Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Schnitzle

Redeveloping archived EarthCaches

Recommended Posts

Personally I think you should set the bar a little lower, dig out an encyclopedia or do some general web research and throw together a much less comprehensive cache page than what was there before representative of the age of the person writing that cache page.

 

This is actually a very intriguing question. Since the original topic was mainly centered around plagiarism, perhaps this approach would bear fruit. I'm almost positive that I would never be able to get my son to submit an Earthcache based on the perception I have of the high standards for submissions (at least without some major help). It seems logical that if the Guidelines state that the level of education should be written for a 14 year old, then a submission from a 14 year old would be a good test of the system :)

 

That's my feeling about testing the system. I've seen numerous earth cache pages with great design and much information and graphics. For those highly comprehensive pages I would question if they are written at the level that is mentioned in the guidelines.

 

If an average 14 year old (I'll even do 14 with some help from a parent) cannot get an earth cache published in their own words then I question if the reviewers are actually in line with those guidelines or if the guidelines need to be changed to reflect that in actuality the reviewers are looking for information that is not at that level.

 

But I so want to see any 14 year old do a little research at a 14 year old level and put out an earth cache representative of that level. Reality is this will likely not be a lot of academic journal research but rather simple research out of text books from that grade level, encyclopedias, and some very basic web research.

I agree, and I believe it can be done. It would likely take the help of a parent, even if that help was simply encouragement. It may also be helpful to explain this in a reviewer note, that it is being submitted by a 14 year old. I have never found the EC reviewers to be hard to work with, they understand that many of us middle age adults are uneducated. I see many EC pages with great design and much information and graphics, that makes a great web page. Another thing to consider is the local language, I did not understand the word plagiarism. Just ask some teens if the know the meaning of the word. So far I have just got "I don't know", but one 15 year old had it confused with racism, at least he knew that it was wrong. ( I am glad to know that the Pastor knew the meaning.) I agree with GroundSpeaks stand on the subject.

Schnitzle and I are doing some research, but if it were not for some of Cav Scouts research in his listings, we would have not known where to begin. I asked Schnitzle if he remembered a big rock that we hike by many times, which he has climbed on some of them, and he was able to give me a pretty good discription of what it looks like and made of. So that is a start, now that we know the subjuct matter, we can begin researching. It may be best to contact the review team and ask if they still accept these as listings, and give them a better idea of our logging tasks, and ask for suggestions. I know that they are willing to help. It was them that helped me develope 3 EC's in the past. I do want to approach them with our idea first, would it not be great to see an EC approved on the first review? :rolleyes: Most of our local EC developers are retired teachers, and I'm sure that they are willing to help a student develope an EC.

Share this post


Link to post

That's my feeling about testing the system. I've seen numerous earth cache pages with great design and much information and graphics. For those highly comprehensive pages I would question if they are written at the level that is mentioned in the guidelines.

 

If an average 14 year old (I'll even do 14 with some help from a parent) cannot get an earth cache published in their own words then I question if the reviewers are actually in line with those guidelines or if the guidelines need to be changed to reflect that in actuality the reviewers are looking for information that is not at that level.

 

But I so want to see any 14 year old do a little research at a 14 year old level and put out an earth cache representative of that level. Reality is this will likely not be a lot of academic journal research but rather simple research out of text books from that grade level, encyclopedias, and some very basic web research.

 

Developing an Earthcache at age 14 wouldn't have been very difficult for me, but I live in an entirely different country than most of the people who use this forum, and it's no secret that there are educational discrepancies between Canada and the US, particularly in poorer states. We received comprehensive geography lessons in elementary school, with particular focus on local land features (in my case, mostly glacial features). The first Earthcache I developed is a feature near my hometown that I learned about in Grade 7.

 

There are many, many sources, besides academic journal articles, that are perfectly acceptable. Pamphlets published by park authorities, textbooks, and websites aimed at the general public can all be very informative. An Earthcache page needn't involve a PhD level dissertation.

 

That being said, the Earthcache reviewers are not doing a great job of keeping Earthcaches at a consistent reading level. They'll gladly give people a hard time for not providing enough information, but I have yet to hear of someone being asked to revise a cache description that is too dense. Considering that one of the more common criticisms of Earthcaches is that they're too hard/ too boring, looking at the reading level should be a priority for the reviewers. I'm not convinced that the reviewers are actually equipped to enforce the guidelines.

Share this post


Link to post

That's my feeling about testing the system. I've seen numerous earth cache pages with great design and much information and graphics. For those highly comprehensive pages I would question if they are written at the level that is mentioned in the guidelines.

 

If an average 14 year old (I'll even do 14 with some help from a parent) cannot get an earth cache published in their own words then I question if the reviewers are actually in line with those guidelines or if the guidelines need to be changed to reflect that in actuality the reviewers are looking for information that is not at that level.

 

But I so want to see any 14 year old do a little research at a 14 year old level and put out an earth cache representative of that level. Reality is this will likely not be a lot of academic journal research but rather simple research out of text books from that grade level, encyclopedias, and some very basic web research.

 

Developing an Earthcache at age 14 wouldn't have been very difficult for me, but I live in an entirely different country than most of the people who use this forum, and it's no secret that there are educational discrepancies between Canada and the US, particularly in poorer states. We received comprehensive geography lessons in elementary school, with particular focus on local land features (in my case, mostly glacial features). The first Earthcache I developed is a feature near my hometown that I learned about in Grade 7.

 

There are many, many sources, besides academic journal articles, that are perfectly acceptable. Pamphlets published by park authorities, textbooks, and websites aimed at the general public can all be very informative. An Earthcache page needn't involve a PhD level dissertation.

 

That being said, the Earthcache reviewers are not doing a great job of keeping Earthcaches at a consistent reading level. They'll gladly give people a hard time for not providing enough information, but I have yet to hear of someone being asked to revise a cache description that is too dense. Considering that one of the more common criticisms of Earthcaches is that they're too hard/ too boring, looking at the reading level should be a priority for the reviewers. I'm not convinced that the reviewers are actually equipped to enforce the guidelines.

 

I'm not entirely convinced they are necessarily taking that particular guideline into consideration unless it's an extreme circumstance. The average pamphlet, sign, etc. does not contain particularly comprehensive information as they are written for a lay person, lower comprehension level. But then at the same time I've seen here where reviewers ask for more scientific information etc. in a cache page indicating to me that there is some skewed idea of what a 14 year old comprehension level is. Either change the guideline or be realistic about the guideline.

 

But there are a ton of resources (beyond the original cache owner) to glean information from for a cache page. And, no, it will not look like the former owners cache page but that's the beauty of it. The original cache owner must have got his information from somewhere, learned it somewhere or whatever. I'm quite sure with a little research some original information can be located and processed into something new and original (with appropriate citations).

 

Personally I would be greatly disappointed going to a cache by a 14 year and seeing a rehashing of the original owners information.

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps the answer to all of this lies in just how one poses the question. Now direct activities such as measurements yield a more defined answer. I'm finding that the questions that invoke the power of observation seem to lead to better responses as they pertain to the understanding of the text. In other words, there is NO SINGLE right answer.

Simply put, just ask them to explain something in their own words and you should be able to determine their level of understanding.

Edited by GEO WALKER

Share this post


Link to post

That's my feeling about testing the system. I've seen numerous earth cache pages with great design and much information and graphics. For those highly comprehensive pages I would question if they are written at the level that is mentioned in the guidelines.

 

If an average 14 year old (I'll even do 14 with some help from a parent) cannot get an earth cache published in their own words then I question if the reviewers are actually in line with those guidelines or if the guidelines need to be changed to reflect that in actuality the reviewers are looking for information that is not at that level.

 

But I so want to see any 14 year old do a little research at a 14 year old level and put out an earth cache representative of that level. Reality is this will likely not be a lot of academic journal research but rather simple research out of text books from that grade level, encyclopedias, and some very basic web research.

 

Developing an Earthcache at age 14 wouldn't have been very difficult for me, but I live in an entirely different country than most of the people who use this forum, and it's no secret that there are educational discrepancies between Canada and the US, particularly in poorer states. We received comprehensive geography lessons in elementary school, with particular focus on local land features (in my case, mostly glacial features). The first Earthcache I developed is a feature near my hometown that I learned about in Grade 7.

 

There are many, many sources, besides academic journal articles, that are perfectly acceptable. Pamphlets published by park authorities, textbooks, and websites aimed at the general public can all be very informative. An Earthcache page needn't involve a PhD level dissertation.

 

That being said, the Earthcache reviewers are not doing a great job of keeping Earthcaches at a consistent reading level. They'll gladly give people a hard time for not providing enough information, but I have yet to hear of someone being asked to revise a cache description that is too dense. Considering that one of the more common criticisms of Earthcaches is that they're too hard/ too boring, looking at the reading level should be a priority for the reviewers. I'm not convinced that the reviewers are actually equipped to enforce the guidelines.

 

I agree with everything you said except that iif you are implying that Canadian education is superior, you are all wet! I hope that isn't what you meant. I certainly wouldn't presume to have the knowledge and ability to make such comparisons! It's no secret"? Sure, but I have one question. Why make such a comparison in the first place? :)

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

That's my feeling about testing the system. I've seen numerous earth cache pages with great design and much information and graphics. For those highly comprehensive pages I would question if they are written at the level that is mentioned in the guidelines.

 

If an average 14 year old (I'll even do 14 with some help from a parent) cannot get an earth cache published in their own words then I question if the reviewers are actually in line with those guidelines or if the guidelines need to be changed to reflect that in actuality the reviewers are looking for information that is not at that level.

 

But I so want to see any 14 year old do a little research at a 14 year old level and put out an earth cache representative of that level. Reality is this will likely not be a lot of academic journal research but rather simple research out of text books from that grade level, encyclopedias, and some very basic web research.

 

Developing an Earthcache at age 14 wouldn't have been very difficult for me, but I live in an entirely different country than most of the people who use this forum, and it's no secret that there are educational discrepancies between Canada and the US, particularly in poorer states. We received comprehensive geography lessons in elementary school, with particular focus on local land features (in my case, mostly glacial features). The first Earthcache I developed is a feature near my hometown that I learned about in Grade 7.

 

There are many, many sources, besides academic journal articles, that are perfectly acceptable. Pamphlets published by park authorities, textbooks, and websites aimed at the general public can all be very informative. An Earthcache page needn't involve a PhD level dissertation.

 

That being said, the Earthcache reviewers are not doing a great job of keeping Earthcaches at a consistent reading level. They'll gladly give people a hard time for not providing enough information, but I have yet to hear of someone being asked to revise a cache description that is too dense. Considering that one of the more common criticisms of Earthcaches is that they're too hard/ too boring, looking at the reading level should be a priority for the reviewers. I'm not convinced that the reviewers are actually equipped to enforce the guidelines.

 

I agree with everything you said except that iif you are implying that Canadian education is superior, you are all wet! I hope that isn't what you meant. I certainly wouldn't presume to have the knowledge and ability to make such comparisons! It's no secret"? Sure, but I have one question. Why make such a comparison in the first place? :)

 

Now I'm over 50 and educated in the US. I was fortunate to have a baseline education in both history and geography. In the preceeding decades, for whatever reason, both were forsaken in basic education, resulting in a large portion of the population that have no geogrgaphic awareness of the country in which they live in. This is a very unfortunate sign of the times...

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with everything you said except that iif you are implying that Canadian education is superior, you are all wet! I hope that isn't what you meant. I certainly wouldn't presume to have the knowledge and ability to make such comparisons! It's no secret"? Sure, but I have one question. Why make such a comparison in the first place? :rolleyes:

 

We're discussing what is reasonable to expect from a normal 14-y-o. It's possible that due to our relative experiences, our expectations of what to expect from a 14-y-o may be very different.

 

Whether or not one country is "superior" to another is simplistic and argumentative. Comparisons between the two countries are a mixed bag, and ultimately, the countries are culturally more similar than they are different.

 

There are a number of high level studies done by different organizations that compare academic achievement across countries. It's well established that the United States is not at the top of the heap when it comes to public education. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development is a good place to look for comparative statistics on a wide range of topics, including education. Their most recent statistics on education (derived from a study of 15 year olds) can be seen here:

 

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/54/12/46643496.pdf

 

It's very important to remember that data at the population level cannot be used to predict the outcome for an individual within that population - such interpretation constitutes ecological fallacy. If your objection is based on a simplistic interpretation of my original statement, i.e. you think I'm saying that Americans are dumb, that's just illogical (as well as disingenuous).

 

My academic and professional area of expertise involves comparing quantitative data on variables that predict political behaviour, eg. education. Since I come from your tiny, but culturally similar neighbour to the north, the United States is a prominent point of comparison, so I am fairly well-versed in our differences and similarities, at least as far as they pertain to political behaviour - i.e. Americans are, on average, more religious, wealthier (well, debatable, because there's larger income disparity in the US, but the mean is higher), and more conservative (fiscally and socially) than Canadians.

 

I'm happy to provide more extensive academic sources on these topics if you're genuinely interested in researching the issue on your own. I can even direct you to datasets if you'd like to do your own statistical analysis.

 

You seem inclined to take offense at your own misinterpretation, and that's unfortunate. If it makes you feel better to hear it from me, the United States outperformed Canada on the Human Development Index this year. Also, while Canada tends to outperform the United States in elementary and secondary education, the United States is home to several of the world's best universities and produces more Nobel laureates per capita than Canada does.

 

But back to the topic - it's not outlandish to consider that, having been educated in an entirely different country, my idea of what is normal for a 14-y-o may differ from someone who was educated elsewhere. Whether the expectation is higher or lower depends on the place.

 

If any Finnish Earthcachers would like to compare their education system to Canada's, I promise not to take offense. :lol:

Edited by narcissa

Share this post


Link to post

It's true that we are all not educated equally. :rolleyes: Locality is exactly the point that I was trying to make. Please check out the area in question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_County,_Virginia

 

Public education in the United States varies wildly from state to state, county to county, and it sometimes even varies substantially from one neighbourhood to the next.

 

I wish governments in the land of opportunity would take better care to live up to that moniker. The United States is a pretty remarkable country (not to mention a rich country). There shouldn't be so much disparity. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

It's true that we are all not educated equally. :rolleyes: Locality is exactly the point that I was trying to make. Please check out the area in question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_County,_Virginia

 

Public education in the United States varies wildly from state to state, county to county, and it sometimes even varies substantially from one neighbourhood to the next.

 

I wish governments in the land of opportunity would take better care to live up to that moniker. The United States is a pretty remarkable country (not to mention a rich country). There shouldn't be so much disparity. :lol:

Well thank you very much. You don't know how much we poorly undereducated US citizens appreciate your insight. What does all of your so called expertise and negative comments have to do with the discussion at hand?

Stop staring at your reflection in the water and get back on topic!

P.S. Since you seem to know so much about the US, we spell neighborhood.....neighborhood, not neighbourhood. Your 'labours' are in vain or should we say just vain!

Feel free to join any thread that appeals to your vanity, but stop approaching us like you are "casting pearls before swine! "Thanks and a big 'oink' to all! :D

Share this post


Link to post

Do the forum rules specify that we must use American spelling? Is the u such a distraction that it clouds meaning?

 

I'm not sure why you insist on concluding that all Americans are poorly educated. A country with so many excellent universities can hardly be considered poorly educated, universally speaking. I'm sorry you take such a dim view of your own country - I don't.

 

MPH was pointing out that their place of residence is a factor in the available public education. Education disparity is a well-known problem in the US. It was MPH, not me, who brought up this point, so at least some of your apparent outrage is misdirected.

 

If we're trying to establish a baseline expectation for writing Earthcache pages at a 14-y-o level, it's worth mentioning that this will vary from place to place. We received comprehensive lessons in geography in elementary school, so I would expect a bright 14-y-o to have a general understanding of, say, the Wisconsan glaciation, or what the Canadian Shield is. Someone educated elsewhere is likely to have a different expectation of a student the same age.

 

Forgive me for not comprehending your ire. In my earlier post I pointed out that Canada and the US are ultimately very similar, and I even took care to point out a couple of metrics where the US has recently outperformed Canada. The excessively personal and highly selective manner in which you've chosen to interpret my comments seems to suggest that the vanity problem doesn't originate with me.

 

If you disagree with my statements, it might be more productive to counter with your own findings that refute mine. Calling me names isn't particularly persuasive.

Share this post


Link to post

I have been reading this thread for a few days now and thought it was about REDEVELOPING ARCHIVED EARTHCACHES. Perhaps it should come back onto topic and the above education disparities be discussed in another thread.

 

Most appreciated.

Edited by cincol

Share this post


Link to post

I have been reading this thread for a few days now and thought it was about REDEVELOPING ARCHIVED EARTHCACHES. Perhaps it should come back onto topic and the above education disparities be discussed in another thread.

 

Most appreciated.

 

Flaming people for going off topic really isn't any better than going off topic in the first place...

Share this post


Link to post

I have been reading this thread for a few days now and thought it was about REDEVELOPING ARCHIVED EARTHCACHES. Perhaps it should come back onto topic and the above education disparities be discussed in another thread.

 

Most appreciated.

 

A polite suggestion isn't any kind of flame!

You are quite right. My apologies for responding to the original off topic message in the first place. Thanks. :rolleyes:

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I am still trying to get the two Earthcaches that have been archived relisted. I totally rewrote the cache page, but when it came to the questions, I used some of the original and added some of my own. Now I am told that I have to submit all new questions.

 

The thing I don't get (that I have seen on many Earthcaches up to now) is that questions that can be gleaned from the cache page text are no good. When did this rule change?

Share this post


Link to post

I have been reading this thread for a few days now and thought it was about REDEVELOPING ARCHIVED EARTHCACHES. Perhaps it should come back onto topic and the above education disparities be discussed in another thread.

 

Most appreciated.

 

A polite suggestion isn't any kind of flame!

You are quite right. My apologies for responding to the original off topic message in the first place. Thanks. :rolleyes:

KK, I really feel it is a pity that well educated people try to belittle less educated persons just for self gratifycation, I fail to see the reason, unless it be some sort of personality disorder. It is worse than watching someone struggle to develope a EarthCache. I feel that education not properly used is wasted.

If I were able to develope great EarthCaches, I would. I try to keep my logging tasks simple, making no claims that I am any sort of a expert. But far too often I see EC's developed that are much too difficult, or the logging tasks are just made too hard for many of us that enjoy EarthCaching, just so the CO can have sadistic fun from users that visit their caches.

I would just like to thank you and Cav Scout for being great EC developers that are understanding that many of us EarthCachers are just not able to comprehend certin logging tasks, and keep the requirements to where most 14 year olds would be able to log the EC as a find. In my opinion, this is the difference between an educator that wants the finder to enjoy the EC and gain knowledge, and not just to flaunt how smart they are.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I am still trying to get the two Earthcaches that have been archived relisted. I totally rewrote the cache page, but when it came to the questions, I used some of the original and added some of my own. Now I am told that I have to submit all new questions.

 

The thing I don't get (that I have seen on many Earthcaches up to now) is that questions that can be gleaned from the cache page text are no good. When did this rule change?

With the comment that you made to Cav Scout in the OpenCaching.com forum, telling him that his words may not last, but the sites will, knowing that Cav Scouts listings are being published on that site, I hope the reviewers make you scrape, grovel, and beg, then still not publish your listings. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post

[Now I'm over 50 and educated in the US. I was fortunate to have a baseline education in both history and geography. In the preceeding decades, for whatever reason, both were forsaken in basic education, resulting in a large portion of the population that have no geogrgaphic awareness of the country in which they live in. This is a very unfortunate sign of the times...

 

Saw the following in the quotable quotes section of the newspaper (I think it was from an American news commentator

 

"God creates wars to teach Americans geography"

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
With the comment that you made to Cav Scout in the OpenCaching.com forum, telling him that his words may not last, but the sites will, knowing that Cav Scouts listings are being published on that site, I hope the reviewers make you scrape, grovel, and beg, then still not publish your listings. :rolleyes:

 

Why are you bringing what is said on other forums here? At any rate, the point of my statement was that the sites that were chosen by the person that was banned will not fade away. In most circles, that would be considered a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post

 

The thing I don't get (that I have seen on many Earthcaches up to now) is that questions that can be gleaned from the cache page text are no good. When did this rule change?

 

If I'm reading your question correctly, my guess is that the logging requirements would fail the "Internet" type questions, because in essence, if all I have to do is read the Description in order to log a Find, then it doesn't sound as though the questions are site specific enough.

 

Just my 0.02 :rolleyes:

 

Good luck!

Share this post


Link to post

 

The thing I don't get (that I have seen on many Earthcaches up to now) is that questions that can be gleaned from the cache page text are no good. When did this rule change?

 

If I'm reading your question correctly, my guess is that the logging requirements would fail the "Internet" type questions, because in essence, if all I have to do is read the Description in order to log a Find, then it doesn't sound as though the questions are site specific enough.

 

Just my 0.02 :rolleyes:

 

Good luck!

 

You almost have it. My set of questions did have one or two you could glean from the cache page...but the others you'd have to be at the site to answer.

Share this post


Link to post
With the comment that you made to Cav Scout in the OpenCaching.com forum, telling him that his words may not last, but the sites will, knowing that Cav Scouts listings are being published on that site, I hope the reviewers make you scrape, grovel, and beg, then still not publish your listings. :rolleyes:

 

Why are you bringing what is said on other forums here? At any rate, the point of my statement was that the sites that were chosen by the person that was banned will not fade away. In most circles, that would be considered a good thing.

Anyone can view the content and the context of your post that you made in the OpenCaching.com forum. It was not intended to be nice, but a slap in the face to Cav Scout. Why list a copy-cat EC of the same geographic feature, knowing that the archived listings are being published on another listing service? I guess that is what the "Take over the World, one cache at a time" below your avitar means. Stand by your actions.

Share this post


Link to post
With the comment that you made to Cav Scout in the OpenCaching.com forum, telling him that his words may not last, but the sites will, knowing that Cav Scouts listings are being published on that site, I hope the reviewers make you scrape, grovel, and beg, then still not publish your listings. :rolleyes:

 

Why are you bringing what is said on other forums here? At any rate, the point of my statement was that the sites that were chosen by the person that was banned will not fade away. In most circles, that would be considered a good thing.

Anyone can view the content and the context of your post that you made in the OpenCaching.com forum. It was not intended to be nice, but a slap in the face to Cav Scout. Why list a copy-cat EC of the same geographic feature, knowing that the archived listings are being published on another listing service? I guess that is what the "Take over the World, one cache at a time" below your avitar means. Stand by your actions.

 

Well, you are free to view things as you wish. The fact is, while he may indeed publish those caches on the other site, many people will not go there to look for them. So, why shouldn't some of the caches that he once had be revived? Are you saying that no one should revamp the listings and get them on the grid once again?

Share this post


Link to post

[Now I'm over 50 and educated in the US. I was fortunate to have a baseline education in both history and geography. In the preceeding decades, for whatever reason, both were forsaken in basic education, resulting in a large portion of the population that have no geogrgaphic awareness of the country in which they live in. This is a very unfortunate sign of the times...

 

Saw the following in the quotable quotes section of the newspaper (I think it was from an American news commentator

 

"God creates wars to teach Americans geography"

:rolleyes:

 

I Like It.... That sounds like it should be on a college profs wall...

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I am still trying to get the two Earthcaches that have been archived relisted. I totally rewrote the cache page, but when it came to the questions, I used some of the original and added some of my own. Now I am told that I have to submit all new questions.

 

The thing I don't get (that I have seen on many Earthcaches up to now) is that questions that can be gleaned from the cache page text are no good. When did this rule change?

 

It was my understanding that these sorts of questions are okay as long as they are used in conjunction with other tasks that must be completed on site. I'm not sure, though. Earthcache reviewing seems pretty spotty these days.

Edited by narcissa

Share this post


Link to post
With the comment that you made to Cav Scout in the OpenCaching.com forum, telling him that his words may not last, but the sites will, knowing that Cav Scouts listings are being published on that site, I hope the reviewers make you scrape, grovel, and beg, then still not publish your listings. :rolleyes:

 

Why are you bringing what is said on other forums here? At any rate, the point of my statement was that the sites that were chosen by the person that was banned will not fade away. In most circles, that would be considered a good thing.

Anyone can view the content and the context of your post that you made in the OpenCaching.com forum. It was not intended to be nice, but a slap in the face to Cav Scout. Why list a copy-cat EC of the same geographic feature, knowing that the archived listings are being published on another listing service? I guess that is what the "Take over the World, one cache at a time" below your avitar means. Stand by your actions.

 

Well, you are free to view things as you wish. The fact is, while he may indeed publish those caches on the other site, many people will not go there to look for them. So, why shouldn't some of the caches that he once had be revived? Are you saying that no one should revamp the listings and get them on the grid once again?

I have no desire to communicate with you outside of a public forum, so no more personal emails to my account from yours. Whether you think my statement was not very nice or not, it was fact. One of the better features of OpenCaching.com is their privacy control.

Share this post


Link to post
Whether you think my statement was not very nice or not, it was opinion.

 

Fixed that for you. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post

...I really feel it is a pity that well educated people try to belittle less educated persons just for self gratifycation,

 

This would be a pity. Thankfully, nothing of the sort has happened in this thread. My comments about education levels pertained to the "14 year old" guideline. It is illogical to apply population-level generalizations to individuals.

 

The comments in this thread - even mine - are largely in favour of you persevering and helping your child get this thing published. You have an internet connection, a comprehensive list of required changes, and easy access to people who would be happy to give you suggestions. I fail to see how your education level is even relevant at this point. I think everybody in this thread is confident that you and your child could see this through if you wanted to.

 

At this point I'm wondering if you're really just trying to make a political statement about the state of Earthcaching. You have valid points to make, but this is a really disingenuous way to forward your position.

Share this post


Link to post
At this point I'm wondering if you're really just trying to make a political statement about the state of Earthcaching. You have valid points to make, but this is a really disingenuous way to forward your position.

 

Agreed. The beginnings of this thread started off well, but it has now seemingly devolved into making issues about the game personal.

Share this post


Link to post
Whether you think my statement was not very nice or not, it was opinion.

 

Fixed that for you. :lol:

No, you fixed nothing for me. You are trying to back your way out of your statement that you posted on OpenCaching.com in the forum titled "EarthCaches", post # 44. It's there for the World to see. Don't blame me for your actions or statements. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Whether you think my statement was not very nice or not, it was opinion.

 

Fixed that for you. :lol:

No, you fixed nothing for me. You are trying to back your way out of your statement that you posted on OpenCaching.com in the forum titled "EarthCaches", post # 44. It's there for the World to see. Don't blame me for your actions or statements. :rolleyes:

 

Where have I denied anything I have said? What I do contest is the message; you claim ill maneuvers and motives while in actuality, there are none. As Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

 

To echo what narcissa said, I think this boils down to your need to express your politics about Earthcaches.

Share this post


Link to post
Whether you think my statement was not very nice or not, it was opinion.

 

Fixed that for you. :lol:

No, you fixed nothing for me. You are trying to back your way out of your statement that you posted on OpenCaching.com in the forum titled "EarthCaches", post # 44. It's there for the World to see. Don't blame me for your actions or statements. :rolleyes:

 

Where have I denied anything I have said? What I do contest is the message; you claim ill maneuvers and motives while in actuality, there are none. As Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

 

To echo what narcissa said, I think this boils down to your need to express your politics about Earthcaches.

Well, the part about Cav Scout having "blood on his hands from his past actions, and getting what he deserved" and that you already have some of his sites listed for review, it just does not , as you said in your email to my account, sound very nice. Did I just take it the wrong way?

As far as my politics about EarthCaches? We are in the process of working with geoawareCA to develope a EarthCache, we want to pass our idea to them first and see if they still accept this type of EarthCache before we proceed, and see what type reccomendations our developement may need. I'm working with the EC reviewers, not complaining about them. They are quite helpful, it's what they are here for.

Now if you are truely interested in keeping some of Cav Scouts sites listed on GC.com, I see no problem with that. But why do it when you know that Cav Scout is relisting them on another site? The part about taking over the World, one cache at a time on your avatar is a bit confuseing at the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Well, the part about Cav Scout having "blood on his hands from his past actions, and getting what he deserved" and that you already have some of his sites listed for review, it just does not , as you said in your email to my account, sound very nice. Did I just take it the wrong way?

As far as my politics about EarthCaches? We are in the process of working with geoawareCA to develope a EarthCache, we want to pass our idea to them first and see if they still accept this type of EarthCache before we proceed, and see what type reccomendations our developement may need. I'm working with the EC reviewers, not complaining about them. They are quite helpful, it's what they are here for.

Now if you are truely interested in keeping some of Cav Scouts sites listed on GC.com, I see no problem with that. But why do it when you know that Cav Scout is relisting them on another site? The part about taking over the World, one cache at a time on your avatar is a bit confuseing at the least.

 

Actually, the ones I have are not his...they are ones once owned by his girlfriend who archived them on her own. Apparently when he got his archived she did the same. I suppose I figured they were his as well. I might be wrong about it...wouldn't be the first time, LOL.

 

My slogan under my avatar is just something I came up with a long time ago...just sounded neat to me at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Well, the part about Cav Scout having "blood on his hands from his past actions, and getting what he deserved" and that you already have some of his sites listed for review, it just does not , as you said in your email to my account, sound very nice. Did I just take it the wrong way?

As far as my politics about EarthCaches? We are in the process of working with geoawareCA to develope a EarthCache, we want to pass our idea to them first and see if they still accept this type of EarthCache before we proceed, and see what type reccomendations our developement may need. I'm working with the EC reviewers, not complaining about them. They are quite helpful, it's what they are here for.

Now if you are truely interested in keeping some of Cav Scouts sites listed on GC.com, I see no problem with that. But why do it when you know that Cav Scout is relisting them on another site? The part about taking over the World, one cache at a time on your avatar is a bit confuseing at the least.

 

Actually, the ones I have are not his...they are ones once owned by his girlfriend who archived them on her own. Apparently when he got his archived she did the same. I suppose I figured they were his as well. I might be wrong about it...wouldn't be the first time, LOL.

 

My slogan under my avatar is just something I came up with a long time ago...just sounded neat to me at the time.

Sorry about the confusion. I just got defensive when you trashed him in the other sites forum, not knowing the details of why he was banned, and he was planning on coming back to GC.com after the ban was lifted. I very much enjoy his EC's, and EarthCaching in general. Many of us were very upset that his caches were archived, not because they were his, but some really great EC's. I felt that GC.com did not care about their customers anymore, or other arrangements could have been made to keep the EarthCaching community happy. That was a great loss to have those 203 EC's archived, they were very professionally developed. He contributed more to EarthCaching on GC.com than any other user ever has, now they have lost a great source of knowledge, and a customer. I am a private contractor, my work and reputation, and the service I provide for my customers are first priorty. If I did not treat my customers with respect, I would be standing on the roadside at the entrance to Wal-Mart with one of them "Have a family, out of work, please help" signs.

Share this post


Link to post

Hey Manville, just a bit of advise, the best approach to him is avoidance. He has baited CS many, many times over the years in this and several other forums/threads. His so-called rewriting of CS's and bth's caches are being done just to taunt CS.

I also have been guilty of responding to his silliness and all it gets is more silliness. It's kind like a child having a temper tantrum, all that is wanted is attention.

Let's all get back to the real topic at hand...........how to redevelop those 'lost' ECs which I feel very few people are truly interested in! :anicute:

Share this post


Link to post
His so-called rewriting of CS's and bth's caches are being done just to taunt CS.

 

I'm really amazed that you can peer into my head to know my motives, KKM. Have you ever stopped to think that I might just be trying to keep them around because the subject matter was interesting?

Share this post


Link to post

Hey Manville, just a bit of advise, the best approach to him is avoidance. He has baited CS many, many times over the years in this and several other forums/threads. His so-called rewriting of CS's and bth's caches are being done just to taunt CS.

I also have been guilty of responding to his silliness and all it gets is more silliness. It's kind like a child having a temper tantrum, all that is wanted is attention.

Let's all get back to the real topic at hand...........how to redevelop those 'lost' ECs which I feel very few people are truly interested in! :anicute:

Advise taken. That is why I would not respond to the PM, the next PM likely would have been from Groundspeak. Their posts on this site differ greatly from their post on the other site. I may not know much about geology, but I am a good judge of character, having worked in Law Enforcement and Theft Prevention. It would amaze you how many times that people are caught on camera and with the shoplifted merchandise on their person that scream "I did'nt do it!".

Meanwhile back on the subject, I just got some really great links to information from geoawareCA. Seems that our idea for an EC has potential. I discribed a object, they knew what it is, and made some excellant suggestions for our logging tasks that I would have overlooked.

I am going to steer clear of Cav Scouts old sites until we see what the future holds, but not EarthCaching. So for those that want to say I am playing politics with EarthCaching, they are wrong. I am just inexperencied at how to properly list one, but the EC reviewers are very helpful. I have nothing but good things to say about them. :)

Share this post


Link to post

That being said, the Earthcache reviewers are not doing a great job of keeping Earthcaches at a consistent reading level. They'll gladly give people a hard time for not providing enough information, but I have yet to hear of someone being asked to revise a cache description that is too dense. Considering that one of the more common criticisms of Earthcaches is that they're too hard/ too boring, looking at the reading level should be a priority for the reviewers. I'm not convinced that the reviewers are actually equipped to enforce the guidelines.

 

For my first EC, GC26CM1, I was asked to bring it down to the correct reading level. Basically the problem was that I used too much geology lingo/jargon in the original writing that I didn't explain. So I had to fix that.

Share this post


Link to post

That being said, the Earthcache reviewers are not doing a great job of keeping Earthcaches at a consistent reading level. They'll gladly give people a hard time for not providing enough information, but I have yet to hear of someone being asked to revise a cache description that is too dense. Considering that one of the more common criticisms of Earthcaches is that they're too hard/ too boring, looking at the reading level should be a priority for the reviewers. I'm not convinced that the reviewers are actually equipped to enforce the guidelines.

 

For my first EC, GC26CM1, I was asked to bring it down to the correct reading level. Basically the problem was that I used too much geology lingo/jargon in the original writing that I didn't explain. So I had to fix that.

 

This is encouraging.

Share this post


Link to post

So why not resurrect cav scout ECs on GC.COM?

Why were they allowed to be archived in the first place? This upset many users that enjoy EarthCaches, but did Groundspeak care? I don't think so, but I truly belive that if they had it to do over, other arrangements would have been made to keep the listings active. Now that Garmin has their own site many of us are cross listing our caches to keep our years of research from being lost like Cav Scouts was. Not all of us just hide tupperware in the woods, but actually research our listings. I enjoy history, and my caches and waymarks reflect that. Now Groundspeak is trying to keep us PM's by adding new features for us. The two sites are very compareable, less the cost of a Premium Membership.

Share this post


Link to post

So why not resurrect cav scout ECs on GC.COM?

 

Some of us are working on it... :)

Share this post


Link to post

So why not resurrect cav scout ECs on GC.COM?

 

Some of us are working on it... :)

I saw your new listings.

 

Those are my own...not the older ones.

Share this post


Link to post

I just looked at the new one about the bluff. I have a very similar one in the works, but the road is closed for the winter. The trail is still open, but some trees may be downed in the area and hard to get a horse through. Also with the highs in the lower 30's I really don't want to be in the higher elevations this time of year, those little streams become flooded from the melting snow. Guess I'll need to include that in the listing when I send it for review.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, this seems like one big well ......' contest (fill in the blanks here)and all in all, I really don't care how certain person, people, etc. got their earthcaches archived.

 

The only question that I have, that I haven't seen a clear answer to, is why couldn't these have been adopted over to those who wanted to keep them open on this site.

 

What CS does on other sites is his prerogative. If they were archived here against his will, then I might have an issue with this.

 

Like I said, this seems to be just one big ole contest. You would figure that ALL parties that want to get these earthcache sites back in play could WORK TOGETHER to get them done instead of sniping at each other.

 

And that's all I'm going to say on this. I have caches to find.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, this seems like one big well ......' contest (fill in the blanks here)and all in all, I really don't care how certain person, people, etc. got their earthcaches archived.

 

The only question that I have, that I haven't seen a clear answer to, is why couldn't these have been adopted over to those who wanted to keep them open on this site.

 

What CS does on other sites is his prerogative. If they were archived here against his will, then I might have an issue with this.

 

Like I said, this seems to be just one big ole contest. You would figure that ALL parties that want to get these earthcache sites back in play could WORK TOGETHER to get them done instead of sniping at each other.

 

And that's all I'm going to say on this. I have caches to find.

Your points are well taken and your assumptions are good.

Why CS got banned is between him and GS, but like you and the rest of us who have no axe to grind, had/have an issue regarding the massive archive.

I also agree with your last statement, "You would figure that ALL parties that want to get these earthcache sites back in play could WORK TOGETHER to get them done instead of sniping at each other." The only problem, with 203 ECs scattered over 15 states and Washington DC it is a really tremendous and time consuming task. Another problem is the guidelines have changed since most of the ECs were published so a revised version of the old, but no longer acceptable EC, would be a big waste of time and most assuredly turned down!

I wholeheartedly agree with your call for the end of sniping! I like a good debate as much as the next guy, but it's getting much, much too personal.

 

P.S. One last appeal to TPTB at Groundspeak: please allow the ECs to be adopted out. I am not looking for an inflation of my numbers, but I will volunteer to adopt them all and if you like, I will sort them out from there and allow other adoptions thus taking the problem off your hands. I believe I can get CS to agree. Please? You have got to admit, it should end all of the sniping. :)

Share this post


Link to post

Aside from the seemingly off topic spin this thread appears to have taken (weren't we talking about resubmitting new Listings and not the hopeless case for Adoption?), I would have thought, judging by the number of Closed Threads on this Topic, that you already have received your answer? At least it's abundantly clear to me that Grounspeak does not wish to waste anymore bandwidth on the subject.

 

I am impressed by your tenacity and undying optimism however :)

Share this post


Link to post

Archived EarthCaches of any banned member should be lock cause there is no way of them to be propery taken care of. Any armchair bandit can log them as a find. There is no one to send the answers to. No one to check to see if the answer are right. Is this the right way to log finds? Does Groundspeak promote that this is the way to play? Geoware can you tell me how this promotes ECs when now the answers don't even matter on ECs like these.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

×
×
  • Create New...