Jump to content

Let's lift the discussion....


geoaware

Recommended Posts

As a person who has seen EarthCaching grow from the very first one placed through to the 10,000+ now active, I am super proud of all the amazing experiences that over 1.3 million people have had by visiting EarthCaches. However, I am not proud of the level of discussion in the forums of late - the snide comments, the personal attacks, the rudeness. It has to stop!

 

People, this is a game. People come into the forums to find friendly advice and banter. Over the last few weeks these forums have been dominated by bitterness and negativity which has helped not one person. It makes me so sad to see good people reduced to such stupid bickering and name calling. Threads start and and are dragged down to petty bickering and off topic within minutes. I am sure you are all fine people who would not behave this way in person....so why do so in the forums???

 

I think it's time for many of you to take a deep breath and remember why you are involved in the game....and if it is just to attack others in forums, then maybe you should take up some other hobby.

 

It is time to lift the level of the discussion in these forums to help each other and discuss issues in a mature and positive manner. You don't have to agree with others opinions...but then you don't have to attack them for it either. Think this before you post "Am I adding to the discussion? Am I keeping on topic? Am I being respectful to my fellow cachers?" If you say no to any of these...then change your words or don't post!

 

If you have a personal issue with a cache or a cacher, deal with those through the correct channels via contact@Groundspeak.com or earthcache@geosociety.org.

 

The Groundspeak team, the volunteer reviewers and moderators et al work hard to keep the game moving, friendly and fun. Lets try to operate in the forums with the same ideals in mind!

 

Please all have a safe and fun-filled 2011.

Link to comment

...I am super proud of all the amazing experiences that over 1.3 million people have had by visiting EarthCaches.

 

Wow! That's an amazing number of visits. I also saw a palpable measure of success the other day when I was going through my Favorite's the other day. All but perhaps three or four of the EC's on my Found list had been Favorited, a few in the double digits! I don't think any other cache type on the site can boast that kind of success and acceptance. Truly astonishing.

 

Thanks for coming up with this cache type idea and for managing the program.

 

Happy Holidays!

Link to comment

...I am super proud of all the amazing experiences that over 1.3 million people have had by visiting EarthCaches.

 

Wow! That's an amazing number of visits. I also saw a palpable measure of success the other day when I was going through my Favorite's the other day. All but perhaps three or four of the EC's on my Found list had been Favorited, a few in the double digits! I don't think any other cache type on the site can boast that kind of success and acceptance. Truly astonishing.

 

Thanks for coming up with this cache type idea and for managing the program.

 

Happy Holidays!

Of the 15 of my caches which were favorited...none was a traditional and 8 of them were EarthCaches. Clearly folks appreciate EarthCaches.

Edited by Lostby7
Link to comment

As a person who has seen EarthCaching grow from the very first one placed through to the 10,000+ now active, I am super proud of all the amazing experiences that over 1.3 million people have had by visiting EarthCaches. However, I am not proud of the level of discussion in the forums of late - the snide comments, the personal attacks, the rudeness. It has to stop!

 

People, this is a game. People come into the forums to find friendly advice and banter. Over the last few weeks these forums have been dominated by bitterness and negativity which has helped not one person. It makes me so sad to see good people reduced to such stupid bickering and name calling. Threads start and and are dragged down to petty bickering and off topic within minutes. I am sure you are all fine people who would not behave this way in person....so why do so in the forums???

 

I think it's time for many of you to take a deep breath and remember why you are involved in the game....and if it is just to attack others in forums, then maybe you should take up some other hobby.

 

It is time to lift the level of the discussion in these forums to help each other and discuss issues in a mature and positive manner. You don't have to agree with others opinions...but then you don't have to attack them for it either. Think this before you post "Am I adding to the discussion? Am I keeping on topic? Am I being respectful to my fellow cachers?" If you say no to any of these...then change your words or don't post!

 

If you have a personal issue with a cache or a cacher, deal with those through the correct channels via contact@Groundspeak.com or earthcache@geosociety.org.

 

The Groundspeak team, the volunteer reviewers and moderators et al work hard to keep the game moving, friendly and fun. Lets try to operate in the forums with the same ideals in mind!

 

Please all have a safe and fun-filled 2011.

I feel the same way, as stated before, It is my plan to leave the GC.forums on 01/01/2011. I have tryed to be helpful to other users in the past, I have also been flamed by Trolls and have fired back, only to be reported and have a email sent to me from a moderator. I do not feel that I have any freedom of speech, as many logs have been deleted because they disagree with the opinion of the moderator, and not the topic of the discussion in the thread. I have never been banned, but I find these forums too much of a hostile environment to take place in any futher discussions.

 

Have a safe and happy 2011.

Manville Possum Hunters.

Link to comment

For the most part I agree with Geoaware with only one little exception.

The statement, "If you have a personal issue with a cache or a cacher, deal with those through the correct channels via contact@Groundspeak.com or earthcache@geosociety.org." must be viewed and certainly used carefully!

As I understand it, anything you say via these channels can be held against you and can result in a ban or a more moderate punishment.

If you have a problem with an individual here are two caveats:

1. Be very careful what you say. Just because you are not saying it publicly as in this forum doesn't mean it cannot rear it's ugly head later!

2. Find the "offending" cachers private email address! If you cannot, don't email!

:(

Link to comment

As I understand it, anything you say via these channels can be held against you and can result in a ban or a more moderate punishment.

If two cachers are having a dispute Groundspeak can try to negotiate an understanding. The only time a site suspension would be implemented is if a user violates the Terms of Use. Groundspeak does not punish people for reporting poor behavior, or for having a disagreement with another cacher. There are many who disagree, but are respectful in doing so.

 

If you have a problem with an individual here are two caveats:

1. Be very careful what you say. Just because you are not saying it publicly as in this forum doesn't mean it cannot rear it's ugly head later!

Correct. Please be respectful in all uses of the sites - including forums and private messages. As I said above, it is possible to disagree with someone without attacking them or their character.

2. Find the "offending" cachers private email address!

If you are the target of poor behavior, please report it, rather than retaliating.

If you cannot, don't email!

Better yet, think of it like this: "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." Thumper had it right.

 

In short, Groundspeak can intervene on your behalf if you are targeted by poor behavior, but please do not retaliate.

Link to comment

I feel the same way, as stated before, It is my plan to leave the GC.forums on 01/01/2011. I have tryed to be helpful to other users in the past, I have also been flamed by Trolls and have fired back, only to be reported and have a email sent to me from a moderator. I do not feel that I have any freedom of speech, as many logs have been deleted because they disagree with the opinion of the moderator, and not the topic of the discussion in the thread. I have never been banned, but I find these forums too much of a hostile environment to take place in any futher discussions.

 

If you really wanted to make a serious statement, you would have already left.

 

On topic, I agree, the earthcaches in our home area are clearly loved by all as they have higher ratings than most of the local traditional caches. I want to own more EC's but want to make sure that quality is more important than quantity.

Link to comment

As I understand it, anything you say via these channels can be held against you and can result in a ban or a more moderate punishment.

If two cachers are having a dispute Groundspeak can try to negotiate an understanding. The only time a site suspension would be implemented is if a user violates the Terms of Use. Groundspeak does not punish people for reporting poor behavior, or for having a disagreement with another cacher. There are many who disagree, but are respectful in doing so.

Sandy, I agree , but I was not talking about the usual squabbles that we see on the forums. My point is this. just because you use the recommended channels doesn't free you up to violate those rules. In other words, going to those communication methods can and do get you into trouble too! It's not a free pass to abuse another cacher!

I just wanted everyone to understand that before they get a deserved slap down.

P.S. We wish you an every EC lover a Happy New Year! :)

Link to comment

People, this is a game. People come into the forums to find friendly advice and banter. Over the last few weeks these forums have been dominated by bitterness and negativity which has helped not one person. It makes me so sad to see good people reduced to such stupid bickering and name calling. Threads start and and are dragged down to petty bickering and off topic within minutes. I am sure you are all fine people who would not behave this way in person....so why do so in the forums???

 

I am sorry, but recently I am more and more getting the feeling that the cachers in this forum are not treated as adults. Too many topics are closed before it is even possible to comment on the topic, ask questions, provide answers etc that are both on topic and reasonably respectful.

 

Take e.g. this example

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=266954

(I did not see any attempt to start a new discussion about photograph pro/contra there.)

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=266805

(The thread was not about a special Earth caches, but in general about Earth caches on tribal lands)

 

I can only speak for myself, but the two things that demotivated me most in the recent months with respect to Earthcaching were the change of the language guideline

(effectively disallowing me to use English) and the fact that so many threads get closed here without any reason apparent to me.

 

I do not come to the forums to find friendly advice, but to discuss about controversial topics. If this is not possible any longer and we all are just allowed to write how happy we are and how much we enjoy everything, then participating in this forum makes no sense any longer for me. I agree that an effort should be made to treat each other with respect and to try to be helpful when someone seeks advice or help. When there is however a wish for discussions and debates, when not allow them as long as they do not get personal. I have never encountered that many moderator interventions than during the last months and I feel that there are too many.

 

Of course, this is Groundspeak's forum and they can decide how to handle this forum. I just wanted to reply to your posting to let you know that everything has two sides and what you apparently like to see in this forum is quite different from what I wish to see here.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

People, this is a game. People come into the forums to find friendly advice and banter. Over the last few weeks these forums have been dominated by bitterness and negativity which has helped not one person. It makes me so sad to see good people reduced to such stupid bickering and name calling. Threads start and and are dragged down to petty bickering and off topic within minutes. I am sure you are all fine people who would not behave this way in person....so why do so in the forums???

 

I am sorry, but recently I am more and more getting the feeling that the cachers in this forum are not treated as adults. Too many topics are closed before it is even possible to comment on the topic, ask questions, provide answers etc that are both on topic and reasonably respectful.

 

Take e.g. this example

http://forums.Ground...howtopic=266954

(I did not see any attempt to start a new discussion about photograph pro/contra there.)

 

http://forums.Ground...howtopic=266805

(The thread was not about a special Earth caches, but in general about Earth caches on tribal lands)

 

I can only speak for myself, but the two things that demotivated me most in the recent months with respect to Earthcaching were the change of the language guideline

(effectively disallowing me to use English) and the fact that so many threads get closed here without any reason apparent to me.

 

I do not come to the forums to find friendly advice, but to discuss about controversial topics. If this is not possible any longer and we all are just allowed to write how happy we are and how much we enjoy everything, then participating in this forum makes no sense any longer for me. I agree that an effort should be made to treat each other with respect and to try to be helpful when someone seeks advice or help. When there is however a wish for discussions and debates, when not allow them as long as they do not get personal. I have never encountered that many moderator interventions than during the last months and I feel that there are too many.

 

Of course, this is Groundspeak's forum and they can decide how to handle this forum. I just wanted to reply to your posting to let you know that everything has two sides and what you apparently like to see in this forum is quite different from what I wish to see here.

 

Cezanne

 

We do want to encourage genuine discussion - and we allow many threads that critique our products and our decisions - like this one.

 

We have had a particularly high amount of reported posts and threads lately. We act on these when the thread has shifted off-topic, or if the original question has been answered or thoroughly discussed and the discussion has digressed to personal jibes. There have been many examples of personal comments of late, and if they are at the end of a long - much-discussed thread - we want to stop the discussion from digressing further and close the thread. If it is a shorter discussion, and it won't disrupt the discussion too much we can sometimes just remove the posts that have offended.

 

I know it must seem like we are keeping a closer watch - and we keep abreast of current topics in our forums - but of late users are being more active in reporting other users. There have been some major upgrades, additions and guideline changes in recent times, and it seems reasonable that people want to discuss those. And we want people to discuss those.

Link to comment

We act on these when the thread has shifted off-topic, or if the original question has been answered or thoroughly discussed and the discussion has digressed to personal jibes.

 

First of all, thank you for taking the effort of replying. While several threads indeed went offtopic or digressed into what you refer to personal jibes,

I did not get this feeling in the case of the two threads that I mentioned as examples. (Regarding narcissa's posting the unfortunate thing about a too much condensed version of what has been changed is that the majority of the cachers worldwide do not read this forum or other geocaching fora. The Groundspeak newsletter is read by many more cachers and so I think that what is written in the newsletter will influence much more the general knowledge about Earthcaching than anything else.)

 

The other part of my comment was rather directed to geoaware because he brought up the positive/negative aspect. It is quite normal from my point of view that most

controversial discussions are started by people who are not happy with a particular aspect.

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

I was very disappointed in the decision to close my thread so quickly. The way the new guideline was presented in the newsletter wasn't just a summary, it was incorrect. There are still many legitimate uses of photo requirements in Earthcaches, and it's an issue that is important to a lot of Earthcachers. To see it dismissed in such a manner both in the newsletter and then here in the forum is an insult to all of us. I'd like to see Groundspeak issue a clarification so people who don't follow the forums aren't misled.

Link to comment

We act on these when the thread has shifted off-topic, or if the original question has been answered or thoroughly discussed and the discussion has digressed to personal jibes.

 

First of all, thank you for taking the effort of replying. While several threads indeed went offtopic or digressed into what you refer to personal jibes,

I did not get this feeling in the case of the two threads that I mentioned as examples. (Regarding narcissa's posting the unfortunate thing about a too much condensed version of what has been changed is that the majority of the cachers worldwide do not read this forum or other geocaching fora. The Groundspeak newsletter is read by many more cachers and so I think that what is written in the newsletter will influence much more the general knowledge about Earthcaching than anything else.)

 

The other part of my comment was rather directed to geoaware because he brought up the positive/negative aspect. It is quite normal from my point of view that most

controversial discussions are started by people who are not happy with a particular aspect.

 

Cezanne

Well folks, I just deleted an overly long answer that I composed and perhaps that was the right thing to do. About all I am going to say and say it respectfully, I totally agree with Cezanne!

I think that most of us would not be so vociferous in our retorts if we truly felt that we have been heard.

Thanks, especially to Sandy for listening. Hopefully, others will follow in her footsteps.

I will take the pledge of trying to lift the discourse here to a higher level! :)

Link to comment

I was very disappointed in the decision to close my thread so quickly. The way the new guideline was presented in the newsletter wasn't just a summary, it was incorrect. There are still many legitimate uses of photo requirements in Earthcaches, and it's an issue that is important to a lot of Earthcachers. To see it dismissed in such a manner both in the newsletter and then here in the forum is an insult to all of us. I'd like to see Groundspeak issue a clarification so people who don't follow the forums aren't misled.

 

narcissa, you probably will not believe it, but I also totally agree with you. Where we may differ is your point that there are still many legitimate uses of a photo requirement in Earthcaches. Some of us are totally confused regarding this subject. I honestly hope you are also right on this point too! Maybe it is just my thickheadedness, but I don't know how they (photos) can be used.

Thanks and I promise to be more respectful in the future! :)

Link to comment

I was very disappointed in the decision to close my thread so quickly. The way the new guideline was presented in the newsletter wasn't just a summary, it was incorrect. There are still many legitimate uses of photo requirements in Earthcaches, and it's an issue that is important to a lot of Earthcachers. To see it dismissed in such a manner both in the newsletter and then here in the forum is an insult to all of us. I'd like to see Groundspeak issue a clarification so people who don't follow the forums aren't misled.

I will reply to you privately and you can decide whether I can post that response in this thread.

Link to comment

While it is sometimes too easy to hit the send button, I have felt that there have been threads with genuine discussion that were shut down prematurely. The tribal lands issue was one of them - perhaps it is because I have worked on Native issues for much of my life. I felt that the original spark for the thread raised some important points, some of the reviewers were participating, some of the issues were being clarified, but certainly not all of my questions were addressed or answered -- and ultimately it was about more than just one of the earthcaches on Navajo land. But then Sandy determined that is what it was indeed about: "The cache in question is being addressed . . . The main question in this thread has been addressed. Closing topic."

 

It seemed very abrupt and left a bad feeling with me.

Link to comment

I was very disappointed in the decision to close my thread so quickly. The way the new guideline was presented in the newsletter wasn't just a summary, it was incorrect. There are still many legitimate uses of photo requirements in Earthcaches, and it's an issue that is important to a lot of Earthcachers. To see it dismissed in such a manner both in the newsletter and then here in the forum is an insult to all of us. I'd like to see Groundspeak issue a clarification so people who don't follow the forums aren't misled.

I will reply to you privately and you can decide whether I can post that response in this thread.

 

If you want to post your reply here, be my guest. In my opinion, it's off-base and verging on unprofessional, but it's your choice.

 

Apparently the "clarification" didn't clarify anything. If you honestly believe that the "spirit" of the guidelines is that no pictures are allowed, perhaps you Groundspeak and/or the GSA should edit the guidelines again to reflect that. Telling Earthcachers in the forum one thing, while sending something quite different to all geocachers *is* insulting, whether it was meant to be or not.

 

It is really starting to look like Groundspeak wants to control the discourse that occurs in this forum. And hey - it's Groundspeak's forum, if they choose to employ heavy-handed moderating, it's their choice to do so. It's no surprise to me that many Earthcachers are choosing to take their discussions to other sites.

Link to comment

narcissa, you probably will not believe it, but I also totally agree with you.

 

Why wouldn't I believe this? We have agreed on things in the past, and will in the future. I don't keep score.

 

Good grief woman! Can't you accept an olive branch when it is being offered without the retort? I give up! Maybe your thread should have been closed? :ph34r:

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge
Link to comment

I, for one, come for friendly advice. And intelligent and respectful discussion. And information. I do not come for (what is in my opinion) several of the same thread discussion disguised as different ones. Nor do I come to read that a poster thinks that some rule/person/decision/etc is unfair/terrible/idiotic/etc just because that poster does not agree with whatever it is. Ad Nauseum. I prefer people to say their piece and be done unless someone asks for clarification. I like a good sense of humor, or even good sense, which I sometimes find lacking in posts.

 

We all come for different reasons. What I (personally) would like to see, instead of complaints would be a genuine seeking of resolving a problem, not just a venting session. But I'm new here, and my impression so far is that there are some people who are just ticked off and I (personally) wish they could have their own "I'm just ticked off" thread, so those who don't want to read all that stuff, know where it is and can avoid it. But that is just my impression, as a person considering EarthCaching and wanting to know something about it.

 

MOO

Link to comment

I, for one, come for friendly advice. And intelligent and respectful discussion. And information. I do not come for (what is in my opinion) several of the same thread discussion disguised as different ones. Nor do I come to read that a poster thinks that some rule/person/decision/etc is unfair/terrible/idiotic/etc just because that poster does not agree with whatever it is. Ad Nauseum. I prefer people to say their piece and be done unless someone asks for clarification. I like a good sense of humor, or even good sense, which I sometimes find lacking in posts.

 

We all come for different reasons. What I (personally) would like to see, instead of complaints would be a genuine seeking of resolving a problem, not just a venting session. But I'm new here, and my impression so far is that there are some people who are just ticked off and I (personally) wish they could have their own "I'm just ticked off" thread, so those who don't want to read all that stuff, know where it is and can avoid it. But that is just my impression, as a person considering EarthCaching and wanting to know something about it.

 

MOO

 

+1 Very well said TE :)

Link to comment

As I understand it, anything you say via these channels can be held against you and can result in a ban or a more moderate punishment.

If two cachers are having a dispute Groundspeak can try to negotiate an understanding. The only time a site suspension would be implemented is if a user violates the Terms of Use. Groundspeak does not punish people for reporting poor behavior, or for having a disagreement with another cacher. There are many who disagree, but are respectful in doing so.

 

 

i beg to differ, and that is from personal experience, and NO, i will not go into details

 

 

 

I am sorry, but recently I am more and more getting the feeling that the cachers in this forum are not treated as adults.

 

cezanne

 

AMEN!

 

i've said this over and over for a long time, and it just falls into deaf ears or earns you a suspension

Link to comment

narcissa, you probably will not believe it, but I also totally agree with you.

 

Why wouldn't I believe this? We have agreed on things in the past, and will in the future. I don't keep score.

 

Good grief woman! Can't you accept an olive branch when it is being offered without the retort? I give up! Maybe your thread should have been closed? :ph34r:

Can't you simply share your thoughts without bringing in baggage from other discussions? The mere fact of our agreement or disagreement is irrelevant.

Link to comment

We all come for different reasons. What I (personally) would like to see, instead of complaints would be a genuine seeking of resolving a problem, not just a venting session.

 

I tried to do that for example in the case of the language topic (the suggestion was to allow those languages for Earthcaches in a country that are also accepted in that country for normal caches). Unfortunately, not a single reply of Groundspeak or the Earthcache team commented on that suggestion. If the suggestion is regarded as bad, it would be nice to be informed why this is the case. Also the topic that in many areas there does not exist "one local language has never been addressed from the official side.

 

The valid scientific concerns about the new photo guideline also have not been addressed.

 

It is not that surprising that in this way the same topics pop up again and again.

 

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

We all come for different reasons. What I (personally) would like to see, instead of complaints would be a genuine seeking of resolving a problem, not just a venting session.

 

I tried to do that for example in the case of the language topic (the suggestion was to allow those languages for Earthcaches in a country that are also accepted in that country for normal caches). Unfortunately, not a single reply of Groundspeak or the Earthcache team commented on that suggestion. If the suggestion is regarded as bad, it would be nice to be informed why this is the case. Also the topic that in many areas there does not exist "one local language has never been addressed from the official side.

 

The valid scientific concerns about the new photo guideline also have not been addressed.

 

It is not that surprising that in this way the same topics pop up again and again.

 

 

Cezanne

 

Cezanne, your points are right on!

Here is the dilemma, the problem of 'unhappiness' occurs, much to the chagrin of TPTB, when several questions are posed here and no answers given. I must excuse GS from most of my remarks because as a rule, they are responsive.

When guideline changes are announced without input from the caching community just what do you expect.........................everyone dancing around the May pole?

Yes, I know that GSA has said that if you have a question send them an email. I am sorry but I respectively disagree. A private message or email is just that, private! What a better place to communicate that this forum. If there is any redeeming quality of forums, it is the openness of them!

Maybe the experience when the proposed guideline changes of the vacation and proximity rules were announced has left a bitter taste and that route will not be used again. Don't announce a proposed change until the change is made seems to be the current approach and that's the problem!

I summary: solicit input and don't insist on private emails, answer question here as what happens on other forums.

Thanks you. :)

Link to comment

I, for one, come for friendly advice. And intelligent and respectful discussion. And information. I do not come for (what is in my opinion) several of the same thread discussion disguised as different ones. Nor do I come to read that a poster thinks that some rule/person/decision/etc is unfair/terrible/idiotic/etc just because that poster does not agree with whatever it is. Ad Nauseum. I prefer people to say their piece and be done unless someone asks for clarification. I like a good sense of humor, or even good sense, which I sometimes find lacking in posts.

 

We all come for different reasons. What I (personally) would like to see, instead of complaints would be a genuine seeking of resolving a problem, not just a venting session. But I'm new here, and my impression so far is that there are some people who are just ticked off and I (personally) wish they could have their own "I'm just ticked off" thread, so those who don't want to read all that stuff, know where it is and can avoid it. But that is just my impression, as a person considering EarthCaching and wanting to know something about it.

 

MOO

 

+1 Very well said TE :)

 

-1 Totally disagree!

 

...................respectfully, but still in disagreement!

Are you not also sitting in judgment? Painting the sometimes strong discourse on this forum with such a wide brush is unfair.

I love your attitude and do agree that it would be nice if everything was a bed of roses, but sadly, that is not the case. Policies announced without input and unanswered questions are the root cause of the problems here. Your input is welcome, but as you 'consider earthcaching' think about some of us who are already doing it and how much we love the hobby. When a good thing is tinkered with without concern of the EC community being accounted for, disagreement can and most often arises. Losing an argument can be problematic of course, but not even being allowed to join the debate is much worse! That occurs when changes are made without input.

Most of us who perhaps at times get carried away, aren't doing it just to vent. It is the result of being shut out and leaving questions unanswered.

Please join us and enjoy the earthcaching aspect of geocaching. Earthcaches are a little more complex than the run-of-the-mill geocache and maybe our problems are just a little more difficult too!

Thanks.

Link to comment

All excellent points, however I usually interpret the lack of an "Official" response to mean that the answer will be, "..it depends".

 

I guess in the alternate Universe that I live in, I will usually approach the issue one on one with the Local Reviewer first (or semi local in the case of EC Reviewers).

 

Failing that approach, the GC Guidelines offers some guidance on how to proceed:

 

Step 1:

 

first contact the reviewer and explain why you feel your cache meets the guidelines. Exceptions may sometimes be made, depending on the nature of a cache. If you have a novel type of cache that "pushes the envelope" to some degree, then it is best to contact your local reviewer and/or Groundspeak before placing and reporting it on the Geocaching.com web site. The guidelines should address most situations, but Groundspeak administrators and reviewers are always interested in new ideas.

 

Step 2:

 

If, after exchanging email with the reviewer, you still feel your cache has been misjudged, your next option is to ask the volunteer to post the cache for all of the reviewers to see in their private discussion forum. Sometimes a second opinion from someone else who has seen a similar situation can help in suggesting a way for the cache to be published.

 

Step 3:

 

Next, you should feel free to post a message in the "Geocaching Topics" section of the Groundspeak Forums to see what the geocaching community thinks. If the majority believes that it should be published, then Groundspeak administrators and volunteers may review the submission...

 

Step 4:

 

Finally, if you believe that the reviewer has acted inappropriately, you may send an email with complete details, waypoint name (GC*****) and a link to the cache, to Groundspeak’s special address for this purpose: appeals@geocaching.com. For all other purposes, whenever these Guidelines ask the cache owner to "contact Groundspeak," use the contact@geocaching.com email address.

 

Now I'm guessing that a very articulate individual such as cezanne, will in most cases not need to go beyond Step 1. The rest of us, well....it might take a bit more effort :lol:

 

Once an understanding with the EC Reviewer is met, it seems unlikely that the process would need to repeat itself.

Link to comment

Respectfully, Touchstone's last post is good advice to those who feel GSA and/or Groundspeak are unresponsive to discussions held within these forums.

 

Every EarthCache submitted is unique, and is reviewed on an individual basis. GSA and Groundspeak cannot anticipate every individual possibility, ruling, exception, etc., which is why we have a dedicated team of volunteer EarthCache reviewers. Members of the volunteer EarthCache review team will work hard to help you through the submittal and publishing process.

Link to comment

Every EarthCache submitted is unique, and is reviewed on an individual basis. GSA and Groundspeak cannot anticipate every individual possibility, ruling, exception, etc., which is why we have a dedicated team of volunteer EarthCache reviewers. Members of the volunteer EarthCache review team will work hard to help you through the submittal and publishing process.

 

That's true. My personal case is, however, different and the language to be used is nothing special and nothing which needs to be anticipated. I am not investing many hours of work to write up an Earthcache just to get it denied unless I am providing a German version (of course I am able to provide a German version, I am just not willing to do so and in particular not when forced by a strange rule). Note that my country, Austria, does not have an Earthcache reviewer. The local reviewers in Austria are all Austrians and they accept caches with an English description only. Unfortunately, I have no choice which Earthcache reviewer will handle a submission of mine. Just because they arbitrarily put Austria and Switzerland under the regime of the German Earthcache reviewers, an Earthcache submitted by myself in my home country will be handled by a German reviewer and the chances are very high that they will force me to provide a German version. So somehow this is a vicious cycle.

 

While I use my personal situation as example, there are other Earthcachers around for which the same type of issue occurs and is even more important than in my case.

For example, terratin cannot come up with an Earthcache in their current home country, Denmark, because the guidelines will force them to provide a Danish version.

If exceptions are possible, then who is the Earthcache reviewer whom terratin might contact in advance to ask whether an English only version will be accepted (please refrain from mentioning Google translations)?

 

I asked a non-German Earthcache reviewer (a couple of months ago, i.e. when still the old guidelines were in use, but the new language guideline was already announced in this forum) what my chances would be to get a English only EC published. He was so kind to reply and told me that he could not give me a definitive answer as he is not in charge of my country and that it depends on local habits. Of course I could ask each of the (I think currently four German Earthcaches reviewers), but I am quite sure that the reply will be that I need to write a German version and that they are not willing to invest more work than necessary (they are faster with reading German texts and they know that I am able to provide a German text and moreover, the German geocaching community is quite focused on German).

 

In view of what I wrote above, a suggestion might be that ECs with an English description only are handled by the reviewers who deal with countries for which there is no separate Earthcache reviewer (most of them are native speakers of English). I would have no issue with having to wait for a longer time than the usually quite fast response time of the German Earthcache reviewers.

 

My hope was that by addressing issues like this one in the forum, some reply might be offered. The chances to get a reply to a mail on this topic are even lower.

 

Your general advice of going ahead and then working together with the reviewer is certainly helpful in many cases, but not with respect to the language issue (which is hardly understood by cachers with native language English who live in countries where English is the local language).

 

I guess, however, that it is easy to understand for everyone (regardless of his personal situation) that no one wants to invest days of work without knowing whether there is a chance at all that the work will not be done for the dust bin.

 

 

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

 

If you want to post your reply here, be my guest. In my opinion, it's off-base and verging on unprofessional, but it's your choice.

 

Apparently the "clarification" didn't clarify anything. If you honestly believe that the "spirit" of the guidelines is that no pictures are allowed, perhaps you Groundspeak and/or the GSA should edit the guidelines again to reflect that. Telling Earthcachers in the forum one thing, while sending something quite different to all geocachers *is* insulting, whether it was meant to be or not.

 

It is really starting to look like Groundspeak wants to control the discourse that occurs in this forum. And hey - it's Groundspeak's forum, if they choose to employ heavy-handed moderating, it's their choice to do so. It's no surprise to me that many Earthcachers are choosing to take their discussions to other sites.

 

I have not been unprofessional in my dealings with you.

 

Rather, I explained to you that the thread you started was a complaint, without clear argument and without constructive criticism - further that I addressed the complaint, so closed the thread. I gave you the opportunity to start another thread, even using the text that you posted in this thread, as it could possibly lead to a more constructive discussion.

To address the general concern about the newsletter content:

 

The newsletter first links to the new guidelines, with the request, "please read the updated guidelines." It then provides a summary of some guidelines. Guideline seven reads, "Requests for photographs must be optional." That is the stated guideline, which is included in the newsletter summary as, "Any requests for photos are considered optional."

 

There is no intended deception in the text of the newsletter. The newsletter provides a very general overview of only a few guidelines. It is understood that there are disagreements about this text, but it was crafted by people who are highly involved in developing and sustaining this cache type, and respectfully disagree with this stance.

 

The guideline itself has been hotly debated - and we understand that. Change causes concern and often heated discussions; now the complaint is how we get this information across. We hope to (have) address(ed) this concern to your satisfaction. At the end of the day we know that these discussions become so intense, because all parties are invested in EarthCaching, including Groundspeak and the G.S.A.

 

A reminder that our feedback site is a good idea to post suggestions, such as follow up newsletter articles about EarthCaching. We do want to keep spreading the message about EarthCaching, particularly those ECs earning lots of favorites point.

 

Thanks, everyone.

 

 

Link to comment

I, for one, come for friendly advice. And intelligent and respectful discussion. And information. I do not come for (what is in my opinion) several of the same thread discussion disguised as different ones. Nor do I come to read that a poster thinks that some rule/person/decision/etc is unfair/terrible/idiotic/etc just because that poster does not agree with whatever it is. Ad Nauseum. I prefer people to say their piece and be done unless someone asks for clarification. I like a good sense of humor, or even good sense, which I sometimes find lacking in posts.

 

We all come for different reasons. What I (personally) would like to see, instead of complaints would be a genuine seeking of resolving a problem, not just a venting session. But I'm new here, and my impression so far is that there are some people who are just ticked off and I (personally) wish they could have their own "I'm just ticked off" thread, so those who don't want to read all that stuff, know where it is and can avoid it. But that is just my impression, as a person considering EarthCaching and wanting to know something about it.

 

MOO

 

+1 Very well said TE :)

 

-1 Totally disagree!

 

...................respectfully, but still in disagreement!

Are you not also sitting in judgment? Painting the sometimes strong discourse on this forum with such a wide brush is unfair.

I love your attitude and do agree that it would be nice if everything was a bed of roses, but sadly, that is not the case. Policies announced without input and unanswered questions are the root cause of the problems here. Your input is welcome, but as you 'consider earthcaching' think about some of us who are already doing it and how much we love the hobby. When a good thing is tinkered with without concern of the EC community being accounted for, disagreement can and most often arises. Losing an argument can be problematic of course, but not even being allowed to join the debate is much worse! That occurs when changes are made without input.

Most of us who perhaps at times get carried away, aren't doing it just to vent. It is the result of being shut out and leaving questions unanswered.

Please join us and enjoy the earthcaching aspect of geocaching. Earthcaches are a little more complex than the run-of-the-mill geocache and maybe our problems are just a little more difficult too!

Thanks.

Yay! I'm still at 0! (My bed of roses has thorns, BTW)Judgment is what people do every day of their lives. I judge that my time is not well spent reading non productive posts, so I decide not to do it (that is just an example, not directed at any specific post). You judge just by your disagreement. People judge. Why this seems to be a dirty word to some, I don't know. It's how we manage our lives.

 

Now, I don't believe I painted anything with a wide brush. I have no problem with strong discourse, and agree with the positions on some of the "hot" topics. I am just saying I would prefer to see thread titles like "Looking for solutions to English/Alternate Language", so if I were interested, I could read it, and if not, I don't find that topic taking some other thread off topic (not that I saw that happening, I'm just using that as an example-I would actually read that thread because it is interesting). Maybe I AM too Pollyanna, but I have seen it work on forums where people use really descriptive titles for the threads, keep the threads on topic, say why they disagree with someone/something by using facts (even the fact of, "This takes to dang long to do it this way, how about a compromise?"), do not throw a reference to their pet topic into everyone else's topic, and it works. Most people here seem pretty intelligent, does anyone really think that by telling someone "I'm being ignored and it's your fault and I want you to fix it!", it's going to make them want to help you? Think about the last time someone demanded something of you, all the time telling you you messed it all up and you're not taking my feelings into consideration. You wanted to step right up and help them out, right? (I didn't think so).

 

Again, I get that this is MOO. Just telling it from the perspective of a newcomer, who likes intelligent discourse (strong is fine, rude is not, in my book). And wondering if this is the impression that anyone really wants to give to some newcomers.

 

Of course, not caring about my opinion is always an option. :D I've said my piece, and unless I said something really stupid and didn't realize it (which often happens), I'll be done now.

 

Except to say that I am very impressed with the articulation, issues listed in a factual way, with reasons why they are issues, and consideration that I have seen on this thread. Now that is worth a read!

Link to comment

I have not been unprofessional in my dealings with you.

 

You are attempting to control the discourse by closing threads and trying to relegate discussions to private emails instead of allowing geocachers to communicate with each other. The folly in this is that you can't really control the discourse, and geocachers will find other places to have these discussions where Groundspeak's representatives are less able to provide feedback.

 

There is no intended deception in the text of the newsletter.

 

The deception may be unintentional, but it exists. If the "spirit" of the guidelines is that no photos may be required, ever, then the guidelines should reflect that clearly in their wording instead of making a statement about exceptions. It seems very clear that exceptions will not be granted, despite what the guidelines say.

 

Previous Earthcaching guideline changes were problematic at least in part because there was no attempt to convey the changes to the larger community. Sharing false information with the community - whether this was intentional or not - is no better.

 

A reminder that our feedback site is a good idea to post suggestions, such as follow up newsletter articles about EarthCaching.

 

Again, a clear attempt to control the public discourse. The forum should be a place for geocachers to have informal discussions that can be used to form thoughtful, considered suggestions on the feedback site. The forum is more conducive to nuanced discussion, while the feedback site is better for ideas that have been through the rigors of public scrutiny on the forum.

 

The forum is also a far more appropriate place for a "this bugs me, does it bug anybody else?" thread than the feedback site.

Link to comment

I asked a non-German Earthcache reviewer (a couple of months ago, i.e. when still the old guidelines were in use, but the new language guideline was already announced in this forum) what my chances would be to get a English only EC published. He was so kind to reply and told me that he could not give me a definitive answer as he is not in charge of my country and that it depends on local habits. Of course I could ask each of the (I think currently four German Earthcaches reviewers), but I am quite sure that the reply will be that I need to write a German version and that they are not willing to invest more work than necessary (they are faster with reading German texts and they know that I am able to provide a German text and moreover, the German geocaching community is quite focused on German).

 

Hi cezanne,

 

My understanding of the language guideline is that an EarthCache must be written in the local language. I was also under the impression that German was the official language in Austria. I live in Canada where we have two official languages - English and French. I would assume someone could submit an EarthCache in either language. The reviewer could request a translation if they were not fluent in one of those languages. However, someone could not submit an EarthCache that was only written in German as the locals would not be able to understand it. I don't think the language requirements reflect the Reviewer's language choice, unless as I stated, they need it translated to assist with the review process.

 

There are some countries where multiple languages are spoken, whether they are the official languages or not. I have a friend in Belgium who is probably more fluent in English than he is in his native language (Dutch). I would think exceptions could be requested in countries where English is widely spoken, but I do not know if that is the case for Austria. If you submitted an English only EarthCache in Austria, what percentage of the population would be able to understand it?

Link to comment

 

My understanding of the language guideline is that an EarthCache must be written in the local language. I was also under the impression that German was the official language in Austria.

 

Though this is not my main topic, let me answer your question:

German is one of them, another one is Slovenian which is the native language of quite a considerable group in Carinthia. I am quite sure that none of the Earth cache reviewers is able to deal with a Slovenian only cache. (There is no Slovenian reviewer - almost all caches in Slovenia do have an English description as well.)

 

The situation in Switzerland is even more complex: There are four official languages and three of them are not handled by the German Earthcache reviewers. Yet, the countries have arbitrarily been assigned to the German reviewers.

geoaware at one place wrote that he expects an Earthcache in Italy to be in Italian ignoring the fact that German is an official language in South Tyrol (the language of the majority and not a minoritiers language). There are many other issues with "the local language" which are well beyond special cases that need to be handled on a case to case basis. For example, based on the guidelines a Slovenian only Earthcache description in Austria would have needed to be accepted (though less than 1% of the Austrian cachers are able to read Slovenian while more then 95% are able to read English). It appears to me that the new language guideline is not well-thought up.

 

However, someone could not submit an EarthCache that was only written in German as the locals would not be able to understand it. I don't think the language requirements reflect the Reviewer's language choice, unless as I stated, they need it translated to assist with the review process.

 

On the one hand gc.com even publishes German only caches in Egypt (I am not approving this type of decision) and on the other hand,

I have already mentioned that caches with English description only are approved without any problems in Austria.

The questions asked in Earthcaches are not that much different than questions asked in mystery caches or tasks descriptions in

multi caches which are much more popular in Austria and Germany than e.g. the US (e.g. in Vienna only 39% of the caches are traditionals).

 

So far no one came along with any argument why suddenly Earthcaches should be treated differently than all other caches at gc.com.

I started geocachig back in 2002 because it is an international activity and because its associated language is English. I never would started to geocache in case the activity would have been a local one taking place in German (I am also writing my logs in English.) I am not willing to let someone force me to use German. When I provide a German translation (which I have done for most of my caches), this will always be a free decision and nothing anyone will force me to do.

Of course not all cachers are fluent in English (though it is a compulsory subject at school), but typically the tasks in my caches are what makes them suitable only a for a subgroup of cachers and not the language. It's similar to a climbing cache - it can be in any language of the world - I will not care as I am not able to climb.

 

Before Austria got its own reviewers, my favourite gc.com reviewer Erik has been reviewer for Austria for many years. While Erik was very popular in Austria, the German reviewers have never been popular in Austria. This is an another reason why I am not at all happy with the situation that the German Earthcache reviewers are automatically assigned to ECs from Austria and Switzerland. Somehow Austria is treated like little Germany and whatever is decided for Germany has to hold for Austria. I am fed up by what I perceive as German predominance on gc.com (apart from the US of course). On the Earthcache site and some other places exactly one translation is offered and this is a German one. Germany is also the only country apart the US where each state has been assigned a separate souvenir (I am not interested at all in souvenirs).

 

Ok, the paragraphs above somehow went off-topic. As I already explained at other places, the language issue is important also in many other contexts. Take e.g. the example of terratin I brought up before. Of course a Danish cacher could come up with a Danish translation, but not anyone is willing to publish a translation on his cache page where he is not able to check every detail of the translation.

I am living rather close to the Slovenian border, but I do not speak Slovenian. I never would add a Slovenian version of a cache description to a cache page of mine where the text on the page is of relevance (for some traditionals it is not of relevance, for an Earthcache which is a scientific text at a low level it is of relevance).

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

Cezanne,

Just to make sure I understand. You believe that the following rule is unfair:

 

f2.8 Language

EarthCaches need to be in one of the official local languages. Multiple languages is encouraged. However poor translations using online tools may not be acceptable. You may be asked to provide the text in English to allow review.

 

And you do not believe that a cache (of any kind) should be in any specific language, except the language that the cache creator chooses, no matter what country the cache is located in. (Yes, No)

 

You also think it is unfair for a German reviewer to be assigned to Austria, just because the official language of Austria is German. (Yes, No)

 

And you do not think it is right, even though these are the rules, to require people to abide by them, partially because some people haven't and no one has said anything about it (Yes, No) Or you think that there needs to be some appeal process with exceptions (Yes, No) Or that if Egypt can have German only caches, why can't everyone else? (or whatever language they choose) (Yes, No) I'm a little unclear on this point, because if the rules say you have to do it, you should do it even if someone else got away with not doing it, IMO, or find a way to officially not do it.

 

And you feel like there isn't even an opportunity to plead your case with a rationale as to why you, specifically (or anyone else non-specifically), should not have to provide a translation in the official local language of Austria, because certain areas within Austria have their own local language.(Yes, No)

 

Finally, you are upset because the rules for EarthCaching are different than for GeoCaching regarding language.(Yes, No)

 

That's what I kind of got out of that, if I didn't get it right, feel free to clarify.

 

One of the issues I see here is the generalized words "local language". How local is local? Perhaps that should be specified more carefully in the rules(as in "the local language of the Country" or the "local language of the region", or the "local language of the city"). Heck, I can't always understand people from Alabama or New York, and sometimes it is just a lingo disconnect. (You say Iced Tea in Arizona, California, Nevada, Washinton, or Oregon and you get unsweetened cold tea. You say Iced Tea in the southeast states and you get a VERY sweet, slightly tea tasting drink. Not sure about Florida, though)

 

The other issue I see here is that EarthCaching IS different from GeoCaching. When I GeoCache, I can do it without any words what-so-ever. I can do it on coords alone. But that isn't true of EarthCaching. With an EC, I have to be able to read what the cache is about, what it is I am going to do, and how I can log it. There is definitely a language component to it, so they aren't really the same. Having the language requirement makes a little more sense for an EC than a GC.

 

So I will never place a cache in a German speaking country because I only know the German words to Silent Night (learned phonetically) and "Ach du Lieber Himmel" because a friend used to say it all the time.

Link to comment

Respectfully, Touchstone's last post is good advice to those who feel GSA and/or Groundspeak are unresponsive to discussions held within these forums.

 

Every EarthCache submitted is unique, and is reviewed on an individual basis. GSA and Groundspeak cannot anticipate every individual possibility, ruling, exception, etc., which is why we have a dedicated team of volunteer EarthCache reviewers. Members of the volunteer EarthCache review team will work hard to help you through the submittal and publishing process.

 

I appreciate that and know that I can get help with any questions I have with individual earrthcaches. In the past, I have sought clarifications on one or two things and always have gotten a prompt response.

 

For me, where these forums have gotten a little heavy-handed as of late is with issues of policy -- photography, earthcaches on tribal lands, and the like. On those type of issues it is sometimes hard to get clarification about why the policy is deemed necessary or the Groundspeak moderator has simply determined that the matter has been dealt with and closed the thread -- leaving outstanding questions in any event. I realize that there is a balance between administration and community. But I would like to think that both the GSA and Groundspeak would appreciate the value of debate and discussion -- yet when threads are abruptly closed in this forum (particularly in contrast to other forums on this site), it feels less like community and more like fiat.

Link to comment

I apologize for going off topic again, but I would like to address cezanne's comments.

 

First of all, I can certainly sympathize with you. Canada is considered the 51st State by many Americans, so I can understand how you feel in Austria being compared to or lumped in with Germany. The fact remains that Germany and the USA are really the big players in geocaching these days. Obviously it would be difficult to provide a translation in every language, so you would target the ones with the highest numbers of players. Right now, that is English and German. It makes sense to me that the German reviewers would cover other german speaking countries.

 

I don't mean any offence by this, but it seems that your stance on the language issue is just a matter of stubborness on your part. You have the ability to provide the information in german to help the reviewers, but you choose not to out of principle. I'm all for having principles (my caches are written using the Queen's English, not American English, "colour" not "color" for example), but that doesn't make it Groundspeak's fault, or the GSA's fault, or the Reviewer's Fault that your EarthCaches cannot be published.

 

There are many countries where the general language guideline is an issue due to the multiple languages being spoken. Obviously there are, and have to be, exceptions in some cases. I would take offence to a german only EarthCache being published in Canada, but if it was french only I would understand. I do not speak french even though it is one of our official languages.

Link to comment

I, for one, come for friendly advice. And intelligent and respectful discussion. And information. I do not come for (what is in my opinion) several of the same thread discussion disguised as different ones. Nor do I come to read that a poster thinks that some rule/person/decision/etc is unfair/terrible/idiotic/etc just because that poster does not agree with whatever it is. Ad Nauseum. I prefer people to say their piece and be done unless someone asks for clarification. I like a good sense of humor, or even good sense, which I sometimes find lacking in posts.

 

We all come for different reasons. What I (personally) would like to see, instead of complaints would be a genuine seeking of resolving a problem, not just a venting session. But I'm new here, and my impression so far is that there are some people who are just ticked off and I (personally) wish they could have their own "I'm just ticked off" thread, so those who don't want to read all that stuff, know where it is and can avoid it. But that is just my impression, as a person considering EarthCaching and wanting to know something about it.

 

MOO

 

+1 Very well said TE :)

 

-1 Totally disagree!

 

...................respectfully, but still in disagreement!

Are you not also sitting in judgment? Painting the sometimes strong discourse on this forum with such a wide brush is unfair.

I love your attitude and do agree that it would be nice if everything was a bed of roses, but sadly, that is not the case. Policies announced without input and unanswered questions are the root cause of the problems here. Your input is welcome, but as you 'consider earthcaching' think about some of us who are already doing it and how much we love the hobby. When a good thing is tinkered with without concern of the EC community being accounted for, disagreement can and most often arises. Losing an argument can be problematic of course, but not even being allowed to join the debate is much worse! That occurs when changes are made without input.

Most of us who perhaps at times get carried away, aren't doing it just to vent. It is the result of being shut out and leaving questions unanswered.

Please join us and enjoy the earthcaching aspect of geocaching. Earthcaches are a little more complex than the run-of-the-mill geocache and maybe our problems are just a little more difficult too!

Thanks.

Yay! I'm still at 0! (My bed of roses has thorns, BTW)Judgment is what people do every day of their lives. I judge that my time is not well spent reading non productive posts, so I decide not to do it (that is just an example, not directed at any specific post). You judge just by your disagreement. People judge. Why this seems to be a dirty word to some, I don't know. It's how we manage our lives.

 

Now, I don't believe I painted anything with a wide brush. I have no problem with strong discourse, and agree with the positions on some of the "hot" topics. I am just saying I would prefer to see thread titles like "Looking for solutions to English/Alternate Language", so if I were interested, I could read it, and if not, I don't find that topic taking some other thread off topic (not that I saw that happening, I'm just using that as an example-I would actually read that thread because it is interesting). Maybe I AM too Pollyanna, but I have seen it work on forums where people use really descriptive titles for the threads, keep the threads on topic, say why they disagree with someone/something by using facts (even the fact of, "This takes to dang long to do it this way, how about a compromise?"), do not throw a reference to their pet topic into everyone else's topic, and it works. Most people here seem pretty intelligent, does anyone really think that by telling someone "I'm being ignored and it's your fault and I want you to fix it!", it's going to make them want to help you? Think about the last time someone demanded something of you, all the time telling you you messed it all up and you're not taking my feelings into consideration. You wanted to step right up and help them out, right? (I didn't think so).

 

Again, I get that this is MOO. Just telling it from the perspective of a newcomer, who likes intelligent discourse (strong is fine, rude is not, in my book). And wondering if this is the impression that anyone really wants to give to some newcomers.

 

Of course, not caring about my opinion is always an option. :D I've said my piece, and unless I said something really stupid and didn't realize it (which often happens), I'll be done now.

 

Except to say that I am very impressed with the articulation, issues listed in a factual way, with reasons why they are issues, and consideration that I have seen on this thread. Now that is worth a read!

Not caring about your opinion is not an option for me. While we may or may not agree point for point, you seem to care and have as much right to express your opinion as the next cacher. I guess I am a little jaded because of being around so long and getting exasperated because of a perception (right or wrong) that our input is not valued.

Maybe you can lend a settling influence on us!

Thanks. ;)

Link to comment

I just want to let you all know that read each and every post in these forums and consider the arguments that are put forward. Many of the comments and discussions lead us to make adjustments to the way we deal with the review process and how we have adjusted guidelines. That said, I do not necessarily respond to every comment or even every thread...but that does not mean they are not read. Your should also know that I will not respond to "demands for geoaware" to respond as I personally find such demands rude (even if you don't). I also feel that I or the EarthCache team have no obligation to respond to individual issues in these forums when you can take those up with us through the channels all mentioned in this thread. That is not an attempt to stifle good and robust discussions - it is just the correct mechanism to get things done at an individual case-by-case basis.

 

So, just because your point of view does not solicit a response from me does not mean you are being ignored so please don't be offended. We do respond when we feel it clarifies the discussions...but once we do, we will not comment again in multiple threads about the same issue.

 

But I also offer this pearl of wisdom.....you are just a few people out of a massive amount of people who are involved in EarthCaching. Your comments and suggestions - the vast majority being constructive - are never taken in isolation, but we consider the large number of people who we deal with on a daily basis. I often ask the advice of respected long-time EarthCachers. We do this to be fair to the vast majority rather than seen just to pandering to those who use and enjoy the forums. Please do not think that your voice is not heard....but also realize that you are not the vast majority of people involved in this great game.

 

This thread was asking people to be respectful of each other (and also of us) as personal attacks really does not add to the discussion. Think before you type...and remember that we are all working together to make EarthCaches better. That is not a request for you not to voice concerns or not to disagree with each others points of view....but you can do that with respect for each other.

 

The so called "TPTB" love this game as much as you do...and we want to see it move forward with your considered and respectful input (positive or negative).

Link to comment

[snip]

But I also offer this pearl of wisdom.....you are just a few people out of a massive amount of people who are involved in EarthCaching. [snip]

 

I suspect that are MANY "lurkers" out there - EarthCachers in body and soul like myself - who read ALL the Earthcaching threads and posts with interest on a daily basis. The fact that we do not comment on posts does not necessarily mean that we do not exist as the above might imply. Because I live in a remote part of the world with extremely limited access to EC's whenever I travel EC's are on the top of my list to find in whatever country I visit. I might pass by 300 traditional caches when traveling but will never disregard an EC.

 

Unfortunately there is no way of measuring how many cachers are "lurkers" on the EarthCache Forum but I am sure that there are many.

 

Please don't get me wrong - I value any and all comments made by yourself, reviewers and moderators. It definitely shows that threads are in fact being read which is a huge plus point in my book.

 

BTW, in light of many of the posts that have been made, especially over the the past few weeks, I am sure that if the credentials of the EC Reviewers were to be made known to everyone then I am sure much of the discourse could be resolved? Or am I off the mark with this assumption? Only asking. :ph34r:

Link to comment

I live in Canada where we have two official languages - English and French. I would assume someone could submit an EarthCache in either language.

 

and how is it decided which is local?

 

even though we have two official languages they are not mandatory, so often times going across the "border" i don't understand a word of the french descriptions

 

what puzzles me the most in the new guideline is this sentence

"You may be requested to provide the notes in English to assist with the reviewing process."

 

makes no sense whatsoever, if the reviewer can't understand the local language how can he/she know that the english notes are the same as the ones in the local language?

 

and while on the subject of guidelines making no sense, can someone explain to me what is the point of obtaining the approval of the landowners?

 

an earthcache does not interfere with the environment, and the locations are public places, at least to my knowledge

Edited by t4e
Link to comment

I'm with KK on most of your post. It has been discussed ad naseum in most cases. That's not meant to imply that your opinion doesn't count however. I think all of us appreciate the input and discussion of issues that impact us.

 

I will point out one experience related to the following however:

 

an earthcache does not interfere with the environment...

 

In one instance, a Land Manager requested that I not post a Listing in an area that was deemed to have "unacceptable human impacts". I, of course, complied, although the area is very well traveled and popular. There may be other areas, which we as visitors, may not appreciate the potential problems, that only a Land Manager, who is there day in and day out, sees over a longer term.

 

Just my 0.02 :)

Link to comment

A reminder that our feedback site is a good idea to post suggestions, such as follow up newsletter articles about EarthCaching.

 

Interestingly, Jeremy closed a feedback topic today, stating the following:

 

"I'm updating the status 'declined' not for the suggestion itself, but because it is not a Geocaching.com feature request but a policy request. Policy and guideline discussions are better served in the forums."

 

There seems to be some confusion down at the lilypad about where we're supposed to talk about what.

Link to comment

 

and while on the subject of guidelines making no sense, can someone explain to me what is the point of obtaining the approval of the landowners?

 

an earthcache does not interfere with the environment, and the locations are public places, at least to my knowledge

 

I've just sought and received approval from Hilton Falls Conservation Authority to develop two Earthcaches in their area. I consider the Conservation Authority not as landowners (strictly speaking) rather I see them as stewards of the land. I recognize that a conservation area is developed for a variety of reasons, not least of which is to protect vulnerable habitats and species.

 

To your specific question. One could potentially find a great location for an Earthcache in a conservation area (a public place) but to access the site could require one to trek through breeding grounds of a number of species at risk, or to trample on top of protected wildflowers. I honestly believe that no geocacher would knowingly engage in such behaviour. But not every geocacher is a biologist by training (which I happen to be). Therefore the Conservation Authority, as stewards of the land (call them landowners if you like) have the responsibility to protect these species at risk. One way of doing that is by requiring us to seek their permission to develop Earthcaches, or any other type of cache, outside of these specific locations in order to ensure the continued existence of these species at risk. This is why their guidelines typically state that a cache should be no more than 1-2 m from an approved trail. Otherwise, the placement of an Earthcache, even with the best of intentions, might very well have a very significant negative impact on the environment.

Link to comment

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...
×
×
  • Create New...