[GeoStL] Re: rules, we don't need no rules …

  • From: Maggie Madonia <letsride94@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:01:39 -0600

I have done the same.. I am sure I won't slide off this cliff, yes I am
sure gravity will not prevail!

Maggie

On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 9:37 AM, <ghavens@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Following gmalibby got me in about the same spot!
> 1st lady
> Sent from my U.S. Cellular BlackBerry® smartphone
> ------------------------------
> *From: * Glenn <gln.htc@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Sender: * geocaching-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Date: *Thu, 19 Jan 2012 09:23:18 -0600
> *To: *geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *ReplyTo: * geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject: *[GeoStL] Re: rules, we don't need no rules …
>
> True enough that but by the time I have figured out that a cache is just
> way stupid, I am way to far into "no mans land"  laying upside down in a
> ditch someplace. By that point I might as well sign the durn logbook and
> get the heck out before I get caught. The poor placement has already
> happened, I have already done it and who k ones who may have been
> approached in the past by this less then optimal placement.
>
> I guess I am a slow learner but by the point I am saying "just why the
> heck are we here?", it's too late. And no, the getting chased at gunpoint
> by a guy on an ATV was pretty much my fault. 😨 and we took the LONG way
> back to the car!  ouch
>
> Glenn
> Via iP-4
>
>
> On Jan 19, 2012, at 8:54 AM, Maggie Madonia <letsride94@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Agreed but just like geocache placements common sense is not a
> requirement.  That is where it defaults to me as the finder.
> On Jan 19, 2012 8:50 AM, "Glenn" <gln.htc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Grandfathered!! I like that.
> >
> > In the absence of rules common sense should prevail.
> >
> > I really like the addition of the playground sentence.
> >
> > Glenn
> > Via iP-4
> >
> >
> > On Jan 19, 2012, at 8:29 AM, Maggie Madonia <letsride94@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> >> In defense of those you may deem rules broken...  they were placed
> before Munzee had "rules".
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:13 AM, <steve.bromley@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I wonder how many 'Munzee' deployers have actually read these rules?
> I've seen a lot of these rules broken with some Munzee's.
> >>>
> >>> On , Glenn <GLNash@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> > glad to see no one reads their rules either.   :-)
> >>> >
> >>> > Begin forwarded message:
> >>> >
> >>> > Rules for placing a Munzee
> >>> > Munzees must be placed according to (but not limited to) the
> following rules:A Munzee needs to be placed in a manner that promotes safe
> and reasonable gameplay.The placement of a munzee and the actions taken
> needing to capture it must not break any local, state or federal laws.A
> Munzee cannot be placed on private property without permission. This needs
> to be granted from the property representative or owner (not the barista*)A
> Munzee cannot be placed on airport property. Suspicious activity at an
> airport is going to be a problem.A Munzee cannot be placed within 500 feet
> of a municipal building, school, playground, pool, or memorial area.A
> Munzee needs to be placed a 'reasonable distance' away from other
> Munzees.There is not a currently a set rule, however it is a strong
> guideline. Over-saturation is no fun for anyone!Munzees cannot be located
> in the same place. No "bonus" hides allowed.Place your Munzee with respect
> to the local environment.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Glenn
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>
> >>
>
>

Other related posts: