What will change ?

[The magna defender]

Ok at the end of all these elections and a new committee is formed ... What actually happens ? Is there a big overhaul and tightening of the rules ? I for one enjoy things the way there are. I don't want to be greeted by a traffic warden guideline text when I submit a cache.

Oh it shouldn't be on a bench you might not get back up again or you can't have it in a field cos you might slip on grass and break your neck.

Another question is how will you if elected appeal to the obsessive cachers like myself ? Not just the ones who believe it should be one hill one cache and no caches by roads and all ftfs are pointless and those who do are saddos with no life. But the real question is will you take into the account the numbers cachers out there and there are a lot of them :)

[bobo frett]

Hi Magna, the GAGB are not here to create rules or enforce any of the listing site guidelines.

They are here to offer sound advice on caching in general, be it finding or hiding.

I'm an obsessive cacher myself and I worry that being voted in may eat in to precious FTF hunting time. I'm quite sure many of the other nominees are too.

Are we allowed to throw sickies? ;)

[Zomblou]

Ok at the end of all these elections and a new committee is formed ... What actually happens ? Is there a big overhaul and tightening of the rules ?

I don't think anyone is proposing drastic changes. If you take a look at the current code of conduct here https://www.gagb.org.uk/what-is-geocaching/geocachers-code-of-conduct/ I think you will agree that there's nothing which isn't common sense and are the guidelines which responsible cachers follow as a matter of course.

[martybartfast]

Are we allowed to throw sickies? ;)

Be aware that if you go sick you lose a day's pay :eek:

[northking]

Wise words Bobo, I try not to judge how people choose to play the game, and I certainly wouldn't be comfortable in trying to impose even more confusing guidelines. We need to ensure that the GAGB doesn't become an 'exclusive club' but an 'inclusive association' which members trust to represent them and understand the direction that it is going.

[Team Microdot]

...even more confusing guidelines.

I don't find the present guidelines confusing :confused:

And given the expertise and experience we have here I reckon we're well resourced to assist with clarification for anyone experiencing any difficulty with them - part of what GAGB is all about? :)

[northking]

Slightly out of context. I said that I wouldn't be comfortable in trying to impose ......

[Team Microdot]

Slightly out of context. I said that I wouldn't be comfortable in trying to impose ......

Even more implies or presupposes that the object already possesses some quantity of the property described - even without context :)

Unless of course you were coming from the perspective of the potential for additional guidelines from GAGB over and above those required by the listing sites to potentially lead to confusion?

[Palujia]

As has been stated many times, whatever "guidelines" - or "Best Practice", which is what the previous committee thought was a better title are just that - you are not bound in any way to use the codes on this or any other site. GS are the only people who lay down rules - and you don't even have to use their site now to enjoy caching. All anyone can ask is that we don't bring the game into disrepute, try not to get arrested for lurking and when placing out caches be aware of where you are putting them - I have seen caches very near children's play grounds, schools and public loos - not good places to be caught lurking about - Our outgoing chair liaises with ACPO in cases of Sus caches etc., which was one of the reasons that the guidelines (best practice) was being updated in the wake of a problem with the Police - good luck to the new committee in completing this

[The magna defender]

As has been stated many times, whatever "guidelines" - or "Best Practice", which is what the previous committee thought was a better title are just that - you are not bound in any way to use the codes on this or any other site. GS are the only people who lay down rules - and you don't even have to use their site now to enjoy caching. All anyone can ask is that we don't bring the game into disrepute, try not to get arrested for lurking and when placing out caches be aware of where you are putting them - I have seen caches very near children's play grounds, schools and public loos - not good places to be caught lurking about - Our outgoing chair liaises with ACPO in cases of Sus caches etc., which was one of the reasons that the guidelines (best practice) was being updated in the wake of a problem with the Police - good luck to the new committee in completing this

Oh I do try to place caches with common sense. I meant I didn't want any acceleration of current guidelines like the breaking ground rule. I was worried it would come to no caches underground, up trees or in holes at base of trees.

[keehotee]

Oh I do try to place caches with common sense. I meant I didn't want any acceleration of current guidelines like the breaking ground rule. I was worried it would come to no caches underground, up trees or in holes at base of trees.

As far as I'm aware, the breaking ground rule had nothing whatsoever to do with the GAGB?

If you choose to cache via Groundspeak you agree to abide by their listing rules.

[sandvika]

Ok at the end of all these elections and a new committee is formed ... What actually happens ? Is there a big overhaul and tightening of the rules ? I for one enjoy things the way there are. I don't want to be greeted by a traffic warden guideline text when I submit a cache.

Oh it shouldn't be on a bench you might not get back up again or you can't have it in a field cos you might slip on grass and break your neck.

Another question is how will you if elected appeal to the obsessive cachers like myself ? Not just the ones who believe it should be one hill one cache and no caches by roads and all ftfs are pointless and those who do are saddos with no life. But the real question is will you take into the account the numbers cachers out there and there are a lot of them :)

I think our young game is being stifled by red tape in certain quarters and I would like to see it removed from GAGB. I've proposed that our guidelines should be a means to an end: to demonstrate that we respect land owners' legitimate rights and deserve consent to cache. I think having a very succinct set of salient guidelines accomplishes this best. I think that covering off every single possibility would come across as lacking confidence to the point of paranoia whereas having no guidelines would appear irresponsible.

I don't think this applies to any particular type of cacher as we are all obsessive about our game in different ways. I think it taps into our instinct to hunt for food :) What can be more natural than that?

[lfc4eva]

I think our young game is being stifled by red tape in certain quarters and I would like to see it removed from GAGB. I've proposed that our guidelines should be a means to an end: to demonstrate that we respect land owners' legitimate rights and deserve consent to cache. I think having a very succinct set of salient guidelines accomplishes this best. I think that covering off every single possibility would come across as lacking confidence to the point of paranoia whereas having no guidelines would appear irresponsible.

That's all well and good and I can see that the GAGB having a succinct set of salient guidelines / best practice, for the purpose of obtaining land owner permissions is a good thing and it is what I would expect of the GAGB.

But I would also like to see a section on the GAGB website which highlights the guidelines for the different listing sites, or at least links to the relevant section on the listing sites.

This might help prevent any confusion for those cachers who think that the GAGB Guidelines are the only ones they need to consider and will try to justify placing caches which have breached the rules of a listing site because the association which represents geocaching in Great Britain makes no mention of it on their website.

When placing a cache the CO needs to abide by the rules set by whichever listing site they intend to use to list their cache and upon submission they tick a box confirming that they have read and understood the guidelines for listing a cache (or at least you do on gc.com - I have no experience of the others). :)


The GAGB isn't a listing site. ;)

[northking]

That's a good point. I don't record my hides and finds anywhere other than Geocaching.com, but I regularly check the other listing sites. I usually do this when a player expresses their frustration on Facebook as they have just had a cache submission declined by a reviewer on GC.com, and someone points out 'other listing sites are available'.
If the GAGB are to represent everyone then they ought to reflect this in the website and the service that it provides, then maybe there will be a greater cross pollenation across the listing sites.

[sandvika]

But I would also like to see a section on the GAGB website which highlights the guidelines for the different listing sites, or at least links to the relevant section on the listing sites.

This might help prevent any confusion for those cachers who think that the GAGB Guidelines are the only ones they need to consider and will try to justify placing caches which have breached the rules of a listing site because the association which represents geocaching in Great Britain makes no mention of it on their website.

When placing a cache the CO needs to abide by the rules set by whichever listing site they intend to use to list their cache and upon submission they tick a box confirming that they have read and understood the guidelines for listing a cache (or at least you do on gc.com - I have no experience of the others). :)


I agree in the principle of making sure that cache hiders understand the difference between GAGB's guidelines and listing sites' guidelines and agree that this could be accomplished by linking to them from a "cache hiding best practice" page on our website. I'd prefer them to be separated from GAGB's guidelines so that landowners looking at ours don't go off our site and potentially get confused and bemused by the differences (for reasons I mentioned previously). I'd stop short of copying them to our site because they are not set in stone and would not want them to get out of date and need constant maintenance, however, interpretive guidance might be useful for each site too.

[geocaching womble]

Hi Magna,

Whilst I understand your frustration I never intend to make that many changes to the GAGB guidelines if elected. I will only make them more understandable as well as working with ALL Listing sites which will be extended an olive branch to assist in a much fairer system for all where a universal set of rules are in place for ALL cachers across Britain so everyone know where the boundraies lie. (I have long been a believer that groundspeak should have national guidelines for every country it operates in provided to each new member by their local reviewer in that part of the country rather than just having US Centric ones as they do currently)

All I want to do is make the system fairer I won't be going over the top and saying that you can't have a cache in a feild because you might break your neck nor will I be saying that you can't have a cache on a bench because you may not be able to get back up again.

However I will be saying that some of the more ludicrous rules are will be edited and rephrased in order to make them more user-friendly and some of the other unpopular rules will be set with what are reasonable exceptions if I am elected to office and allowed to make these changes

Thanks
Dominic