In case you were still open-minded

2.3k · September 24, 2003

I would agree that the previous message by enfanta is an accurate assessment.

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

Free your mind and the rest will follow

And may no Admin bricks fly your way

September 24, 2003

Well said, Enfanta.

"...clear as mud?"

22k · September 24, 2003

.

September 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:
I just wanted to point out this page that has links back to geocaching.com:

http://www.piratecaching.com/returned1.htm

It looks like NudeCacher had some fun with this game as well as Chorse and Sophia. They don't seem to post in the forums so instead of "how cool is this new game??" we get "my condolences for the loss of your loved ones, brian".

Just felt that it might be better if people kept a bit more "even keel", as the pirates say, about the whole thing by reading about good experiences from piratecaching.com's better members.

PS - If there are any pirates in the Boston area who would like to have a cache made available to them to pirate (By The Rules, not simply stolen) at a future date, contact me personally and I will place my first geocache (to be pirated at a later date).

--

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

Since you want to have an even keel approach please also consider what piratecaching.com does not put on their web site. Namely, that the same pirate who so graciously returned the contents of three caches fails to mention the ones he hasn't.

Burrows Island plundered >8/19

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=50683&log=y&decrypt=

Geology Geocache #11 plundered >8/18

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=41744&log=y&decrypt=

Skagit Wings plundered >8/19

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=4338&log=y&decrypt=

Samish Bay View Point plundered >9/4

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=2991&log=y&decrypt=

Blanchard plundered >9/4

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=20450&log=y&decrypt=

Little Cache at Big Rock plundered >8/17

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=68695&log=y&decrypt=

Corny plundered >8/29

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=68695&log=y&decrypt=

Almost Lost Park #3 plundered >9/10

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=61446&log=y&decrypt=

A Big Rock with Big Views plundered >9/18

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=44709&log=y&decrypt=

None of these caches have been returned. There may be others out there that haven’t been discovered yet. Remember that the “pirate” doesn’t log on gc.com, or on his page, the caches he has plundered. He just lists what he wants. The aspects that make his actions appear more acceptable.

2.1k · September 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by seneca:
Ju66l3r, you have not made it very clear to me where you stand on the basic ethic of respecting the property of others. Tell me unequivocally that you do not support, or in anyway advocate the interference of caches without the owner's consent/permission, and I would be pleased to listen to any suggested variations on Geocaching that you may have.

Seneca, I think it is a bit hazier than that. I have a hard time accepting the idea that if you leave a box in the woods you should expect everyone to keep their hands off of it (unless they follow your rules). It's not your car, your tent, or any one of a number of other analogies I've read so far. It's a box with a logbook and goodies left on public lands. I want to look into the legality of ownership a bit more. I have a feeling that since it is left overnight or something of that nature, then somehow "ownership" is weakened. If so, then what the pirates do would not _need_ prior consent (although I would advocate at _least_ prior warning). So, until I understand a bit more about the true ownership of a geocache, then I can only unequivocally agree that a person whose intent is to destroy a geocache (i.e. take the logbook, not follow the piratecaching rules) as opposed to temporarily altering it is not acceptable.

--

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

September 24, 2003

quote:
So, until I understand a bit more about the true ownership of a geocache, then I can only unequivocally agree that a person whose intent is to destroy a geocache (i.e. take the logbook, not follow the piratecaching rules) as opposed to temporarily altering it is not acceptable.

So then why do you show support for those who have been proven to plunder caches and not return them?

They have "returned" only a small percentage of the caches taken as demonstrated above. Furthermore, their actions have spawned copycats that take entire caches and them brag about it. If it were part of a harmless variation, then why do the pirates hide their true identity?

This is not a case of muggledom. It is what happens when a wannabe geocacher turns theif and vandal. It is a deliberate, premeditated, act of theft followed up by harassment and taunting.

To use a previous example, it is like a car theif calling the owner from their car and taunting them about the theft.

Try and justify your support all you want. I think it is pretty clear that you will not find any sympathy in this forum.

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

I have never been lost. Been awful confused for a few days, but never lost!

N61.12.041 W149.43.734

September 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:
...So, until I understand a bit more about the true ownership of a geocache, then I can only unequivocally agree that a person whose intent is to destroy a geocache (i.e. take the logbook, not follow the piratecaching rules) as opposed to temporarily altering it is not acceptable.

And by what extension of logic do you arrive at that? Can't I make my own rules that include destruction of the cache, if it puts more excitement in the game for me? I might be able to find a bunch of cache hunters who revel in competing for the most destroyed caches.

Or maybe I think your logbooks are lame, and I'll kindly replace them with something I think is more exciting - like stapled together junk mail.

I can see where all this is leading. Ignorance, I can tolerate - but it's starting to look like there might be too many people who do not value honor. Maybe it's time for me to buy that membership and convert my caches to MO.

Hey - if we all do that, does it mean the pirates lose?

"...clear as mud?"

September 24, 2003

If I put a lot of time, money, and effort into placing a cache, I also accept the fact that it might well be moved.

A non-cacher might stumble across it, and move it without knowing what it was supposed to do (I know of a cache that moved almost three miles that way).

Likewise, someone might trash it - it happens, and I'd be willing to deal with it, just as the first cacher who stumbled across a trashed cache would be (probably) willing to deal with the fact that the cache isn't there.

But Pirate Cachers, to my own mind at least, are insulting on two levels.

1. They profess to be a part of the game that they are undermining. They understand and accept the general expectations of Geocaching, and then completely flout those maxims. The FAQ explicitly stipulates that finders should not move a cache unless the owner has said it is part and parcel of the cache to do so.

Also the guidelines suggest that a finder should take something, and leave something - not take everything and leave sod all but the logbook.

2. They suggest that in some way the caches which I have put a lot of time, money and effort into placing can, by hiding the cache elsewhere, be improved without my permission, and disregarding the fact that the cache may well have been placed in its location for a very specific reason.

I don't care about the petty arguments of whether or not Pirating a cache is theft or not, but I do care that these individuals have the gall to suggest that they know better than other cache owners how visitors should enjoy their caches.

So what if someone enjoyed the Pirate Cache? What about the people that can't do the cache the way it was intended, and are left disappointed? What about the cache owners who put the effort in in the first place? If it's a viable game then make a specific cache out of it, but don't do it with mine, or anyone elses. Go get your own toys.

EDIT: Spellchecked dumb error

------

"There's Sparticus. That's him, over there."

[This message was edited by Kouros on September 24, 2003 at 10:56 AM.]

September 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by enfanta:
As someone who enjoys creating variants on this game (http://ubbx.Groundspeak.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=5726007311&f=7316058331&m=15360815&r=86460886#86460886, http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=79125, http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=62012) I've been trying to decide how the pirates went wrong in what COULD have been an interesting variant on geocaching. And the best I can figure out is that you guys broke trust. We have certain expectations when we set and seek caches and the pirates messed with that too much. We weren't expecting it and when we said we didn't like it, the pirates didn't respect that: they just directed us to their rules to show us it was really okay.

Well, it wasn't okay. And the pirates haven't done much to repair the broken trust as far as I can tell.

In order for this to have worked _I_ think there needed to be some announcement that the pirates were coming to our area and give people a chance to decide if they wanted to participate or not.

But that seems like it wouldn't have been fun for the pirates. Which makes me wonder what their real motivation is...

quote:
It's ironical for someone to comment on the actions of others when he, himself, has setup the architecture for these misguided intentions to spawn these pirate games.

Could it be that all this is a personal vendetta against Jeremy? I suspect so. In which case, you've alienated any moderate people who may have agreed with your arguments against gc.com and brought together folks who normally wouldn't agree with each other.

GC.com may lose some people to that N site but it's hardly going to weaken them.

The Pirates have done little except ruin another "variant" on the game and made themselves unwelcome, to boot.

Oh, and next time you want to "punish" Jeremy leave the rest of us out of it.

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

Excellent, excellent post. Also, I really like your Finders Keepers variation. I’m thinking of using it for distributing my geocoins when they arrive. Although many caches are placed in really great locations that one wouldn’t normally seek out. I think adding your own off set caches to existing caches could add to the entire experience perhaps taking the seeker a little further up the hill or add a bit more of a challenge.

Jul663r, I’m right there with you.

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

September 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by enfanta:
I've been trying to decide how the pirates went wrong in what COULD have been an interesting variant on geocaching. And the best I can figure out is that you guys broke trust.

Talk about hitting the nail on the head, Enfanta! And finding lost trust can sometimes be harder than finding a 5/5 cache.

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.

September 24, 2003

Ok, here's a "fun" variation which will allow me to have fun, and therefore, everyone else will have fun as well.

Since I am a scuba diver, I'm going to take find caches near the water, and toss all the contents into the nearby water. I'll then leave a note in the cache, telling everyone where they can trade their items. It'll be a great boost to the sport of SCUBA, so its gotta be a good idea.

</sarcasm>

I agree that the someone places a cache, then if anyone else wants to use that cache in any other way (other than take something/leave something) they should get the permission of the person who placed it. This is regardless of if it "pirate" activity, or placing a codeword in the cache as part of a larger hide. If it isn't yours, don't mess with it.

2.1k · September 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Whidbey Walk:

Since you want to have an even keel approach please also consider what piratecaching.com does not put on their web site. Namely, that the same pirate who so graciously returned the contents of three caches fails to mention the ones he hasn't.

I'm not completely certain that this is the same pirate. If it is, I think he's figured out a better way of doing things now (which includes the rehiding of caches). If it is the same person, then more than likely these cache contents were discarded prior to his decision to rehide the loot and leave pirate booty for the kids as per his current rules. If you look at the date of last find for these caches *before* it was noticed as looted, then he may have started his pirate caching as early as August 9th or so and was doing it to cause trouble. The three caches that have been returned were rehidden after August 25th and he may now be trying to play along with what could become a valid variant. There is no cache in your list that can be shown to be taken after August 25th and not had them returned. The dates you listed were not the dates of the plundering but the dates that the plundering was first found (in some cases a full month after the previous log).

quote:
None of these caches have been returned. There may be others out there that haven’t been discovered yet. Remember that the “pirate” doesn’t log on gc.com, or on his page, the caches he has plundered. He just lists what he wants. The aspects that make his actions appear more acceptable.

This is true and I think what you've shown is that the pirates did not start on the right foot. I think the person (assuming only one person in Seattle was involved) who pillaged these caches has changed to better involve his activities in the spirit of geocaching by rehiding the taken goods so they can be replaced in the cache and leaving more than a business card.

I still think that the rules as they are listed at piratecaching.com (and have been applied in at least 3 cases) make a solid start for a valid addition to geocaching.

--

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

September 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:
I still think that the rules as they are listed at piratecaching.com (and have been applied in at least 3 cases) make a solid start for a valid addition to geocaching.

I only had a quick look on the site but I didn't see anywhere where these rules allow me to opt out of the possibility of having my cache pirated?

You might be happy to have the caches you've worked hard to place be pirated, that's fine with me. I'm not. If this is supposed to be a solid start for a valid addition I would assume I'd have this choice.

The pirates have a forum. why not make it that people like yourself who are happy with these new addition list their caches in the forum and all caches listed in the Pirate forum are fair game? That way only people who like this new twist are forced to participate in it.

Maybe some day down the track I'll choose to join in, but for now I choose not to.

Edit ^^^^ Avatar buddies

Edit 2 VVVVV Avatar buddies

________________________

What is caches precious?

[This message was edited by Team AshandEs on September 24, 2003 at 04:51 PM.]

1.3k · September 24, 2003

When you mail a letter, you are no longer in possesion of it, but it remains your property untill it is delivered. Tampering with mail is a federal crime. While travel bugs aren't carried by the postal service, they do remain the property of the owner, regardless of where they are. You ought to be able to expect that they will not be tampered with.

September 24, 2003

quote:
I still think that the rules as they are listed at piratecaching.com (and have been applied in at least 3 cases) make a solid start for a valid addition to geocaching.

I hope this doesn't become a common variant and I'll tell ya why. I recently revisited a cache with some friends. It was only a two mile hike in but this cache was after another two mile hike and rock climb. I was pretty beat. I can only imagine my disgust when finding the second cache and realizing I had another hike and find ahead of me when all I wanted to do was sign the book and get back to the car. I wouldn't feel like I could walk away and NOT get the pirate cache: I'd feel the need to set the cache straight by restoring the contents.

Perhaps these work better with quick and easy finds. I really hope they don't take off around here...

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

4.2k · September 24, 2003

I see I now have 2 avatar buddies.

Sorry, off topic but I've posted my comments on this and the other thread ad naseum now.

Moving on to more productive discussions (and caching).

September 24, 2003

We don't have any pirates that I know of around here as of yet, and I haven't placed any caches yet so in my opinion.......................hmmmmm maybe I should just shut up. lol

2.1k · September 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by enfanta:
Perhaps these work better with quick and easy finds. I really hope they don't take off around here...

Good point. It could be stated that any cache greater than a 4 on either difficulty or terrain can not be pirated, since it does add another level to the cache while it is in the "looted" stage. OR if the cache hider is notified prior to the pirating, the cache page itself could be updated with the pertinent information in the description so that the next person would have to be willing to settle for "TNLNSL" or to spend the extra effort to recover the loot from the pirates.

Also in response to AshandEs...oops, fire alarm, report back on this later!

--

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

4.7k · September 24, 2003

so... how about them red sox?

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

presta schrader

2.1k · September 24, 2003

...okay from home now...Making a list of opt-in caches for pirating does sorta take some of the fun out of it (never know who's next...) but would stop all the thin-skinned toe-stepping that created the forum ruckus anyways.

Nobody screams bloody murder when a cache just disappears..and then the thief doesn't even leave a calling card! This isn't even that bad (the stuff's just around the corner)...but it's created a holy terror because "I can't believe someone would do this!"...I can't wait until www.samuraicaching.com starts up and we start hearing about how people are finding their tupperware sliced up so the rain could get into the cache...then, everyone will beg the pirates to get to their cache before the samurais.

--

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

September 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:
...okay from home now...Making a list of opt-in caches for pirating does sorta take some of the fun out of it (never know who's next...) but would stop all the thin-skinned toe-stepping that created the forum ruckus anyways.

For who? It wouldn't take the fun out of it for me.

quote:
Nobody screams bloody murder when a cache just disappears..and then the thief doesn't even leave a calling card!

They don't? Has one of your caches ever been trashed? I'm pretty sure I'd be screaming at the top of my lungs if one of mine was. Either way I don't think painting something as the lesser of two evils is a particularly good way to defend it.

________________________

What is caches precious?

5.3k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:
...but would stop all the thin-skinned toe-stepping that created the forum ruckus anyways.

Calling people who object to having their property stolen "thin-skinned" is a perfect example of the narcissistic mindset of the pirates. Clearly, if the pirate is having fun, that's all that matters; any objection from his victims must certainly result from some defect in them. Thus, pirates are "creative" while those who object to being victimized are "close-minded."

Thanks for such a wonderful illustration of the power of unswervingly high self-regard coupled with complete disregard for the feelings of others. I think you've captured the pirate personality to a tee.

1.3k · September 25, 2003

OK Pirates, I assume you're reading this...

As you like to hide caches and have riddles to solve them and the likes... start lisitng some cahces up here that are owned and hidden by yourselves... take us to a waypint, then give us clues and riddles to find your caches. I for one would love this, but I don't want to solve these puzzles to find my own cache tyvm.

Some people are born great, some achieve greatness, and some just grate

38.2k · September 25, 2003

quote:
They don't? Has one of your caches ever been trashed? I'm pretty sure I'd be screaming at the top of my lungs if one of mine was. Either way I don't think painting something as the lesser of two evils is a particularly good way to defend it.

I don't think Jul66l3r has ever had any caches trashed. That's because Jul6613r doesn't own any caches, which is probably why Jul is so quick to embrace the idea of organized cache thievery.

"You can't make a man by standing a sheep on his hind legs. But by standing a flock of sheep in that position, you can make a crowd of men" - Max Beerbohm

4.5k · September 25, 2003

The pirates admit they are pirates. So let's see what the definition is:

pirate (pì´rît) noun

1. a. One who robs at sea or plunders the land from the sea without commission from a sovereign nation. b. A ship used for this purpose.

2. One who preys on others; a plunderer.

3. One who makes use of or reproduces the work of another without authorization.

4. One that operates an unlicensed, illegal television or radio station.

Excerpted from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition © 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.

I think #2 and #3 apply.

(I don't think I'm a pirate copying the definition for non-commercial use, so let's not get off-topic)

Alan

September 25, 2003

quote:
quote:
------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by enfanta:

Perhaps these work better with quick and easy finds. I really hope they don't take off around here...

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

Good point. It could be stated that any cache greater than a 4 on either difficulty or terrain can not be pirated, since it does add another level to the cache while it is in the "looted" stage. OR if the cache hider is notified prior to the pirating, the cache page itself could be updated with the pertinent information in the description so that the next person would have to be willing to settle for "TNLNSL" or to spend the extra effort to recover the loot from the pirates.

I would like to state for the record that I am in no way collaborating with Ju66l3r in fine-tuning the theivery the pirates are indulging in. I believe Ju66l3r has missed the point of my post which is that "pirate caching" is a nuisance and using other people's caches to play your own game without the express permission of the cache owner is thoughtless and can lead to all sorts of problems.

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

2.1k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by fizzymagic:
Calling people who object to having their property stolen "thin-skinned" is a perfect example of the narcissistic mindset of the pirates.

Please stop using $20 words if you're going to keep buying them at the Five-n-Dime. Also, please attempt to further the discussion in the future instead of psuedo-analyzing motivations, especially on things you know nothing about. As to your final analysis...I am not one of the pirates and so my mindset (narcissistic or otherwise) has nothing to do with them. So much for that theory.

quote:
Clearly, if the pirate is having fun, that's all that matters; any objection from his victims must certainly result from some defect in _them_. Thus, pirates are "creative" while those who object to being victimized are "close-minded."

The only thing defective is your argument. There are some people who have pirated caches in a reasonable manner and the geocacher finding the note and map has had a good time retrieving the cache contents. This thread was to point these instances out and see if something could not be learned from the fact that when a set of reasonable pirating guidelines are established, all parties can enjoy the outcome. Any "victims" are not close-minded. Those that can not admit that the above is true are close-minded. I admit that there are people who do not want to participate in this creative foray in geocaching variation. Those who have been pirated by the book and took such a vehement exception to it as to threaten to remove themselves from the game entirely are thin-skinned.

--

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

2.1k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by BrianSnat:
I don't think Jul66l3r has ever had any caches trashed. That's because Jul6613r doesn't own any caches, which is probably why Jul is so quick to embrace the idea of organized cache thievery.

True. True. False.

And it's ju66l3r, do try and get the name right, ByronSnit.

--

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

2.1k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by enfanta:
I would like to state for the record that I am in no way collaborating with Ju66l3r in fine-tuning the theivery the pirates are indulging in.

<taps the microphone>I have not, am not, nor ever will be a communist, Mr. Chairperson...

It's okay, Enfanta, your secret is safe with me.

quote:
I believe Ju66l3r has missed the point of my post which is that "pirate caching" is a nuisance and using other people's caches to play your own game without the express permission of the cache owner is thoughtless and can lead to all sorts of problems.

No, I didn't miss it. It was clear. I simply used your valid points to begin discussion on a few more things we may need to keep in consideration if this is to be more acceptable to more people.

--

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

September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:

Those who have been pirated by the book and took such a vehement exception to it as to threaten to remove themselves from the game entirely are thin-skinned.

It's statements like this that confuse me.

What do you mean by "pirated by the book"?

What book are we refering to here? Would this not mean "pirated" with the permission of the cache owner? Has anyone threatened to remove all their caches after being pirated when they had given permission for their cache to be pirated?

Or does "pirated by the book" mean non-consensual pirating of a cache to you?

If so who gets to define what "by the book" is?

Also, if you haven't placed any caches yourself what puts you in a position to decide is someone's reaction to their cache being interfered with in a manner they don't approve of is being "thin skinned" or not?

I've never had a cache of my own pirated and trashed or whatever so I don't think I'm in a position to judge anyone's actions should it happen to them. Why do you feel you are in a position to do so?

It's a lot of questions! So feel free to ignore them. But you seem to hop back and forwards on some positions and I would be interested to know where you stood on these sort of things.

September 25, 2003

You keep mentioning things like "pirated by the book" and "pirated according to the rules". It is obvious that pirates ignore rules (they are ignoring the geocaching rules). What makes you think you can control them any more than gc.com?

2.1k · September 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:
You keep mentioning things like "pirated by the book" and "pirated according to the rules". It is obvious that pirates ignore rules (they are ignoring the geocaching rules). What makes you think you can control them any more than gc.com?

This is to respond to both geo and Ash...a few times in the pages upon pages of comments by me on this topic, I pointed out that when I am talking about pirating ("by the book", "by the rules", "good pirating", etc), I am specifically discussing this page and pirating done in accordance with these rules. I know they do not take hider permission into account. If my way were law (which I have no intention or misgivings of it being), hider permission would not be necessary but courteous nonetheless.

The causality in geo's post is bad logic. "Pirates ignore some rules therefore pirates will ignore your rules" does not follow. The pirates have rules and the ones that I consider to be deemed "pirates" follow those rules and people have had fun. Not following those rules (e.g. taking all the stuff and throwing it away) is not under consideration or supported by me (or anyone who has discussed it here). I do not claim to control pirates (nor do I want to)...I would like to set forth a code by which current and would-be pirates could participate to the benefit of everyone. Those who wouldn't behave within these guidelines are no better than someone who uses geocaching.com just to remove local caches (which has been a problem in the past in some areas).

Finally, as for what allows a non-hider like me to say what I have, I have a brain and with it, I have decided that when I do place a cache, it will be modifier-friendly. The general trashing of my cache would bother me, but I also know that this is an unfortunate part of leaving a box in the woods, no matter how much forethought and exquisite detail went into the hiding spot and cache contents and theme. I would not pout. I would not instantly archive all of my caches. I think my greatest response would be to make a note on the cache logs online and purchase/scrounge up some refills for the contents. I like to keep things in perspective...after all, it is only just a game. Hope that answers all those questions.

--

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

38.2k · September 25, 2003

quote:
There are some people who have pirated caches in a reasonable manner and the geocacher finding the note and map has had a good time retrieving the cache contents.

The key word is "some". Most pirates don't and most finders aren't interested in the twist. Don't you get it?

You call this a "creative foray in geocaching" most of the rest of us call it organized thievery. As many of us see it, YOU are the closed minded one. Buy yourself a clue bucko.

"You can't make a man by standing a sheep on his hind legs. But by standing a flock of sheep in that position, you can make a crowd of men" - Max Beerbohm

21.9k · September 25, 2003

This thread, which began with a title about being "open-minded," has become a thread where both sides of the argument are saying that the other point of view is "close-minded." If you don't mind, it's time to close this thread. There are plenty of other pirate threads in which the discussion may continue... hopefully on a civil basis in accordance with the posted forum guidelines.

Don't make me stop this car!

In case you were still open-minded

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