I!
-
Posts
829 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by I!
-
-
-
So, Lieblweb has a phobia of labels. Any attempt to categorise society is disadvantageous to minorities. The very word, "minority", is perjorative. It's all just a system to keep the privileged few at the top of the pile:
And, yes, we are watching you
Look, Lieblweb, I'm sorry but this "we're all people" stuff is daft when you refuse to acknowledge or discuss cultural differences. To get back to the OP's question, it's a fact that there's an ethnicity bias against minority participation in geocaching, and a few possible causes (again, in answer to the OP's question) have been discussed, ever so briefly, here. Posting, in effect, "don't talk about this stuff!" is counter-productive. Claiming that earlier discussion would have "disgusted" minority readers was ridiculous.
-
I'm referring to Geocaching / Groundspeak. [...] Geocaching is a game.
Geocaching is also a business. GS probably want their business to grow; so if there's a marketing bias, however innocent, that leaves a potentially large segment of the market untapped then they might want to do something about that.
I seem to remember that there aren't many French cachers or caches on gc.com, in stark contrast to the take-up in Germany. Would it offend you less if gc.com took steps to entice more French players into the game?
-
"Numpty sat"? That's a new one for me! I found "Numpty", but not the full "numpty sat".
"Sat" is being used as an adjective - think of "seated" instead. "What a numpty seated next to Chad".
-
Why would they waste spend valuable funds to research why the horse doesn't want to drink and try to figure out how to force encourage him to drink??
At least two reasons: reach out to an untapped market, and cover themselves against charges of discrimination. I would hope and expect that the former is what motivates the NPS. If there's an ethnicity thing going on then perhaps the NPS, with a simple tweak to how they present their parks, could greatly increase visitor numbers. It makes sense to research the possibilities unless, that is, you've already written-off the non-white segment of society as "not being in to wilderness and stuff".
-
How embarassing for the National Park Service to publish such "theories".
Oh, please. When there's obviously low attendance by non-Caucasians at National Parks, it makes perfect sense that the NPS and others should ask to what extent that's a problem that needs fixing. There's no need for you to be embarrassed by social science.
Another couple of quotes (from a different report) for inquiring minds:
The results from the study done by Floyd, et al. have been supported by studies performed by other researchers. A study by Dwyer and Hutchinson discovered that African-Americans tended to prefer developed facilities and conveniences more than Whites. Their surveys indicated that 53% of African Americans showed a strong preference for developed facilities, as opposed to 24% of Whites. Conversely, 57% of Whites showed a strong preference for preserved natural areas, compared to only 27% of African-Americans.and
In 1990, Irwin, Gartner, and Phelps conducted a study comparing differences in environmental preferences between Whites and Hispanics. The study, preformed at a New Mexico campground, found that both Whites and Hispanics preferred minimally developed campgrounds. However, the group ethic groups had different interpretations of development. Those surveyed were asked to list their priorities in facilities and design when choosing a campground. White people listed quiet surroundings (24%), privacy (14%), water (14%), and space between campsites (13%) as their major priorities. On the other hand, Hispanics listed toilets (39%), camping space at each site (25%), water (14%), and fire rings (8%). Furthermore, Whites tended to prefer being far away from other campers more than Hispanics (67% vs. 28% respectively). (Irwin, et al., 1990)Interesting how different people are.
-
It seems there's plenty of research on the subject of ethnic variation in outdoors pursuits.
For example (link) ...
Research has been conducted to explore potential reasons for underrepresentation of racial/ethnic minorities in national parks, identify barriers to visitation among racial/ethnic minorities, and understand differences in recreation choices and preferences between people of color and Whites (Dwyer and Hutchison, 1990; Dwyer and Gobster, 1992; Dwyer, 1993; Hutchison, 1987; Johnson, Bowker, and Cordell, 2001; Payne, Mowen, and Orsega-Smith, 2002; Tinsely, Tinsley, and Croskeys, 2002; West, 1989). This body of research has led to the development of four hypotheses or theories to help explain racial/ethnic minority underrepresentation in outdoor recreation, including attendance at national parks (Floyd, 1999; Gomez, 2002; Johnson, Bowker, English, and Worthen, 1998). These hypotheses are:
-
Marginality: The marginality hypothesis attributes differences in racial/ethnic minority representation to socioeconomic factors or measures of social class, such as limited financial resources, lower levels of education, and limited employment opportunities caused by historical discrimination. (Floyd, 1998; Floyd, Shinew, McGuire, and Noe, 1994; Dwyer and Hutchison, 1990; Lindsay and Ogle, 1972; Washburne, 1978; Woodward, 1988)
-
Subcultuel/Ethnicity: The subculture/ethnicity hypothesis recognizes the influence of marginality on leisure and recreation patterns but attributes differences in national park visitation at least partially to cultural norms, value systems, social organizations, and socialization practices. Examples of cultural values or norms can include size of recreational groups, preferred activities (e.g., hiking, biking, swimming, picnicking), and development level of sites (e.g., bathrooms, pavilions, visitor centers). (Chavez, 2000; Dwyer and Hutchison, 1990; Dwyer and Gobster, 1992; Dwyer, 1993; Floyd, 1999; Gobster, 2002; Washburne, 1978)
-
Discrimination: The discrimination hypothesis places importance on contemporary, post civil rights discrimination that occurs from interpersonal contact with other visitors or park personnel or through institutional policies. (Blahna and Black, 1993; Floyd, 1999; Gobster and Delgado, 1992; Roberts, 2007)
-
Opportunity: The opportunity hypothesis examines the relationship between the residential location of minority populations, recreational sites, and recreation preferences. (Hauser, 1962; Lindsay and Ogle, 1972; O’Leary and Benjamin, 1982; Payne, Mowen, and Orsega-Smith, 2002)
- Acculturation: The acculturation hypothesis examines the relationship between cultural assimilation into the majority culture and recreational choices. According to this hypothesis, as a minority culture assimilates into the majority culture, they begin to take on the recreational patterns of the majority culture. (Floyd, 1999)
Research has also examined potential barriers to visitation by minority racial and ethnic groups (Payne, Mowen, and Orsega-Smith, 2002; Solop, Hagen, and Ostergren, 2003; Tinsley, Tinsley, and Croskeys, 2002). These barriers can include:
-
Transportation: Ability to get to a national park or natural recreation site.
-
Knowledge: Lack of knowledge about where parks are located and what activities parks offer.
-
Expense: Both the internal cost of visiting a park (entrance fees) and the external cost of visiting a park (lodging, transportation, food, etc.).
- Interpretation and History: Lack of interpretation in parks relating to minority history and culture.
So when the OP asks, "Any theories?", well, there's your reading list for the great outdoors.
(Can't help you when it comes to LPCs though!)
-
Marginality: The marginality hypothesis attributes differences in racial/ethnic minority representation to socioeconomic factors or measures of social class, such as limited financial resources, lower levels of education, and limited employment opportunities caused by historical discrimination. (Floyd, 1998; Floyd, Shinew, McGuire, and Noe, 1994; Dwyer and Hutchison, 1990; Lindsay and Ogle, 1972; Washburne, 1978; Woodward, 1988)
-
Worth a look: Outdoor Recreation Participation Report 2012. Page 44 shows a greater overall outdoor participation rate by Caucasians than by other ethnicities. Page 45 shows that African Americans aren't keen on hiking in particular. The stats are significant, but not so extreme as experienced here in geocaching.
If Obama gets kicked out of the White House then perhaps he should run for president of gc.com instead
-
Many cachers will replace logs and dry out caches
No, don't. Instead: "KILL IT. KILL IT WITH FIRE." Ha!
-
That worked out well and I didn't even tip off The Magna Defender to this thread
Dog-almighty, you might want to reserve the spot now it's "open". Set up a basic cache listing page with the right coordinates, but leave it unpublished until everything's perfect with the physical hide.
-
I wouldn't be so cheeky as to ask the other CO to archive their cache!
So that's The Magna Defender, then.
Don't ask him to archive his cache. Instead, just mail him, pointing him to this thread, and asking his advice on how you can best implement your idea. He might be willing to close down one of his caches to make room for yours, or perhaps can use his experience of the local area to suggest another suitable spot.
The answer is but a quick PM away.
-
His more subtle camouflage can't have been much worse than "Tescoflage"
Ugh. I hope you removed the placcy bag. That's one bit of "theft" I think we can encourage.
-
I found one whilst bombing down the fast lane of the M4
... bringing new meaning to "motorway mayhem".
(Edit: oops, "mayhem", not "madness")
-
Sabotage?
-
-
Well I suppose the locals might form an instant opinion of a new hider whose first and only contribution to the game was a death-defying challenge for freaky cat-like climbers
You could put out a much more straightforward one at the same time if that bothers you.
-
Well, if you exclude most of the caches, especially in an area where it's inevitable that there are few larger caches, then of course the results will be different
."
" - wtf? Don't get all haughty with me. It was a simple observation made for conversational purposes, not as a trailblazing scientific breakthrough. Thanks for doing the grunt work to enable it. -
Could you please repeat that analysis, restricting to caches marked as "regular" in size? Just curious.
I'm not entirely convinced of the value of it but here it is.
Look what it did to the City of London's ranking! The value? I just wanted to know where the "real" caches were, as I tend to take a dim view of micros.
-
Rank County Caches Area (km²) Density 1 City of London 51 2.9 17.59 2 Dundee 173 60 2.88 3 Bristol 274 110 2.49 ...Could you please repeat that analysis, restricting to caches marked as "regular" in size? Just curious.
-
So, can we assume that when you were a noob just 2 years ago, you were the Geocaching Poster Child of How Things Should be Done?
I suppose you're just grouchy that you didn't get a poster of your own. Happy ten years, by the way.
-
the pay phone, the lightpole and the entire wooded area for one
The first two - keep archived; think of somewhere better. The third - new listing.
-
A photo taken earlier this evening whilst out doing some maintenance on our own caches, we did not even have the camera with us this is just a quick snap from the phone, the photo graph does not give this evenings sunset the credit it really deserves as it was totally stunning
Wow. I was considering entering the competition until I saw that photo. Amazing! Game over.
-
There's a bookmark list that might help.
I've found when walking with a five year-old that he'll forgive any amount of muddy trudging if he gets lunch in a pub. Not all pubs are equal though ... spend a bit of research time finding a good one first.
-
It's all rather two-dimensional. If I had landowner permission then I should be able to place a few caches at N25.197139 E55.274111 without falling foul of the 528' guideline.
.
Photo Competition - October 2012
in United Kingdom and Ireland
Posted
That's an amazing picture. I can even read the bracket number on the original, it's so detailed. Lovely deep colours, too. Did you get a new camera for your birthday?!