Logging requirements. Must cacher finders be human?

[+TerraViators]

It seems pretty clear that NO photo may be required as a logging requirement.

 

A common misconception. Actually the Guidelines state that:

 

Taking a photograph alone...

 

Which implies that a photo can't be the ONLY Logging Requirement.

 

In addition, from the discussion in this Forum Section, it appears that requests for photos of people and/or their GPS are not generally allowed.

I can understand that, but check out this listing GC1TVB6. The ONLY requirement is a photo. How does that get approved?

[+geoaware]

It seems pretty clear that NO photo may be required as a logging requirement.

 

A common misconception. Actually the Guidelines state that:

 

Taking a photograph alone...

 

Which implies that a photo can't be the ONLY Logging Requirement.

 

In addition, from the discussion in this Forum Section, it appears that requests for photos of people and/or their GPS are not generally allowed.

I can understand that, but check out this listing GC1TVB6. The ONLY requirement is a photo. How does that get approved?

 

In the past we have found some CO 'update' their listings to remove logging tasks AFTER it is published. When we find out about such listings, or if somehow one like the suggested cache above are reported, we work with the CO to get it corrected.

 

You CAN NOT just require a photo and no other tasks and get it published.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

 

I can understand that, but check out this listing GC1TVB6. The ONLY requirement is a photo. How does that get approved?

 

A quick check of the earthcache page indicates this is not completely accurate. In addition to the required photo, two questions need to be answered:

"1- How were the deposits formed?

2- What do geologists call the deposits?"

Maybe the requirements have been changes since the original post, but none-the-less, the photo is not the ONLY requirement! Thanks.

Edited July 18, 2010 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+Touchstone]

Maybe the requirements have been changes since the original post...

 

It must have been updated by the cache owner. When I looked earlier this morning, I only saw the photo requirement.

 

I love happy endings

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Maybe the requirements have been changes since the original post...

 

It must have been updated by the cache owner. When I looked earlier this morning, I only saw the photo requirement.

 

I love happy endings

 

Me too!

Do you think it will be unarchived? Then, it will be a very happy ending. Thanks.

[+Touchstone]

Maybe the requirements have been changes since the original post...

 

It must have been updated by the cache owner. When I looked earlier this morning, I only saw the photo requirement.

 

I love happy endings

 

Me too!

Do you think it will be unarchived? Then, it will be a very happy ending. Thanks.

 

It appears to be merely Disabled and the Cache Owner doesn't realize it, or hasn't found the correct button to Enable it.

 

Or they could just follow geoaware's instructions:

 

Please email geoaware when complete.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Note: quotes are all goofy, so I am gonna start all over.

Edited July 18, 2010 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Maybe the requirements have been changes since the original post...

 

It must have been updated by the cache owner. When I looked earlier this morning, I only saw the photo requirement.

 

I love happy endings

 

Me too!

Do you think it will be unarchived? Then, it will be a very happy ending. Thanks.

 

It appears to be merely Disabled and the Cache Owner doesn't realize it, or hasn't found the correct button to Enable it.

 

Or they could just follow geoaware's instructions:

 

Please email geoaware when complete.

 

Once again you are right. I am going to bow out on this one. The logs on the cache change more often than the weather down here. Thanks.

[+ArcherDragoon]

Animals logging caches...really? And you are surprised when a CO deletes the log?

No more absurd than the photo debate that goes around in circles…

.

.

.

Photos are ALR's no matter how one tries to "justify" it...and I will be happy to say I have never required photos on my Earthcaches...nor will I ever require it...

[+Lostby7]

Animals logging caches...really? And you are surprised when a CO deletes the log?

No more absurd than the photo debate that goes around in circles…

.

.

.

Photos are ALR's no matter how one tries to "justify" it...and I will be happy to say I have never required photos on my Earthcaches...nor will I ever require it...

Sorry but photos are not ARLs in many cases and require no need "justify" them, so your statement is false. So you see no need / have no desire to have photo reqs on your caches, that's fine. Others chose to have their reqs set up differently and I respect that.

[+narcissa]

Photos are ALR's no matter how one tries to "justify" it...and I will be happy to say I have never required photos on my Earthcaches...nor will I ever require it...

 

Please read the guidelines - the ALR guideline applies to physical geocaches. Earthcaches have separate guidelines, and the term "ALR" does not apply to them.

 

Earthcache owners are allowed to require photographs as a form of data collection, but they cannot require a photograph of a cacher and/or GPS at the location.

 

As a form of data collection, asking the cacher to come prepared with a camera is no different than asking them to come prepared with any other sort of tool (i.e. measuring tape, thermometer, bucket). The difficulty rating of the Earthcache should reflect these requirements.

[Schnitzle]

Why would you have to be human to log a find if the logging requiremedts are met? Humans are not the only species that enjoy getting outdoors and geocaching,

[+jellis]

My dog Lily (may she rest in peace) actually found some caches before me but never thought to give her an account. Too late now.

[+Touchstone]

Earthcaches have separate guidelines, and the term "ALR" does not apply to them.

 

I would probably describe it as "additional" Guidelines, rather than separate. I suspect that other than the Saturation portion of the Guidelines, Earthcaches would need to conform with the spirit of many parts of the Geocaching Guidelines, such as Solicitation and Commercial portions for instance. Although not specifically mentioned in the GSA's Earthcache Guidelines, there could be other parts of the GC Guidelines that are universal to all Listings.

 

Sounds like Lily was a great companion

[+jellis]

 

One of the last pictures I took of her before she was hit by a car (no we were not caching at the time). She didn't like going caching with me but she began to so we could be together more. The photo is after we found a cache and noticed the leaves were almost as big as she was so I put one on her and said that this was her camo. Yes she was my baby.

Edited July 21, 2010 by jellis

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

 

One of the last pictures I took of her before she was hit by a car (no we were not caching at the time). She didn't like going caching with me but she began to so we could be together more. The photo is after we found a cache and noticed the leaves were almost as big as she was so I put one on her and said that this was her camo. Yes she was my baby.

How cute.

We share your grief at the loss. We have a couple of Golden Retrievers and have lost three in the past. It may not seem right, but losing a companion like a pup can be as bad as losing a human. We rescue Goldens and the thought that if we hadn't rescued them, they would have had a much harder and perhaps shortened life has helped.

Thanks for sharing.

[+narcissa]

Earthcaches have separate guidelines, and the term "ALR" does not apply to them.

 

I would probably describe it as "additional" Guidelines, rather than separate. I suspect that other than the Saturation portion of the Guidelines, Earthcaches would need to conform with the spirit of many parts of the Geocaching Guidelines, such as Solicitation and Commercial portions for instance. Although not specifically mentioned in the GSA's Earthcache Guidelines, there could be other parts of the GC Guidelines that are universal to all Listings.

 

 

The ALR portion of the guidelines is explicitly limited to physical geocaches.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Earthcaches have separate guidelines, and the term "ALR" does not apply to them.

 

I would probably describe it as "additional" Guidelines, rather than separate. I suspect that other than the Saturation portion of the Guidelines, Earthcaches would need to conform with the spirit of many parts of the Geocaching Guidelines, such as Solicitation and Commercial portions for instance. Although not specifically mentioned in the GSA's Earthcache Guidelines, there could be other parts of the GC Guidelines that are universal to all Listings.

 

Sounds like Lily was a great companion

You are quite correct.

By definition ECs really have additional logging requirements ( i.e. answering questions and photos), they are simply exempt from that part of the guidelines which pertain to traditional caches. The so-called vacation (distance living from cache) and sometimes the proximity rule (tenth of a mile) also don't apply. I may be mistaken, but I think most other guidelines apply.

[+narcissa]

The so-called vacation (distance living from cache) and sometimes the proximity rule (tenth of a mile) also don't apply. I may be mistaken, but I think most other guidelines apply.

 

Generally speaking, the regular guidelines do apply to Earthcaches (in addition to the specific Earthcache guidelines), but the ALR guideline explicitly does not.

 

The reviewers probably aren't as strict about "vacation" Earthcaches as they are about physical geocaches, but Earthcache owners are expected to keep track of the site in case conditions change.

 

The proximity rule does not apply to any virtual geocaches or waypoints, but Earthcache reviewers expect that Earthcache waypoints will be a reasonable distance from physical cache containers to prevent confusion and to prevent Earthcache owners from trying to use another cache as a physical log for the Earthcache.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

We don't need anyone's interpretation of the guidelines as to vacation and proximity. As we have been discussing, here are the guidelines as they are currently applied to earthcaching!

 

"Going forward, we are reserving the right to refrain from publishing EarthCaches that present the same or substantially similar content regarding a particular geological feature. Conversely, we reserve the right to publish an EarthCache in close proximity to another EarthCache if we believe that it presents a distinct geological lesson.

 

The current guidelines regarding vacation EarthCaches will remain as is for the moment. The EarthCache team has decided not to make any further changes at this time."

 

Is that enough? As with the previous thread, the dead horse is being beaten to death!

 

Now if you don't want to believe me or you want to reinterpret the meaning and/or give it your own spin, I would advise anyone to see Geoaware's post no 1 on December 7, 2009. Those are his words and they are quite clear!

Case closed!

[+narcissa]

We don't need anyone's interpretation of the guidelines as to vacation and proximity. As we have been discussing, here are the guidelines as they are currently applied to earthcaching!

 

"Going forward, we are reserving the right to refrain from publishing EarthCaches that present the same or substantially similar content regarding a particular geological feature. Conversely, we reserve the right to publish an EarthCache in close proximity to another EarthCache if we believe that it presents a distinct geological lesson.

 

The current guidelines regarding vacation EarthCaches will remain as is for the moment. The EarthCache team has decided not to make any further changes at this time."

 

Is that enough? As with the previous thread, the dead horse is being beaten to death!

 

Now if you don't want to believe me or you want to reinterpret the meaning and/or give it your own spin, I would advise anyone to see Geoaware's post no 1 on December 7, 2009. Those are his words and they are quite clear!

Case closed!

 

I don't see how this contradicts anything I said or why you insist on being so antagonistic. Perhaps if you read the substance of a reply instead of flying off the handle at the mere fact of it, you'd realize that some comments are written to add to - not contradict - the original post or comment.

 

If others want to continue discussing a topic after you've lost interest in it, there's no need to shout at them for doing so. Just stop reading the thread. Sheesh.

[+Manville Possum]

So, must a cache finder be human to log finding a cache if all of the ECO's requirements are met, and is requiring a cache finder to be human an ALR?

BTW, Signal is a geocaching Frog, correct?

Edited July 23, 2010 by Manville Possum Hunters

[+Ambrosia]

So, must a cache finder be human to log finding a cache if all of the ECO's requirements are met, and is requiring a cache finder to be human an ALR?

BTW, Signal is a geocaching Frog, correct?

 

Here's Signal, fulfilling a requirement for Creating Cobbles.

 

[+Manville Possum]

So, must a cache finder be human to log finding a cache if all of the ECO's requirements are met, and is requiring a cache finder to be human an ALR?

BTW, Signal is a geocaching Frog, correct?

 

Here's Signal, fulfilling a requirement for Creating Cobbles.

 

Wow, looks like this thread died once it got back on subject. I would agree that a finder does NOT have to be human to log an EC as long as the ECO's requirements are met.

Edited July 26, 2010 by Manville Possum Hunters

[Schnitzle]

Yes, you are correct. A finder does not have to be human to log a find as long as the CO's requirements are met. Some photos are considered ALR now on EC's. You only need a GPS unit of some type and an account on GC.

BTW, I am a proud Bronze level EarthCache Master.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Yes, you are correct. A finder does not have to be human to log a find as long as the CO's requirements are met. Some photos are considered ALR now on EC's. You only need a GPS unit of some type and an account on GC.

BTW, I am a proud Bronze level EarthCache Master.

I totally agree with your position.

The key word on the photo requirement is "some" photos are considered ALR, but not all!

Requiring the cacher to show their face is a no no, but if it (the photo) relates to the geological aspect of the EC or to the educational requirements you may require it.

By the way and back on topic, we have had several animals log our caches. It constantly amazes us how smart some animals are! Actually, some may be smarter than some humans!

[+narcissa]

Please read the guidelines. ALR is a term that applies to physical caches with logbooks. "Additional" in the sense of "ALR" means "in addition to signing the log." Earthcaches can't have ALRs because they don't have a physical log.

[+Manville Possum]

Please read the guidelines. ALR is a term that applies to physical caches with logbooks. "Additional" in the sense of "ALR" means "in addition to signing the log." Earthcaches can't have ALRs because they don't have a physical log.

Guidelines for Submittal

(Updated 11 January 2010)

Please read through these carefully to make sure your EarthCache submission meets these guidelines PRIOR to submittal.

 

EarthCache sites must provide Earth science lessons. They take people to sites that can help explain the formation of landscapes or to sites of interesting phenomena such as folds, faults, intrusions or reveal how scientists understand our Earth (such as fossil sites etc.)

 

EarthCache sites must be educational. They provide accurate but simple explanations of what visitors will experience at the site. Cache text must assume no previous knowledge of earth science. The educational notes must be written to a reading age of an upper middle school (14 year old) student. Avoid direct plagiarism from web sources and quote sources of information where appropriate. Additional technical or scientific notes can be provided for the scientific community at the end of the listing. All notes can be submitted in the local language but must also be in English.

EarthCache sites can be a single site, or a multiple virtual cache. No items, box, or physical cache can be left at the site. You must have visited the site recently (within two months), checked the site is safe and taken multiple GPS readings to ensure accuracy of coordinates. You are responsible for disabling an EarthCache if conditions change to access, safety or other issues.

EarthCaches should highlight a unique feature. EarthCaches that duplicate existing EarthCache information about the site or related sites may be rejected. EarthCaches should be developed to provide a unique experience to the visitor to the region. Multiple EarthCaches on the same feature should be avoided and content rather than proximity will be the guiding principle.

EarthCache sites follow the geocaching principles and adhere to the principles of Leave No Trace outdoor ethics. Use waypoints to ensure cachers take appropriate pathways. Use established trails only. Do not create new trails to a site in order to concentrate use impacts. EarthCache sites will highlight the principle of collect photos - not samples. However, if there is no possible damage to a site which is outside of the public land system and approved by the site owner, small samples may be collected as part of the cache experience.

Logging of an EarthCache must involve visitors undertaking some educational task that relates to the Earth science at the site. This could involve measuring or estimating the size of some feature or aspect of the site, collecting and recording data (such as time of a tidal bore), or sending an e-mail to the cache owner with the answer to Earth science related questions they obtained by reading an information display. While photographs may be requested, they do not take the place of other logging requirements. Taking a photograph alone or asking people to do internet research does NOT meet these logging guidelines. 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.

All EarthCache sites developed must have prior approval of the landowners before submission (depending on local country laws and customs). When applicable you must have written approval with the appropriate owner or land-managing agency. The name and contact details of the person from who you received approval MUST be given at time of submission in the “Note to Reviewer”. The developed text should be sent to the landholder/manager for approval*. * Please note that by placing an EarthCache on public land, even with approval, does not mean you can use the public land logo in your text. For example, only EarthCaches developed by US National Park Service personnel in their park can display the NPS logo in their cache text.

All EarthCache sites will be reviewed by the EarthCache Team to ensure appropriateness of the site and educational standard of the notes.

Damage to the site is unacceptable. Please be mindful of fragile ecosystems.

The Geological Society of America and the EarthCache Team retains the right to edit, modify, reject or archive any EarthCache that does not adhere to these guidelines, or for any other purpose that the Team deems as appropriate.

 

The only rules that I play by are the written ones by the people that review and publish EarthCaches, and GC. It is quite clear that some photos are considered ALR and MUST be optional, and you the CO can NOT delete a log based solely on an optional task. I don't worry about the "make them up as you play" rules that some ECO's try to enforce. When my logs are deleted, I do not argue with the CO, I just appeal it with GC and let them decide the outcome.

I am glad that all photos are not ALR, because some actually have something to do with the geological aspect of the cache. Most people don't seem to have an issue with posting their face in a photo, but some do. I like to see a GPS unit at the site, but leave photos an option to log our EC's. I just make the questions harder, and make them solid enough that you know if the cacher visited the site or not.

Edited July 26, 2010 by Manville Possum Hunters

[+narcissa]

The only rules that I play by are the written ones by the people that review and publish EarthCaches, and GC. It is quite clear that some photos are considered ALR and MUST be optional, and you the CO can NOT delete a log based solely on an optional task. I don't worry about the "make them up as you play" rules that some ECO's try to enforce. When my logs are deleted, I do not argue with the CO, I just appeal it with GC and let them decide the outcome.

I am glad that all photos are not ALR, because some actually have something to do with the geological aspect of the cache. Most people don't seem to have an issue with posting their face in a photo, but some do. I like to see a GPS unit at the site, but leave photos an option to log our EC's. I just make the questions harder, and make them solid enough that you know if the cacher visited the site or not.

 

This is pretty rich, after your recent conduct toward other Earthcache owners. Anyway...

 

No, owners can't delete your logs if you don't post a picture of yourself. Nobody is disputing that.

 

What I'm saying is that using the term "ALR" is confusing, because the "ALR" section of the guidelines pertains only to physical geocaches. Now that the term is also being thrown around Earthcaches because of the new guideline about photos, many geocachers are assuming that the ALR guideline applies to Earthcaches and that all they have to do to log the find is visit the site.

[+jellis]

I don't know how many times we have to go over it.

GC and EC agree that the only ALR they are enforcing with Earthcaches is the requirement for a photo with the cacher or the gps in the picture. Meaning you can require a photo of a lake, a rock or anything else to do with the Earthcache. Cannot require one of the cacher or gps to verify they were there. You can only make that as an option and the Earthcache owner is not allowed to delete your log because you didn't post one.

Again if a ECO deletes your log because you didn't supply a photo of a yourself or gps at the location, DO NOT contact the Earthcache owner. GC wants you to send an email to them and they will take care of it.

Also do not track down Earthcaches that have that ALR. GC said they will take care of them when the log deletion is reported to GC. So yes you will see ECO's with that ALR. on their ECs. GC said you can ignore the requirement and only report it if they delete your log. They just don't want cachers to stir up trouble with the ECOs and cause fights.

Edited July 27, 2010 by jellis

[+jellis]

*

Edited July 27, 2010 by jellis

[+Manville Possum]

The only rules that I play by are the written ones by the people that review and publish EarthCaches, and GC. It is quite clear that some photos are considered ALR and MUST be optional, and you the CO can NOT delete a log based solely on an optional task. I don't worry about the "make them up as you play" rules that some ECO's try to enforce. When my logs are deleted, I do not argue with the CO, I just appeal it with GC and let them decide the outcome.

I am glad that all photos are not ALR, because some actually have something to do with the geological aspect of the cache. Most people don't seem to have an issue with posting their face in a photo, but some do. I like to see a GPS unit at the site, but leave photos an option to log our EC's. I just make the questions harder, and make them solid enough that you know if the cacher visited the site or not.

 

This is pretty rich, after your recent conduct toward other Earthcache owners. Anyway...

 

No, owners can't delete your logs if you don't post a picture of yourself. Nobody is disputing that.

 

What I'm saying is that using the term "ALR" is confusing, because the "ALR" section of the guidelines pertains only to physical geocaches. Now that the term is also being thrown around Earthcaches because of the new guideline about photos, many geocachers are assuming that the ALR guideline applies to Earthcaches and that all they have to do to log the find is visit the site.

My recent conduct toward EarthCache owners? My wife had an issue with an ECO over a deleted log over the face in the photo issue, also she got some wrong answers about estimating distances, and contacted Geoware. The CO had the main issue over the photo, truthfully think that the CO was unaware of the new ruling. The cache was retracted until the CO took care of the ALR. It was the first and last cache that she will ever log. And ALR as defined in the guidelines is simple enough for me to understand, it means Additional Logging Required. I don't know what exactly you mean by "This is pretty rich" comment, but think I get your point. Why would anyone have a problem with someone that plays by the rules, and will not let a CO "Bully" them over a "your face ain't in the photo" so I am deleting your log issue?

Edited July 27, 2010 by Manville Possum Hunters

[+narcissa]

I don't know how many times we have to go over it.

GC and EC agree that the only ALR they are enforcing with Earthcaches is the requirement for a photo with the cacher or the gps in the picture. Meaning you can require a photo of a lake, a rock or anything else to do with the Earthcache. Cannot require one of the cacher or gps to verify they were there. You can only make that as an option and the Earthcache owner is not allowed to delete your log because you didn't post one.

Again if a ECO deletes your log because you didn't supply a photo of a yourself or gps at the location, DO NOT contact the Earthcache owner. GC wants you to send an email to them and they will take care of it.

Also do not track down Earthcaches that have that ALR. GC said they will take care of them when the log deletion is reported to GC. So yes you will see ECO's with that ALR. on their ECs. GC said you can ignore the requirement and only report it if they delete your log. They just don't want cachers to stir up trouble with the ECOs and cause fights.

 

I fail to see where anyone has refuted any of this, or why you thought it needed to be dictated to everyone as though someone had refuted it.

[+narcissa]

This geocaching account had an issue with an ECO over a deleted log...

 

Everyone who participated in that forum thread saw exactly what happened, and it had nothing to do with the photo requirement.

 

I will grant you that it was a clever excuse to log an Earthcache without actually fulfilling any of the requirements, but there's been a substantial amount of fallout as a result of your conduct and Groundspeak's reaction to it. Some Earthcache owners have actually archived their Earthcaches as a result of Groundspeaks's decision to allow your log to stand despite NONE of the logging requirements being attempted or met. It's a shame that those owners have allowed one bad apple to spoil things for future finders, but I'm not surprised.

 

I'm certainly reticent about creating new Earthcaches, knowing that the legitimacy of a log is ultimately dependent on how loud you complain to Groundspeak, rather than any kind of thought and learning.

 

But back on topic, I am certain that many geopets can boast more legitimate Earthcache logs than some human cachers.

[+jellis]

I don't know how many times we have to go over it.

GC and EC agree that the only ALR they are enforcing with Earthcaches is the requirement for a photo with the cacher or the gps in the picture. Meaning you can require a photo of a lake, a rock or anything else to do with the Earthcache. Cannot require one of the cacher or gps to verify they were there. You can only make that as an option and the Earthcache owner is not allowed to delete your log because you didn't post one.

Again if a ECO deletes your log because you didn't supply a photo of a yourself or gps at the location, DO NOT contact the Earthcache owner. GC wants you to send an email to them and they will take care of it.

Also do not track down Earthcaches that have that ALR. GC said they will take care of them when the log deletion is reported to GC. So yes you will see ECO's with that ALR. on their ECs. GC said you can ignore the requirement and only report it if they delete your log. They just don't want cachers to stir up trouble with the ECOs and cause fights.

 

I fail to see where anyone has refuted any of this, or why you thought it needed to be dictated to everyone as though someone had refuted it.

Then why is this thread continuing? It seems it started out someone just wanted to know about non humans logs being deleted from Earthcaches. That was answered. I am wondering why you are repeating what has been said over and over. So I am repeating what you said but in a language anyone can understand. What was sent to me by one of the Lackeys. Maybe someone should start a new thread on just Earthcache ALRs so everyone can find it and maybe not have so many separate threads all about the same thing.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

 

Then why is this thread continuing? It seems it started out someone just wanted to know about non humans logs being deleted from Earthcaches. That was answered. I am wondering why you are repeating what has been said over and over. So I am repeating what you said but in a language anyone can understand. What was sent to me by one of the Lackeys. Maybe someone should start a new thread on just Earthcache ALRs so everyone can find it and maybe not have so many separate threads all about the same thing.

 

You are right. The initial question has been answered over and over again. Harry Dolphin's animal friend has already logged one of our ECs.

[+Manville Possum]

This geocaching account had an issue with an ECO over a deleted log...

 

Everyone who participated in that forum thread saw exactly what happened, and it had nothing to do with the photo requirement.

 

I will grant you that it was a clever excuse to log an Earthcache without actually fulfilling any of the requirements, but there's been a substantial amount of fallout as a result of your conduct and Groundspeak's reaction to it. Some Earthcache owners have actually archived their Earthcaches as a result of Groundspeaks's decision to allow your log to stand despite NONE of the logging requirements being attempted or met. It's a shame that those owners have allowed one bad apple to spoil things for future finders, but I'm not surprised.

 

I'm certainly reticent about creating new Earthcaches, knowing that the legitimacy of a log is ultimately dependent on how loud you complain to Groundspeak, rather than any kind of thought and learning.

 

But back on topic, I am certain that many geopets can boast more legitimate Earthcache logs than some human cachers.

So you are saying that I am lying? You were not the ECO, had nothing to do with it except try and cause more trouble, as you are doing know. You have no facts, you were not involved. You only followed the forum. Ask yourself why Geoware retracted the cache until it was corrected. The log was allowed to stand because someone helped her resubmit her answers and uploaded a better photo, still without showing her face, and the CO let the log stand. They were not forced by Groundspeak to do so. Remain ignorant to the facts. I don't care. It just shows what kind of cacher that you are that you would get on this public forum after something that happened last March and try to bring it back up. But don't get on this public forum posting lies about this account. That is called slander in this Country, and I find your post abusive. No wonder people create accounts for their pets, they have the decentacy to at least show respect to other users, but come to think of it, dogs seem to enjoy sniffing eachother's butts. I do not enjoy their pratice, so please remove your nose from this accounts butt, and quit following this account trying to cause trouble in the forums. Here is what the CO had to say: This issue has been resolved to put a end to it, I received the revised answers which were MUCH closer to what I was asking for and I am happy with them. I have allowed the cachers log to stand since she made a effort to get the correct answers....

So there is your proof that the CO let the log stand, and was NOT forced by Groundspeak to do so. So quit spreading lies about this account.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Manville Possum Hunters

[+narcissa]

 

So you are saying that I am lying? You were not the ECO, had nothing to do with it except try and cause more trouble, as you are doing know. You have no facts, you were not involved. You only followed the forum. Ask yourself why Geoware retracted the cache until it was corrected. The log was allowed to stand because someone helped her resubmit her answers and uploaded a better photo, still without showing her face, and the CO let the log stand. They were not forced by Groundspeak to do so. Remain ignorant to the facts. I don't care. It just shows what kind of cacher that you are that you would get on this public forum after something that happened last March and try to bring it back up. But don't get on this public forum posting lies about this account. That is called slander in this Country, and I find your post abusive. No wonder people create accounts for their pets, they have the decentacy to at least show respect to other users, but come to think of it, dogs seem to enjoy sniffing eachother's butts. I do not enjoy their pratice, so please remove your nose from this accounts butt, and quit following this account trying to cause trouble in the forums. Here is what the CO had to say: This issue has been resolved to put a end to it, I received the revised answers which were MUCH closer to what I was asking for and I am happy with them. I have allowed the cachers log to stand since she made a effort to get the correct answers....

So there is your proof that the CO let the log stand, and was NOT forced by Groundspeak to do so. So quit spreading lies about this account.

 

I brought it up because it's laughable for you to get on a high horse about respect and following the rules after that debacle. Never mind your sound and fury - your conduct is on public record here in the forum, and in the PMs sent from your account.

[+Manville Possum]

 

So you are saying that I am lying? You were not the ECO, had nothing to do with it except try and cause more trouble, as you are doing know. You have no facts, you were not involved. You only followed the forum. Ask yourself why Geoware retracted the cache until it was corrected. The log was allowed to stand because someone helped her resubmit her answers and uploaded a better photo, still without showing her face, and the CO let the log stand. They were not forced by Groundspeak to do so. Remain ignorant to the facts. I don't care. It just shows what kind of cacher that you are that you would get on this public forum after something that happened last March and try to bring it back up. But don't get on this public forum posting lies about this account. That is called slander in this Country, and I find your post abusive. No wonder people create accounts for their pets, they have the decentacy to at least show respect to other users, but come to think of it, dogs seem to enjoy sniffing eachother's butts. I do not enjoy their pratice, so please remove your nose from this accounts butt, and quit following this account trying to cause trouble in the forums. Here is what the CO had to say: This issue has been resolved to put a end to it, I received the revised answers which were MUCH closer to what I was asking for and I am happy with them. I have allowed the cachers log to stand since she made a effort to get the correct answers....

So there is your proof that the CO let the log stand, and was NOT forced by Groundspeak to do so. So quit spreading lies about this account.

 

I brought it up because it's laughable for you to get on a high horse about respect and following the rules after that debacle. Never mind your sound and fury - your conduct is on public record here in the forum, and in the PMs sent from your account.

Please quit stalking our account. Go geocaching or create an EC or something, and look at your own conduct while you are at it.

[+narcissa]

 

Please quit stalking our account. Go geocaching or create an EC or something, and look at your own conduct while you are at it.

 

Replying to your public comments on a public forum is not "stalking your account." I haven't looked at your account. I can assure you that your armchair logs hold no fascination for me.

 

It is very silly to comment in a public forum and then throw a fit when those comments are met with responses from others.

[+Manville Possum]

 

Please quit stalking our account. Go geocaching or create an EC or something, and look at your own conduct while you are at it.

 

Replying to your public comments on a public forum is not "stalking your account." I haven't looked at your account. I can assure you that your armchair logs hold no fascination for me.

 

It is very silly to comment in a public forum and then throw a fit when those comments are met with responses from others.

O.K. Will you stop following this account in this public forums, making faulse accusations and bringing up the past from other threads with the sole purpose to embarass and harrass this user account because you find the past incident "laughable"?

 

This thread is finished IMHO. The answer is no, you do not have to be human to log a EC find. Thanks to all who agree. I won't let the door hit me in the cache on the way of this thread.

[+MissJenn]

I would be happy for a puppy, kitty or llama to learn some Earth science by visiting an EarthCache....as I am sure that their owner/guardian/best two legged friend would learn a little as well.

I agree.

We are inclusive here in this game community.