Jump to content

The Poles....


Recommended Posts

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?)

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Try on Masters in Education. No big deal.

 

The data collection is performed by the cache listing. "Found it", "Did Not Find", etc logs are all maintained on each cache listing. Thereby, collecting the data in one nice, tidy package.

Link to comment
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?)

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Try on Masters in Education. No big deal.

 

The data collection is performed by the cache listing. "Found it", "Did Not Find", etc logs are all maintained on each cache listing. Thereby, collecting the data in one nice, tidy package.

 

PS, don't create a quote that I didn't say. Slander much?

Link to comment
A study can involve few or many thousands of people.

Very true. So long as you collect reliable data from every participant in the "study", you could, conceivably, call it that. Since you don't appear to be collecting data from any of the participants, it's not a study. Someone "schooled in teaching" should know that. Hence, my belief that your prevarication was intentional. I,e; A lie.

Link to comment

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.

 

Please don't get me wrong... I think that this is very interesting and commedable that you are doing this calling. I'm just stating what I think the perception is likely to be based on how you present your question.

 

As to Minnesota Power, I just looked them up. "Minnesota Power proudly serves 144,000 electric customers in Northeastern Minnesota and Northern Wisconsin." As far as power companies go, that is basically a Mom & Pop operation. I think you'd have a very tough time even getting to first base with a company like XCel Energy. You'd probably have a tough time even getting a human to talk to you.

Link to comment

Scientific method may have evaded you in school...

 

Here's how I see what I (we) do as performing a "study", or test of a hypothesis:

 

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. Place cache)

Analyze the data (Found it/Did not Find logs)

Interpret the data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis (Cache found/not found, # of times. Must be possible to find objects on the surface of the earth with better accuracy post-selective availability. New Hypothesis: Objects placed with GPS coordinates are able to be located with a GPS unit.)

Publish results (Cache listing)

Retest (frequently done by other scientists) <--US! (Place another cache, repeat)

 

It is how scientific method works. As someone who teaches the process, we often demonstrate it by applying it to daily life:

 

Define a question (Does eating something make me less hungry?)

Gather information and resources (observe) (hungry person, food, availability of food, etc)

Form an explanatory hypothesis (Eating food will make me less hungry)

Perform an experiment and collect data, testing the hypothesis (When hungry at lunchtime, eat food)

Analyze the data (Did I feel less hungry after eating? How much less?)

Interpret the data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis (Eating made me less hungry. This must mean that eating will make me less hungry)

Publish results (Hey, everyone! I'm less hungry after I ate!)

Retest (What about tomorrow? If I eat then, will it make me less hungry?)

 

It's a crude example, but it is how scientific method works. Science is everywhere.

Link to comment
A study can involve few or many thousands of people.

Very true. So long as you collect reliable data from every participant in the "study", you could, conceivably, call it that. Since you don't appear to be collecting data from any of the participants, it's not a study. Someone "schooled in teaching" should know that. Hence, my belief that your prevarication was intentional. I,e; A lie.

It's collected on my cache listings.

 

Stop calling me a liar, please.

 

"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."

We are all taking part in a grand experiment (study) to see how location-based technology can enhance outdoor recreation. That is, whether you know it or not.

Edited by NeverSummer
Link to comment
Try on Masters in Education. No big deal.

That much is evident. :lol:

 

The data collection is performed by the cache listing. "Found it", "Did Not Find", etc logs are all maintained on each cache listing. Thereby, collecting the data in one nice, tidy package.

Let's take a peek at the "data" you are collecting.

Here's a DNF log from one of your caches:

 

"Looked everywhere we could not find this one"

 

What empirical data can we gather from that statement?

 

You mentioned earlier that your "study" included accuracy.

 

Do you know what kind of device that user had?

Do you know how familiar that person is with their device?

Do you know how fresh the batteries were in that device?

Do you know what time of day it was that they searched?

Do you know what the satellite constellation was at that time?

Do you know what the weather was?

Do you know how long they searched?

Do you know what vector they approached from?

Do you know where they searched?

Do you know what the EPE, (Estimated Position Error), was when they were at ground zero?

 

If you had collected this data, then I could accept that you were doing a "study".

Since you did not, you are not doing "science". <_<

Edited by Clan Riffster
Link to comment
Try on Masters in Education. No big deal.

That much is evident. :lol:

 

The data collection is performed by the cache listing. "Found it", "Did Not Find", etc logs are all maintained on each cache listing. Thereby, collecting the data in one nice, tidy package.

Let's take a peek at the "data" you are collecting.

Here's a DNF log from one of your caches:

 

"Looked everywhere we could not find this one"

 

What empirical data can we gather from that statement?

 

You mentioned earlier that your "study" included accuracy.

 

Do you know what kind of device that user had?

Do you know how familiar that person is with their device?

Do you know how fresh the batteries were in that device?

Do you know what time of day it was that they searched?

Do you know what the satellite constellation was at that time?

Do you know what the weather was?

Do you know how long they searched?

Do you know what vector they approached from?

Do you know where they searched?

Do you know what the EPE, (Estimated Position Error), was when they were at ground zero?

 

If you had collected this data, then I could accept that you were doing a "study".

Since you did not, you are not doing "science". <_<

Good thing I'm not "publishing" my study in the Clan Riffster Journal of Petulance.

 

Our "study" is simply to answer the hypothesis I mentioned. I'm not testing what you have listed as variables. The study isn't regarding differences in device, time of day, satellite constellation, weather, length of search, vector of approach, or "EPE".

 

I can, however, take those variables into account when hiding and listing my next cache. It's how geocaches get better--the analysis of data. If people stuggled to find my cache, these variables might come into consideration for the next hide I make. I may provide better descriptions of the location, a better hint, etc to account for the variables that may affect hide rate.

 

I can go all day. It's all science. Even if you don't want it to be for arguement's sake.

Link to comment
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?

I have to say yes it should.

In a study, it would be a limited amount of known individuals involved.

All documenting something for the study.

Visitation frequency can be controlled.

Giving permission for the study, can be done by way of contract to prevent the property owner from liability.

 

In geocaching it would be every random individual that decided to hunt that cache.

Wile many would be documenting something, not everyone would.

Visitation frequency can not be controlled.

Because of the nature of geocaching the only way a property owner can attain the highest level of protection is by refusing the game.

 

~~~edit to add~~~

NeverSummer,

Liars always have justification for their lie, but that does not make it right.

Edited by Vater_Araignee
Link to comment
It is how scientific method works.

So, you knowing exclude the most important part of the process. <_<

(collecting relevent data)

Yet you still insist that what you do is "science"? :unsure:

 

Stop calling me a liar, please.

Fair enough. You did ask nicely. And the term "liar" could be perceived as a TOU violation. I will no longer call you that, and I apologize for doing so. How about if I refer to you as someone who has presented something intended or serving to convey a false impression, or someone who made a false statement with the deliberate intent to deceive? Would that be better? It's certainly accurate, given what you've told us.

 

You knowingly misrepresented this game in a bid to get permission. <_<

Link to comment
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?

I have to say yes it should.

In a study, it would be a limited amount of known individuals involved.

All documenting something for the study.

Visitation frequency can be controlled.

Giving permission for the study, can be done by way of contract to prevent the property owner from liability.

 

In geocaching it would be every random individual that decided to hunt that cache.

Wile many would be documenting something, not everyone would.

Visitation frequency can not be controlled.

Because of the nature of geocaching the only way a property owner can attain the highest level of protection is by refusing the game.

 

~~~edit to add~~~

NeverSummer,

Liars always have justification for their lie, but that does not make it right.

Wow. You folks are quite literal. I'm not PUBLISHING A STUDY like you might see in JAMA or something. I'm conducting a "study". Anyone can do the same.

And, Vater_Araignee, I'm not including those variables in my "study". It is open-ended with no determined end date. One can study as such. Many "experiments" or "studies" can include infinite numbers of participants, or simply be ongoing.

 

But none of this is relevant. Folks want to call me a liar, so be it. If you read what I said, this is an ongoing conversation with a vendor about permissions. You can light the fire under the stake you've prepared when I come back and tell you how the actual remaining part of the conversation goes. But by then, it will be me with the permissions, and you not trying.

 

My interpretation of what it is I do when participating in geocaching is up to me. I presented it as such, and will be discussing details, in person, with the concerned parties. (Which doesn't include any of you) I didn't lie. What I do when I participate in hiding a geocache is a study in GPS technology. You don't have to think the same.

Edited by NeverSummer
Link to comment
Our "study" is simply to answer the hypothesis I mentioned. I'm not testing what you have listed as variables. The study isn't regarding differences in device, time of day, satellite constellation, weather, length of search, vector of approach, or "EPE".

Didn't you state this way back when, in Post # 87?

"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."

If you are not collecting any relevent data, how can you call this a study in accuracy?

 

I can, however, take those variables into account when hiding and listing my next cache.

Awesome! That's a study I can sink my teeth into. Are you planning on posting yourself, or a qualified assistant, next to this hypothetical cache 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? If not, how, exactly, do you plan on acquiring the data represented by those variables?

Link to comment

How about if I refer to you as someone who has presented something intended or serving to convey a false impression, or someone who made a false statement with the deliberate intent to deceive? Would that be better?

Applicable descriptions would be deceiver, phony, false witness, con artist, falsifier, and perjurer.

 

I can easily foresee a harsher respond to perjury that punishes more than the individual. I guess some people think that "No, you cant hide it there." is the same as fibbing, getting caught and having an ordinance created adding distance from the pole to the no.

Link to comment
Stop calling me a liar, please.

Fair enough. You did ask nicely. And the term "liar" could be perceived as a TOU violation. I will no longer call you that, and I apologize for doing so. How about if I refer to you as someone who has presented something intended or serving to convey a false impression, or someone who made a false statement with the deliberate intent to deceive? Would that be better? It's certainly accurate, given what you've told us.

 

You knowingly misrepresented this game in a bid to get permission. <_<

I have not. Stop reading into this. My entire post about contacting MP for permissions was clear in stating that I had STARTED the conversation, and that we (TPTB at MP, and I) will be discussing details. Chuck is no slouch, and I'm sure takes permissions to place an object on his property seriously. He asked for details, and we are meeting next week to discuss them. My view on what this game is makes it exactly that. I treat it as a study to find the ways in which location-based technology could enhance outdoor recreation. I explore this matter though my hiding and seeking of geocaches at Geocaching.com.

 

These facts hardly deserve the "liar" comments, or calling me "someone who has presented something intended or serving to convey a false impression, or someone who made a false statement with the deliberate intent to deceive". I opened the conversation by cracking the door, not barging in. Again, I like the idea of approaching people for permissions with a little courtesy and clarity. If I started the conversation by saying, "Hi, I'd like to place a geocache on a guy-wire of a utility pole," it would not go well. By introducing it in a careful way, it opens the door to more accepting conversations. Ask the Native Americans how chats with the settlers went.

Edited by NeverSummer
Link to comment
Our "study" is simply to answer the hypothesis I mentioned. I'm not testing what you have listed as variables. The study isn't regarding differences in device, time of day, satellite constellation, weather, length of search, vector of approach, or "EPE".

Didn't you state this way back when, in Post # 87?

"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."

If you are not collecting any relevent data, how can you call this a study in accuracy?

 

I can, however, take those variables into account when hiding and listing my next cache.

Awesome! That's a study I can sink my teeth into. Are you planning on posting yourself, or a qualified assistant, next to this hypothetical cache 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? If not, how, exactly, do you plan on acquiring the data represented by those variables?

Really? Really? It's time to feed the troll.

Stop baiting me with this. I've said how "this" works, over and over. You don't have to like my study. I'm not reporting to you.

 

Basic Pot of Pole Beans

Ingredients

 

3 bacon slices

1 cup chopped onion

1/4 teaspoon salt

1/4 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper

3 (14-ounce) cans fat-free, less-sodium chicken broth

1 1/2 pounds pole beans, trimmed and cut in half crosswise

Preparation

 

Cook bacon in a large Dutch oven over medium heat until crisp. Remove bacon from pan, reserving 1 teaspoon drippings in pan. Crumble bacon; set aside. Add onion to drippings in pan; cook 3 minutes, stirring frequently. Add bacon, salt, and remaining ingredients; bring to a boil. Reduce heat, and simmer, uncovered, 25 minutes or until beans are tender.

Link to comment
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?)

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Try on Masters in Education. No big deal.

 

The data collection is performed by the cache listing. "Found it", "Did Not Find", etc logs are all maintained on each cache listing. Thereby, collecting the data in one nice, tidy package.

 

I have a friend that can spot a cammoed bison in a tree from 50', in a matter of seconds. I can search that same tree for an hour and not find it. He logs a find, I log a DNF. How does any of that relate on the accuracy of our GPS readers?

Link to comment

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.

 

He's already shown that he believes that all people are stupid and must be finessed, (manipulated), into accepting his supreme knowledge and ideas. We went though this same process with the trespassing in the park after hours thread. Remember the part where he said he would knowingly lie to the police because they are two stupid to understand geocaching if it was explained to them. He's using the same approach with the power company.

 

I can only wonder how much damage will be done to Geocaching as a result of his intentional misrepresentation to Minnesota Power.

Link to comment
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:

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?

 

Actually, John has shown that a loose guy wire can, and has become energized. I now know that if I ever see one, not to mess around with it and to report it.

Link to comment
He's already shown that he believes that all people are stupid and must be finessed, (manipulated), into accepting his supreme knowledge and ideas.

Let's not forget how we are living in denial, possibly ensconced in bubble wrapped hamster balls, and are slinging straw man arguments, while poo pooing everything, as petulant trolls... who shouldn't call him a liar. :unsure:

 

I can't help but think I should call Chuck and let him know what's really going on here.

If anyone else cares to join me, he can eventually be reached at 800-228-4966.

Link to comment

Do the poles have wooden survey stakes beside them? I found a cache earlier this year that was a nano capsule inside a wooden survey stake next to a telephone pole. The stake was about two feet long 2 inches wide and about half an inch thick, the top spray painted orange. The cap of the stake was removable and and had doweling to pin it together with a hole drilled in between for the nano capsule to fit inside.

Edited by KaneNorth
Link to comment

I am the original person who posted and all I've got to say is, "WOW!"

 

I was gone for a few days on a work trip in Nashville, TN. And yes, I did stop by the Geo Maze (comments about that in my other post). I came back here and saw this amazing thread!

 

I've learned SO MUCH about the legal dynamics and physical properties of poles that I feel almost burdened with the knowledge! THANKS! Also, trying to related Geocaching to the Scientific Method is quite intriguing! Being a teacher, I LOVE this potential idea! I can almost see how I can justify it to my school to almost ask for a small grant to purchase some GPS units! I do have an afterschool program that does Geocaching and I think that I am going to try and utilize this thread to 'legitimize' Geocaching more to my coworkers and administration. Do not worry, I wouldn't quote anyone directly. Also, I don't plan on misrepresenting the fact that Geocaching is primarily FOR FUN, but with now a twist of an action research that I plan on creating (through the motivation of this thread!) THANKS again!

 

BTW- my original post was about helping to find some caches on utility poles and I had one in specific that I hadn't found and that was why I had wanted to post this. And to this day, I still haven't found it. It's a straight pole without any of the guylines (thanks for this thread I know what they are called!) attached and no metal cross attachment to hold other wires. The CO still maintains that it's still there. Fundamentally, it just one huge, long, and lonely wooden working telephone pole. Crazy! However, reading this post, I saw a hint that I think that I do now have a great solid idea of where it is! I plan on checking it in the next week!

 

Thanks again for all your posts!

Link to comment

I have to agree with the original poster. I almost never post on boards, am mainly a lurker. I opened this up because I am currently haven't the same difficulty with a pole hide that I can't find.

 

I was quickly reminded as to why I do;t post on boards enough. The original poster asked for some tips to find it and got some from the next couple of posts. For that, thank you very much, I think I will find it using them.

 

Then the post got wildly side tracked and almost personal between a few.

 

He asked for help, give him some help. If you disagree or don't care, then don;t bother reading it.

Link to comment
If you disagree or don't care, then don;t bother reading it.

Rather than silencing any dissent, could we allow folks with opposing opinions to post them? This is, after all, a discussion forum. If you were to post a question about how to hide a film can, someone posting a recipe for chocolate chip cookies could be considered off topic, but just about any statement relating to film cans, and/or hiding small items in general could easily be seen as on topic.

Link to comment

All I mean is, if the guy wants help, help him. If you don't want to help him, move on. Don't spend the next 3 pages giving him or anyone else involved crap for wanting to find a cache on a pole.

 

This is where the online tough guy comes from, willing to argue and talk a big game online while sitting in his parents basement afraid of his shadow.

 

He asked for some constructive help finding a cache, if you have some suggestions so be it. That is what this 'discussion forum' topic is about.

Link to comment

Oh god. I was hoping this site would be devoid of over-used baseless internet cliches like "willing to argue and talk a big game online while sitting in his parents basement afraid of his shadow"

 

It means nothing. It says nothing excpet that you cant make a response with out making something up. If you want to insult somebody, make it impactfull and use something based in reality.

Link to comment

All I mean is, if the guy wants help, help him. If you don't want to help him, move on. Don't spend the next 3 pages giving him or anyone else involved crap for wanting to find a cache on a pole.

 

This is where the online tough guy comes from, willing to argue and talk a big game online while sitting in his parents basement afraid of his shadow.

 

He asked for some constructive help finding a cache, if you have some suggestions so be it. That is what this 'discussion forum' topic is about.

 

Shebaz,

 

Did you see the OP's reply in post #9? (These are very helpful! Thanks! I plan on rechecking some ones that are near me today! I hope to find a few! )

Did you see how the OP ended their post just above yours? (Thanks again for all your posts!)

 

Apparently they don't have an issue with this thread... they were commenting on the silliness of it, but not complaining about it. I'm not sure why you should let it bother you. Your comments fall right in with "Then the post got wildly side tracked and almost personal between a few."

 

By the way, I'm not in my parent's basement.

Link to comment

First off, I did appreciate the tips that were given. I think they will prove helpful.

 

And my comments were not meant to be insults. They were simply stating that this type of conversation is where that view comes from. I just meant that if I were to come with a question, I would be helped in finding a solution, not told I am wrong for ever asking it.

Link to comment
As far as I know, most utility companies have explicit rules against attaching anything to their equipment, including poles.

Yeah, but that doesn't mean they aren't there anyway.

That sounds a lot like, "but officer, everybody drives over the speed limit on this road".

 

Break the law/rule, and an excuse like that isn't likely going to prevent you from suffering the consequences.

No one said utility pole hides were legal, or that certain excuses would prevent them from suffering the consequences. The OP was stumped on them and we offered some solutions.

as far as that being illegal when was the last time you saw someone ticketed or anything attaching a lost dog sign or something to that effect and not getting in trouble. i come from a law enforcement community and i can say this much if an officer talks to you about that and tickets you then he really had nothing else better to do. my advice play ignorance if anyone says something to you about it then when the areas clear discreetly put it back (isn't that what ur supposed to do in the first place?)

Link to comment
As far as I know, most utility companies have explicit rules against attaching anything to their equipment, including poles.

Yeah, but that doesn't mean they aren't there anyway.

That sounds a lot like, "but officer, everybody drives over the speed limit on this road".

 

Break the law/rule, and an excuse like that isn't likely going to prevent you from suffering the consequences.

No one said utility pole hides were legal, or that certain excuses would prevent them from suffering the consequences. The OP was stumped on them and we offered some solutions.

as far as that being illegal when was the last time you saw someone ticketed or anything attaching a lost dog sign or something to that effect and not getting in trouble. i come from a law enforcement community and i can say this much if an officer talks to you about that and tickets you then he really had nothing else better to do. my advice play ignorance if anyone says something to you about it then when the areas clear discreetly put it back (isn't that what ur supposed to do in the first place?)

 

:blink: You chose to quote Ambient_Skater where he points out how off-topic this thread had become, and use that as a lead-in to go off-topic again? :lol:

Link to comment

 

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 to summarize:

 

No, you can't get permission to place a cache on a utility pole.

 

You MIGHT be able to get permission to place SOMETHING on a guy wire, but only by lying about what that something is. You almost got permission to place an "object" for a "study." You aren't even close to getting permission to place a "game piece" that will have dozens of people poking around looking for it.

Link to comment

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.

 

 

No, it's not "misrepresenting." It's out and out lying.

Link to comment
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?)

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Try on Masters in Education. No big deal.

 

The data collection is performed by the cache listing. "Found it", "Did Not Find", etc logs are all maintained on each cache listing. Thereby, collecting the data in one nice, tidy package.

Only an education major could think that cache logs are scientific data and that collecting them is a "study."

Link to comment

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 ( :P )

 

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.

 

My post is not bull. I only remember this fact from a friend who worked as a linesman, who got the 12" splinter from someone sticking a tag sale sign on a phone pole he had to climb. He described the splinter, the injury and the pain of having to have the creosote coated splinter removed from his thigh. I don't make this stuff up just to add to an argument, off the top of my head. I try to keep my head clear, and speak up when it's important. The spikes he was wearing to climb the pole slipped when he couldn't make the grab, because he hit a nail, or heavy metal staple, and started to slide down. I still cringe at the thought of it. And I might be exagerating the length. But even at 3", OUCH!!! And if a linesman falls, it's not the drop, it's the sudden stop that will get them every time.

 

I can't believe we're still discussing this. I'm sure it's probably illegal everywhere they have utility poles.

Link to comment

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 ( :P )

 

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.

 

My post is not bull. I only remember this fact from a friend who worked as a linesman, who got the 12" splinter from someone sticking a tag sale sign on a phone pole he had to climb. He described the splinter, the injury and the pain of having to have the creosote coated splinter removed from his thigh. I don't make this stuff up just to add to an argument, off the top of my head. I try to keep my head clear, and speak up when it's important. The spikes he was wearing to climb the pole slipped when he couldn't make the grab, because he hit a nail, or heavy metal staple, and started to slide down. I still cringe at the thought of it. And I might be exagerating the length. But even at 3", OUCH!!! And if a linesman falls, it's not the drop, it's the sudden stop that will get them every time.

 

I can't believe we're still discussing this. I'm sure it's probably illegal everywhere they have utility poles.

He got a 12" splinter because of a tag sale sign that was thumbtacked to the pole. Doesn't make any sense to me, but OK.

 

But the legality of caches on power poles is not what this thread is about. How to find caches that have already been hidden on them is the question that was originally raised.

Link to comment

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 ( :P )

 

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.

 

My post is not bull. I only remember this fact from a friend who worked as a linesman, who got the 12" splinter from someone sticking a tag sale sign on a phone pole he had to climb. He described the splinter, the injury and the pain of having to have the creosote coated splinter removed from his thigh. I don't make this stuff up just to add to an argument, off the top of my head. I try to keep my head clear, and speak up when it's important. The spikes he was wearing to climb the pole slipped when he couldn't make the grab, because he hit a nail, or heavy metal staple, and started to slide down. I still cringe at the thought of it. And I might be exagerating the length. But even at 3", OUCH!!! And if a linesman falls, it's not the drop, it's the sudden stop that will get them every time.

 

I can't believe we're still discussing this. I'm sure it's probably illegal everywhere they have utility poles.

He got a 12" splinter because of a tag sale sign that was thumbtacked to the pole. Doesn't make any sense to me, but OK.

 

But the legality of caches on power poles is not what this thread is about. How to find caches that have already been hidden on them is the question that was originally raised.

 

OK, let's rephrase it to big splinter. Spikes on his boots got hooked on the metal thing that was holding the tag sale sign onto the pole and he began to slide down the pole. Natural instinct is to grab hold with whatever you can. His thighs and his hands. His thighs hit the tip of a splinter on the pole, and it imbedded in his thighs, seperating the splinter from the pole and attaching it to his thigh muscle, and it is probably what kept him from sliding all the way down, but at a painful price.

 

How to find the cache? Simple. Look at the pole, not at the GPS. Phone a friend. Read the hint. Read past logs. Think like a cacher, where would YOU put it? Or just walk away and find a different cache. I can't answer that part, because I wouldn't look for a cache on a phone pole. Not my cup of tea.

Link to comment

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 ( :P )

 

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.

 

My post is not bull. I only remember this fact from a friend who worked as a linesman, who got the 12" splinter from someone sticking a tag sale sign on a phone pole he had to climb. He described the splinter, the injury and the pain of having to have the creosote coated splinter removed from his thigh. I don't make this stuff up just to add to an argument, off the top of my head. I try to keep my head clear, and speak up when it's important. The spikes he was wearing to climb the pole slipped when he couldn't make the grab, because he hit a nail, or heavy metal staple, and started to slide down. I still cringe at the thought of it. And I might be exagerating the length. But even at 3", OUCH!!! And if a linesman falls, it's not the drop, it's the sudden stop that will get them every time.

 

I can't believe we're still discussing this. I'm sure it's probably illegal everywhere they have utility poles.

He got a 12" splinter because of a tag sale sign that was thumbtacked to the pole. Doesn't make any sense to me, but OK.

 

But the legality of caches on power poles is not what this thread is about. How to find caches that have already been hidden on them is the question that was originally raised.

 

OK, let's rephrase it to big splinter. Spikes on his boots got hooked on the metal thing that was holding the tag sale sign onto the pole and he began to slide down the pole. Natural instinct is to grab hold with whatever you can. His thighs and his hands. His thighs hit the tip of a splinter on the pole, and it imbedded in his thighs, seperating the splinter from the pole and attaching it to his thigh muscle, and it is probably what kept him from sliding all the way down, but at a painful price.

 

How to find the cache? Simple. Look at the pole, not at the GPS. Phone a friend. Read the hint. Read past logs. Think like a cacher, where would YOU put it? Or just walk away and find a different cache. I can't answer that part, because I wouldn't look for a cache on a phone pole. Not my cup of tea.

 

I see. He slipped.

Link to comment

But the legality of caches on power poles is not what this thread is about. How to find caches that have already been hidden on them is the question that was originally raised.

Q: There's a cache near me that is hidden on a power pole. I can't find it. Any advice on how what I should look for?

 

A: Don't look for it, post an "NA" log because it has been placed illegally on private property without permission.

 

There.

Link to comment

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 ( :P )

 

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.

 

My post is not bull. I only remember this fact from a friend who worked as a linesman, who got the 12" splinter from someone sticking a tag sale sign on a phone pole he had to climb. He described the splinter, the injury and the pain of having to have the creosote coated splinter removed from his thigh. I don't make this stuff up just to add to an argument, off the top of my head. I try to keep my head clear, and speak up when it's important. The spikes he was wearing to climb the pole slipped when he couldn't make the grab, because he hit a nail, or heavy metal staple, and started to slide down. I still cringe at the thought of it. And I might be exagerating the length. But even at 3", OUCH!!! And if a linesman falls, it's not the drop, it's the sudden stop that will get them every time.

 

I can't believe we're still discussing this. I'm sure it's probably illegal everywhere they have utility poles.

He got a 12" splinter because of a tag sale sign that was thumbtacked to the pole. Doesn't make any sense to me, but OK.

 

But the legality of caches on power poles is not what this thread is about. How to find caches that have already been hidden on them is the question that was originally raised.

 

OK, let's rephrase it to big splinter. Spikes on his boots got hooked on the metal thing that was holding the tag sale sign onto the pole and he began to slide down the pole. Natural instinct is to grab hold with whatever you can. His thighs and his hands. His thighs hit the tip of a splinter on the pole, and it imbedded in his thighs, seperating the splinter from the pole and attaching it to his thigh muscle, and it is probably what kept him from sliding all the way down, but at a painful price.

 

How to find the cache? Simple. Look at the pole, not at the GPS. Phone a friend. Read the hint. Read past logs. Think like a cacher, where would YOU put it? Or just walk away and find a different cache. I can't answer that part, because I wouldn't look for a cache on a phone pole. Not my cup of tea.

 

I see. He slipped.

And the splinter caused by the sign someone stapled to the pole saved his life.

 

But seriously, my cousin is a lineman and he assures me that not only is it against the law to attach things to their poles, it can cause problems for them. But generally, it's not a huge issue as they are trained to ensure good footing before moving the other foot. Rinse and repeat.

Link to comment
With a thumbtack.

Or a nail. Or a hook. Or a staple. Etc, etc, etc. I'm not sure what difference it makes at that point. When you slide down a pole, embedding a splinter in your thigh, would you say, "It's OK", if the sign that caused you to slip was affixed with a thumbtack? If so, I gotta give you props. Me? I'd likely be pretty upset.

 

One thing I was curious about. Did he fall as he was ascending or descending?

 

Way back in my misspent youth, I worked for Jack's Tree Service, and climbing spikes were part of our issued gear. The boss claimed that most falls occur on the way down, because, after you've spent a couple hours up a tree doing whatever you were hired to do, you could forget those little problem areas that you focused on on your way up. Because of the angle of your body, and the placement of your legs on either side of the tree, it's very hard to get a good visual of the trunk immediately below your feet. Descending is something often done on faith. You shift your belt down about a foot, pull one leg free, and drive it into the trunk a foot or so below where it was. That's the dangerous point. You are only on two points of contact. If your descending spike fails to embed, and the mishap causes your body to shift, you could easily find yourself in a pickle. If you kept your belt fairly tight, and you don't panic, you probably won't hit the ground. Protocol way back then was to wrap your legs around the trunk, while bringing your forearms together, tucking them into your chest. This will (hopefully) cause your belt to bite into the trunk, slowing you enough to let your legs grip. The guys who get injured are the ones who try wrapping their arms around the trunk.

 

It doesn't take a lot to deflect a spike.

 

But then, that's not what the OP was about.

On topic: Look for likely hiding spots.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...