Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tozainamboku

  1. Maybe you are reading too much into the guideline saying "An event is a gathering of geocachers, facilitating the social aspect of geocaching. It is organized by geocachers and is open to other geocachers and those interested in learning about the game." The fact the event is open to other geocachers does not mean that it has to be of interest to all geocachers. I bet there are many geocachers who would not attend an event at restaurant because they wouldn't be interested in meeting other geocachers in that environment. But they may be interested in hiking or ice skating. Different events with different activities are going to attract different geocachers. cezanne may be overly concerned that a half hour spent before the hike is going to attract a bunch of people just interested in getting a smiley and not the group that shares his interest in hiking. As has been pointed out, if this is the case, those who leave to go on the hike will be spending more of their time hiking together than the half hour they were forced to deal with other cachers. Most of them can even show up just before the hike leaves if they want to avoid socializing with the non-hikers. I'm still more concerned that events organized around some activity that moves might not be listed simply because the half hour add on is going to be seen as burdensome (even if you all think it is trivial). I could be wrong, but I look back to before advent of flash mobs. People didn't have a way to share a hike, particularly if they couldn't convince the reviewer that the primary purpose was to have an organized hike and not to organize a cache hunt. So these events were seldom listed. When flash mobs became popular they provided a way to use the event to publicize hikes and cache hunts. This may have been perceived as abusing the flash mob to get around other guidelines (Nobody has suggested this but I will). Rather than proposing a hokey fix of making the flash mob part last 30 minutes, TPTB could have looked at why this was so popular and have gone the other way to allow hikes and even organized cache hunts to be listed. They apparently even experimented with this and had reported what seemed to be favorable results. So I wonder why the choose the path they did.
  2. Right, it's abuse of freedoms that hurt everyone else who don't abuse it. It hurts when there's no feasible way to distinguish an action between legitimate and abuse. If cutting back on abuse is more important to tptb, then the ones that lose out in that case are the 'Good People'. And I have indicated that I would find examples of abuse of flash mob events as a better rationale for a 30 minute limit that the claim that you can socialize or form "meaningful relationships" in less time. Nobody has been forthcoming except for those who seem annoyed by people getting a find count for a flash mob rather then some real abuse. I don't have too much problem with the stacking rule because I remember seeing abuse before it was put into effect. I recall we had an annual beach party event. One year there was an event to show up early to help claim the spot on the beach for the event. Then there was the event. Then the was the cookout. Then the camp fire. And finally a CITO to clean up. This was clearly one event and it as also cleat that some people would only be there for parts of it. Many came early, then went off geocaching, and came back for dinner. My guess is that in another state, the cache owner would have one listing and tell people to log it once for each part, and that may even pass muster with Groundspeak. The issue of course is even then you had different people hosting the different parts of the event. Groundspeak needed a guideline that gave the reviewers some discretion in deciding if these were one event or if they could be listed separately. I even recall that HQ modified the guideline a bit when they though reviewers were being too strict.
  3. The event listing really only needs to leave a window where, presumably, people can be there. That could mean the event listing owner, a proxy, a geocaching association or their representative, general attendees, etc. might be at the coordinates for a minimum of 30 minutes. It's a window to allow for those who might not be willing or able to go the activity listed in the event to attend and socialize in a way that might be more appropriate for them. Cezanne socializes on the trail; John Doe Cacher can't hike, but would like to still have the opportunity to catch other cachers to socialize before they might, in the hiking cache example, take off on the hike from the trailhead. Still a "cake and eat it too" event. And yes, it bans events that were previously under 30 minutes. Oh well. It's not like 30 minutes is that hard of a guideline to meet...we've been through the myriad of ways people can list an event and still meet the guidelines as they are today. By your own examples, spending 30 minutes in a fixed location in the middle of the hike would allow it to be published. The only reasonable way to be able to socialize at that location would be to go on the hike. If can you get to the location of the event it seems you would be willing and able to do the hike. So I can't believe that Groundspeak could use that as the rationale for these rules. Talk about having your cake and eating it! It makes no sense to say you need a window to allow for those who might not be willing or able to go on the activity listed in the event to attend and socialize, when you can schedule your 30 minutes of standing still in the middle of the hike. Why not just use the rule that always gets invokes for caches someone doesn't like or thinks is too hard. If you don't like or can't participate in the activity then don't attend.
  4. Yeah it's fairly hard to think of a large event that didn't consist of multiple activitives that take place over the course of the event, some of which may even take you some distance away from the posted event coordinates. For these large events there is almost always an unspecified activity of showing up at some central locations that is available for the the entire duration of the event, or a least the majority of the duration. It has always been the case is that in addtion to large events there have been small events. Many small event have been dedicated to just one activity. Sometimes that activity takes place in one location and last more than half an hour. Prior to the latest change there were events that took place in one location but may have only lasted a few minutes. Prior to a previous change were events that had a starting location and time, but may have left this location a few minutes after the start time. The new guideline ban (I don't underastand some people's instance that nothing has been banned) events that last less than half an hour and events that move from the posted coordinates without lingering half an hour. Groundspeak might have a good rationale for banning these events. But, in spite of attempts by lackeys and reviewers in the other thread and by individuals who are posting in this thread, I have not heard a rationale that convinces me that these events really needed to be banned. There are reasonable concerns that activities that people enjoy may not get listed as events since you now must include other activities in order to comply with the guidelines. There is a also a feeling that the guidelines show favoritism to certain activities because these activities meet the guidlines without being combined with other activities. It seems reasonable to point out that you can drink beer or eat pizza and make these activities an event, but you can't make a hike an event without adding an activity to stand around in one place for half an hour.
  5. Yes, it would be a shame if the local event holders would be unwilling to modify their events to come into compliance with the new guidelines (regardless of what one may think of them) and continue to hold events with the same flavor. As has been shown, you can host an event where hiking/kayaking/biking/etc. is the main activity, but stay compliant to the guidelines. I think you miss the point I'm making. Sure, one can make a hike/kayak/bike event compliant by including a 30 minute period at a fixed location. For many people who organize these events adding that period may not be as trivial as you make it. You need a location where everyone can stand around comfortably for the period. Maybe that means some shelter from the elements. Maybe that means benches or picnic tables to sit at. Maybe it means drinking water, or toilet facilities. For some people 30 minutes is short enough to do without, but that can't be generalized. Particularly as people who may not be physically able to do the hike/kayak/bike may attend this compliance activity. Add to this that someone who wants to organize a bike ride or other moving event may find the compliance activity a silly burden that none of the people participating in the ride really care to do. Of course everyone could show up at the very end of the compliance activity and just do the ride, but then you've basically just added an activity that either has nobody attends or that simply exists to accomodate the people who don't ride. Why bother just to get the event listed on GC.com? You can have hiking/kayaking/biking events but they will be organized on Facebook. Only the people who follow the local geocaching groups on Facebook will know of these events. People who rely on GC.com to find events will simply not know about them. The rules will result in events that are enjoyed by many cachers no longer being listed on GC.com. Only a few will add the compliance activity now that it must be at least 30 minutes.
  6. I may have misread, but I didn't see anyone saying it wasn't allowed and therefore reading more into any guideline. I can only see people offering their personal opinion of how they cache. However, again out of curiosity... a little bit of digging reveals: 1.5. Are there rules? and 4.1. How do I log my first geocache find? Grounspeak has long provided guidance/instructions for newbiew that has been somewhat similar. I've never interpreted these as official rules but rather a simplified set of instructions so that people can start caching right away and feel comfortable that they are logging in "accordance" with common practice. Someone at Groundspeak seems to have feel that it is now necessary to state in these instructions that the reason to sign the physical log and to log online is to get your smiley. In addition for the first time, there is a statement that Grounspeak HQ is going to police physical logs. As this is counter to the way I enjoy the game, I will no longer be logging my finds online. Be sure to thank the lackey who came up with this.
  7. Once again people read far more into the guideline for logging physical cache than was intended. The guideline does not mean that you can only log a cache online if you have signed the physical log. It simply says "Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed." The guideline was added to explain that, with the exception of challenge caches, a cache owner could not have additional requirements, beyond signing the physical log, for logging a cache online. There is nothing in the Groundspeak guidelines that bars a cache owner from having a multi-cache that encourages cachers in different parts of the world to cooperate by finding various stages and allowing all those who found a stage to log a find online. If you wish to have a personal rule that you only log caches where you have signed the physical log in the final stage that is your personal choice. Other people can do what they feel is appropriate. (Keystone should note that I exercised great restraint in avoiding certain words, acronyms, and phrases in my response).
  8. Geocachers are well know for adapting (finding workarounds) and I suspect that various kinds of events will find ways to continue. Perhaps cezanne (who has been around far longer than most) still recalls when the guidelines actually contained language to encourage innovations, along with suggestions to bring ideas to the forum to gauge interest as well as discuss ways to acomplished things not necessarily considered in the guidelines. What may have changed is the number of geocachers who never knew a situation other than one where the guidelines are what they are and aren't worth challenging. There seems to be some concern that the current set of guidelines changes effect some events that either were just the hike or got by with a short meeting as the start after which most of those who showed up went on the hike. It seems likely that some people who did host hiking events will not bother anymore because of the new rules. If that happens, cezanne can be legitimately concerned that he will have trouble finding hikes. Perhaps Groundspeak could have a new listing type for hikes and other activities that don't involve sitting in one place long enough to form meaningful relationships . And if some of you are concerned that people will earn a smiley for hiking or ice skating, not count these activities in the "find" (not the word I wanted to use) count.
  9. There always a chance two geocachers are scheduling two unrelated events the same day. You could handle this the way physical cache proximity is handled and say who ever submitted theirs first wins. But I'm not sure that Groundspeak is all that opposed to having multiple related events, particularly in association with mega events. The problem they had was that stacking was being abused. TPTB feel that it's better to have a single listing for activities that take place in the same general location and at roughly the same time (or consecutively in time). People can get around the stacking rule by moving the stacked event a little farther away and adding a little time. In most cases this workaround is easy. If you can't move the activity a some distance and have a half-hour break then you probably have stacked events. People seem to think the stacking rule has something to do with the number of attended logs someone might be getting in a day. While stacked events may have been listed because the event planners were trying to use the "Woohoo!" effect of getting another smiley to encourage people to attend, I suspect the issue Groundspeak had was with multiple events are held in one general area over consecutive time periods, not how many smileys someone could get. This may have the result of fewer people listing stacked events, but since it probably isn't Groundspeak's rationale for the guideline, it doesn't really apply. And even if attending events didn't increment the 'find' count, there would probably still be a count somewhere for the number of events attended and challenge caches for attending multiple events in a day, so someone is likely going to still want to stack events.
  10. Sounds like the problem here is not the minimum time or even the cache in one place guideline, but the guideline for logging an event which states "Event Cache owners can request that cachers sign a logbook, but this is optional and cannot be a requirement for logging an Event Cache." The event owner can still have the log cloth, particularly since she didn't delete online log of people came and didn't skate whether or not they signed the log. Seems you're more upset that the reviewer says the D/T is 1/1. I find this a silly requirement that is put on the reviewers. If there are activities at the event that have a higher terrain why not allow that to be reflected even if not everyone participates in the activity. Same for difficulty; if an activity is difficult to complete, allow the event to show that difficulty. The problem is that Groundspeak and reviewers seem to want to force the D to be the difficulty in scoring a W_I_G_A_S point (sorry about circumventing the profanity filter, I felt it was appropriate place to use that acronym). If a cache or event has a difficult component that may be optional, is can't be reflected in the D/T rating. cezanne will be happy to know that I am reviewing the D rataing on all my puzzles since no one is actually required to solve the puzzle to log a find. Someone can get the answers from a friend or from a "spoiler" site. I suspect I'll be changing some 5/4 puzzle to 1.5/4 (Can't do anything about shortening the hike.)
  11. What's your point? cezanne would like to go on hike with other geocachers. He prefers to be able to look on GC.com for events that are hikes or involve a hiking activity. It isn't important to him whether there are caches to find on the hike or not. He simply wants to socialize with other geocachers who enjoy the same hobbies he does. Certainly someone could have an event with hiking as an activity and say that 1/2 before the hike they will meet at the trailhead for a meet and greet. cezanne may feel that this requirement may result in the hike not being listed at all, or he may feel that even though he could show up just before the hike, he is still being made to participate in the part of the event he is not interested in. While he hasn't said it, there are those who also find this a bit unfair. If your hobby is scrapbooking, or bowling, or beer drinking you could have an event with just that activity. There is no requirement to tack on an extra half hour long activity. It may be implied that if you are at a bowling alley or restaurant people can show up and "attend" the event without participating in the stated activity, but you don't really have to say this. Except perhaps if you have a reviewer who insists that you have to put in the listing "Beer drinking is not required". Yet on the other hand with a hike, you could post the coordinates for the 1/2 hour event in the middle of the hike. Now hiking is clearly required. So the point of the rule doesn't seem to be that the event be opened to non-hikers (or non beer drinkers) Instead it comes across as if TPTB think that geocachers can't walk and socialize at the same time. Sure Groundspeak can have guidelines for what they list as events. But when they give a rationale that seems to have no logic, it should not be surprising the there multiple multi-page threads about it.
  12. The log facilitates socializing among geocachers. In order to form meaningful relationshion any log that can be read in less than 30 seconds should not count.
  13. Nice. I've seen a few like that as well over the years. You can bet they won't be writing nice logs like that for long, once they see how most other cachers log their finds. If you're so bitter about the whole log thing, why do you still play this game? It's not good for your blood pressure or ulcers. So I gave the example to show one reason that cache owners may prefer getting logs that share the experience of the finders instead of just saying TFTC. It wasn't meant to indicate that cache owners should expect this kind of log every time. When I get a log like this it's a treat, not an expectation. I don't go around trying to control what others write in logs. I think the best one can do in to try and influence good logs through example. But I suspect that many cachers never even look at the logs and simply see them as an obstacle for getting their find point. (I typed find because the profanity filter would change the word I wanted to use to that anyhow ). Just be happy that some people still take the time to share more than TFTC in their logs.
  14. Did I do the wrong thing sending an unsolicited email after getting this log? Not that I complained about it.
  15. I see cezanne already responded. +1 Of course its about him. Geocaching is about many different individuals who enjoy various aspects of this activity for as many reasons are there are geocachers. When guidelines limit options for caches or events, somebody is bound to feel that the thing they enjoyed is getting short schrift (even if not outright banned). What's worse is when there are people who insist on seeing only winners in the change. Sure your might prevent some abuses by requiring an activity at a fixed location for some minimum durataion. But perhaps there are other ways to prevent these abuses that would still allow an event to be just a hike. And perhaps the real issue is not that people find geocaches together but that Groundspeak would like to encourage people to go geocaching even when there isn't an event. If they really want events to have other activities beyond finding geocaches, maybe they need to have a list of acceptable event activities. If hiking isn't an acceptable stand alone activity for an event, perhaps a picnic, drinking beer, or playing pin the tail on the donkey, shouldn't be acceptable stand alone events. Maybe the guidelines should require a lecture on a geocaching topic, showing slides or video from a geocaching trip, or playing a party game with a geocaching theme (put the travel bug in the micro)?
  16. And why do you refer to this as a hiking event? It does not even suggest parking coordinates, trails to take, information on how long one might need etc It's up to the participants to find someone to join them for the hike and all the socializing of the event has to take place at the picnic. It's just a 4 hour picnic at a location reachable only by a hike. I'm not against such events, but a hiking event is something completely different to me. How is a picnic at a location reachable only by a hike not a hiking event? I still do not understand what it is you ARE looking for, although I've heard 100 things that you are not. Why is this example not suitable for you? You don't like picnics? What is the difference?!? I don't understand why people have so much of a issue understanding that an event could be the hike itself (prior to recent changes) and that geocachers can socialize and hike at the same time. A picnic that you have to hike to is still a picnic event - especially when you post the coordinates for the picnic and the time you will be a that location. Sure the write up can give instructions for joining the group some hours before at the trailhead and hiking to the picnic together, so cezanne probably isn't going to miss out on the social hiking, but he may feel that having to add a picnic (or maybe providing the option for someone to show up in their helicopter at the coordinates just for the picnic) has trivialized the hike. Now there is some speculation in the other thread that people abused the ability to have hiking and other events by really using this to organize a geocache hunt (oh! my!) and TPTB had to make sure that this wasn't happening. I don't know how many events I've been to where the event was really organized as breakfast before a day of geocaching or a dinner after a day of geocaching. Of course the event was opened to geocachers who didn't spend the day caching and they often account for a significant number of attendees. But on the same level, just because there are caches to find on the trail doesn't mean that everyone on the hike is finding these caches. I've gone on hiking events where I had found most of the caches on the trail already. I can't say I didn't log any caches on the hike, but would contend that I went for the hike and the social interaction and not to find caches.
  17. As that statement is subjective, I did not take it as a rule that by extension "meaningful connections must be made". The spirit of that statement was that, you know, people come and mingle and be social in one location for a minimum period of time that would be best conducive towards that goal. It's not far fetched. They changed their opinion and felt that 15 minute events were too short, and for various reasons they wanted to set the minimum time to 30 minutes. Whether it's to reduce over saturation, or event stacking, or lack of what they feel is sufficient social time... whatever the reason, after many given, they feel that 30 minutes is what they deem sufficient. Doesn't matter whether or not they have some scientific research to back up their statement, and frankly if it gets to the point that the community demands scientific backing for any rule they decide to set in the world of Geocaching.com, I wouldn't blame them if they throw their hands up and shut down. c'mon I don't think the statement was subjective. But OK, I'll accept, if someone at Groundspeak is of the opinion that 1/2 hour is more conducive to forming meaningful relationships than 10 minutes, they can pick 1/2 hour as a minimum time you have to have in one place. I certainly am entitled to my opinion that hiking with people for 2 hours is more conducive to making meaningful connections than 1/2 hour trying to have a conversation in a noisy restaurant. I happen to also hold the opinion that a 10 minute encounter may be a better way to start a relationship than sitting for 1/2 an hour - as shown by the popularity of speed dating and similar events. Read between the lines, if those exact words haven't been spoken. The reasons they've given clearly imply that. Maybe not as clear to some people. Those words have not been spoken by any Groundspeak representatives in this thread. I think it may be something I proposed as a better reason than the one given. If the reviewer felt that the wording for the event was sufficient that it wasn't consider an event for the sake of finding geocaches, and that the event itself was about geocaching, then yep. Published. Good to know that reviewers never make mistakes. Yep, it certainly would be. And BTW, I stayed there last year while doing the ET trail. If I were in the area, I would very much attend, if not host, an event there. You make it seem that if you spend 1/2 hour standing in one place twiddling your thumbs it doesn't matter what other activities you did, the event wasn't about organize a group geocache hunt - it was about standing around twiddling thumbs (i.e. socializinge). Is 1/2 hour magic? Couldn't 10 minutes do the same thing? It could be that since you need a minimum time 1/2 hour is as good as anything else. I suspect that we're so used to 528 feet for cache separaration (we only get a thread on that occasionally now), that we're supposed to be happy was nay arbitrary number. I've actually enjoyed the flash mob events I attended. And I personally didn't have a problem when they got tacked on to the start of a hike or other activity. From my point of view the change appears to be made to please people who were bothered by others being able to log attended and incrementing their find count. My guess is that many of them will still be upset because there will still be events they don't think are worthy. cezanne has a bit of reputation for having his own view of geocaching. There have been many threads where I can recall trying to explain why Waymarking could be used to create the kind of experience he misses with virtuals being grandfather (or due to someone logging a multi without visiting all the stages). I've pretty much learned that when someone has a certain Weltanschauung (or maybe Geoanshaung?) that what is simple to us makes no sense to them.
  18. I don't get that from them at all. They have said that geocaching events are to promote socializing and be geocaching-related. That's not a negative statement about anything not allowed as a geocaching event. I think it's ridiculous to think that Groundspeak somehow now feels that moving events are not socializing or geocaching-related. The key point is that those are moving events, and the reason they are disallowed is because it's been abused to create group caching events, which they do not want to allow - even though there have been legitimate hiking and other moving-activity geocaching events. But because they can't control what actually happens during an event, only what the host intends and announces in the listing with the presumption that they are being honest, they tightened the rules about what constitutes an official event. That means, in dissuading event listings that are abuses of freedom, it may also adversely affect legitimate events that weren't abusing said freedom. But it's a cost they apparently were willing to accept. I don't recall that Groundspeak has shared this rationale. They may have, when they changed the guideline that events had to take place at the posted coordinated and have a start and end time. For this latest change they gave a reason that it takes 1/2 hour to make meaningful connections. (I'm not covinced, maybe the can find a Psych professor at the University of Washington to back up this claim) It seems that perhaps they should say the 1/2 limit was to dissuade the use of short events to work around the guideline that an Event Cache should not be set up for the purpose of gathering geocachers for a geocache search. Did this change as well? I recall that it used have 'solely' or 'primarily' in that sentence. In fact at looking at some events I attened, I found a hiking event that clearly says there were caches on the trail that people could find. But the cache page also indicated that we would stop at the top for drinks and snacks and to watch the sunset. That was apparently enough to get the cache published. ...and yet those activities can still be done - just not required in order to receive your coveted find smiley. That's the only issue here. Nothing is being restricted, only what constitutes an event listing, which awards Attendees with a Smiley. All those acitivities can still be done. This doesn't stop that fact that for a long time hiking and other moving events have been published and that even after the change that events took place at a fixed location they could still be published by saying that for the purpose of logging online you simply had to show up at the start at the posted time and weren't required to go on the hike. Can they still be published if you stand around for 1/2 hour at the start? Seems so. Hey, I'm going with some friends on the E.T. trail. We're going stop at the Lil Ale'inn for breakfast from 7?30 to 8:00. Guess that's still a listable event. As I've said many times, I'm all for discussion and improvement, but there's a line between that and constant complaining with no effort to seek a solution. Key: constant. Everyone has the right to post whatever they want within the forum guidelines. Everyone has an opinion. But threads become like this one when people simply cannot accept any resolution, nor present any of their own beyond their stationary position. And continue to argue it. It's frustrating, and this is one of the reasons that fewer staff ever visit the forums. Ultimately, it does a disservice to those who do want to respectably find solutions and move forward while recognizing that Groundspeak is the authority and makes the final decisions. Actually if you were the bigger man and let cezanne get in the last word, this thread would drop off the front page in a hurry. These long threads are long because not everyone agrees with every decision Grounspeak makes. Sure they're a private company and can decide when not to listen. I don't believe it is in their interest to tell us to shut up. (Bring back virtuals )
  19. I did a quick search to see what if any discussion occured when the guidelines were changed to say the event takes place at the posted coordinated and has a stop time and start time. I did't find anything; perhaps someone else will have more luck. I suspect that there were people who express an concern that this would effect hiking caches and other "moving" events. I also suspect that they were told not to worry becuase there was an easy work around to have a minimal time set aside at the start or end of the hike. It is possible that the workaround was abused. I.E. people were creating "flash mobs" just to start off or end a day of geocaching, or to get a bunch of geocachers to meet them a the airport to exchange travel bugs when the were going on vacation. So perhaps TPTB feel that making the mini-event have to be at least 1/2 would dissuade the abuse. If does seem pretty clear that legitimate hiking or paddling events are being affected, but in the past when a guidline created such a restriction this was at least acknowledge by TPTB. Here they simple imply that hiking, paddle, or any activity that doesn't stay in one place isn't socializing. The world doesn't end. But when guidelines restrict or treats unfairly what a substantial number of geocachers view as a legitimate cache or event, some may take their case to the forums. Perhaps someone from Grounspeak is listening, or perhaps they get annoyed by someone using certain acronyms or speculating on the real reason for the change . For sure there will always be people who simply accept Groundspeak's decision and feel its their job to object to the critics. We all agree that under the new guidelines you can still have a hiking activity. We all agree that by adding a 1/2 hour activity that does stay in one place you can get the event listed. It seems legitimate to ask Groundspeak to review the impact of all the guidelines on events that previously got published, that people enjoyed, and that facilitated socialization in many cases better that the traditional pizza and beer event.
  20. Seems to me this would include anything from hiking a trail to kayaking a lake. What's all the fuss about? The purpose of an event cache is to get folks together. If you don't care about having a group get together at a specific time and place, why would you even make it an event cache? The purpose of event is to facilitate socialization. A group hiking together or floating on a raft can socialize just as well (if not better) than a group trying to have a conversation in a noisy restaurant while drinking beer. One may want to disassociate the particular activities from the "event" and say you can have hiking, eating, three-legged race, lab caches, beer drinking, and a raffle as activities. Attendees just need to show up at coordinates and can choose whether or not to participate in any of the activities. But the guidelines do not treat all activities equally. If the activities take place close to or at the posted coordinates for most or all of the length of the event, your event gets published. If your activity moves away from the posted coodinates you are forced to add activities that don't move. You must add a 1/2 hour activity of standing around, then schedule the event for that 1/2 hour and only then can you have other activities you want, even ones that move away from the posted coordinates and even take place outside the 1/2 hour or the 'event'.
  21. Good, then leave it at that. It's not your decision to make. All the stuff you want to do, you can still do. But if you insist on doing it your way, then you won't be able to let other people get that oh-so-coveted smiley in their profile. But they can still do what you want them to be able to do, and even have loads of fun doing it. I'm not sure why someone who finds the change changes the way he and others might view a hiking event can't express their opinion. In the past you either had an event where you just went on the hike, or you had a very short period you set aside to comply with the requirment that an event be at the coordinates. Now you must set aside a bit longer time and in cezanne's opinion that takes away something from the hike. Cleary one can still have the hike with this longer time spent standing around in one place, so in the end he may have to "let it go" and comply with the guidelines. But I certainly feel his pain that that under the new rules the hike is made to look like an afterthought. Oh, lookie here! We've strayed waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic. We should be discussing how "flash mobs are essentially toast". Oops! If the reason for the new guideline was to reduce or eliminate flash mob events, that doesn't necessarily mean that the guidelines don't have a impact othoer events. We're discussing the new time limit and the effect it has on other event as well a flash mobs. I don't think it is cezanne or me that need to let it go but perhaps those who think you can convince people who are concerned about the intended or unintended consequence of the rule that "nothing has changed and nothing has been banned". That is utter nonsense, of course there has been changes and the option to have a five minute "event" has been banned. Great, for those who feel that five minutes is ridculously too short to call something an event, you're happy. For people who found the quick flash mob - either by itself or inconjunction with a hike or other activity a useful and valid option, things have changed and they are expressing their opinions.
  22. Fewer and fewer geocachers will put forth the effort to "workaround" them, if they are continually dissuaded by Groundspeak. This is as much as they can do towards what they want without outright banning specific examples by name. I tend to doubt this. If the issue is that TPTB are tired of all the flash mobs, they can set the minimum time. That will likely reduce "flash mobs" I'm not even sure that people will consider a half-hour event - even if is standing around in a parking lot - a flash mob. But long before flash mobs people had events like "We'll meet a McDonalds before the hike for coffee" or "After Cirque du Soleil we'll meet at IHOP for food and drink." Those who are upset with people getting a smiley for standing in a parking lot might be satisfied with an event at restaurant before or after some other activity that guidelines say can't be an event or can't be a stand alone event. But in fact, these are events just put together by geocachers engaging in that other activity either to get a "cheap smiley" or to get their activity listed on Geocaching.com.
  23. Thes "solid ideas" are simply to force a listing that meet guidelines. They don't really solve the problem for someone who wants to have a event that is "the hike". Once upon a time you could list an event that was a hike. You posted coordinates and a time for the start of the hike. People showed up before the start time and went on the hike. Then the guidelines were changed that the event had to be at the posted coordinates and have a start time and stop time. I'm not quite sure what was discussed then. Most likely people who comlained were told "What's the big deal. You have to get organized at the start of the hike. Set aside some time and call that the event. Your hike will be listed". My guess is that reviewers continued to publish hiking events as they always had, so long as there was some indication that a period of time was set aside and anyone who showed up during that time could log "Attended" whether or not they went on the hike. The latest change says the end time must be at least half an hour past the start time. The ostensible reason is so people can socialize. This appears to imply than nobody is socializing on the hike and that only by making people stand around on some freezing cold morning can they form "meaningful relationships". I have to agree with cezanne and HikingSeal that this trivializes the actual hike, making it feel like an afterthought. But people have always found workarounds to list activities on geocaching.com that didn't meet whatever the guideline were for events were at the time.
  24. Yeah. You should only get a for drinking beer. Why is is that people have such a visceral reaction to others getting a ?
  25. I think Groundspeak sees this as dissuading those very types of caches for that very reason, because they're not how they want Geocaching.com Events to be structured - but they realize they can't police the actual content of an event. If you try to publish something that overtly skirts the guidelines, it'll likely be denied. If you lie and create a listing that is valid and acceptable to their judgement, but do something entirely different at the event, well, you'll get on the reviewers' black list, and rightly so. So, this grey area is precisely that - they can only require so much, and ensure that what you put in the listing is the truth and implies the style of event they want them to be structured as. But beyond that, they have no control. So it's up to you how you want to design the event and how you want to list it, and what you want to do directly outside the event timeline and description. It comes back to the issue cezanne has. Are events limited to sitting in a restaurant eating pizza and drinking beer or can a event be an activity like a hike or a river float? Guidelines become a challenge for geocachers to workaround, and geocachers have been very resourceful in working around them. TPTB can throw more rules to "dissuade" the workaround but geocachers will continue to workaround them. I suspect that Groundspeak never intended events to be used to advertise every time a group of gecoachers gets together - particularly just to go geocaching. Groundspeak probably views events as something that stands on their own. While an event can have activities, activities are not the event. In practice, cachers have added the idea of listing an event because a group of cacher get are getting together for some activity (which may be to geocache or may be something else). For example, I went to see Cirque du Soleil with a group of geocachers. At $50 per ticket, this was not going to be listed as a event. So instead after the show we met at a local restauarant. We got a lot of cachers who didn't go to the show but came to the event. The event probably stood on its own, but it certainly had the added purpose of letting others know we were going to Cirque. However I belive that guideline prevented us from telling people who to contact to buy tickets, so it may not have resulted in very many additional cachers attending the show. Was this an appropriate use of an event or just a cheap way for those going to Cirque to get an extra smiley?
  • Create New...