Jump to content

Guideline Reassurance


Recommended Posts

The majority of new caches these days seem to be from people to disregard the cache guidelines that are listed: http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx


Why? well its ugly and long. It's well beyond the attention span of anyone who is anxious to put out their jewel of a cache (the BEST cache E-V-E-R)


I would like to propose/discuss the following:

Make the most important points SEPERATE checkboxes in the cache publishing page (while still maintaining their place inside the guidelines)


For instance, the check boxes would look like the following:

  • Yes. My geocache is visibly labelled Geocache
  • Yes. I have obtained permission from the landowner to place this cache
  • Yes. I will maintain this cache if it needs fixing, and archive it when I no longer intend to do so.
  • Yes. I have read and understand the guidelines for listing a cache.
  • Yes. I have read and agree to the terms of use agreement..


Small change, possibly a little annoying to those that change their cache listings alot - But it would solve ALOT of problems.

Edited by Juicepig
Link to comment

The problem is their "guidelines". Which is subjected to a lot of interpretation.


It would be interesting if they make it "rules". It would be really interesting to "clearly" label my nano cache. Hardly enough room on the log boot to sign your initials.


or ever tried to seek permission to place a road side?

Link to comment

I sympathise with the OP. It's frustrating to get to GZ (if you're lucky) and find some blatant violation. Normally it will be something the reviewer couldn't have picked up from the cache description.


I have fantasy moments imagining a sequence of 10 separate pages, each displaying a pictorial "right" and "wrong" category: buried vs hidden, religious or political propaganda vs cute kittens, railroad tracks vs scenic forest. At each stage you have to certify, by typing something like "YES MY CACHE IS NOT NEAR RAILROAD TRACKS" exactly into a box, that you are in conformity with the guidelines.


However, like anything else, there's only so far you can go.


Did you see this news story? A guy took a monkey on a plane under his hat. I guess there was no question about that at checkin, and no requirement to take your hat off at security (actually, I'm a little surprised about that, but then I'm still trembling in case someone in security thinks that someone might try to blow up a plane with, uh, internally-fitted explosivies). Should they add a checklist procedure saying "are you carrying a monkey under your hat"?


El Al would have picked it up, of course. You get a face-to-face interview before they let you on the plane. But that's why El Al is one of the world's biggest loss-making airlines, with every ticket subsidized by the Israeli government. Not quite Groundspeak's business model. <_<

Link to comment

At each stage you have to certify, by typing something <snip> that you are in conformity with the guidelines.


Your link to the guy with a monkey under his hat trying to board a plane is completely irrelevant. He was breaking a rule (regarding bringing animals onboard aircraft). It doesn't matter whether or not they asked him if he had a monkey under his hat. It is still a rule.


See that bold word in your quoted post above? That's the issue here. They aren't hard, fast, cut 'n dried rules. They are guidelines.


The way I look at it, if it's a cache hidden that I can find, it was a fun cache. I don't police every single cache I find, because I make them all fun. Have I found buried caches? Yep. Did I get to the cache, discover it was buried, and then rant and rave that the owner didn't follow the guidelines? Nope. Did I write the reviewer, and demand that the cache be archived? Nope. Did I log that I enjoyed it? Yep. Just like others before me, and others since.


We, the Geocaching community, have the entire burden placed on us to make this an enjoyable pasttime. If I ever find a cache that was placed completely void of any thought, disregarded every guideline, and was a hazard to those around it, I would turn it in. Until then, I'm content finding caches. All caches.

Link to comment

i dont expect it will work perfectly, there will still be some who choose to not label their caches caches, not seek permission of the landowner, and not maintain their cache, or read the guidelines.


It will make a difference though. If i can make one person think more seriously about their hides, then it was all worth it (especially since i didn't have to pay for it, hehehe)


What started this whole thought process? Too many bomb scares in the area lately. People that do not label their caches as such causing city services to close down areas so they can blow them up.


"Put out and seek quality caches. Why fix what isn't broken?" - You think everyone is putting out quality caches? You sir, must be the happiest man alive [<_<]

Link to comment

... - But it would solve ALOT of problems.


It would solve none of the problems that you are having.


When I say none, I mean, zero, nada, zilch, and zip. It would however require people to click a few more check boxes and thus make more work for the people who read the guidelines just like you would like while doing nothing for the ones you are trying to force some of your comprehension on.

Link to comment

Our society is always looking at solving the symptoms rather then looking at the cause.


1. People don't get "permission" because they think public space means it's ok, or they don't know who to ask, or other reasons. Rather than complaining about peoples lack of action, maybe we should look at getting better avenues for permission. Most of us are not great negotiators. I have had my share of "no" because of a reason which could be worked around.


2. Clearly marked. I've had three containers go missing that were clearly marked. The problem is to keep muggles from stealing our containers we really have to blend it into it's surroundings. So a rock that I drill a hole in, it doesn't make sense to now paint "I'm here take me" on the container.


So my thought... let's look at why people would "ignore" the guidelines and help to smooth out that area. More rules is never the answer.


A team withing GC.com, which are good negotiators, who could take up the mantel of hashing out agreements on our behave would be really cool. I keep sending e-mails (so I have a paper trail) and most are ignored.

Link to comment

I'll bet that seeing as one of the 3 original founders of GC.com is a lawyer, that those 2 check boxes, the guidelines for listing a cache, and the terms of use agreement are exactly what they view as the best compromise possible on all fronts. You have to remember that those documents exist also to cover their corporate butts when us cachers (me included) do some really stupid things.


Leave the check boxes and documents alone. Mentor your fellow cachers whenever possible, that's the best way to achieve the results you are looking for.



AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

Link to comment

I agree that the extra check boxes would just waste time.


Everyone is going to occasionally have problems with placing caches (or more likely, finding caches) that in some major way don't meet the guidelines. This will happen. This is what contacting the cacher, contacting the reviewer, or SBA logs are for. Just don't become the cache police. If it isn't dangerous or damaging in some way, and you have no major reason to address it, leave it be.


We lost a very good cache in my area due to three newbie Geocachers who panicked when they saw something that wasn't there, called out the police and fire departments, wasted a lot of public servants' time, and ruined a cache that was there for multiple years with no problems, injuries, or issues otherwise.

Link to comment
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...