What is the GAGB

[Mongoose39uk]

What in your opinion is the purpose of theGAGB?

How would you communicate this to the members and the broader community?

[daddyanddude]

the purpose of the GAGB has to be that of the voice of the caching community,the gagb has to be more proactive and be seen, we also need regional representatives especially in areas that there is no committee member, we need to be speaking to people find out what they want and also tell them about whats going on we need to include all members this could be done with a simple GAGB regional meet and greet.

[sandvika]

GAGB is an association for some UK Geocachers, maintaining a database of land owner permissions, forum and publishing an online magazine. It survives mostly because of goodwill and appreciation that the land owner database is essential. Membership benefits are discounts to some Gecaching stores and ability to shape the organisation through annual elections.

I would like GAGB to be the pre-eminent Geocaching organisation in UK, respresenting the overwhelming majority of our UK Geocaching community in their interactions with land owners, authorities and listing sites. GAGB membership should be the obvious choice because we should provide a wealth of valued benefits that our members make regular use of.

We can take a steer from the British Canoe Union (http://www.canoe-england.org.uk/membership/) and British Mountaineering Council (http://www.thebmc.co.uk/membership-benefits?s=6), both of which have similar issues to GAGB, and to a lesser extent from the Ramblers Association (http://www.ramblers.org.uk/membership/about/membership_benefits.htm), but most importantly, from our members and potential members.

[geocaching womble]

I beleive that the purpoose of the GAGB is to be used as a force for improving British geocaching as a whole and as it already offers a wide ranging variety of services (Seeker, Discounts and the land owner database being the biggest 3) I would seek to expand them by furthering the work laid down by the past 2 committee's and improving the relationship of the GAGB with the general caching commuity by reaching out to everyone across the forums and not ignoring people because they
didn't have the chance to get to an event. If anyone has an issue they want to discuss (if I am elected) I WILL be there to listen to them no matter what.

Thanks
Dominic

[Team Microdot]

I asked the same question, firstly when I was invited to vote for Zomblou as a committee member and secondly when I was invited to run for election to it myself :confused:

It's true that I've made very little use of the site or the organisation myself in the roughly 2.5 years I've been geocaching.

I'm aware that there's a landowner permission database of some kind - but have never made use of it, instead negotiating individual permissions myself. More recently I've come to understand that the database is in need of an update too.

I'm aware that there are forums here and prior to these recent elections these forums seemed fairly quiet. That's not unusual though - activity on those other geocaching forums I'm active in has dwindled to almost nothing over the past 2.5 years too - I suspect as more people migrate over to Facebook etc.

And from delving into those threads which have arisen around the elections, it seems that the GAGB itself isn't quite sure or, to frame more positively, is recognising the fact that it's probably time to review and reshape the organisation in order to improve relevance / membership / support moving forward.

Personally I'd like to think that GAGB can become what I think it originally set out to be - the voice of GB cachers and a bridge between cachers and non-cachers. And maybe it can - with the cooperation and support I think of the major listing sites.

Which is where I think difficulties might start to arise.

Why do I think that?

Let's imagine I'm a landowner for a moment...

A GAGB representative contacts me to ask for an agreement to allow the placing of geocaches on my land.

I'm not averse to the idea - but I want to make sure there are reasonable rules in place to ensure that I don't suffer as a result of granting this permission.

GAGB hands over a list of - well, let's call them rules for now - and tells me that geocachers play by these rules.

Problem is, geocaching is organic - nobody owns it - and there's no actual quality control in place which ensures that geocachers play by those rules - particularly as each listing site (I imagine - I haven't researched in any depth) has its own variation on a theme.

So how do I feel, as the landowner, when a geocacher who favours another listing site, which has guidelines which differ from the GAGB standard, places a cache outside the scope I as the landowner agreed to - and then points to the fact I've given a blanket permission agreement via GAGB?

Who sorts it out?

GAGB? The listing site in question? Am I left between two chairs?

Surely if GAGB seeks to be the voice of GB geocachers, and the bridge between cachers and non-cachers - and seeks to negotiate landowner permission agreements on the basis of a set of agreed guidelines - then those guidelines MUST span all listing sites?

In summary, I think that being the voice of GB geocachers (if that it what GAGB seeks to be) will require greater integration between GAGB and the major listing sites. I don't see how we can have one, without the other.

[geocaching womble]

I asked the same question, firstly when I was invited to vote for Zomblou as a committee member and secondly when I was invited to run for election to it myself :confused:

It's true that I've made very little use of the site or the organisation myself in the roughly 2.5 years I've been geocaching.

I'm aware that there's a landowner permission database of some kind - but have never made use of it, instead negotiating individual permissions myself. More recently I've come to understand that the database is in need of an update too.

I'm aware that there are forums here and prior to these recent elections these forums seemed fairly quiet. That's not unusual though - activity on those other geocaching forums I'm active in has dwindled to almost nothing over the past 2.5 years too - I suspect as more people migrate over to Facebook etc.

And from delving into those threads which have arisen around the elections, it seems that the GAGB itself isn't quite sure or, to frame more positively, is recognising the fact that it's probably time to review and reshape the organisation in order to improve relevance / membership / support moving forward.

Personally I'd like to think that GAGB can become what I think it originally set out to be - the voice of GB cachers and a bridge between cachers and non-cachers. And maybe it can - with the cooperation and support I think of the major listing sites.

Which is where I think difficulties might start to arise.

Why do I think that?

Let's imagine I'm a landowner for a moment...

A GAGB representative contacts me to ask for an agreement to allow the placing of geocaches on my land.

I'm not averse to the idea - but I want to make sure there are reasonable rules in place to ensure that I don't suffer as a result of granting this permission.

GAGB hands over a list of - well, let's call them rules for now - and tells me that geocachers play by these rules.

Problem is, geocaching is organic - nobody owns it - and there's no actual quality control in place which ensures that geocachers play by those rules - particularly as each listing site (I imagine - I haven't researched in any depth) has its own variation on a theme.

So how do I feel, as the landowner, when a geocacher who favours another listing site, which has guidelines which differ from the GAGB standard, places a cache outside the scope I as the landowner agreed to - and then points to the fact I've given a blanket permission agreement via GAGB?

Who sorts it out?

GAGB? The listing site in question? Am I left between two chairs?

Surely if GAGB seeks to be the voice of GB geocachers, and the bridge between cachers and non-cachers - and seeks to negotiate landowner permission agreements on the basis of a set of agreed guidelines - then those guidelines MUST span all listing sites?

In summary, I think that being the voice of GB geocachers (if that it what GAGB seeks to be) will require greater integration between GAGB and the major listing sites. I don't see how we can have one, without the other.

As an OC UK Committee Member I find that Comment slightly Biased because our guidelines are more extensive and cover a wider range of eventualties than the GAGB Guidelines do.

Thanks
Dominic

[Team Microdot]

As an OC UK Committee Member I find that Comment slightly Biased because our guidelines are more extensive and cover a wider range of eventualties than the GAGB Guidelines do.

Thanks
Dominic

You've quoted my entire post.

So which comment in particular do you find slightly biased?

And you've probably actually proven my point - that as things stand, GAGB cannot responsibly be the voice of GB geocachers in terms of guideline compliance and landowner agreements - because each listing site does things differently :)

[geocaching womble]

You've quoted my entire post.

So which comment in particular do you find slightly biased?

And you've probably actually proven my point - that as things stand, GAGB cannot responsibly be the voice of GB geocachers in terms of guideline compliance and landowner agreements - because each listing site does things differently :)

Thats exactly why I want to rewite the Guidelines from scratch working with ALL Listing sites if I take office and as to answer your question I found the entire post slightly Baised

Thanks
Geocaching Womble (Dominic)

[Team Microdot]

Thats exactly why I want to rewite the Guidelines from scratch working with ALL Listing sites if I take office and as to answer your question I found the entire post slightly Baised

Thanks
Geocaching Womble (Dominic)

Good - something we're agreed on :cheers:

Biased how?

[geocaching womble]

Biased how?

I felt it was slanted at a slightly slanderous dig and towards me and my campaign and more OC UK centred (about our laidback management style) sorry if that was not your intent but that was what I felt the post read

Thanks
Dominic

[Team Microdot]

I felt it was slanted at a slightly slanderous dig and my campaign at more OC UK centred (about our laidback management style) sorry if that was not your intent but that what I felt the post read

Thanks
Dominic

It wasn't - I promise you that.

I wasn't saying that the guidelines operated by any particular listing site were any better or worse than any other listing site - with the main reason being that I've never looked at the guidelines on any listing site other than geocaching.com - which I've built up detailed knowledge of.

So it might be fair to say that I am baised towards geocaching.com - but only because that't the only listing site I've ever felt the need to use.

If that goes against my suitability for election then so be it - although I don't see why it should :)

So I would fully endorse GAGB reviewing its own guidelines against those of all the major listing sites - AND vice-versa.

I'm probably cross-posting again but - here's a bunch of thoughts / perceptions in no particular order...

GAGB 'wants' to be the voice of GB geocachers.

GAGB 'wants' to offer landowner permission negotiation as a service to its members.

At that point GAGB takes some level of responsibility as the bridge between that landowner and the game as a whole.

So GAGB needs to ensure that it speaks in an informed manner - with the support of those listing sites whose members might later USE the permissions negotiated by GAGB.

So why not look at establishing partnerships of some form between GAGB and the listing sites - so that we can put our heads together and build AT LEAST a core of guidelines which are common to all?

THEN each listing site might be persuaded to 'advertise' the fact that its own guidelines fulfill the core requirements of the GAGB guidelines which - of course - are the core guidelines all geocachers adhere / aspire to.

Which in turn will bring GAGB into cacher's field of vision - increasing awareness and hopefully membership and in turn more cachers informing the permissions database?

So, in simple terms, each listing site with guidelines which include GAGB's core guidelines gets a 'seal of approval' from GAGB.

And then - cachers who adhere to those core guidelines and wish to promote them - also get a seal of approval - I'm seeing a graphic which they can include in the cache pages - further promoting GAGB and linking back to the GAGB website.

And so on...

[geocaching womble]

It wasn't - I promise you that.

I wasn't saying that the guidelines operated by any particular listing site were any better or worse than any other listing site - with the main reason being that I've never looked at the guidelines on any listing site other than geocaching.com - which I've built up detailed knowledge of.

So it might be fair to say that I am baised towards geocaching.com - but only because that't the only listing site I've ever felt the need to use.

If that goes against my suitability for election then so be it - although I don't see why it should :)

So I would fully endorse GAGB reviewing its own guidelines against those of all the major listing sites - AND vice-versa.

I'm probably cross-posting again but - here's a bunch of thoughts / perceptions in no particular order...

GAGB 'wants' to be the voice of GB geocachers.

GAGB 'wants' to offer landowner permission negotiation as a service to its members.

At that point GAGB takes some level of responsibility as the bridge between that landowner and the game as a whole.

So GAGB needs to ensure that it speaks in an informed manner - with the support of those listing sites whose members might later USE the permissions negotiated by GAGB.

So why not look at establishing partnerships of some form between GAGB and the listing sites - so that we can put our heads together and build AT LEAST a core of guidelines which are common to all?

THEN each listing site might be persuaded to 'advertise' the fact that its own guidelines fulfill the core requirements of the GAGB guidelines which - of course - are the core guidelines all geocachers adhere / aspire to.

Which in turn will bring GAGB into cacher's field of vision - increasing awareness and hopefully membership and in turn more cachers informing the permissions database?

So, in simple terms, each listing site with guidelines which include GAGB's core guidelines gets a 'seal of approval' from GAGB.

And then - cachers who adhere to those core guidelines and wish to promote them - also get a seal of approval - I'm seeing a graphic which they can include in the cache pages - further promoting GAGB and linking back to the GAGB website.

And so on...

First of all apology accepeted and secondly you've just described exactly what I am going to do If I get to to office with regards to the guidelines anyway

Thanks
Dominic

[Team Microdot]

First of all apology accepeted and secondly you've just described exactly what I am going to do If I get to to office with regards to the guidelines anyway

Thanks
Dominic

I didn't apologise - as I had nothing to apologise for.

EDIT TO ADD:

And while I admire your obvious enhusiasm and drive, I assume any decision making process which might lead to that outcome will be at committee rather than individual level and will take into account the views of the members.

And while your own perspective would no doubt be a useful inclusion in that process, given your strong association with one of the listing sites, we would need to make sure that the process was seen to be transparent and obviously free from bias or the perception of it.

[geocaching womble]

Yes, obviously that would be a cheif concern, however I would be making the guidelines free from ALL Bias by reaching out to representatives from all listing sites (Including Garmin's opencaching.com) to Come up with a workable and completely universally agreed (by every listing site and then have them debated with the membership) that everyone feels proud to be a part of. However despite my longstanding association with OC UK. If I am elected I WILL Be Completely impartial as per the role dictated by my office.

Thanks
Dominic

[Team Microdot]

I didn't apologise - as I had nothing to apologise for.


Actually you did apologise even if you didn't mean to

Thanks
Dominic

No Dominic - I didn't apologise, and if you're determined to play silly games like that you'll need to find someone else to play them with.

[mollyjak]

What in your opinion is the purpose of theGAGB?

How would you communicate this to the members and the broader community?

The GAGB is to represent cachers in Great Britain. I am not going to repeat as others have given answers above.:)

How would I communicate this? As often and as loudly as I have done this year:) at events, through the many Facebook groups I belong to, as Admin for the GAGB Facebook group. I now realise that while spending time on FB I haven't been posting on this forum even though I do log in a few times a week.

[DrDick&Vick]

I don't feel that the flow of this thread, and any others in the Q&A section, is being helped by the deletion of posts.
Please leave the posts in place so as we can all read what has been posted.

[The Wombles]

The GAGB has a purpose both for the caching community and also as a point of contact/ interface to the wider non-caching world. The latter results in approaches from the public, landowners and the press. GAGB publishes channels for these approaches, both email addresses and also phone numbers which can be used on cache containers. This allows a consistent response to such enquiries and I believe it is a really useful service that ensures "the good name" of geocaching.

GAGB started because we were concerned that geocaching could get a bad name and effectively become an activity which was discouraged by landowners, part of this concern came from the early bans of caching on US National Parks. We have been successful in avoiding significant problems of this sort, having only a few UK landowners who have banned caching and this is at least partly as a result of being able to reference GAGBs early agreements in subsequent discussions.

It would be good to find ways to encourage more UK cachers to join GAGB. I'd love to find a "killer application" that means everyone joins and even to find ways to bring back those who have actively decided that they don't want to be members but I think there is a much bigger opportunity to bring in more of the masses of cachers who have never heard of us and would probably join because we do have useful resources.

[sandvika]

As an OC UK Committee Member I find that Comment slightly Biased because our guidelines are more extensive and cover a wider range of eventualties than the GAGB Guidelines do.

Thanks
Dominic

That's the way it should be. GAGB pioneers the way by getting consent to cache on the most flexible terms possible, individual listing sites differentiate themselves from one another by putting in place additional guidance that matters to them and their members.

It seems to me that OC UK could have stayed in line with GAGB's guidelines, had GAGB not acquired a whole load of excess baggage from one other listing site.

I'm looking forward to GAGB having minimal guidelines and being empowered by them.

[northking]

Be flexible, be professional, be inclusive and actually achieve something rather than negative introspection.

I am a Geocacher who is aware of other listing sites, it is however, my choice to record my finds on just one of them. From what I can see the basic guidelines are similar across the sites with slight nuances, the GAGB should therefore work to engage with all listing sites and become the central point of contact for the majority of GB players.
The massive take up of smartphone players, and the way in which the GPSr's on these phones and the improvement in battery life means that the way in which Geocaching is being played has evolved, casual players now have the ability to dip into and out of the game without having the additional expense of dedicated GPSr's, we need to engage with these too as they may never log onto the main listing sites, just use the phone apps, they may never join forums, just FaceBook and so they miss out on a lot of the basic stuff. We need to cast the net wide and try to bring all players under the umbrella of the GAGB, that we can say that we have a mandate to talk to the listing sites and may be able to influence the way that we would like to see the game played.
Do we need to rip up the guidelines and start again?
In my opinion, we need to point out the different guidelines as laid down by the different listing sites, I do not think that we should be adding to these until we receive a mandate to do so. I do however believe that we should be trying to enhance the enjoyment of every player, working with landowners to achieve placement permissions and negotiating with listing sites when players perceive that they are imposing unnecessarily restrictive guidelines. I would also seek to communicate with our volunteer reviewers, these people are an essential part of our game, they are invariably GAGB members, I would like them to agree with our aims and objectives and be consulted on a regular basis to receive any relevant feedback from them.