Agenda Literature Placed in Caches by Finders

[+niraD]

I didn't take photos of all the finds. I'm going to start now. For the photos you see in my finds, if you see anything business-card sized, it's often a map to a church on one side with agenda lit on the other. The more I think about it, the more I suspect it's probably the work of two or three people alone in my area.

Huh... Now that I think about it, I'm probably carrying some "agenda literature". I'm a member of The Rallye Club, and we have business cards that can be redeemed for a free entry. But on the back is a description of what a rallye is, and an encouragement for people to try a rallye. So that card is "agenda literature", even if it can be redeemed for a free entry for one of our rallyes.

 

Oh, wait, my signature in this forum is "agenda literature" too. Run away! Run away!

[+SwineFlew]

I didn't take photos of all the finds. I'm going to start now. For the photos you see in my finds, if you see anything business-card sized, it's often a map to a church on one side with agenda lit on the other. The more I think about it, the more I suspect it's probably the work of two or three people alone in my area.

Huh... Now that I think about it, I'm probably carrying some "agenda literature". I'm a member of The Rallye Club, and we have business cards that can be redeemed for a free entry. But on the back is a description of what a rallye is, and an encouragement for people to try a rallye. So that card is "agenda literature", even if it can be redeemed for a free entry for one of our rallyes.

 

Oh, wait, my signature in this forum is "agenda literature" too. Run away! Run away!

The OP lives in Bible Belt and everybody here should be aware of that. I used to live in the Bible Belt myself and I understand where the OP is coming from. People in the south always seem to be pushing their religion agenda pretty strongly. I always tell them this.. I am going to heaven because I am not bothering anyone with my idea of faith. I see agenda literature just about every state I cached in but I see a little more in the Bible Belt area. One in every 20 caches isnt a problem, but once you see like 1 in every 3 caches... it starts getting annoying. And yes, its often the work of more than one person. I even found caches in church parking lots pack full of trash. Sure, there no agenda on the cache page but once you find the cache, its another story.

[+LaughterOnWater]

Well, you'll need to set some parameters first.

 

Clearly define "agenda literature."

I should define my hypotheses first:

1. Agenda lit is rampant.

2. People are replacing it.

 

Additional hypothesis for future study:

3. Counter-Agenda Cards will reduce Agenda lit.

 

I'll probably need to define "agenda lit", "rampant" and define what's also not agenda lit. And I'm not so sure agenda lit should be confined to paper. A video sermon or a commercial advertisement for a business on DVD might also be considered agenda lit. If someone has practical wording or ideas on how to define agenda literature, I'm open to suggestions.

 

Outline a time period and a geographic zone.

 

How many caches are in that zone? What is an appropriate sample size based on that?

 

Randomly sample the caches, but do small batches over the outlined time period, so you capture old and new caches as they are placed. If your defined area has 10,000 active caches, a sample of 750 caches will give you an acceptable margin of error as long as you make sure the sample is truly random and representative. You'll want to check things like the average terrain and difficult rating, average age, etc. to make sure the sample is in line with the full population of caches.

 

You should probably visit caches more than once. Caches are ephemeral, and the contents change quickly.

This is not a university study. If anything, it's an merely investigative study to determine whether there is something worth looking at closer. The object is to suggest through data that something is more than anecdotal and worth further consideration. If I were getting paid to do the study, that would be another matter.

 

Cache sizes in consideration for investigation should be limited to caches that are of a size large enough to contain agenda lit. Caches should be relatively urban/suburban. All caches mislabeled as to size where they are too small to hold anything except a log should also be discarded from the study.

 

Instead of regions/random caches, I suspect it would be just as random to take consecutively whichever caches I come across, the way any geocacher might cache normally, that are near where I live. I'm not sure setting regions and random samples wouldn't add a different set of biases. There's really no way to know unless you geocache normally, using any geocacher's random whim for how they approach a cache and doing it with regions/random samples.

 

750 caches out of a region of 10,000 caches? I'm chuckling here... By then I'd be old-hat, eh? There are less than 800 caches within a 25-mile radius of where I live including micros. A set of 40 to 60 caches of the target size range should be enough to determine whether my theory is more than merely anecdote and worth further investigation. A second visit to those same caches six months later might confirm or deny the second anecdote that once agenda lit is removed, someone is coming back to replace it.

 

Recruit other geocachers to help you. This will mitigate some of the potential for bias. For example, you might be visiting clusters of caches close together, immediately after someone has done a literature drop in the same area. Someone else visiting those caches two months later could have a totally different experience.

 

You should count and categorize all the contents of each cache, so the true proportion of agenda literature can be calculated. When you do find agenda literature, you should categorize it too. Is it religious? Political? Commercial?

 

It's a big undertaking. Some might decide that it's easier to just trade out objectionable items, but I have faith in you. Always happy to discuss methodology in more detail.

Again, just investigative.

 

For many people to take part, it would also mean coming up with a standard operating procedure and a method that compensates for many various biases. There would have to be a way to determine whether some citizen investigators were intentionally fudging their results or reporting erroneously for other reasons.

 

It is an intriguing idea to study cache size, location and contents anyway. I'm going to try to develop a standard procedure over the next few cache finds.

 

Instead of a tray, I've elected to use this cutting mat for photographic scale. It's light-weight, just a little smaller than my tablet and can be held against larger caches to show cache size and used as a tray to display cache contents, or some of it. It will also give me something to write on for those scroll logs.

 

Edited June 19, 2015 by LaughterOnWater

[+narcissa]

Investigative or not, a rigorous methodology is necessary if you expect your findings to be taken seriously. Any troll who wants an excuse for being extremely disruptive to the game can claim that agenda literature is rampant. Surely you aren't a troll...

Edited June 19, 2015 by narcissa

[+LaughterOnWater]

Investigative or not, a rigorous methodology is necessary if you expect your findings to be taken seriously. Any troll who wants an excuse for being extremely disruptive to the game can claim that agenda literature is rampant. Surely you aren't a troll...

Wow.

 

Clearly, I have mistaken your motives. I'm thoroughly trolled. I'm not sure what else to say.

 

This forum seems to have little use for new perspectives.

 

I see that now. Okay. Message received.

 

I am uncertain where this cruel bitterness stems from or why it is so important to stoke its existence, but I won't continue to enable it for you.

[+ArtieD]

Investigative or not, a rigorous methodology is necessary if you expect your findings to be taken seriously. Any troll who wants an excuse for being extremely disruptive to the game can claim that agenda literature is rampant. Surely you aren't a troll...

Wow.

 

Clearly, I have mistaken your motives. I'm thoroughly trolled. I'm not sure what else to say.

 

This forum seems to have little use for new perspectives.

 

I see that now. Okay. Message received.

 

I am uncertain where this cruel bitterness stems from or why it is so important to stoke its existence, but I won't continue to enable it for you.

 

New perspectives are welcomed. Yours are...how do I say it...absurd. You don't like certain things you find in caches and you go on this grand crusade to try to end it, instead of simply ignoring it and moving on. Do you see why people might not be so keen on the idea that you espouse, especially since you lack a lot of real-world caching experience?

[+Mudfrog]

Investigative or not, a rigorous methodology is necessary if you expect your findings to be taken seriously. Any troll who wants an excuse for being extremely disruptive to the game can claim that agenda literature is rampant. Surely you aren't a troll...

Wow.

 

Clearly, I have mistaken your motives. I'm thoroughly trolled. I'm not sure what else to say.

 

This forum seems to have little use for new perspectives.

 

I see that now. Okay. Message received.

 

I am uncertain where this cruel bitterness stems from or why it is so important to stoke its existence, but I won't continue to enable it for you.

 

New perspectives are welcomed. Yours are...how do I say it...absurd. You don't like certain things you find in caches and you go on this grand crusade to try to end it, instead of simply ignoring it and moving on. Do you see why people might not be so keen on the idea that you espouse, especially since you lack a lot of real-world caching experience?

 

GS already has this guideline for hiding caches.

 

Geocaches do not solicit for any purpose.

Cache listings perceived to be posted for religious, political, charitable or social agendas are not permitted. Geocaching is intended to be an enjoyable, family-friendly hobby, not a platform for an agenda. Cache pages cannot require, and should not strongly encourage, the placement of new caches. This is considered an agenda and the listing will not be publishable.

 

Sure, i know that the above is easier to enforce. Still, i wouldn't think it absurd at all if GS came up with a similar guideline for cache content.

[Cascade Reviewer]

I am closing this thread at the OP's request. It's disappointing to see people posting insults to a newer poster. I hope to see more productive and helpful comments in the future.