Dirtbag Geocaching Society

[Keystone]

The problem is that I hear of issues where a DGS member does something distasteful, and rather than the other members pointing out to them their error, many of them circle the wagons.

 

That is usually the way to determine if a group believes something or not. For example if cacher XYZ sends threatening emails, steals caches, or something else, and you defend that person and circle the wagons, then the group looks bad. If you denounce him, then it is a separate act. That does not mean you have to accept a bad decision if it is wrong. Sadly Irarely see the DGS denounce people that do something wrong. Sometimes they have even joined in the harassment.

 

This. is. all. hearsay.

that is what that is

 

Do not EVER edit my post to suit your agenda again. GOT IT?

Agreed; that is very poor form. Thank you, Arthur & Trillian, for pointing out the misleading edit.

[+SloCachers]

Also, You never did finish proving deception.... what happened? couldn't find the evidence to prove the lackey's point?

I think I've posted quite enough about your cache that was logged as found in two different states, yet is somehow has not "moved" in your mind. You appealed, your appeal was denied, your case is closed. Thank you, though, for having the courage to bring your example to the forum. It is a useful example of a pattern of behavior, as noted above in maingray's post.

 

What pattern of behavior? It was stated that we were deceptive. I see no deception according to GS laws, and you have failed to prove any.

 

As for the appeal being closed, there is no mention of that to us. It was simply ignored because it was archived by a lackey that had no viable evidence to prove that it broke the GS Laws. I can do whatever I want with my containers. At no point do they become the property of GS. The entire time that cache was published, it was in place, as is required by the GS Laws you keep referring to. Before publishing and after archival I have the right to choose to do what I want with my container.

 

Any thoughts there, Keystone?

The listing that was published is for a cache ostansibly chained to a tree in Bolingbrook, Illinois. That listing was archived because people were logging "found it" logs based on seeing the cache at an event miles away in Illinois, and at an event hundreds of miles away in Las Vegas. It's true that Groundspeak doesn't own your cache container and doesn't control what you do with it. But, Groundspeak does control how a listing page was used on its site. If there were no logs from people who found the cache at places other than next to a tree in Bolingbrook, Illinois, I bet your listing would still be active.

 

Enjoy your special cache container. It sounds very creative. It would have made for a very nice "Lab Cache" at GeocoinFest. That would have been a way to play the game within the rules established by the listing service.

is it not GS's law that says, if the logbook is signed, then the cache may be logged online? Also, yes the container went to an event in illinois, ONLY AFTER it was archived. How am I to prevent people from logging it?

 

Still no proof of deception...

[+junglehair]

My only real interaction with the DGS was attending an event in Salt Lake City which was hosted by the group there. They were a great bunch of people and this event was no different that the hundreds of other events that I have attended across North America. But my question would be: Why call yourselves the DIRTBAG Geocaching Society if you don't want to be seen as the bad guys? It seems that the entire mission of the group is to stir up trouble, but maybe not all members are drinking the Kool-Aid.

 

this was covered very early on in this thread. The dirtbag moniker comes from the group creators that are/were army service members. That is a term in the army, just the same as a grunt, jar head, flyboy, etc.

 

Thank you for that explanation, but even so - they must be aware of the negative connotations. Pardon my ignorance, but what is the true mission of this group?

[+SloCachers]

The problem is that I hear of issues where a DGS member does something distasteful, and rather than the other members pointing out to them their error, many of them circle the wagons.

 

That is usually the way to determine if a group believes something or not. For example if cacher XYZ sends threatening emails, steals caches, or something else, and you defend that person and circle the wagons, then the group looks bad. If you denounce him, then it is a separate act. That does not mean you have to accept a bad decision if it is wrong. Sadly Irarely see the DGS denounce people that do something wrong. Sometimes they have even joined in the harassment.

 

This. is. all. hearsay.

that is what that is

 

Do not EVER edit my post to suit your agenda again. GOT IT?

Agreed; that is very poor form. Thank you, Arthur & Trillian, for pointing out the misleading edit.

Yes oh powerful overlords of false information!! I will NEVER do that again. Sincerest apologies. Please don't spread FALSE information about people anymore. GOT IT?

[+firennice]

The problem is that I hear of issues where a DGS member does something distasteful, and rather than the other members pointing out to them their error, many of them circle the wagons.

 

That is usually the way to determine if a group believes something or not. For example if cacher XYZ sends threatening emails, steals caches, or something else, and you defend that person and circle the wagons, then the group looks bad. If you denounce him, then it is a separate act. That does not mean you have to accept a bad decision if it is wrong. Sadly Irarely see the DGS denounce people that do something wrong. Sometimes they have even joined in the harassment.

 

This.

that is what that is

No it is not hearsay, I have seen the abuse and read the logs, Facebook, and forums. Once again, they were by a few in the group, but I saw a few others join in rather than tell them to calm down.

Edited November 19, 2013 by firennice

[+ArtieD]

Yes oh powerful overlords of false information!! I will NEVER do that again. Sincerest apologies. Please don't spread FALSE information about people anymore. GOT IT?

 

[+SloCachers]

My only real interaction with the DGS was attending an event in Salt Lake City which was hosted by the group there. They were a great bunch of people and this event was no different that the hundreds of other events that I have attended across North America. But my question would be: Why call yourselves the DIRTBAG Geocaching Society if you don't want to be seen as the bad guys? It seems that the entire mission of the group is to stir up trouble, but maybe not all members are drinking the Kool-Aid.

 

this was covered very early on in this thread. The dirtbag moniker comes from the group creators that are/were army service members. That is a term in the army, just the same as a grunt, jar head, flyboy, etc.

 

Thank you for that explanation, but even so - they must be aware of the negative connotations. Pardon my ignorance, but what is the true mission of this group?

We are aware of the negativity of our members that have made poor choices. There have been efforts to change this behavior since before we became members. The mission is the same as it has always been, Better caches, Better adventures.

[+SloCachers]

Yes oh powerful overlords of false information!! I will NEVER do that again. Sincerest apologies. Please don't spread FALSE information about people anymore. GOT IT?

 

And this right here is why there are problems. Please explain how your actions here are any different from any DGS member that you claim are bad apples?

[+ArtieD]

We are aware of the negativity of our members that have made poor choices. There have been efforts to change this behavior since before we became members. The mission is the same as it has always been, Better caches, Better adventures.

 

Since when?

 

You do realize that your behavior in this very thread is not helping the DGS's image, right?

[+junglehair]

My only real interaction with the DGS was attending an event in Salt Lake City which was hosted by the group there. They were a great bunch of people and this event was no different that the hundreds of other events that I have attended across North America. But my question would be: Why call yourselves the DIRTBAG Geocaching Society if you don't want to be seen as the bad guys? It seems that the entire mission of the group is to stir up trouble, but maybe not all members are drinking the Kool-Aid.

 

this was covered very early on in this thread. The dirtbag moniker comes from the group creators that are/were army service members. That is a term in the army, just the same as a grunt, jar head, flyboy, etc.

 

Thank you for that explanation, but even so - they must be aware of the negative connotations. Pardon my ignorance, but what is the true mission of this group?

We are aware of the negativity of our members that have made poor choices. There have been efforts to change this behavior since before we became members. The mission is the same as it has always been, Better caches, Better adventures.

 

Admirable goals. Perhaps "Delightful Geocaching Society" would have set a better tone for trying to accomplish those goals and attract the type of geocachers that could help make this happen. Just an outside observation.

[+SloCachers]

We are aware of the negativity of our members that have made poor choices. There have been efforts to change this behavior since before we became members. The mission is the same as it has always been, Better caches, Better adventures.

 

Since when?

 

You do realize that your behavior in this very thread is not helping the DGS's image, right?

 

What is one to do when provoked by self righteous people such as yourself? You have done nothing but lie this entire time, yet you feel smugly superior to everyone and call me out. I am simply responding to you. What is a person to do? I have been truthful since I joined in on this "trash the DGS fest" that you are relentlessly perpetuating.

[+Reviewer Who]

Has anyone here had any unpleasant experiences arising from interactions with any DGS member?

Yes.

 

And you may want to double check your emails that you've saved up. One of them mentions that as a condition of having your listing unarchived (after you modified it post-publication to indicate that it would be traveling around), was that virtual logs would not be tolerated and could lead to your cache being archived again, which is exactly what happened.

[+TerrificTingens]

How can i report them......I would be glad to. They are telling false info as far as i see. they show no facts and are wrong. if others can be banned for simple things why is this being allowed.

I asked you to stop this line of discussion. Since your post was just a few minutes after that request, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt.

I CALL FOR THIS TO BE LOOKED AT>. How can someone go on a form and state such things and still be allowed to spread such info. This is a one sided deal in my eyes. if i start telling such things on others that are false i expect to have to pay for it. why do others get away with it. Groundspeak needs to look at this.

It's been looked at. Thanks for your report.

[+ArtieD]

EDIT: Not even going to bother with SloCachers' latest dross...

Edited November 19, 2013 by Arthur & Trillian

[+TerrificTingens]

Maybe needs to be looked at by someone who isn't narrow minded and simple. This whole thing is stupid and juvenile. This entire thread should be deleted. If I got on the forums and talked smack about a particular group, GS would go nuts.

And by the way, there is a cache two miles from my home that one has to go into a business to on order to complete. Against GS guidelines? I thought so. But some people are special and others aren't.

[+SloCachers]

Has anyone here had any unpleasant experiences arising from interactions with any DGS member?

Yes.

 

And you may want to double check your emails that you've saved up. One of them mentions that as a condition of having your listing unarchived (after you modified it post-publication to indicate that it would be traveling around), was that virtual logs would not be tolerated and could lead to your cache being archived again, which is exactly what happened.

 

That was sent to us after it was republished, when you mentioned that it was on GS level and we said we were not going to delete the logs because they were not in violation by any definition of GS's Laws. I had no idea that a Lackey could say that, because in their mind it "goes against the spirit of geocaching". So it was archived for not being in violation of the guidelines.

 

We were also never deceptive and explained to you the mixup with the listing (which I have mentioned earlier in this thread).

[+T.D.M.22]

Maybe needs to be looked at by someone who isn't narrow minded and simple. This whole thing is stupid and juvenile. This entire thread should be deleted. If I got on the forums and talked smack about a particular group, GS would go nuts.

And by the way, there is a cache two miles from my home that one has to go into a business to on order to complete. Against GS guidelines? I thought so. But some people are special and others aren't.

 

Go into a business? Not against guidelines. If you're so smart, you'd know that the issues are paying some form of fee(entry fee, or purchasing something), or having to interact with the employees. If there is a mural on the wall, that you can go in, look at, and leave, it would be fine. You would also know that some caches are grandfathered. And you would also know that because something is allowed for one cache, doesn't mean it would be allowed for another cache.

 

Anyway, looking at your first sentence compared to the rest, and going on this thread to complain about this thread, I think you should meet my friend...His name is Kettle.

[+Reviewer Who]

Has anyone here had any unpleasant experiences arising from interactions with any DGS member?

Yes.

 

And you may want to double check your emails that you've saved up. One of them mentions that as a condition of having your listing unarchived (after you modified it post-publication to indicate that it would be traveling around), was that virtual logs would not be tolerated and could lead to your cache being archived again, which is exactly what happened.

 

That was sent to us after it was republished, when you mentioned that it was on GS level and we said we were not going to delete the logs because they were not in violation by any definition of GS's Laws. I had no idea that a Lackey could say that, because in their mind it "goes against the spirit of geocaching". So it was archived for not being in violation of the guidelines.

 

We were also never deceptive and explained to you the mixup with the listing (which I have mentioned earlier in this thread).

That email was dated 10/10. Your cache was republished on 10/23. So no, it was not sent to you after your cache was republished.

[+T.D.M.22]

 

Has anyone here had any unpleasant experiences arising from interactions with any DGS member?

 

This whole thread.

[+firennice]

I think details of this specific cache can be left out of this discussion. It can be taken to its own thread if the cache owner desires. We end up discussing this one cache rather than general behavior patterns that lead to the view by many that some cachers see as problematic.

 

I just wonder if the DGS members have discussed poor behavior by some? Do they condemn them publicly when it occurs, or do they jump on the bandwagon to persecute others? My guess is most just stay quiet because the group is large enough that the problem is "over there in another state".

[Cascade Reviewer]

Maybe needs to be looked at by someone who isn't narrow minded and simple. This whole thing is stupid and juvenile. This entire thread should be deleted. If I got on the forums and talked smack about a particular group, GS would go nuts.

And by the way, there is a cache two miles from my home that one has to go into a business to on order to complete. Against GS guidelines? I thought so. But some people are special and others aren't.

This is a reminder to keep the forum guidelines in mind. Please be courteous to others here, and don't call people names. You can get your point across without using derogatory labels.

[+briansnat]

We as cachers are expected to play nice. Why shouldn't GS be held to the same standards? I'm stating facts about my personal dealings with GS, which if they would just do what they are supposed to do, I would most likely change my position, but until then, I'm not a GS fan.

 

I doubt it's an issue of GS playing nice or not; they were likely simply believing the CO.

 

Volunteers are well, human, and Reviewers / Lackeys have to have some faith in the CO's honesty. Sometimes, honesty is they all can rely on.

 

Neither I nor you can prove the intention of this cache, but pocket (aka moving aka event-only) caches are not new, were banned years ago for rampant abuse, and some groups still try and get them through by any means possible (and within businesses..and armchair caches.. and virtuals..ignore offlimit areas..etc etc). I've seen many examples and suggestions on Facebook of how to do this.

 

Man, I have to get me one of these Facebook accounts. Sounds like a lot of Geocaching drama goes on there.

 

The posters here are drama amateurs compared to those in many of the FB groups.

[+SloCachers]

Has anyone here had any unpleasant experiences arising from interactions with any DGS member?

Yes.

 

And you may want to double check your emails that you've saved up. One of them mentions that as a condition of having your listing unarchived (after you modified it post-publication to indicate that it would be traveling around), was that virtual logs would not be tolerated and could lead to your cache being archived again, which is exactly what happened.

 

That was sent to us after it was republished, when you mentioned that it was on GS level and we said we were not going to delete the logs because they were not in violation by any definition of GS's Laws. I had no idea that a Lackey could say that, because in their mind it "goes against the spirit of geocaching". So it was archived for not being in violation of the guidelines.

 

We were also never deceptive and explained to you the mixup with the listing (which I have mentioned earlier in this thread).

That email was dated 10/10. Your cache was republished on 10/23. So no, it was not sent to you after your cache was republished.

 

The reference you are making says that you couldn't guarantee that the state reviewer would not archive it, if a local whined about it. the next mention was when you contacted us to inform us that someone had whined right to Groundspeak about the cache, at which point we asked you to please put us in touch with the lackey handling the case, or to have them contact us, so that we could argue our case and that didn't happen. So, it was abruptly archived without explanation. Then the appeal was ignored. Thanks Rooney. We look forward to you publishing our future caches.

[+SwineFlew]

When a group choose their members by hand, they should run a tight ship.

[+OReviewer]

Go into a business? Not against guidelines.

 

I would say #2 says it is against the guidelines...

 

Commercial geocaches are disallowed.

1. It has overtones of advertising, marketing or promotion.

2. It suggests or requires that the finder go inside a business, interact with employees and/or purchase a product or service.

3. It contains links to businesses, agencies, commercial advertisers, charities, or political or social agendas.

4. It contains the logo of a business or organization, including non-profit organizations.

5. It contains the name of a business or commercial product.

[Keystone]

I agree with OReviewer. The better questions to ask are "when was the indoors cache published?" and "what did the reviewer know about the cache location when they published it?" As noted above, part of the fun for DGS members is to obfuscate the review process.

[+wallacefamilysc]

ARE YOU KIDDING ME...................HOW IS A&T STILL HERE IF WE GO BY WHAT WAS SAID BY THE MODERATOR......NO NAME CALLING AND SUCH>>>>>>>WHAT A JOKE. Guess we know who is friends with who.

[Keystone]

The problem is that I hear of issues where a DGS member does something distasteful, and rather than the other members pointing out to them their error, many of them circle the wagons.

 

That is usually the way to determine if a group believes something or not. For example if cacher XYZ sends threatening emails, steals caches, or something else, and you defend that person and circle the wagons, then the group looks bad. If you denounce him, then it is a separate act. That does not mean you have to accept a bad decision if it is wrong. Sadly Irarely see the DGS denounce people that do something wrong. Sometimes they have even joined in the harassment.

 

This. is. all. hearsay.

that is what that is

 

Do not EVER edit my post to suit your agenda again. GOT IT?

Agreed; that is very poor form. Thank you, Arthur & Trillian, for pointing out the misleading edit.

Yes oh powerful overlords of false information!! I will NEVER do that again. Sincerest apologies. Please don't spread FALSE information about people anymore. GOT IT?

Here's a great example of a DGS member being snarky, engaging in name-calling, and aggressively butting heads with another geocacher. Fortunately, SloCachers have chosen to engage a moderator. We are equipped with Kevlar flak jackets and a generous supply of Admin bricks. Thanks for helping to prove the points being raised in this discussion.

[+SloCachers]

I agree with OReviewer. The better questions to ask are "when was the indoors cache published?" and "what did the reviewer know about the cache location when they published it?" As noted above, part of the fun for DGS members is to obfuscate the review process.

thanks for singling out the DGS, ... again.

 

This is lifted right off the cache page "Hidden : 06/25/2013". Don't the reviewers have to verify coords? If this was done it would have been shown that the coords were inside a building, which should have prompted further investigation.

[+SloCachers]

The problem is that I hear of issues where a DGS member does something distasteful, and rather than the other members pointing out to them their error, many of them circle the wagons.

 

That is usually the way to determine if a group believes something or not. For example if cacher XYZ sends threatening emails, steals caches, or something else, and you defend that person and circle the wagons, then the group looks bad. If you denounce him, then it is a separate act. That does not mean you have to accept a bad decision if it is wrong. Sadly Irarely see the DGS denounce people that do something wrong. Sometimes they have even joined in the harassment.

 

This. is. all. hearsay.

that is what that is

 

Do not EVER edit my post to suit your agenda again. GOT IT?

Agreed; that is very poor form. Thank you, Arthur & Trillian, for pointing out the misleading edit.

Yes oh powerful overlords of false information!! I will NEVER do that again. Sincerest apologies. Please don't spread FALSE information about people anymore. GOT IT?

Here's a great example of a DGS member being snarky, engaging in name-calling, and aggressively butting heads with another geocacher. Fortunately, SloCachers have chosen to engage a moderator. We are equipped with Kevlar flak jackets and a generous supply of Admin bricks. Thanks for helping to prove the points being raised in this discussion.

What is there left to do? When you allow harassment to go on for so long, isn't expected that someone is going to be fed up with the blatant disregard for the equal enforcement of the guidelines and finally react?

[+SloCachers]

ARE YOU KIDDING ME...................HOW IS A&T STILL HERE IF WE GO BY WHAT WAS SAID BY THE MODERATOR......NO NAME CALLING AND SUCH>>>>>>>WHAT A JOKE. Guess we know who is friends with who.

This^^^

 

Mods? anything to chime in with here?

Edited November 19, 2013 by SloCachers

[+T.D.M.22]

Go into a business? Not against guidelines.

 

I would say #2 says it is against the guidelines...

 

Commercial geocaches are disallowed.

1. It has overtones of advertising, marketing or promotion.

2. It suggests or requires that the finder go inside a business, interact with employees and/or purchase a product or service.

3. It contains links to businesses, agencies, commercial advertisers, charities, or political or social agendas.

4. It contains the logo of a business or organization, including non-profit organizations.

5. It contains the name of a business or commercial product.

 

My mistake-I thought there was an "and" as in ...go inside and interact...

[+K13]

Go into a business? Not against guidelines.

 

I would say #2 says it is against the guidelines...

 

Commercial geocaches are disallowed.

1. It has overtones of advertising, marketing or promotion.

2. It suggests or requires that the finder go inside a business, interact with employees and/or purchase a product or service.

3. It contains links to businesses, agencies, commercial advertisers, charities, or political or social agendas.

4. It contains the logo of a business or organization, including non-profit organizations.

5. It contains the name of a business or commercial product.

 

One must pay handsomely to enter the business to complete this Wherigo? M&M-183 Wherigo Whenican't...Downtown Disney or any of the other Virtuals near this one: EPCOT

or this one: Happiest EarthCache on Earth or this multi: Disney's California Adventure (DCA) Cache II

[Cascade Reviewer]

ARE YOU KIDDING ME...................HOW IS A&T STILL HERE IF WE GO BY WHAT WAS SAID BY THE MODERATOR......NO NAME CALLING AND SUCH>>>>>>>WHAT A JOKE. Guess we know who is friends with who.

This^^^

 

Mods? anything to chime in with here?

I don't see where Arthur & Trillian has been calling people names. I am not a personal friend of Arthur & Trillian, nor do I know them personally. But I do think that they've been managing themselves pretty well in this thread.

[+palmetto]

,One must pay handsomely to enter the business to complete this Wherigo? M&M-183 Wherigo Whenican't...Downtown Disney or any of the other Virtuals near this one: EPCOT

or this one: Happiest EarthCache on Earth or this multi: Disney's California Adventure (DCA) Cache II

 

The old virtual caches pre-date the commercial listing guideline, and the Downtown Disney Wherigo does not require paying any fees to enter any business. From the listing, "Downtown Disney seemed the perfect spot as there are no parking or entry fees." Downtown Disney is an area of hotels, restaurants, and shops, it's not the Disney attraction.

 

... and now back to the thread topic ..

[+SwineFlew]

I agree with OReviewer. The better questions to ask are "when was the indoors cache published?" and "what did the reviewer know about the cache location when they published it?" As noted above, part of the fun for DGS members is to obfuscate the review process.

This make it harder for us cache owners to get our cache(s) published in reasonable time. It does waste our valuable volunteer reviewers' time and resources.

[Mr.Yuck]

Has anyone here had any unpleasant experiences arising from interactions with any DGS member?

Yes.

 

And you may want to double check your emails that you've saved up. One of them mentions that as a condition of having your listing unarchived (after you modified it post-publication to indicate that it would be traveling around), was that virtual logs would not be tolerated and could lead to your cache being archived again, which is exactly what happened.

 

That was sent to us after it was republished, when you mentioned that it was on GS level and we said we were not going to delete the logs because they were not in violation by any definition of GS's Laws. I had no idea that a Lackey could say that, because in their mind it "goes against the spirit of geocaching". So it was archived for not being in violation of the guidelines.

 

We were also never deceptive and explained to you the mixup with the listing (which I have mentioned earlier in this thread).

 

Ya' know, I'm dying here. New moving caches have not been allowed on this website for OVER 10 YEARS. Or more than 8 years before you created your account. How are you on here arguing about this? There are other Geocaching websites that will accept your moving cache. But it's never going to happen here, and it's highly unlikely you're going to get away with it for other than a short period of time here.

[+K13]

,One must pay handsomely to enter the business to complete this Wherigo? M&M-183 Wherigo Whenican't...Downtown Disney or any of the other Virtuals near this one: EPCOT

or this one: Happiest EarthCache on Earth or this multi: Disney's California Adventure (DCA) Cache II

 

The old virtual caches pre-date the commercial listing guideline, and the Downtown Disney Wherigo does not require paying any fees to enter any business. From the listing, "Downtown Disney seemed the perfect spot as there are no parking or entry fees." Downtown Disney is an area of hotels, restaurants, and shops, it's not the Disney attraction.

 

... and now back to the thread topic ..

 

I was just trying to obfuscate the discussion by trying to point out apparent inconsistencies in the application of cache placement guidelines. I am aware that these were placed prior to guideline 'adjustments' and that 'past practices are not a precedence for present placement principles.' I realize that it may have been a dirty thing to do, but please don't put me in the bag with some of the others in this thread.

[+TerrificTingens]

Maybe needs to be looked at by someone who isn't narrow minded and simple. This whole thing is stupid and juvenile. This entire thread should be deleted. If I got on the forums and talked smack about a particular group, GS would go nuts.

And by the way, there is a cache two miles from my home that one has to go into a business to on order to complete. Against GS guidelines? I thought so. But some people are special and others aren't.

 

Go into a business? Not against guidelines. If you're so smart, you'd know that the issues are paying some form of fee(entry fee, or purchasing something), or having to interact with the employees. If there is a mural on the wall, that you can go in, look at, and leave, it would be fine. You would also know that some caches are grandfathered. And you would also know that because something is allowed for one cache, doesn't mean it would be allowed for another cache.

 

Anyway, looking at your first sentence compared to the rest, and going on this thread to complain about this thread, I think you should meet my friend...His name is Kettle.

[+TerrificTingens]

What is wrong with you? I never said this is a DGS hide. The cache I'm speaking of is not a mural on a wall. It's being made to go into a grocery store. I'm allowed to say my two cents worth. Sorry you didn't like it. Who are you anyway?

[+cerberus1]

My only real interaction with the DGS was attending an event in Salt Lake City which was hosted by the group there. They were a great bunch of people and this event was no different that the hundreds of other events that I have attended across North America. But my question would be: Why call yourselves the DIRTBAG Geocaching Society if you don't want to be seen as the bad guys? It seems that the entire mission of the group is to stir up trouble, but maybe not all members are drinking the Kool-Aid.

 

this was covered very early on in this thread. The dirtbag moniker comes from the group creators that are/were army service members. That is a term in the army, just the same as a grunt, jar head, flyboy, etc.

 

Thank you for that explanation, but even so - they must be aware of the negative connotations.

When I volunteered in the Service and we still had a draft, a Dirtbag was the guy who tried to get out of work details, never followed orders, always on sick call, always testing the rules, or trying his best to get out of the Service.

Often this behaviour was dealt with by making the entire Company suffer for his actions.

- Blanket parties were the usual result.

In no way was the term "dirtbag" ever "the same" as Grunt, Jarhead, etc., which were light-humored names for members of other Branches.

Hopefully that hasn't changed.

[Bryan]

Ladies and Gentlemen, this topic has clearly run its course and I am closing it. Here are a few parting thoughts:

 

The vast majority of geocachers and geocaching organizations are a wonderful force for good. We are inspired by how these groups organize great events, help new players learn the ropes, create awesomely creative geocaches, and go above and beyond to foster the welcoming and inclusive geocaching community we all know and love. Our goal is to keep the game fun and safe, and we applaud the efforts of groups that help make this happen.

 

Then there are the others. It’s rare, but some geocachers and geocaching organizations/clubs/teams/groups actually promote the harassment of other geocachers and/or HQ employees. Harassment can take many forms: geocache theft, nasty logs, spamming emails, or posts across social media platforms. We’ve seen some really harsh examples of this lately and it’s unfortunate, to say the least.

 

Historically, we’ve felt that the best response is to ignore the groups and handle the negative behavior on an individual basis. This is because we feel it’s a dangerous and unfair practice to label an entire group based on the actions of a few bad actors.

 

Going forward, as in the past, this means that when an individual geocacher’s activities cross the line from harmlessly irreverent to harassment or even the encouragement of harassment, we will simply not tolerate it, including, where appropriate, locking accounts as well as engaging and/or fully cooperating with law enforcement.

 

We want to create a positive and inclusive community that is fun and safe for all members and we’re asking everyone to continue helping make it happen.