And if they shut down a mega event for discussing it on GCA I think people will kick up a stink...caughtatwork wrote: Groundspeak DO expect to moderate things outside their control until shouted down. Look what they did to the YouTube cacherspoiler guy. This is the same thing. They try to moderate by heavy handedness until someone kicks up a stink. If you are OK with the rule, that's fine by me. If you think the rule is set up to penalise those who engage in other listing services, then it's not OK and Groundspeak should be told.
Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
-
- 10000 or more caches found
- Posts: 1304
- Joined: 05 October 10 10:20 pm
- Location: Australia
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
-
- 4500 or more caches found
- Posts: 727
- Joined: 08 August 09 12:04 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
I'd hope they would, but I can't see what anyone could actually do. Groundspeak are not known for listening and being understanding are they?Laighside Legends wrote:And if they shut down a mega event for discussing it on GCA I think people will kick up a stink...
Last edited by LouiseAnn on 25 April 12 11:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- caughtatwork
- Posts: 17039
- Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
Do you want to wait for the SA Mega-Event to be yanked or should we discuss now?
I'm trying to look out for the community. It seems that the word is "when it happens we'll bitch, but until then bury your head in the sand c@w". OK. Message understood. Loud and clear.
No impact on me personally. I don't list Mega-Event caches.
I'm trying to look out for the community. It seems that the word is "when it happens we'll bitch, but until then bury your head in the sand c@w". OK. Message understood. Loud and clear.
No impact on me personally. I don't list Mega-Event caches.
- PesceVerde
- 700 or more Caches found
- Posts: 452
- Joined: 07 February 08 12:12 pm
- Location: Arana Hills.
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
I like the not-for-profit nature of GCA. By necessity it's also not-for-loss.
Send Groundspeak an invoice for all costs of Mega™ promotions on this site. There may be a lose lose result (for caching), but I reckon grey areas would become clear fairly quickly.![Neutral :|](./images/smilies/icon_neutral.gif)
Pick one
"Yeah sure here's the couple K to cover your expenses. Thanks for for your assistance.."
or
"Are you kidding and here's a bill for our costs to process your request (USD only. prefer AmEx)."
Send Groundspeak an invoice for all costs of Mega™ promotions on this site. There may be a lose lose result (for caching), but I reckon grey areas would become clear fairly quickly.
![Neutral :|](./images/smilies/icon_neutral.gif)
Pick one
"Yeah sure here's the couple K to cover your expenses. Thanks for for your assistance.."
or
"Are you kidding and here's a bill for our costs to process your request (USD only. prefer AmEx)."
-
- 4500 or more caches found
- Posts: 727
- Joined: 08 August 09 12:04 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
Is there now avenue to request clarification or a ruling from Groundspeak about cachers discussing a mega event on this forum and weather that contravenes their new rule?
I'd have though it was a reasonable question to ask them.
I'd have though it was a reasonable question to ask them.
- CraigRat
- 850 or more found!!!
- Posts: 7019
- Joined: 23 August 04 3:17 pm
- Twitter: CraigRat
- Facebook: http://facebook.com/CraigRat
- Location: Launceston, TAS
- Contact:
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
Someone who is organising a Mega will have to ask that.LouiseAnn wrote:Is there now avenue to request clarification or a ruling from Groundspeak about cachers discussing a mega event on this forum and weather that contravenes their new rule?
I'd have though it was a reasonable question to ask them.
Its not our problem, we don't need Groundspeak's blessing for anything we do here, it's the Mega organisers who will have to take the risk.
- CraigRat
- 850 or more found!!!
- Posts: 7019
- Joined: 23 August 04 3:17 pm
- Twitter: CraigRat
- Facebook: http://facebook.com/CraigRat
- Location: Launceston, TAS
- Contact:
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
Ok,
howsabout this then for a workaround:
We place a post in the forums, sticked for future use:
howsabout this then for a workaround:
We place a post in the forums, sticked for future use:
MEGA event organisers:
Please be aware that asking us to promote your event through:
* Giving prominence on Dashboards
* Banners and Daily emails
* Promotion of your event from the official committee using the facilities here (forums/blogs etc)
All of these things have actual commercial value based on previous approaches from potential sponsors and MAY be construed by others as in-kind 'sponsorship from a cache listing site'.
Geocaching Australia will take NO responsibility (moral, financial or other) for the fate of your MEGA in the event it is demoted due to Groundspeak's MEGA Event sponsorship exclusivity clause from using this site or its facilities in any way.
It is up to YOU to seek clarification or permission with Grounspeak if you are uncertain. We will provide no other forms of assistance, endorsement, sponsorship or prizes for this type of event.
- Richary
- 8000 or more caches found
- Posts: 4189
- Joined: 04 February 04 10:55 pm
- Location: Waitara, Sydney
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
As an ex-Senator but someone who still seems to have access here, I think there is too much being made of this. GC cannot control what is said on forums around the world, and many forums discussing caches exist outside their control. If they want to introduce this rule retrospectively and consider that GCA is sponsoring the event by allowing discussion then both Aussie megas would be cancelled.
My belief is that while GC would prefer we all use their forums, they must recognise we don't - either here or in NZ. I can't see how it would benefit them to stop discussions on mega events either here or in the gps.org.nz forums, as it will simply mean the megas won't happen as not enough people will know about them. I would consider it pretty petty of them to delist a mega because someone is discussing it elsewhere - whether they are an alternative listing site or not. It's not like GCA is competing by trying to hold it's own mega. And yes, they can be petty. But how about we wait for Big Matt's feedback from them about whether allowing discussion here would jeapordise an event's status.
My belief is that while GC would prefer we all use their forums, they must recognise we don't - either here or in NZ. I can't see how it would benefit them to stop discussions on mega events either here or in the gps.org.nz forums, as it will simply mean the megas won't happen as not enough people will know about them. I would consider it pretty petty of them to delist a mega because someone is discussing it elsewhere - whether they are an alternative listing site or not. It's not like GCA is competing by trying to hold it's own mega. And yes, they can be petty. But how about we wait for Big Matt's feedback from them about whether allowing discussion here would jeapordise an event's status.
- CraigRat
- 850 or more found!!!
- Posts: 7019
- Joined: 23 August 04 3:17 pm
- Twitter: CraigRat
- Facebook: http://facebook.com/CraigRat
- Location: Launceston, TAS
- Contact:
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
I don't see how informal DISCUSSION by members could cause issue. I don't know why anyone's approaching GC about it, it's nothing to do with GCARichary wrote: But how about we wait for Big Matt's feedback from them about whether allowing discussion here would jeapordise an event's status.
The items in my post above most certainly could cause problems.
We were approached by the previous mega to do the things I mention two posts up.
By rights under the new rulings they could cause issues, and we don't want to be the ones who get blamed if it all goes tits up.
And if GC are not allowing any love for us thru the mega, we shouldn't be sending love their way.
I don't think people are grasping the issue:
It's us doing any active PROMOTING, ASSISTING or providing ADVERTISING for a Mega that's the major issue for *US*, not chit chat in a forum.
The GC guys in here can talk to all the people they want, this site isn't seeking approval from anyone for anything we do. The risk isn't ours to take.
- Dvixen
- 750 or more caches found
- Posts: 755
- Joined: 04 April 07 3:21 pm
- Twitter: Dvixen, Geowhat
- Location: Canberra
- Contact:
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
Given that even mentioning pathtags on the GC.com forums can earn someone a ban, I can easily see even informal discussion causing issue. >.< But yes, clarification is needed in this, because as we can see, some fair extreme examples can be brought out to play.CraigRat wrote:I don't see how informal DISCUSSION by members could cause issue. I don't know why anyone's approaching GC about it, it's nothing to do with GC or even the organisers.Richary wrote: But how about we wait for Big Matt's feedback from them about whether allowing discussion here would jeapordise an event's status.
This x lots.And if GC are not allowing any love for us thru the mega, we shouldn't be sending love their way.
- CraigRat
- 850 or more found!!!
- Posts: 7019
- Joined: 23 August 04 3:17 pm
- Twitter: CraigRat
- Facebook: http://facebook.com/CraigRat
- Location: Launceston, TAS
- Contact:
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
We (GCA) need no clarification (about forum discussions), no-one should be seeking it in our name. We don't care at the end of the day!Dvixen wrote:But yes, clarification is needed in this, because as we can see, some fair extreme examples can be brought out to play.
The GC approvers and the Mega people will need to seek this, we are not to advise others on Groundspeak policy.
GC cannot and will not be able to police this site anyway, their whole TOS is irrelevant to what happens here.
- gmj3191
- 7500 or more caches found
- Posts: 1316
- Joined: 22 April 03 12:37 am
- Location: Sandringham, Vic Garmin Oregon 650
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
My take on all this is that GC.com doesn't want their listed events being sponsored by other organisations because those organisations could then assume a right to promote themselves at the event either directly with stalls (101geo, Munzee) or indirectly with signs, sponsorship acknowledgements etc.
Using the forums here to discuss or facilitate our attendance at the event does not imply anything, and I'm sure GC.com wouldn't delist an event because it was discussed here or anywhere else. If the event actively promoted competitors with signage or other acknowledgements then it could be delisted, quite rightly.
Using the forums here to discuss or facilitate our attendance at the event does not imply anything, and I'm sure GC.com wouldn't delist an event because it was discussed here or anywhere else. If the event actively promoted competitors with signage or other acknowledgements then it could be delisted, quite rightly.
- caughtatwork
- Posts: 17039
- Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
This probably had a lot to do with it.
Garmin tent advertising opencaching.com at Geowoodstock 2011
http://twitpic.com/5kloql
I think the Albury guys were lucky the GCA shop didn't turn up with our big banner and tent![Shame on you [-X](./images/smilies/eusa_naughty.gif)
Garmin tent advertising opencaching.com at Geowoodstock 2011
http://twitpic.com/5kloql
I think the Albury guys were lucky the GCA shop didn't turn up with our big banner and tent
![Shame on you [-X](./images/smilies/eusa_naughty.gif)
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
GCA has a tent?caughtatwork wrote: I think the Albury guys were lucky the GCA shop didn't turn up with our big banner and tent
It's for loitering within, I presume.
![Dancing \:D/](./images/smilies/eusa_dance.gif)
![Stabby :stabby](./images/smilies/stabby.gif)
Thank you, very much. I'm here all night. Especially since I have a pile of marking still to do.
- Trigg-A-Nomics
- Posts: 260
- Joined: 18 March 10 10:25 pm
- Location: Adelaide SA
Re: Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"
Richary wrote:GC cannot control what is said on forums around the world, and many forums discussing caches exist outside their control.
CraigRat wrote:GC cannot and will not be able to police this site anyway, their whole TOS is irrelevant to what happens here.
Yes, but they can ban you or remove your listing if you breach their TOS. It wasn't that long ago that a cacher was banned because their "Geocaching spoilers" videos on Youtube were deemed to breach the Groundspeak ToS. If I were to list spoilers for caches on these forums, I could be banned.
OT: Thumbs up for the sticky note in the forums, that seems to be the best way of dealing with it.