eCache

Inconsistencies Abound on Big Green

The reason so many folks have issues with the moderation at GC.com is exemplified by Michael Lapaglia’s post, as CO Admin, this evening. First, a little background. Someone brought to light a cache that was recently approved which clearly states there is no logbook in it. It was pointed out that this is against the guidelines.

A container with just an object or codeword for verification, and no logbook, generally, does not qualify as a traditional cache.

This all stems from a February 2003 thread in which this was first made public. In this thread, Jon made it very clear that a logbook is now required.

I’m sorry that you feel that the admins are being too regulatory, but we are having to restrict physical caches that do not include logbooks.

Greg joined in with:

These standards are not new. . . . What are the rules in Geocaching? Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple: 1. Take something from the cache 2. Leave something in the cache 3. Write about it in the logbook.

Note, Jon and Greg are two volunteers who have as much knowledge about the approval process at GC.com as anyone. They are generally respected by the community and two and one-half years ago they interpreted the the original rules of the game to require a logbook. Just in case it was not clear, Jon responded to my direct question about the logbook:

Originally posted by Frolickin:
Do I understand that no traditional cache will be approved unless a logbook is present?

That’s what we’ve been enforcing, but we’re not mindless automatons. If the community as a whole is against that measure, we’ll certainly remove it.

And that has been the rule/guideline ever since.

Until this evening. This evening, the vociferous Michael Lapaglia re-wrote the interpretation for the site.

This is the original cache type consisting of (at a bare minimum) a container and a logbook. The cache may be filled with objects for trade. Normally you’ll find a Tupperware-style container, ammo box, or bucket filled with goodies, or smaller container (”microcache”) too small to contain items except for a logbook. The coordinates listed on the traditional cache page are the exact location of the cache. A container with just an object or codeword for verification, and no logbook, generally, does not qualify as a traditional cache. Note the generally statement. This indicates that the reviewer has the option to allow it if he sees reason to. While not the norm they can be allowed occasionally.

This is why folks do not respect Mr. Lapaglia. If you recall, dear reader, he also read into the guidelines that a reviewer can disapprove any cache that the reviewer considers inappropriate, whether it violates any stated guideline, is generally accepted by other approvers, etc. There is not even the appearance of fairness involved in Lapaglia’s interpretations.

He has cost Groundspeak customers and he will continue to do so with his radical views.

Also blogged on this date . . .

• X Marks the Spot - 2008
• Sunset at Higbee Beach - 2008
• Bad Cache Containers - 2007
• I Feel Lucky to Be Alive - 2006
• Thundercrack - 2005
• Pat Benatar - 1981

Tags: Geocaching, GPS Games