Drive-By Events

[+me N u]

Drive by events where there is no need to stop sound great to us - no longer will we have to listen to the loudest cacher extolling the virtues of their latest 100+ film pots at the base of fence posts every .1of a mile trail or the latest D5 puzzle cache they've devised.

[Mr.Yuck]

 

As long as Groundspeak allows it, then let them have their fun, especially if it doesn't affect you.

 

That's just the thing, isn't it? Anything that degrades the quality of the game does potentially affect me.

 

Most changes don't have that effect, but there is a cumulative "trickle-down" effect that has undeniably changed the game from the way it was when I joined, to the point that I sometimes think that if I were joining the game today, I wouldn't find it nearly as appealing as I did back then.

 

An event, by its very name and nature, is a social event, intended for meeting and mingling. Eliminate that aspect and it doesn't deserve to be called an event at all.

 

+1, as they say. Great post. If it degrades the quality of the game it does potentially affect me. Note that I'm not particularly talking about Drive by events in New Zealand or Flash Mobs. I'm sick and tired of being labeled a big meanie by the handfull of defenders of lame around here. We all know what is lame and cheesy and half-arsed be it in this game, any other game, or pretty much anything else in life. Am I a big meanie when my 14 yr. old does a half-arsed job of vacuuming his room, and I call him out on it? Is that just my personal preference of how vacuuming should be done? C'mon, you're killing me here.

The basic difference is that you control the life and actions of your child. Attempting to do the same with a bunch of strangers is pushing your agenda too far.

 

Awesome! When ranting on the defenders of lame, there can be no greater honor than a personal reply from sbell111. You sir, are like the Dave Ulmer and L. Ron Hubbard combined of the DOL.

 

Welcome back! Hope all is well. Good thing you didn't live up here this Winter. Boy, what a brutal one.

[+thebruce0]

Eh, saying you don't like it, is not letting them have their fun? I suppose there could be someone who tosses the logbook to passing cars, and they could sign it and toss it back to another person up the road. Or, they could drive around the block and toss it back to the same person. Better yet, they could sign in ahead of time, place it in a film can and wing it at the host. Even better, the host could just place a 55 gallon drum and collect them all the next day without attending. At what point does someone realize its not really an event? It sounds like fun, but why should a smiley make it fun? If its not fun without the smiley, then its just silly.

When Groundspeak says: "That's not an event."

They've done it before. They can do it again.

Right now, it's an event. Neither you nor I may not prefer them, but they have every right to exist and provide fun and entertainment for whoever may find them fun and entertaining (rather, people who find value in attending them) as any other published listing, until GS says otherwise.

[+RobDJr]

As long as Groundspeak allows it, then let them have their fun, especially if it doesn't affect you.

That's just the thing, isn't it? Anything that degrades the quality of the game does potentially affect me.

I'm not seeing how thee described event stops you from having one at Pizza Hut.

 

You're right, it certainly doesn't.

 

Most changes don't have that effect, but there is a cumulative "trickle-down" effect that has undeniably changed the game from the way it was when I joined, to the point that I sometimes think that if I were joining the game today, I wouldn't find it nearly as appealing as I did back then.An event, by its very name and nature, is a social event, intended for meeting and mingling. Eliminate that aspect and it doesn't deserve to be called an event at all.

Every player has the ability to make any event as social as they want it to be. A non-social person such as myself is not going to be very social at any event. A much more social person could certainly hang out with the organizer and have a long talk about whatever while meeting every single geocacher who comes to sign in.

 

Again you're right. But I don't think the issue is how social people are, or even those who show up at events for just the amount of time it takes to sign the log before leaving. The real problem is what could happen if this idea catches on and becomes more popular.

 

Your implied suggestion that I alone am responsible for my choices and the enjoyment I get out of what I do is also absolutely correct. And yet, I wouldn't have a very difficult time at all pointing out to you a few situations where my enjoyment of geocaching has been impacted negatively in spite of my efforts. Having to wade through an increasingly long list of uninspired, unimaginative, and low quality film can hides in order to find anything I would really enjoy is a prime example of the 'trickle-down' effect I mentioned, impacting me in ways I really can't control (except by working that much harder for my own enjoyment, which I do).

 

That's just the thing, isn't it? Anything that degrades the quality of the game does potentially affect me.Most changes don't have that effect, but there is a cumulative "trickle-down" effect that has undeniably changed the game from the way it was when I joined, to the point that I sometimes think that if I were joining the game today, I wouldn't find it nearly as appealing as I did back then.An event, by its very name and nature, is a social event, intended for meeting and mingling. Eliminate that aspect and it doesn't deserve to be called an event at all.

While I'm still sitting on the fence on this one, I do think that the line I highlighted above is not quite right. It may just be semantics, but an event by name and nature is an event. Adding the word social is arbitrary and not part of the definition of event:eventnoun1. something that happens or is regarded as happening; an occurrence, especially one of some importance.2. something that occurs in a certain place during a particular interval of time.3. physics in relativity, an occurrence that is sharply localized at a single point in space and instant of time.(Note: I removed some less related definitions of event)Nowhere does it define the social aspect that is only traditional to geocaching events, but is not part of an event "by its very name".

 

Well, OK. I would admit you're right, and I would also point out that you're taking my statement on a very literal level, bordering on splitting hairs.

 

When I said 'event' I didn't mean it in the sense that a meteor impact could be called an event. I was referring specifically to a geocaching event, which I do hold to be, by name and nature, a social thing. Although I haven't done a detailed study, I feel comfortable in saying that the vast majority of geocaching events have probably centered mainly around socializing.

 

Given the recent trends in micros, power trails, and poor or nonexistent logs, in an apparent effort to cater to the "that's one more for me" crowd, I can't see the reduction or elimination of the social aspect of the game to be a good thing.

 

Of course, saying things like that probably means that someday I'll find myself sitting on my front porch shaking my fist in the air as I yell, "Get off my lawn!"

[4wheelin_fool]

Eh, saying you don't like it, is not letting them have their fun? I suppose there could be someone who tosses the logbook to passing cars, and they could sign it and toss it back to another person up the road. Or, they could drive around the block and toss it back to the same person. Better yet, they could sign in ahead of time, place it in a film can and wing it at the host. Even better, the host could just place a 55 gallon drum and collect them all the next day without attending. At what point does someone realize its not really an event? It sounds like fun, but why should a smiley make it fun? If its not fun without the smiley, then its just silly.

When Groundspeak says: "That's not an event."

They've done it before. They can do it again.

Right now, it's an event. Neither you nor I may not prefer them, but they have every right to exist and provide fun and entertainment for whoever may find them fun and entertaining (rather, people who find value in attending them) as any other published listing, until GS says otherwise.

There's a quite a big difference between what Groundspeak allows as an event, and what they actually define it as.

 

When someone's definition of an event does not match anything in the dictionary listed under "event" or what anyone sane might believe, and even among fellow geocachers, I think that people certainly should be permitted to point that out. I don't know how this could be ruining their fun though. Is it really less fun if they know there are other geocachers out there who don't believe that it is an event? Would they come into the forums afterwards and then suddenly get depressed when they learn that there are others that don't think they attended any type of event? There's not many nonGeocachers who would think that's any type of event, and somehow our belief that it isn't an event either, is ruining their fun? It's like saying there is no Santa Claus isn't it?

Edited March 17, 2014 by 4wheelin_fool

[+L0ne.R]

Can you log them if you just drive by slow and beep, or do you have to come to a complete stop?

 

the one I attended, you had to get out of the car and go up to sign the log hubby stayed in the car (he doesnt cache) and left the car running while I got out, I also wanted to meet other caches even if it was quick.

but I guess if you sat in your car and waved someone over with the log book I guess that would count, but there is no way I would do that.

 

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

A local cacher held an event out in the woods at a cool location. A couple of folks walked past between caches, waved, said "hello", and claimed an "Attended." Since logs no longer need to be signed, this had to stand.

[+thebruce0]

When someone's definition of an event does not match anything in the dictionary listed under "event" or what anyone sane might believe

Not an objective response.

On geocaching.com, there are guidelines for an "Event Listing". Reviewers judge and decide if it's a valid Event Listing. If Drive-By events are being published, they are valid Event Listings. So, is Groundspeak insane? Are their reviewers insane?

 

and even among fellow geocachers, I think that people certainly should be permitted to point that out. I don't know how this could be ruining their fun though.

Well, to them, you could be trying to "take away their fun" by getting Groundspeak to disallow the event style. But yes, it's one thing to criticize an event style and encourage a certain standard for what you believe the 'geocaching event' should be, but it's another to imply people are "insane" for enjoying what Groundspeak currently allows within the definition of Geocaching Event listing.

See what I'm saying yet?

Edited March 17, 2014 by thebruce0

[+The Jester]

This google search produces scads of them. I stopped paging after the first three pages of them.

 

site:www.geocaching.com drive-by

 

A project-GC returned 32 in the US and one was an Earthcaches

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?key=Drive-by

And not one of those returned are an event, so they really don't have anything to do with this discussion.

 

As the owner of one those on that list, I'll just say it's a multi that the first three waypoints are be done driving by (grabbing numbers from addresses) and then go to the listed co-ords, do an offset and find an ammo can. I couldn't think of a good way to do a drive-by final. But it really has nothing to do with a discussion of drive-by events.

[4wheelin_fool]

When someone's definition of an event does not match anything in the dictionary listed under "event" or what anyone sane might believe

Not an objective response.

On geocaching.com, there are guidelines for an "Event Listing". Reviewers judge and decide if it's a valid Event Listing. If Drive-By events are being published, they are valid Event Listings. So, is Groundspeak insane? Are their reviewers insane?

 

and even among fellow geocachers, I think that people certainly should be permitted to point that out. I don't know how this could be ruining their fun though.

Well, to them, you could be trying to "take away their fun" by getting Groundspeak to disallow the event style. But yes, it's one thing to criticize an event style and encourage a certain standard for what you believe the 'geocaching event' should be, but it's another to imply people are "insane" for enjoying what Groundspeak currently allows within the definition of Geocaching Event listing.

See what I'm saying yet?

 

There are a few who are only stating an opinion that those are not really events. Somehow this has been characterized as

trying to "take away their fun" by getting Groundspeak to disallow the event style.

But it's only an opinion. Somehow you feel threatened by this opinion, even though you agree the practice is lame. We should recognize and obey Groundspeak's definition without any dissent?

 

An event could refer to anything at all, such as an earthquake, but these are social events. The word social has not been used, but implied, as it would be redundant to call them social events. Perhaps they now should be identified as social events, and other events such as drive-by's should be listed with a different icon. What icon should be used for an antisocial event?

 

If someone is under the delusion that driving by a fixed point is attending a social event, then social events are happening right now all over the world on every highway. All of the cars passing by mile marker 22.9 on I-40 at 8:05am this morning attended some social event, and didn't even know it? Here is a definition for delusion.

[+thebruce0]

There are a few who are only stating an opinion that those are not really events. Somehow this has been characterized as

trying to "take away their fun" by getting Groundspeak to disallow the event style.

But it's only an opinion.

"These are not events! And people who think they are are insane" is not the same as "These shouldn't be allowed as geocaching events because..."

 

Somehow you feel threatened by this opinion, even though you agree the practice is lame. We should recognize and obey Groundspeak's definition without any dissent?

Absolutely not. And I do not feel 'threatened', as not once have I implied that.

 

An event could refer to anything at all, such as an earthquake, but these are social events. The word social has not been used, but implied, as it would be redundant to call them social events.

Once again, you missed my point. We are not going by a 'dictionary definition' - we are going by what Groundspeak allows as Geocaching Events. Some consider these 'social', some consider these simple 'happenings', based precisely on the guidelines that Groundspeak sets.

 

Perhaps they now should be identified as social events, and other events such as drive-by's should be listed with a different icon. What icon should be used for an antisocial event?

I don't know, begin a legitimate topic for about this as a suggestion in the appropriate forum if you truly feel it should be considered.

 

If someone is under the delusion that driving by a fixed point is attending a social event

But it's clearly not a social event. Yet it is a valid, approved Event Listing.

 

How is this even such a big deal? There only one actual 'drive by' event mentioned in this thread is GC4T8YG in New Zealand, and technically it requires as much as any standard event for the Attend log (sign the logbook at the event), except that the organizer has actually said that coming and leaving right away is perfectly fine, and that there's a 2 hour window (that seems pretty event average to me). The same can be said of any event (as the log signing minimum requirement has been met - which technically isn't even a minimum requirement any more).

 

So, here's a question - would Groundspeak publish an event listing where the organizer has found a spot to sit and watch people drive by, while discouraging anyone to get out and hang around for a while, and for which there is no physical log for 'attendees' to sign?

Something tells me that would not be published. That sounds like the type of actual drive-by event that's being debated here. The example linked above really is just a standard event by most every disclaimer, except that it has "Drive By" in the title and isn't shy about actually saying you don't have to stick around at all.

[+funkymunkyzone]

....An event, by its very name and nature, is a social event, intended for meeting and mingling. ...

While I'm still sitting on the fence on this one, I do think that the line I highlighted above is not quite right. It may just be semantics, but an event by name and nature is an event. Adding the word social is arbitrary and not part of the definition of event:eventnoun1. something that happens or is regarded as happening; an occurrence, especially one of some importance.2. something that occurs in a certain place during a particular interval of time.3. physics in relativity, an occurrence that is sharply localized at a single point in space and instant of time.(Note: I removed some less related definitions of event)Nowhere does it define the social aspect that is only traditional to geocaching events, but is not part of an event "by its very name".

Well, OK. I would admit you're right, and I would also point out that you're taking my statement on a very literal level, bordering on splitting hairs.

 

When I said 'event' I didn't mean it in the sense that a meteor impact could be called an event. I was referring specifically to a geocaching event, which I do hold to be, by name and nature, a social thing. Although I haven't done a detailed study, I feel comfortable in saying that the vast majority of geocaching events have probably centered mainly around socializing.

 

Given the recent trends in micros, power trails, and poor or nonexistent logs, in an apparent effort to cater to the "that's one more for me" crowd, I can't see the reduction or elimination of the social aspect of the game to be a good thing.

 

Of course, saying things like that probably means that someday I'll find myself sitting on my front porch shaking my fist in the air as I yell, "Get off my lawn!"

You're right, I was splitting hairs. However, I'm starting to lean towards the opinion that a drive-by event with it's reduced social element is probably closer to what an event is, than how far removed a geocaching event is from what a geocache is, no matter how social, large or even mega, the event is. But that's a whole other argument, and as it stands geocaching events are geocaches...

[Clan Riffster]

A local cacher held an event out in the woods at a cool location. A couple of folks walked past between caches, waved, said "hello", and claimed an "Attended." Since logs no longer need to be signed, this had to stand.

Why would it even be questioned?

[+briansnat]

Eh, saying you don't like it, is not letting them have their fun? I suppose there could be someone who tosses the logbook to passing cars, and they could sign it and toss it back to another person up the road. Or, they could drive around the block and toss it back to the same person. Better yet, they could sign in ahead of time, place it in a film can and wing it at the host. Even better, the host could just place a 55 gallon drum and collect them all the next day without attending. At what point does someone realize its not really an event? It sounds like fun, but why should a smiley make it fun? If its not fun without the smiley, then its just silly.

 

There is no distance requirement for events, so you can have a drive by every 10 feet. Imagine the possibilities!. Logging 1,000 events in a day is now attainable.

[+thebruce0]

There is no distance requirement for events, so you can have a drive by every 10 feet. Imagine the possibilities!. Logging 1,000 events in a day is now attainable.

 

Presuming a reviewer decides it's allowable.

And I highly doubt any reviewer would use their given power of judgement and allow 1000 of these 'drive by' events (of which no current example has even been provided) each 10 feet apart.

Actually, someone trying to publish them that might even prompt the needed 'adjustment' to the guidelines if they continued to force the validity of the event listings. Legalism at its finest.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

A local cacher held an event out in the woods at a cool location. A couple of folks walked past between caches, waved, said "hello", and claimed an "Attended." Since logs no longer need to be signed, this had to stand.

Why would it even be questioned?

 

Sorry, but passing by an event, to me, does not constitute "attending" the event.

[+Ma & Pa]

A local cacher held an event out in the woods at a cool location. A couple of folks walked past between caches, waved, said "hello", and claimed an "Attended." Since logs no longer need to be signed, this had to stand.

Why would it even be questioned?

 

Sorry, but passing by an event, to me, does not constitute "attending" the event.

 

Well they were there and saw them and spoke to them. Seems to qualify

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

A local cacher held an event out in the woods at a cool location. A couple of folks walked past between caches, waved, said "hello", and claimed an "Attended." Since logs no longer need to be signed, this had to stand.

Why would it even be questioned?

 

Sorry, but passing by an event, to me, does not constitute "attending" the event.

 

Well they were there and saw them and spoke to them. Seems to qualify

 

So if I drive by the Playboy Mansion and yell "Hello" real loud I can say I partied with Hef?

[+wimseyguy]

A local cacher held an event out in the woods at a cool location. A couple of folks walked past between caches, waved, said "hello", and claimed an "Attended." Since logs no longer need to be signed, this had to stand.

 

Sounds like a win-win situation to me. They got what they wanted which was another quick smiley without being social.

And no one who was enjoying the social situation at a cool location had to put up with those people either.

[+Ambrosia]

A local cacher held an event out in the woods at a cool location. A couple of folks walked past between caches, waved, said "hello", and claimed an "Attended." Since logs no longer need to be signed, this had to stand.

Why would it even be questioned?

 

Sorry, but passing by an event, to me, does not constitute "attending" the event.

 

Well they were there and saw them and spoke to them. Seems to qualify

 

So if I drive by the Playboy Mansion and yell "Hello" real loud I can say I partied with Hef?

Hey, I've done that!

[+funkymunkyzone]

So if I drive by the Playboy Mansion and yell "Hello" real loud I can say I partied with Hef?

Well, if I may be so bold as to reign in your rather exaggerated example, if Hef put out the general invite to a drive-by street party outside the mansion, he then was out on the street partying at the time of the aforementioned party, and he acknowledged you as you drove past yelling "Hello" out the window, I suppose you could say you partied with Hef for a very short time.

[+thebruce0]

^-- That.

[+briansnat]

A local cacher held an event out in the woods at a cool location. A couple of folks walked past between caches, waved, said "hello", and claimed an "Attended." Since logs no longer need to be signed, this had to stand.

 

Sounds like a win-win situation to me. They got what they wanted which was another quick smiley without being social.

And no one who was enjoying the social situation at a cool location had to put up with those people either.

 

I've been to many events where people came in, signed the log and moved on without interacting with people. If that is their thing then that is their business. I do have an issue with events where limited interaction is the point. It seems to be the antithesis of what an event is about.

[+DragonsWest]

^--- Once again - Geocaching means different things to each person, trying to exert your will upon everyone is a recipe for universal disappointment.

[+briansnat]

^--- Once again - Geocaching means different things to each person, trying to exert your will upon everyone is a recipe for universal disappointment.

 

We can debate the merits of numbers caching, park and grabs, micros, etc. ad nauseam. However events have a single purpose and that is socializing. Turning them into a mere smiley collecting exercise bastardizes the entire concept. If the trend is toward changing the purpose of events I will exert my will in every way possible to prevent it. The numbers hounds ruined this game for many of us. I won't let them ruin events if I have any say.

Edited March 18, 2014 by briansnat

[+K13]

^--- Once again - Geocaching means different things to each person, trying to exert your will upon everyone is a recipe for universal disappointment.

 

We can debate the merits of numbers caching, park and grabs, micros, etc. ad nauseam. However events have a single purpose and that is socializing. Turning them into a mere smiley collecting exercise bastardizes the entire concept. If the trend is toward changing the purpose of events I will exert my will in every way possible to prevent it. The numbers hounds ruined this game for many of us. I won't let them ruin events if I have any say.

 

I vote with briansnat on this subject.

[4wheelin_fool]

There are a few who are only stating an opinion that those are not really events. Somehow this has been characterized as

trying to "take away their fun" by getting Groundspeak to disallow the event style.

But it's only an opinion.

"These are not events! And people who think they are are insane" is not the same as "These shouldn't be allowed as geocaching events because..."

 

Somehow you feel threatened by this opinion, even though you agree the practice is lame. We should recognize and obey Groundspeak's definition without any dissent?

Absolutely not. And I do not feel 'threatened', as not once have I implied that.

 

An event could refer to anything at all, such as an earthquake, but these are social events. The word social has not been used, but implied, as it would be redundant to call them social events.

Once again, you missed my point. We are not going by a 'dictionary definition' - we are going by what Groundspeak allows as Geocaching Events. Some consider these 'social', some consider these simple 'happenings', based precisely on the guidelines that Groundspeak sets.

 

Perhaps they now should be identified as social events, and other events such as drive-by's should be listed with a different icon. What icon should be used for an antisocial event?

I don't know, begin a legitimate topic for about this as a suggestion in the appropriate forum if you truly feel it should be considered.

 

If someone is under the delusion that driving by a fixed point is attending a social event

But it's clearly not a social event. Yet it is a valid, approved Event Listing.

 

Its still not a social event. Just because the word "social" has not been included with "event" does not mean that the definition of events should change to not being social. There is the icon which implies that it is a social event.

 

 

How is this even such a big deal? There only one actual 'drive by' event mentioned in this thread is GC4T8YG in New Zealand, and technically it requires as much as any standard event for the Attend log (sign the logbook at the event), except that the organizer has actually said that coming and leaving right away is perfectly fine, and that there's a 2 hour window (that seems pretty event average to me). The same can be said of any event (as the log signing minimum requirement has been met - which technically isn't even a minimum requirement any more).

 

So, here's a question - would Groundspeak publish an event listing where the organizer has found a spot to sit and watch people drive by, while discouraging anyone to get out and hang around for a while, and for which there is no physical log for 'attendees' to sign?

Something tells me that would not be published. That sounds like the type of actual drive-by event that's being debated here. The example linked above really is just a standard event by most every disclaimer, except that it has "Drive By" in the title and isn't shy about actually saying you don't have to stick around at all.

 

Its not a big deal at all. If it becomes a big deal, well then..

 

If you haven't noticed, there are PLENTY of people that have signed up and gone geocaching over the years. One thing that is consistent, is than most have lost interest or dropped out. Compare the amount of total accounts to the amount that are active and the active ones are by far in the minority - 1,334,506 cachers with at least 1 find in the past year, out of a total of 9,000,000 or so accounts created. I suppose having a "treasure hunt" without any swag, due to micros was one reason, or perhaps lousy locations could be another reason. Lousy non-social events seem to be next on the horizon. Liking them is only just a measurement of your obsession level. Someone new, without the hypnosis treatment from Signal, would simply say "this is stupid". Being under a delusion that they are social events is just not sane. Really, its the truth.

Edited March 18, 2014 by 4wheelin_fool

[+thebruce0]

Its still not a social event. Just because the word "social" has not been included with "event" does not mean that the definition of events should change to not being social. There is the icon which implies that it is a social event.

But... again... IF Groundspeak publishes events where socializing is not a requirement let alone even suggested, then events aren't fundamentally intended to be "social". Events are just events. How do you define social, even? To what degree? Do you have to talk to everyone to be social? What if you only talk to one person? What if you go with a friend, stay the whole time, but talk to no one else? "Social" is so arbitrary it makes sense that Groundspeak hasn't required that events be "social". It would be ludicrous to verify and police.

 

We want them to be social, and most if not all are in some manner social. But if "being social" is not a requirement for an event, then Groundspeak's made that decision. It would only be a matter of time before sometime tries some form of overtly non-social event (effectively a drive-by).

 

Which... again... has not even been demonstrated with an actual example

Edited March 18, 2014 by thebruce0

[+Guwisti]

We haven't had any drive-by events here in Arkansas that I know about, which is good.

 

But we haven't had any events at any bars (that I can think of), which is bad.

 

As far as Flash Mobs go, it takes alot of planning to pack 3 hours worth of fun into 15 minutes. I have been

a flash mob host and attendee and there are usually clothing "requirements" and a dance or sing along or some form of activity. Cheesy, yes. But, IMHO, Fun! A great way to catch up with all my caching friends when we only have a few minutes to maybe get together.

 

But I'm also a super huge fan of meet and eats too!

 

And as others have stated. Everyone plays the game differently. There are rules and some break them. I just play for me.

[+The A-Team]

Its still not a social event. Just because the word "social" has not been included with "event" does not mean that the definition of events should change to not being social. There is the icon which implies that it is a social event.

But... again... IF Groundspeak publishes events where socializing is not a requirement let alone even suggested, then events aren't fundamentally intended to be "social". Events are just events. How do you define social, even? To what degree? Do you have to talk to everyone to be social? What if you only talk to one person? What if you go with a friend, stay the whole time, but talk to no one else? "Social" is so arbitrary it makes sense that Groundspeak hasn't required that events be "social". It would be ludicrous to verify and police.

I'm amazed this discussion of the social aspect has gone on for so long without the relevant guideline being quoted:

Event Caches facilitate the social aspect of geocaching.

As for defining which events are "social", that's up to the judgement of the reviewers, possibly with some guidance from HQ. I haven't looked at the event listing in question, but if it was published, the reviewer has deemed that there's enough of a social aspect to qualify as a Geocaching.com event.

[+thebruce0]

I'm amazed this discussion of the social aspect has gone on for so long without the relevant guideline being quoted:

Event Caches facilitate the social aspect of geocaching.

As for defining which events are "social", that's up to the judgement of the reviewers, possibly with some guidance from HQ. I haven't looked at the event listing in question, but if it was published, the reviewer has deemed that there's enough of a social aspect to qualify as a Geocaching.com event.

Exactly. Reviewer judgement, Groundspeak approval. And, referencing example events provided so far, each had or encouraged social aspects. This hypothetical "Drive By" (wherein zero social engagement has been encouraged or allowed) doesn't yet exist, as far as this thread is concerned...

 

PS, note it reads "facilitate the social aspect". At worst, one might make an argument that if the event provides in any way a method for geocachers to 'be social' with each other (whatever that arbitrary term may entail), then it should be considered a valid event listing.

PPS, just to be clear, again I am not condoning such a defense or event style simply looking at how people might push the guidelines - while the reviewers still have the power to make the judgement call (see the previous example of a proposed 'power trial' of hypothetical non-social 'Drive By' events, almost guaranteed to not be published, even though individually they may adhere to the guidelines).

Edited March 18, 2014 by thebruce0

[JASTA 11]

Brucie, you're the one showing the emotion.

 

I never said they couldn't do it, didn't suggest it was against any rules either.

 

It really doesn't matter to me. Don't care if they are allowed or not. Over the years I've learned that Groundspeak doesn't care to reason, so it's not worth the effort.

 

It's lame. There it is, cut and dried.

 

I agree completely, although you did just steal my idea from post 13 and attempt to pass it off as your own. It is copyrighted and fully in the development stage. It tentatively will be called lamecaching - version K13.

 

Sorry Fool, the idea was ours first!

 

It's already in production:

 

 

(I may be able to get you a discount on one)

[+sbell111]

Most changes don't have that effect, but there is a cumulative "trickle-down" effect that has undeniably changed the game from the way it was when I joined, to the point that I sometimes think that if I were joining the game today, I wouldn't find it nearly as appealing as I did back then.An event, by its very name and nature, is a social event, intended for meeting and mingling. Eliminate that aspect and it doesn't deserve to be called an event at all.

Every player has the ability to make any event as social as they want it to be. A non-social person such as myself is not going to be very social at any event. A much more social person could certainly hang out with the organizer and have a long talk about whatever while meeting every single geocacher who comes to sign in.

 

Again you're right. But I don't think the issue is how social people are, or even those who show up at events for just the amount of time it takes to sign the log before leaving. The real problem is what could happen if this idea catches on and becomes more popular.

How could that happen? Wouldn't you and all pizza-eating geocachers still have the ability to have an event at Pizza City? Who cares if other people are holding and going to these so-called drive by events? Those who don't like those will skip them and hold and go to the other kind.

[+sbell111]

 

As long as Groundspeak allows it, then let them have their fun, especially if it doesn't affect you.

 

That's just the thing, isn't it? Anything that degrades the quality of the game does potentially affect me.

 

Most changes don't have that effect, but there is a cumulative "trickle-down" effect that has undeniably changed the game from the way it was when I joined, to the point that I sometimes think that if I were joining the game today, I wouldn't find it nearly as appealing as I did back then.

 

An event, by its very name and nature, is a social event, intended for meeting and mingling. Eliminate that aspect and it doesn't deserve to be called an event at all.

 

+1, as they say. Great post. If it degrades the quality of the game it does potentially affect me. Note that I'm not particularly talking about Drive by events in New Zealand or Flash Mobs. I'm sick and tired of being labeled a big meanie by the handfull of defenders of lame around here. We all know what is lame and cheesy and half-arsed be it in this game, any other game, or pretty much anything else in life. Am I a big meanie when my 14 yr. old does a half-arsed job of vacuuming his room, and I call him out on it? Is that just my personal preference of how vacuuming should be done? C'mon, you're killing me here.

The basic difference is that you control the life and actions of your child. Attempting to do the same with a bunch of strangers is pushing your agenda too far.

 

Awesome! When ranting on the defenders of lame, there can be no greater honor than a personal reply from sbell111. You sir, are like the Dave Ulmer and L. Ron Hubbard combined of the DOL.

 

Welcome back! Hope all is well. Good thing you didn't live up here this Winter. Boy, what a brutal one.

This kind of rudeness is why many are not participating in the forums.

[+sbell111]

Its still not a social event. Just because the word "social" has not been included with "event" does not mean that the definition of events should change to not being social. There is the icon which implies that it is a social event.

But... again... IF Groundspeak publishes events where socializing is not a requirement let alone even suggested, then events aren't fundamentally intended to be "social". Events are just events. How do you define social, even? To what degree? Do you have to talk to everyone to be social? What if you only talk to one person? What if you go with a friend, stay the whole time, but talk to no one else? "Social" is so arbitrary it makes sense that Groundspeak hasn't required that events be "social". It would be ludicrous to verify and police.

I'm amazed this discussion of the social aspect has gone on for so long without the relevant guideline being quoted:

Event Caches facilitate the social aspect of geocaching.

As for defining which events are "social", that's up to the judgement of the reviewers, possibly with some guidance from HQ. I haven't looked at the event listing in question, but if it was published, the reviewer has deemed that there's enough of a social aspect to qualify as a Geocaching.com event.

It seems to me that as long as the event organizer or his representative is present, then there will always be a social element because an attendee will always be able to stop by and visit.

[Mr.Yuck]

 

As long as Groundspeak allows it, then let them have their fun, especially if it doesn't affect you.

 

That's just the thing, isn't it? Anything that degrades the quality of the game does potentially affect me.

 

Most changes don't have that effect, but there is a cumulative "trickle-down" effect that has undeniably changed the game from the way it was when I joined, to the point that I sometimes think that if I were joining the game today, I wouldn't find it nearly as appealing as I did back then.

 

An event, by its very name and nature, is a social event, intended for meeting and mingling. Eliminate that aspect and it doesn't deserve to be called an event at all.

 

+1, as they say. Great post. If it degrades the quality of the game it does potentially affect me. Note that I'm not particularly talking about Drive by events in New Zealand or Flash Mobs. I'm sick and tired of being labeled a big meanie by the handfull of defenders of lame around here. We all know what is lame and cheesy and half-arsed be it in this game, any other game, or pretty much anything else in life. Am I a big meanie when my 14 yr. old does a half-arsed job of vacuuming his room, and I call him out on it? Is that just my personal preference of how vacuuming should be done? C'mon, you're killing me here.

The basic difference is that you control the life and actions of your child. Attempting to do the same with a bunch of strangers is pushing your agenda too far.

 

Awesome! When ranting on the defenders of lame, there can be no greater honor than a personal reply from sbell111. You sir, are like the Dave Ulmer and L. Ron Hubbard combined of the DOL.

 

Welcome back! Hope all is well. Good thing you didn't live up here this Winter. Boy, what a brutal one.

This kind of rudeness is why many are not participating in the forums.

 

The rudest person in the history of these forums, bar none, playing the victim card. Gotta love it. You have a nice day.

[+RobDJr]

It seems to me that as long as the event organizer or his representative is present, then there will always be a social element because an attendee will always be able to stop by and visit.

 

 

That is true. The problem is a drive-by event implies more: "You can stop by and visit. Or not."

 

That is the same slippery slope that resulted in poor logs becoming commonplace. We went from "write about your experience" to "write about your experience, or TFTC" to "Don't write anything if you don't want to."

 

I, at least, would like to see more of an effort to avoid catering to the "do as little as possible" mindset.

[+popokiiti]

Haven't had any drive-by events here, the closest was 5 events in one day. Started with a breakfast event, ended with the New Year event in the evening. Some folks managed to attend all 5, others just some of them. Fun day, but tiring (first event at 7am) - the best part was chatting with fellow cachers. Each event was at least half an hour, average was an hour or two, the evening being the longest one.

A drive by suggests to me a fleeting meeting with the organizer and a small chance of other cachers being there at the same time. Almost a non-event. I would have to try one to see, but am not sure that it is my cup of tea....

[Cascade Reviewer]

I think it would be best if we stop the discussions about who is more rude than the other.

 

Let's all try to practice being friendly and helpful towards everyone, thanks.

[team tisri]

It's all very well to talk of people who aren't social by nature but to try and create events (that facilitate the social aspect of geocaching) in ways that don't require some form of social interaction seems stupid. If you don't like social occasions then don't go to events. It's not rocket science.

 

We don't change the game of geocaching to cater to those who don't want to look for hidden containers, we don't expect vegetarian restaurants to serve meat dishes for those who aren't vegetarians, and we don't send cyclists around Nascar circuits to cater for those who would rather watch the Tour de France than the Nascar. Why do events need to consider those who don't want to be at least a little bit sociable?

[+thebruce0]

We don't change the game of geocaching to cater to those who don't want to look for hidden containers

Except that you know, Events don't have hidden containers.

Earthcaches have no hidden containers.

Virtuals and Webcams, though grandfathered, are still 'geocache listings' that have no hidden containers.

Benchmarks aren't themselves hidden containers (in the same sense as physical geocaches), and as physical objects to find don't even belong to a user.

All are still different experiences in the "geocaching" pastime (according to Groundspeak)

 

Why do events need to consider those who don't want to be at least a little bit sociable?

 

Again, no event has yet been created that doesn't 'want' to be at least a little bit sociable. Even if not, Events are not required to be "sociable" precisely because that arbitrary concept cannot be adequately policed, regardless of how long or short an event actually is.

Edited March 21, 2014 by thebruce0

[+J Grouchy]

Last August during the souvenir frenzy a local Atlanta group held a "flash mob" event every day of the month. I didn't object (and even participated) because A- each one was held at a local landmark or "famous" spot in town and B- it offered a face-to-face opportunity to gather cachers together to finally put a face to a name.

 

Recently, however, I've seen a few individually created events pop up...one actually being in a parking area BEHIND a Target store...that consist of arriving, signing a log, then leaving. Those, to me, are not at all even intriguing to me. I mean, no real "meeting" planned and not even an interesting place for a photo op. It's the event cache equivalent of an LPC.

[+L0ne.R]

I suppose it's human nature, if not kept in check, to drag a game down to the lowest common denominator (in this case, the smiley). It's too bad that Groundspeak has sanctioned it over the years with emphasis on the numbers -- public statistics tab, challenge caches, app with a canned online log message - which suggests that once you get your smiley the online log is of little importance. Maybe events shouldn't have a smiley reward. Without the smiley then going to events could really be about socializing. They could be handled like a Lab Cache - listed in your inventory, but doesn't count towards your smile count.

[team tisri]

We don't change the game of geocaching to cater to those who don't want to look for hidden containers

Except that you know, Events don't have hidden containers.

Earthcaches have no hidden containers.

Virtuals and Webcams, though grandfathered, are still 'geocache listings' that have no hidden containers.

Benchmarks aren't themselves hidden containers (in the same sense as physical geocaches), and as physical objects to find don't even belong to a user.

All are still different experiences in the "geocaching" pastime (according to Groundspeak)

 

Events are an unusual one - the others still require the overall process of "go outside and find a specific location". Arguably events do the same, and so are little more than virtuals but without the requirement to answer a question.

 

Why do events need to consider those who don't want to be at least a little bit sociable?

 

Again, no event has yet been created that doesn't 'want' to be at least a little bit sociable. Even if not, Events are not required to be "sociable" precisely because that arbitrary concept cannot be adequately policed, regardless of how long or short an event actually is.

 

"Sociable" can't be objectively defined or policed, I guess it just keeps coming back to the eternal question of why people would want to log an event unless they actually attended the event and talked to some other geocachers.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

 

PS, note it reads "facilitate the social aspect". At worst, one might make an argument that if the event provides in any way a method for geocachers to 'be social' with each other (whatever that arbitrary term may entail), then it should be considered a valid event listing.

 

Sometimes it seems that this game has become more about finding loopholes in the guidelines that will facilitate increasing ones find count as fast as possible rather than a game about finding geocaches.

 

 

[+briansnat]

 

PS, note it reads "facilitate the social aspect". At worst, one might make an argument that if the event provides in any way a method for geocachers to 'be social' with each other (whatever that arbitrary term may entail), then it should be considered a valid event listing.

 

Sometimes it seems that this game has become more about finding loopholes in the guidelines that will facilitate increasing ones find count as fast as possible rather than a game about finding geocaches.

 

Sometimes?