update to Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines, April 2009

[+Waldo_Mudd]

Ok, this has a very simple, but complex answer. This used to be a free market, seller (Cache owner) providing what buyer (cache finder) wanted. When the buyer didn't want what the seller had, he didn't buy. He walked past the fruit (geocaching) stand and the seller's fruit all spoiled (no one logged his cache) causing the seller to change how he sold his fruit, but now you have people addicted to the fruit so the seller can sell it anyway he wants, rotten, moldy, mind altering fruit (pictures, lengthy logs, hoops and whistles) and the addicted buyer will still eat it and then complain to the government (ground speak) that the seller had rotten apples and they knew they had rotten apples, but they still bought them, and please oh please GS can you save me from the evil seller who wishes to do me harm, so you have GS (Government Sensors) dictating what the seller can sell to the buyer and how he can sell it, to protect the buyer from a bad apple or two, but stopping the sale of a funkadelic apple, that may have been the addicted buyers favorite apple of all time. I wouldn't expect someone from the all liberal Michigan to understand the free market and why it's important, so I broke it down all fruit style for you.

Ah but if only placement of caches were a free market. Perhaps some hiders place caches with intention that other cachers will enjoy them. And perhaps if they get few people finding there cache they will decide that people aren't enjoying their cache and will either change it to be more enjoyable or will archive. But I would contend that many people do not really care how many people find their cache. They place a cache that they would enjoy themselves and hope that others will enjoy it. They don't count the number of thank you logs they get and in many instances they never get any complaints since people general ignore the cache they don't want to find. But what has also happened is that there is a small number of hiders who for some reason don't care at all whether others will enjoy their cache. Perhaps some of these hiders get some kick from seeing a lot of DNF logs or perhaps (in the case of ALRs) they get a kick out of writing a requirement where they can delete logs because no one is going to actually do the requirement to the letter. In addition TPTB determined there were some things they didn't was cachers to require in an ALR, because they felt the Geoaching would be better off if these task were voluntary. For example, TPTB would not publish an ALR to hide a new cache in order to log this one or and ALR that reserved FTF for a particular person. In the OP, Miss Jenn apologize that the new guidelines mean that some cool ideas would be lost. The guideline was put in place because (to use your free market analogy) there were a few AIGs and Lehman Brothers out there making bad ALRs and ruining the market.

A few AIGs and Lehman Brothers? Every failure in our economy can be traced straight back to government control and the response of the free market to follow the rules, but figure out how to make the rules work for them. The housing crisis is a direct reaction to a government regulation that made banks loan money to people they knew couldn't pay it back, but to lesson the risk they let others wager on the outcome (derivitives), that was great if only a few people defaulted. Once a large number defaulted which was caused by OPEC making us pay at the pump, the banks were forced to A) confiscate property, and no bank wants to own property not recieve money from the home owner and C) have to pay out on the derivitives for the people who bet on the foreclosures. That's really what the first bail out was about. It was so the banks could make good on deals that were struck. If the Clinton era regulation of allowing more people to have the american dream was never instituted, you don't have our current crisis, but with liberals, it's always the intention, never the end result. Everyone's always trying to help me, but I don't want the help, don't protect me from anything Groundspeak.

[+Waldo_Mudd]

YES!!! Anarchy is the answer, THANKS Waldo!!

 

What the hey, agendas are now OK, who cares if it's Taliban loving (or hating), devil worshipping (or hating) or whatever, giddyap! While we're at it, why NOT let caches be buried or placed right in front of the local bank or post office or government building or school, remove the shackles!!! Why should we care if the National Parks want our caches or not, place them anyways! Some parks have rules fro caches? REMOVE THE SHACKLES!!!! Hey, why even have reviewers at all, everything goes...REMOVE THE SHACKLES!!!!

 

Hiders can now put drugs and sharp objects and hey, even weapons in their caches, no rules, no worries!! Hiders can now require finders to do their every whim since hey, it's all about the hiders and not the finders! Booby-trapping the caches will be OK now, I want to have physical proof you visited my cache, and a pool of blood will do nicely! While we're at it, maybe GS should pay the hiders for their services, I mean GS can't possibly survive without us placers...right?

 

Sound outlandish?? Maybe exxagerated a bit, but think about it.

 

As for the liberals statement...you don't know me at all, so keep your labels to yourself, OK? I believe the guidelines are against this....ohhhh those darned guidelines always restricting someone's ights!

Rockin Roddy, Anarchy is not the Free Market, and the Free Market is not Anarchy. I'm simply saying that there doesn't NEED to be limits and restrictions on what my cache entails. Notice I listed "dangerous" as being bannable. I've been to plenty of caches placed in front of gov't buildings and banks and post offices. It's not a big deal, because I pay attention to others. If I see an individual looking at me, I approach them and ask if they know what Geocaching is and then explain it to them. If you had read my post entirely you would have seen how I used the word dangerous, but I guess when you're raging you start to get tunnel vision and don't quite see the whole post.

[+AngelWolf93]

All the new posters are ones who are asking the same questions as ones in the last 951 posts, and now the thread has been hijacked into talking about the economy and getting into conservative Rushspeak. Can we close the thread yet?

[+Rockin Roddy]

All the new posters are ones who are asking the same questions as ones in the last 951 posts, and now the thread has been hijacked into talking about the economy and getting into conservative Rushspeak. Can we close the thread yet?

 

HEAR HEAR!!! It was fun, but this has run as far as it can realistically...there's always the fringe though!!

[+Rockin Roddy]

YES!!! Anarchy is the answer, THANKS Waldo!!

 

What the hey, agendas are now OK, who cares if it's Taliban loving (or hating), devil worshipping (or hating) or whatever, giddyap! While we're at it, why NOT let caches be buried or placed right in front of the local bank or post office or government building or school, remove the shackles!!! Why should we care if the National Parks want our caches or not, place them anyways! Some parks have rules fro caches? REMOVE THE SHACKLES!!!! Hey, why even have reviewers at all, everything goes...REMOVE THE SHACKLES!!!!

 

Hiders can now put drugs and sharp objects and hey, even weapons in their caches, no rules, no worries!! Hiders can now require finders to do their every whim since hey, it's all about the hiders and not the finders! Booby-trapping the caches will be OK now, I want to have physical proof you visited my cache, and a pool of blood will do nicely! While we're at it, maybe GS should pay the hiders for their services, I mean GS can't possibly survive without us placers...right?

 

Sound outlandish?? Maybe exxagerated a bit, but think about it.

 

As for the liberals statement...you don't know me at all, so keep your labels to yourself, OK? I believe the guidelines are against this....ohhhh those darned guidelines always restricting someone's ights!

Rockin Roddy, Anarchy is not the Free Market, and the Free Market is not Anarchy. I'm simply saying that there doesn't NEED to be limits and restrictions on what my cache entails. Notice I listed "dangerous" as being bannable. I've been to plenty of caches placed in front of gov't buildings and banks and post offices. It's not a big deal, because I pay attention to others. If I see an individual looking at me, I approach them and ask if they know what Geocaching is and then explain it to them. If you had read my post entirely you would have seen how I used the word dangerous, but I guess when you're raging you start to get tunnel vision and don't quite see the whole post.

 

Wait for it......

 

 

Raging....man, you should be a comedian!!

 

OK, just finished wiping the milk off my monitor...

Edited April 11, 2009 by Rockin Roddy

[+tozainamboku]

Ok, this has a very simple, but complex answer. This used to be a free market, seller (Cache owner) providing what buyer (cache finder) wanted. When the buyer didn't want what the seller had, he didn't buy. He walked past the fruit (geocaching) stand and the seller's fruit all spoiled (no one logged his cache) causing the seller to change how he sold his fruit, but now you have people addicted to the fruit so the seller can sell it anyway he wants, rotten, moldy, mind altering fruit (pictures, lengthy logs, hoops and whistles) and the addicted buyer will still eat it and then complain to the government (ground speak) that the seller had rotten apples and they knew they had rotten apples, but they still bought them, and please oh please GS can you save me from the evil seller who wishes to do me harm, so you have GS (Government Sensors) dictating what the seller can sell to the buyer and how he can sell it, to protect the buyer from a bad apple or two, but stopping the sale of a funkadelic apple, that may have been the addicted buyers favorite apple of all time. I wouldn't expect someone from the all liberal Michigan to understand the free market and why it's important, so I broke it down all fruit style for you.

Ah but if only placement of caches were a free market. Perhaps some hiders place caches with intention that other cachers will enjoy them. And perhaps if they get few people finding there cache they will decide that people aren't enjoying their cache and will either change it to be more enjoyable or will archive. But I would contend that many people do not really care how many people find their cache. They place a cache that they would enjoy themselves and hope that others will enjoy it. They don't count the number of thank you logs they get and in many instances they never get any complaints since people general ignore the cache they don't want to find. But what has also happened is that there is a small number of hiders who for some reason don't care at all whether others will enjoy their cache. Perhaps some of these hiders get some kick from seeing a lot of DNF logs or perhaps (in the case of ALRs) they get a kick out of writing a requirement where they can delete logs because no one is going to actually do the requirement to the letter. In addition TPTB determined there were some things they didn't was cachers to require in an ALR, because they felt the Geoaching would be better off if these task were voluntary. For example, TPTB would not publish an ALR to hide a new cache in order to log this one or and ALR that reserved FTF for a particular person. In the OP, Miss Jenn apologize that the new guidelines mean that some cool ideas would be lost. The guideline was put in place because (to use your free market analogy) there were a few AIGs and Lehman Brothers out there making bad ALRs and ruining the market.

A few AIGs and Lehman Brothers? Every failure in our economy can be traced straight back to government control and the response of the free market to follow the rules, but figure out how to make the rules work for them. The housing crisis is a direct reaction to a government regulation that made banks loan money to people they knew couldn't pay it back, but to lesson the risk they let others wager on the outcome (derivitives), that was great if only a few people defaulted. Once a large number defaulted which was caused by OPEC making us pay at the pump, the banks were forced to A) confiscate property, and no bank wants to own property not recieve money from the home owner and C) have to pay out on the derivitives for the people who bet on the foreclosures. That's really what the first bail out was about. It was so the banks could make good on deals that were struck. If the Clinton era regulation of allowing more people to have the american dream was never instituted, you don't have our current crisis, but with liberals, it's always the intention, never the end result. Everyone's always trying to help me, but I don't want the help, don't protect me from anything Groundspeak.

While I don't share your Rush Limbaugh dittohead views on the economy, I will have to say the analogy is mostly correct. You can look at my post from late last night (or very early this morning depending on where you live). I basically say the same thing. ALRs were mostly under the radar and very few really were being enforce by owners deleting logs. Then TPTB changed the guidelines to officially recognize ALRs by requiring they be listed as mystery/unknown caches. That seemed to allow more people to push the limits and cause problems for the reviewers. So in a way you could argue it is the unintended consequence of government intervention. Perhaps leaving ALRs alone in the begining would have resulted in individuals how did not like them ignoring them en masse and that may have convinced the owners of the really bad ALRs to change them

Edited April 11, 2009 by tozainamboku

[+NeverSummer]

 

My popcorn bucket is about empty, and I don't think the stand will be open with refills...

 

Keep it on topic if you want the discussion to continue!

 

And remember, Groundspeak describes their mission as:

Groundspeak enables people to create and share interactive location-based experiences in the real world using a unique combination of technology and the internet.

 

So, perhaps ALRs don't have a place in Geocaching.com, but they certainly fit the mission, as long as the "R" is directly related to the location of the cache. But then there's the container...so maybe, instead of being so dug in with the conspiracy theories of cache owners "controlling" you, or that Groundspeak has a global technology money-grubbing skew to its decision making, we could all get along and see what TPTB have to say after this thread cools down.

 

I'm sure they're watching!

 

...Everybody wave!

 

<wave>

[+Waldo_Mudd]

Right on, I hadn't thought about the intervention that already had taken place. I am going to do something else now, I've said my piece and also emailed Groundspeak. I will get off my little soapbox and comply with every good intentioned regulation that will allow me to continue to place my copy cat, cookie cutter, micro, traditional, lightskirt, one word log, caches so every number crunching cache addict can get his 4348th cache and won't be inconveinanced with having to do any other task besides holding a pen and scribbling his illiterate mark on a piece of paper and copying and pasting his logs in all 143 garbage caches he visited today. Thank you for looking out for my best interest Groundspeak and deciding for me what caches should contain and require, I whole heartedly enjoy when my hand is held and I don't have to think for myself. It sounds alot like the ARMY, go figure.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Right on, I hadn't thought about the intervention that already had taken place. I am going to do something else now, I've said my piece and also emailed Groundspeak. I will get off my little soapbox and comply with every good intentioned regulation that will allow me to continue to place my copy cat, cookie cutter, micro, traditional, lightskirt, one word log, caches so every number crunching cache addict can get his 4348th cache and won't be inconveinanced with having to do any other task besides holding a pen and scribbling his illiterate mark on a piece of paper and copying and pasting his logs in all 143 garbage caches he visited today. Thank you for looking out for my best interest Groundspeak and deciding for me what caches should contain and require, I whole heartedly enjoy when my hand is held and I don't have to think for myself. It sounds alot like the ARMY, go figure.

 

Yep...this happens when you have little hiding skills, no imagination on how to creatively place a cache, place LPC and P&Gs etc. I pity you if that's how it is in your area! Here, we have some really fun walks which take people out and into the nature, give awesome scenery, get you to think and look and think some more. I've spent whole days on a single cache and still DNFd it...and it was a multi-cache without a single requirement or puzzle to it. I spent a whole day climbing a mountain to make the find. We've got night caches which get people to make movies about their experiences, we've got canoe and kayak caches which allow those who like to enjoy the water to get into caching. There's climbing caches and backpacking caches and 4x4 caches. There's cachers out there with more imagination than just making up some ALR so they try to instill arificial fun into the hide!

 

I like it where I am much better than where you sound like you are!!

 

But wait...as a cache HIDER, I've also spent whole days just planning a single stage of a cache, spent whole days rigging, planning, getting the right materials, building and refining! I've spent months on end placing a single cache, planned for months and months on hides where I get stuck on the way to handle a situation...and then get that "AHA" moment and find the way to finish, spent day after day walking the woods and swamps and creeks looking for the right spot. Hiding is as much fun as finding, if you apply yourself and work at making caches fun to find! And, even our quick ones get people to DNF, our Where's the Elevator cache is one which took all of 5 minutes to place and is one tricky devil: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...96-3e19e6519cf5 Our The Devil Made Me Do It cache was another 5 minute wonder: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...f2-4ef598d195ab And lets not forget our night cache which has had great reviews: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...bf-abb92644e4f5

 

Truly, if it's as bad as you make it out to be, why are you still around? It can't be much fun...can it?

Edited April 11, 2009 by Rockin Roddy

[+Waldo_Mudd]

Right on, I hadn't thought about the intervention that already had taken place. I am going to do something else now, I've said my piece and also emailed Groundspeak. I will get off my little soapbox and comply with every good intentioned regulation that will allow me to continue to place my copy cat, cookie cutter, micro, traditional, lightskirt, one word log, caches so every number crunching cache addict can get his 4348th cache and won't be inconveinanced with having to do any other task besides holding a pen and scribbling his illiterate mark on a piece of paper and copying and pasting his logs in all 143 garbage caches he visited today. Thank you for looking out for my best interest Groundspeak and deciding for me what caches should contain and require, I whole heartedly enjoy when my hand is held and I don't have to think for myself. It sounds alot like the ARMY, go figure.

 

Yep...this happens when you have little hiding skills, no imagination on how to creatively place a cache, place LPC and P&Gs etc. I pity you if that's how it is in your area! Here, we have some really fun walks which take people out and into the nature, give awesome scenery, get you to think and look and think some more. I've spent whole days on a single cache and still DNFd it...and it was a multi-cache without a single requirement or puzzle to it. I spent a whole day climbing a mountain to make the find. We've got night caches which get people to make movies about their experiences, we've got canoe and kayak caches which allow those who like to enjoy the water to get into caching. There's climbing caches and backpacking caches and 4x4 caches. There's cachers out there with more imagination than just making up some ALR so they try to instill arificial fun into the hide!

 

I like it where I am much better than where you sound like you are!!

 

But wait...as a cache HIDER, I've also spent whole days just planning a single stage of a cache, spent whole days rigging, planning, getting the right materials, building and refining! I've spent months on end placing a single cache, planned for months and months on hides where I get stuck on the way to handle a situation...and then get that "AHA" moment and find the way to finish, spent day after day walking the woods and swamps and creeks looking for the right spot. Hiding is as much fun as finding, if you apply yourself and work at making caches fun to find! And, even our quick ones get people to DNF, our Where's the Elevator cache is one which took all of 5 minutes to place and is one tricky devil: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...96-3e19e6519cf5 Our The Devil Made Me Do It cache was another 5 minute wonder: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...f2-4ef598d195ab And lets not forget our night cache which has had great reviews: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...bf-abb92644e4f5

 

Truly, if it's as bad as you make it out to be, why are you still around? It can't be much fun...can it?

I know I said I was stepping down, but I have to say that it's only the middle of it all. It will end up as what I say. Your caches will go down one by one until all we have left is light skirts because every other cache violates some new or existing rule. I was stationed in El Paso and there was the mountain to hike, and then Sierra Vista, AZ and there was a mountain there too, and I even spent a year in Korea where there were mountains too, but it was before it blew up like it has over there. Now I'm in Killeen, TX and even though this is the Heart of Texas Geocaching and there are alot of good caches, when I first got here, there was little variety, so I started placing caches that I enjoyed from elsewhere, like a Liar's cache, a phoon, a costume cache, Lock boxes, multiple redirectors, decoys, and ciphers. All area cachers have enjoyed the bit of refreshment and I now enjoy placing more than finding. When a cacher makes the transition from being a taker to being a giver, he wants the freedom to give in any creative manner he can think of. By limiting his creativity you kill the essence of the cache. Simply those two ALR's should be made the exception. The only ALR's you can require can be a picture and/or a bigger than 4 word log. Now let me step down already. Waldo

[+tozainamboku]

And lets not forget our night cache which has had great reviews: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...bf-abb92644e4f5

Night caches are not really geocaches. You use a flashlight to follow a trail of reflectors. Where it the use of the GPS in that? And don't tell me that the coordinates of the trailhead you start at make the use of GPS integral to finding the cache. I've yet to do a night cache that I couldn't have just left the GPS at home.

 

It took me almost a full week to understand the rationale behind the new guidelines and that was because of all the posts by people like Rockin Roddy who kept repeating a fallacious argument that ALRs are not caches and who used the change to celebrate that a type of cache they didn't enjoy was now no longer permitted. Even the reviewers who posted in this thread to try to explain why the change was made didn't help much when they posted under their player accounts how happy they were that some type of cache they didn't like was not longer allowed. Miss Jenn gave the best explanation in her original post where she apologized on behalf of Groundspeak that some cool idea would be affected by the change. And the actual wording of the guideline bothers me because it tends to enforce a puritan view of the 'Found It' log that I don't agree with. Still if were weren't for the people who keep insisting that ALR don't fit the definition of a geocache, I may have understood sooner what was happening with ALRs that caused the need for a guideline change again. Perhaps Rod can shut up now. We know he doesn't like ALRs for ideological reasons. He ought to accept that many people liked ALRs and try to help explain that they can still have them so long as they are optional. Personally I'd be happy if night caches were banned because they're not really caches.

[+Rockin Roddy]

And lets not forget our night cache which has had great reviews: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...bf-abb92644e4f5

Night caches are not really geocaches. You use a flashlight to follow a trail of reflectors. Where it the use of the GPS in that? And don't tell me that the coordinates of the trailhead you start at make the use of GPS integral to finding the cache. I've yet to do a night cache that I couldn't have just left the GPS at home.

 

If you read my night cache listing, you'll quickly realize you DO use the GPS for about half the cache. It's a 5-stage multi which starts with reflectors which take you to coords which then leads you to reflectors and then coords and on. I'll add that it's about a 3 mile trek on mostly nice trails in a very dark and quiet park in the country...the stargazing is AWESOME!! The only other night cache I have found required you to project the final as well as used the same coords/reflector alternating stages.

Edited April 11, 2009 by Rockin Roddy

[+gof1]

And lets not forget our night cache which has had great reviews: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...bf-abb92644e4f5

Night caches are not really geocaches. You use a flashlight to follow a trail of reflectors. Where it the use of the GPS in that? And don't tell me that the coordinates of the trailhead you start at make the use of GPS integral to finding the cache. I've yet to do a night cache that I couldn't have just left the GPS at home.

 

It took me almost a full week to understand the rationale behind the new guidelines and that was because of all the posts by people like Rockin Roddy who kept repeating a fallacious argument that ALRs are not caches and who used the change to celebrate that a type of cache they didn't enjoy was now no longer permitted. Even the reviewers who posted in this thread to try to explain why the change was made didn't help much when they posted under their player accounts how happy they were that some type of cache they didn't like was not longer allowed. Miss Jenn gave the best explanation in her original post where she apologized on behalf of Groundspeak that some cool idea would be affected by the change. And the actual wording of the guideline bothers me because it tends to enforce a puritan view of the 'Found It' log that I don't agree with. Still if were weren't for the people who keep insisting that ALR don't fit the definition of a geocache, I may have understood sooner what was happening with ALRs that caused the need for a guideline change again. Perhaps Rod can shut up now. We know he doesn't like ALRs for ideological reasons. He ought to accept that many people liked ALRs and try to help explain that they can still have them so long as they are optional. Personally I'd be happy if night caches were banned because they're not really caches.

 

 

I have yet to do an LPC that I couldn't have left the GPS at home.

[+Renegade Knight]

....So, perhaps ALRs don't have a place in Geocaching.com....

Of course they have a place. It's only folks who can't think outside the box who can't come up with a circumstance where they have a place. Worst it's folks who don't recognize that just because they can't think of a good reason there must be none who have clapped the loudest at the loss.

[+Renegade Knight]

....Night caches are not really geocaches. ....

 

Of course they are. They are a very nice variation. The use of a GPS is an ALR of this site (L for Listing).

 

If they ever turn back on SA it should be interesting to see how we all comply with that ALR.

Edited April 11, 2009 by Renegade Knight

[+Rockin Roddy]

 

It took me almost a full week to understand the rationale behind the new guidelines and that was because of all the posts by people like Rockin Roddy who kept repeating a fallacious argument that ALRs are not caches and who used the change to celebrate that a type of cache they didn't enjoy was now no longer permitted.

 

First, have you really been reading the thread at all, or are you trolling for a bite? I waited a bit to think about that, but I'll bite anyways...I have no care about an ALR, it can stay or go, I am not worried about it either way. Personally, I don't do them, but that doesn't mean I have actively asked for their ban nor would I care if the PTB suddenly reversed course. Just because I had one bad experience doesn't mean I would champion a change. Second, the reason I DO agree with the change is because of the reviewers. Third, when did I ever say an ALR stopped a cache from being a cache? Please point that out to me or I'm going to call BUNK on your whole assesment! Finally, if my argument truly had you swaying back and forth, it must have held merit, or you're very easily swayed?

 

Perhaps Rod can shut up now. We know he doesn't like ALRs for ideological reasons. He ought to accept that many people liked ALRs and try to help explain that they can still have them so long as they are optional. Personally I'd be happy if night caches were banned because they're not really caches.

 

Another trolling here?? I'll tell you this, beg me to shut up and you'll never get the last word! You have no idea even what you're talking about, maybe this really IS a trolling and you snagged me hook line and sinker? Have you not seen where I have tried over and over to explain that ALSs (I believe I even coined that acronym) were still allowed and you'd have more freedom since there's not much for the reviewers to object about! Yes, I mentioned ALS more times than I can recall even, but hey, prove me wrong and read the thread!

 

Last, I see now, it IS a trolling to see if I'd bite on the night cache "carrot" you seem to be waving in front of my face! Yes Toz, a well planned night cache can actully involve the use of a GPS!! But THANKS for trying!

[+Renegade Knight]

...

That's the beauty of Wherigo caches - you can't shortcut to the end like you can with some multicaches. If you don't complete the cartridge, you don't get the completion code regardless of whether you "accidentally" found the actual cache container. Maybe this is why Groundspeak has allowed Wherigo caches to have a code where it does not for other cache types.

 

Got it. Wherigo is an AWF (Additional work to Find) which is nothing more than an ALR with the work in front of the find instead of in front of the log.

 

Philosphically there isn't much difference between a buch of stupid crap required one way vs. another. Since the case against ALR is all about the "stupid extra crap" it works just as well against Wherigo crap as it does against ALR crap.

 

The real difference showcases where people are like trained rats. Reward them AFTER the work. Not before it. The reward being the smilie from the log.

Edited April 11, 2009 by Renegade Knight

[+Renegade Knight]

....

I am ignoring something I don't want to participate in - ALRs. I've been geocaching for the last 7 years so I could go geocaching. If I wanted to take pictures of people (myself included) wearing funny hats or glasses, phooning (whatever that is), write poems, or whatever I would go to those websites and get involved. I'm on this website because I want to go geocaching.

 

You don't even know what geocaching is. Any way you would define it would cut out a lot of what this site does for listing types and varieties that a lot of people enjoy. Not to mention future variations and past variations that people have and will enjoy.

 

Reality is you know what parts of geocaching you like. Keep that in mind as you work hard to eliminate peoples fun.

 

The only reason an ALR is a problem is because of finders who's sence of entitlement empowers them to whine about something they don't like but which isn't in their conrol. They won. Now they have imposed their game on others.

 

There are a lot of angles to this activity that I have no control over. I've adapted. Since finders like tearing up the area I no longer place hard caches in areas that can't take the abuse. After all it would be an ALR to actually expect them to respect the location.

[+Renegade Knight]

....As has been stated in this thread a few times now, so the reviewers don't have to deal with "but that cache was allowed" for the next 5 years. It may have been missed with all the repeated questions and answers throughout the several pages here!....

 

You can only pick your problems. If you don't want to deal with that then all non complying caches, all seemingly non complying caches, all grandfathered caches that used to comply but now don't, or the kinds thatare no longer listed are all archived.

 

No grandfathered, no way, no how. That problem is then solved. You get a new set of problems in return but maybe it works better.

[+Rockin Roddy]

....

I am ignoring something I don't want to participate in - ALRs. I've been geocaching for the last 7 years so I could go geocaching. If I wanted to take pictures of people (myself included) wearing funny hats or glasses, phooning (whatever that is), write poems, or whatever I would go to those websites and get involved. I'm on this website because I want to go geocaching.

 

You don't even know what geocaching is. Any way you would define it would cut out a lot of what this site does for listing types and varieties that a lot of people enjoy. Not to mention future variations and past variations that people have and will enjoy.

 

Reality is you know what parts of geocaching you like. Keep that in mind as you work hard to eliminate peoples fun.

 

The only reason an ALR is a problem is because of finders who's sence of entitlement empowers them to whine about something they don't like but which isn't in their conrol. They won. Now they have imposed their game on others.

 

There are a lot of angles to this activity that I have no control over. I've adapted. Since finders like tearing up the area I no longer place hard caches in areas that can't take the abuse. After all it would be an ALR to actually expect them to respect the location.

 

There you go...it is ANY reason you can find to make it seem so bad. Forgetting of course, it was because of the REVIEWERS!!!!!! We can argue what is or isn't a cache until we're old and wrinkled, but that's neither here nor there!

[+Rockin Roddy]

I find it funnier than all get-out that Toz and others can come in here and post such "stuff" to get others to believe that we who are for the change are the villains.

 

My main reason for the change has ALWAYS been because of the mods! I have also continuously said the change doesn't do ANYTHING to about 99.999% of all caches, if you HAVE to have proof of a find, check the logbook! I've continuously said you can still suggest! I've tried to calm those with the paranoid belief that TPTB were headhunting many cache types and this was only a start...

 

but I'm the villian!

[+sbell111]

... The new guidelines are NOT for the benefit of the game, but for the benefit of the company, Groundspeak. ...

Given that Groundspeak is a private for-profit company, I would imagine that every decision that they make is for the benefit of the company.

Ok, this has a very simple, but complex answer. This used to be a free market, seller (Cache owner) providing what buyer (cache finder) wanted. When the buyer didn't want what the seller had, he didn't buy. He walked past the fruit (geocaching) stand and the seller's fruit all spoiled (no one logged his cache) causing the seller to change how he sold his fruit, but now you have people addicted to the fruit so the seller can sell it anyway he wants, rotten, moldy, mind altering fruit (pictures, lengthy logs, hoops and whistles) and the addicted buyer will still eat it and then complain to the government (ground speak) that the seller had rotten apples and they knew they had rotten apples, but they still bought them, and please oh please GS can you save me from the evil seller who wishes to do me harm, so you have GS (Government Sensors) dictating what the seller can sell to the buyer and how he can sell it, to protect the buyer from a bad apple or two, but stopping the sale of a funkadelic apple, that may have been the addicted buyers favorite apple of all time. I wouldn't expect someone from the all liberal Michigan to understand the free market and why it's important, so I broke it down all fruit style for you.

Here's the thing: this game has never been a free market. Caches listed to GC.com have always had to comply with guidelines established by TPTB. As such, allow me to fix your analogy:

 

Imagine that we are all produce vendors who sell at a farmer's market. Customers are free to buy our fruits and vegetables, or not. However, we are not free to sell whatever we want because we are subject to guidelines established by the management of the farmer's market. Produce must be grown locally, it must be fresh, no commercially grown produce is allowed, etc. These guidelines are not static. New guidelines are established and current ones are adjusted as necessary for the good of the farmer's market.

A few AIGs and Lehman Brothers? Every failure in our economy can be traced straight back to government control ... blah-blah-blah

Please keep your political junk to the off-topic section of the forums. Edited April 11, 2009 by sbell111

[+Renegade Knight]

....These conditions are acceptable to you and others but what about the few who do not accept the idea of meeting Nude people on the trails - at a cache?...

 

I have to pick this one out of the larger post.

 

A few years back my wife and I hiked into a hot springs with another couple. This was up near McCall where I know you and Red have been though perhaps not this particular spring. We get there after a peaceful hike, and there are a lot of folks kicked back and relaxing. Someone pulled out a glow stick and started tossing it around and everyone at the springs was having a good time. Someone tossed it a bit high and this young woman jumped up to catch it. Well heck, butt naked and highlighted by the moon. All those rumors I had hears about hot springs were true.

 

The world is comprised of us all. It is what it is. I didn't invent the clothing optional rule and while I may have chosen to grind my teeth and complain to TPTB it wasn't mine to do if I were to get along in this world and with the people at this hot spring. Instead when the glow stick was tossed my direction I'd toss it back and tempting as it may have been to toss it a bit high I kept my aim true. We all enjoyed the game of catch until some Anal Retentative rule monger who didn't like that spring with that game at that time managed to hide it where the sun don't shine.

 

To me the question is very similar to that hot springs having a variety of folks in it. Some naked, some with swim suits, all getting along playing catch. Right up until Mr. Sun Don't Shine cast a dark shadow in the name of truth, justice and liberty for all. Ok liberty for all was a stretch, the rest of us had that. The rule monger didn't believe in it though no doubt he thought we was doing us a favor.

 

ALR's suck I agree, but I believe that each cache owner needs to learn the lesson on their own. This new rule has a price that's too high and quite frankly if I do (as I've had in the past) have a cache that needs an ALR (say hibernating critters dictating when I can accept logs to discourage winter finds) it's going to get one. As for Mr. Sun Don't Shine, I hope he got raging hemorrhoids out of the deal that still itch all these years later to remind him of that moment of glory.

[+Rockin Roddy]

....These conditions are acceptable to you and others but what about the few who do not accept the idea of meeting Nude people on the trails - at a cache?...

 

I have to pick this one out of the larger post.

 

A few years back my wife and I hiked into a hot springs with another couple. This was up near McCall where I know you and Red have been though perhaps not this particular spring. We get there after a peaceful hike, and there are a lot of folks kicked back and relaxing. Someone pulled out a glow stick and started tossing it around and everyone at the springs was having a good time. Someone tossed it a bit high and this young woman jumped up to catch it. Well heck, butt naked and highlighted by the moon. All those rumors I had hears about hot springs were true.

 

The world is comprised of us all. It is what it is. I didn't invent the clothing optional rule and while I may have chosen to grind my teeth and complain to TPTB it wasn't mine to do if I were to get along in this world and with the people at this hot spring. Instead when the glow stick was tossed my direction I'd toss it back and tempting as it may have been to toss it a bit high I kept my aim true. We all enjoyed the game of catch until some Anal Retentative rule monger who didn't like that spring with that game at that time managed to hide it where the sun don't shine.

 

To me the question is very similar to that hot springs having a variety of folks in it. Some naked, some with swim suits, all getting along playing catch. Right up until Mr. Sun Don't Shine cast a dark shadow in the name of truth, justice and liberty for all. Ok liberty for all was a stretch, the rest of us had that. The rule monger didn't believe in it though no doubt he thought we was doing us a favor.

 

ALR's suck I agree, but I believe that each cache owner needs to learn the lesson on their own. This new rule has a price that's too high and quite frankly if I do (as I've had in the past) have a cache that needs an ALR (say hibernating critters dictating when I can accept logs to discourage winter finds) it's going to get one. As for Mr. Sun Don't Shine, I hope he got raging hemorrhoids out of the deal that still itch all these years later to remind him of that moment of glory.

 

[+Renegade Knight]

....

There you go...it is ANY reason you can find to make it seem so bad. Forgetting of course, it was because of the REVIEWERS!!!!!! We can argue what is or isn't a cache until we're old and wrinkled, but that's neither here nor there!

 

I don't list caches for reviewers. Nor do I make the guidelines that they are required to enforce. I can't control who whines to them, but I'd much rather the whiners paid the price for their annoyances than cache owners.

[+Rockin Roddy]

....

There you go...it is ANY reason you can find to make it seem so bad. Forgetting of course, it was because of the REVIEWERS!!!!!! We can argue what is or isn't a cache until we're old and wrinkled, but that's neither here nor there!

 

I don't list caches for reviewers. Nor do I make the guidelines that they are required to enforce. I can't control who whines to them, but I'd much rather the whiners paid the price for their annoyances than cache owners.

 

RK...the reviewers themselves WERE the complainers. I'm sure others were too, but from what I have seen in here and elsewhere, the reviewers had had enough! The cache owners WERE the ones causing the problems and thus are being called for it!

 

Someone in power can correct this if I'm wrong??

[+Waldo_Mudd]

Here's the thing: this game has never been a free market. Caches listed to GC.com have always had to comply with guidelines established by TPTB. As such, allow me to fix your analogy:

 

Imagine that we are all produce vendors who sell at a farmer's market. Customers are free to buy our fruits and vegetables, or not. However, we are not free to sell whatever we want because we are subject to guidelines established by the management of the farmer's market. Produce must be grown locally, it must be fresh, no commercially grown produce is allowed, etc. These guidelines are not static. New guidelines are established and current ones are adjusted as necessary for the good of the farmer's market.

 

But that's what I'm saying. There may someday be a competing farmers market just down the street with less restrictions and more variety, and that's the farmer's market I want to be selling my fruit at. When enough of the sellers move down the street, what will the buyers have to buy but left over old rotten fruit. This is why we have to have openness and variety or that other farmer's market will start taking all your suppliers and customers and the whole community will suffer. I will place one of my caches or I guess we will call them treasure loggers right next to your geocache and people won't know what they are signing. It is important to keep just one community so we don't have problems like this, but you risk alienating your suppliers with restrictive rules and regulations. Just reverse the policy already or just amend it to allow pictures and/or extensive online logs.

[Clan Riffster]

This used to be a free market. I wouldn't expect someone from the all liberal Michigan to understand the free market.

Brother, if you think this, (caching as presented at Groundspeak), has ever been a free market, I'd have to say that you're the one who has little grasp of the fundamentals of economics. Since the very early days at geocaching .com, there have been guidelines in place dictating and limiting the behavior of cachers. With the possible exception of Dave Ulmer, we have never been "free" to do what we want. As time passes, and cachers continue to do really stupid things, more guidelines will be put into place. If you really want to be productive, you should expend your energies railing against the idiots, rather than espousing the evils of the corporation. Your blatant entitlement makes you sound like the very Liberals you are vilifying.

 

Rockin Roddy, Anarchy is not the Free Market, and the Free Market is not Anarchy.

Very true. Irrelevant, yes. But true none the less.

If I were to respond to your post with a comment like "Pickle juice contains sodium" that would be every bit as true, and as irrelevant as your free market/anarchy comparison.

 

I'm simply saying that there doesn't NEED to be limits and restrictions on what my cache entails.

I think what Roddy was suggesting, (and I tend to agree with him), is that, if there were NO restrictions, the result would be anarchy.

 

ALRs were mostly under the radar and very few really were being enforce by owners deleting logs.

What numbers do you have to support such a claim? When you say "very few", were you talking 51%? 5%? Somewhere in between? Can you quote your source?

 

Then TPTB changed the guidelines to officially recognize ALRs by requiring they be listed as mystery/unknown caches. That seemed to allow more people to push the limits

I'm not sure I follow this logic. Can you break it down for me? How did Groundspeak's decision to place ALRs in the mystery cache category lead to an increase in what Groundspeak would see as a bad ALR? Again, what are the numbers? How far do they deviate from the normal growth pattern? What is your source? Or is this just speculation without supporting evidence?

 

continue to place my copy cat, cookie cutter, micro, traditional, lightskirt, one word log, caches

Brother, if that's all you are capable of hiding, please do Texas a favor and take up knitting. If you can't have fun playing this game without the ability to control the actions of others, maybe this hobby isn't for you? In your childish rant, you are implying that your creative license has been stifled by the repressions of "The Man". For the record, you, and a handful of other entitlement junkies, are the only ones who think so. Personally, I plan on continuing to hide caches that exite and inspire others, as my creativity hasn't been reduced at all.

 

Post script: If you honestly believe that "copy cat, cookie cutter, micro, traditional, lightskirt, one word caches" excite and inspire, please disregard my posts to this thread.

[Clan Riffster]

There may someday be a competing farmers market just down the street with less restrictions and more variety

You haven't been paying attention. The "competing farmers market with less restrictions and more variety" has been in play almost as long as Groundspeak. I play over there, as my muse dictates. I also play here. My ratio of active GC to the other site's hides is about 25/1. I prefer playing in this sandbox because Groundspeak offers a better service than the other site, even with the restrictions.

[+Waldo_Mudd]

Right on, I hadn't thought about the intervention that already had taken place. I am going to do something else now, I've said my piece and also emailed Groundspeak. I will get off my little soapbox and comply with every good intentioned regulation that will allow me to continue to place my copy cat, cookie cutter, micro, traditional, lightskirt, one word log, caches so every number crunching cache addict can get his 4348th cache and won't be inconveinanced with having to do any other task besides holding a pen and scribbling his illiterate mark on a piece of paper and copying and pasting his logs in all 143 garbage caches he visited today. Thank you for looking out for my best interest Groundspeak and deciding for me what caches should contain and require, I whole heartedly enjoy when my hand is held and I don't have to think for myself. It sounds alot like the ARMY, go figure.

 

This used to be a free market. I wouldn't expect someone from the all liberal Michigan to understand the free market.

Brother, if you think this, (caching as presented at Groundspeak), has ever been a free market, I'd have to say that you're the one who has little grasp of the fundamentals of economics. Since the very early days at geocaching .com, there have been guidelines in place dictating and limiting the behavior of cachers. With the possible exception of Dave Ulmer, we have never been "free" to do what we want. As time passes, and cachers continue to do really stupid things, more guidelines will be put into place. If you really want to be productive, you should expend your energies railing against the idiots, rather than espousing the evils of the corporation. Your blatant entitlement makes you sound like the very Liberals you are vilifying.

 

Rockin Roddy, Anarchy is not the Free Market, and the Free Market is not Anarchy.

Very true. Irrelevant, yes. But true none the less.

If I were to respond to your post with a comment like "Pickle juice contains sodium" that would be every bit as true, and as irrelevant as your free market/anarchy comparison.

 

I'm simply saying that there doesn't NEED to be limits and restrictions on what my cache entails.

I think what Roddy was suggesting, (and I tend to agree with him), is that, if there were NO restrictions, the result would be anarchy.

 

ALRs were mostly under the radar and very few really were being enforce by owners deleting logs.

What numbers do you have to support such a claim? When you say "very few", were you talking 51%? 5%? Somewhere in between? Can you quote your source?

 

Then TPTB changed the guidelines to officially recognize ALRs by requiring they be listed as mystery/unknown caches. That seemed to allow more people to push the limits

I'm not sure I follow this logic. Can you break it down for me? How did Groundspeak's decision to place ALRs in the mystery cache category lead to an increase in what Groundspeak would see as a bad ALR? Again, what are the numbers? How far do they deviate from the normal growth pattern? What is your source? Or is this just speculation without supporting evidence?

 

continue to place my copy cat, cookie cutter, micro, traditional, lightskirt, one word log, caches

Brother, if that's all you are capable of hiding, please do Texas a favor and take up knitting. If you can't have fun playing this game without the ability to control the actions of others, maybe this hobby isn't for you? In your childish rant, you are implying that your creative license has been stifled by the repressions of "The Man". For the record, you, and a handful of other entitlement junkies, are the only ones who think so. Personally, I plan on continuing to hide caches that exite and inspire others, as my creativity hasn't been reduced at all.

 

Post script: If you honestly believe that "copy cat, cookie cutter, micro, traditional, lightskirt, one word caches" excite and inspire, please disregard my posts to this thread.

What I was saying is that eventually with enough bitching by one side or the other on every topic, decision, and type of cache that we can place, we will be reduced to placing a copy cat, cookie cutter, micro, traditional, lightskirt, one word cache because we won't be able to place anything else.

[Clan Riffster]

What I was saying is that eventually with enough bitching by one side or the other on every topic, decision, and type of cache that we can place, we will be reduced to placing a copy cat, cookie cutter, micro, traditional, lightskirt, one word cache because we won't be able to place anything else.

Your posts indicate that you have at least a passing ability at communication, which is indicative of a reasonably high IQ.

Surely, someone as bright as yourself doesn't believe such alarmist propoganda?

[+Waldo_Mudd]

Are you allowed to advertise the competing website, so those that are fed up and want to play a different game can go away. I'm not at that point yet, but there will come a day when enough is enough and the rules won't even be able to be followed by a harvard law grad. I dread the day, but there is a price to pay for GC.com's popularity, it means more difference of opinion and voices to be heard. Maybe everyone needs to pay to play, then we only have the real cachers and our voices get louder when we have complaints.

[+sbell111]

Here's the thing: this game has never been a free market. Caches listed to GC.com have always had to comply with guidelines established by TPTB. As such, allow me to fix your analogy:

 

Imagine that we are all produce vendors who sell at a farmer's market. Customers are free to buy our fruits and vegetables, or not. However, we are not free to sell whatever we want because we are subject to guidelines established by the management of the farmer's market. Produce must be grown locally, it must be fresh, no commercially grown produce is allowed, etc. These guidelines are not static. New guidelines are established and current ones are adjusted as necessary for the good of the farmer's market.

 

But that's what I'm saying. There may someday be a competing farmers market just down the street with less restrictions and more variety, and that's the farmer's market I want to be selling my fruit at. When enough of the sellers move down the street, what will the buyers have to buy but left over old rotten fruit. This is why we have to have openness and variety or that other farmer's market will start taking all your suppliers and customers and the whole community will suffer. I will place one of my caches or I guess we will call them treasure loggers right next to your geocache and people won't know what they are signing. It is important to keep just one community so we don't have problems like this, but you risk alienating your suppliers with restrictive rules and regulations. Just reverse the policy already or just amend it to allow pictures and/or extensive online logs.

Locally, we have a couple farmer's markets. One requires all produce sold to be grown locally by the person selling it. Another pretty much lets anyone sell whatever they want. The more exclusive market always has much better produce that actually commands a much higher price. Also, if you don't get there early, you will miss out on your veggies, because the farmers very often sell out.

 

Similarly, you are welcome to list your caches on a website that has fewer guidelines than GC.com. However, I think that you will quickly notice that the bulk of the customers stay with GC.com because they know that the quality (website and cache) is higher here.

[+sbell111]

Are you allowed to advertise the competing website, ...

Of course you can. Buy an ad in the local paper, if you like. Heck, you could buy commercial time during next year's super bowl, if you like. You can't advertise a competing site on any of your cache pages, however. It would violate the guidelines which, since you are posting in this thread, I assume that you have read.

[+Waldo_Mudd]

No, I'm asking, "What Is It?" I've never heard of any others. Probably because I've never been to an event and being in the Army, I move around to much to get involved with local cachers.

[+Rockin Roddy]

No, I'm asking, "What Is It?" I've never heard of any others. Probably because I've never been to an event and being in the Army, I move around to much to get involved with local cachers.

They were recently posted in this thread, I believe!

[+sbell111]

No, I'm asking, "What Is It?" I've never heard of any others. Probably because I've never been to an event and being in the Army, I move around to much to get involved with local cachers.

The two 'biggest' competitors are Navicache.com and Terracaching.com, I believe. Have fun.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

....

I am ignoring something I don't want to participate in - ALRs. I've been geocaching for the last 7 years so I could go geocaching. If I wanted to take pictures of people (myself included) wearing funny hats or glasses, phooning (whatever that is), write poems, or whatever I would go to those websites and get involved. I'm on this website because I want to go geocaching.

 

You don't even know what geocaching is. Any way you would define it would cut out a lot of what this site does for listing types and varieties that a lot of people enjoy. Not to mention future variations and past variations that people have and will enjoy.

Things have been added to geocaching over the years as TPTB try out some new ideas. Some of those things have been removed again because they really didn't fit what "geocaching" is all about.

 

The core game of geocaching has 3 rules to it. (Take something, leave something, write about it in the logbook). If you want to to more than that, you have to follow the guidelines on whichever listing site you're using. This listing site has said "no" to ALRs. What's the problem? It doesn't affect the core game of geocaching.

[+Parabola]

All the new posters are ones who are asking the same questions as ones in the last 951 posts, and now the thread has been hijacked into talking about the economy and getting into conservative Rushspeak. Can we close the thread yet?

 

HEAR HEAR!!! It was fun, but this has run as far as it can realistically...there's always the fringe though!!

 

Hey now we haven't hit the 1000th post yet. It just too close to shut her down now.

 

I still disagree with the descicion to wipe them out all together. Some where good, some where a pain. But if I didn't like it, I wouldn't have done the one's I did. But I don't live in an area that had very many of them. I guess that might be why it was such a shock to me to see them get the boot.

[+paleolith]

OK, pushing for #999.

 

Since there's been discussion of free market, I'll point out again that the reason you don't see much competition is that this is a natural monopoly. Very few of us want to spend time trolling around on three or four web sites to locate caches, so we use the site with the most caches, which grows at the expense of the others. In the case of crucial businesses, this monopoly might be modified by regulation (Taft-Hartley etc). Somehow I don't think it'll come to that for geocaching.

 

Letterboxing continues to offer something similar but significantly different. I haven't done any letterboxing, but AFAIK geocaching hasn't reduced its popularity and perhaps has even helped it.

 

The core game of geocaching has 3 rules to it. (Take something, leave something, write about it in the logbook).

If true, then the majority of finds completely ignore two of the three rules and pay little more than lip service to the third. In practical terms today, the rules seem to be "find the box, sign the log, mark it found online" -- and the first two can be done by proxy as long as you are present.

 

But then, the leanness of those rules allow those who wish to do more: trade, write in the book, write online, post photos. The leanness of the rules means that the rest is lagniappe -- and more pleasing because it's not required.

 

Edward

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

....

I am ignoring something I don't want to participate in - ALRs. I've been geocaching for the last 7 years so I could go geocaching. If I wanted to take pictures of people (myself included) wearing funny hats or glasses, phooning (whatever that is), write poems, or whatever I would go to those websites and get involved. I'm on this website because I want to go geocaching.

 

You don't even know what geocaching is. Any way you would define it would cut out a lot of what this site does for listing types and varieties that a lot of people enjoy. Not to mention future variations and past variations that people have and will enjoy.

Things have been added to geocaching over the years as TPTB try out some new ideas. Some of those things have been removed again because they really didn't fit what "geocaching" is all about.

 

The core game of geocaching has 3 rules to it. (Take something, leave something, write about it in the logbook). If you want to to more than that, you have to follow the guidelines on whichever listing site you're using. This listing site has said "no" to ALRs. What's the problem? It doesn't affect the core game of geocaching.

 

Being right about 1 out of 3 ain't bad! Write (or just sign...my edit) something in the log book is the only "rule" that really applies. Micros and oh yes, those caches that you love so much ECs don't require rules one and two to be followed and with ECs skip pass your rule no. 3 and go directly to jail or in this case to on line log!

I certainly would not disagree with the comment that "you do not know what geocaching is!"

Again, somebody may have acted a little too quickly with the ban on ALRs.

Edited April 12, 2009 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+Parabola]

Really still in the geocaching borcher the core rules are

 

Simple Rules of Geocaching

• If you take something from the cache,

leave something of equal or greater value.

• Write about your find in the cache logbook.

• Log your find at www.geocaching.com.

 

 

Well with micro's there's no room in the log sheet to write about your about your find. As I go along the less and less I see anything but a name and a date in log book's. Have to wonder if this is due to the micro log's.

 

Not to change the subject at all but if you can't write about your find on these little log sheet's then they should be banned as well?

 

I'm not trying to bash on a micro here. I've found some really cool one's that I'm glad they are there. But now that ALR's are gone and we are trying to get back to the "core basic's" (at least this is the impression I am getting from banishing ALR's), are micro's the next to go to get back to them?

 

I've been trying to weed threw this thread looking for where some have said it was reviewer's that kind of made the call about ALR's, but haven't been able to locate them yet.

 

I just need to go to bed, I don't think this post is making any sense.

 

How many post's needed to hit 1000 now?

[+tozainamboku]

Simple Rules of Geocaching

• If you take something from the cache,

leave something of equal or greater value.

• Write about your find in the cache logbook.

• Log your find at www.geocaching.com.

The funny thing about the three rules is they are not rules. They are Dave Ulmer's ALR when he hid the first cache. Since no one had found a cache before Dave was free to make up whatever requirements he wanted for the people who found his cache. So he wrote

Well, I did it, created the first stash hunt stash and here are the coordinates:

 

N 45 17.460

W122 24.800

 

Lots of goodies for the finders. Look for a black plastic bucket buried most of the way in the ground. Take some stuff, leave some stuff! Record it all in the log book. Have Fun!

Of course there was no website to report your results so Dave couldn't exactly delete your log if you didn't following his requirements. (I wonder how he was going to tell if you had fun?). Later when Jeremy established this site he paraphrased Dave's instructions as the "rules of geocaching".

 

IMO, the rules of geocaching are

• hide a cache
  
• post the coordinates on a website
  
• wait for people to find it.
  

Of course what happened is that the website that became the de facto one for posting coordinates is Geocaching.com. For a variety of reasons GC.com has over the years restricted the what caches they will list on the site. Mostly this was in response to problems that land managers and, sometimes, law enforcement had with certain caches, and with trying to present a good image to the general public which includes potential new geocachers. Eventually they felt they needed to restrict somewhat the definition of a geocache. This was in part because they developed other websites like Waymarking and needed to differentiate geocaches from other location based activities. But they also probably felt that a simple definition would make it easier for newbies to understand the game.

 

Another thing that Jerry did was to provide a way to log your geocaching experiences online. He provide 'Found It' logs as well as DNF and notes. Perhaps a little naively he believe that people would use the different types appropriately. And in fact most geocachers do. However some people would put spoilers in the log, others may use use inappropriate language for what Jeremy touted as a family friendly site, and in a few rare instances people would simply lie about finding caches and post "Found It' when they had never even been to the cache. So Groundspeak allowed cache owners to delete logs and even made the responsibility to control the logs on their cache page part of the cache maintenance guidelines. What this meant was that cache owners could start to enforce their additional logging requirements by deleting logs. Not wanting to weaken the concept that it was the cache owners and not Groundspeak that police the logs on a cache page, they allowed this enforcement of ALRs to continue.

 

With the advent of more cachers doing paperless caches, we had some people finding caches that had ALRs which they didn't know about. In some cases this meant they couldn't comply with the requirement because they were supposed to take a picture at the cache site or perhaps they were suppose to accomplish a challenge before even looking for the cache. So they were stuck. They couldn't log the cache online or they could log it and risk getting their log deleted. In order to satisfy these people, the guidelines were changed to require that ALR caches be listed as unknown type. You have to read the unknown type cache page before you hunt because some of these caches are not at the posted coordinates.

 

This should have taken care of the problem. Instead what seems to have happened is that now ALRs and the ability of the cache owners to delete logs for not meeting an ALR were codified in the guidelines. No doubt there were some stupid ALRs before this and there were some cache owners who deleted logs as well. But this change to the guidelines was a green light for cache owners who may have been holding back. Groundspeak started to tell reviewers to not approve certain specific ALRs. This list was probably growing. Groundspeak and the reviewers looked for a way to state in the guidelines what ALRs would be allowed. After much thought they came up with allowing challenges that involved finding certain geocaches before you could log the bonus cache. (Waymarks and Wherigo were also acceptable challenges). They decided that all other ALRs should be voluntary - much like Dave Ulmers' "Take some stuff, leave some stuff!" So go ahead and post your requirements for your caches. And if someone wants to log a find because they found the cache and signed the log, let them. Don't be stubborn. You can no more enforce your ALRs than Dave Ulmer was able to enforce his. The online log is an invention of Jeremy and Geocaching.com and has only a tiny influence on Dave's other ALR "Have Fun!"

Edited April 12, 2009 by tozainamboku

[+niraD]

How many post's needed to hit 1000 now?

6

[+paleolith]

Now reviewers had to arbitrate what type of task was or wasn't appropriate for an ALR. In future they have to arbitrate what type of task is or isn't appropriate for a Challenge cache. Will it change much?

Though I think that GS should clearly define challenge caches (which the new guidelines do not do), I also think it's generally understood that a challenge cache is one which requires you to find a certain set of other caches before finding the challenge cache. The set may be a specific list (often a bookmark list) or may be defined by criteria (such as one in each county of a state). This is pretty clean and clearly defined and should not cause problems.

 

Edward

[+tozainamboku]

Now reviewers had to arbitrate what type of task was or wasn't appropriate for an ALR. In future they have to arbitrate what type of task is or isn't appropriate for a Challenge cache. Will it change much?

Though I think that GS should clearly define challenge caches (which the new guidelines do not do), I also think it's generally understood that a challenge cache is one which requires you to find a certain set of other caches before finding the challenge cache. The set may be a specific list (often a bookmark list) or may be defined by criteria (such as one in each county of a state). This is pretty clean and clearly defined and should not cause problems.

 

Edward

I have a problem with one of your challenges. Spinal Tap (GC1C4Y) allows you to log the cache after finding all the caches on the Backbone trail in the Santa Monica Mountains. But this list is constantly changing. New caches are hidden, old ones are archived. When this cache was published I was probably near the top of the list of how many BBT caches I had done. I find these caches because, like you, I enjoy hiking in the Santa Monica Mountains. In my case I live close to the eastern terminus of the trail and to several trailheads on eastern end. In fact, the majority of the cache I've yet to find are on the western most portion of the trail, and even here I've found a good number. When this challenge was put out, I watched as people who had found only a few of these caches went out and quickly found caches so they could log the challenge. So are these people going to go back and find the new cache placed on the BBT now that they've found Spinal Tap. I think not. I also will know that many did not find some now archived caches that I have found and that they didn't find the two waypoints of my multi-cache that are on the BBT. I suppose if at some time I actually "qualify" for this challenge I will log the cache. But I'm just going to continue to enjoy the BBT caches that I find and if people keep hiding them so I have to find more to qualify, I'll be happy that there are more caches to find. This is one challenge that I didn't need to make me find any caches.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

....

I am ignoring something I don't want to participate in - ALRs. I've been geocaching for the last 7 years so I could go geocaching. If I wanted to take pictures of people (myself included) wearing funny hats or glasses, phooning (whatever that is), write poems, or whatever I would go to those websites and get involved. I'm on this website because I want to go geocaching.

 

You don't even know what geocaching is. Any way you would define it would cut out a lot of what this site does for listing types and varieties that a lot of people enjoy. Not to mention future variations and past variations that people have and will enjoy.

Things have been added to geocaching over the years as TPTB try out some new ideas. Some of those things have been removed again because they really didn't fit what "geocaching" is all about.

 

The core game of geocaching has 3 rules to it. (Take something, leave something, write about it in the logbook). If you want to to more than that, you have to follow the guidelines on whichever listing site you're using. This listing site has said "no" to ALRs. What's the problem? It doesn't affect the core game of geocaching.

 

Being right about 1 out of 3 ain't bad! Write (or just sign...my edit) something in the log book is the only "rule" that really applies. Micros and oh yes, those caches that you love so much ECs don't require rules one and two to be followed and with ECs skip pass your rule no. 3 and go directly to jail or in this case to on line log!

I certainly would not disagree with the comment that "you do not know what geocaching is!"

Again, somebody may have acted a little too quickly with the ban on ALRs.

Most people don't take or leave things, partly due to the sheer number of microcaches, but that doesn't mean those aren't still part of the 3 rules. Everything else, on this site anyway, is a guideline.

[+Parabola]

Simple Rules of Geocaching

• If you take something from the cache,

leave something of equal or greater value.

• Write about your find in the cache logbook.

• Log your find at www.geocaching.com.

The funny thing about the three rules is they are not rules. They are Dave Ulmer's ALR when he hid the first cache. Since no one had found a cache before Dave was free to make up whatever requirements he wanted for the people who found his cache. So he wrote

Well, I did it, created the first stash hunt stash and here are the coordinates:

 

N 45 17.460

W122 24.800

 

Lots of goodies for the finders. Look for a black plastic bucket buried most of the way in the ground. Take some stuff, leave some stuff! Record it all in the log book. Have Fun!

Of course there was no website to report your results so Dave couldn't exactly delete your log if you didn't following his requirements. (I wonder how he was going to tell if you had fun?). Later when Jeremy established this site he paraphrased Dave's instructions as the "rules of geocaching".

 

IMO, the rules of geocaching are

• hide a cache
  
• post the coordinates on a website
  
• wait for people to find it.
  

Of course what happened is that the website that became the de facto one for posting coordinates is Geocaching.com. For a variety of reasons GC.com has over the years restricted the what caches they will list on the site. Mostly this was in response to problems that land managers and, sometimes, law enforcement had with certain caches, and with trying to present a good image to the general public which includes potential new geocachers. Eventually they felt they needed to restrict somewhat the definition of a geocache. This was in part because they developed other websites like Waymarking and needed to differentiate geocaches from other location based activities. But they also probably felt that a simple definition would make it easier for newbies to understand the game.

 

Another thing that Jerry did was to provide a way to log your geocaching experiences online. He provide 'Found It' logs as well as DNF and notes. Perhaps a little naively he believe that people would use the different types appropriately. And in fact most geocachers do. However some people would put spoilers in the log, others may use use inappropriate language for what Jeremy touted as a family friendly site, and in a few rare instances people would simply lie about finding caches and post "Found It' when they had never even been to the cache. So Groundspeak allowed cache owners to delete logs and even made the responsibility to control the logs on their cache page part of the cache maintenance guidelines. What this meant was that cache owners could start to enforce their additional logging requirements by deleting logs. Not wanting to weaken the concept that it was the cache owners and not Groundspeak that police the logs on a cache page, they allowed this enforcement of ALRs to continue.

 

With the advent of more cachers doing paperless caches, we had some people finding caches that had ALRs which they didn't know about. In some cases this meant they couldn't comply with the requirement because they were supposed to take a picture at the cache site or perhaps they were suppose to accomplish a challenge before even looking for the cache. So they were stuck. They couldn't log the cache online or they could log it and risk getting their log deleted. In order to satisfy these people, the guidelines were changed to require that ALR caches be listed as unknown type. You have to read the unknown type cache page before you hunt because some of these caches are not at the posted coordinates.

 

This should have taken care of the problem. Instead what seems to have happened is that now ALRs and the ability of the cache owners to delete logs for not meeting an ALR were codified in the guidelines. No doubt there were some stupid ALRs before this and there were some cache owners who deleted logs as well. But this change to the guidelines was a green light for cache owners who may have been holding back. Groundspeak started to tell reviewers to not approve certain specific ALRs. This list was probably growing. Groundspeak and the reviewers looked for a way to state in the guidelines what ALRs would be allowed. After much thought they came up with allowing challenges that involved finding certain geocaches before you could log the bonus cache. (Waymarks and Wherigo were also acceptable challenges). They decided that all other ALRs should be voluntary - much like Dave Ulmers' "Take some stuff, leave some stuff!" So go ahead and post your requirements for your caches. And if someone wants to log a find because they found the cache and signed the log, let them. Don't be stubborn. You can no more enforce your ALRs than Dave Ulmer was able to enforce his. The online log is an invention of Jeremy and Geocaching.com and has only a tiny influence on Dave's other ALR "Have Fun!"

 

Thank you for some of the back history. Obviously I haven't been here from day one and it's nice to hear about how the site has evolved over the year's. most of my ALR's where just do to logging trying to get more than a one liner on the cache. But I was never a real "stickler" on it. Then as I learned and tried to hide more physical challenging cache's I didn't bother with them cause anyone doing them has something to say when and if they finished it.

 

Again I just have this one, it a six stage multi. the state park only will allow two caches in it. Well, my attempt at defeating someone getting the final location and skip the rest was to put in three logbook's threw out the cache, and the seeker needed to sign all three, hence having to visit every stage. It was an attempt at keeping the seeker do to the cache as intended. Which never seemed to bother anyone. I've made it a request for the moment to sign all the log's, and won't punish those who don't. But I've put it on a time frame and will archive it now. I'm holding it open for a few people that want to finish it. Really I didn't know if this was an ALR since if they are hunting the cache, they should come across those book's anyway's.

 

But again, thank you Toz for the back history. It's nice to see how the site work's now compared to year's ago and why changes have been made.

 

So it's time to go back to the drawing board and see what I can dream up next that will be fun for some, that fit the changes in the guidelines.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Again I just have this one, it a six stage multi. the state park only will allow two caches in it. Well, my attempt at defeating someone getting the final location and skip the rest was to put in three logbook's threw out the cache, and the seeker needed to sign all three, hence having to visit every stage. It was an attempt at keeping the seeker do to the cache as intended. Which never seemed to bother anyone. I've made it a request for the moment to sign all the log's, and won't punish those who don't. But I've put it on a time frame and will archive it now. I'm holding it open for a few people that want to finish it. Really I didn't know if this was an ALR since if they are hunting the cache, they should come across those book's anyway's.

I've never understood having logbooks in more than just the final cache. If your multi is designed in such a way that you have to resort to this, maybe you should design it a different way.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Post #1000...what do I win?