Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [CentralTexasGeocachers] What's going to happen if they decide to pick up their toys and go home?

Expand Messages
  • The Diver
    Well then, I guess that I must be weird or something because I actually like virtuals. So I guess if your virtual is associated with a historical marker, then
    Message 1 of 22 , Jan 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Well then, I guess that I must be weird or something because I actually
      like virtuals. So I guess if your virtual is associated with a
      historical marker, then you must attach a magnetic box on the back for a
      log book? To me, virtuals are just points of interest. Take for instance
      my virtual, GCA946 - Golden-cheeked Warbler, I could really care less
      that someone emailed the answers or even emailed the correct answers. To
      me, it's just a POI and I hope they enjoyed the location.

      alan


      On Wed, 2003-01-01 at 01:58, Mark Gessner wrote:
      > The secret guidelines now include:
      >
      > 1) I (the approver) personally don't like virtuals.
      > 2) If you can at all possible place a small container with a logbook,
      > do so, because (see #1).
      > 3) This just isn't unique enough, even though I (the approver) have
      > never even seen the place
      > 4) The rules for virtuals are changing, we (the approving class) are
      > approving less of them because (see #1).
      > 5) I (the approver) am letting this go to my head, I have the power, my
      > game: "Neener neener neener."
      >
      > From now on all my caches are starting out as 50 cal ammo boxes with a
      > logbook inside, hidden in a state park. Immediately after approval,
      > some may secretly turn into virtuals and the coordinates may change
      > --well... more than a little bit. :-)
      >
      > -mark
      > aka lowracer
      >
      > On Wednesday, January 1, 2003, at 01:50 AM, The Diver wrote:
      >
      > > Mark,
      > >
      > > What were the reasons for "The Cheerful Dead" being rejected? Based on
      > > the so called "guidelines", I don't see why it should be rejected?
      > >
      > > alan
      > > aka The Diver
      > >
      > > On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 08:11, Mark Gessner wrote:
      > >> I've been thinking about geocaching.com lately. I've had a perfectly
      > >> legitimate virtual cache (GCB841, "The Cheerful Dead") on hold for a
      > >> week while trying to convince the 'approver' that it is legitimate.
      > >>
      > >> Brings me to the subject point: what happens when the owners of
      > >> geocaching.com decide to pick up their toys and go home? Seems like
      > >> the whole game is played on their board with their pieces, by their
      > >> rules, at their whim.
      > >>
      > >> I guess I'm wondering if there is some way to make this game 'open
      > >> source.' Instead of a central geocaching.com site, have a more
      > >> peer-to-peer arrangement with the cache pages spread out over many
      > >> unrelated servers with perhaps a search engine or yahoo-like portal
      > >> helping to tie them together.
      > >>
      > >> I would be a sad camper indeed if they ever shut down geocaching.com
      > >> (on purpose or by accident). Anyone backing up their cache pages to a
      > >> local machine?
      > >>
      > >> Could we recover if the powers that be got bored of geocaching.com and
      > >> shut 'er down?
      > >>
      > >> -mark
      > >> aka lowracer
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > >> CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > >>
      > >>
      > >
      > >
      > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > > CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > -mark
      >
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
    • Eoghan <eoghan@sharawadgi.com>
      Posted this yesterday but it never showed up in my email box, only the archives, so I m resending it since it seems to have gotten lost somewhere on the way
      Message 2 of 22 , Jan 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Posted this yesterday but it never showed up in my email box, only
        the archives, so I'm resending it since it seems to have gotten lost
        somewhere on the way to distribution.

        --- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "Eoghan <eoghan@s...>"
        <eoghan@s...> wrote:

        > > How long has thie discontent been brewing in the
        > > geocaching ranks?
        >
        > The issue has been hot since the very beginning (about two and a
        half
        > years ago). The first person to suggest the idea of a GPS Stash and
        > the first to hide one (Dave Ulmer) quit geocaching early on, in
        large
        > part because of the debate over a centralized vs. decentralized
        > approach to cache listings.
        >
        > (He also had strong reservations about the environmental effects of
        > the sport and was vocal about his disagreements with
        geocaching.com.
        > For a while the geocaching.com site gave a brief history of the
        sport
        > saying that a 'gentleman' in Washington placed the first cache, but
        > now apparently to avoid the question of WHICH gentleman, the brief
        > history paragraph has been completely removed from the site. I'm
        not
        > sure why else the history of the sport would be deemed unworthy of
        a
        > place on the FAQ.)
        >
        > The debate has also been a central sticking point between the
        > groundspeak team and Ed Hall, the creator of the BEST geocaching
        maps
        > (at Buxley's Geocaching Waypoint,
        http://www.brillig.com/geocaching/)
        >
        > The pro's and con's have been endlessly debated on every forum I've
        > seen. If anyone wants to find out what each side has to say they
        can,
        > with a little work, dig it out of:
        > the groundspeak forums
        > (http://opentopic.groundspeak.com/0/OpenTopic),
        > the old groundspeak forums archive
        > (not all posts migrated to the new forums, not sure how to get to
        > these anymore),
        > the archive of the usenet group alt.rec.geocaching,
        > the original email list "Global Positioning Stash Hunt" archives
        > (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gpsstash/),
        > the Navicache forums
        > (http://navicache.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi),
        > or the Geocaching Worldwide Forums
        > (http://www.geocachingworldwide.com/forum.asp)
        >
        > Questions about centralized vs. decentralized, open source vs.
        > proprietary, single owner vs. organization, cache ownership vs.
        cache
        > stewardship, responsibilities of cache owners and listers,
        > cohesiveness of the data set vs. stale data sets, longevity of data
        > in the hands of a single entity, the legal status of databases,
        > oversight of listings vs. unrestricted listings, single contact
        point
        > for land agencies vs. multiple groups, etc., et al, ad nauseum are
        > all there.
        >
        > Those who've decided that they don't want anything do do with
        > geocaching.com but still enjoy geocaching have typically gone to
        > alt.rec.geocaching to discuss the sport, and post their caches to
        one
        > of the alternate listing sites. By doing so their caches still end
        up
        > on Buxley's maps and are available to most cachers.
        >
        > My opinions on the issues would probably quadruple (at least) the
        > length of this post so I'll just stick a sock in it and keep them
        to
        > myself for now.
        >
        > Glad this conversation is still alive.
        >
        > Cache on!,
        > -Eoghan
      • Will Nienke <nienke@nienke.com>
        Hi, As a newbie geocaching.com admin, I can tell you that there is no specific bias, posted or not, against virtuals. Hang in there folks! Its not as bad as it
        Message 3 of 22 , Jan 6, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi,
          As a newbie geocaching.com admin, I can tell you that there is no
          specific bias, posted or not, against virtuals.

          Hang in there folks! Its not as bad as it seems, and it IS just a
          game! :-)

          9Key

          --- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, The Diver
          <thediver@a...> wrote:
          > Well then, I guess that I must be weird or something because I
          actually
          > like virtuals. So I guess if your virtual is associated with a
          > historical marker, then you must attach a magnetic box on the back
          for a
          > log book? To me, virtuals are just points of interest. Take for
          instance
          > my virtual, GCA946 - Golden-cheeked Warbler, I could really care
          less
          > that someone emailed the answers or even emailed the correct
          answers. To
          > me, it's just a POI and I hope they enjoyed the location.
          >
          > alan
          >
          >
          > On Wed, 2003-01-01 at 01:58, Mark Gessner wrote:
          > > The secret guidelines now include:
          > >
          > > 1) I (the approver) personally don't like virtuals.
          > > 2) If you can at all possible place a small container with a
          logbook,
          > > do so, because (see #1).
          > > 3) This just isn't unique enough, even though I (the approver)
          have
          > > never even seen the place
          > > 4) The rules for virtuals are changing, we (the approving class)
          are
          > > approving less of them because (see #1).
          > > 5) I (the approver) am letting this go to my head, I have the
          power, my
          > > game: "Neener neener neener."
          > >
          > > From now on all my caches are starting out as 50 cal ammo boxes
          with a
          > > logbook inside, hidden in a state park. Immediately after
          approval,
          > > some may secretly turn into virtuals and the coordinates may
          change
          > > --well... more than a little bit. :-)
          > >
          > > -mark
          > > aka lowracer
          > >
          > > On Wednesday, January 1, 2003, at 01:50 AM, The Diver wrote:
          > >
          > > > Mark,
          > > >
          > > > What were the reasons for "The Cheerful Dead" being rejected?
          Based on
          > > > the so called "guidelines", I don't see why it should be
          rejected?
          > > >
          > > > alan
          > > > aka The Diver
          > > >
          > > > On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 08:11, Mark Gessner wrote:
          > > >> I've been thinking about geocaching.com lately. I've had a
          perfectly
          > > >> legitimate virtual cache (GCB841, "The Cheerful Dead") on hold
          for a
          > > >> week while trying to convince the 'approver' that it is
          legitimate.
          > > >>
          > > >> Brings me to the subject point: what happens when the owners of
          > > >> geocaching.com decide to pick up their toys and go home?
          Seems like
          > > >> the whole game is played on their board with their pieces, by
          their
          > > >> rules, at their whim.
          > > >>
          > > >> I guess I'm wondering if there is some way to make this
          game 'open
          > > >> source.' Instead of a central geocaching.com site, have a more
          > > >> peer-to-peer arrangement with the cache pages spread out over
          many
          > > >> unrelated servers with perhaps a search engine or yahoo-like
          portal
          > > >> helping to tie them together.
          > > >>
          > > >> I would be a sad camper indeed if they ever shut down
          geocaching.com
          > > >> (on purpose or by accident). Anyone backing up their cache
          pages to a
          > > >> local machine?
          > > >>
          > > >> Could we recover if the powers that be got bored of
          geocaching.com and
          > > >> shut 'er down?
          > > >>
          > > >> -mark
          > > >> aka lowracer
          > > >>
          > > >>
          > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > > >> CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          > > >>
          > > >>
          > > >>
          > > >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          > > >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          > > >>
          > > >>
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > > > CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > -mark
          > >
          > >
          > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > > CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          > >
          > >
        • David Gahagan
          Will, glad to see you re on board and I know you ll always be fair. The problem seems centered around one paticular admin and virtual caches. If you ve been
          Message 4 of 22 , Jan 7, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Will, glad to see you're on board and I know you'll always be fair. The
            problem seems centered around one paticular admin and virtual caches. If
            you've been on this list long, or have read the archives, you know who I'm
            talking about. Quite frankly, I would like to see him gone for good. In my
            opinion, he brings nothing to the sport. I'll be over at navicache and
            austinexplorer's site from now on. I got nothing for my "Charter
            Membership" but grief and a few poorly constructed features.

            FireCacher


            ----- Original Message -----
            From: <nienke@...>
            To: <CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 9:46 PM
            Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: What's going to happen if they decide
            to pick up their toys and go home?


            > Hi,
            > As a newbie geocaching.com admin, I can tell you that there is no
            > specific bias, posted or not, against virtuals.
            >
            > Hang in there folks! Its not as bad as it seems, and it IS just a
            > game! :-)
            >
            > 9Key
            >
            > --- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, The Diver
            > <thediver@a...> wrote:
            > > Well then, I guess that I must be weird or something because I
            > actually
            > > like virtuals. So I guess if your virtual is associated with a
            > > historical marker, then you must attach a magnetic box on the back
            > for a
            > > log book? To me, virtuals are just points of interest. Take for
            > instance
            > > my virtual, GCA946 - Golden-cheeked Warbler, I could really care
            > less
            > > that someone emailed the answers or even emailed the correct
            > answers. To
            > > me, it's just a POI and I hope they enjoyed the location.
            > >
            > > alan
            > >
            > >
            > > On Wed, 2003-01-01 at 01:58, Mark Gessner wrote:
            > > > The secret guidelines now include:
            > > >
            > > > 1) I (the approver) personally don't like virtuals.
            > > > 2) If you can at all possible place a small container with a
            > logbook,
            > > > do so, because (see #1).
            > > > 3) This just isn't unique enough, even though I (the approver)
            > have
            > > > never even seen the place
            > > > 4) The rules for virtuals are changing, we (the approving class)
            > are
            > > > approving less of them because (see #1).
            > > > 5) I (the approver) am letting this go to my head, I have the
            > power, my
            > > > game: "Neener neener neener."
            > > >
            > > > From now on all my caches are starting out as 50 cal ammo boxes
            > with a
            > > > logbook inside, hidden in a state park. Immediately after
            > approval,
            > > > some may secretly turn into virtuals and the coordinates may
            > change
            > > > --well... more than a little bit. :-)
            > > >
            > > > -mark
            > > > aka lowracer
            > > >
            > > > On Wednesday, January 1, 2003, at 01:50 AM, The Diver wrote:
            > > >
            > > > > Mark,
            > > > >
            > > > > What were the reasons for "The Cheerful Dead" being rejected?
            > Based on
            > > > > the so called "guidelines", I don't see why it should be
            > rejected?
            > > > >
            > > > > alan
            > > > > aka The Diver
            > > > >
            > > > > On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 08:11, Mark Gessner wrote:
            > > > >> I've been thinking about geocaching.com lately. I've had a
            > perfectly
            > > > >> legitimate virtual cache (GCB841, "The Cheerful Dead") on hold
            > for a
            > > > >> week while trying to convince the 'approver' that it is
            > legitimate.
            > > > >>
            > > > >> Brings me to the subject point: what happens when the owners of
            > > > >> geocaching.com decide to pick up their toys and go home?
            > Seems like
            > > > >> the whole game is played on their board with their pieces, by
            > their
            > > > >> rules, at their whim.
            > > > >>
            > > > >> I guess I'm wondering if there is some way to make this
            > game 'open
            > > > >> source.' Instead of a central geocaching.com site, have a more
            > > > >> peer-to-peer arrangement with the cache pages spread out over
            > many
            > > > >> unrelated servers with perhaps a search engine or yahoo-like
            > portal
            > > > >> helping to tie them together.
            > > > >>
            > > > >> I would be a sad camper indeed if they ever shut down
            > geocaching.com
            > > > >> (on purpose or by accident). Anyone backing up their cache
            > pages to a
            > > > >> local machine?
            > > > >>
            > > > >> Could we recover if the powers that be got bored of
            > geocaching.com and
            > > > >> shut 'er down?
            > > > >>
            > > > >> -mark
            > > > >> aka lowracer
            > > > >>
            > > > >>
            > > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > > > >> CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            > > > >>
            > > > >>
            > > > >>
            > > > >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            > > > >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            > > > >>
            > > > >>
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > > > > CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > -mark
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > > > CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            > > >
            > > >
            >
            >
            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > CentralTexasGeocachers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.