Deceangi

It is with a extremely heavy heart [in fact over the last 24 hours, I've shed many a tear, as I've told people, ad read messages] that of Midnight GMT+1 13th June 2014. I ceased to be a Groundspeak Volunteer Reviewer. Over the last few months, the gulf between how I work to provide the best support the community needs and deserves. And how Groundspeak expect me to work in a Corporate manner. Has widened to such a extent, that it became irreparable. The recent incident, which because I achieved a perfect result means I bow out on Cloud Nine, Has show that Groundspeak has lost it's way, it regards to it's customers, who are hobbyists. And now instead requires them to be treated as business customers. So it was with a heavy heart, that I found that I could not meet Groundspeak's requirements to comply with a multi page document on accepted behaviour. Which override the needs of the community to comply with Corporate Ethos. This issue being deliberately escalated to cause as much trouble for me personally, by a individual I will not name. Made me realise, just how much Groundspeak has lost it's way. The company which started off as one Owned and Run by Geocachers, has grown into one so large. That people with specialised skills have had to be brought on board, these people not being Geocachers, but being turned into Geocachers. Means that the true understanding of the Hobby and the people who form it's community, has been lost to a Corporate Ethos. Where the Company comes before the needs of the customer. Several months ago, Groundspeak were "requiring" a Cache Owner to post to a Cache Description, That is was "not" to be accessed, by RoW, because the Landowner of the property the RoW ran over, but not the property the cache was located on. Requested so. Despite me sending 2 very polite and clear emails to Groundspeak, explaining that the "requirement" was illegal under UK Access Laws. I got the reply back "Groundspeak complies with all reasonable requests by a Landowner", this showed a lack of understanding of Local Law, and a total ignoring of what I had explained. To block the "requirement" I was forced to send a strong worded email, pointing out, that if the "requirement" was posted to the Cache Page. It would open the Cache Owner and possibly Groundspeak for requiring it to be posted, to Legal Action under UK Access Laws. But despite the fact I had first made two attempts to politely and quietly resolve the issue. Having both being ignored. I became the person at fault. From that point forward, I knew that the gulf between what was best for the community, and Groundspeak's now Corporate Ethos was getting ever wider. So I spent several months, dreading every direct email off Groundspeak, wondering when they came in, whether that would be the one to remove me as a Volunteer. So when the current issue arose, and I did what I had to stop a small community from splintering to pieces. This was not taken into account, despite a offer to request those involved in the dispute, contact Groundspeak directly. Instead I was informed that because I had failed to read the multi page document, on expected Reviewer behaviour, and comply. I had 14 days in which to resign or be removed as a Volunteer. I chose the immediate option of resigning and set the cut off as Midnight GMT+1 13th June. Because I can no longer Volunteer for a Company, which has so lost it's way, and instead become like any other company in that it has become a Corporate Entity. I would like to thank my former colleagues, who are special friends. I have been blessed and privileged to work with you, and watch the team grow. Not working with you, will just like no longer being a Volunteer, leave a huge hole in both my life and my heart. To the community I can only say that I owe so much gratitude for the last eight years, which have been so special. That now words can adequately express my gratitude to you So with tears in my eyes, and a heavy heart, for the final time I sing off with Deceangi

Personally I'd say there are no issues with the cache page, it presents historic facts about the Church, and encourages respectful visitors, to what is in essence a micro Nature Reserve. There is no promotion of Christianity on the page. Also apart from the Publishing Reviewer, I counted 4 Reviewers who have found the cache, and had no issues with the page or the concept Plus many Church Micros, the CO's will not even attempt to obtain Permission to place the container within the Grounds of the Church, which the cache is actually Promoting. With this series, Permission will be obtained. And show, that asking for permission, for such locations is worth the effort. Deci

I wonder if anyone will borrow the book Titled "Do It Yourself Divorce" I bet you thought I was referring to the log book at first Deci

FYI at that point in time, I was covering Sweeps of Southern England, The Guidelines specifically state Note! Not "Disable" with a statement Events can still be logged as Attended even when Archived, and TB's logged out. I opened Disabled Caches in Southern England one by one, to see if there was a genuine reason to be Disabled. So came across Paul's event whilst doing that sweep. If you or anyone else has a issue with that, please make a Formal Complaint to Groundspeak! Also FYI, when ever I do a Sweep of a region, and come across a Event which has Passed, but yet to be Archived, I do so. Deci

Groundspeak took a decision a few years ago, that provided a User Name is not offensive in any sort of way, nor is a attack aimed at anyone. They would generally allow most user names, even if it was the name of a business. As your aware, Groundspeak decided that the name is close enough to being offensive, that the name was deemed inappropriate, and the example your referring to, was the initials of the first 2 words and "UK", not the full name you have posted. Deci

The Original East of England Committee, who were awarded the Annual UK Mega Account for 2015, having collapsed for a number of reasons. And a Event held on the 8-3-2014 to see if it would be possible to reform the committee, to hold the 2015 Annual UK Mega Event. Having decided that there is not enough interest or time available. Have withdrawn the withdrawn the East of England request for the 2015 Event. Now leaves the Account available for any committee to submit a request to hold the 2015 Annual UK Mega Event in 2015. Due to time constraints, given the short run in to the 2014 Annual UK Mega Event Ayrshire. Requests will be taken up to Midnight on the 31 March 2014. If more than one Request is made, the usual Tender Process will be instigated. If by Midnight 31 March 2014, no request has been received. The Account for 2015, will be put in to a Contingency Planning status, the aim being to retain the Legacy Mega Status, which allows publication at 12 months run in. Contingency plans, covering a number of options are currently being discussed. Deceangi On behalf of the Annual UK Mega Stake Holder Committee

As far as I am aware there is nothing to stop three totally separate events in the same county on the same day by three different Geocachers. I know that event *stacking* is not allowed but what is to stop me hosting my CITO in the same county (department) as this year's Mega in France? I haven't seen the new event guidelines BTW. Where are they posted? Well done on your "8" by the way! Groundspeak have clarified the revised Event Guidelines Guidelines see Section II: subsection 2.6 within the Last few days my Bold. Any event or CITO taking place on the same day as a Mega Event, and intended to attract Attendee's of that Mega Event. Will not be Listed, as they are elements of the Mega Event. A CITO the day before or the day after, or a Event, is not attracting the Attendee's of the Mega Event. Please Note! No mention of different accounts to the Mega Organiser, submitting the Events. It the "intended for the same audience should be submitted as a single event" which is the important part. Many seem to have also missed the fact that the Mega Status Submission process has also changed, and the awarding of Mega Status by Groundspeak, has been tightened up. So the 2 changes are linked. Deci

If someone was to run that concept the OP has past me, I'd advice that what is being described is simply a container, no Log book. A container and log book are 2 separate items, the container at minimum "Holds" the log book/sheet, but does not form part of the log book/sheet. Because to replace the log book, would require the container replacing, when the log book is full. That is not 2 separate entities That is correct, it is a container That is incorrect, as when full the the "Whole" container has to be replaced, and not just the log book Which would happen with a separate log book. The book has been hollowed out, so there is room for a "independent" log book, without using the pages of the hollowed out book as the log book,which means a full log book could be replaced, without replacing the container. Stapling in more and more pages, would just make the book stick out more and more. And whilst the stapled pages, would be a independent log book, the container would still have to be used as the log book first. Deceangi UK Reviewer

Due to personal reasons, The Bee Keeper is taking a Sabbatical from Reviewing Caches. During this period, I will be acting as Primary for all London Cache Submissions. Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer

The forum is now basically defunct, after a issue with the host, meant that the forum could not be recovered after a major crash of the Hosts servers. The members now congregate in the N West FB group, linked to by Mrs B. The NW forum basically ceased to exist Deci

Actually that should read I think I'm having a bit of a rebellious streak here, keeping a virtual alive in spite of the Virtual Cache Owners best efforts to kill them off! As there is no attempt to hunt down Hunt down and Kill of Virtual caches, where the Owner is not complying with the Guidelines. They are dying from natural wastage, when complaints are made about Virtual logging, which the CO is not Policing. Or when a Needs Archive Log is made to them [/url] I'm aware of a couple of Grandfathered In caches, which have been Disabled for a extended period, due to circumstances beyond the Owners control. But where the owners, are complying with the Guidelines, and monitoring the situation. Also several years ago, when for a short Period, Grandfathered In caches, were accidentally Unlocked, allowing adoption. A number of UK ones, were in fact adopted over to Active cachers, after they got given the by some one. So the evidence completely contradicts your statement, especially as the requirement for Grandfathered In Cache Owners, to log into GC once a Month, is no longer present in the Guidelines which if Groundspeak were actively killing them off, would have been left in. If you wish to keep Grandfathered In caches active, contact the Owners, and request, that they maintain the caches, including Policing the Found Logs, and they will be around for a long time. If the owner is ignoring their responsibilities, then you can hardly expect them to remain active. Deci

Sorry but you can not just blame missing trackables on the Phone App Generation. I had two trackables, one launched 2004, the other 2005. Both disappeared in 2008. One went to a Event and the other put in a cache. The issue has been going on for as long as I can remember, and I've been caching since 2002. I can even point out, about the Jeep TB's (as Sponsored by Jeep), which people grabbed and they disappeared. It used to depress me personally, I'd organise a event. I would be last to leave, and would physically check the area, to insure that No Trackables were left behind, yet at most events, a Trackable or two would disappear. At one point, Event Owners required people to log Trackables in a book, and the person tacking them to log them out by indicating so in the book. And this pre-dated Smart Phones. The well equipped cacher, had a PDA, sometimes with a GPSr Jacket. Deci

Geocache Listing Requirments/Guidelnes Section 2 has a list of Cache Types including Grandfathered In types, many sections have links to expanded information Deci

The change in the EU payment structure was announced in the Main forums, so it was not slid in completely under the radar. It has always been advisable to subscribe to the Topic areas in the Notices from Groundspeak area. Deci

Under Reciprocal Trade Agreements with the US and EU, sales taxes due in each country for Goods bought from one Country or economic area , for delivery from either area to the other. Where Sales taxes are due on the item. The Originating Seller is Legally Required to collect the Sales Tax, and pay that to a Unified Collector in the particular Country or Economic Area. In the case of Digital Subscriptions, which Premium Membership is. Under EU law [this can all be confirmed by contacting HMCR or a Net search] wherever they are purchased from, become Liable to VAT, when the person is resident in the EU. Again HMRC or the net can confirm this. Groundspeak on doing a review, came across the fact that for a large number of years, they had been legally Liable to collect VAT off EU residents, for a Digital Subscription, for a number of years. After negotiations with the Unified Collections Agency in the EU, which in Groundspeak's case is the UK's HMRC. Groundspeak now collect the relevant VAT amount liable for each Premium Membership, which is then paid to the Unified Collections Agency, who then forwards the relevant payment of VAT collected, to the persons Country of Residence within the EU, where the VAT is liable for payment. By suggesting you are insinuating that Groundspeak is committing a Criminal Act, in falsely charging VAT, and not paying that to the Unified Collections Agency. A criminal act in the US that is. Somehow I do not believe they would be stupid, to do such and post that they are collecting VAT, in a public forum, unless they are actually paying all such VAT collected, to HMRC as the Unified Collections Agency for the EU, especially as they are subject to US Accountancy Laws and Federal Tax Laws. They have set the cost of Premium membership, in Dollars, converted that at the Exchange Rate at the specific time they were working things out. Then added a currency conversion fee. This was done, to stabilise the amount received, as in the past the exchange rate has been as low as £15 sterling, which when received, due to the fluctuations in the exchange rate, might have after currency conversion fee's been well under $30. As when recieved the Exchange rate might have risen to £19 Sterling. Then VAT is charged on top of this, this is set by the EU and not Groundspeak, so if you have issues, with having to pay VAT, on the currency conversion fee. You need to take that point up with your MP or MEP. As Groundspeak are liable to apply VAT in the way set by the EU.Which is chargeable on the total amount payable [you pay VAT on Fuel Tax in the UK. Which is why fuel is so expensive] As for the poor communication on the matter, well Groundspeak have been known to have poor communications with their customers, going way back to the early days of the company. Nothing new, and just something which is easy to get on with, as it does not affect you going out and find caches. Then again as the members from 2001/2/3 can tell you, that might be better, than a very brutally truthfully Jeremy posting. He did not take to fools, and people putting Geocaching and Groundspeak down, very lightly. Deci

Honest opinion, as a Reviewer, I'm happy to work with even someone with zero finds provided that they are prepared to work with me, to resolve all issues. Sadly just like with a very tiny minority of more experienced cachers, you get some who throw a rant, when issues are pointed out to them I've published caches by genuine 0/0 hiders, which have had the finders raving about the cache. I can remember exchanging over 15 emails with one cacher, when Additional Waypoints were first made Mandatory in the UK (mid 2006, Groundspeak took a further 12/18 months to do so, even though they supported our stance), who despite trying could just not grasp the idea of creating them. So the solution was to sit down with a piece of paper, and log every stage, as I created one. Which I then emailed to the person, who then had success. Work with me, and I will go to the ends of the earth to help you out. What does annoy me, are the tiny minority, who despite being very experience Geocachers, use Sock Accounts to set caches. This is not a dig at all Sock accounts, just a very tiny minority of them. These socks are used to set huge cache trails, that the CO then ignores, so when Maintenance issues arise, it is usually the finders who rectify them. Sadly over time, these Trails, get archived by the local Reviewer, in a Piecemeal fashion, as individual caches, get Needs Archived logs on them. In many of these cases, the caches under the CO's main account, are well maintained, and the person is out every week caching. It is those 2 tiny minority groups, who waste Reviewers time and energy, and at times, saps the will to continue. For me personally, not only as a Reviewer, but Geocaching as well . It is the majority of the community, who make it worth while continuing. There are huge trails out there, which you know the CO(s) will move heaven and earth, to quickly resolve all issues, even when set under a Generic Sock account. Because even under the Sock, they still take pride in their hides. Sadly that is not something Reviewers can tell from a cache submission, but get hints of, from interactions, when issues have to be resolved. And that includes off 0/0 hiders. Plus we have to remember, this hobby was started by a 0/0 hider, as were many of the first 30 or 40 caches in the world Deci

There is a very active South Wales Facebook group, pop in and say Hi, you'll get a warm welcome Deci

The cache idea in London Zoo, was rejected after discussion by the UK Reviewers, because the entry fee, is well above the Guidance given by Groundspeak to "All" Reviewers. If you would care to look, you'd find the cheapest Adult entry is £23. If either of the posters, above my post, have a issue, please take them directly to Groundspeak. And let they make a decision! Deci

The UK has had 6 Approvers which was the original name for Reviewers Resign on Mass in 2003, and 2 Reviewers Resign in 2008 [ 2 people I worked very closely with for just under 2 years]. There has been a case of a Reviewer being removed by Groundspeak, but that is the rare case. Reviewers have resigned for a number of reasons. And some have taken sabbaticals. There are Reviewers, who have passed 10 years in the role, and are still active. Personally I'm into my 8th year in the role, and 2 of my colleagues in the UK, will hit their 5th year come August. There have been Reviewers who have only put in a few months to a year in the role. Everyone's situation varies. For me personally, as a Full Time Carer, Reviewing gives me a escape from Carers Four Wall syndrome, I've made very special friends, who I work with very closely every day and whom I'm very proud off. And I have made a huge friendship base One rule applies to all Reviewers, where ever they are, and that is "Reviewing should be fun", not achievable 100% of the time. But the majority of the time. When the fun goes out of it, that is the time to hang up the Reviewer account, and happily walk away. Deci

Looks like the UK is bigger than I realised, when did Deci start to land grab Land Grab the size of the area I Review has reduced a huge amount IoM, Malta, Gibraltar, Jersey & Guernsey, and pre Regions caches Listed in Northern Ireland under the UK [caches in NI could also be listed under Ireland] have been the responsibility since before I became a Reviewer, of the UK Reviewers. Way back in 2006, the UK was split between 3 Reviewers, Eckington took bellow N51, Lactodorum took N51 to N53, and I took everything above N53. The other 2 also Reviewed the Non UK mainland areas between them. Move forward to April 2008, and I all of a sudden, inherited everything . August 2008 and Graculus and Alba came on board, and the team has grown since. NI was put into Ulster Ireland [that is the Historic Ulster, which pre-dates the Modern one, by hundreds of years] so the Irish Reviewer took that off my hands. Antheia as she lives in the Channel Islands, took them off my hands. And I have handed over various regions, as new team members have come on board. To be honest IoM. Malta and Gibraltar do not have the sort of numbers, to justify recruiting a locally based Reviewer. In fact it has only been the last 6 months or so, where Gibraltar has had a number of caches published, it was so quiet before that, I was shocked to actually get one there to review I've also dropped from publishing over 10,000 caches in 12 months [2 years on the trot ], to a very sedate publish rate now days, it's almost like being retired Deci oh and at one point I was Reviewing 110-120 caches a day, 7 days per week

Provide a Name and contact details for the Landowner [Phone Number is sufficient] and that is all the Proof you need to provide. Contact details are required, should there be issues in the future, it provides a imediate route to contacting the person giving permission. This information is confidential, and will not be accessible by anyone but Reviewers and Lackeys. Just make sure you select Reviewer Note as the log type, pre publication To make it clear, it is the Landowner who has to Give Permission, not as some presume the Designating Authority, Natural England, SNHi, Natural Resources Wales (NRW) [formally CCW] unless they actually own the property. The Designating Authority, if they do not own the Land, can only give Approval. The UK Reviewers leave the decision in regards to Approval off the Designating Authority to the Landowner. To make it clear, it is not something we require, only Landowner Permission. The same situation applies to locations Designated as a Nature Reserve, or a Scheduled Monument. In the case of Scheduled Monuments the Designating Authorities are English Heritage, Historic Scotland, CADW. Deci

The Op replied to my communication, stating that he would "Pass" the request to be contacted, on to the "Appropriate" person. Up to today, there has been no further contact off the OP, nor the Appropriate person he was going to contact, has made contact. Deci

Please contact Groundspeak using http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=request using Category 8 as the communication type. Providing a contact Name and contact details, for the appropriate person acting on behalf of the Landowner I have also made the same request via PM, and the Contact a Member Facility Will no one please make any further Needs Archived logs, until the person actually acting on behalf of the Landowner, has made contact with Groundspeak, and confirmed that the request is genuine. Once the Landowner has confirmed the request is genuine, and a map of the Boundary has been obtained, all the caches within the defined area will be Archived, by the local Reviewer. Making NA Logs, on the basis of one post, by a person who has not identified themselves as the Landowner is not appropriate. Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer

As a US based cacher, you would not have been caught up in the initial issues re Northern Ireland. A very early decision by Jeremy Irish, allowed cachers in NI to List their caches under either the UK or Ireland. This being dependant on their political beliefs. It created a mess, and resulted in cachers in Eire running PQ's getting some caches in NI but not all. On the other side, cachers in Scotland running PQ's, were getting caches Listed under the UK in NI. When Regions for the UK and Ireland were being developed. A solution, which took Politics out of caching in Northern Ireland was looked for. Groundspeak was offered 2 separate options The 6 counties of NI being Listed as Ulster UK or The Historic Region of Ulster, which Pre-dated the invasion of the Island of Ireland, bringing it under the English Crown, so pre-dating the modern troubles by centuries. A Region which took in the current 6 counties in NI, but also several in the Eire The best advice given to Groundspeak, was for the Non Political second choice. When this was adopted by Groundspeak, cachers on both sides of the Political divide living in NI [and at the end of the day, this decision affects them the most] happily accepted the usage of the Historic Ulster. Since the creation, it has mainly been Non NI based cachers, who complain, or the odd NI cacher, who has just started caching, and has no knowledge of the past history of the hobby in NI. The change was and has been happily accepted by those who were extremely vocal about which Country they Listed their caches under [so bringing Politics into the hobby], so is a win win situation for the hobby in NI. Deceangi Who pre regions, used to Review caches in NI, Listed as being in the UK. But not those Listed as being in Ireland.

I think you just have to give him chance to check, if he's heard nothing about the ban. Otherwise it's unfair, if you know that you have him at a disadvantage. Logically I'd expect the reviewer to allow the cache if you mention that the land manager is aware of the MOD policy but has given permission anyway. But he/she probably would still refuse it. Basically your suggesting that a Local Manager, despite knowing that his Senior Management has set a specific policy, should ignore that. And over rule his Senior Management? Would you if you were in the position of being a Senior Manager, accept that of someone under you? It is just asking for the Local Manager to put himself in a position of facing Disciplinary Proceedings. And you feel that a Volunteer Reviewer, should aid in that? Sorry but risking someone's job is not acceptable. And I am horrified that you would even suggest such a thing. Deci