[Az-Geocaching] Replying in general

[ShadowAce]

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx
If a cache has been posted and violates any guidelines listed below, you are
encouraged to report it.

 Yep, when you have to walk beyond the 'No trespassing' sign to get the
cache that 20 people already signed, I will send off the email.

On 2/12/07, AZcachemeister <azcachemeister at getnet.com> wrote:
>
> I seriously think the digest format is virtually unusable, and I don't
> know why it's even offered.
> Shari, you really need to switch over...
> I understand your issue, but I'm not about to spend MY life leaning on
> the delete key to clean up every one of my replies.
> I get annoyed enough by posters who have their Email client set to add
> their reply BELOW the original text...
>
> With that out of the way, Shari has distilled the entire discussion down
> rather well.
> I would say, however, that we all need to be the cache police, but we
> need to be as gentle as possible while doing it.
> I have a pending issue with a buried cache, and I'm wrestling with just
> how to handle it. I have pointed out (privately) to the owner that it's
> in violation. If the parks department of Mesa finds out that cachers are
> digging holes in their parks, a whole lot of caches, and caching turf,
> could be eliminated! The owner has yet to respond, and I'm loathed to
> push the SBA button. Other cachers are finding the cache, and
> (apparently) saying nothing, so mine is a lone voice of dissent. It's a
> nice cache, in a nice area, but the technique (buried) is a problem.
> I DO NOT think that just because a cache doesn't make me say WOW, means
> it's a bad cache or that it should be archived.
>
> Shari Guida wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > Maybe I should subscribe to the individual e-mails, and then I wouldn't
> have
> > to spend my life scrolling. So, only because life is all about me, I'm
> > requesting that when you reply, that you delete most (if not all) of the
> > previous posts that tag onto your reply...that most of us have seen
> already.
> >
> > With regards to the micro topic/permission topic/caching police topic
> that's
> > ongoing, here's our input:
> >
> > 1. Micros: love 'em or hate 'em, they're just one kind of cache. If it's
> not
> > your thing, then pocket query to ignore them.
> >
> > 2. Get permission. That's the deal. Period. Not a bad suggestion,
> however,
> > to note who gave permission. If it's a store manager, then say the store
> > manager on x/xx/200x if they don't want their name on the website.
> >
> > 3. Caching police. Play nice. Respect each other's individuality in
> where
> > and how they cache (as long as they abide by #2). You don't like TB
> hotels?
> > Don't go there. You don't like micros? Don't go there. You don't have a
> > boat, diving certification, 4 wheel drive, strong legs, climbing gear,
> don't
> > go there. There are plenty of caches out there that you will like.
> Remember,
> > this is supposed to be fun.
> >
> > IMHO,
> >
> > Shari
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv at azgeocaching.com
> > To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
> > http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
> >
> > Arizona's Geocaching Resource
> > http://www.azgeocaching.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv at azgeocaching.com
> To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
> http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
>
> Arizona's Geocaching Resource
> http://www.azgeocaching.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/pipermail/az-geocaching/attachments/20070212/9ab8f351/attachment.htm