Should we form a Geocaching Maine Organization?

I have discussed this with several geocachers in PMs and emails the topic is our web site and starting an organization. I was just asking a few opinions on this. I know sooner or later a rumor may start saying I was trying to organize an organization. So I am stepping forward now before the rumor starts or someone puts a twist to it. I was not trying to start an organization. I asked a few geocachers the following questions:

I am writing to you to get your opinion on whether or not you think we should become an organization? Do we truely want monthly meetings and dues? I feel that we really do not need to be anything more than we are Geocachers!! I would like to hear your opinion on this.

So instead of asking the few people I was sending messages to I thought it would be better to include everyone in the question, like it should have been done in the first place. I apologize for not doing this.

Here is the vote, Keep in mind you can only vote once and read the rules for responding to this thread before you respond.

RULES FOR RESPONDING

1. Please respond with appropriate and legitimate answers and stay on topic.
2. This has nothing to do with MGA so do not refer to them at all or reference them because this pertains to us. If you reference them your response will be deleted.

Now that I have started this vote and response area I would like to give my ideas on this.

I see no reason why we need to create an organization. If you think about it right now we are already pretty much an organization with the web site holding us together. We stay in contact with each other and that is what an organization does. We usually have caching events pretty much at a rate of once a month through out the year and sometimes more. These events are organized geocaching events and in my opinion what I consider our organization.

Even though we are already registered with the IRS as a nonprofit organization I see no need to actually form a group of board members. If we did what purpose would they serve? Everything we need to accomplish can be done in the web site forums and be put to a vote there. I see no reason to charge for membership fees. What would the money go towards? There is a donation area on the web site’s front page that you can use to donate to the web site. When you do this it goes toward the server cost and the software renewal fees. Any extra money stays on hand in the geocachingmaine paypal account and if we ever accumulate any money that become a substantial amount then we will post it in the forums and vote on what we want to do with it.

Well that is all that I can think of at this time. If I have any more to say I will post it as I think of it.

Rick, I'll vote "NO". I've been involved with other activities that brought together a loose knit group on an ad hoc basis. With time, the idea for an organized club seemed to be a good idea. We ended up with a full corporation, and a budget in the multi-thousands of dollars. It became a business, and really ended up not being anywhere near as fun as the "let's all get together this weekend" type events we had previously had. Over time, we got in trouble with the IRS, club funds were mis-managed, and the club finally disbanded with many hard feelings. I therefore vote to keep the status quo--we're having fun the way things are and I see no reason to change. Just MHO, of course.

I'm not really decided right now... seriously, it's geocaching... have we ever needed such things to govern us in the past? are the gc.com guidelines not enough? Do we really need to spend money on a membership card that says we belong? We all have our own ideas about geocaching, we all play in different ways, that's the beautiful thing about geocaching, it's like driving, you go to driving school and learn the basics, then you're on your own. everyone has their own ways to drive, sometimes we like the way people drive, sometimes we dont, but we govern (most of us do) ourselves when we drive... it works out pretty good that way, everyone has an understanding of the way things work and it just falls into place (like the traffic circles). If the site was turned into an organization I probably wouldn't join (I pay too many dues for other things already, I donate to the site because I enjoy it, and I want to see it continue) I cache for enjoyment, to get away from everything, geocaching is my escape, I don't want it cluttered up with meetings and dues and other stuff like that. So that's my two cents. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The G Team

I therefore vote to keep the status quo--we're having fun the way things are and I see no reason to change.

---

ya know I could've saved a lot of time typing my response if you would've been a little quicker so I could just quoted this and been done with it. :D

God no. No more rules!!!!!!!!!!:D

My vote is a very emphatic NO! I don't SAY alot in this forum, but I read it almost every day....and enjoy everyone's personalities...good, bad and indifferent. I am a donating member, but I don't want to HAVE to pay. I pay because it's a fun group of people and I want to help pay Rick's expenses. I don't want to pay just to have someone write up a bunch of rules.:D :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mainelyroses

My vote is a very emphatic NO! I don't SAY alot in this forum, but I read it almost every day....and enjoy everyone's personalities...good, bad and indifferent. I am a donating member, but I don't want to HAVE to pay. I pay because it's a fun group of people and I want to help pay Rick's expenses. I don't want to pay just to have someone write up a bunch of rules.:D :rolleyes:

---

ditto, if I want someone to yell at me and tell me i'm caching the wrong way... i'll just bring the wife with me. :eek: :D :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mainelyroses

My vote is a very emphatic NO! I don't SAY alot in this forum, but I read it almost every day....and enjoy everyone's personalities...good, bad and indifferent. I am a donating member, but I don't want to HAVE to pay. I pay because it's a fun group of people and I want to help pay Rick's expenses. I don't want to pay just to have someone write up a bunch of rules.:D :rolleyes:

---

Well said!:) I wholeheartedly agree. :D

YES!

Just kidding....

I like the "just geocaching term" Put me down for a grand ol' NO... Thanks.

I don't see how we can do anything as an organization better than we can do as the group we are right now. If a problem or a need arises in the geocaching community, we can discuss what needs to be done as a group, and get together a few willing cachers to see that the job gets done. And the more members we include in these decisions, the more that decision reflects on the Maine geocaching community as a whole, and it uses the maximum resources we have available to us.

I know personally,Ive always stay away from organizations because of all the rules and the politics that are involved.We all know people that belong to volunteer fire departments,rescue squads, American Legion,etc.,good freinds that because of the rules no longer speak to one another.That shouldn't be us!!!

I thought THE place to go for geocaching in Maine has and always will be "The woods":rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mainiac1957

I thought THE place to go for geocaching in Maine has and always will be "The woods":rolleyes:

---

OK, wise guy, good point! LOL! (I've made the comment clearer.) :p :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dave1976

God no. No more rules!!!!!!!!!!:D

---

I don't think I have to elaborate too much on this.:D

I would like to have seen some form of official organization here that would have given the folks here a united voice, a united front againt any adversity. By organization I don't think there is a need to dictate how we cache but a place for the non-geocaching community to interface with us.
This is our chance to put a name forward, an elected person(s), that we could put out in the public to promote caching and be the liaison for answering question. Rick does answer question regarding the forums and does a fantastic job!! My desire to organize is not a reflection on these forums as I think these forums are awesome!!!!

Some States have banned geocaching and we should take the preemptive measures to have a united front for just such an event (or similar event). This may never happen but if it does we here will be reliant on the officially organized groups to represent us. These forum are great and I never want to say otherwise but if we want to stop non-geocaching restrains on us then we need to be organized in the event something like the above happens. If we wait to organize then it will be to late and our only option will be to back the "other" organization to protect geocaching.

Many folks here think an organization is about the dues and the rules. It doesn't have to be that way. Firstly, let me say that these forum DO have rules (look at the user agreement) and the donation button, without it the cost is shifted to Attroll who does a great job and shouldn't be burdened with the cost. This reminds me of a Tim Sample phrasology, " You can put a kitten in an oven but that won't make it a bisquit." Dues / donation , Rules/User agreement, there is little difference in my opinion. I chose to make a donation and I would chose to pay dues. I chose to abide by the user agreement and I would abide by the rules.

I also wanted to mention that with all the private land trust and preserve that we place our caches on, that I would think having one person represent Maine geocaching and getting official permission to place caches on their property is better than having individuals. One of my reasons is the commitment an organization would show versus an individual. By putting GeocachingMaine.org signature on the permission slip shows that all member feel that way about using their property. We all know that some cachers lose interest in the sport (I can't fathom that but.....); if that indiviidual had permission to cache on a certain piece of property, he/she takes that permission with them when they leave the sport. While individuals come and go the organization would be perpetual and keep the permission for all geocachers.

I hope people can stop and see the trees though the forest. An organization is not a negative thing. There does not have to be more restrictive rules and dues can still be a donation. Even this site shows priviledge by donation with a "members only" thread. This site could be kept free but dues paying members could help set policy that will help guide Maine Geocachers well into the future. That doesn't mean that a donating member would not listen to the general opinions of all geocachers, rather I would hope that they would.

Meetings don't have to be monthly. They could be annually or even per deim if that is how the organization is outlined. This doesn't have to be a business even though some feel that it will be. There are many super large organzitions that only meet 4 time a year, the one I'm familiar with would be the Safari Club, they do lots to promote themselves but don't limit the activity of their members at all.

Everyday there are more folks entering geocaching. The numbers of people out there will increase public perception of us, either good or bad, and I think we need to be prepared to deal with that. I don't think organizing should be viewed as a way to contain geocachers rather as a way to promote our sport with one loud voice instead of many whispered voices. We have the opportunity to do good things beyond these forums and will only be able to do that if we can show that we are united.


IMHO

Cache On!!!!!

Why fix something that "ain't" broke! I like it just the way it is!
Twin 2 of Hiker Twins

I generally stay out of these discussions, but I like the freedom and flexibility of the way things are right now. I think an organization adds a level of complexity that doesn't exist now, and I think it's great this way.

There are two types of people... those that group people into categories, and those that don't. I belong to the latter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trezurs*-R-*Fun

I also wanted to mention that with all the private land trust and preserve that we place our caches on, that I would think having one person represent Maine geocaching and getting official permission to place caches on their property is better than having individuals. One of my reasons is the commitment an organization would show versus an individual. By putting GeocachingMaine.org signature on the permission slip shows that all member feel that way about using their property. We all know that some cachers lose interest in the sport (I can't fathom that but.....); if that indiviidual had permission to cache on a certain piece of property, he/she takes that permission with them when they leave the sport. While individuals come and go the organization would be perpetual and keep the permission for all geocachers.

---

Would it be any different if we appoint one or two people in our group to represent us as cachers for a particular land trust? And another one or two in another area that may need to be represented? Can't issues be discussed here as easily as they could at meetings, so that anyone interested can voice their thoughts and ideas? Does our word mean any more if we are an organization than if we are member of geocachingmaine.org speaking as a group?

I'd never join a group or orginization that would accept me anyway...

ok, maybe I would, but I don't think we need to "orginize"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brdad

Would it be any different if we appoint one or two people in our group to represent us as cachers for a particular land trust? And another one or two in another area that may need to be represented? Can't issues be discussed here as easily as they could at meetings, so that anyone interested can voice their thoughts and ideas? Does our word mean any more if we are an organization than if we are member of geocachingmaine.org speaking as a group?

---

The short answer is yes, in my opinion. An association or organization is structured and organization and structure is important in defining commitment. For example, if you were looking for answers to lets say the benefits of CPR in post cardiacarrest victims, would you seek your answers from a forum of loosely group parties that have little to no vested interest or would you goto the AHA (American Heart Association) that has proven its commitment.
These forum offer great information but lack a unified voice. We all have an idea of what geocaching should be but how do we pursue one agenda when several will be presented. We don't speak with one voice and as a result their has already been some folks that have splintered off and formed there own organization. When new cachers come along and see forums versus organization, especially one with the name MGA, I believe they will first look to the MGA for answers. This will further weaken these forums in the long run.

You asked me a question now let me pose one. How would organizing these forums hurt them or change them? Would it be so detrimental to have many voices internally but speak out publicly with one voice?

We can debate this back and forth all day long. I don't disagree with the folks here but what I'm afraid of is that when it comes time for policy that effect geocaching in the state of Maine, this group of folk will not have a voice. It will be hard to go to a policy/lawmaker and say, "we at the forums decided....", whereas the MGA will be able to say, "We have x number of vested members who have decided this is the course of action......" I understand that anything like that is a big if, but what if. I don't know which state it is but I'm under the understanding that geocaching is banned on all public property there. Who were the opposing parties to that law. Was there an organized group opposed to that legislation? I don't know the answers. On the other hand I don't see how organizing would be dangerous to these forums. We all donate and we all abide by rules set forth in the user agreement. The only thing lacking is the structure of an official organization/association.

Cache On!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trezurs*-R-*Fun

The short answer is yes, in my opinion. An association or organization is structured and organization and structure is important in defining commitment. For example, if you were looking for answers to lets say the benefits of CPR in post cardiacarrest victims, would you seek your answers from a forum of loosely group parties that have little to no vested interest or would you goto the AHA (American Heart Association) that has proven its commitment.
These forum offer great information but lack a unified voice. We all have an idea of what geocaching should be but how do we pursue one agenda when several will be presented. We don't speak with one voice and as a result their has already been some folks that have splintered off and formed there own organization. When new cachers come along and see forums versus organization, especially one with the name MGA, I believe they will first look to the MGA for answers. This will further weaken these forums in the long run.

You asked me a question now let me pose one. How would organizing these forums hurt them or change them? Would it be so detrimental to have many voices internally but speak out publicly with one voice?

We can debate this back and forth all day long. I don't disagree with the folks here but what I'm afraid of is that when it comes time for policy that effect geocaching in the state of Maine, this group of folk will not have a voice. It will be hard to go to a policy/lawmaker and say, "we at the forums decided....", whereas the MGA will be able to say, "We have x number of vested members who have decided this is the course of action......" I understand that anything like that is a big if, but what if. I don't know which state it is but I'm under the understanding that geocaching is banned on all public property there. Who were the opposing parties to that law. Was there an organized group opposed to that legislation? I don't know the answers. On the other hand I don't see how organizing would be dangerous to these forums. We all donate and we all abide by rules set forth in the user agreement. The only thing lacking is the structure of an official organization/association.

Cache On!!!!

---

you are begining to slightly sway my opinion... I'll have to cache on those thoughts for a few days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trezurs*-R-*Fun

These forum offer great information but lack a unified voice. We all have an idea of what geocaching should be but how do we pursue one agenda when several will be presented. We don't speak with one voice and as a result their has already been some folks that have splintered off and formed there own organization. When new cachers come along and see forums versus organization, especially one with the name MGA, I believe they will first look to the MGA for answers. This will further weaken these forums in the long run.

You asked me a question now let me pose one. How would organizing these forums hurt them or change them? Would it be so detrimental to have many voices internally but speak out publicly with one voice?

---

Sheesh! VERY well stated! Thanks. :D :D

And I again emphazise, that an organization does not have to be so formal as to have actual meetings. The "meetings" can be right here. And why would be need "officers"? We could have a poll and select 2-3 people to serve as spokesmen for the group - if it were required.

I think the idea needs to be thought out instead of a "no rules!" gut reaction.

IMHO... :) :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trezurs*-R-*Fun

For example, if you were looking for answers to lets say the benefits of CPR in post cardiacarrest victims, would you seek your answers from a forum of loosely group parties that have little to no vested interest or would you goto the AHA (American Heart Association) that has proven its commitment.

---

While in this example I most likely would choose the AHA, I don't think being an organization instantly proves your commitment. Only time can prove that, whether we are an official organization or not. And we do not have to be, nor do I think we are just a loosely grouped party. We are geocaching Maine, a group of cachers deciding what's best for Maine, just like we are doing in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trezurs*-R-*Fun

These forum offer great information but lack a unified voice. We all have an idea of what geocaching should be but how do we pursue one agenda when several will be presented. We don't speak with one voice and as a result their has already been some folks that have splintered off and formed there own organization.

---

I said in my previous post we could appoint people to represent us as one. Even in our government we appoint people to represent many, and half the time they voice their own opinion rather than the that of the whole. This can happen whether we stick with that we have or we are an organization. Either way, it would have to be policed by the rest of us, and if the appointed person(s) didn't follow through, we would have to appoint someone else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trezurs*-R-*Fun

You asked me a question now let me pose one. How would organizing these forums hurt them or change them? Would it be so detrimental to have many voices internally but speak out publicly with one voice?

---

I must admit I can't answer this one well. Mostly because I'm not sure how the politics of an organization seem to change things, but I know it often does. But it does seem like we want the end result; To have individuals speak for us as geocaching Maine. And I am not against that at all. But we can appoint those people as we are. Rick could even adda section on the site of people to contact if they have such questions for us. Perhaps you? Haffy? Someone else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhereRWe?

Sheesh! VERY well stated! Thanks. :D :D

And I again emphazise, that an organization does not have to be so formal as to have actual meetings. The "meetings" can be right here. And why would be need "officers"? We could have a poll and select 2-3 people to serve as spokesmen for the group - if it were required.

I think the idea needs to be thought out instead of a "no rules!" gut reaction.

IMHO... :) :)

---

Well, I guess this is where I get confused as to the where what we have stops and an organization begins....
Again, it appears we are looking for similar end results.
Perhaps the poll should be "Should we appoint a few persons to represent us when needed and to be added as a contact on the web site?"
Or do we need more trhan that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trezurs*-R-*Fun

On the other hand I don't see how organizing would be dangerous to these forums. We all donate and we all abide by rules set forth in the user agreement. The only thing lacking is the structure of an official organization/association.

Cache On!!!!

---

Having been a teacher for 35 years, I KNOW the importance of rules.:) My comments about "no rules" is of course facetious. ;) I'm talking more about unnecessary rules. AUP's have become a necessity with the advent of the internet to protect the websites and webmasters so we accept them. You raise some good points about having an official organization/association. As has been said before though, having meetings is difficult to get a good representation attending. Doing them here allows more members to participate which also allows for a much greater input and variety of ideas. Look how this thread has evolved. Keep the discussion going. I think we are making progress.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brdad

Again, it appears we are looking for similar end results.
Perhaps the poll should be "Should we appoint a few persons to represent us when needed and to be added as a contact on the web site?"
Or do we need more trhan that?

---

Right now we have a web site where cachers go to discuss geocaching (or beer drinking, or whatever). Great site, so mistake in that. But it's basically an open forum - no more. Having a name as an organization legitimizes us an an entity.

And I do like your suggestion... :D :D

So what is going to change. I voted No way for this since the beggining becuase I never liked the idea, it always seemed like there would just be more guide lines. Do this, dont do that, meet here meet there, send money for this send money for that. If its not geocaching dont talk about it here, dont tell jokes, stay on topic. If we can have the meetings right here and the politics can be discussded here and the dues stay the way they are, than whats to loose. I would be interested in seeing where this is going.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhereRWe?

Sheesh! VERY well stated! Thanks. :D :D

And I again emphazise, that an organization does not have to be so formal as to have actual meetings. The "meetings" can be right here. And why would be need "officers"? We could have a poll and select 2-3 people to serve as spokesmen for the group - if it were required.

I think the idea needs to be thought out instead of a "no rules!" gut reaction.

IMHO... :) :)

---

I think that this could work...

But lets not make this to complicated. I would hate to appoint 2-3 folks to take care of some of the stuff and then end up with a whole government and that could be the end result with out meaning to have it go that far.

So great idea to keep talking about this.:)

I believe that the question, as written, was slanted in a very negative way. Just over a year ago the cachers that I'm closest associated with formed a Northern New Jersey Cachers organization. This wasn't done to place rules and guidelines on cachers, but rather to speak as a group to forestry, wildlife, and park managers. This, indeed, has worked out well. It's much better speaking as a group as opposed to "I'm Joe Geocacher and I think you should consider this".

The group in it's first year has had many functions, charitable (almost $20,000 from coin sales and donations), social, and the primary as described above. There have been no rules for geocachers or dues adopted or even considered. Looking back I'm amazed at the things the group has managed to do, support, and change. It will take active and dedicated officers to accomplish this for any other group too, but the results have been gratifying. Think about it, and don't dismiss it as a rule forming committee as seems to be the theme of this thread.

I think I would be all for appointing persons to represent caching. When I first started working with the Kennebec Land Trust I mustve been asked about 20 times about a geocaching organization, and the only answer I could give was... well, we meet on the trails and the internet. It would be nice PR to have some place to refer people too.

I agree with what Quoddy and Hiram has said. When I found out about a few caches in the Boothby Region not being maintained, I approached them and asked them if they would be willing to adopt the caches. I gave them the cache owners name and email address and they took it upon themselves to go through the proper channels to be able to adopt all of the caches that were on the BRLT preserves. They now have full control over all of the caches on their land trusts and they can't be happier about it. I just wish at the time that we would have had a go to person that could have directed them to the proper people,as it was I took it upon myself to guide them in what I had hoped would be the proper ettique and channels to go through. I hoped that I succeeded. And the cache owner even thanked me afterwards for the steps that were taken for this to happen. If we decide to go about this organization thing then it at least would be a good idea to ask for a few people who would be responsible enough to help out when the needs arose for a situation as this.

Perhaps we should re-phrase the voting poll and ask again?

Yes, the formation of something like this "organization" for informational purposes, for want of a better term would be sensible. It is when folks start talking dues, bylaws, club houses, merchandise sales, etc. that warning flags should go up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The G Team

Yes, the formation of something like this "organization" for informational purposes, for want of a better term would be sensible. It is when folks start talking dues, bylaws, club houses, merchandise sales, etc. that warning flags should go up.

---

I concure with that.

Ditto and more ditto

Great minds think alike! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Let me get this straight. All most people are saying is that we need to assign a representative for the group and that should be it?

I think so, but I think TRF and a ferw others may desire a little more, however.

BTW, rick, you have exceeded your limit for PMs. not sure if you got my last one...

I think" responsible representative" is a good use of the term for anybody in here willing to step up to plate and be just that. I'm sure I can name a few of you who I would like to see take this responsibility.