No Soliciting Rule

[+Falcon Loader]

Before reading this post, I should give a bit of a note:

About a year ago, the MAGC was maligned by a person who claimed to speak for MAGC (they did not trully speak for MAGC or our Military Forces)and made unaceptable comments to a member of the Groundspeak staff. This person never came forward. The discussion left our MAGC members being allowed to say that we support our troops on our profile page but not on our cache pages. The topic has again come up on the GC forums by a non-magc member so I now ask Groundspeak to consider the following.

 

Dear Groundspeak,

We recently had a situation where our members were told that we could no longer place on our cache pages the MAGC logo “support our troops”. This was resolved for MAGC members (though not to our liking.) Since then others that are not MAGC members have come across similar situations.

Groundspeak Cache regulation:

“Caches that Solicit”

Solicitations are off-limits. For example, caches perceived to be posted for religious, political, charitable or social agendas are not permitted. Geocaching is supposed to be a light, fun activity, not a platform for an agenda.

Perhaps it is time that Groundspeak remove this regulation on caches and “leave it to the individual cacher to decide if we consider a cache enjoyable”. Would I do a cache that was against one of my held political beliefs or faith, probably not, but I would not wish to limit a person who places a cache called “X – religion rules” or one that said they don’t support candidate X. Perhaps the caching community is mature enough to handle such things.

MAGC represents over 400 geocachers from 5 separate nations and who are serving on every continent. Our organization has placed in your hands thousands of dollars in gear and accounts. Maybe it is time to allow us to use the freedom we protect and simply say, We support one another. At the same time, I fully understand this will allow others who do not support the troops, the war or what ever topic to do the same. It is ok, I’m willing to die for their freedom to gripe, but I also feel the GeoCaching community is mature enough to handle such topics.

Thank you for hearing me out on this,

M. “Duke” Clements

Falcon Loader

MAGC Founder

 

One final note to all geocachers. Please understand the the reviewers are volunteers who deserve our thanks. They are there to aid in our addiction to the outdoors. please use propper decorim even if our requests are not heard.

Edited April 4, 2008 by Falcon Loader

[+briansnat]

The way to do it is allow all agendas or allow none. I prefer the latter. Keep geocaching light and fun.

[+gof1]

The way to do it is allow all agendas or allow none. I prefer the latter. Keep geocaching light and fun.

 

What he said.

[+IANNA]

I want to know when caching became more then going out in to the woods to look for tupperware? How did we get all these politics involved.

[+sbell111]

There will always be agenda caches to one extent or another. TPTB should just decide which agendas are OK and to what extent. Allowing 'Support Our Troops' does not require them to allow 'Give Your Children to Bealzabub' caches.

[+egami]

When people started getting hypersensitive about contents of cache pages.

[+sbell111]

I want to know when caching became more then going out in to the woods to look for tupperware? How did we get all these politics involved.

About the same time as the average cache stopped being called 'geocache' and the description stopped being a place to simply list the original tradeables.

[+Stargazer22]

The way to do it is allow all agendas or allow none. I prefer the latter. Keep geocaching light and fun.

 

Another vote for agreement with Briansnat on this one.

[+egami]

My vote is to enforce the rule the way it's currently written which specifically isn't about agendas alone, but rather using cache pages to solicit. I don't think simple mentioning of such things automatically equates to "having an agenda".

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

The way to do it is allow all agendas or allow none. I prefer the latter. Keep geocaching light and fun.

 

What he said.

What they said! However, since we live in a less-than-perfect world, and since people are less-than-perfect, and since everyone (including reviewers) will interpret rules and guidelines a bit differently, there will always, I am sure, be a few caches that will slip through that will appear to most viewers to be pushing an agenda. What surprises me is not this fact, but rather the fact, as we have seen in the concurrent unacceptable cache description thread, that some folks seem to feel the need to finger-point and say "You are meanies! You have asked me to tone down the agenda-related theme in my cache, but I just did a search and found six caches across the world that contain similar words, so that means you are mean and evil!" It is all about emotional maturity, and it is about live and let live, and it is about sanity and inner peace, versus being a drama queen.

 

Oh, and Falcon Loader (OP on this thread), good to hear from you again! I have not seen a post from you in quite a while! Hope all is well!

Edited April 4, 2008 by Vinny & Sue Team

[+Renegade Knight]

I want to know when caching became more then going out in to the woods to look for tupperware? How did we get all these politics involved.

It was always involved. Cachers remain people and place caches according to their muse. I've done button themed caches for people who's agenda was their button fetish, I've done NASCAR themed caches. I've done caches that had me look up political boundaries from a past era that either had History or something else as it's agenda.

 

What's new is that now we have more people who's agenda is whining about other peoples agendas and a site that's getting more strict on how it defines agenda. If you hide a letterbox hybrid is your agenda to expose people to letterboxing? You can dream up an agenda out of anything.

 

When I go caching, none of this crap comes into play. It's still a box hidden somewhere with various kinds of write ups in the listings. Same as it always was.

Edited April 4, 2008 by Renegade Knight

[+Renegade Knight]

...some folks seem to feel the need to finger-point and say "You are meanies! You have asked me to tone down the agenda-related theme in my cache,...

 

Nice spin.

Ironicly it's not far from the truth. A cache owner minding thier own business is told one idle tuesday afternoon., "You Your agenda now sucks and is a flagrant violation of our founding fathers sacred principals' Change your wording or we will kick your cache out of this site"

 

Meanies are proactive. Who took the first step?

[+egami]

Oh, come on now RK, you know darn good and well it wasn't an idle Tuesday afternoon. That cacher was at one of their "activist" meetings!

[+mvigor]

The way to do it is allow all agendas or allow none. I prefer the latter. Keep geocaching light and fun.

 

The point most people are trying to make is that eventually the cache page will just say "I hid something at these coordinates. Good luck!"

 

Everything else won't be allowed.

[+Falcon Loader]

Vinny & Sue, Thanks, been busy keeping the sky safe over DC and for a bit down in LA. (Oh, sorry, guess that was an agenda )

For some reason I'm not able to do the quote thing, but I like the earlier post saying how soon it will be on the cache pages, "Oh, I hid something here". I may have to make a cache dedicated to that idea.

 

Again, it all comes down to common sense; if something comes on TV I don't like, I change the chanel, if I see a cache that I don't want to do... I find another.

 

Hope to see you all out finding something that some one hid without the agenda being to find it.

[+NorthWes]

I understand & agree some rules are necessary to help keep the game fun and focused on cache placement & subsequent searches for said cache.

 

While reviewing the latest log on a cache I'm watching (GCRQGV) my email popped up with notification of this new topic. What a coincidence! After reading this thread I've sent in my request to join MAGC. It's going to help reinforce for me the larger significance behind what occured at the GCRQGV cache site on April 4th of 2005.

 

Thus said, I'll move forward with planning my caching activities for the weekend. I'm trusting the more than 6,000 guys & gals of the 50th Space Wing are able to keep the GPS signal up and running for me so I can go play. Too bad I can't do more on a website for a game that's totally dependent on their work than post a note here in the forums saying 'thanks for all you do', but hey - I don't want anyone to think I'm promoting an agenda about the people whose work makes this game possible... let alone promoting an agenda by saying "thanks" for what Paul Smith did five years ago...

[+NYPaddleCacher]

There will always be agenda caches to one extent or another. TPTB should just decide which agendas are OK and to what extent. Allowing 'Support Our Troops' does not require them to allow 'Give Your Children to Bealzabub' caches.

 

In other words, if it's an agenda that most everyone agrees with (if so, what's the point?) it's okay, but if it's an agenda that a review might not agree with isn't not okay?

[+NYPaddleCacher]

There will always be agenda caches to one extent or another. TPTB should just decide which agendas are OK and to what extent. Allowing 'Support Our Troops' does not require them to allow 'Give Your Children to Bealzabub' caches.

 

In other words, if it's an agenda that most everyone agrees with (if so, what's the point?) it's okay, but if it's an agenda that a review might not agree with isn't not okay?

[+sbell111]

There will always be agenda caches to one extent or another. TPTB should just decide which agendas are OK and to what extent. Allowing 'Support Our Troops' does not require them to allow 'Give Your Children to Bealzabub' caches.

 

In other words, if it's an agenda that most everyone agrees with (if so, what's the point?) it's okay, but if it's an agenda that a review might not agree with isn't not okay?

No. In other words, perhaps TPTB can decide which agendas are OK for cache pages and to what extent.

[+Harry Dolphin]

The point being missed is that it is Groundspeak/Geocaching's decision to become a-political and a-commercial. One can see that it has been coming for a while. I doubt that one could put out a 'Wally World' cache these days. "No cache sets a precedent." Yes, there may be 7,000 Wally World caches. Do not expect to be able to hide one with that name anymore. Big Box Store caches!

The same goes with this discussion. If Groundspeak/Geocaching decides that a cache is not acceptable, for whatever reason, then that is the decision. If one wishes to have a cache listed here, then one needs to listen to what Groundspeak/Geocaching (and its volunteer reviewers) have to say. It they say that some editing of the cache pages is necessary, then that is what nees to be done to have a cache listed here.

High horses are very fine. We all have our agenda. But agenda have their time and place. This is not the place.

[+hydnsek]

A cache owner minding thier own business is told one idle tuesday afternoon., "You Your agenda now sucks and is a flagrant violation of our founding fathers sacred principals' Change your wording or we will kick your cache out of this site"

Oh puleeze. I've tried to stay out of these threads, but really - nobody said 'Your agenda now sucks and is a flagrant violation of our founding fathers sacred principals.' Several mods and others have taken pains to say they DO support the OP's sentiments (aka agenda). However, for reasons that have been very cogently expressed by Keystone, Briansnat, kealia, and a few others, Groundspeak has chosen not to allow cache pages to convey agendas - regardless of whether we/they support those sentiments or not.

 

It's these sort of deliberate (or, perhaps, emotional) misrepresentations that fuel the fires and prevent understanding of the core issues.

 

The argument that some are making that GS should define which agendas are ok and to what extent is no more feasible than attempts to retain virtual caches by requiring they have a 'wow' factor. It's subjective and opens huge cans of worms (or sends you down a slippery slope - choose your metaphor).

 

One thing that has not been touched on enough in these threads: This is not an Americans-only caching site. Geocaching is an international activity, and this site supports cachers from all countries. We need to broaden our perspective and realize we are part of a global caching community, not all of whom may share our cultural values or political persuasions (which doesn't mean anyone is right or wrong, just different, with different circumstances). Cache pages stating "win the war" might elicit a different reaction from an Iraqi family who has lost everything (relatives, jobs, basic sanitation, electricity, etc.) in the conflict. I'm just sayin'...we need to see the Big Picture, which is, I think, what GS is trying to do. PC isn't necessarily a bad thing - it depends on the context and extent. Sometimes, it means showing consideration and respect for others with differing viewpoints.

[+Zolgar]

There will always be agenda caches to one extent or another. TPTB should just decide which agendas are OK and to what extent. Allowing 'Support Our Troops' does not require them to allow 'Give Your Children to Bealzabub' caches.

 

In other words, if it's an agenda that most everyone agrees with (if so, what's the point?) it's okay, but if it's an agenda that a review might not agree with isn't not okay?

No. In other words, perhaps TPTB can decide which agendas are OK for cache pages and to what extent.

 

So.. Let's say you want to place a cache that your agenda is gay rights (if we were to go with the rule that "some agendas are OK")

You get a reviewer who is a homophobic, hellfire and brimstone bible belt Christian, they won't allow your cache just because they think your agenda is wrong.

 

Or maybe you try to place a religious cache. And get an Atheist reviewer?

 

But maybe TPTB should just give us a list of OK agendas? .. Well, other than the fact that that would get them about 2,000 flaming emails a day from people whose pet agenda isn't on there, or there is an agenda they think shouldn't be on there.

 

I firmly agree that it's better to allow all agendas or none. I say allow them all, but I don't really care either way.

[+NorthWes]

The point being missed is that it is Groundspeak/Geocaching's decision to become a-political and a-commercial. ... ... ...

High horses are very fine. We all have our agenda. But agenda have their time and place. This is not the place.

 

Exactly. Keeping the focus of the game clear of agendas is necessary to keep it palatable for all. The ancillary associations & organizations allow for personal support of particular agendas. I don't think I made that clear in my post, but that's what I meant by joining the organization I referenced.

 

Trust me to seldom be succinct...

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

There will always be agenda caches to one extent or another. TPTB should just decide which agendas are OK and to what extent. Allowing 'Support Our Troops' does not require them to allow 'Give Your Children to Bealzabub' caches.

And just what is wrong with Give Your Children To Beelzebub caches?

 

These wonderful caches free up parent's precious time so that they can pursue their geocaching agenda.

[+Confucius' Cat]

The way to do it is allow all agendas or allow none. I prefer the latter. Keep geocaching light and fun.

Well, I guess TPTB succeeded in THAT, didn't they?

[+Confucius' Cat]

Please understand the the reviewers are volunteers who deserve our thanks.

Just don't thank them on a cache page, that would be an illegal agenda.

[O-Mega]

I think the point that is being missed here is the fact that TPTB has not properly defined THEIR definition of agenda. As has been pointed out, practically everything can be viewed as having an agenda and they have to set a line somewhere. But when they jump back and forth across our perceived line, it is not very conducive to this hobby.

Personally I feel that asking someone to support this or that may not be good for this site, but it seems to me that the mere mention of the Military in any form has recently been grounds to deny the publishing of a cache. Now if that doesn't sound like an agenda I don't know what does.

 

Maybe we should suggest all Military related caches be listed on another site where our contribution would be more welcome.

[Clan Riffster]

for reasons that have been very cogently expressed by Keystone, Briansnat, kealia, and a few others, Groundspeak has chosen not to allow cache pages to convey agendas - regardless of whether we/they support those sentiments or not.

But a sentiment is not an agenda. At least not in any dictionary I know of. "I love brussel sprouts" is a sentiment. "You must eat brussel sprouts" is an agenda. Perhaps Groundspeak has their own Secret Squirrel dictionary that we commoners are not privy to?

[+hydnsek]

for reasons that have been very cogently expressed by Keystone, Briansnat, kealia, and a few others, Groundspeak has chosen not to allow cache pages to convey agendas - regardless of whether we/they support those sentiments or not.

But a sentiment is not an agenda. At least not in any dictionary I know of. "I love brussel sprouts" is a sentiment. "You must eat brussel sprouts" is an agenda. Perhaps Groundspeak has their own Secret Squirrel dictionary that we commoners are not privy to?

My apologies. I was simply trying to avoid using the word 'agenda' 58 times in my post, and didn't have my thesaurus handy.

[Clan Riffster]

No thesaurus necessary. A dictionary works just fine. What's odd is that the cache that started all this broo-hahha was expressing a sentiment, not promoting an agenda. Hence, the Secret Squirrel reference.

[+Confucius' Cat]

We can now have a new form of geocide modeled around "suicide by cop."

 

Rather than just archiving all of one's own caches and posting about it on the forum, one can just type the words "I SUPPORT OUR TROOPS" in all of their cache pages and wait for TPTB to archive them.

[O-Mega]

We can now have a new form of geocide modeled around "suicide by cop."

 

Rather than just archiving all of one's own caches and posting about it on the forum, one can just type the words "I SUPPORT OUR TROOPS" in all of their cache pages and wait for TPTB to archive them.

 

Suicide by Reviewer

[+Confucius' Cat]

We can now have a new form of geocide modeled around "suicide by cop."

 

Rather than just archiving all of one's own caches and posting about it on the forum, one can just type the words "I SUPPORT OUR TROOPS" in all of their cache pages and wait for TPTB to archive them.

 

Suicide by Reviewer

Actually, i have never been much of an advocate for civil disobedience, but ... what if, (just what if...) EVERYONE put those words in all of their already published cache pages? Or even if just a LOT of cachers did?

 

(answering my own rhetorical question)

1. GC would have a COW

2. cache pages would be locked the same way as coordinate changes are locked now.

3. GC would write software to remove unacceptable words and phrases much like the "auto-moderate" certain words in the fora

4. In the mean time, not much they could do but one-at-a-time edit them or archive them.

 

And I'll probably be excommunicated for even mentioning it.

[O-Mega]

We can now have a new form of geocide modeled around "suicide by cop."

 

Rather than just archiving all of one's own caches and posting about it on the forum, one can just type the words "I SUPPORT OUR TROOPS" in all of their cache pages and wait for TPTB to archive them.

 

Suicide by Reviewer

Actually, i have never been much of an advocate for civil disobedience, but ... what if, (just what if...) EVERYONE put those words in all of their already published cache pages? Or even if just a LOT of cachers did?

 

(answering my own rhetorical question)

1. GC would have a COW

2. cache pages would be locked the same way as coordinate changes are locked now.

3. GC would write software to remove unacceptable words and phrases much like the "auto-moderate" certain words in the fora

4. In the mean time, not much they could do but one-at-a-time edit them or archive them.

 

And I'll probably be excommunicated for even mentioning it.

 

Leave it to a Sapper to help you out, just have everyone add a link to a picture on an offsite page that shows cute little rabbit or something. Then on say 4 July change the picture to show big bold letters:

 

"SUPPORT OUR TROOPS"

Stand behind us or stand in front, your choice

[+Confucius' Cat]

We can now have a new form of geocide modeled around "suicide by cop."

 

Rather than just archiving all of one's own caches and posting about it on the forum, one can just type the words "I SUPPORT OUR TROOPS" in all of their cache pages and wait for TPTB to archive them.

 

Suicide by Reviewer

Actually, i have never been much of an advocate for civil disobedience, but ... what if, (just what if...) EVERYONE put those words in all of their already published cache pages? Or even if just a LOT of cachers did?

 

(answering my own rhetorical question)

1. GC would have a COW

2. cache pages would be locked the same way as coordinate changes are locked now.

3. GC would write software to remove unacceptable words and phrases much like the "auto-moderate" certain words in the fora

4. In the mean time, not much they could do but one-at-a-time edit them or archive them.

 

And I'll probably be excommunicated for even mentioning it.

 

Leave it to a Sapper to help you out, just have everyone add a link to a picture on an offsite page that shows cute little rabbit or something. Then on say 4 July change the picture to show big bold letters:

 

"SUPPORT OUR TROOPS"

Stand behind us or stand in front, your choice

Love it! ROFL

[Keystone]

Reminder: there are two threads running because they deal with two separate topics. Please reserve this topic for discussing the "Caches that Solicit" guideline (and proposed changes to it) in general terms. There's another thread for discussing the specific cache which led to this thread being started. Thanks!

[Keystone]

Upon further review, I am closing this thread because of posts advocating violations of the website terms of use. Take a break and don't open another one on this subject just now.