Change logtype for geocoins

[+G.O. Cash]

I have noticed that many, many times geocoins or travelbugs listed with a cache actually are no longer there (I know, "duh!"). While they may have gotten stolen, in most cases the reason is simply that inexperienced cachers log them as "discovered" instead of "retrieved" when they have in fact taken the coin with them. Obviously, the term or logtype "discovered" is confusing people. Why not call it "spotted it" or something, instead of "discovered"?

[+the hermit crabs]

I have noticed that many, many times geocoins or travelbugs listed with a cache actually are no longer there (I know, "duh!"). While they may have gotten stolen, in most cases the reason is simply that inexperienced cachers log them as "discovered" instead of "retrieved" when they have in fact taken the coin with them. Obviously, the term or logtype "discovered" is confusing people. Why not call it "spotted it" or something, instead of "discovered"?

"Spotted" was the favorite choice when this log type was being discussed, but for some reason they went with the ambiguous "discovered it" instead. I agree with you that the existence of this term, combined with the complete lack of any explanation of its proper use on the TB page and the "how to log a TB" pages, causes confusioon and likely contributes to the disappearance of many coins and bugs.

 

You are not the first person to voice this opinion, though -- it's been mentioned many times before, but there has never been any indication that it is going to be changed.

 

If you'd like to read the history of the "discovered it" concept, you might find these threads interesing:

• "Icon swap meets", started in November of 2005, in which Jeremy proposes this new type of log and asks for opinions and suggestions. Many possible names were suggested, including "spotted it", "saw it", "touched it", etc.
  
• "Preventing virtual coin drops at events", from Januuary of 2006, in whch the topic comes back up. Note that in post #40 of that topic, Jeremy even refers to it as the "spotted it" log type.
  
• "Discovered It log entry", from May 2006, when the new log type was introduced. In post #4 of that thread, Jeremy says that

  From prior discussions the word "spotted" came out on top but after some consideration I felt that discovered sounded better and makes as much sense.

[+Isonzo Karst]

remember that the website is used by many for non-English speakers. If they Babel translate "spotted" all kinds of weirdness can ensue. Discovered translates better. The instructions on the geocoins page need updating. They don't even mention the "discovered" log type.

[+G.O. Cash]

I have noticed that many, many times geocoins or travelbugs listed with a cache actually are no longer there (I know, "duh!"). While they may have gotten stolen, in most cases the reason is simply that inexperienced cachers log them as "discovered" instead of "retrieved" when they have in fact taken the coin with them. Obviously, the term or logtype "discovered" is confusing people. Why not call it "spotted it" or something, instead of "discovered"?

"Spotted" was the favorite choice when this log type was being discussed, but for some reason they went with the ambiguous "discovered it" instead. I agree with you that the existence of this term, combined with the complete lack of any explanation of its proper use on the TB page and the "how to log a TB" pages, causes confusioon and likely contributes to the disappearance of many coins and bugs.

 

You are not the first person to voice this opinion, though -- it's been mentioned many times before, but there has never been any indication that it is going to be changed.

 

If you'd like to read the history of the "discovered it" concept, you might find these threads interesing:

• "Icon swap meets", started in November of 2005, in which Jeremy proposes this new type of log and asks for opinions and suggestions. Many possible names were suggested, including "spotted it", "saw it", "touched it", etc.
  
• "Preventing virtual coin drops at events", from Januuary of 2006, in whch the topic comes back up. Note that in post #40 of that topic, Jeremy even refers to it as the "spotted it" log type.
  
• "Discovered It log entry", from May 2006, when the new log type was introduced. In post #4 of that thread, Jeremy says that

  From prior discussions the word "spotted" came out on top but after some consideration I felt that discovered sounded better and makes as much sense.

 

Thanks for directing me to the prior postings on the topic, and sorry for not searching the topic more thoroughly before posting. But maybe there could be some value in bringing it up again now, because in the meantime, the track record appears to prove that the label "discovered" does indeed lead to confusion, cachers being disappointed because of coins/TB's they expected to find are not there, coins /TB's going missing etc. I came across one cache recently that is a case in point: Central Park carousel GC12N21. Nine trackables listed, four of those are not there. If you read the logs, you find that all four have been taken out, and were logged as "discovered". If "spotted" came out on top, and somebody picked "discovered" because it sounds better - well, anybody can know now that in fact it doesn't make as much sense, not by far. I would say it's time to change it.

[+G.O. Cash]

remember that the website is used by many for non-English speakers. If they Babel translate "spotted" all kinds of weirdness can ensue. Discovered translates better. The instructions on the geocoins page need updating. They don't even mention the "discovered" log type.

 

Good point. It wouldn't have to be "spotted". Other logtypes use several words as well ("grab it from somewhere else"), why not make it "saw it, but didn't take it"? If it has to be short, "tag it", "tally", "score", whatever...

Edited September 30, 2007 by G.O. Cash

[+scottpa100]

I was going to suggest the language thing too. Discovered has got to be far less ambiguous when translated into other languages than spotted.

 

You could just say that the English language users themselves need to use a dictionary. Discovered ("Ooo - look what I've found") is something quite different to retrieved ("Ooo - look what I've taken home"). If you don't believe me, why do you think there is a breed of dog called a retriever and not a discoverer? :)

[+G.O. Cash]

I was going to suggest the language thing too. Discovered has got to be far less ambiguous when translated into other languages than spotted.

 

You could just say that the English language users themselves need to use a dictionary. Discovered ("Ooo - look what I've found") is something quite different to retrieved ("Ooo - look what I've taken home"). If you don't believe me, why do you think there is a breed of dog called a retriever and not a discoverer? :)

 

Well, so you're not confused, neither am I - good for us, huh? Fact is, many people make that mistake. As in, Columbus discovered America - and claimed it for his king or country. It still has that connotation of "take possession of", and I'm merely making a practical suggestion, guided by observations.