see things that we do not agree with, or are against the guidelines, if we report this we are seen as trouble makers. And the angery mob turns against us.

See what they can do? They got your caches locked with their protests of vulgar comments. Who is next? Never mind the rules, shut up and geocache or your account will be locked. Is this what I paid to be a PM for?

Wow. Such sillieness.

Thank you for your comment. I will now launch all of the much needed NA's on ownerless caches. I hope that this is what you are asking for. We need to clean up and remove unmaintained caches that are not in according to guidelines. They are just geolitter aren't they?

Link to comment

Some of the posts in this thread was very well thought out and they voice their opinion(s)in a civil manner even I disagree with them strongly. The rest, I am not sure sure how I can say it so its best to leave that unsaid. dry.gif

 

I picked that cache because I want to see if those "special" caches get better treatment over some not so special caches when all caches are to been treated the same under the guideline.

 

I am sure GS uses that cache part of their sale pitch when they are asked where all the caches are. I dont think they will archived it, however, the guideline said the CO have to be on GC every month to keep that virtual alive. So let see if they will follow the guideline they wrote out for all of us to follow. If they wanna play wishy washing, thats fine with me.

 

You my friend are finding out what I already know. I call it the Golden Rule. If Groundspeak wanted us to police this site they would give us a badge. I'm a guilty party of posting NA's on ownerless caches. I also let a family member use my IP address to post NA logs on ownerless caches with THEIR account, which is now locked because of all the trouble it started. I requested the account to be locked because it looked like a sock puppet account from my IP address. I was also told that there were 9 more accounts connected, but when I asked, it became a "privacy issue". My IP address correct?

I don't think that what you did was random, you knew it would make some users mad. Now you see how nasty this "family sport" is. I don't think that we can find a better site than what we have here. I am a user on that other site too. When we see things that we do not agree with, or are against the guidelines, if we report this we are seen as trouble makers. And the angery mob turns against us.

See what they can do? They got your caches locked with their protests of vulgar comments. Who is next? Never mind the rules, shut up and geocache or your account will be locked. Is this what I paid to be a PM for?

Wow. Such sillieness.

Thank you for your comment. I will now launch all of the much needed NA's on ownerless caches. I hope that this is what you are asking for. We need to clean up and remove unmaintained caches that are not in according to guidelines. They are just geolitter aren't they?

Wow. Even more sillieness. I guess I will have blood on my keyboard if you choose to go off. When did this forum degrade to posts and attitudes such as this? :blink:

Link to comment

Some of the posts in this thread was very well thought out and they voice their opinion(s)in a civil manner even I disagree with them strongly. The rest, I am not sure sure how I can say it so its best to leave that unsaid. dry.gif

 

I picked that cache because I want to see if those "special" caches get better treatment over some not so special caches when all caches are to been treated the same under the guideline.

 

I am sure GS uses that cache part of their sale pitch when they are asked where all the caches are. I dont think they will archived it, however, the guideline said the CO have to be on GC every month to keep that virtual alive. So let see if they will follow the guideline they wrote out for all of us to follow. If they wanna play wishy washing, thats fine with me.

 

You my friend are finding out what I already know. I call it the Golden Rule. If Groundspeak wanted us to police this site they would give us a badge. I'm a guilty party of posting NA's on ownerless caches. I also let a family member use my IP address to post NA logs on ownerless caches with THEIR account, which is now locked because of all the trouble it started. I requested the account to be locked because it looked like a sock puppet account from my IP address. I was also told that there were 9 more accounts connected, but when I asked, it became a "privacy issue". My IP address correct?

I don't think that what you did was random, you knew it would make some users mad. Now you see how nasty this "family sport" is. I don't think that we can find a better site than what we have here. I am a user on that other site too. When we see things that we do not agree with, or are against the guidelines, if we report this we are seen as trouble makers. And the angery mob turns against us.

See what they can do? They got your caches locked with their protests of vulgar comments. Who is next? Never mind the rules, shut up and geocache or your account will be locked. Is this what I paid to be a PM for?

Wow. Such sillieness.

Thank you for your comment. I will now launch all of the much needed NA's on ownerless caches. I hope that this is what you are asking for. We need to clean up and remove unmaintained caches that are not in according to guidelines. They are just geolitter aren't they?

Wow. Even more sillieness. I guess I will have blood on my keyboard if you choose to go off. When did this forum degrade to posts and attitudes such as this? :blink:

 

He learned it at that other place where 95% of the posts talk about how mean we are.

:anibad:

Link to comment

 

Thank you for your comment. I will now launch all of the much needed NA's on ownerless caches. I hope that this is what you are asking for. We need to clean up and remove unmaintained caches that are not in according to guidelines. They are just geolitter aren't they?

 

Do I smell sarcasm here? :ph34r:

Link to comment

You could have just asked in the forums without actually trying it. That's like trying to find out if the neighbors would be more mad if you ran over one of their pet dogs versus some raccoon by actually going out and running over one of their dogs.

:lol:

Disclaimer: At no point was I advocating that anyone should run over any dog, especially ones wearing glasses.

We both thank you.

 

Arf!

Link to comment

Swineflew just posted a NA on Manzanar Virtual Cache, one of California's more popular caches, with 64 legitimate finds last year.

 

To say my blood is boiling would be an understatement.

 

I hope that the lackeys realize that this individual is trying to be an ad-hoc reviewer, and lock his account.

 

The owner hasn't logged in for more than two years. It's an abandoned cache. Virtual geocaches need maintenance just like all the others.

 

I really wonder why nobody more local has reported it in all this time - geocaching relies on the community to uphold standards. The people who are really in the wrong are the countless local cachers who have kept the abandonment of this cache hushed up for so long.

Link to comment

Swineflew just posted a NA on Manzanar Virtual Cache, one of California's more popular caches, with 64 legitimate finds last year.

 

To say my blood is boiling would be an understatement.

 

I hope that the lackeys realize that this individual is trying to be an ad-hoc reviewer, and lock his account.

 

The owner hasn't logged in for more than two years. It's an abandoned cache. Virtual geocaches need maintenance just like all the others.

 

I really wonder why nobody more local has reported it in all this time - geocaching relies on the community to uphold standards. The people who are really in the wrong are the countless local cachers who have kept the abandonment of this cache hushed up for so long.

 

The problem is, nobody wanna deal with the fallout like what happen to me. This is where the real problem is.

Link to comment

Swineflew just posted a NA on Manzanar Virtual Cache, one of California's more popular caches, with 64 legitimate finds last year.

 

To say my blood is boiling would be an understatement.

 

I hope that the lackeys realize that this individual is trying to be an ad-hoc reviewer, and lock his account.

 

Thats not me! Reread the SN really careful.

 

Yeah, its a sock. Not sure who owns the sock. Not so sure we can trust your protestations, though. Guess who brought all these troubles on himself?

Link to comment

Some of the posts in this thread was very well thought out and they voice their opinion(s)in a civil manner even I disagree with them strongly. The rest, I am not sure sure how I can say it so its best to leave that unsaid. dry.gif

 

I picked that cache because I want to see if those "special" caches get better treatment over some not so special caches when all caches are to been treated the same under the guideline.

 

I am sure GS uses that cache part of their sale pitch when they are asked where all the caches are. I dont think they will archived it, however, the guideline said the CO have to be on GC every month to keep that virtual alive. So let see if they will follow the guideline they wrote out for all of us to follow. If they wanna play wishy washing, thats fine with me.

 

You my friend are finding out what I already know. I call it the Golden Rule. If Groundspeak wanted us to police this site they would give us a badge. I'm a guilty party of posting NA's on ownerless caches. I also let a family member use my IP address to post NA logs on ownerless caches with THEIR account, which is now locked because of all the trouble it started. I requested the account to be locked because it looked like a sock puppet account from my IP address. I was also told that there were 9 more accounts connected, but when I asked, it became a "privacy issue". My IP address correct?

I don't think that what you did was random, you knew it would make some users mad. Now you see how nasty this "family sport" is. I don't think that we can find a better site than what we have here. I am a user on that other site too. When we see things that we do not agree with, or are against the guidelines, if we report this we are seen as trouble makers. And the angery mob turns against us.

See what they can do? They got your caches locked with their protests of vulgar comments. Who is next? Never mind the rules, shut up and geocache or your account will be locked. Is this what I paid to be a PM for?

Wow. Such sillieness.

Thank you for your comment. I will now launch all of the much needed NA's on ownerless caches. I hope that this is what you are asking for. We need to clean up and remove unmaintained caches that are not in according to guidelines. They are just geolitter aren't they?

Wow. Even more sillieness. I guess I will have blood on my keyboard if you choose to go off. When did this forum degrade to posts and attitudes such as this? :blink:

 

He learned it at that other place where 95% of the posts talk about how mean we are.

:anibad:

No. I have been a member here for many years. I just avioded the forums. Now if you really want to play by the rules, we will. I won't use a sock puppet account. My account will probally be locked like the other users caches were because of outlaw users that post junk and defile this site.

 

IBTL.

Link to comment

Swineflew just posted a NA on Manzanar Virtual Cache, one of California's more popular caches, with 64 legitimate finds last year.

 

To say my blood is boiling would be an understatement.

 

I hope that the lackeys realize that this individual is trying to be an ad-hoc reviewer, and lock his account.

 

The owner hasn't logged in for more than two years. It's an abandoned cache. Virtual geocaches need maintenance just like all the others.

 

I really wonder why nobody more local has reported it in all this time - geocaching relies on the community to uphold standards. The people who are really in the wrong are the countless local cachers who have kept the abandonment of this cache hushed up for so long.

 

Because there is absolutely nothing to warrant such action. It is a very popular spot along US395, through the Owens Vally. The site is that of the Manzanar Interment camp where the US locked up the US citizens of Japanese descent, after the attack on Pearl Harbor and our entrance into WWII. I think that it is a very important cache. To post an NA simply to cause trouble is wrong. I'm sure that they can find plenty of traditional caches with cracked lids and a science experiment growing on the log book. It would be a better use of their efforts.

Link to comment

Swineflew just posted a NA on Manzanar Virtual Cache, one of California's more popular caches, with 64 legitimate finds last year.

 

To say my blood is boiling would be an understatement.

 

I hope that the lackeys realize that this individual is trying to be an ad-hoc reviewer, and lock his account.

 

The owner hasn't logged in for more than two years. It's an abandoned cache. Virtual geocaches need maintenance just like all the others.

 

I really wonder why nobody more local has reported it in all this time - geocaching relies on the community to uphold standards. The people who are really in the wrong are the countless local cachers who have kept the abandonment of this cache hushed up for so long.

Are you SERIOUS? You would have a historically important site like this one fade from geocacher's view just because a cache owner does not appear to be available to check the logs? What exactly are these "standards" that you are trying to uphold? My standards are that awesome virtuals like this one are a very special thing.

Link to comment

it seems as though he has a sock puppet account now by the name of Swine FIew here is a link to that account http://www.geocachin...23-6e5f9e0e697f He asked for two virtuals in Florida to be archived today. Who does this guy think he is anyhow?

 

Interesting to note that if you go to that members page and click on "view forum posts for this Member" the name it shows is "isitanywonder".

Link to comment

I am sure someone took a sock name within one letter of yours and just happens to ask two caches in Florida be archived on the same day you stir up a hornets nest. If this not a sock puppet with your name and modus operandi written all over it I apologize. But it is really hard to smell a sock and not know it is a sock but not to worry Groundspeak can sort that out. I hope you are getting the attention you wanted.

Link to comment

Virtual geocaches need maintenance just like all the others.

 

We usually address that with a needs maintenance log.

 

The people who are really in the wrong are the countless local cachers who have kept the abandonment of this cache hushed up for so long.

 

Because this cache was really hurting our game by drawing attention to a historic sight that has been enjoyed by hundreds of cachers already.

 

Come on, get off the soap box and use some discernment. :blink:

Link to comment

 

Thank you for your comment. I will now launch all of the much needed NA's on ownerless caches. I hope that this is what you are asking for. We need to clean up and remove unmaintained caches that are not in according to guidelines. They are just geolitter aren't they?

 

Do I smell sarcasm here? :ph34r:

No. I have done the same thing that you are doing. Posting NA's on caches that the owner has left the game. You are just getting hit harded because you picked a bigger fight with the geocommunity. No sarcasam intended. I don't like these type caches either, but see what trouble it causes if you try and play by the rules?

Link to comment

it seems as though he has a sock puppet account now by the name of Swine FIew here is a link to that account http://www.geocachin...23-6e5f9e0e697f He asked for two virtuals in Florida to be archived today. Who does this guy think he is anyhow?

 

Interesting to note that if you go to that members page and click on "view forum posts for this Member" the name it shows is "isitanywonder".

 

Again another sock created today and if you go to his forum posts it links to SwineFIew still a sock for I believe Swine Flew

Link to comment

Virtual geocaches need maintenance just like all the others.

 

We usually address that with a needs maintenance log.

 

 

Yes, but the problem is this, it doesnt send an email to the local reviewer so nothing will happen. When you hit NA, it emails the reviewer. Thats is why it needs to change the name from Need Archived to Need Reviewer Attention.

Link to comment

When it comes to the grandfathered (and other special) caches, the ultimate rule is...is it harming the game of geocaching?

 

The South Pole cache wasn't doing any harm. It was/is an interesting curiosity that really wasn't having significant issues. It wasn't harming geocaching so it has been allowed to remain.

 

This will cause those who go by the letter of the law, and not the spirit of the law, to blow their gaskets. It's inevitable. (A reverse scenario would cause the 'spirit of the law' types to blow their gaskets as well.)

Link to comment

I've also just received a "Needs Archived" notification from SwineFlew for a cache in my shared reviewer territory. It's a classic virtual cache involving a historical marker honoring a much-beloved organization.

 

It appears that the experiment has been stepped up to the next level.

 

EDIT: The additional Needs Archived logs are coming from an account that is impersonating SwineFlew.

Edited by Keystone
Link to comment

Yes, but the problem is this, it doesnt send an email to the local reviewer so nothing will happen. When you hit NA, it emails the reviewer. Thats is why it needs to change the name from Need Archived to Need Reviewer Attention.

 

Which woulde be a great arguement if you knew it needed maintenance, but you did this from the comfort of your chair. You lied about any need for this cache (since your log was based on assumption) and in an effort to prove yourself the pious advocate of all things geocaching related you have tried (we won't know if it worked until later) to sabotage a point of interest for the geocaching community.

 

For most people when they disagree with something they choose to live and let live, to carry on with what pleases them. Especially in a game! You undermine your position (whether correct or not) by acting without any sense of consequence. It is hard to respect a "shoot first ask questions later" kind of person, they always seem unreasonable.

Link to comment

Swineflew just posted a NA on Manzanar Virtual Cache, one of California's more popular caches, with 64 legitimate finds last year.

 

To say my blood is boiling would be an understatement.

 

I hope that the lackeys realize that this individual is trying to be an ad-hoc reviewer, and lock his account.

 

I'm guessing because the Ad-hoc reviewer thing over at the Garmin site didn't work out too well for him? :unsure:

 

EDIT: IBTL

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

Virtual geocaches need maintenance just like all the others.

 

We usually address that with a needs maintenance log.

 

 

Yes, but the problem is this, it doesnt send an email to the local reviewer so nothing will happen. When you hit NA, it emails the reviewer. Thats is why it needs to change the name from Need Archived to Need Reviewer Attention.

I used to believe that, as well. But these days I'm beginning to believe that it should be changed to simply "I Need Attention".

Link to comment

Now here is an interesting fact I found about SwineFlew it seems he is not the Pinnacle of Virtue he holds himself out to be here. He logged 2 virtual caches in 2010 with an owner who at the time had not logged in since 2009 and still has not logged in and guess what no archive requests are posted on those virts in his backyard. Yet he wants to come in here and pick on caches miles from his home and deny others of the privilege of finding virts. Perhaps if you were genuine you would asked for the 2 virtuals in your own backyard to be archived.But that would have raised the ire of your own community so you thought perhaps you would make your stand elsewhere so you would not have to face the locals. Be fair point out those offenders as well if you are on some quest to clean up Geocaching for the rest of us.

Link to comment

The best thing we could do right now is for all of us to voluntarily stop responding to this thread. I'm sure that won't happen, but I would love it if it did! Let's all bore the OP to tears.

 

+1 pull the plug

 

I'm logging off and dragging out the Buffalo Springfield vinyl and que'ing it up.

 

"There's something happening here...

what it is ain't exactly clear..."

 

"There's battle lines being drawn...

nobodys right if everybody's wrong...'

"I think its time we stop, hey, whats that sound...

everybody look whats going down..."

Edited by NeecesandNephews
Link to comment

Swineflew just posted a NA on Manzanar Virtual Cache, one of California's more popular caches, with 64 legitimate finds last year.

 

To say my blood is boiling would be an understatement.

 

I hope that the lackeys realize that this individual is trying to be an ad-hoc reviewer, and lock his account.

 

Thats not me! Reread the SN really careful.

SwineFlew is correct. Fortunately, I double-checked this before pulling the fire alarm at the Lily Pad. I will still report the account that is impersonating SwineFlew.

Link to comment

When a discussion that a mob rules turns into a debate amoung users in a civil manner turns into a debate/discussion and the users taking part want it ended, the only term that I can apply is Communism. I thought this was a debate about geocaches that the OP is no longer a registered user?

 

Communism, because people are exercising their free right not to speak? Uh, sure. Whatever.

 

And yes, yes, I know. Personal attacks are not aloud. That was a rhetorical question.

 

Retreating back into Communism here, by getting back out of the thread.

Link to comment

I don't really care what SwineFlew's experiment was attempting to prove. It proved something else. Some people really ought to go out and find some caches and stop living vicariously by watching cacches they're never going to find, then getting upset if these "special" caches are ever threatened with being archived because when they don't meet the guidelines. Just what is so special about this than makes it different than any other vacation virtual cache?

 

If anything, people should be angry that Groundspeak seems to want to eventually get rid of all virtual caches via attrition. These are the only caches I see getting archived and often locked because there are a few bogus logs and no cache owner to delete them. The reviewers will go out of their way to remove a needs maintenance attribute or change the cache type for some old traditional cache that is being maintained by the community, but since virtual "maintenance" is viewed differently, a missing cache owner is more likely to get a virtual archived.

 

Groundspeak compounds this problem by not allowing virtual caches to be adopted. So if someone is no longer able to "maintain" their virtual cache, they can't adopt it out to someone else who is willing to do this.

 

In the feedback site, Jeremy has indicated

We have a basic draft of the functionality complete and are trying to schedule the development of the concept ....
for bringing back virtuals. But we have no hint what Groundspeak is planning. One speculation is that Grounspeak might enforce the guideline for checking in on the website and archive virtual caches when the owner fails to do this. It would be ironic if bringing back virtuals is delayed because of this experiment and Grounspeak needs to decide how to make sure that new virtual owners are committed to maintaining their caches while old one that pass some "wow" test get a pass.

 

I suppose they could go ahead and archive this cache and say that once virtuals are brought back, someone can put a new one at the south pole. In the meantime, I don't know if this cache bodes well for defining a "wow" requirement replacement. Obviously a lot of people think that if the cache is in a remote and hard to get to place that makes it "wow". Will this be the guideline for new virtuals? Or is "wow" going to be defined as what Jeremy or the appointed lackey of "wow" decides are caches that don't have to follow other guidelines.

Link to comment

"The OP did not bring upon himself the actions of the loony toons who posted vile messages on his caches. Those log entries are entirely the responsibility of the sad loaner who (apparently) stopped taking their medications recently." (Bolding was me)

 

A depressed banker did it? ;)

 

Seriously, I think the NA log was not needed. I think what really irritated people were the tactics used, not so much what was done. I admit I checked the OP out when I first found these reams of emails in my inbox. (He is in Oregon!?!) I never thought about messing with his caches. Sad that someone did, but he knew full well what he was getting into. He admitted as much when he said that he was testing Groundspeak. What I want to know is what is the desired solution from the OP's perspective? Any ownerless cache archived automatically, to see if the 'special' caches have special rules, to see how you rate in comparison, to change the names of the notes you can log from 'Needs Archived' to 'Needs Reviewer Attention'...

 

I hope that the owner logs back in soon to get rid of the looming archival. I have been watching this cache for a couple months. Interestingly, more people have begun watching it since the 'publicity' increased.

 

I think an Earthcache would be just as good here--if the original got archived. It is the Geographical South Pole! I cant think of another more true Earthcache. I know it isn't the old virt, but it would be just as awesome to go to if it was an Earthcache. I think the problem would be who could place it. Wouldn't it be a 'vacation cache' by definition and not publishable?

Link to comment

When a discussion that a mob rules turns into a debate amoung users in a civil manner turns into a debate/discussion and the users taking part want it ended, the only term that I can apply is Communism. I thought this was a debate about geocaches that the OP is no longer a registered user?

 

Communism, because people are exercising their free right not to speak? Uh, sure. Whatever.

 

And yes, yes, I know. Personal attacks are not aloud. That was a rhetorical question.

 

Retreating back into Communism here, by getting back out of the thread.

 

Have it your way comrdade.

 

GCB9B8

 

GCB9BA

 

Don't worry. I have plenty more. If 1 go, they all should go. According to guidelines anyway..........

Link to comment

Swineflew just posted a NA on Manzanar Virtual Cache, one of California's more popular caches, with 64 legitimate finds last year.

 

To say my blood is boiling would be an understatement.

 

I hope that the lackeys realize that this individual is trying to be an ad-hoc reviewer, and lock his account.

 

Thats not me! Reread the SN really careful.

SwineFlew is correct. Fortunately, I double-checked this before pulling the fire alarm at the Lily Pad. I will still report the account that is impersonating SwineFlew.

 

I don't have any black dye on my hands, do I? Pulling the fire alarm, I mean. :lol: All I know is, it wasn't any hostile impersonating sock puppet posting the SBA on the South Pole cache. And it wasn't no hostile impersonating sock puppet blocking dozens of caches all over the world from being published on Opencaching.com, most notably many that were already listed on this website, and were trying to be cross-listed. Dude, why are you doing this stuff?

Link to comment

When a discussion that a mob rules turns into a debate amoung users in a civil manner turns into a debate/discussion and the users taking part want it ended, the only term that I can apply is Communism. I thought this was a debate about geocaches that the OP is no longer a registered user?

 

Communism, because people are exercising their free right not to speak? Uh, sure. Whatever.

 

And yes, yes, I know. Personal attacks are not aloud. That was a rhetorical question.

 

Retreating back into Communism here, by getting back out of the thread.

 

Have it your way comrdade.

 

GCB9B8

 

GCB9BA

 

Don't worry. I have plenty more. If 1 go, they all should go. According to guidelines anyway..........

 

Those virts both have SBA notices from "SwineFIew." I'm confused; are you admitting to being that sock?

Link to comment

Swineflew just posted a NA on Manzanar Virtual Cache, one of California's more popular caches, with 64 legitimate finds last year.

 

To say my blood is boiling would be an understatement.

 

I hope that the lackeys realize that this individual is trying to be an ad-hoc reviewer, and lock his account.

 

Thats not me! Reread the SN really careful.

SwineFlew is correct. Fortunately, I double-checked this before pulling the fire alarm at the Lily Pad. I will still report the account that is impersonating SwineFlew.

Thank you Keystone and My apologies to Swine Flew for the false accusation

Link to comment

Swineflew just posted a NA on Manzanar Virtual Cache, one of California's more popular caches, with 64 legitimate finds last year.

 

To say my blood is boiling would be an understatement.

 

I hope that the lackeys realize that this individual is trying to be an ad-hoc reviewer, and lock his account.

 

Thats not me! Reread the SN really careful.

SwineFlew is correct. Fortunately, I double-checked this before pulling the fire alarm at the Lily Pad. I will still report the account that is impersonating SwineFlew.

Thank you Keystone and My apologies to Swine Flew for the false accusation

 

Thank you and I forgive you.

Link to comment

Swineflew just posted a NA on Manzanar Virtual Cache, one of California's more popular caches, with 64 legitimate finds last year.

 

To say my blood is boiling would be an understatement.

 

I hope that the lackeys realize that this individual is trying to be an ad-hoc reviewer, and lock his account.

 

Thats not me! Reread the SN really careful.

SwineFlew is correct. Fortunately, I double-checked this before pulling the fire alarm at the Lily Pad. I will still report the account that is impersonating SwineFlew.

Thank you Keystone and My apologies to Swine Flew for the false accusation

 

Thank you and I forgive you.

Apologies for falsly accusing him of posting needs archived on that particular cache. Doesn't really matter it's posting them on plenty of others. No appolgy needed.

Link to comment

When a discussion that a mob rules turns into a debate amoung users in a civil manner turns into a debate/discussion and the users taking part want it ended, the only term that I can apply is Communism. I thought this was a debate about geocaches that the OP is no longer a registered user?

 

Communism, because people are exercising their free right not to speak? Uh, sure. Whatever.

 

And yes, yes, I know. Personal attacks are not aloud. That was a rhetorical question.

 

Retreating back into Communism here, by getting back out of the thread.

 

Have it your way comrdade.

 

GCB9B8

 

GCB9BA

 

Don't worry. I have plenty more. If 1 go, they all should go. According to guidelines anyway..........

 

Those virts both have SBA notices from "SwineFIew." I'm confused; are you admitting to being that sock?

 

I do believe that's exactly what he's saying.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 7
×
×
  • Create New...