Copy Cat caches - what do you think?

[+Off Grid]

Neat idea. I just may steal it without giving credit.

 

As long as you gave credit for the copying the cache I don't see why not it would be nice to have more unique caches out there.

 

Plus everywhere copy rights look at ford Toyota all the cars are the same.

 

I don't have a problem with someone copying posts, but copying them in the same topic? That's just tacky. At least have the common decency to copy them in another topic in a completely different forum.

 

Its not tacky its funny haha

[+wmpastor]

I went to the copy-cat's cache listing and posted a note remarking about the active forum discussion of copying a cache in the same shopping center. That post lasted less than half a day. Here's what I saw next:

 

Your log entry for the listing Snake Bite (Traditional Cache) was deleted by BDanner at Wednesday, 01 May 2013 07:50:49

Guess he's feeling the heat!

 

Once again, the world can see whose cache was created years earlier!

[+cheech gang]

I went to the copy-cat's cache listing and posted a note remarking about the active forum discussion of copying a cache in the same shopping center. That post lasted less than half a day. Here's what I saw next:

 

Your log entry for the listing Snake Bite (Traditional Cache) was deleted by BDanner at Wednesday, 01 May 2013 07:50:49

Guess he's feeling the heat!

 

Once again, the world can see whose cache was created years earlier!

 

You honestly feel it was your position to get involved directly, rather that merely discussing it here? Cheezits.

[+Harry Dolphin]

 

I don't mind at all if someone copies one of my puzzles, as long as they tell me about it and say in the description where they copied it from. But I work hard creating my puzzles, and for someone else to claim credit for them is extremely annoying!

 

Exactly. It's totally dishonest to take the credit for something you didn't come up with yourself.

 

In actuality, there is almost nothing that is 'original'. Someone else has thought of it somewhere else. In almost all cases. Sometimes, my weird mind works in strange ways. But, with two million caches out there, don't think that no one else has come up with the same idea. Rather presumptive of you? I won't copy a cache idea that's anywhere near. As if there are not another 23 or 67 caches with the same concept out there. My point was that you should not set out another cache with the same idea anywhere nearby. As noted somewhere above, someone ran across a cache similar to his, but it was borrowed from a different cache. Not much original out there.

So, I wander the world looking for interesting puzzles/concepts. Ah! There's one in Quebec, or Nothern Queensland, or Quintana Roo. Probably another 23 or 67 that use the same idea. I'm not free to borrow the oncept? Work it out my own way. Ah. 44 wrong guesses on my 5 difficulty puzzle. I should check the world to see if anyone else has a similar puzzle? I don't think so. Something oddly presumptive in your statement.

[+JL_HSTRE]

Generally, I would say copying another cache is a case of "Imitation is the highest form of flattery." Credit would be nice, but doesn't happen too often it seems. And with all the caches that have been published, your creative idea is probably not unique ("parallel design").

 

That said, copying a creative hide very close to the original does seem rather tacky.

[Nylimb]

 

I don't mind at all if someone copies one of my puzzles, as long as they tell me about it and say in the description where they copied it from. But I work hard creating my puzzles, and for someone else to claim credit for them is extremely annoying!

 

Exactly. It's totally dishonest to take the credit for something you didn't come up with yourself.

 

In actuality, there is almost nothing that is 'original'. Someone else has thought of it somewhere else. In almost all cases. Sometimes, my weird mind works in strange ways. But, with two million caches out there, don't think that no one else has come up with the same idea. Rather presumptive of you? I won't copy a cache idea that's anywhere near. As if there are not another 23 or 67 caches with the same concept out there. My point was that you should not set out another cache with the same idea anywhere nearby. As noted somewhere above, someone ran across a cache similar to his, but it was borrowed from a different cache. Not much original out there.

So, I wander the world looking for interesting puzzles/concepts. Ah! There's one in Quebec, or Nothern Queensland, or Quintana Roo. Probably another 23 or 67 that use the same idea. I'm not free to borrow the oncept? Work it out my own way. Ah. 44 wrong guesses on my 5 difficulty puzzle. I should check the world to see if anyone else has a similar puzzle? I don't think so. Something oddly presumptive in your statement.

 

I agree that most puzzles borrow some ideas from previous ones. But what I'm complaining about is blatant copying: If you compare eRDeeWee's cache to mine, you can see that it's not an independent invention that happens to be similar. Nor is it a similar puzzle inspired by mine. It's a copy: The puzzle description is almost identical to mine, just translated into Dutch. The pictures are slightly edited versions of mine; he just changed the tablecloth color in one and translated the text in the other to Dutch.

 

So no, I don't think I'm being presumptuous: He copied my puzzle and his refusal to admit that is dishonest.

[+The_Incredibles_]

 

In actuality, there is almost nothing that is 'original'. Someone else has thought of it somewhere else.

 

Wrong. Try finding a puzzle that's similar to my Jack Jack puzzle. You won't find it.

 

In the case of Nylimb's puzzle, another cacher copied it AND the photo from the cache page. That's plagarism, baby!

Edited May 2, 2013 by The_Incredibles_

[Martymarquette]

I would say it is an honor - flattery.

but in the same close area - well that is odd - but to copy in a different part of the city or even another city - awesome.

 

Where I live - we could use some creativity - give more excitement then just finding a Tupperware in the woods using a billion dollar satellite.

[+Don_J]

 

In actuality, there is almost nothing that is 'original'. Someone else has thought of it somewhere else. In almost all cases. Sometimes, my weird mind works in strange ways. But, with two million caches out there, don't think that no one else has come up with the same idea. Rather presumptive of you?

 

I am certain that I have an original cache. It was custom built for the exact spot where it is hidden. That "spot" and it's artistic design was custom built for it's purpose.

[+ras_oscar]

I know .... "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" .... (Charles C. Colton, 1780-1832)

 

So we are sort of flattered that a cacher in our area put out a cache very, very similar to one of our most popular ones. Ours has been in place for several years and the new one was just published about a month ago. We kept getting logs on our cache that said, "I just found another one like this a few minutes ago." It turns out that the new cache is just a tenth of a mile away and in the same shopping center as ours! I don't mind that he used our style of hide, which is original, as far as I know, but why does it have to be right "next" to ours? (I guess my pride is hurt that finders will think we copied from his cache!)

 

Have any of you had this situation come up before? We would never think of complaining to the other cacher; he has a perfect right to hide whatever he chooses. Just looking for a little sympathy, I guess...

 

Here's what you do: post a find on their cache, give them 12 favorite points and write a 14 page log on how unique their hide is. Then email all your caching buddies and tell them to do the same. Revenge is a dish best served cold

[+GraceThalia]

I found a cache that I really liked and awarded it a favorite point. I thought about it for months and decided I'd like to do something similar about 40 miles away in my hometown where I spend a good portion of my time.

The original CO is no longer active and their cache has been transferred to an active member. I wanted to mention the inspiration for my cache on the cache listing, however I was concerned about giving away the hide to those very active, seasoned cachers in my area who have already found the original and will make long trips just to find new caches.

Should I mention the original in my listing? Should the adoptive owners be emailed?

[4wheelin_fool]

 

In actuality, there is almost nothing that is 'original'. Someone else has thought of it somewhere else.

 

Wrong. Try finding a puzzle that's similar to my Jack Jack puzzle. You won't find it.

 

In the case of Nylimb's puzzle, another cacher copied it AND the photo from the cache page. That's plagarism, baby!

 

Harry has a good point, as I've seen every cache get copied in one way or another. The automobile would have been eventually created one way or another, despite whoever was first.

 

In Nylimb's case, it is blatant plagiarism and they should probably create a short bookmark list titled "copycat caches" with their cache along with the clone on it.

[+JKMonkey]

The way I see it is that as long as it follows the guidelines and is maintained, it will bring people joy when they find it, and that's all that matters.

[Nylimb]

I found a cache that I really liked and awarded it a favorite point. I thought about it for months and decided I'd like to do something similar about 40 miles away in my hometown where I spend a good portion of my time.

The original CO is no longer active and their cache has been transferred to an active member. I wanted to mention the inspiration for my cache on the cache listing, however I was concerned about giving away the hide to those very active, seasoned cachers in my area who have already found the original and will make long trips just to find new caches.

Should I mention the original in my listing? Should the adoptive owners be emailed?

 

If I were in that situation, I'd write to the current owner and ask what their preference is. I'd suggest these possibilities:

 

(1) The cache page could say that it was copied with permission from <owner's name>.

 

(2) The cache page could say that it was copied with permission from someone else, whose name isn't being mentioned to avoid giving away how their cache is hidden.

 

Either way, it would be clear that I wasn't taking credit for the idea.

 

And if the owner asked me not to copy it or suggested something else to say in the description, I'd respect their wishes.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

As long as you gave credit for the copying the cache I don't see why not it would be nice to have more unique caches out there.

 

Plus everywhere copy rights look at ford Toyota all the cars are the same.

Yes, we need more identical unique caches!!

 

OK, so if you copy them, they won't exactly be unique anymore, but I do get BillyBob's point.

 

It's nice to see local geocachers bring ideas home from their travels. Heck, I did that and ended up launching a whole series.

 

 

Unfortunately I've also seen a lot of copycat caches that seem to exist only because of some contrived series. The most common is the "Always" series given an "Always #" because their placed in a parking lot of a a *Mart store that is always open. Rarely do they show any imagination in how their hidden (they're usually LPCs) and they don't even require any thought to come with a cache name. Just call it 'Always' and append a number to it. I't like, "look, there's a walmart that doesn't have a cache close to it, let's toss a film can in a bush so that it can be part of the "seriies". I've seen the same think with a well known doughnuts and coffee chain, one which is about two competing drug store chains, and even a puzzle cache series that uses post office box numbers. But some of the "series" don't even require similar features at the locations where the caches are placed. Just come up with some common theme like rock-n-roll musicians, or insects, or words that begin with the letter M, and toss out as many caches as possible as close as possible and give them a name that matches the "theme". I don't see these as any sort of "series" because there is rarely anything about the cache that adheres to a theme other than the name. The just look to me like an excuse to put out as many easy finds as possible so the locals can rack up the numbers.

 

 

[+The VanDucks]

deleted duplicate post

Edited May 3, 2013 by The VanDucks

[+The VanDucks]

I went to the copy-cat's cache listing and posted a note remarking about the active forum discussion of copying a cache in the same shopping center. That post lasted less than half a day. Here's what I saw next:

 

Your log entry for the listing Snake Bite (Traditional Cache) was deleted by BDanner at Wednesday, 01 May 2013 07:50:49

Guess he's feeling the heat!

 

Once again, the world can see whose cache was created years earlier!

[+The VanDucks]

I wish "wmpastor" had NOT sent a note to the owner of the other cache. That was rude and totally uncalled for! We have always had very frendly interactions with the other cachers in our area. We are almost all members of our local geocaching club. I would NEVER have confronted the other cacher in this way. As I said in my original post, he has a perfect right to hide any type of cache he desires. You do not have a right to cause bad feeling between us and this other cacher. Next time, mind your own business! Now I need to send him a note of apology for your rudeness!

[+wmpastor]

I went to the copy-cat's cache listing and posted a note remarking about the active forum discussion of copying a cache in the same shopping center. That post lasted less than half a day. Here's what I saw next:

 

Your log entry for the listing Snake Bite (Traditional Cache) was deleted by BDanner at Wednesday, 01 May 2013 07:50:49

Guess he's feeling the heat!

 

Once again, the world can see whose cache was created years earlier!

 

You honestly feel it was your position to get involved directly, rather that merely discussing it here? Cheezits.

Yes I absolutely do! In fact, if the CO believes he showed good sportsmanship, he would come here & defend his viewpoint. But no, he's slinking around, guilty as sin. And the consensus in this forum is that the best you can say about him is that he's tacky.

[+wmpastor]

I wish "wmpastor" had NOT sent a note to the owner of the other cache. That was rude and totally uncalled for! We have always had very frendly interactions with the other cachers in our area. We are almost all members of our local geocaching club. I would NEVER have confronted the other cacher in this way. As I said in my original post, he has a perfect right to hide any type of cache he desires. You do not have a right to cause bad feeling between us and this other cacher. Next time, mind your own business! Now I need to send him a note of apology for your rudeness!

Your comments in this forum were totally polite - you have nothing to apologize for. He also might easily have come across this on his own. All you said was you wanted sympathy. The other posters called his action tacky - you didn't. I called him out on his action on my behalf (& those with a similar view), not on your behalf. It is my right to confront tackiness and poor sportsmanship when I see it.

[4wheelin_fool]

Well the OP was talking about it in a public forum. The other cacher should know that it is being discussed, and if wmpastor had discovered it on his own, he may have just gone ahead and done the same thing without the thread. it's not that bad, although I personally wouldn't have done it without seeing the hides myself.

[+cerberus1]

I called him out on his action on my behalf (& those with a similar view), not on your behalf. It is my right to confront tackiness and poor sportsmanship when I see it.

You may think you have a right to harass confront another, but you have no right speaking for me.

If there's a need, I'm more than capable of handling my issues myself.

 

Though the OP posted in a public forum, they did say in their first post, "We would never think of complaining to the other cacher; he has a perfect right to hide whatever he chooses. Just looking for a little sympathy, I guess... "

- A little sympathy they got.

[+GraceThalia]

I found a cache that I really liked and awarded it a favorite point. I thought about it for months and decided I'd like to do something similar about 40 miles away in my hometown where I spend a good portion of my time.

The original CO is no longer active and their cache has been transferred to an active member. I wanted to mention the inspiration for my cache on the cache listing, however I was concerned about giving away the hide to those very active, seasoned cachers in my area who have already found the original and will make long trips just to find new caches.

Should I mention the original in my listing? Should the adoptive owners be emailed?

 

If I were in that situation, I'd write to the current owner and ask what their preference is. I'd suggest these possibilities:

 

(1) The cache page could say that it was copied with permission from <owner's name>.

 

(2) The cache page could say that it was copied with permission from someone else, whose name isn't being mentioned to avoid giving away how their cache is hidden.

 

Either way, it would be clear that I wasn't taking credit for the idea.

 

And if the owner asked me not to copy it or suggested something else to say in the description, I'd respect their wishes.

 

Thank you for your suggestions. I will contact the current CO before I do any more work.

[+wmpastor]

To the VanDucks -

Like other posters here, I question the copycat hide so close to your original. If a clever hide is copied, it's nice to acknowledge the source. And putting the copy less than 1/4 mile away just ain't right! I hope my post on the copycat site doesn't create local tension for you. It really shouldn't - you were not critical of the cacher at all - others here were. I sprung into action, maybe too fast. I hope & believe that your calm question & discussion will not cause any friction in your local caching community.

[+SSO JOAT]

Just go with the 20% rule. If you like an idea that you see somewhere else, change or improve it by at least 20% and then put it out. There are no original ideas, only variations of a theme. If you get bothered by someone duplicating "your" design, then stop designing such unique stuff (j/k).

 

I could care less about people copying my designs, though I have had people contact me and ask first. Of course I tell them that they are free to copy. Actually had a puzzle guy contact me recently. He was sure he had come up with the most unique puzzle idea ever, but he searched for some key terms and got back one of my puzzle listings. Since he was over 3,000 miles away, he could have just copied it and I'd never know (or care), but he chose to ask first. And that's fine, too.

[+M4RKO]

I think it's silly to get mad at someone for pointing out the existence of this thread to the person who is sort of the TOPIC of this thread. If you didn't want them knowing about your feelings, you shouldn't have posted them on a public forum. You start this thread, turn people against this guy, then wonder why someone would act on it. If you didn't want him called out, you shouldn't have called him to everyone's attention.

[+Don_J]

I think it's silly to get mad at someone for pointing out the existence of this thread to the person who is sort of the TOPIC of this thread. If you didn't want them knowing about your feelings, you shouldn't have posted them on a public forum. You start this thread, turn people against this guy, then wonder why someone would act on it. If you didn't want him called out, you shouldn't have called him to everyone's attention.

 

And I think that it is silly to go out of the forum and tattle-tale on someone for the express purpose of trying to create further controversy. There is no reason why the discussion can't simply be on the topic and NOT the specific caches or parties involved. This is why I never like to see specific caches named in the forum, as well as people proudly displaying their investigative skills and naming a specific cache when the OP had no intention of doing so.

 

Some people simply can not resist the urge to get involved in matters that don't concern them and real bad things have happened here in the past because of behavior exactly like this.

[+TerraViators]

I know .... "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" .... (Charles C. Colton, 1780-1832)

 

So we are sort of flattered that a cacher in our area put out a cache very, very similar to one of our most popular ones. Ours has been in place for several years and the new one was just published about a month ago. We kept getting logs on our cache that said, "I just found another one like this a few minutes ago." It turns out that the new cache is just a tenth of a mile away and in the same shopping center as ours! I don't mind that he used our style of hide, which is original, as far as I know, but why does it have to be right "next" to ours? (I guess my pride is hurt that finders will think we copied from his cache!)

 

Have any of you had this situation come up before? We would never think of complaining to the other cacher; he has a perfect right to hide whatever he chooses. Just looking for a little sympathy, I guess...

 

These are the Groundspeak forums, no sympathy is ever allowed here, unless it involves untimely death.

 

Ha!

[4wheelin_fool]

I think it's silly to get mad at someone for pointing out the existence of this thread to the person who is sort of the TOPIC of this thread. If you didn't want them knowing about your feelings, you shouldn't have posted them on a public forum. You start this thread, turn people against this guy, then wonder why someone would act on it. If you didn't want him called out, you shouldn't have called him to everyone's attention.

 

It has happened all too many times that someone will come in and complain about someone and not name names, but then they will leave plenty of evidence so anyone can figure out who it is with 2 clicks of the mouse. Next they will act all innocent, as if the end result was not intended. Can't be sure if that is what's happening here, but this is a public forum and the other person has a right to know that they are being discussed if anyone can figure it out. The OP is upset that they found out about the thread, but has not asked anyone to close it.

 

There's a thread in off topic - "the stands" which is supposed to be about threads in here, but yet several times has turned into a discussion about individuals behind their backs who do not go in there. Can't say either is right. If someone can easily figure out who your discussing, dont be surprised that the person finds out about it.

[+bflentje]

I think it's silly to get mad at someone for pointing out the existence of this thread to the person who is sort of the TOPIC of this thread. If you didn't want them knowing about your feelings, you shouldn't have posted them on a public forum. You start this thread, turn people against this guy, then wonder why someone would act on it. If you didn't want him called out, you shouldn't have called him to everyone's attention.

 

And I think that it is silly to go out of the forum and tattle-tale on someone for the express purpose of trying to create further controversy. There is no reason why the discussion can't simply be on the topic and NOT the specific caches or parties involved. This is why I never like to see specific caches named in the forum, as well as people proudly displaying their investigative skills and naming a specific cache when the OP had no intention of doing so.

 

Some people simply can not resist the urge to get involved in matters that don't concern them and real bad things have happened here in the past because of behavior exactly like this.

 

Both valid points. But the thing that really stands out to me is how intentionally mean spirited people can be. I am not someone who thinks the end is near but I swear, sometimes I think our species is doomed.

[+M4RKO]

It has happened all too many times that someone will come in and complain about someone and not name names, but then they will leave plenty of evidence so anyone can figure out who it is with 2 clicks of the mouse. Next they will act all innocent, as if the end result was not intended. Can't be sure if that is what's happening here, but this is a public forum and the other person has a right to know that they are being discussed if anyone can figure it out. The OP is upset that they found out about the thread, but has not asked anyone to close it.

 

There's a thread in off topic - "the stands" which is supposed to be about threads in here, but yet several times has turned into a discussion about individuals behind their backs who do not go in there. Can't say either is right. If someone can easily figure out who your discussing, dont be surprised that the person finds out about it.

 

I haven't been around very long, but I definitely have noticed that whenever someone makes a thread to gripe about a cache/cacher, even if they don't name names, someone reading the thread does the digging and then everyone knows exactly who is being discussed. Which I don't really think is that surprising, given human nature, and how easy it is to click and get the info...

 

Both valid points. But the thing that really stands out to me is how intentionally mean spirited people can be. I am not someone who thinks the end is near but I swear, sometimes I think our species is doomed.

 

I see what you mean, and that's why I would not want to be the one to have told the person...but at the same time, don't they have a right to know they're being discussed? How can they make things right, or learn from a mistake, if everyone just wants to talk about them and not let them in on it?

 

If it were me, I'd want to know if I were doing something that wasn't kosher. Especially since I'm new. I've already learned a few things from reading posts here on the forum, but if I made some caching faux pas and everyone was talking about it, I'd like to be given the chance to make it right.

[+wmpastor]

I think it's silly to get mad at someone for pointing out the existence of this thread to the person who is sort of the TOPIC of this thread. If you didn't want them knowing about your feelings, you shouldn't have posted them on a public forum. You start this thread, turn people against this guy, then wonder why someone would act on it. If you didn't want him called out, you shouldn't have called him to everyone's attention.

 

It has happened all too many times that someone will come in and complain about someone and not name names, but then they will leave plenty of evidence so anyone can figure out who it is with 2 clicks of the mouse. Next they will act all innocent, as if the end result was not intended. Can't be sure if that is what's happening here, but this is a public forum and the other person has a right to know that they are being discussed if anyone can figure it out. The OP is upset that they found out about the thread, but has not asked anyone to close it.

 

 

I don't know what anyone's attitudes and intentions are, but we can see conduct. This was a public forum - someone in the close-knit geocaching community in the area of the two caches was bound to see the forum postings. Starting a calm discussion, saying, "it's alright with me, but what do you think?," then acting surprised when the public rightly takes your side and thinks less of the "copy cat," IS a great strategy to "let the so-and-so know what you think" while SEEMING to "take the high road" in the close-knit local geocaching group.

 

And by the way, if the OP's DID want to "call out" the copy-cat, I obviously have no problem with that.

 

Was I someone recruited as a hit-man? We'll let history decide!

 

By the way, the only thing I said on the post was, hey, this copy-cat issue is being discussed in the forums. That wasn't for drama, that was to have a discussion. His unwillingness to discuss tells us all we need to know about his guilt.

 

Anyway, speaking of the local caching community, at least seven cachers remarked in their posts that they knew of the other cache. And it is obvious which cache came first. So I salute the original designers for their creativity, I fault the copy-cat for not acknowledging his source and placing the copy far away, and I know that the OP's will do just fine with their reputation in the local community, and let's not for a minute pretend otherwise.

 

So, here are excerpts from the postings on the copy-cat listing:

 

Seven quotes from seven different find-postings:

 

Hmmm, just saw a hide like this a few minutes ago.

 

I've seen one like this before, lol.

 

I expanded the search only to find a VERY familiar hide.

 

Reminds me of a nearby hide.

 

Having found the similar cache nearby made this one a quick find.

 

Looking at this cache container brought on a bit of deja vu.

 

Container is familiar for this area. Found a similar cache just a block west of here.

 

[+Don_J]

 

By the way, the only thing I said on the post was, hey, this copy-cat issue is being discussed in the forums.

 

From your post #70

I called him out on his action on my behalf (& those with a similar view), not on your behalf. It is my right to confront tackiness and poor sportsmanship when I see it.

 

I took your first comment to mean that you did more than simply tell him an issue regarding him was being discussed. If that is not the case, then my previous comments really don't apply. I also think that your motivation for notifying him is important. It's one thing if it is out of fairness to him. It's quite different if it is simply to "stir the pot" and create further controversy.

 

There have been past incidents here where someone, after only hearing half of a story, took it upon themselves and confronted someone else outside of the forum. It has led to a lot of trouble, geocides, forumcides, etc.

 

If you honestly felt that the other party deserved a chance to defend himself, then that shouldn't be an issue.

[+wmpastor]

 

By the way, the only thing I said on the post was, hey, this copy-cat issue is being discussed in the forums.

 

From your post #70

I called him out on his action on my behalf (& those with a similar view), not on your behalf. It is my right to confront tackiness and poor sportsmanship when I see it.

 

I took your first comment to mean that you did more than simply tell him an issue regarding him was being discussed. If that is not the case, then my previous comments really don't apply. I also think that your motivation for notifying him is important. It's one thing if it is out of fairness to him. It's quite different if it is simply to "stir the pot" and create further controversy.

 

There have been past incidents here where someone, after only hearing half of a story, took it upon themselves and confronted someone else outside of the forum. It has led to a lot of trouble, geocides, forumcides, etc.

 

If you honestly felt that the other party deserved a chance to defend himself, then that shouldn't be an issue.

 

Okay, thanks. Post 70 sounds stronger than what happened because I wrote it while stunned by the OP's reaction to me. This experience reminds me (and possibly others) that any email-type communication tends to magnify what was said. I believe that copying a unique hide 1/10 mile away without the okay of the originator or at least an acknowledgement is bad sportsmanship. This lead to hasty action/reaction on my part. But, yes, if the copier had something to say, he should say it. (Who knows, maybe in his opinion he made enough changes that he disagees that it's an improper copy.) In any case, this experience will improve my future use of the forums, & I'm sure we all want a peaceful, happy geocaching community.