Geocachers Supporting The Tsunami Relief Effort

[+hydee]

We have added the following text to the main page of the site:

 

Help Support Tsunami Relief Efforts

All of us at Groundspeak are deeply saddened by the recent Tsunami disaster. We are inspired by the support offered by the Geocaching community. Here is a list of charitable organizations and resources that Google put together where you can help out. We sincerely encourage everyone to help support the victims of this tragedy.

 

We support the victims of this tragedy and would like to offer a way for the geocaching community to help. The geocaching community is large and can make an HUGE impact. I know many of you have already donated time, money, and any resources you have at your disposal.

 

So please feel free to pick from the list provided or any other way that is comfortable for you.

[+JoGPS]

This is way Tooooooooo Cool ……….. JOE

[+TEAM 360]

Good move!

[+Team Perks]

Right on!!

[dcr]

[+fly46]

I have to say something.

Geocachers just got heated over not being allowed to say that there would be a Toys For Tots bin at an event. I've gotten my cache page edited because I said that if anyone happend to leave money in my cache it would go to VJGC. The response to us, every time, was that GC had decided to not get involved with charities and so there was a blanket ban on anything charitable.

 

I'm not complaining that those links are there, and I'm not saying that this isn't a good thing to sponsor. However, How can TPTB pose a blanket ban - which they discussed less than a month ago - and then add that to their website?

[+Hemlock]

The ban is on using cache pages to promote an agenda.

 

What they put on the front page of the site is entirely different.

[+fly46]

The ban is on using cache pages to promote an agenda.

 

What they put on the front page of the site is entirely different.

Is it?

 

There are plenty of outlets for charity, but we decided long ago that geocaching was for the journey and adventure, not to raise cash or push forward someone's agenda.

 

Sounds like a blanket statement against charity to me. By the way, Jeremy said that.

[+carleenp]

From the listing guidelines:

 

Commercial caches attempt to use the Geocaching.com web site cache reporting tool directly or indirectly (intentionally or non-intentionally) to solicit customers through a Geocaching.com listing.  These are NOT permitted. Examples include for-profit locations that require an entrance fee, or locations that sell products or services.

 

Solicitations are also off-limits. For example, caches perceived to be posted for religious, political, or social agendas may not be listed. Geocaching is supposed to be a light, fun activity, not a platform for an agenda.

 

Some exceptions can be made. In these rare situations, permission can be given by the Geocaching.com web site. However, permission should be asked first before posting. If you are in doubt, ask first.

 

I would assume that if Groundspeak has left open the possibilty for permission, they can give themselves permission.

 

Generally, I think staying away from charity caches is good. I also think it was a nice gesture to put up the list of links. It provides a middle ground for those who complain about anything charitable on the site and those who wanted charitable caches.

 

How about appreciating the positive here. There has been enough negativity today.

Edited January 6, 2005 by carleenp

[+hydee]

Groundspeak's position is pretty well explained here:

 

In keeping with Groundspeak’s policy of not permitting charity caches or caches that promote agendas or platforms, effective immediately, the two caches created recently for the purpose of collecting money for Tsunami/Earth quake victims have been archived.

 

Our hearts go out to the victims of this terrible tragedy. However, although we understand that these caches were created with the best of intentions; the uproar from within the community regarding these caches has reinforced our position.

 

Questions like, “Why can’t I do a cache for my charity?” or “I don't like this organization, why can’t we create a Tsunami cache for a different organization” make a couple of things clear.

 

First, we do not want to have to admit/deny caches based upon our perceived merits of the specific agenda, position, organization or charitable cause. Most opinions vary when it comes to issues like these and we have no interest in hosting the battleground or becoming an arbiter.

 

Second, this web site is about geocaching and we do not wish to see it converted to a platform for issues, whether good, bad or otherwise.

 

There are plenty of ways to donate to charity and plenty of ways to help out. We encourage you to find them and participate to the extent you believe it is right. We certainly do.

 

Now, I realize that this post and action will most likely cause another uproar. Personally, I am sorry that we did not enforce this guideline sooner. The blame for this lies solely with Groundspeak and not the volunteers. As far as this web site is concerned, we plan to do our best to keep it related to geocaching and we hope you like it.

 

Sincerely,

 

Rothstafari

Groundspeak

www.geocaching.com

 

The site has chosen to support the victims not any specific organization. By allowing cache listings that encourage specific organizations in a sense we would be picking and choosing organizations for our community to support. This is a way in which we can support the community effort without, in any way, imposing our personal beliefs on that effort.

 

If *you* as an individual choose to show support in some way that is *your* choice.

[+Team Piggy]

And permission was applied for.. I know because I submitted the cache.

 

Most of you have hung someone without even knowing what went on.. Sad

 

Personally, We are going nowhere with the fighting and "cr@p" that has been going on in the forums..

 

Thanks to Heidi for getting the donation link up and running.

 

Now all go click it and get your wallets out..

[WH]

There is this thread in the OT forum already discussing the tsunami disater. Also in the thread is a listing of charities accepting donations.

[+sept1c_tank]

Thanks, Groundspeak.

[Mushtang]

Most of you have hung someone without even knowing what went on..

I don't understand how anyone was hung in this thread by most of us.

 

I've read the other threads that discuss the archived cache, and the pros and cons of charities listed on cache pages, so I'm very familiar with the back story.

 

But I don't know what you mean. Who was hung? (I realize you don't mean literally hung, it's just an expression)

[+Spzzmoose]

WOW!! Log into the forums and all hell has broken loose! Good job for posting those links Hydee! Maybe you can "stickey" them for a few weeks.

[+Spzzmoose]

Oops...nevermind. Seen them on the front page. WTG GS!

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

Respectful and appropriate.

 

Unlike a regular charity -- this is a world event of significant proportions and, hopefully a singular event.

 

Groundspeak's response is in-line with many other major corporations and websites.

 

I commend you on supporting this "special" case scenario, maintaining your stance on normal charitable causes, and provding a respectful response to many of your customers concerns as expressed in the forum (especially some International members)

 

To those that feel their charity is left out -- please take the high-road on this one.

Edited January 6, 2005 by Lemon Fresh Dog

[Aushiker]

Glad to see something postive has happened. Sorry it had come as a result of all the disquiet in the forums here and eslewhere. It should have happened without all the agro. Sad when there is some much hurt as a result of this diaster.

 

Regards

Andrew

[+sTeamTraen]

(changed my mind)

Edited January 6, 2005 by sTeamTraen

[+Phone guy]

This is a world wide relief effort. I am very proud to know there are so many people around the world that come together when something like this happens. There is an Organization I heard on the radio yesterday that has "kit's" that they are handing out that contain a cook stove and pots/pans, utinsels, a lantern, plates spoons forks etc. It dawned on me that getting food is the first thing but how do you cook it with out a stove? I love the practicality. Its called Samaritanspurse.org

 

Samaritans Purse

[+fly46]

To those that feel their charity is left out -- please take the high-road on this one.

 

It has nothing to do with feeling 'left out' as you put it. I simply wanted them to explain to me why one is okay and the other is not.

 

Once again, I reiterate that I don't mean to say that the Tsunami efforts aren't worthwile or that this isn't a tragedy or anything else.

[Bronze]

Now that wasn't so hard.

 

Shame we lost some great cachers and caches over it all. A blimp on the radar to what some other countries have lost recently. The middle ground has been sought - enough is enough.

 

Lets spit and shake on it.

 

Bronze.

[+Team Piggy]

Most of you have hung someone without even knowing what went on..

I don't understand how anyone was hung in this thread by most of us.

 

<snip>

But I don't know what you mean. Who was hung? (I realize you don't mean literally hung, it's just an expression)

I am full of repsect for Geo.com placing that link on their front page.

Personally I would also love to see a link on each & every search page by State /territory etc. but also know that the advertising there pays for what we get in a way.

 

My meaning by "hung" which thanks for understanding what I meant was:

 

There was certain members on those forums, who have basically pointed fingers and openly slandered me.

 

Words like "Liar" "heartless" etc etc have been used.. All this for the cacher that started this cache in the effort to raise funds for the victims.

Its a nice thankyou isnt it? (thats why I feel hung)...

 

You cant please all the people all the time, and this certainly proved that saying to be so true...

 

Thanks..

[+CO Admin]

Lets call the whole thing a mulligan and just start over. Its done, lets move on past the anger and the hurt feelings.

 

"Nothing to see here lets move along."

[+Renegade Knight]

The ban is on using cache pages to promote an agenda.

 

What they put on the front page of the site is entirely different.

Is it? ...

No, not really. It's damage control. It's still promoting specific charities. There is no true difference between grounspeak doing it directly or giving permission via an approved cache.

 

I have more issues with arching an approved cache than the entire charity business. If approving the cache was a mistake, archiving it was a bigger one. The band aid is a nice gesture but not compounding mistakes would of done more good overall.

Edited January 7, 2005 by Renegade Knight

[+El Diablo]

The ban is on using cache pages to promote an agenda.

 

What they put on the front page of the site is entirely different.

Is it? ...

No, not really. It's damage control. It's still promoting specific charities. There is no true difference between grounspeak doing it directly or giving permission via an approved cache.

 

I have more issues with arching an approved cache than the entire charity business. If approving the cache was a mistake, archiving it was a bigger one. The band aid is a nice gesture but not compounding mistakes would of done more good overall.

Well actually they have a ban against charity caches...not charities. There is a big differrence. I don't believe that they compounded a mistake. I believe thay came up with a solutiion to offer what the members wanted.

 

I for one applaud GC's effort to help.

 

El Diablo

[+Renegade Knight]

...Well actually they have a ban against charity caches...not charities. There is a big differrence. I don't believe that they compounded a mistake. I believe thay came up with a solutiion to offer what the members wanted.

 

I for one applaud GC's effort to help.

 

El Diablo

The first mistake apparently (since I thought the approved cache was fine) was approving the relief virtual cache. Once approved it's grandfathered. That's from the guidelines. Then they come out and archive the cache saying it was a mistake to have approved it at all, but in the process adding more fuel to the fires from increasing numbers of caches that Groundspeak is archiving that were not broken and were grandfathered. It's setting a bad precedent.

 

As for Groundspeak supporting a charity directly or via an approved cache, it's 6 of one and half dozen of another. Worse it's "Don't do as I do, do as I say" cause they will archive your cache then come out in favor of specific charities.

 

If endorsing charities is verboten, then own up to it and be a caching site. It's actually an easy thing for them to do and most cachers, and I'm one of them, are in support of that stance.

Edited January 7, 2005 by Renegade Knight

[+El Diablo]

...Well actually they have a ban against charity caches...not charities. There is a big differrence. I don't believe that they compounded a mistake. I believe thay came up with a solutiion to offer what the members wanted.

 

I for one applaud GC's effort to help.

 

El Diablo

The first mistake apparently (since I thought the approved cache was fine) was approving the relief virtual cache. Once approved it's grandfathered. That's from the guidelines. Then they come out and archive the cache saying it was a mistake to have approved it at all, but in the process adding more fuel to the fires from increasing numbers of caches that Groundspeak is archiving that were not broken and were grandfathered. It's setting a bad precedent.

 

As for Groundspeak supporting a charity directly or via an approved cache, it's 6 of one and half dozen of another. Worse it's "Don't do as I do, do as I say" cause they will archive your cache then come out in favor of specific charities.

 

If endorsing charities is verboten, then own up to it and be a caching site. It's actually an easy thing for them to do and most cachers, and I'm one of them, are in support of that stance.

Well whata ya think...should we just shoot them? Or get over this and move on? Seems we all agree to the cause...we just can't agree on how we got here. Is that really important?

 

El diablo

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

To those that feel their charity is left out -- please take the high-road on this one.

 

It has nothing to do with feeling 'left out' as you put it. I simply wanted them to explain to me why one is okay and the other is not.

 

Once again, I reiterate that I don't mean to say that the Tsunami efforts aren't worthwile or that this isn't a tragedy or anything else.

All suffering and need is tragic. I sincerely hope for a better world -- all charity is important.

 

This is a massive, sigular event of insanely tragic scale. It is not an issue of balance, it is an issue of immediate, massive need.

 

Keep working for your charities and know that I appreciate people like you.

 

Let's let this one through and apply the intelligent, well-intentioned policy to prevail during the rest of the time.

[Azaruk]

It seems that whatever TPTB do in this regard results in negativity and contentious comments.

 

The link is a good idea.

geocaching is a game.

 

If you don't like the idea of a link - ignore it - you don't have to click on it.

 

Go play .........

 

There must surely be more important things in your respective lives than ranting about a link on a site that simply serves to make the GAME easier to play, organise and administrate.

 

I have watched all the threads in the forum regarding the whole tsunami appeal and am amazed at the comments, rants and flames from supposedly mature GAME players.

 

Get a life!!!!

[+mtn-man]

The first mistake apparently (since I thought the approved cache was fine) was approving the relief virtual cache. Once approved it's grandfathered. That's from the guidelines.

Incorrect.

 

The guidelines say regarding grandfathered caches...

However, if the cache was placed prior to the date when a guideline was issued or updated the cache is likely to be “grandfathered” and allowed to stand as is.

 

Grandfathered caches are only for caches approved *before* a guideline was changed. Caches approved that do not conform to the guidelines that were in place when that cache was approved may in fact be archived. Reviewers can make mistakes. If I accidentally approve a cache located in a US National Park without permission then I would hope that it would get archived by TPTB if it was brought to their attention.

[+cachew nut]

There is this thread in the OT forum already discussing the tsunami disater. Also in the thread is a listing of charities accepting donations.

I was going to point out how that forum is only for Premium members. Then I thought about it. Think about it.

[dcr]

Grandfathered caches are only for caches approved *before* a guideline was changed.  Caches approved that do not conform to the guidelines that were in place when that cache was approved may in fact be archived.  Reviewers can make mistakes.  If I accidentally approve a cache located in a US National Park without permission then I would hope that it would get archived by TPTB if it was brought to their attention.

But the 'guidelines' http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#commercial have not been changed to indicate that the 'guidelines' have been changed. The *only* indication of this change of 'guidelines' is buried in the forums. When you submit a cache you agree to the 'guidelines' as posted at the above url ... I think this is where a fair bit of the heat in the discussion came from (on both sides).

 

Perhaps the 'guidelines' need to be updated to show the current moritorium is in effect?

 

cheers Darren

Edited January 7, 2005 by dcr

[+New England n00b]

<ignoring continuing pointless debate>

 

Thank you Hydee & all of Groundspeak for placing that link on the front page.

[+mtn-man]

Grandfathered caches are only for caches approved *before* a guideline was changed.  Caches approved that do not conform to the guidelines that were in place when that cache was approved may in fact be archived.  Reviewers can make mistakes.  If I accidentally approve a cache located in a US National Park without permission then I would hope that it would get archived by TPTB if it was brought to their attention.

But the 'guidelines' http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#commercial have not been changed to indicate that the 'guidelines' have been changed. The *only* indication of this change of 'guidelines' is buried in the forums. When you submit a cache you agree to the 'guidelines' as posted at the above url ... I think this is where a fair bit of the heat in the discussion came from (on both sides).

 

Perhaps the 'guidelines' need to be updated to show the current moritorium is in effect?

 

cheers Darren

The guidelines are correct and are explicit regarding caches that solicit.

 

I will say this again. Caches approved that do not conform to the guidelines that were in place when that cache was approved may in fact be archived. Reviewers can make mistakes.

 

This topic is not about a debate about the archived caches. I have made my feelings clear about further debate regarding those caches. Stay on topic in this topic.

[Azaruk]

Surely the fact that certain people's wishes were satisfied by closing the original thread and archiving the offending cache was enough.

 

Surely a link on the home page is an excellent compromise.

 

Surely everyone can stop arguing pointlessly about the whys and wherefores and get on with the business of enjoying the game.

[+mtn-man]

Surely the fact that certain people's wishes were satisfied by closing the original thread and archiving the offending cache was enough.

 

Surely a link on the home page is an excellent compromise.

 

Surely everyone can stop arguing pointlessly about the whys and wherefores and get on with the business of enjoying the game.

You would think.

[+sept1c_tank]

Wouldn't you?

[+kewfriend]

Help Support Tsunami Relief Efforts

All of us at Groundspeak are deeply saddened by the recent Tsunami disaster. We are inspired by the support offered by the Geocaching community. Here is a list of charitable organizations and resources that Google put together where you can help out. We sincerely encourage everyone to help support the victims of this tragedy.

 

Well done GC - a sensible outcome

 

For those of you unaware: the UK side of the site exploded at the earlier 'rigid' rule interpretation by GC, followed up by an even greater explosion at the closure of UK discussions relating to cache support towards the disaster, followed by a spate of considerable anti-US postings.

 

Everything will cool down now. I suppose the initial general US ( govt and otherwise ) response to the disaster was muted by the fact that it wasn't their ocean, there are few ex-colonial links with the countries involved, there aren't large immigrant communities from the areas, and its not a big US tourist destination.

 

I am delighted that the GC ( and US govt et al ) responses have changed.

 

Well done GC - a sensible outcome

 

[davester]

Help Support Tsunami Relief Efforts

All of us at Groundspeak are deeply saddened by the recent Tsunami disaster. We are inspired by the support offered by the Geocaching community. Here is a list of charitable organizations and resources that Google put together where you can help out. We sincerely encourage everyone to help support the victims of this tragedy.

 

Well done GC - a sensible outcome

 

For those of you unaware: the UK side of the site exploded at the earlier 'rigid' rule interpretation by GC, followed up by an even greater explosion at the closure of UK discussions relating to cache support towards the disaster, followed by a spate of considerable anti-US postings.

 

Everything will cool down now. I suppose the initial general US ( govt and otherwise ) response to the disaster was muted by the fact that it wasn't their ocean, there are few ex-colonial links with the countries involved, there aren't large immigrant communities from the areas, and its not a big US tourist destination.

 

I am delighted that the GC ( and US govt et al ) responses have changed.

 

Well done GC - a sensible outcome

 

Just to put the perspective over from a UK point of view (our forum is pretty active so many do not stray from it), our situation was somewhat different to the Australian Virtual cache.

 

This cache was a result of me posting about the idea on the UK forum. The idea was met with approval and as a result, the UK approvers decided on this cache placement as a compromise to the guidelines.

 

The cache was allowed to exist for two days. It was then removed by a non-UK approver.

 

Discussion of the cache and the policy decision took place in the UK forum. This discussion was curtailed by a non-UK forum moderator.

 

I will not offer an opinion of the whole incident here, but I will state that the front page statement is welcome although perhaps a more internationalist view could be taken.

[+mtn-man]

The cache was allowed to exist for two days. It was then removed by a non-UK approver.

 

Discussion of the cache and the policy decision took place in the UK forum. This discussion was curtailed by a non-UK forum moderator.

 

I will not offer an opinion of the whole incident here, but I will state that the front page statement is welcome although perhaps a more internationalist view could be taken.

 

The cache was archived by the lawyer for Groundspeak, not just a "non-UK approver".

 

The topics in the UK were closed by a site-wide moderator who looks over every topic in every forum on these discussion boards.

 

An international view *was* taken. What is done in one country should apply to ALL countries. No country is more special than any other country. Unfortunately the only FAIR way to do this is to NO LONGER ALLOW THEM -- PERIOD!

 

I will say this for the second time, and I will make it big this time.

 

This topic is not about a debate about the archived caches. I have made my feelings clear about further debate regarding those caches. Stay on topic in this topic.

 

If I have to say it again it will be in a private message telling you that you will not be allowed to post in these forums for some time period (moderated postings).

[+GrizzlyJohn]

You are right this is not about caches that wrap around some kind of charity. They should not be allowed unless they are open to every type and kind of charity. I don't see that happening so end of story.

 

It is about Groundspeak putting text on its front page about a disaster and how to donate to releif efforts. That was a corporate decision. As many other companies have done in the past two weeks. It is their site, they can make that choice. As always I would encourage those people that do not like the decision to stop using the site, if in fact it causes that much of a problem for you. But follow through completly with it and don't use any site that has posted like messages. This will actually cut way down on the amount of time you will spend surfing the web.

 

The only negative point I would have about the message on the front page is this. At this point does it really matter? I think by now everybody who is going to donate resources knows how to do so. I am not sure I need this or any site to tell me there was a disaster and how I can donate to it. I think I might have heard it mentioned somewhere else, radio, TV, newspapers, magazines, the water cooler.

 

But again it was a corporate decision by Groundspeak on when, where, why and how. And again, if it causes you that much of a problem you get to speak with your wallet and the footsteps you leave as you exit this site.

[+carleenp]

You know folks, it is a game. It is a box in a park. Is two days of angst really part of your game? It isn't part of mine.

 

I am glad Groundspeak corrected the mistakenly listed caches by archiving them. I am also glad that they decided to post the list of charities. They could have taken all sorts of other actions or no action at all and I would be happy. You know why? Because it is a game about a box in a park. It isn't a game about free speech in a private forum or charitable solicitations. I wish it would stay that way.

 

A box in a park. Maybe it would be good for people to get out and find one and settle down........

[+Mopar]

You are right this is not about caches that wrap around some kind of charity. They should not be allowed unless they are open to every type and kind of charity. I don't see that happening so end of story.

 

It is about Groundspeak putting text on its front page about a disaster and how to donate to releif efforts. That was a corporate decision. As many other companies have done in the past two weeks. It is their site, they can make that choice. As always I would encourage those people that do not like the decision to stop using the site, if in fact it causes that much of a problem for you. But follow through completly with it and don't use any site that has posted like messages. This will actually cut way down on the amount of time you will spend surfing the web.

 

The only negative point I would have about the message on the front page is this. At this point does it really matter? I think by now everybody who is going to donate resources knows how to do so. I am not sure I need this or any site to tell me there was a disaster and how I can donate to it. I think I might have heard it mentioned somewhere else, radio, TV, newspapers, magazines, the water cooler.

 

But again it was a corporate decision by Groundspeak on when, where, why and how. And again, if it causes you that much of a problem you get to speak with your wallet and the footsteps you leave as you exit this site.

dadgum, I gotta agree with GJ yet again?

 

Perfectly stated, John.

[+carleenp]

And again, if it causes you that much of a problem you get to speak with your wallet and the footsteps you leave as you exit this site.

I like that line!

[+GrizzlyJohn]

dadgum, I gotta agree with GJ yet again?

It is still early in the new year. You must pace yourself or you will use up all of those chits by the summer. And where would that leave you then.