GCA listings a code of conduct for placement?

[caughtatwork]

I second mind socket's why!
without further evidence or reason why raise the issue again. I know the approvers must trash so many things... maybe some examles of what not to do are needed
perhaps if rules are on the agenda again we should form another splinter cell and join Anarchy geocaching! LOL!

http://www.freewebs.com/anarchygeocaching/
they seem to have some interesting ideas on rules, or not.

Find an Anarcache
None - listed.
BWHAHAHAH

Now putting aside the humour, guidelines to help people make this a better game are good. It helps people understand why they might not want to do something. Sure, they can ignore that and the two competing cachers / caches can duke it out at the one location.

Forcing people to tick boxes, agree not to do silly things, set up the site to disallow certain locations is not what this should be about.

It's only a plastic box for goodness sake. If a location of mine gets compromised by another cache (ie. the wrong cache gets logged against mine too often), then I'll just remove the cache.

I'm not killing baby seals. I'm removing a piece of plastic. I wouldn't take it personally.

On the other hand if a particular cacher started to endanger the game by behaving inappropriately (say placing another cache in the same location as every single one of mine, placing "dynamite" under bridges, etc) then the "community" would put a stop to it. I think you know what I mean.

Let the game/rule/site stay the way it is. It's been working great so far.

[swampgecko]

Re-examine the "rules/guidelines issues" would probably be a better term.

GCA now seems to turning into an "anything goes 'cause no-one seems to care" cache repository.

Wasn't the original idea to provide an Australian alternative to geocaching.com?

Now admittedly I did promote "Well, if gc.com won't list it, put it on GCA" but I also wanted some basic guidelines that would help preserve the integrity of the caches listed with GCA.

Now I know of one location that has one GC cache, and three GCA caches within .1 klm of each other... and having intimate knowledge of exactly where they are... some of them are within the average error of most gps units.

Now we have the situation where a GCA cache was placed near a GC listed cache, now while gc.com don't care about other sites and where their caches are, the GCA site does have some limited functionality to allow for this to be checked, obviously it can't tell where the final cache is of a multicache would be.


Now my intent with this poll was to see if a majority of cachers who use the GCA cache listing facility believe that a set of voluntary guidelines or code of conduct for cache placement would be helpful/useful.

I believe that such a "code" could be helpful to new players, give them some basic help at first. Secondly, and I know what some think about this, but if it ever came to the point that if we need to form an association to ensure the survival of the "sport" within Australia, having a set of "guidelines/code of conduct" in place would make a good starting point. Ask i,riblit or embi about the US cachers and reviewers, and the hoops they have to jump through to ensure caches are legally placed.

Example: A lot of landholders/controlling bodies in the states require that geocachers get permission from them before placing a cache, and it is a requirement of gc.com that the cacher get it. The Landowner can place restrictions on the cache, such as a time limit for placement, from what I saw a 3 to 6month time frame was common. This practise was also being implemented in the UK at one point.

I use to always dodge the permission issues, when asked by the US based reviewers, "was permission given?"

We are lucky here in that the local reviewers do try to do their best and bend the GC guidelines to suite our culture of caching. But they also have to abide by what the Owner of the site says too.

The various associations in the States seemed to help the game grow and survive in the face of resistance. The Associations in most cases act as a contact point within the state for concerned landholders and cachers alike.

Back to the topic, As I stated, the guidelines would be totally voluntary, however I am sure with only a little manipulation the programmers could add a little check box that could say something like, I believe this cache to be placed in accordance with the code of conduct for cache placement for GCA, maybe a little icon or such could appear on the cache page.(smiley face? a thumbs up?) to signify that the cache setter does follow the code of their own free will.

I for one have tried to always follow the GC requirements when placing my later caches on GCA. Why? Because I really don't want to see the landscape overrun with a lot of GCA caches that no one wants to do.

[EcoTeam]

I second mind socket's why!
without further evidence or reason why raise the issue again. I know the approvers must trash so many things... maybe some examles of what not to do are needed
perhaps if rules are on the agenda again we should form another splinter cell and join Anarchy geocaching! LOL!

http://www.freewebs.com/anarchygeocaching/
they seem to have some interesting ideas on rules, or not.

Welcome to AGC ( Anarchy GeoCaching)
Where we throw out the rules so no-one can complain about them.

All right, no rules!

Oops, what's that... a guidelines page...

First and foremost, caches containing flammable substances of any type will never be allowed regardless of their type or location.
This includes cigarettes, tobacco , and cigars.( special events will be considered )
Guns and knives are also out.

Otherwise, be sensible about what you want to do and it will probably get approved.

Commercial caches will require a donation to be made to this sites maintenance, as it is only right, that if you make a buck from it so should we! oroight?
Alcohol caches will require the owners to be present at cache logging, able to monitor closely the cache, or secure them in a way they will not be abused.

EcoDave

[ideology]

personally we think the way to go is a rating system that allows cachers to vote on good or bad caches, ie not just recommend them. that way if the community feels that a cache is dangerous, or placed right next to someone else's in bad faith, or whatever reason, it can be voted as such. if opinion is divided, then so is the vote. we proposed this type of thing ages ago in the cache rating thread and people didn't seem to want it, so we went with a recommendation system instead.

we already have a link from the new cache page to a page on the wiki. why not use that to write some stuff? the trick will be to avoid it looking like rules as aushiker suggests

[Damo.]

I for one have tried to always follow the GC requirements when placing my later caches on GCA. Why? Because I really don't want to see the landscape overrun with a lot of GCA caches that no one wants to do.

Here here. I don't think anyone wants "free reign" to mean endless rubbish caches. Just because you can now get a "vacation" cache approved doesn't mean you should stick one out there with no intention of maintaining it. Or putting a dozen magnetic micros on every bridge.

Put some thought into it and make it worthwhile.

[Grank]

personally we think the way to go is a rating system that allows cachers to vote on good or bad caches

the logs often tell me all I need to know .....

[Damo.]

i know in my work its common to do a few check lists after a job, ticking off each section to say it has been done.
maybe when you click on 'Hide a Cache' it first comes up with a page with a few short questions, nothing long as no body will read it.

Sounds like a good idea to me.

[TEAM LANDCRUISER]

personally we think the way to go is a rating system that allows cachers to vote on good or bad caches, ie not just recommend them. that way if the community feels that a cache is dangerous, or placed right next to someone else's in bad faith, or whatever reason, it can be voted as such. if opinion is divided, then so is the vote. we proposed this type of thing ages ago in the cache rating thread and people didn't seem to want it, so we went with a recommendation system instead.

we already have a link from the new cache page to a page on the wiki. why not use that to write some stuff? the trick will be to avoid it looking like rules as aushiker suggests

<p>
Maybe it's time to rethink this approach. Peer reviews would certainly discredit the dangerous and drive by's ... I assume you would be forced to vote when logging a cache or even posting a note about a dangerous situation.<p>This sounds to me to be a better approach than making up a wiki with statements that are not guidelines or rulez

[caughtatwork]

There are cliques in the caching community as there will be in any association.

A clique of cachers who decide to "trash" someone elses caches by continually voting "low" is a readily forseable issue.

As long as the "votes" are not made anonymous then this may work.

We should also consider "sock puppet" accounts that are used to "discredit" some cache hides. We already have socks on the forums and there is nothing to stop them going and trashing a caches rating.

However, if there is an easily implementable solution for ratings, then I would be for it. We can always monitor the use of the ratings and if they are getting out of hand, disable them (I suppose).

I agree with the sentiment that guidelines would be considered a good thing, but of course if someone is going to go out of their way to place a cache in an unacceptable location then they will simply ignore the guidelines anyway.

It will help people who are new to the game in understanding some of the "gentlemens agreements" that exist in not encroaching on others "territory" but it will never stop those who want to, from being asshats.

[GIN51E]

When i place a GCA cache its usually because i want the cache to be looked after and enjoyed without being trashed, and i find the Cachers that find GCA caches seem to care a little more than some others.

personally we think the way to go is a rating system that allows cachers to vote on good or bad caches, ie not just recommend them. that way if the community feels that a cache is dangerous, or placed right next to someone else's in bad faith, or whatever reason, it can be voted as such. if opinion is divided, then so is the vote. we proposed this type of thing ages ago in the cache rating thread and people didn't seem to want it, so we went with a recommendation system instead.

When i vote for a cache am i giving it a 1 out of 5 because it had leeches? "i hate leeches" or because of the cache location i got picked up by the boys in blue and had to answer a few questions? you would really have to specify why the cache got such a vote and in doing that wouldn't it be the same as what you write in your log anyway?

[caughtatwork]

Find an Anarcache
None - listed.
BWHAHAHAH

I dare someone to be first to list one. Im allready formulating an anarcahe but will not get to hide it for a few days.

I haven't got time at the moment to do it. I was supposed to hide a TerraCache too, but haven't done that either. I might just keep my caching to GC and GCA.

[Grank]

I for one have tried to always follow the GC requirements when placing my later caches on GCA. Why? Because I really don't want to see the landscape overrun with a lot of GCA caches that no one wants to do.

Here here. I don't think anyone wants "free reign" to mean endless rubbish caches. ...

Put some thought into it and make it worthwhile.

Jumped from the forum to my emails and received one with some on topic comment from the US (as part of the Geocoin Underground Railway) as follows:-

I don't know what it's like where you are, but where I live, you have to
wade through hundreds of caches that I would call boring and pointless
before you find something fun to hunt.

So the state of play has deteriorated there to a level where some are seeking alternatives. Where people respect others "possessions" (ie Geocoins don't get snaffled) and caches of quality exist.

So where are we going

Now as the person concerned was GC based it would appear that rules/guidelines are not the answer. The manner in which people choose to participate is what will determine the level of enjoyment others will get out of play.

If there is no introductory brief upon entering play people with the best intentions will go awry. A good description of the game emphasing FUN with examples of what people enjoy. Innovation needs to be encouraged - love that 1st time experience for a different cache (even if I do have to go back five times) ...

oh, and if they stray we'll get them in the forums

[Grank]

I dare someone to be first to list one. Im allready formulating an anarcahe but will not get to hide it for a few days.

I vote for pure anachy .. don't event list it!