Closed Threads

[pm28570]

brdad
Hands off my peavey!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bangor, ME
GC Name: brdad Posts: 3,479



This is not the venue for this type of conversation and IMO posting against the Geocaching Maine User Agreement.

Thread Closed

Dave, I was disappointed to see the thread closed. I agree it is in violation of the user agreement, I cannot agree with Chadd's position and my opinion is that the original post should not have occurred. That said, I believe I had something to say that would contribute to the issue and perhaps enable the poster to see things in a different light.

I must also say, the volunteer moderators, at times, have to make a decision that serves the common good and you made that decision. I certainly cannot fault that. Being responsible often ticks off people!

[brdad]

I hear you. I did what I did based on fear that either Chad, Tom, or the owner of the cache posted would be overly criticized.

Anyone is welcome to start a new thread discussing any of the issues if they can just restrain from singling out people or caches. I understand his feeling on the cache first mentioned, I have been annoyed by similar caches in the past as well. But there is a better way to discuss it.

If you feel you cannot generalize and need to address the particular incident, you can do so personally by PM.

[TRF]

I hear you. I did what I did based on fear that either ... ... ... would be overly criticized.

You could also justify closing most threads based on that same "POTENTIAL."

Didn't Ben Franklin say that, Giving up ones liberties thinking you are gaining security is a sure way to lose your freedom.

Seems that providing censorship in the guise of potentially protecting people is a sure way to lose our rights to say what we wish.

Yours is a hard decision for sure, Dave.

my 2 cents

[pm28570]

I can't agree that this being "censored". It's a private site that provides guidelines for posting and I am here by choice. Pretty straightforward. While I disagree with Dave's actions, I respect his decision and hope that he's uses the same good judgment in the future.

[cano]

I'm not sure what other option Chadd has had since cache owner, publisher or groundspeak did not care to resolve this issue at all, but I'm sure with one thing, soon a new geocaching web sites without any censorship or any other restrictive practises will emerge.

[TRF]

I can't agree that this being "censored". It's a private site that provides guidelines for posting and I am here by choice. Pretty straightforward. While I disagree with Dave's actions, I respect his decision and hope that he's uses the same good judgment in the future.

Private site or not doesn't change the definition of censorship. The guidelines being referred to were not being specifically violated any more than the post for a person to visit a certain business. The word "fear" could be substituted for "potential" in the context it was used.

I agree that I am here by choice and IF GeocachingMaine.org wishes to take an official stance on an issue will determine IF I wish to visit or not.

My point wasn't a criticism as much as trying to determine where the "fine line" is actually being drawn. As pointed out, the moderator(s) do have a tough job in figuring out where that line is. I don't envy them.

Remember, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

[pm28570]

This just points out that I was wrong as a teenager......I will need to know Latin as an adult.

TRF, lets agree to disagree on the finer points.

Remember, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

[brdad]

You could also justify closing most threads based on that same "POTENTIAL."

To solely close it based on what is feared to happen would be wrong, but as I stated in the thread the post was also against the Geocaching Maine User Agreement.

And again, anyone can start a new thread discussing about what to do about caches that are listed incorrectly or how many have been wronged by an approver, just don't single out those individuals or caches.

I'm not sure what other option Chadd has had since cache owner, publisher or groundspeak did not care to resolve this issue at all, but I'm sure with one thing, soon a new geocaching web sites without any censorship or any other restrictive practises will emerge.

Be sure to check out the new anythinggoescaching.com site, where there are no restrictive practices or censorship. Hiders are now allowed to place caches on bridges, bury them in cemeteries, and there is no distance restriction, they can be placed on top of each other. You are allowed to booby trap your caches with flying knives and adult oriented trade items are encouraged, as is food. You are allowed to log any cache as often as you like, even if you don't find it. Oh yes, that sounds much better than the dictatorship known as gc.com.

[cano]

To solely close it based on what is feared to happen would be wrong, but as I stated in the thread the post was also against the Geocaching Maine User Agreement.

And again, anyone can start a new thread discussing about what to do about caches that are listed incorrectly or how many have been wronged by an approver, just don't single out those individuals or caches.



Be sure to check out the new anythinggoescaching.com site, where there are no restrictive practices or censorship. Hiders are now allowed to place caches on bridges, bury them in cemeteries, and there is no distance restriction, they can be placed on top of each other. You are allowed to booby trap your caches with flying knives and adult oriented trade items are encouraged, as is food. You are allowed to log any cache as often as you like, even if you don't find it. Oh yes, that sounds much better than the dictatorship known as gc.com.

Why do you think people will start behaving like this? If you had the option to booby trap you cache with knives would you do it? I have no problem with caches on bridges I found some. I welcome buried caches, it would be a nice twist to use metal detectors and shovels, however it should be mentioned in cache description. Don't be ridiculous with booby traps. I welcome adult material in caches , kid unfriendly attribute already exists. Food in caches, no problem for me, if your cache will be eaten by wild animals you will not do it again. Do you need to take a **** into my cache? No problem I already put a toilet paper in one (TB2A9XY). Do you need to log your find hundred times? No problem with me, feel free to log any of my caches as many times as you wish even if you don't find it. Caches stuck on each other? It would be funny I hope I will find one day something like this. Don't get me wrong I'm not against guidelines I'm against enforcing them. Regulations will kill the progress. If you have a bad idea about placing a cache, this idea will die with your cache itself after time.

[oneday]

Be sure to check out the new anythinggoescaching.com site, where there are no restrictive practices or censorship. Hiders are now allowed to place caches on bridges, bury them in cemeteries, and there is no distance restriction, they can be placed on top of each other. You are allowed to booby trap your caches with flying knives and adult oriented trade items are encouraged, as is food. You are allowed to log any cache as often as you like, even if you don't find it. Oh yes, that sounds much better than the dictatorship known as gc.com.

brdad....are you sure that is the site....I went but no luck.

Was looking forward to booby traps!