Stupid Rules

[+Renegade Knight]

Time and again in the forums rule suggestions crop up. "Limit the number of hides", "No hides until you have 10 finds", "If you can't jump on a cache and maintain it with 4 hours notice you can't have caches", "There is no reason at all under any circumstances that a disabled cache should exist for more than a week, archive them all" blah blah blah.

 

This site allready generates enough controversy with certain existing rules. No matter what the intent of the rule suggestions, the net result is that each and every stupid rule that gets in the way of people who like to cache and like to place caches will drive more people to the other sites. Then this site will be free to have all the rules it wants for both of it's caches.

 

Meanwhile the rules mongers who helped knock GC.com off the throne will then have to go to the other sites to play the game. If a rule doesn't need to exist it shouldn't and any rule that impacts a persons ability to enjoy this game should only be put in place if it protects the game for everyone. Not just someone who found one lame cache too many. I'm glad that most of these rules suggestions remain forum controversies.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

As I said in another thread I wonder about the mindset of those who have this overwhelming need for excessive rules and guidelines. There are more than enough in place already.

 

Those who are pushing for these rules are a tiny fraction of less than 1% of forum users let along geocachers.

 

I shouldn't pay them any mind at all.

[+briansnat]

I think there should be a rule against posting about rules.

[thorin]

I think there should be a rule against posting about rules.

[+EraSeek]

Here, here! Boy, I couldn't agree with you more!!!! If there is one thing that will kill the sport for me and many others it is this sort of overbearing cr*p!

 

It is the cacher who is responsible for himself, not the community. Live your ethics. Get others to follow by your example!

[+Team DEMP]

I think there should be a rule against posting about rules.

I was gonna post the same thing!

[Pto]

It is the cacher who is responsible for himself, not the community. Live your ethics. Get others to follow by your example!

 

Couldnt agree more!! Some here are so into rules, they are even trying to push them on others who arent even using this site! Email is a funny thing.

I dont get it.

[+CompuCash]

I think there should be a rule against posting about rules.

I was gonna post the same thing!

 

gotta say the same thing !

[+JMBella]

Get others to follow by your example!

Perfect.

 

If you want rules, impose them on yourself. New rule, every cacher that hides quality caches has to hide MORE caches. Are all your hides well thought out and in beautiful or interesting locations? Do you use only air tight, quality containers? Do you always put decent swag in your caches?

Well then, you now have to place at least 4 caches a month. Now get out there and start hiding!

[+Harrald]

I agree that folks need to calm down with trying to create new rules. It’s just another tactic to try and force GC.com to bend to their will.

 

<<SNIP>>the net result is that each and every stupid rule that gets in the way of people who like to cache and like to place caches will drive more people to the other sites.  Then this site will be free to have all the rules it wants for both of it's caches.<<SNIP>>

 

I do think you have the part I quoted backwards. It’s the other sites that have both caches.

 

Chicken Little was wrong. The sky is not falling.

[+Criminal]

Sort of reminds me of the people who call in to (already) popular radio talk shows and proceed to tell the host how he can make the show better.

 

As I have said before, a hearty “shut the hell up” from me.

 

Sadly, the reality is that if Seattle perceives any threat to the bottom line they will, as demonstrated in the past, drop rules to appease everyone except the players.

[+Polgara]

Rule #1....all posts concerning rules must be preceded by an abundance of rumplminze, beer or whatever sauce ya like.

 

Rule #2....after consumption, if you can handle 3 consecutive throw up rides, including 2 more drinks between each ride at any amusement park of your choice, without kissing the American Standard, then you can post a new rule.

 

This process ensures all rule makers to be out of their mind.

[Toron]

Just because I gotta.

 

I think people should be able to list cache coordinates without placing a cache or log book even though it is NOT listed as a virtual. That way the cache hider could admire all the purple frowns on his/her cache page.

 

And this whole rule thing that prevents me from hiding a cache on the back side of the million year old stalagmite in Carlsbad Caverns is just lame. I know it would cause the destruction of an irreplaceable natural wonder, but dangit I'm trying to have fun here! Lighten up and just let me cache. Can't you see how allowing me to place really cool caches like that would really help the sport?

 

I guess I could go on, but you get the point. Rules just suc*. They ruin all the fun for everyone, and trying to use open forum discussion to test drive adaptations to a wide-open rapidly evolving sport is just a waste of time.

 

And this whole "lame rule" thing goes way beyond GC rules. I could get to caches a lot faster if I didn't have to always worry about driving on the right sight of the freeway, and there would be a lot more adrenaline involved. Don't even get me started on the stupid stop sign concept. I mean, Duh! I could obviously get there a lot faster if I didn't have to keep stopping every place someone decided to put up a stinkin red sign. I admit, there would be a lot more body bags along the way, and the traffic tie-ups from the horrific carnage would be a hassle, but without the ridiculous speed limit restrictions, I could get around the freeway traffic jams just as fast using residential roads.

[+switchdoc]

I gotta agree with Toron on this one. The thing that attracted me to this sport was that the community had rules. If you could just drop a cache anywhere you wanted regardless of the rules you would be 1) be tripping over 5 rotting tupperware containers for every 1 cache you were trying to find 2) risking ruining beautiful public areas by sending people trapsing around where people shouldn't be trapsing, and 3) wasting hours hunting caches that didnt exist because some joker thought it would be funny to send people on a wild goosechase or just cant be bothered to maintain their cache. What in the world is the fun in that?

 

Personal responsibilty is a great concept, and a lot of folks here could probably live up to that ideal. But, there are always those guys who aren't going to because of a lack of respect for the sport or for other people. if the rules keep those folks from ruining a great thing, I say keep em coming.

 

You folks who think the rules that help maintain an aura of respectability to this endeavor are useless do not really understand what geocaching is all about IMHO. The day you people take over is the day I throw my GPS in the lake.

 

QUALITY folks, not quantity. This should be a QUALITY sport with QUALITY caches in QUALITY areas.

Edited July 13, 2004 by switchdoc

[+Team Perks]

QUALITY folks, not quantity. This should be a QUALITY sport with QUALITY caches in QUALITY areas.

So what makes them mutually exclusive? I just don't see how having fewer caches would do anything to improve their quality. It would just mean you'd have fewer caches, and the same percentage of them would still reek.

[+Criminal]

Just because I gotta.

 

I think people should be able to list cache coordinates without placing a cache or log book even though it is NOT listed as a virtual. That way the cache hider could admire all the purple frowns on his/her cache page.

 

And this whole rule thing that prevents me from hiding a cache on the back side of the million year old stalagmite in Carlsbad Caverns is just lame. I know it would cause the destruction of an irreplaceable natural wonder, but dangit I'm trying to have fun here! Lighten up and just let me cache. Can't you see how allowing me to place really cool caches like that would really help the sport?

 

I guess I could go on, but you get the point. Rules just suc*. They ruin all the fun for everyone, and trying to use open forum discussion to test drive adaptations to a wide-open rapidly evolving sport is just a waste of time.

 

And this whole "lame rule" thing goes way beyond GC rules. I could get to caches a lot faster if I didn't have to always worry about driving on the right sight of the freeway, and there would be a lot more adrenaline involved. Don't even get me started on the stupid stop sign concept. I mean, Duh! I could obviously get there a lot faster if I didn't have to keep stopping every place someone decided to put up a stinkin red sign. I admit, there would be a lot more body bags along the way, and the traffic tie-ups from the horrific carnage would be a hassle, but without the ridiculous speed limit restrictions, I could get around the freeway traffic jams just as fast using residential roads.

Nobody appreciates sarcasm more than I do, but this argument is off topic. Nobody here said or believes there shouldn’t be rules. Most of us do not see the necessity of more (or new) rules.

 

If a cache is hidden somewhere it shouldn’t be, deal with that cache. Don’t add another blanket restriction as a knee-jerk reaction to an isolated incident.

 

Common sense is still the best way to ensure quality.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

What's wrong with having new rules proposed? It doesn't mean they will be implemented. Besides, it gives us something to laugh at and a chance to Markwell another n00b

[+Renegade Knight]

What's wrong with having new rules proposed? It doesn't mean they will be implemented. Besides, it gives us something to laugh at and a chance to Markwell another n00b

In the end, nothing. Discussion is a good thing. Following up a discussion with a rant, is maybe not so good.

 

Knowing this will shoot myself in the foot, man am I ever glad that most of the time the site doesn't change jack due to discussions in the forums. Sure I might get the rules on virtuals relaxed but the price would be that I have to retire 3 of my other caches, check up on 4 suspect caches, press and iron the log books, while obtaining my permission form form the governer's council on geocaching. I won't give up ranting but I'll keep it in perspective.

[+bigredmed]

Nobody appreciates sarcasm more than I do, but this argument is off topic.  Nobody here said or believes there shouldn’t be rules.  Most of us do not see the necessity of more (or new) rules. 

 

If a cache is hidden somewhere it shouldn’t be, deal with that cache.  Don’t add another blanket restriction as a knee-jerk reaction to an isolated incident. 

 

Common sense is still the best way to ensure quality.

Thing is Criminal, the reaction to ANY suggestion of a new rule or process is an immediate flood of knee-jerk reaction by the "we don't need any more rules" set.

 

Somehow, we need to either get better at teaching the sport to new players (via our local groups) or we need to get better at telling owners of lame caches that they aren't going to be approved if they don't get less lame, or we need some rules to protect the sport from the halfwits who hide caches in places that they shouldn't (like the middle of a busy street crossing or a crowded parking lot).

 

Like it or not, we have to evolve the sport as it becomes more mainstream or we will face the ire of land managers and even more land that can be used for anything else will be banned to geocaching.

 

A given rule may not affect this anti-geocaching bias, but the lack of them makes us look bad. Anyone who doesn't like us can accuse us of wanting to place a cache in George Washington's nose on Mt Rushmore or bury caches in some Anasazi ruin, or make a drug drop in Yosemite, and get away with it. We can't say anything persuasive against this nonsense as we can't say with confidence that a geocacher wouldn't try to place a buried cache (and call it placed in a hole) or place a multi in the land near a Nat Park with the final in some banned location.

 

This sport is not just a bunch of guys in Oregon hiding stuff in the woods anymore. It has grown way past the confines of "we can police our own without rules". Even if it hadden't grown, keep in mind that the original cache violated 3 rules: on private property, contained food, and was buried), so even back in the day, we couldn't count on policing ourselves.

Edited July 13, 2004 by bigredmed

[+switchdoc]

So what makes them mutually exclusive? I just don't see how having fewer caches would do anything to improve their quality. It would just mean you'd have fewer caches, and the same percentage of them would still reek.

 

I agree that they don't have to be mutually exclusive. I think good hides will proliferate in an environment where there are standards to be met. What worries me is that many times something truly fascinating and worth while (like geocaching) tends to get polluted by those who start yelling "But I don't wanna..." or "WhyshouldIhaveta..." because the rules put limits on their idiotic behavior. They could care less and they don't want rules because they get in the way of them caring less. These people tend to multiple like sex starved gerbils when put in an environment of lax oversight. THATS what I worry about.

 

I am not saying there should be rules just so there can be rules. What I am saying is, if something makes sense for the sport, it should be implemented. To say "We shouldn't have rules because there are too many rules" is not a valid argument. If its good for the sport, it should be on the books.

 

I also disagree with the notion that rules will drive people away from the sport. In the long I think they will bring a quality to the sport which will be attractive to people. Slow measured growth will bring this wonderful sport everywhere. Wild, reckless unrestrained growth seems much more likely to destroy it.

 

Also, I know I'm just a n00b. I'm just sharing my insight here on whats been attractive to me as I've started this great new sport. As of yet I admit I don't understand everything about this community or about geocaching in general. I do know that it is the structure and code of conduct thats made it enjoyable to me so far.

[+hedberg]

Shouldn't it be a rule against topics about rules?

 

If we get to many rules will Geocaching die!

 

And also remember that what are unlegal and not appropiate in the US, is okay in other countries...

[+The Leprechauns]

First off, I was curious whether switchdoc could let me know of a reliable supplier for sex-starved gerbils.

 

Second, I would observe that the "Rules" have grown over time in response to various recurring problems caused, in many cases, by a lack of common sense in cache placements. When the game started, there were no rules, so it was fine to bury a cache with food in it on private property. When land managers criticized buried caches, a "no buried caches" rule was added. When landowners complained about caches being hidden on their land without permission, the permission rule was added. When park managers kept complaining about pen knives being found in geocaches, the "no knives in caches" rule was added. When a geocacher was arrested and fined for trespassing on railroad property, the "no caches near railroads" rule was added. And so on.

 

I don't think that Jeremy sits in his ivory tower dreaming up new rules to burden the community with. There have, in fact, been no changes in the rules in nearly 9 months -- a fair piece of time for an activity that just began in May 2000. Rather, the new rules are added in response to perceived needs for them. I don't find them to be knee-jerk. It is a fairly deliberative process, and the forum debates are a part of that. So are the phone calls from land managers and bomb squads, which we rarely hear about.

 

It always amuses me when someone joins our activity and is surprised to learn of a rule like "no moving caches" or "caches should be 528 feet apart from each other." They post in the forums complaining about how The Man is holding them down. Some of them grumble and try one of the other listing sites, which by volume of caches are much like this site was in 2000-2001. I'd wager that, if other listing sites continue to grow, they will face the same need for rules as we see here. Just last week, swisscheesecaching (or whatever it was called) quickly backed off from the "place a cache anywhere" position initially taken on its site. To paraphrase, "Oh yeah, sure... we can have a rule for THAT and THAT... just not so many like gc.com."

 

I truly do hope, however, that we don't need any more rules. If only common sense would prevail, we wouldn't even need all the ones we already have. Unfortunately, common sense has not always been present at the placement of every geocache.

[+clearpath]

Nobody appreciates sarcasm more than I do ...

hehehe, truer words have never been spoken.

[+switchdoc]

First off, I was curious whether switchdoc could let me know of a reliable supplier for sex-starved gerbils.

 

Erm.. I might be able to hook you up... but.. um... what are you gonna do with em?

[+The Leprechauns]

First off, I was curious whether switchdoc could let me know of a reliable supplier for sex-starved gerbils.

 

Erm.. I might be able to hook you up... but.. um... what are you gonna do with em?

I am finding that, at the rate I've been finding geocaches lately, the production of hamsters cannot keep up with the number of geocaches where I need to leave my signature item. If gerbils can reproduce faster, this may offer a solution.

 

Additionally, with the proliferation of microcaches, I am severely limited in my ability to leave my signature item off at the caches I visit. Sure, I can stuff a hamster into a decon container and, with a very young one, even an altoids tin -- although this takes extra effort. I am wondering whether something like white mice might make for a better alternative.

 

There is no *rule* prohibiting live animals in geocaches, is there? I mean, they're not intended as food items or anything.

[+Sparky-Watts]

First off, I was curious whether switchdoc could let me know of a reliable supplier for sex-starved gerbils.

 

Second, I would observe that the "Rules" have grown over time in response to various recurring problems caused, in many cases, by a lack of common sense in cache placements. When the game started, there were no rules, so it was fine to bury a cache with food in it on private property. When land managers criticized buried caches, a "no buried caches" rule was added. When landowners complained about caches being hidden on their land without permission, the permission rule was added. When park managers kept complaining about pen knives being found in geocaches, the "no knives in caches" rule was added. When a geocacher was arrested and fined for trespassing on railroad property, the "no caches near railroads" rule was added. And so on.

 

I don't think that Jeremy sits in his ivory tower dreaming up new rules to burden the community with. There have, in fact, been no changes in the rules in nearly 9 months -- a fair piece of time for an activity that just began in May 2000. Rather, the new rules are added in response to perceived needs for them. I don't find them to be knee-jerk. It is a fairly deliberative process, and the forum debates are a part of that. So are the phone calls from land managers and bomb squads, which we rarely hear about.

 

It always amuses me when someone joins our activity and is surprised to learn of a rule like "no moving caches" or "caches should be 528 feet apart from each other." They post in the forums complaining about how The Man is holding them down. Some of them grumble and try one of the other listing sites, which by volume of caches are much like this site was in 2000-2001. I'd wager that, if other listing sites continue to grow, they will face the same need for rules as we see here. Just last week, swisscheesecaching (or whatever it was called) quickly backed off from the "place a cache anywhere" position initially taken on its site. To paraphrase, "Oh yeah, sure... we can have a rule for THAT and THAT... just not so many like gc.com."

 

I truly do hope, however, that we don't need any more rules. If only common sense would prevail, we wouldn't even need all the ones we already have. Unfortunately, common sense has not always been present at the placement of every geocache.

Very well put, Lep. I've never seen the rules coming down as kneejerk reactions, and in my time here, I've never known Jeremy to be a compulsive, non-thinking robot in an ivory tower. Seems to me that everything he has done has been well thought out. In fact, I'm sure he hated to implement any of the rules, but did so out of necessity. The recent thread demanding rules on cache-placement limits isn't something that I see happening, because there is no necessity for it. Sure, I imagine there will be more rules handed out in the future, and I will reference Lep's last statement as a reason (bold emphasis in his quote).

[+Criminal]

Thing is Criminal, the reaction to ANY suggestion of a new rule or process is an immediate flood of knee-jerk reaction by the "we don't need any more rules" set.

 

LOL, very true! I would have to admit to being somewhat reactionary on the subject.

 

Somehow, we need to either get better at teaching the sport to new players (via our local groups) or we need to get better at telling owners of lame caches that they aren't going to be approved if they don't get less lame, or we need some rules to protect the sport from the halfwits who hide caches in places that they shouldn't (like the middle of a busy street crossing or a crowded parking lot).

 

Very good point up to the part about “not getting approved”. I wouldn’t want that much power, judging whether a cache is lame, to rest with any one or two people. I believe in letting the logs rate the cache, in lieu of any other rating system for the finders of a cache. My super lame drive up altoids tin on the light pole in the middle of the abandoned parking lot was supposed to be funny. Some go it, some really didn’t get it. A lot of finders had praise for it, as it was the first of its kind here. (Now they’re everywhere.) Nonetheless, many enjoyed it and it was a popular stop on the way to other area caches. Like many of my archived caches, it was a beta-cache to me, and many of the lessons learned were applied to my not so lame caches.

 

Like it or not, we have to evolve the sport as it becomes more mainstream…]

Possibly therein lies the real issue, many of us don’t want the game to get more mainstream. Some of us enjoy being stealthy, sneaky, and operating “under the radar”.

 

First off, I was curious whether switchdoc could let me know of a reliable supplier for sex-starved gerbils.

Yikes, tiny needle sharp teeth, not for me thanks!

 

Second, I would observe that the "Rules" have grown over time in response to various recurring problems caused, in many cases, by a lack of common sense in cache placements

I don’t have a problem with rules as a “result of recurring problems”. The knife ban rule was not the result of a recurring problem. It was a knee-jerk reaction by Seattle to an imaginary problem. Since they are well aware that the rule is going to be routinely ignored, it’s not too much of a problem. Just CYA.

 

Unfortunately, common sense has not always been present at the placement of every geocache.

Fudging-A-right it hasn’t, and often isn’t. But the endless debate will continue to be how best to solve the problem. Some say rules, some of us think there may be better approachs.

 

The real issue, and the reason for the original rant, is likely due to RK having been here a while, longer than most, and the cumulative demands by newer cachers for rule changes to meet their paradigm of how the game should be played. That’s my issue anyway.

 

I will not pull punches with regards to Seattle and the way they are administering the game, but to be fair I won’t hold back positive words either. Thankfully, the majority of the BS rules proposed here do not seem to be given much thought in Seattle.

Edited July 13, 2004 by Criminal

[Pto]

If its good for the sport, it should be on the books.

 

Who decides whats "good"? gc.com-since they "own" the sport, or We the community, because we support it, participate in it? Whoever has to decide, unfortunately it wouldnt please everyone.

 

It always amuses me when someone joins our activity and is surprised to learn of a rule like "no moving caches" or "caches should be 528 feet apart from each other."

...Just last week, swisscheesecaching (or whatever it was called) quickly backed off from the "place a cache anywhere" position initially taken on its site. To paraphrase, "Oh yeah, sure... we can have a rule for THAT and THAT... just not so many like gc.com."

 

Wasnt the rule against moving caches instated because there were listing issues with this site? Didnt the site just decide it didnt want to deal with those issues, and thus ruled them out? Does a Virtual cache ring a bell?How about locationless?

 

Seems to me some of the issues involved with Virts & RLC's are site based, not really game based. Some people love these, some dont- But it has been determined by this site the 2 are not "good for the sport" or actually not part of the sport depending. Since too many people before us ruined those options for the rest of us, we dont get the option.

Edited July 13, 2004 by Pto

[+The Leprechauns]

I won't get into a debate about the reasons underpinning each of the geocache listing requirements, as I understand them as someone who's been around here for two years. That would be beyond the scope of RK's topic, which is "no more rules," and basically a statement with which I agree. There are separate topics about moving caches, virtual caches, etc.

 

What will I do instead? I think I'll go find a geocache in this lovely park system over in Ohio, an hour or so west of me. It's a very nice day. Oh, I forgot... caches are banned in that park system due to a ranger finding a pen knife in a geocache. I thought that was an imaginary problem? Perhaps I can log imaginary finds on the imaginary caches that used to be there.

 

Or I could just go watch the gerbils go at it. Yeah, that'll do.

[+Criminal]

Oh, I forgot... caches are banned in that park system due to a ranger finding a pen knife in a geocache.

 

Sounds like a problem with the ranger or the knifer, not the hider. Some numbnuts put a knife in an urban park cache and we ban them from all caches? Sounds reactionary to me.

 

What if Seattle just said, "You know Mr. Ranger, you're right about that knife being inappropriate, we'll talk to the numbnuts and ask him to use a bit more common sense. Problem solved.

Edited July 13, 2004 by Criminal

[+bigredmed]

Oh, I forgot... caches are banned in that park system due to a ranger finding a pen knife in a geocache.

 

What if Seattle just said, "You know Mr. Ranger, you're right about that knife being inappropriate, we'll talk to the numbnuts and ask him to use a bit more common sense. Problem solved.

If that were to happen, the entire Internet would unravel and all humanity would descend into a life of darkness and chaos....Or at least that seems to be what they think would happen if TPTB would actually get involved in that manner.

[Micqn]

When it comes to rules here is what I think.

 

A kite in flight is able to fly because it is held back by a string; it IS what makes it able to fly. If you let go of the string the kite will sooner or later fall to the ground.

 

The same applies to anything in life, in this case rules of geocaching and its site. If we are stop using the rules and coming up with more rules this site and hobby will fall because it is human nature to go around rules and destroy.

 

Lets not cut the string out from under this 'kite'.

[+Beta Test]

Exelent analogy. I completely agree.

[+Renegade Knight]

When it comes to rules here is what I think.

 

A kite in flight is able to fly because it is held back by a string; it IS what makes it able to fly.  If you let go of the string the kite will sooner or later fall to the ground.

 

The same applies to anything in life, in this case rules of geocaching and its site.  If we are stop using the rules and coming up with more rules this site and hobby will fall because it is human nature to go around rules and destroy.

 

Lets not cut the string out from under this 'kite'.

That was a good anology. However lets add a couple of rules to the kite.

 

One string only. No acrobatics.

Strings can only be 10' long. Can't interfere with airplanes after all.

Some rules are good. Some flat out suck though you can rationalize them.

Big kites need holes in the wings so they don't lift little kids off the ground.

Get a kite operators permit and kite training. Find some kids flying kites before you even dare to fly your own. Get permission to fly your kite in the park. Don't fly a kite at night to save the bats. No lame kits, get your colors approved before you fly and clutter out sight with your kite.

 

Some rules have a job to do and benifit the entire RASH. Some are just rationalizations of personal preference.

Edited July 13, 2004 by Renegade Knight

[MOCKBA]

When it comes to rules here is what I think.

 

A kite in flight is able to fly because it is held back by a string; it IS what makes it able to fly. If you let go of the string the kite will sooner or later fall to the ground.

 

The same applies to anything in life, in this case rules of geocaching and its site. If we are stop using the rules and coming up with more rules this site and hobby will fall because it is human nature to go around rules and destroy.

 

Lets not cut the string out from under this 'kite'.

Gee, I guess your paraplane is never going to fly

 

BTW the kites may be blocking kids' prayers from reaching heaven, so the Taliban issued a rule banning kite flying alltogether.

 

Moral? Rules made without checks and balances may be good only when not enforced.

[+Robespierre]

SOME FAIRLY IMPRESSIVE SARCASM ABOVE, Y'ALL

Now, two different solutions:

First, gc would set up a "cache factory," and all caches must be a product of, and purchased from that factory - or

Second, caches may only be place by an Approver or one of his 12 disciples.

Fact is, I know of el-lame-oh cache right now, placed by a newbie. I have emailed some "help", kindly, to that newbie, and I hope it gets improved. If not it will soon be ruined and archived. I thinks that's the best we can do.

[+sbell111]

I agree with most of what has been said in this thread. I would like to post my disagreement with Toron's position on driving on the wrong side of the interstate, however. I never really used to think about this issue, but recently I have had some time to consider it. Driving on the wrong side of the interstate is wrong.

[+BigHank]

"Possibly therein lies the real issue, many of us don’t want the game to get more mainstream. Some of us enjoy being stealthy, sneaky, and operating “under the radar”.

 

Criminal may have really hit the nail on the head there. I enjoyed 'caching more when it was that way.

It's sort of like playing sandlot baseball when I was a kid....a bunch of us just got together and played, and had fun. Nowadays, my grandkids have to be on formal teams, there are tryouts, leagues, parents arguing about rules, and the kids aren't having a lot of fun anymore.

Is 'caching going to go that way? Are you going to have to be part of a formal group, have tryouts to determine your skill level, have senior cachers arguing about rules, and the folks playing not having a lot of fun anymore? I sure hope not, but I'm afraid it seems that way.

 

Hank

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

When it comes to rules here is what I think.

 

A kite in flight is able to fly because it is held back by a string; it IS what makes it able to fly. If you let go of the string the kite will sooner or later fall to the ground.

 

The same applies to anything in life, in this case rules of geocaching and its site. If we are stop using the rules and coming up with more rules this site and hobby will fall because it is human nature to go around rules and destroy.

 

Lets not cut the string out from under this 'kite'.

Not one single person has said to do away with rules. Not a single one, you're putting words in our mouths.

 

We are tired of new useless proposals for new and overbearing rules. It's getting old and those of us who've been around long enough don't need to see new ones to make the game suit an individual.

 

We're fine the way we are, let's move on, nothing to see here.

[+bigredmed]

"Possibly therein lies the real issue, many of us don’t want the game to get more mainstream. Some of us enjoy being stealthy, sneaky, and operating “under the radar”.

 

Criminal may have really hit the nail on the head there. I enjoyed 'caching more when it was that way.

It's sort of like playing sandlot baseball when I was a kid....a bunch of us just got together and played, and had fun. Nowadays, my grandkids have to be on formal teams, there are tryouts, leagues, parents arguing about rules, and the kids aren't having a lot of fun anymore.

Is 'caching going to go that way? Are you going to have to be part of a formal group, have tryouts to determine your skill level, have senior cachers arguing about rules, and the folks playing not having a lot of fun anymore? I sure hope not, but I'm afraid it seems that way.

 

Hank

I am not sure that its going the way of youth sports, but it has to become more formal. As we get bigger and more spread out, its harder to not bump into people. Some of these people don't like us, some don't know us, and some may like us, but want the same thing we want, but for a different reason.

 

A ecofacist may think that a sport that encourages a vile human to walk in their pristine woods with a piece of evil human technology (GPS unit) is evil and do what they can to mess with us. They we can't deal with by rules and organization, but nor can any other group. They do cause us image problems indirectly.

 

The mobile home set will be the direct problem. If they want a piece of land for their campers and we want it for geocaching, we lose. They can say anything and we don't have a means of arguing their points as we have no rules and we have a forum full of threads that say "We don't want no stinking rules!". If I am a park ranger, and I can chose between docile mobile homers who pay fees or a bunch of geocachers that sound like they might be trouble, who do I side with?

 

When you add in the corporate sponsors that can lobby for skiers, snow mobilers, campers, and such versus our corporate sponsors that can't even run a marketing campaign for their own products very well, we have to be strong, focused, and pristine appearing.

 

Does all this mean that we have to live by a long list of rules? Not really, we will have to figure out ways to teach what works to new cachers. If you teach someone how to do it, you don't have to enforce the rules as much. We will have to figure out how to effectively get rid of lame or old caches

 

Example: your cache's last visit was 3 months ago. There were no periods in that time that people couldn't go caching if they wanted to. You get an email to check on the cache. A month goes by, you get a letter to pack it in, if you didn't go to check on the cache to start with and determine that it was still there, etc. This would not force you to trash a seldom visited cache that was good, but would give the system a way of purging a cache that wasn't being used, thus preventing the piling up of geotrash and keeping our image positive.

[+rusty_tlc]

...

I am not sure that its going the way of youth sports, but it has to become more formal. As we get bigger and more spread out, its harder to not bump into people. Some of these people don't like us, some don't know us, and some may like us, but want the same thing we want, but for a different reason.

 

A ecofacist may think that a sport that encourages a vile human to walk in their pristine woods with a piece of evil human technology (GPS unit) is evil and do what they can to mess with us. They we can't deal with by rules and organization, but nor can any other group. They do cause us image problems indirectly.

 

The mobile home set will be the direct problem. If they want a piece of land for their campers and we want it for geocaching, we lose. They can say anything and we don't have a means of arguing their points as we have no rules and we have a forum full of threads that say "We don't want no stinking rules!". If I am a park ranger, and I can chose between docile mobile homers who pay fees or a bunch of geocachers that sound like they might be trouble, who do I side with?

 

When you add in the corporate sponsors that can lobby for skiers, snow mobilers, campers, and such versus our corporate sponsors that can't even run a marketing campaign for their own products very well, we have to be strong, focused, and pristine appearing.

 

Does all this mean that we have to live by a long list of rules? Not really, we will have to figure out ways to teach what works to new cachers. If you teach someone how to do it, you don't have to enforce the rules as much. We will have to figure out how to effectively get rid of lame or old caches

 

Example: your cache's last visit was 3 months ago. There were no periods in that time that people couldn't go caching if they wanted to. You get an email to check on the cache. A month goes by, you get a letter to pack it in, if you didn't go to check on the cache to start with and determine that it was still there, etc. This would not force you to trash a seldom visited cache that was good, but would give the system a way of purging a cache that wasn't being used, thus preventing the piling up of geotrash and keeping our image positive.

I think I agree with what you are saying in between bashing RV'ers, and a few other groups.

Did you mean to say;

Educating the geocaching community would eliminate the need for more rules.

[+Destitute]

Common sense is still the best way to ensure quality.

The only problem with common sense is, it ain't all that common.

[+JMBella]

You folks who think the rules that help maintain an aura of respectability to this endeavor are useless do not really understand what geocaching is all about IMHO. The day you people take over is the day I throw my GPS in the lake.

 

Don't let the water splash ya. I'm KIDDING!!! Nobody said due away with all rules. So although you may have been trying to direct the "you folks <snip> are useless" at some of the people in this thread, thankfully I believe you have missed. Other wise that would be considered a personal attack.

 

QUALITY folks, not quantity. This should be a QUALITY sport with QUALITY caches in QUALITY areas.

 

Who says we can't have a quantity of quality. We have been able to achieve both in my area with no cache limit rules. Take control of your area, hold events, get to know everyone, talk to the cacher in the area. When you have a sense of community I think it goes a long way. Players kind of feel accountable because they know each other. Does that make any sense? I think it had gone a long way to keep the caches extremely high in quality as well as quantity around here. When I hide a cache, I think about the players around here and if they'll enjoy it and who will enjoy it more than others etc...

 

What I am saying is, if something makes sense for the sport, it should be implemented.

 

A cache limit rule in no way, shape or form make sense for the sport.

[+bigredmed]

I think I agree with what you are saying in between bashing RV'ers, and a few other groups.

Did you mean to say;

Educating the geocaching community would eliminate the need for more rules.

I was not trying to bash the groups, merely trying to relate their relatively stronger political position.

 

My main point though is that if we try to work on educating new cachers on how to set up a good cache (one that is interesting, appropriately constructed, and legal), we will likely not have to worry so much about rules.

 

I recently took a HAM radio class. The exam was a minor part of the class, mostly it was how to do it right so other people didn't think badly of you. The class was really helpful in terms of advice for using my radio.

 

Our local groups could take this on as a formal or informal activity. We could do this by asychronous learning for the guts of a good cache, with a brief session on local rules and styles.

[+rusty_tlc]

I think I agree with what you are saying in between bashing RV'ers, and a few other groups.

Did you mean to say;

Educating the geocaching community would eliminate the need for more rules.

I was not trying to bash the groups, merely trying to relate their relatively stronger political position.

 

My main point though is that if we try to work on educating new cachers on how to set up a good cache (one that is interesting, appropriately constructed, and legal), we will likely not have to worry so much about rules.

 

I recently took a HAM radio class. The exam was a minor part of the class, mostly it was how to do it right so other people didn't think badly of you. The class was really helpful in terms of advice for using my radio.

 

Our local groups could take this on as a formal or informal activity. We could do this by asychronous learning for the guts of a good cache, with a brief session on local rules and styles.

You have a way with words.

[+El Diablo]

There are rules and laws in every civil organization including the world you live in. They are a necessary tool to keep the intended goal on track. No one likes to be told what they can or can't do, and for some it isn't required. However for others it is an absolute necessity to maintain civility and to stop the degrading of the organization as it was intended to be.

 

If you have been with Geocaching.com over the last three years or so, you've seen a lot of new rules put into place. Every one of those rules were the result of some sort of abuse, or an endangerment to the game of caching. The abuse or endangerment is what is perceived by TPTB, and their perception is our reality. After all, we are in their world and their organization.

 

Without the rules that have been put into place this sport/hobby/addiction would have long ago died. I'm not for more rules, but if it's necessary to maintain the quality of this site and caching, then I'll welcome them with open arms. If you don't police yourself, then expect others to do it for you.

 

El Diablo

[+Criminal]

Common sense is still the best way to ensure quality.

The only problem with common sense is, it ain't all that common.

Very true, but you can’t legislate it either.

 

We don't want the jagged edge on geocaching to be smoothed down for those who are intellectually challenged. Reactionary rules do that, and not just to geocaching.

[+woodsters]

Can we stop the whining?

[+Destitute]

Common sense is still the best way to ensure quality.

The only problem with common sense is, it ain't all that common.

Very true, but you can’t legislate it either.

 

We don't want the jagged edge on geocaching to be smoothed down for those who are intellectually challenged. Reactionary rules do that, and not just to geocaching.

You're right, I didn't mean to imply that it could be legislated or given out to those who lack common sense or any sense for that matter. It just seems that when things don't go the way folks want them to, the first thing that comes to mind is, "Hey, we need a new rule/law to cover the reason why I ain't getting my way".

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Can we stop the whining?

Oh, so you shut down your site and came back here to whine?