Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
t4e

Charities in Event Listing

Recommended Posts

I hate beating dead horses, truly, but the enabling of the cache was implied, not requested. My only request was that the line remain. Groundspeak's only request was that the line be removed. Archiving was a conditioned response to my lack of adherence to Groundspeak's request. When it became obvious that Groundspeak was unwilling to allow me to keep the line, I made a modified request. Again, that was denied. I modified the line AFTER Groundspeak allowed me to do so by Unarchiving. Unarchiving was a requirement to allow me to make the change. I solely enabled the listing. Therefore Groundspeak did not compromise or make any changes on their end.

 

The only reason I continued on was because of the note above from Nicole.

 

Horse = Dead

Stop beating it.

 

Compromise only requires one party to give up something, not both. You gave up the line. I am sure if you had not capitulated, the listing would have been archived again. The choice was yours and yours to make alone. It is not like Groundspeak flexed their muscle and gave you no choice. They gave you a choice and you chose to give I've up the line. Regardless of what you think you may or may not have an won, the simple fact it you chose to give up the line in favor of enabling the listing. That matches the definition of a compromise. Feel free to look it up if you don't belive me, I did provide a link.

Share this post


Link to post

I guess I have a different definition of compromise. Mine is where both parties involved give up something in return for moving forward. Yours is one party does what the other says.

 

There are two things I have learned from this experience:

 

1. Compromise has different a different definition for some people than it does for others. I am sure that when asked to define it in a group of 100 people, likely there would be at least 2 different definitions, if not many more than that.

 

2. Some people just aren't inclined to let things go.

Share this post


Link to post
It is not like Groundspeak flexed their muscle and gave you no choice. They gave you a choice and you chose to give I've up the line.

 

Huh. Really?

 

1) Comply.

2) Have the listing archived (which they would have done).

 

You call that a choice? :lol:

Edited by dfx

Share this post


Link to post
It is not like Groundspeak flexed their muscle and gave you no choice. They gave you a choice and you chose to give I've up the line.

 

Huh. Really?

 

1) Comply.

2) Have the listing archived (which they would have done).

 

You call that a choice? :lol:

 

That is a choice.

Share this post


Link to post

I guess I have a different definition of compromise. Mine is where both parties involved give up something in return for moving forward. Yours is one party does what the other says.

 

There are two things I have learned from this experience:

 

1. Compromise has different a different definition for some people than it does for others. I am sure that when asked to define it in a group of 100 people, likely there would be at least 2 different definitions, if not many more than that.

 

2. Some people just aren't inclined to let things go.

 

1) I am sure it has a few definition variants and at least one will fit this situation. Since Groundspeak has the final rulling, theirs is the one that counts.

 

2) That is so much like telling someone that they just have to have the last word. It only demonstrates the person saying it is doing exactly what they are accusing the other of doing.

 

I am glad for the people attending that the event can still go on. Too bad this had to descend into yet another thread about how unfair the reviewers and Groundspeak is.

Edited by Keith Watson

Share this post


Link to post

ETA: You could also add the leftover toy clause in a note/announcement log, as that's not the listing and not subject to the same guidelines (as per business names and other restricted content) :anibad:

 

Not recommended. Doing so would fall under the maintenance of a cache listing, which logs are a part of that aspect. Using the "announcement" log type by any host would be likely viewed as attempting to circumvent the guidelines they agreed to follow.

 

:cool: CD

 

Really now??? please......... This has become so petty it is beyond reason.

Edited by Frank Broughton

Share this post


Link to post

This is seriously making me laugh out loud now. Thank you for providing tonight's entertainment!

Share this post


Link to post

This is seriously making me laugh out loud now. Thank you for providing tonight's entertainment!

 

Here's what makes me laugh.

 

Back in the summer CacheViewer declined a cache listing because it promoted the virtues of the drive-thru window of a restaurant. Instead of simply accepting that and updating their listing, this whiner kicked and screamed like a child that they were being treated so unfairly then promptly went on their own personal vendetta. They collected over 50 listings and DEMANDED that the reviewers take IMMEDIATE action against those listings just to satisfy the ego and entitlement issues that so cripple their delicate self-confidence. As the logs went out they likely puffed up with pride knowing the swath of disablings were sending shock waves across the province. So while this whining child-like cacher sat veiled in secrecy, the reviewers took all the heat from the locals that were so frustrated. All of this just because some listing wasn't allowed to promote a local restaurant. So here's what I see.

 

SOME cachers in Ontario simply cannot accept that things don't always go their way, but instead of being adult about it they would rather see everyone else suffer too. "I didn't get my way so I'm going to take it out on everyone else. And I'm going to do it behind everyone's back safe in my secret bunker where no one will ever know it was me."

 

So from time to time things like this happen in Ontario, because when some cacher with entitlement issues gets turned down they sabotage a bunch of other cache listings... claiming it is to be fair, but never with the courage to be public about it.

 

How does that make you feel "thebruce0"? Imagine that guy was reading or even posting in this same thread... Any special words for the person that flipped out and emailed me that list of 50+ caches demanding they be changed? I blame THAT guy for all of this nonsense that has happened this year. I blame the mentality that SOME people have, that they need to take others down all because they didn't get their way. Boo hoo!

Share this post


Link to post

Any respect I've had for you has just been tossed completely out the window.

Un. Believable.

 

This has not, and has NEVER been about me. It has ALWAYS been about fairness and consistency. I am NOT the only one speaking up here. I have NEVER made it personal. I WANT to respect reviewers. I DO NOT and HAVE NEVER carried out a personal vendetta against other caches NOR cachers. I DETEST being blamed for resulting actions of reviewers based on INCONSISTENT review processes and/or reviewer oversight.

 

I have NEVER threatened geocide. I HAVE stated I will no longer be placing caches (at least as long as certain review processes and/or reviewers are still active). Geocaching - by whatever service - is, and SHOULD BE an enjoyable, fair, and sane sport and pastime for ALL - including volunteer reviewers. DO NOT BLAME ME - let alone me alone for all the "ANGST" that has occurred this summer.

 

Un. Believable. Dare I share the whole story?

 

Good day, CacheDrone.

:back:

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post

Any respect I've had for you has just been tossed completely out the window.

Un. Believable.

 

This has not, and has NEVER been about me. It has ALWAYS been about fairness and consistency. I am NOT the only one speaking up here. I have NEVER made it personal. I WANT to respect reviewers. I DO NOT and HAVE NEVER carried out a personal vendetta against other caches NOR cachers. I DETEST being blamed for resulting actions of reviewers based on INCONSISTENT review processes and/or reviewer oversight.

 

I have NEVER threatened geocide. I HAVE stated I will no longer be placing caches (at least as long as certain review processes and/or reviewers are still active). Geocaching - by whatever service - is, and SHOULD BE an enjoyable, fair, and sane sport and pastime for ALL - including volunteer reviewers. DO NOT BLAME ME - let alone me alone for all the "ANGST" that has occurred this summer.

 

Un. Believable. Dare I share the whole story?

 

Good day, CacheDrone.

:back:

 

Where did I infer it was you? I said...

 

How does that make you feel "thebruce0"? Imagine that guy was reading or even posting in this same thread... Any special words for the person that flipped out and emailed me that list of 50+ caches demanding they be changed? I blame THAT guy for all of this nonsense that has happened this year. I blame the mentality that SOME people have, that they need to take others down all because they didn't get their way.

 

and that was because you keep suggesting the lack of consistency by the reviewers is causing all these problems.

Share this post


Link to post

This is seriously making me laugh out loud now. Thank you for providing tonight's entertainment!

 

Here's what makes me laugh.

 

Back in the summer CacheViewer declined a cache listing because it promoted the virtues of the drive-thru window of a restaurant. Instead of simply accepting that and updating their listing, this whiner kicked and screamed like a child that they were being treated so unfairly then promptly went on their own personal vendetta. They collected over 50 listings and DEMANDED that the reviewers take IMMEDIATE action against those listings just to satisfy the ego and entitlement issues that so cripple their delicate self-confidence. As the logs went out they likely puffed up with pride knowing the swath of disablings were sending shock waves across the province. So while this whining child-like cacher sat veiled in secrecy, the reviewers took all the heat from the locals that were so frustrated. All of this just because some listing wasn't allowed to promote a local restaurant. So here's what I see.

 

SOME cachers in Ontario simply cannot accept that things don't always go their way, but instead of being adult about it they would rather see everyone else suffer too. "I didn't get my way so I'm going to take it out on everyone else. And I'm going to do it behind everyone's back safe in my secret bunker where no one will ever know it was me."

 

So from time to time things like this happen in Ontario, because when some cacher with entitlement issues gets turned down they sabotage a bunch of other cache listings... claiming it is to be fair, but never with the courage to be public about it.

 

How does that make you feel "thebruce0"? Imagine that guy was reading or even posting in this same thread... Any special words for the person that flipped out and emailed me that list of 50+ caches demanding they be changed? I blame THAT guy for all of this nonsense that has happened this year. I blame the mentality that SOME people have, that they need to take others down all because they didn't get their way. Boo hoo!

 

you did mention in the original thread that the whole fiasco was caused by one disgruntled cacher, but...since when do the reviewers give in to demands from cachers?

 

i thought that's when they distance themselves from the situation and directed them to appeals

i asked if they were directed to appelas in the original thread but nobody replied

 

also, that would have been a good time to invoke the no precedence rule that keeps flying around every time someone brings up a similar older listing, and the majority of those listings that were disabled were older, mine at least were 2 years old

 

to me, giving in to their demands was as bad as them making the demand

so now you got one "happy camper" hiding somewhere behind a screen at the expense of dozens of others

meanwhile in the announcement you made we are told not to bother gathering a list of similar caches because nothing will be done about it

 

and you are surprised the reviewers were blamed?

 

and with all due respect to the CacheViewer, he/she does seem to have an inclination towards interpreting everything as being commercial

 

i find it amazing that people like this, the disgruntled cacher, are allowed to throw mud and start a "war", invoke the right to "privacy" thus cowardly remaining behind the scenes

 

its a wonderful thing the society has created with the right to "privacy"

we can live in comfort that we can do pretty much anything and be allowed to remain anonymus

Share this post


Link to post

and the mystery is solved :lol:

 

busted because of a C&Per :anibad:

 

timeline makes a lot of sense now...C&P event gets published on December 4 and the Original Event gets disabled on December 4

 

The Original Event

 

The C&P Event

Share this post


Link to post

and the mystery is solved :lol:

 

busted because of a C&Per :anibad:

 

timeline makes a lot of sense now...C&P event gets published on December 4 and the Original Event gets disabled on December 4

 

The Original Event

 

The C&P Event

 

0382c92f-3b16-4960-8a9b-43a43aa26ea8.jpg?rnd=0.6010385

 

Just wanna point out ... a search for the word "charity" on that other listing produced zero matches for that word ....

Share this post


Link to post

 

Just wanna point out ... a search for the word "charity" on that other listing produced zero matches for that word ....

 

:rolleyes:

 

seriously? its just too obvious lol

 

the second listing copied and pasted everything, including the "charity" part...CD reviews it and notices the line, points it out to the CO who in turn points out the original event....the original listing is disabled december 4, the other CO removes the line their event gets published december 4

Share this post


Link to post

 

Just wanna point out ... a search for the word "charity" on that other listing produced zero matches for that word ....

 

:rolleyes:

 

seriously? its just too obvious lol

 

the second listing copied and pasted everything, including the "charity" part...CD reviews it and notices the line, points it out to the CO who in turn points out the original event....the original listing is disabled december 4, the other CO removes the line their event gets published december 4

 

But I don't seem to recall the massive CO outrage and peer debate about that listing to arrive at the event being enabled. As for the Copy/Paste of another event cache, very poor taste but a completely different topic altogether (not like this topic has stayed on target per se)

Share this post


Link to post

and the mystery is solved :lol:

 

busted because of a C&Per :anibad:

 

timeline makes a lot of sense now...C&P event gets published on December 4 and the Original Event gets disabled on December 4

 

The Original Event

 

The C&P Event

 

Um, nope. I went to sign up for the event on the morning of the 4th and noticed it was disabled. At that time there were no other events of the same name. Later that same day, I checked the event listings again after this one was archived and saw the other one there.

Share this post


Link to post

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=0ade9b35-58e3-4d9f-911c-0f4e55f1cb1a

 

WTF?

 

There must be some rule against stealing an entire page worth of information for a cache event without asking the original creator for permission first?

 

Yup. It's called Copyright Law (or something similar if there's a lawyer in the room). Your listing is still your creative work so, while Groundspeak isn't dropping an anvil on that other CO, you're certainly able to. Downside is that'll involve lawyers and such.

 

For now rest easy that the only attendee for the rip-off event is the CO as of 9:19 this morning. Bad karma to do that I say, but I'll re-iterate I believe the cache listing theft in whole or in part is a new forum topic. There was quite the kerfuffle in the Geocaching Topics forum over something similar (cross listing exact caches).

Share this post


Link to post

When one looks at the "newest listings" for Ontario, it's very confusing to see two events with exactly the same name, with one being a complete rip-off of the original.

 

The fact that the two are miles and miles apart is not immediately apparent.

 

Permission to copy the concept and the cache page is not noted, and from the sounds of it, not granted by Geeocachers.

 

Again, I would like to ask CacheDrone if the C&P submission didn't raise some concerns. It seems rather confusing to allow it to be published as a almost-verbatim copy of the original.

Edited by Pup Patrol

Share this post


Link to post

When one looks at the "newest listings" for Ontario, it's very confusing to see two events with exactly the same name, with one being a complete rip-off of the original.

 

The fact that the two are miles and miles apart is not immediately apparent.

 

Permission to copy the concept and the cache page is not noted, and from the sounds of it, not granted by Geeocachers.

 

Again, I would like to ask CacheDrone if the C&P submission didn't raise some concerns. It seems rather confusing to allow it to be published as a almost-verbatim copy of the original.

 

You realize you're asking if CacheDrone happened to remember the exact wording of another cache when this one was published. While I'm sure this particular cache is easy enough to remember, there are over 25,000 geocaches in Ontario and it's a pretty tall order to ask the reviewers to memorize the listing text of all caches for future reviews. More likely they don't worry about that and respond to emails from COs who feel slighted instead.

 

Geeocachers, I sure hope you've generated that WTF email to CacheDrone rather than relying on him to visit this thread again... and also contacted the copy paste cacher to find out why they thought that was a good idea in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post

Copyright law???? man oh man, how petty is this going to end up? Hang it up boys - this is getting majorly embarrassing. I am siding with the drone! Some people are just plain insane over this hobby.

Share this post


Link to post

I would think that with all the recent "attention", that yes, the exact title and concept and cache page write-up would immediately ring a bell.

 

I don't think it's much of a stretch. I've approved thousands of registrants in my forum, and you would be surprised how easy it is to recognize an email address out of thousands.

Share this post


Link to post

Copyright law???? man oh man, how petty is this going to end up? Hang it up boys - this is getting majorly embarrassing. I am siding with the drone! Some people are just plain insane over this hobby.

 

I host one event a year. I'm certainly not insane. I would appreciate an ask from someone before they copy my entire cache event page, as I am sure you would if it happened to you.

Share this post


Link to post

Copyright law???? man oh man, how petty is this going to end up? Hang it up boys - this is getting majorly embarrassing. I am siding with the drone! Some people are just plain insane over this hobby.

 

I host one event a year. I'm certainly not insane. I would appreciate an ask from someone before they copy my entire cache event page, as I am sure you would if it happened to you.

 

I would be glad they thought my words so great that they felt no need to change any of them! Guess there are different ways to look at everything. I would take it as a compliment!

Share this post


Link to post

I host one event a year. I'm certainly not insane. I would appreciate an ask from someone before they copy my entire cache event page, as I am sure you would if it happened to you.

 

I'm not in your area, but I recognize the "ReGift-O-Rama" event and its recurring format from years past:

 

GC2GM64 ReGift-O-Rama 2011!

GC20XKJ ReGift-O-Rama 2010!

GC1J0A0 ReGift-O-Rama 2009!

GCYDRR Evil in the Park: The ReGift-o-Rama Event!

Share this post


Link to post

Copyright law???? man oh man, how petty is this going to end up? Hang it up boys - this is getting majorly embarrassing. I am siding with the drone! Some people are just plain insane over this hobby.

 

I host one event a year. I'm certainly not insane. I would appreciate an ask from someone before they copy my entire cache event page, as I am sure you would if it happened to you.

 

I would be glad they thought my words so great that they felt no need to change any of them! Guess there are different ways to look at everything. I would take it as a compliment!

 

In addition to the blatant verbatim lifting of the text and event structure, I find the timing of the C&P event to be "interesting".

Share this post


Link to post

and the mystery is solved :lol:

 

busted because of a C&Per :anibad:

 

timeline makes a lot of sense now...C&P event gets published on December 4 and the Original Event gets disabled on December 4

 

The Original Event

 

The C&P Event

 

Um, nope. I went to sign up for the event on the morning of the 4th and noticed it was disabled. At that time there were no other events of the same name. Later that same day, I checked the event listings again after this one was archived and saw the other one there.

 

huh?

what you mean nope?

they all took place on December 4th

 

original event disabled, maybe at 00:01

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=f506a279-64f9-437b-97d2-d834adcec840

 

as a result of the original event being disabled the CO of C&P event removes line and the event is published sometime during December 4th

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=96d67004-28b8-4a0c-99d5-b5f4cab7219a

 

archival took place on December 5th

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=e228b3c5-297e-4368-8f3e-9241d98840b6

 

come on, its no brain surgery...a day has 24 hours

perhaps is the reason why there are no time stamps on the logs

Edited by t4e

Share this post


Link to post
SOME cachers in Ontario simply cannot accept that things don't always go their way, but instead of being adult about it they would rather see everyone else suffer too. "I didn't get my way so I'm going to take it out on everyone else. And I'm going to do it behind everyone's back safe in my secret bunker where no one will ever know it was me."

 

So from time to time things like this happen in Ontario, because when some cacher with entitlement issues gets turned down they sabotage a bunch of other cache listings... claiming it is to be fair, but never with the courage to be public about it.

 

What I don't understand is why this mystery cacher isn't simply cited the "no precedence" guideline with no further action against anyone else?

 

Edit: I see that's already been mentioned.

Edited by dfx

Share this post


Link to post

Copyright law???? man oh man, how petty is this going to end up? Hang it up boys - this is getting majorly embarrassing. I am siding with the drone! Some people are just plain insane over this hobby.

 

I host one event a year. I'm certainly not insane. I would appreciate an ask from someone before they copy my entire cache event page, as I am sure you would if it happened to you.

 

I would be glad they thought my words so great that they felt no need to change any of them! Guess there are different ways to look at everything. I would take it as a compliment!

 

So, I should take it as a compliment that someone copied the entire Ontario Trails Project, and included it in a commercial product worth $150 then. After all, they thought my product was good enough to market it as their own!

 

Same issue here. Give credit where credit is due, and ask permission first.

Share this post


Link to post

Copyright law???? man oh man, how petty is this going to end up? Hang it up boys - this is getting majorly embarrassing. I am siding with the drone! Some people are just plain insane over this hobby.

 

I host one event a year. I'm certainly not insane. I would appreciate an ask from someone before they copy my entire cache event page, as I am sure you would if it happened to you.

 

I would be glad they thought my words so great that they felt no need to change any of them! Guess there are different ways to look at everything. I would take it as a compliment!

 

So, I should take it as a compliment that someone copied the entire Ontario Trails Project, and included it in a commercial product worth $150 then. After all, they thought my product was good enough to market it as their own!

 

Same issue here. Give credit where credit is due, and ask permission first.

 

Yup. Copyright issues may seem petty to you (Frank), but in fact there's a whole page on gc.com dedicated to exactly this issue.

Share this post


Link to post

Copyright law???? man oh man, how petty is this going to end up? Hang it up boys - this is getting majorly embarrassing. I am siding with the drone! Some people are just plain insane over this hobby.

 

I host one event a year. I'm certainly not insane. I would appreciate an ask from someone before they copy my entire cache event page, as I am sure you would if it happened to you.

 

I would be glad they thought my words so great that they felt no need to change any of them! Guess there are different ways to look at everything. I would take it as a compliment!

 

So, I should take it as a compliment that someone copied the entire Ontario Trails Project, and included it in a commercial product worth $150 then. After all, they thought my product was good enough to market it as their own!

 

Same issue here. Give credit where credit is due, and ask permission first.

 

Yup. Copyright issues may seem petty to you (Frank), but in fact there's a whole page on gc.com dedicated to exactly this issue.

 

I saw this on that page: "Licensee may use, copy, alter, modify, merge, reproduce, and/or create derivative works of the on-line textual content..." what am I missing on that page, in truth, I need glasses.

Share this post


Link to post
I saw this on that page: "Licensee may use, copy, alter, modify, merge, reproduce, and/or create derivative works of the on-line textual content..." what am I missing on that page, in truth, I need glasses.

 

you're missing the next few words afterwards: "... for Licensee's own internal use."

Share this post


Link to post

Internal use, what does that mean, give a warm fuzzy feeling when using it.... {snicker} ya, I know all about the "letter" of the law. The letter KILLETH! that is my beef with all sides of the argument.

Share this post


Link to post

Internal use, what does that mean, give a warm fuzzy feeling when using it.... {snicker} ya, I know all about the "letter" of the law. The letter KILLETH! that is my beef with all sides of the argument.

 

How about this:

 

6. License to Use Submissions

All comments, articles, tutorials, screenshots, pictures, graphics, tools, downloads, and all other materials submitted to Groundspeak in connection with the Site or available through the Site (collectively, "Submissions") remain the property and copyright of the original author. If You submit Submissions to Groundspeak, You must adhere to any applicable submission guidelines that may be posted from time to time on the Site. By submitting any Submission to Groundspeak, You grant Groundspeak a worldwide, non-exclusive, transferable, perpetual, irrevocable, fully-paid royalty-free license and right to use, reproduce, distribute, import, broadcast, transmit, modify and create derivative works of, license, offer to sell, and sell, rent, lease or lend copies of, publicly display and publicly perform that Submission for any purpose and without restriction or obligation to You.

 

Which says, you own the copyright for your cache page but allow Groundspeak to list it. You don't automatically grant the right to another cacher to use that information for their cache page.

Edited by northernpenguin

Share this post


Link to post

There must be some rule against stealing an entire page worth of information for a cache event without asking the original creator for permission first?

Yup. It's called Copyright Law (or something similar if there's a lawyer in the room). Your listing is still your creative work so, while Groundspeak isn't dropping an anvil on that other CO, you're certainly able to. Downside is that'll involve lawyers and such.

Lawyers don't necessarily have to be involved. If GeeOCachers wants to protect his creative efforts, then the logical first step would be to contact juliendon directly and ask them to modify their event listing. It appears GeeOCachers already has done this.

 

If that doesn't produce the desired result, then GeeOCachers might want to use Groundspeak's copyright dispute process. From Groundspeak's guidelines:

 

7. Claims of Copyright Infringement

Groundspeak respects the intellectual property rights of others, and Groundspeak asks that all users of the Site do the same. If You believe that Your work has been published on the Site in a way that constitutes copyright infringement, You may notify Groundspeak's copyright agent by providing the following information...

Edited by CanadianRockies

Share this post


Link to post

haha - ya such valuable material. Them dirty thieves. They just want the extra gifts for themselves.... hang em! I say form a posse and hang 'em. Ya, my original comment stands - boldly so...

Share this post


Link to post

haha - ya such valuable material. Them dirty thieves. They just want the extra gifts for themselves.... hang em! I say form a posse and hang 'em. Ya, my original comment stands - boldly so...

 

i'm sure there must be something for your taste here

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's unfortunate that the 3 "hottest" topics this year in the Canadian forums amounted to:

 

1. I feel I am entitled to mention a store name on my cache listing as my FTF prize.

 

2. I feel one cache is more important than the thousands that have come before it and therefore feel, because of the perceived historiocity of that cache, it should be entitled to the spot that someone else now wishes to use for any purpose whatsoever, even though that goes against an established VR protocol of spot reservation that may have benefitted me in the past.

 

3. I feel I am entitled to mention on a cache listing that a charity stands to benefit from any excess toys brought by attendees since giving to charity is inherently good and I've always been able to do so in the past. Further, I have a beef with anyone else using my listing description to further the comeraderie of the game.

 

:(

 

In this country, and many others around the world, we have more pressing issues that affect this game which should garner our attention, but because they don't tend to affect one person solely, we conveniently ignore them. We tend to draw arbitrary lines in the sand which say "I'm OK with that, but not with this" and then debate the merits of those points as though we are somehow "owed" something because we play the game and may or may not pay a menial subscription fee that allows us to enjoy the game more completely.

 

As an example, in this province (Ontario), we have an entity that will not allow for physical placements of caches within their boundaries, and while a portion of your tax dollars goes toward this entity, nobody seems to care about that anymore and would seemingly rather argue the merits of how the needs of a few should take precedence. Why aren't we all up in arms about this entity's policy? Why do people really feel the need to argue incessantly about petty things like the 3 mentioned above?

 

The lines in the sand many folks continue to draw while sweating the petty details about this game reek of petulance and entitlement and stunt the game more than any VR has ever done by following established guidelines.

Share this post


Link to post

haha - ya such valuable material. Them dirty thieves. They just want the extra gifts for themselves.... hang em! I say form a posse and hang 'em. Ya, my original comment stands - boldly so...

 

i'm sure there must be something for your taste here

 

I think my dart is pretty close to triple 20 here. Thanks!

 

Edited to add: Dr House just hit the Double bulls eye!

Edited by Frank Broughton

Share this post


Link to post

What about this event? :ph34r::ph34r:

 

http://coord.info/GC36PKX

 

And a "commercial" tie-in, with the restaurant being named and donating raffle prizes.

 

Gee, a donation of a kid's coat only got you one raffle ticket.

 

It wasnt just geocachers doing it, it is an annual kid coat drive with the whole community doing it along all the local TV station. I didnt go because I thought goecaching event shouldnt be tied with those things.

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's unfortunate that the 3 "hottest" topics this year in the Canadian forums amounted to:

 

1. I feel I am entitled to mention a store name on my cache listing as my FTF prize.

 

2. I feel one cache is more important than the thousands that have come before it and therefore feel, because of the perceived historiocity of that cache, it should be entitled to the spot that someone else now wishes to use for any purpose whatsoever, even though that goes against an established VR protocol of spot reservation that may have benefitted me in the past.

 

3. I feel I am entitled to mention on a cache listing that a charity stands to benefit from any excess toys brought by attendees since giving to charity is inherently good and I've always been able to do so in the past. Further, I have a beef with anyone else using my listing description to further the comeraderie of the game.

 

:(

 

In this country, and many others around the world, we have more pressing issues that affect this game which should garner our attention, but because they don't tend to affect one person solely, we conveniently ignore them. We tend to draw arbitrary lines in the sand which say "I'm OK with that, but not with this" and then debate the merits of those points as though we are somehow "owed" something because we play the game and may or may not pay a menial subscription fee that allows us to enjoy the game more completely.

 

As an example, in this province (Ontario), we have an entity that will not allow for physical placements of caches within their boundaries, and while a portion of your tax dollars goes toward this entity, nobody seems to care about that anymore and would seemingly rather argue the merits of how the needs of a few should take precedence. Why aren't we all up in arms about this entity's policy? Why do people really feel the need to argue incessantly about petty things like the 3 mentioned above?

 

The lines in the sand many folks continue to draw while sweating the petty details about this game reek of petulance and entitlement and stunt the game more than any VR has ever done by following established guidelines.

 

Can you hear the applause all the way from Markham????

 

 

.

Share this post


Link to post

Applause here in Barrie too. Thanks for putting this one to bed!... I hope.... LOL

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

×