Appropiate Cache site?

What I am saying is that gpsfun has already known about this since May 22 and has been following it since then. It's now August and it's getting rehashed times two; you have less gotten GPSFUN involved than you have actually second guessed him.

E-mails or not; if I was that geocacher, I would certainly be 'ignoring' some of the comments I've been reading, lest I go and think that there are way too many ignorant people in Maine.

If ANY of you are thinking that you don't have a friend, child, co-worker or a fellow geocacher among you that is gay or lesbian, it's time to dig yourself out of the 1700's!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeoMaine

What I am saying is that gpsfun has already known about this since May 22 and has been following it since then. It's now August and it's getting rehashed times two; you have less gotten GPSFUN involved than you have actually second guessed him.

E-mails or not; if I was that geocacher, I would certainly be 'ignoring' some of the comments I've been reading, lest I go and think that there are way too many ignorant people in Maine.

If ANY of you are thinking that you don't have a friend, child, co-worker or a fellow geocacher among you that is gay or lesbian, it's time to dig yourself out of the 1700's!

---

Wake up and smell the roses here GeoMaine. This is not about being gay. No one is bashing gay people. It is about doing indecent things at this particular rest stop. You seem to be reading between the lines and find hidden messages that are not there.

AGAIN... this is not about someone having lesbian or gay friends, family or whatnot, it's the fact of the matter of what goes on here and people that don't want to be around these sexual acts in the woods. It's not bashing gays and lesbians, but do you see straight people going at it in the woods when you are looking for a cache? No.
You probably don't have kids, but one would imagine you wouldn't want your kids looking for a cache and saying "Look dad!" Think outside the box for a change.
Don't worry about GPSFUN, he is old enough to take care of himself.
Who are you calling ignorant, your not even reading whats going on here are you?

Rick, you probably should go through all of the posts and actually READ them (not just skim them) before you make a blanket statement like that? Not just the last page. ALL of them. I have and there are many examples.

Better yet, just delete both my posts, it's immediately obvious I'm not ever going to be welcome here with an opinion that isn't shared by the masses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeoMaine

Rick, you probably should go through all of the posts and actually READ them (not just skim them) before you make a blanket statement like that? Not just the last page. ALL of them. I have and there are many examples.

Better yet, just delete both my posts, it's immediately obvious I'm not ever going to be welcome here with an opinion that isn't shared by the masses.

---

Enough of this. I am not going to keep this going. I will leave your posts up. I will not reply anymore. It seems like you are just trying to lead me on and I fell victim to it for a bit but I am not going to fall for it again. Ta Ta

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_Cyr

You probably don't have kids, but one would imagine you wouldn't want your kids looking for a cache and saying "Look dad!"

---

Quite the assumption but honestly, I'm very much used to it. Actually, I do have a daughter. She's six. I already have to explain all too many things to her, us surprising a couple that are having sex on said cache trail would honestly NOT be on that list I want to have to get to anytime soon. In fact, I'm pretty good with never. : )

As to what that couple was actually comprised of? That's the part that wouldn't bother me in the least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brdad

I feel more against these caches for the most part, and then on the other hand I wonder if it's any different than other dangerous caches. There are several caches in Central Park, NYC for one (I know a geocaching cop who has taken people to get these at night). And then there are the rock climbing caches, deep water hydro caches, and others. But still, I'd rather not see the Fitz type caches around.

What really gets me is you know if someone complained about someone sneaking through these woods to get a cache, there's a good chance the authorioties would be all over us, and yet they seem to do little about the other behaviors going on.

---

I'm still unsure if I would call this a "dangerous" cache . . . I was uncomfortable and that "little voice in my head" (no, not the one yelling RedRum, RedRum . . . the other little voice ;) :D ) kept telling me that something was going on besides just a few folks taking a break.

My personal take on the whole thing is that there should at the very least be a sticky note or note in the description alluding to the fact that there may be some questionable activities going on here . . . the same words of warning I would expect to see if I was to do a cache has other elements that folks should be aware of (i.e. nearby poison ivy, steep cliff, abandoned well, etc.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeoMaine

. . . A hotel window cache or a cache under the bed of a married couple should be no less disturbing . . .

---

Hmmm . . . you can't be talking about any caches under my bed since I've been married now close to 10 years and about the only thing disturbing under our bed are the dust bunnies . . . well that and my wife has about a bazillion half-completed puzzle books which she has accumulated over the years. ;) :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by firefighterjake

I'm still unsure if I would call this a "dangerous" cache . . . I was uncomfortable and that "little voice in my head" (no, not the one yelling RedRum, RedRum . . . the other little voice ;) :D ) kept telling me that something was going on besides just a few folks taking a break.

My personal take on the whole thing is that there should at the very least be a sticky note or note in the description alluding to the fact that there may be some questionable activities going on here . . . the same words of warning I would expect to see if I was to do a cache has other elements that folks should be aware of (i.e. nearby poison ivy, steep cliff, abandoned well, etc.)

---

Should there be a warning for the lightpost micro at the Wal-Mart parking lot saying its not kid safe. After all there have been several abductions. I agree that I don't want to see the "activity" that is alledged to have happened at the Fitz cache but placing a "attribute" to warn others of such behavior...hmmm. Your cache on top of the mountain,,,one of the first you placed FFJ,,,,should have a warning that there may be partying and "other" activity happening there. That could be a rowdy situation if you arrived unawares. Any cache that is remote should then come with that warning.
It should be implied that anytime someone ventures into areas unknown that they should expect the unexpected. Using the general rules of, "Never put yourself in a dangerous situation." and "Trust your instincts." should keep you out of most trouble. Putting that kind of information in the cache description should not be necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeoMaine

Before this gets MORE carried away, I'd like to make a suggestion? Everyone just needs take a moment, take a deep breath and remove their PERSONAL BELIEFS from their posts for this topic before submitting them. Going to ANY place for a geocache where people are unexpectedly and openly engaging in sexual acts are hopefully the ONLY issue people are having, not the sexual orientation of the people that meet here for it. A hotel window cache or a cache under the bed of a married couple should be no less disturbing.

To reference this cache as ‘bad’ and also to mention the cache owner by name is completely uncalled for. They haven’t signed into their account for two weeks now and have only found five caches. They hid this in the middle of May, probably way before any of this would have been obvious. They also could have hid it in April as well and waited to submit it to geocaching.com – why this ‘topic’ ever got posted to the groundspeak forums is beyond me. Now there are STUPID posts regarding mosquitoes of all things! A simple e-mail to gpsfun and it would have been over and done with, even though he was already well aware of the situation.

Here at geocachingmaine? Posting a simple ‘Hey, you might want to check out this cache listing before you go do it… just in case’ note and locking the topic on this site would have been the way to go.

I hope all of you are ready to stand behind TAT (no matter what!) if someone comes along and inadvertently does something similar as to what Haffy just did. I'm sure this geocacher is equally as blindsided as TAT would be right about now?

---

I have to say I agree with some points made here . . . it did seem that all of a sudden folks were being whipped into a frenzy about this cache even though it's been operating since May or so. It almost seemed like we were about ready to grab the pitchforks and flaming torches.

I imagine these folks may feel rather blindsided by the sudden barrage of flaming e-mails and in one way I feel bad for them . . . I said my piece a long time ago and after I said what I needed to say about deleting logs without notifying folks I moved on. That said, as others have mentioned, these folks have (or should be) receiving regular e-mails that clearly show a pattern where folks were surprised to find out what has been going on here, many felt uncomfortable and there are few positive comments . . . I know these folks are new, and maybe it's just me, but after receiving more than a few negative comments about the activities going on here I think I would consider archiving this cache myself.

I would hope that folks are more upset about the sexual activity rather than the sexual preference that is occurring here. Honestly, I've done a few caches in areas where a couple is engaged in some activities that are one or two steps below being illegal (at least in public) and I didn't particularly like it then either . . . but the main difference for me has been seeing a single set of lovers versus five or six folks looking for love. Maybe it's just me and my prudish Puritanical ways . . .

I'm not saying I like this cache . . . and in fact quite honestly this was probably one of the worse caches that I've done . . . but that's my opinion.

I was more upset that the cache owners arbitrarily deleted my log entry without me knowing . . . although the issue of other geocachers knowing about the area was important enough to me personally that I sent GPSFun an e-mail about the cache and he put up a note in the log entries which I though was well worded. For me personally, that was pretty much the end of my involvement with this cache . . . although I keep it on my watchlist just to see what other folks think of the cache.