Stand alone camping events

[+Mad H@ter]

It has always been my understanding that for a camping event to be approved it must have a non-camping element, ie meet up in pub, on-site BBQ open to all etc. I have just been re-reading the guidelines on creating an event cache and it states:

Events are generally published no more than three months prior to the date of the event, to avoid having the listing appear for a prolonged period of time on the nearest caches page and in the weekly e-mail notification of new caches. Exceptions are sometimes made for events that are designed to attract a regional, national or international group of geocachers, or if an overnight stay is expected as part of the event, requiring advance reservations and travel planning (for example, a campout).

In my mind this would imply that a "campout" is acceptable as a standalone event where everyone is expected to camp!

Ah, but I hear you say "Event caches are gatherings that are open to all geocachers". And yes I agree that this is and should be the case, and it is my opinion that a "campout" is open to all, provided they camp. I see this restriction as no different to say a pub meet that could potentially exclude people on faith/culture, and infact IMHO is probably less restrictive than a pub meet.

 

I'm not posting this to start a major debate/argument on the evils of camping, but just to get some clarification, hopefully from a moderator / reviewer / lackey.

[+Mad H@ter]

I forgot to add the point about cost, and yes there generally is a cost element to a camping event. But nowhere can I find a mention that the event must be free of charge, and there is an attribute to indicate that there is a "Access or parking fee". Why have this attribute if an access fee is not acceptable?

[+Simply Paul]

The access/parking fee attribute has been there a long time- as have most grandfathered caches they generally apply to. My understanding of the rules is that caching is the primary element and so long as you prove that in the description, you should be ok. Saying you HAVE to camp to attend the event is rather restrictive- what if a cacher on a tight budget lives just around the corner- you'd be saying they can't pop home to sleep.

 

The highighted text is from a section about how long before an event's date it can be listed. It's not saying camp-outs are events (and I'm not saying they aren't!), it's saying if it's going to be a major undertaking, a maximum of 6 months notice can be given.

 

Without wanting to open the what is/what isn't commercial can of worms either, if an event with an optional pay-to-play element can't be allowed, I can't see how an event with a non-optional expense is less commercial.

[+Mad H@ter]

My understanding of the rules is that caching is the primary element and so long as you prove that in the description, you should be ok.

Not for an event cache which should purely be a gathering of cachers, and in fact the guidelines go on to say "an event cache should not be set up for the sole purpose of drawing together cachers for an organized hunt of another cache or caches."

Saying you HAVE to camp to attend the event is rather restrictive- what if a cacher on a tight budget lives just around the corner- you'd be saying they can't pop home to sleep.

Agreed, but with just about every event there will be "what ifs". You might not be fit enough to climb the mountain. You might suffer from claustrophobia and can't be in an enclosed space with lots of people. You might be on a tight budget and can't afford a GPSr to find the event .

The highighted text is from a section about how long before an event's date it can be listed. It's not saying camp-outs are events (and I'm not saying they aren't!), it's saying if it's going to be a major undertaking, a maximum of 6 months notice can be given.

But it does say "or if an overnight stay is expected as part of the event", would this not exclude the person who wants to go home at night?

Without wanting to open the what is/what isn't commercial can of worms either, if an event with an optional pay-to-play element can't be allowed, I can't see how an event with a non-optional expense is less commercial.

Agreed, but the guidelines on commercial caches state "A commercial cache is a geocache listing or geocache which is perceived by Groundspeak, Groundspeak's employees, or the Volunteer Geocache Reviewers as having been submitted to geocaching.com with the principal or substantial intent of soliciting customers or generating commercial gain. IMHO the principal or substantial intent of a camping event on a commercial site (is there any other sort in the UK?) would not be to solicit custom or generate commercial gain.

[Deceangi]

The reason we require that event's have a Open to All element, is due to the amount and strength of the complains that were received from Members of the UK community. When I published a camping event located on a campsite which would not allow non campers to visit the site. The person organising the event, had intended oranising a Saturday Evening BBQ, which was only open to those actually staying on site. The event owner eventually organised a Off Site element.

 

On discussing the issue with Eckington and Lactodorum, the 3 of us came to the consensus that any camping event in future must have a Open to All element. It had nothing to do with the Commercial Guidelines at all. Just the UK Community expressing a opinion and the UK Reviewers and a Event Owner listening to that opinion.

 

Event caches should be submitted no less than two weeks prior to the date of the event, so that potential attendees will have sufficient notice to make their plans. Events are generally published no more than three months prior to the date of the event, to avoid having the listing appear for a prolonged period of time on the nearest caches page and in the weekly e-mail notification of new caches. Exceptions are sometimes made for events that are designed to attract a regional, national or international group of geocachers, or if an overnight stay is expected as part of the event, requiring advance reservations and travel planning (for example, a campout). Contact your reviewer if you wish to set up such an event, which may be published up to six months prior to the event date.

 

To provide the full paragraph that the quote is from, you'll see it is aimed at the minim and maximum periods before the date of the event that it can be submitted for review and the reasons to allow a extension to the maximum 3 month lead in period.

 

Oh and I've published a event that involved climbing Ben Nevis, but the organiser arrange for the Open to All element to be in a local pub after the walk.

[+Mad H@ter]

Event caches should be submitted no less than two weeks prior to the date of the event, so that potential attendees will have sufficient notice to make their plans. Events are generally published no more than three months prior to the date of the event, to avoid having the listing appear for a prolonged period of time on the nearest caches page and in the weekly e-mail notification of new caches. Exceptions are sometimes made for events that are designed to attract a regional, national or international group of geocachers, or if an overnight stay is expected as part of the event, requiring advance reservations and travel planning (for example, a campout). Contact your reviewer if you wish to set up such an event, which may be published up to six months prior to the event date.

 

To provide the full paragraph that the quote is from, you'll see it is aimed at the minim and maximum periods before the date of the event that it can be submitted for review and the reasons to allow a extension to the maximum 3 month lead in period.

But then why mention "if an overnight stay is expected as part of the event" if events that expect an overnight stay are not allowed.

 

My understanding of the current interpretation of the guidelines suggests that camping events are not allowed. All the camping events since the one that started this have not been camping events, they have in fact been pub, BBQ etc. events thinly disguised as camping events. I am really struggling to understand why "campouts" are not allowed when they are specifically mentioned in the guidelines.

 

I realy do not see the point of having a thrown together (as they sometimes are) pub meet as a work around for an interpretation of the guidelines. As I mentioned in my OP there are many (if not all) events that may cause restrictions/exclusions to some cachers, meaning that they will not be open to all, so why do we single out camping events.

On discussing the issue with Eckington and Lactodorum, the 3 of us came to the consensus that any camping event in future must have a Open to All element. It had nothing to do with the Commercial Guidelines at all. Just the UK Community expressing a opinion and the UK Reviewers and a Event Owner listening to that opinion.

Does this make this a UK only ruling, or is this applied across the board by Groundspeak?

Edited September 22, 2008 by Mad H@ter

[+Bear and Ragged]

As I read it.

 

If you organise an event for local cachers, most will turn up and go home on the day.

 

If you organise an event to bring in people from further away (regional/national/international etc.) then its reasonable to expect them to stop somewhere and not turn up and go home on the same day...

 

Does "advance reservations" not indicate they will be likely to be spending money?

[Deceangi]

Please explain how requiring someone to camp overnight to log a attended is open to all? Which is why the requirement was added, after members of the community made a complaint that they would be forced to camp to attend. In one case the person lived within walking distance of the campsite.

 

As you are not happy with the way the Guidelines have been applied regarding Camping events, please make a complaint to Groundspeak using reviewers@geocaching.com. If Groundspeak instruct me to change the way I review camping events I will do so.

 

As a local Reviewer I've applied the Guidelines in a way which I believe benefited the UK Community! After making a mistake when reviewing a Camping Event, lead to members of the UK Community making a complaint that the way you wish Camping Events to be reviewed was wrong!

[+kewfriend]

I'm with DEC the Dave the Brave on this one.

 

Cache and Camp you hardy souls may be, but I see no reason why a preference for my duck down duvet should otherwise impinge on a good day out. A logged cache surely must not rely on where the weary lay their heads.

 

Of course if there were a night cache .... but then you wouldn't expect me to sleep on it - the cache that is.

[+rutson]

Hmmm... I can see both sides of this...

 

I can't see the difference between a 5/5 which requires the finder to be very physically able and have climbing equipment and an event which requires a night under canvas.

[+PopUpPirate]

I'm with John Mad Hatter on this one - sometimes adding a pub event to a camping meet can be a frustration to organise, for what is essentially a token gesture. I don't think for one minute that John was complaining, merely popping a question and an opinion about A camping event is certainly OPEN to all, even though there's a cost involved. Now, if John was to stand at the gate to camp and saying "I don't like the look of you, you're not logging this one" or perhaps limiting it to cachers with less than 100 finds, then that's different.

 

Not all camp sites permit day visitors, so as an event setter, you then have to choose to find a pub thats large enough and close enough, or find a different camp site that's perhaps has lesser facilities / lesser location, etc. And thus, a compromise is needed.

 

Edited September 22, 2008 by PopUpPirate

[+Mad H@ter]

Please explain how requiring someone to camp overnight to log a attended is open to all?

I think I made that quite clear in my OP

And yes I agree that this is and should be the case, and it is my opinion that a "campout" is open to all, provided they camp. I see this restriction as no different to say a pub meet that could potentially exclude people on faith/culture, and infact IMHO is probably less restrictive than a pub meet.

All I am saying is that GSPs guidelines certainly imply that an overnight stay may be expected as part of an event.

Which is why the requirement was added, after members of the community made a complaint that they would be forced to camp to attend. In one case the person lived within walking distance of the campsite.

<snip> as not relevant to following comment

As a local Reviewer I've applied the Guidelines in a way which I believe benefited the UK Community! After making a mistake when reviewing a Camping Event, lead to members of the UK Community making a complaint that the way you wish Camping Events to be reviewed was wrong!

If the event is the one that I believe you are talking about (I was involved with its organisation on the sidelines), the original complaint was received from a non UK cacher, and I know of no other complaints resulting from this event, although obviously I am not privy to all correspondence that went on.

 

So if my assumptions are correct this ruling was not as a result of pressure from the UK Geocaching community, was made a couple of years ago, and the guidelines have since changed, so perhaps it was time that this ruling was revisited.

 

As you are not happy with the way the Guidelines have been applied regarding Camping events, please make a complaint to Groundspeak using reviewers@geocaching.com. If Groundspeak instruct me to change the way I review camping events I will do so.

Unfortunately you seem to have taken this as a personal attack, this was not what was intended, and please accept my apologies if I have offended.

My sole purpose was to try and seek clarification of why we have this ruling, and to discuss if its application is correct. Geocaching is evolving so perhaps the guidelines and the application of them should also evolve.

 

As I seem to have an answer perhaps this thread should be closed to avoid any more upset.

[+Mad H@ter]

I can't see the difference between a 5/5 which requires the finder to be very physically able and have climbing equipment and an event which requires a night under canvas.

Exactly my point, thank you Ian for putting it so well.

[+PopUpPirate]

 

As I seem to have an answer perhaps this thread should be closed to avoid any more upset.

 

I'd like to think it was open to discussion

[+rutson]

I concur with PuP, please don't close this thread John! I'd really like to learn the difference in the example I quoted...

[+HazelS]

hmmmm....

 

I know of an event held recently that had no "open to all" bit, and was a climb up Snowdon. Now.... I love events, but I know my limits, and I knew I'd not be able to manage the walk up, but would have liked to have attended somehow....

 

I know the event organiser, and so arranged that if I could have made it to meet them when they got back, then I could have logged it, but what about others??

 

This is by no means a go at my dear friend Scottpa100 - who's event this is, but a demonstration that somewhere, somehow, this was published without an open to all category... what I'm saying is that there MUST be different rules that not everyone is aware of...

 

How does me not being able to climb snowdon and someone without a tent different?

 

I thought I understood the event rules, but I'm really confused now!

[+Skate and Jane]

I held this event GC1CNTC last Summer and intend to hold another one next Summer. There is a stipulation that you must camp the night to claim it but it is free. Am I breaking the rules?

[+rutson]

s&J... can it be futher north next year? If so... I'm in :-)

[+Skate and Jane]

Further North on Dartmoor, yes

Free camping

[+Mad H@ter]

As it seems that people want this discussion to continue, please leave it open for now.

 

To be honest I don't believe that it has really been answered and I would very much like a definitive and reasoned answer to this. But I do not want it to degenerate into a bun fight and cause upset, there has been far too much of that here.

[+rutson]

Agreed John. My point stands though.

[+Jaz666]

I can see both sides of the coin here.

On the one hand, events should be "open to all", but on the other hand "tacking on" a pub meet or something similar to some types of events doesn't always seem the right choice.

 

To take a recent example; I held an activity event that involved a bit of driving. To make it open to all I allowed anyone who turned up at the start to log the event. Understandably the vast majority turned up for the free smiley, and didn't take part in the activity - which I'm totally fine with, as I expected that, and the numbers who did take part in the activity was spot on.

However, it has since been pointed out to me by several of those who did take part that "why should I be allowing the majority to have a free 5* smiley on their stats".

 

So far I believe the reviewers have used their judgment fairly, but I do feel that activity based events, which are free to enter, shouldn't have an "open to all pub meet" if the organiser thinks it isn't appropriate.

[Mittellegi]

Agreed John. My point stands though.

I'd like to see an event listed close by This Cache ... not a lot of space for one tent, let alone several ... but plenty of space in the valley

[+minstrelcat]

 

All I am saying is that GSPs guidelines certainly imply that an overnight stay may be expected as part of an event.

 

 

I don't think they mean that people could be *obliged* to camp at a camping event, rather that they expect some people to want to camp at a camping event.

 

I've been to camping events without camping. I'm not sure what the problem is.

 

Lisa

[+Mad H@ter]

I've been to camping events without camping. I'm not sure what the problem is.

 

Lisa

The problem is that it is not always acceptable or possible for non campers to visit the campsite. It is not always easy to find a suitable campsite and this ruling can introduce unnecessary IMHO obstacles for the organisers, which usually means a pub event to get around it. Let's take this a step further, what would we think about a 5 minute Flash Mob event at the gates of the campsite, totally pointless IMHO but enough to get the event approved. It seems to me that this ruling is there to appease smiley hunters, I can see no other reason why we have it. Don't get me wrong, if it is possible for non campers to attend and the organiser is happy for that to happen then I'm all for it.

 

If for instance I was to organise an event in a chamber of a pot-hole this would exclude many cachers (including me ), so would this be allowed or would it have to have a separate element to it so all could log it?

[The Royles]

I still cannot grasp why the reviewers think a camping event is not open to all.

 

If it is a camping event, anyone can attend by camping, it is not exactly rocket science is it.

[+Stuey]

I still cannot grasp why the reviewers think a camping event is not open to all.

 

If it is a camping event, anyone can attend by camping, it is not exactly rocket science is it.

 

You've hit the nail on the head there Andy

[+Pengy&Tigger]

We recently cancelled plans to attend an event in a pub. On that occasion we were skint and couldn't really justify the cost of the fuel to get there as well as drinks (landlords do expect you to buy a drink in a pub). On this occasion the expense involved meant that the event was not open to us, though I have no complaint about this.

 

I'm not sure how this differs from a camping event, where someone may not have a tent (which could be bought for a few quid), or the means to pay for a night camping. It's 'open to all' in exactly the same way as a pub event.

 

If the organiser of a camping event has to find a site which allows visitors for free, does that mean the organiser of a pub event should find a pub where the landlord doesn't expect people to buy a drink?

[Mittellegi]

If the organiser of a camping event has to find a site which allows visitors for free, does that mean the organiser of a pub event should find a pub where the landlord doesn't expect people to buy a drink?

...and where the landlord provides free transport to and from his pub, even though you won't be buying a pint

Edited September 22, 2008 by BexyBear

[+Simply Paul]

As someone planning an event at the top of Ben Nevis and Shetland next summer, I'm disturbed to read the former will need a commercial (discuss) pub element (or similar) to get listed. Open to All is not the same as Available to All; An event in Australia is beyond my means to attend, but it's still listable. The fact an event is in a tricky spot to reach shouldn't be reason enough to disallow it; if it was, St Agnes and St Kilda would both have been no-go areas. While climbing Ben Nevis for an event in 2005 I was over taken by a Septuagenarian blind woman, so I don't see it as a location excluding people.

 

Conversely, the text John quoted in his original post says 'people may want to stay in the area so GS will let you give extra notice'; it doesn't say, in my opinion, 'expecting people to camp can be a logging requirement'. As a location-based game, as rutson says events as well as caches should principally be about where you go, not how you got there or what you do when you're there. Perhaps there needs to be a 'puzzle event' option for events with additional logging requirements, as there can be with physical caches (take a photo wearing the underwear provided', or whatever)?

 

The argument that pubs make poor venues in many ways (I'm thinking of when I first met Dorsetgirl at the Mitre as she dragged herself into a room up a narrow, steep flight of steps) is a good one. They can exclude or at least make life hard for children, dogs, wheelchair users, muslims, non-drinkers... Of my 16 events, only 2 have been set in pubs, and that was mostly due to lack of better options in specific areas. Pub as non-commercial location baffles me too, but I'm glad they're given special dispensation.

 

Returning to camping, personally I'd list the event time as 3am. That way it'd only be practical for folks camping to attend it- anyone else is going to find the time inconvenient at best. But then I've always enjoyed trying to circumvent rules

[+The Cache Hoppers]

I remember a camping event a few years back where it was deemed a bad idea for non-campers to be turning up at the campsite, mainly from a safety point of view, and the event was very nearly archived. Fortunately the event organisers were able to save the day by having a pub meet on the Sunday which was open to all. Problem solved. I have a feeling that is where all this stems from.

 

It's much better for camping event organisers not to feel the need to organise something additional, a pub meet for instance, just so that the event can be open to all. It's extra work and means you have to get out of your sleeping bag relatively early on the Sunday morning, get your tent packed away and rush off to the pub, quite often skipping breakfast into the bargain! Far better for people to actually come onto the campsite on the Saturday evening and join in with the bbq, or as is fast becoming the trend, the bulk order from the local Chinese/Indian.

 

I personally do not feel that a hike up Snowdon, Ben Nevis, Scafell or any other big hill needs to have an element where it is open to all. It's already open to all!!! To say it needs to have a pub event is just like saying that a cache box at the top of a mountain should have a logbook at the bottom for people to sign too! How ridiculous would that be?!

 

Camping events also are open to all. Camp ... or don't camp! If you want to turn up on site, share a meal with us, have some beers, and post an Attended log, that's fine. You will receive a very warm welcome. Its pretty obvious that people who live closeby will not want to camp over, although some do!

 

For me personally, to log Simply Paul's Ben Nevis event or Scott's Snowdonia event, I think I would have to do the climb. Sitting in a pub and having a beer with them when they came back down just wouldn't cut the mustard for me. []

 

Guidelines ... rules ... sheesh! Getting a bit excessive! Where will it all end? It's a game!!!! It doesn't need to be taken quite so seriously!

[+Mad H@ter]

Fortunately the event organisers were able to save the day by having a pub meet on the Sunday which was open to all. Problem solved. I have a feeling that is where all this stems from.

Not exactly, there was already a separately listed pub event organised, DSCB06. The reviewers just let it go, but changed the interpretation of the guidelines for all camping events that followed .

Camping events also are open to all. Camp ... or don't camp! If you want to turn up on site, share a meal with us, have some beers, and post an Attended log, that's fine. You will receive a very warm welcome. Its pretty obvious that people who live closely will not want to camp over, although some do!

Not always possible as this requires the cooperation of the campsite owner.

[+Haggis Hunter]

Oh and I've published a event that involved climbing Ben Nevis, but the organiser arrange for the Open to All element to be in a local pub after the walk.

Being the person that organised the first caching hike up Ben Nevis, I remember having to organise a social element to it so that it included all. This has also been the stipulation for all further SGDO's that have been held. i.e. a hike up a mountain then a meet in a pub.

 

Now going down the road, of being open to all. My daughter who is 10 years old has her own geocaching account, but she couldn't attend an event* that I went to last year, just because it was a pub that didn't allow children. It did have in the description the following quote

But sorry it's not a child friendly location.

Yet with this restriction the event was published by Deceangi!

 

How is this any different to what Mad H@ter is saying? Does she have different geocaching rights because she is a child? Or do you only value the opinions of the people who constantly complain?

 

Rather than play into these people's hands, you should be giving them the advice to complain to Groundspeak rather than the innocent people they have decided to target. Far to many a time the silent complainer has been backed to prevent a fuss, rather than just quite simply saying NO!!

 

*This event was organised by a friend of mine, and in principle I do not have an issue with it. But it does serve as an example of the different standards that are being set.

[big_bob]

Why not just allow the reviewers to exercise some locally based common sense? They are well placed to know if a location is "commercial" and is touting for business and when it happens to be a convenient meeting place for all concerned but charges a small admission fee. It's not as if campsites have been set up to profit from Geocaching, neither is it likely that event organisers choose a particular campsite to ensure they make a profit from us.

 

I sometimes think this commercial business has gone too far and we ought to just be allowed to choose or ignore caches with a possible commercial element as we wish. After all, who is Geocaching actually for? The people who play the game or those who think they have a God given right to run it?

[+Mad H@ter]

This topic appears to be going down two closely related avenues, which I believe I am probably partially responsible for. These are the "open for all" aspect of events and the "commercial" side of events. Although both issues can be important to event organisers it is my belief that the commercial side of things has been well discussed and like it or not, we seem to have some fairly clear guidance both on the forums and in the guidelines.

A commercial cache is a geocache listing or geocache which is perceived by Groundspeak, Groundspeak's employees, or the Volunteer Geocache Reviewers as having been submitted to geocaching.com with the principal or substantial intent of soliciting customers or generating commercial gain.

The purpose of this thread (although perhaps not totally clear at the outset), was to discuss the "open for all" aspect of events. This I do not think has been visited for some time, in fact probably not since the Oxfordshire camping event a couple of years ago that started it all, therefore I think it would be helpful if we could try to avoid the commercial side of things as it just seems to muddy the waters a bit. Thanks for your co-operation.

[+The Cache Hoppers]

Fortunately the event organisers were able to save the day by having a pub meet on the Sunday which was open to all. Problem solved. I have a feeling that is where all this stems from.

Not exactly, there was already a separately listed pub event organised, DSCB06. The reviewers just let it go, but changed the interpretation of the guidelines for all camping events that followed .

Camping events also are open to all. Camp ... or don't camp! If you want to turn up on site, share a meal with us, have some beers, and post an Attended log, that's fine. You will receive a very warm welcome. Its pretty obvious that people who live closely will not want to camp over, although some do!

Not always possible as this requires the cooperation of the campsite owner.

 

Ahhh is that what it was - my memory fails me slightly .. it was more than a few events back.

 

Most campsite owners I've found are ok with visitors onsite. As a rule of thumb, I work on the basis that if they are totally inflexible about it, then they are likely to be a bit tight on other stuff too and it's probably a good idea to source a different site.

 

Hope we are having the Spires and Oxford camp next year Phillis Muddy Haters It won't be the same without them.

[big_bob]

Sorry if I was guilty of derailing the original thread.

 

As I see it, all camping events are open to all if you are prepared to pay to go on site. I'm sure site owners don't mind if you don't actually pitch a tent! So it all boils down to whether or not you are prepared to pay an admission fee. I'm all for applying common sense when it comes to reviewing such situations.

[+uktim]

Fortunately the event organisers were able to save the day by having a pub meet on the Sunday which was open to all. Problem solved. I have a feeling that is where all this stems from.

Not exactly, there was already a separately listed pub event organised, DSCB06. The reviewers just let it go, but changed the interpretation of the guidelines for all camping events that followed .

Camping events also are open to all. Camp ... or don't camp! If you want to turn up on site, share a meal with us, have some beers, and post an Attended log, that's fine. You will receive a very warm welcome. Its pretty obvious that people who live closely will not want to camp over, although some do!

Not always possible as this requires the cooperation of the campsite owner.

 

Ahhh is that what it was - my memory fails me slightly .. it was more than a few events back.

 

Most campsite owners I've found are ok with visitors onsite. As a rule of thumb, I work on the basis that if they are totally inflexible about it, then they are likely to be a bit tight on other stuff too and it's probably a good idea to source a different site.

 

Hope we are having the Spires and Oxford camp next year Phillis Muddy Haters It won't be the same without them.

 

I've never been on a site that doesn't allow visitors, but it's probably important to recognise the difference between a few friends dropping by for a quiet beer and BBQ and dozens of people turning up for an "event".

 

I presume that camping events involve a bit more than just sitting on the site, maybe the answer is to run an event around one of the off-site activities and have the option to camp?

[+HazelS]

maybe the answer is to run an event around one of the off-site activities and have the option to camp?

 

Nope cos that's not allowed either - a camping event in the same area as another event on the same weekend is seen as a "linked" event, and not allowed............ although Dreaming Spires has always got the go ahead!!

 

I seem to remember there was some relaxing of the rules on this, but for the life of my I don't remember.

Edited September 23, 2008 by HazelS

[+Mad H@ter]

maybe the answer is to run an event around one of the off-site activities and have the option to camp?

Nope cos that's not allowed either - a camping event in the same area as another event on the same weekend is seen as a "linked" event, and not allowed............ although Dreaming Spires has always got the go ahead!!

They are allowed:

For geocaching events that involve several components, such as a full weekend event that includes a geocoin trading session, a seminar and a potluck dinner, multiple event listings may be submitted if they each stand on their own merits as events meeting the listing guidelines.

[+Mad H@ter]

Hope we are having the Spires and Oxford camp next year Phillis Muddy Haters It won't be the same without them.

It is looking very much like next years will be the last that we organise .

But watch out for the replacements in Avon/Wiltshire/Gloucestershire or wherever we end up in 2010 .

[+purple_pineapple]

Oh and I've published a event that involved climbing Ben Nevis, but the organiser arrange for the Open to All element to be in a local pub after the walk.

Being the person that organised the first caching hike up Ben Nevis, I remember having to organise a social element to it so that it included all. This has also been the stipulation for all further SGDO's that have been held. i.e. a hike up a mountain then a meet in a pub.

 

Now going down the road, of being open to all. My daughter who is 10 years old has her own geocaching account, but she couldn't attend an event* that I went to last year, just because it was a pub that didn't allow children. It did have in the description the following quote

But sorry it's not a child friendly location.

Yet with this restriction the event was published by Deceangi!

 

How is this any different to what Mad H@ter is saying? Does she have different geocaching rights because she is a child? Or do you only value the opinions of the people who constantly complain?

 

Rather than play into these people's hands, you should be giving them the advice to complain to Groundspeak rather than the innocent people they have decided to target. Far to many a time the silent complainer has been backed to prevent a fuss, rather than just quite simply saying NO!!

 

*This event was organised by a friend of mine, and in principle I do not have an issue with it. But it does serve as an example of the different standards that are being set.

 

a VERY good point. It has always been my opinion that a pub event is considerably MORE restrictive than a camping event, as many pubs won't allow children or dogs. I'm not aware of any campsite that doesn't allow children or dogs... On the current interpretation, I could host an event in a pub in Carshalton (Surrey) which is 2 minutes walk from Edgemaster's house, and this could be published, even though it is not open to edgey, as he is not old enough. however, a camping event in the same town, which IS open to all is not allowed...

 

I think there is an inclination to interpret 'Open to All' to mean 'accessible to all', which is clearly not the same thing. There are many many events that are open to me to attend, but I can't possibly because they are too far away, or I'm working, or simply not fit enough!

 

Like many others, I can see both sides of the story, but I personally have no problem with camping events that require people to camp, and if someone lives very close, then they have to make a choice about whether to attend it. Nobody is taking that choice away from them, and is no different from the choice of whether to attend a pub event or a Xmas meal event and spend money on that instead...

[+uktim]

maybe the answer is to run an event around one of the off-site activities and have the option to camp?

 

Nope cos that's not allowed either - a camping event in the same area as another event on the same weekend is seen as a "linked" event, and not allowed............ although Dreaming Spires has always got the go ahead!!

 

I seem to remember there was some relaxing of the rules on this, but for the life of my I don't remember.

 

Is it that important that an event is defined as a camping event? I was thinking of an event where people could camp at a local site if they wished rather then an extra event for the sake of camping.

 

What are the percieved advantages of forcing people to camp in order to collect a number and an icon?

[+PopUpPirate]

Some very good points on here. I'm happy for pub events to be permitted, stand-alone camping events to be permitted, frisbee events to be permitted (yes it has been known!) etc etc.

 

There's two lines that can be taken here - ban them all, or allow them all (within reason of course - every event such as every normal cache has to be individually assessed).

 

There are many, many restrictions that prevent it being possible to attend every event, or complete every cache.

 

You might not have :

• A Wherigo enabled GPS device
  
• A snowbuggy
  
• A premium-member account
  
• A torch
  
• Ladders
  
• A dinghy
  

etc etc etc etc etc...

 

any of which would prevent you doing a great many caches.

 

I'm thinking of organising a camping do in Little Stretton, nr. Church Stretton. UKTim got it spot on in saying there's a difference between one or two waifs and strays turning up, versus a full-on doubling of numbers on camp. I know the camp site is suitable for an adequate number of campers, but I don't know of a suitable pub. There might not be one. I could, of course, pop a log book outside the camp site in a tupperware box outside the campsite gates, and could allow people who sign the book over the weekend to log an "Attend". But what's the point? I'll TRY to sort a pub event - I think it would add something to the weekend, but I don't think it should be compulsory.

Edited September 23, 2008 by PopUpPirate

[+Stuey]

I'm not aware of any campsite that doesn't allow children or dogs...

 

I know a very nice site on Dartmoor that doesn't allow children. It's wonderful

[+Mad H@ter]

What are the percieved advantages of forcing people to camp in order to collect a number and an icon?

I see no more advantages or disadvantages than forcing someone to climb a mountain or visit a pub

[+purple_pineapple]

I'm not aware of any campsite that doesn't allow children or dogs...

 

I know a very nice site on Dartmoor that doesn't allow children. It's wonderful

 

bah - who's side are you on! Anyway, you know what I mean

[The Royles]

.............................. What are the percieved advantages of forcing people to camp in order to collect a number and an icon?

 

The same as the perceived advantages of forcing people to go to a pub/walk up a hill/take part in a flashmob etc.

 

The word forcing is a bit strong, but it does illustrate the point that the situation we have exists because some people believe that they should be able to log an event on their terms.

 

If someone is kind enough to organise an event based on any criteria (walking, climbing, camping frisbeeing) surely everyone has the option of joining in with the event or not, if you dont take part then that is your choice.

 

The advantage of a camping event is that there is so much more time to socialise with other cachers, people get together in a much more relaxed atmosphere than any other type of event.

 

It is great to see the caching kids all playing together, groups of cachers going for trips off site (for caching and non caching activities), to meet all the geodogs and to witness all the help and advice offered by fellow cachers. Strong bonds are forged at these events that are only possible by spending time with people to really get to know them, this I feel cannot happen at most other types of events.

 

To see the most social of events banned (because they are at the moment) due to a few cachers moaning because they cannot get another smiley goes against all common sense.

[+Bear and Ragged]

Is the UK now getting enough cachers/hiders/event organisers, that the "There must be a social part to camping" can now be dropped?

 

I dont have the equipment, caravan/tent to camp -it doesn't appeal to me -but have no problem with those that enjoy it.

 

I don't consider the event to not be "Open to all" I choose not to attend.

 

Under those circumstances I don't feel "Excluded" from camping events.

 

If there was a camping event I was interested in, I'm sure I could beg, borrow, steal, or buy a tent for that event!

[+Pharisee]

I think you have to decide what the 'prime reason' for hosting a gathering is. If it's geocaching then I personally don't believe that you should force people endure a night under canvas in order to collect the 'Attended' smilie. If the reason you're hosting a gathering is primarily to enjoy the perceived delights of camping with a bit of geocaching chucked in on the side, then you're doing it on the wrong website. You should be organising it on 'come-camping.com' or some such website that caters for the camping enthusiast and leave the geocaching site to those whos prime enjoyment is geocaching. Just my opinion!