Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
cachensfun

What do you think of the new system?

Recommended Posts

YIPPIE!!!! :unsure::anibad::mad:

 

My first Earthcache was published a few minutes ago!

 

(GC24FZD) "Highway 54 Filled Sinkhole"

 

I am so stoked!

 

My third was cleared for re-enabling yesterday, after permission had been given and then withdrawn, and then re-given. I'm on the track to Platinum now! ;)

 

:) and I know just how to get there! :D

Share this post


Link to post

I like the new system as its fast. However, I wonder when caches will be listed on the earthcache.org website. One of ours was approved on Jan 12 and is still not listed there. I thought new caches were supposed to be listed there once a month.

Share this post


Link to post

Hallo,

Als 71 Jähriger, der nie eine Fremdsprache gelernt hat, bin ich überhaupt nicht einverstanden mit der Meinung von cezanne was Fremdsprachen, hier Englisch, anbetrifft. Wer zufällig, jünger und das Glück hatte für unser Hobby die englische Sprache zu beherrschen soll sich glücklich schätzen.

Aber stellen wir uns doch nur einmal vor, dass unsere Platform Japanisch wäre, würde cezanne und alle englisch sprechenden, das auch so hin nehmen und ihr Listing auch immer in Japanisch machen?

 

Microsoft ist da schlauer!

 

Meine Meinung ist, dass wir als Premium Mitglieder mit unserem Beitrag erwarten können in unserem Hobby in unserer Heimat Sprache arbeiten zu können. Aus der Praxis heraus sehe ich keine Veranlassung ausgerechnet bei dem EC auch noch eine englische Version des Listings an zuhängen. Bei Tradis, Multis etc. machen wir das doch auch nicht. Bei allen meinen ECs kann ich mich auch nur an ein einziges englisches Log erinnern, was soll das Ganze? Das englische Listing ist total überflüssig.

Es gibt zwei viel wichtigere Punkte, die erhalten bleiben sollten.

 

1.

Der Foto Beweis muss erhalten bleiben. Achtung! Wo er gefordert wird. Es kann nicht sein, dass es ein freiwilliger Bestandteil ist.

2.

Das Einverständnis des Eigentümers muss vorliegen. Das Einverständnis muss vom Reviewer auch wirklich überprüft werden.

 

By Abacho translated

Hello,

as a 71 year-old who has never learned a foreign language, I completely disagree with the opinion of cezanne what languages concerns. Here English. Who by chance, younger, and was fortunate enough to speak the English language for our hobby can count themselves lucky.

 

But let us only once imagine, that our platform would be Japanese, would cezanne and all English speaking, accept it without a word of protest and also always do their Listing into Japanese?

 

Microsoft is cleverer there!

 

My opinion is that we can expect as a premium member with our contribution to work in our hobby in our native language. From the practice I just see no reason at all to attach an English version on the EC, At Tradis, Multis, etc. we do not do it either. At all my ECs I only one can remember to single English log, what's the point? The English listing is totally unnecessary.

 

There are two more important points that should be preserved.

 

1.

The photographic evidence must be preserved. Regard! Where it is required. It cannot be that it is a voluntary part.

 

2.

The approval of the owner must be on hand. The consent must be by the reviewer actually reviewed.

 

Now here my part in German to the topic from the German forum:

 

Hallo,

 

zufällig habe ich etwas Neues beim Stöbern im grünen Forum gefunden, dass eine völlig andere Sichtweise über die (virtuellen) Earthcache erfordert. Leider! Siehe unter Punkt 6 der Guidelines. Desweiteren ist bei öffentlich zugänglichem Gelände keine Zustimmung des Eigentümers mehr erforderlich. Das aber nur am Rande.

 

http://www.stash-lab.de/?p=188

http://www.geosociety.org/earthcache/guidelines.htm

 

Unter 6.

Ist ein wesentlicher Knacke punkt beschrieben, der dass eigentliche Wesentliche eines Earthcaches der alten Art abschafft. Damit wird, wenn ich es richtig verstehe, der EC zu einem Coachpotato oder auf Deutsch mit meinen Worten mal aus gedrückt ein übler Virtueller Leitplanken Cache, der von zu Hause vom Sofa aus gelöst werden kann. Eine Überprüfung, dass der Logger auch wirklich vor Ort war, fast unmöglich gemacht. Ist das wirklich der Sinn eines Erdnaturkundlichwissentschaftlichen Lektion durch einen Earthcache? Leider muss ich schweren Herzen den Einwänden von Mr. emedi und Radioscout mit ihren

Einwänden gegen Virtuellen Cachen, so zustimmen.

 

Hier unten noch einmal der entscheidende Satz in Englisch aus den EC Regeln. Wir er Grammatisch korrekt in Deutsch aus zulegen ist, darüber mögen sich andere auslassen. Ich komme dabei mal wieder an den Punkt, warum wir es uns als eine der größten zahlenden Gruppe gefallen lassen, entscheidende Regeltexte vordiktieren lassen. Überbertrieben behaupte ich mal, dass die meisten von uns das nicht verstehen oder verstehen wollen und weiter geht es wie bisher. Bis zur Klärung der Zusammenhänge, werde ich auf einen Bestandschutz meiner alten ECs beharren.

 

Es ist meiner Meinung dringend eine Klärung durch GeowareDe gefragt.

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.

 

Bis dann im Wald camino8

Share this post


Link to post

Hallo,

Als 71 Jähriger, der nie eine Fremdsprache gelernt hat, bin ich überhaupt nicht einverstanden mit der Meinung von cezanne was Fremdsprachen, hier Englisch, anbetrifft. Wer zufällig, jünger und das Glück hatte für unser Hobby die englische Sprache zu beherrschen soll sich glücklich schätzen.

Aber stellen wir uns doch nur einmal vor, dass unsere Platform Japanisch wäre, würde cezanne und alle englisch sprechenden, das auch so hin nehmen und ihr Listing auch immer in Japanisch machen?

 

Microsoft ist da schlauer!

 

Meine Meinung ist, dass wir als Premium Mitglieder mit unserem Beitrag erwarten können in unserem Hobby in unserer Heimat Sprache arbeiten zu können. Aus der Praxis heraus sehe ich keine Veranlassung ausgerechnet bei dem EC auch noch eine englische Version des Listings an zuhängen. Bei Tradis, Multis etc. machen wir das doch auch nicht. Bei allen meinen ECs kann ich mich auch nur an ein einziges englisches Log erinnern, was soll das Ganze? Das englische Listing ist total überflüssig.

Es gibt zwei viel wichtigere Punkte, die erhalten bleiben sollten.

 

1.

Der Foto Beweis muss erhalten bleiben. Achtung! Wo er gefordert wird. Es kann nicht sein, dass es ein freiwilliger Bestandteil ist.

2.

Das Einverständnis des Eigentümers muss vorliegen. Das Einverständnis muss vom Reviewer auch wirklich überprüft werden.

 

By Abacho translated

Hello,

as a 71 year-old who has never learned a foreign language, I completely disagree with the opinion of cezanne what languages concerns. Here English. Who by chance, younger, and was fortunate enough to speak the English language for our hobby can count themselves lucky.

 

But let us only once imagine, that our platform would be Japanese, would cezanne and all English speaking, accept it without a word of protest and also always do their Listing into Japanese?

 

Microsoft is cleverer there!

 

My opinion is that we can expect as a premium member with our contribution to work in our hobby in our native language. From the practice I just see no reason at all to attach an English version on the EC, At Tradis, Multis, etc. we do not do it either. At all my ECs I only one can remember to single English log, what's the point? The English listing is totally unnecessary.

 

There are two more important points that should be preserved.

 

1.

The photographic evidence must be preserved. Regard! Where it is required. It cannot be that it is a voluntary part.

 

2.

The approval of the owner must be on hand. The consent must be by the reviewer actually reviewed.

 

Now here my part in German to the topic from the German forum:

 

Hallo,

 

zufällig habe ich etwas Neues beim Stöbern im grünen Forum gefunden, dass eine völlig andere Sichtweise über die (virtuellen) Earthcache erfordert. Leider! Siehe unter Punkt 6 der Guidelines. Desweiteren ist bei öffentlich zugänglichem Gelände keine Zustimmung des Eigentümers mehr erforderlich. Das aber nur am Rande.

 

http://www.stash-lab.de/?p=188

http://www.geosociety.org/earthcache/guidelines.htm

 

Unter 6.

Ist ein wesentlicher Knacke punkt beschrieben, der dass eigentliche Wesentliche eines Earthcaches der alten Art abschafft. Damit wird, wenn ich es richtig verstehe, der EC zu einem Coachpotato oder auf Deutsch mit meinen Worten mal aus gedrückt ein übler Virtueller Leitplanken Cache, der von zu Hause vom Sofa aus gelöst werden kann. Eine Überprüfung, dass der Logger auch wirklich vor Ort war, fast unmöglich gemacht. Ist das wirklich der Sinn eines Erdnaturkundlichwissentschaftlichen Lektion durch einen Earthcache? Leider muss ich schweren Herzen den Einwänden von Mr. emedi und Radioscout mit ihren

Einwänden gegen Virtuellen Cachen, so zustimmen.

 

Hier unten noch einmal der entscheidende Satz in Englisch aus den EC Regeln. Wir er Grammatisch korrekt in Deutsch aus zulegen ist, darüber mögen sich andere auslassen. Ich komme dabei mal wieder an den Punkt, warum wir es uns als eine der größten zahlenden Gruppe gefallen lassen, entscheidende Regeltexte vordiktieren lassen. Überbertrieben behaupte ich mal, dass die meisten von uns das nicht verstehen oder verstehen wollen und weiter geht es wie bisher. Bis zur Klärung der Zusammenhänge, werde ich auf einen Bestandschutz meiner alten ECs beharren.

 

Es ist meiner Meinung dringend eine Klärung durch GeowareDe gefragt.

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.

 

Bis dann im Wald camino8

 

Zu Punkt 2 (oder 6): Wer einen Earthcache entwickelt der von zu Hause aus gelogt werden kann ist doch selber schuld. Bedenkte Fragen die nur vor Ort geloesst werden koennen. und dann noch ein paar Ersatzfrage falls du das Gefuehl hast dass einige Logger die Antworten irgendwo anders herbekommen haben. Ausserdem kannst du immernoch ein Foto verlagen. Nur das Gesicht des Cachers darf nicht mehr zu sehen sein. Das Foto muss einen Zusammenhang mit dem Thema haben. Macht doch Sinn, oder?

 

English: Camino argues that Earthcaches are useless because you cannot proof anymore that the cacher was actually there. The old face-photo discussion again. I suggested intelligent questions and asking for photos that are site-specific, instead of cacher-specific.

Share this post


Link to post

I like the new system as its fast. However, I wonder when caches will be listed on the earthcache.org website. One of ours was approved on Jan 12 and is still not listed there. I thought new caches were supposed to be listed there once a month.

 

Same thing here. No issues with the new system. But the Earthcache.org listing has not been updated. we have a few people in the area that really only hunt ECs but only use Earthcache.org to find them. So there are a few news ones they didn't realize posted yet.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm putting my first earhcache together and noticed something unexpected in the guidelines. In the latter part of guideling #6

 

"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."

 

Has this always been the case? Most of the earthcaches that I have found required a picture showing my face and a feature at the cache site. I always felt that it was justified because the photo proved that I had actually been there. But this guideline seems to take that assurance away.

 

No, that is a very recent change. Old caches to my knowledge are grandfathered in - however - that is not the case with new caches published after the new rules went into effect.

Share this post


Link to post

I was thinking that the new system was good, I got a couple of Earthcaches posted with little or no problems, then came the 2 that are up for reveiw now, I submitted them March 8th and still no word. I have sent emails to the reveiwer but still no progress. Anyone know anyone that can help me? The caches in question are GC24F7B and GC24TT3 :sad:

Share this post


Link to post

Just wanting to know what everybody thought of the new system. It looks like it will speed stuff up. Please leave your thoughts.

 

It is a complete and utter joke. Cops in a donut-shop are more effective.

 

I submitted a cache on April 14. Took them 5 days to get back to me demanding additional info, which I responded with more or less immediately. 8 days have now passed since I resubmitted it and not a single sign of life.

Edited by Motorcycledude

Share this post


Link to post

I'm putting my first earhcache together and noticed something unexpected in the guidelines. In the latter part of guideling #6

 

"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."

 

Has this always been the case? Most of the earthcaches that I have found required a picture showing my face and a feature at the cache site. I always felt that it was justified because the photo proved that I had actually been there. But this guideline seems to take that assurance away.

 

After a very long wait I got response back from the reviewers and they had added a long list of demands for changes (that strangely enough were not mentioned the first time around) and this was one of them.

 

How on earth am I going to know if the person has really been there with no photo?

 

Seems as if they want to kill earthcaches imho.

Edited by Motorcycledude

Share this post


Link to post

I was thinking that the new system was good, I got a couple of Earthcaches posted with little or no problems, then came the 2 that are up for reveiw now, I submitted them March 8th and still no word. I have sent emails to the reveiwer but still no progress. Anyone know anyone that can help me? The caches in question are GC24F7B and GC24TT3 :blink:

 

I am experiencing a similar approach. First few on the new system were really speedy. The momentum seems to have shifted now?

Share this post


Link to post

This is getting more ridiculous by the minute.

 

In the latest response the reviwere writes that I should consider adding questions that involve looking at the object in question and describing something like how wide it is for instance.

 

One of the questiona already included is:

 

"Make an estimate of how many metres about the water level in the surrounding lake you are when standing ontop of the esker.".

 

I guess this is it. I won't bother with earthcaches anymore. The people responsible should consider in whose interest they are working and how they best promote and advance geocaching.

Share this post


Link to post

This is getting more ridiculous by the minute.

 

In the latest response the reviwere writes that I should consider adding questions that involve looking at the object in question and describing something like how wide it is for instance.

 

One of the questiona already included is:

 

"Make an estimate of how many metres about the water level in the surrounding lake you are when standing ontop of the esker.".

 

I guess this is it. I won't bother with earthcaches anymore. The people responsible should consider in whose interest they are working and how they best promote and advance geocaching.

 

The example question you've provided doesn't make any sense. If the rest of your cache description is written that poorly, it's no wonder you're having difficulty getting your cache published. Instead of getting angry and lashing out at the reviewers for upholding standards, perhaps you could ask a friend to help you edit the cache description.

 

The reviewers are looking for rigorous logging tasks that engage and teach geocachers. "Take a picture with your GPS" doesn't meet that standard. If you can't come up with something better, then perhaps it's for the best that you don't publish an Earthcache.

Share this post


Link to post

This is getting more ridiculous by the minute.

 

In the latest response the reviwere writes that I should consider adding questions that involve looking at the object in question and describing something like how wide it is for instance.

 

One of the questiona already included is:

 

"Make an estimate of how many metres about the water level in the surrounding lake you are when standing ontop of the esker.".

 

I guess this is it. I won't bother with earthcaches anymore. The people responsible should consider in whose interest they are working and how they best promote and advance geocaching.

 

The example question you've provided doesn't make any sense. If the rest of your cache description is written that poorly, it's no wonder you're having difficulty getting your cache published. Instead of getting angry and lashing out at the reviewers for upholding standards, perhaps you could ask a friend to help you edit the cache description.

 

The reviewers are looking for rigorous logging tasks that engage and teach geocachers. "Take a picture with your GPS" doesn't meet that standard. If you can't come up with something better, then perhaps it's for the best that you don't publish an Earthcache.

 

The question would make sense if you said above water level instead of about.

 

Since there are more reviewers now and they are presumably more local, I would think that your reviewer would have understood and worked with you better on this, since the way you present it here seems to be a language thing that even I can figure out. The question is as valid as most that I have seen for EarthCaches.

Share this post


Link to post

This is getting more ridiculous by the minute.

 

In the latest response the reviwere writes that I should consider adding questions that involve looking at the object in question and describing something like how wide it is for instance.

 

One of the questiona already included is:

 

"Make an estimate of how many metres about the water level in the surrounding lake you are when standing ontop of the esker.".

 

I guess this is it. I won't bother with earthcaches anymore. The people responsible should consider in whose interest they are working and how they best promote and advance geocaching.

 

The example question you've provided doesn't make any sense. If the rest of your cache description is written that poorly, it's no wonder you're having difficulty getting your cache published. Instead of getting angry and lashing out at the reviewers for upholding standards, perhaps you could ask a friend to help you edit the cache description.

 

The reviewers are looking for rigorous logging tasks that engage and teach geocachers. "Take a picture with your GPS" doesn't meet that standard. If you can't come up with something better, then perhaps it's for the best that you don't publish an Earthcache.

 

So I accidentally swapped the word "above" for "about" but I am sure you knew that and only wanted to pretend you don't. The fact is it is exactly the kind of question he asked me to include, and it was already there.

 

1. The rules have turned into a poor joke. Reviewers don't make the rules, but they (the rules) are still a joke.

2. Having to wait over a week for a response is not acceptable.

3. If a reviewer has complaints he should bring them all forward at once and not come up with additional issues in later messages when you have fixed the initial ones.

4. Heavy work load or not they should _read_ the description properly before commenting on it.

Share this post


Link to post

Is this not coming back to having to have English language Earthcaches? As the cacher in question is from Sweden - I am assuming that English may be a second (or third) language. So a fairly simple grammatical error such as that should either be overlooked or helped by the reviewer IMHO.

 

But then again I may be mistaken and it may be a poorly written cache. It is difficult to tell from getting one side of the story only.

Share this post


Link to post

I am not really mad with the reviewer. It is the new rules and the new organization that [potty language removed by moderator].

 

Too much work is the likely explanation both to the long wait and to the sloppy reading of the description.

 

They took a system that was not perfect but which worked and replaced it with one which doesn't.

 

They had people reviewing earthcaches for my country but removed them, without appointing new ones. As a result people responsible for another region are forced to take on tasks that are really not theirs.

 

As a result we now get caches with more ambitious descriptions/lessons but it takes forever and is very difficult to get them approved and basically any couch potato could then log them from the comfort of their homes.

 

I honestly think earthcaches will die out in the long run. I certainly won't bother creating a new one and don't really know if I am motivated to log any when I know that lots of the other logs may be fakes.

Edited by Keystone

Share this post


Link to post

 

They had people reviewing earthcaches for my country but removed them, without appointing new ones. As a result people responsible for another region are forced to take on tasks that are really not theirs.

 

 

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!

Share this post


Link to post

So you made the guidelines better for visitors? What about the people who locate and create these caches? The guidelines should be for the ECOs.

 

The new sysytem is fast for a few and ok for others.

 

I've noticed earthcaches are not as popular as they were a few years ago :D

 

 

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!

Share this post


Link to post
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!

 

If so, then howcome I had an earthcache published on February 21st which:

 

* Was published in about 24 hours (in this case the first response took 5 days and the second took 8 days)?

 

* Stated that the visitor must upload a photo of him/herself at the site?

 

* Has questions of the same character as those that all of a sudden are not ok?

Share this post


Link to post

 

So I accidentally swapped the word "above" for "about" but I am sure you knew that and only wanted to pretend you don't. The fact is it is exactly the kind of question he asked me to include, and it was already there.

 

 

It still doesn't make much sense, and on its own it doesn't seem like a particularly rigorous logging task. I'm not surprised they asked for you for more.

 

The tasks are supposed to be educational and rigorous. Good logging tasks that must be done at the site help reduce or eliminate armchair logs.

Share this post


Link to post
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!

 

If so, then howcome I had an earthcache published on February 21st which:

 

* Was published in about 24 hours (in this case the first response took 5 days and the second took 8 days)?

 

* Stated that the visitor must upload a photo of him/herself at the site?

 

* Has questions of the same character as those that all of a sudden are not ok?

 

Since geoaware Published your other EC I would assume he knows what he's talking about :anibad:

 

As far as the logging requiements go, they appear to be a bit on the softish side. My impression of photo logging requirements in general, leaves me with the impression that the EC must be very weak indeed if that is the best that someone can come up with.

 

FWIW, I used to have an ALR on one of my Listings that was somewhat similar. When the Guidelines were updated I removed it to conform with the current convention and to keep the game fun for everyone.

 

It's really best to work with the Reviewer. There's really not much that can be accomplished from our vantage point.

 

Good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Since geoaware Published your other EC I would assume he knows what he's talking about :ph34r:

 

That is exactly what puzzles me. How was it ok back then and not now?

 

My impression of photo logging requirements in general, leaves me with the impression that the EC must be very weak indeed if that is the best that someone can come up with.

 

I never said that I wanted photo logging only. But as one of the requirements it is the only way to really prove you have been there. Any other EC could be logged if someone handed you the answers.

 

Anyway, as for my own contribution I am past caring. I made a final attempt. If something is still not ok so be it. Regardless of which I won't be creating any new ones in the future, good or bad. The rule change killed the value of it in my personal opinion.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree - it can be frustrating. But I think this is the value of having a reviewer. My newest EC - although I have thought my logging requirements were fine (and I have a few EC's published ) - geoaware's input has helped the questions become clearer and in line with EC requirements.

 

It is not so much that everything had to change - more the way I have asked the questions that needed ammendment.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree - it can be frustrating. But I think this is the value of having a reviewer. My newest EC - although I have thought my logging requirements were fine (and I have a few EC's published ) - geoaware's input has helped the questions become clearer and in line with EC requirements.

 

It is not so much that everything had to change - more the way I have asked the questions that needed ammendment.

 

both my ECs were published just over a week of submittal. That included 2 reviews and ammendments on my part for one of them - and a baby being born to geoaware and family!

 

Also as a note - my first EC NOT reviewed by geoaware was published too - thanks geoaware3.

Share this post


Link to post
Since geoaware Published your other EC I would assume he knows what he's talking about :anicute:

 

That is exactly what puzzles me. How was it ok back then and not now?

 

Maybe the requirement that the identity of the cachers must be clearly visible has been overlooked or added at a later time.

 

It is no problem at all to ask for a photograph with a certain prespecified geological content.

In my opinion the logging tasks of your published Earth cache do not teach the visitors anything about geology.

 

Photo requirements which ask for photos on which the cache visitors can be identified rather serve the curiosity of the cacher owner and other cachers than avoiding armchair logs. If you do not know the cacher, such photos cannot be used to check whether someone really has visited the location. In case of a physical cache you have to accept logs by all cachers whose alias is contained in the log book. You have no means to check whether the cacher has entered his entry by himself.

 

I like Earth caches as long as they convey an interesting geology-related lession. I choose to ignore, however, to log all Earth caches with photo requirements that force me to upload a photograph of mine on which I can be recognized. I am very glad that such caches do not get published any longer.

Earthcaches are about learning and enjoying geology and not about presenting one's face in the internet.

 

Cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

×
×
  • Create New...