New Ngs Benchmark Groundspeak Forum

[evenfall]

Hey All,

 

I have a proposal which I hope many of you, both Benchmark Hunters and Geocachers, who are both either active in the forums as a poster or a lurker will feel is a great idea. It is my hope that you please take a moment to weigh in with your thoughts on this topic.

 

For some time now I have been aware of the different kinds of ways we all can enjoy the hobby of Benchmark Hunting. Though Groundspeak and Tennessee Geocacher, as the forum moderator, have been very hands off regarding the wide range of discussion that occur in this forum, I have been feeling we as an online community could perhaps be a bit better served if there was an additional forum added for the purpose of discussing the recovery of these survey markers to the NGS.

 

First, though this forum is currently handling all things Benchmarking, we have over time evolved into a group who enjoys playing this game in more than one way. In the most basic of all ways, there is the Gamer, who wants to find benchmarks and claim them here on the site. There are some who just want the Game, and are uncomfortable with the discussions about recovering these to the NGS. Sometimes they have questions about how to better play the game but are uncomfortable about a pressure they perceive here to report to NGS and the high level of accuracy and scrutiny required in doing this as well as it needs to be done.

 

Second there are the people who enjoy recovery to the NGS, just as they enjoy the game as well but want to play at the level that the high scrutiny and different recovery rules of the NGS require.

 

Because of the differences in the way we can play this game of benchmark hunting, it seems a good fit to have both a forum for the game, and a forum for those who prefer doing NGS reporting in addition to playing the game.

 

I could go on with positive reasons to add an additional forum, but I would really like to see what others think. Please feel free to weigh in on this Topic. The Hope Is that Perhaps Jeremy will see our support for this Idea, and create such a forum.

 

Thank you for your time.

 

Rob

[+Limax]

Rob -

I haven't been around for almost a year, so I may be missing something, but weren't there members of the NGS reading these posts on a regular basis at one point? Are we talking about a new forum somewhere else other than Groundspeak, or are are trying to facilitate a better way of communicating with the NGS?

 

Sorry, but your post left me very confused...

[+PFF]

I agree that some non-reporting participants might be tired of reading about the subject. On the other hand, leaving it in the present forum might encourage new members to take this additional step. (That's how I found out about it.)

 

Perhaps we could have a gentlemen's agreement that the subject of every new thread related to NOAA/NGS reporting will contain "NGS" as the opening characters of the subject line.

 

Yes, NGS reporting will creep into other threads. But then, it will do that, anyway, another forum notwithstanding.

 

-Paul-

[evenfall]

Limax,

 

What I am proposing is that a forum be created here at Geocaching for the purposes of discussing the recovery efforts dedicated to finding and reporting the Survey Markers to the NGS. A hopeful way of keeping most people happy most of the time.

 

The come and go of Hunting for Survey Markers often becomes technically involved, especially when trying to do so with the desire to report the findings to the National Geodetic Survey, which is the agency that monumented these Markers and keeps the database for them. A problem often arises between two camps here in this forum. There are those who want this forum to be about the game of hunting Benchmarks, and only for the purpose of playing the game here at Geocaching. They would prefer that the discussion of NGS recovery take place elsewhere or perhaps not at all. Some have come forth and made statements that they would prefer this forum be only for the purposes of playing the Game, and Not about NGS recovery. Others have claimed that the Purists are too technical and are too imposing with their scrutiny so as to take away from the aspects of what they want from the game. Simply put, some just want to enjoy the game without the technical discussions. I do not blame them for their feeling. Different strokes for different folks, but with only one place for us all to come together here at Geocaching, we must coexist.

 

In the other camp are those who have many questions which require answers which go into the technical nature of surveying and other similar concepts in order to play the game they want to, which is to report what they find to the NGS so that the Database can be updated. The Updates to the data that the NGS keeps is largely maintained on a volunteer basis by those who choose to do so.

 

There is probably a third camp who is not bothered either way and think it is all good. Some may actually feel strongly either way or feel both, some may evolve from one to another or both or neither. My Hope is to become more accommodating and inclusive of all if we can, and if Jeremy agrees. As much fun as possible for all, no matter their brand of fun.

 

Communication with the NGS is already happening here in this forum. This proposal would not facilitate this more so than now as the NGS is already very welcome here, but it would facilitate all who want to talk tech, and those who do not, by making the topic more specific. What I am proposing would make some of the discussion in this forum more Topic Centric. Those who just want to play the Geocaching Game version of Benchmark hunting would have a forum which is set forth for the purposes of discussing the Hunts, showing the pictures and congratulating others on cool finds, and hopefully would attract people by the fun aspects of the hobby. Hopefully people not interested in NGS recovery would not feel put upon by those who love to do it. The New Forum, Hopefully would be hosted Here at Geocaching and would be for the hobbyist who wants to take the game further into the technical aspects of hunting, finding, problem solving, error reporting and the general discussion of the Surveying Aspects of these monuments along with the liaison with NGS so as to go deep and discuss the matters we do without it becoming a bother or a drain of those who just want to play a game. Of course the photos and the congratulations would also be welcome in either forum but the deep discussions towards NGS recovery would be most welcome in one forum more than the other.

 

As things currently are, the potential for a newcomer to the hobby to ask a simple question about the game is sometimes misinterpreted and the answers range from simple answers to an involved discussion about how to recover the mark to the NGS and is interpreted as that they ought to. I contend that there is no ought to, yet in the eyes of some beholders I am told they feel put upon. I am looking for a way to relieve this feeling and promote the fun for all the ways we all enjoy the hunt here. If such a clear way of asking were currently possible, then if a person were to be in the NGS Forum, they are looking specifically for an technical answer, and those in the Benchmark game forum would answer questions about playing the game, geocaching style. It would clear up the question as to the type it is and the kind of answer desired. Of course all people would be welcome to post in all the forums and participate in any way, it would just be more clear to all what in fact they should expect to be discussing in the appropriate forum for the questions at hand. I am looking for a way to accommodate both Camps and a way to give the NGS recoverers a Forum similar to that which was given the USGS National Map. I feel the recovery efforts geocachers make to the NGS is important, and merits it's own space. I know the NGS greatly appreciates the geocaching efforts. I hope others share this feeling. There is a good deal more discussion about NGS recovery here at Geocaching than there is for the USGS National Map.

 

For the most part, things run pretty smoothly here, and yet there are ways we could run smoother. it is a simple matter for Jeremy to create a new forum, and he recently demonstrated this by starting a special forum for the USGS National map, a topic which had been formerly being discussed in this Forum Space. He has also started Special Forums for other Topics as the need has arisen over time. The NGS and their Station Data are what enable us to play this game, and it seems fitting to have a space to discuss the return of the favor, by those who elect to report what they find or not to the NGS. The recovery to NGS is a different animal than the game, and cross exposure to both sides of the game will still happen, in fact it is really symbiotic, you almost have to choose not to participate in some ways just as much as choosing to. Both ways are hand in hand yet at the same time, elective. My Proposal is not one which would divide us so much as it would just more clearly define that which we are discussing as based on the expectations of what we want to talk about. Game or NGS Recovery. It would remove animosity and direct the topical content towards the desired topic without the intermixing of the two, which has been shown to cause tension and confusion amongst some. Though it would be a separate place, most of us would likely post in both forums and direct the more technical questions to the new forum, and I feel most people would find the forum on their own, as it would likely be on the forum list and found by all who frequent the list as it is. That is how most people find all the forums anyway.

 

I hope this helps clarify my thoughts and please feel free to ask any other question that you feel I may not have adequately answered. Just as importantly, I posted this topic as a way of finding out if there are others who feel as I do and would support having a new, separate forum created here at Groundspeak/geocaching, for the purposes of discussing the recovery of survey markers to the NGS and Technical Survey talk in general. So please, If you feel in support of my proposal, feel free to post your support in the thread. If you don't then please feel free to add your comments as well. Thanks!

 

Rob

[+Limax]

Okay, evenfall... that makes more sense to me. For the record, I'm someone who falls into that third category. I've hunted a couple of times for benchmarks unsuccessfully, due to lack of time, etc. I got a digital camera for my birthday last year for the sole purpose of finding benchmarks. (It's since been taken over by my wife, but that's a different story ) All I can say is that I hope your proposal makes the rest of the camps happy.

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Hopefully, we here in the southwest will get a new "regional" forum separate from California, first.

 

What I have advocated all along is Quite Simple...... Wait on the forum poster to ask for help with NGS logging, before starting another book length response about how they should be doing it.

 

The biggest problem I see in ALL forums is the number of people who can not read a simple question and give a simple answer, or the don't even answer the question asked, but go off on a tangent.

 

When people first get into hunting benchmarks it should Not be pressed about filing a report to the NGS. Give them time to learn what benchmark hunting is all about first, then when they ask for more info go ahead and supply it.

 

Do we really want to end up with the same reputation as the POWER SQUADRON?

 

How many people find the reference mark and claim a find for the station? When you consider how many just pop in and out of the forums only occasionally and only get part of the needed info and then log with the NGS, it is easy to see another Power Squadron happening.

 

We don't need another forum, what we do need is an understanding that most newbies don't need to be overwhelmed right out of the gate. Try giving them some time to adjust to the game and let them decide when they are ready for more information & how much information they want.

 

John

[+BilboB]

I for one would like to see it remain status quo. I get the feeling you want to elevate this "game" to a purist discussion group, and a hobby group. I dont think that this foum should evolve like that. I enjoy all the postings, either in a technical nature, or simply "asking a dumb question" type. If you dont have anything to say...dont say it. I treat my responses like conversational snippets. They may not have any relevance, but that is just me. There are also many threads I dont touch with a response, but I still read through it in its entirety. Usually these are the ones with disertational responses about technogeek subjects, but I am not a surveyor, nor ever will I be, but I do like the discussions none the less.

[+seventhings]

Rob, et. al.

 

I am tempted to agree with you but, in the end, I don't. As we have seen the benchmark hunting community array itself along a continuum ranging from the very serious to the barely credible, the idea of separate fora for NGSers and NonNGSers is very appealing. The problem I see, however, is that the separation may allow the less careful to become even, well, less careful. NOTE VERY VERY WELL: I am NOT suggesting that NGS non-reporters can't be or aren't among the very serious. There are, we all know, some very serious (read reliable, accurate, etc.) benchmark hunters who don't give a hoot for NGS reporting. I AM suggesting that if we had two fora, the less careful would tend to be in the "Not NGS" camp (along with some very serious hunters) where, due to the absence of technical discussion, they would stagnate. The non-serious portion of the NonNGS group may well become our equivalent of the Power Squadron, despite the socialization efforts of the very serious among them. For that, we would all be unhappy.

 

Instead, I tend to agree with John2oldfart when he says we (NGS reporters)should not leap to the "hypothetical NAD83 1992.1234 geoid Deb Brown" discussion when some newbie asks "What's a reference mark?". I admit that I am as quilty as anyone on that count, so I'll stop it. Mostly, probably.

 

Will

[+Harry Dolphin]

Ouch, Seventhings, and Evenfall, you're givng me a headache.

I guess that my first question would be whether there are enough participants in this field to be willing to split them into two groups. Yes, there are the game players, and there are the purists. Yes, I'm a game player. I logged one find and two DNFs today.

Trenton State Capitol Dome

Am I sure that it is the actual dome of the state capitol? I read enough to be pretty sure that it is.

Then we have KV6035. From the game plyer's point of view, this is probably long gone. Might be buried under the brick sidewalk, or, more likely. was dug up during construction. I'm not going to dig up the sidewalk looking. DNF.

The third is also a DNF. KV6034

The question here is whether we are game-players, or follow-up surveyors? Or both?

I have seen enough stations that have not been reported since 1932 to woder if anyone really cares. Ad I've found a few that are not on this list that we work from.

No, I have not gone to the trouble to report as missing some tht are obviously long gone. The Wor-TV Mast for one example.

I'm here playing a game.

I do not see that there are enough of us to split this group into two.

[+Black Dog Trackers]

I am not in favor of this idea. I don't really see that there are two entirely separate groups.

 

My personal situation, for instance, is that I have reported only one mark to the NGS. I have no particular reason for not reporting to the NGS, other than figuring that I'll do it when I feel ready. I don't consider myself a 'game player' at all. I take searching for benchmarks seriously. I figure that surveyors can search the Geocaching site for information as they can search the NGS site for information - via the web.

 

I don't understand the need to avoid participating in a forum among people who are interested in hunting benchmarks, but not as seriously as some would like, or not reporting their finds to the NGS for whatever reason, or are in a process of getting there.

 

If one's goal is to promote more and better reporting to the NGS, making a separate forum to discuss it is absolutely the worst way of achieving it.

[evenfall]

Hi Harry,

 

This isn't about giving headaches, it is more about solving one. There are enough people to make a split at any level if all who use this forum cannot seem to share the space they have been given. The purists and game players are both within their rights to play the game the way they like, with respect to the rules which have been set forth in the FAQ. It seems a shame that some people choose not to hunt benchmarks because they feel the rules and scrutiny is more than they feel is acceptable. I was thinking, how could we accommodate them too? If we decide that we want to share the space we have then the onus is on everyone to do exactly that, and from what I am seeing that is the consensus. I am happy to see it. Respect for each other's desire to take this game to the level each enjoys is something I feel I should respect, and I hope others feel as I do. If this thread serves to refocus us all on the needs for that then it is serving us well. If this respect rules the day then there is probably no need for a second Forum. Either way, I hope to continue to see others weigh in on the proposal.

 

From what you say, it looks to me like you have a good grasp as to what is what and how to play. Some of the methods used to determine a find often have to be taken on a case by case basis. But some things are like monopoly, if you roll a five then you get to advance 5 places. If you can afford the property, you may purchase it. Some times you have to take a chance card. Same sort of rule system here. If anyone isn't sure, the forum is a great place to flesh it all out. As long as we follow the guidelines here we have a basis for which we can compare our scores to one another. How else can a basic playing field exist and be level?

 

No one here is a follow up Surveyor. There is no such thing. Some people happen to work in that profession but that is of no consequence. If you want to play in the way you enjoy, Play. That is how things work best. We just need to be mindful of the guidlines. If others want to play harder or at another level, that is up to them. Some Never Benchmark Hunt and some never Geocache and then there is everyone in between. If all want to discuss all the variations, share the photos, congratulate each other, and answer all the myriad questions, that is why the Forum is here. It doesn't matter if you are a purist or a weekend warrior, a game lover or a person who wants to send what they find to a higher level. In other words, it is all good.

 

If you find or don't find survey markers that have not been reported since 1932, it simply means that nobody has reported them yet. That is all it means. Yes the agency that placed them does care and would love an update if someone wants to send it. If no one does, then no one does. You could be that person if you like, or not. No biggie, Your option.

 

John,

 

You make a good point on the Power Squadron and No I don't think we are even close. My purpose has never been to rankle you, but it does take putting the info out there so people can ask questions. Information and answering questions for those who do want to know. Even those who do not ask learn something if they want. Unfortunately this subject isn't always simple. This is part of how people become proficient at anything. Even those who just want to hunt can become better at hunting from reading some of the more technical discussions. No matter where we go, There we are, at whatever level.

 

One way we can avoid becoming like a Power Squadron, though it isn't really fair to be disrespectful of their public service, is to be clear about how to go about this. For instance we can use NAD 83 and WGS 84 as an example. On a Consumer Grade GPS it does not seem to make much difference between these two particular datum. But there is about a Meter of difference in a basic way, and there is a lot of fine tuning to NAD 83 in this country. Since in places there could be more than a 1 meter difference, just because one meter never seems to show some people a difference at the consumer grade, and it may well be fine, the more accurate we get the further from the actual spot we become. What if consumer grade GPS becomes more accurate at the price point they sell it? Then we will reveal the hidden meter and the philosophy will no longer be valid. If we change to yet another datum we can become even further off course the further we go. Especially if we believe the datum shift doesn't matter, Like NAD 83 and WGS 84 are close eh? So any other Datum ought to work too? That could happen in some people's thinking. I have found a lost hiker or two. There are plenty of Datum whose shift is recognizable with consumer grade gear. With respect to both you, and the science that is available, what is the harm in just teaching people that it is safest to follow best practices even if it is just a bit more hassle? Sure Many People know this. Many Many Do Not.

 

What I mean is that you are right, you can use the default WGS 84 to play the game and you should be fine. It will probably get you close enough to find what is being hunted. It ends there though. But many of these markers are part of how NAD 83 is determined and fixed to the ground, and that is something a player who wants to take the game to a higher level should know. WGS 84 and NAD 83 are different and belong to two different Agencies. They are both currently in use. One is not superseding the other. One is basically for the entire world Primarily for use by the US Military and accurized by various countries in their respective regions, sometimes. The other is for specific and accurized for use in the USA.

 

Now should we, if we choose to do so, send WGS 84 Datum Scaled Mark improvements to the NGS? Well Not really. In fact, let me just say no. I realize you would not ask for this to happen either. That is not serving the purpose well if we do that, but it could happen if we don't know any better. If people want to play at that level they should know why it is important some things are done in certain ways or it seems to become it's own undoing. The age old advice is that we should use the posted Datum, for the map or other wise is still good advice. Establish the bad habits of mixing Datums is not a good one. Most of these Survey markers were established during NAD 27 or before, they have been converted so to speak, to NAD 83. You are right in the sense that for a game here this difference isn't much difference but that doesn't outmode the old advice. I understand your desire to simplify some things and have them be more about the game and fun, and I will give you that it is a good thing you want. But if we can teach and establish good orienteering practices from the very beginning, even if it is a bit more difficult, most people will come out ahead anyway.

 

In the most important sense, I am not worried about people who know the difference, I am hoping to help the ones who do not. People can fudge on what they want to as long as they know the differences. It does not seem right (to me) to fudge up front when teaching them. Some of this stuff is not easy to get ones mind around and everyone is different. In the end not knowing the difference on a Datum is just as you say, as reckless as asking someone to recover stations to the NGS before they know the ins and outs. If we do it right we all find a balance somewhere along the way. Again, I am just talking about this as a for instance and I am not cheerleading for NGS recovery.

 

Will,

 

I enjoyed your thoughts and feel you did your thinking well. Thanks for that. The one forum does help keep everyone honest and the playing field level. I also give credit to John for the point he raised. There is Much Zeal to play in the forum and I see that as a good thing.

 

I have come across many posts like John pointed out and I was well down the list of posters to the thread. After reading my way to the bottom I often saw a lot of answers based on the way each person likes to Benchmark hunt for themselves, which may not have always been a real basic answer. In fact it is often a lot of different answers. John and Shirley have always been big advocates for helping the beginners and I think it is great. I sense they want to keep basic with basic and that is understandable.

 

I have attempted on more than one occasion to cumulatively hash out what it all meant so that when the person who asked checked in for the answer they would have something, or at least I hoped something that would be the answer they wanted as well as how the other things people added might relate to the basic answer. Sometimes I have even contrasted comparisons if I thought it would help. I don't do this on every thread on the board, nor most of them, but I like to play too, and I enjoy helping just as much as we all do. I am sure I haven't always done this right or as well as I could have, and there are times we all probably feel we could have done something differently, but I am also sure that people's hearts are in the right place.

 

We are all different personalities but that is what makes the Forum interesting. Things and questions go in cycles, the uninitiated don't see it but those who are familiar with what has already been said, know. It isn't about losing one's religion, we all have to allow things to evolve as they will and try to be ok with however it happens.

 

Thanks Guys,

 

Rob

Edited January 17, 2005 by evenfall

[+Mastifflover]

Let me give you the perspective of a newbie benchmark hunter. I reside and probably always will be in the just playing a game camp. I would not like to see this forum split. While some of the more technical discussions make my head swim I do learn some things from time to time from them. There was a recent discussion that I think illustrates the point that John is trying to make. It had to do with recording a find of a benchmark that the poster took a picture of from a couple of floors up on the Empire State Building. The poster seemed to be obviously from the playing a game camp and was exited about a find. I believe that he had no desire whatsoever to ever report this to the NGS. While not technically accurate because he saw the plaque over where the actual mark would be he did not indeed view the actual mark which was more than likely still there but covered with concrete. Myself and other "game player" benchmark hunters would have been quick to congratulate him as this is as close to viewing the actual mark as he or anyone else would ever get. The "purists" which I do not intend as a derogatory title were very quick to point out to him how terribly wrong he was to claim a find for this mark. Exitement effectively squelched. This is where I believe that some of the percieved intimidation comes from. I believe that we can co-exist in this forum together but just keep in mind that some of us are just playing a game.

[holograph]

I'll add my $.02 since it sounds like this thread is an informal poll. I'm like Mastifflover, I would regret the division of the group into pros and amateurs. I like the technical discussions, but I don't feel bound to follow professional standards. From what I see in the gallery, there are a lot of BM'ers out there who never participate in the forum, and a lot of them play by their own rules. After all, we go out, mostly alone, motivated by whatever turns us on, to find a small piece of metal or scratch on a rock. After that, we each do what we want, log or not, photograph or not, report to NGS or not.

 

There are no enforcable rules for the game, just recommendations and guidelines. Some people seem to like the competitive aspect of it and want firm rules to make the scorekeeping fair -- I'm not one, I just go out to get out and see what I find. Not matter what, it's an honor system. For me, it's fun to post photos and go on record in GeoCaching, and it's even fun to occasionally report a difficult find to NGS to make it easier for some pro who might make use of it, or to update a 70 year old record. NGS rules are NGS rules, and if I want to report a recovery to them, I accept their rules.

 

On the other hand, posting to Geocaching seems more like keeping a scrapbook or diary. I don't take it too seriously -- all I try to do is keep from misleading another gamer who may follow me; using WG84 won't hurt any gamer using NAD83, and vice versa. I hope the forum stays diverse and interesting, but of course, if the Pros find us amateurs' discussions boring or annoying, I can understand their desire for a separate forum undiluted by uninformed opinion.

[ArtMan]

I guess I'll weigh in, too. And I lean toward not establishing the proposed new forum.

 

Lately I've been playing around with and trying to teach myself Linux. (If you don't know Linux, it's a free, open-source operating system; think of it as an alternative to Microsoft Windows.) Books and online material written by and often geared to higher-level users often makes this newbie's head swim, as Mastifflover put it. But how else to learn?

 

I think it's the same way here. We were all newbies once. I starting out knowing nothing about benchmarks, GPS and surveying. Now, thanks in great part to the contributions of professionals and knowledgeable amateurs posting here, I know a lot more. And I visit this forum regularly because I know I still have more to learn. (And by now, I would like to think I also have some knowledge to share.)

 

Most casual benchmarkers will never visit this forum, just like I rarely visit the caching forums (or fora for you purists out there!). I suspect even fewer know that they can file a report with NGS; given the relatively small number of reports that seem to be made by the experienced benchmarkers who are regulars here, I don't think there is any serious risk that the NGS database will be polluted by reports by inept but well-meaning geocachers. I'm not saying it can't happen - it probably has already. But I think the best way to provide guidance to the relatively inexperienced benchmarker is a one-stop forum where a broad range of information is on offer.

 

-ArtMan-

Edited January 17, 2005 by ArtMan

[+JoGPS]

I have found a few benchmarks and a few caches along the way, even did a quad for National Map Corp., but its still a game.

 

ITS STILL A GAME

 

Will have to agree with some of the above posters that some folks will get turned off even thinking they should be up dating to the NGS or belittled if they don‘t, not me ,it’s a game.

 

We are not trained at finding or logging benchmarks ( well most of us ) If the NGS thinks we are doing a great job let them come to this web site and retrieve the information for their site.

 

How about the NGS setting up another web site ( or making theirs as easy as this one ) for those that want to update and give some instruction on how to it, but this site is where I come to play games, if I wanted another non paying job, would get one. This is a game leave it that way here ……………… JOE

[+coloradojeep]

I have found a few benchmarks and a few caches along the way, even did a quad for National Map Corp., but its still a game.

 

ITS STILL A GAME

 

Will have to agree with some of the above posters that some folks will get turned off even thinking they should be up dating to the NGS or belittled if they don‘t, not me ,it’s a game.

 

We are not trained at finding or logging benchmarks ( well most of us ) If the NGS thinks we are doing a great job let them come to this web site and retrieve the information for their site.

 

How about the NGS setting up another web site ( or making theirs as easy as this one ) for those that want to update and give some instruction on how to it, but this site is where I come to play games, if I wanted another non paying job, would get one. This is a game leave it that way here ……………… JOE

I agree. I'm just here for the fun of it. If the NGS want to cut me a check then it would be a different story.

[evenfall]

Well put by all and thanks.

 

The basis for my idea came from the people who had been Vocally Against the Technical Discussions in the past. It was not an attempt to get the surveyors a place to chat, as we generally do not chat amongst ourselves as it is. I doubt it would start in a new forum. The thought was that if there was a separate place for the Technical Discussions, Those who wanted the just the game would be less bothered. They would have a place to play without the technical discussions that they wished Perhaps it would persuade others who are put off by the technical nature and the long learning curve to join in anyway. Some had taken their ball and went home and told us as much. My hope was to find a way to include them.

 

It is reasonably unanimous that all want the forum to continue to be shared. Two forums would have better defined the scope of discussion taking place and would have offered a channel changer for those who did not want to participate in something they didn't want to. NGS recovery, whether anyone likes it or not is an option here, it is in the FAQ, and it is equally open for discussion as anything else. It is a way some people do play the game and whether everyone likes that or not, it is time to accept it. John's point concerning overwhelming a newcomer with more than a simple answer is a good one and we should remain mindful of this, thanks John.

 

Going forward this choice to keep things as they are means that ALL people will need to be tolerant of all discussion, technical or not. Yes this IS a Game and since there are variations to the way it can be played, everyone is agreeing to be tolerant of all of it. I would not make light of this point if it had not been a bone of contention in the recent past. This means we put the sharp elbows away and accept it, No more griping, sniping, and innuendoes, because in accordance with the FAQ, it is all considered on Topic. It is not all about the way some people want to play and the others don't matter. The rules here are not only by TPTB, but with the input from member benchmark hunters as well. Things work best when we follow them. If the rule is you must be able to read the Disc, then it is what it is. If you do not like scrutiny or being made to feel like a cheater by a purist, do not subject yourself to the scrutiny, or Better yet, just follow the rule and no one will take a dim view of that sort of Game Play.

 

Over time, there have been some who have asked if they planned to submit their finds to the NGS, It was not always asked by Surveyors. In fact it was generally not any of the surveyors at all. It is simply an option, a choice. It does seem however to have become a point of contention for some. I am sure the question was asked in a should sort of way by those who like playing the way they like playing and not meant to spread ill will. it is instructive to remember that it is optional to report to the NGS what one finds, or not, and some people do, some even want to. I have not seen any of them coming out against playing a game. They play it too. I hope those who feel so offended can get over it.

 

In closing, we should remember that this is what we collectively seem to want so I hope to see things go smoothly into the future. I will now close this thread as this is not about Bashing the NGS nor speaking about them in a disparaging way. That is not an opinion I asked for and not something I intend to be part of. My fear is that it could digress to that so we'll just avoid that altogether. As for the NGS and to their credit, They have not asked anyone here for, nor expected from anyone, a single thing.

 

And Joe, I really will have to take some of what you said with a grain of salt since you do have custom magnetic survey mark recovery sign and a light bar on your SUV so you can hunt Benchmarks! ;-D

 

Again, My email box is available if anyone has anything else or any thing further.

 

Best regards to all,

 

Rob