The WGA – More than just a social club?

[gotta run]

On the Left Side of the Road...

[CacheNoTrace]

Well put, but I do have to add something. The latest heated debate have ended in poor taste. Everyone has their own opinions. What one group thinks is a poor pacement, another grou may think something else. It was this bantering at the end that things got out of hand which resulted to the discussion being locked. And I agree holeheartedly that it should of been locked! Quite frankly, I thought I was reading posts fro grade school aged people with the usage of arguments being used and the name calling.

Yes, I do not know you, but I do respect your opinions just like I respect the opinions of everone else. It was the lack of respect shown by a few that got out of hand.

You did nail it that eductation is important. Actually, education is key! Caching is a huge hobby with a very large following. Other outdoor organizations sees this. As Wisconsin State Advocate, I see the need for education on outdoor ethics. There are some geotrails that are too big to be fixed. We need to think about what impacts we are causing on the lands when we hide new caches. But that is my opinion.

I guess what I am saying is that during heated debates, both sides needs to keep a cool mind. Also, each side does need to RESPECT both sides of the argument. I firmly believe that not doing so will eventually kill the game.

[zuma]

Interesting question, and for reference here is our mission statement:

Article II: Purposes
The purposes of the WGA are to:

–Work as closely as possible with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and other property management officials to protect the rights of individuals to geocache in the state of Wisconsin.
–Provide an opportunity for geocachers in the State of Wisconsin to gather and socialize with one another.
–Promote the “Cache In Trash Out” and “Leave No Trace” programs to help in the maintenance of parks and trail systems.
–Educate Wisconsin geocachers about the responsible use of natural resources and educate non-geocachers about the sport of geocaching.

stop quote.

As you can see 1/4 of our mission is for social things, as spelled out in our bylaws.

But the 4th quarter comes close to addressing the issues that you are concerned with. Given that, I do believe that there is a place for the WGA Board to take a position on a whole variety of issues related to cache placement.

Even so, it is hard to define what is “craptastic” since beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Your view of what is craptastic, may differ from my view of what is craptastic, so that is one thing that limits us. (Though I suspect that in real life, our views are pretty much the same.)

The other thing that limits the WGA Board in taking a position on placement of caches is that there is a private, for profit company that calls all of the shots on that issue. Their profitability is more related to the number of eyeballs that look at their website than on the quality of the geocaching experience. As long as it is in the financial interests of gc.com to allow lots of craptastic caches to be posted, they will continue to do what the market wants.

And that leads me to the third reason that is difficulty for the WGA Board to take a position on cache placement. Quite simply, lots and lots of people appear to actually like quick caches with little cacheworthyness. I know of many caches on the LCG that are first rate caches, an enjoyable experience, yet they sit without a finder for months at a time. On the other hand, there will be several hundred logs just this weekend of caches placed on fire hydrants, in stop signs, or in guardrails. Clearly, the geocaching market likes those caches, as those are what gets hit all the time.

So in summary, I agree with your central point that the WGA should promote geocaching much like a professional association would and that we should work to improve the sport. But it seems to be that we are limited by 3 big factors: 1) variations in taste, 2) GC.com calls the shots and they have a profit motive instead of a quality motive, 3) and market forces, since many people like the caches that you are calling craptastic.

zuma

[Team Deejay]

I can echo Ralph’s sentiments. It has always bugged me that a guardrail cache gets found 10 to 20 times as often as a nice hiking cache. Unfortunately, it seems the majority of geocachers (and I assume our members) would prefer drive through city neighborhoods and parking lots than hike through forests and prairies. So, that is what they look for and what they place. I don’t buy that people don’t know the difference. They do what they enjoy. Just because you and I don’t understand it doesn’t make it wrong. The strange thing is, if you compare Wisconsin to other states, you will find that we actually have a much greater ratio of “hiking” caches to drive ups. Apparently some people are trying to change that.

[jseymour84]

First off I didn’t read every single post in detail so forgive my ignorance which is usually heavily on display. I joined the WGA because I want to do the following activities in regards to geocaching:

Organize and conduct geocaching workshops or classes
Work with WDNR representatives to help establish geocaching friendly policies
Meet and greet with other geocachers
Organize and conduct geocaching-related events such as pathtag swaps and other events in the northern portion of the state

My background as a political activist and being actively involved in lobbying legislators and assisting with campaigns give me some experience with the above list, but my problem is that I have no clue how to get started so I joined the WGA hoping that I could be “mentored” as it were into doing the things above.

So far though all I have done is placed caches and found caches – I am completely clueless in the other areas. Just my two cents on what I see the WGA being and the things we could work towards accomplishing.

The short version of my point is that I would like to see the WGA become more active in the non-social aspects of its mission: working with state legislators, advancing the sport through education and public awareness, and organizing more events in other parts of the state for geocachers who may not know about the West Bend Cache Ba$h or may not be able to get down there for it.

[rcflyer2242]

Everybody is not the same and that is what makes the world go round. Thats why there are thousands of caches. Some for the adventure’rs and some for the meak. I enjoy the adventures best, they stick in the old data base longer but I will also take some P & G’s. Apples or Oranges there a totally different fruit but both are good.

[-cheeto-]

“Quality” is one thing. Placing caches in people’s front yards, near the entrance to a school, or in roundabouts in the middle of traffic (possibly jeopardizing the game in a city) is quite another. I think as a group when we see a new trend start that could lead to moving backwards with land managers, we should have an obligation to research the facts and attempt to do something about it. Whatever that something is, be it sending in a petition to Groundspeak or whatever.

As zuma points out from Article II:

…and other property management officials to protect the rights of individuals to geocache in the state of Wisconsin.

So do we protect the “rights” of a cache owner who feels that it is in the best interest of the activity to hide caches in people’s front yards or in traffic? Or do we protect the “rights” of the geocaching community as a whole? Or do we talk about it a lot on the forums and at social events (and look the other way, following Groundspeak’s example)?

Ultimately, if the WGA is not going to try to put some logical sense into the game here in Wisconsin, then who else will?

On the subject of having a website resource available if Groundspeak were ever to close up shop. That’s a pretty silly thought nowadays.

We can debate quality versus quantity and whether a micro in every possible spot will be to the demise of the game till were blue in the face. For me, the more important take-away from gotta run’s observations and question is: the WGA should get involved when it can to protect the game and the progress that has been made with land managers across the state.

All it takes is one piece of “bad publicity” to lose the ability to place geocaches in a city’s parks.

[jseymour84]

@gotta run wrote:

During the planning for events in 2002, we established this web site as a resource for Wisconsin geocachers. Now, if geocaching.com goes off-line or if Jeremy Irish decides he’s had enough and calls it quits, you still have a way to stay in touch with other Wisconsin geocachers.

Groundspeak does have the market cornered but it is not the only resource for listing caches. There is OpenCaching.com but a quick search for caches in my area brings up zero hits.

Now while it is highly unlikely that the WGA could create a database of Wisconsin caches that would rival the popularity of geocaching.com, especially since Groundspeak has the image of the official curator of the sport, we could probably put more effort into promoting different classes of caches. Maybe a monthly newsletter or something sent out to the members via email that features a top ten list of different classes of caches such as top ten family parks, or top ten outdoor adventures, or top ten park and grabs.

Personally I would love to see some marketing assets that explain more in-depth what geocaching is, what the WGA is, and maybe some more effort in events in other parts of the state. Like I said earlier I am more than willing to do the work if someone is willing to sort of mentor me through my first couple of events and heck I will even put together some educational materials that could be distributed at WGA or geocaching events or placed in brochure racks or on community bulletin boards.

[gotta run]

As cheeto says, if not us, then who? Groundspeak has said it is not them.

We had another thread here on “what will kill the game” that started with the premise that TFTC logs will kill the game. However I don’t buy that, because what kind of log do you expect on a guardrail cache?

What will kill the game will either happen from inside out or outside in. From inside out, what will stop people from playing it? That will have to be when it is no longer rewarding. Is there really this large community of cachers who enjoy driving thru city neighborhoods and parking lots as DJ says? If so, they don’t seem to be represented here.

What will kill the game from the outside in is when the people in charge of saying yes or no to cache placements–land managers–start saying no and caches go bye bye.

Isn’t this what we are trying to avoid? Isn’t this why we have worked with the DNR to establish guidelines? Isn’t this why we keep trying too work with the DOT? And have community liaisons? And educate law enforcement?

Groundspeak has clearly shown it likes to have its cake and eat it too…to control the publication of caches while enforcing no standards around quality and apparently giving reviewers no discretion to do so themselves.

If not us, then who?

I fear in five years many of us will be saying “I wish we would have…”

(the above ramblings may set the record for rhetorical questions in one post…)

On the Left Side of the Road...

[ruff54]

@Team Deejay wrote:

I can echo Ralph’s sentiments. It has always bugged me that a guardrail cache gets found 10 to 20 times as often as a nice hiking cache. Unfortunately, it seems the majority of geocachers (and I assume our members) would prefer drive through city neighborhoods and parking lots than hike through forests and prairies. So, that is what they look for and what they place. I don’t buy that people don’t know the difference. They do what they enjoy. Just because you and I don’t understand it doesn’t make it wrong. The strange thing is, if you compare Wisconsin to other states, you will find that we actually have a much greater ratio of “hiking” caches to drive ups. Apparently some people are trying to change that.

Maybe it’s not that they are preferred caches…maybe they’re just so easy to find that no one can resist. Everyone plans to get to the other ones, but…..sometimes that takes longer than one would prefer.

I would say that while there are some urban caches that are in “distaste,” there can be hides in fairly public places that can be nearly completely unobtrusive. Again, thoroughly enjoy a hike in the woods out to a waterfall or a rock formation just as much as anyone, BUT, locally, sometimes that isn’t an option.

Too bad Groundspeak couldn’t prorate the number of caches you could place by the number of caches you’ve found…similar to favorite points. However, like zuma pointed out, that wouldn’t be real friendly for their profit margins.

[-cheeto-]

@ruff54 wrote:

Maybe it’s not that they are preferred caches…maybe they’re just so easy to find that no one can resist.

I was thinking about that as well based on the commentary in this thread. My earlier response is what I feel is really important but I’ll touch on the park and grab trend.

The easy park-n-grabs get found because they’re on the way. They’re easy. And most importantly — somehow numbers matter. If they didn’t matter, why bother stopping and signing the log and logging the find online if all you found was a random stop sign? If they didn’t matter you as a geocacher would be content with getting close to ground zero and spotting the hide. You found it right?

It is possible to not find the easy one’s and only hunt destination type caches. But it doesn’t result in high numbers. It seems like high numbers is what Groundspeak is basing success on.

I’m not trying to say high numbers is a bad thing. It is a game after all. Games should have a score. And there is an element of competition. FTF’s, milestones, etc. They all play a part in this for many.

But at what point is the game and score more important than trying to protect the game in the first place? Have we crossed that threshold yet? Can I ask more rhetorical questions than gotta run in one post?

[Todd300]

Keep this in mind….

If it wasn’t for the “easy park and grabs”, people with disabilities would not be able to go geocaching, right?

[CodeJunkie]

I think this thread brings up some interesting issues. The game is obviously changing and the “charter” (term used very loosely) of the WGA is to promote the sport (my interpretation of the core).

In my opinion the whole GC.com (as well as other geocaching sites) points system is flawed which has led us down the slippery slope of an overall decline in cache “quality”. According the sites, you get one “point” for every cache you log (notice I didn’t say “find” here). There’s no incentive / bonus to do the harder caches and it becomes “all about the numbers”. I think it could still be “all about the numbers” but with a modified scoring system.

I know it’s been talked about online before, but down in the SW part of the country they use an alternative rating system that’s pretty interesting. I believe it uses a combination of cache longevity and number of finders (i.e. harder caches don’t get hit as often and that makes them more “valuable” to the score) It’s only one example, and I think there are lots of ways to represent the “score”.

There are many examples of other sports where participants complete the same task and yet get different scores. Golf is one example of same task / different score. Many olympic sports are timed which are also great examples of the same task / different score scenario.

[CodeJunkie]

@Todd300 wrote:

Keep this in mind….

If it wasn’t for the “easy park and grabs”, people with disabilities would not be able to go geocaching, right?

Depends on your perspective I guess. I did a supposed P&G cache on Friday that was completely handicap INaccessible. I also have a puzzle cache that is not a P&G that has a great final (IMHO) and is 100% handicap accessible.

[gotta run]

Disabilities have nothing to do with the original topic. I am talking about cache placements that alarm or concern the public and have a potential to put an end to the game, and/or that we as an association collectively agree are bad to the image of the game.

On the Left Side of the Road...

[Author]

Posts