Briefje naar GC.com

[Peetee]

Zoals bekend, gisteravond verstuurd:

 

Dear Yotian Soldier,

 

On last August 29. Remco (aka Hawkeyes, one of the geocaching.nl moderators)

informed us about your e-mail to the moderator-team of the Dutch

Geocaching.nl forum.

In this e-mail you informed them about a 'group of Dutch geocachers' who

asked you to force us, Dutch geocachers, to ask permission to the owners of

the areas where we hide our caches in, and mention that in the

cache-descriptions that you (dis-)approve.

 

In all cases:

- doesn't matter in what place or area we hide our caches in.

- doesn't matter whether the owner of the area thinks it's neccessary to ask

permission or not.

 

As geocachers we would like to ask you a few questions about that:

- What reasons do you have not to leave the responsibility for asking

permission with the geocachers that place the caches?

- Why take the word of just a small group of Dutch cachers, that complain

about Dutch caches, and act on that?

- Why just óne approving policy, where asking permission is concerned, for

all areas in the Netherlands:

    - doesn't matter whether the area is a nature reserve or not

    - doesn't matter whether the area is public or private

 

We recognise the responsibility that you might feel as an organisation, but

nevertheless we would like you to recognise the fact that we as Dutch

geocachers can take our own responsibility.

 

We think we are all responsible, adult people, who feel they are not being

taken too seriously by the sharp rules that you think you have to handle. We

feel no need to being "mothered" by the .com-team.

 

Hope to hear from you soon. Preferrably we would like you to reply on the

forum of www.geocaching.nl, as a lot of Dutch geocachers don't understand

why you impose the rules upon us as you do now.

By replying on the forum you would allow them to participate in the

discussion.

 

 

Another group of Dutch geocachers:

 

Chamsin/Dutch-Locutus/Kruimeldief/Peetee

[Peetee]

Snelle reactie van Yotian Soldier:

 

Dear Peetee,

thanks for your email.

 

first of all: The permission thing is not forced on you, it is just a baserule of www.geocaching.com (also see our guidlines (line 11 or so) it is stated there quite clear: http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx)

and that in fact just means that if you want to post your caches in our database you need to ask permission for those caches.

We are not too strickt of course with this rule (if a cache is placed inside a big city (clearly not in a park) or industrial area it is sometimes quite hard to trace the owner of the tree that is just beside the road in front of your house.....). But if we can find the owner (on the internet with not too much searching and translating) of the terrain that a geocacher would like to place a cache, the rule surely DOES (and will) rule!

 

so for the rest I took the liberty of quoting your questions and stripping the rest and adding my answeres:

 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Geocaching.com User Email BOT"

Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 12:39:16 -0700

To: yotian_soldier@europe.com

Subject: Peetee contacting you from Geocaching.com

 

- What reasons do you have not to leave the responsibility for asking permission with the geocachers that place the caches?

- Main reason is that we would like the sport to be in BRIGHT daylight, and that means that we want that (land / park / nature / property) owners (and keepers) to know what is going on on their turf (geocaching wise that is). If these owners run into a chace and they don't even know what geocaching is (because some bonehead just dumpt a cache there without asking) this owner will be pissed and send us an email and dispromote (giving off on) geocaching. As this is something we want to rule out we created this rule.

 

- Why take the word of just a small group of Dutch cachers, that complain about Dutch caches, and act on that?

- The complaint was not about the caches, they did run into forrestry guys as they were of track (by 25 meters or so) and the forrestry guys were flapping with their ears as they listened to the story about geocaching. So these geocachers did not like the fact that they were doing something illegal (by law) without knowing this. As I explained above this is one of our baserules and we do not want to concess on it. Here we thought that all the dutch caches were placed with permission. The email I had from these two cases (were two different geocachers came across a coulple of forrestry guys wile they were caching (and not just one cache but four) that did not know of geocaching at all) made it clear that asking permission is not such a common thing in the Netherlands for geocachers. (This thought was really enstronged by the comments given in the forum on the dutch geocaching website (http://www.geocaching.com/forum) in the topics about asking permission. As we have some of our staff that can translate dutch quite ok we were shocked by the reactions and comments.....

 

- Why just óne approving policy, where asking permission is concerned, for all areas in the Netherlands: 

- In fact is is one policy for ALL caches all over the world (check out our guidelines).

 

  - doesn't matter whether the area is a nature reserve or not

  - well to us it DOES.... when a cache is place in a reserve permission is a must, no discussion, when placed in urban areas (where no owner is easy found) we sometimes approve caches that are placed without anybody giving permission for the caches. But this is only in caces where we cant find owners of areas.

 

  - doesn't matter whether the area is public or private

  - you are right here, if it is nature -> permission (no discussion, private or public)

 

- We recognise the responsibility that you might feel as an organisation, but nevertheless we would like you to recognise the fact that we as Dutch geocachers can take our own responsibility.  We think we are all responsible, adult people, who feel they are not being taken too seriously by the sharp rules that you think you have to handle.

- Again you have proven to us otherwise, just this week a geocacher posted that he had permission of PIET DE VRIES (a farmiliar name if you read your forums....) and in an email reply to me asking if he had permission for this cache he said that he did not need permission as there was no owner to the cache site. After just three minutes of searching (with www.google.com, mapquest and an internet translator) on the net I was able to find the owner of the terrain he wanted to place a cache in.

So to me that is not taking responsibility....that is just lying, and not wanting to take three minutes to try and find out whom the owner is of a nice spot you want to place a cache in.

 

- We feel no need to being "mothered" by the .com-team.

- We do not want to mother, just act responsible and we will treat you likewise, there are quite a few dutch geocachers that pass the approving with no extra effort....so it is possible.

 

 

- Preferrably we would like you to reply on the forum of www.geocaching.nl, as a lot of Dutch geocachers don't understand why you impose the rules upon us as you do now.

- You may post this COMPLETE email in your forums, I will also send it to Hawkeyes (as you all seem to know him) and ask him to post it if you do not.

 

- By replying on the forum you would allow them to participate in the discussion.

- There is no discussion needed as we see it....just act as a responsible geocacher and we will treat you likewise.

 

Many greetings,

Yotian Soldier

[Heirbaut Hunters]

Fijn dat die man het allemaal zo goed opneemt. Jammer dat ik er niks aan heb. Ik had wel eens weten hoe we, volgens YS, moeten omgaan met de veelheid van eigenaren van vooral bosgebieden.

Nu wijst hij er op dat ze regels hebben (dat wist ik al) en daar wijst hij ons weer op. Maar hij zegt er niet bij hoe je met de regels moet omgaan. Ik vind zijn reactie nogal "Amerikaans" in de zin van "wij weten alles beter".

 

Dus conclusie: wat moeten we met zijn antwoord?

[Peetee]

De reactie van de .com-site, verwoord door Yotian Soldier, doorlezend vallen mij in elk geval een paar dingen op:

 

1. De brief is héél duidelijk.

2. De gestelde regels zijn héél duidelijk.

3. Deze regels staan niet ter discussie.

4. De .com controleert, en laat daarmee de verantwoordelijkheid voor het wel of geen toestemming hebben voor plaatsing uitdrukkelijk níet bij de plaatser van de cache, maar trekt die naar zich toe.

5. De toestemmingsregel wordt niet in alle gevallen zwart/wit toegepast. Overleg hierover is echter alleen in zeer speciale omstandigheden mogelijk.

 

Dus conclusie: wat moeten we met zijn antwoord?

Tja, dat zal een ieder voor zich uit moeten maken. Ik ben daar nog niet uit.

[Heirbaut Hunters]

heb je al ge-clicked op de link naar de guidelines. Doet het niet. Regels zijn afgeschaft

 

 

Oke, beetje flauw...

[dutch-locutus]

Een duidelijke vraag van ons en een duidenlijk antwoord.

Face it, zolang we aan de .com site vast zitten zullen we aan hun regels moeten geloven...of we het willen of niet.

Ik denk dat we met verdere discussie aan zijn adres niet veel goeds doen aan de relatie met de aprovers.

Hij was duidenlijk kwaad over het feit dat hem voor een bepaalde cache valse info over de toestemming is verstrekt.

 

Nogmaals we hebben een nette brief gestuurd, en hij heeft netjes geantwoord, ik denk dat het niet verstandig is het verder op de spits te drijven.

 

locutus

[Heirbaut Hunters]

Ik begrijp iets niet:

De .com controleert, en laat daarmee de verantwoordelijkheid voor het wel of geen toestemming hebben voor plaatsing uitdrukkelijk níet bij de plaatser van de cache, maar trekt die naar zich toe.

 

Hoe kun je een hollander met verantwoordelijkheidsgevoel wat laten plaatsen, dan daar de verantwoordelijkheid van overnemen, en dan vervolgens tegen de geocachers (de zoekers) zeggen dat ze geen enkele verantwoordelijkheid aanvaarden? Staat immers met koeieletters boven elke uitgeprinte cachepage.

 

You assume all risks involved seeking a cache. By using this printout you agree to the disclaimer posted at http://www.geocaching.com/disclaimer.asp

 

Aanklagen en miljoenen eisen voor gelden psychische schade.

[remco.1971]

Als het goed is heeft Petee ook berichtje terug gehad op zijn reactie op de reactie op de door hem gestuurde emeel ( volgen we het nog? ik moest het echt drie keer nalezen ) (die heeft ie namelijk gepost toen we aan het online beppen waren).

Misschien handig als die hier ook ff geplaatst wordt..

Groeten en Petee ook dank voor je inzet, hielp mee in lobbie.

Remco

[Kruimeldief]

Als het goed is heeft Petee ook berichtje terug gehad op zijn reactie op de reactie op de door hem gestuurde emeel  (   volgen we het nog? ik moest het echt drie keer nalezen  ) (die heeft ie namelijk gepost toen we aan het online beppen waren).

Misschien handig als die hier ook ff geplaatst wordt..

Groeten en Petee ook dank voor je inzet, hielp mee in lobbie.

Remco

Ik kan het wel volgen ja.

 

GRTZ

 

Kruimeldief

 

Wij kunnen ons werk op drie manieren doen: goed, snel en goedkoop. U mag er twee kiezen...

1 Goed en snel, niet goedkoop.

2 Snel en goedkoop, niet goed.

3 Goedkoop en goed, niet snel.

[Peetee]

Goed, ik begrijp dat van mij verwacht wordt dat ik hier mijn laatste briefje en de reactie daarop van Yotian Soldier ga plaatsen, hoewel ik in eerste instantie toegezegd had dat niet te doen.

 

Daarom, hierbij:

 

Hello Yotian Soldier,

 

Thank you for your quick and clear response. As you have probably seen (or

heard from the .nl-team) I placed your letter on the .nl-forum.

 

For me personally the response was a disappointment, because I believe your

response expresses several negative attitudes towards the Dutch geocaching

community:

- you don't trust the people that post at your site

- you believe that people cannot be responsible for their own behaviour, so

you take the reponsibility away from them.

I think that is a disrespectful way of treating people.

 

Personally, I believe more in convincing people, instead of forcing people

to do what I believe is right. As you can read in the forum I tried to do

that for several times, concerning the placing of caches: You may not

believe it, but I'm in favour of asking permission. Not because the

.com-team wants me to, but because the keepers let us know that they would

appreciate it.

 

I also believe that the Dutch geocaching sites could help in the effort by

creating a easy and transparent way of communication towards the several

organisations involved in placing caches, instead of blindly following the

.com rules.

This way they would create a surrounding where cachers and keepers could be

talking with each other, instead of talking about each other.

 

I also believe that your way of approving will have an unwanted effect. Only

those areas where people (owners/keepers) are reachable caches will be

placed in. As facts are now, that will mostly be SBB.

Besides that, I believe a lot of other caches will be denied for all the

wrong reasons. Not to be bothered by cachers and their stupid game will be

one of those reasons.

 

I also believe that you are under-estimating Dutch bureaucracy. If I

send a letter to our city hall, I know I will not get a first response for

at least two or three weeks, and that response would only be the statement

that they got my letter and will answer as soon as possible. I know that to

be a fact. Believe me, I've been there several times. I don't even want to

think about writing to the province or the state.

 

Ok, my letter has already gotten longer than I had expected, so I'm going to

stop now. I only felt I had to write this.

I'm not planning to place this letter on the forum, as it it a purely personal.

 

Greetz,

Peetee.

 

Hierop de volgende reactie:

Ok in all....I will respect you all....on one condition....just all do the same with geocaching (respect it!).

 

I will go back to approving as I did (I will go by that permission is asked when possible and if it is not stated there is no easy way of finding out whom the owner is).

 

There is only one condition:

I you (anyone of the dutch geocachers) violates my trust (for the second time) there will be no buts and pieces for a very long time.

 

I will ask Hawkeyes once again if he wants to help out so communication might be a bit quicker.

 

Please post this post in also in the forums and BE SURE all the active geocachers READ & UNDERSTAND it! If there are any questions just ask.

 

greetings,

Yotian Soldier

--

[leokrabbendam]

Peetee,

 

 

Sapperdeflap..... toch nog !

 

Klassebrieven, maar vooral je laatste !

 

Petje af !

[dutch-locutus]

Gefeliciteerd iedereen, nu nog even alle neuzen van geocachend Nederland op 1 lijn krijgen.

 

Op deze plek stond een idee over wat huisregels maken betrefende ons gedrag in de natuur.

Gezien de 1e reacties door mij verwijderd, ik wil niet de starter zijn van nog een lange discussie.

Ik hoop dat de rust weer terug keert en dat nieuwe problemen uitblijven.

 

Laten we allemaal wel goed nadenken over alles wat in de laatse weken besproken is zodra je weer wat plaats of als je weer aan het zoeken bent.

Yotian soldier heeft water bij de wijn gedaan, en daar moeten we blij me zijn.

Laten we nu met zijn allen zorgen dat hij niet weer de neiging krijgt in te grijpen.

 

Keep geohunting.

 

Groeten, Dutch-Locutus

[Heirbaut Hunters]

Nee, asteblief, niet NOG meer regels; al helemaal geen Nederlandse. Het is allemaal al duidelijk en voldoende gereguleerd. Stop ook asteblief met discussies over regels; voor je het weet hebben we het allemaal weer complex en bijna onwerkbaar gemaakt.

'T is mooi zo.

[TeamTobi]

Klaar !

[Kruimeldief]

Ik zeg helemaal niets meer, voordat ik afgeschoten wordt.

 

Lekker wel de ex-illegale cache van Ronnie gelopen vanmiddag. Ik zal het straks loggen. Voor degene die niet langer kan wachten, de cache is ontmaagd en er is voor wat approving betreft echt helemaal niets mis mee. En dat is serieus en niet omdat ik tegen de Amerikaanse inbreng ben.

 

GRTZ

 

Kruimeldief die straks ook ff een cache gaat laten approven

 

We shall see, huiver en schuiver, hibber en bibber