[Az-Geocaching] Caches - Different Strokes For Different Folks
Brian Casteel
listserv@azgeocaching.com
Sat, 11 Jan 2003 16:10:29 -0700
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C2B98B.F58C98E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Jeff,
[soapbox]
You've struck a chord with me, so therefore, I'll bite. First I'll =
start by asking you if you've been to any of the geocaching 'event' =
caches, such as the Potluck Picnic Cache put on by ChicksWithTrucks not =
too long ago, or the one in Tucson (the name slips my mind) a few months =
later. To have done so, you would know a great number of the cachers in =
the metro Phoenix area, and not just the 'elite' at the top of the list. =
All I have to say about them is that their need to overturn rocks in =
this state far exceeds mine. :) Say what you will about our =
'attitudes', but know this. The purpose of a mailing list such as this =
is to voice OPINIONS on the sport of geocaching, different caches, or =
geocachers in general (as long as the tone doesn't change to one that =
implies a personal attack). I would venture to say I didn't appreciate =
your attitude in accusing geocachers in Arizona of having 'attitude' (an =
attitude about what, you failed to specify). =20
Now, I agree that Jeremy is the Admin of geocaching.com, the originating =
point of the sport, and that he has the right to allow/deny any caches =
he sees fit. If by chance we don't agree with his reasons, who are you =
to say that we shouldn't voice our opinions on the matter in a forum =
completely independent (and IMO is far more efficient at managing =
information for quick retrieval) of geocaching.com? As for the 'right' =
to circumvent the rules, who's to say that creating a cache and linking =
to it from another place would circumvent anything? Geocaching.com is =
not the be all end all, and Jeremy has no right to govern caching =
activities in any location. But, he does have the right to admin his =
own site and refuse any caches for the reason he sees fit. Granted, if =
we don't like the reason, hopefully there is room for dialogue to work =
out an alternative or come to some sort of middle ground.
Charter Memberships....
In some ways I support it, and others I don't. Members Only caches have =
a snooty elitism about them, in my opinion. For that reason alone, I =
will not buy a charter membership. Fortunately for us, we have the =
Snaptek gurus who have put together a very rich pool of information to =
prepare for caching, which as I said before, is more efficient and user =
friendly than what I've seen at geocaching.com. My reasons for not =
getting one at this time are valid and legitimate, and I choose not to =
share those in this arena. So please do us all a favor and present your =
ideas a little less abrasively in the future. I'm sure mine will not be =
the only message in response to your accusatory toned argument.
Finally, who says the cache placers were not being adult in their =
response to the denial? I see both sides of the situation and support =
both for different reasons. However, there should be a dialogue between =
them and Jeremy in order to come to a resolution that satisfies both. =
In fact, after barking at them about how they acted, it just so happens =
that they borrowed your recommendation and posted the info somewhere =
independent of geocaching.com. Now I'm confused. You vented about =
something another geocacher did, then offered the solution they already =
implemented.... Ugh
[/soapbox]
Brian
Team A.I.
------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C2B98B.F58C98E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Jeff,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>[soapbox]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You've struck a chord with me, so =
therefore, I'll=20
bite. First I'll start by asking you if you've been to any of the=20
geocaching 'event' caches, such as the Potluck Picnic Cache put on by=20
ChicksWithTrucks not too long ago, or the one in Tucson (the name slips =
my mind)=20
a few months later. To have done so, you would know a great number =
of the=20
cachers in the metro Phoenix area, and not just the 'elite' at the top =
of the=20
list. All I have to say about them is that their need to overturn =
rocks in=20
this state far exceeds mine. :) Say what you will about our =
'attitudes',=20
but know this. The purpose of a mailing list such as this is to =
voice=20
OPINIONS on the sport of geocaching, different caches, or geocachers in =
general=20
(as long as the tone doesn't change to one that implies a personal=20
attack). I would venture to say I didn't appreciate your attitude =
in=20
accusing geocachers in Arizona of having 'attitude' (an attitude about =
what, you=20
failed to specify). </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Now, I agree that Jeremy is the Admin =
of=20
geocaching.com, the originating point of the sport, and that he has the =
right to=20
allow/deny any caches he sees fit. If by chance we don't agree =
with his=20
reasons, who are you to say that we shouldn't voice our opinions on the =
matter=20
in a forum completely independent (and IMO is far more efficient at =
managing=20
information for quick retrieval) of geocaching.com? As for the =
'right' to=20
circumvent the rules, who's to say that creating a cache and linking to =
it from=20
another place would circumvent anything? Geocaching.com is not the =
be all=20
end all, and Jeremy has no right to govern caching activities in any=20
location. But, he does have the right to admin his own site and =
refuse any=20
caches for the reason he sees fit. Granted, if we don't like the =
reason,=20
hopefully there is room for dialogue to work out an alternative or come =
to some=20
sort of middle ground.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Charter Memberships....</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In some ways I support it, and others I =
don't. Members Only caches have a snooty elitism about them, in my =
opinion. For that reason alone, I will not buy a charter =
membership. =20
Fortunately for us, we have the Snaptek gurus who have put together a =
very rich=20
pool of information to prepare for caching, which as I said before, is =
more=20
efficient and user friendly than what I've seen at geocaching.com. =
My=20
reasons for not getting one at this time are valid and legitimate, and I =
choose=20
not to share those in this arena. So please do us all a =
favor=20
and present your ideas a little less abrasively in the future. I'm =
sure=20
mine will not be the only message in response to your accusatory toned=20
argument.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Finally, who says the cache placers =
were not being=20
adult in their response to the denial? I see both sides of the =
situation=20
and support both for different reasons. However, there should be a =
dialogue between them and Jeremy in order to come to a resolution that =
satisfies=20
both. In fact, after barking at them about how they acted, it just =
so=20
happens that they borrowed your recommendation and posted the info =
somewhere=20
independent of geocaching.com. Now I'm confused. You vented =
about=20
something another geocacher did, then offered the solution they already=20
implemented.... Ugh</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>[/soapbox]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Team A.I.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C2B98B.F58C98E0--