The Poles....

3.1k · August 4, 2011

Didn't read all the entries so if this has been posted I apologize.

If the pole has guide lines sometimes there is a plastic sleeve over those guide lines around here they are usually yellow for identificaton. Sometimes the cache is hidden under that yellow plastic. It usually just slides up very easily.

Good Luck

I don't have time to research it right now, but when I searched the forums to find the thread I linked above, I found posts specifically mentioning those wires, and the fact that a utility employee was quoted as saying that the yellow sleeves are there to protect passers by from the off chance that it is acting as a ground to one of the wires above.

In other words, aside from the fact that such a hide is still illegal under the "no objects on utility poles" laws, tampering with them defeats the entire purpose of their existence.

Bad idea.

(Oh, if someone wants to look, I believe I found it by searching for "utility poles." Look for threads that I participated in...)

This is hilarious. If the plastic shield is there for electrical purposes, it's a total fail as there is still plenty of exposed cable. If this were the concern, the cable would be totally insulated. But, assuming that this is the shield's true purpose, I fail to see how sticking a film can or bison tube in the back of one would defeat it's purpose.

It is laughable. Especially because the sleeves (often yellow) are over guy-wires, which are attached to some (not all) utility poles for stability and counter against the pull of the aerial lines. The sleeves are for visibility and protection from impact, not electrical discharge.

Again, a grounding wire for electrical utility poles is found in most cases as a bare copper wire, and will follow down the pole itself to a metal rod in the ground. Even that grounding wire is not "live", and is most often grounding for lightening strikes or surges caused by transformer failure.

2.5k · August 4, 2011

Here is one of the only statutes I could find:
Washington State Legislature

"RCW 70.54.090

Attachment of objects to utility poles — Penalty.

(1) . . . Any attachment to utility poles shall only be made with the permission of the utility involved, and shall be placed not less than twelve feet above the surface of the ground.

In this case, one might be able to talk to the municipal, public, private, or state utility and ask if a location-based study object would permitted if it was designed not to, or would not present a hazard to, electrical workers. It appears that permissions can be had, so long as one does so with the utility and if the object is not more than 12 feet above ground.

You misspelled "less."

If caches can only be attached to poles with permission, and they have to be more than 12 feet above the ground, all utility pole caches would have a 5-star terrain rating.

NeverSummer didn't misspell anything. I'd imagine they copy/pasted the entire quote, because according to the linked law, the object "shall be placed not less than twelve feet above the surface of the ground." I'd imagine this wording was added so that towns could hang flags and such during holidays. They generally get put up above peoples' reach.

This is hilarious. If the plastic shield is there for electrical purposes, it's a total fail as there is still plenty of exposed cable. If this were the concern, the cable would be totally insulated. But, assuming that this is the shield's true purpose, I fail to see how sticking a film can or bison tube in the back of one would defeat it's purpose.

If their purpose is to keep casual passers by from touching the possibly electrified wires as they brush by, any reasonable person should be able to see how encouraging people to molest the wires defeats their purpose.

It is laughable. Especially because the sleeves (often yellow) are over guy-wires, which are attached to some (not all) utility poles for stability and counter against the pull of the aerial lines. The sleeves are for visibility and protection from impact, not electrical discharge.

Again, a grounding wire for electrical utility poles is found in most cases as a bare copper wire, and will follow down the pole itself to a metal rod in the ground. Even that grounding wire is not "live", and is most often grounding for lightening strikes or surges caused by transformer failure.

I am not trying to say that the guy wire is intentionally being used as a grounding wire. Bad things happen, sometimes wires fall from where they belong, the plastic is there to keep people from accidentally brushing up against the wire should it become inadvertently connected with a live wire. Visibility may be another benefit, but what do you think that plastic piece is going to protect in the event of an impact?? Talk about a laughable concept! <_<

Regardless, the wire & cover are still part of the pole, and thus off limits for any attachment. :anitongue:

2.1k · August 4, 2011

Here is one of the only statutes I could find:
Washington State Legislature

"RCW 70.54.090

Attachment of objects to utility poles — Penalty.

(1) . . . Any attachment to utility poles shall only be made with the permission of the utility involved, and shall be placed not less than twelve feet above the surface of the ground.

In this case, one might be able to talk to the municipal, public, private, or state utility and ask if a location-based study object would permitted if it was designed not to, or would not present a hazard to, electrical workers. It appears that permissions can be had, so long as one does so with the utility and if the object is not more than 12 feet above ground.

You misspelled "less."

If caches can only be attached to poles with permission, and they have to be more than 12 feet above the ground, all utility pole caches would have a 5-star terrain rating.

NeverSummer didn't misspell anything. I'd imagine they copy/pasted the entire quote, because according to the linked law, the object "shall be placed not less than twelve feet above the surface of the ground."

That's right. He cut and pasted "not less than 12 feet above the ground," and then said that caches would be ok as long as they were not more than 12 feet above the ground. I was pointing out his error.

3.1k · August 4, 2011

I am not trying to say that the guy wire is intentionally being used as a grounding wire. Bad things happen, sometimes wires fall from where they belong, the plastic is there to keep people from accidentally brushing up against the wire should it become inadvertently connected with a live wire. Visibility may be another benefit, but what do you think that plastic piece is going to protect in the event of an impact?? Talk about a laughable concept!

Regardless, the wire & cover are still part of the pole, and thus off limits for any attachment.

TTJ, it isn't part of a grounding system. And the voltage that a downed wire would provide would easily arc through the thin plastic. Ask around. It is a protective marker for the guy lines, which exist to stabilize the pole against the force of the aerial system.

The protection from "impact" isn't for missiles or car crashes. It is for dunderheads who bonk into them as they walk/run/bike by. http://www.arrisistore.com/subcat.php?cat=ACW And the color is to make it more visible, instead of a drab grey cable.

The pole is part of the pole, and the guy-wire is part of the guy-wire. (that's why it's called a pole and guy-wire, respectively...) The wire is not part of the pole, and not something described by, or included in any of the descriptions found in legal documents. Also, you are missing the definition of "attachment" as used in the restrictions you cited earlier. See my post a few back.

Essentially, the proof is in the pudding, but you can choose to ignore it. You don't have to hide or seek a legally-placed cache.

edited linky

Edited August 4, 2011 by NeverSummer

3.1k · August 4, 2011

I am not trying to say that the guy wire is intentionally being used as a grounding wire. Bad things happen, sometimes wires fall from where they belong, the plastic is there to keep people from accidentally brushing up against the wire should it become inadvertently connected with a live wire. Visibility may be another benefit, but what do you think that plastic piece is going to protect in the event of an impact?? Talk about a laughable concept!

Regardless, the wire & cover are still part of the pole, and thus off limits for any attachment.

BAM :anibad:

3.1k · August 4, 2011

I am not trying to say that the guy wire is intentionally being used as a grounding wire. Bad things happen, sometimes wires fall from where they belong, the plastic is there to keep people from accidentally brushing up against the wire should it become inadvertently connected with a live wire. Visibility may be another benefit, but what do you think that plastic piece is going to protect in the event of an impact?? Talk about a laughable concept!

Regardless, the wire & cover are still part of the pole, and thus off limits for any attachment.

BAM

Ba-zing :yikes:

3.1k · August 4, 2011

I am not trying to say that the guy wire is intentionally being used as a grounding wire. Bad things happen, sometimes wires fall from where they belong, the plastic is there to keep people from accidentally brushing up against the wire should it become inadvertently connected with a live wire. Visibility may be another benefit, but what do you think that plastic piece is going to protect in the event of an impact?? Talk about a laughable concept!

Regardless, the wire & cover are still part of the pole, and thus off limits for any attachment.

BAM

Ba-zing

Sha-pow!

"The pole may be grounded with a heavy bare copper wire running down the pole, attached to the metal pin supporting each insulator, and at the bottom connected to a metal rod driven into the ground. Some countries ground every pole while others only ground every fifth pole and any pole with a transformer on it. This provides a path for leakage currents across the surface of the insulators to get to ground, preventing the current from flowing through the wooden pole which could cause a fire or shock hazard.[2][3] It provides similar protection in case of flashovers and lightning strikes. A surge arrester (also called a lightning arrester) may also be installed between the line (ahead of the cutout) and the ground wire for lightning protection. The purpose of the device is to conduct extremely high voltages present on the line directly to ground."

"In populated areas, guy wires are often encased in a yellow plastic or wood tube reflector attached to their lower end, so that they can be seen more easily, reducing the chance of people and animals walking into them or vehicles crashing into them. Another means of providing support for lateral loads is a 'push brace' pole, a second shorter pole that is attached to the side of the first and runs at an angle to the ground. If there is no space for a lateral support, a stronger pole, e.g. a construction of concrete or iron is used."

3.1k · August 4, 2011

NeverSummer didn't misspell anything. I'd imagine they copy/pasted the entire quote, because according to the linked law, the object "shall be placed not less than twelve feet above the surface of the ground."

That's right. He cut and pasted "not less than 12 feet above the ground," and then said that caches would be ok as long as they were not more than 12 feet above the ground. I was pointing out his error.

Yes, you did! Double gold stars! (I appreciate you catching the error, GGB...I shall edit my previous post to honor the event.)

(and, TTJ, it doesn't say "object". Don't try and insert language to support your argument. The items are clearly listed about which are not allowed. Also, see definition of "attachment" as used when discussing utility poles and permissions for such "attachments")

Edited August 4, 2011 by NeverSummer

5k · August 4, 2011

Here is one of the only statutes I could find:
Washington State Legislature

"RCW 70.54.090

Attachment of objects to utility poles — Penalty.

(1) . . . Any attachment to utility poles shall only be made with the permission of the utility involved, and shall be placed not less than twelve feet above the surface of the ground.

In this case, one might be able to talk to the municipal, public, private, or state utility and ask if a location-based study object would permitted if it was designed not to, or would not present a hazard to, electrical workers. It appears that permissions can be had, so long as one does so with the utility and if the object is not more than 12 feet above ground.

You misspelled "less."

If caches can only be attached to poles with permission, and they have to be more than 12 feet above the ground, all utility pole caches would have a 5-star terrain rating.

NeverSummer didn't misspell anything. I'd imagine they copy/pasted the entire quote, because according to the linked law, the object "shall be placed not less than twelve feet above the surface of the ground." I'd imagine this wording was added so that towns could hang flags and such during holidays. They generally get put up above peoples' reach.
This is hilarious. If the plastic shield is there for electrical purposes, it's a total fail as there is still plenty of exposed cable. If this were the concern, the cable would be totally insulated. But, assuming that this is the shield's true purpose, I fail to see how sticking a film can or bison tube in the back of one would defeat it's purpose.
If their purpose is to keep casual passers by from touching the possibly electrified wires as they brush by, any reasonable person should be able to see how encouraging people to molest the wires defeats their purpose.
It is laughable. Especially because the sleeves (often yellow) are over guy-wires, which are attached to some (not all) utility poles for stability and counter against the pull of the aerial lines. The sleeves are for visibility and protection from impact, not electrical discharge.

Again, a grounding wire for electrical utility poles is found in most cases as a bare copper wire, and will follow down the pole itself to a metal rod in the ground. Even that grounding wire is not "live", and is most often grounding for lightening strikes or surges caused by transformer failure.

I am not trying to say that the guy wire is intentionally being used as a grounding wire. Bad things happen, sometimes wires fall from where they belong, the plastic is there to keep people from accidentally brushing up against the wire should it become inadvertently connected with a live wire. Visibility may be another benefit, but what do you think that plastic piece is going to protect in the event of an impact?? Talk about a laughable concept!

Regardless, the wire & cover are still part of the pole, and thus off limits for any attachment.

If the plastic guard is truly there to prevent accidental electrocution, why did they used to be made out of metal? In fact, the current plastic versions use metal hardware which is exposed.

Years ago, in my area, they were all metal and they were only placed on wires that were facing oncoming traffic. Their purpose was to prevent wayward cars from catching on the wire and driving to the top of the pole, (something that I have witnessed).

http://www.guyguards.com/about_guy_guards.htm

Guy guards are typically provided on guy wires installed on utility poles, in order to help clearly identify them and serve as a safety system to prevent un wanted injuries caused by individuals or animals running into a guy wire accidentally while walking at night, snowmobile, running, cross-country skiing, or any human or animal simply looking away and not noticing the guy wire.

I understand that certain laws may prohibit placing objects on guy wires or their guards, but I honestly fail to understand how attaching a cache to one would render it unable to perform it's primary function.

7.9k · August 5, 2011

(I have no idea what the laws are for Arizona,

You scared me there for a moment...I thought he was from Arizona! :unsure:

He's from Arkansas...your bad riffster! :lol:

19k · August 5, 2011

Didn't read all the entries so if this has been posted I apologize.

If the pole has guide lines sometimes there is a plastic sleeve over those guide lines around here they are usually yellow for identificaton. Sometimes the cache is hidden under that yellow plastic. It usually just slides up very easily.

Good Luck

I don't have time to research it right now, but when I searched the forums to find the thread I linked above, I found posts specifically mentioning those wires, and the fact that a utility employee was quoted as saying that the yellow sleeves are there to protect passers by from the off chance that it is acting as a ground to one of the wires above.

In other words, aside from the fact that such a hide is still illegal under the "no objects on utility poles" laws, tampering with them defeats the entire purpose of their existence.

Bad idea.

(Oh, if someone wants to look, I believe I found it by searching for "utility poles." Look for threads that I participated in...)

This is hilarious. If the plastic shield is there for electrical purposes, it's a total fail as there is still plenty of exposed cable. If this were the concern, the cable would be totally insulated. But, assuming that this is the shield's true purpose, I fail to see how sticking a film can or bison tube in the back of one would defeat it's purpose.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you. Not that I'm any sort of anti-phone pole fanatic. But just in this particular argument, those guy lines *could* become a ground, however remote the chance, and if you touched it and it was grounding a power line, you would probably not be signing that micro in legible script.

On the other hand, the odds of a car running off the road and striking you as you are hunting for that cache are MUCH higher than that the guy cable was grounding a powerline.

19k · August 5, 2011

Theres several things attached to most poles , one more little geocache doesn't hurt anybody now does it. I'm not going to pass up a geo just because its on a telephone pole. I consider them far more enjoyable than a regular street sign hide. The tougher ones are great and i dont see any problems with them. Also on a lot of those poles there are wooden wedges stuck in them which makes a perfect slot for a nano, without havn't to drill a whole or anything. No harm no foul.

That's total bull, and these hides, along with all the tag sale signs, and lost dogs signs could hurt someone. Yes harm, yes too foul. Read this. And read it well. And hope someone doesn't come to your workplace and place dangerous objects in your way. It's illegal. It's dangerous for the linesman, and should not be happening.

Imagine climbing the pole, getting your spikes caught and sliding down the pole with your thighs grabbing twelve inch long, inch thick splinters the whole way. Have some common courtesy, and common sense.

There is another thread about this very thing, and a geocacher who IS A LINESMAN asked if people could please stop it. It's dangerous for them!!!

Boy! Pardon me for coming in late on this thread, but that is "total bull", if not the most hyped post in the entire universe ( )

Yeah, the CEO signed off on an article that some lackey wrote, and yes, I do believe there are laws against this, just as there are laws against spitting on the sidewalk in Marquette, Michigan. Any lineman that dies because he snagged his palm on the head of a tack that was used to put a garage sale sign on the pole had simply come to that time in his life when he was to meet his maker.

And what is that about a twelve inch splinter catching the lineman's spikes on his way down? Have some common sense.

9.3k · August 5, 2011

So, you admit you are passing judgement based on your personal experiences and not by actual knowledge that someone has proper permissions.

Yes. In that context, that's what "Judgement" means;

judg·ment [juhj-muhnt] noun

4. the forming of an opinion, estimate, notion, or conclusion, as from circumstances presented to the mind.

If we had the facts, we wouldn't have to use "judgement". It would no longer be a matter of opinion, estimate, notion or conclusion based on the available information. As you know, Night Hiker still hasn't told us who he obtained permission from for his utility pole hide, or even if he did. Without this information, we are left speculating, (AKA: making "judgements").

The only way to know is to try...which you claim you are going to pre-judge everyone that they have not gained permissions

Actually, if you carefully read what I wrote, I've never made that claim. According to Groundspeak, there are over 5 million geocachers. I happen to be one of them. For me to claim that "everyone" does not have permission, I would have to include myself in those 5 million. Since I know that my caches do have permission, any claim regarding "everyone" not having permission would be a falsehood. I would, however, make certain opinions, and/or conclusions, (AKA: Judgements), if I saw a cache on a USPS drop box. One of those conclusions would be that the cache owner did not acquire adequate permission for his hide. If I saw an ammo box cache wedged between the ties of an active railroad track, I would make the same conclusion. Even though I had no proof.

That's kinda how I feel about utility poles. While I'm not aware of any federal prohibitions, (though in this day and age it wouldn't surprise me if there were some bizarre laws revolving around Homeland Protection and utility oriented objects), I do know about local laws prohibiting placing anything on utility poles. Since these laws make placing a geocache on a utility pole illegal, (and therefor a direct violation of the guidelines), I find it reasonable and prudent to conclude, (AKA: Prejudge), that the owner did not acquire adequate permission for that hide. Night Hiker's power pole hide appears to be in Van Buren County. If I'm reading their map correctly, the Petit Jean Electric Cooperative owns that particular power pole. (This opinion, AKA: Judgement, is based on observations, not hard facts. If Night Hiker wishes to correct my opinion, I will happily listen) In your opinion, would it be reasonable to believe that the Petit Jean Power Cooperative, or one of its agents with the authority to do so, gave Night Hiker permission to hide his cache on their pole?

Even if we stuff our collective heads in the sand, pretending that there are no legal issues involved, there is still the permission issue to consider. A power pole is private property. This is not really up for debate. The guidelines seem fairly clear about hides placed on private property. They state that you must obtain permission from the property owner. Since, for the reasons cited above, I don't believe Night Hiker obtained permission for that particular hide, it would be reasonable for me to conclude, (AKA: Prejudge), that the cache was in violation of the guidelines.

This would be a good opportunity for Night Hiker to clarify this issue.

Night Hiker, did you get permission to hide http://coord.info/GC306J1 ? If so, who did you get permission from?

If it seems sketchy, then I will report as necessary.

So, you are using "judgement". That's a good thing. But earlier, you were critical of me for suggesting the exact same thing, calling me a presumptuous vigilante. Surely you can see how confusing your stance has become. One would think you are embracing a rather hypocritical belief system. When I see laws all across our nation prohibiting a particular behavior, (such as placing objects on power poles), this observation leads me to believe that doing so might not be a good thing. It also leads me to believe that obtaining adequate permission for placing an object on a power pole would be almost impossible. Your fire hydrant example is perfect proof of this concept. The process you described in acquiring permission for that hide seemed a bit arduous, to say the least. The fact that your cache is the only one in your area that has permission tends to strengthen my argument.

I guess it boils down to what we each consider "sketchy".

I see attaching a physical object to a power pole as "sketchy". Perhaps you do not. If that's the case, I'm OK with that. We each make our own "judgements", based upon our past life experiences. (Though, you criticize me for doing what you yourself claim to do)

Perhaps, at this point, we should simply agree to disagree?

August 5, 2011

I don't see an issue as long as the pole is not on private property and now you see others think your being ridiculous as well with your exaggerated injury projections. I have accessed permission for my fire hydrant. Actually I know the people, and might I add no one is impressed by your big words and definitions, it's annoying.I've never heard someone repeat words like you have "Judgement", I don't have the time of day to read threw your lengthy post. It's almost like beating a dead horse, hmm that sounds familiar maybe I should acquire permission before using that statement. Probably copy righted and owned by someone. Dodged a bullet there thanks for the life lesson, I'm done on this subject use your smug insults on someone else

5k · August 5, 2011

Didn't read all the entries so if this has been posted I apologize.

If the pole has guide lines sometimes there is a plastic sleeve over those guide lines around here they are usually yellow for identificaton. Sometimes the cache is hidden under that yellow plastic. It usually just slides up very easily.

Good Luck

I don't have time to research it right now, but when I searched the forums to find the thread I linked above, I found posts specifically mentioning those wires, and the fact that a utility employee was quoted as saying that the yellow sleeves are there to protect passers by from the off chance that it is acting as a ground to one of the wires above.

In other words, aside from the fact that such a hide is still illegal under the "no objects on utility poles" laws, tampering with them defeats the entire purpose of their existence.

Bad idea.

(Oh, if someone wants to look, I believe I found it by searching for "utility poles." Look for threads that I participated in...)

This is hilarious. If the plastic shield is there for electrical purposes, it's a total fail as there is still plenty of exposed cable. If this were the concern, the cable would be totally insulated. But, assuming that this is the shield's true purpose, I fail to see how sticking a film can or bison tube in the back of one would defeat it's purpose.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you. Not that I'm any sort of anti-phone pole fanatic. But just in this particular argument, those guy lines *could* become a ground, however remote the chance, and if you touched it and it was grounding a power line, you would probably not be signing that micro in legible script.

On the other hand, the odds of a car running off the road and striking you as you are hunting for that cache are MUCH higher than that the guy cable was grounding a powerline.

The properties of electricity can't be denied. This was not what I was discounting. The idea that the cable guards were there to protect the public from a ground short, was. To be clear, the idea that placing a film can or a bison tube on a plastic guy cable guard, would expose the public to electrocution is hilarious.

2.5k · August 5, 2011

BAM
Ba-zing
Sha-pow!

Holy sound effects, Batman! You still seem unable to refute the fact that attaching things, including geocaches, to utility poles is illegal.

(and, TTJ, it doesn't say "object". Don't try and insert language to support your argument. The items are clearly listed about which are not allowed. Also, see definition of "attachment" as used when discussing utility poles and permissions for such "attachments")

This is getting ridiculous. Did you actually read the page you linked to?

...or any similar object which presents a hazard to, or endangers the lives of, electrical workers.

2.5k · August 5, 2011

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you. Not that I'm any sort of anti-phone pole fanatic. But just in this particular argument, those guy lines *could* become a ground, however remote the chance, and if you touched it and it was grounding a power line, you would probably not be signing that micro in legible script.
The properties of electricity can't be denied. This was not what I was discounting. The idea that the cable guards were there to protect the public from a ground short, was. To be clear, the idea that placing a film can or a bison tube on a plastic guy cable guard, would expose the public to electrocution is hilarious.

So, on the one hand, you are willing to admit that the guy line could become a ground, but that anyone touching such a line for the purpose of retrieving a film can or bison tube would be immune to being electrocuted? :unsure:

August 5, 2011

All these walls of text over caches with no permission! :laughing:

I don't see an issue as long as the pole is not on private property and now you see others think your being ridiculous as well with your exaggerated injury projections. I have accessed permission for my fire hydrant. Actually I know the people, and might I add no one is impressed by your big words and definitions, it's annoying.I've never heard someone repeat words like you have "Judgement", I don't have the time of day to read threw your lengthy post. It's almost like beating a dead horse, hmm that sounds familiar maybe I should acquire permission before using that statement. Probably copy righted and owned by someone. Dodged a bullet there thanks for the life lesson, I'm done on this subject use your smug insults on someone else

The pole itself IS private property, so discussion over. You see the issue, good.

Also, Clan isn't using any "big" words here, and if he were, your efforts to cast the guy as some sort of smug snobby elitist are kinda' laughable knowing as little as I do about him. :laughing:

(Side note: This hurts my feeling a bit since I AM a clearly a snobby elitist and never get credit for it :lol: )

It can really stink reading things you don't want to hear and being confronted with the truth, but acting like someone is being a bully because they are just telling it to you straight won't help you grow.

Now is the moment, where I restrain myself from going into an off topic rant on how stuff like this reflects a larger problem with our modern culture and how it treats information that doesn't jive with it's world view....

*restrains*

Edited August 5, 2011 by d+n.s

5k · August 5, 2011

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you. Not that I'm any sort of anti-phone pole fanatic. But just in this particular argument, those guy lines *could* become a ground, however remote the chance, and if you touched it and it was grounding a power line, you would probably not be signing that micro in legible script.
The properties of electricity can't be denied. This was not what I was discounting. The idea that the cable guards were there to protect the public from a ground short, was. To be clear, the idea that placing a film can or a bison tube on a plastic guy cable guard, would expose the public to electrocution is hilarious.
So, on the one hand, you are willing to admit that the guy line could become a ground, but that anyone touching such a line for the purpose of retrieving a film can or bison tube would be immune to being electrocuted?

Not at all. You described a safety system that does not exist, then said that placing a cache would disable that safety system. I've grabbed onto these wires for support while waiting for a bus. I have leaned my bike against them. I have locked my bike to them. I've seen countless kids playing with them. I'm certain that many more people come in contact with these things on a daily basis then if every geocache on every one was found simultaneously. I've yet to hear of anyone being injured or killed because of a ground fault. BTW, most of them are isolated by ceramic insulators, half way down.

There are many legitimate reasons why caches shouldn't be placed on poles and guy wires. I don't consider risk of electrocution to be one of them.

2.5k · August 5, 2011

Not at all. You described a safety system that does not exist, then said that placing a cache would disable that safety system. I've grabbed onto these wires for support while waiting for a bus. I have leaned my bike against them. I have locked my bike to them. I've seen countless kids playing with them. I'm certain that many more people come in contact with these things on a daily basis then if every geocache on every one was found simultaneously. I've yet to hear of anyone being injured or killed because of a ground fault. BTW, most of them are isolated by ceramic insulators, half way down.

First, I described a safety feature originally described by a utility worker. Second, just because you've never been electrocuted by a guy wire while handling them doesn't mean the concept should be dismissed or described as "laughable". Third, consider yourself as having heard of someone getting electrocuted while touching a guy wire. Google is your friend.

There are many legitimate reasons why caches shouldn't be placed on poles and guy wires. I don't consider risk of electrocution to be one of them.

Well, I'm glad we can agree on the first half...

9.3k · August 5, 2011

I don't see an issue as long as the pole is not on private property

Kewl! Glad to see that you at least somewhat acknowledge the private property issues mentioned in the guidelines. My only concern is that you deliberately ignore the fact that the pole itself is private property. Did you get permission for your power pole cache? If so, who gave you permission? One of your staunch defenders suggested that, if faced with a sketchy cache, we, as members of the community, should question it. Since this one seems sketchy to me, I thought I'd ask... again.

6.1k · August 5, 2011

Well, there goes my 5/5 idea about placing a film can inside a pair of sneakers and winging it up over the wires..

I think I'll do a simple keyholder on an electrical box instead?

9.3k · August 5, 2011

That reminds me. A caching buddy used to work as a utility locator, marking off buried wires, pipes, etc, when folks were planning on digging stuff up. He struck up a conversation with a Florida Power & Light foreman about geocaching, and the guy thought it was a kewl concept. FP&L was replacing a string of poles, and my friend suggested tapping a Bison tube into the top of a power pole, while it was laying on the trailer, making it a 5/5 once the pole was set. The foreman thought it was a great idea. I wonder if that would qualify as "adequate" permission? :lol:

Edit to add: No, he didn't hide the cache.

Edited August 5, 2011 by Clan Riffster

3.1k · August 5, 2011

BAM
Ba-zing
Sha-pow!
Holy sound effects, Batman! You still seem unable to refute the fact that attaching things, including geocaches, to utility poles is illegal.

(and, TTJ, it doesn't say "object". Don't try and insert language to support your argument. The items are clearly listed about which are not allowed. Also, see definition of "attachment" as used when discussing utility poles and permissions for such "attachments")
This is getting ridiculous. Did you actually read the page you linked to?
...or any similar object which presents a hazard to, or endangers the lives of, electrical workers.

Aside from reading what I've posted previously: cited from legal documents and rulings, speaking with a utility provider, cited from dictionaries, on and on...

Perhaps it is you that has a problem with understanding legality? How about you just don't hide or seek a utility pole cache? I'll continue to get proper permissions for hides. Deal?

...and as for the "object" part, I'm sorry that I left out the word "just". I should have said, "it doesn't say just "object". You really should look at what "objects" are listed on the statute. And then...realize that they are talking about things other than what a geocache would present. Especially if it is placed on a guy wire, and not the pole. <_<

And you still can't admit you were wrong about what a guy wire does, and what the yellow sleeves are for. Keep it classy with denial.

Edited August 5, 2011 by NeverSummer

3.1k · August 5, 2011

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you. Not that I'm any sort of anti-phone pole fanatic. But just in this particular argument, those guy lines *could* become a ground, however remote the chance, and if you touched it and it was grounding a power line, you would probably not be signing that micro in legible script.
The properties of electricity can't be denied. This was not what I was discounting. The idea that the cable guards were there to protect the public from a ground short, was. To be clear, the idea that placing a film can or a bison tube on a plastic guy cable guard, would expose the public to electrocution is hilarious.
So, on the one hand, you are willing to admit that the guy line could become a ground, but that anyone touching such a line for the purpose of retrieving a film can or bison tube would be immune to being electrocuted?

If that were to happen...you likely wouldn't be approaching the area. It would take a downed line, and those jump around like crazy.

So, your argument could be, yet again, applied to things like flying, driving a car, or playing golf. All have a likelihood that you could get hurt. Slim, but possible.

What kind of bubble-wraped hamster ball do you have to live in to think like this?

3.1k · August 5, 2011

First, I described a safety feature originally described by a utility worker. Second, just because you've never been electrocuted by a guy wire while handling them doesn't mean the concept should be dismissed or described as "laughable". Third, consider yourself as having heard of someone getting electrocuted while touching a guy wire. Google is your friend.

There are many legitimate reasons why caches shouldn't be placed on poles and guy wires. I don't consider risk of electrocution to be one of them.
Well, I'm glad we can agree on the first half...

1) Guy wires on utility lines in America are not grounding sources. You either misunderstood, or your "utility worker" source didn't describe the process properly to you

2) Guy wires are not installed in contact with live wires. The only way for electrocution to happen is for lightening to strike (which likely will arc to you without regard to the guy-wire existing or not), or for the guy wire to be disconnected and come in contact with a live wire. (in which case, you likely aren't going to be touching it, or near is, as the arc it would be creating would be noticeable from a distance)

3) The link you provide describes a situation during an installation procedure by professionals. A guy wire was detached and came in contact with the live wire. This isn't a "normal" situation those of us that are not linemen would ever encounter anyway. As for the horse, that pole was derelict and lines were sagging. This was from neglect, and located on private property. Common sense takes the lead here, and I know I wouldn't be fussing with a raggedy, leaning old pole that is missing a guy wire. If someone sees a live wire sagging near...well, anything...you probably should keep your distance.

TTJ, if I get permission (implied or explicit) to hide a cache on a guy wire, would you throw a hissy fit? If you don't like them don't hunt or hide them. Nuf said.

Edited August 5, 2011 by NeverSummer

3.1k · August 5, 2011

I propose that each of us take up a challenge. Call your local electrical utility and ask, sincerely, if placing a small object for the purpose of a location-based study would be allowed on a utility pole. Ask, also, if it would be allowed on the lower portion of a guy wire or under a protective sleeve.

Don't ask with the intent being that you don't want a cache there. Ask to be an advocate for placement of a geocache--to keep locations and ideas open for use. (no credit will be given to those that purposefully sabotage the request to the utility)

I've called my local provider. Months ago. And a few days ago when this thread to this direction. And again this morning. This last call I asked to be passed up the chain of command a little higher. And, every time, they said that, so long as it was small and non-obtrusive visually or physically, they would allow it. If I were to use a guy wire, the ask that it not be exposed or alter the wire physically. In fact, 2 of 3 people I talked to said they were surprised that I even bothered to call and ask, as it wouldn't be a problem anyhow.

19k · August 5, 2011

I propose that each of us take up a challenge. Call your local electrical utility and ask, sincerely, if placing a small object for the purpose of a location-based study would be allowed on a utility pole. Ask, also, if it would be allowed on the lower portion of a guy wire or under a protective sleeve.

Don't ask with the intent being that you don't want a cache there. Ask to be an advocate for placement of a geocache--to keep locations and ideas open for use. (no credit will be given to those that purposefully sabotage the request to the utility)

I've called my local provider. Months ago. And a few days ago when this thread to this direction. And again this morning. This last call I asked to be passed up the chain of command a little higher. And, every time, they said that, so long as it was small and non-obtrusive visually or physically, they would allow it. If I were to use a guy wire, the ask that it not be exposed or alter the wire physically. In fact, 2 of 3 people I talked to said they were surprised that I even bothered to call and ask, as it wouldn't be a problem anyhow.

I did just that, and the receptionist said that she had no problem at all with it. In fact, she thought that it sounded like fun.

19k · August 5, 2011

I propose that each of us take up a challenge. Call your local electrical utility and ask, sincerely, if placing a small object for the purpose of a location-based study would be allowed on a utility pole. Ask, also, if it would be allowed on the lower portion of a guy wire or under a protective sleeve.

Don't ask with the intent being that you don't want a cache there. Ask to be an advocate for placement of a geocache--to keep locations and ideas open for use. (no credit will be given to those that purposefully sabotage the request to the utility)

I've called my local provider. Months ago. And a few days ago when this thread to this direction. And again this morning. This last call I asked to be passed up the chain of command a little higher. And, every time, they said that, so long as it was small and non-obtrusive visually or physically, they would allow it. If I were to use a guy wire, the ask that it not be exposed or alter the wire physically. In fact, 2 of 3 people I talked to said they were surprised that I even bothered to call and ask, as it wouldn't be a problem anyhow.

Despite my weak attempt at humor in my previous post, I think that this is some very interesting information. How high up the chain were you able to get?

Aren't the poles generally shared by telephone, cable, and power utilities? Which one(s) did you contact, and are they the actual owner of the pole?

3.1k · August 5, 2011

I propose that each of us take up a challenge. Call your local electrical utility and ask, sincerely, if placing a small object for the purpose of a location-based study would be allowed on a utility pole. Ask, also, if it would be allowed on the lower portion of a guy wire or under a protective sleeve.

Don't ask with the intent being that you don't want a cache there. Ask to be an advocate for placement of a geocache--to keep locations and ideas open for use. (no credit will be given to those that purposefully sabotage the request to the utility)

I've called my local provider. Months ago. And a few days ago when this thread to this direction. And again this morning. This last call I asked to be passed up the chain of command a little higher. And, every time, they said that, so long as it was small and non-obtrusive visually or physically, they would allow it. If I were to use a guy wire, the ask that it not be exposed or alter the wire physically. In fact, 2 of 3 people I talked to said they were surprised that I even bothered to call and ask, as it wouldn't be a problem anyhow.

Despite my weak attempt at humor in my previous post, I think that this is some very interesting information. How high up the chain were you able to get?

Aren't the poles generally shared by telephone, cable, and power utilities? Which one(s) did you contact, and are they the actual owner of the pole?

I called Minnesota Power. Just for fun, I called again (and spoke with a different operator). She started by saying that nothing can be attached to a pole, but I'm actually on hold as she connects me to their central dispatcher. I'm getting connected with Chuck Kimball, Manager of Distribution.

Update: He said he would not be able to permit anything on the pole itself. However, when I mentioned using the lower portion of a guy-wire or the protective sleeve, he said that would be a possibility.

I mentioned that it would be a small object used for a location-based GPS study, and that I would be happy to discuss specifics about location and object with him. He said it sound entirely possible to allow it, but would like a little more information.

So, implied permission? I wouldn't say that

Explicit permission? Looks like I'm moments away from settling that score.

Could one "get away" with placing a geocache on a pole here on a Minnesota Power pole? Nope.

Could one "get away" with placing a geocache on a guy wire protector on a Minnesota Power pole? Yes

Should one place a geocache on a guy-wire or protector, without explicit permission, on a Minnesota Power pole? No

Might we eventually be able to have implied permissions for use of guy wires to place a geocache on Minnesota Power pole? I'll let you know how my meeting goes next week.

So, what leg work has anyone else done? All huff, no puff, I'm guessing.

So

2.3k · August 5, 2011

I bet if you said game instead of misrepresenting this as a study the answer would be vastly different.

3.1k · August 5, 2011

I bet if you said game instead of misrepresenting this as a study the answer would be vastly different.

Misrepresenting? Are you really going to say that? It is hardly such, and I have been very clear about what it is I am planning on doing.

How is our "game" not a location-based GPS study? Did the "game" not start as a way to see if the availability of consumer GPS would allow people to locate an item at a set of coordinates? Do we not try to confirm that possibility every time we set out to look for a geocache?

Why split hairs? What difference does it make if I were to ask for the permission to place a small container with a log at a site on my own, versus doing so under the guise of "geocaching"?

I am starting this conversation with a "muggle" on a level he can understand. The details are between me, and the listing service I use.

Would it be ok if I placed a "geocache" and listed the coordinates on a different server? A blog? My local geocaching association forum? If I have permission to place a small object on the guy-wire from the utility, is that not sufficient permission to list a geocache on geocaching.com?

August 5, 2011

I bet if you said game instead of misrepresenting this as a study the answer would be vastly different.

This.

It does make a difference, and he knows it.

9.3k · August 5, 2011

I propose that each of us take up a challenge.

An interesting challenge. I like it!

I mentioned that it would be a small object used for a location-based GPS study

So... you lied. What you call "splitting hairs" is what the rest of the known world calls being truthful. Geocaching is not a location-based GPS study. It may have been one 11 years ago, when Dave Ulmer placed the first one, but it is not a study anymore. We already know the technology works. It is a game, hobby or sport which incorporates GPS coordinates for the purpose of finding hidden containers, objects and/or places. If you didn't want to explain geocaching to a muggle you could have simply said "placing a gamepiece for a GPS related hobby". At least that would have been an honest statement. Since you elected to present a fiction, one could argue that you are "purposefully sabotaging the request to the utility". What makes me curious is why you deliberately presented a falsehood. Why not be upfront from the start? Is it because you agree with the notion that referring to it as a game might elicit a less than positive response?

If I take up your challenge, I will be honest with whoever I speak with.

What difference does it make if I were to ask for the permission to place a small container with a log at a site on my own, versus doing so under the guise of "geocaching"?

One is deliberately dishonest. The other is not...

Edited August 5, 2011 by Clan Riffster

6.1k · August 5, 2011

What difference do the labels mean anyhow?

It IS a study until it's found.

And it is not a game because there is no "winner", or "rules", only guidelines..

19k · August 5, 2011

What difference does it make if I were to ask for the permission to place a small container with a log at a site on my own, versus doing so under the guise of "geocaching"?

One is deliberately dishonest. The other is not...

I don't know if I agree with you. The permission is to place an object on the pole. Why should the answer would be different depending on the motive for placing said object? Yes, in reality, it may make a difference, but should it?

3.1k · August 5, 2011

I propose that each of us take up a challenge.

An interesting challenge. I like it!

I mentioned that it would be a small object used for a location-based GPS study

So... you lied. What you call "splitting hairs" is what the rest of the known world calls being truthful. Geocaching is not a location-based GPS study. It may have been one 11 years ago, when Dave Ulmer placed the first one, but it is not a study anymore. We already know the technology works. It is a game, hobby or sport which incorporates GPS coordinates for the purpose of finding hidden containers, objects and/or places. If you didn't want to explain geocaching to a muggle you could have simply said "placing a gamepiece for a GPS related hobby". At least that would have been an honest statement. Since you elected to present a fiction, one could argue that you are "purposefully sabotaging the request to the utility". What makes me curious is why you deliberately presented a falsehood. Why not be upfront from the start? Is it because you agree with the notion that referring to it as a game might elicit a less than positive response?

If I take up your challenge, I will be honest with whoever I speak with.

What difference does it make if I were to ask for the permission to place a small container with a log at a site on my own, versus doing so under the guise of "geocaching"?

One is deliberately dishonest. The other is not...

Hey, CR, I get it. You don't like utility poles. Quit creating straw man issues with this and move on, please.

I fail to see how you can call how I started the conversation a lie. It is what we do when we seek a geocache, at it's most stripped-down level.

It is a study every single day. Just because you take it for granted does not make it less of a study. I consider what I do every day with geocaching to be a location-based study of GPS accuracy. Using a GPS unit to locate coordinates in space, and then locating a log to document the accuracy of the provided coordinates, I am, as the "geocache placer", asking you to confirm my waypoint and the accuracy of my and your GPS unit.

You may not see it as such, but I do. I always have. And to introduce an unfamiliar subject to a person takes finesse. I start with a concept they know, and then show them what I am talking about. As a person schooled in teaching, I know what it takes to help people understand difficult concepts. Don't poo-poo what you don't know.

And stop calling me liar.

Edited August 5, 2011 by NeverSummer

3.1k · August 5, 2011

Ah, the history of why we are all here:

"The three men were inspired by the ways in which location-based technology could enhance outdoor recreation. They founded Groundspeak Inc. to explore this matter and manage Geocaching.com. "

I'm helping Groundspeak research and explore this matter. It's a location-based study using a GPS unit.

August 5, 2011

How is it not a lie? There is a huge difference between a scientific study and a geocaching.

Does he know that a unknown amount of non-scientists of all ages are going to be looking for it on, and around the pole while not knowing the exact location?

3.1k · August 5, 2011

How is it not a lie? There is a huge difference between a scientific study and a geocaching.

Does he know that a unknown amount of non-scientists of all ages are going to be looking for it on, and around the pole while not knowing the exact location?

First of all, I never said "scientific".

Second, by nature, yes, it would be "scientific": Based on or characterized by the methods and principles of science. '

Simple scientific method involves a "procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses."

So yes. It could be a "scientific study" if we so wanted to characterize it.

School is in session...

The history of how geocaching began was the construction of a test:

Define a question (How does the lack of selective availability affect our ability to better locate objects on the Earth's surface?)

Gather information and resources (observe) (GPS units, location possibilities, etc)

Form an explanatory hypothesis (Selective availability will make it more likely to pinpoint an object on the Earth's surface)

Perform an experiment and collect data, testing the hypothesis (Take coordinates. Place object. List coordinates. Seek coordinates. Dave Ulmer places his cache)

Analyze the data (Found it/Did not Find logs conveyed to Dave Ulmer via his "Great American GPS Stash Hunt" post on the GPS users' group)

Interpret the data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis (Dave Ulmer's cache found. Must be possible to find objects on the surface of the earth with better accuracy post-selective availabiltiy)

Publish results (on the web-forum)

Retest (frequently done by other scientists) --US!

Holy smokes! We're doing science! Yay science!

"...You mean our game is more than just recreation?"

Yes, Billy, it is! Science is everywhere! In your baseball game, the construction of that computer screen you're looking at, and even in the toilet you use every day!

"...So I can be a scientist, too?"

Why yes, Billy, you can! You don't have to have a "job" with "scientist" under your name to help with science. Anyone can test a hypothesis! You do it every day!

Edited August 5, 2011 by NeverSummer

August 5, 2011

Like how you ignored the important part. About an unknown amount of people of all ages looking it, while not knowing the exact location.

Does he know that children might be poking around that pole.

Im guessing no. You should have told him exactly what it was for. Clearly you thought you would get a different reponse so you misrepresented the situation.

I look forward to your unnecessarily snarky reponse.

3.1k · August 5, 2011

Like how you ignored the important part. About an unknown amount of people of all ages looking it, while not knowing the exact location.

Does he know that children might be poking around that pole.

Im guessing no. You should have told him exactly what it was for. Clearly you thought you would get a different reponse so you misrepresented the situation.

I look forward to your unnecessarily snarky reponse.

Well, the point of the "study" is to have people look, yes. It's not like a mob of people are going to be standing around a guy wire looking for an object. If the traffic becomes an issue, Chuck can let me know, and I'll take the listing down. (That's how the system is supposed to work...)

Not snark. Science. (Well, a little snark. But you didn't want to take my word for it, so I gave a lesson on scientific method for you to "get your learn on")

And, if you would read, I haven't finalized anything with Chuck Kimball, Manager of Distribution at Minnesota Power, Duluth. I have preliminary permissions, pending details about locations, type of object and more.

Also...this whole idea of "it's for the children" isn't going to float. Especially when talking about a(n always) non-electrified guy-wire. Did you read anything I wrote, or did you just selectively read the things you wanted to disagree with?

See post #76 and #80.

I mentioned that it would be a small object used for a location-based GPS study, and that I would be happy to discuss specifics about location and object with him. He said it sound entirely possible to allow it, but would like a little more information.

So, implied permission? I wouldn't say that

Explicit permission? Looks like I'm moments away from settling that score.

Could one "get away" with placing a geocache on a pole here on a Minnesota Power pole? Nope.

Could one "get away" with placing a geocache on a guy wire protector on a Minnesota Power pole? Yes

Should one place a geocache on a guy-wire or protector, without explicit permission, on a Minnesota Power pole? No

Might we eventually be able to have implied permissions for use of guy wires to place a geocache on Minnesota Power pole? I'll let you know how my meeting goes next week.

So, what leg work has anyone else done? All huff, no puff, I'm guessing.

August 5, 2011

I didnt want to take your word for it? There is nothing in any of my responses that would imply that. Why you felt the need to go off on a useless rant is beyond me.

You can live in a world where definitions dont change if you want to. Id rather not.

3.1k · August 5, 2011

I didnt want to take your word for it? There is nothing in any of my responses that would imply that. Why you felt the need to go off on a useless rant is beyond me.

You can live in a world where definitions dont change if you want to. Id rather not.

My "rant" was in response to you (and others) not seeing how geocacing is, in fact, a scientifically related "game". Also, how my efforts to attain proper permissions were not a "lie", "dishonest(y)", or misrepresentation.

How is your inquiry with your local utility going?

If you don't want to do the legwork to find out the specifics of the permissions required, so be it. Just don't call me a liar, a dishonest person, or a misrepresenter for working with some finesse to introduce the processes of geocaching to a "muggle". I'm of the school of thought that we should do what we can to get permissions and introduce geocaching in the best light possible, rather than being gloomy and resigning myself to seeing increased limitations on where we can hide.

How is it not a lie? There is a huge difference between a scientific study and a geocaching.

This is where your response showed you didn't want to take my "word for it".

Edited August 5, 2011 by NeverSummer

9.3k · August 5, 2011

Hey, CR, I get it. You don't like utility poles.

Why would you think that? :unsure:

I love power poles. They make great landscaping accessories.

And they do an awesome job holding up power lines.

What's not to love? :unsure:

I fail to see how you can call how I started the conversation a lie.

Because it was deliberately misleading?

lie [lahy] noun

1. a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive

2. something intended or serving to convey a false impression

I consider what I do every day with geocaching to be a location-based study of GPS accuracy. Using a GPS unit to locate coordinates in space, and then locating a log to document the accuracy of the provided coordinates, I am, as the "geocache placer", asking you to confirm my waypoint and the accuracy of my and your GPS unit.

Wait... I thought you didn't like straw men? :unsure:

Or were you being hypocritical? <_<

What you just presented here is laughable at best. Following an arrow till a countdown reaches zero is not conducting a study. Stopping at ground zero and hunting a film can is not a study. Considering the inherent inaccuracies present in consumer grade GPSr units, there is simply no way for you to acquire any empirical data. If, when you place a cache, your 60CSx says it has an accuracy of 9', and your marked ground zero is 2' away, and when I find that cache, my 60CSx says it has an accuracy of 15' and ground zero is 4' away, what, exactly, can you conclude from such a study? It has been determined many years ago that those numbers are essentially meaningless. Is your study the collection of random numbers? Do you include requests on your cache pages asking users to share the EPE and distance from ground zero displayed on their devices when they find your cache? As to verifying the initial placement of a cache, I suppose, if you were not a concientious cache hider, who would verify their own coordinates prior to publication, you might leave verification up to the FTF. But once that's done, the "study" is over. You published the coords. Someone else verified them.

Edit to add: I just checked 5 of your traditionals. I didn't see any requests for seekers to privide you with accuracy data. Doesn't seem like your "study" is going very well.

You may not see it as such, but I do. I always have.

No. You don't. You just found yourself backed into a silly argument with no way out.

Then you stretched the truth to a utility employee, just to further your agenda.

Rather than admit that, you invented all this silliness about a "study".

And to introduce an unfamiliar subject to a person takes finesse.

No. It takes honesty.

As a person schooled in teaching, I know what it takes to help people understand difficult concepts.

I am a certified by FDLE as an instructor. I have been for over 20 years. That means I also know a little something about teaching. One of the most basic rules of the craft is buiding trust between the student and the teacher. The instant your class senses you are lying, you are done. Your effectiveness as an instructor is gone. I would think you would know this, seeing as how you are "schooled in teaching". Maybe that was left out of the curiculum when you were "schooled in teaching"? If you'll share with us who certified you, I could find out.

Don't poo-poo what you don't know.

What, exactly, am I poo pooing? :unsure:

And what, exactly, do I not know? :unsure:

Let's review:

I know that, in many areas, placing objects on utility poles is illegal.

I know that, in many places, utility poles are owned by a utility company.

I know that utility poles, owned by utility companies, are private property.

I know that the guidelines specifically address caches that violate the law.

I know that the guidelines also state you need permission for hides on private property.

I beieve these are the points I have stressed throughout this debate.

Which one(s) do I not know? :unsure:

And stop calling me liar.

Be truthful. :unsure:

Ah, the history of why we are all here:

"The three men were inspired by the ways in which location-based technology could enhance outdoor recreation. They founded Groundspeak Inc. to explore this matter and manage Geocaching.com. "

Ah, the history of why three guys were there. (past tense)

Which has little to do with why we are here.

They did a "study". You did not.

They utilized the results of their study to create a business.

You & I utilize the results of their study to play a game.

19k · August 5, 2011

The way I see it, the difference between representing it as a "study" vs. a "game" is the perception of the number of people interacting with the "device" you are asking to hide. By calling it a "study", I think you are (deliberately or not) implying that a very limited few people, perhaps only yourself, will be visiting this device. By calling it a "game", they would immediately understand that there will be others, possibly many others, hence their answer could be different.

Also, I suspect a small-town utility company may behave quite differently than something like, say, XCel Energy, but I'm not planning on trying.

August 5, 2011

How is your inquiry with your local utility going?

Why are you asking me? I would never want to hide anything on a power pole.

3.1k · August 5, 2011

The way I see it, the difference between representing it as a "study" vs. a "game" is the perception of the number of people interacting with the "device" you are asking to hide. By calling it a "study", I think you are (deliberately or not) implying that a very limited few people, perhaps only yourself, will be visiting this device. By calling it a "game", they would immediately understand that there will be others, possibly many others, hence their answer could be different.

Also, I suspect a small-town utility company may behave quite differently than something like, say, XCel Energy, but I'm not planning on trying.

Believe me, when the time comes, I will describe the "study" of which I'm performing. We don't exactly have a high find rate here in this region. I never implied that my experience was a blanket for any/all of the other situations. I'm simply conveying my experience in seeking permissions for a hide on/near utility poles.

A study can involve few or many thousands of people. As far as traffic goes, we all know that there are more people waiting for a bus (or something similar) near utility poles than geocachers at a site in most given days or situations.

9.3k · August 5, 2011

Simple scientific method involves a "procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses."

So yes. It could be a "scientific study" if we so wanted to characterize it.

No. It couldn't. The key to scientific study is the collection of data.

Since you are not collecting data from every user, you are not doing science.

Your utter lack of understanding makes me wonder if the sum of your being "schooled in teaching" was you attending high school. :unsure:

Holy smokes! We're doing science! Yay science!

No. The folks who built the website might be classified as having done science.

What you do is non-science.

(Note how it sounds like nonsense?)

Edited August 5, 2011 by Clan Riffster

3.1k · August 5, 2011

How is your inquiry with your local utility going?

Why are you asking me? I would never want to hide anything on a power pole.

Excellent. Then your time weighing in on my experiences seeking permissions for this type of hide is complete?

The Poles....

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