Jump to content

I PAYED AND I WANT ALRs BACK!

Influence Waterfowl Calls
Followers 1

Recommended Posts

entogeek

+entogeek

Posted
Posted

Rather than outright ban ALR's why not institute guidelines for them? I have to agree with Tequila's post on another thread. I helped him set out his 9 stage multi that required one to submit their GPS log so you could prove you visited all stages rather than head straight to the final if you got the co-ords from a previous finder. The entire multi requires a 15+ km hike - to go straight to the final is only about 2 km and defeats the purpose of completing a very challenging multi.

Link to comment
KBI

+KBI

Posted
Posted
I love ALR's

HOW ABOUT YOU?

Nope. Not really. While I often enjoy a cache owner adding a light and fun activity to their cache page, it stops being fun, for me, the moment it becomes a requirement.

Requirement?

 

ALR caches were never "required" for anyone to hunt. All cache hunts are voluntary. Always have been, always will be. You were never being "controlled" by the mere existence of an ALR cache.

 

Those who enjoy ALRs, however, will now no longer have the option to hunt them. That policy change is not optional. It is a "requirement."

 

The fact that certain cachers who never hunted ALRs will see this as an improvement tells me quite a bit about their desires to "control others."

Link to comment
Mag Magician

Mag Magician

Posted
Posted

Hmm, interesting thread. Since I am not the owner of the site, nor a $ receiving shareholder, I have no opinion about what those who do own the site do with the listings. I submit, I get approval, and those interested go seek my hides. When that part gets to be boring, or less of a challenge, I could go elsewhere.

 

Oh, yes, I can appreciate the time and energy it takes to place a challenging hide, or the time and thought it takes to create something different and obtuse, but in the end, it's all about the hunt.

Link to comment
dakboy

+dakboy

Posted
Posted

Rather than outright ban ALR's why not institute guidelines for them? I have to agree with Tequila's post on another thread. I helped him set out his 9 stage multi that required one to submit their GPS log so you could prove you visited all stages rather than head straight to the final if you got the co-ords from a previous finder. The entire multi requires a 15+ km hike - to go straight to the final is only about 2 km and defeats the purpose of completing a very challenging multi.

Doesn't that ALR essentially require that you complete all 9 stages in one trip (without indicating as such), since the track log is required to show that the full hike was completed?

Link to comment
mtn-man

+mtn-man

Posted
Posted

Hate 'em. Good riddance.

 

I've had a log deleted. I frankly don't want it back and don't want to do the cache again. The guy was a jerk about it and it was a stupid ALR. It was a traditional cache listing though. My name is in the logbook. I got no find.

 

Unfortunately, the bad (and the ridiculous) killed some that might have been good.

Link to comment
Rockin Roddy

+Rockin Roddy

Posted
Posted
I love ALR's

HOW ABOUT YOU?

Nope. Not really. While I often enjoy a cache owner adding a light and fun activity to their cache page, it stops being fun, for me, the moment it becomes a requirement.

Requirement?

 

ALR caches were never "required" for anyone to hunt. All cache hunts are voluntary. Always have been, always will be. You were never being "controlled" by the mere existence of an ALR cache.

 

Those who enjoy ALRs, however, will now no longer have the option to hunt them. That policy change is not optional. It is a "requirement."

 

The fact that certain cachers who never hunted ALRs will see this as an improvement tells me quite a bit about their desires to "control others."

 

Yep, my not logging an ALR is really trying hard to control others....I see that now. How ashamed I am of myself for not doing something I deem not fun! How controlling of me for applauding the move! ;)

 

Maybe I didn't read the guidelines right, but (from how I read it and was told several times in the other thread) they didn't say you couldn't ASK people to do something, you just can't require it! Unless I'm mistaken (and believe me, it happens), you could publish a cache ASKING everyone in the group sign the log, everyone in the group poses for a picture etc, but when the owner makes that a requirement (controlling the find), that's not allowed! So, your argument that those who want to do the ALS suggestions, will no longer have that option....seems you're mistaken.

Link to comment
Rockin Roddy

+Rockin Roddy

Posted
Posted

Sorry, didn't realize they had gone anywhere....isn't that what the blue ? is for?

Hey Mr Behind the Times. :D

 

ALRs are now banned and not grandfathered.

 

Yeah, I am really upset, too. I wasn't informed of this in time to allow myself to get totally worked up and bent out of shape....HOW DARE THEY NOT SEND ME THE NOTICES!! ;):laughing::unsure::blink: Now, I'm only mildly inconvenienced and feel deprived of my chance to break out the pitchforks and torches.....the humanity (or lack thereof)! :PB):)

Link to comment
sbell111

+sbell111

Posted
Posted

For the life of me, I can't figure out how anyone is really negatively impacted by this new guideline. Cache owners can still ask for finders to do silly things. Cache finders can still be silly if they wish. The only people that should be angstified by this guideline are those that get their fun out of forcing others to do something that they don't find to be fun.

Link to comment
briansnat

+briansnat

Posted
Posted (edited)
Those who enjoy ALRs, however, will now no longer have the option to hunt them. That policy change is not optional. It is a "requirement."

 

The fact that certain cachers who never hunted ALRs will see this as an improvement tells me quite a bit about their desires to "control others."

 

 

In that additional logging requirement caches are no longer available, you are technically correct. But for those who enjoyed performing the tasks that these caches formerly required, they still have that option. They've lost nothing. And for those who don't want to be bothered, now they can have fun finding the cache in their own way and if they don't complete the task, its their loss.

 

The only people who are losing out are the cache owners who insist on controlling others.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment
Vater_Araignee

+Vater_Araignee

Posted
Posted

SON OF A...

 

Now I have to go out and pick everything back up and apologize to to a few people for wasting their time trying to convince them to let me place my cache because the phrase "They will be required to upload a photo of themselves with the cache at it's location." is what finally convinced them to allow it.

 

Guess that's what I get for getting off the forums and actually doing something.

Link to comment
Rockin Roddy

+Rockin Roddy

Posted
Posted

For the life of me, I can't figure out how anyone is really negatively impacted by this new guideline. Cache owners can still ask for finders to do silly things. Cache finders can still be silly if they wish. The only people that should be angstified by this guideline are those that get their fun out of forcing others to do something that they don't find to be fun.

 

THANKS for this post, SPOT ON!!!

Link to comment
Kit Fox

+Kit Fox

Posted
Posted

Hate 'em. Good riddance.

 

I've had a log deleted. I frankly don't want it back and don't want to do the cache again. The guy was a jerk about it and it was a stupid ALR. It was a traditional cache listing though. My name is in the logbook. I got no find.

 

Unfortunately, the bad (and the ridiculous) killed some that might have been good.

 

Will you be re-logging your find? You can always post the new guidelines along with your found it log.

Link to comment
wimseyguy

+wimseyguy

Posted
Posted

I love ALR's

 

YES I DO!

 

I love ALR's

 

HOW ABOUT YOU?

 

Unless your local reviewer stayed up all night editing cache types of the ones you have found, I wonder what you are basing this opinion on? A quick scan of the 13 "?" finds in your profile shows regular old school puzzles and night caches, but no pics of you wearing a clown suit, or pink wig. Nor are there pics of you or your GPS at GZ, or cache logs written in verse, haiku, limerick, or a twisted version of the never ending story.

If ya love them so much, why haven't you logged any? ;)

 

BTW, I didn't mind them, but thought it was a really stupid idea to lump them in with the mystery/puzzle category in the first place.

Link to comment
Vater_Araignee

+Vater_Araignee

Posted
Posted

I love ALR's

 

YES I DO!

 

I love ALR's

 

HOW ABOUT YOU?

 

Unless your local reviewer stayed up all night editing cache types of the ones you have found, I wonder what you are basing this opinion on? A quick scan of the 13 "?" finds in your profile shows regular old school puzzles and night caches, but no pics of you wearing a clown suit, or pink wig. Nor are there pics of you or your GPS at GZ, or cache logs written in verse, haiku, limerick, or a twisted version of the never ending story.

If ya love them so much, why haven't you logged any? ;)

 

BTW, I didn't mind them, but thought it was a really stupid idea to lump them in with the mystery/puzzle category in the first place.

So what we have here is somebody using a profiles numbers in a sad attempt to invalidate what some one claims to like.

 

I suppose that because I only have 2 hides with only one active, you would say I don't like hiding.

Link to comment
wimseyguy

+wimseyguy

Posted
Posted (edited)

Actually for someone who's been playing for less than a year you have a decent find/hide ratio IMO. I've never endorsed anything that required people to hide caches who didn't want to.

 

I do think your post/find count it a bit high though. ;)

Edited by wimseyguy
Link to comment
mtn-man

+mtn-man

Posted
Posted
For the life of me, I can't figure out how anyone is really negatively impacted by this new guideline. Cache owners can still ask for finders to do silly things. Cache finders can still be silly if they wish. The only people that should be angstified by this guideline are those that get their fun out of forcing others to do something that they don't find to be fun.

 

THANKS for this post, SPOT ON!!!

Indeed. Perfect. EPE=0.

Link to comment
mtn-man

+mtn-man

Posted
Posted

I would like to see a new cache category for ALR's. This would be best of both worlds. Count Hunters could easily filter them out. And purists can easily filter them in.

 

Purists? Were these ALS's always around?

Funny, I read that post as 180 degrees wrong too.

 

ALR's were an experiment. They spiraled out of control and the experiment failed... horribly. Face up to the fact and move on.

Link to comment
Radman Forever

Radman Forever

Posted
Posted

So people are now allowed to skip the requirements of a challenge cache and just log the cache. This improves geocaching how? That's like leaving an easy cache at the base of a cliff you are suppose to climb because I want the find, but is too lazy to do the work to do it the right way.

 

Challenge caches, in general, allow geocachers to try their hobby in a different aspect. Just because they are required doesn't force geocachers to actively seek them out. They did have the option of ignoring the caches. Do some people have a problem ignoring caches, because they show up on their list?

 

It's sad of reading some comments on here that ARL's were a general waste of time or just saying "good riddance" on the whole thing, just because you don't like to do them. I don't like certain geocaches, so I choose to NOT DO THEM. I don't go out and campaign them to be banned and applaud the leaders because I got my way. It ruins the game for others.

 

You can still do the challenges, but this is kind of like doing the ten-stage cache and watching someone just go right to the final stage and celebrating like they just climbed Mt. Everest. It cheapens it and kind of deflates the point of pushing yourself, IMO.

Link to comment
larryc43230

+larryc43230

Posted
Posted

So people are now allowed to skip the requirements of a challenge cache and just log the cache. This improves geocaching how? That's like leaving an easy cache at the base of a cliff you are suppose to climb because I want the find, but is too lazy to do the work to do it the right way.

 

Challenge caches, in general, allow geocachers to try their hobby in a different aspect. Just because they are required doesn't force geocachers to actively seek them out. They did have the option of ignoring the caches. Do some people have a problem ignoring caches, because they show up on their list?

 

...

 

You can still do the challenges, but this is kind of like doing the ten-stage cache and watching someone just go right to the final stage and celebrating like they just climbed Mt. Everest. It cheapens it and kind of deflates the point of pushing yourself, IMO.

Please read MissJenn's original post announcing the change in the guidelines here. Pay special attention to the bottom of her post. Challenge caches are still allowed, although apparently with a new requirement.

 

--Larry

Link to comment
briansnat

+briansnat

Posted
Posted

I love ALR's

 

YES I DO!

 

I love ALR's

 

HOW ABOUT YOU?

 

Unless your local reviewer stayed up all night editing cache types of the ones you have found, I wonder what you are basing this opinion on? A quick scan of the 13 "?" finds in your profile shows regular old school puzzles and night caches, but no pics of you wearing a clown suit, or pink wig. Nor are there pics of you or your GPS at GZ, or cache logs written in verse, haiku, limerick, or a twisted version of the never ending story.

If ya love them so much, why haven't you logged any? ;)

 

BTW, I didn't mind them, but thought it was a really stupid idea to lump them in with the mystery/puzzle category in the first place.

So what we have here is somebody using a profiles numbers in a sad attempt to invalidate what some one claims to like.

 

I suppose that because I only have 2 hides with only one active, you would say I don't like hiding.

 

No, he's using profile numbers to show that the OP is just trolling.

Link to comment
tozainamboku

+tozainamboku

Posted
Posted

So people are now allowed to skip the requirements of a challenge cache and just log the cache. This improves geocaching how? That's like leaving an easy cache at the base of a cliff you are suppose to climb because I want the find, but is too lazy to do the work to do it the right way.

 

Challenge caches, in general, allow geocachers to try their hobby in a different aspect. Just because they are required doesn't force geocachers to actively seek them out. They did have the option of ignoring the caches. Do some people have a problem ignoring caches, because they show up on their list?

 

It's sad of reading some comments on here that ARL's were a general waste of time or just saying "good riddance" on the whole thing, just because you don't like to do them. I don't like certain geocaches, so I choose to NOT DO THEM. I don't go out and campaign them to be banned and applaud the leaders because I got my way. It ruins the game for others.

 

You can still do the challenges, but this is kind of like doing the ten-stage cache and watching someone just go right to the final stage and celebrating like they just climbed Mt. Everest. It cheapens it and kind of deflates the point of pushing yourself, IMO.

The new guidelines specifically treat challenge caches as type of mystery/unknown cache. Caches which meet this definition are explicitly exempt from the ban on ALR caches.

Challenge caches incorporate special logging requirements and are listed as Mystery/Puzzle caches. Typically they require the seeker to have previously met a reasonable geocaching-related qualification (Waymarking and Wherigo qualify too, of course) such as first finding a cache in every county in your state. If you are thinking of creating such a cache, please include a note to the reviewer demonstrating either that you have met the challenge yourself, or that a substantial number of other geocachers would be able to do so.
Link to comment
Vater_Araignee

+Vater_Araignee

Posted
Posted

Actually for someone who's been playing for less than a year you have a decent find/hide ratio IMO. I've never endorsed anything that required people to hide caches who didn't want to.

 

I do think your post/find count it a bit high though. :laughing:

Hmmm, lets assume I took the time to try and reconcile every waystash and letterbox I ever found over to geocaching and say only around 1% of them where, my find count would go up by 20.

 

20 is 1% percent of what number? ;) A GPSr requirement doesn't invalidate experience.

Link to comment
Radman Forever

Radman Forever

Posted
Posted

So people are now allowed to skip the requirements of a challenge cache and just log the cache. This improves geocaching how? That's like leaving an easy cache at the base of a cliff you are suppose to climb because I want the find, but is too lazy to do the work to do it the right way.

 

Challenge caches, in general, allow geocachers to try their hobby in a different aspect. Just because they are required doesn't force geocachers to actively seek them out. They did have the option of ignoring the caches. Do some people have a problem ignoring caches, because they show up on their list?

 

...

 

You can still do the challenges, but this is kind of like doing the ten-stage cache and watching someone just go right to the final stage and celebrating like they just climbed Mt. Everest. It cheapens it and kind of deflates the point of pushing yourself, IMO.

Please read MissJenn's original post announcing the change in the guidelines here. Pay special attention to the bottom of her post. Challenge caches are still allowed, although apparently with a new requirement.

 

--Larry

 

Sorry, I have reread it and have a better understanding of the rules, but that doesn't mean I am for them. I have seen it when certain caches are banned and I know how nitpicking becomes the tip of the iceburg. I retract nothing and stand by what I said. ;)

Link to comment
Radman Forever

Radman Forever

Posted
Posted

...Challenge caches are still allowed, although apparently with a new requirement.

 

--Larry

Irony strikes again. Challenge caches are allowed with a new ALR (Additional Listing Requirent).

 

I read the rules, but I first understood that challenge caches were also banned, because it doesn't make any sense to ban ALR's and not other caches having requirements. Now that I understand it, it still doesn't make sense.

Link to comment
Renegade Knight

+Renegade Knight

Posted
Posted (edited)

Challenges require additional geocaching to log them. ALRs require something that's not geocaching to log them.

 

An ALR by any other name is still an ALR. Challenge should not be an exception. Just reverse the ALR. Now it's a puzzle and permitted

 

However I suppose we can excpect "Stupid Puzzle requirements that aren't additional caching" to go next.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment
CLV3

CLV3

Posted
Posted

As much as I do not understand WHY an entire cache type is banned (we can always choose to do or not do a cache), I respect the decision and I also respect the fact that a cache owner can still REQUEST the finder to do something. As far as my own personal feelings go, I will honor a cache hider's request as long as it is something that I am willing to do. I have not decided if I am going to log caches that were once ALRs if I am not willing to do whatever is requested.

 

I also hope that puzzle caches remain as I LOVE them.

Link to comment
Radman Forever

Radman Forever

Posted
Posted

I see your point, but this banning wasn't one of practicality or necessity but of morals. These caches were acceptable for a while, but because they were catching on in popularity and annoying for some vocal objectors, they were deemed expendable. IMO, they do not hurt geocaching's good reputation in parks or cemeteries. They just became annoying for some.

 

They weren't banned because they are tough for reviewers to approve or that they are desired by park managers instead of traditionals, but because they were annoying.

 

This scares me that geocaching will be changed in the future based on the vocal few who believe that they speak for the majority of geocachers, when they may not.

 

Another brand of caches that had requirements attached to it has been banned, like virtuals and webcams before it, so it scares me what's in store for challenge and puzzles caches down the road...

Link to comment
Renegade Knight

+Renegade Knight

Posted
Posted

...I also hope that puzzle caches remain as I LOVE them.

 

The only difference between a puzzle and an ALR is where you do the work.

Do it before the find, it's a puzzle. Do it after it's an ALR.

 

However people are like rats. They will press a button to get food, but they won't press the button after they got the food.

Link to comment
webscouter.

+webscouter.

Posted
Posted

 

They weren't banned because they are tough for reviewers to approve or that they are desired by park managers instead of traditionals, but because they were annoying.

 

 

While I have no inside knowledge I would hazard a guess that they were banned because Groundspeak was getting lots of e-mails from cachers who had found a cache and had a find log deleted. I would guess that it was time consuming enough and got enough cache finders and cache owners upset with Groundspeak that TPTB felt it was an aggravation that they did not want to continue to deal with.

 

But that is just a guess.

Link to comment
CLV3

CLV3

Posted
Posted

...I also hope that puzzle caches remain as I LOVE them.

 

The only difference between a puzzle and an ALR is where you do the work.

Do it before the find, it's a puzzle. Do it after it's an ALR.

 

However people are like rats. They will press a button to get food, but they won't press the button after they got the food.

 

I personally do not see why any cache type should be banned unless there is something illegal involved. Like I mentioned before, is it not enough that people can choose which caches to pursue and which ones not to? Do I need to find every cache just because its there??? No.

 

However, I still enjoy the activity of caching and will continue to do so even though I do not agree with the mentallity of banning cache types.

Link to comment
Radman Forever

Radman Forever

Posted
Posted

And it came to pass that ALR's were banned from the face of the Earth.

The storms subsided and as the clouds parted, warm rays of sunshine sprayed down upon the land.

 

As the birds began to sing I had reason to proclaim :laughing::unsure: "LIFE IS GOOD"!! :blink:B)

 

Glad to know the usual attendees of these forums had an impact on geocaching. Too bad it was subtracting something from it instead of adding to it. ;)

Link to comment
Dinoprophet

Dinoprophet

Posted
Posted

Challenges require additional geocaching to log them. ALRs require something that's not geocaching to log them.

 

An ALR by any other name is still an ALR. Challenge should not be an exception. Just reverse the ALR. Now it's a puzzle and permitted

That's right.

 

However I suppose we can excpect "Stupid Puzzle requirements that aren't additional caching" to go next.

As I read the new guidelines, you can't delete a log if someone finds your cache without solving a puzzle, either. I'm fine with that, too.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
Followers 1
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...