Jump to content

Dirtbag Geocaching Society


JL_HSTRE
Followers 7

Recommended Posts

Eh, I didn't say Pennsylvania. Those were the arrests in just the city of Philadelphia, and I wouldn't trust any priest alone with a kid, as the percentage of arrests is much higher than the general population.

Oh. Gotcha. In that case, the math is a bit different. With about 7,000 cops, 60 arrests in a 5 year period, (while still 60 arrests too many), represents just under 1% of the whole, which, statistically speaking, is better than the general population. So the closed minded bigot analogy still works. In a population of 7,000 people, having about 12 arrests a year does not warrant calling the whole association criminals.

 

As to prejudging priests? As ever, that is certainly an option, for the closed minded. I know our friend in the media like to paint the picture that priests are all lechers, filled with evil intent. It does make for a good story line. There are even some folks who are willing to believe such silliness, despite any evidence to the contrary. My research indicates that priests are no more likely to offend than the average male.

Sources:

http://news.uk.msn.com/world/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=152959036

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8654789.stm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/16/AR2010041602026.html

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/facts/fm0011.html

 

..."the group" is known to engage in activities that are [bad]

Actually, it is individuals engaging in activities that go against the grain of the geocaching ways and mores. Not "the group". The only reason that "the group" is known for such activities is because a select handful in the community have elected to act as bullies, targeting "the group" based on the actions of a few.

Link to comment

 

..."the group" is known to engage in activities that are [bad]

Actually, it is individuals engaging in activities that go against the grain of the geocaching ways and mores. Not "the group". The only reason that "the group" is known for such activities is because a select handful in the community have elected to act as bullies, targeting "the group" based on the actions of a few.

 

I guess I'd not be so down on this particular incident, if it wasn't rather obvious the self-proclaimed CEO of the DGS was personally responsible for the open distribution of the tracking number for this long missing TB. I could be wrong, but it's rather coincidental that he was one of the last few cachers to handle it before it went missing in 2010. :huh: That's OK though, he was a n00b at the time. Not that it ever occurred to me to write down tracking numbers and give them to other people while I was a n00b, all while hating micros and hiding ammo boxes in the woods. :D

 

I'd think it would be good PR to remove the offending militant, abusive, armchair TB logger from the DGS rolls. And to distance themselves from armchair TB logging. :)

Link to comment

What I find particularly sad about tis entire thread - is the raw hypocrisy.

 

I have been banned several times from the forums for preceived "bashing" of moderators, lackeys, Groundspeak, reviewers, etc. (Still not sure how I bashed them when I was just critical of the practices, but whatever) - yet this thread and others persist - not only by regular members, but by moderators as well - I fail to see how this thread is productive or positive, much less a constructive discussion of the community. But guess it is ok to bash a group because gorundspeak doesn't like them making it open season.

 

Whatever, people who want to bash DGS without getting to know them are probably not folks I would not want to be around. As I said before, all of my interactions with DGS have been nothing but positive and rewarding. I have yet to see them destroy a cache - as a matter of fact at a cito several weeks ago, two DGS members along that trail were being cache angles to missing micros in a series. They didn't say they were going to do it and did not take credit for it.

Link to comment

I also want to et it be known another dirtbag is looking to possibly take up a collection for abused foster kids to give them a christmas this year....I think it is important to counter this ridiculous thread with many of the good stories I know of these people. I suspect people go by web and facebook pages and form conclusions on people and groups quite often when they should be getting away from their computer and simply go meet these folks.

Link to comment

I also want to et it be known another dirtbag is looking to possibly take up a collection for abused foster kids to give them a christmas this year....I think it is important to counter this ridiculous thread with many of the good stories I know of these people. I suspect people go by web and facebook pages and form conclusions on people and groups quite often when they should be getting away from their computer and simply go meet these folks.

 

I believe that some outlaw MC (e.g. Hell's Angels) do this too as they hope it will give them some positive PR and draw attention away from the otherwise negative aspects of their group.

Link to comment

I also want to et it be known another dirtbag is looking to possibly take up a collection for abused foster kids to give them a christmas this year....I think it is important to counter this ridiculous thread with many of the good stories I know of these people. I suspect people go by web and facebook pages and form conclusions on people and groups quite often when they should be getting away from their computer and simply go meet these folks.

 

I believe that some outlaw MC (e.g. Hell's Angels) do this too as they hope it will give them some positive PR and draw attention away from the otherwise negative aspects of their group.

 

LOL. And I am not laughing because I thin the statement is funny. But the sheer absurdity of it. Comparing a caching group with criminal elements.

 

Explain to me what "negative aspects" of DGS have you personally ever experienced outside of the hear-say you read on here or as Brian is so quick to point out "Well, I read their facebook posts" - please, you and anyone else enlighten me on how DGS has hurt you or or the game you play in any way shape or form?

Link to comment

and you can all say what you will but, to me, there is a high level of honor that DGS won't come into these forums to defend themselves - because they are above it. (For me however, I am not DGS and dont represent them, but will defend them because they are incredibly nice people).

Edited by nthacker66
Link to comment

What I find particularly sad about tis entire thread - is the raw hypocrisy.

 

I have been banned several times from the forums for preceived "bashing" of moderators, lackeys, Groundspeak, reviewers, etc. (Still not sure how I bashed them when I was just critical of the practices, but whatever) - yet this thread and others persist - not only by regular members, but by moderators as well - I fail to see how this thread is productive or positive, much less a constructive discussion of the community. But guess it is ok to bash a group because gorundspeak doesn't like them making it open season.

 

 

Well, if you're talking about the moderator I think you are, they are NOT a moderator of THIS forum. No problem there.

 

Groundspeak doesn't like them? I believe I have seen pictures of both Jeremy Irish, and Bryan Roth wearing skull and crossbone DGS shirts. Then again, I know there's a picture of Jeremy wearing a TRIGO T-shirt out there as well. You have to go waaaaay back for that one. :P

 

I believe that some outlaw MC (e.g. Hell's Angels) do this too as they hope it will give them some positive PR and draw attention away from the otherwise negative aspects of their group.

 

I wouldn't compare The Outlaws and the Hell's Angels as one and the same. I think they don't like each other. I should know, I saw a documentary on A&E or something once. :D

Link to comment

There is a high level of honor among the Groundspeak volunteers, such that we don't come into the public forums to raise complaints about troublesome individuals and/or groups - because we are above it. But stay tuned, as the only thing constant in the world of geocaching is change.

Link to comment

I said my piece - it is just wrong to sit here bashing a group on rumors, hear say and things that not only happened years ago now, but things that other cachers have done long prior to DGS ever existing.

 

I'm sorry but i just don't see "bashing" going on here. There are lots of opinions, many like mine based on few facts. Being this is a forum, it seems the proper place to talk about and voice these opinions.

 

To be honest, i'd betcha there are DGS members reading this thread and getting a laugh out of it. I doubt they care one iota that the thread exists or that there are a few forum regulars trying to defend them.

Link to comment
I believe that some outlaw MC (e.g. Hell's Angels) do this too as they hope it will give them some positive PR and draw attention away from the otherwise negative aspects of their group.

 

This.

 

and you can all say what you will but, to me, there is a high level of honor that DGS won't come into these forums to defend themselves - because they are above it.

 

They are above it? The reason that many of them don't come into the forums to defend themselves is because many of them are banned for being jerks. You can add a couple more to that list that recently found it just rip-roaringly funny to create Photoshopped images to make fun of/harass other cachers.

 

Yep, the DGS is just chock full of up and up people.

Edited by Arthur & Trillian
Link to comment

...many of them are banned for being jerks.

I was not aware of this. I know there is one DGS member who is currently experiencing a ban. Hopefully this will end in a few months or so, and you guys can find some other group to bash. What other DGS members are currently banned, either from Groundspeak as a whole, or just from the forums? When you say "many", what numerical does that represent?

 

On a separate note, how certain are you in your speculation regarding their motivation for not participating? I know several geocachers, who are not DGS members, (probably not enough to constitute "many"), who avoid these forums like the plague. Would you care to speculate about their motivations as well?

 

Yep, the DGS is just chock full of up and up people.

Finally, something I can agree with. B)

Link to comment

Why does Groundspeak allow this "negative posting" of DGS to continue...

Maybe there's a hidden clause in the TOU? Something to the effect of, "Thou shalt not harass, demean, belittle or otherwise make negative postings about another cacher. Nor, shalt thou be so bigoted as to judge an entire group based on the actions of an individual". <Unless they are DGS. Then it's okay.> :lol:

Link to comment

Clan Riffster, I would dial it back a notch if you'd like to keep posting in this thread. Your posts from a DGS perspective lend balance to the discussion. But calling others bigoted or suggesting that the TOU or forum guidelines are being bent isn't productive.

 

There's no rule against posting true facts.

Link to comment

Clan Riffster, I would dial it back a notch...

Understood. My apologies. My dial is officially notched back. B)

 

There's no rule against posting true facts.

True. But in the case of this thread, that's not what's happening. Rather, many of the forum regulars are applying negative connotations to an entire group, based on the actions of a few members. Is that not the textbook definition of bigotry? Many, many years ago, whilst serving in the Army in Korea, I got my backside handed to me by a Marine. If I were to apply negative connotations to the entire Marine Corp based upon the actions of this individual, would that not be bigotry? A few months ago, whilst driving around in my patrol car, I had a lady driving a BMW cut me off in traffic, forcing me to slam on my brakes or rear end her. I probably shouldn't have, but I honked my horn. She made a rude gesture involving a single digit on her left hand. If I were to apply some negative connotations to all BMW drivers, would that not be bigotry? In perusing Faceybook, I've seen members of numerous caching groups sharing TB and geocoin tracking numbers. To date, I have only seen me group take decisive action against the number sharers. If I were to label all those other geocaching organizations with negative connotations, judging the whole for the actions of a few, wouldn't that be bigotry?

 

I'm honestly trying to understand. I'm not trying to argue. Seriously. Isn't that what bigotry is?

 

I'll not use that term again, if another descriptor is more appropriate.

Link to comment

so than why does Groundspeak allow this "negative posting" of DGS to continue where they quickly banish postings like this on anyone and anything else? I am guessing this is a "lets look the other way" on the forum guidelines because of the subject,,,,

 

Don't you have anything better to do? Like emailing people who start threads in the forum and telling them that none of us cache? :ph34r:

 

C'mon man, you're bringing me down. I just put up a Christmas tree. Yeah, it's kind of early, but I had to buy a new one this year, and I said "what the heck, might as well install this thing". :)

Link to comment

I just put up a Christmas tree. Yeah, it's kind of early...

Dude! Never apologize for early Cristmas tree deployment.

Christmas trees are way kewl! :lol:

 

Yup. I'm having a Dirtbag Christmas. Are there DGS Christmas ornaments? I'll bet you CafePress.com or Spreadshirt.com would make those. :P

Link to comment
I was not aware of this. I know there is one DGS member who is currently experiencing a ban. Hopefully this will end in a few months or so, and you guys can find some other group to bash. What other DGS members are currently banned, either from Groundspeak as a whole, or just from the forums? When you say "many", what numerical does that represent?

 

Be aware of it. Forum rules dictate that matters of bannination are between Groundspeak and the bannee, so I will not name names. However, one only has to cruise around that social media site created by Mark Zuckerberg and do a little searching. There you will find users complaining about being banned whilst having the peanut gallery bemoan such actions by the evil bad Groundspeak, all the while using more than their fair share of profanity mixed in the posts.

 

The funny thing is, I keep reading over and over that people should not judge the DGS based on the actions of a few. This group, though, does not openly come out against such actions and as such gives tacit approval of those less than savory actions. Heck, as I said, if you look on the social media site I alluded to, you'll find the peanut gallery not only does not rebuke the offender, it actually supports them!

 

Tell me again why people shouldn't judge the DGS as a whole?

Link to comment

and you can all say what you will but, to me, there is a high level of honor that DGS won't come into these forums to defend themselves - because they are above it. (For me however, I am not DGS and dont represent them, but will defend them because they are incredibly nice people).

 

This would be a perfect opportunity for members of DGS to come in into the forums to make a statement that the actions of the DGS member that was banned is not condoned by their group. A public declaration that they actually practice what they preach. But, they won't...because they are above that sort of thing.

Link to comment

and you can all say what you will but, to me, there is a high level of honor that DGS won't come into these forums to defend themselves - because they are above it. (For me however, I am not DGS and dont represent them, but will defend them because they are incredibly nice people).

 

This would be a perfect opportunity for members of DGS to come in into the forums to make a statement that the actions of the DGS member that was banned is not condoned by their group. A public declaration that they actually practice what they preach. But, they won't...because they are above that sort of thing.

 

right. because the forums have proven to be a fair, equal and forgiving place all these years.

Link to comment
This would be a perfect opportunity for members of DGS to come in into the forums to make a statement that the actions of the DGS member that was banned is not condoned by their group. A public declaration that they actually practice what they preach. But, they won't...because they are above that sort of thing.

 

Bingo and amen.

 

right. because the forums have proven to be a fair, equal and forgiving place all these years.

 

They are, as long as you conduct yourself as a mature, even-keeled and respectable individual.

Link to comment

...so I will not name names.

Translation: No Riffster, I don't know of any, other than the one guy currently banned. I'll offer a fairly transparent excuse for not giving away the details of the "many" I previously alluded to. Once again, negative innuendos regarding a particular group are considered perfectly acceptable by the regulars of this forum, so long as that group is the DGS. Slighting the integrity of this particular organization, without offering a shred of evidence to support those slights, is seemingly okay. I think that's kinda sad.

 

However, one only has to cruise around that social media site created by Mark Zuckerberg

Been there, done that. Maybe now I'll get the tee shirt? :lol: What I see the most on those sites is folks displaying some fairly awesome caches. Got some great ideas for future hides, so I'll offer my Thanx for the suggestion to browse there. In dividing up the content into general categories, the next largest group would be postings about events. The next largest category would be smarky meme posts. Many are quite funny, some, not so much. Following this would be a hodgepodge of assorted commentary not related to bannination. The smallest category would be the occasional post regarding bannination. For the most part, I'm seeing folks discuss past bans. Other than the one mentioned here, I'm not seeing anyone discussing being currently banned.

 

Once again, you are bashing a group, for the actions of a few.

The only thing you've added is the baseless allegations.

 

Tell me again why people shouldn't judge the DGS as a whole?

Because prejudice, (to pre judge), is generally considered a bad thing? :huh:

Though, apparently, if the DGS is involved, it's okay...

 

Let me ask you this. Other than the overwhelmingly large amount of armchair logs on a missing travel bug, for which a well deserved ban was enacted, the two offenses I've seen in this thread attributed to the DGS is sharing of trackable numbers and logging virtual events. The event thing is betwixt the owner of the listing and the person posting the log, so I'll not delve into the morals of that. I do take issue to sharing trackable numbers. Though I've not seen it myself, I've heard of Groundspeak locking trackable pages due to virtual logging. As an owner of many trackables, I'd be sorely cross at anyone who caused one to be locked because they thought it would be a fun to pass around the number.

 

As the aforementioned social media site has expanded, adding more caching groups and people, this behavior has become far more common. As mentioned earlier, I've seen members from other caching groups, to include SFG, FGA, SCGA, GOG, CFLAG and NEFGA do this exact same thing.

 

My question is thus.

 

Would it be reasonable, to you, if I were to bash these groups because of the actions of a few? :unsure:

Edited by Clan Riffster
Link to comment
This would be a perfect opportunity for members of DGS to come in into the forums to make a statement that the actions of the DGS member that was banned is not condoned by their group. A public declaration that they actually practice what they preach. But, they won't...because they are above that sort of thing.

 

Bingo and amen.

 

right. because the forums have proven to be a fair, equal and forgiving place all these years.

 

They are, as long as you conduct yourself as a mature, even-keeled and respectable individual.

 

So bashing DGS is considered "mature" "even keeled" and "respectable" ???

Link to comment

...the forums have proven to be a fair, equal and forgiving place all these years.

Yeah, maybe not so much. :P

 

Don't get me wrong. I enjoy the forum. It's a great place to share your adventures, ask questions and solicit ideas. For the most part, the replies do fit the descriptors you listed. Seriously. They do. Close your eyes and randomly select a link. The chances are quite high that you will see fair, equal and forgiving commentary throughout the thread. In those rare instances where the conversation devolves, you'll see level headed Moderators step in and act with professionalism, guiding the conversation back on track, or closing it, if necessary. Since I've been known to take a Mtn-man brick upside the head from time to time, I think I can say with a degree of certainty, that when the Moderators to take direct action against an individual, that action is mostly deserved. In my case, it was deserved every single time. My behavior was unacceptable, and I've learned from my forum bans.

 

But I will say that there is at least one topic which leads to a bandwagon mentality. When one of these discussions starts, fair, equal and forgiving go right out the window. Rather than take a neutral perspective, judging the behavior of individuals in a reasonable and calm viewpoint, many folks hop on the bandwagon and commence bashing away.

Link to comment
Translation: No Riffster, I don't know of any, other than the one guy currently banned. I'll offer a fairly transparent excuse for not giving away the details of the "many" I previously alluded to. Once again, negative innuendos regarding a particular group are considered perfectly acceptable by the regulars of this forum, so long as that group is the DGS. Slighting the integrity of this particular organization, without offering a shred of evidence to support those slights, is seemingly okay. I think that's kinda sad.

 

Yet again, Riffster, you are completely wrong. Look in many other threads speaking about banned members of this site and you'll almost always find posts stating pretty much what I said...issues of banning are between Groundspeak and the user. It is not my place to name names and as I said, it doesn't take much digging. What's sad is that you are so blind in your support of these people that you refuse to see the facts. Yes, there are more than one person from the DGS banned from this site. Heck, even in my local area, we have had two just get banned for what amounts to be typical DGS actions...high school mentality pranks against and harassment of other users. But...you know...I don't know anything about this at all.

 

Once again, you are bashing a group, for the actions of a few.

The only thing you've added is the baseless allegations.

 

Prove me wrong, then. Either way, it shows the DGS's true colors because they has never come out against such actions. Tacit approval speaks volumes.

 

Wait...that's not true. They do tend to make a statement in such situations, always against Groundspeak for "abusing their power" for banning users for "harmless" actions. The most recent example is the local case I stated above. Their members commit the acts and get their hands slapped, but if you believe the posts of their fellow DGS members, it's Groundspeak's fault!

 

Would it be reasonable, to you, if I were to bash these groups because of the actions of a few? :unsure:

 

If they acted like the DGS, then yes. From my experiences with different groups, they own up to things. The DGS does not. They think it's cute and funny and all that, when in all actuality it's just plain immature.

 

So bashing DGS is considered "mature" "even keeled" and "respectable" ???

 

No one is bashing the DGS. Facts are facts, and if you think that is bashing, then I don't know how I can help you on that one.

Link to comment
But I will say that there is at least one topic which leads to a bandwagon mentality. When one of these discussions starts, fair, equal and forgiving go right out the window.

 

Bringing back virts? :unsure:

 

Lol. Nah, Gotta be my ODS project. I was just trying to destroy Geocaching per prophecy, but all anyone wanted to talk about was science. :anibad:

Link to comment

Eh, I didn't say Pennsylvania. Those were the arrests in just the city of Philadelphia, and I wouldn't trust any priest alone with a kid, as the percentage of arrests is much higher than the general population.

Oh. Gotcha. In that case, the math is a bit different. With about 7,000 cops, 60 arrests in a 5 year period, (while still 60 arrests too many), represents just under 1% of the whole, which, statistically speaking, is better than the general population. So the closed minded bigot analogy still works. In a population of 7,000 people, having about 12 arrests a year does not warrant calling the whole association criminals.

 

As to prejudging priests? As ever, that is certainly an option, for the closed minded. I know our friend in the media like to paint the picture that priests are all lechers, filled with evil intent. It does make for a good story line. There are even some folks who are willing to believe such silliness, despite any evidence to the contrary. My research indicates that priests are no more likely to offend than the average male.

Sources:

http://news.uk.msn.com/world/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=152959036

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8654789.stm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/16/AR2010041602026.html

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/facts/fm0011.html

 

 

Actually the number is 68 arrests since 2009, and there are 6600 philly cops. Saying its only one percent is still ignoring the fact that the police are not acting at a higher standard. Many cops are unwilling to arrest their own, and usually downplay any misconduct. The arrests only represent the most serious offenders that have managed to get caught. The amount of civil case settlements have ballooned to an amount that is unequalled in many cities. The government response is to note that there is a surplus in the budget, so it is fine.

 

http://articles.philly.com/1995-11-17/news/25681514_1_drug-cases-police-misconduct-civil-cases

 

There are many small towns across the country with 7000 people that don't have a crime rate anywhere near that among just the officers of Philly.

 

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/tag/philadelphia-police-corruption/

 

When a persistent pattern emerges, it is more than just "individual actions".

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/39th_District_corruption_scandal

http://articles.philly.com/2013-11-10/news/43858411_1_officer-jeffrey-walker-jeffrey-cujdik-alleged-police-corruption

http://www.examiner.com/article/too-much-police-corruption-philadelphia

 

Police need to be held to a higher standard than the population. Why have any police at all, if they are just as likely to have criminals respond to complaints? Citizens arrests should be sufficient. Would you call an electrician if you found out that he didn't know anything more about electricity than the average person?

 

The articles you cited about priests all refer to one study in which they said only 4% of priests are molesters. I dont know about you, but I don't think that 1 in 25 people is a child molester. Again, it also ignores the higher standards which are supposed to characterize priests.

Link to comment

While a brief analogizing reference to police officers, priests, etc. is fine, detailed conversation about these side issues takes the main discussion off-topic. So, if people wish to debate the fine points of those analogies, feel free to open threads in the Off Topic forum. Thanks.

Edited by Keystone
Link to comment

It is not my place to name names

I see. It is, apparently, 'your place' to make accusations, and then refuse to provide supporting evidence. I understand now, and I appreciate the clarification.

 

What's sad is that you are so blind in your support of these people

These people. Wow...

What's sad is you are so blind in your angst against an entire group of people that you refuse to see that there is a difference between groups, and the actions of people who happen to belong to said groups. One would think that this kind of prejudice, (to pre judge), would have died out decades ago, due to shame.

 

that you refuse to see the facts.

I don't think I've ever 'refused' to see a fact, when presented. Many people in this thread have presented facts, myself included. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly refused to provide facts, after your divisive claim that "many" DGS members are currently banned.

 

Yes, there are more than one person from the DGS banned from this site.

So, we're reverting to past tense now? I don't doubt that there have been members, (plural), from within the ranks of the DGS who have been banned for behaving badly. Having been banned in the past for this very same reason, I understand that, at times, some of us, myself included, have typing fingers which operate faster than our gray matter, resulting in statements which violate the TOU. During my bans, (which were undisputedly deserved), I was a member of several geocaching groups, to include SCGA, FGA and NEFGA. None of these groups came forward, publicly condemning my behavior, even though they would have been well within their rights to do so. By your logic, shouldn't these groups be bashed, for their 'tacit' consent of my inappropriate behavior? When other members of these groups received deserved hand slaps from TPTB, again, there was no public outcry.

 

Can you explain how bashing the DGS for the exact same behavior as other groups is not biased?

 

Prove me wrong, then.

I already have. Repeatedly.

But your bias won't let you see it.

 

From my experiences with different groups, they own up to things.

If the group ever does something untoward, it would be appropriate to have this conversation. Since the dreaded behaviors you keep hinting at were committed by a small minority within the group, I would suggest that the group has nothing to own up to.

 

No one is bashing the DGS.

Everyone who is assigning negative connotations to a group, because of the behavior of a few of its members, is bashing the DGS. Facts are facts. If you think that's not bashing, I don't think I can help you any further.

Link to comment
I see. It is, apparently, 'your place' to make accusations, and then refuse to provide supporting evidence. I understand now, and I appreciate the clarification.

 

What part of it’s against forum rules don’t you understand? Are you seriously trying to bait me into violating the rules?

 

You, on the other hand, have repeatedly refused to provide facts, after your divisive claim that "many" DGS members are currently banned.

 

As I’ve said, the proof is there. You just have to look. It’s not my problem you’re too lazy. Just a quick look at one Facebook thread in one group that appears almost at the top of a search for “DGS” reveals two individuals currently banned. Add to that the three DGS members from my area recently banned and you have five. Need I go on?

 

If the group ever does something untoward, it would be appropriate to have this conversation.

 

Which is precisely why we have this thread. Thank you.

Link to comment

What part of it’s against forum rules don’t you understand?

I wasn't aware that there was any portion of that statement beyond my ken.

 

Are you seriously trying to bait me into violating the rules?

I don't think you need my assistance in this matter.

You are doing an awesome job on your own.

 

As I’ve said, the proof is there.

Yup. That's what you say. If only it were true...

 

You just have to look.

As mentioned earlier, I did look. More than once. I even detailed my findings for you.

 

It’s not my problem you’re too lazy.

See? I told you that you were doing fine violating the TOU all on your own.

 

Thank you.

You are welcome. :)

Link to comment

Just a quick look at one Facebook thread in one group that appears almost at the top of a search for “DGS” reveals two individuals currently banned. Add to that the three DGS members from my area recently banned and you have five..

Kewl! Since you've finally answered one of my questions, (how many constitutes "many"), with an apparent answer of five, we can now continue with this conversation. Isn't one of those individuals current banned a sock puppet of the other individual? If so, then those two just became one. And the three mystery members from your area. Are they still banned? I ask, because your comment, which I questioned, was that "many" DGS members are banned. Current tense. If they are not currently banned, and rather, like me, are folks who have been previously banned, then your five just became one.

 

Does one count as "many"?

 

BTW, I don't think mentioning the moniker of a banned geocacher violates either the TOU or the forum guidelines. Saying BillyBobNosePicker is a banned geocacher is not a slight. Not an insult. It's not defamatory in any way. Unlike, for example, you suggesting that i was lazy, which is both insulting and defamatory. It is simply describing a fact. If you are not comfortable stating such facts, could you send me their monikers via a PM?

 

If we accept that a number somewhere between five and one qualifies as "many", when applied to a group as large as the DGS, I'd sure like to know who they are.

Edited by Clan Riffster
Link to comment

 

As I’ve said, the proof is there. You just have to look. It’s not my problem you’re too lazy. Just a quick look at one Facebook thread in one group that appears almost at the top of a search for “DGS” reveals two individuals currently banned. Add to that the three DGS members from my area recently banned and you have five. Need I go on?

 

 

I don't have a Facebook account. And I can't believe, after all these years, A&T has finally pointed out a disadvantage of not having one. :laughing:

 

You may be giving them credit for more bans than there are, however. In the case of the militant, abusive armchair TB logger for a long missing TB, it is known that the 300 find basic member "DGS persona" is a sock puppet for a 6,000 find premium member account, and both accounts are banned.

 

There is a high level of honor among the Groundspeak volunteers, such that we don't come into the public forums to raise complaints about troublesome individuals and/or groups - because we are above it. But stay tuned, as the only thing constant in the world of geocaching is change.

 

I could point out, many years ago, a Groundspeak volunteer dissing TRIGO in these forums, on more than one occasion, with a sock puppet account for his Dog. But alas, I don't feel like looking for them. :ph34r:

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

Let us also realize here what being banned from forums really means - many times, yes, it is merited as clan has pointed out, and sometimes it is not (depends on the mood of a moderator that day or the nature of the subject) but does a forum ban make a person just an awful human being? does it merit an entire group to be labled as horrible people because they won't come in here and apologize for the actions of 1 or even 5 of their own people? should they even have to?

we are supposed to be adults and know better through the education of history - knowing that the actions of a few in a group of people does not always represent that entire group nor does the inaction of the entire group to the behaviors of a few mean they support it.

but none of these words really matter do they? because this was never a discussion from the first post - minds were already made up.

let me ask this question - if the DGS was replaced by "lackeys" or "reviewers" or "moga" would this thread still be going on?

Link to comment

If and when a subset of volunteer cache reviewers began harrassing community members via email, Facebook and cache page logs, and Groundspeak sat back and cheered them on, I'm sure there would be a forum thread about it. In that fictional and unlikely forum discussion, I would condemn that behavior, disavow it, and perhaps even discuss disassociating myself with a group that condones such behavior.

 

That's all hypothethical, of course.

 

By the way, we are talking about website account suspensions here, not forum suspensions. It takes a LOT of work to get an account suspension -- much less so to get a forum suspension. So, the swipe at the arbitrariness of forum moderators in the above post is misplaced. Only the professionals at Groundspeak can suspend a user's account on the website.

Link to comment
I see. It is, apparently, 'your place' to make accusations, and then refuse to provide supporting evidence. I understand now, and I appreciate the clarification.

 

What part of it’s against forum rules don’t you understand? Are you seriously trying to bait me into violating the rules?

 

You, on the other hand, have repeatedly refused to provide facts, after your divisive claim that "many" DGS members are currently banned.

 

As I’ve said, the proof is there. You just have to look. It’s not my problem you’re too lazy. Just a quick look at one Facebook thread in one group that appears almost at the top of a search for “DGS” reveals two individuals currently banned. Add to that the three DGS members from my area recently banned and you have five. Need I go on?

 

If the group ever does something untoward, it would be appropriate to have this conversation.

 

Which is precisely why we have this thread. Thank you.

 

In regards to the bolded bit up there, would that happen to be the "DGS" FB page that has around 600 likes? the public one that is more than just DGS members? If so, that does not fly as viable evidence against any members of the DGS. So please, entertain us all, and go on...

Link to comment

I must say this is NUTS.......Before getting to know the DGS i didn't know what to think of them. I was on the side of..........lets say the unhappy but after getting to know them i have had a different view. i would love to see the names of the "banned" i don't want to go looking for it since i see those here know the names. Don't make the mistake of calling me lazy or other things because i don't play the name calling game. I work for a living and just don't want to go looking everywhere. i will look around in my free time but if someone knows just say it. I agree there are bad apples in every group and to bash the entire group over 1 or two people isn't fair. Just to give a heads up i ask this as a fair question and not to stir things up. I WILL NOT put up with personal attacks on me so don't even go there. again i just want to know the names and feel the Group as a whole is getting a bad rap.

Link to comment

If and when a subset of volunteer cache reviewers began harrassing community members via email, Facebook and cache page logs, and Groundspeak sat back and cheered them on, I'm sure there would be a forum thread about it. In that fictional and unlikely forum discussion, I would condemn that behavior, disavow it, and perhaps even discuss disassociating myself with a group that condones such behavior.

 

That's all hypothethical, of course.

 

By the way, we are talking about website account suspensions here, not forum suspensions. It takes a LOT of work to get an account suspension[/b} -- much less so to get a forum suspension.

 

This is a joke right? We were threatened to be sent to Geojail by a lackey because we were allegedly "deceptive in the review process" and "against the spirit of geocaching". For the former, we have all emails discussing our cache submission with our local reviewer, and somehow that makes us deceptive. And then we are against the spirit of geocaching because we refused to delete legit found it logs. It doesn't take anything to get banned.

 

 

So, the swipe at the arbitrariness of forum moderators in the above post is misplaced. Only the professionals at Groundspeak can suspend a user's account on the website.

 

 

This thread should have been deleted a long time ago. We should start a thread that bashes all the lackeys (Everyone knows that they are all good people, and only a handful of them make bad decisions (sometimes)) and see how long it would last. The Mods would delete it right away. But, because its DGS, and nobody likes the DGS, we'll just let it go.

Link to comment

I must say this is NUTS.......Before getting to know the DGS i didn't know what to think of them. I was on the side of..........lets say the unhappy but after getting to know them i have had a different view. i would love to see the names of the "banned" i don't want to go looking for it since i see those here know the names. Don't make the mistake of calling me lazy or other things because i don't play the name calling game. I work for a living and just don't want to go looking everywhere. i will look around in my free time but if someone knows just say it. I agree there are bad apples in every group and to bash the entire group over 1 or two people isn't fair. Just to give a heads up i ask this as a fair question and not to stir things up. I WILL NOT put up with personal attacks on me so don't even go there. again i just want to know the names and feel the Group as a whole is getting a bad rap.

 

+1

Link to comment

We were threatened to be sent to Geojail by a lackey because we were allegedly "deceptive in the review process" and "against the spirit of geocaching". For the former, we have all emails discussing our cache submission with our local reviewer, and somehow that makes us deceptive.

Moving caches are against the guidelines. When you said you were submitting a moving cache, your reviewer said no. You changed your tune, and your cache was published. You then turned it into a moving cache. This is not deceptive, how?

 

Also, remember that reviewers and lackeys can read Facebook too, and we receive reports from others about what they see there.

Link to comment
we are supposed to be adults and know better through the education of history - knowing that the actions of a few in a group of people does not always represent that entire group nor does the inaction of the entire group to the behaviors of a few mean they support it.

 

It represents the entire group when said group does not come out against such actions and, in many cases, cheers them on whilst rallying against Groundspeak when they get their hands slapped.

 

If and when a subset of volunteer cache reviewers began harrassing community members via email, Facebook and cache page logs, and Groundspeak sat back and cheered them on, I'm sure there would be a forum thread about it. In that fictional and unlikely forum discussion, I would condemn that behavior, disavow it, and perhaps even discuss disassociating myself with a group that condones such behavior.

 

Precisely.

 

In regards to the bolded bit up there, would that happen to be the "DGS" FB page that has around 600 likes? the public one that is more than just DGS members? If so, that does not fly as viable evidence against any members of the DGS. So please, entertain us all, and go on...

 

Actually no, that is not the page. The one I refer to is by DGS members and for DGS members. You’ll recognize it by the potty mouth and juvenile posts.

 

This is a joke right? We were threatened to be sent to Geojail by a lackey because we were allegedly "deceptive in the review process" and "against the spirit of geocaching". For the former, we have all emails discussing our cache submission with our local reviewer, and somehow that makes us deceptive. And then we are against the spirit of geocaching because we refused to delete legit found it logs.

 

Well hold on…

 

Moving caches are against the guidelines. When you said you were submitting a moving cache, your reviewer said no. You changed your tune, and your cache was published. You then turned it into a moving cache. This is not deceptive, how?

 

…ah yes, the rest of the story.

 

Also, remember that reviewers and lackeys can read Facebook too, and we receive reports from others about what they see there.

 

Thank you. More than just a few have been watching and taking notes.

 

It doesn't take anything to get banned.

 

It takes a lot to be banned from the site. I have had a few forum bans way back when, and I earned every one of them. To be banned from the site? From the examples I have seen, you have to be egregious in your actions. However, I suppose to people used to acting immature it would seem like anything would get you banned.

Link to comment

We were threatened to be sent to Geojail by a lackey because we were allegedly "deceptive in the review process" and "against the spirit of geocaching". For the former, we have all emails discussing our cache submission with our local reviewer, and somehow that makes us deceptive.

Moving caches are against the guidelines. When you said you were submitting a moving cache, your reviewer said no. You changed your tune, and your cache was published. You then turned it into a moving cache. This is not deceptive, how?

 

Also, remember that reviewers and lackeys can read Facebook too, and we receive reports from others about what they see there.

 

We never said we were submitting a moving cache. We never turned it into a moving cache either. It made an appearance at an event BEFORE it was published. It was only published after it was placed in the wild (as per agreement with reviewer [emails to prove this]). Please show me how that violates any guidelines or is deceptive in any way.

 

GS has no jurisdiction outside of GS owned and managed websites. Whatever happens outside of those pages has no bearing on GS pages, so how can they suspend/ban people based on things that are happening outside of the GS kingdom, where the GS ToU have no effect??

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 7
×
×
  • Create New...