[Az-Geocaching] Caches - Different Strokes For Different Folks
Jeff Moriarty
listserv@azgeocaching.com
Sat, 11 Jan 2003 17:05:34 -0700
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C2B993.A7916550
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Brian,
I appreciate your reply, but you might want to go back and re-read my =
original message. =20
First, I said "attitude of some of the Geocachers in this state", not =
all. I have emailed and met several fellow cachers on the trails, and =
some of them are great. Others not so much.
Second, please note that I was replying directly to Brian LaFrance, not =
Mark, the original poster. It was Brian who suggested deceiving Jeremy =
by changing the cache after posting it, and it pissed me off. I have no =
problem with Adults Caches, but you, Brian, Mark, and I don't have the =
right to override their final decision on the matter. I have no problem =
with Mark's approach, and liked that he posted the cache info in this =
forum for interested parties. In my original post I even said "if you =
disagree with Geocaching.com's decision then discuss it, plead your =
case, etc.," so I don't understand why you felt I said anything to the =
contrary. My argument was simply that if you don't like =
Geocaching.com's policy the one thing you should NOT do is deceive them =
about it.
I stand by my assertation that you should be ashamed of yourself for not =
being a charter member if you have found more than 20 caches. According =
to the Geocaching.com site you have found 205 caches and hidden 3, and =
you have done absolutely nothing to support Geocaching.com for all the =
entertainment you have had. Who do you think pays for their =
electricity? Their computers? Internet connections? They need to pay =
their bills or they will shut down. They are not a charity. This isn't =
about Member Caches. I am a charter member and don't care for the idea, =
either. This is about people using their service and not paying for it. =
So since people like you who frequently use Geocaching.com won't carry =
your share, they are raising the rates for the people who DO pay. So I =
get to pay for your entertainment. Thanks a lot.
Jeff.
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Brian Casteel=20
To: az-geocaching@listserv.azgeocaching.com=20
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Caches - Different Strokes For Different =
Folks
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_0007_01C2B993.A7916550
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 6.00.2800.1126" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I appreciate your reply, but you might =
want to go=20
back and re-read my original message. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>First, I said "attitude of some of =
the=20
Geocachers in this state", not all. I have emailed and met several =
fellow=20
cachers on the trails, and some of them are great. Others not so=20
much.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Second, please note that I was=20
replying directly to Brian LaFrance, not Mark, the original =
poster. =20
It was Brian who suggested deceiving Jeremy by changing the cache after =
posting=20
it, and it pissed me off. I have no problem with Adults Caches, =
but you,=20
Brian, Mark, and I don't have the right to override their final decision =
on the=20
matter. I have no problem with Mark's approach, and liked that he =
posted=20
the cache info in this forum for interested parties. In my =
original=20
post I even said "if you disagree with Geocaching.com's decision=20
then discuss it, plead your case, etc.," so I don't understand why =
you felt=20
I said anything to the contrary. My argument was simply that if =
you don't=20
like Geocaching.com's policy the one thing you should NOT do is deceive =
them=20
about it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I stand by my assertation that you =
should be=20
ashamed of yourself for not being a charter member if you have found =
more than=20
20 caches. According to the Geocaching.com site you have found 205 =
caches=20
and hidden 3, and you have done absolutely nothing to support =
Geocaching.com for=20
all the entertainment you have had. Who do you think pays for =
their=20
electricity? Their computers? Internet connections? =
They need=20
to pay their bills or they will shut down. They are not a =
charity. =20
This isn't about Member Caches. I am a charter member and don't =
care for=20
the idea, either. This is about people using their service and not =
paying=20
for it. So since people like you who frequently use Geocaching.com =
won't=20
carry your share, they are raising the rates for the people who DO =
pay. So=20
I get to pay for your entertainment. Thanks a lot.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Jeff.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dbcasteel@cox.net href=3D"mailto:bcasteel@cox.net">Brian =
Casteel</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
title=3Daz-geocaching@listserv.azgeocaching.com=20
=
href=3D"mailto:az-geocaching@listserv.azgeocaching.com">az-geocaching@lis=
tserv.azgeocaching.com</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, January 11, =
2003 4:10=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Az-Geocaching] =
Caches -=20
Different Strokes For Different Folks</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<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=20
mind) a few months later. To have done so, you would know a =
great number=20
of the cachers in the metro Phoenix area, and not just the 'elite' at =
the top=20
of the list. All I have to say about them is that their need to =
overturn=20
rocks in this state far exceeds mine. :) Say what you will about =
our=20
'attitudes', but know this. The purpose of a mailing list such =
as this=20
is to voice OPINIONS on the sport of geocaching, different caches, or=20
geocachers in general (as long as the tone doesn't change to one that =
implies=20
a personal attack). I would venture to say I didn't appreciate =
your=20
attitude in accusing geocachers in Arizona of having 'attitude' (an =
attitude=20
about what, you 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=20
to allow/deny any caches he sees fit. If by chance we don't =
agree with=20
his reasons, who are you to say that we shouldn't voice our opinions =
on the=20
matter in a forum completely independent (and IMO is far more =
efficient at=20
managing information for quick retrieval) of geocaching.com? As =
for the=20
'right' to circumvent the rules, who's to say that creating a cache =
and=20
linking to it from another place would circumvent anything? =20
Geocaching.com is not the be all end all, and Jeremy has no right to =
govern=20
caching activities in any location. But, he does have the right =
to admin=20
his own site and refuse any caches for the reason he sees fit. =
Granted,=20
if we don't like the reason, hopefully there is room for dialogue to =
work out=20
an alternative or come to some 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=20
don't. Members Only caches have a snooty elitism about them, in =
my=20
opinion. For that reason alone, I will not buy a charter=20
membership. Fortunately for us, we have the Snaptek gurus who =
have put=20
together a very rich pool of information to prepare for caching, which =
as I=20
said before, is more efficient and user friendly than what I've seen =
at=20
geocaching.com. My reasons for not getting one at this time are =
valid=20
and legitimate, and I choose not to share those in this arena. =20
So please do us all a favor and present your ideas a little =
less=20
abrasively in the future. I'm sure mine will not be the only =
message in=20
response to your accusatory toned 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=20
being adult in their response to the denial? I see both sides of =
the=20
situation and support both for different reasons. However, there =
should=20
be a dialogue between them and Jeremy in order to come to a resolution =
that=20
satisfies both. In fact, after barking at them about how they =
acted, it=20
just so happens that they borrowed your recommendation and posted the =
info=20
somewhere independent of geocaching.com. Now I'm confused. =
You=20
vented about something another geocacher did, then offered the =
solution they=20
already 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></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C2B993.A7916550--