Can we salvage anything good from this pirate issue?

24.7k · September 25, 2003

ju66l3r:

I've learned the same thing. People do listen and do watch. In Idahogeocachers there are a lot of people who monitor this forum. They don't participate. They partipate on the Idahogeocacher forums. But things bleed over every now and then. It's the bleedover that does happen that can catch you by suprise in a place you don't expect.

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:
That's awesome...getting multiple permissions (even if it's to single caches from each hider) maintains an element of surprise that would be lost otherwise.

Very cool, Sylver, very cool.

Thanks ju66l3r, but I can't take credit for that idea. It came from a pirate when I was discussing the asking of permission over on their site.

That's what I mean though, about working towards a form of 'pirating' that suits both us and at least some of them.

SylvrStorm

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by fizzymagic:
Another brilliant illustration of the narcissistic mindset of the pirates: since _they_ enjoy stealing other peoples' stuff, anyone who objects must _surely_ have something wrong with _them_. And the overwhelming antipathy expressed toward pirating the in forum cannot _possibly_ be reality.

Excuse me, this thread wasn’t about if or why a group was supported. This thread was about what could be learned from the whole mess. Why are you saying that those of us who embrace variation and are trying to keep open minds have the narcissistic mindset of the pirates? I don’t care to presume (as do you) what some in an other group may enjoy or not, that’s not the point. Your continuing to rant about what the other group does, does not help the rest of us move on.

quote:
Even better! An invocation of the famous “martyr” argument, one of the most self-serving and fallacious out there. Roughly, it goes like this: “They persecuted Galileo, and he was right. I feel persecuted, so I must be right, too.”

No actually I think what was being said was to be careful of what you say when the Spanish Inquisition is in town. You seem to be inferring self-righteousness on the part of those who want to learn from the entire ordeal. To the contrary, I think this thread is more about stepping back from the lynch mob, keeping an open mind and not being caught up in the hatred. This thread is not about supporting the actions of some group, it was about learning from the actions of others in order to move on.

quote:
See above. The dismissal of massive evidence counter to your own worldview is a classic sign of narcissism.

So my saying that the postings of a small yet vocal population (myself included) of the geocachers is not representive of the entire group is erroneous? Whaaa? If you (in your own worldview) think that your “massive evidence” as posted here is a representative sample of the geocaching community you are probably being a bit more narcissistic than I. Additionally, it shows that you have no concept of statistics. Besides, I was not commenting on the results of the interpretation of the data, I was commenting on the error made in extrapolating results from such a data set. In other words I don’t care what the result were, I care about the methodology used to obtain the results.

quote:
Yet another superb example; once again, since the pirates enjoy stealing stuff, anyone that objects to having stuff stolen must have something _wrong_ with them. In this case they are not “open-minded”.

Again, Whaa? Did I criticize someone for not being open-minded?

quote:
I suggest that people go back through these threads and marvel at the rationalizations and dismissal of other peoples' feelings exhibited. It's unusual that a pathology is so clearly exposed.

The only thing I marvel at is the pathological methodology you use in your rationalizations to continue your spewing dislike of a group, which isn’t the topic of this thread.

As long as you hold the attitude of; your right and I’m wrong, and that’s all that matters to you, your label will be that of being just an aggressive closed minded poster in forums. Are you sure it's not fuzzylogic instead of fizzymagic?

When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout!

9.4k · September 25, 2003

Most elections in this country have nowhere near participation from a vast majority of the population.

Our local election a couple of days ago had a turnout of less than 20 percent. So, if 10 percent of the population agreed with the ballot question, it becomes law.

Wow, only 10 percent of the citizens in Albuquerque need to support a candidate and he (or she) would become mayor.

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

5.7k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by SylvrStorm:
There is one point that has been brought up that I think bears closer scrutiny, and I'd like to see what TPTB have to say about it. That is the requirement of admin approval. I can definitely understand the rationale of those in favour of it - the same reasons caches have to be approved in the first place. But we don't currently have an approval process for owners changing their own caches. How is this any different?

You must not have tried to modify any of your caches recently, such as changing the coordinates to a new spot, or changing the cache type. Doing so will cause the cache to be archived and will require reapproval to get it active again. This is already in place. So, if someone wants to change a traditional cache into a multi, it needs to have all the legs approved. The "bonus" "stealth" cache, or what ever you want to call it needs to go through the same approval, or it shouldn't officially be a part of this game (as an approved variant).

--Marky

"All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer with a backlit GPSr"

5.3k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Trogdor!:
Excuse me, this thread wasn’t about if or why a group was supported. This thread was about what could be learned from the whole mess.

Right. And the thing I learned is that the pirates and their supporters are self-centered, and don't even consider what impact their actions could have on others.

quote:
No actually I think what was being said was to be careful of what you say when the Spanish Inquisition is in town.

Characterizing people who disagree with you as "the Spanish Inquisition" is another excellent example of that self-centeredness.

quote:
So my saying that the postings of a small yet vocal population (myself included) of the geocachers is not representive of the entire group is erroneous?

No, your demand that the "other side" bear the burden of proof in the face of prima facie evidence in their favor is a logical fallacy.

quote:
Additionally, it shows that you have no concept of statistics.

I'm guessing that you think you understand statistics; is that correct? That is probably the funniest thing I've read all day. Thanks for injecting humor here.

quote:
Again, Whaa? Did I criticize someone for not being open-minded?

Yes, you did. I suggest reading your own posts.

quote:
As long as you hold the attitude of; your right and I’m wrong, and that’s all that matters to you, your label will be that of being just an aggressive closed minded poster in forums.

There you go, calling people with whom you disagree "close-minded."

I'm not pushing any agenda here; there is no "I'm right" part to my argument. My entire point is that the pirates and their apologists are pathological. Big difference.

I will not post further in this thread. I think the reaction to my initial post is testimony enough to its essential correctness; there's nothing a narcissist hates more than being pointed out.

[This message was edited by fizzymagic on September 25, 2003 at 02:53 PM.]

4.1k · September 25, 2003

My question for the so-called pirates is pretty simple really. If you don't like the way Jeremy runs Geocaching then why not buy him out and set up your own rules. As long as Jeremy owns it I suggest you play by his rules or get your own website up and running and then play by your own rules.

As far as the 'bonus' cache goes you are still using his site and that requires approval by TPTB. The .1 mile restriction applies to any new cache that is placed by someone else.

The rules are really simple, if you take the time to follow them then there is less trouble for everyone involved.

My suggestion is to set up your own site and use your own caches to prey upon with or without the your own permission.

If your ideas are as good as you think then you may overtake Geocaching in popularity and members.

And you too can have all the problems and headaches that Jeremy has.

John

*******************************************************

Everybody is entitled to my opinion - the ornery oldfart

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Marky:
You must not have tried to modify any of your caches recently, such as changing the coordinates to a new spot, or changing the cache type. Doing so will cause the cache to be archived and will require reapproval to get it active again. This is already in place.

Thank you very much Marky for pointing this out. You're right - the only thing I've ever changed about one of my caches, other than temporarily disabling them, is the wording of the description, and even that was a while ago now. I wasn't aware of this re-approval process.

quote:
The "bonus" "stealth" cache, or what ever you want to call it needs to go through the same approval, or it shouldn't officially be a part of this game (as an approved variant).

I'd still like to get opinions from a few admins on this. In the FAQ it says:

quote:
That little logbook may have a hundred dollar bill in it or a map to greater treasure. It could even contain clues or riddles to solve that may lead to other caches.

Does this mean that such bonus caches/treasures, whether part of the original or added later, must be approved by an admin? I didn't think that was the case, and (I could be wrong) I don't think that's happening. Is this saying I'd be breaking rules if I put a note in one of my caches with instructions to find a bonus cache, but didn't report it to gc.com? Not trying to instigate arguments or go way off topic, but this reflects on a key element of what we're discussing. It really would be great to get some admin input on this.

SylvrStorm

2.1k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Team GPSaxophone:
Wow, only 10 percent of the citizens in Albuquerque need to support a candidate and he (or she) would become mayor.

Scary thought, isn't it? Imagine if only 10% of geocachers got to influence what geocaching.com considered important! ::shudder::

--

http://www.nedevett.com/gollum.swf

September 25, 2003

quote:
My suggestion is to set up your own site and use your own caches to prey upon with or without the your own permission.

That's a brilliant solution.

2.1k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders):
As long as Jeremy owns it I suggest you play by his rules or get your own website up and running and then play by your own rules.

Umm...

Isn't that what started this holy war in the first place?

--

http://www.nedevett.com/gollum.swf

September 25, 2003

I think you're kidding yourselves if you think any productive conversation can come out of this forum without some kind of peace-making happening.

Your looking for ways to make this work without acknowledging the damage that's been done is short-sighted. No one is going to believe that new "rules" will help when they're still hurting from the whole fracas. I predict your "variation" on the game will get a very cold reception.

And I still want an apology from the pirates for the ruckus they've caused.

Ode to a Pigeon: Roses are Red, Violets are Blue, You Lookin' at Me? YOU LOOKIN' AT ME?! (b. katt, 7/14/03)

September 25, 2003

You forgot to quote the most important part of his suggestion, I'll quote it again in case you missed it the second time.

quote:
My suggestion is to set up your own site and use your own caches to prey upon with or without the your own permission.

4.2k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:

quote:
Originally posted by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders):
As long as Jeremy owns it I suggest you play by his rules or get your own website up and running and then play by your own rules.

http://www.piratecaching.com

Isn't that what started this holy war in the first place?

--

http://www.nedevett.com/gollum.swf

Yes they have their own website and play by their own rules.

We use THIS webiste and play by THESE rules.

Them using OUR caches but using THEIR rules is what started this 'holy war'.

FYI - As far as statistics go, usually a sample group of 600 or so random people is accurate enough to provide a 95% confidence rating (+ or - a percentage or two).

I don't think you'd get 600 cachers to answer a poll here, but it is clear what the majority of cachers that post here feel.

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders):
My question for the so-called pirates is pretty simple really. If you don't like the way Jeremy runs Geocaching then why not buy him out and set up your own rules. As long as Jeremy owns it I suggest you play by his rules

I'm not a pirate, I do like the way Jeremy runs Geocaching.com, and I do play by his rules. As far as I know, no pirates have posted to this thread, though I admit I have no way of knowing.

In any case, I believe there is always room to evolve, expand, and improve. If we stuck to the original, going way, way back 3 years or so, we'd all be hiding/hunting buckets in holes. We now have multi, micro, theme, puzzle, virtual, locationless, and event caches. Not every cacher enjoys every new idea, but many do.

I've read Jeremy's posts regarding pirating. I'm of the impression that he abhors the name 'pirating' because of what it has meant to geocaching in the past. I don't believe he's against any possibility of deriving a new variant, providing he approves of it. If he tells me to stop discussing ways of making variants that are acceptable, I will. Until then, I'll feel free to discuss it here.

SylvrStorm

2.1k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by fizzymagic:
Right. And the thing I learned is that the pirates and their supporters are self-centered, and don't even consider what impact their actions could have on others.

Then, take a deep breath and try learning something new, because the supporters in this thread have done nothing but consider the impact of future actions on others. The whole point behind this thread is to determine how best to consider everyone's involvement in the game (pirates and hiders alike).

quote:
Characterizing people who disagree with you as "the Spanish Inquisition" is another excellent example of that self-centeredness.

No, actually, it's an excellent example of hyperbole.

quote:
No, your demand that the "other side" bear the burden of proof in the face of _prima facie_ evidence in their favor is a logical fallacy.

You have not provided any evidence that a majority of geocachers feel a certain way. The burden of proof is only for those that would make a bold claim such as "most people hate the pirating idea". The only such claim that can be made by the evidence at hand is: Most people who write in the forum do not want their caches included in the pirating idea. This is vastly different. Understanding that difference would allow you to participate intelligently in this conversation.

quote:
I'm guessing that you think you understand statistics; is that correct?

Personally, my job is statistics. I've been doing enough t-tests, regression, Pearson's correlation, and k-means clustering on my data for the past 3 weeks to scare small children from ever looking at a math book again. You also didn't invalidate his statement, you simply attempted to dilute the matter with wild conjecture. If you think that the current sample of forum writers is an accurate representation of geocaching/geocachers, as a whole, then you do have a problem with population statistics and sample statistics analysis.

quote:
My entire point is that the pirates and their apologists are pathological. Big difference.

This is not disease-related, therefore your use of the term "pathological" is incorrect.

quote:
there's nothing a narcissist hates more than being pointed out.

Hello Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle...

--

http://www.nedevett.com/gollum.swf

4.1k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:

quote:
Originally posted by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders):
As long as Jeremy owns it I suggest you play by his rules or get your own website up and running and then play by your own rules.

http://www.piratecaching.com

Isn't that what started this holy war in the first place?

--

http://www.nedevett.com/gollum.swf

A lack of following the rules has been known to have a cause and effect. Don't cry when you don't follow the rules and then get jump on by those that do follow the rules. I still suggest getting your own site going.

John

*******************************************************

Everybody is entitled to my opinion - the ornery oldfart

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders):
As far as the 'bonus' cache goes you are still using his site and that requires approval by TPTB. The .1 mile restriction applies to any new cache that is placed by someone else.

I have to disagree with you on this point. If the 'bonus' cache is not listed on GC then there is no need for approval. I think you're making an assumption that GC makes the rules for geocaching. They do not. They make rules for geocaches that are listed on their site. I think you are confusing GC.com/Groundspeak with all geocaching.

If I were to place a card in someone else's cache, as a trade item, with directions to a one-time cache in the vicinity that contains some sort of bonus gift, then I am not breaking any of GC's rules.

If I place instructions in my own cache that leads the finder to an additional cache, I'm still not breaking any rules because the bonus cache is not listed on GC. In fact, as SylvrStorm pointed out, there is explicit permission for this in the GC FAQ.

What part of this do you have a problem with? What part of this do you consider piracy?

__________

Gorak

4.1k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by SylvrStorm:

quote:
Originally posted by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders):
My question for the so-called pirates is pretty simple really. If you don't like the way Jeremy runs Geocaching then why not buy him out and set up your own rules. As long as Jeremy owns it I suggest you play by his rules

I'm not a pirate, I do like the way Jeremy runs Geocaching.com, and I do play by his rules. As far as I know, no pirates have posted to this thread, though I admit I have no way of knowing.

In any case, I believe there is always room to evolve, expand, and improve. If we stuck to the original, going way, way back 3 years or so, we'd all be hiding/hunting buckets in holes. We now have multi, micro, theme, puzzle, virtual, locationless, and event caches. Not every cacher enjoys every new idea, but many do.

I've read Jeremy's posts regarding pirating. I'm of the impression that he abhors the name 'pirating' because of what it has meant to geocaching in the past. I don't believe he's against any possibility of deriving a new variant, providing he approves of it. If he tells me to stop discussing ways of making variants that are acceptable, I will. Until then, I'll feel free to discuss it here.

SylvrStorm

From what I have read in this thread, there has been nothing new offered to geocaching that isn't already here. Bonus caches exist, multi-caches exist, first to find prizes (maps to treasures)exist, bonus coordinates exist, you name it, it exists as part of Geocaching and it's all done by the cache owner. There are even caches placed by several owners (only one gets his name on the cache and credit for the hide.) The only thing you offer is to alter someone's existing cache, but the owner can do that if he so chooses.

What good ideas are you offering that I missed?

*******************************************************

Everybody is entitled to my opinion - the ornery oldfart

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders):
What good ideas are you offering that I missed?

Fair enough. Maybe none. But if that's the case, why is everybody getting so bent out of shape? Just because of the word 'pirate'?

You're right - what is being proposed, when you look at it objectively, is not so different from what can already be done according to the rules. But because there is such a huge outcry over it, it seems a good idea to open it for discussion, and air out any issues. Seems to me, there aren't many. I'd re-iterate them, but they're in a previous post of mine, on page 2 I think, and I have other, non-caching things to attend to right now. I'll check in on this discussion again tomorrow.

SylvrStorm

1.6k · September 25, 2003

The thing is that we need to respect the rights of the cache owners to set up the cache as they see fit. Some caches are kind of lame, there may be very good reasons why the lame location (ie the owners won't let you put something in the cool spot.)

_____________

"Half this game is ninety percent mental." Danny Ozark

4.1k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Gorak: They make rules for geocaches that are listed on their site. I think you are confusing GC.com/Groundspeak with all geocaching.

If I were to place a card in someone else's cache, as a trade item, with directions to a one-time cache in the vicinity that contains some sort of bonus gift, then I am not breaking any of GC's rules.

If I place instructions in my own cache that leads the finder to an additional cache, I'm still not breaking any rules because the bonus cache is not listed on GC. In fact, as SylvrStorm pointed out, there is explicit permission for this in the GC FAQ.

What part of this do you have a problem with? What part of this do you consider piracy?

__________

Gorak

If you place a card into a cache for a bonus cache then it falls under the Geocaching rules if that original cache is listed on Geocaching. By place the 'bonus' cache nearby and putting the coordinates into the first cache you're creating a multi cache. Anyway you look at it you are still using Geocaching to get people to your cache. If you place the card into your own cache then list the cache on Geocaching then it falls under their rules also. A multi-cache is still a multi-cache regardless of what you choose to call it. If you place a multi then Admin needs the coordinates of all legs for approval.

If you place your card into a cache for a nearby cache, there is still the .1 mile restriction. When you use Geocaching to get people to your cache you need to follow their rules.

John

*******************************************************

Everybody is entitled to my opinion - the ornery oldfart

September 25, 2003

Random comment on whether the forums represent Geocachers as a whole.

I am not a professional statistician, and have not studied statistics too much, but I do have a basic sense on this from experience: I would imagine if you ask a subgroup something which is correlated to their membership in a subgroup in the first place, you will often find the subgroup doesn't represent a larger group as a whole. For an obvious example, if I were to ask the forum participants "Do you like contributing messages to online forums?" and get an answer of "98% Yes! 2% No!" I could not possibly conclude that the forum answer represents Geocachers as a whole in answering this question. However, if I ask them "What kind of caches do you like most: Multi, Traditional, Puzzle, Event, Virtual?" And get an answer... I can *reasonably* assume that the answers I get are *independent* of the sub-group. So the forum subgroup is a fair representative sample of the larger geocaching group. The one exception to that last question, could be that the forum people may like event caches more than the average cacher, because there may be a correlation between "forum participation" and "desire to be with other socially" which could indicate forum members are more likely to want to do social things like go to event caches.

Now, the question to ask is "Is there a reason the forum members would be biased in their answer one way or the other to "Do you like pirate caches?""

Again, I am no statistician, but even to those who are, I would ask: Give me a reason to believe that a person's forum participation is likely to indicate that they also hold particular views about pirate caches, which would mean that a survey of forum members (or even of people who respond to the topic) could not be fairly considered representative of the larger Geocaching group?

So, with all respect, please answer that.

-Jif

2.1k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Kealia:
FYI - As far as statistics go, usually a sample group of 600 or so random people is accurate enough to provide a 95% confidence rating (+ or - a percentage or two).

This depends on the population size (although 600 would cover a decent estimation of the population of geocachers) BUT, the word "random" is key to your statement and its validity in the forums. I do not believe (and there is no evidence to the fact) that the voices heard on this topic in these forums is a random sample of the geocaching population.

EDIT to cover Jiffy's post as well:

Try a google search for "self-selected sample" and you'll find any one of hundreds of websites that explain that a self-selected sample (and here it's even a self-selected self-selected sample!...you have to decide to even join in the forums AND participate in a poll/state your opinion) regardless of the topic (independent or not) you can not be guaranteed a representative sample of the population. Those who would read AND respond in the forums of geocaching are very strongly opinionated (which also feeds our other problem here of all-out flame wars starting from simple threads). So, unfortunately, while it would seem that asking a group of people their opinion on a matter not related to web-writing would sound feasible, it's not good form in determining the population's thoughts on a topic. Two good examples I can point to are the Literary Digest Poll of 1936 and Nightline UN 1-900 Poll. While the LitDig Poll also suffers from an additional problem of skewed sampling, both have the self-selection problem. Often self-selection gives you a heavy negative answer (e.g. all pirating is bad and should never be a part of this game) because those are often the strongest feelings which lead someone to answer (and only those with the strongest feelings on many topics are going to be the ones posting in a webforum). Hope that helps.

--

http://www.nedevett.com/gollum.swf

[This message was edited by ju66l3r on September 25, 2003 at 04:51 PM.]

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by SylvrStorm:
Fair enough. Maybe none. But if that's the case, why is everybody getting so bent out of shape? Just because of the word 'pirate'?

That would be my assumption. I don't think it is an unreasonable one. As I said earlier if you want to refer to these innovaitons (or not as they may be) as "piracy" you have to begin to talk about "good pirates" and "bad pirates" to avoid confusion with the type pirates a lot of people don't like at the moment. This is just complicating matters because *any* pirate has a lot of fairly negative connotations about it.

The word pirate is going to push buttons. You don't sound like the sort of person who is trying to intentionally push buttons, but I don't really understand your attatchment to a word you *know* is a sore spot for a lot of people around here at the moment.

A lot of this might be irrational. But I think a lot of it is quite reasonable. I don't want to talk up cache "piracy" because unless I take the time to make the good/bad piracy distinction in every post I'll feel like I'm lending some legitimacy to a practice I do not agree with.

Even if I'm wrong and no one is being reasonable. Everyone is making a close-minded knee-jerk reaction wouldn't it just be easier for everyone if you proposed you changes in terms that didn't prod at any sore spots? I just seems to me the sensible thing to do if you want a discussion that people won't come into with pre-concieved piratical notions.

That's my take on it anyway.

________________________

What is caches precious?

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders):
If you place a card into a cache for a bonus cache then it falls under the Geocaching rules if that original cache is listed on Geocaching. By place the 'bonus' cache nearby and putting the coordinates into the first cache you're creating a multi cache. Anyway you look at it you are still using Geocaching to get people to your cache. If you place the card into your own cache then list the cache on Geocaching then it falls under their rules also. A multi-cache is still a multi-cache regardless of what you choose to call it. If you place a multi then Admin needs the coordinates of all legs for approval.

If you place your card into a cache for a nearby cache, there is still the .1 mile restriction. When you use Geocaching to get people to your cache you need to follow their rules.

Is it really a multicache if the first cache contains a logbook and trade items? There is no need for the finder to go to the bonus cache to log the original cache on GC. In fact, even if they went to the bonus cache, because it is not listed, they cannot log it on GC. Perhaps I'm splitting hairs, but in my little mind the bonus cache does not constitute a multi-cache because their is no requirement for the finder to search for the second cache. It's a one-time bonus.

If you don't understand my logic, try this on for size. I go to your cache and leave a movie coupon in it for the next finder. To use the coupon the finder has to search out a movie theater and redeem the coupon. Have I turned your cache into a multicache?

__________

Gorak

September 25, 2003

Actually, I think some analysis as given in my prior post *can* do that. Can anyone think of a reason why forum participation could be used as a predictor to my views on pirate caches? I mean if we are asking the spouses of police officers "Do you like police?" we would expect a certain answer, but why does forum participation predict my answer about pirate caches?

I mean, based on people's personal views, they may feel more "comfortable" in believing the forums do/don't represent cachers as a whole, but let's get away from "comfort" and "desire" and get into "reality".

-Jif

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:

This depends on the population size (although 600 would cover a decent estimation of the population of geocachers) BUT, the word "random" is key to your statement and its validity in the forums. I do not believe (and there is no evidence to the fact) that the voices heard on this topic in these forums is a random sample of the geocaching population.

September 25, 2003

Actually, there is a point to using a softer name. "Pirates" creates a lot of negative assumptions.

I suggest instead of Pirate Caches, we call these "Communist Baby-Harp-Seal-Clubbing Bald-Eagle-Hunting Secondhand-Smoke Caches"

-Jif

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Gorak:
Is it really a multicache if the first cache contains a logbook and trade items? There is no need for the finder to go to the bonus cache to log the original cache on GC. In fact, even if they went to the bonus cache, because it is not listed, they cannot log it on GC. Perhaps I'm splitting hairs, but in my little mind the bonus cache does not constitute a multi-cache because their is no requirement for the finder to search for the second cache. It's a one-time bonus.

If you don't understand my logic, try this on for size. I go to your cache and leave a movie coupon in it for the next finder. To use the coupon the finder has to search out a movie theater and redeem the coupon. Have I turned your cache into a multicache?

I think this type of cache does exist though. Check out a series called "Pieces of the Puzzle" for an (impressieve) example. The cache consists of a series of 4 logable caches that give the location of a fifth logable cache.

So it is effectively a multicache where you can log the different parts of the multi individually.

In this case the final cache is effectively the "bonus" cache.

________________________

What is caches precious?

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Team AshandEs:
I think this type of cache does exist though. Check out a series called "Pieces of the Puzzle" for an (impressieve) example. The cache consists of a series of 4 logable caches that give the location of a fifth logable cache.

So it is effectively a multicache where you can log the different parts of the multi individually.

In this case the final cache is effectively the "bonus" cache.

We have a similar series of caches in our neck of the woods that are part of the "Vancouver Decachelon". You need to locate 10 different caches, which are listed as either trads or micros, gathering a clue from each of the 10 caches to find the bonus cache. In this case, the caches are spread out over a fairly large geographic area. None of the caches is listed as a multi-cache and you can log all 11 caches.

What I'm working on is slightly different in that the bonus cache is one-time only and will contain a relatively generous gift. You won't need to locate multiple caches to find it, it won't be listed on GC so numerous cachers won't be looking for it. The entire contents of the cache will go to the finder so maintenance is not really an issue. Directions to the cache will be placed in a randomly chosen established cache as a pleasant surprise and bonus for the next finder. The directions placed in the established cache, IMHO, are just another type of trade item.

__________

Gorak

2.1k · September 25, 2003

Jif, please see my post above for an answer to your sample statistics question...the thread moved too fast or I would have posted it down here instead...I just edited the one above to talk about self-serving sampling.

--

http://www.nedevett.com/gollum.swf

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Gorak:

What I'm working on is slightly different in that the bonus cache is one-time only and will contain a relatively generous gift. You won't need to locate multiple caches to find it, it won't be listed on GC so numerous cachers won't be looking for it. The entire contents of the cache will go to the finder so maintenance is not really an issue. Directions to the cache will be placed in a randomly chosen established cache as a pleasant surprise and bonus for the next finder. The directions placed in the established cache, IMHO, are just another type of trade item.

Right, I get it. I guess the only problem you have is if someone takes the clue and then doesn't get around to doing the bonus.

Other than that it sounds pretty cool

Edit: Another variation on this would be a "thank you" cache. If you've really enjoyed someone's caches then leave the instructions in one of theirs and let the person who placed it know.

This gives the cache placer a better than even chance of being able to get the instructions and the bonus cache first... if they choose not to someone else will.

________________________

What is caches precious?

1.6k · September 25, 2003

I publicly call on the owners of this site to put an end to the effects of the willful contempt shown by those who advocate the pirate concept in the Vancouver area.

I will not be doing any caches that display the 'pirate zone' logo.

If the folks around here want to play a different game with the para-site, let them list their caches somewhere else.

That this so-called Captain Urchin has been able to round up a small handful of deckmates is astounding.

September 25, 2003

another good piece of information to be salvaged from this whole thing is: if you want to create a fun new variant on the game, Don't go about it the way the geop*******es did.

and I'm also not convinced that these people had the best of intentions and only wanted to improve the game with a fun new twist, as some have mentioned...

I can't believe they started out the way they did and did not anticipate the outcry and repercussions that followed.

I believe at first they didn't care who they hurt, then when they started getting a lot of flak they came to realize they had better modify things a bit, and backed off and became the "good" pirates that asked permission and posted missing girl reports.

But by then, in many people's eyes, the damage had already been done.

I think part of the problem is that when they started (from what I remember seeing on the website) they didn't ask permission, they looted and stole and they didn't necessarily give anything back....

then, they changed. they started asking permission, I assume in response to some of the outcry from other cachers.

but the damage had already been done.

add to that the fact that the vocal factions here on the forums are actually talking about several different things under the guise of one subject.

some are talking about piracy of caches that existed before geopirating.com and also during the first part of their "reign of terror" meaning -- unasked-for looting, stealing, altering or moving the cache without permission.

others are talking about the "kinder, gentler" piracy recently exhibited by the owners/participants of the website geopirating.com

still others are trying to use this whole issue to figure out the best way to push through variants of the game.

sorry so long-winded, just some thoughts.

24.7k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by canadazuuk:
...I will not be doing any caches that display the 'pirate zone' logo...

I'll add my name to this list and refuse to do the caches of anyone who displays the republican logo. Caches displaying liberal logos will be found but not inhaled.. All caches with the union logo will get the shaft. Any cache with the corporate America logo will be relocated to another country. Caches displaying the recession logo will have any funds inside reduced by a third. Militia logos will be checked for booby traps especially in Texas and Montana. Caches with the pirate logo will be plundered and finally caches that display the chrome girl who models for mudflaps and grills will get a "Schwing" vote.

On odd numbered days it's reversed, except for the chrome.

1.6k · September 25, 2003

My sentiment was inspired by this post by Peregrine007 of course:

quote:
I've been lead to a cache that's already "flagged" as "pirate-friendly", and I think it's a great idea to welcome pirates to your cache - this may well deter anti-pirates from seeking your cache as well

There is no way I will buy into the concept of someone parasiting off the geocaching.com website via such an activity as p#####caching.

1.4k · September 25, 2003

I don't recall that anyone has specifically asked you to buy into it Zuuk.

I've stayed out of the discussions about pirates over the last few days and this will be the last and final thing that I have to say about it.

There are pirates out there who are plundering caches -- I say plundering in the sense that we all use the word -- to mean that the cache has been stolen or gone missing. Do I agree with this? Of course not. I do not condone or support the actions of the pirates who are stealing caches or moving them great distances away.

There is at least one pirate who tried a different twist to the pirate concept -- a friendlier, playful twist -- but because the majority of people here couldn't get past the semantics and made a big deal out of a simple word, they won't even listen to what is being said, no matter how much good sense it makes. Instead of changing the perception of that word, several people insisted that the word itself is evil and will not stand for anyone else having any other view.

For those of you with the forward vision and the maturity to accept that the word 'pirate' does not necessarily need to have negative connotations, good for you -- I applaud your open-mindedness and sense of fairness. For those of you who believe that there *is* a way to incorporate a playful twist to the game, I also applaud your open-mindedness and your ability to appreciate the creativity of others.

No one should be telling me, you, or anyone else who AGREES to participate in this variation that we can't. We are all grown adults capable of making decisions for ourselves. But, there are those amongst us who don't think that you or I are capable of thinking for ourselves. Those of you who don't think that it is possible for the pirate concept to work in any form, you need to give this some more consideration -- there are indeed ways of making it work.

I'm extremely surprised at a good many people who refuse to open their minds to anything new and different. You ought to try it once in a while -- it can be very refreshing.

Now, very carefully read this very, very slowly:

It's... OK... with... me... if... a... cache... is... pirated... with... the... owners... approval...

There is no harm being done if the cache owner is willing to participate.

No... harm.

There are some very good points that have been made to support a variation on the game and I'd like to thank SylvrStorm for his valiant attempt to cultivate some positive ideas in this thread. There are many possiblities if minds are kept open...

That's it. That's all that I have to say. It's my opinion. It's not open to discussion and I will not reply to any comments regarding this opinion. If you don't like it -- too bad for you. It's mine, and I'm very much entitled to it.

*****

September 26, 2003

.

[This message was edited by Team AshandEs on September 26, 2003 at 01:17 AM.]

1.6k · September 26, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:

It's not open to discussion and I will not reply to any comments regarding this opinion.

Thank you for returning from keystroke hibernation at the end of the very lengthy discussion we all had to let us know it's 'not open to discussion'.

You've made Captain Urchin proud I'll bet.

When does this new 'listing database' open that you're going to list everyone's caches on that wants to play your free lock & lock box pirate game?

September 26, 2003

First, let me say that I am COMPLETELY AGAINST what the pirates are trying to do here. They are not your caches so leave them alone.

But...

If you had done better marketing and not fashioned yourselves after characters that are already disliked in this community, perhaps you would have had better luck. Here's what I mean --

Instead of 'pirates' you should have gone with 'elves'. Everyone loves elves. Who wouldn't want an elf to visit their cache? The elves could take two or three trinkets from the cache, place them nearby, and leave a note that says something to the effect that "a cache elf has visited your cache and has squirreled a few items at (enter new coords here). Would you please return them to the cache?"

See? Much better. But I feel that you (pirates) prefer to steal. After all, you're pirates. It's not about a 'new variation' of the game; it's about stealing and bragging about it. And, elves don't get to talk with funny pirate talk like in grade school.

Also, elves don't have their own website (but they do have their own cookies).

2.1k · September 26, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:
It's not about a 'new variation' of the game; it's about stealing and bragging about it.

I don't think you can know the motivation of the pirates any better than someone telling me that I can know that they're doing it for fun...IOW, until a pirate actually says "we do it to steal and brag about it", then what you've said is total conjecture. On the other hand, what some of us are now *trying* to do is disregard all of that and figure out if this is something we can abstract into some really fun gaming.

quote:
And, elves don't get to talk with funny pirate talk like in grade school.
Also, elves don't have their own website (but they do have their own cookies).

Actually... they do...

--

http://www.nedevett.com/gollum.swf

September 26, 2003

(sigh)

I'm glad this thread generated some good discussion on some possible variations. I'm also glad that at least a few people realized that those of us discussing it rationally are not pirates ourselves, and were not trying to justify any pirate actions, but were rather simply looking for ways of making geocaching even more fun.

But the signal:noise ratio is getting too low. The topic is drifting to statistics and other side issues, and little is being said about making the 'good pirate' concept work. I'm tired of defending the appropriateness of the variation, or the thread itself, or the use of the word 'pirate' (especially since I've said multiple times that I know it's an issue and I'm open to other suggestions).

You know what? This isn't even my issue. I don't want to be a "good pirate". I started this thread simply because I thought it would be cool to find a cache one day, and be surprised by a bonus addition with a pirate's treasure map.

So that's it for me. Thank you to everyone who read this thread and really got what I was trying to get at. If any of you want to start a private thread to discuss it further, please invite me as I'd be happy to take part. But I'm not going to do it myself. I'm just too tired of it all.

SylvrStorm

2.1k · September 26, 2003

I think a lot of good has come from this thread and a few comments in a thread I started along similar lines. I am putting together what might be something akin to this and will be contacting some of the hiders in the Boston area to see if they are up for some fun along these lines. I'm not sure how I'm going to approach it quite yet, but at least I know what some of the ground rules will be to make it safe clean fun for those who choose to participate. If you ever come down this way, give me a list of the caches you want to go to and I'll see what I can do to have one ready for you...but which one will be up to you to figure out!

--

http://www.piratetravels.com/pirate.htm

3k · September 26, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Trogdor!:

Well, it is pretty obvious that the source is right here in the forums. Most cachers want their caches left as is, no plundering, enhancing, removing items, changing, adding onto, etc....

Planet

Beaaant!! Sorry Planet wrong answer, try again please.

Any thoughts that those who post here represent the majority of cachers is waaay off base! The only thing posted in the fourms represent is those who post in the forums, who are a very small percentage of all cachers.

Thanks for keeping an open mind SylverStorm, it does seem to be a rare item on these fourms.

Beeant!! Wrong yourself, those who aren't participating in the forums probably haven't even heard of the pirates, so my answer sticks, this is all the representation of the minority/majority you're going to get.

And WHY pray tell does this vandalism to our caches have to become acceptable?? WHY are people trying to push it on us? I knew ju66ler would out themselves as a pirate with all the pushing they were doing. The knew avatar shows just how they feel. This whole thread makes me sick, all the whining and moaning in the forums makes me sick, all the fighting. ALL I WANT IS WORLD PEACE, DARN IT! Think I might have to stay away from all you apologists and sympathizers for a while. You're ruining all the fun of geocaching! It's like waiting for another bomb to fall somewhere, and not knowing where.

As the famous WC fields once said: "Go away kid you bother me."

I'm going caching, meeting real cachers, in person, at an event. You are all just pixels to me now. Bye!

Planet

September 26, 2003

Short answer - NO. Long answer - No Way.

___________________________________

I once was lost, but now am found;

Was blind, but now I see.

2.1k · September 26, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Planet:
I knew ju66ler would out themselves as a pirate with all the pushing they were doing. The knew avatar shows just how they feel.

My new avatar is just really funny, not a sign of my feelings about anything. I'm not pushing anything on you. I'll be sure to never play with your caches in CT, don't worry. I am not one of the pirates. Check the Boston area logs, not a single one of them pirated. I have decided that if I do pirate, it will be in a coordinated effort with a cache owner and I have yet to even build the list of those I might ask.

Go grab a few caches before the rain gets here. I think you need some fresh air.

--

http://www.piratetravels.com/pirate.htm

September 26, 2003

here are some conclusions I got from the discussion:

The activity sometimes described as pirating is OK with permission and guidelines.

If no permission, then pirating is NOT OK.

Some people think Pirating is a fascinating addition to the game.

Some people think pirating is childish and stupid.

pirates should be elves instead.

by the way, I visited the pirates website and there's still no mention of permission anywhere on there that I saw, so in my opinion they're still "doing it wrong".

I'm sick of talking and reading about this too.

2.3k · September 26, 2003

To keep it short, simple, sweet and directly on topic: Yes, hopefully we can salvage something good from this pirate issue.

Remember, wherever you go- there you are!

September 26, 2003

Now THAT, I can dig.

1.9k · September 26, 2003

arrrr mayteee, i say the pirates should be walkin the plank =)

Now where did I set my GPS??? planetrobert.net

Can we salvage anything good from this pirate issue?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment