A response to the poll thread

[+Icenians]

We have been asked not to reply to the post with the poll so I have started this thread as my response.

 

I disagree that the other threads have degenerated to point where they are not constructive. The admin of this site is running a poll, which is a good sign, and we should all have the opportunity to vote. I reserve the right as a member of this community and hobby to campaign against the setting up of this association. Just as GAGB have the right to campaign for it.

 

Many points raised are claimed to have been noted. Nothing has been done to change either the claim to be the single voice, nor have links been updated to the other caching sites. This is a simple process.

 

The GAGB have suggested that all those that read but do not contribute to this forum will have no say. This is their choice. If they read the forum they can choose to click on a poll or not. That isn't the fault of the nays so please do not imply that it is.

 

Pro's and Con's of this subject are meaningful. Just because we do not share the same view does not make my view of your proposed voice for me meaningless.

 

Will this be how the association conducts it's business?

 

I don't critise Jeremy, or anyone else for controlling geocaching. Jeremy does an excellent job running 1 web based database and has every right to stipulate the rules that apply to adding a cache to the database. I have said that several times now.

 

If I was a landowner I would rather deal with the person that wants to place the cache. How are GAGB going to have clout if they don't control the hobby. Any agreement they have with a landowner does not stop someone sticking a box on the landowners property and posting it on the web. It only stops them putting it on the sites you control.

 

Evidenced by the member list means nothing when only one side of the arguement knows the member list. No I'm not suggesting that you tell us. You have all their email addresses, tell them about the poll.

 

One final point I would add is I will support you association if you stop claiming to represent all cachers and start acknowledging the other sites.

 

Statistics show that those with the most birthdays live longest.

[+Kouros]

Although I support the group in theory, I do agree that GAGB should acknowledge the other databases, and I think that the way in which it describes itself could be worded better.

 

Perhaps something along the lines of "The Geocaching Union of Great Britain and Ireland"? That way, there it would reflect that Eire is not a part of the Empire (and makes no presumptions as such), does not pretend that it is an over-arching body that speaks for all cachers, whether or not they are a part of it, yet still has an air of authority, which it must have.

 

Just a thought, which too has its own faults, no doubt, so feel free to point them out.

 

------

An it harm none, do what ye will

[+washboy]

So as not to pollute T&J's poll thread with questions, I'd like to use this one to ask T&J to clarify some of the things they said in their poll thread. OK, so I'm kinda thick , but I simply didn't understand everything they said.

 

quote:

---

In short, June and I have not got enough time to do justice to the position, and for what it's worth neither does MT or R&B.

---

Do you mean the position of gc.com UK Admin(s) or your position within GAGB?

 

quote:

---

We are not in a position to appoint people of our choosing to do some of this work for us because we represent GC.com, and do not have the authority to do so.

---

Do you mean the work of negotiating with landowners, etc. or your gc.com UK Admin work?

 

=====

There's no such thing as a free lunchbox!