EarthCache Guidelines Updates

[+Chokecherry]

Well said Chokecherry...but every cache is not for every person. No one says you need to do EarthCaches. I love puzzles but avoid many (most) puzzle caches because they are simply too hard. I'm not going to demand that the puzzles all provide answers or hints just because I think they are too hard.

 

I don't do many puzzles either.

 

If you don't want people to earth cache and have it be elitist great. I would like to do earth caches. I enjoy the ones I do. But if I'm apparently not welcome to do earth caches because "not all caches are for all people" then fine.

 

But if that is the official stance of earth cachers I would hope that is clearly posted on all earth cache pages and promoted by the overseeing group. So people don't become disenchanted and think earth caches are meant to be found by all cachers. Not just the select few.

EarthCaches are no more an elitist type of cache than are puzzles...the fact remains that I cannot solve many puzzles...does that make the owner elitist? No. You many not want to publish a photo (any photo) does that make an EarthCache owner elitist? No. It's not a big leap to state that every cache is not for every person.

 

I would occur to me if they did not want this activity to be widely accessible they would then eliminate the guideline about making them understandable by your average high school aged person.

 

I get that some earth caches I'll never be able to do. Same with some high terrain caches and many puzzle caches. That's the reality.

 

Earth caching is no different than any other cache in that some are going to be able to be found by many and someone aren't based on terrain alone.

 

But this is my issue with these forums. You go Joe Average cacher with no education in geology being told what a great hobby earth caching is and how great it is to start ot learn about geology only to come here and find posts like "all caches aren't for all people." And how exactly does one think that looks to people? This is why I regret ever coming to these forums is posts just like these because it speaks louder about the community beliefs than all the warm fuzzies on the earth caching website.

 

And as I stated before my issue isn't with taking pictures at the cache site. It was the numerous people who then made a leap from there to post pictures of yourself at the cache site. And maybe they guideline would not have been simplified to the degree it was if people hadn't spent so much trying to find ways around it. I couldn't care less if someone says take a picture of that giant rock over there. If that is what makes them happy fine. But don't demand that I be in that picture.

[+Lostby7]

Well said Chokecherry...but every cache is not for every person. No one says you need to do EarthCaches. I love puzzles but avoid many (most) puzzle caches because they are simply too hard. I'm not going to demand that the puzzles all provide answers or hints just because I think they are too hard.

 

I don't do many puzzles either.

 

If you don't want people to earth cache and have it be elitist great. I would like to do earth caches. I enjoy the ones I do. But if I'm apparently not welcome to do earth caches because "not all caches are for all people" then fine.

 

But if that is the official stance of earth cachers I would hope that is clearly posted on all earth cache pages and promoted by the overseeing group. So people don't become disenchanted and think earth caches are meant to be found by all cachers. Not just the select few.

EarthCaches are no more an elitist type of cache than are puzzles...the fact remains that I cannot solve many puzzles...does that make the owner elitist? No. You many not want to publish a photo (any photo) does that make an EarthCache owner elitist? No. It's not a big leap to state that every cache is not for every person.

 

I would occur to me if they did not want this activity to be widely accessible they would then eliminate the guideline about making them understandable by your average high school aged person.

 

I get that some earth caches I'll never be able to do. Same with some high terrain caches and many puzzle caches. That's the reality.

 

Earth caching is no different than any other cache in that some are going to be able to be found by many and someone aren't based on terrain alone.

 

But this is my issue with these forums. You go Joe Average cacher with no education in geology being told what a great hobby earth caching is and how great it is to start ot learn about geology only to come here and find posts like "all caches aren't for all people." And how exactly does one think that looks to people? This is why I regret ever coming to these forums is posts just like these because it speaks louder about the community beliefs than all the warm fuzzies on the earth caching website.

 

And as I stated before my issue isn't with taking pictures at the cache site. It was the numerous people who then made a leap from there to post pictures of yourself at the cache site. And maybe they guideline would not have been simplified to the degree it was if people hadn't spent so much trying to find ways around it. I couldn't care less if someone says take a picture of that giant rock over there. If that is what makes them happy fine. But don't demand that I be in that picture.

I'm confused, if you agree with me that all caches are not for all people why do you chastise me for stating that obvious fact? Pictures of peoples faces is crossing the privacy line and I don't believe those should be allowed, eliminating pictures of the location itself is where disagree with the new rules.

[+Sioneva]

This is getting ridiculous. Is this ever going to stop? What good is trying to drive more people away from earthcaches over this photo question? TPTB have spoken. Photos are not required. (Except of nice pears.)

 

Telling someone that earthcaching isn't for them because they may not have or may not choose to carry a camera - how is the lack of a picture going to impair their ability to absorb the geology or appreciate the beauty of the spot they have been drawn to? Presumably, the cache owner has already been there and admired the view him/herself, as have each person logging it, yes?

 

Sorry, just getting tired of the whole bloody Mt. Debacle. Can't we cork it up?

[+Lostby7]

This is getting ridiculous. Is this ever going to stop?

Just wait until Virts come back...this will all come up again.

[+Sioneva]

This is getting ridiculous. Is this ever going to stop?

Just wait until Virts come back...this will all come up again.

 

Yeah, okay. So can we drop it until then?

[Narnian Rockhound]

I sometimes get wide-ranging answers like that to the first question of my Castle Mountain Fault earthcache even though all the information required to reach the answer is provided on the cache page. However, some people are not and/or never were very good with math word problems, so I'll e-mail back a response along the lines of, "your answer of ____ isn't quite what I was looking for. Can you tell me how you arrived at it? I'll be happy to help you out if I have a starting point." That puts the ball back in the cacher's court explain their method and to try again, yet leaves the door open to receive help.

 

I recently visited a number of danieloliveira's very nicely done earthcaches in Portugal and he related to me how some cachers have real difficulty estimating the size of objects. He knows they visited the location because the accompanying photos are correct, but they'll say a feature was three meters tall when it was thirty meters or that a fossil was ten centimeters long when it's really only 20 millimeters. He's attempted to remedy that situation by providing ranges of sizes to choose from that provide the cacher with the right order of magnitude to choose from.

 

Having run into the wall (literally and figuratively) on some earthcaches where I just didn't "get it," I try to empathize with with cachers that don't "get" my caches, help them along, and sometimes adjust my cache page in recognition that perhaps I didn't get my write up correct on the first attempt(s).

 

I completely agree with the sentiments you express here, and I've done much of that as well. I definitely want to be helpful as a cache owner, and not some kind of "bouncer" keeping people out of the club! But it's going to be a lot harder to help people & work with them when they don't post photos and you as the cache owner have serious questions about whether they actually visited the site.

 

If someone completes the logging requirements correctly, then there's no problem. It is those that don't do this correctly where it will be more difficult. And maybe the geoaware folks don't really care how well we as owners verify finds, I don't know. Some guidance there would be helpful.

[+Lostby7]

This is getting ridiculous. Is this ever going to stop?

Just wait until Virts come back...this will all come up again.

 

Yeah, okay. So can we drop it until then?

We can try...

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Well said Chokecherry...but every cache is not for every person. No one says you need to do EarthCaches. I love puzzles but avoid many (most) puzzle caches because they are simply too hard. I'm not going to demand that the puzzles all provide answers or hints just because I think they are too hard.

 

I don't do many puzzles either.

 

If you don't want people to earth cache and have it be elitist great. I would like to do earth caches. I enjoy the ones I do. But if I'm apparently not welcome to do earth caches because "not all caches are for all people" then fine.

 

But if that is the official stance of earth cachers I would hope that is clearly posted on all earth cache pages and promoted by the overseeing group. So people don't become disenchanted and think earth caches are meant to be found by all cachers. Not just the select few.

 

You totally miss the point! No one is talking about earthcaching is only for the elite whomever they are? The point is not all caches are for all cachers. I have almost grown to hate those tiny, tiny micros, but I don't have to do them and the CO doesn't owe me explicit directions to find them!

A photo requirement is far from being elitist just as they (the photos) were never meant to signify "elite only" when used with virtual caches. The photo is only "a" proof of visit and/or a step in the completion of the educational tasks.

Above all, we want you to have fun and see a wonder of Nature.

 

P.S. I am editing this post to give you an example of one of our ECs which require photos. It is a large outcrop with a diamictite base and several cobbles or drop stones of various types of rock. The cacher is given a description and then asked to find and photograph a few examples of the different drop stones. That's not elitist. it's educational and if someone wants to object, then archive it!

Edited December 30, 2010 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+geodarts]

This change disappoints me. While I have never agreed with a requirement of taking a picture of yourself or your gpsr, taking a picture of the geological formation seems like it should be related to an essential part of the earthcache - recognizing, considering, and taking time to stop and think about what you are seeing.

 

But the practical effect seems like it will make earthcaching more contentious. I looked at a listing yesterday that said the "optional" photo might be necessary to save your log. And I have done one earthcache that included a task to measure the elevation with your gpsr - without the "optional" photo my log would have been deleted because the elevation my gpsr took was not within 25 feet of the owner's. So I am not sure when an optional photo is optional or how arbitary an earthcache developer might be. I am afraid people will become more arbitrary.

 

All I know is that the first time my log is deleted will be the last time I will earthcache.

Edited December 30, 2010 by mulvaney

[+narcissa]

All I know is that the first time my log is deleted will be the last time I will earthcache.

 

This seems counter-intuitive. Most Earthcache owners aren't deleters. Depriving yourself of all future Earthcaches because one cache owner was a jerk doesn't make any sense, and it certainly won't affect a cache owner who treated you badly.

 

The best revenge is living well. If I ever get deleted, I'll keep finding Earthcaches, and I'll keep rewarding the good ones with favourite points!

[jholly]

All I know is that the first time my log is deleted will be the last time I will earthcache.

 

This seems counter-intuitive. Most Earthcache owners aren't deleters. Depriving yourself of all future Earthcaches because one cache owner was a jerk doesn't make any sense, and it certainly won't affect a cache owner who treated you badly.

 

The best revenge is living well. If I ever get deleted, I'll keep finding Earthcaches, and I'll keep rewarding the good ones with favourite points!

I don't know, from reading some of the threads in this forum seems like there is an abundance of jerks in the earthcache owning community.

[+Lostby7]

Name calling is not necessary or condusive to a friendly discourse.

[+Sioneva]

Name calling is not necessary or condusive to a friendly discourse.

 

(even if it is true)

[+geodarts]

This seems counter-intuitive. Most Earthcache owners aren't deleters. Depriving yourself of all future Earthcaches because one cache owner was a jerk doesn't make any sense, and it certainly won't affect a cache owner who treated you badly.

 

The real point is not my personal threshhold, but whether owners will tighten their logging standards (as some have indicated they will do); or whether a photo is really optional if it is the only way of completing an earthcache if arbitrary standards are imposed. I spend a lot of time at earthcaches and enjoy the educational aspect, but I would not feel deprived if it no longer was fun.

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

If not for control freaks deleting logs there would be no need to change the requirements. You brougt this on yourselves by your actions. I do not have a camera anymore, haven't had one in four years, not even in my phone. Maybe I can look for an earthcache now.

[Narnian Rockhound]

All I know is that the first time my log is deleted will be the last time I will earthcache.

 

This seems counter-intuitive. Most Earthcache owners aren't deleters. Depriving yourself of all future Earthcaches because one cache owner was a jerk doesn't make any sense, and it certainly won't affect a cache owner who treated you badly.

 

The best revenge is living well. If I ever get deleted, I'll keep finding Earthcaches, and I'll keep rewarding the good ones with favourite points!

 

Good words! Live well! Shrug off the bad & move on with a positive attitude.

[+Lostby7]

If not for control freaks deleting logs there would be no need to change the requirements. You brougt this on yourselves by your actions. I do not have a camera anymore, haven't had one in four years, not even in my phone. Maybe I can look for an earthcache now.

I believe the control freaks you refer to are the folks who were required by the guidelines to verify that EarthCaches were visited and that the answers demonstrated gained knowledge...those freaks right? There may have been a few folks out there who took their responsibility a bit too seriously but please do not make blanket statements condemning all EarthCache owners.

[+nanncyan]

I have only done one Earth Cache. It was fun to do because I had to let the owner know what was on a sign and how long a bridge was. It was easy to do and I had a good time. I would have done more but when I looked at others they required pictures. Since I'm one of the average Joe cachers, I don't know how to post a picture. I have put all other Earth Caches on my ignore list. Now that I no longer have to post a picture or get on the internet to search for answers, I can do these again. I will try a few to see if Cache owners delete logs because no picture is posted. If they do I won't turn them in to Groundspeak. I have been ignoring them for years and can continue to do so. I think some owners are very stubborn and will fight this change in the rules. Unfortunately this will lead to some contention between owners and seekers. That is what happens when some try to make caching a competition instead of just a fun activity. I may even place an Earth Cache now.

[+Touchstone]

I may even place an Earth Cache now.

 

That's the best post I've seen so far

 

Besides looking over the EC Guidelines (Earthcache Guidelines), I would also recommend glancing at the so called, "Best 10 List"on the main page of the GSA site. While most of us will never reach that caliber of submission, it does offer some useful guidance on what is viewed as a great submission.

 

Best of luck and let us know how it goes

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

If not for control freaks deleting logs there would be no need to change the requirements. You brougt this on yourselves by your actions. I do not have a camera anymore, haven't had one in four years, not even in my phone. Maybe I can look for an earthcache now.

I believe the control freaks you refer to are the folks who were required by the guidelines to verify that EarthCaches were visited and that the answers demonstrated gained knowledge...those freaks right? There may have been a few folks out there who took their responsibility a bit too seriously but please do not make blanket statements condemning all EarthCache owners.

 

You bet! We were required to verify that the ECs were visited. A little known fact, while photos have become so distasteful all you have to do is look at the very first ECs and you will see where the 'old' requirement came from!

Good then, bad now, why? Oh yes someone said the photos were ALR tasks, but then there are those pesky required questions? ALR type requirements, of course they are! Maybe GS can address them and eliminate all facets of the ALR approach in earthcaching. It is absolutely wrong to call photos ALR type requirements and avoid addressing the same thing with the questions! As Paul Harvey once said, "here is the rest of the story" and the chapter that is so carefully avoided is those educational tasks! If you eliminate one, then it is only logical to eliminate the other.

For those who want to throw stones and call names like "control freaks", instead of the criticism, try developing an EC or even finding one before you overreact! Thanks.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

I may even place an Earth Cache now.

 

That's the best post I've seen so far

 

Besides looking over the EC Guidelines (Earthcache Guidelines), I would also recommend glancing at the so called, "Best 10 List"on the main page of the GSA site. While most of us will never reach that caliber of submission, it does offer some useful guidance on what is viewed as a great submission.

 

Best of luck and let us know how it goes

I am the first to admit, those so called top ten ECs that you refer to are really nice, but you and others overlook one fact. Most are in violation of the guidelines! I have the methodology to test reading levels and virtually everyone of those ECs test out at a 12th grade plus level.

I do agree that most will not reach that caliber since most don't read nor write at that level!

Maybe that's another guideline that needs revisiting???

[+Touchstone]

Maybe that's another guideline that needs revisiting???

 

I couldn't agree with you more, although perhaps not "revisiting" as much as applying it properly. There's probably a tendency with the Reviewers to look at some of those and merely say, "...well that's sufficient.." rather than judging the content at the level the Guidelines suggest.

 

Making the process approachable to all those that wish to participate is always something I can support.

[+GEO WALKER]

If not for control freaks deleting logs there would be no need to change the requirements. You brougt this on yourselves by your actions. I do not have a camera anymore, haven't had one in four years, not even in my phone. Maybe I can look for an earthcache now.

 

As a CO it is our responsibility to ensure the requirements are followed. Now in your view does this make us a “control freak” if they are not?

If you are going to “play” any “game” you should do so by following the rules of that “game”. Just how can someone give you 100% when you only meeting 75% of the requirements. You’re sounding like a spoiled child.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Maybe that's another guideline that needs revisiting???

 

I couldn't agree with you more, although perhaps not "revisiting" as much as applying it properly. There's probably a tendency with the Reviewers to look at some of those and merely say, "...well that's sufficient.." rather than judging the content at the level the Guidelines suggest.

 

Making the process approachable to all those that wish to participate is always something I can support.

We are in total agreement. "Applying it properly" or another way of putting it, applying it consistantly explains many of the disputes on this board.

 

P.S. I still want the archived ECs unarchived......he, he. lol

signed,

Don, full of windmill splinters, Quixote

[+geodarts]

Since I'm one of the average Joe cachers, I don't know how to post a picture.

 

Regardless of whether the photo is optional, it can be a fun part of recording your experience -- and is often required for virtuals. If you have a camera, posting a picture is simply a matter of uploading the photo by clicking the "upload image" link in the right hand corner after you submit a log. There are many people here, in the tech forum, or elsewhere on the forums who can help you should you ever run into a problem with the site.

[Brad_W]

P.S. I still want the archived ECs unarchived......he, he. lol

signed,

Don, full of windmill splinters, Quixote

Let's drop the campaign to have the Earthcaches unarchived. It's not going to happen.

[Brad_W]

If not for control freaks deleting logs there would be no need to change the requirements. You brougt this on yourselves by your actions. I do not have a camera anymore, haven't had one in four years, not even in my phone. Maybe I can look for an earthcache now.

There is a lot of good discussion about Earthcaches and the associated guidelines in this forum. Please don't derail it with personal attacks, finger pointing or judgmental statements.

[+Stuey]

That said, you are more than welcome to ask cachers to provide a photograph, but the request must be optional and that you can't delete a log if a person does not provide a photograph.

 

What a ridiculous change. I'm giving very serious consideration to archive my Fossil Hunt earthcache as without the photo I have no idea whether they've bothered (or managed) to actually find a fossil. They could just say "I found a 30mm amonite" rather than persevere to find an actual specimen and take a photo of it with their GPS.

 

I can't believe that *any* cachers don't have something able to take a photo with (whether camera or phone). What is the logic behind this change?

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

P.S. I still want the archived ECs unarchived......he, he. lol

signed,

Don, full of windmill splinters, Quixote

Let's drop the campaign to have the Earthcaches unarchived. It's not going to happen.

The last mention of the un archive one was a joke! That's what all this means!

"he, he. lol

signed,

Don, full of windmill splinters, Quixote"

Edited December 31, 2010 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[Brad_W]

P.S. I still want the archived ECs unarchived......he, he. lol

signed,

Don, full of windmill splinters, Quixote

Let's drop the campaign to have the Earthcaches unarchived. It's not going to happen.

The last mention of the un archive one was a joke! That's what all this means!

"he, he. lol

signed,

Don, full of windmill splinters, Quixote"

Understood, Konnarock Kid & Marge. My post was intended for the general audience of this thread and not specifically to poke you in the eye. Maybe you can use it to explain the pirate's eye patch.

 

edit - added missing smiley

Edited December 31, 2010 by Brad_W

[+nanncyan]

That said, you are more than welcome to ask cachers to provide a photograph, but the request must be optional and that you can't delete a log if a person does not provide a photograph.

 

What a ridiculous change. I'm giving very serious consideration to archive my Fossil Hunt earthcache as without the photo I have no idea whether they've bothered (or managed) to actually find a fossil. They could just say "I found a 30mm amonite" rather than persevere to find an actual specimen and take a photo of it with their GPS.

 

I can't believe that *any* cachers don't have something able to take a photo with (whether camera or phone). What is the logic behind this change?

I see you already archived your Earth Cache. That's too bad because it looked like those who did it really enjoyed your cache. I found a fossilize vertebra in my gravel driveway many years ago. I still have it. My wish is that you wouldn't let the dishonest cachers ruin the fun you have made available to so many honest ones. There are always those that have a different agenda than ours. I think the key is to ignore them and continue to have fun with this activity in spite of them.

[+nanncyan]

Since I'm one of the average Joe cachers, I don't know how to post a picture.

 

Regardless of whether the photo is optional, it can be a fun part of recording your experience -- and is often required for virtuals. If you have a camera, posting a picture is simply a matter of uploading the photo by clicking the "upload image" link in the right hand corner after you submit a log. There are many people here, in the tech forum, or elsewhere on the forums who can help you should you ever run into a problem with the site.

I do know many are very helpful to those like me that are not computer savvy. The problem is me. I spent over an hour on the phone to Garmin trying to figure out how to delete geocaches from my new Nuvi. Thank goodness for their patience. Being older, I don't seem to catch on as easily as I used to. My cell phone does not have photo capabilities. With the camera, I would have to hook it up to the computer, then save pictures. I have to search to find where the pictures went, then try to put them into the log. With all that work I just ignore Earth Caches and Virtuals that require pictures. I'm not angry pictures are required, I just get too frustrated. Thanks to all who try to help but I am a lost cause.

[+Touchstone]

That said, you are more than welcome to ask cachers to provide a photograph, but the request must be optional and that you can't delete a log if a person does not provide a photograph.

 

What a ridiculous change. I'm giving very serious consideration to archive my Fossil Hunt earthcache as without the photo I have no idea whether they've bothered (or managed) to actually find a fossil. They could just say "I found a 30mm amonite" rather than persevere to find an actual specimen and take a photo of it with their GPS.

 

I can't believe that *any* cachers don't have something able to take a photo with (whether camera or phone). What is the logic behind this change?

I see you already archived your Earth Cache. That's too bad because it looked like those who did it really enjoyed your cache. I found a fossilize vertebra in my gravel driveway many years ago. I still have it. My wish is that you wouldn't let the dishonest cachers ruin the fun you have made available to so many honest ones. There are always those that have a different agenda than ours. I think the key is to ignore them and continue to have fun with this activity in spite of them.

 

How sad It's unfortunate that the cache owner took the, "I'm going to take my toys and go home" approach to the problem.

 

It's too bad that the cache owner didn't enlist the help of some of the knowledgeable folks in this Forum to come up with some new Logging Requirements that are within the spirit of the Guidelines and merely make the picture optional.

 

My guess is they had point to make.

Edited December 31, 2010 by Touchstone

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

P.S. I still want the archived ECs unarchived......he, he. lol

signed,

Don, full of windmill splinters, Quixote

Let's drop the campaign to have the Earthcaches unarchived. It's not going to happen.

The last mention of the un archive one was a joke! That's what all this means!

"he, he. lol

signed,

Don, full of windmill splinters, Quixote"

Understood, Konnarock Kid & Marge. My post was intended for the general audience of this thread and not specifically to poke you in the eye. Maybe you can use it to explain the pirate's eye patch.

 

edit - added missing smiley

 

Thanks.

As old Don slowly retreats from the windmill enriched with only splinters, he and the campaign fade into the sunset!

[+Sioneva]

P.S. I still want the archived ECs unarchived......he, he. lol

signed,

Don, full of windmill splinters, Quixote

Let's drop the campaign to have the Earthcaches unarchived. It's not going to happen.

The last mention of the un archive one was a joke! That's what all this means!

"he, he. lol

signed,

Don, full of windmill splinters, Quixote"

Understood, Konnarock Kid & Marge. My post was intended for the general audience of this thread and not specifically to poke you in the eye. Maybe you can use it to explain the pirate's eye patch.

 

edit - added missing smiley

 

Thanks.

As old Don slowly retreats from the windmill enriched with only splinters, he and the campaign fade into the sunset!

 

Pssst! Before you go... have a donut!!

[+geodarts]

What a ridiculous change. I'm giving very serious consideration to archive my Fossil Hunt earthcache as without the photo I have no idea whether they've bothered (or managed) to actually find a fossil. They could just say "I found a 30mm amonite" rather than persevere to find an actual specimen and take a photo of it with their GPS.

 

It is too bad this cache was archived because it offered a fun and educational experience. My most recent earthcache is based on "hands on" tasks that could be similarly armchaired. I want to show the origin of the sand along a stretch of beach. Some of it came to the area during the ice ages, from the action of glaciers in the Sierras, others from erosion of coastal cliffs. So one task is to pick a location and look through a hand lens to see if you can identify grains that originated in the mountains.. The other task is to use a magnet see if you can find heavier magnetite and gold. Up until the change in guidelines, I also asked that people take a photo of rock formations at the end of the beach -- they did not have to be in the picture and I did not care about seeng their gpsr. Without the photo it will be easy for someone to state they completed the task without even visiting the site.

 

But I learned about this in a geology book and found it to be a great thing to do with my daughter. If someone decides to armchair the cache, it is their loss. In the end, most things in this game are a matter of trust. I don't check log books on my traditionals to verify that each finder actually signed the log. And in this case I will trust that people will want to do this cache for the same reasons that I found it to be fun.

[+Lostby7]

I don't check log books on my traditionals to verify that each finder actually signed the log. And in this case I will trust that people will want to do this cache for the same reasons that I found it to be fun.

I don't check my physical logs either but their very existence is enough to keep most folks honest....

[+narcissa]

 

I don't know, from reading some of the threads in this forum seems like there is an abundance of jerks in the earthcache owning community.

 

Illogical conclusion. The number of regular posters in this forum is very, very tiny compared to the number of Earthcache owners worldwide. Even if this group was randomly selected, and not self-selected, it would not be a very good sample.

[Narnian Rockhound]

I have completed modifying my 3 ECs to make the photograph requirement optional. I encourage others to do the same & comply with the new guidelines.

 

I would also ask again that GeoAware please post further clarification on when pictures can be required when writing up an EC. The information given so far is minimal and leaves a number of unanswered questions, and I don't know where else to look for better understanding.

[Narnian Rockhound]

I would like to add, in as graceful a manner as possible, that there are a couple of the "10 Best" ECs that are not in compliance with the 2011 or even the 2010 guidelines. Holding up an EC as a great example for all that violates the guidelines is a bit hypocritical. While I'm sure that there is no ill intended, these "10 Best" ECs need to lead by example if they are going to be given such a noble recognition.

 

Best to all in the New Year, and let's all keep working to make EarthCaching even better.

[+junglehair]

I don't really see what the big deal is here. Photographs have never been a requirement on traditional caches, and yet their image galaries are full of photos when the cache is located in a great area. This shouldn't change with the EarthCaches. I think people will continue to post photos if they want to - I know I will. The difference is the "if they want to" part, not because they have to. Unfortunately, there are always a few cache owners that seem to take the fun out of things by carrying it too far. I found that with the virtual caches too. Some seemed to have a power trip about them and wanted you to do things just so in order to earn the priviledge of logging their cache.

 

I would far prefer to see an EarthCache that says "it would be great if you could include a photograph of the waterfall from your visit so that we can see the changes over time/season" rather than "in order to log this EarthCache, you MUST post a photo of the waterfall".

[+GEO WALKER]

I don't really see what the big deal is here. Photographs have never been a requirement on traditional caches, and yet their image galaries are full of photos when the cache is located in a great area. This shouldn't change with the EarthCaches. I think people will continue to post photos if they want to - I know I will. The difference is the "if they want to" part, not because they have to. Unfortunately, there are always a few cache owners that seem to take the fun out of things by carrying it too far. I found that with the virtual caches too. Some seemed to have a power trip about them and wanted you to do things just so in order to earn the priviledge of logging their cache.

 

I would far prefer to see an EarthCache that says "it would be great if you could include a photograph of the waterfall from your visit so that we can see the changes over time/season" rather than "in order to log this EarthCache, you MUST post a photo of the waterfall".

Please refer to Post #73.

[+junglehair]

I don't really see what the big deal is here. Photographs have never been a requirement on traditional caches, and yet their image galaries are full of photos when the cache is located in a great area. This shouldn't change with the EarthCaches. I think people will continue to post photos if they want to - I know I will. The difference is the "if they want to" part, not because they have to. Unfortunately, there are always a few cache owners that seem to take the fun out of things by carrying it too far. I found that with the virtual caches too. Some seemed to have a power trip about them and wanted you to do things just so in order to earn the priviledge of logging their cache.

 

I would far prefer to see an EarthCache that says "it would be great if you could include a photograph of the waterfall from your visit so that we can see the changes over time/season" rather than "in order to log this EarthCache, you MUST post a photo of the waterfall".

Please refer to Post #73.

 

As an EarthCache owner, I review every log for my EarthCaches. If I don't receive an email from them within a few days of logging the cache, I send them a friendly reminder. I have never had to delete a log. This is not what I meant by a power trip. There are very few EarthCache owners that I would put in that category, but I have run across one or two. I never had photographs as a requirement to log any of my EarthCaches.

[+GEO WALKER]

I don't really see what the big deal is here. Photographs have never been a requirement on traditional caches, and yet their image galaries are full of photos when the cache is located in a great area. This shouldn't change with the EarthCaches. I think people will continue to post photos if they want to - I know I will. The difference is the "if they want to" part, not because they have to. Unfortunately, there are always a few cache owners that seem to take the fun out of things by carrying it too far. I found that with the virtual caches too. Some seemed to have a power trip about them and wanted you to do things just so in order to earn the priviledge of logging their cache.

 

I would far prefer to see an EarthCache that says "it would be great if you could include a photograph of the waterfall from your visit so that we can see the changes over time/season" rather than "in order to log this EarthCache, you MUST post a photo of the waterfall".

 

Please refer to Post #73.

 

As an EarthCache owner, I review every log for my EarthCaches. If I don't receive an email from them within a few days of logging the cache, I send them a friendly reminder. I have never had to delete a log. This is not what I meant by a power trip. There are very few EarthCache owners that I would put in that category, but I have run across one or two. I never had photographs as a requirement to log any of my EarthCaches.

Well keep in mind the "mugshot" as I like to call it was a requirement at least 3 years ago. It took me a while to master the outstretched arm self profile.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

I don't really see what the big deal is here. Photographs have never been a requirement on traditional caches, and yet their image galaries are full of photos when the cache is located in a great area. This shouldn't change with the EarthCaches. I think people will continue to post photos if they want to - I know I will. The difference is the "if they want to" part, not because they have to. Unfortunately, there are always a few cache owners that seem to take the fun out of things by carrying it too far. I found that with the virtual caches too. Some seemed to have a power trip about them and wanted you to do things just so in order to earn the priviledge of logging their cache.

 

I would far prefer to see an EarthCache that says "it would be great if you could include a photograph of the waterfall from your visit so that we can see the changes over time/season" rather than "in order to log this EarthCache, you MUST post a photo of the waterfall".

 

The quote in bold print will get us to the point. Questions have never been a requirement on traditional caches as well. Should we eliminate them? I may vote in favor of that guideline change at some later date, but for the time being the geologically oriented questions are one of the things that make earthcaches different from traditional caches. Earthcaches are different which is one of the things that make the change so abhorrent!

 

Slowly but surely we are reforming ECs into something like other caches! Personally, I don't like this metamorphosis!

 

Remember when it was suggested that ECs should have the same vacation and proximity requirements as traditional caches? That was the beginning of the change. No those changes didn't happen just maybe because the vast, vast majority responding on this board were quite vocal against such changes.

Yes, I am one who has mentioned that the questions are also ALR in their very nature and even suggested that guideline be changed because of it, but I really don't want that to happen. The questions or as others have described them, educational requirements are one of the things that set ECs apart. So do the photos, no logs to sign and the very fact that ECs must be of a geological nature. In other words, earthcaches are different and we need to keep them that way.

We never did get an explanation as to why the change other than the photos are ALR stuff, but we also know the questions are ALR stuff! I can't find the reference, but someone once said that any email requirement to a cache owner is an ALR and guess what? That's how the questions are answered in 99% of the EC cases.

This is not meant to keep folks from visiting ECs or to make them elitist and I for one feel the need of a WOW factor and keeping things simple, but dog gone it, what in the heck is happening? Are the vacation and proximity rules next to go?

Thanks.

[+geodarts]

We never did get an explanation as to why the change other than the photos are ALR stuff, but we also know the questions are ALR stuff!

 

I agree that an explanation for the changes would be helpful. When earthcaches were started, photos were required at most earthcaches.. As has been pointed out, many of the earthcaches on the "top ten" list had (and continue to have) photo requirements that include a picture of the cacher. It was later decided that photos of a person implicated privacy concerns -- I supported making such photos optional but believed that photos related to the site itself and the geology of the area were a useful part of the purposes of earthcaching. Now virtually every photo is being deemed an ALR. I have no idea why this is so.

 

To me, the real ALRs in earthcaching are the questions that have nothing to do with earth science or the educational purpose of the cache. The number of steps that are in a particular location, the color of paint on a building, or an elevation reading that must be within 25 feet of the owner's gpsr seem like they are more like ALRs in sense of traditional caching -- requirements that have nothing to do with the central task of finding the container and logging the cache (or in this case, learning geology).

 

As has been pointed out, photos are often part of a geological assessment of an area and seem much less of an ALR. I recognize that not everyone has a camera or is comfortable with learning how to use it on this site. In this sense, photos at my earthcaches were always optional. But this issue could have been solved by guidelines requiring an alternative task if a photo is required -- take a picture of the site or tell me the number of steps or the color of the paint. Many virtuals took this approach.

 

As a personal matter, I have to go back to what I wrote originally. As long as some earthcache owners expressly state on the page that optional photos might be necessary to "save the log" -- or apply this practice should their be a dispute about other answers given (often in regard to tasks that have nothing to do with geology) -- then I will consider all optional photos to be in fact (in actual practice) mandatory. Fortunately, I like taking pictures and got a new camera for Christmas (after I lost the previous one at an ec) - but I think the present approach will give rise to even more contentions than the previous system.

 

In light of this, discussion and explanation before the change went into effect, as was done with proximity and vacation guidelines, would have at least made the process seem more community-based, which I have always considered earthcachiing to be at least in part.

Edited January 2, 2011 by mulvaney

[nobby.nobbs]

I'm just airing the same views expressed by others on here.

 

I think this is a pointless and unneeded change which will only detract from the value of earthcaches.

Of course it will increase armchair caching as any question will be answerable via google, whilst this may educate the "finder" to a limited degree they will not have been to the location and experienced the information themselves at first hand.

I struggle to see any reason for it. Any reason for removing a photo requirement to prove you actually arrived and found something out for yourself.

This is a short sighted and ill conceived change that will only result in the devaluing of earthcaches.

 

But at the end of the day I, and the rest of you posting, are wasting our time. When have any of tptb ever listened to the thoughts of those who actually post on these forums?

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

I'm just airing the same views expressed by others on here.

 

I think this is a pointless and unneeded change which will only detract from the value of earthcaches.

Of course it will increase armchair caching as any question will be answerable via google, whilst this may educate the "finder" to a limited degree they will not have been to the location and experienced the information themselves at first hand.

I struggle to see any reason for it. Any reason for removing a photo requirement to prove you actually arrived and found something out for yourself.

This is a short sighted and ill conceived change that will only result in the devaluing of earthcaches.

 

But at the end of the day I, and the rest of you posting, are wasting our time. When have any of tptb ever listened to the thoughts of those who actually post on these forums?

You make some excellent points.

It is sort of ironic that the whole idea of requiring photos at earthcaches began with the very first earthcaches. Yes, even those requirements (on the first ECs) have been changed to optional and that's fine. Just leave the option of requiring photos as our choice not GSA's! If you have read previous threads that go back a couple of years, you will see that the elimination of required photos has been a goal for some time.

If the whole emphasis is on science, then why not allow "scientifically" taken photos to be required?

At the risk of inviting an audit of our caches, we have a couple of ECs where finding a geological aspect of the EC is necessary and photographing it is required! Descriptions and photos are given as to what the cacher should be looking for and to verify the identification of the the phenomena a photo is required.

Yes, ECs are different, but with the change, slowly but surely we are forcing ECs into the "traditional" cache mold!

[Brad_W]

I'm just airing the same views expressed by others on here.

 

I think this is a pointless and unneeded change which will only detract from the value of earthcaches.

Of course it will increase armchair caching as any question will be answerable via google, whilst this may educate the "finder" to a limited degree they will not have been to the location and experienced the information themselves at first hand.

I struggle to see any reason for it. Any reason for removing a photo requirement to prove you actually arrived and found something out for yourself.

This is a short sighted and ill conceived change that will only result in the devaluing of earthcaches.

 

But at the end of the day I, and the rest of you posting, are wasting our time. When have any of tptb ever listened to the thoughts of those who actually post on these forums?

You make some excellent points.

It is sort of ironic that the whole idea of requiring photos at earthcaches began with the very first earthcaches. Yes, even those requirements (on the first ECs) have been changed to optional and that's fine. Just leave the option of requiring photos as our choice not GSA's! If you have read previous threads that go back a couple of years, you will see that the elimination of required photos has been a goal for some time.

If the whole emphasis is on science, then why not allow "scientifically" taken photos to be required?

At the risk of inviting an audit of our caches, we have a couple of ECs where finding a geological aspect of the EC is necessary and photographing it is required! Descriptions and photos are given as to what the cacher should be looking for and to verify the identification of the the phenomena a photo is required.

Yes, ECs are different, but with the change, slowly but surely we are forcing ECs into the "traditional" cache mold!

A couple of quick points.

 

1. A number of folks who can be involved in the evolution of the guidelines do listen to comments expressed here. Explaining a position clearly and objectively is helpful; however, there are multiple viewpoints that are sometimes mutually exclusive of one another. For example, expecting cachers who log finds on EarthCaches to do so honestly is in conflict with expecting cachers who log finds on EarthCaches to lie about it unless various control measures are put in place by the cache owner. Personally, I believe that the great majority of EarthCache loggers do so honestly, and they should not be required to comply with stringent control measures due to concerns of inappropriate logging by the small minority. Groundspeak can and does take action in the case of persistent inappropriate loggers who are reported.

 

2. I believe EarthCaches will continue to be recognized as a category clearly separate from traditional or physical geocaches. They are an asset to the idea of getting outdoors to play and they attract a large number of visitors. While I am not an avid EarthCache fan, I have enjoyed and learned from the ones I have found. While I had to submit photos to log them, I would have enjoyed them and learned as much from them had that not been a requirement.

[+Manville Possum]

Personally, I believe that the great majority of EarthCache loggers do so honestly, and they should not be required to comply with stringent control measures due to concerns of inappropriate logging by the small minority. Groundspeak can and does take action in the case of persistent inappropriate loggers who are reported.

 

I agree with Brad.