Jump to content

Saving this for reference, three cache monte approved.


Recommended Posts

I know I'll forget where I read it so I'm creating this thread so it won't get lost, direct from one of the Lackeys, Moun10Bike, proof that three cache monte or container swapping is an accepted practice.

 

Here is a link to the original post linking to a video where he and his friends are doing the E.T. Highway using the three cache monte technique. If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.

 

Below is the post:

 

It's quite doable. The group I was with took things easy (sleeping in, relaxing lunch stops, short detours for sight-seeing, etc.) and still made it to 877 caches on our biggest day on the E.T. Highway.

is a short summary of our excursion.
Link to comment

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

- Inigo Montoya (The Princess Bride)

 

The post shows that some lackeys used the three cache monte on a numbers run trail where the owners approve/encourage the technique.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean that it is "approved" or that it is "an accepted practice" in any larger sense. It means only that those lackeys used it on that particular occasion.

Link to comment

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

- Inigo Montoya (The Princess Bride)

 

The post shows that some lackeys used the three cache monte on a numbers run trail where the owners approve/encourage the technique.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean that it is "approved" or that it is "an accepted practice" in any larger sense. It means only that those lackeys used it on that particular occasion.

 

What it boils down to is they used it on a power trail and as they work for GS then it must be OK to use on power trails unless it goes against the wishes of the CO.

Link to comment

What it boils down to is they used it on a power trail and as they work for GS then it must be OK to use on power trails unless it goes against the wishes of the CO.

Well, no, it shows that's it's OK if it goes with the wishes of the CO. In other words, it's not OK simply because the CO doesn't express an opinion one way or the other.

 

I didn't think this was news. I thought we already knew GS didn't care if COs allowed 3-card monte.

Link to comment

What it boils down to is they used it on a power trail and as they work for GS then it must be OK to use on power trails unless it goes against the wishes of the CO.

Well, no, it shows that's it's OK if it goes with the wishes of the CO. In other words, it's not OK simply because the CO doesn't express an opinion one way or the other.

 

I didn't think this was news. I thought we already knew GS didn't care if COs allowed 3-card monte.

 

Guess we will see, I'll update this thread everytime I link to it while replying to someone complaining in generL how three cache monte is not geocaching or how it's cheating.

Link to comment

What it boils down to is they used it on a power trail and as they work for GS then it must be OK to use on power trails unless it goes against the wishes of the CO.

Well, no, it shows that's it's OK if it goes with the wishes of the CO. In other words, it's not OK simply because the CO doesn't express an opinion one way or the other.

 

I didn't think this was news. I thought we already knew GS didn't care if COs allowed 3-card monte.

 

Hmmm, just read the description on E.T. 0001 and their web page and although they state they are ok with cachers replacing missing caches nowhere do they even hint at that they approve of (or disapprove of) three cache monte.

Edited by Roman!
Link to comment

Fuzzy logic at its best

By whom - the anti-monte damage-control experts above?! :anibad:

 

I'm a low-numbers cacher and not interested in 3-cache monte, but the video is the video. Let's not rewrite history.

 

There are still limits on what can't be done in a power trail, but it seems that signing in the car is not one of those limits.

 

I suppose some purists will soon be crying in their beer, and I do feel smypathetic for them.

Link to comment
Guess we will see, I'll update this thread everytime I link to it while replying to someone complaining in generL how three cache monte is not geocaching or how it's cheating.
Well, I still don't consider the three cache monte to be geocaching (that whole "return the geocache to its original location" thing). The fact that certain lackeys have chosen to do it doesn't change that. Just as certain lackeys playing Munzee doesn't make it geocaching either.

 

There, now my opinion will be included every time you link to this thread. :P

Link to comment
Guess we will see, I'll update this thread everytime I link to it while replying to someone complaining in generL how three cache monte is not geocaching or how it's cheating.
Well, I still don't consider the three cache monte to be geocaching (that whole "return the geocache to its original location" thing). The fact that certain lackeys have chosen to do it doesn't change that. Just as certain lackeys playing Munzee doesn't make it geocaching either.

 

There, now my opinion will be included every time you link to this thread. :P

 

If it's good enough for GS employees it's good enough for me and your munzee reference makes no sense.

Link to comment
Guess we will see, I'll update this thread everytime I link to it while replying to someone complaining in generL how three cache monte is not geocaching or how it's cheating.
Well, I still don't consider the three cache monte to be geocaching (that whole "return the geocache to its original location" thing). The fact that certain lackeys have chosen to do it doesn't change that. Just as certain lackeys playing Munzee doesn't make it geocaching either.

 

There, now my opinion will be included every time you link to this thread. :P

 

If it's good enough for GS employees it's good enough for me and your munzee reference makes no sense.

Let's hope a lackey doesn't decide to jump off a bridge. :rolleyes: That's a big assumption assuming all GS employees play geocache that particular way. If you found out one lackey had blue eyes, does that mean all lackeys have blue eyes? The I way I read it is that Moun10Bike and his friends choose to log that particular Power Trail series the way they did. I wouldn't try to read into it anymore than that. Just my opinion. :)

Edited by TahoeJoe
Link to comment

o·pin·ion

əˈpinyən/

noun

a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

 

Must be referring to post #3!

 

(Don't get me wrong, I am also completely opposed to the three card monte concept, but that has no bearing on the fact that the "logic" being used here by the OP is bogus.)

 

BTW, the munzee analogy reference makes perfectly good sense to me.

Edited by cheech gang
Link to comment

o·pin·ion

əˈpinyən/

noun

a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

 

Must be referring to post #3!

 

(Don't get me wrong, I am also completely opposed to the three card monte concept, but that has no bearing on the fact that the "logic" being used here by the OP is bogus.)

 

BTW, the munzee analogy reference makes perfectly good sense to me.

 

If an employee plays geocaching a certain way he is geocaching and one would assume he is playing in an accepted fashion,if he plays munzee he is not geocaching, he is playing a different game and has no bearing whatsoever on geocaching.

Link to comment

Let's hope a lackey doesn't decide to jump off a bride.

Well I suppose it matters whose bride it was. They really shouldn't be on someone else's bride as she's already spoken for. If they were on their own bride they don't need to jump off at all, unless she wasn't happy that they were on her in the first place. Then they may want to run quickly away and only return with flowers and chocolates.

Link to comment
Guess we will see, I'll update this thread everytime I link to it while replying to someone complaining in generL how three cache monte is not geocaching or how it's cheating.
Well, I still don't consider the three cache monte to be geocaching (that whole "return the geocache to its original location" thing). The fact that certain lackeys have chosen to do it doesn't change that. Just as certain lackeys playing Munzee doesn't make it geocaching either.

 

There, now my opinion will be included every time you link to this thread. :P

 

If it's good enough for GS employees it's good enough for me and your munzee reference makes no sense.

Let's hope a lackey doesn't decide to jump off a bride. :rolleyes: That's a big assumption assuming all GS employees play geocache that particular way. If you found out one lackey had blue eyes, does that mean all lackeys have blue eyes? The I way I read it is that Moun10Bike and his friends choose to log that particular Power Trail series the way they did. I wouldn't try to read into it anymore than that. Just my opinion. :)

 

I've jumped off a bride before and luckily just in time.

 

Well, if three cache monte was cheating I don't think it would be appropriate for GS employees to be cheating, they should be examples of proper geocaching etiquette.

Link to comment
Well, if three cache monte was cheating I don't think it would be appropriate for GS employees to be cheating, they should be examples of proper geocaching etiquette.

 

Not taking sides on the issue, but the flaw in that logic shows up when you look at any area where we expect people to be an example.

 

The cases we remember are the ones where they were a bad example.

Link to comment

How a couple of us who happen to be Lackeys found and logged caches at that particular time in no way constitutes endorsement by Groundspeak/Geocaching HQ of the parties involved or their logging behavior. rolleyes.gif

 

I'm going to stick with if it's good enough for you it's good enough for me.

 

And I didn't know it was more than one lackey, two makes it that much better :laughing:

Edited by Roman!
Link to comment

o·pin·ion

əˈpinyən/

noun

a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

 

Must be referring to post #3!

 

(Don't get me wrong, I am also completely opposed to the three card monte concept, but that has no bearing on the fact that the "logic" being used here by the OP is bogus.)

 

BTW, the munzee analogy reference makes perfectly good sense to me.

'

 

 

If an employee plays geocaching a certain way he is geocaching and one would assume he is playing in an accepted fashion,if he plays munzee he is not geocaching, he is playing a different game and has no bearing whatsoever on geocaching.

 

So by your logic, a bank employee steals money then it's ok for us to rob a bank?

Edited by dphickey
Link to comment
your munzee reference makes no sense.
Okay, I'll try to spell it out.

 

I don't consider the three cache monte to be geocaching because it violates the basic "return the geocache to its original location" concept that IMHO defines geocaching (at least as far as physical geocaches go). Certain lackeys use the three cache monte, but that does not make me think that the three cache monte is therefore geocaching.

 

I don't consider Munzee to be geocaching because it lacks the container and log that IMHO defines geocaching (at least as far as physical geocaches go). Certain lackeys play Munzee, but that does not make me think that Munzee is therefore geocaching.

 

Does that help you understand my point?

Link to comment
your munzee reference makes no sense.
Okay, I'll try to spell it out.

 

I don't consider the three cache monte to be geocaching because it violates the basic "return the geocache to its original location" concept that IMHO defines geocaching (at least as far as physical geocaches go). Certain lackeys use the three cache monte, but that does not make me think that the three cache monte is therefore geocaching.

 

I don't consider Munzee to be geocaching because it lacks the container and log that IMHO defines geocaching (at least as far as physical geocaches go). Certain lackeys play Munzee, but that does not make me think that Munzee is therefore geocaching.

 

Does that help you understand my point?

 

No, finding caches using TCM you're still finding caches listed on GC.com and according to most you are geocaching, playing munzee is a totally different game. Most accept TCM as geocaching, no one claims munzee to be geocaching.

 

Besides, if it's good enough for Moun10Bike, it's good enough for me.

Link to comment

o·pin·ion

əˈpinyən/

noun

a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

 

Must be referring to post #3!

 

(Don't get me wrong, I am also completely opposed to the three card monte concept, but that has no bearing on the fact that the "logic" being used here by the OP is bogus.)

 

BTW, the munzee analogy reference makes perfectly good sense to me.

 

If an employee plays geocaching a certain way he is geocaching and one would assume he is playing in an accepted fashion,if he plays munzee he is not geocaching, he is playing a different game and has no bearing whatsoever on geocaching.

 

So by your logic, a bank employee steals money then it's ok for us to rob a bank?

 

Once caught the bank employee would not be an employee any longer and would be in jail, I see Moun10Bike still is an employee and not in jail, now if one could rob a bank and keep their job and not land in jail after being caught I'd be applying at all the local banks.

Edited by Roman!
Link to comment
your munzee reference makes no sense.
Okay, I'll try to spell it out.

 

I don't consider the three cache monte to be geocaching because it violates the basic "return the geocache to its original location" concept that IMHO defines geocaching (at least as far as physical geocaches go). Certain lackeys use the three cache monte, but that does not make me think that the three cache monte is therefore geocaching.

 

I don't consider Munzee to be geocaching because it lacks the container and log that IMHO defines geocaching (at least as far as physical geocaches go). Certain lackeys play Munzee, but that does not make me think that Munzee is therefore geocaching.

 

Does that help you understand my point?

Are you saying that if certain Lackey's enjoyed playing Frisbee in the park I shouldn't expect to call it geocaching when my dog catches a Frisbee?

 

What if there are geocaches in the same park? Aren't I close enough?

Edited by Team GPSaxophone
Link to comment
No, finding caches using TCM you're still finding caches listed on GC.com and according to most you are geocaching
I suppose that makes sense, if finding caches is the only thing that defines geocaching. To me, geocaching is more than that.

 

Several years ago, a number of local caches were found by people who filled them with excrement. By your definition above, they were geocaching. After all, they were still finding caches listed on GC.com.

Link to comment

Let's hope a lackey doesn't decide to jump off a bride.

Well I suppose it matters whose bride it was. They really shouldn't be on someone else's bride as she's already spoken for. If they were on their own bride they don't need to jump off at all, unless she wasn't happy that they were on her in the first place. Then they may want to run quickly away and only return with flowers and chocolates.

I've crashed more than my share of weddings to participate in bride jumping. If you really want to get some air, you need to get a good running start. Isn't it amazing how one word can change the context of your message? :rolleyes:
Link to comment
No, finding caches using TCM you're still finding caches listed on GC.com and according to most you are geocaching
I suppose that makes sense, if finding caches is the only thing that defines geocaching. To me, geocaching is more than that.

 

Several years ago, a number of local caches were found by people who filled them with excrement. By your definition above, they were geocaching. After all, they were still finding caches listed on GC.com.

 

At least they were actually finding them. :ph34r:

Link to comment
No, finding caches using TCM you're still finding caches listed on GC.com and according to most you are geocaching
I suppose that makes sense, if finding caches is the only thing that defines geocaching. To me, geocaching is more than that.

 

Several years ago, a number of local caches were found by people who filled them with excrement. By your definition above, they were geocaching. After all, they were still finding caches listed on GC.com.

 

That's not a widely accepted way of caching and I suspect should a lackey do that they wouldn't be a lackey much longer.

Link to comment
No, finding caches using TCM you're still finding caches listed on GC.com and according to most you are geocaching
I suppose that makes sense, if finding caches is the only thing that defines geocaching. To me, geocaching is more than that.

 

Several years ago, a number of local caches were found by people who filled them with excrement. By your definition above, they were geocaching. After all, they were still finding caches listed on GC.com.

 

That's not a widely accepted way of caching and I suspect should a lackey do that they wouldn't be a lackey much longer.

I'm not so sure TCM is a "widely accepted way of caching" just because a couple of Lackeys did it.

Link to comment
No, finding caches using TCM you're still finding caches listed on GC.com and according to most you are geocaching
I suppose that makes sense, if finding caches is the only thing that defines geocaching. To me, geocaching is more than that.

 

Several years ago, a number of local caches were found by people who filled them with excrement. By your definition above, they were geocaching. After all, they were still finding caches listed on GC.com.

That's not a widely accepted way of caching and I suspect should a lackey do that they wouldn't be a lackey much longer.
Exactly.

 

So apparently you actually do define geocaching as more than just finding caches.

Link to comment

How a couple of us who happen to be Lackeys found and logged caches at that particular time in no way constitutes endorsement by Groundspeak/Geocaching HQ of the parties involved or their logging behavior. rolleyes.gif

 

Why does this seem to me to be a classic "CYA" post designed to keep things nicey-nicey at the office? :ph34r:

 

By the way, people, he did *not* repudiate the technique in his post! Very telling! ;)

 

And let's face it - one film can is the equivalent to another. Oh, and it's not like we're going crazy and advocating team logging or something. That's not finding because part of the group is not even physically present at the find.

 

So sit tight, traditionalists, three-cache-monte won't end civilization as we know it! :D

 

There, now I've achieved immortality also! B)

Link to comment

Variation of cache sizes across a power trail would prohibit it's use.

 

Caches supposed to be marked with GC code as identifiers - would imply you can't do it.

 

Replace geocache as found not replace a geocache as found.

 

Not sure you can imply we as CO's have to opt out rather than opt in to acceptance of the 3CM system.

 

So taking this all into account it seems replacing a cache without a CO's permission is a throwdown. Looks like you have just implicated some GS staff in a breach of one of their own tenants. And by implication that their logs can be deleted :D

Link to comment

Post #1

If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.

 

Post #10

If it's good enough for GS employees it's good enough for me..

 

Post #20

I'm going to stick with if it's good enough for you it's good enough for me.

 

Post #23

Besides, if it's good enough for Moun10Bike, it's good enough for me.

 

I think we got it now. Best of luck

 

P.S. to add, I like the bridge analogy :lol:

Edited by Touchstone
Link to comment

Once caught the bank employee would not be an employee any longer and would be in jail, I see Moun10Bike still is an employee and not in jail, now if one could rob a bank and keep their job and not land in jail after being caught I'd be applying at all the local banks.

The penalty for 3 cache monte is somewhat lower than the penalty for embezzling. Way lower than jail or termination. As I recall, the official penalty for 3 cache monte is some serious razzing.

Link to comment

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

- Inigo Montoya (The Princess Bride)

 

The post shows that some lackeys used the three cache monte on a numbers run trail where the owners approve/encourage the technique.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean that it is "approved" or that it is "an accepted practice" in any larger sense. It means only that those lackeys used it on that particular occasion.

 

What it boils down to is they used it on a power trail and as they work for GS then it must be OK to use on power trails unless it goes against the wishes of the CO.

 

From another thread:

When I was a kid we played street hockey in our cul-de-sac and there was a grumpy old man who always sat on his front lawn and yelled at us whenever we shot the ball onto his yard. All my friends were scared to go retrieve it so I always did, in fact sometimes I even purposely shot the ball onto his lawn.

 

Deep down I know he liked me because I gave him something to do, a purpose in life and I truly believe he lived longer and happier.

 

dry.gif

Link to comment

What it boils down to is they used it on a power trail and as they work for GS then it must be OK to use on power trails unless it goes against the wishes of the CO.

Well, no, it shows that's it's OK if it goes with the wishes of the CO. In other words, it's not OK simply because the CO doesn't express an opinion one way or the other.

 

I didn't think this was news. I thought we already knew GS didn't care if COs allowed 3-card monte.

 

Guess we will see, I'll update this thread everytime I link to it while replying to someone complaining in generL how three cache monte is not geocaching or how it's cheating.

 

Just because some lackeys do something doesn't make it acceptable. You are just kicking the ball into the neighbor's yard, and you know it.

Link to comment

Post #1

If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.

 

Post #10

If it's good enough for GS employees it's good enough for me..

 

Post #20

I'm going to stick with if it's good enough for you it's good enough for me.

 

Post #23

Besides, if it's good enough for Moun10Bike, it's good enough for me.

I think we got it now. Best of luck

 

P.S. to add, I like the bridge analogy :lol:

 

No, actually it's very clear that some have *not* gotten it yet! ;)

Link to comment

Post #1

If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.

 

Post #10

If it's good enough for GS employees it's good enough for me..

 

Post #20

I'm going to stick with if it's good enough for you it's good enough for me.

 

Post #23

Besides, if it's good enough for Moun10Bike, it's good enough for me.

 

I think we got it now. Best of luck

 

P.S. to add, I like the bridge analogy :lol:

 

The forum regulars more or less see TCM as either cheating or not geocaching but the way I see it if lackeys are using the technique then in my opinion it is geocaching and is not cheating or the wouldn't/shouldn't be doing it so I will partake in it as well.

 

Now if the lackeys were to jump off a bridge most likely plummeting to their death, well that's not geocaching is it, there would be no reason to copy them.

 

It's a silly analogy because you've got nothing better.

Link to comment

What it boils down to is they used it on a power trail and as they work for GS then it must be OK to use on power trails unless it goes against the wishes of the CO.

Well, no, it shows that's it's OK if it goes with the wishes of the CO. In other words, it's not OK simply because the CO doesn't express an opinion one way or the other.

 

I didn't think this was news. I thought we already knew GS didn't care if COs allowed 3-card monte.

 

Guess we will see, I'll update this thread everytime I link to it while replying to someone complaining in generL how three cache monte is not geocaching or how it's cheating.

 

Just because some lackeys do something doesn't make it acceptable. You are just kicking the ball into the neighbor's yard, and you know it.

 

Lackeys should partake in geocaching as embassabors to the sport, since they are employed by the company they should be held to higher standards. Obviously they saw nothing wrong with TCM.

 

Funny thing, I am supporting them for the way they cached, I don't consider their actions not geocaching or cheating.

Edited by Roman!
Link to comment

Just as a side note, what is the definition of a troll? Wikipedia says it is "a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response". Is this correct?

 

I know this is off topic, but somehow the question popped up in my head while reading this thread.

Link to comment

Trolls.jpg

 

I'm outa here. See ya.

 

Every company I ever worked for I was held accountable for my actions at all times to represent the company in a positive light.

 

Now imagine if we found out the Lackeys were armchair logging thousands of caches, there'd be an out cry as it is outright cheating, the fact you're all focused on proving me wrong just shows there is absolutely nothing wrong with TCM.

Edited by Roman!
Link to comment

I'm sorry but I can't go along with the TCM approach, I think it waters down and cheapens the game.

It removes one of the basic precepts of the game which is, find a cache, sign the log and rehide for the next geocacher to find.

If this were to become accepted practice then I would be able to go find your cache,(it could be any of you) sign the log and because I'm too busy or time is short or I'm too lazy. "insert your excuse here", take the cache and drop it off at the next cache I find, pick up that one and repeat.

Geocaching would become Geochaos.

 

I'm not going to play the game that way but most assuredly, there are some that would, or at least would try..

Link to comment

This thread was started as a shortcut to boost finds. I would have to agree that TCM goes against one of the basic principals of geocaching which is to sign the log and put it back in the cache. Remember virtual caches? As I remember they were grandfathered because of log issues. I'd sure disapprove if someone were to use the TCM approach on one of my 13 year old caches. Numbers have created a dark side to geocaching for some. Are numbers really that important? ...... Not for this player, that's all they are, just numbers.

Link to comment

The forum regulars more or less see TCM as either cheating...

 

My mistake. My impression was that most of the forum regulars considered it as stupid.

 

There's also the alternative interpretation that might be considered. Power Trails aren't really geocaching, so there's really no sense in using regularly accepted practices with something that is basically a side game. Kind of like claiming a FTF.

Link to comment

The forum regulars more or less see TCM as either cheating...

 

My mistake. My impression was that most of the forum regulars considered it as stupid.

 

There's also the alternative interpretation that might be considered. Power Trails aren't really geocaching, so there's really no sense in using regularly accepted practices with something that is basically a side game. Kind of like claiming a FTF.

 

So standing in the hot sun signing a lot is smarter?

 

And caches placed simply and densely are somehow less authentic than the epic caches that are your paradigm of "real" caches??

Link to comment

I'm sorry but I can't go along with the TCM approach, I think it waters down and cheapens the game.

It removes one of the basic precepts of the game which is, find a cache, sign the log and rehide for the next geocacher to find.

If this were to become accepted practice then I would be able to go find your cache,(it could be any of you) sign the log and because I'm too busy or time is short or I'm too lazy. "insert your excuse here", take the cache and drop it off at the next cache I find, pick up that one and repeat.

Geocaching would become Geochaos.

 

I'm not going to play the game that way but most assuredly, there are some that would, or at least would try..

 

The "slippery slope" argument doesn't persuade me. Certain areas have known "power trails," & it is there and there alone that COs are fine with container-swapping.

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