Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tozainamboku

  1. So if I understand you correctly: 1. Rate the Event for the hiking portion of the Event. 2. Allow everyone to log the Event that shows up at the trailhead, regardless of whether they attend the hiking portion of the hike. That idea should be worth at least a half dozen threads on how people are getting credit for an Event they didn't attend. I think that has about as much chance of working as a Skype Event. Challenge caches have give an imporance to the D/T ratings that they didn't traditionally have. I'm sure there are complaints when someone logs a find on a puzzle that their friend solved has gotten some difficulty rating they "don't deserve". If that is the issue, maybe the quidelines for fizzy challenges should change to not count events or puzzies? I personally have no issue with an event having D/T ratings based on the most difficult optional activity. And of course since I don't log find logs I don't care that someone who does gets that fizzy challenge grid square filled in.
  2. Optional activites are worthless when it comes to the value of Groundspeak geocaching events. Somehow the message of the new event guidelines for me is: You are in the completely wrong world and what event meant to you all disappeared all in a sudden. All activities are optional. Even the standing around for thirty minutes is optional. In order to get your smiley you only need to attend the event. I'm not sure what "attend" actually means. The consensus seems to be that you show up a the posted coordinates between the start time and the end time. It doesn't even seem to require you to be there for any minimum time. To me it appears that the guideline exist expressly to allow this definition of attended and that they have nothing at all to do with facilitating the social aspects of geocaching or making meaningful connections with other geocachers.
  3. It's not a hiking event. Of course TPTB can try to separate event from the activities that take place at the event, but most people will associate an event with the primary activity. If that primary activity is a picnic or eating pizza, then voila! your event is listed. If your primary activity is hiking then your event has to have a 30 minute standing around activity added on to it. cezanne feels that this activity becomes primary chaning the event from a hiking event to a standing around 30 minute event.
  4. It's comments like this that make me feel happy about my decision to stop logging finds online. I can now go find power-trail caches or spend a day finding only multis and puzzles and not have worry that someone will tell me that one is worth more than the other.
  5. I object to stating nothing has been banned. True you can still have a 30 km hike activity in conjunction with an event. But you certainly can't have a 10 minute flash mob event. I've been to several 10 to 15 minute flash mob events. Using the GPS to get accurate coordinates as well as time, geocachers were asked to appear at a location at a specified time and mingle for 10 or 15 minutes, then leave. I actually found it much easier to socialize at these events than ones held in a crowded noisy restaurant. The time limit force you to make connections and there was the incentive to make connections so you could continue to socialize beyond the event while searching for caches with a group. Grroundspeak may not value this kind of social interaction. I do. +1 some people like to debate. I didn't mean to sound like I was telling people to shut up. But I've debated with cezanne on other topic as well as with thebruce0 and narcissa (see my signature), and I can tell when this is debate for debate's sake or when there is some reasonable discussion. I'll probably take my own advice here and take a time out from this (and related) threads.
  6. Perhaps. Groundspeak may have good reason to feel that events have to be at one location and last at least 1/2 hour. They may truly believe that cachers can't make meaningful connections unless they are stationary for 30 minutes or more. The problem people have is that they like other activities that require you to move. In order to do these activities at an event, they are now required to have a 30 minute stationary activity as well. While that is generally simple to do, some people will see it a favoring stationary activites over activities that move. In addition, some people who have been used to having events that consisted of a single activity in the past, may feel that the guidelines now make the qualifying stationary activity "the event" and result in the real activity getting short schrift (for example, the D/T ratings are for the stationary part of the event and not the hike). While these problems may be trivial they are by no means zero problem. I wish the people who disagree with cezanne would stop trying to convince him to take a different view. If they would stop posting, all of these threads would soon fall off the front page. When you get to the point that everyone seems to be decided which side they are on, these threads become a competition for who gets the last word.
  7. You make it sound like Groundspeak has never reverted a decision. Those of use who have been around long enough know this is not the case. In this case we even know that Groundspeak has experimented with allowing some events that involved organizing cache hunts. They have seen a demand for this and appear to be looking for ways to accommodate it. In addition we know there are long standing events in many areas that were hikes (or other moving events). While we are seeing that many of these are able to work around the guideline by including a 30-minute stationary activity at some point, one has to wonder what abuse was happening when the stationary activity was only 5 minutes or when the event listing just said "Meet us for a hike. We will be leaving from xx.xxx yy.yyy. at hh:mm." There may have been some abuse, or perhaps reviewers couldn't tell if this was a hike for socializing or just to get a group to find caches. If that is so, there are suggestions on other ways to handle this. Some geocachers find it difficult to understand why moving events where you hunt caches are bad, while other events have Lab Caches or where the reviewers publish a slew of caches in conjuction with the event are OK.
  8. Again, for those hard-of-hearing at the back, I am not proposing such criteria. I am looking at the issue from a couple of different angles. But really, is it possible that there is some point, as of yet not defined, where something just ceases to resemble an event cache? Why is is this mere suggestion such a problem? Sure Groundspeak could make a guideline like they have for challenge caches But they haven't and until 30 km hikes becomes so numerous that they displace other events they probably won't. Of course it may be the case that flash mob events of less than 1/2 hour did become too numerous in some areas and TPTB decided to make a rule against them. I think part of the reason for all these threads is that some people feel the pizza parlor event or doughnuts at Tim Horton's events have become too numerous and would like to see more diversity. I'm sure there are areas that still organize day long picnics or perhaps a geocacher softball game; but it seems more and more like all events are the same. Relaxing the restraints on moving events might result in a number of different ideas, not just 30 km hikes.
  9. I have no doubt that some people log online to get a +1. There is a whole other active thread at the moment about whether cache owners have any right to expect more from the online log than "Thanks for the smiley". Strangely, I'm of the opinion that cache owners should not expect people to do more than that. But at the same time, I sure am not going to log just to get the +1. From the other thread, I'd say that there are plenty of people who would like it if Groundspeak would emphasize other reasons for logging online and not just "To get your smiley".
  10. Enough for whom / what purpose?+1 Since when is the number of people interested in a given event part of the criteria for whether the event is valid? I'm at a lost to understand the objection to an event that has a higher that 1 terrain. It was clarified back in the thread where reviewers were requiring that events be D1 that you could still have a higher terrain. The idea of the D1 is that in order to get a smiley (i.e. log attended) you just need to show up a the posted location between the start and end time. That was deemed to be equivalent in some way to finding a D1 cache. I personally don't understand why reviewers or Groundspeak should even care about D/T rating for events. Apparently the owners of some challenge caches complained, and this change was made to satisfy them. This is an entirely different issue than whether or not moving events iike hiking should be allowed or whether you need to be at some location for 1/2 hours so that everyone can agree who gets a smiley.
  11. I seem to remember that you stated you were no longer going to be logging online in a different thread a few days ago I guess you were just joking. Have I logged a find since that first post? As stated above, I spent a week mulling it over and decided that Groundspeak has not fundamentally changed it policy on when you can log a find online. The wording in the current version is still troubling to me. I wait to see what will be changed in the next update.
  12. Did you read my reply? The first paragraph addressed a possible concern of the OP, though of course I don't know for sure if his question was motivated by BYOP caches. The second paragraph warns that I'm going to take advantage of this thread to provide some backgroud on the related topic of signing the physical log. Anyone is free to stop reading at this point. I spent most of the weekend thinking about starting a new thread after spending the week to getting together my thoughts after what I had posted in the "Would You Log This?" thread. I did not want to hijack that thread - it seems to have already been hijacked into a thread for posting your pictures from Singapore. I apologize for hijacking this one, but as stated, the OP asked a fairly simply question that could be answered in one reply. Of course one carries a pen to sign the physical log book. But whenever there are claims about signing the physical log that I don't agree with, I reserve the right to post my objections. And so I took advantage of the related topic to address my concerns about a few words in the help center article on logging finds. (And yes I realize the irony that I wrote so much in responses to four words).
  13. Maybe - and I'm just thinking out loud here - a terrain 4, 30km hike just isn't suitable for a geocaching event. Maybe a a terrain 4, 30km hike, with a difficult puzzle to solve just isn't suitable for a geocache. It's possible that TPTB would like to limit events to those that any cacher can attend. Could you still have a beach party or a picnic in the woods that might not be wheelchair accessible? Probably one can think of other "reasonable" events that not everyone can attended. Where do the guidelines draw the line? Of course we've already seen an example where the 1/2 hour at a fixed location was not a the start of the hike but at some spot on the trail, so you could have a T4 event. The requirement for D1 events is a different story. TPTB apparent don't want events where you have to solve a puzzle to get the coordinates, or once at the coordinates you need to find the secret entrance to the event. Since the purpose of the event is to facilitate socializing, requiring someone who shows up to have to leap through hoops to log attended is deamed unacceptable.
  14. That's a flash mob at a location reachable by a hike, but not a hiking event in my opinion. The chance to socialize which is organized by the event host is offered at the posted coordinates and not on the way to the location or back from it. It seems to me that the chance to socialize to/from the posted coordinates is exactly the same no matter what the guidelines say. Exactly, so why have a guideline whose rationale is that it takes 1/2 hour to form meaningful connections and apply it only to the part of the event that takes place at a fixed coordinates. Published 03/01/2015: http://coord.info/GCZZZW Seems to me that complying with the new guidelines isn't that difficult. No. But it does say "the actual event takes place from 9:45am-10:15am at the posted coordinates" and that makes it seem the hike is separate from the event. The event organizer wants to have a hiking event but is forced to include 1/2 hour of another activity before the hike that seems to best be described as standing around doing the the socializing you could be doing while hiking. It may be easy to comply with the new guidelins, but it still isn't clear what purpose they serve. The most likely reason I can think of is that you need posted coordinates with start and stop times to allow the guidelines for logging attended to be made simple, and the 1/2 is an arbitrary time to allow people who have trouble being punctual to get a smiley. (Note to mods: it's really hard to find ways to describe rules that are meant to simplify who gets a smiley that don't end up being a little snarky - please forgive me if you don't like me refering to people who arrive 1/2 hour late as having trouble being punctual).
  15. I suspect the OP may have seen caches that said BYOP and when finding out that this means "Bring Your Own Pen", wondered what the pen is for. My guess is that few people who start the game today spend much time perusing the help center or even the sections of the cache placement guidelines that deal with logging caches. I will however take advantage of this thread to talk a bit about my perception of the history of geocaching and the reasons I think that the signing of physical logs is being over emphasized. Geocaching is an ancient sport that dates back to the year 2000 A.D. Back when Dave Ulmer placed the first geocache he put a logbook in the cache and gave instructions that when people found the cache they could take something from, leave something in exchange, and write about it in the logbook. These became the "rules" for geocaching whether or not they make any sense years later. A few months later, Geocaching moved into the realm of online gaming. Jeremy Irish created a website called Geocaching.com where not only could you find the most complete listing of geocaches that had been hidden, but you could report the results of your search online. There were online logs for reporting you found the caches and online logs for reporting you were unable to find the cache. Since the "rules" said to sign the logbook in the cache, many people extended this to mean that you had to sign the logbook in order to log a find online. Later, it became clear that some people would make bogus claims about finding caches in the online logs. This was not good, both for cache owners who depend on the online log, and for other cachers who make choices about which caches to search for and how long to search. So Groundspeak began asking cache owners whose caches were listed on Geocaching.com, to take responsibility for the quality of the online logs posted on their cache page. One suggestion was that if an online find appeared bogus, the cache owner could check the physical cache log to see if the finder had actually signed the log (according to the "rules"). As geocaching has continued to become more of an online game (now played primarily with a smartphone app), Groundspeak has updated the instruction/rules for posting an online find several times, making small changes in the wording, limiting the power of cache owners to delete logs and clarifying to finders exactly what the powers of the cache owners are. The current help center article on logging finds says In another thread I have expressed my surprise that Groundspeak would begin this direction with "To get your smiley". For years I've thought the purpose of the online log is to share your geocaching experiences - not "to get your smiley". And one point I've always made in the forum is that if someone forgot their pen, or it stopped working, or the log was too wet to write in, or they were just so excited about finding a cache that they forgot about signing the log, a reasonable cache owner would not march out, check the log book, and delete the online log for failing to sign the logbook. If the log does not appear bogus (what the article goes on to call "couch logging") I think cache owners should accept the log. Of course some cache owners are more suspicious of logs that say "I forgot a pen". My guess is that this is Groundspeak's attitude as well, and I am hopeful that the next revision of the help center article will make this clearer. In the meantime, a change that makes signing the physical log a prerequisite to logging a find online would probably result in my stopping to log online. Long ago, a local cacher who I had a lot of respect for, felt that the game had become too much about the numbers. They stopped logging finds when they got to 999 (that was a big number back then). Sometimes (but not always) they logged a note. I've always felt the purpose of the online log was more than just getting a smiley, but if that is what it has become then I don't see a reason to log online.
  16. Groundspeak is in a difficult position. They want to just be a listing service. But they also want to be a business. Part of that is attracting and maintaining geocachers. They initially decided to list events because promoting and facilitating social interaction among geocache is one way to grow and maintain the base of users. But they also decided early on that they needed to limit events. They wanted geocacher to organize cache hunt informally and not turn their listing service into a community bulletin board for organized cache hunts. Later they saw a need to eliminate cachers using the event to organize a group of cachers to attend some other non-geocaching event. I think their primary concern may have been to keep the Groundspeak listing from being used to advertise commercial events. Of course this rule eliminated the ability for what some might find a reasonable event like Geocacher Day at a professional baseball game. What probably is the case is that Flash Mob events were being used to work around these rules. Have a flash mob then go out on a hike to find caches. Or have a flash mot even in the parking lot, then go to the baseball game. I just think that making these events 1/2 hour doesn't really stop this abuse of the flash mob to list things Groundspeak doesn't want listed. You might have some people decide not to like their hike because half an hour is too burdensome, but others will find that half an hour with hot coffee and doughnuts before hike is even better than a flash mob. If there is a problem, I just think these new guidelines don't really address it. Watch this for half an hour ->
  17. Thanks for sharing how one group is continuing to list their event under the new guidelines. In this case people were already working around the guidelines by designating a 15 minute period as the "event". In this case all that has changed is that the amount of time spent at the "event" has doubled. I doubt many of the attendees will care much. Perhaps a few won't want to stay the extra time - of course they can still log attended even if they decide to leave early. I guess one could argue that if someone is late the 30 minute window gives them and extra fifteen minutes to log the event (though they still might not get in the photo). The problem with this example is it raises a few question. 1, Why not just have a monthly hike? 2, Do you really need to designate a full half hour for the attendees to make meaningful connections? Especially where many will hike to the event in a group or will spend time before and after the event finding caches in the area.
  18. Certainly people may want to use events to announce a group of gecoachers getting together for a cache hunt or just for some other activity that TPTB don't want to list as event (maybe because it would be commercial or have an agenda outside of geocaching). What make you think that Groundspeak would want to list these announcements as some non-event that doesn't earn a smiley? I think limitations on events are there because Groundspeak only wants to list certain activities: those that they see as facilitating socializing of geocachers but not simply an attempt to have an organized search for geocaching and not some just getting some geocacher together to go to some non-geocaching event. I think a better approach would be to review the list of non-listable event and see whether it makes sense to allow some to be treated as events. Experiments have been done with allowing certain organized cache hunts to be listed. Allowing hikes and certain other moving events may also be something that can be relaxed. I'd like to have a geocacher day at a professional baseball game - but that might be seen as having commercial overtones. In the end I think Groundspeak needs guidelines for what they will list. But there are several ideas that either can't be listed now or must include an add-in activity to be listed.
  19. Here's some proposed solutions Allow the add-in activity for the purpose of logging attended to be 5 minutes instead of half-an-hour. If the purpose of the time limit is to have enough time to form meaningful relationships that happens on the hike. If the purpose is to have some definition of attended to prevent event owners from deleting logs, five minutes is long enough to look around and see who is there. Don't require events stay in one place. It's an easy enough change to say you can log a hiking event if you go on the hike. You might require that you are at the starting point for five or ten minutes to allow people a chance to arrive. But that shouldn't be how the event is defined. Probably not a popular solution, but allow reviewers to exercise discretion as to whether the event is just an organized geocache hunt or if it is primarily a social activity for geocachers. Perhaps there could be some requirement that event owner needs to document activities on the hike other than finding caches. - e.g. we will stop at the view point to take pictures (probably won't take more than half an hour though).
  20. After sleeping on it, I'm not seeing the purpose of yet another thread. There seem to be two distinct views (in truth people fall on a spectrum between these views) Group I: The new guidelines are fundamentally changing the way I can list my hiking or other moving event. Group II: The new guidelines simply give minimum requirements for an event to be listed. Once you meet the minimum requirements, you can still have the event you always had. I personally would be more interested in a third way. How can Groundspeak provide guidelines that accomplish their goals without impacting the way people have been holding events for many years. One part of this is understanding their goals and I've already gotten in trouble for doubting the "official" reason. So now I'm willing to accept the official stand that events are to facilitate the social aspect of caching and Event Caches should not be set up [solely or primarily] for the purpose of gathering geocachers for a geocache search. (OK the brackets indicate that I would like geocache search guideline to less absolute - and more in keeping with today's reality where caches are published to coincide with events and mega events have Lab Caches). I'm willing to accept the need for a guidelines update to achieve these goals. I simply don't think that fixed time at fixed location contributes to achieving them.
  21. You would still only be able to list events Grounspeaks wants to reccognize in the guidelines. If they truly beleive you can't socicalize without staying in one place for 30 minutes, then events that don't include this activity would not be listed. I don't believe Groundspeak should be deciding what is worthy of being listed based on what some vocal minority thinks is worthy of a smiley. I hope it had nothing to do with the decision to make this guideline change. I believe that it is reasonable to define events as activities organized by geocachers for other geocachers (of course family, friends, and even muggles who are interesting in meeting geocachers are welcome). I believe it is reasonble to declare that purposed is to facilitate socialization among geocachers. While I would not be as strict if I formulated the guidelines, I understand, for the reasons I stated above, why TPTB don't want events to be used to organize geocaching hunts. The reasons for requiring the event to take place at the posted coordinates and have a stated start time and end time appear to have more to do with defining what 'attended' means for the purpose of logging online and less to do with socializing with other geocachers. This is reason for discussing the find count. If there were no count would cache owners be so quick to delete a log because someone showed up late, or showed up for the start of the hike but didn't go on it? I haven't seen anyone getting events published that are primarily a hike (or some other moving activity) So far was are only speculating on what reviewers might allow. There could very well be ways that people put on a hiking event, or some other event, by adding an activity that takes place at the posted coordinate for 30 minutes that does and overshadow the hike or become the "event" in place of the hike. It would be interesting for people to report their experiences here.
  22. Hopefully this thread won't get into the type of shouting and not listening the other threads have fallen into. (Full disclosure, I've been warned by a moderator). So I'll agree that people would like to hold have a somewhat different kind of event than one that has to conform to guidelines requring a minimum time spent in a fixed place. Clearly, there have traditionally been events like a hike or a train ride that can no longer be published without a qualifying "activity" - i.e. "we will be at the posted coords from time X till time Y". Activities like hiking or a train ride clearly promote socialization and many cachers find these activities more conducive to making connections with other geocachers that sitting in a dark, noisy restaurant. Getting together to hunt geocaches probably works even better than hikes or train rides. Yet TPTB have always felt that the GC event listing should not be used for organizing cache hunts. People have always worked around these rules by creating mini events before or aftet the cache hunt. Traditionally these were either meeting for coffee in the morning or for drinks and perhaps a meal later in the day. It is true that with the advent of flash mob events these workaround became even easier. I think many people are quite willing to have these sorts of events not count in the find count. The main interest is to use GC.com to let people know about the hike, train trip, or organized cache hunt. Of course, there may be some people who attend events to earn a smiley. I would hope that people don't use the smiley as the only excuse to cache or attend events. I'd prefer that Groundspeak doesn't start making distinctions now because that sends a message that the smiley is more important than it really is. My personal preference would be to simply role back some of the guidelines to either allow events to start in one place and move, or to allow very short events to be used for the purpose of logging attended, and allow other activities to be shared in this way. I can understand that if people wanted (and could plan far enough in advance) they might schedule an event any time they are going geocaching - simply to find others to go with them. I think this possibility is part of the reason there has always been a guideline that events should not be used to organize geocache hunts. I'm not certain just how often events are used in this way. Perhaps someone can think of a way that reviewers could tell easily if this is what is planned or if this is really organizing geocachers to go on a hike (that just happens to have caches along the way).
  23. Yep. I don't see how that description allows for moving events - where the event itself is no longer at the posted coordinates after its start time. Sorry, I not seeing where this old guideline says the entire event is at the posted coordinates. In fact there were events the attendees met at the posted coordinates then went off on some activity. People who began geocaching later are so use to the idea that you can log attended just by showing up at anytime during the event and that you can't be required to participate in an activity are incredulous that that it was ever any different. Even more since they have been told that additional logging requirements are not allowed on physical cache, so that must have always been what the way it was. Sadly cache and event owners think that because they are given responsibility for quality control of the logs, they need to delete logs that don't meet their personal definition of attended or find. Also sadly, imo, Groundspeak has felt forced to put itself in the position of arbitrating disputes. So they have simplistic rules as to what is required to log a find or an attended. These make arbitration somewhat easier. Some cache or event owners may still want to be have more control. Whether it is that people visit all the stages in a multi or that they actually go on the hike. I assume you brought up this example because the current guidelines would still allow it, but I thought I'd point that out explicitly. I guess you could have half-hour long flash mobs and after stopping at one for 10 minutes drive as fast as you can to the next on. But no, I was thinking of 5 to 10 minute flash mob events with a gap between each for those who wanted to get from one to another. I find the often repeated "But you can still have that with the new guidelines - you just need someone to be at the posted coordinate from the start time to the stop time" a bit of a tiresome argument. I don't care if you find standing in one place for half an hour a simple, trivial task. Not everyone cares to do this and some people, believe it or not, may find it challenging.
  24. To me, you've answered your own question. The new clarification "bans" simple 5-minute drop in/drive by events, and asks that listing owners and hosts are more deliberate about how they will facilitate socialization. Meaning, all they need to do is allow for a little more time for those who might be late, might want to meet other cachers but otherwise wouldn't be willing or able to go out hiking or skating or whatever, etc. To allow for more socialization, and to open the door to the uninitiated, a 5-minute flash mob isn't very attractive or conducive to socialization for a noob. To make it more possible to meet and get to know others, the guideline opens the window further to make sure that duration isn't a deterrent. It can be argued that 30 minutes might be a deterrent for cezanne and friends, but we've shown that there are ways to get around it clearly in the cache description etc. E.g., one can just show up for the few minutes prior to departure if they don't want the "boring parking lot", and the noob can show at the beginning and have a chance to meet more people, and the non-hiker can still meet and chat with others before they depart up the trail. You could be right. It's all about the smiley. Maybe someone at Groundspeak does think that attending a five minute event is a cheap way of getting a WooHoo! another smiley. I've found the few flash mobs I've been to enjoyable and more than enough time to socialize and even introduce myself to new cachers. I find this much harder to do at crowded restaurants where it's usually too noisy to have a conversation and not even clear who are the geocachers and who are other diners (even when we reserve a room). But perhaps a bigger sample of flash mobs will show there are just as lame as pizza and beer. I don't think there have been 60 flash mobs in 60 minutes because the event stacking rules could be use to stop that. But maybe there have been 20 flash mobs over a ten hour period with a half hour between each to get from one to another (and no doubt they were arranged to form geoart). In a different thread I've already threatened to stop logging finds because some Groundspeak lackey wrote that the online log is in order to get a smiley. It seems like the people who in yet another thread complain about short logs are the ones who are supporting the minimal event time. I hope we can agree that Groundspeak should be more thoughtful in providing reasons to sign the physical log and log online, or attend an event, and not promote the view of the find count that leads to all the angst in the forums. In the other thread on this topic, Keystone got so irritated when I suggested this change is due to someone concerned that flash mobs shouldn't be worth a smiley that he said he wouldn't answer me anymore (ever) - and he went further by adding the acronym I use to refer to what I see as a misinterpretation of the find log to the forum profanity filter. I'm not sure if perhaps I shouldn't take hope from Keystone's reaction that the reason for this change isn't the find count. I think that Groundspeak really believe their official reason. And I really believe that five minutes is plenty of time to make meaningful connections- especially when the five minutes are followed by a 3 hour hike. In that case we have a disagreement over how people socialize and form connections - which I'm more comfortable with than a disagreement on what the find count is for.
  • Create New...