quote:

Originally posted by mtn-man:

Yeah, really and truly I feel the same way. I have been offered a complimentary membership each year for the volunteer work I do as a reviewer. I still pay each year. One thing Hydee did do was make the puppymonster a Premium Member for kicks last year. LOL!

A complimentary premium membership is the LEAST GC can do for hard-working volunteer approvers! Y'all are awesome! (Contrary to some snide comments to the contrary elsewhere, we have no problems or complaints about any of the GA or TN approvers and they are not why we are also active with Terracaching.) It's not an either/or situation. It's all fun stuff to hunt! Likewise letterboxes and Geodashes.

Some days we want steak, some days burgers, some days pure pasta ...

quote:

Originally posted by mrmnjewel:
I'm curious enough to take a look. Number of caches available will determine if I hang.

Very few in GA so far -- go set a couple and we will come hunt 'em! (And set some more while we're there!)

TC posts leadership boards based on number of finds and difficulty of finds. So far, we're top of the chart in TN and AZ even though our home coordinates are in GA ! That's due to the proportionate number of TC finds we have logged in each state.

The guy who runs TC and does all the advanced stats and math behind the ranking/rating formulas must be an over-the-top mathematician -- or else has too much time on his hands (Montana winters...)

quote:

Originally posted by Love GC.com:

quote:

Nice of you to show up with the unknown-comic-ish bag over you head to remain anonymous.
Maybe......but maybe my views/opinions might fit right in with some Terracachers. At least one of my approvers is a GGAr and knows me pretty well and he hasn't revoked me yet. Another GGAr offered to be a local sponsor for me too.Kenneth

Predicted defensive blog-ish/log-ish response. Hmmmm, another one to this as well?

I don't appreciate sock puppets in our forums. As a moderator here, be advised that the forum guidelines do state that we can and will delete your posts if needed. If you don't have the guts to post as yourself, please don't post at all. We defend the right of our members to post their opinions as long as they conform to the guidelines. Ken has always done that. If you don't like his post, please leave our discussion boards.

Thank you.

I don't like sock puppets either so I checked to see if I could figure out what ISP was used to do the posting.

I could and did. 'nuff said.

quote:

Originally posted by Rebel:
I don't like sock puppets either so I checked to see if I could figure out what ISP was used to do the posting.

I could and did. 'nuff said.

Which depending on how they connect and the ISP may or may not be useful.

If it had come back AOL or Earthlink or similar I wouldn't have had a clue.

quote:

Originally posted by kennethpruett:
But in their forums/faqs they say that approval of such caches is up to your approvers and if they do not have a problem with it, then it can stay.
I think their rules are more like guidelines.
They do say that co-listed caches usually get lower ratings in the system and discourage it.

As I read more threads on T.C. I found one about co-listing and the posters make it pretty clear they don't want co-listed caches on T.C.
They give good reasons why it is not a good idea, so I'd now say I would not recommend listing the same cache in both places.

Kenneth

This message has been edited. Last edited by: reepicheep,

quote:

Originally posted by JBzHOW:
The whole deal seems too complicated & exculsive to me and almost smacks of cache snobbery.

This statement implies that there isn't already a form of cache snobbery. There is.

I know all groups have cliques, but I've been surprised at how cliquish Geocaching can be.

BT