Running, And A Shameless Plug For Bag Books

[enitharmon]

At the end of May I went to the Binfield Bank Holiday Cache Bash. Although I walked all the way from Bracknell station, I felt like the original tub of lard. This was confirrmed a few days later when I went to the doc for my MOT.

 

"Now Rosalind, would you like to step on the scales?'

 

"Oh no doctor. Please, not the scales. Anything but the scales..."

 

It was horrible. It was repulsive. Something had to be done.

 

So I put on my old tennis shoes and sweat pants and a big baggy old sweatshirt. I'll just jog to my shiny new geocache at Lousehill Copse to check it out, I thought.

 

Ha bloody ha!

 

After wobbling a hundred yards I thought I was going to die. But I'm no quitter. I walked for a while. Then when I'd got my breath back I wobbled to the next lamp post. Walked for a bit. Woobbled to the next lamp post. And so on.

 

Someone gave me a graduated programme to follow. A week later I bought a pair of running shoes. After another week I joined a club. On 1 August,, the day before my 51st birthday, I ran for a broken 30 minutes for the first time. A week after that I ran three miles without stopping.

 

And now it's nearly the end of September...

 

Here comes the punchline. I'm kinda addicted now. My long-term aim is the Reading Half-Marathon next March, but as a staging post I've entered myself for the Brighton Reebok 10K race on 20 November. But I'm not just doing it for me, I'm doing it for a good cause.

 

I wanted a suitable charity to raise funds for. And I settled on Bag Books. They produce books in a bag for children and adults with severe learning difficuties who do not have access to ordinary books. Their lives are enriched through the power and joy of storytellling using all the senses.

 

You can find out more here

 

Rosie

[+Simply Paul]

A very very polite suggestion:

I'd quickly lock this thread before the mods get involved!

 

SP

[+Learned Gerbil]

A very very polite suggestion:

I'd quickly lock this thread before the mods get involved!

 

SP

I agree - Since the T word was first mentioned, any suggestion that caching be linked, even in an obtuse way, with raising money for good causes has caused endless trouble!

Edited September 25, 2005 by Learned Gerbil

[enitharmon]

I am a bear of very little brain, evidently, and I can't for the life of me see why there should be a problem about fundraising for a cause which would be impossible to take exception to.

 

Please explain.

 

Rosie

[enitharmon]

I am a bear of very little brain, evidently, and I can't for the life of me see why there should be a problem about fundraising for a cause which would be impossible to take exception to.

 

Please explain.

 

Rosie

[+Simply Paul]

You'd be surprised what can be taken exception to. I personally have no issue with fund-raising by 'genuine cachers' via this forum, but the rules say you can't do it. If the thread was started and immediately locked, you might just get away with it. As it stands, the usual process is a mod - following GC.com guidelines, of course- will lock it with a very nice and carefully worded note, and edit the links out of your original post.

 

I'll quickly add my congratulations on the running and my best wishes for your sponsorship of a very deserving cause.

 

SP

[+Team Hydro]

Hi SP,

 

What do you mean by "locking" the thread. How do you do it and what does it do?

 

Hydroman

 

Rosie, Good luck with the running !

[+Simply Paul]

Hi SP,

 

What do you mean by "locking" the thread. How do you do it and what does it do?

When you start a thread, you also have the option of stopping it. That means it can be read but not added to - so it'll drift naturally down the table and safely off into forum no-mans-land. If you look down the table you'll see threads whose little blue envelopes have a red padlock on them, showing they can be read, but not replied to. In effect locked!

 

The button is at the bottom left corner of the thread, but only if you're a mod or the original poster (wink).

 

SP

[+Team Hydro]

What a useful option.

 

Thanks for the explanation.

[+Learned Gerbil]

I am a bear of very little brain, evidently, and I can't for the life of me see why there should be a problem about fundraising for a cause which would be impossible to take exception to.

 

Please explain.

 

Rosie

Apparently the T word wasn't considered a good enough cause to allow a breach of the "no promoting agendas" rule. Look back through the forums in late December and January to see why I can't even use the word. It might be useful to look here -

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...c8-06dca880d6ea

[+Haggis Hunter]

Hi Rosie,

 

Unlike the last person that wanted backing on here, you have at least got some background with geocaching, were as monno was a complete new member who was asking.

 

I am afraid however that SP is correct, fundraising isn't allowed, unless it can be linked very closely with geocaching. Your best bet is to follow SP's instructions and lock the thread, as if you don't the mods most certainly will.

 

Well done on your achievements so far, and the best of luck with your race at Brighton

[Lactodorum]

There is a clear and unambiguous ban on listing caches that promote an "agenda", even a very well meant charitable one. The "T" word saga is an excellent example I for one wont forget !!

 

However the Forum guidelines state:

 

Commercial Postings/Solicitations are not allowed. Commercial content as a direct or indirect (either intentional or non-intentional) attempt to solicit customers through a forum post will be edited or deleted. Notwithstanding the above, Groundspeak reserves the right to include limited commercial content in this Forum, in its sole discretion.

 

There's a subtle difference there as it refers to Commercial solitications and as long as the thread remains essentially Geocaching related (and in my opinion this one is) I'm happy to let it continue.

 

I'm very gratified that legitimate concerns have been expressed in such a fashion though. Thanks guys.

[+walkergeoff and wife]

Forgive my ignorance - what is the 'T' word? Email me privately if it is that verboten!

[+Haggis Hunter]

Hooray , I'm pleased to see that we were wrong on this occassion.

[+Haggis Hunter]

Forgive my ignorance - what is the 'T' word? Email me privately if it is that verboten!

A word that had something to do with a BIG wave that wiped out a large chunk of Asia on December the 26th last year.

 

Just look at the link Learned Gerbil has provided.

[+Simply Paul]

I'm very glad to be wrong. Hooray for common sense!

Sorry to mislead you Rosie. My intentions were all good, I promise.

 

SP

Edited September 26, 2005 by Simply Paul

[+Learned Gerbil]

I too am glad to see that ruling.

[+mongoose39uk]

Eh I will mention it Tsunami

 

Well I have been on my best behaviour for far too long

Edited September 26, 2005 by mongoose39uk

[+John Stead]

Eh I will mention it Tsunami

There now - it didn't hurt, did it?

[+mongoose39uk]

Eh I will mention it Tsunami

There now - it didn't hurt, did it?

Not yet, maybe I am not on the watch list anymore

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

Good luck Rosie.

 

Glad to see this is allowed.

 

Puzzled though, given the quote above from the Guidelines as to why this cache isn't seen as a commercial...setter has not logged one find, cache page has more about local tea room than the cache, and first three, very experienced cachers to visit logged DNFs!

[Lactodorum]

Good luck Rosie.

 

Glad to see this is allowed.

 

Puzzled though, given the quote above from the Guidelines as to why this cache isn't seen as a commercial...setter has not logged one find, cache page has more about local tea room than the cache, and first three, very experienced cachers to visit logged DNFs!

There will always be a "grey" area and this falls into it. Long before I became a reviewer (indeed before we had UK reviewers at all) any mention or recommendation of nearby pubs was frowned upon as "commercial". Once it was explained what a central role they play in normal life over here the guideline was relaxed.

 

In the cache you mention you don't need to visit the tearoom to find the cache (a key requirement) but the cache placer obviously found it a nice place to visit. We have no grounds to suspect any commercial involvement in the establishment mentioned so we assume normal "good faith".

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

Many thanks for the swift reply, I kinda get the picture, but of course it would look far more innocent if the setter had at least found a few caches!

[+purple_pineapple]

i understand that you have to work in good faith, as you say. Perhaps Mr L can give his opinion (if that's allowed! ) about a requirement to have found a minimum number of caches before placing? has this been considered by the big cheeses upstairs and rejected for some reason? Its only my opinion, but it seems a good idea on many levels!

 

Dave

[Lactodorum]

i understand that you have to work in good faith, as you say. Perhaps Mr L can give his opinion (if that's allowed! ) about a requirement to have found a minimum number of caches before placing? has this been considered by the big cheeses upstairs and rejected for some reason? Its only my opinion, but it seems a good idea on many levels!

 

Dave

I'm always allowed to express MY opinion

 

Actually this has been discussed many times before, both here in the UK forum and in the general forums. Whenever it is brought up there is never a consensus with valid arguments being expressed by both sides.

 

In my capacity as a cache reviewer I have to try and let the guidelines direct me, rather than personal opinions. So if it meets the guidelines it gets published. It grieves me sometimes, both to have to publish certain caches and to have to turn down others.

[+purple_pineapple]

fair enough! maybe one day there'll be an agreement! i won't hold my breathe though i confess that i can't see a valid argument against it, but i'm not wearing my glasses at the moment...