Thanks Thanks:  3
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: What is the GAGB

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    0

    Default What is the GAGB

    What in your opinion is the purpose of theGAGB?

    How would you communicate this to the members and the broader community?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    newcastle upon tyne (cullercoats)
    Posts
    63

    Default

    the purpose of the GAGB has to be that of the voice of the caching community,the gagb has to be more proactive and be seen, we also need regional representatives especially in areas that there is no committee member, we need to be speaking to people find out what they want and also tell them about whats going on we need to include all members this could be done with a simple GAGB regional meet and greet.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Warfield, Berkshire
    Posts
    436

    Default

    GAGB is an association for some UK Geocachers, maintaining a database of land owner permissions, forum and publishing an online magazine. It survives mostly because of goodwill and appreciation that the land owner database is essential. Membership benefits are discounts to some Gecaching stores and ability to shape the organisation through annual elections.

    I would like GAGB to be the pre-eminent Geocaching organisation in UK, respresenting the overwhelming majority of our UK Geocaching community in their interactions with land owners, authorities and listing sites. GAGB membership should be the obvious choice because we should provide a wealth of valued benefits that our members make regular use of.

    We can take a steer from the British Canoe Union and British Mountaineering Council, both of which have similar issues to GAGB, and to a lesser extent from the Ramblers Association, but most importantly, from our members and potential members.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    369

    Default

    I beleive that the purpoose of the GAGB is to be used as a force for improving British geocaching as a whole and as it already offers a wide ranging variety of services (Seeker, Discounts and the land owner database being the biggest 3) I would seek to expand them by furthering the work laid down by the past 2 committee's and improving the relationship of the GAGB with the general caching commuity by reaching out to everyone across the forums and not ignoring people because they
    didn't have the chance to get to an event. If anyone has an issue they want to discuss (if I am elected) I WILL be there to listen to them no matter what.

    Thanks
    Dominic

  5. #5

    Default

    I asked the same question, firstly when I was invited to vote for Zomblou as a committee member and secondly when I was invited to run for election to it myself

    It's true that I've made very little use of the site or the organisation myself in the roughly 2.5 years I've been geocaching.

    I'm aware that there's a landowner permission database of some kind - but have never made use of it, instead negotiating individual permissions myself. More recently I've come to understand that the database is in need of an update too.

    I'm aware that there are forums here and prior to these recent elections these forums seemed fairly quiet. That's not unusual though - activity on those other geocaching forums I'm active in has dwindled to almost nothing over the past 2.5 years too - I suspect as more people migrate over to Facebook etc.

    And from delving into those threads which have arisen around the elections, it seems that the GAGB itself isn't quite sure or, to frame more positively, is recognising the fact that it's probably time to review and reshape the organisation in order to improve relevance / membership / support moving forward.

    Personally I'd like to think that GAGB can become what I think it originally set out to be - the voice of GB cachers and a bridge between cachers and non-cachers. And maybe it can - with the cooperation and support I think of the major listing sites.

    Which is where I think difficulties might start to arise.

    Why do I think that?

    Let's imagine I'm a landowner for a moment...

    A GAGB representative contacts me to ask for an agreement to allow the placing of geocaches on my land.

    I'm not averse to the idea - but I want to make sure there are reasonable rules in place to ensure that I don't suffer as a result of granting this permission.

    GAGB hands over a list of - well, let's call them rules for now - and tells me that geocachers play by these rules.

    Problem is, geocaching is organic - nobody owns it - and there's no actual quality control in place which ensures that geocachers play by those rules - particularly as each listing site (I imagine - I haven't researched in any depth) has its own variation on a theme.

    So how do I feel, as the landowner, when a geocacher who favours another listing site, which has guidelines which differ from the GAGB standard, places a cache outside the scope I as the landowner agreed to - and then points to the fact I've given a blanket permission agreement via GAGB?

    Who sorts it out?

    GAGB? The listing site in question? Am I left between two chairs?

    Surely if GAGB seeks to be the voice of GB geocachers, and the bridge between cachers and non-cachers - and seeks to negotiate landowner permission agreements on the basis of a set of agreed guidelines - then those guidelines MUST span all listing sites?

    In summary, I think that being the voice of GB geocachers (if that it what GAGB seeks to be) will require greater integration between GAGB and the major listing sites. I don't see how we can have one, without the other.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    369

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    I asked the same question, firstly when I was invited to vote for Zomblou as a committee member and secondly when I was invited to run for election to it myself

    It's true that I've made very little use of the site or the organisation myself in the roughly 2.5 years I've been geocaching.

    I'm aware that there's a landowner permission database of some kind - but have never made use of it, instead negotiating individual permissions myself. More recently I've come to understand that the database is in need of an update too.

    I'm aware that there are forums here and prior to these recent elections these forums seemed fairly quiet. That's not unusual though - activity on those other geocaching forums I'm active in has dwindled to almost nothing over the past 2.5 years too - I suspect as more people migrate over to Facebook etc.

    And from delving into those threads which have arisen around the elections, it seems that the GAGB itself isn't quite sure or, to frame more positively, is recognising the fact that it's probably time to review and reshape the organisation in order to improve relevance / membership / support moving forward.

    Personally I'd like to think that GAGB can become what I think it originally set out to be - the voice of GB cachers and a bridge between cachers and non-cachers. And maybe it can - with the cooperation and support I think of the major listing sites.

    Which is where I think difficulties might start to arise.

    Why do I think that?

    Let's imagine I'm a landowner for a moment...

    A GAGB representative contacts me to ask for an agreement to allow the placing of geocaches on my land.

    I'm not averse to the idea - but I want to make sure there are reasonable rules in place to ensure that I don't suffer as a result of granting this permission.

    GAGB hands over a list of - well, let's call them rules for now - and tells me that geocachers play by these rules.

    Problem is, geocaching is organic - nobody owns it - and there's no actual quality control in place which ensures that geocachers play by those rules - particularly as each listing site (I imagine - I haven't researched in any depth) has its own variation on a theme.

    So how do I feel, as the landowner, when a geocacher who favours another listing site, which has guidelines which differ from the GAGB standard, places a cache outside the scope I as the landowner agreed to - and then points to the fact I've given a blanket permission agreement via GAGB?

    Who sorts it out?

    GAGB? The listing site in question? Am I left between two chairs?

    Surely if GAGB seeks to be the voice of GB geocachers, and the bridge between cachers and non-cachers - and seeks to negotiate landowner permission agreements on the basis of a set of agreed guidelines - then those guidelines MUST span all listing sites?

    In summary, I think that being the voice of GB geocachers (if that it what GAGB seeks to be) will require greater integration between GAGB and the major listing sites. I don't see how we can have one, without the other.
    As an OC UK Committee Member I find that Comment slightly Biased because our guidelines are more extensive and cover a wider range of eventualties than the GAGB Guidelines do.

    Thanks
    Dominic

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by geocaching womble View Post
    As an OC UK Committee Member I find that Comment slightly Biased because our guidelines are more extensive and cover a wider range of eventualties than the GAGB Guidelines do.

    Thanks
    Dominic
    You've quoted my entire post.

    So which comment in particular do you find slightly biased?

    And you've probably actually proven my point - that as things stand, GAGB cannot responsibly be the voice of GB geocachers in terms of guideline compliance and landowner agreements - because each listing site does things differently

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    369

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    You've quoted my entire post.

    So which comment in particular do you find slightly biased?

    And you've probably actually proven my point - that as things stand, GAGB cannot responsibly be the voice of GB geocachers in terms of guideline compliance and landowner agreements - because each listing site does things differently
    Thats exactly why I want to rewite the Guidelines from scratch working with ALL Listing sites if I take office and as to answer your question I found the entire post slightly Baised

    Thanks
    Geocaching Womble (Dominic)

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by geocaching womble View Post
    Thats exactly why I want to rewite the Guidelines from scratch working with ALL Listing sites if I take office and as to answer your question I found the entire post slightly Baised

    Thanks
    Geocaching Womble (Dominic)
    Good - something we're agreed on :cheers:

    Biased how?

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    369

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post

    Biased how?
    I felt it was slanted at a slightly slanderous dig and towards me and my campaign and more OC UK centred (about our laidback management style) sorry if that was not your intent but that was what I felt the post read

    Thanks
    Dominic
    Last edited by geocaching womble; 18th November 2012 at 02:55 PM.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by geocaching womble View Post
    I felt it was slanted at a slightly slanderous dig and my campaign at more OC UK centred (about our laidback management style) sorry if that was not your intent but that what I felt the post read

    Thanks
    Dominic
    It wasn't - I promise you that.

    I wasn't saying that the guidelines operated by any particular listing site were any better or worse than any other listing site - with the main reason being that I've never looked at the guidelines on any listing site other than geocaching.com - which I've built up detailed knowledge of.

    So it might be fair to say that I am baised towards geocaching.com - but only because that't the only listing site I've ever felt the need to use.

    If that goes against my suitability for election then so be it - although I don't see why it should

    So I would fully endorse GAGB reviewing its own guidelines against those of all the major listing sites - AND vice-versa.

    I'm probably cross-posting again but - here's a bunch of thoughts / perceptions in no particular order...

    GAGB 'wants' to be the voice of GB geocachers.

    GAGB 'wants' to offer landowner permission negotiation as a service to its members.

    At that point GAGB takes some level of responsibility as the bridge between that landowner and the game as a whole.

    So GAGB needs to ensure that it speaks in an informed manner - with the support of those listing sites whose members might later USE the permissions negotiated by GAGB.

    So why not look at establishing partnerships of some form between GAGB and the listing sites - so that we can put our heads together and build AT LEAST a core of guidelines which are common to all?

    THEN each listing site might be persuaded to 'advertise' the fact that its own guidelines fulfill the core requirements of the GAGB guidelines which - of course - are the core guidelines all geocachers adhere / aspire to.

    Which in turn will bring GAGB into cacher's field of vision - increasing awareness and hopefully membership and in turn more cachers informing the permissions database?

    So, in simple terms, each listing site with guidelines which include GAGB's core guidelines gets a 'seal of approval' from GAGB.

    And then - cachers who adhere to those core guidelines and wish to promote them - also get a seal of approval - I'm seeing a graphic which they can include in the cache pages - further promoting GAGB and linking back to the GAGB website.

    And so on...

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    369

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    It wasn't - I promise you that.

    I wasn't saying that the guidelines operated by any particular listing site were any better or worse than any other listing site - with the main reason being that I've never looked at the guidelines on any listing site other than geocaching.com - which I've built up detailed knowledge of.

    So it might be fair to say that I am baised towards geocaching.com - but only because that't the only listing site I've ever felt the need to use.

    If that goes against my suitability for election then so be it - although I don't see why it should

    So I would fully endorse GAGB reviewing its own guidelines against those of all the major listing sites - AND vice-versa.

    I'm probably cross-posting again but - here's a bunch of thoughts / perceptions in no particular order...

    GAGB 'wants' to be the voice of GB geocachers.

    GAGB 'wants' to offer landowner permission negotiation as a service to its members.

    At that point GAGB takes some level of responsibility as the bridge between that landowner and the game as a whole.

    So GAGB needs to ensure that it speaks in an informed manner - with the support of those listing sites whose members might later USE the permissions negotiated by GAGB.

    So why not look at establishing partnerships of some form between GAGB and the listing sites - so that we can put our heads together and build AT LEAST a core of guidelines which are common to all?

    THEN each listing site might be persuaded to 'advertise' the fact that its own guidelines fulfill the core requirements of the GAGB guidelines which - of course - are the core guidelines all geocachers adhere / aspire to.

    Which in turn will bring GAGB into cacher's field of vision - increasing awareness and hopefully membership and in turn more cachers informing the permissions database?

    So, in simple terms, each listing site with guidelines which include GAGB's core guidelines gets a 'seal of approval' from GAGB.

    And then - cachers who adhere to those core guidelines and wish to promote them - also get a seal of approval - I'm seeing a graphic which they can include in the cache pages - further promoting GAGB and linking back to the GAGB website.

    And so on...
    First of all apology accepeted and secondly you've just described exactly what I am going to do If I get to to office with regards to the guidelines anyway

    Thanks
    Dominic
    Last edited by geocaching womble; 18th November 2012 at 10:58 AM.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by geocaching womble View Post
    First of all apology accepeted and secondly you've just described exactly what I am going to do If I get to to office with regards to the guidelines anyway

    Thanks
    Dominic
    I didn't apologise - as I had nothing to apologise for.

    EDIT TO ADD:

    And while I admire your obvious enhusiasm and drive, I assume any decision making process which might lead to that outcome will be at committee rather than individual level and will take into account the views of the members.

    And while your own perspective would no doubt be a useful inclusion in that process, given your strong association with one of the listing sites, we would need to make sure that the process was seen to be transparent and obviously free from bias or the perception of it.
    Last edited by Team Microdot; 18th November 2012 at 12:56 PM.

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    369

    Default

    Yes, obviously that would be a cheif concern, however I would be making the guidelines free from ALL Bias by reaching out to representatives from all listing sites (Including Garmin's opencaching.com) to Come up with a workable and completely universally agreed (by every listing site and then have them debated with the membership) that everyone feels proud to be a part of. However despite my longstanding association with OC UK. If I am elected I WILL Be Completely impartial as per the role dictated by my office.

    Thanks
    Dominic
    Last edited by geocaching womble; 18th November 2012 at 01:55 PM.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    I didn't apologise - as I had nothing to apologise for.
    Quote Originally Posted by geocaching womble View Post
    Actually you did apologise even if you didn't mean to

    Thanks
    Dominic
    No Dominic - I didn't apologise, and if you're determined to play silly games like that you'll need to find someone else to play them with.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •