MnGCA

15Tango · Posted: Wed May 21, 2003 2:32 am Post subject: GC Admins

Does anybody know if Jeremy needs any more admins for cache approval, etc., and if so, is anyone interested in becoming one? So far, it seems like the admins we deal with the most when it comes to cache approval are mtn-man and erik88l-r, and occasionally somebody in Wisconsin. While they've been good, and occasionally hard, but fair (what's wrong with turning the last phone booth in Minneapolis into a virtual cache, anyhow?), I don't know if they're aware of certain circumstances unique to geocaching in Minnesota. When I submitted my State Park CITO event, I got an email explaining that they weren't aware of the geocaching ban in State Parks. I would be happy to do it, but right now, I'm an alternate to get deployed to either Bosnia or Kosovo for the peacekeeping mission over there.
_________________
There comes a time in every young boy's life when he gets an irresistible urge to seek buried treasure.--Mark Twain

LanceVE · Posted: Wed May 21, 2003 8:06 am Post subject:

I know that the WGCA has a deal worked with Jeremy so that they supply a cache approver from their board...... Perhaps we could do the same?

I also just came across This thread about how cache approvers get selected....

towlebooth · Posted: Wed May 21, 2003 9:30 am Post subject:

When this has come up in previous board meetings the prevailing thought was that this organization would not be the police. I spoke with the WI approver at last weekend's WI Geo-campout and got some background. I would not want to be the bad guy and I still believe that no one in this group should be an approver and an officer of this assoication at the same time. Distance between the info people (us) and the cops (approvers) so that those offended by the cops will still consider listening to us as we try and help spread info and good practices is a good idea IMHO.
--towlebooth

Centris · Posted: Wed May 21, 2003 9:35 am Post subject:

LanceVE · Posted: Wed May 21, 2003 9:37 am Post subject:

Perhaps the board could take the position of recommedning a local/regional approver? Based perhaps on a vote by the community?

I think offering a chance to choose a local approver would help get rid of some sour grapes... If you don't like how they approve caches, vote for somebody else... You think you could do better? Throw your hat in the ring...

We should at least think about working with the approvers to make sure that they are aware of the local requirements/regs....

LanceVE · Posted: Wed May 21, 2003 9:57 am Post subject:

15Tango · Posted: Wed May 21, 2003 11:15 am Post subject:

I think having a mngca member, who isn't on the board, as a gocaching.com admin is a good compromise. My main point isn't having one of us become geopolice--my issue is that most of our caches, when submitted, go through either mtn-man or erik88l-r, and they're both in Georgia, where geocaching issues are going to be different from Minnesota. As a group, we are more up to speed on local issues--I don't know if the guys in Georgia are aware of the geocaching ban in State Parks, and what counties require cache registration, and other such issues.
_________________
There comes a time in every young boy's life when he gets an irresistible urge to seek buried treasure.--Mark Twain

Centris · Posted: Thu May 22, 2003 12:58 am Post subject:

Jillibean · Posted: Thu May 22, 2003 6:37 am Post subject:

To be very honest, I personally think that it would be best for our group if we did not become geocaching.com admins. I belive this for two reasons:

First, our relationship with our parks is very unique. If you look at the cache guidelines page, you will see 5 different policies (Ramsey, Three Rivers, and Carver counties, State Parks, and Superior National Forest/BWCA). Three of these policies require cache registration. It sounds like we have dialog with other counties and park services, so this list of park systems with individual policies will grow.

Right now, our contacts at the park systems are OK with us registering and placing our caches, and they are the ones that are reviewing if each new cache meets their specific rules. Is the cache so many feet from a trail or from the next closest cache? Is it in a protected area? Are we over the limit of caches per park? Is it in the right kind of container? If a cache doesn't get their approval, they are the ones contacting the cache owner and requesting that it be removed. The park systems are enforcing their own rules, individual cachers are responsible for caching according to those rules, and MnGCA is facilitating the dialog between the parks and MN cachers.

If MnGCA members become geocaching.com admins and have the responsibility to approve or deny new caches, my fear is that our contacts with the park systems will see us as having the responsibility for enforcing their rules. They would expect the admin to verify that every new cache meets the very detailed rules for each park system, and to not approve the cache if it didn't meet those rules. They may expect us to remove the cache as well, or to make (not ask) the cache owner do that.

For one person to be responsible for checking all those things on every new MN cache could easily become unmanageable. So maybe one MnGCA member is up to the challenge, but what about when they get tired of it? When they step down, these expectations will have already been set, and the park systems will expect someone else to step up into that position.

Secondly, if MnGCA members start enforcing the parks' rules, then MN geocachers will not look on this organization as being helpful to their sport, as doing the best that we can to promote geocaching in the face of some very cautious park systems. We all know how irritable and stubborn some MN cachers can be, and in my opinion, we will make some big problems for ourselves if we are making enemies within the caching community.

According to our mission statement, we have formed to promote caching in the state, with the cooperation of both park systems and cachers. In my opinion it is essential that the park systems are responsible for enforcing their own rules, that cachers are responsible for (and willing to) place their caches according to both the geocaching.com and local park system rules, and that MnGCA is viewed simply as a friendly resource for both parties. We want to promote cooperation, not take sides and potentially create enemies.

Finally, if the complaint is that currently there are only 2-3 geocaching.com admins, and they are not familiar with Minnesota's unique situation, it would seem to me that the easiest solution would be to email those 2-3 people and invite them to visit our web site, to look at the Cache Guidelines page. At least that way they could be aware that in Minnesota, caches are not allowed in State Parks and that we may place a virtual cache out of necessity in a park where physical caches are not allowed.

So that's my 5 cents. If you believe that MnGCA should supply geocaching.com with admins, we should discuss that, but I do see these potential problems for the organization if we go down that path.
_________________
Jillibean

Centris · Posted: Thu May 22, 2003 10:33 am Post subject:

I agree that the MnGCA should not become the "police", any MN geo-admin would have to come from outside our ranks and yet still be well versed in all the differing park policies. Must be a non controversial and experienced geo-cacher.....

I also am frustrated that it keeps taking longer and longer to get caches approved. Paul put one in Zimmerman last Saturday and it is still waiting to be approved. Caches used to be approved within a day or two, now it seems to take forever. My MTM virtual took 8 days to be approved.

Even the events postings are taking forever -- the Pioneer Park event took 3 days to get posted. In the past, events have been posted within hours of submitting.

It is a problem and there is no easy answer.

Moe the Sleaze · Posted: Thu May 22, 2003 11:33 am Post subject:

Centris · Posted: Thu May 22, 2003 11:56 am Post subject:

LanceVE · Posted: Fri May 23, 2003 6:32 am Post subject:

I do agree with Jillibean that it has to be clear that doing cache approvals is not a function of the MNGCA.

If we got a Minnesota approver, I'm sure that whoever they were, they would be here a lot checking up on guidelines...

The questions really are, do we want to push GC.com for a MN admin, and if so, what kind of input do we want to have in that choice?

welch · Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2004 9:38 pm Post subject:

Not to drag this dormant? topic off trail, but this was the closest related thing I could find for my question.
Who is currently approving caches in Minnesota? Anyone willing to share who approved their recent caches?

rickrich · Geocacher Joined: 06 Jul 2003 Posts: 673

mtn-man usually offers the last ciggy and pulls the trapdoor lever around here.