[New England n00b]

Quote

Although, I'm sure such a list could potentially be incredibly long for an entire region.

And incredibly fluid as well. Perhaps a park changed it's mind and allowed/disallowed caches. Fall on the wrong side of that before an approver has time to update it and *bang* another nail in the coffin of public access geocaching.

This has been an interesting thread. Geo Ho, move it over. I'm marrying Mopar. Mopar, keep whispering those sweet words of wisdom.

*notes Geo Ho has rifle*

(okay, for the record, JUST KIDDING - I. B. Straight.)

This post has been edited by New England n00b: 04 March 2004 - 09:23 PM

[PILTY]

Watch the big boys and watch how they play. I made the mistake of having an opinion that I stood by and got stomped on!

[Keystone]

PILTY,
Welcome back to the forums. I do hope you will make constructive contributions to the discussions. But discussing your own past experience in unrelated topics serves to do nothing but divert attention from the topics being discussed here. Please leave your beef about your moderated posting period behind you, and confine your posts to the topic at hand. Thank you.

[ironman114]

ringbone, on Mar 4 2004, 04:23 PM, said:

I have yet to hear a even an adequete argument for one time caches other than "It's against the rules" or "I dont like it" or "I, I, I, I, I," Like I stated before. If maintenence is the main issue of a one time cache whether it be vacation or otherwise, the maintenence factor is iliminated by the first person who finds it. Land managers, permission, etc have nothing to do with the issue. The basic common sense rules are followed just like everyone else.

and I have not heard another person in 3 pages say "I want to do one time caches also". It seems as you said to me and others

Quote

Ironman and the lot

You keep implying that this game is about you and only you.

!!!

You have been offered suggestions about how to work around this but you refuse to listen!!

Criminal had a one time cache with beer in it! but it wasn't posted as a regular cache on gc.com. people came and enjoyed it anyway. He found a way to work around things to accomplish his goal.

You can too "IF YOU WANT TO".

You may pay to use certain features of this site but you don't "own it".

[FullOn]

I just wrote a very long rant pointing out the idiocy of this discussion which was filled with verbal abuses, profanity and even a few good points. Of course I decided to delete it and write this instead. I have to admit it was very cathartic though!

Get out and go geocaching. It's supposed to be fun, okay?

[ju66l3r]

It's amazing how many people have posted since my last post and have not even recognized that I've said anything.

If in these three pages, you can't find a few people who agree that one-time caches should be allowed other than ringbone you're either visually- or comprehension-disabled.

Beyond that, I mused about the entire "go somewhere else" argument and pointed out rather successfully that it is a pointless and tired argument which is better said "play *this* game or don't geocache" as the entire geocaching community *completely* detached to GC.com isn't even enough to win a college campus phonebooth stuffing contest.

To continually parrot out "love it or leave it" with no regard to the opposing point of view is a disservice to rational discussion and is no better than hearing "but what about one-time caches" every third post.

Hopefully the next few posts will actually progress further than the half-way mark where this conversation started spinning its wheels a day ago.

[fizzymagic]

yumitori, on Mar 3 2004, 10:17 AM, said:

In a word (okay, two), Problem Hides.
[excessive and repetitive sycophantic text removed]

I think the answer is brilliantly illustrated by Yumitori's post.

It's sad that geocaching has become as rule-bound as it has. However, there seem to be a number of people who just aren't happy unless every possible contingency is covered by some regulation. Instead of getting a job in the government, like most good petty tyrants, they have chosen to plague us here.

This post has been edited by fizzymagic: 04 March 2004 - 11:54 PM

[GeoWorms]

I think the "one time only" cache argument can be recast in less emotional terms. Rather than right or wrong, there is the simple issue of scalability. It would be nice if we could accomodate every nuance of the sport, but we can't.
Geocaching is growing exponentially, and the policies we have now, must also be workable a year from now when there are 10 times as many cachers, seeking and logging 10 times as many caches.
A one time only cache has one hider and one finder. But it will show up in hundreds of pocket querries, and thousands of searches. Even if it's found the day it's posted, it might not get logged and archived for a day or two. This also assumes perfect, responsible behaviour by the finder, and a prompt response by the owner. Anyone have a travel bug that was found but not logged for a few days (months)?
My point is that we consume a hugely out of proportion amount of server time and bandwidth for one find. It seems like the community does not feel the need to spend our digital capital this way.
There--a perfectly reasonable argument against one-time caches, that doesn't involve "It's against the rules" or right or wrong.

[ironman114]

ju66l3r, on Mar 4 2004, 10:45 PM, said:

It's amazing how many people have posted since my last post and have not even recognized that I've said anything.

If in these three pages, you can't find a few people who agree that one-time caches should be allowed other than ringbone you're either visually- or comprehension-disabled.

Beyond that, I mused about the entire "go somewhere else" argument and pointed out rather successfully that it is a pointless and tired argument which is better said "play *this* game or don't geocache" as the entire geocaching community *completely* detached to GC.com isn't even enough to win a college campus phonebooth stuffing contest.

To continually parrot out "love it or leave it" with no regard to the opposing point of view is a disservice to rational discussion and is no better than hearing "but what about one-time caches" every third post.

Hopefully the next few posts will actually progress further than the half-way mark where this conversation started spinning its wheels a day ago.

o.k. I stand corrected. There are some here that agree with ringbone. But I have not heard you say you want more one time caches, just less rules.

You yourself said that geospotter found a way to work around the rules and hasn't hurt anything, why can't ringbone do something similar? I pointed out criminal also found a different way to accomplish his goal.

Did you look at the link in the fourth post of this thread?

It is a link to a "ONE TIME ONLY CACHE" that has worked succesfully for 8 times and has over 100 posts to it!

Personally I would love to try for one of his treasures, but I don't have a good disposable income to travel to mexico to look for a silver coin. If I knew he might come close to where I live I would look for it and even bookmark where ever he did list it and keep tabs to see if he was coming here.

Read my sig line. I know he can find a way to accomplish what he wants to do, even at gc.com. He has been given 2 or 3 examples and he can use these or come up with a novel one of his own.

I am looking forward to seeing his creativity flow.

[cacheKidds]

Edited diatribes against geonsnobs

This post has been edited by cacheKidds: 05 March 2004 - 07:00 AM

[ringbone]

I started this thread to stimulate discussion on a topic that I have every right to defend, support, discuss etc. At this point 2700 people have read this topic and 155 people have written about it. It seems that the people who are against it for whatever reason seem to talk on and on about the negative aspects of one time caching. The dead Horse has been beaten. Hopefully in the coming weeks or months different people with their opinions can voice in, (not necessarily agreeing with mine mind you) I know you are out there because the stats show it. For those of you who like the see your ownityped words, give it a rest and let some new voices air it out. You know who you are. Let me say this and I will No longer respond to this thread.

Things can be done one of two way, in this situation A. abide by the rules or B. Stretch the rules a little. (I didnt say break)I could Leave a cache with a logbook pen etc anywhere in the world. (It would be maintained and looked after) Leave a bounty of treasure for the first person who finds it and "stuff" for the rest who subsequently find it. (I make friends rather easily so it wont be difficult to find someone to maintain it). Maybe even get them involved in Geocaching. I get what I want and you get your rules. I know there will always be the first guy excited about finding the gold coin and the twenty who curse me about finding the wooden nickle, and all in keeping with the rules and traditions of Geocaching. That is until they change again). Thanks for your opinions. (truly) Sorry if i may have offended anyone. Hopefully I'll see some of you out there. Good Luck

Ringbone

[Team GPSaxophone]

ringbone, on Mar 5 2004, 10:55 AM, said:

Things can be done one of two way, in this situation A. abide by the rules or B. Stretch the rules a little. (I didnt say break)I could Leave a cache with a logbook pen etc anywhere in the world. (It would be maintained and looked after) Leave a bounty of treasure for the first person who finds it and "stuff" for the rest who subsequently find it. (I make friends rather easily so it wont be difficult to find someone to maintain it). Maybe even get them involved in Geocaching. I get what I want and you get your rules. I know there will always be the first guy excited about finding the gold coin and the twenty who curse me about finding the wooden nickle, and all in keeping with the rules and traditions of Geocaching. That is until they change again). Thanks for your opinions. (truly) Sorry if i may have offended anyone. Hopefully I'll see some of you out there. Good Luck

Ringbone

This cache idea looks like situation A. Put a cache out there with a neat (and possibly valuable) first-finder's prize. If you had listened to this suggestion on the first page of this thread, maybe it would have turned out better for you.

[beejay&esskay]

ringbone, on Mar 5 2004, 12:55 PM, said:

At this point 2700 people have read this topic and 155 people have written about it.

Well, that's not 2700 unique people, so it could just be the 155 posters visiting the thread 17 times each. (Or that's probably not even 155 unique posters, is it?)

I been to the thread numerous times, but I'm not sure what to add....

I've found 150 caches and haven't noticed a problem with the rules as currently enforced.

[Mopar]

ringbone, on Mar 5 2004, 12:55 PM, said:

Leave a bounty of treasure for the first person who finds it and "stuff" for the rest who subsequently find it.

That's pretty common practice, and well within the guidelines. It's called a First To Find prize. Not that you seem to care about anyone's opinion other then you're own, but most cachers I know (myself included) would get the same enjoyment from a well placed cache that contained a wooden nickle as we would a $20 gold coin.

[AmishHacker]

bigredmed, on Mar 3 2004, 11:03 AM, said:

ringbone, on Mar 3 2004, 09:49 AM, said:

1. No posting of one time caches
2. No posting without a logbook
3. Cant post a cache within .10 miles from another cache
4. Cant post a vacation cache

1. They are called Event Caches now.

2. This was a rule placed to keep micros from becomming so small that we would have to pack a magnifying glass in our bags. (overstated by the proponents, but TPTB liked them better than the rest of us, so we have the rule.)

3. Come on, you are talking about lowering the limit to less than 528 feet? Where do you cache where this is a problem? If anything, we need less geographic proximity (increase it to a mile between caches without permission).

4. You can if you can show that you go there regularly enough to maintain the cache. This is a good rule that keeps down the likelihood that we will turn on the news and see a bunch of boy scouts cleaning up a park only to see a geocache is the trash collected.

The Amish says Amen!

[southdeltan]

Mopar, on Mar 5 2004, 10:14 AM, said:

ringbone, on Mar 5 2004, 12:55 PM, said:

Leave a bounty of treasure for the first person who finds it and "stuff" for the rest who subsequently find it.

That's pretty common practice, and well within the guidelines. It's called a First To Find prize. Not that you seem to care about anyone's opinion other then you're own, but most cachers I know (myself included) would get the same enjoyment from a well placed cache that contained a wooden nickle as we would a $20 gold coin.

I agree totally.

I could care less what "valuable coin" you hide in your treasure box.

I don't geocache to find treasure or to trade.

You'll find that neither do the majority of geocachers.

If I WANT something, I'll buy it. My pleasure is in the find and the location (and sometimes the history of the location).

southdeltan

[CoyoteRed]

I don't know that the majority of geocachers cache for something other than trading, but I do know that is the case for a good portion. Try to advocate a non-trading cache and you will get howls of displeasure from those who like to trade.

I think my main point in all of this is options. I'd like the option of putting out a moving cache, a self-depleating cache, or maybe even something that hasn't even been thought of yet. Or maybe a concept that never took off like a COS (Circular Offset Stash). The concept actually seems quite interesting.

<shrug>

If we can't do it here, we'll just have to find or create another place to do it.

[Pto]

Quote

Well, that's not 2700 unique people, so it could just be the 155 posters visiting the thread 17 times each.

Ive come in about 10 times in the last day and a half- trying to figure out why this thread is still going.....
As was mentioned- I saw plenty of reasonalbe posts on Pg 1 that could have settled most of the arguments. . ..

But, Reading IS fundamental . . . .

[yumitori]

fizzymagic, on Mar 4 2004, 11:20 PM, said:

yumitori, on Mar 3 2004, 10:17 AM, said:

In a word (okay, two), Problem Hides.
[excessive and repetitive sycophantic text removed]

I think the answer is brilliantly illustrated by Yumitori's post.

It's sad that geocaching has become as rule-bound as it has. However, there seem to be a number of people who just aren't happy unless every possible contingency is covered by some regulation. Instead of getting a job in the government, like most good petty tyrants, they have chosen to plague us here.

Cool! I'm a sycophant! Does that come with a non-paycheck like the approvers get?

Fizzy, what I'm failing to see acknowledged by the 'too many rules' crowd is that all of those rules/guidelines/dictates/good ideas came about in response to some problem.

Contrary to some folks' beliefs, Jeremy doesn't wake up on Mondays and muses 'What should I ban this week?' If geocaching.com disappeared tomorrow and the wonderful neo-anarchist freegeocachingforall.org is created in its place, in a year or two it would have many of the same rules/guidelines/dictates/good ideas because the problems aren't going to go away.

I'll ask you what I asked CoyoteRed - given that these issues exist and need to be addressed to keep more land managers from banning geocaching, how would you write rules/guidelines/dictates/good ideas that satisfies all parties?

[Keystone]

Thanks, Yumitori. Funny, my questions along the same lines were not answered either. I was just told that land manager issues are irrelevant. I'll repeat the questions I asked in my post on page one, since they were buried at the end of my long example illustrating all the regulations implemented by land managers:

Quote

How will this complex patchwork system of regulations be administered on opencaching.com? How is it administered today at navicache? Don't say "rely on the owner and the other local cachers." I have too many examples EACH WEEK of cache hiders who violate one or more of the land manager permission rules described above.

I think everyone is talking past each other in this topic. Please, everyone, regardless of your position, read the poster's words carefully and THINK. We learn best when groups of diverse people with diverse opinions get together to discuss them. If you want to be critical, please criticize the ideas and opinions, and not the person holding them.

[southdeltan]

CoyoteRed, on Mar 5 2004, 11:04 AM, said:

I don't know that the majority of geocachers cache for something other than trading, but I do know that is the case for a good portion.  Try to advocate a non-trading cache and you will get howls of displeasure from those who like to trade.

A non trading cache already exists, it's called a micro. (And some are called virtuals)

Most of the geocachers I know could care less about the items in the cache. That doesn't mean that they don't stock the caches they hide - that just means they rarely, if ever, trade. In over 150 traditional finds - I can count the number of times I traded on 1 hand.

I'm sure you probably will get howls if you suggest anything - but most geocachers don't read the forums so I can't say that it really matters...

Quote

If we can't do it here, we'll just have to find or create another place to do it.

I think several people have already suggested that. GC.com is NOT geocaching. There are other sites out there (heh) and more than a few people working on stuff (OC.com - which has so many cooks ... nevermind...).

The long and short of it is this whole thread is this: GC.com is a listing service - if your cache doesn't fit in THEIR guidelines then list it somewhere else. I know of at least 1 physical in a NPS listed recently on NC.com - so I'm sure there are other places with less rules...

southdeltan

[CoyoteRed]

yumitori, on Mar 5 2004, 11:30 AM, said:

... came about in response to some problem.

No doubt.

My assertion is the response was a wrong one.

Instead of banning vacation caches, fix the problem of unmaintained caches.

Instead of banning moving caches, make sure people are more aware of where they can and can't put a cache.

The list goes on.

Why can't lists like the one Keystone Approver displayed be displayed for all to see AND make it prominent to those in that area? Why is it something you have to beg for, wade through multitudes of fora, or glean through other means?

Most of the problems that these bandaid fixes are for come about because people didn't know any better. True, there are jerks, but fix the problem, not the symptom.

[CoyoteRed]

southdeltan, on Mar 5 2004, 11:40 AM, said:

A non trading cache already exists, it's called a micro.

I don't know about you, but I've traded out of plenty of micros! Some as small as an APS film can.

[yumitori]

CoyoteRed, on Mar 5 2004, 11:42 AM, said:

My assertion is the response was a wrong one.

Instead of banning vacation caches, fix the problem of unmaintained caches.

Instead of banning moving caches, make sure people are more aware of where they can and can't put a cache.

The list goes on.

Ah, but how?

There may be more geocachers who take vacations in Montana every summer than there are those of us who actually live here. We still few if enthusiastic. If each of those cachers leave even just two or three caches each year on their trips (and some have left more), that's an additional two or three every year for each of us to adopt, to run out to if a problem develops, to take time away from our own planned hides and weekend hunts to fix.

Why would you wish that on us?

And if your solution is that they are recovered if a problem develops instead of being adopted, I encourage you to search for the numerous discussions about who owns a container in the woods. There's those who reject the idea of anyone except the owner removing their cache, no matter in how bad a shape it's in.

How would you fix the problem of unmaintained caches? Please. What solution do you have that will satisfy everyone?

[Sparky-Watts]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.................................someone wake me up when there's anything at all new that hasn't been beaten, er, discussed in this thread already.........zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[fizzymagic]

Quote

Cool! I'm a sycophant!

Yes, in my opinion, you are. If you could point out a single post you have ever made in which you haven't supported the Party line, I would be most happy to be proven wrong.

Quote

I'll ask you what I asked CoyoteRed - given that these issues exist and need to be addressed to keep more land managers from banning geocaching, how would you write rules/guidelines/dictates/good ideas that satisfies all parties?

So, if I understand you properly, you endorse a system with a single set of rules for cache placement. In other words, if a single land manager anywhere places an additional requirement on caches on the land they manage, either that requirement will be imposed upon all caches everywhere or else no caches will be allowed on that land.

I find that position simplistic, rigid, and childish. If geocaching.com is not able to adjust requirements to meet specific conditions because it is too much work, then I suggest that maybe they are in the wrong business.

[geospotter]

fizzymagic, on Mar 5 2004, 12:31 PM, said:

Yes, in my opinion, you are.  If you could point out a single post you have ever made in which you haven't supported the Party line, I would be most happy to be proven wrong.

So....because someone (like me) agrees with TPTB you are of the opinion that we are somehow butt-kissing, brown-nosing sycophants?

To quote a recent post "I find that position simplistic, rigid, and childish."

I find it ironic that EVERY time someone is asked how to improve on the decisions/rules/guidelines made by TPTB they attack rather than answer the question.

So I'll ask again. Please provide some concrete solutions to the issues at hand.

This post has been edited by geospotter: 05 March 2004 - 12:51 PM

[Sparky-Watts]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz........

Quote

I find it ironic that EVERY time someone is asked how to improve on the decisions/rules/guidelines made by TPTB they attack rather than answer the question.

............Huh? Oh, yeah!!!! Good shot, geospotter, I thought I was the only one that noticed that.....ok, back to sleep....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[CO Admin]

Gentlemen and ladies, This thread is becoming nothing but a constant repeat of the same concepts. the two side are not going to agree with each other. Unless there is less name calling and flaming and more constructive conversation the thread will be closed as it will have outlived its usefulness

PN:IABS

CO Admin

[CoyoteRed]

yumitori, on Mar 5 2004, 12:09 PM, said:

How would you fix the problem of unmaintained caches? Please. What solution do you have that will satisfy everyone?

You'd never satisfy everyone. There will always be those who will be contentious no matter what.

However, I explored a solution before, but people seem to not like to break paradigms. If game had started off as self limiting and someone wanted to put out a perpetual cache, you'd meet the same resistance.

Here's a solution: Self depleating cache (or a nicer name I'd hope) is one where there is no "owner" only a placer. The placer knows when the cache is placed it belongs to the community at large. Finders trade, don't trade, or take items out of the cache. The idea is to only take, and not replace, items, but people will do what they do. Once all of the items are gone the last person takes the container and log, and requests it to be archived.

To answer the problem of any cache that is designed to not be in an advertised spot be it a self-depleating cache, moving cache, one-time cache, or what have you, the placer leaves a piece of biodegradable flagger's tape for the person who takes the cache to tie on a nearby object. Biodegradable flagger's tape lasts anywhere from a few weeks to a few months in the wild. Problem solved.

What's the prevent someone from looking at a cache, saying it's empty, and taking it? The same thing there is now. Nothing. So someone wants that spot and takes the cache? It's no different than now.

While it might be a bitter pill to allow a foreigner to come and place a cache, it's really no different than a local placing one and abandoning it. At least I'm addressing the root problem--unmaintained caches.

Therefore, all caches placed outside of one's own stomping ground is automatically considered a self-limiting cache. As soon as the cache needs more maintenance than the locals are willing the handle, it's archived. The placer knowing it's a temporary thing accepts it has run it's course. If he wanted it to last longer, he could have used a sturdier container and put in more swag.

See, these problems can be successfully handled without banning something.

[ringbone]

New to geocaching. Let me pose this question. If not a one time cache then what happens to all those caches that havent been found in all those countries in more than two years. See Brazil, China. Vietnam. After how many months do those unfound caches become geotrash. How do I contact a land manager in Cambodia? At least with a one time cache in Vietnam the chances of it being removed are probably greater than the cache that has gone MIA in vietnam. thanks for listening. Look forward to starting the game soon New GPS and I'm page 5 of 105

[CoyoteRed]

CO Admin, on Mar 5 2004, 01:01 PM, said:

Unless there is less name calling and flaming and more constructive conversation the thread will be closed as it will have outlived its usefulness

Hopefully some of my posts will be considered constructive enough to keep it open?

Someone asked for solutions. I've provided.

Let's continue with the debate.

[ringbone]

Why does my post say Ringbone

[Oronma]

Why does my post say ringbone?

[CoyoteRed]

This thread is for testing posts...

[RichardMoore]

Oronma, on Mar 5 2004, 01:34 PM, said:

Why does my post say ringbone?

I think it has something to do with "cookies."

[Team GPSaxophone]

RichardMoore, on Mar 5 2004, 02:57 PM, said:

Oronma, on Mar 5 2004, 01:34 PM, said:

Why does my post say ringbone?

I think it has something to do with "cookies."

*snicker*

[Shawn&Holly]

Team GPSaxophone, on Mar 5 2004, 01:59 PM, said:

RichardMoore, on Mar 5 2004, 02:57 PM, said:

Oronma, on Mar 5 2004, 01:34 PM, said:

Why does my post say ringbone?

I think it has something to do with "cookies."

*snicker*

hhhhmmmmmmmmm

[Mopar]

RichardMoore, on Mar 5 2004, 04:57 PM, said:

Oronma, on Mar 5 2004, 01:34 PM, said:

Why does my post say ringbone?

I think it has something to do with "cookies."

Moron, I mean Oronma,
The forum is on a dif server then the website. When you created your new sockpuppet, you didnt log your ringbone accout out of the forum.

BTW, check the forum guidelines up at the top of the page. More rules you arent gonna like. Sockpuppet accounts can get you banned.

[ringbone]

Sorry Conspiracy theorist but its not me. unless i can be in two places at once and im not that computer savvy

[southdeltan]

ringbone, on Mar 5 2004, 02:16 PM, said:

im not that computer savvy

Somehow I don't doubt you....



southdeltan

[Shawn&Holly]

Oronma/ringbone, on Mar 5 2004, 01:27 PM, said:

New to geocaching. Let me pose this question. If not a one time cache then what happens to all those caches that havent been found in all those countries in more than two years. See Brazil, China. Vietnam. After how many months do those unfound caches become geotrash. How do I contact a land manager in Cambodia? At least with a one time cache in Vietnam the chances of it being removed are probably greater than the cache that has gone MIA in vietnam. thanks for listening. Look forward to starting the game soon New GPS and I'm page 5 of 105

If caches are placed in a country other then the one you live in, I think that should be up to the local cachers and the local approver to deal with land managers there, like in Cambodia. You should worry about the land manager within your own area. Welcome to Geocaching, hope you have as much fun with the hobby as we do, I just find it funny that your -2 post jumps right into this thread instead of how to find a cache in the getting started forum on your first day.

This post has been edited by Car37&Shnde: 05 March 2004 - 02:31 PM

[briansnat]

Quote

im not that computer savvy

That's pretty obvious, or you wouldn't have made such a silly mistake.

[Mopar]

ringbone, on Mar 5 2004, 05:16 PM, said:

Sorry Conspiracy theorist but its not me. unless i can be in two places at once and im not that computer savvy

Well, if you WERE computer savvy, you might understand things like IP addresses and protocols, and the info you send to another computer such as the one running this forum. You might also understand server logs that show that stuff, as well as admin rights in forum software that probably displays that info for the admins when they view posts.
So, since Moron...errr Oronma isnt you, why would Ringbone post this just 1 minute before Oronma did? Why would ringbonewhoisntplayinggames wonder why your post still said ringbone?

This post has been edited by Mopar: 05 March 2004 - 09:50 PM

[Sparky-Watts]

Oh, my, this is a riot!!!!! This is better than the PILTY pages!!!!!! Oh, my ribs.....this is too funny!!!!! Another zealot goofs up in the forums and bites the dust!!!!

Man, that was a really bad move, ringbone.....who's gonna listen to ya now?!?!?!?

[Team GPSaxophone]

Sparky-Watts, on Mar 5 2004, 03:58 PM, said:

Oh, my, this is a riot!!!!! This is better than the PILTY pages!!!!!! Oh, my ribs.....this is too funny!!!!! Another zealot goofs up in the forums and bites the dust!!!!

Man, that was a really bad move, ringbone.....who's gonna listen to ya now?!?!?!?

Subigo's hiring...

[Team GPSaxophone]

Why does my post say ringbone?

[umc]

WoW, I was just re-directed to this thread and I have to say thanks for the laughs and the rules.

[Cache Viking]

Sparky-Watts, on Mar 5 2004, 02:58 PM, said:

Oh, my, this is a riot!!!!!  This is better than the PILTY pages!!!!!!  Oh, my ribs.....this is too funny!!!!!  Another zealot goofs up in the forums and bites the dust!!!!    

Man, that was a really bad move, ringbone.....who's gonna listen to ya now?!?!?!?            

I'll ditto that Sparky. Just when I was thinking this thread was going nowhere the stage acts show up.

[bob393]

The world is just full of rules! Half of which I don't agree with either.