Squid Tempest
|
Re: GeoCaching
Jan 22, 2003, 13:35
|
Kaipath,
Rhiannon is right - this is a friendly place, honest. It may not seem it to you given the replies you've had, but I'm afraid this geocaching lark has touched a nerve, as you may have guessed.
|
grufty jim
|
one man's litter. . . .
Jan 22, 2003, 13:40
|
>
> Oh, and it's not littering. See the Cache
> In-Trash Out part of the website.
>
Ummmm... it *is* littering. You may not consider a metal box containing "a packet of water bombs, a set of juggling balls, a magic trick, a novelty sharpener, a log book and pencil" to be litter at a sacred site. I do, i'm afraid. And you'll not convince me otherwise i'm afraid.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: WTF!?!
Jan 22, 2003, 13:40
|
Definitely to boost hits. And hanging about so long continuing the argument is part of the same thing (the bloke who reckons there's a face on Mars has people spamming science forums full time for weeks on end to keep the arguments going).
Alternatively: a culture clash between grownups and sad little hobbyists. For Geocasher read metal detectorist, same limited academic attention span, same insistence that they are God's gift to conservation.
Incidentally, what's this about "within sight of a monument"? Why, for God's sake?
|
Kaipaith
|
Re: GeoCaching
Jan 22, 2003, 13:41
|
Which I fully understand, but I must say I believe that the response is misguided.
Although I've tried to explain otherwise, everyone here seems to believe that Geocachers are seeking to destroy monuments, or to aesthetically intrude upon the countryside. That is most definately not the case - in fact, it is quite the opposite. Most Geocachers actually tidy up any litter they come across while on a hunt.
However, in response, I've had threats of violence (albeit half jokingly - "Chopped up Geocacher", anyone? - nevertheless, it does worry me that someone here might fly off the handle at a family of cachers), and people seem to be jumping to all of the wrong conclusions.
I understand you are a friendly bunch... and I can understand the response (to a degree) but the profanity and threats are not a nice welcome!
|
Kaipaith
|
Re: GeoCaching
Jan 22, 2003, 13:47
|
Just a quick case in point... from another poster.
"Alternatively: a culture clash between grownups and sad little hobbyists."
Why the need to resort to personal insults? We are all grownups, and we can have informed discussions based upon that level of understanding, surely, without having to throw perjorative terms like that around.
|
Rhiannon
|
Re: Why not?
Jan 22, 2003, 13:47
|
|
please don't chop me up but I put alton priors on a while back. But it has got sarsens inside so I felt justified.
|
lobsterboy
|
Re: one man's litter. . . .
Jan 22, 2003, 13:53
|
Fair point,
but considering that a walk on a winters day reveals that there are normally huge amounts of litter in our countryside that you can see - the one piece you can't (left there with the landowners permission) seems not much to weorry about.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: GeoCaching
Jan 22, 2003, 13:53
|
I think you've proved my point, by not highlighting my other theory...
"Definitely to boost hits. And hanging about so long continuing the argument is part of the same thing (the bloke who reckons there's a face on Mars has people spamming science forums full time for weeks on end to keep the arguments going)."
This is a site about ancient sites. There's nothing for you here, no-one agrees with you, and you're off topic, so why should you persist?
|
Squid Tempest
|
Re: GeoCaching
Jan 22, 2003, 13:55
|
it's the strong feelings that have been aroused by this I'm afraid. The folks here wouldn't say boo to a goose on the whole, but issues like these tend to get the hackles raised.
Perhaps a bit of background wouldn't go amiss. There have been similar discussions on this site going back some time now regarding the leaving of "offerings" at ancient sites. While the folk who do this think they are showing reverence for the site, most of the TMA crew (myself included) think that wedging pennies in crack in stones or burning candles on them (which leaves sooty marks and destroys lichen deposits) is sheer vandalism. Basically, anything which could potentially damage or disfigure a site is frowned upon, and I'm afraid geocaching fits the bill here, despite what you say about not littering. Please don't take it personally, it's just that a lot of us TMA folks are on a bit of a mission to protect these places at all costs.
Peace and Noise,
Squid
|
Rhiannon
|
Re: WTF!?!
Jan 22, 2003, 13:57
|
You can wind people up about theoretical things like the face on mars, and it's only going to up people's blood pressure. It doesn't have any other physical effect. But hiding ammo boxes of tat is physically changing a site, and like grufty jim says, it's litter alright.
I don't know. Normal spamming is just to fuck up a discussion for a laugh: do you think these geocachers spammed our site for a laugh? Maybe they did or maybe they do genuinely enjoy leaving crap round the countryside and misguidedly thought we might too.
Time to straighten the antimacassars and get a cup of tea.
|
