CCBot/2.0 (http://commoncrawl.org/faq/) British Columbia Geocaching Association —» Forums —» General Caching —» General —» Groundspeak bans ALRs
Home Newest Caches Forums Your Account About BCGA Search Blitz  
Mount Sheba
Mount Sheba:  [?] . Reminiscent of the temples of Egypt and Persia, the exotic landscape beckoned early pioneers to name the peak Mount Sheba. [M | C
Toggle Content=  Register or Login  Please Join our Association 
topleft topfill topright
Toggle Content Our Sponsors
Worldcaching.com
Worldcaching.comLandsharkz Coins and Geocaching GearGold CountryCaching Containers
bottomleft bottomfill bottomright
topleft topfill topright
Toggle Content Waypoints
bottomleft bottomfill bottomright
topleft topfill topright
Toggle Content Coming Events
bottomleft bottomfill bottomright
Forums —» General Caching —» General —» Groundspeak bans ALRs
toplefttopfilltopright
Groundspeak bans ALRs
If you have questions/comments about geocaching in general or anything that doesn't fit anywhere else, post them here.
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index —» General

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Aerodoq



Joined: Apr 01, 2007
Posts: 66
Location: Vancouver

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:24 pm    Post subject: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

See the gc.com forum for details:

forums.groundspeak.com...pic=218388

In short, ALRs are no longer required. That is, you cannot require additional logging requirements. Old caches will not be grandfathered in. Earthcaches and virtuals will be grandfathered.

I'm sad to see these go. It seems Groundspeak is trying to homogenize the game too much.

A>

_________________

Cache stats and map
Back to top
scruffster



Joined: Sep 29, 2004
Posts: 1207
Location: Burnaby

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:08 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

I guess nobody will need their jewel for SQ Chapter #9 now. **snarfle** And all those passwords in the SSIM series to the next cache might have to go. Hmmmmm. I'll have to read the guidelines more closely.

Sometimes is it is part of the fun to complete a task like wearing a silly hat and posting a photo. The drag caches are hillarious. But some people don't want to do it but can log it anyway?

I guess we can always post a list of people that dont complete the task. Yes, log it. Get the smiley but if you do not have a jewel you will be put on Scruffy's wussie list in large font for all to see!!! **giggle** Is Scruffy's wall of shame somewhere you would want to be???

I'm not sure if getting rid of the ALR's is the best thing but my guess is that it is the cause for a lot of complaints to groundspeak.
Back to top
Doonchak



Joined: Sep 07, 2008
Posts: 81

PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:59 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Honestly, stuff like this makes me angry.

The reason behind stuff like this is generally because lazy people don't want to make the effort to do the extra stuff, but they don't want to be told they can't log the cache. So they complain loud enough that everyone just loses the right to do something that certain people felt were fun.

Not every cache is intended for every person. What's next? Sorry, you can't put that cache on the difficult hike, because Joe from Idaho doesn't want to walk the 3 kms to the cache....please move it to the parking lot where he can easily access it by car.

BLAH!!!

/end rant
Back to top
gearhedd



Joined: Feb 16, 2007
Posts: 124

PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 1:14 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Or better yet, this one to come "If you are the owner of a puzzle cache you are know required to hand out the coordinates to cachers that ask for them, because they shouldn't have to do any work to solve your puzzle cache if they so chose to." lol
Back to top
Derlwyn



Joined: Feb 28, 2009
Posts: 22
Location: Lower Mainland - Tri-City Area

PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 8:23 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

While the new regulation certainly took me by surprise, what made me more shocked was to read the number of positive comments on the forum about this new regulation.

It seems that rather than calling their hobby geocaching, they should call it smiley-catching, and leave one of the funnest aspects of the game for the rest of us.

To extend hearhedd's thought, why doesn't groundspeak just allow online only logs. If you can find the location on google maps, why do you need to go there in person?
Back to top
vanislelady



Joined: Jan 20, 2007
Posts: 226
Location: Campbell River

PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 8:35 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

So a requirement such as uploading the picture
Back to top
_canadianbacon_



Joined: Jan 05, 2004
Posts: 1154
Location: Surrey, BC, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:47 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Boy rules like this sure is taking the fun out of the game. There are so many caches to do, and the few that require a photo or something else are a problem?

As for all the positive response, it human nature, the minority of people who think its a problem will always make more noise the the silent majority.

Does not groundspeak do some polling, from its own 'customers'. I bet if they send out a poll to every single paying user the majority would say its not a problem.

So is actually physically finding a cache an additional requirment on top of just finding the cache page? If so I better start logging caches right away!

_________________
~~~~ _CanadianBacon_~~~~
Back to top
Aerodoq



Joined: Apr 01, 2007
Posts: 66
Location: Vancouver

PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:17 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

In the end, you can still put "suggested" or "recommended" logging requirements. Those that want to play along will. Those who are smiley-collecting won't. Meh. It shouldn't take any enjoyment from the game for the CO -- those people wouldn't have participated in the first place.

The only conflict I can see is when the difficulty rating is bumped up because the ALR added to the difficulty of the cache.

I truly don't understand why this rule was necessary though. If you didn't like the ALR, then you didn't have to attempt the cache.

At some point, Groundspeak is going to tighten their grip so much that the caching community will be alienated and one of the other (or a new) caching site will gain prominence.

_________________

Cache stats and map
Back to top
vanislelady



Joined: Jan 20, 2007
Posts: 226
Location: Campbell River

PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 1:16 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

vanislelady wrote:
So a requirement such as uploading the picture

Should have had a question mark.. Anyway if this is the case then I will be archiving another cache. The photo requirement on my cache is to keep some over eager cachers from revealing where the cache is and attempting it at inappropriate times due to its proximety to the ferry terminal.
Back to top
grafinator



Joined: Nov 12, 2006
Posts: 195
Location: Coruscant

PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 7:07 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

This is disappointing, in my opinion, if people don't like the requirements, don't do the geocache.

I guess eventually there will be no creativity allowed.

_________________
I find your lack of faith disturbing. - Darth Vader
Back to top
hollyburn



Joined: Jul 22, 2006
Posts: 162
Location: Vancouver

PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 10:15 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Wow! I can't access the forums to see the extent of this but it seems it will affect some of the most rewarding and fun caches. Groundspeak has reversed decisions before so maybe if they get feedback from enough people they may give it a second thought. Makes one wish there were more competition.
Back to top
tlgTakingAbreak



Joined: Jan 05, 2004
Posts: 418
Location: In your face.

PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 7:39 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

grafinator wrote:
This is disappointing, in my opinion, if people don't like the requirements, don't do the geocache.

I guess eventually there will be no creativity allowed.

I don't understand how removing ALRs from caches will stifle creativity. You can still make up a decent puzzle cache you just can't include an ALR. Requiring a picture is not creative, requiring one to click on the cache page so as to appear in the audit log is not creative, etc. etc.

I prefer seeing creativity in the hiding spot, not on the cache page. But that's just me.

_________________
pgcachers.blogspot.com
Back to top
gearhedd



Joined: Feb 16, 2007
Posts: 124

PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 8:26 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Taking a picture is just one ALR, there are more creative ones I'm sure.
What some might not see is that geocaching is slowly taking away power/creativity/fun ideas from cache owners. Yes some ideas are far off the wall and are crazy but if as a cache owner thats what we want to do with our cache. I don't think there are too many ALR caches in BC.
What will be next? And who is asking for these changes? The reviewers always could have said your cache is a little too crazy could we change it.

Or are these changes in place, to take power away from cache owners. If you have a ALR cache and some find the cache and didn't wear the wig, take a picture, so on and so on, but found the cache you can't delete their log. Is this one step, to have no ability to delete logs?
Back to top
tlgTakingAbreak



Joined: Jan 05, 2004
Posts: 418
Location: In your face.

PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 10:48 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

gearhedd wrote:
Taking a picture is just one ALR, there are more creative ones I'm sure.
What some might not see is that geocaching is slowly taking away power/creativity/fun ideas from cache owners. Yes some ideas are far off the wall and are crazy but if as a cache owner thats what we want to do with our cache. I don't think there are too many ALR caches in BC.

I don't see them as removing any power/creativity/fun. All they're doing is basically defining what constitutes a "find". You find the cache, you sign the log and it's a find. Not taking a picture, doing a dance, dressing in drag, etc. does not negate the veracity of the find. You found it, you signed the log, end of story. Hiders still have the ability to create interesting puzzles.

Quote::

What will be next? And who is asking for these changes? The reviewers always could have said your cache is a little too crazy could we change it.

I understand that the most vocal group that advocated for the change were the reviewers themselves.

Quote::

Or are these changes in place, to take power away from cache owners. If you have a ALR cache and some find the cache and didn't wear the wig, take a picture, so on and so on, but found the cache you can't delete their log. Is this one step, to have no ability to delete logs?

If someone finds your cache they've found your cache; deleting their log does not negate that fact. Finding caches and signing the logbook is the basic premise of this game.

_________________
pgcachers.blogspot.com
Back to top
Derlwyn



Joined: Feb 28, 2009
Posts: 22
Location: Lower Mainland - Tri-City Area

PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:03 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Quote::
I don't see them as removing any power/creativity/fun. All they're doing is basically defining what constitutes a "find". You find the cache, you sign the log and it's a find. Not taking a picture, doing a dance, dressing in drag, etc. does not negate the veracity of the find. You found it, you signed the log, end of story. Hiders still have the ability to create interesting puzzles.

You are absolutely right; dressing up, doing a dance, or taking a picture is not the most interesting example of ALRs that out there. I take it that you have not experienced some of the caches with ALRs that I have.

I can think of at least 5 caches in the lower mainland, that I have completed, whose ALRs actually increase the enjoyment of the cache. Their ALRs are the source of much applause and discussion at events, cause confusion and spark interest of people who troll through logs, and make for an very creative cache experience.

With these ALRs gone, these caches simply become another cache to find, instead of a very creatively planned and well thought out cache. These caches in particular lose their flavour and value if people do not adhere to the ALR.

While finding and logging caches may be the most basic aspect of the game, does it improve the game to restrict it to its most basic components?
Back to top
tlgTakingAbreak



Joined: Jan 05, 2004
Posts: 418
Location: In your face.

PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:54 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Derlwyn wrote:
Quote::
I don't see them as removing any power/creativity/fun. All they're doing is basically defining what constitutes a "find". You find the cache, you sign the log and it's a find. Not taking a picture, doing a dance, dressing in drag, etc. does not negate the veracity of the find. You found it, you signed the log, end of story. Hiders still have the ability to create interesting puzzles.

You are absolutely right; dressing up, doing a dance, or taking a picture is not the most interesting example of ALRs that out there. I take it that you have not experienced some of the caches with ALRs that I have.

I can think of at least 5 caches in the lower mainland, that I have completed, whose ALRs actually increase the enjoyment of the cache. Their ALRs are the source of much applause and discussion at events, cause confusion and spark interest of people who troll through logs, and make for an very creative cache experience.

With these ALRs gone, these caches simply become another cache to find, instead of a very creatively planned and well thought out cache. These caches in particular lose their flavour and value if people do not adhere to the ALR.

While finding and logging caches may be the most basic aspect of the game, does it improve the game to restrict it to its most basic components?

I took a quick look at the 13 mystery caches that you've done and I don't see a single ALR among them. I think perhaps you don't quite understand what an ALR entails.

_________________
pgcachers.blogspot.com
Back to top
Derlwyn



Joined: Feb 28, 2009
Posts: 22
Location: Lower Mainland - Tri-City Area

PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 7:05 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

And thus my point is proven. Some of the ALRs were Unknown Caches and some were traditional caches. They were done so well that even looking at the logs people don't know that there are ALRs.
Back to top
tlgTakingAbreak



Joined: Jan 05, 2004
Posts: 418
Location: In your face.

PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 8:04 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Derlwyn wrote:
And thus my point is proven. Some of the ALRs were Unknown Caches and some were traditional caches. They were done so well that even looking at the logs people don't know that there are ALRs.

Huh?

If it's a traditional cache with an "Additional Logging Requirement" then it's been mis-labeled. Your last sentence makes absolutely no sense. There are caches out there that don't tell you that you need to do something other then find the cache in order to log it as a find? Do you have a vision a week later that informs you of the additional requirements?

_________________
pgcachers.blogspot.com
Back to top
scruffster



Joined: Sep 29, 2004
Posts: 1207
Location: Burnaby

PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 8:35 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Derlwyn is right. He does indeed know what he's talking about. There are several caches around with specific logging requirements. They've created a lot of buzz and they've been a lot of fun. Of course I cannot give examples since it would give it all away. There are caches I haven't done but have heard the buzz. I just hope I can get to them before the owners alter the rules and/or someone who is a stick in the mud gives them away. The trouble is, I don't know where the caches are and may never know.

On another note, I am happy that my SQ caches will not have to be altered or archived. It seems that by giving everyone a chance to log (but having harder routes for people that don't visit the caches in order) is OK. **wiping brow** Now I can get onto Chapter 9 for the Blitz.

I was a bit confused with the new rules at first. However it seems quite straight forward now. It simply means that logs cannot be deleted if someone doesn't perform the ALR. My guess is most people will do it anyway.
Back to top
Derlwyn



Joined: Feb 28, 2009
Posts: 22
Location: Lower Mainland - Tri-City Area

PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 8:49 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

I think that we in BC are very lucky to have such creative individuals who provide caches that go beyond what people would consider normal.

I can understand your confusion as you have obviously not experienced the same caches as I, and many others, have. It is not until these caches are discovered that their creativity truly shines.

Yes, there are caches whose ALRs are not known until you actually find the cache. The cache page exists solely to list the cache, not spoil the surprise. There is no need to degrade this topic by adding commical slights,“visions”, just because you are not aware that these caches exist.

The cachers who have created such original caches have demonstrated excellent lateral thinking, which is a benefit to the game. If all ALRs were only about taking pictures with hats and wigs I would not be so opposed to this new rule, but there exists some very original and quality ALR caches that enhance the game. It is upsetting to know that these caches are now, essentially, ruined.
Back to top
PEARLWIND



Joined: Nov 14, 2006
Posts: 20
Location: British Columbia

PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 2:20 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

They'll have to pry the GPS from my cold dead hands before I "Declassify" my cache! It's a conspiracy! Logs have been deleted. Lives have been lost. But they were all warned! It's not my fault!
Back to top
tlgTakingAbreak



Joined: Jan 05, 2004
Posts: 418
Location: In your face.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:25 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Derlwyn wrote:


Yes, there are caches whose ALRs are not known until you actually find the cache. The cache page exists solely to list the cache, not spoil the surprise. There is no need to degrade this topic by adding commical slights,“visions”, just because you are not aware that these caches exist.
.

Those caches sound like prime candidates for the SBA log; especially if they've been labeled as a traditional when they're obviously not. It would indeed be quite the surprise to find out you didn't actually find the cache that you just found.

Personally, I'm glad to see gc.com attempting to get back to the roots of the game. Find the cache, sign the log. Pretty straight forward concept. No need to be "creative" if you've taken me to a memorable spot.

_________________
pgcachers.blogspot.com
Back to top
Derlwyn



Joined: Feb 28, 2009
Posts: 22
Location: Lower Mainland - Tri-City Area

PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 6:26 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Quote::
Personally, I'm glad to see gc.com attempting to get back to the roots of the game.

Even with the relative few ALRs out there, and the fewer more creative ones out there, how has Geocaching moved away from its roots?

Of the now over 10,000 caches in BC how many have moved away from "the roots of the game?"

This game, at its most basic level, is to seek, find, and log. You seem to agree that people can be creative in the seeking aspect; a memorable spot to visit.

I believe you agree that people can be creative in the finding aspect; a neat cache container or a brilliant camo.

Why shouldn't people extened their creativity to the logging aspect of the game? It is a part of the game and if done well, it certainly adds to the experience.

tlg, these creative cachers should be congratulated and acknowledged for their contributions to the game, not restricted. And yes, there certainly is a place for creativity in geocaching, in all aspects of the game.
Back to top
tlgTakingAbreak



Joined: Jan 05, 2004
Posts: 418
Location: In your face.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:27 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Derlwyn wrote:
Quote::
Personally, I'm glad to see gc.com attempting to get back to the roots of the game.

Even with the relative few ALRs out there, and the fewer more creative ones out there, how has Geocaching moved away from its roots?

Of the now over 10,000 caches in BC how many have moved away from "the roots of the game?"


Lots. See "micro". However, I'm not here to buy either the five minute argument or the full half hour.

Quote::


This game, at its most basic level, is to seek, find, and log. You seem to agree that people can be creative in the seeking aspect; a memorable spot to visit.

I believe you agree that people can be creative in the finding aspect; a neat cache container or a brilliant camo.

Why shouldn't people extened their creativity to the logging aspect of the game? It is a part of the game and if done well, it certainly adds to the experience.

tlg, these creative cachers should be congratulated and acknowledged for their contributions to the game, not restricted. And yes, there certainly is a place for creativity in geocaching, in all aspects of the game.

I have no objection to people being creative in the logging process. I don't see the point in altering the logging process; I don't like it and apparently neither do the people who make the rules.

Anyhow, we're digressing; this thread is about the misunderstandings people had about the ALR changes. As scruffster noted, it's not really that big of a change, you can still include an ALR, you just can't enforce it.

_________________
pgcachers.blogspot.com
Back to top
Derlwyn



Joined: Feb 28, 2009
Posts: 22
Location: Lower Mainland - Tri-City Area

PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:31 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Quote::
Lots. See "micro".

I would be interested to hear your viewpoint on how micros do not represent the roots of Geocaching, but certainly not in this post. Don't want to subject any more people to off topic banter. Smile

Quote::
Anyhow, we're digressing; this thread is about the misunderstandings people had about the ALR changes.

Actually I believe this topic was created for the notification of the ALR ban, not due to misunderstandings. You are right, this is digressing to a discussion of opinions and clarifying points of views. I hope at some point you are able to visit some of the caches that required ALRs that I have been to, it might clarify my feelings better than just talking about it in a forum.

I will take some advice from canadian bacon though, and not relegate myself to a silent majority. This is an upsetting rule change and I do plan to be vocal about it.
Back to top
tlgTakingAbreak



Joined: Jan 05, 2004
Posts: 418
Location: In your face.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 2:17 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Derlwyn wrote:

I will take some advice from canadian bacon though, and not relegate myself to a silent majority. This is an upsetting rule change and I do plan to be vocal about it.

Good luck with that. There was quite a vocal uprising when they removed (or moved depending on your POV) Virtual and Locationless caches but they're still gone. Of course, when they removed stats there was also an uproar but that decision was soon reversed so you may have a chance.

_________________
pgcachers.blogspot.com
Back to top
_canadianbacon_



Joined: Jan 05, 2004
Posts: 1154
Location: Surrey, BC, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 2:28 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

Well, I have only once cache that makes you experience the exciting life of a blond, and record it for all to see with a photograph. I'm not terribly upset that cachers no longer have to put themselves out there on the logs for this cache, it is not the end of the world, my little fun is not a big deal.

I think there are some much more creative uses of ALR out there, I'm sure I've done one or two myself (I just don't recall them off the top of my head).

I don't believe that these ALR's were created because the cache owner did not trust that people really got to a cache, most of them are probably just for fun (like mine). That's why I think it is a silly rule change, "IT IS JUST FOR FUN!"

I hate to call this a 'sport', it is really a hobby in my eyes. Caching will never make it to the 2020 Olympics, so maybe the powers that be should worry more about outsiders and gov't perception of the game, and these little things.

_________________
~~~~ _CanadianBacon_~~~~
Back to top
scruffster



Joined: Sep 29, 2004
Posts: 1207
Location: Burnaby

PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 3:57 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

I happened to like going out there and letting my inner blonde loose.



And I got to put Mr. Turbos in a dress too. Yes, I did.

It's all in fun. If you don't want to do it, don't go to the cache. It really is as simple as that as far as I'm concerned. Most geocachers are fun people and they will have no problem with the little extra tasks.

In all honesty I don't recall deleting a log on my caches. If people want to cheat they'll find a way anyway.
Back to top
Fryertuck



Joined: Oct 04, 2006
Posts: 4
Location: Langley, BC

PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:51 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

One of the attractions of geocaching is the fact that it is not overly regulated and there is room for novel ideas.
As a cacher who stays pretty much with traditional caches I certainly do not want to restrict what others wish to create or solve. If someone is interested enough and inventive enough to add to the experience, why not?
Possibly a notation that there is a further requirement placed on the listing would mollify those who object, rather then restricting the freedom
of cache creaters.
Back to top
legacypac



Joined: Feb 26, 2007
Posts: 29
Location: Chilliwack - or where ever the GPS Says I am

PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:04 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

forums.groundspeak.com...pic=218388

Please read the post from MissJen heading the topic. This is about people setting up verifications and additional requirements and then deleting found logs.

It is perfectly fine to delete duplicate or abusive logs. Other then that I can't see much point in deleting legit logs - esp found logs.

Challange Caches are permitted and for the first time I am aware of, specifically addressed in the guidelines.

Requesting additional activity, like writing the log in a certian style, is perfectly fine. Requiring it is no longer ok. Therefore there is no henderance to creativity I can see.
Back to top
Mrs_Landsharkz



Joined: Dec 04, 2008
Posts: 295
Location: Victoria

PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 9:05 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

legacypac wrote:
http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=218388

Please read the post from MissJen heading the topic. This is about people setting up verifications and additional requirements and then deleting found logs.

It is perfectly fine to delete duplicate or abusive logs. Other then that I can't see much point in deleting legit logs - esp found logs.

Challange Caches are permitted and for the first time I am aware of, specifically addressed in the guidelines.

Requesting additional activity, like writing the log in a certian style, is perfectly fine. Requiring it is no longer ok. Therefore there is no henderance to creativity I can see.

If Challenge caches are permitted, would that allow for the '42' cache to remain active with a little re-wording perhaps?
Back to top
Mrs_Landsharkz



Joined: Dec 04, 2008
Posts: 295
Location: Victoria

PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 9:20 am    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

We had an ALR cache that we re-worded to meet the new guidelines. We also added a statement regarding 'Royal Shaming' if you choose to log this cache and not complete the optional requirement.

"If you log this cache and choose not to make a royal phoon of yourself, you should encrypt your log and please be advised that you will probably be brought up before the royal shaming committee on VIGPS.COM" Jester .

It's a little micro, so the fun is really in the now extinct ALR. At the Hide n' Go Wrap up folks asked us to modify the wording and not archive it because they were really looking forward to going and having fun doing it. Also, the Royal Shaming on VIGPS.COM was suggested by folks from the area as a way to have a bit more fun with this. We've had a few locals go out since we changed the wording and all have complied... because they were looking forward to it and it was part of the experience. If you have a really fun ALR that folks enjoyed, by all means change it to optional but remind people that it's there for them to have fun with and not just sign the log.

Make a Royal Phoon of Yourself!
Back to top
legacypac



Joined: Feb 26, 2007
Posts: 29
Location: Chilliwack - or where ever the GPS Says I am

PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 9:29 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

What is the 42 cache? As I read it, pretty much anything is fine as long as it is not required. For challanges, like my "A BC Challange" which clearly involves a geocaching activity and is clearly possible for many cachers to complete, the cache is not affected. I had another cache that I recently shut down that would have been affected, but I was not deleting unacceptable logs anyway.
Back to top
PEARLWIND



Joined: Nov 14, 2006
Posts: 20
Location: British Columbia

PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 11:51 pm    Post subject: Re: Groundspeak bans ALRs Reply with quote

There are a few caches out there that would be affected if they came across the wrong people. Namely, the 'Liar Caches'. The only requirement being to lie and play along that the cache is "protected by a monster' or "requires a boat" to get to. Etc.)

To have a poster put in their log a spoiler such as "This cache was in plain sight without the need of a boat, or this cache doesn't justify it's 5 star difficulty..." would have had its log deleted if I was the owner. Thankfully most play along, but we should be allowed to remove "Spoiler" logs regardless of it being a find? Why have a cache ruined because someone doesn't want to play along?
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index —» General
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 8 Hours



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


bottomleftbottomright
topleft topfill topright
Advertisement
bottomleft bottomfill bottomright

:: Copyright 2003 - 2009 BC Geocaching Association ::

RSS Feed:
Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BCGeocaching
Interactive software released under GNU GPL, Code Credits, Privacy Policy
Theme by British Columbia Geocaching Association.