Geocaching, Epinions, Internet Communities, and Volunteers

My hobby of geocaching largely works because of volunteers.  There is a staff at Geocaching headquarters in Seattle, but the caches that are put out for us to find are put there by “cache owners” – people who just enjoy hiding the containers for people to find.  When submitted to be listed on the site, they are approved by other volunteers – “reviewers” who make sure they are placed according to the rules.

A recent discussion reminded me of my days at Epinions.  We had a great community there, too, for quite some time.  There was some compensation involved but whether you were a “Top Reviewer” providing considerable content to the site or an “Advisor” who read what was written and rated it, trying to keep the better reviews near the top of the search engine findings, it amounted to pennies per hour for the amount of time put into the site.

You can see there’s a similar structure between the two.  Epinions doesn’t exist anymore, though.  The short version of the reason is eventually the community died off quite a bit and there was considerably less content being published.   I don’t think geocaching is going anywhere any time soon, but there are problems with the cache owner/ reviewer/community dynamic that are similar to what I saw happen at Epinions.

The saying “the devil is in the details” is true.  The problems arise not with the cut-and-dried rules but where there is wiggle room and people can use a bit of their own judgement.

There are many cache owners who disappear from Geocaching.  Sometimes they pass away, but more often than not they just lose interest and move onto other things.  This leaves caches listed on the geocaching website with no real owner.  There is a way to adopt them over to another cache owner, but most people who drift away aren’t that vested in the activity to do that.  Since a cache container is considered property, Geocaching Headquarters themselves cannot allow them to be adopted without consent of the original cache owner, or in some cases their estate.

Most of the time, this is not an issue.  The caches either just stay in place for years after the owner is no longer interested or they eventually are not found and get archived.  There are some caches, though, that have a deeper meaning for a variety of reasons.  Geocaching began back in the year 2000.  There are very few of the older caches still in place.  A good many of the people who were geocaching back then aren’t any more.  Here in New Hampshire, the community is very good about helping each other out.  I carry replacement log sheets with me most of the time so I can replace any that might be wet or full for a cache owner.  I have containers as well, although I am more reluctant to replace those without talking to the cache owner.  I carry tape and other items so I can repair a cache if it needs it – such as if the lid is cracked.

Not all areas do this, and not all cachers do, and that’s fine.  This is one of those places where there can be “wiggle room.”  However, a year or so ago we had an issue with one of the volunteer reviewers who was supposed to “clean up” the state.  He wasn’t our usual reviewer, but was from an entirely different part of the country.  He didn’t care how our community pitched in and helped each other.  If a cache needed maintenance and the actual cache owner didn’t perform it, he was archiving the caches.  Several cache owners complained to Geocaching Headquarters about him, and some were quite vehement.  It became a very adversarial situation with people threatening to archive all of the caches they owned and being “done with it.”  This reviewer gave deadlines for people to perform maintenance after a “needs maintenance” log was put on a cache and then sometimes archived the caches before that deadline.  One cache owner who had complained rather loudly was targeted to go check his caches whenever someone logged that they didn’t find it, with no mention of maintenance, even if that was the first time it hadn’t been found.

Most reviewers are great people, just like most of the Advisors at Epinions were great people.  Most of them really wanted to build up the community and make it a better place for everyone and encourage new people, just like most geocaching reviewers want to make sure the caches listed on the site are there to be found.  The problem is, some people, when given a little bit of authority, have it go to their head.  They end up alienating the same people they are supposed to be helping.  Just like many people who wanted to write at Epinions were sometimes put off by heavy-handed Advisors who were more critical and less nurturing of new writers, Geocaching reviewers have the potential to do the same thing.

I’ve been fortunate that other than this one outsider we’ve had great reviewers in this area.  We worked together on ideas I came up with and they helped me.  I also was considerate of them to ask them at times what was easier for them, knowing that they are volunteers.  This outsider, though, had cache owners in New Hampshire ready to archive their caches across the board.  About ¼ of the caches were potentially going to be archived when a local reviewer stepped in and took over the maintenance for the state.  He knew how to work with the community and make allowances for how we operate.  Isn’t the best thing to have quality caches people can find?

I saw what happened, though, and after a discussion that involved other people who thought like the reviewer we had issues with, I can see how this can be a detrimental thing that alienates the community.  Much like it did at Epinions, being too heavy-handed can drive people away.  Although volunteers, some people are not cut out for the position.  A little bit of authority goes to their head.  It’s like a security guard who secretly wants to be a police officer and ends up causing more issues than he solves.

I don’t think Geocaching would disappear.  It’s too much of a great hobby now for too many people.  However, there are a lot less people hiding and finding geocaches than there were a few years ago.  There are other things that entertain people, such as Munzee and Pokemon, so there is competition where there wasn’t before.  There’s a balance that’s hard to strike and I think the Reviewers have to understand that they are not there to act like police but to encourage the community.