MnGCA Home MnGCA
Minnesota Geocaching Association
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   User listUser list   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Questions about DNR policies
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    MnGCA Forum Index -> Park Relations
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
tomslusher
Geocacher


Joined: 02 Jan 2003

Posts: 182

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 8:07 pm    Post subject: Questions about DNR policies Reply with quote

To pearhead or MnGCA president,

I guess I am not sure how this question should be asked as I don't want anyone to fly off the handle, but I still feel it is one that needs an answer. And you may claim that it has already been answered but I have been unable to find it so please humor me and answer my question.

I am under the impression there are past and ongoing discussions of what MnGCA wants for a policy from the MN DNR concerning geocaching and MnGCA has started to formulate a plan on how MnGCA will accomplish this.

1) What does MnGCA hope for or what will our ideal geocaching policy look like?

2) Is the board satisfied with the current policy? Is the board planning on waiting out the year and hoping the MN DNR will change it? Does the board want to be more aggressive and start talks with legislators to force the DNR to work with geocachers?

3) How does MnGCA propose we accomplish these goals?

4) Has any discussions taken place with any officials from the DNR since they implemented their policy of only earth caches (that the board is aware of)?

5) Has the MnGCA board polled members or in any other way surveyed it's membership to see what they (the membership) would like to see for a DNR policy? Or how that goal would best be accomplished? And if so, please share the results.

6) If, for some reason, the MnGCA board feels this should be kept confidential, can you please calmly and simply explain why this needs to be so.


tomslusher
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pear Head
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 04 Apr 2004

Posts: 5708

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 9:25 pm    Post subject: Re: Questions about DNR policies Reply with quote

tomslusher wrote:
I guess I am not sure how this question should be asked as I don't want anyone to fly off the handle, but I still feel it is one that needs an answer.


Hi Tom (and everyone else). I'll do my best to answer the questions you have below. A lot of the content of the questions hasn't been official discussed among the board members, so I can't speak for all of them. Much of the topics below will be discussed in further detail during our first board meeting which will be held in a couple of weeks.

Quote:
1) What does MnGCA hope for or what will our ideal geocaching policy look like?


Although we haven't official discussed this, I believe the ideal would be something very similar or identical to the Duluth policy. At the same time I understand that such a policy is not likely, although that would be the "ideal".

Quote:
2) Is the board satisfied with the current policy? Is the board planning on waiting out the year and hoping the MN DNR will change it? Does the board want to be more aggressive and start talks with legislators to force the DNR to work with geocachers?


I don't believe the board is satisfied with the current policy, no. Our plans are not to wait out the year, no. I think all understand that it is not likely to change if we leave it for the DNR to do on their own.

At this point we haven't decided to start talks with legislators to force the DNR, no. The reasons why are best described in the answer to #3 below.

Quote:
3) How does MnGCA propose we accomplish these goals?


We are planning/working on establishing a line of communication with one or more higher-up DNR officials. My point of view on this, and again I can't speak for the rest of the board, is to try and approach this from within the DNR first. If (and many say when) that fails, we'll have to look and start acting on other approaches.

Quote:
4) Has any discussions taken place with any officials from the DNR since they implemented their policy of only earth caches (that the board is aware of)?


As far as I know, no. We are working on establishing communications, but we've been waiting to see what we would learn from the Three Rivers policy meeting as (I believe) the DNR has pulled a lot of the information about geocaching from Three Rivers. Now that the Three Rivers discussions have basically passed we'll be moving full speed ahead on the DNR. I wouldn't anticipate much movement before the upcoming MnGCA board meeting.

Quote:
5) Has the MnGCA board polled members or in any other way surveyed it's membership to see what they (the membership) would like to see for a DNR policy? Or how that goal would best be accomplished? And if so, please share the results.


Informally, yes. There is a thread (linked below) that I started before I became a board member that allowed members to speak up about what we should have for a policy. There was some discussion (the second thread linked below) about how it would best be accomplished, but the thread was locked (I don't want to restart the whole argument on WHY it was locked). I believe that the discussion on the proposed policy is still open - we're all still interested in hearing constructive comments there. The discussion on how to go about it was locked. I don't want to say that we're not interested in the comments about how we should go about it, but we basically have two different approaches on how to do it, and we've chosen one path (at some point you have to make a choice, and for that subject it's been made).

Arrow Proposed MNDNR State Park Geocaching Policy

Arrow MN State Park Earthcaching and Virtualcaching Guidelines

Quote:
6) If, for some reason, the MnGCA board feels this should be kept confidential, can you please calmly and simply explain why this needs to be so.


Hopefully I've been able to answer your questions satisfactorally. Keep in mind that the answers I have given above are not a board consensus, they are my personal views (as a board member) on the situation. A lot more will hopefully start happening in mid December.

Have a good Thanksgiving!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
miles58
Geocacher


Joined: 07 Mar 2005

Posts: 196

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 10:10 am    Post subject: Re: Questions about DNR policies Reply with quote

Although we haven't official discussed this, I believe the ideal would be something very similar or identical to the Duluth policy. At the same time I understand that such a policy is not likely, although that would be the "ideal".

Quote:
3) How does MnGCA propose we accomplish these goals?


We are planning/working on establishing a line of communication with one or more higher-up DNR officials. My point of view on this, and again I can't speak for the rest of the board, is to try and approach this from within the DNR first. If (and many say when) that fails, we'll have to look and start acting on other approaches.

Quote:
5) Has the MnGCA board polled members or in any other way surveyed it's membership to see what they (the membership) would like to see for a DNR policy? Or how that goal would best be accomplished? And if so, please share the results.


Informally, yes. There is a thread (linked below) that I started before I became a board member that allowed members to speak up about what we should have for a policy. There was some discussion (the second thread linked below) about how it would best be accomplished, but the thread was locked (I don't want to restart the whole argument on WHY it was locked). I believe that the discussion on the proposed policy is still open - we're all still interested in hearing constructive comments there. The discussion on how to go about it was locked. I don't want to say that we're not interested in the comments about how we should go about it, but we basically have two different approaches on how to do it, and we've chosen one path (at some point you have to make a choice, and for that subject it's been made).


Who is we? You got a mouse in your pocket? If MNGCA locks the thread discussing the matter then MNGCA is not listening to it's members and the WE must be board members. If the board is discussing this then post the meeting minutes. You certainly cannot be claiming to be listening to members since it was you personally who had the thread locked that was attempting to find out the truth about what contact was made with the DNR and by whom.

If you please. Who from MNGCA talked to whom in the DNR and on what occasions? You want to be a board member and represent people, then get us that information. Get it soon and get it complete and accurate.

If you cannot or will not get that information then get out of the way and I will file an MGDPA request and get full documentation myself. But if you choose that route either because you cannot or will not present the information yourself then at least have the grace that god gave rabbit turds and quit claiming to represent anyone other than yourself.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jaywc7
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Sep 2004

Posts: 360

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is on topic, but a slight tangent - since I haven't really posted here yet...

What I don't understand, is why the MnGCA represents all geocachers in MN in dealing with the DNR despite the fact that many geocachers in MN aren't a part of the MnGCA at all?

I'm sure the MnGCA is the largest organization of geocachers in MN, but isn't and never will be exclusive.

I feel like the MnGCA is lobbying to the MNDNR for changes that effect people the MnGCA doesn't even represent. It's not like this is a democracy and the MnGCA is the government. Geocaching is not about the MnGCA - it's about geocaching!

Whether I agree with what is being done or not is irrelevant. What I don't like, is that the MnGCA is the face of all geocachers in the state of Minnesota as far as the DNR is concerned. When I decided to be a geocacher, I just signed up on GC.com and started caching in MN.

I feel like the organization of geocachers in large volume and devastating effects on the environment where geocaches are stationed is actually giving the DNR, Counties, Parks, State all reason to create laws and rules to suppress geocaching.

All you have to do is read a little Edward Abbey to know that the people of the park service don't neccesarily want "outsiders" roaming around "their" parks and protected land. Most of them like it better when we sit and watch our TV rather then get outside and make a new trail in a state park.

I would like to see geocaching permited everywhere! But not now - not yet. From what I have found, we are not responsible enough to geocache on land that has been preserved. We adopt the policy of CITO, but I can find lots of litter around geocaches if I want to. We place geocaches in areas that require new trails and rummaging around destroying whatever we pass (without even realizing it). C'mon people - just cause the trees are still standing, doesn't mean you didn't impact the environment in that particular place... I think we need to earn the responsibility of geocaching in state parks, rather then demand it. This has become such a "game" to so many of us. I don't care for the political organization much, but that doesn't mean geocaching is a game. The fact is - we are outside, there is enough of us to make an impact on the environment, and we have two choices : 1 - We make a good impact. 2 - We make a bad impact.

Right now - I see the wrong one happenining, but nobody is admiting it...

Frankly - I don't blame anybody right now who want's geocaching out of protected area...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
King Boreas
Geocacher


Joined: 16 Dec 2002

Posts: 2442

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Happy Thanksgiving.

You know what? I THINK I get two warnings, so that means I can waste one.

Is this editted by SB worth it? edited by SB the DNR. I'm tired of reading all this crap. I know I choose to read it. Why? I don't know.

Anyway, I will never place a cache in a State Park, and I will never look for one there. There are WAY too many little gems in this state to put up with all their edited by SB.

Happy Thanksgiving.
_________________
Joined: 16 Dec 2002

arrive...raise heck...leave (SCSA)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Arcticabn
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 30 Nov 2003

Posts: 1846

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:28 am    Post subject: Re: Questions about DNR policies Reply with quote

miles58 wrote:
Who is we? You got a mouse in your pocket? If MNGCA locks the thread discussing the matter then MNGCA is not listening to it's members and the WE must be board members. If the board is discussing this then post the meeting minutes. You certainly cannot be claiming to be listening to members since it was you personally who had the thread locked that was attempting to find out the truth about what contact was made with the DNR and by whom.


Just how do you know that we are not listening to the members. Just because there are several of you that are very vocal here on the board does not mean that a host of members have not contacted us with their opinions. Several have contacted me personally and specifically requested not to be identifed on the forum for fear that they will be abused just as the members and others that have spoken up differently from you have. So don't assume that we are not listening just because we have not followed your specific format. There are others out there that also have spoken to us.

miles58 wrote:
If you cannot or will not get that information then get out of the way and I will file an MGDPA request and get full documentation myself. But if you choose that route either because you cannot or will not present the information yourself then at least have the grace that god gave rabbit turds and quit claiming to represent anyone other than yourself.


You are a free individual to do as you wish. What you are not free to do is to represent yourself as a representative of the MnGCA. We have no authority to stop you from taking any individual action or action on behalf of another organization within the state. I think that it is even fair to state that you are a member of the MnGCA. But you do not represent the organization in your actions.
_________________
Airborne All the Way!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jaywc7
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Sep 2004

Posts: 360

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Happy Thanksgiving.

You know what? I THINK I get two warnings, so that means I can waste one.

Is this **** worth it? **** the DNR. I'm tired of reading all this crap. I know I choose to read it. Why? I don't know.

Anyway, I will never place a cache in a State Park, and I will never look for one there. There are WAY too many little gems in this state to put up with all their ******** edited by SB.

Happy Thanksgiving.


WELL SAID KB - I THINK I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH YOU!


Last edited by jaywc7 on Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:35 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jaywc7
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Sep 2004

Posts: 360

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
But you do not represent the organization in your actions.


These days,,, who would want to? Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pear Head
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 04 Apr 2004

Posts: 5708

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:36 am    Post subject: Re: Questions about DNR policies Reply with quote

Dave -

I'm not going to let this get drawn into a long argument again - we get nowhere with them. If you want information, I'll do my best to provide or point you to what I can. If you want to offer an opinion, then do so here or in the other appropriate threads. I'm not willing to rehash what has already been debated here.

miles58 wrote:
If the board is discussing this then post the meeting minutes.


It's hard to post meeting minutes since this board hasn't had a meeting yet. All of the minutes that are available can be accessed thought your profile screen.

Quote:
If you please. Who from MNGCA talked to whom in the DNR and on what occasions? You want to be a board member and represent people, then get us that information. Get it soon and get it complete and accurate.


I haven't been with the organization much longer than you have. Unfortunately I don't have file cabinets full of DNR transcripts and letters.

I do have this thread, which is in this same forum. I'm not sure if it has all of the information you're looking for or not, but it's the best history that I know of at the moment. I will do a little looking around to see if I can come up with more, but off the top of my head I'm not aware of anything else dealing with past dealings with the DNR.

Arrow http://www.mngca.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=108

The problem is that there ISN'T much of a written history, best I can tell.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
jaywc7
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Sep 2004

Posts: 360

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
put up with all their ******** edited by SB.


Laughing

I edited it out of respect, but it wasn't good enough. (bull - as in the animal?)

What a bunch of Turkey! Shocked Can I say that?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Arcticabn
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 30 Nov 2003

Posts: 1846

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jaywc7 wrote:
What I don't understand, is why the MnGCA represents all geocachers in MN in dealing with the DNR despite the fact that many geocachers in MN aren't a part of the MnGCA at all?


I don't believe that this board or any previous board has ever stated that it represents all of the geocaching community. I believe we state that we represent the MnGCA which is part of the geocaching community. We may be the largest or not. I don't know. I'm not aware of any other organized geocaching organization in Mn. I am aware of a couple of other discussion groups but that doesn't make them an organization.


jaywc7 wrote:
I feel like the MnGCA is lobbying to the MNDNR for changes that effect people the MnGCA doesn't even represent. It's not like this is a democracy and the MnGCA is the government. Geocaching is not about the MnGCA - it's about geocaching!


[quote="jaywc7"]In my opinion (either as an individual or a board member) is that you are right on point here. Which is a definate reason that we are moving slowly. We don't represent all of the geocahers in the state or those that may visit our state. What we do represent is a small (right now very small) organization that is interested in an outdoor recreational sport and sees an issue with the DNR policy. The same point you make here is also true of any of the outspoken individual here. Moreover, any proposed policy that we may proposed may differ from a proposed policy from any other individual here on this forum or other websites. This is what makes the approach so difficult. The approach to the DNR is haphazard and not representative of the sport. My personal opinion therefore (not as a board member) is that the optimal DNR policy is one that is similiar to other state policies that are open to geocaching. It therefore won't take into account any of our individual opinions that may differ. As long as we appear to be fighting with each other we have zero credability with anyone internal or external to our organization.

jaywc7 wrote:
Whether I agree with what is being done or not is irrelevant. What I don't like, is that the MnGCA is the face of all geocachers in the state of Minnesota as far as the DNR is concerned. When I decided to be a geocacher, I just signed up on GC.com and started caching in MN.


Again, I can argue with your comment here. It's accurate. Why is the MnGCA the face. Because it is the only one visible and have ever made an attempt. GC.com could care less whether the DNR changes its policy or not. They will not get involved in a state matter. They are running a successful game and it doesn't matter to them whether we get another 100 caches approved in State Parks or not.

jaywc7 wrote:
I would like to see geocaching permited everywhere! But not now - not yet. From what I have found, we are not responsible enough to geocache on land that has been preserved. We adopt the policy of CITO, but I can find lots of litter around geocaches if I want to. We place geocaches in areas that require new trails and rummaging around destroying whatever we pass (without even realizing it). C'mon people - just cause the trees are still standing, doesn't mean you didn't impact the environment in that particular place... I think we need to earn the responsibility of geocaching in state parks, rather then demand it. This has become such a "game" to so many of us. I don't care for the political organization much, but that doesn't mean geocaching is a game. The fact is - we are outside, there is enough of us to make an impact on the environment, and we have two choices : 1 - We make a good impact. 2 - We make a bad impact.


Again very accurate assessment. I also agree that as a group we are not as responsible as we should. However, the MnGCA is not an enforcement organization to the sport. What we as members of the MnGCA can do is promote responsible caching. We can hold educational seminars and attempt to reach out and improve our sport. This is one reason that I stated in my acceptance for the nomination to VP that the DNR issue was not of a high priority to me personally. I thought that we had a long way to go as an organization and a caching community as a whole before we get the DNR to accept caching is state parks which may only add the potential of a couple hundred additional caches in the state.
_________________
Airborne All the Way!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
miles58
Geocacher


Joined: 07 Mar 2005

Posts: 196

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I began this by trying to help. I began this patiently and politely. I got evasive answers and lost patience and polity.

In order to deal with the DNR after the fact like this we must know who had what discussions with whom inside the DNR so that we can understand what went wrong. From asking my contacts inside the DNR I already knew there had been some contact and that it had been the trigger.

Saxton, then a sitting board member, had the following exchange with PTO, the language has been cleaned up and emphasis added by me:

"Don't pass this on much as some of this rather bad for
me to be saying politically. At least you'll get my
private and honest take.

pto wrote:
This statement (to me) implies that much of the work
done this year was to "fix" problems created in the
past by former boards - or "do things right" because
they either werent done, or done poorly in the past.
Although Iev been around a long time, I dont recall
who the previous boards were. So my question is this:
How many people involved in the past boards are still
around,still involved, still contributing to the
board?


Nobody from the previous Board is around much. 15Tango
posts now and then (but did nothing on the Board when
he was on it), Centris edited by SB about edited by SB (she was one
of the founding members and has been a royal pain edited by SB since) and Towlebooth was also a founding
member and became the webmaster, but he resigned the
same day I put my foot down after he wasn't doing his
job. The previous Board also had JT, but he barely did
anything (he's done NOTHING this term and it's almost
offensive to me that he's running for a position when
he should be resigning as he's the one who 100%
dropped the ball on the DNR stuff). The person that
really did work on the last Board was a guy named RJ,
who is a really great guy, but he got so burned out
about a) Doing all the work and b) people complaining
when they didn't agree but yet not doing anything
about it.

Quote:
I guess what Im getting at is, I got the impression
from SB's post that the past boards screwed everything
up, and this board is "here to fix it"
Arent some/many of the same people involved in
previous Boards, also here now ? Arent those people
offended? shuold they be, or should it be embarrased?
Are any former board members, on the board now?


They should be ashamed, yes, but most of them don't
ever even log in anymore. The only people that really
still chime in are 15T, Towle and Centris as far as I
remember.

Quote:
Obviously, the more new people who get involved, the
better mix of people can be elected to the board- but
if the last 3-4 boards are a revolving set of
basically the same people - how is it anything can be
accomplished?


The only person that was on the previous Board that is
on this Board is JT. Out of the current Board, only
Silent Bob will be on the next one (unless JT wins
being Member at Large, which I oppose).

Quote:
This board HAS made progress - so again, im curious if
it was because of new people on board, or the past
board members giving way to the new school of thought?


The past Board members are out of the picture. The
progress about the organization of the MnGCA, the
Lester Park Bash and notably the Duluth Policy were
done by me and Silent Bob and really nobody else. All
of the day-to-day work throughout this year has been
done by Silent Bob and I.

Quote:
All just curious thoughts in my head- I didnt want to
post it to the main forum, becuase it is really just
my curiousity - and I dont want to offend anybody by
asking.


Actually, what would happen is that a lot of time
would end up getting wasted by 100 people chiming in
with crap when they don't know what they're talking
about.

Quote:
Speaking of, i hope nothing i typed here was in any
way offensive to you- I 100% do NOT mean anything
sarcastic, rude or otherwise by asking you these
questions. I came to you, mostly because of your post,
stating you are now at #4 on the list (Geocacher A
finally has enough, stops helping, and either goes
away completly or just focuses on the sport rather
than the organization. You are still willing to be on
the board, so did you Now become a #4, or did you get
on the board as a #4?


I was pumped to help revive the organization and turn
it around. With my work with Silent Bob, we were able
to do that. The other Board members we had trailing
along and we framed things in a way so all they had to
do was "agree" or "disagree" most of the time, because
they wouldn't get much more involved than that. I have
been very pleased about the work that I've done and
the work that Silent Bob has done, but what it all
boils down to now is the DNR stuff. This was JT's
responsibility and Silent Bob and I were sick of doing
all of JT's work. JT dropped the ball, and now Silent
Bob and I are simply just trying to do damage control.

Quote:
I guess I just am trying to figure out whether or not
its even worth my time to think towards next years
election.
I know several other cachers who have been kicking
around the idea of running, but we all kind of
hesitate - mostly because most of us have felt
unwelcome here by the treatment we recieve.


What we've been trying to do is get people to talk
about the policy, because honestly, JT hasn't done
that on the Board. When Silent Bob and I brought up
ideas and basically *forced* him to contact the DNR to
begin talks, it was pulling teeth.

It was a mistake on my part, perhaps, to try to get
our membership to come up with their own ideas
instead, instead of the Board simply listening and
trying to understand their thoughts and creating our
own proposed policy. The Board should be representing
the people, but the Board should not be putting Board
tasks on the shoulders of the membership at large. It
just makes it too confusing for everyone, and not
everyone is in the best seat to be creating policy and
dictating negotiation. That should be done at the
Board level. Again, it was a mistake on my part to try
to get people stirring about it. I tried to see what
would happen in lieu of JT not doing his job.

We honestly are trying to hear everyone's point of
view on the policy, but there is way too much bitching
about how it's being handled. The reason it's handled
poorly is because the president did jack edited by SB, and
he's a horrible negotiator in the first place. The
MnGCA Board (i.e. Silent Bob and I) are interested in
hearing everyone's point of view, honestly. We simply
are having a hard time with people edited by SB about how
we're supposed to work with the DNR, which is nothing
we can do about or decide and is best to be organized
by the Board, and not the membership at large.

People were feeling shut out (notably miles58) when we
told them basically to shut the edited by SB up about
derailing the conversation over and over again. The
point is that we want to hear everyone's point of
view, and not to have a few edited by SB up the DNR
threads with their bitching about how it's being
handled (and not providing any insight to the policy
itself, which is what was actually need and want).

Again, I repeat, we want to hear people's points of
view, which is why we don't have much tolerance for
people that want to change the subject to something
else and shun other people's points of view.

Quote:
Final ? - do you think its worth the time investment,
or should we just keep on cachin in MN, and quit
worrying about making things better for the
organization.


Not worth it. What I've told a bunch of people, and
it's advice I'm starting to take myself: Get off the
computer and go out caching. That's what I'm doing
when I resign at the end of my term in October.

Quote:
Sorry, so long and rambling- I had to stop a couple
times while typing this, so my thoughts all
intertwined, rambled, etc-

Pete


No problem.

Right now, Silent Bob will do fine as president. He's
got more motivation than anyone and I sincerely
believe he does work in the best interests of cachers
in the state.

The main guy I wanted on the Board, and I spent a
serious amount of time (months) courting is Pear Head.
I'm extremely thankful that he decided to be on the
Board, and he's the kind of guy I can see being
president in 2007.

Sui Generis has a good legal background that will help
a lot, but he's gotta learn not to feed trolls. He's
rather detailed oriented which will make him the best
secretary we've ever had.

ArcticAbn is an extremely organized and motivated guy
that can be put to task and get the job done.

It's just that Memeber at Large position I'm worried
about. I wish Paklid would change his mind and decide
to accept his nomination (he hasn't formally declined
it yet). Paklid is a very good speaker, a decent
negotiator, and our primary contact with the DNR at
this point.

There's my private thoughts on the current state of
things.

-Aaron

I Think according to Saxton and Silent Bob (the board) I correctly perceived that information was being concealed, and that they were shutting people out of the discussion.


I also believe that my perception of backchannel communication between Pear Head and Saxton and Silent Bob was correct, and that the three of them discussed shutting down the inquiry into what happened.

Saxton admits to basically telling me to "shut edited by SB up", and that also is the distinct impression I got from trying to find out what was being hidden.

If Saxton is to be believed, Silent Bob's protestations of nothing being hidden and nothing being misrepresented are a crock of... well you know. If he is not, then what is he misrepresenting to PTO and elsewhere in the forums as an officer of the MNGCA?

Arcticabn, who likes to refer to people who don't agree with him as trolls, was notified of what appeared to be subversion of MNGCA by "the Board" of Saxton and Silent Bob who aside from their obvious and explicitly stated disregard for member input should be noted do not constitute either a majority or a quorum. He chose not to even ask what made me suggest that.

I do not like it when people who claim to represent me make misrepresentations of fact. It certainly looks like that was done here, and done with purpose. I am stuck in MNGCA as a member in perpetuity since there is no way to disassociate myself wholly. I cannot unjoin. As long as I am a member and this board wants to represent the membership there is a degree of obligation to the membership that I feel must be pointed out.

I have done so.

I it is at all possible please remove all membership information for me from this organization. If you cannot do that, then like I told Pear Head, have the grace god gave rabbit turds and stop telling me to shut the edited by SB up and stop telling me things that are not true.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Regardless of what Aaron told pto in private (which should have been kept as such until the time that Aaron or pto decided to make it public -- a third party has no such rights based on ethics IMHO) is only one person's interpretation of events. I'm not about to go into what I believe happened because you, and your group of feather rufflers (sorry its Thanksgiving) are here only to stir the pot and cause aggrivation for EVERYONE that doesn't feel the need to respond to you for fear of your constant attacks.

If you want to leave, edit your cacher profile and switch to Cache Games Only. You're done. You are no longer a member and won't be misrepresented as such. You are just a website user and have no bearing on any data, reports, or otherwise that we present to any parks district.

You might want to also considering removing yourself from geocaching.com as well because we use data compiled from stats that you make available there to present as an overall picture of geocaching in Minnesota.

BTW -- All edits made to miles58's posting of the private communications between pto and s4xton were to remove inappropriate content. Putting *'s to eliminate a few letters of words doesn't change the meaning. It's still inappropriate and will be edited to keep this Forum family friendly.

Happy Thanksgiving.
_________________
Sad state of affairs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
s4xton
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 23 Mar 2003

Posts: 1070

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Happy Thanksgiving.

I'm pretty confident that if people actually read what I've said and what else has been said they'll have a pretty clear picture of what's going on. I still stand behind what I said and what I've done, and anyone who is interested in understanding the situation will read what's been said and probably make a much more intelligent conclusion than what miles and pto created. By posting what I've said in private only hurts your crusade. Try actually reading what I said.

No need for me to respond further.

Happy Thanksgiving!

-Aaron
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
miles58
Geocacher


Joined: 07 Mar 2005

Posts: 196

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

s4xton wrote:
Happy Thanksgiving.

I'm pretty confident that if people actually read what I've said and what else has been said they'll have a pretty clear picture of what's going on. I still stand behind what I said and what I've done, and anyone who is interested in understanding the situation will read what's been said and probably make a much more intelligent conclusion than what miles and pto created. By posting what I've said in private only hurts your crusade. Try actually reading what I said.

No need for me to respond further.

Happy Thanksgiving!

-Aaron


[LOG] Owner: s4xton requested Rock & Hard Place (Traditional Cache) to be archived Inbox

noreply@geocaching.com
to me
More options 2:08 pm (1 hour ago)
This is an automated message from Geocaching.com

You are receiving this email because you are the owner of this listing.

Location: Minnesota, United States
s4xton requested Rock & Hard Place (Traditional Cache) to be archived at 11/24/2005

Log Date: 11/24/2005
This cache is in the St. Croix National Scenic Riverway, under control of the National Park Service. Geocaching is not allowed on these grounds.

Visit this log entry at the below address:
http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=c8a2324b-fef2-48f9-a92a-f2d22e9da22a

Visit Rock & Hard Place
http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=2e1ebeef-1d30-4f5f-b318-a295b01ab884

Profile for s4xton:
http://www.geocaching.com/profile/?guid=c2c47c0a-2ae7-4170-9b5d-4a56702afaca


[LOG] Owner: s4xton requested Canoe Landing (Traditional Cache) to be archived Inbox

noreply@geocaching.com
to me
More options 2:05 pm (1 hour ago)
This is an automated message from Geocaching.com

You are receiving this email because you are the owner of this listing.

Location: Minnesota, United States
s4xton requested Canoe Landing (Traditional Cache) to be archived at 11/24/2005

Log Date: 11/24/2005
This cache is in the St. Croix National Scenic Riverway, under control of the National Park Service. Geocaching is not allowed on these grounds.

Visit this log entry at the below address:
http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=bec6d8b7-3d3f-4c6c-a472-ecb104d3ee80

Visit Canoe Landing
http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=20f583e0-a92e-4b4c-9665-97be76869ea5

Profile for s4xton:
http://www.geocaching.com/profile/?guid=c2c47c0a-2ae7-4170-9b5d-4a56702afaca

Aaron,

If you don't feel so good about yourself it's not worth taking a whack at the whole caching community. mtn-man is no fool. He knows well that neither of those caches are in NPS administered land. He was given the pages for the NPS maps and the MNDNR maps for Interstate Park with the submission.

I don't see any need to attack you or SB, you both seem to be fine examples of what I am describing, and you do not seem inhibited in the least about doing precisely what you wrongly accuse others of. If you are going to go about trying to sabotage a couple of fine caches I think it''s time for you to get out of caching altogether. If it's not you way you obviously don't want to see it at all. You made that clear by word and deed. This was as graceless and classless an action as your archiving of Centris' CITO cache in what sure looks now like another fit of pique.

Pear Head,

This is why I said I didn't think you had the judgement. I at least have done what I can to dissociate myself from these people. Have You?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    MnGCA Forum Index -> Park Relations All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Geocaching Cache Icons, Copyright 2009, Groundspeak Inc. All rights reserved. Used with Permission.