Garbage In, Cash Out? (gico)

[+DaveA]

Here is the scenario:

 

I see in a cache items that have been in the cache for, apparently, a very long time... that have been handled, set in the dirt, stepped on, scratched, broken, and otherwise destroyed by cachers over many many visits. Their value has been CHANGING over time to where the original person that valued it when they left it might not care to have it anymore.

 

Half of the stuff in the cache has degraded to this point.

 

It is a picture of neglect.

 

Now... I decide to take this "trashed" half of the cache as a "cache angel", and leave a dollar bill, with the intent of throwing out the stuff I traded for.

 

There is no actual intent to trade. The intent is to clean. A trade happens only to cover my butt, adhering to basic game 'rules'.

 

Thumbs up?

 

Thumbs down?

 

 

Honestly I don't know.

 

I don't see any relevance in how long a cache item "appears" to have been around. I don't see how thier having been handled matters. Many items in a cache will get dirty, many items don't degrade by being stepped on and a scratch doesn't necessarily reduce the items value to someone. A broken item I can agree with you on, in most cases, but not all.

 

The problem I have here is that everything you listed as a criteria for removing items is not something I would *always* consider a reason to remove the item. It is subjective. On subjects that are subjective and where opinions vary I think the respectful policy is to inform the rightful decision maker. This would be the cache owner and if no response then the web site via the "archive cache" function.

 

My position is that when it comes to issues that are of a subjective nature the respectful policy is to email the cache owner and ask what they prefer. If you wish you could remove the items and email the owner after the fact as to what you removed and why. If you get no response within, say 30 days then trash the items, but if the owner emails back and requests that you put the items back then I would suggest the respectful thing would be to be prepared to do so, quickly.

 

See, if you take the time to gather items for a cache, figure out where to stash it, go stash it, go through the approval process, take the time to pay maintenance visits and all of that I am sure you would want those visiting your cache to treat it a certain way. The way you wish others to treat your cache may vary from what I would want. This is why the generally accepted rule in caching is to leave maintenance up to the owner. If you feel the cache is out of shape the generally accepted practice is to notify the owner via email from the site and to wait a reasonable (subjective term) amount of time for a response. If you get no response then the site provides an "archive cache" function which alerts the approvers to check on things. If the cache owner doesn't respond to the approvers the cache may get archived. If you wish, you can request to adopt such a cache and it then becomes yours and you can do as you wish with it.

 

It is also perfectly fine to log a find for a cache and say anything you wish. If you find the contents of the cache to be really lame, you can say so and list the contents of the cache in your log. Anyone seeking that cache has thus been fully informed.

 

There are many options available to you other than taking it upon yourself to potentially annoy a cache placer and discourage them from placing caches in the future.

 

Please just stick to obvious trash like used toilet paper or paper items that have rotted inside a waterlogged cache container and leave the rest to the cache owner. You can't possibly offend or discourage anyone this way. And you can always leave a gem of an item at any cache you wish.

 

Your interest in this topic seems motivated by a desire to improve the sport for everyone. I would suggest that doing the owner's job for them without asking when it comes to things that opinions vary on is not a good way to improve things. Without those willing to place caches this thing would get boring for all of us. Respect those who take the time, effort and expense to place caches by asking them what they would like done anytime anything other than a crystal clear condition presents itself to you. Please.

[+Snoogans]

So.... my view has become even MORE protective of my caches.  This way, I'll avoid cache "editors" from roaming the woods to "clean" my caches in the name of "bettering" the game.

Yes, I had already wasted 10 minutes of my life on this thread, so what's 5 minutes more.

 

"Cache Editor" is just a soft term for self appointed cache police which I personally can't stand. It seems Spiffmeister wants a rubber stamp on his crusade.

 

Leave my half-chewed army man alone

 

One of my favorite cachin' trades was for a broken toy. A headless knight with his sword drawn. It just has character. I like it.

 

Ahem,

 

I don't know what I find more annoying about this thread. The fact that I keep looking at it like a NASCAR crash reel, or that I am annoyed at myself for looking at your (Spiffy's) stats and wondering where the heck you get off trying to improve the game after a couple of weeks and only 3 finds.

 

As I get older, I'm finding that presumption really sticks in my craw.

 

See, I hate it when other people slam someone for lack of experience and I'm totally ticked at myself for doing that now, but you talk like someone with more than 3 cache finds, so maybe I'm annoyed because my spider sense believes that you're a sock puppet troll. Maybe you're not. I don't really care. It doesn't change the fact that this entire thread (the parts I've bothered to read) has been an annoying abrasive experience. After this, I need some mental floss.

 

Good luck with that cache editing thing. How 'bout a progress report this time NEXT year.

Edited January 4, 2005 by Snoogans

[SpiffJr]

So.... my view has become even MORE protective of my caches. This way, I'll avoid cache "editors" from roaming the woods to "clean" my caches in the name of "bettering" the game.

 

But the deeper point is: You won't.... any more than you can stop a thief that steals swag. Currently, players actions counter the effects of thieves more quickly and probably more substantially than the cache owners. It would not suprise me to discover that the player is the key to cache health in the case of theft, the world over.

 

If I am right, the sport ignores this at it's own peril.

 

Merely changing your "view" can not substantially protect your cache...

Clearly.

 

It may also have adverse effects on the game.

 

But of course: go for it!

 

Do what you feel is right...

 

PS, how do you know that your cache(s) have not been substantially affected by the forces you seek to avoid already? Experienced veterans have disclosed that they incorporate these behaviors... and if you had no idea that it was happening because it was not detectable... a disease without symptoms?

 

Interesting notion...

 

Best of luck!

Edited January 4, 2005 by SpiffJr

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

But the deeper point is: You won't.... any more than you can stop a thief that steals swag. Currently, players actions counter the effects of thieves more quickly and probably more substantially than the cache owners. It would not suprise me to discover that the player is the key to cache health in the case of theft, the world over.

 

If I am right, the sport ignores this at it's own peril.

 

Your "view" can not substantially protect your cache...

Clearly.

 

It may also have adverse effects on the game.

 

But of course: go for it!

 

Do what you feel is right!

Oh... I WILL thank you.

 

Players are NEVER a problem.

Self-appointed "cleaners", self-appointed administrators, priests-of-the-cache -- especially under the so-called name of game-improvement - they are the problem.

 

I place caches for players.

I do not place caches for your philosophical shennanigans.

If you not get pleasure in SEEKING my caches, or understand the very, very basic rules of the game -- you are not my target audience and I prefer that you do not hunt my cahces. To this end, if people insist on living in other people's pockets, then the game will not be "improved" -- it will fragment. People will create groups of like-minded cohorts and exclude those elements that do not appeal to them.

 

You are, in fact, HURTING the game by modifying its foundational rules and norms arbitrarily. While you claim to seek clarification in the name of game maturity and the establishment fo new norms -- you fail to see what is directly in front of you: people accept your removal of a gum wrapper -- they do not accept your removal of items on the margin of what may be considered trash. Sorry about that.

[SpiffJr]

"Cache Editor" is just a soft term for self appointed cache police which I personally can't stand.

 

Editor is too vague. it lacks direction, principle and effect in it's selection in your title.

 

Queston: When a player comes across an empty cache, or nearly so, and DECIDES that the cache is not INTERESTING or FULL enough for THEIR tastes, and they decide to ADD to it (not checking with the owner), are they not in some manner editing or changing the cache to suit their existing perspective?

 

I know there are differences... and even substantially... but don't be too hard on the police... they've been out there for a long time, and one would hope, doing the right thing.

 

(Cito is a policing function. 100% Think about it. Do they bend you out of shape?)

 

Also, don't kid yourself to believe that #of cache finds is the source of wisdom. I assure you that it is not.

 

SO! It seems that the "intent" of the trade is in fact, important after all....

 

Interesting.

Edited January 4, 2005 by SpiffJr

[SpiffJr]

You are, in fact, HURTING the game by modifying its foundational rules and norms arbitrarily.

 

WHAT rules and norms?

 

The norm is, that it is OK to trade down in value. Yes?

 

Are you, too, saying that "intent" is critical in a trade?

 

While you claim to seek clarification in the name of game maturity and the establishment fo new norms -- you fail to see what is directly in front of you:  people accept your removal of a gum wrapper -- they do not accept your removal of items on the margin of what may be considered trash.  Sorry about that.

 

What YOU fail to see, and has been demonstrated for you numerous times here, not by myself, but by others, including very seasoned veterans, is that your statement "they do not accept your removal of items on the margin of what may be considered trash" as plainly and materially FALSE.

 

You are now fighting for YOUR unique perspective.... in a sea of unique perspectives.

 

This thread merely showed this to you.

 

Larger question: Game health in a sea of unique perspectives.

 

I already expected this.

 

Did you expect this?

 

I appreciate your views.

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

[+DaveA]

But the deeper point is:  You won't.... any more than you can stop a thief that steals swag.  Currently, players actions counter the effects of thieves more quickly and probably more substantially than the cache owners.  It would not suprise me to discover that the player is the key to cache health in the case of theft, the world over.

 

The player, rather than the placer does in fact affect the game enourmously both positively and negatively. The cache pirate affects the game adversely in discouraging future cache placements. The cache cleaner, even if the actions are desired by the placer, are rarely if ever going to be noticed by placer or seeker.

 

If I am right, the sport ignores this at it's own peril.

 

Not really. If a cache placer is being benefited without realizing it then there is no peril in continuing to not realize it. It is only when a cache placer is harmed and does realize it that the sport is threatened by one more person unwilling to place a cache.

 

PS, how do you know that your cache(s) have not been substantially affected by the forces you seek to avoid already?  Experienced veterans have disclosed that they incorporate these behaviors...  and if you had no idea that it was happening because it was not detectable...  a disease without symptoms?

 

Well if someone's primary reason for caching is to get loot they are playing the wrong game. If someone with a so so attitude towards caching decides to stick with it a bit longer because they found a $1000 trade item in a cache it won't take long before they realize most caches have "junk" items that would list for 25 cents or less at a second hand store. One would do better to buy lottery tickets than geocache, it is less effort.

 

Trading is great and can be a blast, but it almost never is because there is a high value item to be found and who really cares if they have to shuffle through broken army men and filthy bouncy balls to retrieve that $1000 item you so generously placed in a cache?

 

Feel free to improve the sport via placing caches and placing items of high value. Please just don't ruin the sport by editting caches of items the owners approve of and you don't.

 

As Aretha Franklin once said: R-E-S-P-E-C-T

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

My unique perspective should be respected as should everyone elses. The difference is that my perspective does not seek to control others caches -- yours does.

 

What is it that you want? What is your objective in this game? Why do you cache?

 

These are questions you need to ask.

 

When you suggest you will be my "cache angel" be very aware that there is a fine line between angel and devil.

 

Again, what are you trying to accomplish? There is little discourse at this point and your single conclusion seems to be "everyone has a unique perspective" -- okay, now that you are aware of this fact -- I guess the best I can say is -- welcome to life. Do not FORCE your perspective onto me by modifying the intent of MY cahces.

 

I still encourage you to do and allow whatever you want with your OWN caches.

[SpiffJr]

The cache cleaner, even if the actions are desired by the placer, are rarely if ever going to be noticed by placer or seeker.

 

Precisely.

 

(and just so you know... your often repeated "respect" messages are coming through 5-by-5. Just an acknowledgement so that you know.)

 

Consider: is the cache owner the primary figure/purpose of the sport?

(keep the cache owner happy at all costs)

 

OR

 

Is the sport/player more important?

you may find that the two can be competing interests... where trade-offs are made.

Example: will Groundspeak Incorporated allow the registration of caches that are very restrictive in how they work? "no black people may hunt my cache" (as an example to make the point) "no cleaning down-traders may hunt my cache". You may be surprised how this evolves. As might I.

 

Is this covered by an existing philosophy/rule, or is this new too?

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

[+DaveA]

Oh... I WILL thank you.

 

Players are NEVER a problem. 

Self-appointed "cleaners", self-appointed administrators, priests-of-the-cache -- especially under the so-called name of game-improvement - they are the problem.

 

Couldn't agree more. Find a cache, trade if you wish and go your way. If you feel there is a problem, notify the cache owner and if no response notify the listing site. Could it be more simple?

 

I place caches for players.

 

As a player I thank you for that. Whether I find your cache to contain only army men and bouncy balls or high def TVs I thank you for taking the time and effort to provide me with a cache to go seek. People like you do positive things to make this sport enjoyable for all of us.

 

I do not place caches for your philosophical shennanigans.

 

You mean you don't want to debate the concept of subjectivity ad nauseum? I don't understand.

 

If you not get pleasure in SEEKING my caches, or understand the very, very basic rules of the game -- you are not my target audience and I prefer that you do not hunt my cahces.

 

Oddly, this doesn't seem difficult to understand.

 

To this end, if people insist on living in other people's pockets, then the game will not be "improved" -- it will fragment.  People will create groups of like-minded cohorts and exclude those elements that do not appeal to them.

 

As I noted previously I have only placed one cache and it went missing within a month or so. That was 3 years ago. I am strongly considering another placement, but there is no way in hell I will place a 1/1 cache ever again due to this experience. Given Spiff's comments my decision to never place an easy, loot filled cache is just reinforced. The cache idea I have been thinking about are all micro or lootless caches that are cleverly hidden or loot filled caches that are a 5/5 or close to it. Why? To discourage idiots from finding the cache. I would rather have a cache that gets found once per decade than one that gets cache policed every week.

 

You are, in fact, HURTING the game by modifying its foundational rules and norms arbitrarily.  While you claim to seek clarification in the name of game maturity and the establishment fo new norms -- you fail to see what is directly in front of you:  people accept your removal of a gum wrapper -- they do not accept your removal of items on the margin of what may be considered trash.  Sorry about that.

 

Agreed. If people are going to place caches it will only be if seekers respect what they have done. I won't place caches in areas where the disapearance rate is high because this suggests there is a cache pirate using the board to be stupid. I won't place any loot in a cache if I suspect cache police are numerous.

 

Respect the cache owner and email them before taking any action other than those that are "common sense" like removing used toilet paper. If you feel like you are improving the sport by going beyond this, please understand you aren't.

 

Without cache placers there can be no cache finders. Taking cache cleaning actions that are controversial without the approval of the owner do not encourage more cache placements.

 

Spiff, all anyone is asking is that you seek guidance from the cache owner before taking any administrative actions. Is that unreasonable?

 

Really it doesn't matter to me what Spiff's answer is. I am pretty much solidified in that I will not place a cache that any moron can find in 10 minutes. I figure that the more effort required to find it, the more respect the finder will have. It is unfortunate that it has to be this way, but with cache pirates and self appointed cache police how can it be any other way except for cheap, not at all thought through micros? Why bother when players rather than those who have actually placed a cache self appoint themselves as authorities?

 

Caches have become a preponderance of ill thought micros and junk filled 1/1 caches. Perhaps this is because the cache owners aren't getting the respect they deserve?

 

Side note: The emergence and increasing popularity of sites other than geocaching.com is probably largely due to idiots who appoint themselves as cache police. I would rather serve a small group that appreciates and respects what I have done than serve the masses who crap on what I have done while feeling they are doing a service to me and the community.

 

My message to cache police and cache pirates is this: Respect what the placers have done, or find yourself with nobody willing to place caches for you.

 

You aren't serving the community, you are splintering it and discouraging placers from investing much in the cache due to your lack of respect. You want more control over the sport? Place your own cache.

[SpiffJr]

My unique perspective should be respected as should everyone elses. The difference is that my perspective does not seek to control others caches -- yours does.

 

Problem: what, are there some 500,000 cashers approximately?

 

How do you transmit 500,000 unique perspectives?

 

Respect MUST be substantially through social norms. It is not workable IMHO to use any other method... with exceptions that prove the rule.

 

You will note that GCing workes hard to promote shared perspectives... so it's obvious that many understand this need, even if many others have not given it a second thought.

 

Whoever has the cache in their posession, even if it is many times in a week, HAS TOTAL CONTROL. The profundity of this fact can not be overstated. It is not a trivial moment in the life of a cache. I'm not asking for or seeking control, because I ALREADY KNOW EXACTLY WHO HAS IT.

 

Don't kid yourself over who has control.

 

Recognizing this, and dealing with it, are non-trivial matters.

 

Think about it, you are placing a "valued" object in seclusion, telling people exactly where it is, and invite people to, essentially, ransack it.

 

I have no delusions about where actual control resides.

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

[+DaveA]

Consider: is the cache owner the primary figure/purpose of the sport?

(keep the cache owner happy at all costs)

 

There is a symbiotic relationship. Without placers there would be no seekers and without seekers there would be no placers. Both are important and to be respected.

 

Which came first though, the chicken or the egg? Ultimately it doesn't matter how many are willing to seek, this sport depends on people willing to place. By disrespecting the wishes of the placer we discourage that placer from placing anything more or even maintaining what they have placed. Respect the cache owner is my advice.

 

If you don't please don't be surprised when all you can find are no thought micros tossed on the side of the road or regular caches with a 1/1 difficulty containing only low value items. What people are willing to invest is directly proportional to the respect they are shown. Cache pirates are a real problem and enough of a discouragement to placers. Pirates are simply idiots beyond reach. Cache police are generally well meaning people who simply don't get the idea of respecting the cache owner. I choose to believe such people can be reached.

 

Is the sport/player more important?

you may find that the two can be competing interests... where trade-offs are made.

 

Respectfully your philosophical nature is getting tiresome. I like philosophy, but this just isn't the place to confuse issues by waxing philosophical. Most folks here aren't interested in debating the nuances of what is or is not garbage and exploring it's subjective nature.

 

Example: will Groundspeak Incorporated allow the registration of caches that are very restrictive in how they work?

 

Yes, they allow 5/5 caches which require special equipment to get to and require a needle in a haystack approach to locating them once you are in the area.

 

  "no black people may hunt my cache" (as an example to make the point)  "no cleaning down-traders may hunt my cache".  You may be surprised how this evolves.  As might I.

 

I fail to see how your point is relevant to anything.

 

Is this covered by an existing philosophy/rule, or is this new too?

 

Please stop making simple issues into complex philosophical debates. You aren't confusing anyone other than yourself.

 

Respect the cache placer if you wish people to continue placing caches. This is a simple concept. If the caches listed on Groundspeak become the target of cache pirates and police then the market will insist upon another site gaining in popularity. A site that is more restrictive and does a better job of excluding pirates and police. If that is what you want, continue.

 

Frankly I view it as inevitable under the 80/20 rule.

[SpiffJr]

Spiff, all anyone is asking is that you seek guidance from the cache owner before taking any administrative actions. Is that unreasonable?

 

Not at all... but there is no definition of "administrative action".

 

A meme attached to a difficult notion of "administrative action" will not travel as well as "leave it better than you found it", which has a rather strong vector of transmission, and is well demonstrated.

 

You have 500,000 people to address.

 

And remember, I have been told multiple things by multiple people... where I expected I might not... but that is fact. The scenario has two thumbs up and one down, and an I don't know, and I know experienced cachers care for the caches they find, using, I suspect, "common sense".

 

Your positon seems to devalue the concept of "good Samaritan". Have you noticed that? Does it match your world view outside of GeoCaching?

 

Do you *really* think that stamping out the good Samaritan reflex will *help* GC and the GC.com registry?

 

This is a most amazing development.

 

And I just realized: It is gone from "leave it better than you found it" to "don't improve my cache without my express permission"

 

And this is not me. This is you (and others), and is truly the damnedest thing I've seen in a good long while...

 

And I'm truly sorry... that observation is NOT meant to frustrate you, but I know it certainly might, but truly, it is worth noting... and really amazing. Sincere apologies if it causes you grief. Wow.

 

I'm still VERY much attached to "leave it better than you found it" concept. It's really stamped into me as a personal trait, and it won't shake easily. So much in the world depends on it.

 

dadgum... that just blows my mind.... probably time for bed!

 

Peace,

 

Thanks,

 

Spiff

Edited January 4, 2005 by SpiffJr

[SpiffJr]

What people are willing to invest is directly proportional to the respect they are shown.

 

I tend to agree...

 

BUT... the LARGEST investment in the cache, is by the player. This is easily true. If you don't focus on the player experience/mindset, the cache has no chance.

 

The player has near TOTAL control. You may not like it. I may not like it.

 

But that is the reality that has to be dealt with.

 

AND, there seems to be no shortage in growth of caches... it has been exploisive.

You even note more places to register caches (althought I personally doubt the reasons you express for the reason behind this phenomenon...)

 

Your disheartening of the 1-1 cache, and the disenchantment expressed by MANY regarding the finds and the maintenance aspects of the cache, seem to indicate, that before my arrival, the cache has, shall we say, developed issues.

 

Of course they have.

 

New ideas? Or just stick with the old ones?

[SpiffJr]

Respectfully your philosophical nature is getting tiresome. I like philosophy, but this just isn't the place to confuse issues by waxing philosophical. Most folks here aren't interested in debating the nuances of what is or is not garbage and exploring it's subjective nature.

 

People have suggested that if I am so concerned about the ethical specifics of the sport, then maybe it is not the sport for me.

 

If you don't enjoy the philosophical nature of GC issues... then might I suggest that their advice applies to your participation in this thread as well?

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

[+DaveA]

Spiff, all anyone is asking is that you seek guidance from the cache owner before taking any administrative actions. Is that unreasonable?

 

Not at all... but there is no definition of "administrative action".

 

Oh bull. The definition of admin action is to notify the owner with your conerns and let them decide. If the owner doesn't respond then go to the listing site. There is your definition. This isn't new, this isn't controversial. It is just you who are new and controversial. You are stubbornly refusing to accept the accepted norms and labelling the accepted norms as non defined. It is all in your head.

 

A meme attached to a difficult notion of "administrative action" will not travel as well as "leave it better than you found it", which has a rather strong vector of transmission, and is well demonstrated.

 

You have 500,000 people to address.

 

No, I just have you to address. Thankfully there aren't 500,000 cache pirates and cache police to address or this sport wouldn't exist.

 

And remember, I have been told multiple things by multiple people... where I expected I might not... but that is fact.  The scenario has two thumbs up and one down, and an I don't know, and I know experienced cachers care for the caches they find, using, I suspect, "common sense".

 

Baloney, the overwhelming majority have expressed disagreement with you as anyone who cares to wade through this thread can see. It is only when you cloak "low value items" with the word "trash" that you find any agreement with one exception. Your appeal to "experienced cachers" rings quite hollow given that those disgreeing with you are experienced cachers and at least 2 (by my count) are "charter members" meaning they have been involved for several years. Your appeal to authority falls flat.

 

Your positon seems to devalue the concept of "good Samaritan".  Have you noticed that?  Does it match your world view outside of GeoCaching?

 

If a good samaritan would move me when I have a spinal injury then I prefer the good samaritans stay away from me and leave me to the medical professionals who actually know what they are doing. I don't care what your intent is. Arrogant people believe their intent is good. Few agree with thier actions, but arrogant people still think they are in the right.

 

Respect the cache owner/placer. This is a simple concept. That you don't seem to grasp this concept has me bewildered.

 

You keep this thread going by arguing that you are a better authority on what should be than the cache owner even though they meet the listing requirements of the site they list through.

 

Start your own site, place your own caches. You don't seem like you wish to do either. Instead you argue that you are somehow a good samaritan by virtue of appointing yourself an arbiter of other people's caches. Dude, seriously, grow up. You appear unwilling to do your own work, you just want to argue that you are doing everyone a favor by screwing with what others do.

 

If 499,999 cache placers told you they object and one told you they approve it seems to me you would feel the 499,999 are wrong by virtue that there isn't unanimous agreement.

[+DaveA]

Respectfully your philosophical nature is getting tiresome. I like philosophy, but this just isn't the place to confuse issues by waxing philosophical. Most folks here aren't interested in debating the nuances of what is or is not garbage and exploring it's subjective nature.

 

People have suggested that if I am so concerned about the ethical specifics of the sport, then maybe it is not the sport for me.

 

If you don't enjoy the philosophical nature of GC issues... then might I suggest that their advice applies to your participation in this thread as well?

If caching was open only to philosophy majors I would agree with you, but since it isn't....

[SpiffJr]

 

If you don't enjoy the philosophical nature of GC issues... then might I suggest that their advice applies to your participation in this thread as well?

If caching was open only to philosophy majors I would agree with you, but since it isn't....

participation in the *thread*, Dave. Not the sport.

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

[+Snoogans]

Respectfully your philosophical nature is getting tiresome. I like philosophy, but this just isn't the place to confuse issues by waxing philosophical. Most folks here aren't interested in debating the nuances of what is or is not garbage and exploring it's subjective nature.

 

People have suggested that if I am so concerned about the ethical specifics of the sport, then maybe it is not the sport for me.

 

If you don't enjoy the philosophical nature of GC issues... then might I suggest that their advice applies to your participation in this thread as well?

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

Thank you for that opening.

 

I like popcorn.

 

Sometimes a little piece of popcorn kernel gets between a molar and my gum on the inside of my mouth.

 

Now, USUALLY I carry dental floss everywhere I go, but wouldn't ya know it. EVERY single frickin time that happens, my dental floss is nowhere to be found. So, I try to ignore it, but my tongue keeps trying to flick at it until I'm driven half insane.

 

Gawd! The relief when it finally goes away.

 

That's what you and this thread are doing now. *flick goes my tongue, but fails to dislodge the kernel* Your profile shows 3 cache finds and that you started on Dec 17, 04. *flick* Your thread title speaks of fighting a trend. *flick* 3 caches does not a trend, or a philosophy make . *flikity-flick-flick-flick*

[+DaveA]

Spiff, I want to thank you. First of all I will no longer respond to you as I consider you to be one who is beyond reach.

 

Second, you have motivated me to place 2 caches. One cache will be a well thought out micro cache. I figure cache police have no interest in such caches as they don't contain any items that cache police can police.

 

The second cache will be loot filled, but will be difficult enough to find that I doubt cache police will be willing to actually put in the effort to find it. Lord knows cache police can't be bothered to put in the effort to place thier own caches which they could manage as they see fit, they prefer managing other people's 1/1 caches whether they want them to or not. If they can find my loot filled cache they have my permission to do whatever they wish with it including defecating in it. I have no worries, cause they aren't going to expend the effort.

 

Congratulations, Spiff, you have persuaded me to never, ever place a 1/1 loot filled cache ever again. I do feel kind of bad that folks with mobility issues won't be able to go after one of my caches, but they can thank the self appointed cache police who aren't willing to respect the cache placer's rights for that.

 

You have improved the sport already.

[+DaveA]

That's what you and this thread are doing now. *flick goes my tongue, but fails to dislodge the kernel* Your profile shows 3 cache finds and that you started on Dec 17, 04. *flick* Your thread title speaks of fighting a trend. *flick*  3 caches does not a trend, or a philosophy make . *flikity-flick-flick-flick*  

The problem with Spiff isn't Spiff, it is the 80/20 rule. In some cases the 80/20 rule is the 90/10 rule or the 99/1 rule, but the point is that for everyone willing to stand up and present themselves as they are, there are more just like that person who won't identify themselves.

 

Assuming we could persuade Spiff as to the error of his ways, there would remain many more Spiffs who aren't participating that would continue as Spiff appears headed to.

 

In this sense Spiff is a welcome wake up message to me. The message is that if one places a loot filled 1/1 or similar cache it will be disappeared by a cache pirate or "improved" by a cache policeperson.

 

I sincerily feel horribly for mobility impaired folks.

 

I just don't see how I can provide them with quality traditional caches when pirates and police abound.

 

Because I believe that pirates and police are inherently lazy (else they would place their own caches) and seek easy caches with loot it would seem that the only way to avoid most of them are via micros, multi leggers and high difficulty caches.

 

We can argue with Spiff types until the cows come home, but this world will always have Spiff types that know better than everyone else how things should be.

 

Those of us who aren't interested in being helped by Spiff types will have to adjust accordingly.

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

Whoever has the cache in their posession, even if it is many times in a week, HAS TOTAL CONTROL. The profundity of this fact can not be overstated. It is not a trivial moment in the life of a cache. I'm not asking for or seeking control, because I ALREADY KNOW EXACTLY WHO HAS IT.

 

Don't kid yourself over who has control.

 

Ahhhh... there you are incorrect.

 

There is a difference between control and possession. If you mix the two, you end-up being very obnoxious.

 

While possession gives the the opportunity to control -- control relates more closely to the act of making executive decisions about an object and the ultimate ownership of that object. Any player that mixes the two is a "cache-cop" or a "cleaner". They may find that their brand of "control" is not appreciated.

 

You seem to assume that your cache find is a find in the absence of placement. The only reason you are finding a cache is because it was created, placed and posted. All of which are at risk when you confuse possession with control.

 

Make no mistake about it. If you find a car in a parking lot with the engine running, do you feel obligated to drive it away and get it washed for the owner. Motivation aside -- it is still is an act with a name.

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

People have suggested that if I am so concerned about the ethical specifics of the sport, then maybe it is not the sport for me.

 

If you don't enjoy the philosophical nature of GC issues... then might I suggest that their advice applies to your participation in this thread as well?

Agreed and agreed.

 

I'm going out geocaching.

 

If you or anyone else begins to "police" my caches they will either see my caches removed, made exclusive to my friends, or a surprize left that requires cleaning. (and police is a bad word, because police have badges and are authorized by the "state" -- you are actually cache-thieves with similar philosophies to many despots in history because you are self-appointed. You rob others of enjoying the game through your "improvements" which are only "improvements" unto yourself. Similar to the "improvements" made to humanity by those seeking ethnic cleansing -- your philosophical brethren, really)

[SpiffJr]

...Protect the integrity of the gamepiece.

The owner entrusts you to not damage or jeopardize the cache. Try to ensure the cache is ready for the next finder and is as good or better than you found it.

 

Here is the interestnig thing, Dave...

 

The Geocaching community has just released, just before Christmas, the GeoCaching code.

 

If contains a reminder: "The code is independent of geocaching.com and Groundspeak (i.e. it's our creation, not theirs)."

 

Next, the code says this, specifically, about the players relasionship with the cache:

 

If you exchange trade items, trade kindly: Consider what future finders would like and leave something equal to or better than what you take.

 

...Protect the integrity of the gamepiece.

The owner entrusts you to not damage or jeopardize the cache. Try to ensure the cache is ready for the next finder and is as good or better than you found it.

 

It SPECIFICALLY asks the PLAYER to decide what THEY think OTHER people would want, and to UPGRADE based on that SUBJECTIVE VIEW.

 

It ALSO asks that the player make sure that the cache is READY and in a BETTER condition then when found.

 

These concepts place the on-going health of the contents SQUARELY on the shoulders of the player. It SPECIFICALLY asks the player to trade using their own subjective beliefs about what they think others would like to find. Specifically.

 

It does not say "Be sure to take only things you want to have".

 

Clearly, the writers of the code recognize that the quality of the cache is the burden of the player PRIMARILY. And just as clearly, TRUSTS that PLAYERS will make GOOD, SUBJECTIVE, decisions, about VALUE, to IMPROVE the experience for OTHER PLAYERS.

 

While you, on the other hand, have gone from "leave it better than you found it" to "Don't knowingly trade to better my cache without my permission"

 

How did you get to where you are?

 

Are you *sure* this is the sport for you? I think you (and some others) seek some kind of high level of control over _your_ cache, that is, quite frankly, unrealistic to have.

 

If you are looking to control things to a greater degree... then maybe you are not the type of person that is especially suited to leaving caches.

 

If the gamepiece you contribute is not your "gift" to the game that you give freely for the benefit of all (with their diverse perspectives), then what is it?

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

Trade all you want.

 

The issue is your subjective "cleaning".

 

Trade all you want.

 

The issue is your subjective "cleaning".

 

I said it several times above. I said it twice here.

My "gift" to the sport is not my cache. That is only the beginning. I maintain my own caches and continue to provide the "gift" by having well-maintained caches. If you find one of my caches in disrepair I will fix it. That's the "gift". What's your gift to the sport? I know as a cache placer that I do not appreciate your type of player -- one that seeks to use my cache as an opportunity to "improve" the game to match their perspective.

 

Why don't you place your own caches? Why?

[SpiffJr]

What's your gift to the sport?

 

Making the sport more enjoyable for children (primarily).

 

I'm sorry that you don't like clean caches with nice things in them.

 

It really is too bad... because children really dig that part of it, and they depend on adults for this part of the game.

 

I'm glad that you are active in keeping your caches up...

 

Obviously, YOUR caches will be very enjoyable for all. (but anyone can see how far that will go).

 

Spiff

[SpiffJr]

Why don't you place your own caches? Why?

 

Because too many players are not doing their part in keeping them nice.

 

Did you really have to ask?

Edited January 4, 2005 by SpiffJr

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

I'm sorry that you don't like clean caches with nice things in them.

 

It really is too bad... because children really dig that part of it, and they depend on adults for this part of the game.

 

If you are able to logically draw the conclusions above from any of my posts -- then you are unable to logically process information.

 

My caches are enjoyed by many MANY children. My caches are primarily created FOR children, BY my 3 year-old daughter. As a matter of fact, one cache (Ed's Cache in Calgary, Alberta) was a cache found by my daughter. It was a completely rusted coffee can. Had a pile of mush at the bottem that used to be paper. But....it had a plastic whistle..... a wonderful plastic whistle....

 

We took it home, gave it a boiling water bath (which I would do no matter WHAT shape it appeared to be in) and she LOVES it!

 

Since that time, logs have been left for the owner of the cache. They were unable to get it clean, so another cacher replaced the container and cleaned-up the cache for the owner (AFTER RESPECTFULLY CONTACTING THE OWNER via logs and possibly e-mail)

 

You should not fear placing caches -- just maintain them. Players should have no role in cache maintenance. That is not only the owner's RIGHT, but also RESPONSIBILITY. If, and only if, they are contacted and fail to commit to their reposnsibility can other actions be taken -- from cleaning to archiving as appropriate.

 

Sorry, but the system actually works with the exception of a few meglomaniacs.

[SpiffJr]

My caches are enjoyed by many MANY children

 

I know... I already said that.

 

I wish you maintained ALL caches. I truly do!

 

But how does closing your eyes to issues with caches that are NOT yours help?

 

I'm glad you believe you live in a perfect world...!

 

Spiff

[SpiffJr]

Sorry, but the system actually works with the exception of a few meglomaniacs.

 

Hey, *I'm* not the one saying you can't trade out a nasty broken thing (because it is nasty and broken) and put a nice one in... you are. NICE SYSTEM DUDE.

 

Where are your priorities? Oh, that's right... control.

 

That's *your* system. Not *my* system, nor that of the larger geocaching community...

 

(but I guess it takes all kinds to make up the geocaching community... so I'm sure there is room for your point of view)

 

Spiff

Edited January 4, 2005 by SpiffJr

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

Ummm... do you have a problem because I take responsibility for my cache and control it?

 

C'mon. Answer the POST not one line to further your delusions. If I move into your neighbourhood does that give you the right to control my house and items in it? Even if I invite you over by posting an invitaion? Does that give you the right to come in and control what you consider dirty or unacceptable to YOUR stadards? Build your OWN house. When I place a cache I "give" you the experience and an opportunity to trade. You think I also give you the oportunity to control, clean and otherwise modify the object which I placed time, thought and creativity into creating. Sorry, it doesn't work that way around here buddy.

 

If you and others do this, then cache placers will tire of your meddlesome "benefits" and soon resort to micro's, virtuals, and 5/5's -- not kid friendly in the extreme.

 

If you and your ilk ever began to mess with my caches, I would soon exclude you from benefiting from my "gift" by not posting caches for you, but rather privately to to like-minded, respectful cachers. I would even consider removing my existing caches and visiting yours to take ownership of them (but you have no caches, do you? Your reasons for not having any seem to be that you are afraid to take true ownership. Personally, I don't mind cleaning up after the party, so if the cache become a mess, I clean it. *I* clean it). I place approximately $20-$30 worth of new items in each of my caches each year to improve them -- in what *I* consider a beneficial way. I leave it to others to manage their own treasures in the woods. If I want to help them, I'll e-mail them or trade items -- not co-own their hunts.

 

You are the meglomanic because you seek rules and justifications to control the entire game in the name of the sport. You introduce ideas that do nothing but exclude cache owners from the right to their own caches or at best place them in the position of a spectator to their own concept and work. You claim this will benefit the players that seek caches because it will improve the quality of caches. Will it? Or will it frustrate cache owners to the point of deciding not to place caches due to cache-cops and other geo-vermin.

 

Myself, I just want to be a responsible cache owner free from meddlesome "do-gooders" that do no good other than for themselves. Visit my caches, but they don't belong to you. They belong to ME, exclusively, because I am responsible for them. You are a visitor, act as such and have the humility to respect your status as a guest -- not a co-owner through forced management.

 

Because you have demonstrated a lack of subjective logic when it comes to trash (bubblegum wraper) versus "lower-value" items (a broken army man), my preference is that you simply trade. Nothing more. Actually, I prefer you don't even visit my caches. Your type of "help" is the sort of thing that hurts the game.

 

This has been explained to you time and again. I am glad you feel justified in not being wanted by many cache owners. If you argue that some cache owners appreciate your help, compile a list and help them. Maybe you and your like-minded friends can leave those of us that don't appreciate you alone by leaving our caches alone or using them in the way they intended. When in doubt as to whether your help is needed, send an e-mail asking -- respect.

 

You have visited only a few caches -- and that's okay. Have you improved them? Have the cache owners asked you to? Are they grateful? Then they are your new friends. Find more. "Improve" my cache -- or even suggest it, and you will not find a friendly response. Sorry about that.

 

You are assigning yourself "rights" that do not exist in the sport. The cache owner is the cache owner -- not the "cache placer" or the "giver of the cache". If you want to give yourself the "right" to clean a cache -- become an owner.

Edited January 4, 2005 by Lemon Fresh Dog

[SpiffJr]

Ummm... do you have a problem because I take responsibility for my cache and control it?

 

I have a problem because your level of desired control over a cache is so extreme that it eclipses someone doing something NICE for the next kid that comes along...

 

...and you couple it with delusions that it will affect the whole sport in a bad way, when trading cache value up in that way is non-detectable.

 

You can NOT tell intent behind a trade... and that is your beef. And it is nuts.

 

You are saying "if you like balloons with a holes in them, and you want to add a dollar, then go ahead" BUT "If you don't like balloons with holes in them and you want to add a dollar, then you may not trade for the balloon", (even though it is a trade that is likely to do the most good).

 

My god man...

 

A disease with NO SYMPTOMS. (except maybe a few more smiles for kids)

 

A paranoia driven by a basic mistrust of your fellow man, who can not be trusted to do good without supervision. And isn't that lovely.

 

dang, dude.

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

Never said anything bout trading. Other than "go for it"

 

If you want to trade something NICE (which I always do) -- more power to you.

If you want to change the container to a friendlier color, move it a little to make it easier for kids to find, take away items you think are no-good without trading (such as a broken or cracked army man)..... hey.... we've been here before.

 

If you want to keep changing your OWN argument -- go ahead. Don't change mine.

 

Ta-ta -- I've started a topic I'm interested in and will not be able to visit you for some time -- nor continue our circular little dance.

 

You may now have the last word ---- which I have no idea will attribute yet another falicious statement of MY belief's rather that clearly state your OWN.

Edited January 4, 2005 by Lemon Fresh Dog

[SpiffJr]

Never said anything bout trading. Other than "go for it"

 

Don't lie... the scenario I offered CLEARLY contained trade. Everyone knows it.

It's in the thread MULTIPLE times.

 

I think you are simply realizing what a cache controling fiend you have become, and are ducking, because I am calling you on it.

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

Never said anything bout trading. Other than "go for it"

 

Don't lie... the scenario I offered CLEARLY contained trade. Everyone knows it.

It's in the thread MULTIPLE times.

 

I think you are simply realizing what a cache controling fiend you have become, and are ducking, because I am calling you on it.

 

I AM a cache-owning fiend -- to the benefit of all. YOU are not.

I've answered your scenario -- I don't CARE about intent -- just trade, problem solved.

 

Last question: Point blank....

 

Have you EVER advocated the removal of an item from a cache, such as a broken army man figure, WITHOUT trading for it? or, are you suggesting that you will ALWAYS trade from a cache.

Edited January 4, 2005 by Lemon Fresh Dog

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

Sorry -- you called me a liar.

 

Now you can have the last word.

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

Hi all...

 

New to caching... but disappointed that of the caches that I have seen, fellow GCers let the contents degrade. I'm sure it's a matter of time before I find a "pretty rock" that someone picked up along the way.

 

My current thought is to Cito the cache as well. Has this been done before?

 

The philosophy, to me, should be like a campsite: leave it better than when you found it.

 

To do that, one can improve something, or remove that which is damaging. Or both!

 

Broken toys, used and filthy stuff that *should* have gone to the land fill actually detract from the cache... and that their removal actually raises the cache value, like removing rotten apples from a pile of good ones.

 

I'd hate to see this hobby turn into a nutty exercise where hundreds of thousands of people are burning fossil fuels to move small anounts of trash around in circles across the globe.

 

Cito the cache. Leave it better than you found it.

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

Nothing about trading here -- original post.

 

Lot's about what is junk and CITO'ing the cache.

The ENTIRE cache? A SUBSET? TRADE involved?

[SpiffJr]

Yes, first post, and then my VERY NEXT POST, to address Dave's concern...

 

...BEFORE YOU EVER POSTED, I added TRADE and asked him if that would work, and a TRADE has ALWAYS BEEN THERE SINCE, and BEFORE YOU STARTED "contributing"... I fashioned a SPECIFIC SCENARIO example to illustrate exactly what I meant, that containes a CLEAR TRADE...

 

The scenario appears MULTIPLE times, ALWAYS with a trade.

 

The responders to it have discussed the nature of the trade at length.

 

At this point there is NO EXCUSE for the LIE that you did not know there was a trade.

 

It is a lie... you know it. I know it.

 

You keep digging a deeper and deeper hole for yourself... hyper-cache control, and now bald-faced lies.

 

Man, dude... not cool. Very, very not cool.

 

Jan 2: 11:06 am

Now... I decide to take this "trashed" half of the cache as a "cache angel", and leave a dollar bill, with the intent of throwing out the stuff I traded for.

 

Thumbs up?

 

Thumbs down?

 

Jan 2, 7:37pm

Now... I decide to take this "trashed" half of the cache as a "cache angel", and leave a dollar bill, with the intent of throwing out the stuff I traded for.

 

Jan 3, 8:36pm

Now... I decide to take this "trashed" half of the cache as a "cache angel", and leave a dollar bill, with the intent of throwing out the stuff I traded for.

 

How many times do you need to read the same scenario before the lies stop?

Edited January 4, 2005 by SpiffJr

[+sbell111]

Dude, please let this thread croak.

 

You might also note that calling other participants liars when they carefully explained ther position may violate the forum's TOS.

Edited January 4, 2005 by sbell111

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

 

My proposal is thus:

 

If a thoughtful, yet admittedly subjective mind, percieves that the value of a cache will clearly improve by the sole act of removing something, then it should be removed.

 

To aid in agreement of how this might work better, we could consider incorporating it into the accepted proposition of a subjective value trade... where I might take a couple of "low value" items for one rather nice one. (An army soldier and a bouncy ball for an LED flashlight, for example).

 

To "ethically" remove things... leave something of some percieved positive value, and remove all things of negative or zero value.

 

Would this scheme work better for you... ?

 

You don't advocate trading, but leave the option open.

I suggest it is not optional.

 

Again. Do not call me a lier.

[SpiffJr]

Dude, please let this thread croak. 

 

You might also note that calling other participants liars when they carefully explained ther position may violate the forum's TOS.

 

Not to worry... all threads end.

 

Don't suggest it takes one to tango by addressing me alone. And where were you when he called me megalomaniacal?

 

I guess you can play favorites if you wish... nothing I can do about that.

 

I'm satisfied that I documented the "falsehood" he was advancing about what was said or not... (hopefully that is an acceptable word).

 

Yes, it got ugly. I know... it happens. To forum members that saw and were bothered by it, please accept my regrets. I hope that those that were bothered left so that only those involved could straighten out a few matters of pride.

 

(BTW, just because somethig is "carefully explained", does not make a lie disappear. Sometimes "careful explanations" are merely an attempt to back out of one. I know if I was caught so plainly in one, I'd be tempted to try to weasel it away...)

 

Again, regrets to those offended.

Edited January 4, 2005 by SpiffJr

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

I also apologize for my participation in this offensive thread.

[+Oakley1975]

I think it is sad that people fight/argue/disagree over such foolish things. Lets take a moment and think about the real problems in this world, the 150,000 people dead from a tragic natural disaster. Terrorism. 9/11. Cancer. Anything like that.

 

I can see everyone's point in this thread. No-one's point is going to be agreed upon by everone else. Someone will post back with disagreements. Disagreements usually lead to anger, for some stupid reason.

 

This is Geocaching. It is fun. Lots of fun things have its bad/disagreeable side. If we waist time arguing over what is right or wrong about anything we do, we are waisting time that we may not have tomorrow.. like the time that run out for the sunami victims. So there you are in spirit, thinking, I wish I had gone geocaching instead of fighting about how to geocache.

 

This may or may not make sense to everyone but it is my opinion. We are all human and react in different ways. This is how I wanted to react to this thread.

 

Thanks for your time!

 

Oakley1975

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

You know what -- you are right. Absolutely correct. Thank you for the perspective. -- I have donated $100 to the Red Cross Relief effort for Tsunami victims. Our government is matching donations.

 

I'm serious. Thanks for the reality check.

[+5¢]

Bump

[+Snoogans]

Bump

AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!

 

*flick* *flick* *flick*

[+The Jester]

WOW! And you attacked me because I pointed out that you rant at people who disagree with you - not an attack of you (though that's what you called it) just an observation of your posts. And then the last couple of pages are filled with rants - you change the intent of peoples posts/explinations by quoting parts of sentences, don't answer simple questions except with complex and off-topic blatherings, and directly insult people. You ask of simple answers to hypothetical questions, but won't give simple answers yourself. Kettle meet black, black meet kettle.

[+The Jester]

...Protect the integrity of the gamepiece.

The owner entrusts you to not damage or jeopardize the cache. Try to ensure the cache is ready for the next finder and is as good or better than you found it.

 

Here is the interestnig thing, Dave...

 

The Geocaching community has just released, just before Christmas, the GeoCaching code.

 

If contains a reminder: "The code is independent of geocaching.com and Groundspeak (i.e. it's our creation, not theirs)."

 

Next, the code says this, specifically, about the players relasionship with the cache:

 

If you exchange trade items, trade kindly: Consider what future finders would like and leave something equal to or better than what you take.

 

...Protect the integrity of the gamepiece.

The owner entrusts you to not damage or jeopardize the cache. Try to ensure the cache is ready for the next finder and is as good or better than you found it.

 

It SPECIFICALLY asks the PLAYER to decide what THEY think OTHER people would want, and to UPGRADE based on that SUBJECTIVE VIEW.

 

It ALSO asks that the player make sure that the cache is READY and in a BETTER condition then when found.

 

These concepts place the on-going health of the contents SQUARELY on the shoulders of the player. It SPECIFICALLY asks the player to trade using their own subjective beliefs about what they think others would like to find. Specifically.

 

It does not say "Be sure to take only things you want to have".

 

Clearly, the writers of the code recognize that the quality of the cache is the burden of the player PRIMARILY. And just as clearly, TRUSTS that PLAYERS will make GOOD, SUBJECTIVE, decisions, about VALUE, to IMPROVE the experience for OTHER PLAYERS.

 

While you, on the other hand, have gone from "leave it better than you found it" to "Don't knowingly trade to better my cache without my permission"

 

How did you get to where you are?

 

Are you *sure* this is the sport for you? I think you (and some others) seek some kind of high level of control over _your_ cache, that is, quite frankly, unrealistic to have.

 

If you are looking to control things to a greater degree... then maybe you are not the type of person that is especially suited to leaving caches.

 

If the gamepiece you contribute is not your "gift" to the game that you give freely for the benefit of all (with their diverse perspectives), then what is it?

You are confusing two different ideas here.

 

1. Trade - dealling with items IN the cache.

 

2. Integrity of the gamepiece - the whole cache, it's placement and concealment, NOT the contents.

 

Don't take a line from one section and apply it to another.

 

Oh, BTW, the second section give ownership of the cache to the placer - "the OWNER entrusts you...".

[+The Jester]

To address some of the other things you've said:

 

Jan 1 8:04

where I might take a couple of "low value" items for one rather nice one. (An army soldier and a bouncy ball for an LED flashlight, for example).

Here's where you equate bouncy balls/army men with low quality items.

 

Jan 1 11:33

Example: An item is located in a cache... and visited, yet not taken, several dozen times... and in the process is dropped, stepped on, rolls down the hill in the mud... but is continually returned to the cache. When, exactly, does it become "real trash"? How destroyed must it be?

First mention of item - no mention of trade, word used was "remove".

 

Jan 2 8:37

There is no actual intent to trade. The intent is to clean. A trade happens only to cover my butt, adhering to basic game 'rules'.

This isn't really a trade and you freely admit that it is a token to "cover my butt".

 

There could be more examples, but it's late. It seems clear to me that you aren't here to disscuss but to preach; or is it that you are trying to get justification for you ideas, while rejecting any viewpoint opposed and shouting any that seem to support.

 

I'll toss out one little episode that happened a little over a year ago. During a Hot Potato Game, the TB was hidden inside a McToy. The next person traded out the entire contents of the cache (pretty much 1 for 1). This raised quite furor, not only about the intent of the game, but the action of clearing out the whole cache. The question wasn't about the trade, but about taking so much. Search the NW forum for details (hot potato II or 2, sorry I don't have the time to do it now). That has some bearing on the current discussion.

[magellan315]

ENOUGH ALREADY!!

 

Can one of the mods lock this thread I think everyone has made their point.