geoaware

I would not put an artesian well as a 'structural feature'. However, in the past people self designated their type of EarthCache and may be though that it fell into that category. The current system does not allow for you to classify your EarthCache...and so the field is blank in the www.earthcache.org listings.

Thanks you! Oliver George was born on Wed 28 April. He has, so far, been a perfect little boy. He is a little brother for Madeline who is now 2. He also has two big sisters - Fiona and Jemma who live in Australia (and who were with me when the very first EarthCache was set up in Australia many years ago (EarthCache I - A geological tour of Wasp Head). For those of you who did not know, I met my wife Jen geocaching. She was the best thing I have ever found in a cache...and the most wonderful mum to our two little EarthCachers and step-mum to our older geocachers! Life is wonderful - because of geocaching! I will always be proud of the small role I have had in this great past time! Gary

Thanks you so much for these kind words! I am so glad we were able to help after your loss. You really put a a smile on my face and bounce in my step with this thread!

Actually...this is completely untrue. The same person is reviewing EC in your country that always has...but we will soon announce a local reviewer. The guidelines were adjusted to make EarthCaches better for the visitor. I believe those changes were appropriate and are working well. I am sorry you feel the way you do. Most people seem to find the new system faster!

I normally don't buy into this sort of comment.....but its an example of many we get via email and on forums. Firstly, people need to realize that being sent a physical pin in the past was a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT. They should be grateful that we were able to pay for the pins and the postage and develop a system that, for the most part, worked well. The huge majority of people really appreciated what we were doing and how much time it took to reward people in this way. Most of the 'issues' that people had was because of pins lost by the postal service or people not having complete or correct addresses (I was amazed at the people who wrote abusive emails to me....only for me to find that they had refused to provide a complete address for us to send the pin to them! How can we be in the 'wrong' for that?). That a pin went missing in the mail was a shame, and we happily rectified the issue. There was no 'right' or 'wrong'..it was not a debate or a dispute. It was a simple issue that could be dealt with happily and friendly. Once it was resolved it would have been nice to see a 'hey, thanks...the issues was solved" in the forums. Shame that opportunity has slipped past... As I have said in the past, this is a wonderful game and people need to play it in the spirit that was intended. Geoaware

There is no distance rule for EarthCaches other than they can't be EXACTLY at the same location as a traditional cache as that would equate to the EarthCache having a box (which is not allowed by the guidelines). It is a simple fix...move your EC away from the exact coordinates of the existing traditional! Geoaware

If you try and place an EarthCache at the exact location as an existing traditional cache it will not be published as this means that you have an EarthCache with a container - and that is not allowed under the guidelines.

As saturation of containers is an issue in traditional geocaches (and that is why there is a distance rule), so is saturation of content an issue for EarthCaches. The issue as we see it is that a person visiting an area should not be presented with EarthCaches covering the same Earth science lessons. Therefore we have the following guideline : EarthCaches should highlight a unique feature. EarthCaches that duplicate existing EarthCache information about the site or related sites may be rejected. EarthCaches should be developed to provide a unique experience to the visitor to the region. Multiple EarthCaches on the same feature should be avoided and content rather than proximity will be the guiding principle. What this means is that some Earth science features have been covered so many times that new EarthCache submissions on the same content may be rejected. Examples of content which falls into this are (and not limited to) : River gauging stations - in the US there already is a considerable number of these. Glacial erratics Waterfalls - where the content is about classification It is up to the EarthCache developer to look at the other EarthCaches in the wider area before starting development. I would also suggest a friendly email to the EC reviewers checking if you are unsure would work as well. Geoaware

Love the sig line. How appropriate! Deane AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI My father told me that as a young man - I have never forgotten it. It rings true way too often! As for a moderator, I think these forums are moderated well. When people overstep the line they are dealt with quietly and swiftly by the system. People do need to be reminded to be respectful of each other...that, IMHO, is the answer to most of the angst that happens in here! My guess is that if some of the people who create angst in the forums were placed in a room face-to-face they would show much greater respect for each other than they do online - for some people being online seems to remove their 'filters'. It is sad, as I have found most of these people to be terrific when I have spoken to them face-to-face. For my part, I am always happy to provide input where I can. I will not however be pulled into personal arguments or debates about specific cache issues - there are better ways to deal with those issues. I do not respond to begging or pleading to become involved in discussions. If it is appropriate for me to comment I will do so. I also take great offense at any geocaching or EarthCache reviewer being 'flamed' or 'slammed' in these forums. These people give of their time freely to keep the game running and they deserve the ultimate respect. Lets keep our focus on respecting each other in what we write in these forums...and working with each other to make EarthCaches better for everyone!

...

I know that the guidelines have always asked for an English description. Your reply does not explain, however, how it could have happened that there exists an Earth cache from 2008 with a text which is only available in Norwegian. Someone must have reviewed the cache. Is there any chance to urge the creator(s) of the Earth cache to come up with an English version? In the current situation you cannot even check whether the cache fulfills the current guidelines. Cezanne Once the EarthCache is reviewed, there is no obligation for the text to be kept in any language other than the native language of the location.

It has ALWAYS been a requirement that EarthCaches be in English as the reviewers in the past did not speak other languages. It was assumed that once the text was approved, the EarthCache would also be put in the native language of the country in which it was located. Asking for the text in English was not a requirement so English speaking people could visit the EarthCache, however this ended up being a secondary benefit. With more than one reviewer currently working on reviewing EarthCaches in Germany (for example) the requirement remains the same as stated in the guidelines : "All notes can be submitted in the local language but must also be in English" Not doing so will only result in reviewers asking for you to provide the text in English, slowing the process down for your EarthCache submission to be reviewed. As we are working hard to keep the review time short, helping us out by following the guidelines would be a HUGE help. Thanks

EarthCache Masters pins at Bronze, Silver and Gold levels are no longer mailed out to participants. They are available through the EarthCache store. This has been the case for 6 months now. Platinum Pins are still sent out but only once a month.

Sorry about the threadjack here, but what is the very first EC? I can't seem to find a way to search by date placed. To get back to the subject (sort of), I'm Silver, and will have enough finds for Gold by the end of February (still need to place a second one, but have plans in the works). Maybe Platinum can happen later this year... Earthcache I - a simple geology tour of Wasp Head by geoaware (GCHFT2)

You are correct. That is exactly what the guidelines mean. If you are not asking for specific non-site related content you can ask for a photo. If you ask for something in the photo that is not related to the educational logging task or the site, the photo must be optional and you can't delete a log based on the lack of photo alone.

Please read the guideline - it is very clear. Logging of an EarthCache must involve visitors undertaking some educational task that relates to the Earth science at the site. This could involve measuring or estimating the size of some feature or aspect of the site, collecting and recording data (such as time of a tidal bore), or sending an e-mail to the cache owner with the answer to Earth science related questions they obtained by reading an information display. While photographs may be requested, they do not take the place of other logging requirements. Taking a photograph alone or asking people to do internet research does NOT meet these logging guidelines. Requests for specific content in the photograph (must include the visitor's face, for example) will be considered an additional logging requirement and must be optional. Cache owners may not delete the cache seeker's log based solely on optional tasks.

Thank you Cezanne for your concern and comments on this issue. The whole EarthCache review team are looking into this. However, restating your case over and over again in the forums - in multiple threads - will not resolve or speed up our process. Thanks.

I am wondering when a logging tasks will be called poor by you. Could you please explain that in view of the example I refer to below? I would have thought that a question like whether a spring/well currently is dry (a simple yes/no question) like asked in this cache http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...83-2d8cfb29dd8f is quite poor if it is the only logging task besides the photo requirement. I am not astonished at all that creators of such logging requirements feel the photo to be fundamentally necessary. Cezanne Logging tasks are poor if (and this is not an exhaustive list) : 1. They can be answered by doing an internet search or using Google Earth 2. They are reading a simple fact from a sign and not involving the participant in thinking 3. They are not related to the topic covered in the text 4. They are taking a measurement that is not related to the text The whole reason we have a logging task is, in a way, for you to test the people that visit your EC if they have learned from the experience. That whole objective of EC if for people to learn, rather than just to drop in an admire the view (which may also be a wonderful thing, but not the main objective). I understand that people want a WOW factor and, for EC, the WOW should be in the learning! Your logging task is your proof that they have both visited AND learned something. With a strong set of logging tasks, the photo task is purely secondary and should be treated as such. And, as the guidelines say, if you require people to have specific content not related to the lesson or site, then the photo must be optional. I think the original question for this topic has now been well and truly explained. Thanks for all your comments and I hope you can all move forward within the new guidelines.

You are absolutely right. This whole thing is as clear as mud! Just what the heck is specific content? Can you require a picture but not say what ya want in the picture? This is a example of the right hand not talkin to the left hand. For those of us who have done a lota earthcaching, we need some clear water. Please, would the reviewers, Groundspeak and geoaware put out a clear statement about pic requirements and what can be required in the photo? The term 'specific content' refers to content that is not related to the site or educational logging tasks. For example, asking for the face of a cacher, a picture of their vehicle, the picture of their dog......are not related to the site or the logging task. These photo requests MUST be optional.

Good question you have. I have checked the listings on earthcache.org and all the new EC's [Jan 2010 publications] are not featured in the listings at all. Is this because there is no category mentioned as you rightly point out? OTOH this means that I no longer have to spend hours thinking aout which category I need to place my EC under! I quite frankly did not notice the lack of category when I submitted my EC yesterday. It will be interesting to see if geoaware has an explanation for us on this point. The instructions listed on the www.earthcache.org are very clear about this point: The listing on this site will be updated each month. At that time your EarthCache will be assigned a classification (river feature , fossil site, mineral site etc).

1. YES!!!! 2. Yes - but if you request any specific content (like a persons face), then the photo can only be optional!

You are correct! Note however that your site-specific questions will need to be strong. The photo requirement must be made after the questions. They can't be questions answered by an internet search or using online tools (such as Google Earth). AAAAHHH - all makes sense now, UNLESS I am up the wrong tree here. In summary, as long as a photograph is not the SOLE requirement then you may ask for it. That is the way I understand it. As an aside, I often ask for some or other description of what a person can see at a certain bearing [compass] or waypoint. If they answer that incorrectly then I am pretty sure they were not at the site. geoaware - keep up the great work that you guys are doing. You rock!! The photograph can't replace a strong logging task. Basically if you need a photograph to prove a person was at your EC, then your logging task may not be strong enough!

You are correct! Note however that your site-specific questions will need to be strong. The photo requirement must be made after the questions. They can't be questions answered by an internet search or using online tools (such as Google Earth). OK then I have no problems....looks like no real change!!! Thanks! If you have strong logging tasks, then there is effectively no change.

You are correct! However, we will not tolerate logs being deleted because a person did not meet a specific content requirement in a photograph (for example the requirement to show a face). Those requests are now optional only!

You are correct! Note however that your site-specific questions will need to be strong. The photo requirement must be made after the questions. They can't be questions answered by an internet search or using online tools (such as Google Earth).