Geocache hide rejected by moderator for mentioning CITO?

[+Judious1978]

Anyone else have a hide rejected for mentioning CITO, being told that is having an agenda? I thought "Cache In Trash Out" was part of geocaching...

[Keystone]

I'm moving your thread to the Earthcaching forum, since you encountered this issue on a pending Earthcache submission.

[+lee737]

CITO as an agenda? That does sound like someone is overdoing it!

 

[Neos2]

What is the topic of the EarthCache and how was CITO "mentioned"? A little context might be helpful here.

If it was just a causal "This spot might be a good place for a little impromptu CITO", for example, then couldn't that line just be left off?

Edited June 8, 2023 by Neos2
Edited for clarity

[+cerberus1]

15 hours ago, Judious1978 said:

Anyone else have a hide rejected for mentioning CITO, being told that is having an agenda? I thought "Cache In Trash Out" was part of geocaching...

 

We thought that there's got to be at least a few like us who CITO every day out. Solo often because I hold some up, now we know better...

Maybe it's just me, but if I had to "mention" on the cache page that an area may need CITO, nothing would be placed there. 

 - That "placed here just because it's an open space..." thing.  Similar to Neos2, it'd be nice to see how CITO was mentioned...  Thanks.  

[Keystone]

The Earthcache in question focuses on a mountain range, how it was formed, and the types of rocks and minerals found in that area.  The Earthcache description includes the following sentence:

 

"Bonus brownie points to those who pick up and dispose of a piece of trash during their visit! CITO!!!"

 

While generally a statement about CITO'ing during a visit to a geocache is a permissible "agenda," this is an Earthcache.  They are subject to different review guidelines, and that is why I moved the topic to this subforum, so that experts in those guidelines can provide feedback.

[Neos2]

Keystone, thanks for bringing this post into the EarthCache forum. It is an interesting one. 

 The EarthCache guidelines do say 

Quote

10. EarthCaches are submitted through geocaching.com and must meet these guidelines and adhere to the Geocache Listing Requirements/Guidelines and the geocaching.com terms of use agreement. The Geological Society of America and the EarthCache team retain the right to edit, modify, reject, or archive any EarthCache that does not adhere to these guidelines, or for any other purpose that the team deems appropriate.

 

And the geocaching guidelines are clear about agendas. 

Quote

No agendas
Cache pages perceived to promote an agenda or highlight a cause will not be published.

I suppose technically that sentence is promoting an agenda, but it certainly is a basic tenant of geocaching. I can understand being surprised.  As I suggested before, it is certainly easy enough to remove the sentence to get that EarthCache published.

It would be nice to have an EarthCache reviewer chime in to correct me if I am off track here. 
 

[RuideAlmeida]

Also number 9...

 

"9. EarthCache sites adhere to the principles and ethics of geocaching and Leave No Trace. In addition, use waypoints to ensure cachers take appropriate pathways and use established trails only. Damage to the site is unacceptable. Please be mindful of fragile ecosystems. EarthCache sites will highlight the principle of collecting memories — not samples. Furthermore, no physical cache, or other items, can be left at the site."

 

I wonder how someone could "mistake" a sample with simple trash, by instance.

[+Judious1978]

I removed the line in question, I was just surprised. Especially since I got the CITO idea from a different published Earthcache, and I thought CITO was a tenet of geocaching.

Edited June 9, 2023 by Judious1978

[Neos2]

Here's hoping that is the only hiccup while getting your Earthcache approved. If you would happen to run into any other stumbling blocks, feel free to pop back in here for tips. The folks that visit here do like to help when we can.

You made the right decision, to omit that sentence. Also from the guidelines "There are no precedents for placing geocaches. Past publication of a similar geocache is not justification for publication of a new geocache." I feel sure that can be interpreted to include mentioning CITO. Since it wasn't instrumental to the EarthCache, it was smart just to take it out. 

CITO is inherent to geocaching. I was showing a newbie the ropes the other day and was taking out little bits of rubbish, sort of on autopilot; he noticed. I explained that is just what we cachers do. 

[+niraD]

18 hours ago, RuideAlmeida said:

I wonder how someone could "mistake" a sample with simple trash, by instance.

Would it be okay to remind seekers of a geocache not to collect samples or otherwise damage the site, with the caveat that CITO is always acceptable if they find trash left by others?

[RuideAlmeida]

4 minutes ago, niraD said:

Would it be okay to remind seekers of a geocache not to collect samples or otherwise damage the site, with the caveat that CITO is always acceptable if they find trash left by others?

 

Most probably... but the main question remains. Who reads the guidelines nowadays?

[+Crazedllama]

On 6/9/2023 at 9:44 PM, niraD said:

Would it be okay to remind seekers of a geocache not to collect samples or otherwise damage the site, with the caveat that CITO is always acceptable if they find trash left by others?

 

I have two Earthcaches where I remind geocachers not to collect rocks from the area as it is illegal in those two places. It passed by my geoaware without issue. I didn't mention CITO, just local laws so tourists would be aware.