Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
geoaware

Change to language guidelines

Recommended Posts

. Basically from now on (existing EarthCaches will be grandfathered), we will only publish EarthCaches that provide the text in the local language.

 

By the way, did you notice that under this guideline also the only Earth cache that you have logged under your account would not exist? (It is located in Iceland and has been set up by someone from Germany and none of the visitors logged in Icelandic.)

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

The vast majority of scientists around the world publish their work in English though of course for many of them it would be easier to write in their own language. If automatic translation were useful and leaded to reasonable results, many of them would not take the effort. There are many sciences where the typical texts are certainly easier amenable to automatic translation than geology.

 

The vast majority of people around the world do not learn about science from scientific journal articles - they learn about science from secondary materials written in their own language. Earthcaching isn't aimed at scientists, it's aimed at everybody.

Share this post


Link to post

Earthcaching isn't aimed at scientists, it's aimed at everybody.

 

Or at least everybody with a gpsr and a relative amount of privilege. So yes the goal should be to make earthcaches available in the local language and increase participation in them, but one consideration should also reflect the language that the developer believes is appropriate to the area and the user who will be visiting the site.

 

There are ways to get closer to the goal. In some areas there is no reason not to develop an earthcache in the local language (the example geoaware gave of an earthcache in Italy or the problems that Cezanne mentioned when German developers try to use online translations). Other areas call out for multi-language support, like French Quebec or even parts of Los Angeles -- people should go to the feedback site to ask for this. But there are also numerous examples that have been given from South Africa, Sri Lanka, or Albania, where the issue is not so clear -- where theory and practice have to find a way of meeting. Its a challenge, and probably not an "either/or" kind of answer. Simply saying "local language" may not be any more of an answer than requiring English.

 

I look upon earthcache deveopment in some areas as laying a foundation. It may await technological, political, and economic changes to develop more fully but for now perhaps doing the best we can is enough.

Edited by mulvaney

Share this post


Link to post

Give it up people. It's done and no matter how confused we may be, that's it. Kinda remind you of anything................................................................................requiring photos? :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

Give it up people. It's done and no matter how confused we may be, that's it. Kinda remind you of anything................................................................................requiring photos? :laughing:

 

Maybe its more like proximity amd vacation guidelines, where things can be thought through as a community. But then the current photo guidelines are fine with me - although that is for the other threads. At any rate, I think the discussion is interesting because it challenges some of my own assumptions. Then again I once majored in cultural studies and might think ebonics would be appropriate in some areas.

Edited by mulvaney

Share this post


Link to post

Such a shame, another Earthcache idea down the drain. I've been wanting to turn my MSc thesis into an Earthcache for ages. But now I can't simply because I don't write French fluently and certainly don't know the French expressions for many scientific words. This, by the way is something no online translater does correctly. So I guess we won't publish any more ECs because we never stay long enough in one place to learn the local language fluently enough to either write one in local language or find out if a translation from another cacher is done well enough.

 

Mrs. Terratin

Share this post


Link to post

Or at least everybody with a gpsr and a relative amount of privilege. So yes the goal should be to make earthcaches available in the local language and increase participation in them, but one consideration should also reflect the language that the developer believes is appropriate to the area and the user who will be visiting the site.

 

Isn't privilege another way of saying entitlement? And doesn't that make it a horrible insult? (j/k)

 

I agree with you that the person developing the Earthcache should have some freedom to determine what the most appropriate language is. I don't think the Earthcache reviewers are well-equipped to determine what language or languages are appropriate in many situations.

 

We should start a little match-making service the hooks up Earthcachers to translate for each other. :laughing:

 

There are ways to get closer to the goal. In some areas there is no reason not to develop an earthcache in the local language (the example geoaware gave of an earthcache in Italy or the problems that Cezanne mentioned when German developers try to use online translations). Other areas call out for multi-language support, like French Quebec or even parts of Los Angeles -- people should go to the feedback site to ask for this. But there are also numerous examples that have been given from South Africa, Sri Lanka, or Albania, where the issue is not so clear -- where theory and practice have to find a way of meeting. Its a challenge, and probably not an "either/or" kind of answer. Simply saying "local language" may not be any more of an answer than requiring English.

 

Just a clarification about Quebec - "French Quebec" *is* Quebec. French is the only official language in the province of Quebec, and Anglophones are very much in the minority.

 

But you're absolutely right that "local language" is not much of a guideline when the "local language" isn't obvious.

 

Your earlier mention of privilege certainly comes into play. There are many places where very few, if any, local people are equipped to create or search for Earthcaches, and creating the Earthcaches in "the local language" isn't going to change that. It does seem kind of a shame that the new guideline now makes it virtually impossible to develop Earthcaches in these areas.

 

I look upon earthcache deveopment in some areas as laying a foundation. It may await technological, political, and economic changes to develop more fully but for now perhaps doing the best we can is enough.

 

I think you're right on the money here. Some of the comments against this guideline change have taken an accusatory tone with regard to intent, but I strongly believe that good intentions are at the core of Earthcaching and always have been. I think this new guideline is an attempt to respond to genuine demand from non-Anglophone geocachers.

Share this post


Link to post

The vast majority of scientists around the world publish their work in English though of course for many of them it would be easier to write in their own language. If automatic translation were useful and leaded to reasonable results, many of them would not take the effort. There are many sciences where the typical texts are certainly easier amenable to automatic translation than geology.

 

The vast majority of people around the world do not learn about science from scientific journal articles - they learn about science from secondary materials written in their own language. Earthcaching isn't aimed at scientists, it's aimed at everybody.

 

You took my citation out of the context. Of course, the majority of Earth cache visitors are not scientists.

My argument was directed to the statement of geoaware that automatic translation works fine - he did not only claim that for answering the questions of an Earth cache, but even for the review process. In my understanding the review process should be done by specialists in geology and it should be part of the review process to check whether what is written on a Earth cache page is correct and makes sense.

 

The sad story about many Earth cache submissions is that they are not intended to teach anything about geology. Some cachers just take the text of an arbitrary sign or website and copy it 1:1 to their cache page without understanding what they are writing above. A similar complaint that there are too many weak submissions where just a few general lines, e.g. about volcanism or another geological topic are added to the cache description has recently been issued by one of the German Earth cache reviewers in this forum (but in the German language part). He mentioned there that in way too many submissions the focus appears just to be on showing a location and not on the learning aspect.

 

To illustrate what I am referring to, take e.g. the following two Earth caches as example

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...7c-de4bcb380958

(a recent one from Germany - the German description is not more informative than the English one)

and then take one of your own Earth caches

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...49-7437071d7e54

 

hmichel is not a geologist and I guess the same is true for you. Your Earth cache looks interesting to me and I have the feeling that you spent quite some time in writing up the cache page and thinking about questions with a geology context and your intent was to teach something to the visitors of your cache. My first example does not teach me anything about geology and the text from the cache page has been copied from wikipedia word by word.

 

To sum up, in my opinion a discussion about the quality of Earth caches would be much more in need than a new language guidelines. We already have too many weak physical caches. There this cannot be changed as they are not overlooked by a scientific society with educational goals. For Earth caches this is different. Not every piece of text from Wikipedia should lead to a feasible Earth cache.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

I think this new guideline is an attempt to respond to genuine demand from non-Anglophone geocachers.

 

No, I do not think so. This is certainly true for a certain group of cachers who asked for removing the necessity of an English version, but it is certainly not true for the other aspect of the change that turns English into an infeasible language for Earth caches in most countries of the world.

 

Note that there are way more multi caches and mystery caches e.g. in German speaking countries than Earthcaches (about 1% of the caches in Austria are Earthcaches, 58% are traditionals, almost 22% are multi caches and about 17% are mystery caches). For multi caches (at least those typical for German speaking countries) and mystery caches understanding the language is important. Still English-only physical caches are published without any issues in Austria. (I am taking my home country as example because I do have exact numbers for Austria which I do not have for other countries.)

 

Moreover, note that quite a high percentage of the Earth caches around the world haven been set up by people who do not live near the Earth cache. Many superb Earth caches would not exist if English could not have been used as language for the submission.

 

While I have heard a lot of complaints about weak Earth caches, I have not encountered any complaint about an English only Earthcache (neither in this forum nor somewhere else).

 

I am sure that the new guideline will demotivate some of the most engaged developers of Earth caches.

Several of them have already made a statement of that type in this forum.

It is a big loss to the Earth cache community if cachers like the terratins (just one example) will not submit any further Earth caches. On a similar scale, I would be more than happy if a cacher like

danieloliveira published an Earth cache in Austria when he happened to be in the area even though I do not think that he could come up with a German version. A well done Earth cache where one really can learn something has much more value for me than 1000 Earthcaches where the learning aspect plays a minor role. if I just want to enjoy a location and visit a cache, I usually can go there and search for a physical cache there. The times where Earth caches have been set up mainly at locations where one could not hide a box, are long ago. The focus needs to be on the learning aspect and not just on showing a nice location.

 

 

 

While it is true that Earth cache visitors come from all parts of the population, I noted that most good Earth caches come either from scientists or from people who love geology and have read a lot about it and are eager to learn. Their approach is not just showing a location they have passed by recently and have seen some signs there, but they prepare a write up with a lot of effort. I am deeply impressed by the work some Earth cache developpers invest and I am disappointed about the minimal effort others are putting into their Earth caches.

 

Given the huge amount of work developpers of good Earth caches are investing their work, it should be up to them to choose the language of their submission provided that this results in no problem for the review process which is the case for English as any Earth cache reviewer should be sufficiently proficient in English (otherwise he can hardly be an expert in geology).

 

 

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

I think this new guideline is an attempt to respond to genuine demand from non-Anglophone geocachers.

 

No, I do not think so. This is certainly true for a certain group of cachers who asked for removing the necessity of an English version, but it is certainly not true for the other aspect of the change that turns English into an infeasible language for Earth caches in most countries of the world.

 

We're speculating. Surely Groundspeak c.s. has thought this trough before changing the guideline.

 

Geoaware, would/could you explain the reason(s) behind this guideline change?

 

Mr. Terratin

Share this post


Link to post

Surely Groundspeak c.s. has thought this trough before changing the guideline.

 

Frankly, I do not think that Groundspeak has thought this through - I do not think that they have been really involved into the aspect of turning English into an infeasible language for Earth caches into most countries of the world. Groundspeak does not even care about German caches in Egypt and all the communication with Groundspeak is done in English. It seems very unlikely to me that Groundspeak has the wish to abolish English-only caches - in many countries this is the only feasible approach for Groundspeak as they certainly do not have reviewers for most languages.

 

The issue is a different one as removing the mandatory English description is regarded - that aspect fits into the recent localization trend.

 

For me it's quite simple. As long as the guideline will stay that way, I am not going to visit any Earth caches and will stop my work on my own Earth cache and will not volunteer any longer to provide English versions of Earth caches. Earth caches will be dead for me in the future unless the language guideline is changed again.

 

 

Cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

Surely Groundspeak c.s. has thought this trough before changing the guideline.

 

Frankly, I do not think that Groundspeak has thought this through - I do not think that they have been really involved into the aspect of turning English into an infeasible language for Earth caches into most countries of the world.

 

 

Cezanne

 

We think you are quite right. We also don't believe Groundspeak has had anything to do with the change. Too. too often the "buck is passed" when GS has only deferred to someone else. It's kind of like the definition of earthcache. Did GS do that? We don't think so!

Someone mentioned the proximity and vacation guidelines. At least with them we got to have input before making unwanted changes. With those proposed changes, almost no one wanted them.

With the so called "local language" change, no one really wants it with one exception and she wants further clarification whatever that means!

As I said earlier, it's probably a done deal! :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

Why no comments of clarification / explanation from geoaware? :laughing:

Edited by cincol

Share this post


Link to post

I think this new guideline is an attempt to respond to genuine demand from non-Anglophone geocachers.

No, I do not think so. This is certainly true for a certain group of cachers who asked for removing the necessity of an English version, but it is certainly not true for the other aspect of the change that turns English into an infeasible language for Earth caches in most countries of the world.

 

Note that there are way more multi caches and mystery caches e.g. in German speaking countries than Earthcaches (about 1% of the caches in Austria are Earthcaches, 58% are traditionals, almost 22% are multi caches and about 17% are mystery caches). For multi caches (at least those typical for German speaking countries) and mystery caches understanding the language is important. Still English-only physical caches are published without any issues in Austria. (I am taking my home country as example because I do have exact numbers for Austria which I do not have for other countries.)

 

Moreover, note that quite a high percentage of the Earth caches around the world haven been set up by people who do not live near the Earth cache. Many superb Earth caches would not exist if English could not have been used as language for the submission.

 

While I have heard a lot of complaints about weak Earth caches, I have not encountered any complaint about an English only Earthcache (neither in this forum nor somewhere else).

 

This forum is obviously dominated by a small number of people who can read and write in English. While our discussions are interesting and valuable for many reasons, it is illogical to assume that forum users represent an accurate sample of all geocachers interested in Earthcaches.

 

I have seen complaints on Earthcache logs about the previous English requirement. You haven't. Both of our experiences are valid, but they only represent single data points and can't be extrapolated to make broader assumptions about the demand or lack of demand for non-English Earthcaches.

 

We're not privy to the feedback that Earthcaching receives on this issue. I can't imagine that the language guideline would have been changed without some pressure from somebody, somewhere. Looking at the "Get Satisfaction" posts on this topic, it doesn't seem that this issue has provoked much passion from the masses as of yet.

 

I just noticed something interesting - the FAQ conflicts with the submission guidelines:

 

"EarthCaches need to be in the language of the county in which they sit. However, as many will be visited by international visitors, we request that the cache notes also be in English. All submissions must include english text."

 

Compare that to the text in the submission guidelines:

 

"All notes must be submitted in the local language. You may be requested to provide the notes in English to assist with the reviewing process."

 

At least they're consistent in their failure to recognize that many countries have multiple local languages.

Share this post


Link to post

According to the new rule how this cache could be published?

GC2D0VP

 

Interesting example. An Earthcache in Poland, created in English by a cacher from the Czech Republic.

 

According to the new guidelines, it presumably couldn't be published as is. Poland's only official language is Polish (though we still don't know by which criteria a language will be considered "the local language").

 

Looks like this one slipped in under the wire, or someone's not applying the new guideline too strictly. :)

Share this post


Link to post

 

While I have heard a lot of complaints about weak Earth caches, I have not encountered any complaint about an English only Earthcache (neither in this forum nor somewhere else).

 

This forum is obviously dominated by a small number of people who can read and write in English. While our discussions are interesting and valuable for many reasons, it is illogical to assume that forum users represent an accurate sample of all geocachers interested in Earthcaches.

 

I agree and I did not assume that. I wrote "neither in this forum nor elsewhere". The elsewhere includes several German speaking geocaching fora in Austria, Germany and Switzerland and some geocaching fora in other languages I am looking at occasionally. Moreover, I also took into account what I learnt from personal discussions in several countries.

 

The reason why not many cachers participate in this thread is quite simple. Most particants in this forum are from English speaking countries and they still are allowed to use English. Those who would like to use a local language for their Earth cache are not effected as well. Effected is the group of people who want to use English or do not have another choice as they do not know the local language well enough. This group is of course not very large, but among them are some rather active Earth cache placers.

 

I have seen complaints on Earthcache logs about the previous English requirement. You haven't.

 

Wait. That's something different - you seem to mix up the two changes made in the same way than geoaware. I know a lot of cachers who are not able to prepare an English version of their Earth cache and I volunteered to help several of these cachers. I am aware of many requests to allow descriptions e.g. in German only. That's however a completely different request than ruling out English descriptions in most countries of the world.

 

Reading English is much easier than writing complicated scientific texts in a foreign language. (This is true for other languages as well. I would have no problems to understand a French Earth cache and even an Italian one with using a dictionary from time to time, but I would never be able to come up with a French or Italian version of reasonable quality. So I know the difference between active and passive knowledge quite well.

 

The same cachers who would prefer to offer their own Earth cache in their own language only, are travelling around and are quite happy to find Earth caches (on the basis of the English version) on their trips which neither would exist nor would be understandable to them under the new guideline. Take e.g. the Earth cache in Iceland I referred to above. Already in 2010 at least five Austrian cachers have been there and several from Germany.

Most cachers in Europe cache in several countries in each year. That's certainly a different situation than in the US.

 

The previous requirement for a mandatory English description is at a completely different level than

turning English into an infeasible language. I admit that I am in favor of a mandatory English description as anyone really motivated to set up a nice Earth cache will find someone who is willing to do the English version if the cacher cannot do it on its own. (NB: It is much easier to find people for preparing the English version than say a high-quality Albanian version, Icelandic version etc as many people with some scientiific background are able to produce English texts of reasonable quality while the number of native cachers in some countries is quite small and the number of cachers with some background in science is almost neglectable).

 

 

We're not privy to the feedback that Earthcaching receives on this issue. I can't imagine that the language guideline would have been changed without some pressure from somebody, somewhere.

 

Of course neither of us knows the feedback they got. However, all arguments and examples mentioned so far deal with allowing the local language without complementing it with English and not with forbidding English. The only feedback related to asking for submissions in the local language I could imagine is that e.g. the heavily overloaded German Earth cache reviewers prefer to have to read exclusively the German version as they can read faster in their native language. This issue could, however, easily solved as English only Earth caches could be reviewed by native speakers of English.

 

 

I am not sure whether for someone who is not familiar with the situation e.g. in Europe with its many different languages within a small area, will understand the different effects of the two changes that have been made at the same time.

 

Just for the sake of demonstration, let us consider the case of physical caches for a moment.

It ended up with a big wave of protests if

from now on all caches would have to come along with an English version because this restricts the freedom of the hiders. On the other hand, physical caches with an English version only are published on a routine basis in most countries. The hiders of caches are the capital of geocaching and Earthcaching, not the visitors.

 

As the faq is regarded, it typically takes weeks or months until the text is changed there. So nothing special.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

So, if I develop that Earthcache in southern Louisiana that I had in mind, it will have to be in cajunfrench?? I don't speak that! ALL caches should be in English and the local language if necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
According to the new rule how this cache could be published?

GC2D0VP

Our new earthcache GC21X00 got published on 15 aug. It's in Qatar (should be in arabic; we're German/Dutch and live in Denmark...)

 

Guess the new guidelines wasn't in effect yet, also given Geoaware's intial post dated 20 Aug.

 

Just wondering, as this guideline is active for a week now, are there any earthcaches rejected based on this local language rule?

 

Mr. Terratin

Share this post


Link to post

I've also just had a cache published in Oman (local language Arabic) - but cache published in English - and this was all AFTER the language issue was raised.

Share this post


Link to post

So, if I develop that Earthcache in southern Louisiana that I had in mind, it will have to be in cajunfrench?? I don't speak that! ALL caches should be in English and the local language if necessary.

 

Why should all caches be in English?

 

By which criteria does it become "necessary" to translate a cache into "the local language?"

 

If this is to be a worldwide project, the EarthcachingPTB need to consider what they can do to effectively reach out to developers AND visitors around the world.

 

Either that, or realize their limitations and stick with English despite the protests.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with people who want the option. Obviously ECs in countries like Spain, France and Italy should be in native languages. I have 9 of them in Tanzania which has many languages but mostly Swahili. I dont think many Masaii have a GPS and go looking for caches. Rather it is tourists from all over the world (most of which speak english).

 

If you look at my Kili Climate Zones cache there are over 500 hits from 43 countries, only 3 of which are actually from Tanzania.

Share this post


Link to post

What really puzzles me is that before changing the rules, why not put out a post or a poll and ask for some comments and suggestions BEFORE changing anything?

Share this post


Link to post

There is a text from EarthCache FAQ:

 

Can an EarthCache be in other languages besides English?

 

EarthCaches need to be in the language of the county in which they sit. However, as many will be visited by international visitors, we request that the cache notes also be in English. All submissions must include english text.

 

That sounds good. Is this rule still valid?

Share this post


Link to post

What really puzzles me is that before changing the rules, why not put out a post or a poll and ask for some comments and suggestions BEFORE changing anything?

 

Where would they conduct such a poll? The forum represents a tiny fraction of people who participate in Earthcaching.

Share this post


Link to post

There is a text from EarthCache FAQ:

 

Can an EarthCache be in other languages besides English?

 

EarthCaches need to be in the language of the county in which they sit. However, as many will be visited by international visitors, we request that the cache notes also be in English. All submissions must include english text.

 

That sounds good. Is this rule still valid?

 

We've just got back from a holiday in Belgium where we visited several Earthcaches. It's all very well having the cache descriptions and questions in English but if the information required is on a Dutch-only information board, you're stumped.

 

We put a lot of effort into trying to answer the questions armed with a pathetic phrasebook and we have had permission to log some finds but one or two COs are being very picky despite having photos to prove we were there!!

 

If the cache page had been purely in Dutch we probably wouldn't even have bothered trying...

 

 

Mark

Share this post


Link to post

I've also just had a cache published in Oman (local language Arabic) - but cache published in English - and this was all AFTER the language issue was raised.

 

Love the name! Very well done. :laughing:

 

Thank you - I always try :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post

I have run into a dilemma - can anyone help. I am planning an EC in Armenia after a recent trip. I have a local cacher helping with translation into Armenian - BUT!!!!!!!

 

GC.com does not support the Armenian Alphabet !!?? What is the solution?

Share this post


Link to post

I have run into a dilemma - can anyone help. I am planning an EC in Armenia after a recent trip. I have a local cacher helping with translation into Armenian - BUT!!!!!!!

 

GC.com does not support the Armenian Alphabet !!?? What is the solution?

 

When gc.com does not support the local language alphabet, then we will accept English as the default.

Share this post


Link to post

When gc.com does not support the local language alphabet, then we will accept English as the default.

 

Quite a strange policy - investing huge amounts of money and time in the Earthcache masters program , but forbidding English as language of the local alphabet is supported which is certainly will turn away several of Earthcache developpers with a real love for geology. Allowing English does not cost a single Dollar/Euro or whatever.

 

Cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

When gc.com does not support the local language alphabet, then we will accept English as the default.

 

Quite a strange policy - investing huge amounts of money and time in the Earthcache masters program , but forbidding English as language of the local alphabet is supported which is certainly will turn away several of Earthcache developpers with a real love for geology. Allowing English does not cost a single Dollar/Euro or whatever.

 

Cezanne

 

cezanne,

The whole guideline change is "strange". Folks. as we said earlier, it is a done deal.

If opinions were wanted then they would have been asked for before the announced change! They key words are before and announced. Just like a rejection of publishing your earthcache, the only hope is to appeal to Groundspeak and I am told using the forum is not the way to go. Send a message to GS. You may not win, but at least they 'listen'. :P

Share this post


Link to post

I have run into a dilemma - can anyone help. I am planning an EC in Armenia after a recent trip. I have a local cacher helping with translation into Armenian - BUT!!!!!!!

 

GC.com does not support the Armenian Alphabet !!?? What is the solution?

 

When gc.com does not support the local language alphabet, then we will accept English as the default.

 

Can you clarify by which criteria a language is considered THE local language?

 

What's THE local language in Switzerland? Belgium? South Africa? Canada?

Share this post


Link to post

When gc.com does not support the local language alphabet, then we will accept English as the default.

 

Quite a strange policy - investing huge amounts of money and time in the Earthcache masters program , but forbidding English as language of the local alphabet is supported which is certainly will turn away several of Earthcache developpers with a real love for geology. Allowing English does not cost a single Dollar/Euro or whatever.

 

Cezanne

 

cezanne,

The whole guideline change is "strange". Folks. as we said earlier, it is a done deal.

If opinions were wanted then they would have been asked for before the announced change! They key words are before and announced. Just like a rejection of publishing your earthcache, the only hope is to appeal to Groundspeak and I am told using the forum is not the way to go. Send a message to GS. You may not win, but at least they 'listen'. :rolleyes:

 

Please keep to the topic and stop flaming the EarthCache team.

Share this post


Link to post

When gc.com does not support the local language alphabet, then we will accept English as the default.

 

Quite a strange policy - investing huge amounts of money and time in the Earthcache masters program , but forbidding English as language of the local alphabet is supported which is certainly will turn away several of Earthcache developpers with a real love for geology. Allowing English does not cost a single Dollar/Euro or whatever.

 

Cezanne

 

cezanne,

The whole guideline change is "strange". Folks. as we said earlier, it is a done deal.

If opinions were wanted then they would have been asked for before the announced change! They key words are before and announced. Just like a rejection of publishing your earthcache, the only hope is to appeal to Groundspeak and I am told using the forum is not the way to go. Send a message to GS. You may not win, but at least they 'listen'. <_<

 

Please keep to the topic and stop flaming the EarthCache team.

 

While I cannot speak for cezanne, no one has intentionally flamed anyone. We are sorry that almost everyone has not reacted positively to the change, but we believe nothing personal was intended toward the OP much less a whole team. Again, nothing personal intended! Sorry! :P

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

 

We are sorry that almost everyone has not reacted positively to the change,

 

Um, there are currently 8376 active Earthcaches. How do you know that "almost everyone" is against the change?

 

The forum doesn't represent "everyone."

 

Do you really believe that this was an arbitrary decision with no foundation?

Share this post


Link to post

The new guideline only made sense to me, but I am not privileged to travel to other Countrys and only speak English, and a simple form of that language. I may misunderstand, but do people travel the globe and develope EarthCaches in Countrys that they just visit? <_<

Share this post


Link to post

The new guideline only made sense to me, but I am not privileged to travel to other Countrys and only speak English, and a simple form of that language. I may misunderstand, but do people travel the globe and develope EarthCaches in Countrys that they just visit? <_<

 

Yes, it seems that this happens quite frequently. I have mixed feelings about it.

 

On one hand, it allows Earthcaches to be developed in relatively uninhabited places, and places where most people do not own GPSrs or have easy access to the internet.

 

On the other hand, while there's no physical container to maintain, conditions at sites can change over time, and an absent cache owner has no way to keep an eye on his/her Earthcache sites.

Share this post


Link to post

 

We are sorry that almost everyone has not reacted positively to the change,

 

Um, there are currently 8376 active Earthcaches. How do you know that "almost everyone" is against the change?

 

The forum doesn't represent "everyone."

 

Do you really believe that this was an arbitrary decision with no foundation?

Earthcaches don't have opinions! Sound familiar? The key word is reacted! ECs don 't react!

Only you would question the obvious. I was referring to the forum! I'm good but I am not clairvoyant. Guess what? While responding to forum posts, one can only deal with that limited universe, not the whole world!

Frankly, even you shouldn't put words in my mouth or in this case, on my key board! No one used the word arbitrary. Strange maybe, but not arbitrary. I always feel everyone has a rationale for what they do! Disagreeing with a position doesn't mean the other person acts in a arbitrary manner. Maybe you assume that, but I don't! While I totally disagree with the change, it is not a personal matter and no one is accusing Geoaware of acting in a arbitrary manner. The simple fact of the matter is the reason for the change hasn't been shared.

Maybe just once you can respond to the topic instead another personal 'put-down'. <_<

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

The new guideline only made sense to me, but I am not privileged to travel to other Countrys and only speak English, and a simple form of that language. I may misunderstand, but do people travel the globe and develope EarthCaches in Countrys that they just visit? <_<

 

Manville, you hit the nail right on the head and that is the basic problem. Actually we have done one! Thank goodness English was very, very prevalent where we were!

There are many World travelers who do develop earthcaches in foreign countries of which they are not fluent in the native language.

Some earthcachers travel for pleasure or their job takes them to foreign ports and they are nice enough to develop an EC or two. Imagine yourself in Kuwait and trying to develop an EC in Arabic?

I grew up in a German speaking family, know a little Spanish and know very little French, but there is no way after a visit to Lourdes I could do an earthcache there in the native language............... ....even with holy intervention! lol. :P

Share this post


Link to post

 

We are sorry that almost everyone has not reacted positively to the change,

 

Um, there are currently 8376 active Earthcaches. How do you know that "almost everyone" is against the change?

 

The forum doesn't represent "everyone."

 

Do you really believe that this was an arbitrary decision with no foundation?

Earthcaches don't have opinions! Sound familiar? The key word is reacted! ECs don 't react!

Only you would question the obvious. I was referring to the forum! I'm good but I am not clairvoyant. Guess what? While responding to forum posts, one can only deal with that limited universe, not the whole world!

Frankly, even you shouldn't put words in my mouth or in this case, on my key board! No one used the word arbitrary. Strange maybe, but not arbitrary. I always feel everyone has a rationale for what they do! Disagreeing with a position doesn't mean the other person acts in a arbitrary manner. Maybe you assume that, but I don't! While I totally disagree with the change, it is not a personal matter and no one is accusing Geoaware of acting in a arbitrary manner. The simple fact of the matter is the reason for the change hasn't been shared.

Maybe just once you can respond to the topic instead another personal 'put-down'. <_<

 

Firstly - I am getting very tired of the personal attacks (no matter how veiled they are). Please stop it or retire from the forums. A difference in opinion does not mean you need to be rude. It is behavior you would not do if you met in person - so why do you do it in the forums?

 

Secondly - please don't blow this out of proportion. Already people had been asked to provide the text in the local language and we just reflected what was in the FAQs into the guidelines to make it clear. End of story.

 

If you place an EarthCache in Germany we will expect that German is one of the languages that is used in the text. In Italy we will expect to see Italian and so on. We are not saying don't include English (or any other language). The local EC reviewer will be the person who decides what is acceptable for each country they look after. It is really very simple.

Share this post


Link to post

While I cannot speak for cezanne, no one has intentionally flamed anyone. We are sorry that almost everyone has not reacted positively to the change, but we believe nothing personal was intended toward the OP much less a whole team. Again, nothing personal intended! Sorry! <_<

 

Once again, as stated above, nothing personal was intended. Even the use of the word "strange" isn't an attack, veiled or otherwise, on the person who holds differing opinions!!

Differing with a position isn't an attack.

The OP's clarification does help and maybe we wouldn't have taken this so far if we would known.

Thanks for taking the thread back on topic.

P.S. Believe it or not, I am much more 'frank' in person! lol :P

Share this post


Link to post

 

Earthcaches don't have opinions! Sound familiar? The key word is reacted! ECs don 't react!

Only you would question the obvious. I was referring to the forum! I'm good but I am not clairvoyant. Guess what? While responding to forum posts, one can only deal with that limited universe, not the whole world!

Frankly, even you shouldn't put words in my mouth or in this case, on my key board! No one used the word arbitrary. Strange maybe, but not arbitrary. I always feel everyone has a rationale for what they do! Disagreeing with a position doesn't mean the other person acts in a arbitrary manner. Maybe you assume that, but I don't! While I totally disagree with the change, it is not a personal matter and no one is accusing Geoaware of acting in a arbitrary manner. The simple fact of the matter is the reason for the change hasn't been shared.

Maybe just once you can respond to the topic instead another personal 'put-down'. <_<

 

I'm sorry that you felt that questions your viewpoint was a "put-down" and I'm also sorry that you misunderstood the subject of my comments. I'm disappointed that you've chosen to drag up past issues instead of just discussing the issue at hand.

 

I should have been more clear. With more than 8000 active Earthcaches, there are probably a few thousand owners, and thousands of visitors. Only a tiny handful of these participants are active in the forums.

 

Is it your contention that the forums should be considered an accurate sample of these owners and visitors, or is it your contention that the opinions of forum regulars carry more weight than other participants?

 

If you don't feel that the decision is arbitrary, why do you keep emphasizing that the weight of opinion (in the forum) is against the change? This isn't a put-down, it's a request for a clarification of your position. You seem to be taking this issue very seriously but it's not entirely clear why that is.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm glad that people can visit nice places and create EC's that I can view from GC, even if I can not read the cache discription because it is written in the local language, but most EC's have some type of photos in them. I fail to see any problem the new guideline. KK, just imagine a new EC listing written in something other than English in our area of rural Virginia. A traditional cache I could find and log, but not an EC. :)

Share this post


Link to post

If you place an EarthCache in Germany we will expect that German is one of the languages that is used in the text. In Italy we will expect to see Italian and so on.

 

It is not that simple as you describe it here. Apart from other aspects that have been raised up before, there are countries which have more than one language.

 

In South-Tyrol (part of Italy) German is an official language. It would result in a big affront insisting on an Italian version. What about a cache in Belgium? Does it mean that a francophone Belgian cacher needs to write in Flemish/Dutch because he happens to live in the Flemish part? (that can be a issue of a few km)

In Schleswig-Holstein (part of Germany) you would need to accept Danish Earthcaches.

There are many more examples of this kind.

 

Moreover, note that with this local language rule you use, you would have to accept Slovenian Earth caches in Carianthia (part of Austria) which would make things quite hard for the Earthcache reviewers from Germany who take care of submissions from Austria.

 

 

The local EC reviewer will be the person who decides what is acceptable for each country they look after. It is really very simple.

 

If that's the case, why don't you modify the formulation of the guidelines accordingly? On one hand

I can understand that you are tired of this discussion here, but on the other hand I cannot understand at all why you insist on the current formulation if it does not correspond to the way the issue is handled.

 

If the local reviewer decided on the acceptable languages, you would also get rid of many of the problems I mentioned above.

 

To be honest, I guess that the Earthcache reviewers were glad to receive an English version for the recent Earth caches in Oman and in Poland that have been mentioned in this thread as I have strong doubts that you have Earth cache reviewers who speak the local languages of these countries well enough to judge geological facts. Do you really have an Earthcache reviewer that speaks for example Albanian?

 

I appreciate the energy and time you invest in the Earthcache program and also in taking part in this forum, but I cannot understand why it makes sense to forbid Earthcaches that are available in English only in countries where physical caches in English are published without any problems and not exceptions that slip through.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

The new guideline only made sense to me, but I am not privileged to travel to other Countrys and only speak English, and a simple form of that language. I may misunderstand, but do people travel the globe and develope EarthCaches in Countrys that they just visit? :)

 

Sometimes they do, but there are many more reasons for using English. Let a list a few of them.

 

Some very engaged Earthcache developpers are working in professions where it is not uncommon to live a year or two in country A, then in country B, followed by country C. While these people typically will be able to acquire an intermediate proficiency in the local language(s), this typically is not sufficient for writing a geological text in that language.

 

In Europe regions with different languages are close to one another. Slovenia is closer to my home place than many parts of Styria (and well within my maintenance area for caches), the province of Austria I am living in. Although I live close to Slovenia and also not that far from Hungary and Croatia, I do not speak any of these languages. English is a useful and a handy language of communication and thus taught as compulsory subject in school in all these countries. Do not misunderstand me - learning additional languages is fine (I do know more languages than English and my mother tongue) and it helps to a deeper level of understanding of one another, but English plays the number one role as language of communication between people who have different mother tongues.

 

Some caches have long descriptions where preparing several language versions leads to an explosion in both the length of the cache description (no support for multilingual descriptions) as well as in the work to be invested by the creator of the Earthcache. As I regard geocaching as an international activity, an English version is a must for me. If I need to add another language as well, this takes additional time (also when the language is my native language) I do not want to invest in all cases.

 

 

Cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

You go Cezanne!

All the arguments are falling on deaf ears. We still have never gotten the rationale for the change and at this point, probably not many care. I certainly don't! As usual, your examples are right on point but remain unaddressed. Absent some personal and/or snide remark aimed at this author, I am out of here and I'll leave he 'fight' to you.

Take care and good luck! :)

Share this post


Link to post

To be honest, I guess that the Earthcache reviewers were glad to receive an English version for the recent Earth caches in Oman and in Poland that have been mentioned in this thread as I have strong doubts that you have Earth cache reviewers who speak the local languages of these countries well enough to judge geological facts. Do you really have an Earthcache reviewer that speaks for example Albanian?

 

That's something I've been wondering as well. Do you have good reviewers that can understand all the languages supported by GS perfectly? I could imagine that if this is not the case quality of Earthcaches will go down. How do you make sure the local language part is not just some gibberish ran through google translator?

 

Likewise, how can I be sure that the text I give someone for translation is of a good enough quality? I'd not want a text published under my name that contains wrong information because the translator is not an earthscientist. Again, this would mean the quality of Earthcaches will go down as translations and the abilities of the translator need to be considered.

 

What I think would be good is to have a full list of earthcache reviewers and the languages they are fluent in, so we can contact them and ask them about their language specifications. I'm not going to spend weeks research and writing a text just to see that it's not accepted in one specific language or spend money on a good translation just to find out the reviewer doesn't really understand it either.

 

But why am I writing this? Looks like we're not getting a answer to the issues that worry us anyway. Frustration I guess, as I love earthcaches, and writing earthcaches and now can't do so anymore.

 

Mrs Terratin.

Edited by terratin

Share this post


Link to post

I'm actually quite mystified over the concern over this change in the Guidelines, which merely states:

 

All notes must be submitted in the local language.

 

"Local language" is certainly a term that is fairly open to interpretation here in the multilingual U.S.

 

Sure, here in the U.S., English is fairly predominant, but here in California, a persuasive argument could be made that the growing Hispanic population has made Spanish nearly as predominant as English in some areas, if not more so.

 

It seems like a very simple solution, that if you are submitting a Listing in some language that might not be quite so apparently called "Local" ,would be to also supply statistics that support the argument of submitting it in some other language.

 

Here in the U.S. the Census Bureau keeps track of such information. It is, in fact, quite curious that nearly a third of U.S. States don't even recognize an "official" language:

 

280px-USA_State_Languages-2.svg.png

(i.e. dark blue states recognize English as the official language)

 

Since language is such a matter of importance around the world, I would assume that nearly every developed country gathers similar statistics of its citizenry.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm actually quite mystified over the concern over this change in the Guidelines, which merely states:

 

All notes must be submitted in the local language.

 

"Local language" is certainly a term that is fairly open to interpretation here in the multilingual U.S.

 

I agree with you, but note that geoaware e.g. wrote that the Earthcache team expects an Italian version for an Earthcache in Italy. German is the predominant language in South Tyrol (the native language of about 70% of the population which is not surprising as the region belonged to Austria) and still he expects an Italian version.

 

So it appears to me that the GSA has some concept of local language in mind that is highly problematic from my point of view (even if ignoring the Earthcache aspect) - the usage of the singular (the local language instead of a local language) is a further pointer in this direction.

 

 

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 2

×
×
  • Create New...