Unique Virtual too special to be Archived?

February 17, 2011

Some caches are special and unique, but not that special.

The site should not be used for experiments to see why some are more special than others, because they want to test a ridiculous group mentality to preserve virts either. Sheesh.

What Swineflew did was stupid, but the piling on about the virt is wrong, and the the socks with the NA logs are a disgrace.

Any socks are just childish, for that matter. Grow up people !

6.1k · February 17, 2011

Some caches are special and unique, but not that special.

The site should not be used for experiments to see why some are more special than others, because they want to test a ridiculous group mentality to preserve virts either. Sheesh.

What Swineflew did was stupid, but the piling on about the virt is wrong, and the the socks with the NA logs are a disgrace.

Any socks are just childish, for that matter. Grow up people !

Agreed.

22k · February 17, 2011

Wait a minute. Is that a right or left-footed sock? :anibad:

5k · February 17, 2011

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.

Okay, I'll admit, when I read the log my blood pressure shot up and my vision may have blurred a bit. Swineflew, I apologize that I may have mis-identified you. I still don't understand why you felt it necessary to start this in the first place. As I think the third post said, to paraphrase, "this is going to end badly".

I can only hope that our local reviewers can see through all the bull stuff and ignore the NA log on the Manzanar cache. I would gladly replace it with a traditional, but the area is managed by the NPS.

5k · February 17, 2011

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?

Politely asking people not to throw fuel onto a fire is communism?

5.3k · February 17, 2011

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.

In other words, you were trolling.

I hope you aren't under the misapprehension that your explanation of your actions will make people more sympathetic. Quite the opposite. It makes your actions even more detestable.

6.1k · February 17, 2011

Wait a minute. Is that a right or left-footed sock?

Pantyhose actually. Sheer to the wrist.

Edited February 17, 2011 by 4wheelin_fool

5k · February 17, 2011

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?

Wow, he said he was going to do it. He list two and say that has plenty more to do, but the account doing it is a not his, or is it?

What's next MPH? Why does my post say Ringbone?

Too bad we can't request a Needs Archive on a user.

5k · February 17, 2011

Mine is safe in my lap.

1.3k · February 17, 2011

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.

I feel the same. Let's be honest. If you weren't one of the watchers of this cache and noone had started a forum thread about the NA, and it ended up being archived, would you even know or care that it was gone? How many here had made plans to go visit this virtual before this debacle? How many since? There is no such thing as a cache too special to be archived. The Groundspeak HQ, Original Stash, the Ape caches...any or all of them could be archived if they were no longer maintained.

I don't agree with armchair SBA's and I don't agree with self-righteous crusades to scour the Earth for ownerless caches but I don't let those actions put any kind of damper on my geocaching enjoyment.

February 17, 2011

I don't agree with armchair SBA's and I don't agree with self-righteous crusades to scour the Earth for ownerless caches but I don't let those actions put any kind of damper on my geocaching enjoyment.

That's all well and good, and for the most part I agree with you. But these folks going out of their way to find Virtuals to NA are putting a damper on a lot of people geocaching enjoyment. Just because it's not yours in this particular case does not mean it's something that you shouldn't give a dadgum about. Because next time, when it IS something that you care about, people may take that same attitude with you.

9.3k · February 17, 2011

I mean, you don't see Clan Riffster logging NA on leaky film cans in Australia.

Wait! Australians use film cans? Dude! You so tarnished my image of the good folks Down Under. :lol:

Don't be putting any ideas in Riffters head. He can get into enough trouble all on his own

Sigh... There just ain't no love...

I'm still feeling the lumps from the last time PuppyMonster bounced an Admin Brick off my noggin.

These other cachers are MAD.

Agreed. The OPs actions were inexcusable. That doesn't mean that we, (collectively), should behave badly.

Each of us are diplomats to this hobby, and bad behavior, in response to bad behavior, does nothing to further our hobby.

1.5k · February 17, 2011

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?

What a joke!

Well, another user for my for my ignore list.

2.2k · February 17, 2011

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, in this case, the NA log was a solution in search of a problem. If the area was bulldozed and the Virtual was no longer "findable" as originally intended then there is an issue. If there were tons of bogus Finds, then one could argue there is a problem.

Remember, Groundspeak publishes guidelines -- not laws. If they wanted it to be a law, they would simply schedule a daily task to parse their database and look for any situations where a Virtual cache has an owner who has not logged in for more than a month and automatically Archive all of them.

The fact is Groundspeak wants to have human intervention before archiving these caches so they can apply some common sense to the decision. If the local cachers don't see a problem and the landowner doesn't see a problem then this is clearly a "no harm, no foul" situation.

10.2k · February 17, 2011

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.

Okay, I'll admit, when I read the log my blood pressure shot up and my vision may have blurred a bit. Swineflew, I apologize that I may have mis-identified you. I still don't understand why you felt it necessary to start this in the first place. As I think the third post said, to paraphrase, "this is going to end badly".

I can only hope that our local reviewers can see through all the bull stuff and ignore the NA log on the Manzanar cache. I would gladly replace it with a traditional, but the area is managed by the NPS.

And I admit to taking Don's post at face value, and running with it. I too apologize, Swine Flew.

Oh, I've seen many an SBA "ignored" that were posted over local (not just my area) Geo-drama cat fights. :lol:

10.2k · February 17, 2011

Some caches are special and unique, but not that special.

The site should not be used for experiments to see why some are more special than others, because they want to test a ridiculous group mentality to preserve virts either. Sheesh.

What Swineflew did was stupid, but the piling on about the virt is wrong, and the the socks with the NA logs are a disgrace.

Any socks are just childish, for that matter. Grow up people !

Agreed.

How come Mr. Crowley, as made famous by Ozzy Osbourne, keeps changing from upside down to right side up?

EDIT: Never mind, sock puppetry, of course.

Edited February 17, 2011 by Mr.Yuck

2.7k · February 17, 2011

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?

What is this? 1947?

I'm all for a debate. I'm not for actions that cause many caches to be locked, threats made and foul language in cache logs. Until there's a new NC-17 attribute that can be filtered on for cache pages anyway....

19k · February 17, 2011

Some people really ought to go out and find some caches and stop living vicariously by watching cacches they're never going to find,

19k · February 17, 2011

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?

Can Godwin's Law be expanded to include mention of Communism?

1.2k · February 17, 2011

SwineFIew, would you please stop! You are not from this area, you apparently don't know the COs, and likely have no idea how they perform the maintenance of their caches. Please, just stop!

6.7k · February 17, 2011

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?

Can Godwin's Law be expanded to include mention of Communism?

Only when the poster knows what communism is. :rolleyes:

4.2k · February 17, 2011

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?

Can Godwin's Law be expanded to include mention of Communism?

Can it be expanded to include the word "comrdade"?

Edited February 17, 2011 by Castle Mischief

1.5k · February 17, 2011

SwineFIew, would you please stop! You are not from this area, you apparently don't know the COs, and likely have no idea how they perform the maintenance of their caches. Please, just stop!

That isn't SwineFlew, that is a sock puppet/troll causing trouble with an account by a similar name: SwineFIew. (A capital 'i' instead of an 'l' in the name).

7.2k · February 17, 2011

Too bad we can't request a Needs Archive on a user.

I'm voting with my keyboard. I've sent a complaint regarding the fact that the OP has admitted to trolling to Groundspeak. Just as he can complain about a cache by posting a Needs Archived note on a cache, the community can also complain about users via email to Groundspeak.

This is suppose to be a game. In my opinion, disruptive participants should be thrown out of the game just like in any other game so the rest can enjoy the activity and have fun.

1.5k · February 17, 2011

I'm voting with my keyboard. I've sent a complaint regarding the fact that the OP has admitted to trolling to Groundspeak. Just as he can complain about a cache by posting a Needs Archived note on a cache, the community can also complain about users via email to Groundspeak.

This is suppose to be a game. In my opinion, disruptive participants should be thrown out of the game just like in any other game so the rest can enjoy the activity and have fun.

I don't think it should be a '"1-strike and you're out". The OP made his point, it didn't go over well. I don't think he'll do this again. If he does, I'll rethink my position.

February 17, 2011

That isn't SwineFlew, that is a sock puppet/troll causing trouble with an account by a similar name: SwineFIew. (A capital 'i' instead of an 'l' in the name).

Whoever created this sock puppet account to do their dirty work is a just a sad excuse for a human. At least when swineflew did hid dirty deed he did it with his name and didn't try to hide behind a sock puppet. hopefully GS will be able to track down this sock puppets IP and match it to his real account and do away with both accounts

1.2k · February 17, 2011

SwineFIew, would you please stop! You are not from this area, you apparently don't know the COs, and likely have no idea how they perform the maintenance of their caches. Please, just stop!

That isn't SwineFlew, that is a sock puppet/troll causing trouble with an account by a similar name: SwineFIew. (A capital 'i' instead of an 'l' in the name).

Ecylram, the original spelling is correct, thanks for double-checking though.

4.5k · February 17, 2011

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.

I feel the same. Let's be honest. If you weren't one of the watchers of this cache and noone had started a forum thread about the NA, and it ended up being archived, would you even know or care that it was gone? How many here had made plans to go visit this virtual before this debacle? How many since? There is no such thing as a cache too special to be archived. The Groundspeak HQ, Original Stash, the Ape caches...any or all of them could be archived if they were no longer maintained.

I don't agree with armchair SBA's and I don't agree with self-righteous crusades to scour the Earth for ownerless caches but I don't let those actions put any kind of damper on my geocaching enjoyment.

Great post!

I would add that the location of this virtual isn't like pretty much the entire world doesn't know about. What i mean is, it's not gonna bring someone to a place that they would be surprised to find when they got there. It's a unique place for sure and as such, doesn't need a cache of any kind to get interested visitors there. If someone wants to go to the South Pole, and they have the means, then they are gonna go regardless of whether a cache is there or not. The cache is just a little bonus for the few who know about it...

1.5k · February 17, 2011

That isn't SwineFlew, that is a sock puppet/troll causing trouble with an account by a similar name: SwineFIew. (A capital 'i' instead of an 'l' in the name).

Ecylram, the original spelling is correct, thanks for double-checking though.

I believe that account got locked out yesterday. Unfortunately, that troll isn't interested in the protecting the game. This troll's interest is just disruption and trouble and it's done for the attention. As long as he feels he can affect other people than he can feel he still 'matters' in this world. It's a similar mentality with some taggers. It's sad & silly but that is what his life has come to. It takes a pretty messed up childhood to put somebody into that mindset.

19k · February 17, 2011

Too bad we can't request a Needs Archive on a user.

I'm voting with my keyboard. I've sent a complaint regarding the fact that the OP has admitted to trolling to Groundspeak. Just as he can complain about a cache by posting a Needs Archived note on a cache, the community can also complain about users via email to Groundspeak.

This is suppose to be a game. In my opinion, disruptive participants should be thrown out of the game just like in any other game so the rest can enjoy the activity and have fun.

Would the contact[at]roundspeak[dot]com address be the most appropriate one to send a complaint to? Edited February 17, 2011 by knowschad

19k · February 17, 2011

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.

I feel the same. Let's be honest. If you weren't one of the watchers of this cache and noone had started a forum thread about the NA, and it ended up being archived, would you even know or care that it was gone? How many here had made plans to go visit this virtual before this debacle? How many since? There is no such thing as a cache too special to be archived. The Groundspeak HQ, Original Stash, the Ape caches...any or all of them could be archived if they were no longer maintained.

I don't agree with armchair SBA's and I don't agree with self-righteous crusades to scour the Earth for ownerless caches but I don't let those actions put any kind of damper on my geocaching enjoyment.

Great post!

I would add that the location of this virtual isn't like pretty much the entire world doesn't know about. What i mean is, it's not gonna bring someone to a place that they would be surprised to find when they got there. It's a unique place for sure and as such, doesn't need a cache of any kind to get interested visitors there. If someone wants to go to the South Pole, and they have the means, then they are gonna go regardless of whether a cache is there or not. The cache is just a little bonus for the few who know about it...

Well, there you go! That is a perfect reason to post a NA on it. Nobody would be going to it that wasn't going to it anyway. Why should we care?

If the old "Wow!" factor were still being applied to virtuals, I'd think a virtual at the South Pole would pretty much qualify as a 10 on a scale of 10 WOW points.

5.7k · February 17, 2011

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.

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..........

Why, my dear Manville Possum Hunters, I thought you weren't going to use a sock puppet account? Yet it appears the "Needs Archived" logs are from SwineFiew.

Mods/admins, can we get at least a temporary lock on MPH and a permanent ban on SwineFIew?(edit: that's the sock puppet SwineFiew with an "I", not with an "l")

Edited February 17, 2011 by hzoi

4.2k · February 17, 2011

I'm voting with my keyboard. I've sent a complaint regarding the fact that the OP has admitted to trolling to Groundspeak. Just as he can complain about a cache by posting a Needs Archived note on a cache, the community can also complain about users via email to Groundspeak.

This is suppose to be a game. In my opinion, disruptive participants should be thrown out of the game just like in any other game so the rest can enjoy the activity and have fun.

I don't think it should be a '"1-strike and you're out". The OP made his point, it didn't go over well. I don't think he'll do this again. If he does, I'll rethink my position.

I don't think that, in this case, mtn-man is calling the strike. I think he's asking Groundspeak to make the call.

7.2k · February 17, 2011

Too bad we can't request a Needs Archive on a user.

I'm voting with my keyboard. I've sent a complaint regarding the fact that the OP has admitted to trolling to Groundspeak. Just as he can complain about a cache by posting a Needs Archived note on a cache, the community can also complain about users via email to Groundspeak.

This is suppose to be a game. In my opinion, disruptive participants should be thrown out of the game just like in any other game so the rest can enjoy the activity and have fun.

Would the contact[at]roundspeak[dot]com address be the most appropriate one to send a complaint to?

No, it would be at geocaching, not at Groundspeak. I don't think he deserves a total ban. I think some time off to think about the cause and effect on the community is warranted. That just my opinion though. It is up to the folks in Seattle to decide.

February 17, 2011

I know I'm a newb here, but honestly... hasn't this gone far enough... geez :rolleyes:

8k · February 17, 2011

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, in this case, the NA log was a solution in search of a problem. If the area was bulldozed and the Virtual was no longer "findable" as originally intended then there is an issue. If there were tons of bogus Finds, then one could argue there is a problem.

Remember, Groundspeak publishes guidelines -- not laws. If they wanted it to be a law, they would simply schedule a daily task to parse their database and look for any situations where a Virtual cache has an owner who has not logged in for more than a month and automatically Archive all of them.

The fact is Groundspeak wants to have human intervention before archiving these caches so they can apply some common sense to the decision. If the local cachers don't see a problem and the landowner doesn't see a problem then this is clearly a "no harm, no foul" situation.

Nice summary of why Needs Archive works the way it does.

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.

I feel the same. Let's be honest. If you weren't one of the watchers of this cache and noone had started a forum thread about the NA, and it ended up being archived, would you even know or care that it was gone? How many here had made plans to go visit this virtual before this debacle? How many since? There is no such thing as a cache too special to be archived. The Groundspeak HQ, Original Stash, the Ape caches...any or all of them could be archived if they were no longer maintained.

I don't agree with armchair SBA's and I don't agree with self-righteous crusades to scour the Earth for ownerless caches but I don't let those actions put any kind of damper on my geocaching enjoyment.

Great post!

I would add that the location of this virtual isn't like pretty much the entire world doesn't know about. What i mean is, it's not gonna bring someone to a place that they would be surprised to find when they got there. It's a unique place for sure and as such, doesn't need a cache of any kind to get interested visitors there. If someone wants to go to the South Pole, and they have the means, then they are gonna go regardless of whether a cache is there or not. The cache is just a little bonus for the few who know about it...

Well, there you go! That is a perfect reason to post a NA on it. Nobody would be going to it that wasn't going to it anyway. Why should we care?

If the old "Wow!" factor were still being applied to virtuals, I'd think a virtual at the South Pole would pretty much qualify as a 10 on a scale of 10 WOW points.

It may be a 10 on Knowschad's scale, but Mudfrog on the other hand defines "Wow" as a place that you would be surprised to find when they got there. He apparently thinks most people wouldn't be surprised to find a marker at the south pole that says "You are at the south pole". That is the problem with the ole "wow" factor. It means different things to different people. :mmraspberry:

Edited February 17, 2011 by tozainamboku

19k · February 17, 2011

It may be a 10 on Knowschad's scale, but Mudfrog on the other hand defines "Wow" as a place that you would be surprised to find when they got there. He apparently thinks most people wouldn't be surprised to find a marker at the south pole that says "You are at the south pole". That is the problem with the ole "wow" factor. It means different things to different people.

There is one in every crowd that will chose to argue the opposite side of any argument. We can easily filter out those on the far ends of the bell curve. The rest would say WOW! if they found themselves standing at the south pole. You would, I would, and I would be willing to bet that SwineFlew would.

1.5k · February 17, 2011

The rest would say WOW! if they found themselves standing at the south pole. You would, I would, and I would be willing to bet that SwineFlew would.

Not me. I'd be saying...

#$@&!! It's cold!

February 17, 2011

When I first saw the OP Swine post an NA on the cache I was gobsmacked! How could anyone be so stupid. They must have made and error or be a n00b. Upon research I see the NA (Thick skinned and gutless) poster has a few caches, placed and found, and should know better. Then a reviewer from GA posts a warning that now he must act upon. A tag team of weak kneed reactionaries.

Let's be real here. This is a game, and yes rules are applied, but in reality the game is not a competition. It's for fun and love of the outdoors. This South Pole cache is so unique it should be except form stringent application of the rules. If there were a problem, as discussed above, then yes take it down. As Geocaching moves forward the loss of this cache will be a black eye on the community and Swine has done nothing to promote, or advance Geocaching. So take your skin and listen to my resounding "Way to Go!"

February 17, 2011

A couple of years back I adopted a couple of caches of a cacher who died. Also I arranged some caches to be adopted by others. Lucky enough the brother of the cacher kept the account active, although he could not maintain the caches. By adopting them some old Dutch caches could be saved from being archived.

In this case it will be difficult if RSWrench does not or cannot respond. According to guidelines it is not possible to adopt the cache.

Of course it is possible to make this a long topic on the forum. I also like to take some actions to get in contact with RSWrench. By reviewing his cache behaviour I come up with two leads:

- Alabama is listed a lot of times between 2003 and 2006. Does any cacher in Alabama know him?

- Colorado pops up a couple of times. The last time he cached he was not alone. I contacted his fellow cacher (he was active in January), hopefully he is able to contact RSWrench or has more information.

I personally feel it's a good thing to have guidelines. But next to that I feel not only the CO but the whole geocacher community (including Groundspeak and SwineFlew) has the obligation to keep all geocaches in a good shape. Specially if it is a special cache. On the South Pole it is not possible to hide a box without adding a risk for the environment since it is so extreme and fragile. A virtual is an excelent replacement for the box in some occations. I can imagine they do not want new virtuals any more, but in some places they are a solution if a box is not possible. (or should a nano be put at the back of the South Pole mark, so nobody notices it? It would be a D6 since you need to open it with thick gloves... )

I see some remarks it is for most not possible to get to this cache. That is no reason to get it archived. I am sure I will not get to most of the 1,200,000 caches worldwide. I also did think I would never to get to an APE cache, but lucky enough this summer I will (if it is still there). I also keep hoping to get to the South Pole, so I hope this cache will still be there. There are many special caches. Let's keep them available for your fellow cachers in the future as much as possible.

1.5k · February 17, 2011

I see the NA log was deleted on the South Pole Virtual.

4.2k · February 17, 2011

Then a reviewer from GA posts a warning that now he must act upon. A tag team of weak kneed reactionaries.

Ouch.

5.7k · February 17, 2011

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.

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..........

Why, my dear Manville Possum Hunters, I thought you weren't going to use a sock puppet account? Yet it appears the "Needs Archived" logs are from SwineFiew.

Mods/admins, can we get at least a temporary lock on MPH and a permanent ban on SwineFIew?(edit: that's the sock puppet SwineFiew with an "I", not with an "l")

And just why would you request that my account be locked? I am a well known user and you are falsely accusing me of using a sock puppet account. Is it because I agree that guidelines should apply to everyone and not just a select few? Virtuals are soon to be reinstated on this site, ans I am all for cleaning up the old unmaimtained ones where the CO is no longer part of the game. Those two caches that I posted the GC code for are being bogus logged by one user from Germany and another fron the West Coast of the US. Have a look for yourself. Your request to have my account locked is absurd.

5.7k · February 17, 2011

I see the NA log was deleted on the South Pole Virtual.

Remember what I said in post #64? I have seen this before. As long as that cache is not being abused by armchair logs it should stay because it is unique. The local reviewer should be able to delete the bogus logs. That would solve the problem and keep everyone happy.

February 17, 2011

I already did get a response from heybud. RSWrench is her son. She already contacted him on this subject. He will take care of the cache.

Hopefully this is the end (of the story, not the cache).

1.7k · February 17, 2011

Virtuals are soon to be reinstated on this site, ans I am all for cleaning up the old unmaimtained ones where the CO is no longer part of the game.

Remember what I said in post #64? I have seen this before. As long as that cache is not being abused by armchair logs it should stay because it is unique.

You are contradicting yourself again.

7.2k · February 17, 2011

Then a reviewer from GA posts a warning that now he must act upon. A tag team of weak kneed reactionaries.

Ouch.

Yeah, that kind of bothered me. I know Erik well and there is a good reason why he reviews much of the world. Since you don't know his background, you should probably not insult him. As a good friend of his, I know he is more than qualified to handle the situation. In this case with his warning, he is simply doing his job. If he had not posted that note, the people would be on him for not doing his job. He has not archived the cache yet, and I am sure he will be working with Groundspeak directly on this one due to the nature of the chain of events set in place with all of this.

And moose61, thank you.

February 17, 2011

Then a reviewer from GA posts a warning that now he must act upon. A tag team of weak kneed reactionaries.

Ouch.

Yeah, that kind of bothered me. I know Erik well and there is a good reason why he reviews much of the world. Since you don't know his background, you should probably not insult him. As a good friend of his, I know he is more than qualified to handle the situation. In this case with his warning, he is simply doing his job. If he had not posted that note, the people would be on him for not doing his job. He has not archived the cache yet, and I am sure he will be working with Groundspeak directly on this one due to the nature of the chain of events set in place with all of this.

And moose61, thank you.

I only know Erik from this one post on the South Pole. If his character is in high regard I will trust his friends opinion. My apologies. However, true character sometimes stands up in the face of the hard line rules and finds the exception to the rule. I would value his post if he said... "according to the rules this should be archived but the cache is outstanding and I will contact Groundspeak to consider making an exception". Anyone can read and follow the rules but the real strength comes from using common sense and having the foresight to see this cache should never be archived. Might I suggest a change to the rules is in order where a cache of this magnitude and prestige should be preserved for future cachers to admire. If you consider the efforts of the men and women that travel to the pole (Some dying in the attempt) and other extreme places in the globe then we will promote Geocaching far beyond the status of a hobby or "game".

Since it looks like this cache will be taken care of I may suggest GS review it's policy and have a plan to escalate superb caches to untouchable. Unless abuse warrants archival. I also propose some cacher make up an Earthcache at the South Pole. If this doesn't qualify I don't know what would.

5.7k · February 17, 2011

Oh great, now my account is under attack. What a great community we have here. There is a sock puppet logging my caches and has started a personal conversation with me.

So what next, lock my caches too to keep the outlaw users from posting garbage on them?

2.7k · February 17, 2011

Oh great, now my account is under attack. What a great community we have here. There is a sock puppet logging my caches and has started a personal conversation with me.

So what next, lock my caches too to keep the outlaw users from posting garbage on them?

Guess Anonymous took up geocaching....

I agree the community is not showing how we can be trusted to be self policing if we're going to have garbage like that taking over.

I also feel for the reviewers who have to help clean up this mess

Unique Virtual too special to be Archived?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment