Debating The Same Issues Over And Over

July 21, 2004

Why do we even bother?

I've been reading these forums for a few months now. Every suggestion, every problem, every debate or argument to resolve a problem or bug goes unanswered or is never addressed to a final resolution. Makes me wonder how virtuals and locationless caches came to be decided upon or how certain guidelines came about. Who made the decisions in the past on how the game should be played.....the community or the people running this site? Were they voted on, discussed or polls taken before they came to pass? How many times does a new problem need to be addressed or a new situation in the game arise before some action is taken? How come it doesn't happen very often now?

We could talk about some of the problems here until we are blue in the face and nothing ever seems to get resolved or addressed through the discussions and debates in the forums. So where or when would it happen?

7.2k · July 21, 2004

Many of the discussions amount to "acceptable behaviour." While there isn't a lot one can do to force compliance, there is peer pressure to comform.

Plenty of the rules were established before this site came into existence. Many more came after.

There are some areas where there is room for differing view points can exist and then there are some areas where one person's game tramples another's.

To answer what I think is your primary query, the reason it is hashed over and over is because folks ask before searching for their answer--then it starts all over again.

1.8k · July 21, 2004

EVERYTHING IS RESOLVED! EVERYTHING IS ALREADY RESOLVED!

For a long time I have stifled the urge to use this as a topic.

--I am happy with the game. -- I am happy with the assistance.

-- I am happy with the governors. -- I am happy with the whole concept.

Don't try to fix anything for me. I have never had a problem getting anything done,

or approved. My biggest complaint is that my Wednesday evenings are full, so I can't go to Columbus for a COG Coffee Night.

2.3k · July 21, 2004

Why do we even bother?

I dunno. Can't even place a cache these days without jumping through a bunch of hoops, only to get turned down in the end anyhow.

1.5k · July 21, 2004

EVERYTHING IS RESOLVED! EVERYTHING IS ALREADY RESOLVED!
For a long time I have stifled the urge to use this as a topic.

--I am happy with the game. -- I am happy with the assistance.

-- I am happy with the governors. -- I am happy with the whole concept.

Don't try to fix anything for me. I have never had a problem getting anything done,

or approved. My biggest complaint is that my Wednesday evenings are full, so I can't go to Columbus for a COG Coffee Night.

I agree with you dude! (Wll except for the Wednesday evening thing.. doesn't apply, lol) I'm happy with the way things are done. Sure there are things that I would like to see changed, but then I don't always like the way Wally-world lays out their merchandise and it doesn't stop me from shopping there....

July 21, 2004

Then like I said before......

Why do we even bother?

1.5k · July 21, 2004

Then like I said before......

Why do we even bother?

[$00.02 worth]

Why do we bother to Geocache or why do we bother to post in the forums?

I 'bother' to Geocache 'cause I like it. If that means that I have to come here and jump through the odd hoop to get a 'cache approved/listed or to look one up, so be it.

I 'bother' to post in the forums 'cause I like it as well. I think that there is a lot of good, informative discussion in here. I have learned a lot, and in turn (I hope) assisted some other newcomers.

The forums and 'caching are two separate entities.... there are lots of Charter Members with double or even single digit post-counts. There are lots of new members with triple-digit counts.. The two don't have to go together. You can enjoy one, the other, or both...

[/$00.02 worth]

9.4k · July 21, 2004

Why do we even bother?

I dunno. Can't even place a cache these days without jumping through a bunch of hoops, only to get turned down in the end anyhow.

That's just you. I've never had trouble getting my caches approved.

1.8k · July 21, 2004

My theory: The forums represent only a small and vocal fraction of active geocachers, and TPTB realize that the discussion that goes on here is not necessarily reflective of the general consensus of the geocaching community...

1.6k · July 21, 2004

My theory: The forums represent only a small and vocal fraction of active geocachers, and TPTB realize that the discussion that goes on here is not necessarily reflective of the general consensus of the geocaching community...

You're probably correct. Also, there is no gain in siding with one side or the other in most of the discussions.

Lastly, there is the automatic "we don't want rules" reaction to ANY suggestion.

A forum poster could suggest that killing other geocachers and using their skulls as cache containers should be against the rules, and one of these posters would erupt with some vitriolic diatribe about why "we don't need any more rules and cadaver caches are my favorite kind, and you dirty so and so just want to ruin geocaching for the serial killer crowd, blah, blah, blah..."

So, TPTB realize that coming out in favor of banning cadaver caches would just get them flamed.

24.7k · July 21, 2004

Why do we even bother?...

This is why I bother.

TPTB may not be ready to look at any one issue just now. However when they do you can bet the feedback from the forums will be considered. It won't be the only thing considered but if we didn't say anything at all our opinions can't be considered at all.

Newbies don't know any better and ask perfectly good questions that deserve perfectly good answers. Things in this game are not cut and dry even with everyone linking up on one side of the issue or another. New issues and ideas come up all the time. Just because a newbie said it and a bunch of forum kermudgens who think newbies are pond scum (and often tell them so) doesn't mean their ideas are not good ones, or that even if it isn't that they might learn the lesson better being allowed to make the mistake on their own. Sort of like falling off a bike. I don't do that much anymore but did I ever used too. Someone has to stand up for the newbies.

All other things considered I'd like to see this site grow into what it needs to be. Like everyone else in the world I have my ideas on where this hobby needs to be to remain viable. I promote them just as others promote their own idea of what this sport should be or remain. Were I to stop, that's one less voice of support from one side of the fence and the other side gets that much stronger. Generally I support cache owners, local organizations, newbies, and removing inane rules that do nothing for geocaching. I don't need to support the site, there are plenty of others who do that and in so doing are also promoting where they think this hobby needs to be. I do this on this site because if is best if geocaching as a whole moves the right direction. That doesn't stop me from hedging my bets.

All that and I get a kick out of controversy.

2.3k · July 21, 2004

You are correct. Let's just close the forums since nothing gets accomplished here anyway!

Then we can all go back to work without distraction.

July 21, 2004

Why do we even bother?

Why do we bother to Geocache or why do we bother to post in the forums?

Why do we bother to discuss topics, get all heated over an issue and try to come to some sort of resolution about things when nothing ever gets decided upon and the same issues are on the table at the end of the day?

I agree, geocaching and posting in the forums are two seperate things. I was mainly talking about discussing issues or known problems in the forums. I know why I geocache......I'm glad you do too.

2.6k · July 21, 2004

I guess I never thought of anyone's discussion forum as a complaints department. I'm so accustomed to being able to give my feedback at news or discussion sites now that I can hardly bear to watch TV or read a straight news site because there's no little text input box at the bottom for me to go "Yargh! HEY, MORON!"

But expect someone to act on my complaints? Wouldn't occur to me...

July 21, 2004

My theory: The forums represent only a small and vocal fraction of active geocachers, and TPTB realize that the discussion that goes on here is not necessarily reflective of the general consensus of the geocaching community...

So when they do make a decision on a guideline or an amendment to a guideline, where do they go to get the opinions of it from the geocaching community?

6.5k · July 21, 2004

That's when TPTB activate the New Poll feature. But instead of posting in in the forum where the vocal minority answer, they send out a secret bulk email.

Um wait, you guys haven't been getting those... um er.... never mind I don't have anything to say on this topic after all........

July 21, 2004

My theory: The forums represent only a small and vocal fraction of active geocachers, and TPTB realize that the discussion that goes on here is not necessarily reflective of the general consensus of the geocaching community...

You're probably correct. Also, there is no gain in siding with one side or the other in most of the discussions.

Lastly, there is the automatic "we don't want rules" reaction to ANY suggestion.

A forum poster could suggest that killing other geocachers and using their skulls as cache containers should be against the rules, and one of these posters would erupt with some vitriolic diatribe about why "we don't need any more rules and cadaver caches are my favorite kind, and you dirty so and so just want to ruin geocaching for the serial killer crowd, blah, blah, blah..."

So, TPTB realize that coming out in favor of banning cadaver caches would just get them flamed.

HAHAHA!

I think I just realized something........

In geocaching, I am assuming the only thing you have to do correctly is meet the guidelines for getting a cache approved and listed through this website. Once that's done, you are free to do whatever you want. Am I too far off with that assumption?

1.8k · July 21, 2004

My theory: The forums represent only a small and vocal fraction of active geocachers, and TPTB realize that the discussion that goes on here is not necessarily reflective of the general consensus of the geocaching community...

So when they do make a decision on a guideline or an amendment to a guideline, where do they go to get the opinions of it from the geocaching community?

I don't mean to imply that the forums are completely discounted. Jeremy and his colleagues read and contribute to the discussions. Obviously they're worthwhile enough to have and engage in; otherwise, as you state, why bother?

But where do they come to a consensus when making a policy/guideline change? How do they gauge the general geocaching community? From my conversations with our local approvers, TPTB tend to choose new approvers based on their standing and participation in the local organizations. In my area, the most influential geocachers never set foot in the GC.com forums but are very active locally. So in addition to the GC.com forums, the approvers and the local organizations, in addition to who knows who else, are probably taken into account.

Remember, these are just my surmisings and I can't vouch for their accuracy.

6.5k · July 21, 2004

Why do we even bother?

Why do we bother to Geocache or why do we bother to post in the forums?

Why do we bother to discuss topics, get all heated over an issue and try to come to some sort of resolution about things when nothing ever gets decided upon and the same issues are on the table at the end of the day?

I agree, geocaching and posting in the forums are two seperate things. I was mainly talking about discussing issues or known problems in the forums. I know why I geocache......I'm glad you do too.

Some people keep hitting the same things because for whatever reason they fell the topic important, and hope the opinion will change. I also think arguing your brains out makes some people feel more 'involved'.

And of course, as CR said, many new forum users just don't search very much if at all. So the same topic is restarted time and again, reguardless if there was a big debate about it two days or even two years earlier.

July 21, 2004

And of course, as CR said, many new forum users just don't search very much if at all. So the same topic is restarted time and again, reguardless if there was a big debate about it two days or even two years earlier.

Then I think this sorta gets to where my question was originally going.

Why keep debating a topic over and over for days or years and just get some sort of ruling on it (by whoever) and be done with it?

The ruling on locationless caches most likely went from debate to guideline amendment. (Although, this might be more of a site issue than anything else.)

The guideline about food in caches most likely went from debate by the members to guideline amendment by TPTB.

(I wish I could remember some of the more recently talked about topics to use as examples right now.)

Why can't it be like that on more recent issues? Get some sort of official ruling or majority rule on things and then when a newbie asks next time, we can all say "It's not allowed" or whatever pertains.

7.2k · July 21, 2004

My theory: The forums represent only a small and vocal fraction of active geocachers, and TPTB realize that the discussion that goes on here is not necessarily reflective of the general consensus of the geocaching community...

So when they do make a decision on a guideline or an amendment to a guideline, where do they go to get the opinions of it from the geocaching community?

I don't mean to imply that the forums are completely discounted. Jeremy and his colleagues read and contribute to the discussions. Obviously they're worthwhile enough to have and engage in; otherwise, as you state, why bother?

But where do they come to a consensus when making a policy/guideline change? How do they gauge the general geocaching community? From my conversations with our local approvers, TPTB tend to choose new approvers based on their standing and participation in the local organizations. In my area, the most influential geocachers never set foot in the GC.com forums but are very active locally. So in addition to the GC.com forums, the approvers and the local organizations, in addition to who knows who else, are probably taken into account.

Remember, these are just my surmisings and I can't vouch for their accuracy.

Actually PerkyPerks, that's pretty close.

Only a handful of our GGA member ever come into these forums. They hate them. They love our local forums because we all know each other and we have fun, friendly discussions. We accept the guidelines and just have fun caching. I love our local forums. It is a great place to hang out.

PandyBat, you said: "Every suggestion, every problem, every debate or argument to resolve a problem or bug goes unanswered or is never addressed to a final resolution." They actually have given answers. The answers are the guidelines. Recently Hydee and I asked for someone to give suggested guidelines for virtual caches for example. Some good suggestions started to come out, then the topic was derailed and then it fell off the page. No one was willing to get the topic back on track. TPTB were looking at that topic, but no interest was there to keep it going. There was no groundswell of support for it. TPTB (Hydee) got involved but it died.

Something you must consider is that possibly "no, we don't see the need to change" might be the answer. If they don't get involved in every argument that is fine with me. If the guidelines are not changed then they feel they are OK as they are. Their answers to most of these questions are right there in the guidelines. Some people apparently just won't take no for an answer. That is why those of us who are charged with reviewing caches based on those guidelines quote them. We do that because the guidelines *are* the voice of TPTB. PandyBat, you joined geocaching about 5 months after the last guideline change. Part of the reason why the guidelines *have* changed over time *is* because of discussions in these forums. Being one of the Forum Old-timers, I have seen these changes. Some of the guideline changes have come about because of improper placement and placement issues that have popped up, but some of these changes have come about because of discussions here. For example, people complained that caches they had found were changed from traditionals to virtuals and they were mad because the take pride in the fact that they had never found a virtual cache. You can no longer change a cache type. That change came out of discussion in these forums.

Frankly, I would prefer Jeremy and crew stay locked up working on the site so we can get a solution to virtual and locationless caches sooner. I'm glad that they don't spend a great deal of time here that would take away from them making this site better and better. The forums are Hydee's job for the most part, and I think she does an outstanding job. She gets involved when needed but mostly lets discussion ensue. I think that is a great thing.

6.5k · July 21, 2004

Then I think this sorta gets to where my question was originally going.

Why keep debating a topic over and over for days or years and just get some sort of ruling on it (by whoever) and be done with it?

The ruling on locationless caches most likely went from debate to guideline amendment. (Although, this might be more of a site issue than anything else.)

The guideline about food in caches most likely went from debate by the members to guideline amendment by TPTB.

(I wish I could remember some of the more recently talked about topics to use as examples right now.)

Why can't it be like that on more recent issues? Get some sort of official ruling or majority rule on things and then when a newbie asks next time, we can all say "It's not allowed" or whatever pertains.

Even after you get a firm decision, some will still question it. People still ask how to submit a locationless / why they can't. The difference between that and other topics is that TPTB have said X, so everyone can point it out.

And IIRC, the debate about locationless didn't solve anything. The topics constantly repeated, 'too many LC are being approved, lets stop the lame ones' 'no, LC are good' 'Mines good enough' 'No LC are good, they all suck and shouldn't approved'. Basically what you see happening with virtuals.

[And then came a big hammer] BOOM! "we are stopping any new LC for a while because they are taking up too much time". Maybe you could argue that the debate caused a decision, but it not that the majority decision was the cause of the guideline change (because there was no majority dicision).

As for food I don't know. NO FOOD has been a guideline for very long time. When why that was put into effect I don't recall, but it probably has one of the better basis for the rules. What happens when you leave food outside? Usually something eats it, sooner or later.

Have you considered the knife issue? Some people thought they were good items, some thought they were bad. Eventally TPTB added the no knives rule, (possialby to avoid pressure from the parks?) and thus offically gc.com does not allow knives in caches.

Maybe we're doomed to repeat the same topics in these forums till TPTB finally rule on every question? And then we still debate them, just from a point of 'this is the rule, what do you think?', instead of 'what do you think of topic X?'

July 21, 2004

PandyBat, you said: "Every suggestion, every problem, every debate or argument to resolve a problem or bug goes unanswered or is never addressed to a final resolution." They actually have given answers. The answers are the guidelines. Recently Hydee and I asked for someone to give suggested guidelines for virtual caches for example. Some good suggestions started to come out, then the topic was derailed and then it fell off the page. No one was willing to get the topic back on track. TPTB were looking at that topic, but no interest was there to keep it going. There was no groundswell of support for it. TPTB (Hydee) got involved but it died.

Something you must consider is that possibly "no, we don't see the need to change" might be the answer. If they don't get involved in every argument that is fine with me. If the guidelines are not changed then they feel they are OK as they are. Their answers to most of these questions are right there in the guidelines. Some people apparently just won't take no for an answer. That is why those of us who are charged with reviewing caches based on those guidelines quote them. We do that because the guidelines *are* the voice of TPTB. PandyBat, you joined geocaching about 5 months after the last guideline change. Part of the reason why the guidelines *have* changed over time *is* because of discussions in these forums. Being one of the Forum Old-timers, I have seen these changes. Some of the guideline changes have come about because of improper placement and placement issues that have popped up, but some of these changes have come about because of discussions here. For example, people complained that caches they had found were changed from traditionals to virtuals and they were mad because the take pride in the fact that they had never found a virtual cache. You can no longer change a cache type. That change came out of discussion in these forums.

Ok..yes, I think you hit the nail on the head there, mtn-man. I guess the reason I have been wondering why everyone is always debating the same things over and over and nothing ever comes of it is because there hasn't been much input on it from the people higher up. I understand their reasoning for the lack of response but it just seems that more input from someone other than just regular members would squelch some of the threads that keep popping up about the same old dead horse topics that annoy some of the "Forum Old Timers". When regular members discuss an issue, it just seems like the same old bellyaching from one thread to the next. But when someone higher up chimes in with either a "We're looking into it" or "It's been discussed in the past and wasn't resolved" or a "Here's why it wouldn't work......" post, it seems to calm down those that have the biggest issues and it seems more official and might stop some of the same subjects from being repeatedly asked.

I think most people think that debating an issue with regular members who don't really have the authority to make changes is a waste of time. But if someone official steps in, it seems to go over more smoothly when they are denied or told the reasoning behind why a change can't be implemented.

2.1k · July 21, 2004

It will most likely never be a majority rule solution that answers anything at this website (that does not preclude the majority from agreeing with the soultion). This website has made it very clear in the past that while opinion polling may even take place, the final decisions rest in the hands of the elite few who have dubbed themselves the "custodians of geocaching". Most often their final decisions appease the largest number of people (the reasoning being good business sense or tribal counsel...it's a moot point). Some times their decisions only satisfy a technical requirement that they are unwilling or unable to overcome. Other times, they simply apply their own biases on what the game should be about (see: leaderboard/statistics).

To the overall point (why bother?): Because I want a community that can play the game its way. We are the search engine? Yes, but we are the hide engine, the TB-goal engine, and so on. By voicing my opinions or ideas for new aspects of the game, someone else may pick up on it and the development of the game will continue. Some people won't play poker unless there's a wild card. Others think that detracts from the original game of poker. They can each play poker their way and in the end, one of them may come up with something even better to add to the game.

The repetition just means that next time, someone new or something previously undiscovered may come up in discussion. Especially in a noisy forum such as this, where the threads get easily hijacked or an insignificant tangent is forced to be in the primary spotlight, repetition is the only way at getting back to square one to begin again.

July 21, 2004

Maybe we're doomed to repeat the same topics in these forums till TPTB finally rule on every question? And then we still debate them, just from a point of 'this is the rule, what do you think?', instead of 'what do you think of topic X?'

Yep...it's looking like it. A no win situation.

7.2k · July 21, 2004

Thanks for your reply PandyBat.

Virtual caches are a great example here. Jeremy actually has been very clear about them. I have quoted this before.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...ndpost&p=584849

Re: Virtual Caches

If you really want to enter the murky realm of virtual caches, ask first and post second. Consider that your virtual cache will most likely not get listed. That way you are prepared for disappointment.

<and then just below the post above in the same topic...>

I'm wildly sober about this. Physical caches are the basis of the activity. Virtual caches were created due to the inaccessability of caching in areas that discourage it. If you must create a virtual cache its best to bring the idea up before doing the research. Expect a no first and a yes in extraordinary situations. I hate it has to be blunt but that's the fact, Jack.

He could not be more clear about virtual caches. The guidelines support that statement. All you have to do to see what Jeremy thinks about virtual caches is do a very quick search using the word "virtual" and the member name "Jeremy". In addition to the post above from Jeremy, a few months later he posted this:

I think what you are all losing sight of is:

Jeremy hates virtuals.

pah. Why would I have introduced them in the first place? Sheesh

Again, this is just an example related to the bigger picture questions you have asked. Sometimes when you think they haven't made a decision they may in fact have. I quoted Jeremy's posts above no less that two months ago here. Some folks either forgot it or didn't want to accept it. I bet I quote it again in a couple of months.

July 22, 2004

Ok mtn-man....since I can't go back to those old UBB forum discussions when limits on virtuals were being discussed, please tell me why they were limited before I make another reply. I don't want to reply on how or why a decision to limit virtuals was made when I have no idea why the decision was made in the first place. I believe this was somewhere around September of 2002.....????

Edited July 22, 2004 by PandyBat

1.8k · July 22, 2004

To the overall point (why bother?): Because I want a community that can play the game its way. We are the search engine? Yes, but we are the hide engine, the TB-goal engine, and so on

Is this the dividing issue? No one should be able to tell me what to do?? No one else could possibly have the best interest of the sport in their heart? No rule or decision could ever be proper unless I was consulted first?

24.7k · July 22, 2004

To the overall point (why bother?): Because I want a community that can play the game its way. We are the search engine? Yes, but we are the hide engine, the TB-goal engine, and so on

Is this the dividing issue? No one should be able to tell me what to do?? No one else could possibly have the best interest of the sport in their heart? No rule or decision could ever be proper unless I was consulted first?

To a large extent it is.

If you put a lot of thought and time into a cache you have an investment in that cache and hate to see it rejected. Yes you can list it elsewhere but you do want people to find it, and for that, GC.com is the ticket.

People argue that all the rules are there for the good of Geocaching, This site says they are guidelines and flexable. It is possible to place caches that are a worthy find that happen to break one or more rules and do it in a way that do good for the game because they are creative and outside the box. In general inflexability of the rules creates a problem. Viable caches are rejected. The counter point is if the rules are too flexable all caches would break the rules and very few would be the creative outside the box caches that are good for the game, and thats all approvers would do is work on those caches.

It's a hard balance, and because you even have to have that balance some conflict will always happen. The closest business anology you will find is Farming. Cache owners are like farmers growing a crop that is a commodity. The farmers feed the world but they don't set the prices, and they don't make the rules on what's acceptable. They do however have something to say about it and rightfully so. Having the power to actually change anything though is another thing entirely. Even so, saying nothing, changes nothing. People are always free to bypass any topic of debate but often they don't even when all they are going to do is complain about the debate and hot topic of the moment.

38.2k · July 22, 2004

Maybe we're doomed to repeat the same topics in these forums till TPTB finally rule on every question?

I think one of the problems is that people are still trying to debate issues that were settled long ago. Vacation caches, virtuals, cache saturation, log requirements, etc...

There are people who keep beating these topics to death expecting things to change. The decision's been made and there has been a final ruling guys. I rarely see a new issue introduced that doesn't get the attention of TPTB. Its the dead horse issues that are ignored, for good reason. There is nothing for TPTB to add.

I don't want to reply on how or why a decision to limit virtuals was made when I have no idea why the decision was made in the first place

There were several. First they were getting out of hand. People were waypointing every roadside plaque, no matter how mundane, as well as flagpoles, manhole covers and fence posts and making virtual caches out of them. And of course there are the infamous sneaker in the woods and rotting animal carcass virtual submissions.

Second, and most important in my mind, was that when negotiating with land managers about geocaching, they would often point to virtual caches as an acceptable alternative. This endangered the traditional goecaching concept in many areas. Now that virts have been limited, that option is no longer on the table and negotations can center on getting them to accept traditional caches.

Finally, TPTB wanted to get back to the basics of the sport, which is finding a box in the woods.

Edited July 22, 2004 by briansnat

7.2k · July 22, 2004

PandyBat, I could not have answered your question any better than BrianSnat did. Thanks Brian, that was a excellent synopsis.

Just last night I archived a virtual. That target was a manhole cover.

The guidelines are there, but people still don't read them. It is what it is.

FYI... the UBB forum topics are still here. Almost all of the old topics were imported into this new forum. If you search on the word virtual you will get an outrageous number of results. The guidelines on virtual caches changed in late October and early November of 2002. Go back to topics at that time frame and you can see the discussions.

It is amazing that TPTB gave their final opinions on virtual caches that long ago, yet it is still debated over and over. It is what it is. You can either be angry and stir up bad feelings here in the forums (not saying that is you PandyBat, just speaking in general terms) or you can work within the guidelines and go have fun finding caches and hiding them within the guidelines. I prefer having fun!

Edited July 22, 2004 by mtn-man

24.7k · July 22, 2004

... when negotiating with land managers about geocaching, they would often point to virtual caches as an acceptable alternative. This endangered the traditional goecaching concept in many areas...

I'm in agreement here. Though I champion the cause of this site relaxing the rules on virtuals, I would favor droping them entirely if traditionals were endangered because land managers favored virtual caches and were mandating them. Traditional caches are just flat out more fun and they are why I got into this RASH. Though I do virtual caches, if that's all there was. Yuck. I'd switch to letterboxing or X-caching.

6.5k · July 22, 2004

Maybe we're doomed to repeat the same topics in these forums till TPTB finally rule on every question?

I think one of the problems is that people are still trying to debate issues that were settled long ago. Vacation caches, virtuals, cache saturation, log requirements, etc...

There are people who keep beating these topics to death expecting things to change. The decision's been made and there has been a final ruling guys. I rarely see a new issue introduced that doesn't get the attention of TPTB. Its the dead horse issues that are ignored, for good reason. There is nothing for TPTB to add.

Yea I agree that people do still try to debate settled things, which is what the second sentence was about.

Maybe we're doomed to repeat the same topics in these forums till TPTB finally rule on every question? And then we still debate them, just from a point of 'this is the rule, what do you think?', instead of 'what do you think of topic X?'

Going something off topic,

I sometimes wonder is how (not that I see it as possiable) someone could be a topic to death, again, If noone ever replied. Would they just keep talking/questioning themselves?

1.8k · July 23, 2004

I think one of the problems is that people are still trying to debate issues that were settled long ago. Vacation caches, virtuals, cache saturation, log requirements, etc...

Undebatable!

Just what part of "no" don't you understand? Sorry, couldn't resist.

It's a hard balance, and because you even have to have that balance some conflict will always happen.

Options are: 1) Life With It - every time it is brought up. samo-samo

2.) Try some "enforcement" on ABS topics (already been settled.) Your topic must be approved against a list before it is installed. Nobody wants that.

3.) Is there some other option? huh? Since most of the posting is done by about 23.2 cachers, could we get about 19 of them to boycot ABS topics??

Debating The Same Issues Over And Over

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

Join the conversation