Jump to content

POOR TASTE OR NOT


Recommended Posts

I really dont feel like explaining it but I guess I will and I will give my reasons after that as to why I dont want to explain it.

 

People have died in crash sites. Whether it be from pilot error or mechanical failure or terrorism.

 

It is noones business to visit these sites to glorify what happened nor is it our place to even visit them in rememberance of who died there. If your a family member then fine, you can go there to show remembrance for a loved one.

 

 

enough said about that,

 

Now the reason I didnt want to even reply to this is I think you like to stir the s*** weisbeck. You like to get reactions out of people and up until now I just ignored you and brushed everything to the side, but with this cache you are trying to get approved you have hit a nerve.

 

It just amazes me that you question admin decisions on a website that is not yours and then try to rally everyone around you when I dont think you have any more interest than to be a troll.

 

I have read several posts where you try to roast the admin's and question their decisions. IT IS THEIR SITE AND THEY WILL RUN IT HOW THEY SEE FIT.

 

If you dont like the way the site is ran, I suggest you go and get a couple hundred thousand dollars of your own money and develop your own version of a geocashing website to be equivalent to this one or go visit geocachingworldwide.com and do your geocaching there.

Link to comment

If you're talking about the site where a 767 went down with 200 people, then that is in poor taste. But I do know people who seek out the crash sites (and remains)of small planes, where in many cases the occupants walked away. I know of several in NY's Catskill mtns. I don't have a problem with that.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Lazyboy & Mitey Mite:

give me a break

If you dont want to visit such a site, then don't.


 

I think the question was more about the ethics or morality of such placements. I choose not to participate in that debate, but I believe your suggestion is absolutely correct.

 

Assuming the cache site received approval from the good folk at geocaching.com, people can "vote" on any underlying issues related to the "controversial" site by electing to visit the site ... or not.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah:

is the http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=22710

 

let jeremy and the othe staff @ geocaching know what you think! icon_cool.gif


 

As long as the cache was oun in the country I didn't think it would bother you. Maybe you should send those to the FBI just to make sure THEY approve. Maybe a terrorist can claim a piece of the crash and learn more about our airline industry.

 

Shouldn't you be out looking for caches?

 

george

 

Remember: Half the people you meet are below average.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah:

is the http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=22710

 

let jeremy and the othe staff @ geocaching know what you think! icon_cool.gif


 

As long as the cache was oun in the country I didn't think it would bother you. Maybe you should send those to the FBI just to make sure THEY approve. Maybe a terrorist can claim a piece of the crash and learn more about our airline industry.

 

Shouldn't you be out looking for caches?

 

george

 

Remember: Half the people you meet are below average.

Link to comment

I would say that, yes, it is *exceedingly* poor taste to SHOUT your topic subjects. If you want to know something, feel free to post the topic, but IF YOU KEEP SHOUTING WE'LL ALL HATE YOU! (Well, we really won't hate you; I just get carried away when I'm shouting. icon_wink.gif)

Link to comment

I would say that, yes, it is *exceedingly* poor taste to SHOUT your topic subjects. If you want to know something, feel free to post the topic, but IF YOU KEEP SHOUTING WE'LL ALL HATE YOU! (Well, we really won't hate you; I just get carried away when I'm shouting. icon_wink.gif)

Link to comment

quote:
Maybe a terrorist can claim a piece of the crash and learn more about our airline industry

 

more can be learned from watching the discovery channell etc

 

If you don,t like my views they must be truth!!!

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

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CacheAcrossAmerica

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI

http://www.cachunuts.com

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah:

it got a reaction so YELLING is a good thing!!! icon_smile.gif


  • Jar-Jar Binks got a reaction so JAR-JAR is a good thing!!! icon_smile.gif

  • N'Sync almost being in Episode II got a reaction so N'Sync must be a good thing!!! icon_smile.gif

  • The Unabomber's Manifesto got a reaction so BOMBING is a good thing!!! icon_smile.gif

  • The terrorists got a reaction so MASS KILLING is a good thing!!! icon_smile.gif

Q.E.D. Just because being impolite, stupid, rude, murderous, or terrorist can get a reaction in no way means it's the right thing to do.

 

Elightened yet?

 

(Incidentally, anyone notice how I deftly avoided WWII comparisons, thereby side-stepping Godwin's Law?)

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah:

it got a reaction so YELLING is a good thing!!! icon_smile.gif


  • Jar-Jar Binks got a reaction so JAR-JAR is a good thing!!! icon_smile.gif

  • N'Sync almost being in Episode II got a reaction so N'Sync must be a good thing!!! icon_smile.gif

  • The Unabomber's Manifesto got a reaction so BOMBING is a good thing!!! icon_smile.gif

  • The terrorists got a reaction so MASS KILLING is a good thing!!! icon_smile.gif

Q.E.D. Just because being impolite, stupid, rude, murderous, or terrorist can get a reaction in no way means it's the right thing to do.

 

Elightened yet?

 

(Incidentally, anyone notice how I deftly avoided WWII comparisons, thereby side-stepping Godwin's Law?)

Link to comment

I have to admit that when I saw the masses of people descending daily on the WTC site I was disgusted by their morbid curiousity. I thought visiting the site was something that could be done respectfully, but the media circus about the crowds made it seem like a tourist attraction of the worst kind.

 

When the cache was placed at the Flight 93 site here in PA I told my husband I didn't want to go. He eventually convinced me to go and I am glad he did. We visited the site on New Year's Day 2002 and I was moved to tears. It reinforced my already firm belief that the soldiers we have fighting for us are doing the right thing. No child should have to grow up knowing their daddy or mommy died in some remote field in the middle of some state hundreds of miles from their home. However, if that child grows up knowing that thousands of Americans consider him/her a hero how much better is that?

 

If the cache is there to provide a chance for education and personal improvement - fine. If it's there because the hider has some morbid fascination with death and destruction then it's just wrong. Are you placing the cache there out of respect or to get noticed? Is it a gesture of good will and honor to those who died or just a good site because it's this week's hot story?

 

Would you place a cache at the site of a murder? Would a cache in Brentwood honor Nicole Brown Simpson? I doubt it. Would you want a cache at the site where your dad, mom, sister, brother, child, etc. was killed by a drunk driver?

 

Just some things to think about.....

Link to comment

It seems the argument against this type of cache is the fact that people lost lives in most crashes. Well, since many of the virtual caches out there are historical markers that commemorate (commemorate may be the wrong word, but I don't want to think much harder) battles in which people lost their lives, just petition your state to put a historical marker at the crash site. Maybe then some peoples views will change. But I'm not counting on it.

 

Wes

Link to comment

I think this thread has started to deviate from its original context, which is the search for crash sites of highly classified surveillance aircraft like the A-12, SR-71 and U-2 back in the 1960's. Such stories are of certain interest to aviation/military history/Area 51 enthusiasts and are not intended as a morbid curiosity towards dead people. In fact, in most incidents involving test aircraft the CIA, Air Force and Lockheed pilots were able to eject from their aircraft and parachute to the ground safely. The thread in the unnusual forum was NOT intended to include civil aviation disasters or disrespect the families of airline crash victims.

 

For further reading on the topic, please visit Tom Mahood's search for A-12 #02928 at http://www.serve.com/mahood/a-12/index.htm or the Blackbird loss page at http://www.wvi.com/~lelandh/srloss~1.htm.

 

Cordially,

 

Andre

Link to comment

-the issue isnt lameness-

 

i was told that it wasnt proper because peaple may have died in the wrecks yet THEY ALLOW SHIPWRECKS WHERE PEAPLE DID DIE!!!

 

If you don,t like my views they must be truth!!!

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

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CacheAcrossAmerica

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI

http://www.cachunuts.com

Link to comment

It is NOT inappropiate no more then cemetary caches (and I've seen plenty of them). I scuba dive and one of the most popular activities is werck diving. Some ships sunk with no lives lost but many other ships took people w/ them. There is almost always a short word to be said about the people who lost their lives before such a dive. Sometimes a wreaf or flowers are given to the sea. It is a time for refletion and such a cache gives up the opportunity to do the same.

 

-------> Did you ever do any trail maintainence? - if so you will know that all but the most worn trails need continuous maintenance to prevent mother nature from reclaiming it. herd paths are quickly reclaimed - k2dave to a troll

Link to comment

Although the description could have been written more for that purpose then basically staying there is a cool crashed plane go check it out.

 

-------> Did you ever do any trail maintainence? - if so you will know that all but the most worn trails need continuous maintenance to prevent mother nature from reclaiming it. herd paths are quickly reclaimed - k2dave to a troll

Link to comment

The Choice to hunt this cache is your's, but I see it's no diffrent that puting a cache on a sunken or using a grave has a waypoint.

 

IMHO, these types of caches are JUST waypoints but thats another thead.....

 

If you can place a cache on or waypoint a sunken ship, what is the diffrence that and an Airplane?

 

47502_500.jpg

If it's not one thing, then it's another...

Link to comment

James,

 

Why must you try to constantly get under people's skin. It is becoming very tedious.

 

I have no problem with the 'plane crash' cache in theory. I will say that I jumped to the 'deny it' camp just because you irritate me. This is clearly a fault that I have.

 

By the way, I posted a picture to the 'Ghost Busters' cache with you in mind. You will note that it is me (with my GPS) and a Tennessee State Trooper posing next to the Tennessee Capital building. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cachelog_details.asp?ID=48264&L=339685

Link to comment

James, it seems in so-so taste to me. But, I find that I am loathe to agree with you on anything. Perhaps I am harboring an irrational fear of second-hand stupidity...

 

Seriously, why not drive down to Moab? It is hard to imagine anyone remaining up tight and volatile after spending some time among those towering red rocks and the miraculously lush green valley full of horses...

 

-jjf

Link to comment

Geocaching as educational is a concept I have seen on this site. Visiting ground zero (and other sites) in the spirit of memorial is appropriate but to incorporate the site of recent tragedy into a recreational activity seems ghoulish. If I were to visit the site it would not be to hunt for a cache.

Just one persons opinion.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah:

 

Poll Question:

 

is the aircraft crash sites cache poor taste?

 

if poor taste WHY?

 

let jeremy and the othe staff @ geocaching know what you think

 

Results (49 votes counted so far):

 

NO 24/49%

 

YES 13/27%

 

[This message was edited by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah on May 19, 2002 at 11:40 PM.]


 

I find it curious that the totals and percentages shown above don't add up. It seems obvious to me that there must've been another choice that has since been deleted. (And who knows, maybe the two that are left have also been modified.)

 

In my opinion, if a poll description has been changed after votes have been talled, the staff should delete it from the discussion boards, since there's no way of knowing whether the results been "tampered" with.

 

quote:
If you don,t like my views they must be truth!!!

 

Ummm...I'm sorry, but I just don't get the logic in that. icon_confused.gif

 

-------

"I may be slow, but at least I'm sweet!" 196939_800.jpg

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah:

 

Poll Question:

 

is the aircraft crash sites cache poor taste?

 

if poor taste WHY?

 

let jeremy and the othe staff @ geocaching know what you think

 

Results (49 votes counted so far):

 

NO 24/49%

 

YES 13/27%

 

[This message was edited by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah on May 19, 2002 at 11:40 PM.]


 

I find it curious that the totals and percentages shown above don't add up. It seems obvious to me that there must've been another choice that has since been deleted. (And who knows, maybe the two that are left have also been modified.)

 

In my opinion, if a poll description has been changed after votes have been talled, the staff should delete it from the discussion boards, since there's no way of knowing whether the results been "tampered" with.

 

quote:
If you don,t like my views they must be truth!!!

 

Ummm...I'm sorry, but I just don't get the logic in that. icon_confused.gif

 

-------

"I may be slow, but at least I'm sweet!" 196939_800.jpg

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by citrix_99301:

I think this thread has started to deviate from its original context, which is the search for crash sites of highly classified surveillance aircraft like the A-12, SR-71 and U-2 back in the 1960's. Such stories are of certain interest to aviation/military history/Area 51 enthusiasts and are not intended as a morbid curiosity towards dead people. In fact, in most incidents involving test aircraft the CIA, Air Force and Lockheed pilots were able to eject from their aircraft and parachute to the ground safely. The thread in the unnusual forum was NOT intended to include civil aviation disasters or disrespect the families of airline crash victims.

 

For further reading on the topic, please visit Tom Mahood's search for A-12 #02928 at http://www.serve.com/mahood/a-12/index.htm or the Blackbird loss page at http://www.wvi.com/~lelandh/srloss~1.htm.

 

Cordially,

 

Andre


 

Such crash sites are extremely interesting to a wide number of people. Do I want to visit the crash site of the 9/11 plane in Pennsylvania? NO. On the other hand, there was a jet that crashed in the woods of West Milford about 30 years ago, and ever since it was featured in Weird NJ, people have been wondering about it's location. I located it with the aid of WillyD, and created a cache in its vicinity. The response has been quite favorable.

 

Planes Trains & Automobiles

 

There's another plane crash cache just over the NY border, which I recall had a very favorable response by those who went. I can't seem to locate it now, if someone knows the one I'm talking about, contact me.

 

I think commercial crash sites would be rather pointless as typically the NTSB takes back every tiny piece for examination, so would there be anything to even see? Shipwrecks, on the other hand, often remain for many many years.

 

I don't think theres anything wrong with virtuals or locationless caches which deal with death. graves, memorials, shipwrecks, plane wrecks, etc are all fair game because they remind you of your own mortality & to take life a little less serious & enjoy it more, something some people could probably use a little bit of, IMHO.

 

WUHOO TEAMGWHO!

Link to comment

I don't have a problem with the concept. In my opinion it would be a great find to come across the wreck of an airplane. Not because people died, but because I like exploring old equipment. Old Dredges, Old Mines, Old Ghost Towns, Old Cars, Old Trains, Old Tanks, Old Dewline sites (got to do this one!)and if I was a scuba diver, Shipwrecks. It's not about morbid curiosity, though it is curiosity. I don't feel a need to find the remains of a human when I explore.

Link to comment

I declined to post it because its tone struck me very negatively. I suspect that if more of an explanation had been entered I would have looked upon it more positely.

 

I have a pilots license and I have personally seen a plane crash. Unlike cars, planes seldom have fender benders so the image that came to my mind is analogoes to what you might picture following a fatal car accident - paint on the pavement, skid marks, and the pathetic little crosses and plastic flowers left by the family.

 

I view taking photos of that and logging little smiley faces as totally inappropriate - not something I'd consider a game or sport.

 

Now if you want to go find the site where the Hindenburg crashed and I have no objection whatsoever. Ditto with old shipwrecks and train wrecks of 100 years ago. It's recent disasters that I think are an inappropriate subject for a game.

 

I believe memorials and celebrity graves are fine too, it's just shouting at people to go find a plane crash site that rubs me wrong.

 

erik - geocacaching.com admin lackey

Link to comment

My niece was on the plane that was crashed into the Pentagon on September 11th. When my sister, her mother, me and some of the family were in Washington for a memorial service for her we had the unfortunate circumstance of getting lost while driving on the highway that passes the Pentagon. We circled around a number of times until we found the right exit. I could not stop looking at the building each time we passed. It was bathed in construction lights as the crews searched for bodies. I knew she was still in the rubble, lost. I wanted to reach out and touch. My sister turned away - she couldn't bear to look. When my niece’s body was finally returned to us a few weeks later, we buried her in Virginia. That’s where she now is in our hearts.

 

While I voted no, I can understand why people would want to visit airplanes crash sites, Civil War battle and memorial sites and similar places. Just wait awhile out of respect for the living and don’t do anything disrespectful for those who have died.

 

Thanks.

 

Alan

Link to comment

A dear friend of mine perished in the Pentagon. At his desk, sipping some coffee.

 

I ain't going near the place for about 20 years.

 

And, I used to work there.

 

Others want to go? Fine. Not me though.

 

Visiting the site would, as I see it, be a mixture of curiosity and respect for others. It's a free country, though. So who am I to say that your visit depends on your motive?

 

I'm not willing to give up any freedoms, nor would I restrict anyone else's.

Link to comment

my uncle who is in charge of transportation for the coastguard was in the oposite side of the pentagon 3 days before the crash SO im not much different from you on my views of crash scenes!!!

 

why let 9-11 keep us from doing as we want?

 

banning a cache etc because someone dosn't like it dosn't make any sence!!!

 

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE CACHE DON'T DO IT!!!

 

Stupid peaple judge those with less IQ!!!

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

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CacheAcrossAmerica

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI

http://www.cachunuts.com

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Buckaroo Banzai:

Can you just once spell people correctly in a post?


 

That's his signature, believe it or not. What I don't understand is what it's supposed to mean... are stupid people judging him? If they are, does that mean he has a lower IQ than the stupid people? icon_confused.gificon_confused.gificon_confused.gif

 

warm.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Buckaroo Banzai:

Can you just once spell people correctly in a post?


 

That's his signature, believe it or not. What I don't understand is what it's supposed to mean... are stupid people judging him? If they are, does that mean he has a lower IQ than the stupid people? icon_confused.gificon_confused.gificon_confused.gif

 

warm.gif

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