Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Carbon Hunter

Logging coins and TBs into EarthCaches

Recommended Posts

I would like to find out if we can make a request to ammend the current logging options for geocoins and Travel Bugs.

 

Currently TBs can be logged into VIRTUAL caches and Events - but not EarthCaches.

 

With the recent EarthCache Geocoin, plus a number that are related to earthCaches (such as the Trilobite Geocoin), there is a reason to have a Mission that includes areas where EarthCaches are, or other really pretty or educational areas.

 

Just as many travellers have missions such as visiting Civil War or other historical sites, i believe that the EarthCache (or geological theme) is also a worthy mission.

 

This said, as it is a virtual cache (with additional educational logging requirements) no physical coins wioll remain at the cache site, so the risk of geoloitter is negated.

 

I would like to request that these caches are now allowed to have virtual logging, similar to Virtual caches.

 

I refer to the following thread on the EarthCache forum for your consideration too (http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=230043

Share this post


Link to post

I think that it is a great idea to be able to dip TB's & Geocoins into EarthCaches. After all, if they can be dipped into a Virtual, which is no different to an EarthCache from a physical point of view, why not an EarthCache?

 

I look forward to some debate on this.

Share this post


Link to post

Great, now we're going to lose TB's in virtuals. :mad:

 

But you can already - that's the whole point. What's good for the goose must surely be good for the gander as well.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with the OP. Why can't we log TBs/coins in and out of ECs? As I understand it, you can on virtuals but why not on ECs? :mad:

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

What's good for the goose must surely be good for the gander as well.

Fair enough, I agree. Allow trackables to be moved through earthcaches. At the same time, change the listing guidelines so that earthcaches are subject to all the same guidelines as geocaches. No commercialism. No agendas (other than geology and education). A minimum distance of 528 feet from the next nearest cache container. The cache owner must live near enough to the earthcache to maintain it, or must demonstrate an otherwise acceptable maintenance plan. And so on. Because what's good for the goose must surely be good for the gander as well.

 

On the other hand, if you want to continue having the special guidelines for this different type of "cache," then accept that there are also differences when it comes to trackables.

Share this post


Link to post

The cache owner must live near enough to the earthcache to maintain it, or must demonstrate an otherwise acceptable maintenance plan.......

 

What, pray, is there to maintain with an EarthCache? The same question applies to a Virtual.

Share this post


Link to post

What's good for the goose must surely be good for the gander as well.

Fair enough, I agree. Allow trackables to be moved through earthcaches. At the same time, change the listing guidelines so that earthcaches are subject to all the same guidelines as geocaches. No commercialism. No agendas (other than geology and education). A minimum distance of 528 feet from the next nearest cache container. The cache owner must live near enough to the earthcache to maintain it, or must demonstrate an otherwise acceptable maintenance plan. And so on. Because what's good for the goose must surely be good for the gander as well.

 

On the other hand, if you want to continue having the special guidelines for this different type of "cache," then accept that there are also differences when it comes to trackables.

 

Not sure of your point/

 

There are different guidelines - sure - but the trackables should not make any difference.

 

I also agree with you actually on the minimum distance. I have no clue why there should be any different requirment between EarthCaches and traditional caches. Most of the EC's I have done are actualy many miles away from the next traditional cache, mainly becasue they are in protected areas where traditional caches are not allowed.

 

I am not sure of the logical behind not having trackables in an EC. if there was good logic behind it originally - I am unaware of it and am open to enlightenment.

 

Regarding EC's having different requirements - every cache type has a slightly different set of requirements (Events - need a few weeks before event, all geocachers are welcome etc.); (Multis - need to have a few way points); (Mega events need a minum number of atendees etc.)

 

EarthCaches too have their own unique requirments - but ultimately fall under the geocaching.com rules and the geocaching creed.

 

They are not everyone's cup of tea - but hey - there are a number of cachers I know who dont do nanos - or multis - or dislike quick events etc. Each to his own and do it as it works for you.

Share this post


Link to post

What's good for the goose must surely be good for the gander as well.

Fair enough, I agree. Allow trackables to be moved through earthcaches. At the same time, change the listing guidelines so that earthcaches are subject to all the same guidelines as geocaches. No commercialism. No agendas (other than geology and education). A minimum distance of 528 feet from the next nearest cache container. The cache owner must live near enough to the earthcache to maintain it, or must demonstrate an otherwise acceptable maintenance plan. And so on. Because what's good for the goose must surely be good for the gander as well.

 

On the other hand, if you want to continue having the special guidelines for this different type of "cache," then accept that there are also differences when it comes to trackables.

 

WHAT? I fail to see the logic! ECs are not even close in content to other caches so why should they have the same guidelines. Try developing an EC and you will see the difference. As to distance (528 feet), that comparison is even more far fetched. Maybe for guard rails but often you find locations where there is room for 2 or more ECs. I can think of a cave with a spring with a nearby rock shelter. All three are vastly different and would make great ECs. Even if a guard rail was 528 feet long, it's still a guard rail! :mad:

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for proving my point by saying that earthcaches aren't even close in content to geocaches. That's why the goose / gander logic is fallacious. Rather, earthcaches have more in common with waymarks. So, why not allow trackables to move through earthcaches at the same time when they're allowed to move through waymarks?

Share this post


Link to post

As as far as I am concerned TB/coins should only be allowed to be logged into a physical cache or an event. Not micro's or anything where the actual TB or coin couldn't be physically found in the cache. There are a couple of exceptions where the Tb is too big for the cache itself then it could be allowed at an event or even placed beside the physical cache itself. JMHO

Share this post


Link to post

Its a great idea.... First off the traveler traveled to the location, it was there...why not log where its been? EC's are great locations with great info on the world these TB get to travel. Id also say EC'ers may be a little more prone to pay attention to logging of the Bugs and coins with the additional logging requirements involved in ECs, so yer bugs probably wont end up in an EC~ Its all in who is handling your bug. How many traditionals are more interesting than an EC...there are some, but not the majority by far.

 

Id say to honor EC's in a TB's travels... Container or not, they visited a cool cache that someone felt the need to document on the TBs page.

 

Comon...let our TBs visit "the elite", The purest that geocaching has to offer :mad::mad:

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for proving my point by saying that earthcaches aren't even close in content to geocaches. That's why the goose / gander logic is fallacious. Rather, earthcaches have more in common with waymarks. So, why not allow trackables to move through earthcaches at the same time when they're allowed to move through waymarks?

 

OK, so now explain how you are happy that a TB can go through a VIRTUAL then? Virtuals "aren't even close in content" either. That is where I use the goose / gander logic. If they are allowed for Virtual caches then why not allow them for EarthCaches then?

Share this post


Link to post

Fair enough - I agree. Treat earthcaches just like virtuals. Allow trackables to move through existing earthcaches. However, make earthcaches a grandfathered cache type, such that all new ones would be listed at Waymarking.com. Just like virtuals.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for proving my point by saying that earthcaches aren't even close in content to geocaches. That's why the goose / gander logic is fallacious. Rather, earthcaches have more in common with waymarks. So, why not allow trackables to move through earthcaches at the same time when they're allowed to move through waymarks?

 

Because Earthcaches, Virtual Caches, and all trackables are on the Geocaching side, and Waymarks are on the Waymarking side?

 

Fair enough - I agree. Treat earthcaches just like virtuals. Allow trackables to move through existing earthcaches. However, make earthcaches a grandfathered cache type, such that all new ones would be listed at Waymarking.com. Just like virtuals.

 

Earthcaches, Virtual Caches, Waymarks...the lines do seem to blur, don't they?

I'm sure that almost anyone could cite one from any of these categories that has properties from the other two categories. YET, TPTB have seen fit to separate them into two distinct 'camps':

The Geocaching Camp

and

The Waymarking Camp.

 

Certainly there are Earthcaches that are nothing more than glorified Virtual Caches.

Probably there are some Waymarks that could have been Earthcaches.

Absolutely there are Virtual caches that could be Earthcaches or Waymarks!

 

Earthcaches, Virtual caches, Travel Bugs and Geocoins are all parts of the 'Geocaching side'.

Waymarks are a (the) part of the Waymarking side.

 

Perhaps there is a demand/need for a type of traveler that only visits Waymarks, and I certainly would not be opposed to having my Travel Bugs and Geocoins visit Waymarks if that were to be allowed.

Share this post


Link to post

I have made up a few travel bugs with the goal of visiting EarthCaches. I would like to see them be able to actually be logged in to them.

Share this post


Link to post

I have made up a few travel bugs with the goal of visiting EarthCaches. I would like to see them be able to actually be logged in to them.

A noble mission IMHO - I have a few too.

Share this post


Link to post

I guess I can't get too excited about whether or not travel bugs should be able to be logged into EarthCaches.

 

There seems to be a small community that are very EarthCache oriented. They seem to find the fact that EarthCaches are different than traditional caches and even different than virtual caches means they provide the best or the purest caching experience. Certainly it is a different experience than searching for traditional cache. Clearly there are others who see EarthCaches as some anomaly that would fit much better as a Waymarking category.

 

Much like the EarthCache community, there is the travel bug community. Their passion is sending off travel bugs with various missions and following them as they are logged in and out of caches. It is not surprising that some people are enthusiastic about both EarthCaches and travel bugs and would like to see travel bugs logged in and out of EarthCaches even though the bug obviously can't be in the EarthCache any more than it can be in a virtual.

 

I usually don't have much to say about either EarthCaches or travel bugs because I don't find either particularly interesting. I'll log an EarthCache if there is one in the area I happen to be geocaching in and I have time to look and try to find the answers. I'll move a geocoin or travel bug from time to time, though often I don't even look to see if one is in the cache. It just seems to me that these activities aren't really geocaching. You're not using a GPS to go to a location to find and object. (EarthCachers might claim that in fact you do use a GPS to go to a location and you generally do find an object that demonstrates some principal of geology, but finding a oxbow lake or an eroded canyon is not the size or kind of thing that geocaching intended you to find). TPTB tolerate these excursions from the original intent of geocaching, even as they post guideline clarifications to show they won't tolerate other excursions. Travel bug owners, in particular, seem to enjoy having their travel bugs travel the world and provide them a armchair experience of caches they themselves will never visit. I supposed getting notified about a virtual that your travel bug might have visited is better than a coach potato log that you posted because you read the cache page and were able to figure out the answers to the questions. Certainly at $6 for a travel bug tag, it's a better deal for Groundspeak.

 

Groundspeak actually has provided some input on the intent of travel bugs and trackable coins. They really intend for these to be moved from physical cache to physical cache. When they discovered some people would give out tracking numbers so that a travel bug or coin could be logged in and out of caches without the bug or the coin actually ever being in that place, they decided that these "virtual" travel bugs were not what they had intended and began to archive these bugs. I believe this is still the policy, although I know that a log of people who paid $6 (or more for a coin) were pretty upset that their tracking page on geocaching.com was taken away from them. TPTB also tried to eliminate the ability to log trackables in and out of virtuals. The travel bug community was up in arms as virtual cache was often the goal of travel bug and they wanted their pictures of the bug at the location. And there are the coin collection owners. These are only ever checked into events and only then to be discovered. Sometimes they're not even checked into the event. If that isn't a perversion of the intent of a trackable item I don't know what is. I don't discover coins at events.

 

First they banned virtual trackables, but I wasn't into trackables so I did not speak out. Then they banned armchair logging of virtual caches, but I didn't care to log caches I hadn't visited so I didn't speak out. Then they banned caches in cemeteries, but I didn't care to look for caches in cemeteries, so I didn't speak out. Then they banned my cache and no one spoke out.

Share this post


Link to post

TB's and coins have the 'Discovered' setting (to save retrieving and then dropping them)

Maybe Earthcaches could have a similar thing, you can't drop a TB or coin at an Earthcache, but you can register that it's been there..?

Share this post


Link to post

TB's and coins have the 'Discovered' setting (to save retrieving and then dropping them)

Maybe Earthcaches could have a similar thing, you can't drop a TB or coin at an Earthcache, but you can register that it's been there..?

 

Nope, Discovered doesn't reflect the location of where it was logged.

Share this post


Link to post

I would love it if I could dip mine or other people's coins/TBs in an EarthCache. I have a couple of my own coins that I carry with me just to dip in special caches, I even have a virtual ghost coin that mainly gets logged only at virtuals. For me, it adds a fun element to the game. I usually get a picture of 'ghosty' at the site too.

 

I know I can take pictures and post them for an EC but to be able to track the mileage would be a benefit as well.

 

To go off topic for a moment, I'd like to address the whole virtual/EC/waymark thing. Discarding the simple fact that I find Waymarking *way* too cumbersome to navigate the site/download/log/etc..., I don't think ECs are anything like a waymark. There is a rigorous screening process in place to make sure the ECs are of a certain quality. Most of the virtuals I've done have an educational component that has increased my knowledge. Waymarking on the other hand, anyone can walk down a street and snap pictures of every business and find some category to post it in. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that because I have logged some of those waymarks. I just want to point out IMO, ECs are more significant than a waymark. As such, it would be nice to be able to track my bugs/coins through them the same as virtuals.

 

thanks.

Share this post


Link to post

BTW: I started this threasd to hopefully make representation to the Geocaching.com powers that be.

 

How do we know this has been considered and has been either accepted or rejected? I really dont want to flog a dead horse.

Share this post


Link to post

There's no guarantee of a formal reply here but I would bet at least one of the programmers as read your proposal. If you want a reply you would have to send an email to contact@ gc.com.

Share this post


Link to post

I have made up a few travel bugs with the goal of visiting EarthCaches. I would like to see them be able to actually be logged in to them.

I concur.

 

Mrs. Car54

Share this post


Link to post

You can add another name to the list of cachers who would like to have the ability to log occasional trackables into an EC.

 

Many people have TB vehicles which they move around as they cache to show the miles they have gone. Others have coins which they do the same thing with as a good luck piece. One of the four HOBOs, Lyonden_UT, has a coin that he moves from cache to cache that has over 140,000 miles on it.

 

So if your vehicle TB, coin good luck charm, or any other trackable that moves around from location to location to show it's travels is fine in every other cache type, what would be the problem with enabling it to be loaded into the EC to show it's travels???

 

Like others who would be open to official reasons from either Earthcache.org or GS/GC, I would love to read or hear an official position if there is one. In the mean time, I have put in my two cents and will await a desision one way or another.

 

MYater

Share this post


Link to post

You can add another name to the list of cachers who would like to have the ability to log occasional trackables into an EC.

 

Many people have TB vehicles which they move around as they cache to show the miles they have gone. Others have coins which they do the same thing with as a good luck piece. One of the four HOBOs, Lyonden_UT, has a coin that he moves from cache to cache that has over 140,000 miles on it.

 

So if your vehicle TB, coin good luck charm, or any other trackable that moves around from location to location to show it's travels is fine in every other cache type, what would be the problem with enabling it to be loaded into the EC to show it's travels???

 

Like others who would be open to official reasons from either Earthcache.org or GS/GC, I would love to read or hear an official position if there is one. In the mean time, I have put in my two cents and will await a desision one way or another.

 

MYater

Thank you - we hope we'll get a reply. I trust too that there was a decision a while back that we can consider. Or that it can be reconsidered.

Share this post


Link to post

I have made up a few travel bugs with the goal of visiting EarthCaches. I would like to see them be able to actually be logged in to them.

I concur.

 

Mrs. Car54

 

I do too!

 

I had same intention with my EarthCache geocoin but noticed that it can't be even drop and retrieve. Hey. new traveller log type - visited - would be nice!

Just select that from bugs page and enter the cache where it has visited,and write your log as usual. This can be used only whey you have the coin, but tb milage would be then be calculated to that cache and coin actually stays in your posession until you drop it to actual cache. This could be used only on virtuals...Just speculating, but why not? Maybe it is too complicating to implement.

Share this post


Link to post

Add my vote to allow trackables to be logged through ECs - that's why I bought my EarthCache coin!!! I think it's a shame that we can't do this at present, and was shocked when I discovered this fact. Also, some of my bugs are prime candidates for EC locations, though they don't have that as a specific mission. I don't understand why this is blocked...

Share this post


Link to post

Not only do we have an official Groundspeak "Earthcache" coin - we now also have 4 Earthcache Masters coins - one for each level (bronze, silver, gold and platinum).

 

Would love these to go to Earthcaches.

Share this post


Link to post

There are Waymarking themed geocoins. I've had an idea for a long time for producing one of my own. If and when geocoins can be moved through waymarks, perhaps I will. That change ought to come at the same time when earthcache geocoins are trackable through earthcaches.

Share this post


Link to post

I would also like to be able to log coins and bugs in Earthcaches. I have a personal TB that I dip into every cache I find to track the mileage. I found a Earthcache in Yosemite and I couldn't track my mileage. I planned to do some more caching in the valley but I didn't get around to it. I ended up doing a DNF on a virtual just so I could have some place to dip the bug and get the mileage added on.

Share this post


Link to post

There are Waymarking themed geocoins. I've had an idea for a long time for producing one of my own. If and when geocoins can be moved through waymarks, perhaps I will. That change ought to come at the same time when earthcache geocoins are trackable through earthcaches.

Do you have issues about this, or some agenda? Or did someone catch you at the end of a rainbow and take your pot of gold today? ;) Sheesh!

Share this post


Link to post

The cache owner must live near enough to the earthcache to maintain it, or must demonstrate an otherwise acceptable maintenance plan.......

 

What, pray, is there to maintain with an EarthCache? The same question applies to a Virtual.

 

Signs get removed, geysers stop erupting, areas get closed, ...

 

It's nice if a earthcache owner, if not local, does wander through the area of the earthcache from time to time to make sure the information and features are still accessible and still the same.

Share this post


Link to post

I believe this thread is about logging coins and TBs in and out of Earthcaches, and not about the maintenance of Earthcaches, or the possibility of TBs and coins moving through Waymarks.

 

Just for the record, I fully support the concept of bugs and coins moving through both Earthcaches, and/or Waymarks.

Share this post


Link to post

Since bugs and coins can be logged through virtuals already, I expect the only thing stopping them from being logged through EarthCaches is a policy not programming.

Share this post


Link to post

I'd like to see this, and also for webcam caches too. I have a geocoin I use to track my progress and I'd like to actually have its mileage correspond to my actual mileage rather than just be close.

 

I agree with those that say this is already available for virtuals and so should be for ECs. Of course, the danger of this argument is that it can be resolved the wrong way, i.e., the ability to log trackables into virtual caches will be removed...

Share this post


Link to post

There's no guarantee of a formal reply here but I would bet at least one of the programmers as read your proposal. If you want a reply you would have to send an email to contact@ gc.com.

 

hmmmm

Share this post


Link to post

There's no guarantee of a formal reply here but I would bet at least one of the programmers as read your proposal. If you want a reply you would have to send an email to contact@ gc.com.

 

hmmmm

 

I guess I am not following you. There are no guarantees to anything but what else is this forum for? Groundspeak, on numerous occasions, has replied to other ideas. A single email is from one person, versus several posts voting in the positive, is much better and should elicit a response! :ph34r:

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

We will not allow logging of trackables through Earthcaches. In fact, we should have halted the practice of dropping coins and TBs in virtual caches ages ago. However, I'll do you one better.

 

Let's create a new trackable log type called "Pitstop" (or something) that lets you post a log with a coordinate. We can show these logs as stops on the trackable map.

Share this post


Link to post

We will not allow logging of trackables through Earthcaches. In fact, we should have halted the practice of dropping coins and TBs in virtual caches ages ago. However, I'll do you one better.

 

Let's create a new trackable log type called "Pitstop" (or something) that lets you post a log with a coordinate. We can show these logs as stops on the trackable map.

 

I LIKE THIS IDEA!

 

Perhaps a trackable has a goal to visit (some particular type of location), but there are no Geocaches really near the (particular type of location) where you took the traveler to help it in its goal.

 

I don't understand the proscription against EarthCaches...but there are many things I don't understand.

Share this post


Link to post

We will not allow logging of trackables through Earthcaches. In fact, we should have halted the practice of dropping coins and TBs in virtual caches ages ago. However, I'll do you one better.

 

Let's create a new trackable log type called "Pitstop" (or something) that lets you post a log with a coordinate. We can show these logs as stops on the trackable map.

This would be something.

But I agree with AZcachemeister, I don't understand the stance against virtualy dropping them. If we can get a pitstop log for trackables that are traveling that would appease my desire to show a trail.

 

MYater

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure that the Pitstop is such a good idea. Can place TB's anywhere - that really becomes Google earth caching and you can log TBs into any co ord you like? I still prefer the idea of dipping into exisitng caches.

 

But if that is the official stance - then so be it.

Share this post


Link to post

I wish they would make it easier to 'pitstop' multiple travelers instead having to retrieve each one individually.

 

Too soon? :D

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
There's no guarantee of a formal reply here but I would bet at least one of the programmers as read your proposal. If you want a reply you would have to send an email to contact@ gc.com.
hmmmm

I guess I am not following you. There are no guarantees to anything but what else is this forum for? Groundspeak, on numerous occasions, has replied to other ideas. A single email is from one person, versus several posts voting in the positive, is much better and should elicit a response! :D

Whenever I've emailed them for suggestions, they reply and ask me to post it on the forums for discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
There's no guarantee of a formal reply here but I would bet at least one of the programmers as read your proposal. If you want a reply you would have to send an email to contact@ gc.com.
hmmmm

I guess I am not following you. There are no guarantees to anything but what else is this forum for? Groundspeak, on numerous occasions, has replied to other ideas. A single email is from one person, versus several posts voting in the positive, is much better and should elicit a response! :D

Whenever I've emailed them for suggestions, they reply and ask me to post it on the forums for discussion.

 

Yes, this is best. The people monitoring the email queue have administrative responsibilities that don't leave room for feature request documentation. That is why I am here.

Share this post


Link to post

I wish they would make it easier to 'pitstop' multiple travelers instead having to retrieve each one individually.

 

Too soon? :D

 

:D

 

Feature creep! *runs*

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

×
×
  • Create New...