+Navdog Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Bear & Ducky: I believe it started as the debate over virtual rules being too strict and moved across 3 threads. Please read them before assuming, Thanks! Bear & Ducky I am sorry you don't agree with the reasoning behind the denial of your multi-cache, but you need to look at the bigger picture: 1. There needs to be some stricter control over virts. It's only human nature for folks to be lazy... and the plethora of simple, low quality virts that triggered the tightening of the rules make sense. The original concept of geocaching was about a physical cache and it makes sense that this is where the priority should be for the website. 2. Is it really necessary for you to have a series of caches (some virtual?) strung out along a trail when one quality multi accomplishes the same thing. QUALITY NOT QUANTITY is what we should be striving for. Your caches didn't meet the guidelines and were not allowed. Why can't you post a thread and ask for help or opinions in reworking your cache so that it fits within the guidelines we are all working with. ___________________________________ Moondog3.com - Portland Geocaching Link to comment
Bear & Ducky Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 If it was quantity I wanted then there are many areas I travel through between home and work that I would place many traditionals. This was a quality series in what it did and the thought was to reward the cachers for sticking through 30 km of trails just to complete it. If you have a choice of loggin 1 cache series that takes 30 km of hiking versus doing 10 to 15 others in some of the denser areas with less, then what are you going to do? Most cachers will opt for the later, while the dedicated few would still do the 1. The reference to the few of mine as low quality virts is a biased opinion for most, as many people simlpy dislike the virts out of personal preference and not because they have a place. I understand the concept of the guidlines but I also thought the word guidelines meant what it did in the english dictionary and as spoken here. The best solution I've said before is all you need to add to guidelines is this: "Traditional container, prizes, log. All others need not apply" It would save you a lot of issues if you were all just straight up with your end goals here and said this is no place for anything but standard containers. Thanks but no thanks I'll do my caches somewhere that appreciates quality outside of the box as well as the traditionals. Keith Bear & Ducky Link to comment
+Bilder Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Why do some folks get so worked up over a denied cahce? I have had a cache turned down. Was not that big of a deal. I shrugged and moved on. Why raise such a stink over it? Guess I just don't get it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have never been lost. Been awful confused for a few days, but never lost! N61.12.041 W149.43.734 Link to comment
+Navdog Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 B&D, why don't you consider consolidating your cache idea in to three separate multi-caches, each one going further down the trail. A cacher would not be able to find the second leg until he found the first multi, which has the coords to the start of the second multi and so on. Therefore the cachers who pushed on to the end would be rewarded with more than one find as you seem to feel is important. Why not think outside the box, but within the current guidelines? You have been ranting on a half dozen threads because your cache was not approved, but nowhere have I seen you ask for any help in rethinking your cache idea when it clearly did not meet the rules. ___________________________________ Moondog3.com - Portland Geocaching Link to comment
Bear & Ducky Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Navdog:You have been ranting on a half dozen threads because your cache was not approved, but nowhere have I seen you ask for any help in rethinking your cache idea when it clearly did not meet the rules. Your dead wrong there. This is not a dozen threads to rant on my caches being denied, I gave them up. Its been kept going (in the form of my caches vs the rules) since others wont give it up as well. Its only been a few people trying to say I'm ranting when yet I've continued to say I'm not here to debate my disapproved caches. My issue comes from other circumstances where caches *DID* meet guidelines but *DID NOT* get approved, please reread the dozen threads you have seen me ranting on and this time read every post. This exact type of statement is exactly why its pointless to bring things up in here. Keith Bear & Ducky Link to comment
+The Cache Couple Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Bear & Ducky wrote: quote:If that was the only problem then as you said "BIG FLIPPING DEAL" I had them disapproved and I did decide to take mine elsewhere...they are archived off this site. How many times do we have to cover the same old topic? I don't know how many of you are tired of reading this b.$. everyday but under another useless topic but I for one am. It's very simple for anyone of you (all 4 or 5) that are continually starting this crap.......either take the rules the way they are or don't let the door hit you on your way out! I really don't care if you flame me for writing this but it is obvious to me by reading the posts and replies that you are a very low minority in this game. All I have read over the past few days is the so called problems with one of the Canadian approvers. It seems to me that this issue has been covered by almost everyone in TPTB slots. All of them are telling you over and over and over again to email the appropriate problem to the appropriate place and they will take a look at it. Isn't this simple enough? It should have been after about the upteenth time that it was said by TPTB. At the very least why bring it to the general forum to be discussed? In my humble opinion, if you are so dead set on this site being (for a choice of better words) a communist site, then why don't you just take your toys and go play where you moved your caches? If enough of you do it then you just may have more than a half dozen caches within 100 miles of your home listed on that site. I for one would be a lot happier if the site was free from the bad apples once and for all. My 2 cents worth, flame ahead cause I got my flame retardant clothes on. Happy cachin'! Link to comment
Bear & Ducky Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Bilder:Why do some folks get so worked up over a denied cahce? Its not about a cache or even all my caches. Why do people get worked up when one person dies from a disease? Because the only thing that follows one is two, and two is three, and three is four... etc.. If you dismiss the small slights here and there then you dismiss a larger problem later. Why not discuss it without trying to make this into a discussion that clearly has been defined as *NOT* a my caches were denied sob story. Geesh it seems you guys can put the whinning right into my mouth very well in here. Maybe we should switch sides for a bit so you can do all this ranting for my poor lil caches that I've already dismissed. I'm big enough to see potential in alternate listing services I'm not going to lose sleep over my caches being denied. So find another way to deal with my argument rather than trying to play it off. Keith Bear & Ducky Link to comment
Bear & Ducky Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by The Cache Couple:Bear & Ducky wrote: Yada yada yada.... Its a very close opinion there with flaws, one the rules have in some cases not been followed. this represents a problem for some of us. thus we argue, I have no problem leaving my own caches aside as I see the rules are there and have said I concede to their opinions in the admin/approvers area. I do not subscribe to sweeping things under a rug, hiding them away or continued battering from people with irrelevant posts, continued "go take your toys elsewhere" statements when the solution is simply to address the suggestions trying to be made and work with those of us asking. If your tired of it then stop adding comments to the posts that both provoke and direct us to respond. your as guilty as anyone else if you are going to post messages like that. If you want to walk away simply say you disagree and have nothing further to discuss. I'd at least respect that. Keith Bear & Ducky Link to comment
umc Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Bear & Ducky:If you dismiss the small slights here and there then you dismiss a larger problem later. The thing I've read several times is that it is a small issue and not one nearly worth all of the attention its been getting. That goes for several of the small issues that have been driving people mad as of late. Not directed at anyone in particular but its time to drop this petty bickering over these trivial issues and focus on a more possitive aspect of geocaching. MiGO __________________________ Caching with a clue.... Link to comment
+The Cache Couple Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 quote:If you want to walk away simply say you disagree and have nothing further to discuss. I'd at least respect that. I don't recall asking for your respect. I was voicing my opinion as you have over and over again when you should be sending the email to the appropriate link that TPTB set up. You can take it or leave it, it's up to you. By the way as I have spent time reading these types of threads over the past few days I seem to be in the majority with my opinion here. Anyway, I hope you find happiness in this sport that you obviously loved at one time. Whether you decide to continue it here is totally up to you. Happy cachin! Link to comment
umc Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Keep it on the level and nothing personal you two otherwise this will be the 4th? thread locked for the day. MiGO __________________________ Caching with a clue.... Link to comment
+Navdog Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 B&D, you somehow have not answered my question above. I doubt that you would have posted so much in so many threads recently if your own cache was not approved. I still haven't seen you consider how you can make your cache idea fit within the current guidelines. And I still haven't heard you consider how a relaxed ruling on virtuals would ultimately affect the website as a whole. Again, you need to look at the big picture and not your frustration with your own cache idea, which with a few adjustments and an open mind, would be a good cache. ___________________________________ Moondog3.com - Portland Geocaching Link to comment
+Logscaler and Red Posted October 22, 2003 Author Share Posted October 22, 2003 I just walked through the door after 12 hours of work moving 3000 plus tons of material. As I read further and further into MY thread, I see it has went way off line into the same ol same ol BS that I have grown to detest. And I see also that I was partly right. "The Perfect Cache" was planted and denied. And another cache against the rules was denied. A lot of wasted time and space to throw a temper tantrum over something that should have made you think harder about what to do next instead of coming to a complete stand still. Reminds me of a kid stamping his feet and holding his breath trying to get his way. Tell you what, I will get you a coupon for a gallon of Ice Cream and a bottle of Root Beer if you will just get over it and move along to some creative positive suggestions to try and fix what trouble effect ALL of us, not just you. Navdog asked a very logical question along the line of - Have YOU asked for help from other CACHERS on ideas - (within the guidelines and rules) - to get your 30k hike approved? Red and I happen to to be one couple who would rather do the one long hike verses the flock of small ones, when we have the time. And we do not look for moving caches out of our local area anymore. Period. End of story. Not our thing. But like NavDog also said, make it into three hunts. Each one harder and more rewarding then the one before. I also agree that these rules and guidelines need to be nailed down and applied uniformly(sp) across the board to all cachers and caches. Anyway, This rant was a lot longer then what you see now but I just deleted a bunch of it because I am not in the mood to argue. And I also think having cache approvers as moderators is fine. Who else would you get? Another layer of admin.? And UMC, If this cr@p keeps going along this line of personal attacks, Please lock it - this thread and all offending parties - and through away the flipping key. logscaler. Link to comment
Bear & Ducky Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by logscaler:And UMC, If this cr@p keeps going along this line of personal attacks, Please lock it - this thread and all offending parties - and through away the flipping key. logscaler. Good idea since you obviously read past and through messages rather than taking the content I posted as what it was. I spelled it out, this is not about my caches, geesh go back to the virtual rules too strict thread: http://ubbx.Groundspeak.com/6/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=5726007311&f=4016058331&m=58660529&p=5 Then there are others...you still make assumptions it would be best to lock the thread and drop it since your not willing to see any side but one. Keith Bear & Ducky Link to comment
+Corp Of Discovery Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Not to be flippant or anything but the thread title could have been better too. Remember, wherever you go- there you are! Link to comment
Bear & Ducky Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Navdog:B&D, you somehow have not answered my question above. I doubt that you would have posted so much in so many threads recently if your own cache was not approved. I still haven't seen you consider how you can make your cache idea fit within the current guidelines. And I still haven't heard you consider how a relaxed ruling on virtuals would ultimately affect the website as a whole. Again, you need to look at the big picture and not your frustration with your own cache idea, which with a few adjustments and an open mind, would be a good cache. Actually I wouldnt have, because I would not have had the time to look into the forums if I was out doing my regular cache placments scouting...I spend a great deal of time hiking picking spots I like and checking into their history so that when I do set up a series like I did its not just to get 10 caches online. Your doubt about my convictions is falsly placed since I stand still by my debate with or without my caches in the discussion. Had I submitted them one by one with the description as it existed I can almost guarentee they'd have been approved without the approver asking further questions or knowing any better. As for how to make it fit, I've already had great support in email on ways to make my cache fit and I know whow it would fit and would consider it however I'm not ready to decide to bring anything further to gc.com anymore. Its my choice ultimately right? So thats why I've left it. I keep trying to say its done leave it be, I would have far fewer posts if people kept from trying to reinvent my motives into a "I'm a mad stomping child trying to get his way" I still have my opinions and I still have my principles which say there is still an issue with consistencies and the tendancy to deny virtuals which make good caches because some people value the box at the end. (which is *NOT* *NOT* *NOT* related to my cache series being denied...I never suggested mine would get approved if the virt rules lightened up) Anyway again I say this is the worng debate, can you leave it at that so I dont have yet another post to reply to when someone continues to tell me that I am in fact debating for my caches.. geesh. If you'd like to debate it join me in email..my links to the left..I welcom the good and the nasty emails I've gotten since this started so one more wont bother me. Keith Bear & Ducky Link to comment
+Team GPSaxophone Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Bear & Ducky:I still have my opinions and I still have my principles which say there is still an issue with consistencies and the tendancy to deny virtuals which make good caches because some people value the box at the end. (which is *NOT* *NOT* *NOT* related to my cache series being denied...I never suggested mine would get approved if the virt rules lightened up) This is a thread about APPROVERS, not geocaching guidelines. The approvers have nothing to do with setting the policy to deny virtuals when a regular cache could be placed at or near the site. Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness Link to comment
umc Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Bear & Ducky:If you'd like to debate it join me in email..my links to the left..I welcom the good and the nasty emails I've gotten since this started so one more wont bother me. Email is a good idea at this point as this topic has been discussed in many other threads and its OT to the topic to begin with. MiGO __________________________ Caching with a clue.... Link to comment
Recommended Posts