Jump to content

ALR's have been banned right?


ihorn
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

I was looking at some caches by my Sisters house, and saw one that looked pretty cool. Once I opened it up though it had ALR's in its description. So my question is how they are able to have ALR's for the cache? Also do I have to pay attention to the ALR or can I just log the cache without care of them? Here is the page for the cache in question ALR cache

Link to comment

When ALRs were banned, an exception was made for challenge caches. Later the following was added to the guidelines to define what a constitutes a challenge cache

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

Also some caches that were placed before the ban went into effect have ALRs still on their cache pages, but you are not required to do them, like this one:

 

GCTXZJ

 

However, we decided to do it anyway, because we thought it was fun :o But, if we had logged it the regular ol' way, and the cache owner saw it, she couldn't delete our logs because of the new ALR rule.

Link to comment

I'm no professional but as I understand the "rules" you CAN participate in the ALR (the Challenge) but you don't HAVE to, therefore you should be able to visit, sign the log, and log it online.

 

On a challenge cache you DO have to do the challenge, on an old traditional cache listing that still has ALRs you don't.

Link to comment

I was looking at some caches by my Sisters house, and saw one that looked pretty cool. Once I opened it up though it had ALR's in its description. So my question is how they are able to have ALR's for the cache? Also do I have to pay attention to the ALR or can I just log the cache without care of them? Here is the page for the cache in question ALR cache

 

Yes, it appears that a few cachers have not completed the requirements and have logged it anyway. Perhaps a challenge for the CO to delete their logs..? :o

Link to comment

ALRs have been banned for traditional caches. mystery caches can still have ALRs.

 

That is totally incorrect.

 

Sorry, had to step away, editing. No caches can have ALR's. They're done. Gonzo. Challenge caches are not ALR's. Well, you can argue that they are, but they're allowed.

Edited by TheWhiteUrkel
Link to comment

Please excuse my ignorance on the topic (i'm new), but what exactly is ALR?

An opportunity for one of my too long to read responses with the history of ALR/challenge caches and why the guidelines we have are so confusing. :o

 

Once upon a time, the policy of Geocaching.com was that cache owners had (nearly) complete control over the online logs for their cache. Of course, cache owners were expected to delete logs that contained inappropriate language or off-topic logs such as SPAM. In addition, cache owners are supposed to delete bogus or counterfeit logs. If a cache owner deleted your log you could complain to Groundspeak and you might get your log re-instated. However, the general policy was that it was up to the cache owner to decide if an online log was legitimate and when to delete an online log.

 

Given this power it was not long before cache owners would require finders of their caches to do something extra in order to post a Found It log and not have it deleted. Usually this was some simple and often enjoyable task. It could be to log the find in a certain style or to post a picture of yourself in a funny pose at the cache. Some cachers objected to having to do some of these tasks in order to log a find. In particular, as cachers began to cache "paperless" with only the coordinates of the cache in the GPS, they complained they were being denied a find for something they did not know about until they went to log that find.

 

In order to deal with this objection, the guidelines were at first modified to recognize additional logging requirements (beyond signing the logbook) for posting an online find. Caches with such requirements had to be listed as mystery/unknown type caches. The idea was that finders had to read the cache page before looking (since traditionally mystery/unknown caches included puzzle caches that were not a the posted coordinates).

 

Prior to this change, some cachers began hiding challenge caches. The first challenge caches were Delorme challenges (to find a cache on every page of a Delorme Atlas for a state) or county challenges (to find a cache in every county in the state). These were listed a mystery/unknown cache since the posted coordinates were bogus and the cache owner would only give you the final coordinates once you had completed the challenge. Technically there were issues with cache where the cache owner would email you the final coordinates as well as, in the Delorme case, where the cache could be seen as commercial. Groundspeak decide to allow a limited number of these challenge caches as a novel idea that they saw as benefiting geocaching.

 

With the change to have ALR caches listed as mystery/unknown, the reviewers saw a way to publish additional challenge caches without getting approval from Groundspeak. Just make doing the challenge an additional requirement for logging a Found online and post the actual coordinates so there is no email needed to get coordinates. The number of challenges blossomed.

 

In the meantime, recognizing ALRs had another side-effect. Cache owners began to try to out-do one another with silly or extreme logging requirements. Groundspeak and the reviewers quickly realized this and began to put certain requirements off-limits. For example, you couldn't require that someone hide a cache in order to log a find. But the reviewers and Groundspeak could not keep up with creativity of geocachers. They looked for a formula to describe which ALRs were acceptable and which weren't. But everything they could think of suffered from the "Wow" effect (a reference to when reviewers were required to make subjective judgments on whether or not a location was acceptable for a virtual cache).

 

The only solution was to change the policy. No longer could cache owners delete online Found logs simply because someone failed to complete some additional requirement. Cache owners could request an additional task be performed but they could not delete a log if the task was skipped. At the time the change was made, challenged caches were exempted from the new guidelines. Later, the definition of a challenge cache was added to the guidelines.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I was looking at some caches by my Sisters house, and saw one that looked pretty cool. Once I opened it up though it had ALR's in its description. So my question is how they are able to have ALR's for the cache? Also do I have to pay attention to the ALR or can I just log the cache without care of them? Here is the page for the cache in question ALR cache

 

Its a challenge cache, so technically an ALR is allowed.

 

On a side note, I am starting to notice more and more "challenge" caches that really arent - its just a way to get around the "no alr" requirements.

Link to comment

I was looking at some caches by my Sisters house, and saw one that looked pretty cool. Once I opened it up though it had ALR's in its description. So my question is how they are able to have ALR's for the cache? Also do I have to pay attention to the ALR or can I just log the cache without care of them? Here is the page for the cache in question ALR cache

 

Its a challenge cache, so technically an ALR is allowed.

 

On a side note, I am starting to notice more and more "challenge" caches that really arent - its just a way to get around the "no alr" requirements.

 

I've seen a few more challenge caches in my area as well but there is a distinct difference between those and this one. For pretty much every challenge cache that I have seen the "challenge" is something that can be done *before* finding the cache. For the cache described above it's something that is done *after* finding the cache, and if it was required in order to log the cache, it is, by definition an "Additional Logging Requirement".

Frankly it's getting a bit tiresome to witness some of the hoops that a cache owner will jump through to "get around" one of the guidelines. In this case, the cache was published prior to the change in the ALR guidelines and it's not that surprising that it slipped through the cracks. I can't imagine that all of the reviewers took a look at every cache listing in their area when the new guideline was put into place so that only way that a reviewer (or Groundspeak) might know about it would be if someone tried to log a cache without performing the ALR, they had their log deleted, and a complaint was made to the reviewer or Groundspeak.

Link to comment

There's a Knowledge Books Article on Challenge Caches. It's aimed towards cachers thinking of creating a new Challenge Cache, but may help with understanding the difference, as defined by Geocaching.com, between the old Additional Logging Requirement caches and the Challenge Cache type.

 

In my area, many ALR caches asked cachers to email the cache owner with the answers to questions. Some pretty simple, dates from historical markers. Others rather obscure and puzzling, "what actor does this area bring to mind?"

Link to comment

There's a Knowledge Books Article on Challenge Caches. It's aimed towards cachers thinking of creating a new Challenge Cache, but may help with understanding the difference, as defined by Geocaching.com, between the old Additional Logging Requirement caches and the Challenge Cache type.

 

In my area, many ALR caches asked cachers to email the cache owner with the answers to questions. Some pretty simple, dates from historical markers. Others rather obscure and puzzling, "what actor does this area bring to mind?"

 

You know, those types of ALR's were quite rare not only in my immediate area, but for hundreds of miles in adjoining States and Provinces. Despite the fact that I had a parking lot micro that demanded your log entry be 8 words or less, or it would be deleted. That was just a zany joke. :D

 

People really must have went to town on ALR's in other regions for it to get to the point where Groundspeak felt the need to get rid of them.

Edited by TheWhiteUrkel
Link to comment

i'm not fond of the ALR ban... as there are some really fun little caches out there. making the ALR "optional" definitely takes the luster off the cache. if you don't want to do the ALR... don't do the cache, that was the real solution... not "ban ALRs". sheesh.

 

there's a certain cacher who must have been chomping at the bit waiting for that ban... because he's run amok on the ones with ALR and is glad to copy and paste the guidelines explaining that because he was able to sign the paper... he gets the smiley. when does Grumpiest Old Men (aka grumpy old men III) come to theaters? i can't wait to see the newest movie with caching in it.

 

:D

Link to comment

It is important to keep in mind that not all owners of ALR caches may have gotten the message that ALRs can be enforced. It is not surprising in the least to still see cache listings worded as such. Just be sure when you call a cache owner to task to not be a jerk about it.

Link to comment
You know, those types of ALR's were quite rare not only in my immediate area, but for hundreds of miles in adjoining States and Provinces. Despite the fact that I had a parking lot micro that demanded your log entry be 8 words or less, or it would be deleted. That was just a zany joke. :D

 

People really must have went to town on ALR's in other regions for it to get to the point where Groundspeak felt the need to get rid of them.

My understanding is that the people complaining the most were the volunteer reviewers. Even if caches with really abusive ALRs weren't published, that doesn't mean that the volunteer reviewers didn't have to put up with such ALRs (and with the inevitable fallout when they refused to publish caches with such ALRs).
Link to comment

If my Fiancee and I move to the area I dont mind doing the ALR at all. I just noticed what it said, and remembered that I read they were banned. I mean I think it might be fun to see how quickly I could do it. I look at all the responses, and see that they vary from one point of view to another. I am glad this has been a good conversation piece to discuss.

Link to comment

ALRs have been banned for traditional caches. mystery caches can still have ALRs.

 

That is totally incorrect.

 

Sorry, had to step away, editing. No caches can have ALR's. They're done. Gonzo. Challenge caches are not ALR's. Well, you can argue that they are, but they're allowed.

 

Hmmm... It does make sense to think about it that way. A challenge cache is a challenge cache, an ALR would be if you had to do something else along with the challenge? Am I understanding you right?

 

I was thinking of the elements of the challenge as ALRs, but I suppose they actually aren't really... at least according to the new rule.

 

Thanks for making my brain work a little harder :D

Link to comment

There are some local Earth Caches that require ALR's. What about them? Are the new rules applicable to them?

Earth caches are not physical caches. The logging requirements that apply to physical caches do not apply to them.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#earth

EarthCaches™

 

This is a unique but limited cache type. An EarthCache is an educational site that people can visit to view a unique geoscience feature on-the-ground.

 

All EarthCache must be submitted and approved through the Geological Society of America – the regional Groundspeak volunteer cache reviewers have no involvement with EarthCache listings. The EarthCache submittal form and Guidelines may be found on the EarthCache.org site.

 

Logging an EarthCache find requires compliance with the requirements stated by the owner and the EarthCache website, including answering the required questions by email to the owner, providing original photos if so requested, etc.

Link to comment

You might be able to do what you want, but it would have to be thoroughly researched because copyright in a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work (including a photograph) lasts until 70 years after the death of the author.

Now some counties have been granted newer CoA but the ancient ones (over 170 years of age, just to make sure) are now free of copyright.

I think its a good idea, but personally wouldn't buy one

 

By my understanding...

 

The challenge in a challenge cache (or a mystery /puzzle cache) is completed before you find and log the cache.

An Alternative Logging Requirement is carried out after you've found the cache, and before you're allowed to log it online.

 

Simple!

Link to comment

I've seen a few more challenge caches in my area as well but there is a distinct difference between those and this one. For pretty much every challenge cache that I have seen the "challenge" is something that can be done *before* finding the cache. For the cache described above it's something that is done *after* finding the cache, and if it was required in order to log the cache, it is, by definition an "Additional Logging Requirement".

Frankly it's getting a bit tiresome to witness some of the hoops that a cache owner will jump through to "get around" one of the guidelines. In this case, the cache was published prior to the change in the ALR guidelines and it's not that surprising that it slipped through the cracks. I can't imagine that all of the reviewers took a look at every cache listing in their area when the new guideline was put into place so that only way that a reviewer (or Groundspeak) might know about it would be if someone tried to log a cache without performing the ALR, they had their log deleted, and a complaint was made to the reviewer or Groundspeak.

 

Though it seems more like an ALR, I would still consider this on the challenge cache side. You really could'nt set a no finds before this date count on this one like most challenges because it would'nt be a challenge for someone that stumbles across it years after it was published. So, by making you find it first, they have set a timeline that is adjustable to each cacher so that it is actually a challenge. Otherwise, you could just look back at your last however many finds and say here's 100 points.

Link to comment

I have a cache that I will place soon that requires a boat to get out to. I am wondering if I put a code in the cache that will be sent back to me when the cacher finds it in order to keep people from armchair logging it, is that an ALR? :)

 

short answer - yes

Long answer - yes

 

Sending a code word to prevent the log from being deleted is an ALR.

Link to comment

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines...gingofallcaches

 

Logging of All Physical Caches

 

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

 

If it is appropriate for your cache location or theme, you may ask the cache seeker to accomplish an optional and simple task, either close to the cache site (normally within 0.1 miles or 161 meters) or when writing their online log. For example, wear the goofy hat inside the cache container and upload a photograph. Cache finders can choose whether or not to attempt or accomplish optional tasks. Cache owners may not delete the cache seeker's log based solely on optional tasks.

 

This guideline change applies immediately to all logs written from April 4, 2009 and going forward. Older caches with "additional logging requirements" (ALRs) are not grandfathered under the older guideline. If you own an existing cache with mandatory additional logging requirements, we request that you:

 

* Cease deleting logs based on additional logging requirements.

Link to comment

If it is appropriate for your cache location or theme, you may ask the cache seeker to accomplish an optional and simple task, either close to the cache site (normally within 0.1 miles or 161 meters) or when writing their online log. For example, wear the goofy hat inside the cache container and upload a photograph.

 

sounds like a bunch of party-poopers whined enough....

 

unless of course there were a rash of violent crimes at ALR caches "in order to get this log, you must stab the next person you see in the foot".

 

wear the hat, take the picture. stop being a sour puss. you don't want to.... drive on down the road. there's another cache 528 feet from here that only requires you to raise the lamp skirt. :grin:

Link to comment

Say you have a hard terrain/difficulty cache. Would it be an ALR to say that each person logging the find online must have retrieved the cache on their own, even if the log was passed around and everyone signed?

 

How would you know the difference? As a cache owner, the only "audit" you can do is to check the logbook and see if the signatures are in there. If someone signs as part of a team, they still signed. For that matter, if their partner signed their name, how would you prove that?

 

If the signature is in the logbook, it's a valid find. The only person whose actions you can control is you. Just let it go.

Link to comment

Yep. I believe that that is closer to the truth of the situation, Prime Suspect.

I actually started one of my long explanations that in fact the issue was that the reviewers did not want to be the ones stuck deciding which ALRs were light and fun activities (such as taking a picture wearing a funny hat) and which were over the line (like stabbing someone in the foot or having to hide a cache you wouldn't have hidden otherwise). But as I was summarizing I realized that even if only a few caches with extreme ALRs were submitted, any reviewer who had to deal with just one or two of these would probably come the the conclusion that a few control freaks were pushing the envelop and dealing with just these was tiresome.

 

If you have a light fun activity that can be done at the cache site or when submitting your online log you can still have a request on your cache page. The only change is that you cannot delete someone's Found log just because they didn't do it. Without being able to delete logs, the control freaks have less incentive to ask for some ridiculous or overly burdensome activity.

Link to comment

Yep. I believe that that is closer to the truth of the situation, Prime Suspect.

I actually started one of my long explanations that in fact the issue was that the reviewers did not want to be the ones stuck deciding which ALRs were light and fun activities (such as taking a picture wearing a funny hat) and which were over the line (like stabbing someone in the foot or having to hide a cache you wouldn't have hidden otherwise). But as I was summarizing I realized that even if only a few caches with extreme ALRs were submitted, any reviewer who had to deal with just one or two of these would probably come the the conclusion that a few control freaks were pushing the envelop and dealing with just these was tiresome.

 

If you have a light fun activity that can be done at the cache site or when submitting your online log you can still have a request on your cache page. The only change is that you cannot delete someone's Found log just because they didn't do it. Without being able to delete logs, the control freaks have less incentive to ask for some ridiculous or overly burdensome activity.

 

Also, I think it's fair to state that if you want to wear a silly hat and take a picture at a cache then post it in your log - there's nothing stopping you anyway - (you could even make it your own special requirement whenever you go caching).

 

I do stupid stuff all the time for kicks and giggles, sometimes I'm caching, sometimes I'm not, sometimes I take a photo of it too and if there's an OLR we'll try to do it.

 

If you need a CO to post an ALR specifically directing you in something fun to do - and you are regimented about it - you probably don't really know how to have fun and aren't much of a fun person to hang around!

 

:)

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 2
×
×
  • Create New...