Jump to content

Groundspeaks lays down some event time rules...


ArtieD

Recommended Posts

Nothing's banned, it's just that your flash mob needs to last a half hour, not five minutes.

 

But this change has also effects with respect to those events where the idea is to offer a physical activity to make socializing much more comfortable for the target audience and where the period spent at the posted coordinates is not the real event, but only what Groundspeak enforces. It somehow feels quite artificial to have to spend a minimum time on a parking lot.

I do not care about flash mobs and most of the cachers who ask questions in this thread do not have flash mabs in mind.

 

I even would welcome a 60 minute limit on the minimum length of an event, but at the same would very much that not the whole time of an event has to be spent at the posted coordinates.

 

Myself and many others still would like to understand why the argument behind insisting on the static setting is that events are for socializing while CITOs are for picking up trash.

 

I really, really would appreciate if you could be so kind and explain me why eating pizza is a side activity which falls under socializing for you and going for a walk does not. My interest is sincere and not for the sake of arguing.

Link to comment

 

I think that it is simply to put some boundaries on the valuated thing that is an Event Cache. I think it is to help define the "spirit" of an event on Geocaching.com, where it more clearly sets lines between what is an event and what is an Event Cache.

 

In my opinion, it does the converse. All of the events which I really enjoyed have not consisted in spending some time at the posted coordinates. While of course every such event could still happen after a 30 minutes artificial event, it is still this inactive 30 minutes period which is somehow what Groundspeak then communicates as being an event cache.

If the spirit of geocaching and events is defined in that way, I could not identify myself with the spirit of geocaching any longer.

 

I also think that there might be a hope that it makes event designers be more thoughtful and deliberate with the obligations that come along with being an Event Cache host on Geocaching.com.

 

I do not that think that there are fixed obligations for an event cache host.

 

For example, I do not appreciate if the host welcomes every participant separately while others like you appreciate this sort of behaviour.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

Of late in this thread, the discussion has turned to examining the intent of the guideline change, and various "what if?" hypotheticals. As a reminder, "event stacking" and "event being at the posted coordinates" and "event must have a start and end time" are not new concepts. The sole changes are about minimum duration. Nothing's banned, it's just that your flash mob needs to last a half hour, not five minutes.

So five minute flash mobs are banned.

 

I'd like to remind everyone that we've already had a clear, simple explanation from Geocaching HQ of the reason for the change. It really is this simple:

 

As the guidelines mention, "Event Caches facilitate the social aspect of geocaching." When an event is only 5 minutes long (or less!), it's unlikely much socializing can take place.

 

The 30-minute minimum timeframe aims to ensure that a minimum amount of time is allowed to form meaningful connections.

Rock Chalk and Keystone have provided the "official" rationale for the change. I cannot complain that Grounspeak isn't sharing the rationale.

 

The issues are:

1. the "official" rationale doesn't make complete sense. Why can't meaningful connections be made in fifteen minutes or five minutes? Explain the success of speed dating. And 30 minutes (or any other time) doesn't necessarily mean that meaninful connections are any easier to make. Several people have indicated that events that consist of sitting in a restaurant or pub drinking beer don't really encourage any interaction with people you are just meeting for the first time.

 

2. The shorter time limit provided a workaround for people who wanted to have an event that started at the posted coordinates but then moved. Just have a five minute event at the start or end of the real event. To get this listed now you have to sit in one place for half an hour. My guess is a half hour sit and greet before some acrivity will have most people showing up for the last five minutes, or if held at the end will have people leaving after the first five minutes. So while having events at fixed location isn't new, a fairly reasonable workaround has been turned into a workaround that is just annoying enough that this might stop its use. However, there still seems to be a desire from people to have events that don't stay in one location and which may or may not involve finding physical caches. It would be nice for Groundspeak to explore guidelines that allow these options (particularly if they make the workarounds intolerable).

Link to comment

[

Maybe the best change for Event Caches is that they no longer give you another Smiley for attending. Then there's nothing stopping anyone from having any kind of event they want to, and the guidelines would be quite simple for publication.

 

I was about to post the same thing and it's something that I've suggested before. Of course it doesn't stop GS from creating souvenirs for attending an event on a specific day and people creating events so that people can acquire the souvenir. Nevermind the fact that in most countries in the world March 14th is written as 14/3 and not 3/14.

Link to comment

But the latter will be listed if you add language that states that there is a 30-minute window at the listed coordinates for people to arrive, get oriented, or whatever.

But, wait, I thought the purpose of the change was to enhance socializing. In what way does giving people time to "arrive, get oriented, or whatever" enhance socializing? Indeed, if one were truly interested in enhancing socializing, I would think they would want people to arrive on time, not extend the period where it was legal to arrive.

 

There simply needs to be a requirement met that the event is about gathering geocachers, not about taking people on a hike into a nature preserve.

Taking people on a hike into a nature preserve, for sure, gathers geocachers, so it seems absurd to say the events are about gathering geocachers, then use that as an argument against hikes.

 

The hike could happen without being listed on Geocaching.com...

But the question is what is motivating us to prevent it from being listed on geocaching.com.

 

...Because that's what Groundspeak has determined constitutes an Event Cache on Geocaching.com.

Are you seriously arguing that GS says it's so, so we shouldn't complain?

 

Of late in this thread, the discussion has turned to examining the intent of the guideline change, and various "what if?" hypotheticals. As a reminder, "event stacking" and "event being at the posted coordinates" and "event must have a start and end time" are not new concepts. The sole changes are about minimum duration. Nothing's banned, it's just that your flash mob needs to last a half hour, not five minutes.

Well, yes, that's true, except that the hard time limit has raised the question of what defines that time limit, hence whether it requires anyone at all to be at GZ, or whether everyone can go on a hike. The time limit is, from what I can tell, trying to force the event to be in a fixed place without actually explaining what makes it fixed to that place, let alone why it should be fixed to that place.

 

I'd like to remind everyone that we've already had a clear, simple explanation from Geocaching HQ of the reason for the change. It really is this simple:

 

As the guidelines mention, "Event Caches facilitate the social aspect of geocaching." When an event is only 5 minutes long (or less!), it's unlikely much socializing can take place.

 

The 30-minute minimum timeframe aims to ensure that a minimum amount of time is allowed to form meaningful connections.

The problem is that previous restrictions tried to nail down the location, but, without a time limit, people were free to be at the location for a minute, and then have the rest of the event, beyond the time limit, move. Then in this update, the time limit was added, justified as you explain by "the social aspect", but, as cezanne has so eloquently explained, the social aspect is not debilitated by the event moving. The time limited alone is justified by socialization, but the fact that the movement restriction now enforceable through the time limit cannot be justified in the same way. As far as I can see, it can't be justified at all, but that was OK with everyone as long as it couldn't be enforced.

 

But, really, this is all minutia. The important question is once the cache is listed as happening from time A through time B, what practical impact does that have on what actually happens at GZ from time A through time B. The guidelines don't say that, and the justification you've quoted doesn't make it clearer.

 

Honestly, I thought if I asked, someone would come up with some cases that forced me to concede that, despite the cost, this solves a real problem. But as the conversation drags on, I have to consider more and more that this is nothing more than someone trying to enforce a grudge against hiking events, something they tried to do before but were thwarted by people having 5 minute events and then leading hikes. I've never even seen a hiking event, so I don't personally care whether they're allowed, but it annoys me that I can find no justification for prohibiting them beyond arbitrary preference.

Link to comment

But the latter will be listed if you add language that states that there is a 30-minute window at the listed coordinates for people to arrive, get oriented, or whatever.

But, wait, I thought the purpose of the change was to enhance socializing. In what way does giving people time to "arrive, get oriented, or whatever" enhance socializing? Indeed, if one were truly interested in enhancing socializing, I would think they would want people to arrive on time, not extend the period where it was legal to arrive.

Umm. That is socializing...to an extent. It meets the requirement, and, as I've explained ad nauseum, there is still a way to have this 30-minute window be part of an event which might "move" or have "an activity" such as a hike or bike or rafting trip.

 

If we're talking about any other event, it will last longer than 30 minutes anyway. And for a "Flash Mob" event, that has also been outlined by others for what that will look like.

 

A "5-minute flash mob" can still happen, but the event will need to leave a 30-minute window +/- around the "Flash Mob" portion of the event. That time can be before, after, or around the "Flash Mob", and may be a time to simply laugh at what y'all did, or whatever. It just means that one needs to plan an event which is more than a quick drive-by, wave-and-leave opportunity for another smiley face.

 

There simply needs to be a requirement met that the event is about gathering geocachers, not about taking people on a hike into a nature preserve.

Taking people on a hike into a nature preserve, for sure, gathers geocachers, so it seems absurd to say the events are about gathering geocachers, then use that as an argument against hikes.

You're taking this out of context.

 

I'm NOT arguing against hikes AT ALL. I've demonstrated how to create an event which is a "cezanne-approved" style Event Cache.

 

The hike could happen without being listed on Geocaching.com...

But the question is what is motivating us to prevent it from being listed on geocaching.com.

The fact that you are planning a hike is not an Event Cache. An Event Cache has the duration and location requirements as listed by Groundspeak in the guidelines. An event in the muggle sense is something apart from an Event Cache, unless it meets the listing requirements for duration and location...just like a cache needs a container and a logbook.

 

...Because that's what Groundspeak has determined constitutes an Event Cache on Geocaching.com.

Are you seriously arguing that GS says it's so, so we shouldn't complain?

In a word? No.

 

In more words? You do realize that we can take our business elsewhere, right? It all sounds like all the conflated disgusting hyperbole that comes up every time a guideline change happens--see bflentje's post above.

 

There are simple ways to keep playing the way we were before all of this, unless knickers are twisted too tightly and you need a break from it all.

Link to comment

It appears to me that as far a Groundspeak is concerned, the points don't matter.

After some more thought, I'm going to take back this comment.

 

Instead I think the points matter a lot to Groundspeak. Find counts, souvenirs, and features like statistics provide "game mechanics" that for many geocachers enhance the experience of geocaching. Groundspeak is well aware of this and uses it to promote the game and to attract new geocachera as well as retain those aready playing. But they also know that if the points or souvenirs appear too easy to get then they have less impact and may even alienate some geocachers. Even when Groundspeak has full control, as in when they award souvenirs, there have been misteps - as in 31 souvenirs for August in 2013. That arracted many people who attempted to find a cache every day that month. But it alienated others who saw people hide caches for the sole purpose of making this easier than it would have been for people trying a streak in a month without the souvenirs; or who weren't going for a streak and found it annoying to get a souvenir for finding caches on the days they were going to cache anyhow.

 

Events may be seen a bonus for Groundspeak marketers. When cachers socialize and discuss caches or trade travel bugs, that increases interest. But getting points for events that consist of nothing other than a group of cachers getting together for a few seconds or for doing things they would be doing anyway, may alienate some from attending events at all, and may reduce the ability of a WIGAS point (or a souvenir) for attending an event to attract more "business'.

 

In most cases it would be in Groundspeak's interest to have more caches and more events (and more opportunity to score a WIGAS). But markerting decisions have to be made to ensure that the value of these mechanisms to Groundspeak is not diluted.

 

I agree with your thoughts on points mattering to Groundspeak, although you may have over-analyzed it. I suspect they know it on a more visceral level.

 

PS: Would you mind adding the definition of WIGAS to your signature? I know, but keep forgetting, and it appears in almost all of your posts recently. Do you know how long it took me to figure out that "puritan" really meant "purist"? Now, this "WIGAS" acronym. Makes my head feel like I just ducked it into ice water.

Link to comment

It's SO EASY to have the 30 minutes built into an event it's just mind-boggling to hear arguments against it. Those 30 minutes address so many needs and personalities of this game, I don't see why some can't just accept that it's the yin to their yang of wanting to get out and be "active" at an event too.

Exactly! It would take at least 30 minutes to make sure that everybody that wanted to attend, was there before heading off on your hike or whatever. I either don't really understand the issue, or I don't understand the nay-sayers.
Link to comment

Umm. That is socializing...to an extent. It meets the requirement, and, as I've explained ad nauseum, there is still a way to have this 30-minute window be part of an event which might "move" or have "an activity" such as a hike or bike or rafting trip.

 

Nonone denied that such a workaround exists. However the hike, bike etc trip is not recognized as part of the event cache by Groundspeak which makes me very sad. It's a bit like someone who does hard and good work for his/her company and gets paid reasonably as required by some law, but never gets recognition and appreciation.

 

There are workarounds for many things on gc.com, but typically this relates this aspects where I do not feel that one achieves is something which is valued at Groundspeak. So let me rephrase what I have the greatest issue with and which your repeated explanations of workarounds will not change: It's the feeling that apparently the event cache type I enjoy the most and which is attractive for a reasonably large group of cachers and has been publishable at gc.com for many years is apparently now something which is not valued by Groundspeak at all.

 

It is one thing to require 30 minutes at the posted coordinates (even thought I do not think that this can be argued for by the need for socializing) and another to declare the event to be the part that takes place at the posted coordinates.

 

Your statement that 5 minute flash mobs are still possible, one just needs to stay longer at the posted coordinates somehow is quite

sympomatic of what bothers me. Such an event can still take place with a workaround - it does not increase the level of socialiizing by definition, it will always depend on the people. So what happens if someone describes a 30 minutes event in a way that many flash mob events have been described, just increase the length to 30 minutes. So e.g. dancing around a well in a park for 30 minutes.

This fulfills all requirements of an event cache according to the guidelines, but if the people do not talk to each other will involve less socialising than a typical hike.

 

In the way Groundspeak deals with event caches, it makes mem feel that they tolerate the set up that after what the actual event for them is about, that other activities take place and are mentioned on the cache page (we all know that there are things which are not allowed to be mentioned on the cache page), but they do neither encourage it nor care in the least how degraded organizers of such events must feel by the definition what constitutes a geocaching event due to the new guidelines.

 

Groundspeak also tolerates that owners of trackables delete all logs of their trackables after some years or include insulting text on their trackable pages. What they do with event caches makes me feel similarly: They do not forbid the workaround mentioned, but they do not regard it as part of the actual event cache. That really hurts and moreover, I still cannot understand why socializing is the used argument and why some people apparently think that eating pizza goes well with socializing and going for a walk does not.

 

No workaround whatsoever will change this sadness which at least in my case is sincere.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

It's SO EASY to have the 30 minutes built into an event it's just mind-boggling to hear arguments against it. Those 30 minutes address so many needs and personalities of this game, I don't see why some can't just accept that it's the yin to their yang of wanting to get out and be "active" at an event too.

Exactly! It would take at least 30 minutes to make sure that everybody that wanted to attend, was there before heading off on your hike or whatever. I either don't really understand the issue, or I don't understand the nay-sayers.

 

I happened to attend several such events and we never needed 30 minutes to head off. Of course I came e.g. a bit earlier to put on my treking boots, get ready etc but I did not socialize while doing so and never saw this part of the geocaching event.

 

The new situation is somehow absurd to me: Now getting prepared for an activity gets the official recognition of being the event cache and the rest is just tolerated and can be mentioned on the cache listing. If you and others think that a hike or whatever absolutely needs this official 30 minutes preparation phase, they could rewrite the rules for event caches to require at least 30 minutes at the posted coordinates. It at least would give those who have events that include something else than sitting and standing around (apart from socializing) the recognition that what they do is part of an geocaching event and is not just allowed by a workaround Groundspeak does not sufficiently care about.

 

There is still another aspect I have not yet mentioned. Somewhere I read the formulation that Groundspeak is aware of the fact that most geocachers are over-achievers and that many event caches take longer than 30 minutes. Somehow it makes me feel that they regards a hiking event set up along the workaround solution as one that meets the lowest requirements. So a 2 hour event at a restaurant where people eat and play games is beating by far an event where one spends 30 minutes at a parking lot to prepare for a hike from their perspective. That's not a very bright perspective for someone who loves event caches that involve physical activity. It feels a bit like when noone interferes when you create a lot of noise, but you are perfectly aware of not being really welcome.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

Umm. That is socializing...to an extent.

No, there's really nothing inherently social about "arrive, get oriented, or whatever". It could include socializing, but no more so than the hike you won't let me start until we've all done our arrive, get oriented, or whatever thing for 30 minutes.

 

It meets the requirement, and, as I've explained ad nauseum, there is still a way to have this 30-minute window be part of an event which might "move" or have "an activity" such as a hike or bike or rafting trip.

I've also repeated over and over that I have no problem with the minimum times, I'm just wondering why they're so tightly coupled to the requirement that everyone has to spend the time in one spot.

 

A "5-minute flash mob" can still happen, but the event will need to leave a 30-minute window +/- around the "Flash Mob" portion of the event.

This still doesn't answer the question of what has to happen in that 30-minute window, i.e., who needs to be where doing what. On the one hand, that's entirely unspecified, on the other hand, people like you arguing passionately in favor of the minimum times seem completely convinced that the requirement is that the host be planted at GZ.

 

The fact that you are planning a hike is not an Event Cache.

And I'm trying to figure out why the hike I'm planning can't be an event cache. Nothing being said here in support of these guidelines explains what problems are created by an event that starts at point A and ends at point B. Well, except the circular argument that it's against the rules.

Link to comment

It's SO EASY to have the 30 minutes built into an event it's just mind-boggling to hear arguments against it. Those 30 minutes address so many needs and personalities of this game, I don't see why some can't just accept that it's the yin to their yang of wanting to get out and be "active" at an event too.

Exactly! It would take at least 30 minutes to make sure that everybody that wanted to attend, was there before heading off on your hike or whatever. I either don't really understand the issue, or I don't understand the nay-sayers.

 

I happened to attend several such events and we never needed 30 minutes to head off. Of course I came e.g. a bit earlier to put on my treking boots, get ready etc but I did not socialize while doing so and never saw this part of the geocaching event.

Perhaps, if the event is small enough where you can easily count heads and say with satisfaction that all that logged Will Attend notes are there. But at least in my neck of the woods, that would be a very rare event, indeed. We'd have to wait for a while just to make sure that everybody that wanted to go on the hike (or whatever) hadn't simply gotten a late start or been delayed by traffic. Maybe not 30 minutes, but certainly 15.

 

Exactly what were those events like that you are feeling so much grief for the loss of? What were they like? Maybe that would help us understand why you are feeling so sad about this that you are willing to talk for days about it.

Link to comment

And I'm trying to figure out why the hike I'm planning can't be an event cache.

It's been a while since Groundspeak has been saying that while you can have all sorts of activities at an event, the guidelines for "Attending" an event were to show up at the posted coordinates some time between the start time and end time. You couldn't require anyone to participate in any activity you had planned (just as you couldn't force them to socialize <_<). So you can have a hike as an activity for the event but the requirements for attending meant that there was a posted coordinates (perhaps the trail) and stated start time an end to show up at the post coordinates.

 

I'm too lazy to try an find what discussion was at the time. I suspect we all accepted the change because there were workarounds. These workarounds might even have been suggested be a reviewer or lackey trying to explain those changes.

 

One workaround was to have a five minute event a the start of the hike, then anyone who wanted go on the hike would leave to go on the hike. For people who wanted to make the event involve the hike itself, you could have a fixed coordinate on the hike where you stopped for a few minutes. Anyone who showed up at that location in the stated time window, could log that they attended the event. (The local Sierra Club does something like this every year for John Muir's birthday. They have a designated time for meeting on the summit of Muir Peak. They have organized hikes by several routes, but you are also free to do the hike on your own. Just be on the summit at the designated time to sing "Happy Birthday".)

 

The new time limit still allows the workarounds, but half an hour is now long enough to be an annoyance.

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

It's been a while since Groundspeak has been saying that while you can have all sorts of activities at an event, the guidelines for "Attending" an event were to show up at the posted coordinates some time between the start time and end time.

 

But having rules for when an attended log can be written is something different than defining what a geocache event is. With their new setup one cannot have all sorts of activities at events - dynamic ones have to happen outside of the event which I regard as a big shame.

 

You couldn't require anyone to participate in any activity you had planned (just as you couldn't force them to socialize <_<).

 

Right and that's exactly the point: socializing cannot be enforced either

 

I wonder however how CITOs fit into the picture. Keystone wrote that they do not need to be static because there the goal is to pick up litter (which by the way cannot be enforced either). Then he continued with stating that events need to be static because their goal is socializing. That's very confusing for me and sounds like socializing necessarily removes not moving away from the posted coordinates.

 

If it only were for handling when attended logs are allowed, they easily could have something like a period for guaranteed logs and what happens outside is up to the organizers (as long as fits into the context of a geocaching event).

 

So you can have a hike as an activity for the event but the requirements for attending meat that there was a posted coordinates (perhaps the trail) and stated start time an end to show up at the post coordinates.

 

A hike which starts after the end time of the event is somehow not part of the event.

I would not have an issue with "end of period for guaranteed attended logs".

 

The new time limit still allows the workarounds, but half an hour is now long enough to be an annoyance.

 

Furthermore, before it was required to post end times for events, one could at least write the cache page in a way that the activity is seen as part of the event. Of course everyone could log an attended who showed up at the posted coordinates, but with this new version I would not want to log an attended for such events at all. The activity is not part of the event and logging an attended for spending some time on a parking lot seems very lame to me (as my own logging is regarded).

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

 

This still doesn't answer the question of what has to happen in that 30-minute window, i.e., who needs to be where doing what. On the one hand, that's entirely unspecified, on the other hand, people like you arguing passionately in favor of the minimum times seem completely convinced that the requirement is that the host be planted at GZ.

 

The fact that you are planning a hike is not an Event Cache.

And I'm trying to figure out why the hike I'm planning can't be an event cache. Nothing being said here in support of these guidelines explains what problems are created by an event that starts at point A and ends at point B. Well, except the circular argument that it's against the rules.

First, I NEVER said that I believe the owner has to be "planted" at GZ for 30 minutes. But I do think that it isn't that HARD for an owner to be present for 30 minutes at stated coordinates (or within sight or earshot) for an event or an Event Cache.

 

The hike CAN BE THE EVENT, but there needs to be a minimum requirement met for how long people have to meet, or to come even if they aren't hiking, etc. That way Groundspeak can say that the Event Cache is about a meeting and socializing of geocachers, and the event can still go on as planned.

Link to comment

The hike CAN BE THE EVENT

The hike can be an activity that is planned for the event. It might even be the only activity (other that the 30 minutes standing around [airquotes]socializing[/airquotes]).

 

Given then need for a start time and a stop time and the rules for logging the event by people who aren't taking part in the hike activity, it isn't even clear if the hike activity is part of the event or an activity some cachers are doing after the event. I suppose one is free to interpret start and end time as refering to the section of the event when you have to show up to say you've attended. It's kinda of equivalent to having signed the physical log.

 

I don't think anyone in misunderstanding the guidelines and claiming you can't have a hike as an activity. And I believe, that even if we don't agree with the reasons for them, we understand the rules for logging "attended". This last change is controversial because the "5 minute" event provided an easy workaround to comply with the logging rules. Making the period for logging arbitrarily longer, only makes the workaround less desirable.

 

I also contended that it has not been shown that making the period that is set aside to define who attended 30 minutes, will change in any meaningful way the ability to make "meaningful connections". Sorry Keystone and Rock Chalk, I don't buy the "official" reason for this change.

 

Sadly geocaching has become controlled by the WIGAS. No longer does anyone care if caches or events are fun, interesting, unique, etc. Instead they must comply with rules for logging a find/attended.

Link to comment

The hike CAN BE THE EVENT,

 

According to the guidelines and Keystone's statement it can't.

 

One only can go for a hike before and/or after the event and one can invite for the hike on the event page.

 

 

but there needs to be a minimum requirement met for how long people have to meet, or to come even if they aren't hiking, etc.

 

If that is what is needed, one could simply require that at least 30 minutes are spent at the posted coordinates.

The guidelines read differently and apparently because Groundspeak seems to think that socializing and moving around do not go together.

 

If I would need to use your suggested workaround to get a hiking event published, the formulation Groundspeak is using on some of their pages would me end up feeling like an under-achiever because the official length of the event is at the lower limit as of course noone wants to spend more than 30 minutes at a parking lot (even 30 minutes are too long for many people for that purpose and they will come later, I would do the same).

 

The workaround cannot address the issue that Groundspeak's message is that hiking is not an activity which is welcome for events and only tolerated via a workaround outside of the actual event.

Link to comment

The hike CAN BE THE EVENT

The hike can be an activity that is planned for the event. It might even be the only activity (other that the 30 minutes standing around [airquotes]socializing[/airquotes]).

 

Given then need for a start time and a stop time and the rules for logging the event by people who aren't taking part in the hike activity, it isn't even clear if the hike activity is part of the event or an activity some cachers are doing after the event. I suppose one is free to interpret start and end time as refering to the section of the event when you have to show up to say you've attended. It's kinda of equivalent to having signed the physical log.

 

I don't think anyone in misunderstanding the guidelines and claiming you can't have a hike as an activity. And I believe, that even if we don't agree with the reasons for them, we understand the rules for logging "attended". This last change is controversial because the "5 minute" event provided an easy workaround to comply with the logging rules. Making the period for logging arbitrarily longer, only makes the workaround less desirable.

 

I also contended that it has not been shown that making the period that is set aside to define who attended 30 minutes, will change in any meaningful way the ability to make "meaningful connections". Sorry Keystone and Rock Chalk, I don't buy the "official" reason for this change.

 

Sadly geocaching has become controlled by the WIGAS. No longer does anyone care if caches or events are fun, interesting, unique, etc. Instead they must comply with rules for logging a find/attended.

Thanks for reminding me why it's pointless to provide simple explanations for simple guideline changes -- this being the first guideline change in nearly a year.

 

If the answer conflicts with your narrative, you'll simply reject the answer. The WIGAS narrative is annoying and getting a bit old.

 

I won't play your game anymore.

Link to comment

The hike CAN BE THE EVENT

The hike can be an activity that is planned for the event. It might even be the only activity (other that the 30 minutes standing around [airquotes]socializing[/airquotes]).

 

Given then need for a start time and a stop time and the rules for logging the event by people who aren't taking part in the hike activity, it isn't even clear if the hike activity is part of the event or an activity some cachers are doing after the event. I suppose one is free to interpret start and end time as refering to the section of the event when you have to show up to say you've attended. It's kinda of equivalent to having signed the physical log.

 

I don't think anyone in misunderstanding the guidelines and claiming you can't have a hike as an activity. And I believe, that even if we don't agree with the reasons for them, we understand the rules for logging "attended". This last change is controversial because the "5 minute" event provided an easy workaround to comply with the logging rules. Making the period for logging arbitrarily longer, only makes the workaround less desirable.

 

I also contended that it has not been shown that making the period that is set aside to define who attended 30 minutes, will change in any meaningful way the ability to make "meaningful connections". Sorry Keystone and Rock Chalk, I don't buy the "official" reason for this change.

 

Sadly geocaching has become controlled by the WIGAS. No longer does anyone care if caches or events are fun, interesting, unique, etc. Instead they must comply with rules for logging a find/attended.

 

So much drama over 25 minutes....This guideline adjustment has not "flipped a switch" suddenly making every event uninteresting, not fun, or boring....Nor has it suddenly changed the reasons for which people attend events. As with everything in this activity, some people are after numbers (including challenges to get x number of cache type), some are not...This rule modification changes very little in the scheme of things...Have seen nothing in this thread that proves impending disaster for how events are organized, presented, or scheduled. :blink:

Link to comment

So much drama over 25 minutes....This guideline adjustment has not "flipped a switch" suddenly making every event uninteresting, not fun, or boring....Nor has it suddenly changed the reasons for which people attend events. As with everything in this activity, some people are after numbers (including challenges to get x number of cache type), some are not...This rule modification changes very little in the scheme of things...Have seen nothing in this thread that proves impending disaster for how events are organized, presented, or scheduled. :blink:

Sure the five minute flash mob workaround has just changed to the 30 minute flash mob work around. So you can still turn a hike or a river paddle into an event. But if the reason for the change was to encourage more socializing at events, I don't think it will have that effect.

 

Your reply tends to lead credence to my WIGAS point. If thirty minutes is meant to end the flood of flash mob events in some areas because there are cachers getting their knickers twisted because its too easy to get a WIGAS for an event or to qualify for some challenge by attending a certain number of events, it might have some effect. I think 30 minutes is long enough that some hikes or river paddles will say "The heck with it" and just not list their event on GC.com. And of course if you're in an area where people are putting on five minute flash mobs just because they can, you might have only a few of these changed to 30 minutes and the rest will go away (and make it once again safe to have a challenge to attend x events).

 

Hey. I would buy an official explanation that says the 30 minute limit is to untwist the knickers of those who think 25 minutes is too short for an event.

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

So much drama over 25 minutes....This guideline adjustment has not "flipped a switch" suddenly making every event uninteresting, not fun, or boring....Nor has it suddenly changed the reasons for which people attend events. As with everything in this activity, some people are after numbers (including challenges to get x number of cache type), some are not...This rule modification changes very little in the scheme of things...Have seen nothing in this thread that proves impending disaster for how events are organized, presented, or scheduled. :blink:

Sure the five minute flash mob workaround has just changed to the 30 minute flash mob work around. So you can still turn a hike or a river paddle into an event. But if the reason for the change was to encourage more socializing at events, I don't think it will have that effect.

 

Your reply tends to lead credence to my WIGAS point. If thirty minutes is meant to end the flood of flash mob events in some areas because there are cachers getting their knickers twisted because its too easy to get a WIGAS for an event or to qualify for some challenge by attending a certain number of events, it might have some effect. I think 30 minutes is long enough that some hikes or river paddles will say "The heck with it" and just not list their event on GC.com. And of course if you're in an area where people are putting on five minute flash mobs just because they can, you might have only a few of these changed to 30 minutes and the rest will go away (and make it once again safe to have a challenge to attend x events).

 

Hey. I would buy an official explanation that says the 30 minute limit is to untwist the knickers of those who think 25 minutes is too short for an event.

Wow!! That post is a true collector's item, Toz! Two WIGAS references (without a definition, as usual) and two twisted panty ('cuse me... "knickers") references in one post! And not one single Puritan.

 

If they set the limit at 25 minutes, you would argue for 20.

 

I doubt Groundspeak feels this decision is perfect, but that they are trying their best to do something to keep the event smileys at least somewhat meaningful. Thank them for at least attempting to stop LPC quality events, even if it doesn't work completely.

Link to comment

Funny thing is, I can't recall ever getting out of the parking lot in under 30 minutes on most hikes I've done (unless I'm hiking alone). Those folks that can do it in 5 minutes are truly inspirational :laughing:

 

So you folks that are doing this with groups, are you like synchronizing watches and stuff a day ahead of time?

 

Sounds more like a SWAT team, than a hike.

Edited by Touchstone
Link to comment

If they set the limit at 25 minutes, you would argue for 20.

I would continue to argue that meaningful connections don't happen just because you sit in one place for some arbitrary length of time.

 

I doubt Groundspeak feels this decision is perfect, but that they are trying their best to do something to keep the event smileys at least somewhat meaningful. Thank them for at least attempting to stop LPC quality events, even if it doesn't work completely.

LPC quality events ? :huh:

 

Just as Groundspeak shouldn't be banning caches just because they don't come up to Knowschad's standard of quality, I don't think they should be making judgement on what is a quality event.

 

That said, if they were to give that as the rationale I'd find more understandable than saying you can't make meaningful connections in less than half an hour.

 

Groundspeak has made many guidelines I don't agree with. I reserve the right to not agree. However when a lackey has posted that they realize that good caches/events may have to change to be published but that there were abuses that could not be handled some other way, I'm more likely to accept the change. I'm quite surprised that there have been no examples so far of abuse.

 

I honestly expected to be told about real problems caused by flash mob events - not just that people are getting their knickers twisted. There have been a few folks mention iffy permission. A reviewer might not question a five minute event in a parking lot, but a half hour one may get questioned as to whether the mall is OK with this. I'm not aware of any problems in my area, but perhaps Groundspeak has real examples of this. Sharing some knowledge of how flash mob events caused some real issues and I might be more willing to accept some limitations.

Link to comment

Perhaps, if the event is small enough where you can easily count heads and say with satisfaction that all that logged Will Attend notes are there. But at least in my neck of the woods, that would be a very rare event, indeed. We'd have to wait for a while just to make sure that everybody that wanted to go on the hike (or whatever) hadn't simply gotten a late start or been delayed by traffic. Maybe not 30 minutes, but certainly 15.

I can't speak for cezanne, and I would expect the same slow start you suggest in my area, too. But the point here is that there's nothing obviously wrong with the event organizer simply making clear when the hike starts and that anyone late will just have to catch up. The observation that many geocachers in many areas are habitually late for appointments is completely irrelevant.

 

It's been a while since Groundspeak has been saying that while you can have all sorts of activities at an event, the guidelines for "Attending" an event were to show up at the posted coordinates some time between the start time and end time.

And I think I've made it quite clear that I have absolutely no problem with a minimum time within which anyone showing up at the posted coordinates is considered in attendence. What I've repeatedly asked is whether the host needs to be there to greet them for that entire time, and, if so, why?

 

One workaround was to have a five minute event a the start of the hike, then anyone who wanted go on the hike would leave to go on the hike.

Yes, we've already talked about that workaround multiple times. The only unanswered question -- still unanswered -- is whether the host can go on that hike or not.

 

First, I NEVER said that I believe the owner has to be "planted" at GZ for 30 minutes.

If you think the host should be able to go on the hike that starts 5 minutes after the start time, then we're in agreement and I don't really understand why you've been arguing with me.

 

Thanks for reminding me why it's pointless to provide simple explanations for simple guideline changes -- this being the first guideline change in nearly a year.

Look, I respect the devil out of you, and I really don't have any desire to get in a fight with you, both because I would not enjoy it and because I'd lose. But, with all due respect, I've pointed out something that isn't clear in the new guidelines, and quite politely, I think, asked for clarification: what defines the event time? When the host writes a description that says an event lasts from 2 to 2:30, what, if anything, does he promise will happen from 2 to 2:30? I don't mind if you don't answer, but it's a little annoying for you to throw up your hands and stomp off in a huff as if I'm being irrational for asking.

Link to comment

Funny thing is, I can't recall ever getting out of the parking lot in under 30 minutes on most hikes I've done (unless I'm hiking alone). Those folks that can do it in 5 minutes are truly inspirational :laughing

 

It appears to me that a whole lot is overlooked here

 

(1) It could be that waiting for someone who is late (for such events I try to be not late by if needed arriving a bit earlier in the area) or who is not yet ready might in some cases take longer than 5 minutes, might be what wants to do in some cases (when several groups at school time went for a hike, it was absolutely unthinkable to be late and even 1 minutes was deeply frowned upon).

 

(2) Even if one provides a waiting and preparation time interval at a parking lot, it is typically not that much communicative except for the case that all except 1-2 people are there and ready. When a went for a group hike that starts off at 9:00, I did not arrive at 9:00, but took the time for putting on my treekking shoes and getting ready into account, but I use this time for getting ready as efficiently as possible and not for socializing.

 

(3) Do you personally think that it makes organizers of events where a hike is involved my feel welcome at gc.com if they need to declare 30 minutes at a parking lot as the actual event and if Groundspeak talks about overachievers (thus suggesting that there are underachievers as well)? I would have much less issues if the hike can be part of the event and is recognized as such (I do not care about any rules for when the attend can be logged as attended)?

 

(4) It still has not been explained why several people in this thread apparently think that socializing and going for a walk do not fit well together while socializing and eating pizza or playing games do not fit well together.

 

(5) When using the workaround for a hiking event, one has to live with the fact that the part it is all about for most of the participants is a tolerated side activity taking place outside of the event. How can such an event than ever compare with a 4 hours sedentary event in terms of not being lame and being an overachiever event? There is no decent chance.

 

(6) The workaround allows to use the event listing for making known the hike or whatever activity which will take place outsidede of the actual event. In my opinion, this does not make fans of hiking, paddling etc events feel that they are really welcome and appreciated at gc.com. To me it looks like Groundspeak is much more happy with party like events and would prefer if only those existed.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I never read a statement that made it explicitely clear that they appreciate events where a hike etc takes place.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

I honestly expected to be told about real problems caused by flash mob events - not just that people are getting their knickers twisted. There have been a few folks mention iffy permission. A reviewer might not question a five minute event in a parking lot, but a half hour one may get questioned as to whether the mall is OK with this. I'm not aware of any problems in my area, but perhaps Groundspeak has real examples of this. Sharing some knowledge of how flash mob events caused some real issues and I might be more willing to accept some limitations.

I'm feeling the same way, but I've finally concluded that the problem is simply flash mob events themselves, not a side effect of flash mob events that we haven't been able to identify.

 

The funny thing is that I've always thought flash mob events were kinda lame, too, but that isn't a good enough reason to me for them to be banned.

Link to comment

(4) It still has not been explained why several people in this thread apparently think that socializing and going for a walk do not fit well together while socializing and eating pizza or playing games do not fit well together.

I have a theory about this. I think the problem is that if you allow a hike to be an event, then it's essentially unavoidable that the hike, hence the event, will involve finding caches. By nailing the event to a single location, they're making sure the event isn't really a caching expedition in disguise.

 

I don't really know why GS is dead set against events being caching expeditions, but, at the same time, I think that idea has widespread support.

Link to comment

I have a theory about this. I think the problem is that if you allow a hike to be an event, then it's essentially unavoidable that the hike, hence the event, will involve finding caches.

 

Actually, most of the caches that were set up as party like events (except the local events that take place regularly in the same inn) involved several newly hidden caches nearby while most of the hiking events I attended did not involve finding a cache at all, and if they did it was only one newly hidden cache (so definitely at a lower scale than for the party like events).

Party like events typically take place in more urban areas than hiking events (in my country - as the typical locations for party like events are pubs and restaurants) and so the cache density offered is much higher.

 

Lab caches are extensively used for megaevents. I wonder why this does not interfere with the wish to make sure that there is a guarantee that not a single cache is found while people attend an event.

Link to comment

Thanks for reminding me why it's pointless to provide simple explanations for simple guideline changes -- this being the first guideline change in nearly a year.

Look, I respect the devil out of you, and I really don't have any desire to get in a fight with you, both because I would not enjoy it and because I'd lose. But, with all due respect, I've pointed out something that isn't clear in the new guidelines, and quite politely, I think, asked for clarification: what defines the event time? When the host writes a description that says an event lasts from 2 to 2:30, what, if anything, does he promise will happen from 2 to 2:30? I don't mind if you don't answer, but it's a little annoying for you to throw up your hands and stomp off in a huff as if I'm being irrational for asking.

To clarify, my comment was directed solely at Tozainamboku, after he basically called Rock Chalk and myself liars. Posts like that one are why so few Community Volunteers and Lackeys continue to be active in the forums. If that bothers the rest of the community, please help to encourage a more open dialogue by what I call "community moderation."

 

Unfortunately, this thread has reached toxic level and I doubt highly whether participants will receive further clarification. They won't from me. And Toz won't obtain clarification from me about anything, ever.

Link to comment

Funny thing is, I can't recall ever getting out of the parking lot in under 30 minutes on most hikes I've done (unless I'm hiking alone). Those folks that can do it in 5 minutes are truly inspirational :laughing

 

It appears to me that a whole lot is overlooked here

 

(1) It could be that waiting for someone who is late (for such events I try to be not late by if needed arriving a bit earlier in the area) or who is not yet ready might in some cases take longer than 5 minutes, might be what wants to do in some cases (when several groups at school time went for a hike, it was absolutely unthinkable to be late and even 1 minutes was deeply frowned upon).

 

(2) Even if one provides a waiting and preparation time interval at a parking lot, it is typically not that much communicative except for the case that all except 1-2 people are there and ready. When a went for a group hike that starts off at 9:00, I did not arrive at 9:00, but took the time for putting on my treekking shoes and getting ready into account, but I use this time for getting ready as efficiently as possible and not for socializing.

 

(3) Do you personally think that it makes organizers of events where a hike is involved my feel welcome at gc.com if they need to declare 30 minutes at a parking lot as the actual event and if Groundspeak talks about overachievers (thus suggesting that there are underachievers as well)? I would have much less issues if the hike can be part of the event and is recognized as such (I do not care about any rules for when the attend can be logged as attended)?

 

(4) It still has not been explained why several people in this thread apparently think that socializing and going for a walk do not fit well together while socializing and eating pizza or playing games do not fit well together.

 

(5) When using the workaround for a hiking event, one has to live with the fact that the part it is all about for most of the participants is a tolerated side activity taking place outside of the event. How can such an event than ever compare with a 4 hours sedentary event in terms of not being lame and being an overachiever event? There is no decent chance.

 

(6) The workaround allows to use the event listing for making known the hike or whatever activity which will take place outsidede of the actual event. In my opinion, this does not make fans of hiking, paddling etc events feel that they are really welcome and appreciated at gc.com. To me it looks like Groundspeak is much more happy with party like events and would prefer if only those existed.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I never read a statement that made it explicitely clear that they appreciate events where a hike etc takes place.

Wow! Interesting cultural difference I guess. 1 minute....seriously? Maybe that's a school thing though.

 

Typically what happens in my area is that there is a meet time, and a departure time. Depending on the length of the hike and the driving time to the trailhead, these variables may change, but we usually allow for around 45 minutes to 1 hour to get people together, make introductions, go over the plan for the day so everyone knows the route we're taking, get boots on, water bottles filled, get packs together, etc. For some folks, this may seem like a long "preamble" phase, but for others, it may be there first steps off of pavement. The first objective is to make sure everyone is informed and safe. If there's a car shuttle involved, this may stretch out even longer, requiring an earlier start. There might be some planning on apres' hiking meal or drinks as well.

 

As far as point 4 goes, I can't speak for others, but for the hikes I've gone on or organized, typically the bulk of the socializing goes on in the parking area, at rest stops/lunch break,at caches, and trail junctions, where we tend to gather everyone together to make sure nobody takes a wrong turn. The trails in my area tend to be a mix of narrow single track and fire roads. The single tracks don't lend themselves very well to socializing, as there usually only conversations going on with a couple people in front or behind of where I'm walking, so in that sense, it's really not much of an Event at that stage of things.

 

Sounds like your hiking Events are much more structured and regimented than the ones I tend to go on.

Link to comment

Wow! Interesting cultural difference I guess. 1 minute....seriously? Maybe that's a school thing though.

 

Of course it depends on the setting and on the involved persons. If a starting time is arranged for a group activity around here it means that everyone is ready when the activity starts and comes earlier if preparation is needed.

 

As geocaching events are concerned that involved a hike, the target was mentioned before and I never ever encountered a safety instruction and never regarded one to be necessary. Noone came along who never has been on a hike before.

 

The trails in my area tend to be a mix of narrow single track and fire roads. The single tracks don't lend themselves very well to socializing, as there usually only conversations going on with a couple people in front or behind of where I'm walking, so in that sense, it's really not much of an Event at that stage of things.

 

It allows much more socializing and in particular with the people one selected for this purpose than those typical restaurant events where 50 sit crowded around the tables and even when one wants to go to the toilette one often has to make 6 or more other people to get up. One typically ends up with being able to those which sit nearby without a decent chance to talk to those one would have liked to talked much more.

 

I would not want to for an event hike that lasts the whole day. For events I prefer trails that are relatively easy. Some of the hiking events I have in mind took place at least partially in the dark (to enjoy the full moon) and had a high proportion of logging roads.

 

Sounds like your hiking Events are much more structured and regimented than the ones I tend to go on.

 

No, they are not - you do have a start time too. Around here everyone decides when they want to arrive at the meeting point. Of course there might be activities where one needs e.g. to provide instructions or distribute something. Then it makes sense to fix a meeting time. Other than that I think that everyone can be responsible for deciding when to arrive when knowing when the start takes off.

Link to comment

*** This is precisely why other moderators should take over some posting duties. When it's only one or two people taking on this part of the job, burnout happens quickly. Been there. Not only is it tiresome to be the only one dealing with people, the people you deal with get too comfortable, feeling that they know you and your limits.

 

Seems like there are enough moderators here to give Keystone a spell. It's not fair to the moderators or the members to not rotate at least. ***

 

 

5 pages!?!? :blink:

 

I keep thinking of the title of the theme song from "Frozen". :D

 

 

 

B.

Link to comment

Thanks for reminding me why it's pointless to provide simple explanations for simple guideline changes -- this being the first guideline change in nearly a year.

Look, I respect the devil out of you, and I really don't have any desire to get in a fight with you, both because I would not enjoy it and because I'd lose. But, with all due respect, I've pointed out something that isn't clear in the new guidelines, and quite politely, I think, asked for clarification: what defines the event time? When the host writes a description that says an event lasts from 2 to 2:30, what, if anything, does he promise will happen from 2 to 2:30? I don't mind if you don't answer, but it's a little annoying for you to throw up your hands and stomp off in a huff as if I'm being irrational for asking.

To clarify, my comment was directed solely at Tozainamboku, after he basically called Rock Chalk and myself liars. Posts like that one are why so few Community Volunteers and Lackeys continue to be active in the forums. If that bothers the rest of the community, please help to encourage a more open dialogue by what I call "community moderation."

 

Unfortunately, this thread has reached toxic level and I doubt highly whether participants will receive further clarification. They won't from me. And Toz won't obtain clarification from me about anything, ever.

I did not call you or Rock Chalk liars. I said I didn't buy the official reason. I believe that you are presenting what you have been told or understand to be the official rationale for this change. I even thanked Rock Chalk earlier in the thread for providing this rationale. That doesn't mean that the rationale will satisfy everybody.

 

I understand that the WIGAS references get old and in truth they are meant to get under the skin a bit. Way back when ALRs were forbidden, I posted that I thought Groundspeak had made a mistake because they would now have to deal with restoring logs that were improperly deleted. I understand, and have first hand knowledge, that Groundspeak had to deal with logging disputes long before that change. It appears to me that many guidelines have since been made to make it easier to deal with online logging disputes. Although my first approach would be to wonder why the online logs cause so much twisting of knickers, I understand that neither I, nor Groundspeak, nor the volunteer reviewers, can control other peoples knickers. I'm not sure there is much that can be done than have simplistic logging rules that are easy to enforce. I would find this rationale easier to accept than the official one.

Link to comment

To clarify, my comment was directed solely at Tozainamboku, after he basically called Rock Chalk and myself liars. Posts like that one are why so few Community Volunteers and Lackeys continue to be active in the forums. If that bothers the rest of the community, please help to encourage a more open dialogue by what I call "community moderation."

I know you were responding to someone else, but that post and this one, though both citing specific contributors, are clearly -- and explicitly, actually -- general declarations that further this discussion on this point is useless. I'd be fine with that if I thought any attempt at all had been made to clarify the actual effect of the guideline changes and how reviewers should implement them in practice.

 

Unfortunately, this thread has reached toxic level and I doubt highly whether participants will receive further clarification. They won't from me. And Toz won't obtain clarification from me about anything, ever.

I'm truly sorry you think this discussion is toxic. Frankly, I'm not seeing it. Personally, I don't even think this has risen to the level of "heated".

 

Wow! Interesting cultural difference I guess. 1 minute....seriously? Maybe that's a school thing though.

Yes, cultural differences. I think that's the whole point of the event vs. hike discussion. As it happens, I live (and cache) in the culture that hates following schedules. I personally failed to make it on time to a 9:10:11 12/13/14 event I attended. I'm lucky if I make it to an event before the end time. (Come to think of it, I logged attended for one event I got to 5 hours after the end time.)

 

But the fact that I can't be bothered to be on time doesn't mean I have any reason to oppose people that want to create an event that does require attendees to be on time.

 

At this point, I just want a reviewer's response to one simple question. Let's say cezanne schedules an event from 1:30 to 2, and then explicitly says in the description that he's planning on showing up just before 2 and going on a hike, and he invites everyone to show up then -- or earlier, if they need to -- and join him. As far as I can see, this even would agree with the guidelines. Will it be approved, or it will be rejected? Assuming it will be rejected, is there a specific reason I'm missing, or will it be simply because cezanne isn't showing the right spirit?

Link to comment

I still don't understand "WIGAS".

 

*not ambitious enough to read through all of Toz's posts to find the origin/meaning.*

 

B.

"Woohoo, I Get A Smiley"

 

Thank you.

 

How very Canadian of you to help out like that. :D

 

I would have never figured that out on my own.

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

At this point, I just want a reviewer's response to one simple question. Let's say cezanne schedules an event from 1:30 to 2, and then explicitly says in the description that he's planning on showing up just before 2 and going on a hike, and he invites everyone to show up then -- or earlier, if they need to -- and join him.

 

I have a related, but different question.

 

Suppose that someone posts an event saying

 

start of event: 9 a.m.

end of event: 2 p.m.

 

we meet at the header coordinates.

 

At 9:30 a.m. we start out for a hike up to the summit of mountain X. We will need probably need about 1:30 hours for the ascent. There is not hut at the summit, so bring your own food and water.

 

After a break at the summit we hike back to the parking lot where we plan to arrive around 2 pm.

 

Participation in the hike is not compulsory.

 

Will it be approved?

Link to comment

At this point, I just want a reviewer's response to one simple question. Let's say cezanne schedules an event from 1:30 to 2, and then explicitly says in the description that he's planning on showing up just before 2 and going on a hike, and he invites everyone to show up then -- or earlier, if they need to -- and join him.

 

I have a related, but different question.

 

Suppose that someone posts an event saying

 

start of event: 9 a.m.

end of event: 2 p.m.

 

we meet at the header coordinates.

 

At 9:30 a.m. we start out for a hike up to the summit of mountain X. We will need probably need about 1:30 hours for the ascent. There is not hut at the summit, so bring your own food and water.

 

After a break at the summit we hike back to the parking lot where we plan to arrive around 2 pm.

 

Participation in the hike is not compulsory.

 

Will it be approved?

Just my impression, but the 9-9:30 part is fine, and is essentially The Event. The rest is an activity after the Event, which people can voluntarily participate in (not clear from your post). Any requirement to take part in the hike would be considered an ALR.

 

Now the real question remains, would you allow someone to log an Attended if they joined your group halfway through the hike. Generally that has been left to the host to decide.

 

This is basically how these sorts of things have been interpreted in my area. If it's being done differently in your area, I'm not sure why.

Link to comment

At this point, I just want a reviewer's response to one simple question. Let's say cezanne schedules an event from 1:30 to 2, and then explicitly says in the description that he's planning on showing up just before 2 and going on a hike, and he invites everyone to show up then -- or earlier, if they need to -- and join him.

 

I have a related, but different question.

 

Suppose that someone posts an event saying

 

start of event: 9 a.m.

end of event: 2 p.m.

 

we meet at the header coordinates.

 

At 9:30 a.m. we start out for a hike up to the summit of mountain X. We will need probably need about 1:30 hours for the ascent. There is not hut at the summit, so bring your own food and water.

 

After a break at the summit we hike back to the parking lot where we plan to arrive around 2 pm.

 

Participation in the hike is not compulsory.

 

Will it be approved?

 

Let me preface this question by saying I haven't read the whole discussion so maybe it's been covered.....

 

Could you post the event as

 

Start of event: 9:00am

End of event: 9:30am. After the event anyone interested in a hike to the summit and back can join the event host(s). We will head out promptly at 930am. Stragglers will need to catch up.

 

Would it be approved?

Link to comment

I still don't understand "WIGAS".

 

*not ambitious enough to read through all of Toz's posts to find the origin/meaning.*

 

B.

"Woohoo, I Get A Smiley"

Which technically ought to be spelled WHIGAS (on account of the "Hoo) and pronounced "Whee-gas" (mainly just because it sounds more fun than the long "I" version, "Why-gas"). :D

Link to comment

At this point, I just want a reviewer's response to one simple question. Let's say cezanne schedules an event from 1:30 to 2, and then explicitly says in the description that he's planning on showing up just before 2 and going on a hike, and he invites everyone to show up then -- or earlier, if they need to -- and join him.

 

I have a related, but different question.

 

Suppose that someone posts an event saying

 

start of event: 9 a.m.

end of event: 2 p.m.

 

we meet at the header coordinates.

 

At 9:30 a.m. we start out for a hike up to the summit of mountain X. We will need probably need about 1:30 hours for the ascent. There is not hut at the summit, so bring your own food and water.

 

After a break at the summit we hike back to the parking lot where we plan to arrive around 2 pm.

 

Participation in the hike is not compulsory.

 

Will it be approved?

 

Let me preface this question by saying I haven't read the whole discussion so maybe it's been covered.....

 

Could you post the event as

 

Start of event: 9:00am

End of event: 9:30am. After the event anyone interested in a hike to the summit and back can join the event host(s). We will head out promptly at 930am. Stragglers will need to catch up.

 

Would it be approved?

From what I understand, yes.

Link to comment

At this point, I just want a reviewer's response to one simple question. Let's say cezanne schedules an event from 1:30 to 2, and then explicitly says in the description that he's planning on showing up just before 2 and going on a hike, and he invites everyone to show up then -- or earlier, if they need to -- and join him.

 

I have a related, but different question.

 

Suppose that someone posts an event saying

 

start of event: 9 a.m.

end of event: 2 p.m.

 

we meet at the header coordinates.

 

At 9:30 a.m. we start out for a hike up to the summit of mountain X. We will need probably need about 1:30 hours for the ascent. There is not hut at the summit, so bring your own food and water.

 

After a break at the summit we hike back to the parking lot where we plan to arrive around 2 pm.

 

Participation in the hike is not compulsory.

 

Will it be approved?

From what I understand, yes.

Link to comment

At this point, I just want a reviewer's response to one simple question. Let's say cezanne schedules an event from 1:30 to 2, and then explicitly says in the description that he's planning on showing up just before 2 and going on a hike, and he invites everyone to show up then -- or earlier, if they need to -- and join him. As far as I can see, this even would agree with the guidelines. Will it be approved, or it will be rejected? Assuming it will be rejected, is there a specific reason I'm missing, or will it be simply because cezanne isn't showing the right spirit?

From the discussions I've had with Reviewers, it would seem that being this explicit in your description of an Event Cache would not be publishable.

 

Now, if you simply say all of that without "I'll be there just before 2...", then you're good to go. Especially if the owner doesn't stir any pots by thinking of or actually deleting logs if someone logs an "Attended" if they show before the owner gets there (but still within the listed 30-minute window), or chooses not to take part in the hike.

 

It's when someone starts getting too feisty with enforcing the "WIGAS" side of things when we see problems. So long as the Event Cache owner/host doesn't get all Gestapo on "Attended" logs from people who do 1. Show within the designated 30-minute window, even if the owner or host may not see, greet, or notice who was actually there 2. Show up but do not take part in the "activity" (hike, e.g.), then I think that you'll have no problems in the community where the owner might get "reported" for not being there for the full 30 minute window "sitting still" at the coordinates.

Edited by NeverSummer
Link to comment

 

Could you post the event as

 

Start of event: 9:00am

End of event: 9:30am. After the event anyone interested in a hike to the summit and back can join the event host(s). We will head out promptly at 930am. Stragglers will need to catch up.

 

Would it be approved?

 

Yes, I'm sure (and I do not think that this could depend on the reviewer) but that way the hike is not part of the event and the event is just the phase for getting read, something I do not appreciate at all. It's ok if some only come to this phase and log an attended log (they also could come 1 minute to a 6 hours event and log attended), but I do not appreciate if the event organizer is forced to declare the 30 minutes period at a parking lot as the event.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

From the discussions I've had with Reviewers, it would seem that being this explicit in your description of an Event Cache would not be publishable.

 

Now, if you simply say all of that without "I'll be there just before 2...", then you're good to go.

No kidding? Not telling the truth about when I'll be there makes it better?

 

Especially if the owner doesn't stir any pots by thinking of or actually deleting logs if someone logs an "Attended" if they show before the owner gets there (but still within the listed 30-minute window), or chooses not to take part in the hike.

I'm sorry, I thought that was implicit, although I agree I should have specified it. Yes, of course anyone that shows up during the half hour would be considered in attendance. And we aren't discussing the existing regulation that forbids requiring participation, so I was assuming going on the hike wouldn't be required, particularly since the hike itself takes place after the end of the event.

 

I assume when you say cezanne's version would be approved, you are similarly imagining that anyone showing up at the posted coordinates during the 4 and a half hours everyone else is away on the hike must be allowed to log attended, too.

 

It occurs to me that what really concerns me is that the minimum time limit is specified in a way that leaves the reviewer's twisting in the wind. The minimum time is a requirement for publication that reviewers must enforce, but guidelines don't actually provide any objective measure that a reviewer can present to back up a rejection. But I guess that's OK if the reviewers universally apply the don't ask, don't tell policy you're suggesting.

Link to comment

 

Will it be approved?

From what I understand, yes.

 

From what I understand, it is questionable and might depend on the reviewer. Sometimes around here caches get published where the description says that there is only a log book but no container (in the version sent for review) while I'm sure that such a cache would not get published in some other regions.

 

I really would appreciate an answer to my question by a reviewer or lackey. I can understand that no reviewer can talk for all reviewers, but it would already be helpful if we get a picture whether there are reviewers who would publish or not publish the event in the described form (with no changes and not declaring 9:30 to be the end of the event).

Link to comment

I assume when you say cezanne's version would be approved, you are similarly imagining that anyone showing up at the posted coordinates during the 4 and a half hours everyone else is away on the hike must be allowed to log attended, too.

 

I would not care at all about attended logs. Actually at many events it has become impossible to know who attended even for people who have been there during the entire period. There is no rule that requires someone to introduce him/herself.

Link to comment

It seems to me common sense that if events need a start and end time, that there should be some minimum. An event which lasts 1 second doesn't make sense.

 

Why 30 minutes? Could it have been 5 minutes? 15? Sure, 30 is somewhat arbitrary, but seems reasonable to me.

 

What seems to be more of the issue is the long standing guidelines on events themselves. And I sympathise with that. A "moving event" can allow geocachers to socialize. And I get the connection that very short events are used as a workaround for this. The same workaround can be used with a 30 minute requirement but that brings up the question of why need a workaround at all.

 

So whilst I do see the link, I mainly see these as 2 separate issues:

 

1. As events need a start/end time, a minimum length is needed to avoid events which are so short to be nonsensical.

 

2. Why can't "moving events" be allowed?

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...