NorthWest Arkansas Cachers

ok now that I do know what ALR stands for I guess Im on the dont like side. I havnt done any ALRs but glad to see that part is banned now. If I had done a cache that had this, and for some reason I didnt meet the ALR part but still found the cache and signed log, and then have my log deleted for the ALR part, Id be mad. And Im not about numbers, Im about finding.

Calliope sounds like an ALR to me too, umm since you say it is in the description dont you? But I remember when I heard about this cache and thought thats cool, cause I think people should write better logs.

The "special logging requirements" in a Challenge cache sounds the same as "Alternate Logging Requirements" to me. Sorry I dont see a difference. So maybe you seasoned veterans can enlighten me.

Basically, the distinction between challenge caches and ALRs is this: for challenge caches, you have to meet a specific set of criteria. For example, for the Arkansas County Challenge cache, you have to find a cache in every county in AR. You then email your list to the owner and he sends you the coordinates to the final. Or, for the parks challenge, you find the specified cache in each park and you are then emailed the coordinates to the final

For an ALR, you have to complete a specified task before you can log the cache online. For example, the owner may say you have to take a picture of yourself holding the cache container, or a picture of yourself wearing the jester hat in the ammo can.

For Calliope, you're required to submit a list of a series of caches where your log was more than 30 words. The problem with that may be that since the cache is at the posted coordinates, there is really nothing stopping anyone from going to it, signing the log, posting their find on-line and going on their merry way.

I think that groundspeak's idea behind this ban on ALRs is that if you sign the log, your online log can't be deleted. I do see many challenges in groundspeak enforcing the ban. For example, what of the many caches aound AR where the owner has stated "If you copy and past your log, it will be deleted?" Now, the person who gets their log deleted complains to groundspeak. What is groundspeak's recourse? Ban the offending cache owner? Tell him "pretty please, let the log stay?"

I think they may not publish the cache with the above wording, but what's to stop the owner from adding the wording after its published? Does groundspeak now plan on being the cache log police? Are they taking ownership of the caches away from the owner?

Only time will tell how this all shakes out. And, one thing is guaranteed: different approvers will interpret things in different ways.