Jump to content

For Those With Websites:


Criminal

Recommended Posts

I’m considering the listing of local X-caches on my web page, nothing fancy, just lat/long and a brief description. Sort of a private collection of caches that don’t meet the guidelines for this site, are too close to another cache, or in some way are quasi-legal. I would simply list the information, what you do or do not do with the information is strictly up to you and your common sense. I would only refuse to list caches that were placed on private property w/o permission. I could make cards with the page link and seed them to geocaches.

 

Does anybody have any cool ideas to add?

Link to comment

I consider myself very openminded and personally don't see anything wrong with knives in some caches. And I always thought it would be cool to place a beer and wine exchange cache. But I would hate to see more restrictions placed on geocaching in general by land managers.

 

Bottom line is, land managers view a cache as a "geocache" whether it is listed on this site or another. Your actions have consequences for the entire geocaching community.

 

I may very well list a beer and wine exchange cache, but I guarantee you will have to work for it!!!... because no park ranger will ever find it. Cheers :D

Link to comment
Locationless caches?  :D

Ouch, tough question as I don't do them myself and even after all this time I'm not really sure what they are. Same for virtuals.

 

Have to think on that one...

Locationless caches are defined by the owner of the cache. They ask for pictures and photos of specific objects or subjects that must be searched for. ( Murals, windmills, skate board parks, etc.) Instead of going to coordinates and looking for physical cache. These can generate into miles and spent time equal to hunting regular caches, and instead of a paper log, you have entered your picture of subject with your GPS visable as your log.

 

Edited for grammer.

Edited by woof n lulu
Link to comment
Locationless caches?  :D

Ouch, tough question as I don't do them myself and even after all this time I'm not really sure what they are. Same for virtuals.

 

Have to think on that one...

Locationless caches are defined by the owner of the cache. They ask for pictures and photos of specific objects or subjects that must be searched for. ( Murals, windmills, skate board parks, etc.) Instead of going to coordinates and looking for physical cache. These can generate into miles and spent time equal to hunting regular caches, and instead of a paper log, you have a entered your picture with your GPS as your log.

I'll only list the coordinates and post the yea/nay for the finders. I'm not going to have room or time to post pics. A finder of an LC will have to get with the cache owner of which I'll have no knowledge.

Link to comment
Would you list caches placed in a park that had a published policy prohibiting geocaching, or in a park that had a published policy requiring a permit prior to placement of the cache?

Wow, that's a lot of P's in one sentence...

Peter Piper picked a park that prohibited placing...

Link to comment
Would you list caches placed in a park that had a published policy prohibiting geocaching, or in a park that had a published policy requiring a permit prior to placement of the cache?

Wow, that's a lot of P's in one sentence...

Peter Piper picked a park that prohibited placing...

Interesting. You're the first person to ever say I was full of P. I've been told other things.

Link to comment
I would only refuse to list caches that were placed on private property w/o permission.

Would you list caches placed in a park that had a published policy prohibiting geocaching, or in a park that had a published policy requiring a permit prior to placement of the cache?

Absolutely, I'm not listing geocaches, I'm going to list X-caches.

Link to comment

OK, I'll play along.

 

Assume I'm a park system superintendent who learned about geocaching a year ago when one of my local managers found an ammo can full of happy meal toys, pocket knives, beanie babies and mini-flashlights, along with a logbook and a piece of paper referring to Geocaching.com. I contacted Geocaching.com to complain about this box with a knife in it, which was placed in a protected wildflower preserve. The website put me in touch with the State Geocaching Association.

 

After these folks overcame my initial misgivings by sponsoring cleanup events in three of my parks, I spent the next 8 months working with the State Geocaching Association to develop a set of cache placement permit requirements. Both the parks and the geocachers seem to be happy. All the new cache listings on Geocaching.com have received permits. There have been no surprises.

 

Today my phone rings and it's a park manager saying he found an ammo can full of happy meal toys, pocket knives, beanie babies and mini-flashlights, along with a logbook. There's no "Official Geocache" sticker as required under our cache permit requirements. There is a logo that says "X-cache."

 

I send e-mails to Geocaching.com, the volunteer who reviews all the new caches, and the President of the State Geocaching Association. Nobody knows anything

about this X-cache.

 

What do I do next?

Link to comment
Assume I'm a park system superintendent…

 

dadgum you’re wearing a lot of hats lately….

 

After these folks overcame my initial misgivings by sponsoring cleanup events in three of my parks…

 

Sounds like pay to play. Somebody surrendered their freedoms (to cache) for security (of “approval”) and look what happened.

 

There is a logo that says "X-cache…

 

At this point, you should be thinking, “Hmmmm, seem like deah bein anothuh game in town. I wunnah why?

 

Nobody knows anything

 

Hey, you said it, not me.

 

What do I do next?

 

You should begin to consider how the foolish actions of the upper management have created yet another bureaucratic quagmire. If you’re smart, you’ll go back to the old way ignoring legal and harmless activity going on in the park.

 

EDIT: Typo

Edited by Criminal
Link to comment

So, you're saying the next time I get a call from an angry land manager because someone placed a cache in a protected area of their park:

 

Ranger: I actually like geocaching, but unfortunately this one is in an area with protected flowers and we can't have people step over the fence and get the cache here.

 

Me: Uh. Dude. You should get a life! That's so lame.

 

Ranger: Huh? Well, anyway, we weren't asked if it could be placed here. Can you help me?

 

Me: Dude. You're The Man. What, do you want me to ask permission to fart?

 

Ranger: Um, no. I just need to contact the cache owner so they can get the cache at the station. They can work with us to place it elsewhere.

 

Me: Do it yourself, ranger man. You don't ruule me dood.

 

-click-

 

huuhhhuhhh hhuhh cool.

Link to comment
I would only refuse to list caches that were placed on private property w/o permission. I could make cards with the page link and seed them to geocaches.

 

Aaah, restrictions. Then where does it go from there? We all know that rules tend to build on each other. Because 67.9 percent of the US polulation consists of total morons, how do you address that?

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment
So, you're saying the next time I get a call from an angry land manager because someone placed a cache in a protected area of their park:

 

Ranger: I actually like geocaching, but unfortunately this one is in an area with protected flowers and we can't have people step over the fence and get the cache here.

 

Me: Uh. Dude. You should get a life! That's so lame.

 

Ranger: Huh? Well, anyway, we weren't asked if it could be placed here. Can you help me?

 

Me: Dude. You're The Man. What, do you want me to ask permission to fart?

 

Ranger: Um, no. I just need to contact the cache owner so they can get the cache at the station. They can work with us to place it elsewhere.

 

Me: Do it yourself, ranger man. You don't ruule me dood.

 

-click-

 

huuhhhuhhh hhuhh cool.

LOL! Too funny! :D

 

But seriously, you should tell "the man" the same thing you tell us. "We're just a listing site, we don't own the caches."

Link to comment
Aaah, restrictions. Then where does it go from there?

Well, obviously a concentration camp. I mean, if we lost our geocaching freedom, we might as well be in chains.

 

I say we stand up and fight the oppressors! We should bear arms, each with a McToy and stare them down! We have direction and our direction is the steps of the White House. Who is with me!

 

A Rubbermaid container in every park.

 

A McToy in every backpack.

 

A GPS in every child's toybox.

 

We are the future, and the future runs by atomic clock.

Link to comment
If I have the ability to help resolve a situation, I will. It is good for the geocaching community at large, and good manners.

 

So better than an ill-mannered person, I suppose. Beavis and Butthead?

OK, fair enough. But look at the topics lately. You can’t please everyone; you know that better than anyone.

 

So a problem arises, and you with all good intentions attempt to resolve it. But in the solution lies another problem. You end up robbing Peter to pay Paul. At some point you’ll have to put your foot down and say, “OK, that’s enough rules, everything is perfect now.”

 

When do you think that’ll be?

 

EDIT: Add the following:

 

And at what cost to the game?

Edited by Criminal
Link to comment
At some point you’ll have to put your foot down and say, “OK, that’s enough rules, everything is perfect now.”

 

When do you think that’ll be?

 

And at what cost to the game?

Tell you what. When governments stop introducing and passing legislation, we'll stop with the guideline changes and shout to the heavens "It's perfect!"

 

Well, it ain't a perfect world, and there are stupid rules and guidelines that ultimately keep the world sane. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. But if no guidelines existed, you can't imagine the crap that would be listed. The "rotting bird" cache is probably the most awful listing ever. Hey, lets go to this Lat/Lon and take a picture of the rotting bird in different stages of decomposition. Yeah.

 

I'm sick of rules but I'm resigned to most of them. As a result state geocaching orgs have reintroduced geocaching in their local parks, and parks like the BLM have created very friendly policies toward geocaching.

 

So live with a few crappy rules you may not agree with, or go out and make a difference by influencing policy in your region. But anarchy is not the answer.

 

The better question to ask, is what would the cost of the game be if I told every land manager I met to get a life?

Link to comment
So live with a few crappy rules you may not agree with, or go out and make a difference by influencing policy in your region. But anarchy is not the answer.

Certainly it is not an either/or decision.

 

Another choice is that cachers list caches on their own site. Being responsible adults we do not necessarily have to have the imprimatur of GC.com behind our caches. Some of us may actually place caches that have contact information on the cache. We might even seek permission.

 

A good question then is how will GC.com's .1 mile rule be used. If, as it is often stated, the .1 mile rule is preserve the caching experience, what happens when someone drops a poorly-placed GC.com cache within .1 miles of already well-maintained private label caches? Are we certain GC.com rules are for the good for the geocaching community at large?

Link to comment
... what happens when someone drops a poorly-placed GC.com cache within .1 miles of already well-maintained private label caches? Are we certain GC.com rules are for the good for the geocaching community at large?

Well sure! That means there is only one poorly maintained gc.com cache near your private label one.

Link to comment
The better question to ask, is what would the cost of the game be if I told every land manager I met to get a life?

 

I’ve never opined that the land manager should “get a life”, or that you should tell them to. I’m thinking that you’re addressing someone else.

 

So live with a few crappy rules you may not agree with, or go out and make a difference by influencing policy in your region. But anarchy is not the answer.

 

You’re right; anarchy is not the answer, at least to this particular question.

 

But if no guidelines existed, you can't imagine the crap that would be listed.

 

If I couldn’t before, I sure can now. Yuck. I think I remember that or a similar rotting carcass cache. I would never suggest that there should be no guidelines for this site. But at some point you will cross a line that makes the game unrecognizable from the original packaging.

 

Is it the job of Groundspeak to protect us from ourselves? I have always preached common sense. To say this or that cannot be in a cache is as ridiculous as it is unenforceable. So we spend the afternoon debating leathermans, listed in any catalog as a tool, and whether or not they’re dangerous. Next week we’ll argue with the hand wringers about the dangers of opaque ammo cans.

 

The core rules should not be so restrictive as to destroy the essence of the game.

 

I appreciate the hard work Seattle is doing even if it appears otherwise at times. I have no interest in fighting the parks department; it’s really not an issue here as you know. I can, however, kick up a bit when I think the rules of the game are getting too restrictive.

Link to comment
So we spend the afternoon debating leathermans, listed in any catalog as a tool, and whether or not they’re dangerous. Next week we’ll argue with the hand wringers about the dangers of opaque ammo cans.

This happens any day of the week. Mostly due to people with too much idle time behind the computer.

 

(Of course I don't mean to trivialize the leatherman in a cache topic. I mean, it is of the utmost importance that this issue be resolved.)

 

Of course it is unenforcable. These are some old tired and true topics. We can only ask that you review and accept those guidelines. If you place a knife in a cache and say, so what? Not much I can do about that. I'd be disappointed. Guilt trips work better in person.

 

But I won't throw out guidelines because people think they're restrictive. We didn't pull them out of a hat.

Link to comment
... what happens when someone drops a poorly-placed GC.com cache within .1 miles of already well-maintained private label caches?  Are we certain GC.com rules are for the good for the geocaching community at large?

Well sure! That means there is only one poorly maintained gc.com cache near your private label one.

Let's drag this out . . .

In a park I place four well-placed caches. All are more than .1 miles from each other, labelled with contact information, etc. Each is not listed at GC.com.

 

Then someone places four poor caches in the same park, within the .1 miles of these private label caches, but more than .1 miles from each other. These four are listed at GC.com.

 

This park is now swarming with caches, half of which are poorly placed . . . with geocaching.com prominently stuck to the outside of each box.

 

How is this for the betterment of the community at large?

Edited by Frolickin
Link to comment
Let's drag this out . . .

In a park I place four well-placed caches. All are more than .1 miles from each other, labelled with contact information, etc. Each is not listed at GC.com.

 

Then someone places four poor caches in the same park, within the .1 miles of these private label caches, but more than .1 miles from each other. These four are listed at GC.com.

 

This park is now swarming with caches, half of which are poorly placed . . . with geocaching.com prominently stuck to the outside of each box.

 

How is this for the betterment of the community at large?

Not sure your point on this one. To recind the general .1 mile guideline? Guidelines are bad? Or by the placement of 4 poorly placed caches it diminishes your 1 extremely well placed cache.

 

Normally, by courtesy, most people honor the placement of someone else's cache and don't place one of their own there. Of course if you place a cache and no one knows about that, they can't apply the same courtesy.

 

This already does happen occasionally with letterboxes.

 

How does this benefit the community at large? If the park owner has issues with the caches placed there we can certainly help them contact the cache owners. Or the regional approver can check with the land manager to make sure it is ok to place them there.

Link to comment
(Of course I don't mean to trivialize the leatherman in a cache topic. I mean, it is of the utmost importance that this issue be resolved.)

 

A number of WA cachers would like nothing more than to see leatherman (the cacher) stuffed into an ammo can. :D

 

But I won't throw out guidelines because people think they're restrictive. We didn't pull them out of a hat.

 

Again, didn’t say that. (Although that’s sort of what his thread is about.) Rules are OK, guidelines are OK, we’re all OK. But a rule or guideline must be anchored in a foundation of reasonableness and truth. No, not out of a hat, but sometimes they seem to be based on the IQ of the most idiotic. So the SOG tool I placed as a FTF prize atop Mt Ellinor is not the same as a Bowie knife in a city park cache, see?

 

So it’s not the elimination of the guidelines, but rather the implementation of common sense above the rest of the guidelines that I would like to see. If common sense is the rule, the rest will fall into place all of it’s own accord. (with a few exceptions made for the idiots)

Link to comment

I think the scope of this issue is blowing out of proportion.

 

Even if X-cache becomes organized. Web rings or whatever. It could never be anything like GC.com.

 

Even if there were a gaggle of cachers participating, I doubt there would be more than a couple hundred caches in the country. Look at Navicaching. Pretty small.

 

This might become a tangent thing. I would visit Criminals Booze X-cache. I really doubt it would over saturate an area.

Link to comment

WOW. I could quote a million things here. I don't need to. The points here are all good.

 

Criminal, thanks for your rebellion.

 

Jeremy, thanks for, well, I guess ALL this first of all, and 2nd for a nutshell casing for months of debate.

 

Criminal: I want to find caches that fall outside the lines which have, due to NECESSITY, been drawn. You have referred to skills you learned that would allow you to step outside the lines of legality, but don't. These same skills give you an adventurous spirit, and demonstrate an ability to self-govern against detrimental actions. Hate to say it though brother, but your one of the minority. What do kids idolize these days ? They don't wanna be Luke Skywalker anymore, saving the galaxy from oppresion. They want to be the guy in Vice City, doing WHATEVER they want, no matter who it hurts. Sometimes, hurting is all its about.

 

You set up the game, with the intent of self-governed people just enjoying some extra freedom, and here comes the kids raised on "Jackass".

 

You learned discipline, control, honor. Seen those role models lately ?

 

You, me, and most of the people talking here would probably do all right in your Utopia you envision. But, the "pirates" are out there. You gonna throw out bait, that could destroy what has been worked so hard for ?

 

I like your idea, but I think its like the training you've had: it needs dispensed at a price - and I'm not talking money.I think at some point "Uncle Sam" said, hmm, why should we teach criminal how to pick locks ? Or blow stuff up ? You were an asset to achieve a goal of betterment. You gave your life to a cause; your potential and ability was evaluated. Your commitment was weighed, before you were trained.

 

I want to see some of my "secrets" go to people who I think deserve them. People I think can handle the importance of DISCREETLY finding them. And, who I think will choose to others with the same care. I don't want to know, as soon as I "tell" it, its open to the world.

 

Jeremy has taken and built a socially acceptable sport, thus far. It has setbacks, like all society. Unfortunately, we can't enjoy absolute freedom and still have society. The morons would over-run us. I work with enough of them. If law broke down, I couldn't trust more than 3 coworkers with my back. And its not a small place I work at.

 

With time, geocaching will become commercialized, a fad, over-run. It happened with snowboarding. It became cool, and it became REBELLIOUS. It almost was banned again after so much work. It survived, and is better off now. Hope geocaching survives the same.

Link to comment
Not sure your point on this one. To recind the general .1 mile guideline? Guidelines are bad? Or by the placement of 4 poorly placed caches it diminishes your 1 extremely well placed cache.

This guideline is poorly conceived. It does not satisfy the stated objective-the ultimate goal is to reduce the number of caches hidden in a particular area and to reduce confusion that might otherwise result when one cache is found while looking for another.

 

No, I do not expect GC.com to monitor each and every site to see if the caches are within .1 miles. It cannot be expected to do so. Therefore, there is no way to achieve the objective. If you can't achieve it, then why have it as a rule?

 

Rescind it..

Link to comment

What he is talking about doing could destroy years of work by the Geocaching community. There are cachers out there that have gone above and beyond to convince land owners that Geocaching isn't a bad thing. They have worked hard to come up with rules that make the land owners happy.

 

All it takes is just a few of these so called x-caches placed in a state park that has previsouly worked out an agreement with Geocachers, and all is lost. They will understand that this is being done by a spin off group, but it won't matter. In order to preserve their lands and parks they will ban all caches.

 

I would hate to think that one idiotic idea could ruin the hard work that so many people have put together.

 

El Diablo

Link to comment
No, I do not expect GC.com to monitor each and every site to see if the caches are within .1 miles. It cannot be expected to do so. Therefore, there is no way to achieve the objective. If you can't achieve it, then why have it as a rule?

 

Rescind it..

But it does. If GC.com only allows caches placed within .1 miles of each other, it reduces the overall number of caches in the area simply by the fact that the number of caches are restricted by gc.com

 

In turn, people understand the guideline who need guidelines. For others, common sense prevails and there was no need for that rule.

 

Yes, it doesn't mean we can keep people from placing caches not listed on geocaching.com, but I'll be darned if we're not going to support that kind of activity. Personally I'd rather us be part of the solution and not part of the problem.

Link to comment
Tell you what. When governments stop introducing and passing legislation, we'll stop with the guideline changes and shout to the heavens "It's perfect!"

I understand why GC has rules. And I understand that many of the rules came about as a reaction to various local and national laws/bylaws/rules/regulations. I don't necessarily agree with them, but I understand them.

 

However, I don't live in the USA. The laws/bylaws/rules/regulations in my country are quite a bit different than they are in the US. Given the global nature of the game, some of the rules GC has imposed may not be necessary or make any sense in other countries. Should I abide by those rules anyway? A made-in-the-USA solution is not always the right solution outside the US. In fact, it usually isn't.

 

On a whole 'nuther topic, Jeremy, you admonished someone in the forums last week for using sarcasm in their posting. You stated something to the effect that sarcasm doesn't work well in online forums. Yet every posting you've made in this thread has been dripping in sarcasm. What's that all about?

 

____________

Gorak

Geo 140 124 105

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...