The truth shines through

2.1k · August 15, 2003

Well I wake up to an email from a cache ownerabout their virtual cache. It was a short email, but I took it as sarcasm. It was in reference to a virtual I spoke about in a thread here. I never stated the name of the virtual. I used it in reference as to inconsistencies of what gets approved and what doesn't. I went to look for the virtual, but it didn't show up. I took that it was archived, perhaps by the owner. I wrote an email to the owner and apologized and didn't mean to cause any concern to his cache. And that I didn't singly point it out specifically, but used the basis of it in reference. I told him he could remove my find if he wanted, but it was not fair to the others that have found. Well a little bit later, I'm searching around and I find the cache page and it was archived. There was a note from the approver "Davros" and he stated on it:

quote:
This cache was approved by mistake.. A simular virtual already exists as a locationless.

Forward all complaints to Woodsters for claiming a find then whining like a baby about this cache.

Now I don't think that was called for. In reference to what I spoke about, it had nothing to do about the person who placed the cache or the cache itself. I did state that I did not find it unusual, but others may. I also stated that the person that placed the cache has many other great caches in the area.

I think that the maturity of the approver is shining through here. Once again I apologize to the owner of that cache and to the others that had claimed a find. I will take the blame for it, but by all means I think that the truth shines through about some of the approvers now.

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

[This message was edited by Woodsters Outdoors on August 15, 2003 at 05:32 AM.]

August 15, 2003

quote:
I think that the matureness of the approver is shining through here.

Or even their maturity?

Whining more won't help it any, anyways. *shrug*

3k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:
...It was in reference to a virtual I spoke about in a thread here. I never stated the name of the virtual. I used it in reference as to inconsistencies of what gets approved and what doesn't. I went to look for the virtual, but it didn't show up. I took that it was archived, perhaps by the owner. I wrote an email to the owner and apologized and didn't mean to cause any concern to his cache. And that I didn't singly point it out specifically, but used the basis of it in reference. I told him he could remove my find if he wanted, but it was not fair to the others that have found.

You couldn't find a cache page you had logged a find to? Does your wife really allow you to leave the house unaccompanied by a responsible adult?

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on August 15, 2003 at 05:38 AM.]

2.1k · August 15, 2003

yeah I thought about the word maturity after I posted ...lol

Not whining about it, but I wanted to let the others know that I apologize for what happened.

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

2.1k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

You couldn't find a cache page you had logged a find to? Does your wife really allow you to leave the house unaccompanied by a responsible adult?

When I went to my cahce page and my finds, it was not there. Then I typed in the zipcode and it was not there...I then logged out, typed in the zipcode and still not there. I finally found it by going to the cache owners profile and it was listed on their finds and went to the page that way. Not sure why it wouldn't show up for me on a search, but it didn't.

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

4.7k · August 15, 2003

wow. personal emarks by persons of authority while acting in an official capacity are not called for.

-====)) -))))))))))))

presta schrader

3k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:
...I finally found it by going to the cache owners profile and it was listed on their finds...

The cache owner had logged a find on their own cache, to boot? Really?

August 15, 2003

quote:

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

This cache was approved by mistake.. A simular virtual already exists as a locationless.

Forward all complaints to Woodsters for claiming a find then whining like a baby about this cache.

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

"simular" that cracks me up. Kind of like "nucular" or "supposably", or "Star Track", or "Walla" (or the various other "Voila" misspellings).

OK I'm done.

_________________________________________________________

If trees could scream, would we still cut them down?

Well, maybe if they screamed all the time, for no reason.

Click here for my Geocaching pictures and Here (newest)

1.3k · August 15, 2003

Well, I'm gonna go get be some buhsketti and meatballs now.

"Chock full of essential vitamins and waypoints"

2.1k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:
...I finally found it by going to the cache owners profile and it was listed on their finds...

The cache owner had logged a find on their own cache, to boot? Really?

Got me agian bassoon...dang it...meant in the owners placed caches...wiseguy...

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

2.4k · August 15, 2003

I was gonna say something about the whiner, but given 'woodsters wizdumb' it's just too easy, like fishing in a barrel.....

Nothing to see here, move along.

1.6k · August 15, 2003

And in other news today, here's an excerpt from a powerless president's speech:

quote:
Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the White House and to this day to which Hillary and the vice president and I look forward so much every year.

This is always an important day for our country, for the reasons that the vice president said. It is an unusual and, I think, unusually important day today. I may not be quite as easy with my words today as I have been in years past, and I was up rather late last night thinking about and praying about what I ought to say today. And rather unusual for me, I actually tried to write it down. So if you will forgive me, I will do my best to say what it is I want to say to you - and I may have to take my glasses out to read my own writing.

First, I want to say to all of you that, as you might imagine, I have been on quite a journey these last few weeks to get to the end of this, to the rock bottom truth of where I am and where we all are.

I agree with those who have said that in my first statement after I testified I was not contrite enough. I don't think there is a fancy way to say that I have sinned.

9.2k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by martmann:

"simular" that cracks me up. Kind of like "nucular" or "supposably", or "Star Track", or "Walla" (or the various other "Voila" misspellings).

Don't forget "noone" instead of "no one".

"Don't mess with a geocacher. We know all the best places to hide a body."

August 15, 2003

I always write nobody.

_________________________________________________________

If trees could scream, would we still cut them down?

Well, maybe if they screamed all the time, for no reason.

Click here for my Geocaching pictures and Here (newest)

August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by flask:
wow. personal emarks by persons of authority while acting in an official capacity are not called for.

I concur

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If I want to see a sunrise, I'll STAY up for it!

38.2k · August 15, 2003

I think that was pretty childish of Mr Davros. I remember your post and you never mentioned the name of the cache...I don't think you even described it.

I agree that it was a virtual that probably shouldn't have been approved in the first place. It was for a pretty common item and I know of at least one other virt for the same thing (archived a while ago but the owner because he decided it was lame).

Still, the admin was totally out of line to direct complaints to you in his archival note.

Oh, no, I find myself agreeing with Woodster again!

"Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day" - Dave Barry

[This message was edited by BrianSnat on August 15, 2003 at 08:11 AM.]

2.1k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by BrianSnat:
Oh, no, I find myself agreeing with Woodster again!

That's because I'm your sock pupper account...lmao

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

1.2k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by BrianSnat:

Still, the admin was out of line to direct complaints to you in his archival note.

Oh, no, I find myself agreeing with Woodster again!

_

Holy cow! I'm going to seriously start stocking up on supplies and ammo... the end of the world CANNOT be far away.....LOL!

"Trade up, trade even, or don't trade!!!" My philosophy of life.

2.1k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Breaktrack:
Holy cow! I'm going to seriously start stocking up on supplies and ammo... the end of the world CANNOT be far away.....LOL!

Must be....BrianSnat has some power.....err or knows how to take power away. In another thread, he stated he was finished typing a message and hit the Post Now button and the power went out...Now that is some power!

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

1.2k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

quote:
Originally posted by Breaktrack:
Holy cow! I'm going to seriously start stocking up on supplies and ammo... the end of the world CANNOT be far away.....LOL!

Must be....BrianSnat has some power.....err or knows how to take power away. In another thread, he stated he was finished typing a message and hit the Post Now button and the power went out...Now that is some power!

Brian

_As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump_

OH man, looks like I have less time for stocking up than I thought! I KNEW I should have ordered that pallet of MRE's whan I had the chance....LOL!

"Trade up, trade even, or don't trade!!!" My philosophy of life.

2.1k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Breaktrack:

OH man, looks like I have less time for stocking up than I thought! I KNEW I should have ordered that pallet of MRE's whan I had the chance....LOL!

Sure was a coincidence that it all happened shortly after he hit 4000...huh?

You must get some kind of power with that number....gotta post ...gotta post...

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

August 15, 2003

Zing... two bricks... a short plank.... Where is that anvil when you need it?

A rocking chair or a porch swing with an old person in it is a histroy lesson.

3k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by BrianSnat:
I think that was pretty childish of Mr Davros.

Yeah. It's enough to make people bail out of the MD geocaching organization in droves.

2.1k · August 15, 2003

Just received an email from the cache owner. He appreciated my email to him explaining what had happened. He also pointed out that Davros had also removed my finding log on the cache page, which I didn't bother to check initially. Oh well. That's no biggy to me. The other logs are there though, so not how it will effect their find count. I still can't get to the cache page without going through the owners profile. Normally I would be able to see archived caches with the red line through them. Even the cache has the little red notice on the top of it that says it's been archived but is viewable. Not in those words, but similar.

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

3k · August 15, 2003

quote:
I remember your post and you never mentioned the name of the cache...I don't think you even described it.

And until (whoever) deleted Woodster's find, how much effort did it take to look at Woodster's very short list of finds to figure it out?

1.4k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Canadazuuk wrote:
And in other news today...

What's going on Zuuky? Are you off of your meds again?

-----

Back to the topic at hand... Yes, it would appear that Davros was out of line here. Comments like that from an approver are not needed.

*****

2.1k · August 15, 2003

I don't think I mentioned I found it(in the other thread)...I also mentioned one on a military installation, but it's not in my finds...

But none the less, someone could easily know it. But I didn't post a link to it and say "like this one" , or "what about this one"...

Davros could of just as easily emailed me in reference to which one I was talking about (as he could tell where I live by my location), but he already knew. Whether he archived it or not, it doesn't warrant a message like that.

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

3k · August 15, 2003

quote:
I don't think I mentioned I found it

Put one and one together. The first thing people do when they read a forum posting about an "anonymous" cache is to review the posters record. Usually, one finds what they are looking for right at the top of the list.

Somebody has to post the link, so here it is.

The only question that I have is: Do approvers actually have the ability to delete logs? If so, why?

38.2k · August 15, 2003

So Mr. Davros not only archived the cache and directed any complaints to Mr Woodster, he also deleted Mr Woodster's find? I thought that was up to the cache owner.

Yeah BP, no wonder long time geocachers are pulling out of the MGS if this an example of the childish behavior from the "leadership" of that organization.

"Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day" - Dave Barry

2.1k · August 15, 2003

I don't think it's appropriate to post the link to this one...It was nothing to do with the owner at all. The type it was , was used in reference to inconsistency. There was no complaint about this cache at all. If so, I would of marked it for archival back when it was placed as I already knew the answer to it. I think that's part of the problems here on the forum. A lot of people can not discuss situations or instances without posting direct links to the caches. When this is done, that persons cache and they themselves are tarnished. Someone may think anothers is 'lame', and they say it is on here, then all fingers get pointed at the cache and the owner. As people are human, when they hear something negative, it sticks with them.

As far as deleting logs...they must. They did mine. The cache owner had nothing to do with it. My find was also removed, which is no big deal. You will however notice that the owner is turning it into a micro.

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

[This message was edited by Woodsters Outdoors on August 15, 2003 at 10:48 AM.]

1.7k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:
As far as deleting logs...they must. They did mine. The cache owner had nothing to do with it. My find was also removed, which is no big deal.

Whatever else one could say about this paragraph, it's worth noting that the find count is computed automatically by counting your logs. So nobody went out of their way to decrement your find count.

Oh, and of course approvers must be able to delete logs. Otherwise we'd hear more people whining that their notes to the approver weren't getting deleted before approval.

I'm curious to know how BP found it. Care to share?

pirate.cgi.gif

1.7k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:
You will however notice that the owner is turning it into a micro.

Separate issue, so separate followup: The micro as listed is unapprovable. Micros require a logbook.

pirate.cgi.gif

2.1k · August 15, 2003

But why would the approver delete only mine? I think that was getting a bit personal and should of been left up to the cache owner. I still have no problem with it. When the micro gets approved. I'll go and find it.

Edit: ok so I won't find the micro...lol

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

1.7k · August 15, 2003

Brian, you can always put your find log back, even though the cache is archived.

pirate.cgi.gif

August 15, 2003

Here's what I don't understand: Why do people resort to such actions as Mr. Davros has because of the discussion and disagreements over virtuals. HEY, ITS A GAME!!!!!!! I have been involved in most of these discussions and I feel like people have been mostly civil and respectful about it. People have even put forth ideas on how to fix the problems of virtuals. Why not try to fix it instead of being ugly, rude, and inmature? I have recieved an e-mail from a cacher that has told me another cacher, Grajek, was booted from the site altogether because of their opinions. I have no idea if this is true or not, but if it is, this would be borderline "Stalin-like". I mean kicking those who have different opinions, those in power lashing out at cachers because they have voiced a complaint????? Can we expect a "purge" next? No, I do not know all of the facts, I can only go by what I see and hear. Here's a word of advice: An approver is a leader, lead by example. I give you Mtn-man as an example. He is one of my approvers. NOT kissing butt here but he and I disagree but we still have a respectful and cordial relationship via e-mail. Why can that not rain supreme, being respectful and cordial? I figure the virtual problem could be solved rather easy if we acted like that!

God bless you and your family,

Team Bubba Cache

3k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy:
Oh, and of course approvers must be able to delete logs. Otherwise we'd hear more people whining that their notes to the approver weren't getting deleted before approval.

Is that how people communicate with approvers? I had no idea ... all of my caches were approved without communication with the approver.

It is reprehensible, then, that an approver would delete a legitimate find. If the approvers have such great power, perhaps they should be called upon to also delete the hundreds of fake finds that sneak by every week ... like the ones by that group who leave the exact same log on every find, but whose signature can never be found in a logbook. (Wow, look at all those people scurrying to figure out whom I'm referring to. )

quote:
I'm curious to know how BP found it. Care to share?

It took less than a minute to locate. Would have been even faster if Dan Miller's page was still active.

9.5k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Prime Suspect:

quote:
Originally posted by martmann:

"simular" that cracks me up. Kind of like "nucular" or "supposably", or "Star Track", or "Walla" (or the various other "Voila" misspellings).

Don't forget "noone" instead of "no one".

http://img.Groundspeak.com/user/3608_2800.gif

_"Don't mess with a geocacher. We know all the best places to hide a body."_

... or noon ... I'm guilty of that typo sometimes when the space key isn't pressed all the way.

Cheers!

TL

August 15, 2003

The comment by Davros was totally inappropriate for an approver.

1.4k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Bubba Cache wrote:
I have received an e-mail from a cacher that has told me another cacher, Grajek, was booted from the site altogether because of their opinions. I have no idea if this is true or not, but if it is, this would be borderline "Stalin-like".

Hmmm... there's only this single post by Grajek, can't see this as being reason enough to ban someone (perhaps it's because he quoted Jeremy?) If this post is the reason for being banned, I'd have to agree with the "Stalin-like" comment.

*****

August 15, 2003

Seemed kinda weird that he got banned. I want to make this clear, this is 2nd hand knowledge, so I do not know for sure.

I really don't want to say who e-mailed me about it. Would be crappy if it is true. It just says NA on his profile????

God bless you and your family,

Team Bubba Cache

2.1k · August 15, 2003

Wow...hope he got his money back...lol If that was a reason for him getting banned, then I wonder why others haven't got banned as well. If he did get banned, and for that reason that is. There have been some far worse things said and stated...

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

2.1k · August 15, 2003

Also says that his last visit was today on his profile. If he had finds, they are gone. I imagine he did because there are 4 travel bugs left there as found. Then there are 2 placed caches listed. Maybe he is banning himself?

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

2.1k · August 15, 2003

Wow! my find log showed back up....mysteriously....

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

4.8k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Maybe he is banning himself?

From reading through the various threads and debate about virtuals, that is my suspicion. If he was banned yesterday, he could not visit today. Basically I suspect another quitter drumming up some drama. If he really was banned, I would guess that it has to do with more than his posts. But that is all speculation of course.

August 15, 2003

I agree that IF he was banned, then it had to be about more than his post. He didn't really say anything except being sarcastic.

"Freedom is never given, it is won" A. Phillip Randolph

God bless

1.4k · August 15, 2003

Oops. Incorrect post.

*****

7.4k · August 15, 2003

Grajek has not been banned. When someone has been banned, you will see their user status change to "User not Validated" on their profile page.

38.2k · August 15, 2003

Unless Grajek was a sock puppet. TPTB do not like sock puppets and will ban them from the site as soon as they determine the account is a SP.

Don't let the registration date fool you. Some people create sock puppets and let them lay dormant until they need them.

Back to the other issue. It is odd that Woodster's log is back. Only 3 people can delete a log. The cache owner, the logger and an admin. The first two claim they didn't delete it. Hmmmmm.

"Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day" - Dave Barry

2.1k · August 15, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by BrianSnat:
Unless Grajek was a sock puppet. TPTB do not Back to the other issue. It is odd that Woodster's log is back. Only 3 people can delete a log. The cache owner, the logger and an admin. The first two claim they didn't delete it. Hmmmmm.

Well I know for sure it wasn't me. The cache owner is the one that brought it to my attention actually. We've been communicating all day via email. He told me earlier about that he couldn't even find my log. I initially didn't check for my log. I just noticed that the only virtual I had in my finds was not in my list anymore and my total count was depleted by one. So I would say it was probably the approver.

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

August 15, 2003

First of all I would like to apologize on behalf of Groundspeak and the approver for the comments and actions in this situation. In his frustration this situation was dealt with inappropriately.

The role as an approver can be very stressful. They are subject to much criticism and being human at times it will get to them. There are ways to deal with that criticism professionally and the majority of the time they do. Their actions are accountable to the community, to Groundspeak, to themselves. In some cases the criticism is formed as an attack on the approver or to the approver. We as a community need to work on those issues. The criticism can be positive and help the approvers, Groundspeak and the community to understand each other and work together.

hydee

I work for the frog

The truth shines through

Recommended Posts