PLSO Oregon Surveyor Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 A reviewer asked me to bounce the below language off this forum, see how you folks view this: "This cache was created in conjunction with the Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon, the Oregon Association of County Engineers and Surveyors, the Oregon GPS User Group and the National Society of Professional Land Surveyors geocache program, which have a goal of promoting the surveying and engineering professions at national and state levels." Acceptable language? Thanks, PLSO Oregon Surveyor Quote Link to comment
+bittsen Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 A reviewer asked me to bounce the below language off this forum, see how you folks view this: "This cache was created in conjunction with the Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon, the Oregon Association of County Engineers and Surveyors, the Oregon GPS User Group and the National Society of Professional Land Surveyors geocache program, which have a goal of promoting the surveying and engineering professions at national and state levels." Acceptable language? Thanks, PLSO Oregon Surveyor Did you have the permission of the aforementioned organizations to use their titles? If yes, then there isn't anything wrong with it. Otherwise, I see why it was bumped. You can't use endorsements unless you actually have the endorsements. Quote Link to comment
+KoosKoos Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 I don't have a problem with it...but I can see where people that are sensitive to the "no agenda" portion of the guidelines might have a problem with it. Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) A reviewer asked me to bounce the below language off this forum, see how you folks view this: "This cache was created in conjunction with the Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon, the Oregon Association of County Engineers and Surveyors, the Oregon GPS User Group and the National Society of Professional Land Surveyors geocache program, which have a goal of promoting the surveying and engineering professions at national and state levels." Acceptable language? Thanks, PLSO Oregon Surveyor This would fly. "This cache was created in conjunction with the Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon, the Oregon Association of County Engineers and Surveyors, the Oregon GPS User Group and the National Society of Professional Land Surveyors geocache program." The last part or your orginal sentance, is where the question of promotion comes into play. You are perhaps hitting the minimum level of it. I've seen lesser promotions bounced that I thought were find. "Land Rover Cache #1" (because they were tired of seeing "Jeep" Caches. Edited June 9, 2009 by Renegade Knight Quote Link to comment
+mtn-man Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 A reviewer asked me to bounce the below language off this forum, see how you folks view this: Actually, they did not ask you to post this in the forum. They asked you to write to Groundspeak at the contact address. That is what I see on the cache page in question. People in this forum can give you an opinion, but only Groundspeak will give you the answer. Quote Link to comment
+RonnieGeo Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 First of all...... Ok... I personally have no problem with it, but the word "promote" or a variation of it is probably the concern. There have been many arguments here about "agenda" caches, or promoting something. There will be responses that we cannot promote anything... There will be responses that say ALL caches promote something... There will be people who had caches denied for promoting something... There will be people who put links to caches that have not been archived, but do promote something... This, to me, is one of the toughest areas for the reviewers. I will say that since the cache is promoting something that is directly related to geocaching (surveying) that it might be acceptable - as might a cache that promotes awareness of the Global Positioning satellites, or something like that. Quote Link to comment
+Harry Dolphin Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Long winded and boring (but not as bad as some cache pages I've seen.) Tending toward an agendum and a touch of commercialism. I'd say dump it. Quote Link to comment
+StarBrand Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 A reviewer asked me to bounce the below language off this forum, see how you folks view this: "This cache was created in conjunction with the Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon, the Oregon Association of County Engineers and Surveyors, the Oregon GPS User Group and the National Society of Professional Land Surveyors geocache program, which have a goal of promoting the surveying and engineering professions at national and state levels." Acceptable language? Thanks, PLSO Oregon Surveyor This would fly. "This cache was created in conjunction with the Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon, the Oregon Association of County Engineers and Surveyors, the Oregon GPS User Group and the National Society of Professional Land Surveyors geocache program." The last part or your orginal sentance, is where the question of promotion comes into play. You are perhaps hitting the minimum level of it. I've seen lesser promotions bounced that I thought were find. "Land Rover Cache #1" (because they were tired of seeing "Jeep" Caches. I tend to agree with RK here. The second clause makes it agenda oriented. However, I see the whole thing as a bit unecessary to a cache description. Not information really necesary for either the area or the cache itself. Purely a promotional sentence. But as mtn-man said - ask HQ. Quote Link to comment
bogleman Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) where is that bobble head icon - point of view already mentioned. No need to clutter with trivial fluff. Change the description Edited June 9, 2009 by bogleman Quote Link to comment
PLSO Oregon Surveyor Posted June 9, 2009 Author Share Posted June 9, 2009 I like your proposal. And yes, the project in Oregon was actually started with full cooperation of these entities, and they stepped up to the plate with $ to assist. Fast responses.... much appreciated. Thanks, PLSO Oregon Surveyor A reviewer asked me to bounce the below language off this forum, see how you folks view this: "This cache was created in conjunction with the Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon, the Oregon Association of County Engineers and Surveyors, the Oregon GPS User Group and the National Society of Professional Land Surveyors geocache program, which have a goal of promoting the surveying and engineering professions at national and state levels." Acceptable language? Thanks, PLSO Oregon Surveyor This would fly. "This cache was created in conjunction with the Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon, the Oregon Association of County Engineers and Surveyors, the Oregon GPS User Group and the National Society of Professional Land Surveyors geocache program." The last part or your orginal sentance, is where the question of promotion comes into play. You are perhaps hitting the minimum level of it. I've seen lesser promotions bounced that I thought were find. "Land Rover Cache #1" (because they were tired of seeing "Jeep" Caches. Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Are these orginizations not for profit? Quote Link to comment
+TheAlabamaRambler Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 I can't see where the named organizations are trying to sell geocachers anything, therefore non-commercial, and they're not soliciting my membership or involvement, therefore no agenda. The only answer in this thread so far that matters, however, is Mtn-Man's! Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 A reviewer asked me to bounce the below language off this forum, see how you folks view this: Actually, they did not ask you to post this in the forum. They asked you to write to Groundspeak at the contact address. That is what I see on the cache page in question. People in this forum can give you an opinion, but only Groundspeak will give you the answer. Did you say "AN" opinion? Hahah! You know better than that! Quote Link to comment
+WRITE SHOP ROBERT Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 which have a goal of promoting Enough said. Of course I don't have a problem with it, but as has been discussed before, allowing this kind of statement would open the door to military recruiters, church recruiters etc. Quote Link to comment
+mtn-man Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Did you say "AN" opinion? Hahah! You know better than that! /me chuckles. Also funny is that the original poster seems to have ignored my answer. Quote Link to comment
+DatCrazyMongoose Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 (edited) which have a goal of promoting Enough said. Of course I don't have a problem with it, but as has been discussed before, allowing this kind of statement would open the door to military recruiters, church recruiters etc. And goodness knows we can't allow baby killers and Jesus freaks to infiltrate geocaching. They represent the worst of society..... I find your analogy/reference offensive. I hope you didn't mean it the way it was written. Edited June 10, 2009 by DatCrazyMongoose Quote Link to comment
+steve p Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 which have a goal of promoting Enough said. Of course I don't have a problem with it, but as has been discussed before, allowing this kind of statement would open the door to military recruiters, church recruiters etc. And goodness knows we can't allow baby killers and Jesus freaks to infiltrate geocaching. They represent the worst of society..... I find your analogy/reference offensive. I hope you didn't mean it the way it was written. What exactly is "offensive" about that analogy? It's a perfectly good analogy. Some people might find your descriptive "Jesus freaks" to be offensive. Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Some people might find your descriptive "Jesus freaks" to be offensive. So long as they aren't offended by the "baby killer" reference, all is good. Quote Link to comment
+DatCrazyMongoose Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 How about if he had said this... Enough said. Of course I don't have a problem with it, but as has been discussed before, allowing this kind of statement would open the door to gay rights activists and Muslims, etc. I felt that he used the military and religious groups in a negative way to make his point. I said that I hope he didn't mean it that way. I was giving him a chance to respond, and possibly clarify. *Full disclosure--I am one of the "baby killing" military who WSR apparently doesn't want to be referenced in any caches. Quote Link to comment
+mtn-man Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 (edited) Take your sidebar to email please. Drop it in the topic. And let me clarify... I got WSR's analogy. He is right. DCM, you are going off on a wild tangent. The "baby killers and Jesus freaks" comment was not needed. He is simply saying that if you allow one, you have to allow everything. That is why Groundspeak cuts most of this off. Stay focused on the big picture here. Edited June 11, 2009 by mtn-man Quote Link to comment
+DatCrazyMongoose Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Take your sidebar to email please. Drop it in the topic. Bringing it back on topic... Are non-profits allowed to be referenced in caches? There are numerous regional geocaching organizations that might fall into that category, and they put active solicitations for membership in cache descriptions. Granted, they are related to geocaching, but the same standards should apply. If you were to broaden that out, the military and religious organizations should be able to do the same. Quote Link to comment
+mtn-man Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Geocaching organizations are geocaching related. It is direct involvement. Anything else, not. Quote Link to comment
+TheAlabamaRambler Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 ...the same standards should apply... And therein lies the problem! Like art or WOW factor, everyone sees agenda differently... there is and can be no standard. Thus, lacking any concrete definition of 'agenda', we must work within what our particular Reviewer believes is an agenda or is not. Quote Link to comment
+popokiiti Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 If you get to use their $30,000.00 and up tools of the trade ( 2 cm accuracy, I hear! ) for free to get the co-ords for your cache, how about a thank you in the description? The "advertising" thing seems to be a fine line, difficult for reviewers and cache hiders alike. I think I might end the description at the word "program," as you have already mentioned the professions, and hope that gets cachers interested. Just my 2 cents worth.... Quote Link to comment
+tozainamboku Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 (edited) Geocaching organizations are geocaching related. It is direct involvement. Anything else, not. And my guess is given that surveying uses GPS and is related at least to benchmarks which are somewhat related to geocaching (at least they share a part of the Geocaching.com website), that Groundspeak might have even approved the statement the OP wants to put on his cache page. The volunteer reviewer did not feel comfortable making that call so they asked OP to write Groundspeak at the contact address. mtn-man's answer in post #5 pretty much sums it up. Edited June 11, 2009 by tozainamboku Quote Link to comment
+mtn-man Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Geocaching organizations are geocaching related. It is direct involvement. Anything else, not. And my guess is given that surveying uses GPS and is related at least to benchmarks which are somewhat related to geocaching (at least they share a part of the Geocaching.com website), that Groundspeak might have even approved the statement the OP wants to put on his cache page. The volunteer reviewer did not feel comfortable making that call so they asked OP to write Groundspeak at the contact address. mtn-man's answer in post #5 pretty much sums it up. You are correct sir. I probably would have also sent that one to Groundspeak since it is borderline. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.