Sandy

The test run is to determine how best to implement cache hunts and officially bring them into the game. We will be considering how to update guidelines, and best practices when reviewing these cache types. We are following this thread with interest. Cheers!

This thread has derailed. Closing.

We apologize for lack of response, and I understand that you had posted in the Feedback site too. A colleague on the engineering team is investigating this matter for you. In the meantime, please do send an email to contact@Groundspeak.com, so that we can correspond with you on the specifics of your issue. Write Attention: Sandy in the subject line, and I will get this to my colleague.

Groundspeak does not tolerate cachers being disrespectful of other cachers. This cacher was well-informed of the consequences of his actions. That he has deliberately posted yet another video of a cache by the cache owner who lodged the complaint shows his blatant disregard not only for our Terms of Use, but for other cachers. Further, the Terms of Use were written by legal council. This behavior is not permitted if one wants to use Geocaching.com. Again, Sven. was only asked to remove videos featuring caches by one cache owner, not the whole collection.

Groundspeak has rarely responded to threads of this nature. However, we will take this opportunity to explain recent events that led to this site suspension. This user has drawn many people to geocaching through his YouTube channel. This is one of the reasons that Groundspeak featured Sven. in one of our Blog (Latitude 47) posts (unfortunately removed due to recent events). However, our Terms of Use state that a user may not, "Publish, in any form of media, the solutions, hints, spoilers, or any hidden coordinates for any geocache without consent from the cache owner." (Section 4m). With cache owner permission, videos can be created and posted on other forms of media. Groundspeak has never requested that this user remove all the videos he has posted on YouTube. Rather, two months ago we were contacted by the cache owner of a featured cache, who asked that we intervene in having the video of his cache removed from YouTube. This cache owner had asked Sven. directly, and Sven. had refused. When we intervened and pointed out our Terms of Use, he argued vehemently that the videos are not spoilers - even though that is the name of his YouTube channel. We then explained that not complying with the Terms of Use would result in site suspension, and Sven. complied, removing the video from YouTube. At that time, we thanked him for his cooperation, and explained that other cache owners may come forward, meaning we would need to follow up on any subsequent complaints. Another cache owner came forward about three videos that featured his caches. He wanted them removed. When we contacted Sven. he failed to respond for some time. When pressed about removing the videos, he refused, knowing that the consequence was site suspension from Geocaching.com. Importantly, Sven. did not seek permission from the cache owners who requested that Groundspeak intervene. As a follow up on this matter, he has subsequently posted another video on his Youtube channel featuring a cache by the same cache owner who complained to us about the three videos - again without obtaining permission. Sven. has had ample opportunities to comply with our Terms of Use. He has also had the opportunity to partner more closely with Groundspeak, but has chosen instead to dig in his heels. Groundspeak cannot partner with someone who openly and actively ignores our Terms of Site use. We consider this unfortunate, as we see how a partnership could benefit the game - under better circumstances. However, the decision has been Sven.'s, not ours.

We'll have a new version of the app within a couple of weeks, which will include the fixes for the trial-version issue.

so its a known problem, or am i the only one? Some users are experiencing issues with the trial version of the app.

We are aware of some issues with the trial version. We are determining how best to move forward, and apologize with the ongoing problem.

I have been informed by the engineering team that this will be addressed in the next release of the app.

Posting about this external site is not appropriate Geocaching.com forum content, but we wish you all the best with that endeavor. Closing thread.

Please send an email to contact@Groundspeak.com. We will address this matter for you. We apologize that this decision was not communicated to the userbase affected prior to the change. It was a gross oversight and we are addressing individual user's needs at the above email address.

Groundspeak would have liked to be part of this discussion with law enforcement; the GAGB thought that the matter at hand needed immediate attention. We are working on partnering more closely on these types of matters in the future. That said, neither Groundspeak nor the GAGB represent all the cachers in the UK. There are other sites and other organizations at play. What matters most is stewardship of the game of geocaching overall - by all parties. Our guidelines and the GAGB's guidelines are not absolutes, but offer a platform of guidance for our highly experienced and capable volunteers to make informed decisions - cache by cache - for their designated regions. Cache owners should be reminded that if you do not agree with a decision about your cache, you can submit to the Appeals team here at Groundspeak for further consideration. I know this answer is not definitive, but there are so many factors at play that I would be remiss in replying with something more concrete.

We know that no laws have been updated, but agencies can enforce existing laws. And if they deem geocaching as being in violation of those, then the game will not be permitted in urban areas in the UK. This was a genuine concern at the time of the recent bomb scare. Thanks for the additional information.

The GAGB guidelines are not local laws. I thank you for taking time to answer. I pay Groundspeak a subscription not the GAGB why should they dictate the rules? I also think we are confused over the word guideline verses requirements, Groundspeak list requirements not guidelines. But taking it that the word guideline in Groundspeaks definition means requirement then the answer is simply all of the existing and any new ones that the GAGB publish. With that in mind what other minority organisations can make rules? But on the other hand if you are suggesting that all of the requirements and guidelines are only optional by adoption of the reviewers again I have to ask the question how do we know the ones that are relevant? Thanks We understand that GAGB guidelines are not local laws. What I said was, "The GAGB has addressed a need to cooperate effectively with local law enforcement in the UK." We appreciate their actions that addressed a need, and simultaneously empower our volunteers to make informed judgments case by case. Further, for a cache listing there are both 'requirements' and 'guidelines'. Requirements include that a traditional cache has a container and a logbook and 'all local laws apply'. These are the 'non-negotiables'. The 'guidelines' aspect of cache placement is anywhere we ask a volunteer reviewer to use their experience and judgment to make a call based on the specifics of an individual cache. Essentially, we do not want to make any blanket statements about requiring a specific type of labeling, as each cache must be assessed on its own merits. However, if the local law enforcement agency will not permit caching without specified labels, then we need to comply with the local laws. We trust that the local volunteers know their regions best and will continue to act as stewards of the game within communities external to Geocaching.com.

Groundspeak’s geocache guidelines apply to caches listed on Geocaching.com across the world. One of those guidelines is, “All local laws apply”. The GAGB has addressed a need to cooperate effectively with local law enforcement in the UK. That said, the additional guidelines that they have created are guidelines, rather than hard and fast rules, just as Groundspeak’s guidelines are. Each cache listing is still reviewed by a volunteer reviewer on its own merits. Volunteer reviewers may decide to address this specific aspect of a cache’s placement, but this is at their discretion. They apply their local knowledge and guidelines to each cache individually.

Thanks to all for the feedback. We are tracking this thread and testing these issues. We appreciate your input.

Update is not in mango.

Keep us posted via this thread about the update. Thanks for your incredible patience and understanding over the past months.

We re-submitted to Microsoft, addressing the aspect of the app that they rejected. Stand by...

You are absolutely 100% right. I erred. We are currently compiling the list of beta testers. As this comes at a time when we are trying to get the next version of the app live, onboarding testers has been delayed.

We submitted the app, and it was denied. We appealed the decision and it was denied. We are working on the detail that needs to be addressed. Fair enough. I haven't had an app rejected yet, but I know the time will come. I just wish we could convince GS to be more open, as there are several of us who are willing to lend suggestions. It's a shame they have to be so secretive. We have already reached out to several users about possible/potential beta testing once Microsoft sets up those capabilities, and have heard directly from several users who have been helpful in troubleshooting.

We submitted the app, and it was denied. We appealed the decision and it was denied. We are working on the detail that needs to be addressed.

Our app submission has hit another roadblock. We are actively addressing this matter, but there will be more days without an update, We truly apologize, and share your frustration about this latest delay.

Our app submission has hit another roadblock. We are actively addressing this matter, but there will be more days without an update, We truly apologize, and share your frustration about this latest delay.

Argg... Those guys are driving me nuts! I want the update!! We are still waiting on Microsoft. I will update you when we have a green light.