The Geocacher's Code

[+paul.blitz]

Just found this thread in the general forums, where a group has just launched "The Geocacher's Code".

 

Given its relevance to all cachers, I thought you all might appreciate the link.

 

I'm also hoping that we can add this to the GAGB website soon.

 

Paul

[+Stuey]

"The Geocacher's Code"

Blllaaghhhhh... I can't abide this sort of thing.. It's all a bit OTT.

 

An example: "When seeking a cache, know your limitations and be aware of your surroundings. Don't attempt anything beyond your abilities."

 

I'll do what I like thanks I don't need a code to remind me that I have limits.

 

Anyway, some people will love it, some will live by it, and of course it is purely optional . Thanks for sharing the link. I'm sure it will be very useful on the whole.

[Deego]

say what you mean Stuey :D

[+Birders]

<<Blllaaghhhhh... I can't abide this sort of thing.. It's all a bit OTT.>>

 

He'll probably still be shouting that when some rescue team has to pull him off a hill!

[+sTeamTraen]

An example: "When seeking a cache, know your limitations and be aware of your surroundings. Don't attempt anything beyond your abilities."

Sounds a bit like that dreadful Desiderata which people had on their walls when I was at college.

 

I always preferred the National Lampoon version .

[+kbootb]

An example: "When seeking a cache, know your limitations and be aware of your surroundings. Don't attempt anything beyond your abilities."

Sounds a bit like that dreadful Desiderata which people had on their walls when I was at college.

 

I always preferred the National Lampoon version .

Couldn't get the National Lampoon link to work.

 

Couldn't see anything new in the Cacher's Code. Just a concise collection of current practice.

[Lactodorum]

Personal Statement: Looks to me like somebody else has taken it upon themselves to tell me how I ought to behave. My response is "thank you for your concern for me, but I will manage my life" (This is the edited version ) More and more these days we are seeing this kind of thing. "Nanny knows best".

 

Reviewer Statement: I have a set of guidelines I work to. I shall not be extending them. Be assured they will not form any part of my reviewing activities in the UK/Ireland/etc.

[+sTeamTraen]

Couldn't get the National Lampoon link to work.

Try this one, they even read it to you (flash 526K).

[davester]

A code? Is that really necessary for locating abandoned tupperware?

 

[+Icenians]

Minimize my and others' impact on the environment

I guess the best way to follow this one would be to NOT place a cache!

[+Simply Paul]

Geocachers code? A=N B=O C=P D=Q, etc...

 

SP

[+Donnacha]

Geocachers code? A=N B=O C=P D=Q, etc...

 

SP

lol

[+The Forester]

Codifying common sense very rapidly gets very silly and somewhat impractical.

 

For example, what does this code say about the appropriateness or otherwise of placing a physical cache in a graveyard?

 

Common sense and decency do not need to be defined, only thought about very briefly.

[+Stuey]

Personal Statement: Looks to me like somebody else has taken it upon themselves to tell me how I ought to behave. My response is "thank you for your concern for me, but I will manage my life" (This is the edited version  ) More and more these days we are seeing this kind of thing. "Nanny knows best".

 

You are so much more eloquent than I!

[+CuplaKiwis]

Ah, the joys of Nanny State/Litigation/Political Correctness.

 

This Cacher's Code was set up by an American, perchance?

[+Renegade Knight]

...Reviewer Statement: I have a set of guidelines I work to. I shall not be extending them. Be assured they will not form any part of my reviewing activities in the UK/Ireland/etc.

Why would they?

[JackiePenn]

Ah, the joys of Nanny State/Litigation/Political Correctness.

 

This Cacher's Code was set up by an American, perchance?

Not sure what being American in this has got to do with anything other than having a cheap anti-american dig. It is fact that p.c leftist nann'ism states can easily be labeled onto most western European nations more so than USA as a whole.

[+mongoose39uk]

I think the code is a wonderfull idea. How would i ever survive without somone telling me "exactly" how to play this game/

 

Now I will remove my tongue from my cheek - ah thats better

 

I will play hide the tuperware any way I please thank you.

 

Happy New year.

[+CuplaKiwis]

Not sure what being American in this has got to do with anything other than having a cheap anti-american dig. It is fact that p.c leftist nann'ism states can easily be labeled onto most western European nations more so than USA as a whole.

Ah yes, but where has this come from? Litigation has been the prime driver for our Nannification. Where has our Litigation culture come from?

 

Anti-American dig it may be, but cheap it certainly aint...

Edited January 3, 2005 by CuplaKiwis

[+Brenin Tegeingl]

Personally I felt the same way as a lot of cachers when I read it, after reading other peoples thoughts, and thinking about it myself, my personal preference is "NO THANKS", but as a extra tool when presenting a request to a landowner, I'll include it. I've already altered my personal copy of the Introduction to Geocaching document to include it, anything that might tip a wavering landowner into saying yes, has to be included.

 

Dave

[+Stuey]

Personally I felt the same way as a lot of cachers when I read it, after reading other peoples thoughts, and thinking about it myself, my personal preference is "NO THANKS", but as a extra tool when presenting a request to a landowner, I'll include it. I've already altered my personal copy of the Introduction to Geocaching document to include it, anything that might tip a wavering landowner into saying yes, has to be included.

 

Dave

That's a very good point... It does have a use after all

[+CuplaKiwis]

In all seriousness though, can someone please give me a good reason for why we need this? I realise it's all voluntary etc., but it just seems quite superfluous, and frankly, simply stating the obvious.

 

I guess it may be a natural inlination I have to not doing what I'm told but something about this just grates on me, conceptually.

 

Ah well, to each their own, I guess...

[+CuplaKiwis]

Ah, overlap in responses there...

 

That's a good reason. Thankyou.

[+Haggis Hunter]

Codifying common sense very rapidly gets very silly and somewhat impractical.

 

For example, what does this code say about the appropriateness or otherwise of placing a physical cache in a graveyard?

 

Common sense and decency do not need to be defined, only thought about very briefly.

A rather odd statement that you have made here Forester, can you explain what you mean as the caches that I know of that you have visited that have involved graveyards you haven't had a bad thing to say about them, Please allow me to use 2 extracts from your logs for caches that are physically in a graveyard -

 

Enjoyed doing this one, despite iffy weather.

I'd never visited Corstorphine before and was struck by the villagey feel to it, especially to the immediate South of the kirk.

 

The magnet attachment of the micro to its location was very clever.

 

and this one which has been cut down by a far amount -

 

This cache trail, which is firmly in my Top Ten list of favourites, is a credit to the place and I can't recommend it more highly.

 

Can you explain your statement please, as you hadn't thought about it briefly when you had written up your logs??

[+paul.blitz]

but as a extra tool when presenting a request to a landowner, I'll include it.

Yes, that is an EXCELLENT example of when such a document CAN be quite useful. I know that the GAGB Caching Guidelines have been useful on several occasions now, to show to landowners that we ARE sensible, and that we DO care about the countryside.... something like this could be another useful tool.

 

I appreciate what many of you say, that its pretty much common sense, it what most of us already do, etc etc.... agree 100%... but sadly, there ARE some people out there who simply seem to LACK common sense, and who DO need to have things spelt out to them.

 

And, as our sport grows and grows, we are likely to see more of those who lack common sense.... so we do need to make sure the "guidance" is available for them.

 

Paul

[+klaus23]

When I first read that I thought it was like the "Our Father..."

 

It's a bit OTT and clearly written by someone who has a bit too much time on their hands. But, still, there are a few good points in there.

[+MarcB]

Jeez, it's a bit long winded and over the top isn't it!

[+naffita]

Just had a look at this "code".

 

May the deity of your choice preserve you from the well meaning do-gooder who knows he knows better than anyone else.

[+The Forester]

caches that I know of that you have visited that have involved graveyards you haven't had a bad thing to say about them

What point are you trying to make about this ditzy little code, HH?

 

My point is that such a code gets very silly when it tries to displace common sense and common courtesy with screeds of rules and edicts.

 

Your personally abusive insult in which you imply that I did not think before writing any (or all) of the three logs from which you selectively quote irrelvances does not suggest to me that you have evinced any interest in the topic of this twitty little code.

 

The "villagey feel" of the area I mention is not in a graveyard. The vast majority of the multi which you selectively quote from is also nowhere near a graveyard.

 

I haven't commented on the appropriateness of placing physical caches in such places as graveyards and none of the logreports I have submitted has been a spolier which tells people emabrked on a multi where to look for the final cache.

 

The point I have made is that you cannot replace common sense with a "code".

 

What's your point? What do you think of the code?

 

Cheers, The Forester

[+klaus23]

Lads, it's getting to the point where personal dislikes cloud the subject matter and just lead to sniping. I've highlighted this on other threads and it's always the same people who are involved.

 

I'm as argumentative as the next man but somewhere common sense has to prevail.

 

Grow up and instead of just having a go at each other, why not discuss the topic at hand?

[+The Forester]

why not discuss the topic at hand?

Yes, let's.

 

My viewpoint is that a code such as this is doomed to failure for a couple of reasons.

 

The first is that it is unnecessary.

 

The second is that it will get bogged down in minutiae if it tries to legislate for all eventualities.

 

Forget about comparisons with the Highway Code. That document has the force of criminal Law behind it and is recognised by the Courts as the authoritative document on driving matters. This geocaching code is not comparable.

 

If you try to get into too much detail, sooner or later someone will do something daft and claim that nobody had told them not to do it. Remember the woman who sued the microwave oven manufacturer for not telling her not to put her pet poodle into it to dry out its fur? Nowadays in the US children's batman costumes have to have a label which warns them (or more likely, their parents) "Caution: this cape does not enable the wearer to fly"!

 

As soon as you get into a contentious area, such as whether it is appropriate to hide a physical cache under or behind somebody's grave marker, such a code falls flat on its face.

 

Cheers, The Forester

[+Skate and Jane]

Let those who stride decide

[Hello, I'm Johnny Cache]

What? I didnt realise there were rules for geocaching I thought it was all about going out and having a good time maybe i am mistaken but i go out to have fun and see the country. Its a bit too much for me. OTT!

[+The Forester]

Introduction to Geocaching document to include it, anything that might tip a wavering landowner into saying yes, has to be included.

That sounds like a good use for it .... right up until the landowner starts asking intelligent questions about it -- such as whether the majority of Brit cachers give two hoots about it.

 

I haven't seen anything in it which isn't already either in the normal rules or in the Countryside Code or a matter of blindingly obvious common sense.

 

Neverthless, if it swings any of the major landowners our way, then it's got to be worth an A4 page or two.

 

Cheers, The Forester

[+Team Ullium]

Introduction to Geocaching document to include it, anything that might tip a wavering landowner into saying yes, has to be included.

That sounds like a good use for it .... right up until the landowner starts asking intelligent questions about it -- such as whether the majority of Brit cachers give two hoots about it.

 

I haven't seen anything in it which isn't already either in the normal rules or in the Countryside Code or a matter of blindingly obvious common sense.

 

Neverthless, if it swings any of the major landowners our way, then it's got to be worth an A4 page or two.

 

Cheers, The Forester

Yes I agree if it can sway even just one landowner to give permission then it is worth including in one's plea for placement.

 

But it does seem a bit OTT and as Klaus23 commented a bit like a religious creed (maybe someone can produce a re-vamped less sugary version?) but that apart it does make some good points which as paul.blitz says :

 

And, as our sport grows and grows, we are likely to see more of those who lack common sense.... so we do need to make sure the "guidance" is available for them.

 

It has been my experience in life that so called 'common sense' should indeed be re-named to 'uncommon sense'

[+paul.blitz]

What? I didnt realise there were rules for geocaching I thought it was all about going out and having a good time maybe i am mistaken but i go out to have fun and see the country. Its a bit too much for me. OTT!

The rules for caching are generally 100% common sense: don't tresspass, leave the place as if you haven't visited it etc etc. It is also CERTAINLY about going out and having a good time. But its also about not messing it up for others.

 

The problem is that, some people don't seem to have the same level of "common sense" as others. It is clear, when you visit SOME cache sites, where other cachers have already been. Not only is that a shame because it sometimes trivialises finding the cache, it also means that the countryside gets damaged.

 

And once THAT happens, you'll find that some landowners will decide to remove caching permission.... and that's the LAST thing we need.

 

(To be honest, I suspect a major part of the problem is young children, who (without realising it) run around enthusiasticaly, but cause damage.... even the best parent has trouble contolling children ALL the time!)

 

=================

 

When a sport is small, then there is less of an issue, partly due to the lower number of those involved, but also because those involved truly understand what it is about. But as a sport gets bigger, you get the associated problems: we are NOT regulated in any way, so when someone (you know, the person WITHOUT that common sense....) slightly oversteps the line, then (a) the probably don't realise that they HAVE done so; ( when they are informally "reprimanded" they will then ask what right you have to do so; © they get annoyed, and make things even worse for others.

 

There must be MANY sports that have gone through such growing pains: angling; motor racing; mountain-biking; football.... they start small, and all is ok, then you see growth, and you then start to "give suitable advice". As things get even bigger, you see regulation, formal rules etc etc.

 

=================

 

(please note the "quotes" below.....)

About 2 years ago, caching started to take off, mainly because of a couple of items on the TV (eg the Chris Packham piece). It was about then that "people" realised that, to continue being allowed to cache, "we" needed to create some "UK guidelines", which "we" would "promise" to abide by, and which would be presented to landowners as "the way UK GeoCachers do things". These were initially presented by a small team of cachers to Hampshire CC, who accepted them as the HCC guidelines; soon after, after a couple of tweaks for "generalisation", they were taken on as the "GAGB Guidelines"

 

As a result, the GeoCaching community has actually GAINED a huge amount: as a result of a lot of hard work by a relatively small number of cachers, "we" (ie geocachers in the UK) have now got formal permission to continue caching in many parts of the countryside. There is no doubt that, without those original guidelines, we would not be in this great situation.

 

The GAGB guidelines were kept as concise & generalised as possible, but are mainly aimed at cache PLACEMENT.... these new (ok, made in the USA......) guidelines include more on the cache-seeking side of things.

 

So, yes, it's something else we can show landowners, to explain that "yes, we will look after your land, honest"; maybe something to have available for the more naive cacher; maybe something that parents can look at with their kids, to help them understand what is expected of them when out caching.

 

BTW....The Forester commented on the "Highway Code".... everything in there is already covered by UK laws, so why have it? It's a convenient, concise round up of many of the fundamentals of driving law for those who are starting to drive (but note that it is, itself, not a legally binding document, it is purely advisory in that it "points towards" the law: the web site site quotes "Many of the rules in the Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence".... that little word "many" means that "some bits of advice are not actually legally binding")

 

Paul

[+CuplaKiwis]

The problem is that, some people don't seem to have the same level of "common sense" as others.

Yes, true for cases of severe damage/inattention/whatever, but it's never that cut and dry. There's always going to be umpteen shades of grey - what one person finds acceptable (random eg. trodden grass) may be wanton destruction to another.

 

The cynic in me can see this kind of thing heading further and further towards, oh I don't know: close monitoring of caches, fines for people who don't leave them in what somebody decides is good condition, god forbid - wardens for caches.

 

I know, I know, just as OTT, but I really *really* don't want 'them' to take the fun out of it all!!

[+Team Ullium]

I know, I know, just as OTT, but I really *really* don't want 'them' to take the fun out of it all!!

 

I think I know what you mean CuplaKiwis ... but for some people taking the 'fun' out of it means taking away the opportunity to circumvent the existing rules or interpret them as they would like....or just do what ever the hell they want for what ever reason they want...and that could be something as nondescript as boosting their place in a 'fun' league table !!!

[+The Forester]

for some people taking the 'fun' out of it means taking away the opportunity to circumvent the existing rules or interpret them as they would like....or just do what ever the hell they want for what ever reason they want

A lengthy book of rules can never replace common sense because the people who lack common sense or lack an ability to consider the feelings of others are exactly the sort of people who will trash the rules whenever they feel like it.

 

For example, one of the rules in the "code" which is being drafted specifically advises against the punlication of spoilers. Someone who trashes the rules as a matter of routine just because he or she doesn't give a hoot about the feelings of other people is likely to just go ahead and wreck the fun of a cache for other people by spoiling the cache by publishing a desctiption of its location.

 

Take a hypothetical example. Let's say two cache-placers have spent a great deal of time and trouble devising elaborate multis which have a physical cache in a certain type of place. Let's say a wrecker, who has read the code, comes along and publically names the type of place where the final cache is located, such as an ornamental herb garden or a graveyard or whatever. By so doing, he has spoiled the cache for anyone who reads such a spoiler. That sort of selfishness is very obviously against common sense and is clearly against the part of the code which forbids it.

 

That is exactly the type of person who most needs a code as a substitute for common sense, but that is also the type of person who is least likely to heed the code.

 

Vandals operate in exactly the same way. When they feel they have the power to disrupt, they just go ahead and do it.

 

A code is quite useless to defend us against such people.

 

Cheers, The Forester

[+kewfriend]

GEOCAHERS CODE

 

ensure you are on planet earth

ensure you have anorak

ensure you are equipped with full first aid equipment for snake bites, nettle rash, thorn removal, replacing eyeballs into sockets, silencing screaming kids in the rain, pacemaker batteries

take nothing but batteries

obtain signed undertakings from at least two magistrates and detective sergeant that you are not a terrorist threat

only place into cache discarded christmas presents

ensure that you publish a public apology on your local newspaper for your transgressions as a concerned environmentalist

[+Flyfishermanbob]

Well well well ....and why would you wish to inflict unwanted Xmas tat on someone else Kiwi friend ??????????????

[+Team Ullium]

I hear what you are saying Forester...but because people will unfortunately look for loopholes in the rules.... this means that the only defense one has against that is to plug the loopholes...the government is constantly involved in this exercise!!

 

As for the people who ignore the rules....well I don't see that as a lack of common sense....more a case of putting a telescope to a blind eye like once famous admiral

 

And the only defense one has against that is make the suggested guidelines obligatory...I know that seems like a drastic step to take ... but it is down to those who over step the boundaries...not those who genuinely try to keep to all the rules....suggested guidelines as well as the obligatory ones.

 

There will always be smart asses who spoil it for everyone....that is just a fact of life....and their banner cry is 'it is just a bit of fun' !!!

[+kewfriend]

why would you wish to inflict unwanted Xmas tat on someone else Kiwi

 

 

quality shrinkwrapped and in perfect condition tat -

one person's tat is another's cherished trinket -

 

........... err that picture frame we left in Epsom was truly gruesome but someone will love it .........

Edited January 5, 2005 by kewfriend

[+Flyfishermanbob]

PHEW .......Well I don't feel just so bad about Mother in laws little "treasure" .....

 

[+mongoose39uk]

A Civil Action(1998)

 

Jerome Facher: What's your take?

 

Jan Schlichtmann: They'll see the cache.

 

Jerome Facher: The cache? I thought we were talking about a court of law. Come on, you've been around long enough to know that a courtroom isn't a place to look for a cache.

 

(there must be a magnetic breath strip somewhere)

 

Philadelphia (1995)

 

Joe Miller: Explain this to me like I'm a six year old, okay? The entire street is clear except for one small area under construction, with a huge hole that is clearly marked and blocked off, and you decide you must cross the street at this spot. You fall into the hole and you want to sue the city for negligence? Did you find the cache?

 

Mrs. Finley: Yeah. I have a cache?

Joe: Of course you have a cache! But only so long as you signed the log book!

 

Whoops taking liberties with the Thread and even more so with the scripts.

 

Oh and I will cache, as I have said before, as I please.

Edited January 5, 2005 by mongoose39uk

[MCL]

Oh perleeeaaassee!

 

Can we once and for all stop confusing guidelines, rules, and a code?

 

Its a CODE, guys. They are not ordering you to cache in a certain way, they are an expression of what a responsible person might aspire to. There are no cache police monitoring it, there are no penalties for breaking it.

 

This code is the perfect way to teach young children how to cache responsibly. Geocaching is for many people a family sport, and so we need to consider the needs of the youngest among us. I can see this code being as valuable to the parents when the teach their kids the decency of caching, as the Green Cross code is to parents while teaching their kids to cross the road.

 

You don't see people saying "there's no need for the Green Cross Code, and I'll cross the road how I bloody well like!" Of course there's no need for *them* to have the Green Cross Code, because *they* are above it and also know how to safely get across in their own way, but would they really suggest we dump it for the kids? Did they accuse the DofT of being the nanny state when they invented it?

 

Get real, for heaven's sake. The GCC has saved lives over the years when used properly as a teaching tool to educate the next generation. Used properly, the Geocacher's code can be just as effective. Don't knock it, and don't dump it just because *you* don't need it. To act in such a way could be considered selfish.

[+The Forester]

The Green Cross Code is for kiddywinks. Perhaps a comparison with the proposed geocachers code is apt.

 

The proposed code could be a useful teaching aid for instructing children and perhaps some adults who have a mental age of less than about 10, but I don't think it will restrain the disruptive ones who routinely trash the rules of geocaching and of common courtesy.

[+sTeamTraen]

As those of us who studied mathematics (and in my case, who gave up when it got hard) used to recite: "Necessary, but not sufficient".