Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
One thing to remember is that the official ruling from geocaching.com is:
If you sign the logbook, you can log the cache online.
Of course, there are other sites you can choose to play on, and maybe some of them allow stricter logging requirements. Otherwise, though, if you place your caches on gc.com, you need to accept that some people will choose to bushwack find your 5 star puzzle, some people will stumble upon the final of your 18 stage multi before finding the first stage, some people will drive their car down the bike trail to avoid a hike, and, yes, some people will get help on solving difficult puzzles. Those are the current rules that we play by. I would suggest [email protected] or the national forums if you would like to lobby for a change to the rules.
Personally, we don’t look for puzzle caches that we haven’t solved, or drive down bike trails, but we don’t hesitate to ask for help if we need it. (We also are not averse to ladders or ice bridges.)
No way am I archiving an Illinois cache (although I did archive one just over the border by accident once.) You will notice that the Indiana cache was archived by the owner, not by a reviewer.
Nothing against this event, but this is not an “official” WGA event, even though both hosts are members.
Incidentally, the “future finder” has agreed to replace the travel bug tag with a logbook (the “bin” will count as the container), taking care of a few of the guidelines issues. I believe the GPS usage one will just have to be waived.
In case anyone doesn’t know, marking a cache as ignore will cause it to not show up on searches. This helps a lot if seeing it on your nearest cache search bothers you. If you do a pocket query, be sure to check the “Not on my ignore list” box, or they will still show up there.
If you ever change your mind, just go to your bookmark listings and look for the “Ignore List”, where you can manually delete anything you want back in your searches. It works just like a regular bookmark list. I know some people don’t use the ignore feature for fear that it is “permanent”, so hopefully this will help them.
Yes, this one does not meet the guidelines, but the Groundspeak folks couldn’t resist. You can do that when you own the site.
I hate to tell you this, but I suspect you have a malware infection. These “free” programs to clean up registries, speed up your computer, and even remove malware, which end up requiring payment, are what is referred to as “Blackmailware”. If you pay the company, they will send you a program which temporarily disables the malware they installed, rather than actually cleaning it up. These programs tend to be very ugly, hard to remove, and do very obnoxious things (like rerouting Google results so that only their “programs” come up in the search). Because the programmers are doing this to make money, you will find that they are much more “professional” than the typical virus written by a high school kid. One that I had erased the malware remover I had installed and rerouted the link for the http://www.malwarebytes.org/ website. (I had to get the software on another machine and then use a thumb drive to move the file. Afterwards I threw the thumbdrive away.) Try Malwarebytes and see if it picks up anything and can remove it. If you can’t remove it, you might have to format your drive.
Groundspeak is trying to give you something else to hunt for.
http://www.geocaching.com/adopt
Follow the bouncing ball….
02/02/2010 at 12:25 am in reply to: WGA Banner in a Cache Listing: What Does/Should it mean? #1921317I’m with Brian on this one. I think it shows that the owner endorses the organization, not that the organization endorses the cache. Creating a process to hand out the “WGA Star of Approval” would not be a good idea in my opinion. Even if we could somehow administer it, this would be very subjective and probably lead to losing people who are denied the status. I can just see it now.
The WGA is unfair because they won’t endorse my nano hidden on the grease drum at Cracker Barrel. I’m quitting.
I think the COTM and the Recommended Caches Forum do a good job of promoting good caches without the board or association explicitly being involved.
I would like to see this reopened, but I don’t have a lot of hope that they are willing to talk to us, given what I have been told. It sounds like they won’t even return phone calls.
Perhaps the best approach is for us all to be involved politically with the governor’s race, so that when the new governor is elected, he will count some of us as his friends (no matter who wins). My experience with bureaucrats is that when they are uncooperative, you have to work through their superiors, and the more powerful, the better. Working through your state senators and representatives won’t hurt either.
1. What if GC.com crashed and all the logs disappeared, what would you reaction & action be and WHY??
Wouldn’t be a big deal for me. I suspect I would write a quick macro to repost my logs. Seems a little implausible, however, given the backup technology they employ.
2. Hot topic….Though it is a choice here in WI, to log temp finds in one cache…What if GC.com was set up to not accept more than one find/attendance per cache log…what would your reaction & action be on the matter and why??
As much as I hate to say it, this is almost a implausible as question 1. If they wanted to do this, it would have already been done. That said, it wouldn’t make much difference to me.
3. A repeat question of sorts from last yr….What if you had $5000 of WGA funds, to do what you like …what would you do with it????
At this point, there doesn’t seem to be any pressing need for this sort of expenditure. I would suggest we hold onto the cash until a need becomes apparent.
For me, the top priorities would be making the State Park program happen and be successful, and trying to organize a plan for communicating with parks department and law enforcement.
Just a quick comment on the Indiana game. Indiana does not have a active statewide organization. This puts them at a big disadvantage when trying to coordinate statewide programs.
I really like this program! I think this is the sort of thing our group should do a lot more of, so I would definitely want to be involved in this, regardless of the election. If the DNR rejects this proposal, I would suggest that we counteroffer a plan where we bear all the expenses of the caches (as individuals, not as a group), so that all they need to do is promote the program with their website and a few signs and flyers. In my opinion, the publicity and exposure the WGA would gain as a result of this program would make it a worthwhile endeavor, even if we bear the full cost.
-
AuthorPosts
