Jump to content

Abusive Bookmark Lists


New England n00b

Recommended Posts

A poster has noted some abusive bookmarks.

 

I assume the proper method for dealing with these is to use the contact at geocaching dot com address, but is this so?

 

Anyone have any actual, existing examples of 'bad' bookmarks, is this -REALLY- a problem?

 

I look forward to hearing from TPTB after they catch up from the long weekend. Hope you west-coasters had a good time! :ph34r:

Link to comment

A poster has noted some abusive bookmarks.

 

I assume the proper method for dealing with these is to use the contact at geocaching dot com address, but is this so?

 

Anyone have any actual, existing examples of 'bad' bookmarks, is this -REALLY- a problem?

 

I look forward to hearing from TPTB after they catch up from the long weekend. Hope you west-coasters had a good time! :ph34r:

I have contacted the powers that be with no response from on high. I'm not going to give the purveyor of this kind of carp the light of day by listing his bookmark. He gets off on being a pain in the butt and the attention it brings. I will PM it to you if you wish..
Link to comment

Unless the title of the bookmark list contains obscenity or profanity, I don't think it could be characterized as "abusive."

Good point.

Abusive = "characterized by wrong or improper use or action."

I guess to see if the use was abusive or not we would first have to discover what the original intent of the bookmark function is. If bookmarks were intended as a means by which someone can tag other peoples cache pages and call people logging on them cheats and liars then I guess this would in fact be a proper use and NOT abusive.

Edited by Lostby7
Link to comment
If bookmarks were intended as a means by which someone can tag other peoples cache pages and call people logging on them cheats and liars then I guess this would in fact be a proper use and NOT abusive.

I think it was understood from the beginning that bookmark lists would be available for people to indirectly comment on caches; for example, I could list a cache under a bookmark list of "lamest micros," and that would not be abusive.

 

If the title of a bookmark list were to contain slanderous or libelous material about an individual, that would certainly qualify as inappropriate, and probably as abuse of the system, but I don't know that I would characterize the list as "abusive" of itself. But that is semantic hair-splitting.

 

In other words, you're probably right.

Link to comment

Okay folks, I've just gotta ask! Since encountering this thread, I have been trying to get my mind around the concept of an "abusive bookmark list", but I just cannot do it, save for the overtly obvious types of abusive lists such as:

  • lists which might personally attack cache hiders, perhaps calling them names.
  • lists for puzzle caches which might give away solutions to the puzzles or provide other "cheater" or spoiler information.
  • lists for multistage caches which might give away the coordinates for the final stage, or provide other "cheater" or spoiler information.

So, can and will someone please help me with one or more examples of abusive bookmark lists? If you do not wish to share info about such lists publicly on this forum, please feel free to send your example(s) to me via PM (PM only at the main geocaching.com site; PM does not work for our account on the forums) or send me an email at vinny111@mindspring.com

 

Thanks in advance! In the meanwhile, I remain mystified! :laughing::)

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team
Link to comment

Okay folks, I've just gotta ask! Since encountering this thread, I have been trying to get my mind around the concept of an "abusive bookmark list", but I just cannot do it, save for the overtly obvious types of abusive lists such as:

  • lists which might personally attack cache hiders, perhaps calling them names.
  • lists for puzzle caches which might give away solutions to the puzzles or provide other "cheater" or spoiler information.
  • lists for multistage caches which might give away the coordinates for the final stage, or provide other "cheater" or spoiler information.

So, can and will someone please help me with one or more examples of abusive bookmark lists? If you do not wish to share info about such lists publicly on this forum, please feel free to send your example(s) to me via PM (PM only at the main geocaching.com site; PM does not work for our account on the forums) or send me an email at vinny111@mindspring.com

 

Thanks in advance! In the meanwhile, I remain mystified! :laughing::)

Okay... an update on my earlier post, above. Someone has kindly sent me a link to a bookmark list which he considered to be abusive. And, by the way, I wish to thank the sender for doing so! :(

 

The example provided to me was a bookmark list of caches/practices of which the bookmark list owner did not approve. The list in question did not invoke any invectives or curses (or curse words) toward the caches listed, nor toward any geocchers, nor did it fit in any of the "abusive" categories which I had listed above. For me, such a bookmark list does not seem to be an abusive bookmark list, and it seems to be fully within the scope of what I would call "reasonable use" of bookmarks lists; I cannot see why the admins at geocaching.com would be concerned about this or similar boookmark lists.

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team
Link to comment

If the list is accurate, I dont see anything wrong with it. If cachers are abusing the guidelines, and someone else creates a bookmark list to highlight this, then why would you call the list abusive? Is it abusive to shine light on abuse?

Exactly! Well said! In fact, it is very common in our society at large for folks perpetuating abuse (i.e., fake finds, in this case) to cry "abuse" and claim that they are victims when others point out their activities! It is called "Blame the whistle-blower!" This strategy is, of course, a last-ditch desperate attempt by the folks engaging in questionable behaviors to get other people to stop discussing their activities, and to stop labeling their activities for what they are. Interestingly, one hallmark of abusive religious cults is that they single out any members who have been identifying and disclosing abusive behaviors, and they try to isolate them and shut them up with a variety of sanctions and measures, which often include claiming that the whistle-blower is a "troublemaker" and that they are "abusing" the cult (by the very act of being a whistle-blower...)

 

So, bottom line is that the only folks who feel it is abusive for others to shine light on the abuse is the abusers (and their disciples and sycohpants and other "True Believers"), because they have a vested interest which they are trying to protect.

Link to comment

Thank you for showing me the light....Now I understand. Shame on everyone who doesn't believe as the morally correct does. What was I thinking? This thread is pointless as is the topic. It's been discussed to death in countless threads and nothing changes. I fully understand why so many people don't bother with these forums anymore; count me among them.

Link to comment

I would like to briefly address the solution which Team 360 has chosen to employ. While I have no problem with his using this method (of simply never logging online finds or DNFs), it would not work for me, and, I feel that it would not work for the community at large if a lot of folks started to employ this method. Moreover, as a cache owner and cache seeker, as well as an active member of this evolving community, I would vastly prefer that other cachers did not engage in this behavior, and rather, I prefer that they file online logs, such as notes, finds, DNFs, NMs, and SBAs. Why?

 

At least for me, I feel that much of the lifeblood and pulse of our community lies in the online logs we file, whether they be finds, DNFs, notes, NMs, or SBAs. I always craft my online log entries with a lot of heart and care, whether they be notes, finds, DNFs or SBAs, and in fact, that is one of the primary ways in which I give back to my community and share with it (BTW, my wife Sue, who writes some of our log entries, tends to write far shorter logs than do I; that is just her style.) And, as a cache owner, I always much enjoy reading the online log entries made by seekers, whether they are finds, DNFs, notes or NMs. Lastly, as a cache hunter, I find that half of the "lifeblood" on many cache listing pages is the online log entries, as they help to tell me the kind of experience that others have had with this cache and in the hide area. These entries even help me to know if I may need special gear or if the cache is missing.

 

Personally, although I am not at all into "numbers", I love being able to browse the lists of caches which we have found, and of the caches found by others. These are the stuff of memories, and also part of the bond of community. However, I do support the suggestion that cache owners be allowed to suppress public display of their summary counts (i.e., finds, etc.) if they wish. And, in our case, I do not mind other folks seeing our find counts at all. Lastly, while I am not at all into numbers, I do not mind at all that some other folks in our sport/game ARE into numbers, and indeed, some of my good geo-friends are into numbers. God bless them all! Half of the fun and spice in life is diversity and variety -- it would be quite a boring geo world if everyone had exactly my values (i.e., no interest in numbers.)

 

There... I have stated a few of my paltry opinons on this matter, and now I can trundle off to the kitchen, eat some breakfast, and then go outside and feed our 70 hungry chickens, ducks and geese. . . :(

Link to comment

Oh, and lookit, this whole GW4 matter and the fake finds thing is kinda winding down, and so....

 

 

could we please get back to discussing the really important things in life on these forums, such as:

  • lame urban micros, aka Micro Spew
  • gun-toting gay sex crusiers
  • religion
  • polytheistic religions
  • poly-religious gun-toting gay sex cruisers
  • the advisability of placing multiple copies of Jack Chick religious tracts in lame urban micro cache containers
  • the advisability of placing caches in the parking lots of adult entertainment establishments (i.e., strip clubs, etc.)
  • the advisability of placing lame urban micros in the bushes outside adult entertainment establishments
  • Mitsuko and her desirability or lack thereof
  • the advisability of accepting food from the pig
  • gun-toting poly-religious gay sex cruisers who place lame urban micros in the parking lots of adult entertainment establishments
  • the RAGE and JEALOUSY that most male members of this forum feel upon learning that Mitsuko (along with a duck) has been shacking up with me for the past four years
  • abortion and ducks
  • fundamentalist poly-religious geocachers who place lame urban caches in church parking lots
  • the advisability of leaving nuclear explosive devices and illegal street drugs in geocaches for children to find and play with
  • fundamentalist poly-religious gun-toting geocachers who hate gays and who place lame urban caches in church parking lots, and who sneak into adult entertainment establishments when no one is looking
  • poly-religious gun-toting gay sex cruisers who place multiple copies of Jack Chick religious tracts in lame urban micro cache containers and who secretly desire Mitsuko and who boycott adult entertainment establishments and who have strong views about abortion and ducks
  • women or men we would like to go caching with
  • hottie jenny donkeys we would like to go caching with (blush) :(
  • ....oops! :(

Thank you all for allowing us to return our forums to our regularly scheduled broadcasting, and to the important topics facing the geo community! :(:wub::ph34r::ph34r:

Link to comment

A poster has noted some abusive bookmarks.

 

I assume the proper method for dealing with these is to use the contact at geocaching dot com address, but is this so?

 

Anyone have any actual, existing examples of 'bad' bookmarks, is this -REALLY- a problem?

 

I look forward to hearing from TPTB after they catch up from the long weekend. Hope you west-coasters had a good time! :laughing:

I have contacted the powers that be with no response from on high. I'm not going to give the purveyor of this kind of carp the light of day by listing his bookmark. He gets off on being a pain in the butt and the attention it brings. I will PM it to you if you wish..

Oh, your talking about the actual list description...

 

I think the question is going to end up being about how much coment can you make about the people/caches on the list. If you can make worst caches lists and such it would seem 'negative' lists are ok, but how far can we go?

Lists of caches that have purple containers would ok, caches that are on XYZ trail would be ok, how about caches that suck? What about caches placed by people that suck?

Is there some line that shouldn't be crossed?

Link to comment

It’s an interesting logic really. They say “it’s just a game” and that I (or anyone else) shouldn’t concern ourselves with what they’re doing. “We’re just playing the game in our own way!”

 

However, when I play the game my way, which just happens to be within the guidelines, suddenly they get their panties in a bunch.

 

Read the hostile comments in the bookmark ratings, they’re certainly upset that someone has exposed their acts. If they had any confidence that what they were doing was proper, they would have opened a thread in the forums and allowed debate, sent me an email asking why I have that bookmark, anything but respond with hostility. They responded as someone will when they know what they do is wrong, with anger, shame, resentment, and hostility. Wrong is wrong, no manner of justification can make it right.

Edited by Criminal
Link to comment

[*] the RAGE and JEALOUSY that most male members of this forum feel upon learning that Mitsuko (along with a duck) has been shacking up with me for the past four years

I'm none to happy about that turn of events believe me, but one thing at a time. :laughing:

Link to comment

It’s an interesting logic really. They say “it’s just a game” and that I (or anyone else) shouldn’t concern ourselves with what they’re doing. “We’re just playing the game in our own way!”

 

However, when I play the game my way, which just happens to be within the guidelines, suddenly they get their panties in a bunch.

 

Read the hostile comments in the bookmark ratings, they’re certainly upset that someone has exposed their acts. If they had any confidence that what they were doing was proper, they would have opened a thread in the forums and allowed debate, sent me an email asking why I have that bookmark, anything but respond with hostility. They responded as someone will when they know what they do is wrong, with anger, shame, resentment, and hostility. Wrong is wrong, no manner of justification can make it right.

Criminal, you make some excellent points! Isn't it funny that some pepole who are breaking accepted guidelines will howl the loudest about infringement of guidelines or their rights when their disalloweed acts are exposed to the public? I love it! :laughing:

Link to comment

The following is my reply to one of the people who logged a thumbs down to my bookmark:

 

Not Useful

5/30/2006 10:42:10 AM

I don't find this list useful since you didn't go out to try to "find" these caches at their "real" or "temp" locations at all. Had you attempted either, I would find some credibility in your list. Plus, your list seems to be redundant, listing several caches more than once so it appears to be a much longer (badder) list than it actually is.

I do wonder about people who complain about "stuff" without actually knowing their facts. I am a high school librarian and hear from people who do not read the books, that particular books are "bad." Yet, those complainers haven't read those books to really have an opinion about the book. This list reminds me of that.

Hope you get out and have some fun sometime.....enjoy life more.

SandbassQueen from Rockwall, Texas (I guess, in your opinion, where all the cheaters live!)

 

SandbassQueen

 

RE: My bookmark list.

 

It took me a little time to find you since the name you signed with isn’t listed on the site. Sorry for the delay.

 

What does finding these temporary or misplaced caches have to do with the ethics of logging them on this site? They are not geocaches. If this site didn’t approve them, they shouldn’t be listed as found in your stats (or anyone else’s). I don’t understand the difficulty here. I’m sure finding them was fun, maybe even adventurous, but they are no more valid as a found number than are my pants, which this morning I found had fallen off the end of the bed. What’s next, are you (collective you) going to log a find for finding your car after the cache hunt? This site tracks the number of geocaches (not navicaches, temp caches, etc.) that you have found. To claim that you have found CACHE-X when you did not visit the coordinates listed on the cache page, find the container, and sign the log (if able) like everyone else had to do, is a lie. I’m sorry if that hurts, but that’s the truth.

 

Also, you cannot enter the same cache more than once into any bookmark, so I’m not sure where you are seeing a cache listed more than once.

 

I’m not trying to insult or hurt you, I merely do not agree with your point of view. My bookmark list is just a running tally of all the caches that are being logged as found when the finder never visited the location.

 

Thank you for your concern, but I am thoroughly enjoying life. As an aside, since you are a high school librarian, please note that ‘badder’ isn’t a word in the English language.

 

Chris

Link to comment

could we please get back to discussing the really important things in life on these forums, such as:

  • the advisability of placing multiple copies of Jack Chick religious tracts in lame urban micro cache containers

 

More Chick tracts, please!

 

0046150lh.gif

 

Why don't they understand? She wants to be Debbie!

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...