Jump to content

Cachepolice...


Recommended Posts

Some of you may not understand PC well enough to comprehend what MrGigabyte had to say, so I'm offering the following translation.

 

quote:
I have just been alerted to this thread by some very disparaging emails for some fellow cachers. I would like to offer a an explanation here if I may.

 

TRANSLATION: Oops. I got caught.

 

quote:
I was aware of these photos. However, the talents of a creator of these images are considerably beyond the skills that I possess. He is a graphic artist who has growing interest in caching. He is also, a graphic artist with my firm.

 

TRANSLATION: It wasn't cheating; it was art.

 

quote:
While I am aware of these images, and take full responsibility, I was not really all that concerned at the time. The logs were made with my knowledge, but felt no harm would be done.

 

TRANSLATION: I have no integrity, but I'm not that worried about it and you shouldn't be either.

 

quote:
To any locationless cache owners and other cahers in general who are offended, I offer my apologies.

 

TRANSLATION: Oopsie poopsie.

 

Now I understand that the world won't stop turning because someone lied and cheated in a game. I also understand that he sold his integrity pretty darn cheap. But good grief, this wasn't an accident or some single bad decision. He lied and cheated many times over an extended period and involved someone "who has a growing interest in caching" -- huh? What exactly are you teaching this person?

 

It makes me think of a recent article in the "That's Outrageous" section of the Readers Digest where students were caught using canned term papers and they (and their parents) put so much pressure on the principal that he tried to force the teacher to give them credit for the purchased papers.

 

Maybe we need a "That's Outrageous" section here. MrGigabyte, if you're sincere in your apology, then I hope you will be deleting all the phony logs. That, at least, can be done quickly, which is more than I can say for the damage to your reputation. (I have this image of Gomer Pyle shaking his finger saying, "Fer shame, fer shame, fer shame!)

 

Geocaching is so cool. It bums me out when one of us isn't.

 

-honeychile-

 

'*+.,_,.+*'`'*+.,_A joyful heart is good medicine!_,.+*'`'*+.,_,.+*'`

Link to comment

quote:
While I am aware of these images, and take full responsibility, I was not really all that concerned at the time. The logs were made with my knowledge, but felt no harm would be done.

To any locationless cache owners and other cachers in general who are offended, I offer my apologies.


 

Hey, I didn't realize that Bill Clinton was into Geocaching.

 

But seriously what was his crime? In entire scheme of what is important in the world, it amounted to nothing. Nobody died, nobody lost heir money.

 

The only thing that was lost was this guy's reputation in the Geocaching community. This he deserves. I do feel for him, because if he spent so much effort deceiving us, dishonesty is part of his nature. That is what saddens me the most.

 

[This message was edited by BrianSnat on August 27, 2002 at 06:59 PM.]

Link to comment

As one of the locationless cache "owners", I was distraught at what to do with these fake pics. Numerous people emailed me complaining of the pictures, but what is a cache owner to do? These people who notified me of the pictures requested that the logs be deleted, no more logs allowed by the cacher, etc. I, for one, am no great graphical whiz that can tell a fake from a real picture. In my eyes, it could be real, but closer looking showed it might not. Therefore it made it difficult for me to to decide the course of action (delete or not). On one hand, I can have the logs deleted, but rob a cacher of a find. On the other, I have cachers demanding action. What MrGigabyte did (or his "friend") made many people upset apparently (and put me in a tough spot). Am I mad? NO! Am I disappointed in the person? YES! Will I hold it against him? NO!

 

I think the apology he offered was good enough, but he should also realize that he won't be trusted for a while and will be watched very closely.

 

MrGigabyte--Play right & apology accepted.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:

Yeah, I'm hoping it's a "What took you guys so long!" kind of a joke. Perhaps HE is the Cachepolice.


 

Oh man Geospotter, I loved your alien shot! and I also was thinking they were maybe one in the same (The cache police). But.. doesn't look like it. But what a great prank! Post phony posts for months, switch ID's and start turning yourself in! Not that I want to see anyone do it. I perfer straight up honesty. But it would have been clever.

 

4497_300.jpg

Link to comment

I had hoped my earlier apology would have sufficed. However, the stream of derogatory email persists. I had hoped I had made it clear that I did indeed know of these postings, for which I must assume responsibility, but there was never any malicious intent at any point.

 

Very few of you know me personally. Those who do, know I would not cheat. The character bashing by those of you who who do not know me appears to go far beyond what is warranted in this situation. It is just a game after all.

 

I made an error in judgement by not controlling the actions of others for which I now am responsible. At the time, I was quite impressed with the few images and gave no regard log counts as such.

 

Now, perhaps if any of you actually have any real GPS related questions, I would be happy to help, as I always have.

Link to comment

Why allow someone else to use your ID to log caches using bogus photos? Are you opposed to locationless/virtual caches?

 

The "artist" is only literate in Photoshop, but not in ways/means of creating an ID at geocaching.com?

 

Very puzzling...

 

------------------------

icon_wink.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Mr. Gigabyte:

I had hoped my earlier apology would have sufficed. However, the stream of derogatory email persists.


 

Mr. Gigabyte,

You are correct, your earlier apology should have been the end of the discussion. If people are sending you harrassing e-mail, then they are the ones with personal issues they need to deal with. Attacking you only reduces their position in the moral hierarchy of life.

 

You took responsibility, you apologized. All that need be said is, 'Shame on you, apology accepted, don't let it happen again, now lets get back to the game.

 

 

Misguided One.

Link to comment

quote:

Very few of you know me personally. Those who do, know I would not cheat.


 

This "apology" is rather interesting in light of what George (who started this thread) reported last night. He said that MrGigabyte denied any knowledge of forgeries and demanded proof.

 

Either MrGigabyte was lying then or he's lying now. Or both.

Link to comment

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL MESSAGE FROM GEOCACHING.COM

If you wish to email this person, visit your "my cache page" link on Geocaching.com and use the Email a player link. Please send any abuse complaints to contact@geocaching.com

---------------------------------------------------

 

User MrGigabyte has contacted you with the following message:

 

Arches and Whaling Walls.

 

You've been caught....

 

Hello George.

 

Thank you for your recent email.

 

However, i am somewhat confused. Exactly what part of our teams logs are in question/ We have all the orignal photgraphs that you are welcome to review. If you could provide a reason for your comments, it would be most aprreciated.

 

Thanks you

 

-------------------

Below this was my email telling him he was caught.

 

george

 

Remember: Half the people you meet are below average.

5867_200.gif

Link to comment

It's disturbing to all of us in the Geocaching community that there are dishonest people among us. Yes, in the big picture, this is a silly and meaningless sport. But in a way it is a microcosm of our society. We have "saints", cheats and thieves among us. Most of us are just average people with the basic faults...we may drive too fast, drink too much, take a longer lunch than allowed at work and maybe bring an extra pencil home. Then there are others who go out of their way to lie, cheat or steal.

 

I really hope that it was an overenthusiastic employee who logged your fake posts, but for some reason that doesn't add up. I had joked about your being Bill Clinton earlier in this thread and I'm not too far off it seems. You are either a politician, or should be one. And to use the tragedy experienced by another Geocacher to try to deflect criticism of your alleged actions is really pathetic. You should be ashamed of yourself

 

"Life is a daring adventure, or it is nothing" - Helen Keller

Link to comment

Are we on the same planet?

 

"Those who do, know I would not cheat."

 

Dude, you DID cheat. You claimed credit for caches you didn't find and uploaded phony photos to support the fraudulent claims. This isn't "disparaging" talk; it isn't something subjective open to various intepretations; it's a statement of fact.

 

No one has to bash your character -- you've presented it to us pre-bashed at your own hands. "Character" isn't limited to what we do in big, public, important situations; character is also who we are and what we do in small, seemingly unimportant situations, sometimes when we think no one is looking.

 

By the way, referring one of the folks you cheated to the death notice of a well-loved geocacher is inappropriate. Most things pale when compared to death; that doesn't mean what you did was right or less important. That was a really cheap shot.

 

There are still quite a few phony photos and logs out there with your name on them - getting rid of those will add some credence to the genuineness of your apology.

 

-honeychile-

 

'*+.,_,.+*'`'*+.,_A joyful heart is good medicine!_,.+*'`'*+.,_,.+*'`

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by georgeandmary:

Below this was my email telling him he was caught.

george


 

For what it is worth, we did not know what the heck he was talking about in his email as I have all my own original images at the ready.

 

Regrettably, George has chosen to post personal email between us to a public forum. In rebuttal, I reluctantly follow suit. It appears we are not alone. GEORGE himself admits to forging locationless cache logs. Below is the full email we received.

 

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL MESSAGE FROM GEOCACHING.COM

This user has given you their email address, so simply reply to this message to contact them directly. Please send any abuse complaints to contact@geocaching.com

---------------------------------------------------

 

User georgeandmary has contacted you with the following message:

 

Arches and Whaling Walls.

 

You've been caught....

 

You're locationless finds will be deleted tomorrow. I'm leaving them up so some friends can have a good laugh. I mean you no ill will and have a certain level of respect for you sneakiness but now that you're caught I have to delete. To tell the truth, I did the same thing for a locationless a buddy of mine has. But I then told the truth after about a week and deleted my find myself.

 

see ya,

 

george

 

The user has also sent you their email address (or reply to this message):

gcrawfor@altair.csustan.edu

 

[This message was edited by MrGigabyte on August 27, 2002 at 10:11 PM.]

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by MrGigabyte:

Regrettably, George has chosen to post personal email between us to a public forum. In rebuttal, I reluctantly follow suit.


 

Hey, I was wondering - is there a course I can take to be like you? I hope it isn't too expensive. I'd like to get started right away, if possible.

 

Thanks!

 

snazzsig.jpg

Link to comment

When I did, I expected to get caught and when I didn't get caught I filled in the locals on the joke.

 

I can even find the thread on the local forums where I told everyone...

 

http://opentopic.Groundspeak.com/0/OpenTopic?q=Y&a=tpc&s=1750973553&f=3000938983&m=4680904893&p=9

 

This was the thread, About half way down...

"Speaking of Locationless Caches"

 

It was where I brought up to the Central California Group that I had doctored the photo on the Locationless cache placed by a friend. I then deleted my 'find'.

 

Like I said. I thought your fake photos were clever in a sneaky sort of way but when you denied it after you were obviously caught, I lost any respect I had.

 

I never even brought up your name in the forum and went to lenghts not to. But then you refused to be contrite and take responsibility for you actions.

 

That's what makes the difference. I took responsibility and let people in on the joke. I don't see you joking.

 

george

 

Remember: Half the people you meet are below average.

5867_200.gif

Link to comment

quote:

While I am aware of these images, and take full responsibility, I was not really all that concerned at the time. The logs were made with my knowledge, but felt no harm would be done.


 

Sorry I'm with George & co.

 

I remember mailing him about the found log he placed on the suspension bridges locationless cache page, this was when it turned up.

It did not meet the criteria that I set, he sent a nasty reply back about this point.

If I remember correctly it went like this:

Threatened to challenge me or anyone else legally icon_confused.gif that tried to say that the find did not meet the criteria. besides " He was an engineer, and knew this stuff !" icon_rolleyes.gif

Criteria was that it had to be a suspension bridge similar in construction to the golden gate bridge, NOT a cable stayed suspension bridge.

Plus I had not met "the hand" then anyway, and did not even know it was a faker !

 

This argument was from Mr G himself, and certainly makes me think that he was VERY concerned about getting every log possible, not really what his quote above or further along says.

 

Anyway, out in the open now, Is Mr g going to delete all of the bogus logs himself is the question.

I think his credibility will certainly take a nosedive for a bit, but what the heck it isonly a game...

It has given us all a great forum though ! icon_wink.gif

 

The big question is, Who are the Cachepolice ?

 

[This message was edited by Team Piggy on August 28, 2002 at 03:15 AM.]

Link to comment

See, this is why I hate virtual/locationless caches. What kinda weirdo does this thing over and over again? Doing it once for a joke I can see (even though it's not funny). But more than once? C'mon!?

 

"There's no need to be afraid of strange noises in the night. Anything that intends you harm will stalk you silently."

Link to comment

No pun intended here, but let's be honest: what we see here is a systematic pattern of deception over an extended period of time.

 

How one reacts to this is really a factor of your moral code.

 

The perpetrator is apparently a good fellow in other ways (or alternatively a quite skilled sociopath). Perhaps he enjoyed the feeling of putting one over on others - he seems a bright guy, perhaps he feels his superior intelligence and understanding of his own motives assures him the moral high ground.

 

For other people the question is: does it matter if we are honest in something like this? After all, it's only a game, there are no prizes, etc. In this case for me that argument is largely negated by the hurt feelings and suspicion the cache "placers" now feel. Our actions do have effects outside ourselves, and whether we choose to care about how we make others feel is again a function of our moral code.

 

I am not a big fan of virtual or locationless caches, but that's as may be. Things like this are one of the reasons why, but to each their own.

 

I appreciate those who brought this forward - at the end of the day we are self-policing after all.

 

I wouldn't like to see the hobby drive anyone out, but here's my sense: An adult like the perpetrator here is probably not going to alter his moral code based on anything that is said or done. He either regards his dishonesty in this case as unimportant (gee, what's all the fuss about? lighten up, everyone) or non-existant (it wasn't REALLY a lie), and will continue to do so.

 

We should choose to continue to encourage the good qualities he brings to the hobby, but we should be under no illusions that he has "learned a lesson" or that this "won't happen again". The wording of his so-called apology makes it clear that nothing in how he sees the world has changed. He regrets being caught and the unfortunate attention, he does not see what he did as wrong.

 

In our daily lives, we all tend to draw the honesty line in different places, and justify those times we lie. Incidents like this remind me to maybe scutinize where I put that line a little bit more, move a little closer to total honesty.

Link to comment

Greetings,

 

The logs in question for my Observatory Quest and Historic Forts locationless geocaches have been deleted - but not by me. After reading the apology posted this morning by MrGigabyte, I decided to delete his logs from my caches. When I looked, they had already been deleted. I have no idea if there are any more to worry about or not, but I did search my other locationless caches for that username - there were none. I guess he made his own decision to delete his logs, and I agree with him. And who knows if it was his employee that posted the fake logs, or if that's just a convenient story to get off the hook? Perhaps we'll never know.

 

There are probably other players who are using fake confirmation photos for virtual and locationless caches. If it helps combat this unfortunate abuse, and therefore helps maintain the integrity of the game, I suppose that establishing a separate category for locationless caches might be a useful strategy. Such a category could be set up to keep the find-logs for locationless caches separate from the more traditional caches, and thereby remove the incentive some players might have to produce high numbers of finds by cheating with fake photos.

 

On the other hand, since virtual caches, unlike locationless caches require players to go to a specific location, I would be reluctant to lump virtual caches in with locationless caches. That doesn't seem fair.

 

There has probably been more cheating with locationless caches than with virtual caches. There seems to be a group of players who dislike locationless caches, probably more than they dislike virtual caches, and maybe some of them are messing with locationless caches just to ruin the whole category, or to bug the owners of locationless caches. They have some kind of severely dogmatic attitude about maintaing the purity of geocaching by insisting there be a box of trinkets hidden in the woods, or whatever.

 

So, my vote, if it matters, is to keep virtual caches in the main group for counting finds and hides, and to create a separate category entirely for locationless caches - like the separate category for benchmarks.

 

Having a separate category for locationless caches might also mean that the volunteer "approvers" at geocaching.com could relax, and be a bit less intense about how they scrutinize new locationless cache submissions. It seems that most those submissions get archived immediately.

 

There's a kind of "shoot first" attitude about approving new locationless caches working at geocaching.com. I know some of mine got iced right off the bat. This is unfortunate. Unlike some very silly locationless cache themes, which are always pointed out to me when the approvers make their cases against my new caches, I put a fair amount of thought and work into mine. Some of my locationless caches have been extremely popular with players all over the globe. Others are pretty unique, and therefore, no so easy to log (at least legitimately).

 

Here are two examples, one common & one difficult:

 

Diners Club - 131 logs

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=21289

 

Chess for Kings - 9 logs

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=28365

 

My feeling is that when you can come up with an interesting theme for a locationless cache, and can follow Jeremy's guidelines for creating one, then the approvers should be able to post your new cache with a minimum of effort and analysis. Perhaps, afterall, this little fiasco with fake photos will result in some progress in developing the sport. Let's hope so!

 

Anton - N2RUD

Syracuse, NY

Link to comment

quote:

Maybe we need a "That's Outrageous" section here. MrGigabyte, if you're sincere in your apology, then I hope you will be deleting all the phony logs. That, at least, can be done quickly, which is more than I can say for the damage to your reputation. (I have this image of Gomer Pyle shaking his finger saying, "Fer shame, fer shame, fer shame!)


 

I just wanted to put in here... Yesterday while I was looking up all of his logs, I noticed his found number shrink from 154 to 140. Either he was, or the cache owners were, deleting his logs. I hope all of them are gone so we do not have to think about it anymore. I am disappointed that this puts locationless caches in a poor light. I hope we can get past it.

 

-------------------------------------

Becky Davis

San Jose, CA

Cache 'n' carry... My 4 year old!

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by MrGigabyte:

I was aware of these photos. However, the talents of a creator of these images are considerably beyond the skills that I possess. He is a graphic artist who has growing interest in caching. He is also, a graphic artist with my firm.


So you're blaming it all on someone else then. Nothing like a little personal responsibility. Sad too that this person you claim has a growing interest in geocaching is learning about it from a cheater.

 

quote:
While I am aware of these images, and take full responsibility, I was not really all that concerned at the time.

Not "really all that concerned" that you were responsible for deliberately posting fraudulent finds on caches you did not visit? In other words, cheating is just a-ok with you then?

 

quote:
The logs were made with my knowledge, but felt no harm would be done.


Nope, except to your reputation.

 

My feeling is that all of this cheater's logs should be removed from the site, then his membership privileges on geocaching.com should be revoked. That will send a clear message to the geocaching community that honesty, integrity and good sportsmanship are as important in our sport as any other. Just my opinion.

Link to comment

Its been no secret that some people do an internet search to find the answers to virtual caches' verification questions. This issue is mostly ignored, in my opinion, because no one is 'harmed' by the action.

 

Locationless caches are different, however. Each of these locations can only be logged once. Is the local bridge, stadium, kugel ball, etc is logged inappropriately, local cachers who would have otherwise logged these items are unable to do so.

 

For this reason, I am completely dissatisfied with MrGigabyte's dismissal that he was aware of the logs so its no big deal.

 

[This message was edited by sbell111 on August 28, 2002 at 09:49 AM.]

Link to comment

I really wish locationless caches were a separate count - not just because of what's happened here.

 

I wasn't interested at ALL in benchmarks, until they started being counted on their own; now they have SOME appeal to me.

 

Same with locationless. I really don't like them because I don't even want MY OWN number of finds to increase because of them, but if they became their own count I'd see them as a separate game, and probably start doing them.

 

As far as "trinkets in a box" where I live the caches are very creative. Our caching community prides itself on its creativity, and they don't seem that way at all. Each find is unique around here. Hopefully other areas will become like this also.

 

I vote MAKE LOCATIONLESS ITS OWN COUNT! I want virtual caches to stay with the "regular" cache count because in my small experience they're about as difficult as an easy regular cache, sometimes more difficult and you DO have to go to a specific coordinate.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by pipedreamer:

...My feeling is that all of this cheater's logs should be removed from the site, then his membership privileges on geocaching.com should be revoked...


 

The problem is, there's nothing stopping someone from establishing another GeoCaching membership under a different name using different contact info (not much effort for someone who takes the time to doctor photos for bogus cache finds). For all we know, 'MrG' is already GeoCaching (honestly or otherwise) under another name.

 

What this guy did is obvious. That he's alone is unlikely (he just happened to get caught). How much we let people like this detract from the enjoyment of GeoCaching is directly proportional to the energy we expend in making this thread an endless stream of repetitive venting (the thread served its purpose several posts ago). If there's to be a constructive discussion of the future of locationless caches, perhaps it would be better served by initiating a separate, more focused forum expressly for that purpose.

 

He did it. He knows *we* know he did it. We should move on.

 

(...and HAVE FUN!)

 

[This message was edited by Cache Canucks on August 28, 2002 at 10:18 AM.]

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by ZachNLiam:

I really wish locationless caches were a separate count - not just because of what's happened here.

 

I wasn't interested at ALL in benchmarks, until they started being counted on their own; now they have SOME appeal to me.

 

Same with locationless. I really don't like them because I don't even want MY OWN number of finds to increase because of them, but if they became their own count I'd see them as a separate game, and probably start doing them.

 

As far as "trinkets in a box" where I live the caches are very creative. Our caching community prides itself on its creativity, and they don't seem that way at all. Each find is unique around here. Hopefully other areas will become like this also.

 

I vote MAKE LOCATIONLESS ITS OWN COUNT! I want virtual caches to stay with the "regular" cache count because in my small experience they're about as difficult as an easy regular cache, sometimes more difficult and you DO have to go to a specific coordinate.


 

ZachNLiam: I concur 100% with every one of your points and I, too, would prefer if Locationless caches were in a section of their own. (I have a couple of Locationless caches in my found count and really don't care to have them there.) Physical caches and Virutal caches should remain together. If my vote were to matter, that would be it. Cheers ...

 

~Rich in NEPA~

 

1132_1200.jpg

 

=== A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===

Link to comment

This has nothing to do with locationless caches. It has everything to do about cheating. The question should be: Why would anyone cheat at this game? It would take a petty person to do such a thing.

 

Cheated? Yes, but the locationless cache made me do it.

 

If the #2 pencil is the most popular, why is it still #2?

 

[This message was edited by civilwarranger on August 28, 2002 at 11:32 AM.]

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Geo Quest:

See, this is why I hate virtual/locationless caches. What kinda weirdo does this thing over and over again? Doing it once for a joke I can see (even though it's not funny). But more than once? C'mon!?

 

"There's no need to be afraid of strange noises in the night. Anything that intends you harm will stalk you silently."


 

ain't nothing that keeps someone from faking log entries for traditional caches, either.

 

how many cache hiders do you think compare the signed logs from their caches to the cache logs on the site?

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by ZachNLiam:

I really wish locationless caches were a separate count - not just because of what's happened here.

 

I wasn't interested at ALL in benchmarks, until they started being counted on their own; now they have SOME appeal to me.

 

Same with locationless. I really don't like them because I don't even want MY OWN number of finds to increase because of them, but if they became their own count I'd see them as a separate game, and probably start doing them.

 

As far as "trinkets in a box" where I live the caches are very creative. Our caching community prides itself on its creativity, and they don't seem that way at all. Each find is unique around here. Hopefully other areas will become like this also.

 

I vote MAKE LOCATIONLESS ITS OWN COUNT! I want virtual caches to stay with the "regular" cache count because in my small experience they're about as difficult as an easy regular cache, sometimes more difficult and you DO have to go to a specific coordinate.


 

If you don't want the locationless caches in your count, you don't have to log them on the site when you find them. from looking at signed logs from my caches, it looks like maybe 2/3 of the people who find them never bother to log them.

 

It's possible to design a virtual that requires actually going to the site -- you just have to take the time to make sure that the information isn't available on the web.

 

and it's just as easy to post a bogus online log entry for a traditional, if not easier, since no one has to fake a photo to fake a traditional log entry.

Link to comment

You can cheat anything, but I don't. And I can check my own caches that I've hidden for signed logs. Of course you could have someone ELSE log that for you, but SOMEONE had to make it out there!

 

I want locationless to be its own count NOT because of any cheating reason. I just think they're different and should be counted differently. That's all. Has nothing to do with cheating or not.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by MrGigabyte:

quote:
Originally posted by FlyfishNC:

As one of the locationless cache "owners", I was distraught


 

I am sorry you are distraught over the false logs on your locationless cache. I already apologized. Perhaps you may wish to http://opentopic.Groundspeak.com/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1750973553&f=3000917383&m=9700962135 You are distraught over a cache, a photo and a meaningless log. Sometimes life becomes unbalanced.


 

I'm very sorry you are distraught over the email you've received regarding your forged photos and faked logs on locationless caches.

 

Perhaps you may wish to view an entirely unrelated thread and put your life back in perspective - namely, you are a cheater, and now everyone knows you are a cheater, and if you're unhappy about it, well, I guess that's because you screwed up and now your life is out of balance.

 

Don't view it as hate email, view it as a 'life lesson'.

Link to comment

So, this thread has clearly pointed out that cheating is bad. That's good!

 

We've learned that people are paying attention to logs posted to caches. That's good, too!

 

We've learned that some cache owners will not hesitate to take appropriate action ... namely, deleting "finds" that have proven to be fraudulent. That's reassuring!

 

The other major issue covered was that many people want locationless caches to be counted separately from physical and virtual caches. Fine by me.

 

Can we lock this thread down and put it to bed now? Please??

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

So, this thread has clearly pointed out that cheating is bad. That's good!

 

We've learned that people are paying attention to logs posted to caches. That's good, too!

 

We've learned that some cache owners will not hesitate to take appropriate action ... namely, deleting "finds" that have proven to be fraudulent. That's reassuring!

 

The other major issue covered was that many people want locationless caches to be counted separately from physical and virtual caches. Fine by me.

 

Can we lock this thread down and put it to bed now? Please??


 

We can't be dunne yet, dunne's in California.

 

Oh, no, that's not what I meant to say: We're not done until we've done the part of the thread where we speculate on who Cachepolice is. . .

Link to comment

Look at this as an opportunity for a new type of cache - The Fantasy Cache. Pump up your numbers from the comfort of your favorite chair. No energy? Too tired to venture outdoors? No desire for fresh air? No gas in your car? No matter! Just as long as you have access to some sort of photo editing program….you can impress friends with all the places you haven't been! Only foolin' yourself? Naaw....you know what you're doing….but hopefully nobody else will.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by ZachNLiam:

 

As far as "trinkets in a box" where I live the caches are very creative. Our caching community prides itself on its creativity, and they don't seem that way at all. Each find is unique around here. Hopefully other areas will become like this also.


 

You know, this always got to me as well in the discussions on vandalism of caches. There was always someone who would come back with "who would want to steal a happy meal toy". I've got to say that there are some mighty nice caches out there along with the ones that only have trinkets. If all you are finding is happy meal toys then that says a lot about the community you choose to play your sport in.

Link to comment

When I was refering to creative caches, I meant more how they're hidden and how the titles and locations and descriptions refer to them. Sometimes even the container itself. A Daliesque thing, if you will.

 

I wasn't refering necessarilly to what's INSIDE the cache, but what you have to do to find it.

Link to comment

Ok, so I'm not a cache policeman but the subject intrigued me the other day so I read the thread, and thought it was silly of someone to go to such extents. Then today I am on the subject of "Do other people do this?" and there in the replies is one from KyTrex and it has a picutre alongside and LO AND BEHOLD!!! there is the same hand in the photo. Is he real or is he Photo Shop? icon_confused.gif Check it out: http://opentopic.Groundspeak.com/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1750973553&f=3000917383&m=9830918135

I don't make this stuff up.

Cache you later,

Planet icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif

Link to comment

Living and caching in the same city (Vancouver BC Canada) as the illustrious MrGigabyte i am adding my 2 cents...

 

I notice that one of the sentiments epxpressed here is that this doesn't effect anybody. While not a great effect, what about the "real" cachers (read: non-cheating) who would have like to have gotten off of their butts and logged these caches the traditional way. Wanting to log the "needles of the world" cache i had to drive to Seattle to snag the Space Needle because i had thought that MrG had got off the couch and logged our local needle (Harbour Ctr). Instead it turns out that MrG (or someone at his firm, IN HIS NAME, who has WAY too much time on his hands and should probably dust off the old resume) faked a find.

 

Seneca wrote:

-----------------------

The man in question is an ardent Geocacher who has added tremendously to caching in our area

-----------------------

 

I would ask, What has he done for local caching / cachers now that this has come up?

He prevented LOCAL cachers from logging:

 

Needles of the world (the harbour ctr)

Disc golf Roundup (Little Mtn disc golf course)

Suspension Bridges (Alex Fraser Memorial...which BTW IS cable stayed)

 

He prevented Victoria cachers frm logging their local observatory...

 

Hawaii has felt the Photoshop fingers of MrG as well judging from the damning pics posted here.

 

How many others were prevented from logging legit finds by the, now exposed, cheater.

 

I know its a game, but games have rules. Thats what makes them games. Otherwise, its just herds of people milling about.

 

Thats my 2 cents (sorry American cachers...after exchange its only 1.12 cents)

 

Canbill

--------------

 

Can Bill what?

 

"GeoCoins MIGHT have been seen in this cache - If I had actually been there"

 

[This message was edited by canbill on August 30, 2002 at 02:21 PM.]

 

[This message was edited by canbill on August 30, 2002 at 03:16 PM.]

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