For Those With Websites:

[the 5 little bears]

I’m considering the listing of local X-caches on my web page, ... 

 

Does anybody have any cool ideas to add?

You gonna have a discussion forum on your website? Who's gonna moderate it?

I think there is a misconception as to the scope of what I want to do, even though I have made it clear down to the fourth grade level.

 

I am not looking to mirror this site. I am looking for a way for responsible adults to hide a cache for other responsible adults. I will post the lat/long and a brief description on my site, people who know about my site or are invited may peruse the available caches and make the adult decision to hunt them or not.

 

For example:

Name:  Microbrew Madness

Latitude: N 47° 15.xxx  W 122° 35.xxx

Description:  This Cache is hidden along the Tacoma Narrows, on the beach.  The theme is, bring a microbrew and trade it for one in the cache.  The cache container is a waxy cardboard box hidden at the coordinates provided.  It is also a time limited cache, and will only be available from 5 January until 15 January.  The trail to the cache is on land that has indeterminate ownership, but is commonly used by the public to access the beach.

 

NOTE:  This cache will be iced down ready to drink on 5 January, the cache owner will be present between 6 until 7 pm if you’d like to say hello.  Give a call on FRS 02 as you enter the area. 

 

If you have a problem with that cache concept, stay home. Not to difficult.

 

EDIT: Typo

I love this idea I hope it's not going to be just for your area. Keep us updated so we can start posting our new caches.Thank you.

[Fakk 2]

Just to toss in my 2cents.

 

With the microbrew. How will you regulate that only 'adults' can view your page? What happens when a minor finds the alcohol and then is found by a polise officer. The kid points well I found it at xyz.com site. Who do you think will be charged? The kid will be for being underaged. The person that placed the cache will be for placing alcohol where a minor can drink it(grant it can be done in the provacy of the home when mom and pop are gone. But then when mom and dad sees their brew gone junior will get a whipping). Also you for advertising the location for the accessible alcohol.

 

My scenerio may not happen at first, but the .01% chance that it does, will cause more trouble than the other 99.99%.

 

Not to mention Alcohol in most parks is prohibited. So you would be breaking the laws at that point. (Granted "YOU" would say common sense. But not everyone's common sense is common)

 

I am not in 100% support for GC.Com I would like to see other types of caches, but it is up to them what they want to host. If you want locationless, vacation, virtuals. You can host your site that deals with those. People will visit them since they are not supported here. But you will probably get complaints of one type or another that feels there shd be some other forum. If you give in to everyones demands, then who's demands will you not accept. You say you want virtuals. but what about the people that say they don't want virtuals? Should they be ignored because you do want them? You can satisfy some of the people some of the time, but you can not satisfy all the people any time.

Edited December 19, 2003 by Dream Alchemist

[+carleenp]

With the microbrew. How will you regulate that only 'adults' can view your page? What happens when I minor finds the alcohol and then is found by a polise officer. The kid points well I found it at xyz.com site. Who do you think will be charged? The kid will be for being underaged. The person that placed the cache will be for placing alcohol where a minor can drink it(grant it can be done in the provacy of the home when mom and pop are gone. But then when mom and dad sees their brew gone junior will get a whipping). Also you for advertising the location for the accessible alcohol.

 

I am not in 100% support for GC.Com I would like to see other types of caches, but it is up to them what they want to host.

 

Anyone placing or listing such a cache certainly could run some risks, but if they choose to do so, well then they get to be responsibile for their actions. I don't think Criminal's point was that GC.com should list such a cache, just that he is willing to list some that would not be OK here.

Edited December 19, 2003 by carleenp

[Fakk 2]

I realise he wasnt saying GC.Com shd list it. But the fact that he would. True it is "His" descision too. Just like it is GC.com "not" too. What remains to be answered though through all these threads about guidelines being bent is how far to bend? You let someone take a step over the line, someone else will try 2 steps. Then someone will try 3 steps. how many steps across the line til you lay down a wall(Rules, laws, guidelines). Then what happens when someone jumps over the wall(breaks the rule/guideline/law)?Sooner or later you are right back here where GC.com is explaining why every guideline they have placed is there. it comes down to 1 person out of the 70000+ people that cache did it. And everyone remembers something bad much longer than something good. one bad spot on an apple and the whole apple is thrown away.

[+Criminal]

Ugh, where do I begin?

 

My site doesn’t get all that many visitors as it is. I would venture to say that 90% of the visitors are directed to my site from here. Any underage forum guest would easily be run off by my dadgum foul fudging language anyway.

 

You let someone take a step over the line…

 

Not sure who “you” is here. Nobody is going to “let” me do this. I don’t need permission from Groundspeak to do this.

 

And everyone remembers something bad much longer than something good. one bad spot on an apple and the whole apple is thrown away.

 

Nobody knows this better than me. I can peck this keyboard with great advise, suggestions, and topics all day long, but if I say just one “suggestive” thing, it’s months before the mods will leave me alone.

 

Let me make this clear so there’s no misunderstanding, this idea is not a rebellion against this site or the crew in Seattle. They can’t and shouldn’t list caches like this. It’s also not about virtual or locationless. Check my stats, I have none. I don’t care in the least if they are ever allowed on this site again.

 

Read the history of the game, it’s on the site here somewhere. It was a bunch of friends, a low-key stash, and a set of coordinates. As it grew and became more mainstream, it had to adopt certain rules. Jeremy has, until very recently, done a very good job at this (IMHO). Some of the new guidelines or rules or whatever, are a bit too reactionary for my liking. Sort of the tail wagging the dog. I have a beef about that, but it’s not related to this idea. My idea (which is not really mine) is to experience the pure form of the game. I don’t intend to list X-caches that are out of my area either, just the ones I could reasonably be expected to find.

[+leatherman]

My site doesn’t get all that many visitors as it is. I would venture to say that 90% of the visitors are directed to my site from here. Any underage forum guest would easily be run off by my dadgum foul fudging language anyway.

Not everyone has to see the URL either. The URL could be emailed to a select few. If you don't have an email you wouldn't even know it existed.

[+Criminal]

My site doesn’t get all that many visitors as it is.  I would venture to say that 90% of the visitors are directed to my site from here.  Any underage forum guest would easily be run off by my dadgum foul fudging language anyway.

Not everyone has to see the URL either. The URL could be emailed to a select few. If you don't have an email you wouldn't even know it existed.

[+JoGPS]

I have been sitting back watching this tread go from one extreme to another and trying my best to stay out of the flames, but its time to jump in, because we have worked to hard for a bunch of hard noise clowns to mess things up for us.

 

We have been working with the state parks the Army Corps of Eng. and eight other parks systems around the area for two years and anyone that thinks that X-caching would be welcome in out are area and I mean our area, they are plain STUPID. Not dumb, but , STUPID now I will explain.

 

In November of 2001 the largest local park system ( Nashville TN ) with 101 parks and 11,000 total acreage was pulling out caches, how did they know they were there, they were watching GC.com and other web sites and would with out a blink of an eye they would be watching X-Caching too, and if they didn’t see them I would and let them know about them as not to tarnish our relationship with them. They were the second park system in the US to place caches and now has over 25 out there themselves and have ten GPS’r for teaching geocaching clinics. Yes, that’s right teaching geocaching and helping build our sport.

 

We have made presentations to park mangers conventions and to environmentalist groups and carried them caching to show them what we are all about, what are the underground sites going to show them, nothing but how STUPID some people that don’t like to play by any rules or in a responsible manner can be.

 

The cachers in the area have worked very hard to have a real good working relationship with all the parks and police dept, and would hate to see it messed up by a bunch of clowns and yohoo;s that think they can do what they want when they want because there great cache ideas were not good enough for this site. There are only a few caches cross l listed on other sites in Tennessee because the local cachers are a very reasonable and responsible bunch of people that care a lot about this sport are trying hard to make it grow, not throwing up road blocks.

 

If X-Caching started in an area where there was no or very little policy’s on caching and the first one that a park official found out about was X-Cacheing or any underground site this would be more than likely how caches get banned in entire areas.

 

I can not see anything good in this at all , nothing but bad.

 

If only the same people would spend the same amount of time working within the existing system and working with park officials as they do complaining and whining, I bet we would be back in areas that we have been kicked out of and welcomed in a whole lot more.

 

A Special Thanks goes out to all those great people working park officials, and within the system……………………JOE

[+leatherman]

[+Renegade Knight]

JoGPS

 

There are banned caches that are viable but just don't fit listing site guidelines. Those won't cause a problem. A recent holiday cache for charity didn't meet this sites guidelines. It was temporary. However it's a good example of this kind of cache. Still if there are too many caches that fit this category then listing sites will turn people off of making the effort of listing them. They will go to the rogue sites. One of the goals of any site should be to make it easy to do the right thing.

 

Then there are banned caches like you talk about. The ones placed in parks that don't allow caching etc. Those are just now starting to come out and be a part of the geocaching underground. Those will forever be a thorn in the side of legitimate geocaching.

 

Working with Rogue sites will always be a good strategy. Doing it in a way that pisses them off though isn’t wise at all. With every success though, another will spring up. This will leave the legitimate community no choice but to work with those same parks in solving the rogue cache problem. In doing that legitimate geocaching is going to piss off a lot of people. But then so does the caving community who has a similar problem.

 

Of course if caching is banned universally then even though I'd continue to try and work with land managers to make it acceptable I would not give up geocaching. Land managers also have a responsibility to make it easy to do the right thing.

Edited December 20, 2003 by Renegade Knight

[+JoGPS]

I know you have heard this before , but when I started caching there were no rules or guidelines and the very first time they said NO to a cache of mine, the very first thing I said was send me a rule book and I will play and of course there was none. Now there is one and I do try to play by those rules.

 

All of the rules and guidelines were brought about one by one and as I watched them come about over time every single one on this site had a very good reason why it should be that way, I may not have agreed with them but learned to play by them and adjust. Most of the rules were brought about either by land mangers or forum posters.

 

Working with rouge sites is a bad strategy, whether we like it or not GC.com has set a standard for geocaching and I believe has done an outstanding job of the integrity of the sport to align themselves with any site where there standards are less would be a bad thing in the eyes of the land mangers.

 

The caches that we have seen turned down on the site and brought to the forums 99% of the time were also thought to be a bad idea by the general public posting responses to the type of cache placed and offered ways to get it approved.

 

Every person that places a cache thinks that their ingenuity makes it a great cache but as we all know that is not the case, and will always be pissed when it’s turned down for approval.

 

To change the rules so it would become easier for folks to place caches want help anyone in the long run either it will revert back to being a bad idea for the reasons the guideline or rule was made in the first place.

 

Land mangers do not have the responsibility to make it easy for us to do the right thing they are shepherds of the land for my grandchildren to enjoy in the same way I have, and I can respect that and can be proud that they are doing their jobs.

 

There has NEVER been a park system , or land manger that I have worked with that has refused to allow caching after educating them on just what it is we do. …………………JOE

[+Renegade Knight]

I'm sorry but while you have one heck of a lot of things in the right direction on this I won't agree on a couple.

 

First of all, your efforts to point out to Criminal and others the repurcutions are exactly what I mean by working with rogue sites. We actually agree here.

 

In reality you are right. They have no obligation to do jack let alone make it easy to do the right thing. However in the real world if they want to be effective they will make it easy for geocachers to do the right thing. Trash cans in parks make it easy to not litter. A paved walking path makes it easier to stay on the trail and so forth. The same applies to geocaching. If they ban it, the rogue sites will still list caches. If they make it impossible to comply with the rules because they are so strict they are useless, the rogue sites will still list caches. If they make it easy to comply then their rate of compliance will go up. There is less of a need for the rogue sites.

 

Maybe I didn't disagree so much after all.

[+Criminal]

The "rouge site" is a reality, it will happen. If you don't like it, well tough titty for you. You haven't read my posts so you cannot speak with any authority. If you had, you'd see there was little to worry about.

 

Chill, the world will continue to turn.

[+leatherman]

Chill, the world will continue to turn.

I don't know about that. Liberal freaks think it's coming to an end.

[+sbell111]

I'm amazed that this thread has caused such a stir.

 

It merely suggested that a person might create an alternative caching website. Many of you may remember that this is not a new idea. There already is one out there (although the site name escapes me at the moment).

 

Geocaching.com is not responsible for the caches listed on that site. If someone calls to complain about a cache, TPTB should get info from them to identify the cache. If it is found that it is not listed on GC.com, the complaining party should be advised to see if there is contact info in (or on) the cache and contact the appropriate party. Obviously, they would be free to remove the cache and chuck it in the nearest trash bin for all GC.com could care.

 

Also, I suppose, any reference to the 'rogue' site would be deleted from the forums.

 

Slightly off-topic, what the heck is a rouge site? I assume it has something to do with background colors.

[+writer]

If common sense is the rule, the rest will fall into place all of it’s own accord. (with a few exceptions made for the idiots)

 

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." - Albert Einstein.

 

"Common sense always speaks too late. Common sense is the guy who tells you you ought to have had your brakes relined last week before you smashed a front end this week. Common sense is the Monday morning quarterback who could have won the ball game if he had been on the team. But he never is. He’s high up in the stands with a flask on his hip. Common sense is the little man in a grey suit who never makes a mistake in addition. But it’s always somebody else’s money he’s adding up." - Raymond Chandler

 

"Common sense is judgment without reflection, shared by an entire class, an entire nation, or the entire human race." - Giambattista Vico

[+Sparky-Watts]

Slightly off-topic, what the heck is a rouge site? I assume it has something to do with background colors.

No, that's the site where people hide make-up cases in the woods and track them by the color code on the case.

[BassoonPilot]

I'm amazed that this thread has caused such a stir.

 

Also, I suppose, any reference to the 'rogue' site would be deleted from the forums.

 

Slightly off-topic, what the heck is a rouge site?  I assume it has something to do with background colors.

I think a "rouge site" is one of those parks frequented by "cruisers."

 

I also don't understand why "this thread has caused such a stir." Place any cache you want, in accordance with any laws and/or statutes. Put no identifying information in the cache. E-mail the coordinates, or the link to your private website, to the select group of people whom you have determined to be trustyworthy and reliable. Have fun. After everyone from the group has had an opportunity to find the cache, remove it. Then it's time for the next guy/gal in the group to hide one. And the fun continues.

Edited December 21, 2003 by BassoonPilot

[+Renegade Knight]

...Slightly off-topic, what the heck is a rouge site? I assume it has something to do with background colors.

That's going to depend entirely on your perspective.

 

In a nutshell though any site that lists caches that outside the rules.

 

Pick the rules you want. The NPS ban, Geocaching.com, etc. They probably won't have the same background colors.

[+Bloencustoms]

If you don't know where to look, it is unlikely you will find something hidden. This applies to both caches, and the urls of the pages upon which they are listed.

 

A box in the woods with no identification is just that. The only thing that makes it a cache is the fact that it is labelled as such. Imagine a park ranger who finds a box of beer hidden in the woods. Will he automatically assume it is a geocache he has found? If he is not aware of geocaching, he will only know that he has found some beer stashed in the woods. If he is aware of caching, and the guidelines, will he assume it is a cache? It has no ID, or anything to identify it as a cache. He is likely to make the obvious conclusion that it is only what it appears to be. Beer in the woods. This will not hurt geocaching. We see litter in parks all of the time. I never assume that the junk I stumble across is a geocache just because it is out there. If I did, I might have to apologize for trashing out someone's cache.

 

If the only way to find the location of an X-cache is by invitation, and there is no log or contact info in the cache, it is a simple box in the woods to everyone else. Nothing more.