Jump to content

Geocaching's Class Warfare


WMIM
Followers 9

Recommended Posts

 

I think the things in life people need to survive should be free....

 

Nothing in life is free. Those ideas are the ones that breed laziness into people... Agreed with what you had to say about Caching, just don't agree with your view on life.

 

 

Read over the whole thing, then look up the definition of subtle.

Link to comment

 

I think the things in life people need to survive should be free....

 

Nothing in life is free. Those ideas are the ones that breed laziness into people... Agreed with what you had to say about Caching, just don't agree with your view on life.

 

 

Read over the whole thing, then look up the definition of subtle.

 

So you aren't a Liberal, sorry about that!

Edited by The Peterson Finders
Link to comment

 

I think the things in life people need to survive should be free....

 

Nothing in life is free. Those ideas are the ones that breed laziness into people... Agreed with what you had to say about Caching, just don't agree with your view on life.

 

 

Read over the whole thing, then look up the definition of subtle.

 

Guess I missed the part where he showed that he was a Liberal Communist, sorry about that.

 

Okay then, try looking up hyperbole and irony as someone else suggested.

 

And that's socialist BTW. But try looking those two up, then you'll get it. Perhaps.

 

Or if not, then just go out and get some caching done. There's a lot of beauty to be found outdoors.

Link to comment

I think the things in life people need to survive should be free....

 

Nothing in life is free. Those ideas are the ones that breed laziness into people... Agreed with what you had to say about Caching, just don't agree with your view on life.

 

 

Read over the whole thing, then look up the definition of subtle.

 

Guess I missed the part where he showed that he was a Liberal Communist, sorry about that.

 

Okay then, try looking up hyperbole and irony as someone else suggested.

 

And that's socialist BTW. But try looking those two up, then you'll get it. Perhaps.

 

Or if not, then just go out and get some caching done. There's a lot of beauty to be found outdoors.

 

Don't ya just love it when people edit their posts AFTER someone has quoted them??? Edit doesn't change the quoted lines, only the original.:ph34r:

Link to comment

Don't ya just love it when people edit their posts AFTER someone has quoted them??? Edit doesn't change the quoted lines, only the original.:ph34r:

 

Well.... I don't wanna get in trouble for saying the wrong thing around here. Know what I'm saying?

 

Why yes.... I know exactly what you are saying. I have had to dodge the brick thrown on more than one occasion!!:lol:

Link to comment

WMIM--

 

I'm interested in how you came up with an average of 15 years for a typical cache to get its first favorite point. The first cache was hidden less than 14 years ago, and favorites are only 4-5 years old. Are you using some type of poisson distribution? What are your assumptions?

 

Probably because lots of caches had been in place for years before there were favorite points. Not that many people went back through their old finds to award points. But it was a good way to skew statistics to try to "prove" his point.

 

Mr. Scott, I invite you and your friend rosebud to "prove" me wrong. Please show all the distributions you wish of favorite recognitions.

You have a cache published on 9/4/2007 with 1 favorite out of 275 finds, and you would seem to be considerably better than average.

Your 2/16/2010 cache has 1 favorite for 148 finds, and as I said, you're pretty swell.

 

What point are you trying to "prove" with your many maps and charts of geocaching adventures? All these awards and medallions remind me of North Korean Generals who emblazon their uniforms with garish gold medals, all the way down both sides of their dress jacket and trousers. And here I thought they hadn't fought a battle since the 1950's.

 

Your collective bullying here in this forum pretty solidly confirms what I was saying about the clique, and the class warfare.

That has escaped just about every one of you.

 

And that has made all the difference. - Robert Frost

Link to comment

//

 

Don't ya just love it when people edit their posts AFTER someone has quoted them??? Edit doesn't change the quoted lines, only the original.:ph34r:

 

Cheese with your whine, Neeces? Countless of your *Premium* friends have shoved some cheese in my face, calling me a whiner. You know, others may come to read this thread. It has, after all, 2200 hits in a day or two.

Perhaps you object to my getting them started out on correct information? It does say "edited" at the bottom.

Full disclosure and all that. Besides, you're welcome to edit yours. Perhaps that's too much trouble for you.

 

Oh I know. You'd prefer that I allow information I posted erroneously, but in good faith, to remain, so I will continue looking as foolish as possible and all you *Premium Members* can continue hurling brickbats. After all, you're so very friendly and respectful.

 

My main points were that geocaching.com encourages this class warfare, by enabling *Premium Members* to exclude the underclass, but there is no reciprocity. Why can't beginners have their own caches for other beginners only? Nope.

 

The pretense that annual dues are necessary to preserve the *quality* simply doesn't hold water. There are countless excellent websites that are free.

 

You can't defend cheating, and you should not make excuses in defense of the pathetic overall quality of caches, which many of your *Premium Member* pals have expressed to me long before I said anything here.

 

Altoid box under a booger, anyone? No, this is one special booger!

Edited by WMIM
Link to comment

WMIM--

 

I'm interested in how you came up with an average of 15 years for a typical cache to get its first favorite point. The first cache was hidden less than 14 years ago, and favorites are only 4-5 years old. Are you using some type of poisson distribution? What are your assumptions?

 

Probably because lots of caches had been in place for years before there were favorite points. Not that many people went back through their old finds to award points. But it was a good way to skew statistics to try to "prove" his point.

 

Mr. Scott, I invite you and your friend rosebud to "prove" me wrong. Please show all the distributions you wish of favorite recognitions.

You have a cache published on 9/4/2007 with 1 favorite out of 275 finds, and you would seem to be considerably better than average.

Your 2/16/2010 cache has 1 favorite for 148 finds, and as I said, you're pretty swell.

 

What point are you trying to "prove" with your many maps and charts of geocaching adventures? All these awards and medallions remind me of North Korean Generals who emblazon their uniforms with garish gold medals, all the way down both sides of their dress jacket and trousers. And here I thought they hadn't fought a battle since the 1950's.

 

Your collective bullying here in this forum pretty solidly confirms what I was saying about the clique, and the class warfare.

That has escaped just about every one of you.

 

And that has made all the difference. - Robert Frost

Here is a new word to add to your geocaching class warfare. :laughing:http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=geocide

I think you already hit the nuke button. :anibad:

Link to comment

 

Sometimes hyperbole and irony are entirely missed.

 

So too are hypocrisy and conformity.

 

 

The point of geocaching is to go out and have fun. The secondary point is to find caches. - Tozainamboku

 

Exactly. As I said early on, many have those two sentences reversed. Just have a look at their cybermedallions, colorful maps, and long lists of finds, chronicled to the gnat's patootie.

 

I don't like earning smileys on things that really don't make me smile. - 6NoisyHikers

 

From a newbie, such as me, this would be heresy - "trolling" - worth only of contempt and disdain.

 

This illusion of knowledge is very widespread, particularly on the left. The world is overwhelmingly socialist, corrupt, and not free.

Get into lockstep with the rest of the proletariat or else the beatings will continue.

Link to comment

I understand that you aren't pleased with people armchair logging caches. But really it's not something to get worked up about. They're missing the best part of the game, and at the same time they're making you so angry and frustrated that you seem to be missing out on some of the game's fun as well, because you're too busy hating the Premium members. :rolleyes:

 

You obviously don't want any Premium members and basic members. Everyone is equal. No advantages to those willing to pay the prices. Okay. Sure. But out of curiosity, how do you suggest Groundspeak pays for maintaining Geocaching.com and Waymarking.com as well if they don't make money?

 

 

According to your 'calculations' towards the starting of this thread, you said that Groundspeak would make "around $200,000,000" off of Premium Memberships. Well, my guess is that's a HUGE part in their annual income (of course, that info isn't released by GS, so I could be wrong). Taking away the Premium Features and Premium Memberships doesn't sound like it would do to good for their business. I know they make some money off advertising, especially for geocaching companies like CacheAtNight or Landsharkz, but how else could they make as much money as they do off PM's?

 

I'm very curious to hear your opinion.

Link to comment

I understand that you aren't pleased with people armchair logging caches. But really it's not something to get worked up about. They're missing the best part of the game, and at the same time they're making you so angry and frustrated that you seem to be missing out on some of the game's fun as well, because you're too busy hating the Premium members. :rolleyes:

 

You obviously don't want any Premium members and basic members. Everyone is equal. No advantages to those willing to pay the prices. Okay. Sure. But out of curiosity, how do you suggest Groundspeak pays for maintaining Geocaching.com and Waymarking.com as well if they don't make money?

 

 

According to your 'calculations' towards the starting of this thread, you said that Groundspeak would make "around $200,000,000" off of Premium Memberships. Well, my guess is that's a HUGE part in their annual income (of course, that info isn't released by GS, so I could be wrong). Taking away the Premium Features and Premium Memberships doesn't sound like it would do to good for their business. I know they make some money off advertising, especially for geocaching companies like CacheAtNight or Landsharkz, but how else could they make as much money as they do off PM's?

 

I'm very curious to hear your opinion.

I'm not convinced that the caches were "armchair" logged.

 

I'm also still not convinced that the OP is prepared to listen to reasonable discourse.

 

ibtl

Link to comment

 

Don't ya just love it when people edit their posts AFTER someone has quoted them??? Edit doesn't change the quoted lines, only the original.:ph34r:

 

Well.... I don't wanna get in trouble for saying the wrong thing around here. Know what I'm saying?

Too late.

 

Word to the wise: Using a presumption about people or their politics on the forum boards doesn't go over well.

Link to comment

I understand that you aren't pleased with people armchair logging caches. But really it's not something to get worked up about. They're missing the best part of the game, and at the same time they're making you so angry and frustrated that you seem to be missing out on some of the game's fun as well, because you're too busy hating the Premium members. :rolleyes:

 

You obviously don't want any Premium members and basic members. Everyone is equal. No advantages to those willing to pay the prices. Okay. Sure. But out of curiosity, how do you suggest Groundspeak pays for maintaining Geocaching.com and Waymarking.com as well if they don't make money?

 

 

According to your 'calculations' towards the starting of this thread, you said that Groundspeak would make "around $200,000,000" off of Premium Memberships. Well, my guess is that's a HUGE part in their annual income (of course, that info isn't released by GS, so I could be wrong). Taking away the Premium Features and Premium Memberships doesn't sound like it would do to good for their business. I know they make some money off advertising, especially for geocaching companies like CacheAtNight or Landsharkz, but how else could they make as much money as they do off PM's?

 

I'm very curious to hear your opinion.

I'm not convinced that the caches were "armchair" logged.

 

I'm also still not convinced that the OP is prepared to listen to reasonable discourse.

 

ibtl

The OP's listing was not armchair logged. They altered the listing to include ALR's and advertisement to a bike rental shop after the listing was published. The CO deleted legitimate finds because their ALR demands were not met, the cache page turned into bickering, the local reviewer archived the listing.

Link to comment

I understand that you aren't pleased with people armchair logging caches. But really it's not something to get worked up about. They're missing the best part of the game, and at the same time they're making you so angry and frustrated that you seem to be missing out on some of the game's fun as well, because you're too busy hating the Premium members. :rolleyes:

 

You obviously don't want any Premium members and basic members. Everyone is equal. No advantages to those willing to pay the prices. Okay. Sure. But out of curiosity, how do you suggest Groundspeak pays for maintaining Geocaching.com and Waymarking.com as well if they don't make money?

 

 

According to your 'calculations' towards the starting of this thread, you said that Groundspeak would make "around $200,000,000" off of Premium Memberships. Well, my guess is that's a HUGE part in their annual income (of course, that info isn't released by GS, so I could be wrong). Taking away the Premium Features and Premium Memberships doesn't sound like it would do to good for their business. I know they make some money off advertising, especially for geocaching companies like CacheAtNight or Landsharkz, but how else could they make as much money as they do off PM's?

 

I'm very curious to hear your opinion.

I'm not convinced that the caches were "armchair" logged.

 

I'm also still not convinced that the OP is prepared to listen to reasonable discourse.

 

ibtl

The OP's listing was not armchair logged. They altered the listing to include ALR's and advertisement to a bike rental shop after the listing was published. The CO deleted legitimate finds because their ALR demands were not met, the cache page turned into bickering, the local reviewer archived the listing.

 

Oh, okay. Thanks for filling me in. I didn't know what what going on there. I wasn't sure if by cheating he meant armchair logging or not. I'm pretty sure either way he isn't aloud to have ALR on a traditional caches, let alone advertisements... :blink:

Link to comment
The OP's listing was not armchair logged. They altered the listing to include ALR's and advertisement to a bike rental shop after the listing was published. The CO deleted legitimate finds because their ALR demands were not met, the cache page turned into bickering, the local reviewer archived the listing.

 

So in summation, this whole thread and all the complaining herein are due to a CO not liking the fact he got his hand slapped after blatantly breaking the rules.

Link to comment
The OP's listing was not armchair logged. They altered the listing to include ALR's and advertisement to a bike rental shop after the listing was published. The CO deleted legitimate finds because their ALR demands were not met, the cache page turned into bickering, the local reviewer archived the listing.

 

So in summation, this whole thread and all the complaining herein are due to a CO not liking the fact he got his hand slapped after blatantly breaking the rules.

And it remains open so that we can try to make amends with someone who clearly has no desire to come to the table or learn from mistakes.

 

That, and so the topic can veer off into improper political jabs. <_<

 

The bottom line is that (new) cache owners should be prepared to hear some feedback from more experienced cachers when the caches placed don't meet the guidelines or are improperly categorized. And....

 

Be kind to each other when trying to offer suggestions, be constructive in our criticisms, and don't make assumptions.

 

Now let's play the Full House feelgood outro music and shut 'er down.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 9
×
×
  • Create New...