The recent changes to the cache listing requirements focus around the ALR or Additional Logging Requirement. I've been thinking about these changes, wondering what would be the reason. Here are the three in particular I have thought about:
# Cease deleting logs based on additional logging requirements.
# Review your own cache listing to see if the ALR can be made into an optional and simple task, or whether it must be removed altogether.
# Adjust your geocache listing by editing the text then contact a reviewer to change the cache type, if appropriate.
What would the possible reason be to make these changes…?
Then it hit me…
MONEY!
The new guidelines are NOT for the benefit of the game, but for the benefit of the company, Groundspeak.
The only logical explanation for the changes is as follows:
A cache consists of a container, some coordinates, and a listing description.
Additional logging Requirements or ALR’s are a frustrating point to someone ONLY if they found the cache without knowing they needed to do something beyond the find as requested by the cache OWNER. The only way you would not know that is if you did NOT READ the cache listing description.
So, what geocachers are not reading descriptions?
TRIMBLE Blackberry and Garmin Colorado users!
The new technology and software that Groundspeak has become involved with has made it possible to download to your unit the Cache coordinates to find the cache container, but they have ignored the third part of the cache, the LISTING! Resulting in Blackberry and Colorado users unable to know if an ALR is required or not. One can easily make the jump that these users were getting very frustrated by found caches that had ALR’s being deleted by owners.
Unfortunately, the result is a decision that is made not with the Sport’s best interest in mind, but the pocketbook of Groundspeak and their partners.
This game is built upon the community of cachers, why not ask them for alternatives to banning a type of cache?
Here are some alternatives:
Create a new icon for ALR caches
Write the software for these in-the-field download units to include the description
Develop an icon or difficulty rating that can tip people off to the requirements of the cache
While I respect Groundspeak’s right to remain a viable company, I deny them the right to pose a decision as for the good of the game, when the reasons are just a little less lofty.
So how can we as the community of cachers and the TRUE owners of the sport, rewrite the guidelines that Groundspeak, Navicache, and others must live by, to remind them that the Owners of the caches are still the players? Any Suggestions?
That Fedora Guy
