Jump to content

Hiking Events


HikingSeal
Followers 5

Recommended Posts

Hike sounds nice for an event. But what if I go shopping? 1 km from home, it's about 10 minutes. I could register it as en event, though. Why not? I go shopping and I get a smiley. Or I go running every Wednesday at 19. Why not register it as an event? If any geocacher goes running with me, I get a smiley.

 

The reviewers can easily take care of that and apparently managed to do so since 2002.

It's quite easy to distinguish between a 3 hours train ride on a renowned special steam train with 100 participants from a 15 minutes shopping trip of 3 friends.

 

Requiring 30 minutes on the given coordinates is simply the rational countermeasure to prevent such event misuse. Now events are not for free, they require some effort from the owner. It's not simply 3 friends are going hike on the evening and they got an idea to get a smiley. If they really want to make an event, they need to invest at least 30 minutes to wait for other geocachers.

 

I mentioned many times that the real issue is not having to wait for 30 minutes, but that the event is over when the hike starts.

Moreover such events in areas with many cachers are a perfect invitation for many to join who do not go for the hike. A hiking event is not organized to

offer a stationary meet and greet.

 

That's not the idea of a hiking event. The hiking events I enjoyed were certainly not events where 3 friends went for a hike.

I've never been to a hiking event with less than 20 participants and some of those took place in the early times when 20 meant a lot.

 

That's much more against the spirit of an event in my opinion as events should last considerably longer than 30 minutes and be about more than standing around just because the rules require to do so.

 

If for someone the most important in geocaching is getting smileys for skating, hiking or photographing bus stops, then geocaching is not for them anyway.

 

I suggested to remove smilies for events at all and leave events as what they should be: Nice possibilities to meet other cachers in a setting one enjoys.

I and many others do not enjoy sitting in restaurants and I'm sitting too much in my work already. When I reserve 5 hours for an event on a weekend this 5 hours should be spent

almost exclusively with physical activity. Now there is a bias of what an event should be that has nothing to do with potential abuse or the requirement for socializing or a certain duration or

a certain number of participants.

 

Those event I'm missing are the greatest events I have visited and none of your remarks above applies to them.

In contrast all the pi day events in my area are just something boring and of no attraction to me.

That's indeed for obtaining smilies and souvenirs and most of the hosts of such events in my area also took care to hide a new mystery cache nearby (when possible with respect to saturation) and they

are pretty open with respect to the reason.

 

Those who have organized real hiking events in my area had not the least interest in smileys.

Yes, of course the hike can take place also outside of geocaching.com - so can every event. It's then typically a cliquish thing and newcomers and non locals will never hear about such events.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

What I wrote is much less about me than you might suspect. It is about the effect on the local community as a whole. I have watched so many leaving and this focus on

party style of events fits well into the development.

 

Really? You seem to be the only one, of the "many" leaving because of these party style events, that has voiced dissent. Methinks this is all about you.

 

How many continental Europeans write in these forums at all?

Have you ever taken that into consideration?

 

Have you for example the slightest idea what are topics the very vibrant Czech community cares about?

 

When one only knows this forum one has a restricted view.

 

Of course my statement above was not only about events but also other changes (both on geocaching.com and the caching community), but I did clearly say so (fits into the development).

Link to comment

The reviewers can easily take care of that and apparently managed to do so since 2002.

It's quite easy to distinguish between a 3 hours train ride on a renowned special steam train with 100 participants from a 15 minutes shopping trip of 3 friends.

 

Apparently not, because guidelines doesn't specify the minimal number of attenders and hasn't required the minimal time until recenty.

 

So both events were exactly the same guidelines conform. If by 'taking care' you understand the reviewer publishing one event and declining to publish the second one, although both were exactly the same guidelines-compliant, then it's the reason I'm very happy about the change.

 

Accepting events based on personal preferences of reviewer is for me the worst solution, giving very negative geocaching experience to outsiders. Groundspeak hasn't change the rules recently, they've equalize it for everyone, and it seem to hurt you the most. Since you're no longer allowed to publish events others were never allowed to.

Link to comment

The reviewers can easily take care of that and apparently managed to do so since 2002.

It's quite easy to distinguish between a 3 hours train ride on a renowned special steam train with 100 participants from a 15 minutes shopping trip of 3 friends.

 

Apparently not, because guidelines doesn't specify the minimal number of attenders and hasn't required the minimal time until recenty.

 

 

There is nothing bad about requiring a minimum duration and for many years flash mobs were not possible without guidelines talking about flash mobs.

The reviewers just said that this does not fit the spirit of an event.

 

One can require a minimum duration without requiring that all the time of an event is spent at one place.

All the examples by NiraD outperform a 30 minutes event at one location by far.

 

Accepting events based on personal preferences of reviewer is for me the worst solution, giving very negative geocaching experience to outsiders. Groundspeak hasn't change the rules recently, they've equalize it for everyone, and it seem to hurt you the most. Since you're no longer allowed to publish events others were never allowed to.

 

Moving events have been published all over the world.

 

A 30 minutes waiting event is much more lame than a 5 hours hike including if you happen to insist on that a 30 minutes period at the parking lot (even if this is not to ensure that events are not abused but only to allow those poor cachers that do not have time/motivation to go for a hike to log attended logs for events which are not for them). I do not attend quiz events as I'm not interested into quizzes.

It's as easy as that.

 

Take away the smilies from events (and also do not count them as hidden caches) and everything will work out nicely.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

The reviewers can easily take care of that and apparently managed to do so since 2002.

It's quite easy to distinguish between a 3 hours train ride on a renowned special steam train with 100 participants from a 15 minutes shopping trip of 3 friends.

 

Apparently not, because guidelines doesn't specify the minimal number of attenders and hasn't required the minimal time until recenty.

 

 

There is nothing bad about requiring a minimum duration and for many years flash mobs were not possible without guidelines talking about flash mobs.

The reviewers just said that this does not fit the spirit of an event.

 

One can require a minimum duration without requiring that all the time of an event is spent on one place.

 

Accepting events based on personal preferences of reviewer is for me the worst solution, giving very negative geocaching experience to outsiders. Groundspeak hasn't change the rules recently, they've equalize it for everyone, and it seem to hurt you the most. Since you're no longer allowed to publish events others were never allowed to.

 

Moving events have been published all over the world.

 

A 30 minutes waiting event is much more lame than a 5 hours hike including if you happen to insist on that a 30 minutes period at the parking lot (even if this is not to ensure that events are not absued but only to allow those poor cachers that do not have time/motivation to go for a hike to log attended logs for events which are not for them). I do not attend quiz events as I'm not interestes into quizzes.

It's as easy as that.

 

Take away the smilies from events (and also do not count them as hidden caches) and everything will work out nicely.

 

All the early events I took part in lasted many hours without any rules requiring it. That was absolutely normal and the standard for events.

30 minutes events and also 1 hour events would have been ridiculous.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

Moving events have been published all over the world.

 

Where and when? Because I've never managed to get one published, and it was many months before guidelines 'change'. Maybe they were allowed, but only for some cachers? And from the correspondence with reviewer, they were never allowed (in her region).

 

Take away the smilies from events (and also do not count them as hidden caches) and everything will work out nicely.

 

Yeah, like Waymarking? Only that Waymarking live because there are people who register after each trip 10-100 waymarks, or log as much of them.

Link to comment

Moving events have been published all over the world.

 

Where and when? Because I've never managed to get one published, and it was many months before guidelines 'change'. Maybe they were allowed, but only for some cachers? And from the correspondence with reviewer, they were never allowed (in her region).

 

Before the end time for an event was enforced (which happened quite recently), there was no clear end for an event anyway and so a hike could always be considered as part of the event which has changed.

Now the hike is not part of the event and people who prefer hiking as an acitivity to combine with socializing and prefer it to sitting in a coffee house have to live with the fact that this cannot be part of a geocaching event at all, not even if the event offers a 30 minutes period at the posted coordinates. That makes a huge difference and is a very recent change.

 

 

Take away the smilies from events (and also do not count them as hidden caches) and everything will work out nicely.

 

Yeah, like Waymarking? Only that Waymarking live because there are people who register after each trip 10-100 waymarks, or log as much of them.

 

I guarantee you that for the hiking events I miss there would be enough participants and exactly those for whom such events are organized. It's not about those who hate hiking and want to get another attended log or need one on that day.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

Before the end time for an event was enforced (which happened quite recently), there was no clear end for an event anyway and so a hike could always be considered as part of the event which has changed.

 

So you were able to register hiking events in your local vicinity. And you make from it the general rule, that everyone everywhere was able to do that, which is obviously not true. Because I was never allowed to make such an event in any location.

 

So you've lost your priviledged status, but for others nothing has changed. Groundspeak could allow everyone to register 'moving events' and 'flash mobs', or could take that right away from the very few that were allowed to, and they've chosen the second one as the tinier change. Honestly, it's the reasonable compromise, because it brings more equality at the cost of little flexibility.

Link to comment

Before the end time for an event was enforced (which happened quite recently), there was no clear end for an event anyway and so a hike could always be considered as part of the event which has changed.

 

So you were able to register hiking events in your local vicinity. And you make from it the general rule, that everyone everywhere was able to do that, which is obviously not true. Because I was never allowed to make such an event in any location.

 

What I said is something different: Even in those regions of the world where the reviewers have asked the event to stay at the posted coordinates for a certain amount of time, the event page still could be written such that the hike was not outside of the event as one did not need to provide end times anyway.

 

I'm not saying that the event host could enforce participation in the hike for an aattended log - that's something completely different.

 

Previously you could without any problems write something like

 

We start to meet from 9:00 on and will head for a hike at 9:30.

Come prepared for a hike of 5 hours.

 

Now you have to write in this setting

Start of event: 9:00

End of event : 9:30

 

and it is just tolerated to mention that a hike will take place thereafter.

 

That gives the event a completely different character. Note that I'm not talking about when someone is allowed an attended log - that's the most irrelevant part of an event.

 

You argue that you were not allowed to write a listing of the first type mentioned above before the change that asked for an end time of an event?

 

 

In my first case, the event host can feel comfortable with making a reasonable offer to the event participants beyond a boring waiting period enforced by guidelines. In my second case, all what a hiking event is about is the hike. Noone comes to a hiking event and looks mainly forward to the preparation phase of putting shoes on, preparing one's knapsack, getting ready. They come for the hike and declaring this to happen outside of the event turns attending a hiking event on gc.com into a very lame thing for the target audience. It's absurd (though allowed) to log an attended for being present at the parking lot if the idea is to go for a hike and socialize there.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

Events that appear to be like what you want, but probably won't pass muster with you, although I think there's one that's right up your alley.

Cachers are encouraged to note the published date on many of these Events. Several of them were published prior to the Guideline change and would require some modification before being published today.

I deleted all the events that were published before the guideline changes. ALL the events listed are published on or after the new guidelines went into effect. Touchstone made that point (certainly a valid one) when I first put the list out.

Link to comment

Previously you could without any problems write something like

 

We start to meet from 9:00 on and will head for a hike at 9:30.

Come prepared for a hike of 5 hours.

 

Now you have to write in this setting

Start of event: 9:00

End of event : 9:30

 

and it is just tolerated to mention that a hike will take place thereafter.

 

And where's the difference? It's effectively the same, unless the first has implied some ALRs (for example, that not participating in hike would not count as attending the events) which were forbidden then and now.

 

The only difference is someone who doesn't know the guidelines could have an impression, that not participating in hike would not count as an event. The second makes it clear what constitues attending an event.

 

So what is here that you have problem with? The fact that you're not allowed to write listings in such a way, that could make the false impression, that the hike is the event and that being there between 9:00 and 9:30 is not sufficient to attend?

Link to comment

What I wrote is much less about me than you might suspect. It is about the effect on the local community as a whole. I have watched so many leaving and this focus on

party style of events fits well into the development.

 

Really? You seem to be the only one, of the "many" leaving because of these party style events, that has voiced dissent. Methinks this is all about you.

 

As to the many that left, I could provide you with a list of those cachers who have been around when I started or started say until 2004 and most of them are not active any longer and the reason is how geocaching devolved and a lot of these changes were brought along by Groundspeak.

 

The only Austrian charter member and the most influentual person for getting geocaching started in my area, has quit searching for caches quite some time ago and this year he also let his PMship lapse even if it meant to lose his charter status. There are many other hiders of some of the greatest caches in the area, that left out of frustration about gc.com and the devolvement of the community.

Some are still maintaining a few of their caches, but also this number decreases. Others have archived all their caches.

 

Most events are organized by cachers who have started much after the early years as the many changes do not appeal to the old timers, also not those who are still there (for example in the area of Vienna more oldtimers are still in the game than in my home area where the situation is particularly difficult). For someone who started geocaching within for example the last 2 years, the change has hardly been dramatic. They will have a completely different impression of what's going on and the activity they liked two years ago is about the same they can find now.

 

Of course events are only one tiny bit of what goes wrong.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

In any case, I have always felt that events are something different from a cache and should not count as finds.

 

So... just host a hike and invite geocachers directly without making it an event.

 

That's exactly what the ice skating event will end up.

 

And I can just imagine how the socializing will go....

 

"This is fun but why are all these people talking about geocaching. I want to talk about skating!"

 

"Think the Sabres have a chance for the playoffs this year?"

 

 

 

Link to comment

And I can just imagine how the socializing will go....

 

"This is fun but why are all these people talking about geocaching. I want to talk about skating!"

 

"Think the Sabres have a chance for the playoffs this year?"

 

Definitely not. I'm not living in North America and ice hockey is here a sport only very people are interested into at all.

The only reason why I know at least the Sabres are a hockey club is because there has been a lot of reports in news papers due to

Thomas Vanek (who is an Austrian citizen).

 

I have been on skates exactly twice during more than 30 years, last year and last year during the ice skating event.

Many other participants in former years also joined after having not skated for many years in their life.

 

I did not talk about ice skating at all except mentioning that I'm very bad at it up to the point that it is more stumbling on the ice.

At an event which takes place at a pizza restaurant, the most common topic will also not be how to bake the best pizza.

The ice skating just provides the framework setting as does having a pizza together does for the the event in the pizza location.

 

The ice skating event I attended (and it's the only one I know) was not about a small group of passionate skaters who happen to go skating often per year.

 

The climate is getting milder and milder in our area (it's not Cornell!) and it happens less and less often that natural areas can be used for skating.

The area in Vienna called Eistraum is only offered during a few weeks and is not available during the rest of the year.

Noone who comes there comes because the sports of ice skating - the ice is not of the best quality - it's more about the special atmosphere to

skate around a nice urban place.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

She then went on to say that it is not a loss for gc.com if events like the ice skating event and some hiking events are not hosted any longer on gc.com because they are not related to geocaching. That's why I asked my question.

 

No, actually, I think there are many wonderful examples of geocaching events that encompass all sorts of activities like pizza eating, hiking, skating, etc.

 

I just don't think it's a loss if someone who has no interest in geocaching chooses to take their event elsewhere.

 

To me, it really looks like this is all sour grapes from people who are just using the "event cache" to drum up participants for whatever thing they feel like doing with a group. That's not a statement about the activities at these events. It's a statement about the more general purpose of the event.

Link to comment

Previously you could without any problems write something like

 

We start to meet from 9:00 on and will head for a hike at 9:30.

Come prepared for a hike of 5 hours.

 

Now you have to write in this setting

Start of event: 9:00

End of event : 9:30

 

and it is just tolerated to mention that a hike will take place thereafter.

 

How is it that you are so certain of this? Have you yet tried? Every time somebody asks you to actually test your theories out by creating an event, you ignore them.

Link to comment

This event appears to have incorporated a 5K walk into their event time frame and was published just this week.

 

This event has two separate hikes as part of the duration of the event, one a 2 mile and the other a 5 mile. The event starts at 8:30, the two hikes head out at their specified times and they return at 11, when the event ends.

 

This event has an 8K hike as part of the event duration.

 

This event has paddling as part of it, although I don't see an end time listed and am wondering how it got published if that's the case.

 

I think the biggest inconsistency I have with cezanne revolves around one thing. Cezanne is claiming it's ALL about the hike, which should be part of the event duration and rated correctly. The hike is the reason for the event, the hike dictates the T rating, and the hike is what cezanne most looks forward to. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE HIKE. Most of us see the new guidelines as not allowing a moving event to be published. The new guidelines clearly allow for a hike after the official event, but cezanne doesn't like that because it doesn't take into account the terrain or the fact that the hike isn't really part of the event. I get that you see it as NOT part of the event. I understand but don't really care because I consider my entire time there as part of the event, regardless of the official start and end time.

 

Here's where I have my issue. You make all these claims about how important the hike is to you and then complain that the hike that follows the event isn't part of the event. You're emphasizing the EVENT now, not the hike. The event, hike, and T rating are no longer linked together like they used to be in your area. The smiley you used to get for the event, which included the hike and it's related terrain rating, you can't get anymore under the new guidelines. There has been an alternative method suggested, but you disparage that too, again saying it's not part of the hike, which, once again emphasizes the importance of the EVENT, not the hike that you would be participating in to get to the EVENT.

 

You believe all three should be returned to what makes an event an event in your eyes, once again placing the emphasis on the EVENT, not the hike. It appears to me, then, that you're more interested in getting an attended smiley with an appropriate T rating than you are about actually going on the hike, even though you have made claims that it's not about the smiley. If the hike means so much to you (as you repeatedly state), show up near the end of the event (which you think are lame anyway), log your attended, and go on the hike that you so desire to do. Continued complaints are just going to reinforce my belief that it's not really about the hike anymore, but is instead you feeling you're being slighted because you're not getting the T rating you feel you deserve for going on a hike that's not part of the event anymore. You continue to focus on the EVENT instead of the fact that there's a hike afterwards. If it were TRULY all about the hike (and not the fact that it's no longer part of the EVENT), you wouldn't be discussing what should be considered as part of an event under the new guidelines. You'd be out hiking instead.

Link to comment
That's certainly not the type of hike I got from the discussion. Nonetheless, everything still stands - the point that there must be something happening at the posted coordinates (where the event is being held) for the duration of the event.
Why must there be something happening at the posted coordinates for the duration of the Event Cache? Why isn't it enough to tell people when we're going to depart and when we're going to return?

This was covered a looooooooooooooooooooooooooong time ago. I could just restate the same things again, but then we add "round and " to that little dance that is this thread.

 

ETA: So I guess I'll dance around a bit more in the following paragraphs... :P

 

In the real world, I've planned or otherwise been involved with any number of events (not Event Caches) where everyone met at a specific time and place, and then we went somewhere else. And the socialization took place primarily during the trip, not at the initial meeting place. In the real world, people seem to understand that they need to get to the departure location by the departure time if they're going to join an event that involves traveling as a group.

I agree. But that's not how Groundspeak has decided they want the face of Official Geocaching.com Events to look. And they've provided explaination for their rules. To me, they make sense. I'm satisfied. I don't have this need to make Event listings everything I want them to be. Like I and others have said, we don't necessarily like or agree with all the rules, but I understand why they're there and can understand their reasoning.

 

And maybe it is an insurmountable barrier. Maybe Groundspeak really doesn't want moving Event Caches, and wants all Event Caches to be stationary. If so, then they can just leave the current guidelines the way they are.

Now, yeah. And stationary has been around for a while. Touchstone has even explained his experience with moving event rules. The new change was the duration.

 

In that case, I think my suggested change would allow moving Event Caches without weakening the effort to address flash mob Event Caches and the stacking of Event Caches.

But it's still a moving event - it still leaves the posted coordinates. Yes, even though common sense would tell people to wait around at gz until they return, or to head off and try to find the group -- but this is one reason why they don't like moving events. All you did was make the the starting waypoint and ending waypoint the same. The problem that the event moves away from the posted coordinates still remains.

 

The reviewers can easily take care of that and apparently managed to do so since 2002.

It's quite easy to distinguish between a 3 hours train ride on a renowned special steam train with 100 participants from a 15 minutes shopping trip of 3 friends.

The reviewers can easily do much more than that. Why have rules? The reviewers can judge. No the rules are there to help make the reviewers' jobs easier so they don't have to make every review subjective, and incite argument and launch an appeal every time they say no.

 

Accepting events based on personal preferences of reviewer is for me the worst solution, giving very negative geocaching experience to outsiders. Groundspeak hasn't change the rules recently, they've equalize it for everyone, and it seem to hurt you the most. Since you're no longer allowed to publish events others were never allowed to.

Yup!

 

One can require a minimum duration without requiring that all the time of an event is spent at one place.

Yes. They can. Because when you move, the event is no longer at the posted coordinates. You've forced a minimum on the event taking place at the posted coordinates. The listing details are no longer accurate, because no one is at- nothing is happening at- the posted coordinates. So no, you can require a minimum duration and require that event listing details remain accurate.

 

They require a minimum duration for the coordinates because they favour having it at one location so any attendee will know where the event is without any help or "intuition", and disallow events where there is no guarantee the event is where it says it will be. The posted coordinates.

 

Just be glad they're not requiring start and end times for every additional waypoint activity.

 

I can't understand how this is still not grasped!

The Listing provides Posted Coordinates, time and duration. There must be an event there. The listing gives details for the event at the coordinates. Inherently, it necessarily means it cannot move. The only guarantee that you can find the event per the listing is the location, time and duration.

You can choose to look at it like they somehow dislike certain styles of events or activities, or you can be rational and understand the reasoning for the rule.

 

The 30 minute minimum though is entirely Groundspeak's judgement call, their desire for what constitutes an Official Geocaching.com Event. That one rule means that it explicitly makes certain styles of Events (- NOT ACTIVITIES) unable to be published. Make an Event Listing that complies with that one rule (and any others of course) and you've gor yourself an Official Geocaching.com Event.

 

If the event you want to create is not in line with the rules for an Official Geocaching.com Event, and you can't be bothered with making minor adjustments to make it work (REALLY, being in one place for 30 minutes is so unbelievably minor I'm flabbergasted it's still such an issue!), then this is not the place to list the event!

 

A 30 minutes waiting event is much more lame...

Whenever you use that word in a paragraph like that, I'm now going to skip the rest of the thought. That's my choice, because you've lost all objectivity and I don't really care to argue against your opinion.

 

Previously you could without any problems write something like

 

We start to meet from 9:00 on and will head for a hike at 9:30.

Come prepared for a hike of 5 hours.

 

Now you have to write in this setting

Start of event: 9:00

End of event : 9:30

You really did miss or ignore all the other suggestions made in this thread on this matter, didn't you? dry.gif

 

And certainly you haven't tried, because you've never created an event and you don't care to. You only care that other people won't create the events you want to attend - which by the way, is only if they are too stringent to care to make any changes to have the event comply with the minimum standard, and that you want proper ratings for the events you want to attend.

 

All of it is sour grapes. I don't see any rational, reasonable argument for a change "back".

Link to comment

How is it that you are so certain of this? Have you yet tried? Every time somebody asks you to actually test your theories out by creating an event, you ignore them.

 

The reviewers are (however there maybe some who are reluctant to) effectively enforcing, that the event contains both start time and end time (or start time and duration, which is effectively the same) and for every additional activity that happens after events and is not the part of the event it must be explicitely statet that those activities are only optional.

Link to comment

This event has paddling as part of it, although I don't see an end time listed and am wondering how it got published if that's the case.

I think it's because the 10:30am draw time is stated, with the first team leaving at 11am, which implies that the event will be at the coordinates for at least that half hour.

 

I think the biggest inconsistency I have with cezanne revolves around one thing. Cezanne is claiming it's ALL about the hike, which should be part of the event duration and rated correctly.....You make all these claims about how important the hike is to you and then complain that the hike that follows the event isn't part of the event. You're emphasizing the EVENT now, not the hike.

Well put (the whole comment =))

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

The reviewers are (however there maybe some who are reluctant to) effectively enforcing, that the event contains both start time and end time (or start time and duration, which is effectively the same) and for every additional activity that happens after events and is not the part of the event it must be explicitely statet that those activities are only optional.

 

That's how it's been here, and that to me is the proper interpretation of the guidelines. There's no guarantee however that every reviewer around the globe follows the rules in the same way (and usually it's pointless to argue that issue due to no precedent). However if Groundspeak feels a reviewer isn't doing their job properly they could decide to revoke reviewer status. Probably not as easy to do if an entire region of reviewers is judging the same way. It would take more attention and work to find new reviewers who do follow the rules properly... I feel for regions like that, mainly because it makes the the game worse with situations like this. That said, I don't know what the reviewers are really like in cezanne's area, so I'm not laying any claims, but it certainly sounds like, due to regional and cultural differences, there are a number of legitimate issues and concerns being raised, merely because a rule was adjusted and tightened, having more of an effect on event types than just a lengthened static duration.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

This event has paddling as part of it, although I don't see an end time listed and am wondering how it got published if that's the case.

I think it's because the 10:30am draw time is stated, with the first team leaving at 11am, which implies that the event will be at the coordinates for at least that half hour.

 

That makes sense. I'd love to go but Cali is too far away!

Link to comment

The reviewers are (however there maybe some who are reluctant to) effectively enforcing, that the event contains both start time and end time (or start time and duration, which is effectively the same) and for every additional activity that happens after events and is not the part of the event it must be explicitely statet that those activities are only optional.

 

I missed something along the way. I know the hike after the parking lot gathering is deemed optional. But where does it actually say that you must explicitly spell out that the hike is optional? Is not "we will hit the trail at 11AM" sufficient? I believe this is an urban myth perpetuated in this thread. Please direct me to a reference.

Link to comment

Most of the events I've looked at since the guidelines were changed don't specifically state that the hike is optional. I think the implication that the hike is after the event and as such, isn't required to log the event, is fine. Perhaps reviewers in areas where this wasn't always evident are doing so to cover their bases? I have seen it done both ways though, both explicitly and implicitly.

Link to comment

Ditto on that coachstahly. Here, more often the reviewers will ask for explicit wording if they're not sure it's clear enough. That's a judgement call on their part, afaic, whether they think general populace might misunderstand. And I think our local reviewers tend to favour listing clarity over others' inference.It can be annoying sometimes, but understandable.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

I cant believe I am getting sucked in to posting in this thread, buy anyway, here goes.

 

Consider that I went out for an perfectly epic traditional cache. I chose the cache. I planned my route. It was a glorious day. I had a perfect length hike on the way to the cache. I saw beautiful plants and wildlife, and even took some pictures. I even happened to meet up with a friend as I was walking along. The search for the cache was not too long, just right, and the container and its contents were in good shape. I traded swag and signed the log and put it back. I found a different path back out, and found a secret vista. The sun was just above the horizon and gave a great view, and I took some more photos. I went home and logged about my experience.

 

When I logged about the experience -- did I only mention the two minutes of finding the cache and putting it back? No, I told you all about the great day I had on the way to and from the cache, shared my photos, my enjoyment.

 

Just like in the story above, the 'event cache' is the part that is listed. It lasts 30 minutes or more, and follows all the rules. It is not lame.

If I have an epic day, hiking and skating with the folks I talked to at the event cache, I am going to log about it, and that it was a great event.

 

The whole of the activity is the 'event'. The 30+ minutes at one designated time and place is the 'event cache'.

 

It is not lame that there is a 30 minute window (event cache) at the beginning of an epic hike, because the whole of it, including the hike, represents the event.

The 30 minute window just makes sure that everyone has a chance to check in and share their enthusiasm, so no one gets accidentally left behind.

Link to comment

Events that appear to be like what you want, but probably won't pass muster with you, although I think there's one that's right up your alley.

Cachers are encouraged to note the published date on many of these Events. Several of them were published prior to the Guideline change and would require some modification before being published today.

 

You make me happy by using "guideline change" too while NeverSummer tries to convince me that all the cachers in my country including myself have just not understood what the guidelines said right from the beginning. At least it makes me feel not as that big of an idiot.

Excuse me? Are you SERIOUS right now?! :angry:

 

I have ALWAYS called it a Guideline change and/or guideline clarification throughout each thread on this topic. Do NOT try to defame me, or claim that I've said otherwise.

 

You cannot lump together the fact that I recognized this change and clarification, and the fact that the change has aligned things a bit more closely with now Event Caches were hosted and listed on "this side of the pond" and claim that there's not an issue here...

Edited by NeverSummer
Link to comment

Event Cache under review (I did it because cezanne won't).

 

A Homer Hike, GC5P8D0

D1/T1. N 59° 38.478 W 151° 32.373

Meet me at the coordinates for a lunch break birding hike!

When? Wednesday, March 25 at 12:00pm-1:00pm

Where? Meet at the above coordinates, just inside the Islands And Ocean Visitor Center

We'll depart the coordinates at 12:30pm down the Beluga Slough trail to look for birds. I'll have a scope, and you can check out binoculars at the Visitor Center desk if you need some.

 

Reviewer Note:

11 Mar 2015, Hi Joel:

I have a concern about the event time being 12-1, but you plan to leave the Center at 1230. I'm going to run this through a secondary review process which may take a day or two.

Owner Reviewer Note:

12 Mar 2015, No problem, thanks for the update, XXXX

Reviewer Note:

12 Mar 2015, Reviewer and Groundspeak consensus is that this event is publishable with one change:

 

When? Wednesday, March 25 at 12:00pm-1:00pm 12:30 p.m.

Owner Reviewer Note:

12 Mar 2015, I know "no cache will be used as precedent...", but what about this Event? (visit link) (coachstahly's post)

There are some more examples out there, most of which are now found in this post: (visit link) (this thread)

My description already states when people can expect to find me at the coordinates (12-12:30) for the "Event Cache" portion, and the end time of when I expect I'll be wrapping up with any birding and hiking (1pm).

Is there a reason I can't include the overall timing for the secondary activities within the description of the Event Cache listing?

 

Thanks for any clarifications.

Reviewer Note:

12 Mar 2015 Hi Joel:

 

It's fine to state how long you expect the hike to take, simply separate the event and the hike. The guidance received from Groundspeak reads, "Event times are for the 30 minutes. But it's okay to say how long the hike may take." (emphasis mine)

 

When? Wednesday, March 25 at 12:00pm-1:00pm 12:30pm

 

Where? Meet at the above coordinates, just inside the Islands And Ocean Visitor Center

 

We'll depart the coordinates at 12:30pm down the Beluga Slough trail to look for birds and return in about thirty minutes (emphasis from Reviewer). I'll have a scope, and you can check out binoculars at the Visitor Center desk if you need some.

Owner Reviewer Note:

13 Mar 2015, Thanks, XXXXX.

 

It's nothing personal, but more of a clarification request "from the horse's mouth", that I emailed Appeals directly for clarification on this.

 

The heated rhetoric that you've returned to on the Hiking Event thread on the forums is appreciated--clear enough, but also vague enough at this point.

 

What I'm wondering is now that we're aware of the global differences in interpretation of the new guidelines (see the updated list from coachstahly with events published after the change), how Reviewers work to be more consistent across borders. We're discussing the changes to the guidelines in a global forum, but events are still being "interpreted" and published that do not align with the reasoning provided by you, your Reviewer cohorts, and Groundspeak.

 

So, I'm just wondering how we address the global issue on the forums, while reconciling the differences in interpretations by Reviewers in different regions.

 

This is the current update. I have my 3rd email request to Appeals on the subject, and look forward to hearing back from Groundspeak.

 

At this point, cezanne, it sounds like you're type of event is gone. You'll have to list any event as the portion at the coordinates, and list start and end times as at the coordinates. Any additional information about hikes or other activities may be included, but must be listed separately from the "actual" event at the listed coordinates.

 

Sorry that the current answer will stomp your soul and tear at your heart. You'll be sad, I know.

 

But here's the thing you should know before you keep saying I'm insulting you: I tried my best on YOUR behalf to get an answer YOU would be happy with. I am still working on an appeal which would allow you and your peers in your region to be able to publish Event Caches where the "hike is the event", and as you said you would "welcome" as a "workaround".

 

Now, to discuss the events in coachsthaly's post which do not align with the information provided to me by my Reviewer and also to him from Groundspeak. There are events which are not being consistently reviewed to the same letter as my own. To me this is a problem.

 

Also, this illustrates PERFECTLY how Reviewers might interpret differently, and not be aware of "rulings" by Groundspeak on the subject. If Groundspeak has spoken to my Reviewer and stated that events must be at the listed coordinates for the minimum of 30 minutes, then that is not being clearly and consistently enforced in different regions since the new guideline has been in place. Additionally, you can imagine and extrapolate that events before the guideline change might have also seen the same variation in interpretation and implementation of the guidelines for Event Caches; Event Cache review has not been, and continues to not be consistent across regions.

 

I'll update when I hear more from Groundspeak Appeals directly.

Edited by NeverSummer
Link to comment
Just like in the story above, the 'event cache' is the part that is listed. It lasts 30 minutes or more, and follows all the rules. It is not lame.

If I have an epic day, hiking and skating with the folks I talked to at the event cache, I am going to log about it, and that it was a great event.

 

The whole of the activity is the 'event'. The 30+ minutes at one designated time and place is the 'event cache'.

 

It is not lame that there is a 30 minute window (event cache) at the beginning of an epic hike, because the whole of it, including the hike, represents the event.

The 30 minute window just makes sure that everyone has a chance to check in and share their enthusiasm, so no one gets accidentally left behind.

I agree that I would remember both the epic hike and the 30-minute meet-n-greet Event Cache in the parking lot, and I would comment about both in my log. So in a sense, it's not that hard to include a 30-minute Event Cache as a workaround for Groundspeak's ban on moving Event Caches.

 

But at the same time, I can appreciate the frustration of an event organizer.

 

For example, this sounds like a great event:

You are invited to my 55th birthday party aboard The Liberty Belle. We depart at 5pm sharp, and will return by 10pm.

And while this invitation describes (more or less) the same event, it does seem a bit tortured:

You are invited to join me on the pier of The Liberty Belle from 4:30pm to 5pm. At 5pm sharp, we'll depart on The Liberty Belle to celebrate my 55th birthday party, returning by 10pm.

It's a shame that an Event Cache would have to be structured like the latter example, even though a real-world event could be structured like the former example.

Link to comment

 

Now, to discuss the events in coachsthaly's post which do not align with the information provided to me by my Reviewer and also to him from Groundspeak. There are events which are not being consistently reviewed to the same letter as my own. To me this is a problem.

 

Also, this illustrates PERFECTLY how Reviewers might interpret differently, and not be aware of "rulings" by Groundspeak on the subject. If Groundspeak has spoken to my Reviewer and stated that events must be at the listed coordinates for the minimum of 30 minutes, then that is not being clearly and consistently enforced in different regions since the new guideline has been in place. Additionally, you can imagine and extrapolate that events before the guideline change might have also seen the same variation in interpretation and implementation of the guidelines for Event Caches; Event Cache review has not been, and continues to not be consistent across regions.

 

Continuity should be the name of the game and it's obvious it's not based on this series of back and forth notes as well as the ones I listed that are certainly different in nature. I'll be interested to hear the results of the appeal, both as it pertains to this event as well as possible comments on the other events that I listed which your reviewer appears not to allow. Groundspeak either didn't make the clarifications on the new guidelines clear enough, reviewers are still interpreting the guidelines in a manner of their choice, or it's a combination of both.

Link to comment

 

For example, this sounds like a great event:

You are invited to my 55th birthday party aboard The Liberty Belle. We depart at 5pm sharp, and will return by 10pm.

And while this invitation describes (more or less) the same event, it does seem a bit tortured:

You are invited to join me on the pier of The Liberty Belle from 4:30pm to 5pm. At 5pm sharp, we'll depart on The Liberty Belle to celebrate my 55th birthday party, returning by 10pm.

It's a shame that an Event Cache would have to be structured like the latter example, even though a real-world event could be structured like the former example.

Only "problem" (more of a nitpick-y type issue) I see with this example is you MUST be on the boat before it leaves promptly at 5, meaning you'd have to arrive early enough to find parking, walk to the boat, and board the boat before 5. 30 minutes is the minimum time for the "official" event, but attendees would be there early anyway, at a time of their choosing, just to be sure they were on the boat, both to qualify for an attended log and to make sure they're on the boat before departure. I fully understand the difference, but I really don't see it as that big a deal. It certainly sounds odd the way it's written but it's what most people would be doing anyway, just probably not for the entire 30 minutes.

 

It's the same for a hike. You don't have to be there the full 30 minutes to get credit, but if you leave at 11, you're going to arrive somewhat early anyway for parking, to get your gear ready and to visit however briefly you'd like, as long as you're there before 11.

Edited by coachstahly
Link to comment

 

Now, to discuss the events in coachsthaly's post which do not align with the information provided to me by my Reviewer and also to him from Groundspeak. There are events which are not being consistently reviewed to the same letter as my own. To me this is a problem.

 

Also, this illustrates PERFECTLY how Reviewers might interpret differently, and not be aware of "rulings" by Groundspeak on the subject. If Groundspeak has spoken to my Reviewer and stated that events must be at the listed coordinates for the minimum of 30 minutes, then that is not being clearly and consistently enforced in different regions since the new guideline has been in place. Additionally, you can imagine and extrapolate that events before the guideline change might have also seen the same variation in interpretation and implementation of the guidelines for Event Caches; Event Cache review has not been, and continues to not be consistent across regions.

 

Continuity should be the name of the game and it's obvious it's not based on this series of back and forth notes as well as the ones I listed that are certainly different in nature. I'll be interested to hear the results of the appeal, both as it pertains to this event as well as possible comments on the other events that I listed which your reviewer appears not to allow. Groundspeak either didn't make the clarifications on the new guidelines clear enough, reviewers are still interpreting the guidelines in a manner of their choice, or it's a combination of both.

This is the important context from Groundspeak, passed on to my Reviewer:

The guidance received from Groundspeak reads, "Event times are for the 30 minutes. But it's okay to say how long the hike may take."

 

This, to me, reads as a blanket statement affecting any iteration of "moving" event published to Geocaching.com, including how the others you've noted on page 10.

 

I've asked Groundspeak to clarify via Appeals.

Link to comment

The answer from Geocaching.com Appeals on the matter as listed above in my communication with the Reviewer and to Appeals:

Hello Joel,

 

GC5P8D0 is a social event, so your event page needs to be about that social event from 12-12:30, not about the optional activity that happens afterward. We will allow you to mention the optional hike and provide the basic information needed in your event page, as long it isn't the primary focus. The main thing is that the hike is not the event so it shouldn't be listed as part of it.

 

Good luck with your event and hike and I hope everyone has fun!

 

Kind Regards,

 

 

Cathy Hornback

 

Community and Volunteer Support Coordinator

Geocaching.com

 

I have responded to this email with this:

Cathy,

 

Thanks for your email response. The idea for the event is to have the birding hike be the social part of the event, but I (and others) have read the new guideline to state that there must be a period of time of at least 30 minutes at the listed coordinates. The hike is meant to be the event, but I didn't think it could be listed as such and meet the guidelines.

 

Can I not list the hike itself as the social aspect of the hike then? Like other events published after the new guidelines were updates for Event and CITO caches, I would imagine this might still be possible.

 

Can you please speak to the fact that other Events have been published since the update which do not clearly separate the "social event" portion from the activities (hikes, etc)? It seems like this is a rather inconsistent interpretation of the guidelines.

 

Either we can list events with times including the hike or activity, or we can't. What is Groundspeak's stance on this subject? Many other community members have the same concerns and questions as I, but I've wanted to take initiative and find out from Groundspeak what the line is on what can or cant' be included in an Event Cache listing while meeting the new guidelines.

 

What if my event got rid of the "we will leave at 12:30..." language, and replaced it with something more like:

 

"Ok lets meet at 12:00 and have a short meet and greet. We can meet the rangers who give the permission to hide at the Alaska Maritime Refuge office. Then any one willing can join on the hike along this portion of the Beluga Slough trail.

 

 

A 1 mile hike will begin at 12:30pm and run till 1pm or there after.

 

There are 4 caches or so in the immeadiate area of Bishop's Beach, as well as others in the area. Should make for a great day of geocaching and hiking.

 

I hope to see you all out there.

 

If you are planning to join the hike, please note that the d/t rating is inadmissible. Ratings would behigher while hiking." (Adapted from http://coord.info/GC5NNYJ)

Thank you!

 

Sincerely,

Joel

 

I see in Cathy's response that she calls out "social event":

GC5P8D0 is a social event, so your event page needs to be about that social event from 12-12:30, not about the optional activity that happens afterward...

 

The way she words the email makes it seem that there is a bit of wiggle room should the event be listed more as an "active" or "activity" Event Cache--more like forthis event.

 

But, this doesn't seem consistent with the reasoning provided, and how the Guidelines read. In the way I wrote my event for consideration, it meets all 5 criteria for listing: Not commercial, not for a cache hunt. Will occur at listed coordinates. States start and end time. Lasts for at least 30 minutes.

 

Now I'm wondering more about the consistent execution of review across regions. Does Cathy handle all Appeals? I doubt it. Does the Groundspeak Appeals team have the same opinion? I doubt it. Do Reviewers already interpret the guideline update differently from one another? Clearly.

 

My Reviewer has full knowledge of the context of this thread. Do the other Reviewers across the world? I doubt it. So, if Groundspeak isn't consistent in its Appeals process, its enforcement of the Guidelines, and Reviewers are granted rather significant interpretive freedoms with the guidelines, how are we to understand what can or can't be allowed?

 

It seems like a rather cut-and-dry response is possible, but I don't know how soon we'll see one. I will update when I hear back from Groundspeak again.

 

At this time, it is apparent to me that we should all be held to the same standard for events now:

The guidance received from Groundspeak reads, "Event times are for the 30 minutes. But it's okay to say how long the hike may take."

AND

Your event page needs to be about that social event, not about the optional activity that happens afterward. We will allow you to mention the optional hike and provide the basic information needed in your event page, as long it isn't the primary focus.

 

Cezanne, I can hear your soul being thrown into the furnace of a thousand fires as we speak... :sad:

Link to comment

Additionally,

A Reviewer Note left clarified that he had already contacted Appeals, and that Groundspeak is aware of, and working on the consistent application of the Guidelines across regions.

 

Groundspeak is aware of regional inconsistencies and have a hard-working staff who are very engaged in managing the team of several hundred Community Volunteers who have dozens of different languages as their mother tongue.

 

You see, this tells me (cezanne, I'm directing this toward you) clearly that Groundpeak made the change to the guidelines to address the inconsistencies which they've uncovered across regions. The clarification/update to the Guidelines served as another way to redirect and re-rail Event Caches back on to Groundspeak's tracks.

 

And, apparently, Event Caches are, indeed, viewed as the "sedentary" portion of time spent at the listed coordinates. One can still list the other activities which are parts of events (always have been able to, and the guidelines state clearly that you can/are encouraged to add waypoints for those events), but the "social" part of the event as required must occur at the listed coordinates for at least 30 minutes.

 

The skating event could still happen, as the rink is likely within "error" of coordinates listed, and would go for more than 30 minutes. It's the "moving" events which are not "allowed" as the focus of the event. In the case of a moving event, there must be a "stationary" (read: at/near the coordinates) period of at least 30 minutes for it to get published.

 

This leaves options for a pre-hike trailhead event, a post-hike trailhead event, or a mid-hike stopover at the listed coordinates at some point during the hike itself. The same would go for a train ride, a paddle, a float, or hopscotch marathons.

Link to comment

Now I'm wondering more about the consistent execution of review across regions. Does Cathy handle all Appeals? I doubt it. Does the Groundspeak Appeals team have the same opinion? I doubt it. Do Reviewers already interpret the guideline update differently from one another? Clearly.

 

My Reviewer has full knowledge of the context of this thread. Do the other Reviewers across the world? I doubt it. So, if Groundspeak isn't consistent in its Appeals process, its enforcement of the Guidelines, and Reviewers are granted rather significant interpretive freedoms with the guidelines, how are we to understand what can or can't be allowed?

 

It seems like a rather cut-and-dry response is possible, but I don't know how soon we'll see one. I will update when I hear back from Groundspeak again.

 

At this time, it is apparent to me that we should all be held to the same standard for events now:

The guidance received from Groundspeak reads, "Event times are for the 30 minutes. But it's okay to say how long the hike may take."

 

1. I would think that your appeal is finished as the response was clear.

 

2. Watch what you say about the Appeals team. They are a small group who coordinate quite closely together, and Cathy's answer is consistent with other advice given by the leader of that group. Parenthetically, out of the entire Appeals team, Cathy is the one with the giant five-figure cache find count.

 

3. The advice you received is consistent with how I've reviewed events for the past year or so. Your reviewer and I are very much on the same page. As my character witness, Cheech Gang is active in this thread and he can confirm that I am not publishing moving events in his part of the world.

 

4. If other reviewers are interpreting the guidelines differently, this means that events are being published with a "moving" component, like a hike. In my experience, very few cache owners contact the Appeals group at Geocaching HQ to complain that their cache was wrongfully published under a liberal interpretation of a listing guideline. Similarly, I do not lose any sleep over whatever other reviewers might be doing -- except when, as in the OP's case, the issue is featured prominently and I hear complaints that I am being too strict.

 

I try my best to follow the guidelines as I understand them. There is likely another guideline where I am out of step with what Geocaching HQ is wanting us to do. For example, I am starting to have second thoughts about publishing Cheech Gang's "Scenic Railroad Trestles Near Schools" series of buried PVC Pipe caches.

Link to comment

I try my best to follow the guidelines as I understand them. There is likely another guideline where I am out of step with what Geocaching HQ is wanting us to do. For example, I am starting to have second thoughts about publishing Cheech Gang's "Scenic Railroad Trestles Near Schools" series of buried PVC Pipe caches.

 

:laughing:

Link to comment

Now I'm wondering more about the consistent execution of review across regions. Does Cathy handle all Appeals? I doubt it. Does the Groundspeak Appeals team have the same opinion? I doubt it. Do Reviewers already interpret the guideline update differently from one another? Clearly.

 

My Reviewer has full knowledge of the context of this thread. Do the other Reviewers across the world? I doubt it. So, if Groundspeak isn't consistent in its Appeals process, its enforcement of the Guidelines, and Reviewers are granted rather significant interpretive freedoms with the guidelines, how are we to understand what can or can't be allowed?

 

It seems like a rather cut-and-dry response is possible, but I don't know how soon we'll see one. I will update when I hear back from Groundspeak again.

 

At this time, it is apparent to me that we should all be held to the same standard for events now:

The guidance received from Groundspeak reads, "Event times are for the 30 minutes. But it's okay to say how long the hike may take."

 

1. I would think that your appeal is finished as the response was clear.

I would agree. However, I imagine that cezanne (and others?) might see the wording of the Appeals response and think there's still wiggle room or a lack of clarity which we plainly see.

 

2. Watch what you say about the Appeals team. They are a small group who coordinate quite closely together, and Cathy's answer is consistent with other advice given by the leader of that group. Parenthetically, out of the entire Appeals team, Cathy is the one with the giant five-figure cache find count.
I'm not saying anything meant to be taken that the Appeals team is unskilled or anything derogatory. I meant this in context of interpretation and consistency among humans. We all make mistakes, and I wonder aloud if all people are on the same page. My communication with my reviewer would allude to the fact that Grondspeak is aware of inconsistency and trying to rein it in as we speak.

 

3. The advice you received is consistent with how I've reviewed events for the past year or so. Your reviewer and I are very much on the same page. As my character witness, Cheech Gang is active in this thread and he can confirm that I am not publishing moving events in his part of the world.

I hear you loud and clear. I write things rhetorically for those like cezanne to see that we're working to clarify and establish a baseline. You and I are on the same page too...believe me!

 

4. If other reviewers are interpreting the guidelines differently, this means that events are being published with a "moving" component, like a hike. In my experience, very few cache owners contact the Appeals group at Geocaching HQ to complain that their cache was wrongfully published under a liberal interpretation of a listing guideline. Similarly, I do not lose any sleep over whatever other reviewers might be doing -- except when, as in the OP's case, the issue is featured prominently and I hear complaints that I am being too strict.
Right, which is why a global forum is a place where we find out about inconsistencies across regions which might otherwise stay under the radar. We have examples of "Hey...I saw that so-and-so has X...", and Groundspeak is working actively to clarify and make review consistent.

 

If one sees that my event might be denied, but another event seems to pass muster with a similar description, it makes one wonder about where a line is or isn't crossed according to Groundspeak. By bringing the Review and Appeals process from my own beta test on cezanne's behalf to light, we all here in the global forum can see what Groundspeak's line is on moving events and the guidelines.

 

If I kept it to myself, then nobody would learn anything, and we'd only see more frustration as vented in this topic when one learns that their favorite kind of whatever has been "banned" or whatever.

 

I try my best to follow the guidelines as I understand them. There is likely another guideline where I am out of step with what Geocaching HQ is wanting us to do. For example, I am starting to have second thoughts about publishing Cheech Gang's "Scenic Railroad Trestles Near Schools" series of buried PVC Pipe caches.
:laughing:
Link to comment

Oh, and to dprovan and others hoping to hear "why" on the new guideline update for Event and CITO caches:

The "why" seems to be that Groundspeak is trying to clarify the guidelines to rein in inconsistent review due to vague language, or language/translation barriers.

 

I hope that satisfies your hopes, just as I hope the the other information from the appeal at least helps cezanne come to grips with the reality of Groundspeak's decision..even if she doesn't agree with them.

Link to comment
For example, I am starting to have second thoughts about publishing Cheech Gang's "Scenic Railroad Trestles Near Schools" series of buried PVC Pipe caches.

 

For the love of Jeremy!

 

After all the back and forth we've had on my attempts to get this series published this is how you let me know you might deny it. You gave me no hint. I've already cut the pipes and I doubt Home Depot will accept a return now. My soul aches.

Link to comment

The "Final response on the matter" from Appeals, this afternoon:

Geocaching events are intended to be social gatherings, available and accessible to everyone regardless of their abilities. You can have a hike afterward, but the hike cannot be the event.

 

Regarding other events, please be advised that there is no precedent for placing geocaches.

Link to comment
For example, I am starting to have second thoughts about publishing Cheech Gang's "Scenic Railroad Trestles Near Schools" series of buried PVC Pipe caches.

 

For the love of Jeremy!

 

After all the back and forth we've had on my attempts to get this series published this is how you let me know you might deny it. You gave me no hint. I've already cut the pipes and I doubt Home Depot will accept a return now. My soul aches.

You could re-purpose the pipes into stools for people to sit on at upcoming events. I forbid you to move around.

Link to comment
For example, I am starting to have second thoughts about publishing Cheech Gang's "Scenic Railroad Trestles Near Schools" series of buried PVC Pipe caches.

 

For the love of Jeremy!

 

After all the back and forth we've had on my attempts to get this series published this is how you let me know you might deny it. You gave me no hint. I've already cut the pipes and I doubt Home Depot will accept a return now. My soul aches.

You could re-purpose the pipes into stools for people to sit on at upcoming events. I forbid you to move around.

I wish you right-hand coast Reviewers would review with more consistency. I'm forever having to refer to "there is no cache precedence" due to the existence of this cache that is in a hole drilled in a tree covered with dirt very close to a school and another cache. Edited by Greatland Reviewer
Link to comment

Previously you could without any problems write something like

 

AWe start to meet from 9:00 on and will head for a hike at 9:30.

Come prepared for a hike of 5 hours.

 

Now you have to write in this setting

BStart of event: 9:00

End of event : 9:30

 

and it is just tolerated to mention that a hike will take place thereafter.

 

How is it that you are so certain of this? Have you yet tried? Every time somebody asks you to actually test your theories out by creating an event, you ignore them.

To clarify, the language that was recommended to me was the A option, with it a little more clear that the 30 minutes you've called out are the "meet and greet" social part of the event as required by Groundspeak. You can mention the hike, but the language for the duration of the event needs to be called out apart from the hike itself, as in A+ a little more clarificaton. So yes, it's a bit like A+B in what you've described.

 

What is great is that you're still able to have a hike! Yahoo! Case closed, Mods? :anibad:

Link to comment
Geocaching events are intended to be social gatherings, available and accessible to everyone regardless of their abilities.

 

I guess that rules out having the event during the 30-minute lunch break at the summit, unless said summit is T1 accessible. Back to beer and pizza I'm afraid.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 5
×
×
  • Create New...