Linked Events

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

I've held a few events where I wanted to have a follow on event, such as a flash mob in London which was part of the WWFM, and wanted a follow on event in a pub nearby for those who'd travelled to get together.

 

This has been refused as they are regarded, apparently, as linked events.

 

Fair enough.

 

Last month I saw a WWFM event published with a follow on event very closeby but was told by a reviewer it had slipped through the net and shouldn't have been published.

 

In the coming times I can see CITO events with separate picnic events at or very closeby the original co-ords have been published.

 

Please can someone clarify what does and does not classify as a linked event, as going by what's published, distance clearly isn't the key.

[Deceangi]

Clarification to clear up misunderstanding

 

CITO Events and Geocaching Events, are two totally separate things, with totally different ethos, and as such they are treated as different entities when being Reviewed for Proximity Locational and Time wise.

 

CITO Events, the whole ethos is to bring Geocachers to a specific location, to have a positive impact environmentally.

 

Geocaching Events whole ethos is to bring Geocachers together to discuss Geocaching and Swap Trackables.

 

As such a CITO followed in close proximity location and time by a Geocaching Event, is acceptable

 

However two CITO Events in close proximity, location and time wise, would not be published. As being the same event type, they would be considered to be Stacked.

 

The same with two Geocaching Events in close proximity, location and time wise, would not be published. As being the same event type, they would be considered to be Stacked.

 

As a rule of thumb [so not locked and nailed down] is either One Hours Driving Time, by Google [which is a universally accessible resource] between events. With no way to short cut that as a Pedestrian. So 2 events on either side of a River, with over a hours drive between them, but a Pedestrian bridge/tunnel crossing the River, would not be published.

 

or

 

24 hours separation if at the same location. The exception to this being a Mega Event, where a event the previous evening/ following morning would be listed. As again it's 2 separate Event Types, with different ethos.

 

At the end of the day Reviewers are Human, and make mistakes. provided that they admit that when a mistake is pointed out, there is no issue. It is when they deny that, that there are issues. Personally, I've lost count of the number of times, I have over the last 7 years, put my hands up and said, yes I made a mistake.

 

And some back history, originally CITO events had a Clean Up part and a Get together part. The standard was if you attended the CITO part you logged a "Attended" and if you just went to the Get together, you logged a"Find" [back then you could log a Event as Attended or Found], doing the second showed that you had not attended the CITO part, even though you still got the icon. Groundspeak when they removed "Found" logs from Events, created a situation where people simply attending the Get together, were not being differentiated from those who had done the clean up. Which lead to the current model of CITO Events followed by a Geocaching Event. If you now log a Attended to the CITO, you actually attended that, so it is clear who has not attended the CITO, but has attended the Get together.

 

Deci

 

And on a personal note. The whole purpose of a Flash Mob, is to suddenly congregate at a location, and then after a set period to disperse, each going their own individual way! So why hold a Flash Mob, if your just going to relocate around the corner to the local pub? It's just a case of meet at the location of the Flash Mob, and continue that in the pub. No way is it 2 separate events, unless Smiley Stacking. And dragging that into events is sad

 

Dave

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

Thank you for that, I was only after the official line rather than a personal opinion.

 

Last month a flash mob one side of a road and a pub event the other ... yes, it was admitted it shouldn't have been published.

 

However, I think it is perhaps hasty to immediately assume deliberate event stacking - a couple of years back when I had a WWFM published, it became very clear early on that there were a number of cachers attending from overseas and to send them an hour across London would have been silly, hence no event. However, i was then asked could an event be held nearby as a reviewer wished to attend, I didn't think that was right either.

 

I have no big beef about it but it is sad that there appears to be an exception for CITOs which many people haven't been alerted to either via Groundspeak weekly newsletters, these forums or GAGB.

 

However, looking at http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#event it doesn't mention any of this special status for CITO events, where's it published please?

[+Cache on Wheels]

My link

Thank you for that, I was only after the official line rather than a personal opinion.

 

Last month a flash mob one side of a road and a pub event the other ... yes, it was admitted it shouldn't have been published.

 

However, I think it is perhaps hasty to immediately assume deliberate event stacking - a couple of years back when I had a WWFM published, it became very clear early on that there were a number of cachers attending from overseas and to send them an hour across London would have been silly, hence no event. However, i was then asked could an event be held nearby as a reviewer wished to attend, I didn't think that was right either.

 

I have no big beef about it but it is sad that there appears to be an exception for CITOs which many people haven't been alerted to either via Groundspeak weekly newsletters, these forums or GAGB.

 

However, looking at http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#event it doesn't mention any of this special status for CITO events, where's it published please?

 

Thank you for posting this DG i can't understand either why there is a special rule for CITOs. As you know i am holding a CITO event on sat 1st from 10-3pm, so instead of holding the picnic from 12-1pm, i could have decided to hold it at the end of the CITO, at the same place from 3pm after the event meaning i would be hosting a CITO and an EVENT on the same day and within 1 hours commute from the CITO. - surely if reviewers see others as event stacking,eg an event after a flash mob, if i arranged the picnic after the CITO, wouldn't that be classed as event stacking too?

 

I understand Decagni's point too, but the idea of a flash mob is to disperse after the 15mins so it would not be possible to have a get together there afterwards. - I was told that there are legal implications about a group of people congregating in 1 spot for more than 15 mins anyway, so if this is true, a host could not allow a catch up to take place after the flash mob from that oint of view either - so why could one not hold an event in a pub or such like afterwards?

 

On this note, - i can understand if people were just holding a flash mob for the sake of it and then an event too, and that could be seen as smiley stacking. However, a flash mob held for a specific theme, eg WWFMX would be justified in being held with the addition of an event afterwards to catch up with others IMO - eg DG WWFMX had over 100 people attend, many had travelled a great distance to attend, but as we were not allowed to congregate for more than 15 mins, with the possability of the police being called for a disturbance of the peace, there was no way to catch up with others afterwards at an event - the Navy ship in port nearby had already upped their security level.

 

I understand that some may only attend 1 or the other, but if the purpose of the event as advertised is to catch up after the CITO, then wouldn't this would be a linked event?

 

I agree with DG that there does need to be some clarification with this - ideally from GS in a newsletter and on the GS forums etc