Jump to content

Saving this for reference, three cache monte approved.


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

I know there is no fine line on what constitutes a power trail but it would be nice if one could be established so that they could be separated from and not affect geocaches.

 

I think this is what is really lacking. If someone wants to throw a pill bottle out the window of a van every 160 yards on a utility road in the hinterlands, hooray for them, doesn't affect me.

 

It's when this behaviour starts being applied beyond "power trails" - and it does - that it becomes bothersome to cache owners and problematic for honest geocachers. If we could better differentiate between this variation of geocaching, which some people apparently enjoy, and original-style geocaching, there would be less conflict. It would validate those who seem to need the validation, and give the rest of us a clear way to differentiate our geocaches and our geocaching from that.

 

The first cache was a traditional and there was no PAF or previous log posts to help, are you saying all your finds are trads and you never used PAF or read previous logs for help.

 

Anything else is an evolution of geocaching, you see, you are not an honest geocacher either.

 

i do however agree that TCM should not be applied beyond obvious power trails and would not be impressed with anyone who did.

Edited by Roman!
Link to comment
The first cache was a traditional and there was no PAF or previous log posts to help, are you saying all your finds are trads and you never used PAF or read previous logs for help.

 

Anything else is an evolution of geocaching, you see, you are not an honest geocacher either.

And it was a partially buried 5-gallon bucket that contained food items. Anything else is an evolution of geocaching.
Link to comment
The first cache was a traditional and there was no PAF or previous log posts to help, are you saying all your finds are trads and you never used PAF or read previous logs for help.

 

Anything else is an evolution of geocaching, you see, you are not an honest geocacher either.

And it was a partially buried 5-gallon bucket that contained food items. Anything else is an evolution of geocaching.

 

Now you understand :)

Link to comment

I know there is no fine line on what constitutes a power trail but it would be nice if one could be established so that they could be separated from and not affect geocaches.

 

I think this is what is really lacking. If someone wants to throw a pill bottle out the window of a van every 160 yards on a utility road in the hinterlands, hooray for them, doesn't affect me.

 

It's when this behaviour starts being applied beyond "power trails" - and it does - that it becomes bothersome to cache owners and problematic for honest geocachers. If we could better differentiate between this variation of geocaching, which some people apparently enjoy, and original-style geocaching, there would be less conflict. It would validate those who seem to need the validation, and give the rest of us a clear way to differentiate our geocaches and our geocaching from that.

 

The first cache was a traditional and there was no PAF or previous log posts to help, are you saying all your finds are trads and you never used PAF or read previous logs for help.

 

Anything else is an evolution of geocaching, you see, you are not an honest geocacher either.

 

i do however agree that TCM should not be applied beyond obvious power trails and would not be impressed with anyone who did.

 

I think there needs to be a clear line between:

 

1. A game where a container is found, log is signed, and container is thoughtfully placed back into place.

 

2. A game where containers are permanently removed, replaced, duplicated etc. to facilitate speed.

 

This is where the conflict is. This is the divergence that causes problems for others. Again, as I have clearly stated, I don't believe it is possible to cheat and I see no reason to take issue with people doing this on recognized power trails, just as I see no reason to fuss about what other people claim as a find, etc.

 

When someone starts vandalizing original-style geocaches because they think the power trail way is the accepted way, that is a problem.

Link to comment

If TCM was to become allowed in the guidelines, than the basic premise of geocaching would be changed. I don't see this happening as geocaching has never been about numbers. Once power trails start interfering with traditional caching, I see them going the way of location-less and virtual caches. I for one would not start trying to bend the rules (and encourage others) to boost my find count or you might ruin power trails for the rest of us that follow the guidelines.

Edited by TahoeJoe
Link to comment

If TCM was to become allowed in the guidelines, than the basic premise of geocaching would be changed. I don't see this happening as geocaching has never been about numbers. Once power trails start interfering with traditional caching, I see them going the way of location-less and virtual caches. I for one would not start trying to bend the rules (and encourage others) to boost my find count or you might ruin power trails for the rest of us that follow the guidelines.

 

Don't puzzle caches that require long hours on the computer change the premise of geocaching, what about events, earthcaches, they all do. Things change, get over it, why do you think PTs are thriving? Maybe a large number of people enjoy them.

Link to comment

I repeat:

 

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.

 

What do you folks think is happening here? Just walk away and let Roman! play his silly game by himself.

 

The answer to your question is clear. Roman! has given us something to do, a purpose in life, and I truly believe we will live longer and be happier because of this thread.

 

Don't you feel the *energy* brewing inside you?! B) You're gonna take the world by the tail tomorrow, kiddo!

 

Alright, a quick technical point. The *guideline* says return cache to original location. The intent is to avoid taking it home or rehiding elsewhere. The *CO* of a power trail has the right to say - & does say! - that any similar container returned to the correct coords constitutes returning the cache. Therefore, legit.

Link to comment

I repeat:

 

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.

 

What do you folks think is happening here? Just walk away and let Roman! play his silly game by himself.

 

The answer to your question is clear. Roman! has given us something to do, a purpose in life, and I truly believe we will live longer and be happier because of this thread.

 

Don't you feel the *energy* brewing inside you?! B) You're gonna take the world by the tail tomorrow, kiddo!

 

Alright, a quick technical point. The *guideline* says return cache to original location. The intent is to avoid taking it home or rehiding elsewhere. The *CO* of a power trail has the right to say - & does say! - that any similar container returned to the correct coords constitutes returning the cache. Therefore, legit.

 

LOL,

 

Can you imagine what this forum would be like if everyone agreed?

 

Cacher A: I hate power trails.

Cacher B: Yeah, me too.

Cacher C: Me three, they're so lame.

Cacher D: I used to walk 10 miles to school in the snow everyday and it was uphill both ways.

Cacher E: Yeah me too, 10 miles and I hate power trails.

Link to comment
Alright, a quick technical point. The *guideline* says return cache to original location. The intent is to avoid taking it home or rehiding elsewhere. The *CO* of a power trail has the right to say - & does say! - that any similar container returned to the correct coords constitutes returning the cache. Therefore, legit.
Sure, if by "legit" you mean only that it isn't vandalism or destruction of property or anything like that.

 

It still isn't geocaching IMHO.

Link to comment

Oops was going to add on to a post that seems to have been deleted.

 

Anyways I think I retire from these forums, it's lost its appeal for me.

 

I had my suspicions about posts disappearing in the past. Now I *know* it happens. I saw it. That saddens me. I'm dead serious. It's one thing if there's good reason (offensiveness, abuse, etc.), but to delete the merely controversial is *wrong.* Flat out wrong. Does someone really want this forum to be as interesting as day-old oatmeal???

 

And to the last comment in regard to my last post, Geocaching is about finding caches. TCM practitioners find caches.

Link to comment

I had my suspicions about posts disappearing in the past. Now I *know* it happens. I saw it. That saddens me. I'm dead serious. It's one thing if there's good reason (offensiveness, abuse, etc.), but to delete the merely controversial is *wrong.* Flat out wrong. Does someone really want this forum to be as interesting as day-old oatmeal???

 

I had posts deleted too. The problem I have is with the way it's done. Silently deleting is not the way to go. If a mod decides something is against the "rules" then why not do it the way most other forum do it, delete the sentence and add a moderator note saying something was deleted for "*** insert reason here***".

 

I changed my signature after a post of mine was censored as I strongly believe in being able to speak your mind as long as it's done in a respectful way (free speech, US first amendment... that stuff). Censorship never lead to anything

 

#JesuisCharlie

Link to comment

If TCM was to become allowed in the guidelines, than the basic premise of geocaching would be changed. I don't see this happening as geocaching has never been about numbers. Once power trails start interfering with traditional caching, I see them going the way of location-less and virtual caches. I for one would not start trying to bend the rules (and encourage others) to boost my find count or you might ruin power trails for the rest of us that follow the guidelines.

 

Don't puzzle caches that require long hours on the computer change the premise of geocaching, what about events, earthcaches, they all do. Things change, get over it, why do you think PTs are thriving? Maybe a large number of people enjoy them.

Get over what? I think change is a good thing, I have no doubt that people like power trails but that is not what this thread is about. It's about modifying the way you log a cache to boost your find count by switching caches with your own similar cache which happens to include a pre-signed log sheet. One concern I haven't heard yet addressed is that when you switch caches, you are also moving the signatures from one cache location to another location. I'm pretty sure no matter how you try to interpert the guidelines, moving a cache from one spot to a new spot is not the same thing as placing the cache back to it's original location.

Link to comment

I had my suspicions about posts disappearing in the past. Now I *know* it happens. I saw it. That saddens me. I'm dead serious. It's one thing if there's good reason (offensiveness, abuse, etc.), but to delete the merely controversial is *wrong.* Flat out wrong. Does someone really want this forum to be as interesting as day-old oatmeal???

 

I had posts deleted too. The problem I have is with the way it's done. Silently deleting is not the way to go. If a mod decides something is against the "rules" then why not do it the way most other forum do it, delete the sentence and add a moderator note saying something was deleted for "*** insert reason here***".

 

I changed my signature after a post of mine was censored as I strongly believe in being able to speak your mind as long as it's done in a respectful way (free speech, US first amendment... that stuff). Censorship never lead to anything

 

#JesuisCharlie

 

Totally agree with the free speech issue.

 

Now as for this thread. Let's say that a GS official caches with a friend and "commits TCM." Yes, honestly i'd be interested to hear about it. But i'd also be willing to accept that it's a private act and may be kept "in the closet."

 

But if the official comes to the forum and acknowledges he "committed TCM," why is that not fair game for discussion??

 

At most, a moderator post might be warranted like, "Let's stick to issues, not individuals."

 

Here, Roman! made the point that a GS official acknowledged "committing TCM." Roman! argued that the public acknowledgement of TCM by the official showed that three cache monte can't possibly be wrong because an official did it and publicly acknowledged doing it.

 

The official's acknowledgement was matter-of-fact, not something attributed to "mistakes of youth years ago, " or intoxication, or a horrible misjudgement combined with a public request for forgiveness and a promise never to commit such an evil act ever again.

 

Fair game for discussion.

Link to comment

I had my suspicions about posts disappearing in the past. Now I *know* it happens. I saw it. That saddens me. I'm dead serious. It's one thing if there's good reason (offensiveness, abuse, etc.), but to delete the merely controversial is *wrong.* Flat out wrong. Does someone really want this forum to be as interesting as day-old oatmeal???

 

I had posts deleted too. The problem I have is with the way it's done. Silently deleting is not the way to go. If a mod decides something is against the "rules" then why not do it the way most other forum do it, delete the sentence and add a moderator note saying something was deleted for "*** insert reason here***".

 

I changed my signature after a post of mine was censored as I strongly believe in being able to speak your mind as long as it's done in a respectful way (free speech, US first amendment... that stuff). Censorship never lead to anything

 

#JesuisCharlie

 

Totally agree with the free speech issue.

 

Now as for this thread. Let's say that a GS official caches with a friend and "commits TCM." Yes, honestly i'd be interested to hear about it. But i'd also be willing to accept that it's a private act and may be kept "in the closet."

 

But if the official comes to the forum and acknowledges he "committed TCM," why is that not fair game for discussion??

 

At most, a moderator post might be warranted like, "Let's stick to issues, not individuals."

 

Here, Roman! made the point that a GS official acknowledged "committing TCM." Roman! argued that the public acknowledgement of TCM by the official showed that three cache monte can't possibly be wrong because an official did it and publicly acknowledged doing it.

 

The official's acknowledgement was matter-of-fact, not something attributed to "mistakes of youth years ago, " or intoxication, or a horrible misjudgement combined with a public request for forgiveness and a promise never to commit such an evil act ever again.

 

Fair game for discussion.

I have a feeling in this instance if censorship was used it was because emotions were getting strong and the posts were starting to get personal. If that were the case I would have no problem with the offensive post being deleted.

Edited by TahoeJoe
Link to comment

Just my 2 or 4 cents:

 

TCM is not geocaching in my book.

 

A lackey doing things does not approve doing things. The "official" basic rules and guidelines apply, not lackeys deeds (as long as that does not involve making rules and guidelines).

 

Roman!, you may judge Moun10Bike for his deeds, but you may not constitute any rule from these deeds. Even if it were one of the founders or anyone else, it still would be just a bad example. Nothing else, no good representation of the company they work for, nor for the community. But still it doesn't encourage an intelligent soul to copy said bad behaviour. Including jumping from brides. :)

 

If you start doing it only because you see someone else doing it, that's just stupid and it still is bad behaviour. But somehow I feel like I explain basic common sense, social behaviour and independent thinking to my 8 y/o kid...(except that thing with the bride).

 

So, the thread's original intention simply isn't logical. Fascinating. :D

Link to comment

Please let this troll thread die, OK? Pleeeze?

"Troll thread"?? You may be hearing from his lawyers! :anibad:

 

Don't like the thread? Then don't visit it! But Ben0w had things he wanted to say, and I for one found his thoughtful remarks an interesting read!

Link to comment

Please let this troll thread die, OK? Pleeeze?

"Troll thread"?? You may be hearing from his lawyers! :anibad:

 

Don't like the thread? Then don't visit it! But Ben0w had things he wanted to say, and I for one found his thoughtful remarks an interesting read!

 

I didn't realize that I wasn't supposed to visit threads that I don't like. Let me give that some thought...

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...