How To Fix Geocaching.com?

July 22, 2004

Yeah, I probably didn't even need the title. Half of you clicked because you saw my name under Topic Starter.

Wow...look at this big head...

2.6k · July 22, 2004

The only way to deal with trolls is to limit your reaction to reminding others not to respond to trolls.

I've been online for nearly twenty years now, I've heard this injunction scores of times in dozens of places, and I have yet to see it work in practice. People (especially newbies who don't know the backstory) simply cannot resist talking to trolls. Then you have: the troll, the people telling you not to talk to the troll and the people who talk to the troll anyway. The people telling you not to talk to the troll are angrier at the people talking to the troll than they are the troll, and vice versa. Troll still wins.

For I have been a troll, and lo! it was awesome. (I assure you, I trolled a group of unpleasant characters that eminently deserved trolling).

Love that wikipedia, tho.

22k · July 22, 2004

Here's the question: If you (meaning the reader, not the writer quoted above specifically) are entirely happy with the current site, then if a change is made that does not influence the things you are happy about...would you care?

In other words, given that you are 100% happy with GC.com, would a modified GC.com that in no way interferes with your 100% level of happiness be good, bad, or indifferent?

Anyone asking me to agree to a premise sets off a lot of warning bells. This seems to be nothing but subterfuge.

"If there was a bank, thousand miles away, and some money disappeared, would that directly affect you?". No? OK good.

What's your point here?

Do I care if something is done that doesn't affect me? (boy, if that isn't a loaded question)

You're darn right I do, but not for the reasons you think.

7.2k · July 22, 2004

No, you already said to not try to fix anything for you. See? I made you perfectly happy!

Don't you see??? Since there just aren't enough of the yjtb's to have one for every cache, it was an unreasonable request. TPTB are inundated every day. If I could "POOF!" you into being TPTB, then you would be on that side of things. Not even remotely possible to satisfy all the cravings and desires and wants and needs of all of the rest of us. I want to have hundreds of caches within 15 minutes of my home, without living in the city....There are things I am doing to improve our area, because I want it to be better...but all of those things are already in the system! It works well.

Sorry for my flippant answer previously. I thought you were being sarcastic. My bad.

To more seriously address your query first I have to say that just because I think the site is broken doesn't mean I have a way of making it perfect. Broken and non-perfect is two completely differents things.

With that said, I also must say that the term "broken" in the way I'm using doesn't mean the site isn't working other than it is designed to do. It's my assertion that the design is wrong. No, not in a coding sense since very few are even privvy to the code. It's more of a policy and procedure type of design flaw.

These can be broken down into two broad categories, bandaid fixes and a good ideas that are just not implemented.

What I'm calling bandaid fixes are basically policy changes to take care of a symptom of a problem without addressing the underlying problem. Proximity, commercial caches, moving caches, and more rules that came about to "fix" a problem that really wsn't the real problem. Many of these fixes were for problems most people weren't even having, but do affect them after the fix is in place. The result is the entire community suffers.

Good ideas that aren't implemented is another. For instance, earning the ability to have your caches automatically approved. Do you not think a rather large portion of the caches placed are pretty much rubberstamped? Why not save manpower and implement a flag for cachers who consitently place good caches? They step out of line, yank their status. Saves a lot of manpower.

Another good one is in the PQs getting the archived caches that you've found is a good example. Another is a switch to get only those caches that have changed in any way, not just if the cache page has changed or a found log has been made.

See, this is what I'm talking about.

Besides, if it were perfect why would Jeremy be working on it? Hmm?

1.8k · July 22, 2004

Alright, CR, we're back on track. I was afraid that my communication skills had failed.

It's more of a policy and procedure type of design flaw.

I hope we can drop that "broken" word - because to me it implies that the whole thing doesn't work. At the same time, I'm having trouble replacing that word.

Are you thinking that gc is "fundamentally flawed?" That there was, in its conception, a mistake in the concept or in the implementation of the original concept?

Or are you just saying that the "occasional nip and tuck" - or lack thereof- would be the flaw?

A college prof. once challenged me. "Anyone can see the problems. It takes someone else to see the solutions." I am always conscious of that - and when you suggest, for example, that we create a certified cacher status (whatever you call it in the end}, I tend to see the problems first. Imagine the uproar of those who are not on the list...etc. etc. Problems are easy to see. So I try to look at the other side too.

In this particular case, with this particular "nip and tuck," the only substantial benefit I see (with limited time and thought) is regarding Reviewer/Approver time and effort, and right now I'm still seeing lots of potential problems. Need more time on that one.

Now, let's say said idea is rejected by TPTB. I'm ready to assume that they have a clearer picture of the outcome than I....or at least as clear. I know that you would probably put yourself on the "certified cacher" list. I'd put me there. So do we get upset? How about those who know they wouldn't be on it?

July 22, 2004

A thread about a thread? Oh good, just in time, maybe we'll hav a sweater to wear by winter time to go caching in.

6.5k · July 22, 2004

A while back in another thread I wondered if this use of the term troll evolved from the practice of pullling the bait behind your fishing boat, or the ugly creatures that live under bridges? I never did get that question properly answered.

This thread reminds me a lot of Becket's Waiting for Godot. (go on, do some research-It's very OT)

4k · July 22, 2004

A while back in another thread I wondered if this use of the term troll evolved from the practice of pullling the bait behind your fishing boat, or the ugly creatures that live under bridges? I never did get that question properly answered.
This thread reminds me a lot of Becket's Waiting for Godot. (go on, do some research-It's very OT)

Initially, trolling was referring to pulling bait behind the boat. Dragging an eyecatching topic in front of the other fish in the forum, to see who would bite and give the OP a fight. Now, I think it's both. It starts one way, and by the time it's done, everyone is pretty sure they got attacked and drug under a bridge by the OP.

7.2k · July 22, 2004

Now, let's say said idea is rejected by TPTB. I'm ready to assume that they have a clearer picture of the outcome than I....or at least as clear. I know that you would probably put yourself on the "certified cacher" list. I'd put me there. So do we get upset? How about those who know they wouldn't be on it?

First of all, I'm not sure TPTB would have a clear picture of the outcome. Some decisions just have to be made after testing the theory.

Sure, I'd put myself on the "certified cacher" list, but with my history I don't know if my approver would!

But if the idea is rejected by TPTB I'd just shake my head and move on. The idea doesn't benefit me directly but more of gc.com as a whole and ultimately all placers have to wait some amount of time to get their caches approved. Many folks caches are pretty much rubberstamped, but the approver has to wade through those to get to the ones that really need their attention.

Many of the ideas I and others have come up with, though not implemented, doesn't make this site useless. It only makes it less useful. Some only benefit gc.com. Canned queries come to mind. Canned queries would save a lot of processing power and bandwidth. Want a query of your area, just go and DL it, it's waiting for you. No need for multiple queries emailed to you when you don't need then just to have them when you do.

Want another? How about a "log it" icon on the nearest page to jump directly the log entry page saving the bandwidth of having to go through the cache page. Don't want questions, "what's this?" Make it optional and turned off by default, and you have to agree to a short statement explaining what it is before you can turn it on. That would save plenty of processing right there come Sunday and Monday when folks are logging their finds.

There are plenty more ideas that could save money, processing power, bandwidth, and user's nerves. They just simply aren't being implemented. Many would be pretty simple to implement. Yet, we are waiting for this "new codebase" to arrive--whatever that is. Or is it the "sandbox?" I forget.

As for your last question, my answer is place caches that you know wil be approved and show that you do that consitantly and you too could be a "certified cache placer." Simple.

7.2k · July 22, 2004

There are plenty more ideas that could save money, processing power, bandwidth, and user's nerves. They just simply aren't being implemented. Many would be pretty simple to implement. Yet, we are waiting for this "new codebase" to arrive--whatever that is. Or is it the "sandbox?" I forget.

That is actually not correct.

The implementation is in fact occurring, but it is not a site-wide one-day implementation. One part is being worked on at a time. Profile pages changed some time ago for example. It was a one page, catch all page. Now it has three tabs and gives us detailed stats for each cacher and a gallery page showing all photos that they have uploaded to cache logs. Recently the benchmarks pages have been recoded to rave reviews from those who seek benchmarks. It is obvious at times that things are happening because something will have a bug and report start flying in on the "Geocaching.com Web Page" Forum. Jeremy fixes the bugs and responds to those topics. If nothing was going on then that forum would simply be a "wish list" forum rather than what it is on a monthly basis. As I have said before, these changes will not all take place overnight (what a nightmare that would be) and as some of these changes have opened up new and interesting things that have developed as a side note, which are experimented with and implemented (or scrapped). Another example that you have not seen is an extensive revamping of the reviewer's tools which have streamlined our review process tremendously (and we can not thank you enough for that Jeremy). We still ask for some minor changes ourselves, but he is constantly working on many projects in the background regarding the retooling of the site. We are in line with the rest of these projects.

Jeremy asked for someone out of the geocaching community to move to Seattle to work to help with the site. No one stepped up to the plate. He is now looking outside of the geocaching community. If you (meaning anyone, not just you CR) know of ideas to save money, processing power, bandwidth and user's nerves, all you had to do was step up to the plate. There has been a lot of talk about that, but when the chips were down no one stepped up.

4k · July 22, 2004

I offered to come live with Jeremy and help him with comic relief to calm his nerves. Judging from his reply, apparently he thought that would be counterproductive! I have no clue when it comes to technical computer stuff. I could build cabinets for his computers, desks for him to work at, and remodel his office, but you really don't want me attempting anything on the actual code base of the website. Believe me.....that would not be good!

7.2k · July 22, 2004

If you (meaning anyone, not just you CR) know of ideas to save money, processing power, bandwidth and user's nerves, all you had to do was step up to the plate. There has been a lot of talk about that, but when the chips were down no one stepped up.

Huh? You saying put up or shut up unless one is willing to take J up on his offer?

So, in other words, unless you're willing to move to Seattle your idea has no merit?

Let me ask a question, how hard would it be to put a link on the nearest page to go directly to the log page? Hmm?

How hard would it be to implement the "changed caches" attrbute in the PQs?

Right there are two things that would save money, time, and effort today. Not when ever this new code base comes.

Remember, this Rock-n-Roll Geocaching.com II is well over a year late. No telling when it will arrive. A fix here and a fix there does seem like much progress.

I know I'm calling the kettle black and I, too, tend to get sidetracked on project, but that in no way negates the validity of it.

I work in a production environment too. Plenty of times I've got to do things that are a duplication so things can happen now, not when everything is just right.

4k · July 22, 2004

I work in a production environment too. Plenty of times I've got to do things that are a duplication so things can happen now, not when everything is just right.

Yeah, but who says this makeover has to happen right now? I can't see any need for definite deadlines with the site. It works as is, but the makeover will (most likely) make it better, so why rush it?

2.8k · July 22, 2004

Personally as a developer and user, I'd rather deliver incremental updates constantly vs a big bang approach.

Personal prefence but I've seen a lot more staisfaction on everyone's part from that approach.

2k · July 22, 2004

Messed up quote, message deleted.

Edited July 22, 2004 by Eric K

7.2k · July 22, 2004

If you (meaning anyone, not just you CR) know of ideas to save money, processing power, bandwidth and user's nerves, all you had to do was step up to the plate. There has been a lot of talk about that, but when the chips were down no one stepped up.

Huh? You saying put up or shut up unless one is willing to take J up on his offer?

So, in other words, unless you're willing to move to Seattle your idea has no merit?

Never said the ideas don't have merit. Far from it. I just said that no one stepped up to go help him "fix it".

Let me ask a question, how hard would it be to put a link on the nearest page to go directly to the log page? Hmm?

One extra click. I don't see that as a huge issue, nor have I seen a huge number of people asking for that. That is the first time I have seen that suggested. Interesting idea, but the one extra click is no big deal to me. I think most people here want a solution to virtual caches and locationless caches before they get that, but I could be wrong. (By the way, you don't have to be smug about it. I know you are better than this CR.)

How hard would it be to implement the "changed caches" attrbute in the PQs?

It has been there for some time. All you have to do is select "Updated in the last 7 days" and run the query every seven days. Don't forget to tell Jeremy thanks.

Right there are two things that would save money, time, and effort today. Not when ever this new code base comes.

Remember, this Rock-n-Roll Geocaching.com II is well over a year late. No telling when it will arrive. A fix here and a fix there does seem like much progress.

I know I'm calling the kettle black and I, too, tend to get sidetracked on project, but that in no way negates the validity of it.

I work in a production environment too. Plenty of times I've got to do things that are a duplication so things can happen now, not when everything is just right.

Geez. I agree with Team DEMP and Sparky.

Edited July 22, 2004 by mtn-man

3.8k · July 22, 2004

...This thread reminds me a lot of Becket's Waiting for Godot. (go on, do some research-It's very OT)

I've been waiting for Godot for years; now I'm wondering if he and John Galt are related.

7.2k · July 22, 2004

One extra click. I don't see that as a huge issue, nor have I seen a huge number of people asking for that. That is the first time I have seen that suggested. Interesting idea, but the one extra click is no big deal to me. I think most people here want a solution to virtual caches and locationless caches before they get that, but I could be wrong. (By the way, you don't have to be smug about it. I know you are better than this CR.)

It wouldn't make that much of a difference for the user per se, but here's what happens now. You're at your nearest list and find the cache you want to log. You go to the page and then click on "log your visit." However, in the meantime, the server has to serve up a bunch of information that you really don't need to see. Then when your client gets the page it requests any images and supporting documents that it doesn't have cached--then the server sends that. See, that's at least a couple or better calls to the server for information you're not even going to use. In other words, it's wasted bandwidth. A smaller cache details page is better 20Kbytes. Not much singly. Multiply that by hundreds or thousands and the site slows down. So, that's what just one click costs you.

Sacrific a few bytes on the nearest list, create a link directly to the logging page that is _BLANK target (saves reloading the nearest list each time) and you save a bunch over the long run. Maybe even let the site run faster on crunch days.

How hard would it be to implement the "changed caches" attrbute in the PQs?

It has been there for some time. All you have to do is select "Updated in the last 7 days" and run the query every seven days. Don't forget to tell Jeremy thanks.

Opps, I mispoke. There is check box for cache page changed and one for found logged. What I'm talking about is if there was anything changed in the last 7 days. This could be an all inclusive one that includes changes to the cache page AND the logs, or one just for the logs. Right now you can't get a list of just caches that have had any kind log in the last 7 days.

Here's what this would accomplish. Say you maintain a local list of caches you're likely to hunt. In my case it's all caches I haven't found in a 200 mile radius. Once I find the cache it no longer gets updated. If I want to track a particular cache I put it on my watch list.

Now, because a good number of these caches don't get visited very often I'm getting the extact same information on that cache week after week. This is a huge waste. No telling how much bandwidth would be saved with this implementation. That's not to mention the difference between "logged in the last 7 days" and "found in the last 7 days" would be trivial in the amount of time taken in the query.

It's my thinking bandwidth saved means folks will get their PQ faster because less information needs to be pushed out the door.

Edited July 22, 2004 by CoyoteRed

July 22, 2004

Jeremy asked for someone out of the geocaching community to move to Seattle to work to help with the site. No one stepped up to the plate. He is now looking outside of the geocaching community. If you (meaning anyone, not just you CR) know of ideas to save money, processing power, bandwidth and user's nerves, all you had to do was step up to the plate. There has been a lot of talk about that, but when the chips were down no one stepped up.

That is not totally true. I had emailed Jeremy some general questions about the job. Some of which were answered in a blanket post in the forums, but some were not answered. In fact I never even got a response to my email.

It would not surprise me if Jeremey would not even consider having me working for him. In fact that was one of the questions. But I never even got that as a reply. That's OK but it is not correct to say that people have not stepped up.

I have several times offered to help with programming. I also think there are many others here that would as well. I would do it for free if it would make the site better, if it would get changes done quicker. And that could be done from wherever anyone lives. But those offers have been turned down flat or just not responded to.

It is frustrating for those of us that work in this area to see how long even the most basic changes take to get done. One can not say that they don't have time to make changes and then turn down offers of help and then say that no one steps up. It is time to think outside the box. Use the people that are here that are willing to help. I think you can find enough talent here to quickly clean up the backlog of suggestions and fixes that are sitting out there.

But it is Jeremey's business and he gets to run it how he wants. But it is very clear that without the massive amount of data that he controls he would be left in the dust. If I thought people would use it I would put a site together and I think I could blow this one out of the water. But becasuse people are so tied into this site and would be unwilling to move their caches or list them in more than one place I don't expect that or any other site would see much traffic. It becomes chicken and egg, I don't use that site because nobody lists any caches there and I don't list any caches there because nobody uses that site. But that starts to go down the road as to what gc.com's place is in this hobby. They want to say they are just a listing site yet they also want to control the rules and because of the amount of information they control they effectivly control the sport as a whole.

Also go on some of the boards that Microsoft runs and you will see plenty of bashing of their products, their company and Bill Gates. I have seen people here that love to bash MS and call them a monopoly and the evil empire, etc. But for some reason do not have a problem with some of the similiar practices that exist on this site. Go figure.

1.4k · July 22, 2004

I know a lot of people are very passionate about how they would like the site to change, but I don't think the vocal minority will ever see their desires come to fruition.

The majority of us are happy with the site, how it's run and the staff that operates it.

The performance of the site is better than it's been in a long time and pesonally I don't mind having to make a couple of extra mouse clicks to navigate the site.

Anyways that's my $0.02. Your mileage may vary.

2.1k · July 22, 2004

One VERY important note about the Wikipedia Internet encyclopedia -- anyone can write or edit any page on that site. That dictionary probably should not be taken as gospel. While googling around I found a perfect example of that here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

It's on Wikipedia, so it must be true I guess.

Your right, anyone can edit a page...and 9 minutes after you (or whoever) edited the "internet troll" page, it was reset to the previous copy that I quoted.

To bring this tangent of trolling to topic: The wikipedia is *very* self-correcting because the community doesn't let a single person (or small group of people) destroy what the rest of the people have established. Within that framework, new additions can be added to the wikipedia as long as they do not destroy the integrity or alter the usefulness for someone else. The wikipedia is a very balanced and informational tool on the internet because it is one of the hallmarks of community-based decision making and open-sourced product.

24.7k · July 22, 2004

That's a pretty cool site. I like the Fundamental Attribution Error explanation. It's a true problem I've run into in the online world. Once people grow up a bit they recognize that they do have a lot of assumptions they make. Assumptions are fine, but you have to recognize them as just that and replace them with actual information as it comes along. It helps a lot not to compound assumptions on top of other assumptions.

2.1k · July 22, 2004

Jeremy asked for someone out of the geocaching community to move to Seattle to work to help with the site. If you (meaning anyone, not just you CR) know of ideas to save money, processing power, bandwidth and user's nerves, all you had to do was step up to the plate. There has been a lot of talk about that, but when the chips were down no one stepped up.

Incorrect. Jeremy asked the percentage of the community who read not only the forums but the GC.com Website forum if they would work on the site. Not only would the person responding need to be able to leave their current work situation, but if they did not live in the surrounding area, they would have to search for a new home and move without travel compensation. He also replied to his own message noting that he received e-mails offering help. On top of that, the post was dated June 1st and it's already gone from the front page of the forum. Job listings can sometimes go months before finding a qualified candidate in even more traditional channels.

To say "no one stepped up to the plate" is disingenuous. Anyone who even knew there was a ballgame on only had one strike before they were out....and the plate ump called a wide strike zone.

So, just to remind the unemployed Seattle-based ASP/SQL/VB programming geocachers who weren't reading the GC.com Website Forum between June 1st and June 30th (although I know it didn't even take that long to slip off the page)...there's a job for you to help geocaching.com.

7.2k · July 22, 2004

Sacrific a few bytes on the nearest list, create a link directly to the logging page that is _BLANK target (saves reloading the nearest list each time) and you save a bunch over the long run. Maybe even let the site run faster on crunch days.

I would like that one myself. I always right click and and select "Open in New Window" when I do that. I'm sure lots of people don't do that.

These points are valid ones. Anything to save bandwidth at this point is appreciated. I don't think I have ever seen anyone ask for these improvements before, not that that means anything. I don't drift into the Geocaching.com Web Site Forum that much though. I do think more people want the virtual and locationless caches addressed first though. I don't think Jeremy would mind being reminded of these other upgrades -- say via a "Wish List" topic in the GC.com Web Site Forum that gets bumped every now and then. That is what the reviewers did. We had a wish list topic so things were in one concise area.

GrizzlyJohn, two inflexible conditions for the job were to move to Seattle and work with .net. I'm only curious, but were you were willing to do both?

7.2k · July 22, 2004

Jeremy asked for someone out of the geocaching community to move to Seattle to work to help with the site. If you (meaning anyone, not just you CR) know of ideas to save money, processing power, bandwidth and user's nerves, all you had to do was step up to the plate. There has been a lot of talk about that, but when the chips were down no one stepped up.

Incorrect. Jeremy asked the percentage of the community who read not only the forums but the GC.com Website forum if they would work on the site. Not only would the person responding need to be able to leave their current work situation, but if they did not live in the surrounding area, they would have to search for a new home and move without travel compensation. He also replied to his own message noting that he received e-mails offering help. On top of that, the post was dated June 1st and it's already gone from the front page of the forum. Job listings can sometimes go months before finding a qualified candidate in even more traditional channels.

To say "no one stepped up to the plate" is disingenuous. Anyone who even knew there was a ballgame on only had one strike before they were out....and the plate ump called a wide strike zone.

So, just to remind the unemployed Seattle-based ASP/SQL/VB programming geocachers who weren't reading the GC.com Website Forum between June 1st and June 30th (although I know it didn't even take that long to slip off the page)...there's a job for you to help geocaching.com.

July 22, 2004

GrizzlyJohn, two inflexible conditions for the job were to move to Seattle and work with .net. I'm only curious, but were you were willing to do both?

I asked about the need to move to Seattle. I guess if I would not have to move I would rather not but as I said in the email it was not a deal breaker. It would have to be something I would need to think about in more detail. I would need to get an idea of what the job paid and what the cost of living is in Seattle compared to my current home of Baltimore. I don't think I can just say yes without knowing a little more. But I did not rule it out.

As for .NET I have been using it since in was in beta. It would be hard to find anybody that is a bigger fan and supporter of .NET. And I have spent years prior to .NET coming out writing web-based applications against SQL backends. I have years of experience writing asp, scripting, vb and t-sql. Sure there are plenty of people that have more experience than I do, but I truly think I have enough to do the job. I currently work for a major university that is also a teaching hospital. I understand large databases and trying to get as much out of them as possible to provide a good experience for the end user.

Bottom line is that I don't need a job. But I think that I could without a doubt make some very positive changes to this site. I do female dog this site enough but I would be willing to make it better if given the chance. But I tend to think that my vision of what would make a good site and Jeremy's would be far apart. But in my email to him I left that door open. But I did not even get a reply, not even a, "Have you lost your mind? I would not hire you if you were the last coder on earth in this or any other lifetime." I really fully expected that type of response and that would have been OK. But I think I have the skills needed and I don't think it would be fair of me to point out all of the problems and not offer the chance for a solution. On the other hand I do feel justified in complaining because I do understand what it takes to get and keep a site like this running.

3.8k · July 23, 2004

Caches are everywhere this year. I see log after log mentioning them.

9.4k · July 23, 2004

GrizzlyJohn,

I don't see a mention of your email on the jobs@geocaching.com mailbox.

9.4k · July 23, 2004

If you have requests about features on Geocaching.com, post them in my forum (Geocaching.com Web Discussion Forum). I do not monitor this forum every day, or sometimes for weeks.

If you don't get a response about a feature request, wait a few days and ask again.

I'm going back to my forum now.

July 23, 2004

GrizzlyJohn,

I don't see a mention of your email on the jobs@geocaching.com mailbox.

Now that is strange, perhaps there is a problem with that mailbox and emails have been lost.

I just forwarded my original email. Let me know that you go it.

July 23, 2004

Just to update anybody who might be writing a novel.

Emails have gone back and forth. All is well and sometimes stuff just happens and there is no evil motive behind it.

July 23, 2004

I feel that complaints that are genuine in their masculinity should be apropriated to the weight of their argument and should be taken seriously!

That's all that I have to say about that...

July 23, 2004

But it is Jeremey's business and he gets to run it how he wants. But it is very clear that without the massive amount of data that he controls he would be left in the dust. If I thought people would use it I would put a site together and I think I could blow this one out of the water. But becasuse people are so tied into this site and would be unwilling to move their caches or list them in more than one place I don't expect that or any other site would see much traffic. It becomes chicken and egg, I don't use that site because nobody lists any caches there and I don't list any caches there because nobody uses that site. But that starts to go down the road as to what gc.com's place is in this hobby. They want to say they are just a listing site yet they also want to control the rules and because of the amount of information they control they effectively control the sport as a whole.

I think this explains what I have been trying to ask for the last couple days in other threads. I just couldn't come up with the right words to put it all together.

Hmmmm....... a site that lets the members decide the guidelines?? It would be great to have that choice.

1.6k · July 23, 2004

OK, I guess I'll be in the doghouse tonight. (Equality and all that...)

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

I LOVE going caching! I LOVE this website. I DO NOT CARE if it is not perfect, because it works for me!

If you think CR is bad in here, you should hear him at home! Fortunately, we have other things to talk about, because we have basically agreed to disagree on this subject.

In his defense...he is not a troll. He has a vision and this is the one place it is safe (except for 'warns') to try to express it. While I understand what he wants, and it kind of makes sense (more self-policing like letterboxing is), it really doesn't affect me. There are enough caches out there to last a lifetime, with more being added everyday. I only have interest in placing a few more, and can happily keep them within the guidelines.

Now you know what the sig line means .

How To Fix Geocaching.com?

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