Guideline Test

[+TrailGators]

An idea came up (read Jeremy's post below) in another thread that I would like to have a separate discussion on. The idea was to have a test to ensure that people understand the guidelines. It is obvious that many people do not understand them. I think the test would a good proactive step to help reduce the bad apple caches out there that we are reading about in the press. The test could be given to every new cacher when they place their first hide. It could also be given to any cacher that submits a cache that doesn't meet the guidelines.

 

I like the idea of having someone complete a simple 10 question test in order to place a cache.

 

If there are any wrong answers, the page comes back and gives you an explanation as to why the answer was wrong, but makes you choose another answer before letting you continue.

 

For those you answer correctly it tells you why you answered it correctly, explaining why the other ones are false. This further reinforces the right answer in case the user just picked one by random and got it right.

 

Once all the answers are marked as correct you can go to the new cache page. At that point it will mark that you answered all the questions correctly, so you have no excuse in not knowing the top ten issues around cache placement.

 

Now there were already links to existing questions, but it would behoove us to work on what those actual 10 questions should be.

Here were some initial ideas for questions that could be asked:

 

Which cache(s) do not comply with the guidelines?

a) A cache placed under a highway bridge.

b.) A cache placed under a busy city bridge.

c) A cache placed under a walking bridge in a public park.

d) A cache placed on elementary school property.

e) A cache placed in the bushes of a Federal courthouse.

 

Answers:

a) All the above caches meet the guidelines

b.) a, b, d and e

c) b, c and d

d) c and d

e) c

g) None of those caches meet the guidelines.

 

Which of these cache(s) do not comply with the guidelines?

a) A cache placed near a military installation.

b.) A cache placed on an archaeological site

c) A cache placed placed on a historical site

d) A cache placed 20 feet from an active railroad track.

e) A cache placed on land maintained by the U.S. National Park Service.

 

Answers:

a) All the above caches meet the guidelines

b.) a, b, d and e

c) b, c and d

d) c and d

e) c

f) None of those caches meet the guidelines.

 

When placing a cache in a park area, as long as the cache is not placed on land that is not maintained by the U.S. National Park Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges), it should be OK to place a cache?

a) True

b.) False

 

Please submit your ideas for good questions below.....

[The Vargman]

Just to copy over my idea posted in the other thread: A question that clarifies "What is vandalism?" in placing a cache.

[+TrailGators]

Just to copy over my idea posted in the other thread: A question that clarifies "What is vandalism?" in placing a cache.

This guideline applies: "Caches may be quickly archived if we see the following (which is not inclusive): Caches that deface public or private property, whether a natural or man-made object, in order to provide a clue or a logging method." What are some examples that you have seen?

[The Vargman]

Just to copy over my idea posted in the other thread: A question that clarifies "What is vandalism?" in placing a cache.

This guideline applies: "Caches may be quickly archived if we see the following (which is not inclusive): Caches that deface public or private property, whether a natural or man-made object, in order to provide a clue or a logging method." What are some examples that you have seen?

 

Actually 2 this weekend:

1. Saw a sharpie marker written on a broken speaker system at a vacant Taco Bell.

2. Home made coins (with pieces of coods on them) screwed into telephone poles.

 

*Edit: saw sbell111's post and saw that #2 had really poor grammar.

Edited February 15, 2007 by The Vargman

[+sbell111]

Just to copy over my idea posted in the other thread: A question that clarifies "What is vandalism?" in placing a cache.

This guideline applies: "Caches may be quickly archived if we see the following (which is not inclusive): Caches that deface public or private property, whether a natural or man-made object, in order to provide a clue or a logging method." What are some examples that you have seen?

 

Actually 2 this weekend:

1. Saw a sharpie marker written on a broken speaker system at a vacant Taco Bell.

2. A home made coins (with pieces of coods on them) screwed into telephone poles.

Is it OK to paint coords on a rock? What if you brought the rock with you?

Edited February 15, 2007 by sbell111

[The Vargman]

 

Actually 2 this weekend:

1. Saw a sharpie marker written on a broken speaker system at a vacant Taco Bell.

2. Home made coins (with pieces of coods on them) screwed into telephone poles.

Is it OK to pain coords on a rock? What if you brought the rock with you?

 

Actually, I'd say that's fine. Seems to be not very different than placing a cache to me.

 

Edit: Clarify - If you brought the rock it's not that different than placing a cache.

Edited February 15, 2007 by The Vargman

[+Ambrosia]

Just to copy over my idea posted in the other thread: A question that clarifies "What is vandalism?" in placing a cache.

This guideline applies: "Caches may be quickly archived if we see the following (which is not inclusive): Caches that deface public or private property, whether a natural or man-made object, in order to provide a clue or a logging method." What are some examples that you have seen?

 

Actually 2 this weekend:

1. Saw a sharpie marker written on a broken speaker system at a vacant Taco Bell.

2. A home made coins (with pieces of coods on them) screwed into telephone poles.

Is it OK to pain coords on a rock? What if you brought the rock with you?

This is how I look at it. Yeah, you brought the rock with you, so technically you didn't vandalize puplic property. But newbies and others may not get that and want to go do the same thing with their new hide, only not bring their own rock.

 

Kinda the same as burying a cache on your own property. Technically ok, but could make a newbie copy it somewhere else.

 

So...probably fine, but potentially confusing.

[+Renegade Knight]

...This is how I look at it. Yeah, you brought the rock with you, so technically you didn't vandalize puplic property. But newbies and others may not get that and want to go do the same thing with their new hide, only not bring their own rock.

 

Kinda the same as burying a cache on your own property. Technically ok, but could make a newbie copy it somewhere else.

 

So...probably fine, but potentially confusing.

 

I've actually got rocks for a cache all ready to go with clues sitting on my shelf. Someday I'll get around to it.

 

On topic. I'd make the questions straight out of the guidelines.

 

"What are given as examples of high risk terrorist targets".

 

A. Nursing homes, Stables, Garbage Dumps.

B. Police Stations, Courthouses, Schools

C. yada, blah, yada.

 

What do the guidleins say the minimum distance two caches must be separated for listing?

A. 0.1 miles

B. 528 feet

C. 176 yards

D. as far as you can throw your GPS.

 

Then there are no fuzzy answers. The test is specific to this site. Doesn't cover fuzzy ground like all the exceptions to all the rules or even invite fuzzy debatable angsty answers.

 

(I still don't like the idea of a test, but if there has to be one...)

Edited February 15, 2007 by Renegade Knight

[+sbell111]

Actually 2 this weekend:

1. Saw a sharpie marker written on a broken speaker system at a vacant Taco Bell.

2. Home made coins (with pieces of coods on them) screwed into telephone poles.

Is it OK to pain coords on a rock? What if you brought the rock with you?

Actually, I'd say that's fine. Seems to be not very different than placing a cache to me.

 

Edit: Clarify - If you brought the rock it's not that different than placing a cache.

The catch with the 'What if I bring my own rock?' question is that a bystander won't know the difference between your rock and a 'local' rock. Edited February 15, 2007 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

What do the guidelines say that the minimum distance that any stage of a multicache be separated from another cache?

A. 100 feet

B. 250 feet

C. 528 feet

D. As far as Renegade Knight can throw his GPS.

 

The guidelines state that the cache owner will assume all responsibility of their cache listings.

a) True

b.) False

 

The guidelines state that the cache owner is responsible for physically checking their cache especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.).

a) True

b.) False

[+Bunya]

Here were some initial ideas for questions that could be asked:

 

Which cache(s) do not comply with the guidelines?

a) A cache placed under a highway bridge.

b.) A cache placed under a busy city bridge.

c) A cache placed under a walking bridge in a public park.

d) A cache placed on elementary school property.

e) A cache placed in the bushes of a Federal courthouse.

 

Answers:

a) All the above caches meet the guidelines

b.) a, b, d and e

c) b, c and d

d) c and d

e) c

g) None of those caches meet the guidelines.

 

Which of these cache(s) do not comply with the guidelines?

a) A cache placed near a military installation.

b.) A cache placed on an archaeological site

c) A cache placed placed on a historical site

d) A cache placed 20 feet from an active railroad track.

e) A cache placed on land maintained by the U.S. National Park Service.

 

Answers:

a) All the above caches meet the guidelines

b.) a, b, d and e

c) b, c and d

d) c and d

e) c

f) None of those caches meet the guidelines.

 

When placing a cache in a park area, as long as the cache is not placed on land that is not maintained by the U.S. National Park Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges), it should be OK to place a cache?

a) True

b.) False

 

Please submit your ideas for good questions below.....

 

I like the idea, but there is the problem that geocaching is a WORLD sport/hobby/...

 

Some of these questions are very US specific.

[markandlynn]

What do the guidelines say that the minimum distance that any stage of a multicache be separated from another cache?

A. 100 feet

B. 250 feet

C. 528 feet

D. As far as Renegade Knight can throw his GPS.

 

The guidelines state that the cache owner will assume all responsibility of their cache listings.

a) True

b.) False

 

The guidelines state that the cache owner is responsible for physically checking their cache especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.).

a) True

b.) False

 

Good start

 

Maybe better to ask along the lines of

 

When should you check your cache

a) after a DNF

after a needs maint

c) when soemone reports a problem in there log

 

true false will always be a 50% chance of guessing right.

 

My next contribution

Maintainance on caches is carried out by

a) people who find it should look after it.

friends and locals cachers who live nearby

c) the owner

[+robert]

It's deja vu all over again!

 

[The Vargman]

Actually 2 this weekend:

1. Saw a sharpie marker written on a broken speaker system at a vacant Taco Bell.

2. Home made coins (with pieces of coods on them) screwed into telephone poles.

Is it OK to pain coords on a rock? What if you brought the rock with you?

Actually, I'd say that's fine. Seems to be not very different than placing a cache to me.

 

Edit: Clarify - If you brought the rock it's not that different than placing a cache.

The catch with the 'What if I bring my own rock?' question is that a bystander won't know the difference between your rock and a 'local' rock.

 

Interesting. Hadn't considered that. I suppose that might be one of those gray areas that seem to talked about pretty constantly around here. I'd say that's an excellent reason to have some sort of clarifying question if a test is to be used.

 

To use your example in the format of the questions above, it might (I said might) be good to have a couple "food for thought" examples in with the guidelines. Allow for the answer to be correct either way, but then make a point to add a commentary that states something like "While this is not technically against guidelines, you may want to consider who could be looking at what you are doing and what they might think."

 

Actually, right after typing that, perhaps that could be it's own question. Meaning: A question that will always be right, no matter what answers you choose, but would have some "use your head" commentary beside each potential answer.

Edited February 16, 2007 by The Vargman

[The Vargman]

 

I like the idea, but there is the problem that geocaching is a WORLD sport/hobby/...

 

Some of these questions are very US specific.

 

True. Perhaps (and I know this exponentially increases the task of having a test if many areas wish to adopt it) making the test regionally specific and only for those areas that felt a need (such as the US) to have this quiz/test in place. All that you'd need to do is specify where your cache will be located, and then the logic would either take you to a quiz, or not. Just a thought.

[+TrailGators]

I like the idea, but there is the problem that geocaching is a WORLD sport/hobby/... Some of these questions are very US specific.

I agree the U.S. National Park Service should be in a US only question.

[+knoffer]

I think this is a good idea.

 

I do think that the people that are creating listings with questionable info (whether intentional or unintentional) will still do so. Perhaps some will realize that what they are suggesting is questionable and amend the hide/listing. If the ten questions are always the same then after the first time of answering them correct, I don't think they will hold much merit. If the idea is to have these before every listing then they should change periodically. At least this way you know for sure that they are reading them and not answering them to get on with the listing process.

 

Today we click the checkboxes at the bottom of the listing signifying we acknowledge the guidelines.

Yes. I have read and understand the guidelines for listing a cache.

 

Yes. I have read and agree to the terms of use agreement..

 

 

Maybe it would help to have check boxes incorporated into the listing page instead of a prelisting questionnaire. Like maybe after each section of the listing have a couple of checkboxes or questions that tests if the information entered for that section meets the guidelines and is complete?

[+DeRock & The Psychic Cacher]

 

Maybe it would help to have check boxes incorporated into the listing page instead of a prelisting questionnaire. Like maybe after each section of the listing have a couple of checkboxes or questions that tests if the information entered for that section meets the guidelines and is complete?

 

Excellent point Knoffer!

 

But I don't think TPTB are ready to become the cache police. You will notice that Jeremy wasn't suggesting (that I can see) that anyone acknowledge that their cache meets the guidelines. Just that you complete the test successfully before you are allowed to go to the listing page.

 

Deane (DeRock)

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

Coming soon to a Goodwill or discount bookstore near you - Tales from the FTF Trail

[+knoffer]

 

Maybe it would help to have check boxes incorporated into the listing page instead of a prelisting questionnaire. Like maybe after each section of the listing have a couple of checkboxes or questions that tests if the information entered for that section meets the guidelines and is complete?

 

Excellent point Knoffer!

 

But I don't think TPTB are ready to become the cache police. You will notice that Jeremy wasn't suggesting (that I can see) that anyone acknowledge that their cache meets the guidelines. Just that you complete the test successfully before you are allowed to go to the listing page.

 

 

That's what I get for reading between the lines.

[+The Last Airbender]

Like the idea but am hazy on the application. Do we complete the test every time we create/place a cache? It would seem to me that the test should be initiated periodically rather than every time a cache is placed.(This is supposed to be fun) It could be Once a month or after every 10 caches placed. Thoughts.

[+McPhan]

Even though I know the road rules I occasionally bend some. This would be the same answering a quiz, I would be able to answer the questions and still go and plant a cache that was contrary to guidelines.

 

Perhaps if there were a few questions concerning the placement on the listing page (or a subsequent page like the attributes one). The questions could be along the lines of the above questions but be yes/no answers. An "incorrect" answer would then pop up a warning that the placement may not comply with guidelines and then provide a link to the relevant area.

 

ie Is this cache underground?

 

Yes No. If yes is picked (I don't have the computer nous to show this how it should look) then the warning pops up and links to-

 

"Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate."

 

The questions could also rotate as mentioned in a previous log.

 

Of course this will not stop poor judgement but may make people think and could be a useful/additional tool for the reviewers. (I'm sure they can do with all the help they can get - Thanks guys)

[+TrailGators]

Like the idea but am hazy on the application. Do we complete the test every time we create/place a cache? It would seem to me that the test should be initiated periodically rather than every time a cache is placed.(This is supposed to be fun) It could be Once a month or after every 10 caches placed. Thoughts.

Good point. That's open for ideas. I was thinking that it would be a good idea to have newbie's take the test when they submit their first few caches. I was also thinking that everyone should take the test with their first cache submitted in each subsequent calendar year as a good refresher for the new year.

[+Happy Humphrey]

I like the idea, but there is the problem that geocaching is a WORLD sport/hobby/... Some of these questions are very US specific.

I agree the U.S. National Park Service should be in a US only question.

I'm no expert so I might have to be corrected here, but AFAIK:

highways, cities, and elementary schools have different definitions in different parts of the world so you'd have to leave those questions out.

 

A "walking bridge" is unknown outside the one country, although people would probably guess what that means if their English is good. You can place a cache under a road/highway bridge anywhere except in the US. Railroads only exist in North America (I think), and there is no restriction on placing caches near them except in the US. Only the US has Federal courthouses. The U.S. National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges) has little control outside the US, so I don't imagine that those guidelines apply. The sensitivity of military installations varies.

 

I think only that three of the 11 example questions are non US-specific, illustrating the difficulty of setting a geocaching test. Although the suggestion might be OK for a geocaching-USA test, and I quite like the idea in principle, we have to be aware that guidelines that only apply locally are potentially harmful in that they encourage a divisive attitude when we should be bringing people together.

[+TrailGators]

I like the idea, but there is the problem that geocaching is a WORLD sport/hobby/... Some of these questions are very US specific.

I agree the U.S. National Park Service should be in a US only question.

I'm no expert so I might have to be corrected here, but AFAIK:

highways, cities, and elementary schools have different definitions in different parts of the world so you'd have to leave those questions out.

 

A "walking bridge" is unknown outside the one country, although people would probably guess what that means if their English is good. You can place a cache under a road/highway bridge anywhere except in the US. Railroads only exist in North America (I think), and there is no restriction on placing caches near them except in the US. Only the US has Federal courthouses. The U.S. National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges) has little control outside the US, so I don't imagine that those guidelines apply. The sensitivity of military installations varies.

 

I think only that three of the 11 example questions are non US-specific, illustrating the difficulty of setting a geocaching test. Although the suggestion might be OK for a geocaching-USA test, and I quite like the idea in principle, we have to be aware that guidelines that only apply locally are potentially harmful in that they encourage a divisive attitude when we should be bringing people together.

I agree Happy Humphrey. I didn't mean to come across that way. Of course those questions can be specific to the US. I do think that other parts of the world also have analogous terrorist targets. That was the was the concept behind the railroad and the government courthouse. Also in some areas, railroad tracks can be very dangerous places to put caches near. So consideration of cacher safety should always be a factor as well when placing a cache. Edited February 16, 2007 by TrailGators

[+The Cheeseheads]

If there are any wrong answers, the page comes back and gives you an explanation as to why the answer was wrong, but makes you choose another answer before letting you continue.

 

For those you answer correctly it tells you why you answered it correctly, explaining why the other ones are false. This further reinforces the right answer in case the user just picked one by random and got it right.

As you're coming up with potential questions, be sure to do this part as well; give the reasons explaining why the right answers are right and the wrong answers are wrong...

[+TrailGators]

If there are any wrong answers, the page comes back and gives you an explanation as to why the answer was wrong, but makes you choose another answer before letting you continue.

 

For those you answer correctly it tells you why you answered it correctly, explaining why the other ones are false. This further reinforces the right answer in case the user just picked one by random and got it right.

As you're coming up with potential questions, be sure to do this part as well; give the reasons explaining why the right answers are right and the wrong answers are wrong...

Good point.

[+ibycus]

I like the idea, but there is the problem that geocaching is a WORLD sport/hobby/... Some of these questions are very US specific.

I agree the U.S. National Park Service should be in a US only question.

I'm no expert so I might have to be corrected here, but AFAIK:

highways, cities, and elementary schools have different definitions in different parts of the world so you'd have to leave those questions out.

 

A "walking bridge" is unknown outside the one country, although people would probably guess what that means if their English is good. You can place a cache under a road/highway bridge anywhere except in the US. Railroads only exist in North America (I think), and there is no restriction on placing caches near them except in the US. Only the US has Federal courthouses. The U.S. National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges) has little control outside the US, so I don't imagine that those guidelines apply. The sensitivity of military installations varies.

 

I think only that three of the 11 example questions are non US-specific, illustrating the difficulty of setting a geocaching test. Although the suggestion might be OK for a geocaching-USA test, and I quite like the idea in principle, we have to be aware that guidelines that only apply locally are potentially harmful in that they encourage a divisive attitude when we should be bringing people together.

 

I think a good part of the point of this is not actually that those guidelines necessarily *apply* everywhere, but its more along the lines of 'prove you've read the guidelines' and actually absorbed something from them.

(although I would still try to keep things highly US specific out of there...)

 

As far as "Railroads" go, are you telling me other countries don't have them? or that they are called something different?

The railway issue, AFAIK, is more of a private property/terrorist target issue, than a safety issue.

[Neos2]

Even though I know the road rules I occasionally bend some. This would be the same answering a quiz, I would be able to answer the questions and still go and plant a cache that was contrary to guidelines.

...

 

ie Is this cache underground?

 

Yes No. If yes is picked (I don't have the computer nous to show this how it should look) then the warning pops up and links to-

 

"Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate."

Um, OK, but I did a cache once that was underground, but had not been buried.

It was in an under-road walkway, and was a very clever hide. I loved it!

[Neos2]

Railroads only exist in North America (I think), and there is no restriction on placing caches near them except in the US.

German rail pass info

 

Eurorail info

 

Railroad South America info

 

Trains of Australia

 

Wiki article on northern African railroad

[+McPhan]

Even though I know the road rules I occasionally bend some. This would be the same answering a quiz, I would be able to answer the questions and still go and plant a cache that was contrary to guidelines.

...

 

ie Is this cache underground?

 

Yes No. If yes is picked (I don't have the computer nous to show this how it should look) then the warning pops up and links to-

 

"Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate."

Um, OK, but I did a cache once that was underground, but had not been buried.

It was in an under-road walkway, and was a very clever hide. I loved it!

 

This was only an example not meant to be taken word for word. In this example, when the warning pops up then it could be ignored or prompt you to write to the reviewer explaining that it is indeed underground but is not buried.

[Neos2]

Even though I know the road rules I occasionally bend some. This would be the same answering a quiz, I would be able to answer the questions and still go and plant a cache that was contrary to guidelines.

...

 

ie Is this cache underground?

 

Yes No. If yes is picked (I don't have the computer nous to show this how it should look) then the warning pops up and links to-

 

"Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate."

Um, OK, but I did a cache once that was underground, but had not been buried.

It was in an under-road walkway, and was a very clever hide. I loved it!

This was only an example not meant to be taken word for word. In this example, when the warning pops up then it could be ignored or prompt you to write to the reviewer explaining that it is indeed underground but is not buried.

I understand that, but there are a lot of gray areas in the guidelines--and that is why they are guidelines, and not hard and fast rules. It is also why writing a "test" would be so difficult as to be meaningless.

 

I am a teacher, I write tests all the time, and I have a bit of experience with that. Multiple choice answer tests never show understanding of a topic. They are cheap and easy to administer. They are easy for people to learn how to pass. Being able to "pass" a multiple choice test doesn't demonstrate anything other than knowing how to take a test. My students call them "Multiguess tests"

 

I assure you, some of our best cache hiders could flunk the test consistently, because they aren't "good test-takers" while some of the worst cache hiders would fly through the test with ease.

[+TrailGators]

Even though I know the road rules I occasionally bend some. This would be the same answering a quiz, I would be able to answer the questions and still go and plant a cache that was contrary to guidelines.

...

 

ie Is this cache underground?

 

Yes No. If yes is picked (I don't have the computer nous to show this how it should look) then the warning pops up and links to-

 

"Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other "pointy" object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate."

Um, OK, but I did a cache once that was underground, but had not been buried.

It was in an under-road walkway, and was a very clever hide. I loved it!

This was only an example not meant to be taken word for word. In this example, when the warning pops up then it could be ignored or prompt you to write to the reviewer explaining that it is indeed underground but is not buried.

I understand that, but there are a lot of gray areas in the guidelines--and that is why they are guidelines, and not hard and fast rules. It is also why writing a "test" would be so difficult as to be meaningless.

 

I am a teacher, I write tests all the time, and I have a bit of experience with that. Multiple choice answer tests never show understanding of a topic. They are cheap and easy to administer. They are easy for people to learn how to pass. Being able to "pass" a multiple choice test doesn't demonstrate anything other than knowing how to take a test. My students call them "Multiguess tests"

 

I assure you, some of our best cache hiders could flunk the test consistently, because they aren't "good test-takers" while some of the worst cache hiders would fly through the test with ease.

This is an open book test. The point is to have an interactive way for people to see how well they really remember what they have read in the guidelines before they submit a new cache. If they answer incorrectly, then actual sections of the guidelines would be quoted to show the correct answer. Right now people say they read the guidelines and check the box. However, if some people are skimming through or even not reading the guidelines then guess what can happen? So the test basically is a way to raise awareness and provide some assurance that people are actually reading the guidelines at the time they place a new cache. This is a good thing for geocaching.

[Neos2]

Openbook test show even less understanding as a rule. One only needs to skim to find the matching text. No comprehension needed.

 

Can just imagine what it would be like for someone who already had 30 caches out, who had spent an entire day putting out four new hides, gotten home to write up the caches and then finds themself facing four tests to plow through before they could submit their cache? And how about if they are trying to do it during one fo the rare times the server is locking up?

 

The real "test" in this case is the actual cache and the cache page submission. It's an applied assessment--the proven method in real life and the classroom. Obviously, thousands of people have passed the test, and you seldom hear of anyone flunking the test entirely. I think reading the forums makes it seems like a bigger problem than it is in real life.

Edited February 17, 2007 by Neos2

[+TrailGators]

Openbook test show even less understanding as a rule. One only needs to skim to find the matching text. No comprehension needed.

 

Can just imagine what it would be like for someone who already had 30 caches out, who had spent an entire day putting out four new hides, gotten home to write up the caches and then finds themself facing four tests to plow through before they could submit their cache? And how about if they are trying to do it during one fo the rare times the server is locking up?

 

The real "test" in this case is the actual cache and the cache page submission. It's an applied assessment--the proven method in real life and the classroom. Obviously, thousands of people have passed the test, and you seldom hear of anyone flunking the test entirely. I think reading the forums makes it seems like a bigger problem than it is in real life.

Speaking of reading comprehension...Did you read the previous posts? I'm pretty sure that I recommended the test for the first few caches for newbies and once a year for everyone else.... Edited February 17, 2007 by TrailGators

[Neos2]

Openbook test show even less understanding as a rule. One only needs to skim to find the matching text. No comprehension needed.

 

Can just imagine what it would be like for someone who already had 30 caches out, who had spent an entire day putting out four new hides, gotten home to write up the caches and then finds themself facing four tests to plow through before they could submit their cache? And how about if they are trying to do it during one fo the rare times the server is locking up?

 

The real "test" in this case is the actual cache and the cache page submission. It's an applied assessment--the proven method in real life and the classroom. Obviously, thousands of people have passed the test, and you seldom hear of anyone flunking the test entirely. I think reading the forums makes it seems like a bigger problem than it is in real life.

Speaking of reading comprehension...Did you read the previous posts? I'm pretty sure that I recommended the test for the first few caches for newbies and once a year for everyone else....

That doesn't change the validity issue.

[+GrizzlyJohn]

The problem is that many of the things some consider rules are just guidelines and are not really as cut and dried as they seem.

 

For example AFAIK if I want to bury a cache on my property I can. So to say that buried caches are not allowed is really not correct. But most people would say they are not allowed.

 

This just goes back to the point that it really is all about common sense. What may work for most cases really can not always apply for every case.

 

Here is another example the .1 of a mile rule. That is not really a rule either. If you have on cache that is at the top of a cliff and another that is at the bottom of the cliff they may not appear to be more than .1 of a mile away. But I think if you explain it to a reviewer they will get it and both will be approved.

 

Again you really just need to get over this desire for more control. People will do what they want and you can only do so much to guide them. Again most of what you are talking about are guidelines not rules. If they don't want to follow rules or guidelines then proving they know them will not change anything.

 

It is up to the reviewers and finders of the caches to keep up on what should and should not be allowed based on their judgement of what they see after actually visiting the cache. Having knowledge of the rules does not in any way shape or form mean a person will follow them. I just don't understand why that is so hard to understand. And this is not the only site. There may be sites out there that have no guidelines or rules. What would you do about them? They may not be geocaching.com but they are part of the hobby/sport/pastime of geocaching. And if more layers of nonsense are added to allowing people to post caches here those types of sites will start to see more traffic.

 

I just see so much of this as being nothing more than a knee jerk reaction to a problem that has been a very small percentage of the whole. Maybe all of this effort would be better spent teaching emergency responders about geocaching. From most accounts it would seem that the outcome has been very different if the agency that came upon something was aware of geocaching.

[+TrailGators]

I just see so much of this as being nothing more than a knee jerk reaction to a problem that has been a very small percentage of the whole. Maybe all of this effort would be better spent teaching emergency responders about geocaching. From most accounts it would seem that the outcome has been very different if the agency that came upon something was aware of geocaching.

 

The number of bomb scares has been a small percentage. It's probably only happened about 100 times. But if we cut future incidents in half by making more people familiar with the guidelines would it be worth it? Also think about what would happen if the terrorists actually did start planting bombs? I suppose you think this could never happen. But if it did, we could follow your advice and tell all the LEOs that those things hidden places where they shouldn't be are all just geocaches.

 

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure...

Edited February 17, 2007 by TrailGators

[+Happy Humphrey]

...railroad...

I meant that elsewhere, they are mostly not known as "railroads"...and the restriction/guideline doesn't apply.

[+McPhan]

Okay, one last try. Must be my upside-down view of things that is making me hard to understand.

 

I was not advocating any type of test at all. Re-read the first paragraph of my first post and you will see I am against testing because testing means nothing in practice.

 

I was suggesting a list of questions relating to the actual hide being submitted, based on the guidelines, on the submission page. Or a separate page similar to the attributes page. If any of the answers could be construed as not quite being in line with the guidelines then a warning/link to the relevant guideline would pop up.

 

No test, just an "honesty" in the answers. And yes, I know people will do what they want and answer what they want. It may, however, help when hiders have forgotten or not fully understood the guidelines.

 

P.S. railroad, railway, train tracks are all understood here.

[bogleman]

How about this - remove the 2 boxes at the bottom of the submission page (guidelines & TOS).

 

Prior to the listing moving through the review process you are taken to the guideline page where you have to scroll to the bottom before you get the accept button and the same thing would happen for the TOS section - something like installing new software to your computer.

 

Yes I know that many will simply just quickly scroll through everything but how many right now simply ckeck the boxes.