There's been some discussion in the Members area by the new SC candidates about the need to "update" our website. Well, here's an idea for some new content.

At the bottom of our forums home page is the GGA Members area consisting of 4 sub-forums: Member's Discussion - Members Voting - Challenge Event Planning - and Newsletter Planning. Well, what do you guys think about adding another area called "GGA Members only Caches"? As the name implies, this would be an place where we could list caches that would only be available to folks with a GGA log-in account.

To list a cache, all you'd have to do is start a new discussion with the name of the cache as it's subject, then list the coordinates and a brief description.

Logging a visit would just be a matter of posting a reply. Our commenting system will even let ya add the obligatory smilie to signify a successful find.

To get the ball rolling, I'll go ahead and list the first cache. Since we don't have the member's only cache area (yet), I'll put it in the Member's Discussion forum so click on over there and see what ya think.

The problem I see with this is that geocaches listed on geocaching.com go through reviewers that take into account where the cache is hidden in reference to other caches and to hazards that need to be avoided (railroads, parks that don't allow caching, etc). They are also able to determine if a cache listing is near a puzzle cache or part of a multi cache, whereas we wouldn't be able to do this here. It is an interesting idea, but I think you are opening up problems for the GGA if a "GGA members only" cache conflicts with another cache or the guidlelines on geocaching.com. I don't think we need to make the GGA committee start reviewing caches. They have enough to do already.

Sorry to disagree with your idea, but it's just my opinion. Just thought I would add some thoughts about the idea. Happy caching.

I agree with Whittling Fisher. The GGA is in no position to allow for listing of caches independent of geocaching.com.

Nice thought though.

Yeah, I thought of the GC.com review process... most of the caches that get filtered out by the reviewers are those placed by new cachers i.e. folks that just don't know any better. We're all pretty seasoned here and one glance at the "Best Practices" forum will show that we take our responsibility seriously. The most powerful kind of review is peer review. Back when I was actively caching, there were several times that I alerted the cache hider to problems with their cache, problems and conflicts that were missed by GC.com.

As far as conflicting with GC.com guidelines, well, only caches listed on their website are bound by their terms of service. Don't get me wrong, I agree with most of the rules they've laid down but there's several that just seem arbitrary such as the ban on additional logging requirements. If I say in my cache description that you can only log my cache if you visited it while wearing a chicken suit, you ought to wear a chicken suit or skip it and log another cache but GC.com says otherwise. While I disagree with their rule, I respect and honor it because that's the way you gotta play their version of the game but that doesn't mean caches listed elsewhere are bound by it.

There's been several recent discussions here ( 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 ) detailing the complaints we have dealing with some the of cachers that are out there today. The incredible growth of GC.com has brought with it an increase in the number of folks who don't know or even care about cache etiquette. Limiting listings to GGA members would be one way to filter out the vast majority of these cachers.

The GGA already allows for the listing of caches independent of geocaching.com. They're right here.

quote:

The GGA already allows for the listing of caches independent of geocaching.com. They're right here.

I may be wrong, but I believe that is used to notify GGA members of caches that people plan to have listed on geocaching.com. It is just a way to remind people of events that are coming up or new caches that are going to be posted soon. I think all the ones mentioned on that forum are either on geocaching.com, or are still being planned out and going to be listed later.

quote:

Originally posted by mudbug65:
The GGA already allows for the listing of caches independent of geocaching.com. They're right here.

Each of the caches mentioned on the "GGA Advance Cache Placement Notices" actually has a linked or related cache listing on geocaching.com, which was reviewed by a reviewer.

Ok, I admit that I haven't really looked in the advance notice area in years and you're correct about the current content. I may be thinking about the old EZboard forums that we used back in '01 and '02 but I distinctly remember that we used to list cache coordinates there like a week BEFORE they were submitted to GC.com. The idea was to give our friends a chance to seek out a cache before it was opened up to everybody else. That 1 week period was what I was referring to when I said we already had cache listings independent of geocaching.com.

I just found out that the S/C (geomuse) removed the cache listing from the members only section without giving any reason and allso suspended mudbug65's account.

Removing post from here just an't right.
I have emailed mudbug and told him how sorry i WAS ON BEHALF ON THE gga BECAUSE he can't read it here any more. I hope he an't so pissed that he won't return if the S/C corrects this mistake.

I was going print out the cache and hunt today.

Once again the steering committee has done something sooooo stupid. I can not believe that you would treat Mudbug65 that way. If you knew anything about the history of Geocaching in Georgia You would have known what this man has done for Geocaching in Georgia let alone Geocaching as a whole.

I am disgusted!!!! Once again.

I was acting upon the protocol the SC currently uses to verify valid registrations, after being contacted by a couple of members and consulting another SC member regarding GGA Forums membership protocol. Considering the circumstances, the account permissions have been restored and the account owner has been notified. He has been invited to re-post the cache.

I meant no harm and was acting strictly in good conscience and have issued a formal apology in the Members Only section.

I don't give a flying fig...

I was under the impression that According to the posting guidelines, the SC has to vote before taking any action on something in the forums and the problem posting has to be moved to the members area with a message detailing why there was a problem.

If such vote had been taken... I know that at least 3 out of the 6 steering committee members knows Mudbug65 / bent_twigs. And this would have been avoided all together.

I understand that you didn't know. But the one person you all chose to do this too... I am just so angry beyond belief.

It's like junk punching Ben Franklin because he got to close to the Declaration of Independance.

Meaning, this is a man who helped shape geocaching in Georgia and the GGA and you basically told him to take a hike.

Unreal.

I do not have the benefit of having been a member since 2001. However, I did act in good faith in that I attempted to verify this account as valid, as well as consult with the most senior member of the 5 member SC who has lately been available.

The posting in question was, in and of itself, not offensive. The reason for the removal was because the account appeared to be invalid and it was already in the members only forums.

This was not a personal attack against bent_twigs and had I known there was an association between the two nicks, this would have never happened.


Anyone who really knows me also knows I was acting in good conscience and meant no harm. Mistakes happen and I am not beyod making them, by any means. I have done what I can do at this point to rectify the situation. I have admitted that I erred, have done what I can to correct it, have notified the individual with an apology, and have issued a public apology. What more can I do?

Sounds like a logical and fair mistake. Stuff happens.

Bent who?

~erik~

I said I do understand that. I know that you aren't a malicious person. But how long he had been a member in the GGA and a member of this forum should have been taken into account.

Maybe asking someone who had been geocaching or a member of the GGA since 2001 may have been a more practical way to go then following the whinings of newbies.

By the way since when has it been a requirement to have activity in Geocaching.com to be a member of the GGA?

Where was Greg through all of this???

First off there are only 5 SC members currently and I am not sure that 3 of the 5 know mudbug65/bent_twigs. So those statements are false.

I did not know him by either name. Geomuse clearly did not know this cacher. One of the SC persons with the most tenor was in support of this decision as well, so he must also not have been aware of this persons history.

There is no reason to be so upset about everything. An apology has been issued and this has nothing to do with other cachers, this is between the SC and mudbug65/bent_twigs.

Back in November 2006 when the requirement was made for people to have the same user name on gc.com and the GGA forums it was made aware to all current GGA members that they needed to include the link to their gc.com account in their profile, this was a REQUIREMENT. It has been 3 years and to date mudbug has no gc.com profile listed.

quote:

Where was Greg through all of this???

Unfortunately Greg has not visited these forums since mid October.

quote:

First off there are only 5 SC members currently and I am not sure that 3 of the 5 know mudbug65/bent_twigs. So those statements are false.

I did not know him by either name. Geomuse clearly did not know this cacher. One of the SC persons with the most tenor was in support of this decision as well, so he must also not have been aware of this persons history.

If it had been put to the members here, I know there is at the very least, a dozen or more older active members
here that could have inlighten the S/C of this before it was acted on. Let the members help when ever
possible and take some of the load off ya'll

quote:

Originally posted by johnnie:
If it had been put to the members here, I know there is at the very least, a dozen or more older active members
here that could have inlighten the S/C of this before it was acted on. Let the members help when ever
possible and take some of the load off ya'll

johnnie for president!

Well, OK maybe it's just 2 out of the "5". But still that is 2 not 0.

As for the issue... That is a major point. A month without participation is kinda not fair to the other Steering Committee members... Those who are carrying the load.

Please do not start up with REQUIREMENTS... That is a can of worms you DO NOT want to open. I promise you do not want to go there with ME.


As for my angered postings.

I am so angry with this incident. He is my friend and a cacher who I greatly admire. In fact if you have ever done a parasite spawn cache or at least read one of the cache pages.... you would know. In addition to that info, there is nothing in this world that will get me more riled up then any wrong done to a friend.

Having said that I want to make this perfectly clear... Not only is mudbug my friend but so is Geomuse. I am not attacking her. I am not angry with her. She has worked so hard holding the GGA together. I don't participate much anymore, but it is extremely evident/obvious how much effort, time and herself that she's putting into it.

I am angry that this happened. I am pleased that she has done everything that she can to make it up to him. That is all that we can ask.

Robin, Please accept my apology if you feel this has in anyway been a pointed attack towards you. Thanks for giving of your time to the GGA.

quote:

Robin, Please accept my apology if you feel this has in anyway been a pointed attack towards you. Thanks for giving of your time to the GGA.

DITO DITO DITO