Can I ignore questions based on internet research?

[toczygroszek]

There is a part of guideliness:

 

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.

 

But there are many active Earthcaches where you have to look for answers in google. So can I just ignore these questions (like photo) and send only nswers collced on site? Can an owner delete my log if will not send these "google" answers? Does the guideline meet "old" Earthcaches as well?

[+Lostby7]

...But there are many active Earthcaches where you have to look for answers in google.

Really? I have never seen one in the 79 finds I have made and I did not include Google needed information in any of the 30ish listings I published....I guess anything is possible

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

...But there are many active Earthcaches where you have to look for answers in google.

Really? I have never seen one in the 79 finds I have made and I did not include Google needed information in any of the 30ish listings I published....I guess anything is possible

 

We have found over 200+ ECs and we also have never been requested to Google anything! Maybe you are confusing the desire to Google for answers versus the requirement from the cache developer to do so.

P.S. You can't forget the photo either! (apologies to Lostby7, we wanted dessert!) lol.

Edited July 13, 2010 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+Touchstone]

Are the Descriptions specifically "asking" you to do a search on the internet to fulfill the logging requirement, or is that merely what you surmise?

[toczygroszek]

Are the Descriptions specifically "asking" you to do a search on the internet to fulfill the logging requirement, or is that merely what you surmise?

 

No, they don't ask exactly about internet, I can ask locals, visit library or buy guide about this area. But I can't find answer on the cache spot. This ia an example:

 

To log this earth cache please answer the following questions

 

Question 1.

 

When did the modern word "dune" come into the English language and what language and year did it appear from.

 

Question 2.

 

Name the different shapes and types of Sand Dunes.

 

Question 3.

 

How many boulders are at the above coordinates and what type of Quartz can be seen in them.

 

Question 4.

 

What is a Glacial ridge?

 

Finally At the listed coordinates take a photo of the Sand and Gravel ridges please include either yourself or you gps in the photo, also estimate the wide of the Sand and Gravel ridges at this location.

 

There is no information sign or anything except dunes at this spot. So regarding guidelines answer only to question 3 should be enough. This is only example, I've got problem with other Earthcache what I've "found", and there is question about something, what I can't find at the cache spot, and the owner told me I can't log this cache because my answer is wrong (I really don't know where can I find answer to this question, but definitely not on the site). So can I just ignore this question similar to photo?

[+Lostby7]

I have seen several which ask questions which can be answered from a sign (now finding it may be another issue) or brochure at the location...but none that asked several questions based on information you could not get at the site. That said, it is up to the review team to OK the questions and if they passed the questions then they are viable. I guess if you have specific questions about a specific ECs requirements you could drop a EC reviewer an email and ask for clarification.

[toczygroszek]

OK, thanks.

[+HoustonControl]

OK, it was me...

 

I have an earthcache (GC2176V) that asks for an answer to one question that requires "outside research" (isn't readily available at the EC site). I mention that the answer can be easily found online. My reasoning is that I want finders to learn a little something geological and the feature in question is on private property with no informational plaque or signage nearby. Oh, and I also ask for a picture (now supposedly optional) of the cacher at the location.

 

In reality, I get some emails with the correct answer to the question, many with incorrect answers, and some with no answer at all..... and a few even fail to post a picture. But I've yet to delete a log, so I guess you'd say it's all optional.

[+FourRiverRatz]

I have one we plan to do soon that requires some info from the 'net. (even asks for the url where you find it) Not a problem for us though..it's a good thing when my kids have to look something educational up over summer vacation!

 

and he gave me permission to not post a pic if I can't.

 

So all is good with the world here this morning.

[toczygroszek]

But officially - can I just ignore question like that? CAN I?

 

The question what I'm talking about maybe is easy to find for locals in local language, but not for foreigners. There is NOTHING about it at the cache site.

Edited July 14, 2010 by toczygroszek

[+Lostby7]

If the question was approved for publishing by the EC reviewer then it stands as a legitimate question...you could always email the owner in advance and ask or if no response log the cache and if it is deleted, you can appeal through Groundspeak if you find the deletion unfair...but try not to go the appeal route...most owners will provide latitude in logging.

 

Edit for such poor sentence structure...my teachers would roll in their graves....if they were dead yet, hey I ain't that old yet...just sayin'.

Edited July 14, 2010 by Lostby7

[toczygroszek]

If the question was approved for publishing by the EC reviewer then it stands as a legitimate question...you could always email the owner in advance and ask or if no response log the cache and if it is deleted, you can appeal through Groundspeak if you find the deletion unfair...but try not to go the appeal route...most owners will provide latitude in logging.

 

Edit for such poor sentence structure...my teachers would roll in their graves....if they were dead yet, hey I ain't that old yet...just sayin'.

 

There is lot of published caches, where is question about picture. There are many traditional caches approved witlh ALR, and I can log it ignoring these ALR.

[+TerraViators]

I have seen an earthcache listing that stated that the answers to the logging requirements could be obtained from the internet.

[cezanne]

I have seen several which ask questions which can be answered from a sign (now finding it may be another issue) or brochure at the location...but none that asked several questions based on information you could not get at the site.

 

In German speaking countries there are many of such Earth caches, some even contain only questions that need external sources (internet in most cases, but of course also books will do the job in many cases) except maybe a single pseudo question having nothing to do with geology and of no interest at all.

 

Cezanne

Edited July 19, 2010 by cezanne

[+Lostby7]

I have seen several which ask questions which can be answered from a sign (now finding it may be another issue) or brochure at the location...but none that asked several questions based on information you could not get at the site.

 

In German speaking countries there are many of such Earth caches, some even contain only questions that need external sources (internet in most cases, but of course also books will do the job in many cases) except maybe a single pseudo question having nothing to do with geology and of no interest at all.

 

Cezanne

Sweet! Looks like I can log some German EarthCaches now...and return the favor of all the German armchair logs I have deleted from my virtual.....OK, kidding (about the logging of the ECs....not the deleting of German armchair logs).

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

I have seen several which ask questions which can be answered from a sign (now finding it may be another issue) or brochure at the location...but none that asked several questions based on information you could not get at the site.

 

In German speaking countries there are many of such Earth caches, some even contain only questions that need external sources (internet in most cases, but of course also books will do the job in many cases) except maybe a single pseudo question having nothing to do with geology and of no interest at all.

 

Cezanne

Sweet! Looks like I can log some German EarthCaches now...and return the favor of all the German armchair logs I have deleted from my virtual.....OK, kidding (about the logging of the ECs....not the deleting of German armchair logs).

 

Hey Lostby7,

We had the same invasion (armchair logs) on a couple of our ECs. I think I remember a long thread on another forum regarding the problem.

While I have a sister-in-law in your home State, it may be a while before we can get there so not being German, can we armchair log your virtual? Just kidding, but the cache looks nice!

Now you know why most of us want "proof" of actually visiting the EC site. Maybe we can require the cacher leave behind some sample of their DNA instead of a pic? I recently saw a home DNA testing kit on sale for $1.000,000! Marge and I really cannot afford one, but maybe some of us can pool resources? Also, just kidding, but just what do you think armchair geocachers believe they are accomplishing?

[cezanne]

I have seen several which ask questions which can be answered from a sign (now finding it may be another issue) or brochure at the location...but none that asked several questions based on information you could not get at the site.

 

In German speaking countries there are many of such Earth caches, some even contain only questions that need external sources (internet in most cases, but of course also books will do the job in many cases) except maybe a single pseudo question having nothing to do with geology and of no interest at all.

 

Cezanne

Sweet! Looks like I can log some German EarthCaches now...and return the favor of all the German armchair logs I have deleted from my virtual.....OK, kidding (about the logging of the ECs....not the deleting of German armchair logs).

 

No, armchair logs are not at all common for those Earthcaches. Many creators of Earthcaches put

a high value on the photo requirement (though this is not conforming to the current guidelines).

 

Cezanne

[+narcissa]

If the Earthcache requirements only consist of internet research, then the Earthcache is not in compliance with the guidelines and should be reported to a reviewer.

 

If the Earthcache requirements ask for internet research in addition to on-site tasks, then those requirements should be completed prior to logging the Earthcache.

[+narcissa]

 

Now you know why most of us want "proof" of actually visiting the EC site.

 

If your Earthcache logging requirements are rigorous enough, then additional forms of proof are unnecessary.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

 

Now you know why most of us want "proof" of actually visiting the EC site.

 

If your Earthcache logging requirements are rigorous enough, then additional forms of proof are unnecessary.

 

You make a fallacious point! The issue has nothing to do with the questions! It doesn't matter if the questions are difficult enough that you would need three PhDs in geology to correctly answer them! Just like puzzle caches, answers are passed around. Now frankly I don't give a rat's a__ if the answers are shared but it seems a little unfair for those who actually go to the cache and answer all of the questions while showing a proper photo. It is also unfair to the EC developer who took all the time and effort to "place' the cache. I know there are several armchair logs on our traditional caches, but I am not about to go visit the cache to see if the log was actually signed. Earthcaches are different.

 

"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". (narcissa)

 

With your previous post (see above quote), your position perplexes me????? Are you pro or con?

 

"

Edited July 20, 2010 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+narcissa]

 

You make a fallacious point! The issue has nothing to do with the questions! It doesn't matter if the questions are difficult enough that you would need three PhDs in geology to correctly answer them! Just like puzzle caches, answers are passed around. Now frankly I don't give a rat's a__ if the answers are shared but it seems a little unfair for those who actually go to the cache and answer all of the questions while showing a proper photo. It is also unfair to the EC developer who took all the time and effort to "place' the cache. I know there are several armchair logs on our traditional caches, but I am not about to go visit the cache to see if the log was actually signed. Earthcaches are different.

 

"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". (narcissa)

 

With your previous post (see above quote), your position perplexes me????? Are you pro or con?

 

"

 

I'm not sure why you are perplexed, or why you feel it necessary to express yourself in such an inappropriate manner. The asterisks don't matter - you're still using inappropriate language in a forum that is supposed to remain family-friendly. Flying off the handle in a forum about geocaching is completely unnecessary and ridiculous.

 

Now please read carefully.

 

The Earthcache guidelines are very clear and have been further clarified by the Earthcache reviewers on several occasions. My personal opinion about the recent guidelines changes are irrelevant to the discussion.

 

Again, I'll caution you to read carefully.

 

An Earthcache should require at least one task that must be completed ON-SITE, i.e. some sort of data collection, measuring, etc. It is entirely appropriate for an Earthcache owner to require additional research that isn't done on site, but these sorts of research tasks alone are not good enough.

 

One more time, please read carefully.

 

If your on-site logging tasks are rigorous and you watch the answers closely, armchair logs should be easy to spot. If you think you need photographs of cachers to prove that they've visited the site, your on-site tasks aren't good enough.

[+Lostby7]

Put simply if one passes along an answer to someone else there is no question that can be "good enough." Hence the desire for photographic documentation.

[+Touchstone]

Hence the desire for photographic documentation.

 

I guess folks haven't heard of "photoshop" around here

 

Seriously, I can't think of a "foolproof" logging method. Maybe an obfuscated Wherigo Cartridge as a Logging Requirement, but from what I've heard from a few knowledgeable sources, even that may be hackable.

 

It would be interesting to hear what types of non-photographic Logging Requirements people have had success with.

 

In the end, the whole idea of Geocaching is based largely on trust, and is likely to remain so for a long time.

 

I suspect the Armchair Loggers will eventually tire of posting their logs, either from fatigue or carpel tunnel, and will go back to playing Warcraft or whatever they do in their spare time

[+Lostby7]

Hence the desire for photographic documentation.

 

I guess folks haven't heard of "photoshop" around here

 

I'm actually quite good with the program...but if someone wants to go to that trouble...power to em. It's rare that I have deleted a log due to a picture....if I ever have. Normally the reason for deletions is that the person fails to contact me with answers or that it is clear that they were not in the area...the photo provides evidence of a visit and also a view into the changing nature of the location which I find additionally educational.

 

*Edit to ad statement of topic boredom.

 

Seriously though I'm so tired of this topic...it ranks right up there with logging temps and bring back virtuals discussions, so I'm gonna bow out now as I really have better things to do that correct folks misconceptions about the EC guidelines.

Edited July 21, 2010 by Lostby7

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Hence the desire for photographic documentation.

 

I guess folks haven't heard of "photoshop" around here

 

I'm actually quite good with the program...but if someone wants to go to that trouble...power to em. It's rare that I have deleted a log due to a picture....if I ever have. Normally the reason for deletions is that the person fails to contact me with answers or that it is clear that they were not in the area...the photo provides evidence of a visit and also a view into the changing nature of the location which I find additionally educational.

 

*Edit to ad statement of topic boredom.

 

Seriously though I'm so tired of this topic...it ranks right up there with logging temps and bring back virtuals discussions, so I'm gonna bow out now as I really have better things to do that correct folks misconceptions about the EC guidelines.

 

I am with you Lostby7. This whole 'picture' of a photo requirement has been muddied ever since the change in approvals that occurred earlier this year. Remember all the discussions last year? Well it seems like the photo requirement has been so modified that it is quickly becoming moot or at least unusable.

If some want to use "Photoshop" then let them have at it!

Some people who have posted on this subject want it both ways? If TPTB don't want photos then all that is needed is to simply say, "Any requirement of a photograph is not allowed (period)!"

Don't you get the feeling that is what is wanted?

Like you, I am tired of this topic and am bowing out!

Edited July 21, 2010 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Oops, I did say I was bowing out! Since this is a "family site", I'll wait for some some adults to join in the fun! Thanks.

Edited July 21, 2010 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+narcissa]

Put simply if one passes along an answer to someone else there is no question that can be "good enough." Hence the desire for photographic documentation.

 

You can require photographs as a form of data collection.

[+Manville Possum]

I have only developed two EC's so far, and I have used Google to research those listings. Thats why I made my questions more solid, to prevent someone from useing Google for the answers.

[toczygroszek]

Hmm, in my opinion to "find" an Earthcache does it mean find a geologic feature at listed coordinates and collect some informations at the site (to learn about this site and to proof your find). I was really happy, when I've spotted new guidelines, but it looks nothing has changed. You can still ask about names of children of sister in law of the best friend of a famous geologist, who has visited this site in 1923 or name a limestone in local West-Kabardian dialect only if you prior will ask "what's the taste of salt in the salt mine there". So it looks I can ask about an analyse from mass spectrometry of rock from the site or a picture taken with an electron microscope. And set 5 stars of course.

I thought the basicaly idea of Earthcaching was show interesting places ON SITE, let people to touch, smell even taste a rock, not copying info from Wikipedia or looking in internet for answers to strange questions. I thought Earthcaches are to show geological interesting places, not confuse "finders". If I'm going to an Earthcache site, I hope I will find all answers there - for example on an info sign. What is a sense asking about information from internet to confirm you visit at the site? It's really strange for me, but maybe I'm wrong with whole idea of Earthcaching...

[+narcissa]

Hmm, in my opinion to "find" an Earthcache does it mean find a geologic feature at listed coordinates and collect some informations at the site (to learn about this site and to proof your find). I was really happy, when I've spotted new guidelines, but it looks nothing has changed. You can still ask about names of children of sister in law of the best friend of a famous geologist, who has visited this site in 1923 or name a limestone in local West-Kabardian dialect only if you prior will ask "what's the taste of salt in the salt mine there". So it looks I can ask about an analyse from mass spectrometry of rock from the site or a picture taken with an electron microscope. And set 5 stars of course.

I thought the basicaly idea of Earthcaching was show interesting places ON SITE, let people to touch, smell even taste a rock, not copying info from Wikipedia or looking in internet for answers to strange questions. I thought Earthcaches are to show geological interesting places, not confuse "finders". If I'm going to an Earthcache site, I hope I will find all answers there - for example on an info sign. What is a sense asking about information from internet to confirm you visit at the site? It's really strange for me, but maybe I'm wrong with whole idea of Earthcaching...

 

The point of the Earthcache and its logging requirements is learning - not simply visiting a site. If the Earthcache owner feels that what you see and learn on site can be augmented with additional research, they are allowed to ask for that.

 

How would you propose that an Earthcache visitor conduct mass spectrometry or use an electron microscope on-site, or without damaging the site? Asking an Earthcache visitor to take a sample from the site is usually not permitted.

 

If the tasks in an Earthcache are out of your capability or otherwise unacceptable to you, skip it and move on. I've had to skip Earthcaches because I didn't have a thermometre or a volume-marked bucket while I was on vacation. I was disappointed, but I respect that the Earthcache owner had a certain intent with the tasks they created and I wasn't about to throw a hissy fit in order to log a find on it.

[toczygroszek]

The point of the Earthcache and its logging requirements is learning - not simply visiting a site. If the Earthcache owner feels that what you see and learn on site can be augmented with additional research, they are allowed to ask for that.

 

OK, thanks for explanation. I think guidelines should be better explained, because there is a lot of misunderstandings.

 

How would you propose that an Earthcache visitor conduct mass spectrometry or use an electron microscope on-site, or without damaging the site? Asking an Earthcache visitor to take a sample from the site is usually not permitted.

 

Collecting few grains of sand from a beach is not "damaging". After analysis I can ask to bring this grains back if you are not happy. Or if you still not happy I can give another task - bring a ground-penetrating radar with you and attach to the log copy of radargram - that would be a nice gallery, and everything without damaging the site.

I'm not joking, I'm just wandering how difficult can be log requirement and where is a limit.

[+Touchstone]

The point of the Earthcache and its logging requirements is learning - not simply visiting a site. If the Earthcache owner feels that what you see and learn on site can be augmented with additional research, they are allowed to ask for that.

 

OK, thanks for explanation. I think guidelines should be better explained, because there is a lot of misunderstandings.

 

How would you propose that an Earthcache visitor conduct mass spectrometry or use an electron microscope on-site, or without damaging the site? Asking an Earthcache visitor to take a sample from the site is usually not permitted.

 

Collecting few grains of sand from a beach is not "damaging". After analysis I can ask to bring this grains back if you are not happy. Or if you still not happy I can give another task - bring a ground-penetrating radar with you and attach to the log copy of radargram - that would be a nice gallery, and everything without damaging the site.

I'm not joking, I'm just wandering how difficult can be log requirement and where is a limit.

 

Perhaps a regional, or perhaps a cultural difference, but technically, the taking of even a few grains of sand would be forbidden in some areas of The U.S. and in some instaces illegal. National Parks come to mind, and an extremely low probability of it being approved by the NPS.

 

As far as the "special equipment" question goes, the answer may depend on whether it is considered commercial or not, but seeing that there is a cache on the ISS, there doesn't appear to be an upper dollar figure in which Grounspeak would deny a Listing

[+narcissa]

The point of the Earthcache and its logging requirements is learning - not simply visiting a site. If the Earthcache owner feels that what you see and learn on site can be augmented with additional research, they are allowed to ask for that.

 

OK, thanks for explanation. I think guidelines should be better explained, because there is a lot of misunderstandings.

 

How would you propose that an Earthcache visitor conduct mass spectrometry or use an electron microscope on-site, or without damaging the site? Asking an Earthcache visitor to take a sample from the site is usually not permitted.

 

Collecting few grains of sand from a beach is not "damaging". After analysis I can ask to bring this grains back if you are not happy. Or if you still not happy I can give another task - bring a ground-penetrating radar with you and attach to the log copy of radargram - that would be a nice gallery, and everything without damaging the site.

I'm not joking, I'm just wandering how difficult can be log requirement and where is a limit.

 

Touchstone has already mentioned something along these lines, but intentionally removing any specimen from a National Park in Canada, or any of Ontario's Provincial Parks is forbidden. Most conservation areas run by municipalities have similar rules. Unless your Earthcache is at some sort of open-to-the-public quarry or pick-your-own site for rockhounds, you probably won't be able to publish an Earthcache that asks cachers to take a specimen.

 

I can only think of one Earthcache I've seen that required the cacher to take a specimen. It was at a jade quarry. To get credit for the Earthcache, you had to find a sample of jade, and get a geologist to confirm it. It was difficulty 5.

 

Now, as for your ground-penetrating radar, can you explain how such a task would fall within the defined goals of Earthcaching? Unless you're able to provide the equipment on demand, what would be the purpose of a task that is prohibitively difficult and expensive for most people?

 

Remember too, that Earthcaches are supposed to be geared toward people who don't have previous scientific training. If you make the logging tasks too difficult in that regard, at some point you likely will be asked to modify the tasks before your Earthcache is published.

Edited July 29, 2010 by narcissa

[toczygroszek]

So I'm talking about public, not protected beach, OK? Please, don't stick to the rules about collecting specimens or national parks, it was only example to demonstrate how difficult task you can give.

[+narcissa]

So I'm talking about public, not protected beach, OK? Please, don't stick to the rules about collecting specimens or national parks, it was only example to demonstrate how difficult task you can give.

 

You would need to have express permission from the land manager in charge of the beach before you could ask people to take specimens from it. Read the documents over at Earthcache.org. "Leave No Trace" ethics are an important aspect of Earthcaching.

 

You seem to be confused about the functions of this site - this comment somehow landed in my private messages:

 

This is an Earthcache I was talking about:

 

http://coord.info/GC1MTQF

 

And question:

What is the name of the municipality where the nearest operating Godul sandstone quarry is situated?

 

Wasn't hard to find this quarry is, but was a problem name this village. Probably if you are local you just know that, but for me as for foreigner was it really difficult. So I've named it wrongly, just because it was on the border of two villages on a map what I was look at. So I've just simply asked previous cachers about it, and they corrected my answer. Try to find answer for that and send it to me. Or better ask about it any of your 14-years old friend - right?

 

So the problem isn't that it required research to figure this out, the problem is that the research wasn't as straightforward as a Google search? I don't really understand your objection here.

 

Earthcache owners generally aren't out to trick anybody. If you have trouble with a question like this, why not try emailing the owner to ask them for a nudge in the right direction? I can't imagine any reasonable Earthcache owner objecting to an honest person asking for a bit of help.

Edited July 29, 2010 by narcissa

[+Touchstone]

I can't imagine any reasonable Earthcache owner objecting to an honest person asking for a bit of help.

 

I can .....oops, you said "reasonable".....my bad.

 

Back OT:

 

So I'm talking about public, not protected beach, OK? Please, don't stick to the rules about collecting specimens or national parks, it was only example to demonstrate how difficult task you can give.

 

Sorry toczygroszek, my misunderstanding. It's a knee-jerk reaction I have to questions regarding seemingly small violations of Guidelines and/or Regulations. Saying something like, "only a few grains of sand", is a little like stating, "only slightly pregnant". It's usually more black and white with the majority of Land Managers I've dealt with.

 

If I understand the "meat" of your question correctly:

 

I'm just wandering how difficult can be log requirement and where is a limit.

 

I would have to say, no, there doesn't appear to be any limit to how difficult the Logging Requirements can be.....with the one caveat, that I will presume to extrapolate on:

 

From the Challenge Cache Article in the KB:

 

Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that the challenge is attainable. Reviewers may ask the cache owner to demonstrate that they have previously met the challenge and/or that a substantial number of other geocachers would be able to do so.

 

I think it's reasonable to assume that at some point, when the Logging Requirement gets so ridiculously difficult, it ceases to become a LR, and ventures into the area of a Challenge, merely to fulfill the LR, and therefore, I think it's reasonable to assume that some portions of the Guidelines, and/or KB, which address similar situations, can be used to interpret similar aspects of Listings.

 

In your example, sure, if you have access to a magnetic-ground penetrating-whatchamallit-thingy, then that "special equipment", can be part of fulfilling the LR (providing the Difficulty rating is consistent with the idea).

 

On the other hand, if a cache owner is asking people to fulfill a LR that they themselves have not fulfilled, but merely submits it as a "Thought Exercise", then I suspect the EC Reviewer(s) would reject the Listing as not being reasonable.

 

In other words, it would be similar to submitting a Listing to a location that the cache owner has not visited themselves (e.g. the top of Mount Everest for instance), and therefore failing this portion of the Earthcache Guidelines

 

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.

 

Such "virtual" aspects of the game (e.g. armchair logging, etc.) don't seem to be in keeping in the spirit of Earthcaching to me.

[toczygroszek]

You seem to be confused about the functions of this site - this comment somehow landed in my private messages:

 

Dear narcissa,

 

That what you've just done is really rude. If I want talk about specified cache I will do that on public forum. I've sent it to your private mail-box intentionally for some reason, and you know that well. And your comment above in addition is insulting. If you don't understand what's wrong with your behaviour, there is no point talking with you any more.

 

Touchstone - thanks for your clarifications. I seems I misunderstood the guidelines. So you can give 100 questions about informations from internet if is at leas one question regarding something on the site - that's right? And I can ask about pictures in the same situation - yes? If yes, I've no more questions

[+geodarts]

This is an Earthcache I was talking about:

 

http://coord.info/GC1MTQF

 

And question:

What is the name of the municipality where the nearest operating Godul sandstone quarry is situated?

 

 

So the problem isn't that it required research to figure this out, the problem is that the research wasn't as straightforward as a Google search? I don't really understand your objection here.

 

On the other hand I can't say that the question demonstrates what I might have learned about geology should I ever visit that particular site. While earthcache questions are not necessarily limited to geology, it would be annoying if the information was not available at the location and I had to conduct online research to find out what is the nearest town in the specified mountain region that is closest to an active quarry. That may be in keeping with the letter of the guidelines, but I wonder how much it relates to the spirit of the guidelines -- teaching about earth science at a particular geological location. I generally agree with toczygroszek's earlier post about that.

 

I realize that the answer might be at the site (written in a language I do not speak) and the question might be intended to help people understand the extent of the formation rather than the geography of the area. So in this case I would have taken my best guess based on an initial search and submitted one possible answer that popped up on the first page of my google result. Most earthcache owners, including myself, are pretty flexible with that type of thing.

 

Even though the guidelines focus on earth science, there are a variety of questions asked at earthcaches. Some of the logging requirements may not conform to the guidelines - I have found earthcaches that have asked a single question about a tree (at least the information was available on site) or simply required a photo at a specified trail marker. Others present a geological question to qualify it as an earthcache, but seem to focus more on math or the output of wind powered generators than anything else - I might have learned something about electrical generation but little about earth science. By the time I found an earthcache that was based on a slab of cut granite that was moved to the location to hold a sundial or a plaque, I realized that an earthcache might encompass things I would not normally have expected. I generally try to do my best with whatever is asked, enjoy what I learn from the site (if anything) and take it from there.

Edited July 30, 2010 by mulvaney

[+Touchstone]

Touchstone - thanks for your clarifications. I seems I misunderstood the guidelines. So you can give 100 questions about informations from internet if is at leas one question regarding something on the site - that's right? And I can ask about pictures in the same situation - yes? If yes, I've no more questions smile.gif

 

100 questions...Hmmmm

 

Personally speaking (and this has nothing to do with Guideline interpretations), I would ask the question, what would be the motivation of such an approach? It's possible, if not approached in good faith, that it could be interpreted as being in violation of this portion of the Geocaching Guidelines:

 

Solicitations are off-limits. For example, caches perceived to be posted for religious, political, charitable or social agendas are not permitted. Geocaching is supposed to be a light, fun activity, not a platform for an agenda.

 

In other words, a cache owner submitting a Listing with seemingly impossible number of LR's, would at some point, appear to be submitting the Listing to merely "make a point" (aka Agenda).

 

Otherwise, I agree with many of mulvaney's observations above. The point of the LR's seems to be:

 

1. Impart some Earth Science lesson.

2. Confirm that the person logging the Find actually visited the site.

 

Taking that into account, it's conceivable that to impart the "Lesson", it may require a bit of research (i.e. internet search), but in order to "Confirm" the visit, it may require a question that may not be totally relevant to Earth Science (i.e. words or sentence on an interpretive sign).

 

Nonetheless, by far, my favorite Earthcaches that involve direct observation at the posted coordinates, while learning something about an unusual feature. Not surprisingly, most, if not all, of the so called "Best 10 List" strike a nice balance between Learning and Confirming.

[toczygroszek]

 

I realize that the answer might be at the site (written in a language I do not speak) and the question might be intended to help people understand the extent of the particular formation rather than the geography of the area. So in this case I would have taken my best guess based on an initial search and submitted one possible answer that popped up on the first page of my google result. Most earthcache owners, including myself, are pretty flexible with that type of thing.

 

That was the reason of my confusion - I was thinking there will be an information sign with that information, but there was nothing like that. So at home I've started search on google maps, and I've found quarry, what I've guess there is the same type of sandstone. Unfortunately on the google maps the quarry was exactly between two names of villages. So I've sent one of them to the owner, and he disagreed that. So I've found correct quarry, but I didn't give the correct name of the village where it is. It is probably obvious place for locals, but for me as foreigners it was completely unknown area.

That what I've said is not against this cache and this owner, I just want better understand Earthcache rules and limits with questions. As geomorphologist I really like this type of cache.

[+geodarts]

 

Unfortunately on the google maps the quarry was exactly between two names of villages. So I've sent one of them to the owner, and he disagreed that. So I've found correct quarry, but I didn't give the correct name of the village where it is. It is probably obvious place for locals, but for me as foreigners it was completely unknown area.

 

I would hope that a log would not be deleted under these circumstances.

[+narcissa]

 

Unfortunately on the google maps the quarry was exactly between two names of villages. So I've sent one of them to the owner, and he disagreed that. So I've found correct quarry, but I didn't give the correct name of the village where it is. It is probably obvious place for locals, but for me as foreigners it was completely unknown area.

 

I would hope that a log would not be deleted under these circumstances.

 

Yeah, I'd hate to see a log deleted over an honest attempt to answer correctly.

[toczygroszek]

 

Unfortunately on the google maps the quarry was exactly between two names of villages. So I've sent one of them to the owner, and he disagreed that. So I've found correct quarry, but I didn't give the correct name of the village where it is. It is probably obvious place for locals, but for me as foreigners it was completely unknown area.

 

I would hope that a log would not be deleted under these circumstances.

 

No, I've just simply asked previous finders, they corrected my answer and I've sent to the owner modified answer. So that's a good solution for strange questions if they are allowed in listings