GSAK events banned

[+UMainah]

I have been informed by a reviewer that gsak focused events are now banned worldwide. Any mention of gsak will get the event denied. This is due to the fact that it is a commercial app.

 

Curious what other's thoughts are on this?

[Keystone]

My thoughts are that this isn't an accurate summary.

 

It would be better to say that GSAK should not be mentioned in the title of a cache or event page, and the text shouldn't be overly promotional about GSAK. Events should not be solely based on GSAK, but GSAK workshops can be part of a published social event cache.

[+cheech gang]

GSAK is an approved Groundspeak API partner, has a link on this website to obtain the software, yet should not be mentioned on a cache page ??? Put this on the list of some stuff I'll just never understand.

[Clan Riffster]

My thoughts are in line with Keystone's. GSAK is a commercial product, so it's not one you want to plaster all over a Geocaching listing. I wouldn't put GSAK in the same boat as those small round tags with holes in them, or that other cache listing site run by a GPSr manufacturer, since GSAK doesn't really compete with Groundspeak. I'd put the issue somewhere in the commercial aspect of the guidelines. You could hold an event at a BBQ joint and be fine, but you'd probably want to avoid mentioning the name of the BBQ joint in the title or listing.

[+Reviewer Who]

My thoughts are like Keystone's:

 

Think of it as how you would set up a regular event cache. You can't name your event "Come Get Crabs at Bob's House of Seafood!" but you can certainly mention in the cache description that your event is being held at Bob's so everyone knows where to go.

 

Similarly, you can't name your event "GSAK 101", but at the existing event at Bob's, you can say in the description, "We're going to have a couple laptops available and if you'd like to learn how to use GSAK, stop on by." GSAK is mentioned, but not in a promotional way.

[+bflentje]

I think you should have a Cache Report event instead.

[+Zor]

Instead of GSAK 101 doing Geocaching Software 101 and include GSAK as one of the topics. I think that makes it less commercial.

[Pup Patrol]

My thoughts are like Keystone's:

 

Think of it as how you would set up a regular event cache. You can't name your event "Come Get Crabs at Bob's House of Seafood!" but you can certainly mention in the cache description that your event is being held at Bob's so everyone knows where to go.

 

Similarly, you can't name your event "GSAK 101", but at the existing event at Bob's, you can say in the description, "We're going to have a couple laptops available and if you'd like to learn how to use GSAK, stop on by." GSAK is mentioned, but not in a promotional way.

 

Not according to Keystone:

 

My thoughts are that this isn't an accurate summary.

 

It would be better to say that GSAK should not be mentioned in the title of a cache or event page, and the text shouldn't be overly promotional about GSAK. Events should not be solely based on GSAK, but GSAK workshops can be part of a published social event cache.

 

Once again, Groundspeak has completely reversed their stance on something without any "official" notice to the masses.

 

Yeah, yeah, "no precedence", but a major change in policy like this warrants some sort of announcement.

 

 

B.

Edited August 8, 2013 by Pup Patrol

[+Reviewer Who]

My thoughts are like Keystone's:

 

Think of it as how you would set up a regular event cache. You can't name your event "Come Get Crabs at Bob's House of Seafood!" but you can certainly mention in the cache description that your event is being held at Bob's so everyone knows where to go.

 

Similarly, you can't name your event "GSAK 101", but at the existing event at Bob's, you can say in the description, "We're going to have a couple laptops available and if you'd like to learn how to use GSAK, stop on by." GSAK is mentioned, but not in a promotional way.

 

Not according to Keystone:

 

My thoughts are that this isn't an accurate summary.

 

It would be better to say that GSAK should not be mentioned in the title of a cache or event page, and the text shouldn't be overly promotional about GSAK. Events should not be solely based on GSAK, but GSAK workshops can be part of a published social event cache.

 

Once again, Groundspeak has completely reversed their stance on something without any "official" notice to the masses.

 

Yeah, yeah, "no precedence", but a major change in policy like this warrants some sort of announcement.

 

 

B.

Aren't those quotes the same thing? No mention of GSAK in the cache name, but it's okay to make a non-promotional mention of it in the description.

[+Kacher82]

This just in the last week or so? I was at a GSAK 101 event on July 27.

I don't follow GS's logic here. GSAK is an approved user of the Geocaching.com API. By that same logic, we can't have events about the official Geocaching app, either?

[+UMainah]

This just in the last week or so? I was at a GSAK 101 event on July 27.

I don't follow GS's logic here. GSAK is an approved user of the Geocaching.com API. By that same logic, we can't have events about the official Geocaching app, either?

I think reviewers were only notified of this new interpretation in the past couple days or so.

[4wheelin_fool]

My thoughts are like Keystone's:

 

Think of it as how you would set up a regular event cache. You can't name your event "Come Get Crabs at Bob's House of Seafood!" but you can certainly mention in the cache description that your event is being held at Bob's so everyone knows where to go.

 

Similarly, you can't name your event "GSAK 101", but at the existing event at Bob's, you can say in the description, "We're going to have a couple laptops available and if you'd like to learn how to use GSAK, stop on by." GSAK is mentioned, but not in a promotional way.

 

Not according to Keystone:

 

My thoughts are that this isn't an accurate summary.

 

It would be better to say that GSAK should not be mentioned in the title of a cache or event page, and the text shouldn't be overly promotional about GSAK. Events should not be solely based on GSAK, but GSAK workshops can be part of a published social event cache.

 

Once again, Groundspeak has completely reversed their stance on something without any "official" notice to the masses.

 

Yeah, yeah, "no precedence", but a major change in policy like this warrants some sort of announcement.

 

 

B.

Aren't those quotes the same thing? No mention of GSAK in the cache name, but it's okay to make a non-promotional mention of it in the description.

 

He misread what Keystone wrote, and so did I the first time. It still can be mentioned on the cache page or event page, just not in the title, and the event should not be focused solely on GSAK, or rainbows and unicorns..

[4wheelin_fool]

Possibly because events should not be commercial workshops. The GSAK 101 event posted only had 10 attend logs. Perhaps they could mix some other things in as well to make it more interesting.

[+BlackRose67]

The geocaching group had their monthly workshop last month and an Intro to GSAK was one of the topics. I did the GSAK presentation.

 

Intro to GSAK was mentioned on the cache page and there were no issues getting it published.

[+sduck]

Why would you want to limit something to just gsak anyway? There are lots of other cache database programs out there, and gsak doesn't even run on many computers. Call it tech 101, and have several kinds of softs and os's represented - it'd get more interest anyway, I'd think. Unless you're in one of those weird boondocks where only PCs are available.

[+CanadianRockies]

Why would you want to limit something to just gsak anyway? There are lots of other cache database programs out there, and gsak doesn't even run on many computers. Call it tech 101, and have several kinds of softs and os's represented - it'd get more interest anyway, I'd think. Unless you're in one of those weird boondocks where only PCs are available.

It all depends on how much detail you want to get into during the workshop. If you want a broad overview of geocaching database programs, then what you say makes sense. If you really want to get into the nuts and bolts of using a database program, then it might well make more sense to focus on one program.

[+nthacker66]

Possibly because events should not be commercial workshops. The GSAK 101 event posted only had 10 attend logs. Perhaps they could mix some other things in as well make it more interesting.

 

You mean like how some event caches being held at bars are done?

[+Don_J]

This just in the last week or so? I was at a GSAK 101 event on July 27.

I don't follow GS's logic here. GSAK is an approved user of the Geocaching.com API. By that same logic, we can't have events about the official Geocaching app, either?

 

Of course you can. Just don't set up the event page to be a big advertisement for GSAK. Why is this so hard?

 

The only real question is if this is something that Groundspeak recently changed, or is this a case of a reviewer taking a overly strict interpretation of a longstanding guideline?

 

Or, is this just a case of a reviewer telling a Geocacher something and that cacher blowing it 1000% out of proportion and posting it to the forums?

[+OReviewer]

The only real question is if this is something that Groundspeak recently changed, or is this a case of a reviewer taking a overly strict interpretation of a longstanding guideline?

 

Or, is this just a case of a reviewer telling a Geocacher something and that cacher blowing it 1000% out of proportion and posting it to the forums?

It is definitely a misinterpretation of what the reviewer said leading blowing things out of proportion, that can be read in Keystone's response.

 

I would say more of a clarification of a confusing subject so everyone, reviewers and cachers, are on the same page.

 

For me, the update is already how I'd been reviewing and actually allows me to be a little less strict then I had been so a win for my areas.

[+SwineFlew]

Did the relationship between GSAK and Groundspeak become sour?

 

It was OK for all these years and all at once, no more.

[4wheelin_fool]

Possibly because events should not be commercial workshops. The GSAK 101 event posted only had 10 attend logs. Perhaps they could mix some other things in as well make it more interesting.

 

You mean like how some event caches being held at bars are done?

 

Yes, if it was in conjunction with a drinking competition it would be much better!

[+CacheDrone]

Did the relationship between GSAK and Groundspeak become sour?

 

It was OK for all these years and all at once, no more.

 

Not to my knowledge. Just because a piece of commercial software or some website has access to the API does not mean that the same company can be promoted in a listing. Being in the title is promotional.

 

A casual comment about GSAK is still permitted in the short or long description... once. Just like the name of a venue in an Event Listing can only be mentioned once. When doing so the text should not be enhanced with size, colour, etc. No promotional aspects or endorsements beyond that should be included. The title of a cache page is never the place for a commercial product or business, ever. An event should not be solely about teaching GSAK. Events are a social gatherings to discuss geocaching, the rest is optional.

 

CD

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Possibly because events should not be commercial workshops. The GSAK 101 event posted only had 10 attend logs. Perhaps they could mix some other things in as well to make it more interesting.

 

You can't post an event with GSAK in the title but you can post a flash mob event that exist solely so that 3-4 people can get their August 13 souvenir.

 

 

[+briansnat]

Did the relationship between GSAK and Groundspeak become sour?

 

It was OK for all these years and all at once, no more.

 

It was never OK for all of these years. The commercial cache guideline has long prohibited the using of a business (or product)name as a cache name. It's not a policy change as some suggested, nor is it a secret guideline. It's been the policy and in the guidelines for years.

 

Can anyone explain to me why GSAK should be the only exception to the commercial guideline?

[+Cool Cow Cachers]

Did the relationship between GSAK and Groundspeak become sour?

 

It was OK for all these years and all at once, no more.

 

It was never OK for all of these years. The commercial cache guideline has long prohibited the using of a business (or product)name as a cache name. It's not a policy change as some suggested, nor is it a secret guideline. It's been the policy and in the guidelines for years.

 

Can anyone explain to me why GSAK should be the only exception to the commercial guideline?

 

The only exception? Here are just two that have always puzzled me. I'm sure there are more examples.

 

http://jeep.geocaching.com/

http://www.geocaching.com/geico/

[+CanadianRockies]

Can anyone explain to me why GSAK should be the only exception to the commercial guideline?

The only exception? Here are just two that have always puzzled me. I'm sure there are more examples.

 

http://jeep.geocaching.com/

http://www.geocaching.com/geico/

Those are paid sponsors. GSAK doesn't pay Groundspeak anything.

The commercial guidelines also prohibit links to websites that display ads or solicit donations. Here are three exceptions:

 

GeoChecker

 

GeoCheck

 

Wikipedia

[+DanOCan]

All I can say is "Wow."

 

It's been years since I had an unregistered of GSAK, but it used to be that you could use it completely free as long as you were patient enough to wait for the nag screen to disappear. That should count as non-commercial right?

[4wheelin_fool]

Can anyone explain to me why GSAK should be the only exception to the commercial guideline?

The only exception? Here are just two that have always puzzled me. I'm sure there are more examples.

 

http://jeep.geocaching.com/

http://www.geocaching.com/geico/

Those are paid sponsors. GSAK doesn't pay Groundspeak anything.

The commercial guidelines also prohibit links to websites that display ads or solicit donations. Here are three exceptions:

 

GeoChecker

 

GeoCheck

 

Wikipedia

 

Yeah, I don't understand that either. I submitted a cache with a link to this site, which was denied, being deemed commercial, but a paddle-to with a link to tidal charts went through without a problem.

[+CanadianRockies]

The commercial guidelines also prohibit links to websites that display ads or solicit donations. Here are three exceptions:

 

GeoChecker

 

GeoCheck

 

Wikipedia

Yeah, I don't understand that either. I submitted a cache with a link to this site, which was denied, being deemed commercial, but a paddle-to with a link to tidal charts went through without a problem.

Welcome to the 0.01539% club. If you want an explanation, you can ask Clan Riffster, who claims that roughly 99.98461% of the cache creating population understands this "rather simple concept."

[Pup Patrol]

Did the relationship between GSAK and Groundspeak become sour?

 

It was OK for all these years and all at once, no more.

 

Not to my knowledge. Just because a piece of commercial software or some website has access to the API does not mean that the same company can be promoted in a listing. Being in the title is promotional.

 

A casual comment about GSAK is still permitted in the short or long description... once. Just like the name of a venue in an Event Listing can only be mentioned once. When doing so the text should not be enhanced with size, colour, etc. No promotional aspects or endorsements beyond that should be included. The title of a cache page is never the place for a commercial product or business, ever. An event should not be solely about teaching GSAK. Events are a social gatherings to discuss geocaching, the rest is optional.

 

CD

 

So this is indeed a new interpretation of the "commercial" guidelines.

 

Yeah, don't want to be a jackass, but this is a complete turnaround, obviously very recent.

 

 

 

B.

[+GeoTrekker26]

Did the relationship between GSAK and Groundspeak become sour?

 

It was OK for all these years and all at once, no more.

 

Not to my knowledge. Just because a piece of commercial software or some website has access to the API does not mean that the same company can be promoted in a listing. Being in the title is promotional.

 

A casual comment about GSAK is still permitted in the short or long description... once. Just like the name of a venue in an Event Listing can only be mentioned once. When doing so the text should not be enhanced with size, colour, etc. No promotional aspects or endorsements beyond that should be included. The title of a cache page is never the place for a commercial product or business, ever. An event should not be solely about teaching GSAK. Events are a social gatherings to discuss geocaching, the rest is optional.

 

CD

 

So this is indeed a new interpretation of the "commercial" guidelines.

 

Yeah, don't want to be a jackass, but this is a complete turnaround, obviously very recent.

 

B.

 

See:

GC4E129 (13 July 13)

GC1NC15 (21 Mar 09)

GC4BRW5 (22 Jun 13)

GC4GRYW (28 Aug 13)

GC3WCG3 (8 Sep 12)

 

Now try to tell is this isn't a new policy! GS will spends time to pretty up some screens, create useless "souvenirs," create Facebook tie-ins (wait, isn't Facebook commercial???)and do other things to entice new members, but won't allow a API partner to be mentioned in a cache name? And this is something that might actually encourage people to continue caching. This change is just another example of GS not being one of the "we care about our customers" companies. I guess that is one of the dangers of having a virtual monopoly.

 

I don't know which is worse, the two faced image presented by Groundspeak, or the lap-dog volunteer moderators offering biased lock step excuses.

 

If it's a new interpretation, GS has the right to do so, but don't try to put lipstick on the pig.

[+briansnat]

Did the relationship between GSAK and Groundspeak become sour?

 

It was OK for all these years and all at once, no more.

 

Not to my knowledge. Just because a piece of commercial software or some website has access to the API does not mean that the same company can be promoted in a listing. Being in the title is promotional.

 

A casual comment about GSAK is still permitted in the short or long description... once. Just like the name of a venue in an Event Listing can only be mentioned once. When doing so the text should not be enhanced with size, colour, etc. No promotional aspects or endorsements beyond that should be included. The title of a cache page is never the place for a commercial product or business, ever. An event should not be solely about teaching GSAK. Events are a social gatherings to discuss geocaching, the rest is optional.

 

CD

 

So this is indeed a new interpretation of the "commercial" guidelines.

 

Yeah, don't want to be a jackass, but this is a complete turnaround, obviously very recent.

 

B.

 

See:

GC4E129 (13 July 13)

GC1NC15 (21 Mar 09)

GC4BRW5 (22 Jun 13)

GC4GRYW (28 Aug 13)

GC3WCG3 (8 Sep 12)

 

Now try to tell is this isn't a new policy! GS will spends time to pretty up some screens, create useless "souvenirs," create Facebook tie-ins (wait, isn't Facebook commercial???)and do other things to entice new members, but won't allow a API partner to be mentioned in a cache name? And this is something that might actually encourage people to continue caching. This change is just another example of GS not being one of the "we care about our customers" companies. I guess that is one of the dangers of having a virtual monopoly.

 

I don't know which is worse, the two faced image presented by Groundspeak, or the lap-dog volunteer moderators offering biased lock step excuses.

 

If it's a new interpretation, GS has the right to do so, but don't try to put lipstick on the pig.

 

I'm no lap dog. I've been critical of Groundspeak on numerous occasions, before and after I became a volunteer. The fact is that there is no policy change. I never would have published a cache with GSAK in the title based on my understanding of the guidelines. Other reviewers obviously had a different understanding. Now we have consistency. People here frequently rant about inconsistencies between reviewers and here we are reducing some of that inconsistency and people are complaining. Ya can't win.

Edited August 9, 2013 by briansnat

[+DadOf6Furrballs]

I'm no lap dog. I've been critical of Groundspeak on numerous occasions, before and after I became a volunteer. The fact is that there is no policy change. I never would have published a cache with GSAK in the title based on my understanding of the guidelines. Other reviewers obviously had a different understanding. Now we have consistency. People here frequently rant about inconsistencies between reviewers and here we are reducing some of that inconsistency and people are complaining. Ya can't win.

Thank you.

[Pup Patrol]

When a major reversal of interpretation / policy is put into motion, it would be nice to have a heads-up, an announcement, something.

 

Was it posted in the Release Notes and I missed it?

 

 

B.

[+tozainamboku]

The commercial guideline is a difficult one for both cache owners and reviewers to deal with. Early on, Groundspeak decided that it was not in the interest of geocaching to have cache pages used for advertising or any other solicitation. I suppose the greatest concern would be cache owners going into a store to get permission to place a cache in the parking lot and being told, "Sure you can put a cache here, but be sure to mention our name on the cache page and let geocachers know that they are welcome to come inside and make a purchase." This would of course ture cache pages into free advertising. I'm sure some people would find this less a problem that what we have now where you can never be certain if the cache was placed with permission or not.

 

Originally, reviewers were allowed to make a judgement if the write up seem overly commercial or not. This lead to a lot of incosistancies - with one reviewer publishing caches that mentioned the business name and another saying that this was too commercial. The reviewers and Groundspeak came up with some rules-of-thumb to help determine if the cache page was too commercial. They decided you couldn't have the business name in the title or have links to the business website. You could no longer tell people to go in the store or interact with employees (effectively killing the practice of hiding caches behind the counter and requiring the finder to ask for the cache). For events, of course, you could mention the business - I suppose so people knew where to go and some idea of what to expect.

 

The rules-of-thumb still resulted in some inconsistency. Some reviewers only got concerned seeing the name of a major chain, perhaps not realizing that some other name was a business and not something the cache owner made up. Some would allow the mention of a historic business if this had something to do with the reason the cache was there. And of course people found ways to signal what business a cache was at using an advertising slogan or a slighty modified name.

 

Events were still a problem in that many time the purpose of the event was to participate in a for fee activity (like bowling or mini-golf) or to provide information on geocaching related tools or software (like GSAK). Most reviewers realized this was part of the event and if the page was not exhorting people to buy the product or made it clear that you didn't have to bowl or golf to attend the event, they allowed mention of the product. But some reviewers would consider this too commercial and not publish events that mentioned the product. People could figure out that the event at the bowling alley might involve the opportunity to pay for a game or that a discussion of offline geocaching databases might talk about GSAK.

 

It seems that "change" was simply to apply the rules-of-thumb for the location to the activities that might take place at an event as well. This means that for some reviewers will now be stricter in not allowing events to be called GSAK 101 or seeing GSAK mentioned ten or twenty times in the write up. On the other hand, some reviewes who previously would not publish any event that mentioned GSAK will now allow it to be mentioned to let people know that the event will have GSAK workshop so long at this doesn't come across as too commercial - as in "GSAK is the premier geocaching offline database".

[Clan Riffster]

The commercial guidelines also prohibit links to websites that display ads or solicit donations. Here are three exceptions:

 

GeoChecker

 

GeoCheck

 

Wikipedia

Yeah, I don't understand that either. I submitted a cache with a link to this site, which was denied, being deemed commercial, but a paddle-to with a link to tidal charts went through without a problem.

Welcome to the 0.01539% club. If you want an explanation, you can ask Clan Riffster, who claims that roughly 99.98461% of the cache creating population understands this "rather simple concept."

I've since done a recount.

Of all the users ever to grace these forums, there is only one who can't figure it out, not counting obvious socks.

I'll leave it as a mathematical exercise for you to determine the percentage.

[+CanadianRockies]

The commercial guidelines also prohibit links to websites that display ads or solicit donations. Here are three exceptions:

 

GeoChecker

 

GeoCheck

 

Wikipedia

Yeah, I don't understand that either. I submitted a cache with a link to this site, which was denied, being deemed commercial, but a paddle-to with a link to tidal charts went through without a problem.

Welcome to the 0.01539% club. If you want an explanation, you can ask Clan Riffster, who claims that roughly 99.98461% of the cache creating population understands this "rather simple concept."

I've since done a recount.

Of all the users ever to grace these forums, there is only one who can't figure it out, not counting obvious socks.

I'll leave it as a mathematical exercise for you to determine the percentage.

Busted. I use my 4wheelin sock puppet account to log all my finds in the Eastern U.S. (except for one fairly recent visit to the D.C. area).

[+Don_J]

When a major reversal of interpretation / policy is put into motion, it would be nice to have a heads-up, an announcement, something.

 

Was it posted in the Release Notes and I missed it?

 

B.

 

Why would it be in the release notes? The software didn't change.

 

At any rate, Groundspeak should grant an exception. The commercial enterprise known as CWE Computer Services, (GSAK), is one man trying to put food on the table. It has no other employees, it's website has no outside advertising and he will let you use the program for free if you desire. Slamming the hammer down was a bad, bad move for Groundspeak, especially since they are putting no effort in further development on anything but the api and have basically told us to use it and other peoples products to manage our caching activities.

Edited August 10, 2013 by Don_J

[+palmetto]

Slamming the hammer down was a bad,

 

The only thing that has happened is that the news that "GSAK" should not be in a cache title has been somewhat more broadly disseminated among reviewers, and that in turn got to a cacher - who missed the mark completely with the thread title. GSAK events will keep right on being published.

Those events can mention GSAK in the body of the event page.

 

This has been true for as long as I've been reviewing, ie, "GSAK" a proper name of a commercial product, and is covered by the commercial section of the listing guidelines.

 

Many reviewers are in the habit of publishing what they've always published, and just didn't think about it - GSAK use is pretty fundamental to caching, and almost an absolute for reviewers.

 

It wouldn't shock me to still see some GSAK titled events go out. There's always someone who missed a memo.

 

No hammer, really.....

[+Prime Reviewer]

When a major reversal of interpretation / policy is put into motion, it would be nice to have a heads-up, an announcement, something.

 

Was it posted in the Release Notes and I missed it?

 

 

B.

 

Yes. It was posted when the change actually occurred - five years ago.

 

To excerpt:

Business names should not be in geocache titles. In cases where business names must be mentioned (in some events, for example, it may make sense to do so), this can be done in the description.

[+Don_J]

Slamming the hammer down was a bad,

 

The only thing that has happened is that the news that "GSAK" should not be in a cache title has been somewhat more broadly disseminated among reviewers, and that in turn got to a cacher - who missed the mark completely with the thread title. GSAK events will keep right on being published.

Those events can mention GSAK in the body of the event page.

 

This has been true for as long as I've been reviewing, ie, "GSAK" a proper name of a commercial product, and is covered by the commercial section of the listing guidelines.

 

Many reviewers are in the habit of publishing what they've always published, and just didn't think about it - GSAK use is pretty fundamental to caching, and almost an absolute for reviewers.

 

It wouldn't shock me to still see some GSAK titled events go out. There's always someone who missed a memo.

 

No hammer, really.....

 

Understood, but I'm going to go as far as suggest that GSAK deserves special treatment. Groundspeak has all but said that there will be no further development for Pocket Queries and search functions on the web site and told us that they are concentrating on the api and that we should use third party programs instead. The number one program for managing and searching geocache data is GSAK. An event that shows people how to use the program should be welcomed and it should be encouraged to put the name in title.

 

The way that I see it, one man sitting in his home office in Australia is continually developing a program that allows geocachers to find the caches that they want to find. This can only benefit Groundspeak.

[+tozainamboku]

 

Understood, but I'm going to go as far as suggest that GSAK deserves special treatment. Groundspeak has all but said that there will be no further development for Pocket Queries and search functions on the web site and told us that they are concentrating on the api and that we should use third party programs instead. The number one program for managing and searching geocache data is GSAK. An event that shows people how to use the program should be welcomed and it should be encouraged to put the name in title.

 

The way that I see it, one man sitting in his home office in Australia is continually developing a program that allows geocachers to find the caches that they want to find. This can only benefit Groundspeak.

So why stop with giving Clyde special treatment? How about our local monthly event. Shouldn't it be "SFV Geocachers Meet & Greet sponsored by Enjay Functional Solutions". Then Jeff can write off his expenses as business. And it's not like his business isn't helpful to geocachers. Groundspeak even sells his wares in the Groundspeak store, so it must be OK for him to mention his business.

 

I think Groundspeak wants to make this simple for reviewers. While they might all know what GSAK is, they don't know all the geocachers who run small businesses that provide services to other geocachers (or even to Groundspeak). Rather that giving exceptions out to favored companies, the reviewers were given some guidelines. If they apply these fairly to all, you can still have a GSAK workshop. You just can't name your event "GSAK Workshop" or have a writeup that reads like a list of GSAK features that you absolutely need to have to geocache.

[+cheech gang]

I wonder what would happen if one were to type "GSAK" into our enhanced "starts with" cache search function.

[+Don_J]

 

Understood, but I'm going to go as far as suggest that GSAK deserves special treatment. Groundspeak has all but said that there will be no further development for Pocket Queries and search functions on the web site and told us that they are concentrating on the api and that we should use third party programs instead. The number one program for managing and searching geocache data is GSAK. An event that shows people how to use the program should be welcomed and it should be encouraged to put the name in title.

 

The way that I see it, one man sitting in his home office in Australia is continually developing a program that allows geocachers to find the caches that they want to find. This can only benefit Groundspeak.

So why stop with giving Clyde special treatment? How about our local monthly event. Shouldn't it be "SFV Geocachers Meet & Greet sponsored by Enjay Functional Solutions". Then Jeff can write off his expenses as business. And it's not like his business isn't helpful to geocachers. Groundspeak even sells his wares in the Groundspeak store, so it must be OK for him to mention his business.

 

I think Groundspeak wants to make this simple for reviewers. While they might all know what GSAK is, they don't know all the geocachers who run small businesses that provide services to other geocachers (or even to Groundspeak). Rather that giving exceptions out to favored companies, the reviewers were given some guidelines. If they apply these fairly to all, you can still have a GSAK workshop. You just can't name your event "GSAK Workshop" or have a writeup that reads like a list of GSAK features that you absolutely need to have to geocache.

 

I completely understand what you are saying, Toz. My issue is that Groundspeak has decided that they are not going to provide any additional search services on the website, even those that they originally said that they intended to provide, and to use a program like GSAK instead, to their benefit. I guess it can be said that Groundspeak has pushed business in GSAK's direction and that should be good enough. I can live with that. Obviously I'm a GSAK fan and I just wanted to put my point of view out there. That does not mean that I'm not willing to accept alternate points of view.

 

Basically, I see the commercial guidelines in place to protect Groundspeak's web pages from being used to promote others. I just think that they should be a little more open minded when it could benefit them and their users. "GSAK 101", should be acceptable. GSAK 101 - Don't forget to register at GSAK.net", shouldn't.

[+Roman!]

I wonder what would happen if one were to type "GSAK" into our enhanced "starts with" cache search function.

 

6 events and a ? cache.

 

GSAK 101: beginner level

 

GSAK på dansk

 

GSAK kurs og nybegynner kveld!

 

GSAK pour les nuls #1

 

GSAK pour les nuls #2

 

GSAKworkshop

 

GSAK Class

[+Motorcycledude]

Oh the irony!

 

Remember the "take a picture of yourself eating a big mac etc. challenges" anyone?

 

I am happy Groundspeak has a community manager. It's a pity they have totally missed the point with having someone in that position though. But who are we, paying customers, to complain?

Edited August 30, 2013 by Motorcycledude

[+The Jester]

When a major reversal of interpretation / policy is put into motion, it would be nice to have a heads-up, an announcement, something.

 

Was it posted in the Release Notes and I missed it?

 

 

B.

 

Yes. It was posted when the change actually occurred - five years ago.

 

To excerpt:

Business names should not be in geocache titles. In cases where business names must be mentioned (in some events, for example, it may make sense to do so), this can be done in the description.

But GSAK isn't a business name. It's a product name. Just as pizza is a product of many businesses, but there is no restriction to using 'pizza' in an event name when held at pizza joint, just the business name is restricted.

[+Team Taran]

GSAK is product offered by a single company. I'm pretty sure I couldn't promote Big Macs on my cache page although I could talk about hamburgers.

[+Sapience Trek]

I'm no lap dog. I've been critical of Groundspeak on numerous occasions, before and after I became a volunteer. The fact is that there is no policy change. I never would have published a cache with GSAK in the title based on my understanding of the guidelines. Other reviewers obviously had a different understanding. Now we have consistency. People here frequently rant about inconsistencies between reviewers and here we are reducing some of that inconsistency and people are complaining. Ya can't win.

 

Ditto that - there is no policy change. I would have never published a GSAK focused event either. I have published tech events at libraries where one of the topics mentioned is GSAK. I will allow a casual mention, but if the event is a GSAK event it won't get published.

 

Inconsistency is a part of being human. Reviewers are human (other than mtn-man, who is a dog) and mistakes get made. I don't know how many (hundreds?) of volunteers we have reviewing caches these days, but there is no way you will get anything close to 100% consistency in the review process. We would all like it, as I never like having something thrown back at me saying "but ... but ... this cache was published!". Cultural and language differences sometimes makes it difficult. New reviewers may not read a cache page the same way as seasoned veterans like Keystone, Mtn-man, Erik and others (I'm still a newbie.)