Should my webcam cache be approved?

[Pantalaimon]

Well, my webcam cache, previously discussed here has been denied.

 

Here's the deal, as descriptive as I can be:

 

It is a webcam cache. The webcam is located along the shore of a lake in Maine. I posted coordinates somewhere NEAR the correct coordinates (within about 1/10 of a mile), but I wanted the cacher to have to use some smarts in order to find the cache.

 

Now, the cache coordinate don't SAY they're near the web cam, its more vague than that, it just says the cam is somewhere in Maine, but there are pleanty of ways to figure this out. For example, the sample picture says the website of the cam in the upper left hand corner. The observant cacher will find the page from there.

 

Others might have to Google until they find the correct camera, and using the coordinates given, that shouldn't be too hand.

 

Once you find the correct camera, you will see the picture shown on the cache page and on the camera page match.

 

Then, on the webcam website there is a description of where to go to find the cache. Or, if you're more thorough, you may email the keeper of the cam, he'll tell you the coorect coordinates if you are smart enough to get ahold of him.

 

So, my question is this. Plain and simple. Whether or not YOU like webcam caches, or whether or not you DO webcam caches, or whether or not you will look for this particular cache, should my cache be approved?

 

(Please remember, this is not a discussion of webcam caches in general, its just whether, in the realm of webcam caches, mine should be approved.)

 

Thanks

 

Pan

 

"The internet to tell me where. A GPS to get me there."

[+Prime Suspect]

They were absolutely right to deny it. You give incorrect coordinates, then simply say that it's somewhere in the state? Pu-leeze.

 

There's a big difference between making a cache difficult by using clever and challenging clues, and by simply leaving out pertinent information. The first is good. The second one sucks.

 

You could have made this an off-set webcam cache. Those are pretty rare, and would have been interesting.

 

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

[+briansnat]

quote:

---

They were absolutely right to deny it. You give incorrect coordinates, then simply say that it's somewhere in the state? Pu-leeze.

 

There's a big difference between making a cache difficult by using clever and challenging clues, and by simply leaving out pertinent information. The first is good. The second one sucks.

 

You could have made this an off-set webcam cache. Those are pretty rare, and would have been interesting.

---

 

Ditto.

 

"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

[Dinoprophet]

I've got to agree with the two gents above. I really like the idea of having to find the right spot instead of it being given to you (as I said in the other thread). But if the coordinates are irrelevant to the seeker, I can't see it as a geocache. Even locationless caches involve coordinates.

 

So I voted yes, with these changes.

 

Well the mountain was so beautiful that this guy built a mall and a pizza shack

Yeah he built an ugly city because he wanted the mountain to love him back -- Dar Williams

[little shotgun]

I suggest that you change it to a multistage cach instead of giving the wrong coordinates you can make it more challenging to the cachers.....therefore the people will be able to find it with the same amount of challenge. if anyone dislikes what i have said please respond.

[little shotgun]

I agree that it should be a multistage cach to make it more challenging so the people can still find it....it would be stupid to lead a person within a 10th of a mile of where he or she is and be able to find nothing!

[+NeuroNomad]

Pantalaimon you are too freaking funny. First you will not follow the rules that they gave you. Then you complain in two seperate threads about the deal. And now, I am about 100% sure, you made up a new screen name (le) to try to make it look like someone is on your side. I am sure that someone that just joined today (see le's profile) is going to really care about this topic. Also the other giveaway is that you just might have used LE account to prop up your poll. That plus the only two postings LE has made are in this topic and he (aka YOU) use that account twice to reply with the LE account, but the reply sounds like two different people. Come on dude, grow up, don't you know that the admins can see your IP, so I am sure they are on to you. If I am wrong, sorry, but it just smells too fishy to me.

 

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

Pardon me Sir, but there is a Wild GeoCache in this area.

 

www.neurocache.com - NeuroNomad & Sublonde's Page

[+NeuroNomad]

Example: this LE (aka Pantalaimon) is in agreement with the entry above it. Funny thing is that the entry above it was also posted by LE. So what we have here is LE agreeing to himself, ha ha. Too funny. I can't believe the nerve of some people around here. When the admins say something is not approved, either A) work with them to get it approved by following their options, or Go to another geocaching website or C) Make your own caching website. Why continue to try to get people on your side. If the admins say no, but give you options to get it accepted and you don't take those options then you have no right to complain. That plus you are not even a premium member, so you have even less right to complain.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by le:

I agree that it should be a multistage cach to make it more challenging so the people can still find it....it would be stupid to lead a person within a 10th of a mile of where he or she is and be able to find nothing!

---

 

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

Pardon me Sir, but there is a Wild GeoCache in this area.

 

www.neurocache.com - NeuroNomad & Sublonde's Page

[Pantalaimon]

NeuroNomad and/or Sublonde,

 

You have no idea what you're talking about. Luckily, you apologized if you were wrong, because, well, you are.

 

First, I have no idea who LE is, and second s/he didn't even agree with me! Climb back in your hole, K? Why don't you slip fully into your self-imposed role of forum police and ask the admins to check the ISP of LE. Maybe that will convince you that your "100% sure" is really 0% correct.

 

The first thread I started on this matter was to discuss HOW I could effectively argue to get my cache approved. This thread was to take a poll on the topic, because one of the reasons the cache approver said he was denying the cache is because of the replies on the other thread. The two threads were clearly created for two different purposes. Why do you appear to have such a problem with that? Have I harmed your delicate sensibilities is some way?

 

I didn't realize it was a forum crime to try and get approval for a cache that I thought would be interesting and enjoyable to fellow cachers? Oh wait... its not, you're just overreacting.

 

Not being a premium member gives me no right to post about I cache I want to create? Please. That doesn't even warrant a reply.

 

Don't hurt yourself getting off your high horse.

 

Pan

 

"The internet to tell me where. A GPS to get me there."

[+NeuroNomad]

I am not trying to be a forum police, else I would have emailed the admin telling them that I thought you were making fake accounts. It just seems a little funny thats all.

 

As far as my issue with this, it seems like there are a lot of people here that just will not take no from the admins without running to the message boards and trying to get people to side with them in fighting "the system" so to speak. It gets old. I know there has to be at least four or five threads on the matter. Of course I can just ignore them, but still I want to give my 2 cents worth.

 

Once again I appologize if you and LE are not one and the same. Been around fourms and BBS since the mid 80s and have just seen similar stuff many a time.

 

There is nothing wrong with trying to get your cache approved, but it sounds to me that the Admin tried to work with you, but you just will not work with him, instead you want to run to the forums and act like you are a victim.

 

As far as not being a premium member, I should not have said that. You have an equal right to post about a cache. I appologize for that.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pantalaimon:

NeuroNomad and/or Sublonde,

 

You have no idea what you're talking about. Luckily, you apologized if you were wrong, because, well, you are.

 

First, I have no idea who LE is, and second s/he didn't even agree with me! Climb back in your hole, K? Why don't you slip fully into your self-imposed role of forum police and ask the admins to check the ISP of LE. Maybe that will convince you that your "100% sure" is really 0% correct.

 

The first thread I started on this matter was to discuss HOW I could effectively argue to get my cache approved. This thread was to take a poll on the topic, because one of the reasons the cache approver said he was denying the cache is because of the replies on the other thread. The two threads were clearly created for two different purposes. Why do you appear to have such a problem with that? Have I harmed your delicate sensibilities is some way?

 

I didn't realize it was a forum crime to try and get approval for a cache that I thought would be interesting and enjoyable to fellow cachers? Oh wait... its not, you're just overreacting.

 

Not being a premium member gives me no right to post about I cache I want to create? Please. That doesn't even warrant a reply.

 

Don't hurt yourself getting off your high horse.

 

Pan

 

"The internet to tell me where. A GPS to get me there."

---

 

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

Pardon me Sir, but there is a Wild GeoCache in this area.

 

www.neurocache.com - NeuroNomad & Sublonde's Page

[Pantalaimon]

Okay, well, I feel like we're arguing in two different posts now, which seems ridiculous.

 

I accept your apology for the premium member comment and for the fake post comments.

 

As far as taking this discussion to the forums, like I said on the other thread, it is my understanding that cache creators are encouraged to take the discussion to the forums is the approver fails to approve the cache.

 

I've had discussions with the approver, and we've come to no agreement on the cache. Thus, I took the discussion here, as I am entitled to do.

 

Now, as far as others agreeing with me on the cache, it doesn't look like its going to happen, and I can accept that.

 

Pan

 

"The internet to tell me where. A GPS to get me there."

[+NeuroNomad]

We can just agree to disagree. Mainly at this point I just don't see the purpose for having multiple threads on the same topic.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pantalaimon:

Okay, well, I feel like we're arguing in two different posts now, which seems ridiculous.

 

I accept your apology for the premium member comment and for the fake post comments.

 

As far as taking this discussion to the forums, like I said on the other thread, it is my understanding that cache creators are encouraged to take the discussion to the forums is the approver fails to approve the cache.

 

I've had discussions with the approver, and we've come to no agreement on the cache. Thus, I took the discussion here, as I am entitled to do.

 

Now, as far as others agreeing with me on the cache, it doesn't look like its going to happen, and I can accept that.

 

Pan

 

"The internet to tell me where. A GPS to get me there."

---

 

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

Pardon me Sir, but there is a Wild GeoCache in this area.

 

www.neurocache.com - NeuroNomad & Sublonde's Page

[Pantalaimon]

Well, I think I explained that. Futher, I wouldn't have even continued with this thread until I my posts were negatively commented upon here.

 

And, as I quoted on the other thread:

 

"If your cache has been archived make sure to read the log to see why. If you want to dispute your archived cache, feel free to post a message in the forums to see what others think. If the majority believes it should be posted, your cache may be unarchived."

 

Pan

 

"The internet to tell me where. A GPS to get me there."

[iryshe]

If you wish to debate each other, please do it outside of the forums.

 

BTW, the "nos" seem to have it so far.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location™

[+NeuroNomad]

Sorry for getting carried away. I believe we (Pantalaimon and I) have both shaked our hands, and agreed to just silently disagree on the matter.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeremy (Admin):

If you wish to debate each other, please do it outside of the forums.

 

BTW, the "nos" seem to have it so far.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

---

 

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

Pardon me Sir, but there is a Wild GeoCache in this area.

 

www.neurocache.com - NeuroNomad & Sublonde's Page

[+OzzieSan]

I voted "Other"

 

He-- No!

[Pantalaimon]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeremy (Admin):

If you wish to debate each other, please do it outside of the forums.

---

 

Okay. Sorry. Next time I'll let the baseless attacks about how I'm creating bogus accounts go unanswered.

 

quote:

---

BTW, the "nos" seem to have it so far.

)

---

 

Thanks for pointing out the obvious. Would I have known that if I didn't post the poll?

 

Sorry, again. I thought geocaching.com meant what it said about looking for opinions in the forums.

 

Lock this topic too, please. I'm really beyond caring at this point.

 

Pan

 

"The internet to tell me where. A GPS to get me there."