Logging Requirements

[+Tank and Spaz]

Recently, I have been getting a slew of people complaining about the requirements for my EC's. I honestly have had people look at them who have never cached and those who have 10K+ finds, and all say they are simple, concise, and not hard. So I ask the masses, am I the only one who is getting these types of emails? Also, how long do you wait before you delete a log for someone who never answered the questions (I did send a reminder email twice)? What other thoughts do you have, so I can better develop the EC's I am writing and have?

 

Tank

[savant9]

I read through your ec's and they seem to be very straightforward/appropriate questions.

I have never received an email regarding my logging tasks, but I do keep mine very simple. Logging of EC's seems to be fairly uncommon in my immediate area, so to encourage visitors I try to make my required email questions very simple and not an exam.

I tend to vary on the length of time I wait for an email. If its a local cacher who I am familiar with I would give them a couple days then send a friendly reminder. If its a newbie I tend to send them a reminder email the same day, as they may be unfamiliar with the ALR of an EC (although assuming they read the cache page at all they should be well aware of what is required for a smilie)

[+PaneledZero]

I am in agreement with savant9. Your questions look good. I would think that if there was a problem with them the reviewer would have mentioned something prior to publishing them. Both look very interesting. I live in Washington and will have to make a trip over to Mt. St. Helens!

 

As for your question on deleting logs. I email the "finder" and if I receive no response within a week to a week in an half I will delete it. I try to give them the benefit in case they are traveling and so on. If I do have to delete a log, which I have, I leave a note on that date stating I deleted the log and why I did so. The choice is ultimately up to you though.

 

Cheers!

 

Kaleb

PaneledZero

[+Chokecherry]

As someone not educated in geology I thought your questions were fine. I might ask for clarification on what you were looking for in one of the questions so I could answer it correctly but over all I thought they weren't that complex.

[+Touchstone]

Looking at your one at Mount St. Helens, I could understand a bit of frustration of Finders based on the assumption that the information is:

 

1. Gathered from interpretive displays, and may be difficult to find if there are multiple signs, or buried deep in some text on the sign.

 

2. Requires some knowledge of Geology and/or the area beforehand in order to complete the Logging Requirements.

 

On the other hand, your one in Texas is very straightforward, and generally is what I try to achieve on my Listings, as well the type of LR's I enjoy when I'm out Finding Earthcaches. In other words, simple observation in order to reinforce the "Earthcache lesson" is always best IMHO

 

My 0.02

[+Flintstone5611]

If you find that the general reaction is a frustrated one, I would suggest increasing the difficulty level by a small amount. If it is merely an unsilent minority, then there will always be those that are not pleased, but I found that a simple reminder is all that is needed. Remember too that there are some people that are only logging it on their vacation without fulfilling all the requirements until they get home, when they can spend some more time at the computer. (that being said without actually looking at your LRs, )

 

With my first EC that only has one task in the field, people still complain about converting units from metric to imperial in the calculations, it still makes me chuckle.

[+DragonsWest]

Every Earthcache author's style will be different - I've even found some variance with the same author.

 

I categorize my EC experiences as either Positive or Negative.

 

Where material is presented in a direct manner and relies upon the finder to make observations, which require little to no outside knowledge to make, I find the experience positive.

 

Where material is presented in a meandering manner, cut -n- paste from Wikipedia or other sources without context or requires me to find information which is not available at the EC site, I find the experience negative.

 

Some of the best I've done are covered in a very tidy few paragraphs and direct me to make observations I can easily report back upon.

 

Some of the worst referred to informational plaques for me to parrot back what I read on them. Sometimes the plaques were lacking the precise wording or facts required or for me to go back home and look up some stuff on the internet. Requiring me to use my computer to answer questions is taking me away from the site, where the experience should take place. Though directing me to further info, if I'm interested in pursuing the subject further, is fine.

 

Probably best to have someone who knows little about the theme of the EC go through it and observe how easily they can go about answering it - perhaps not so easy when you are visiting in Pennsylvania, but live in Arizona.

Edited May 26, 2011 by DragonsWest

[+elvenkeeper]

Eartcaches are my very favorite kingd--I love to discover unexpected wonders. The frequent requirment of poasting a photo is really off-putting. I just don't know enough about cameras, those stick things, Windows 7, and how to transfer things from one file and form to another to succeed in posting photos. I was there. I can answer all the questions. But the technical requirements for reporting are beyond me. I am old and, apparently, not adaptable enough. I hasve spent hours on customer/tech support lines trying to figure it out to no avail. Some other cachers have given me explainations of how irt works on their systems, but it's not the same on mine.

Several very kind cache owners have permitted me to emasil the photos directly to them personally-- I know how to do that.

 

The other requirements I have found to be easy to follow and understand and quite within my scope, despite multiple disabilities. My ten-year-old great nephew can do most of the caches with no problem (and he knows how to post photos on his computer)

 

I have given up on finding caches that require photos: no point if I can't get credit and am setting myself up more frustration.

[Neos2]

Will you give it one more try?

 

I see you have a photo in your gallery. (Of yourself). Did you post that photo on a cache log? If so, you've already done it once, and can do it again!

 

The directions for how to post a photo are here. I can tell you are frustrated, but really, it's something you can learn. The only 'tricky' part is knowing where your photo is located on your computer. Trust me. That's it. I promise I'm not patronizing you, I am confident you can do this.

 

1. After you hit 'submit log entry' on your geocache (EarthCache) find log, click 'upload a photo.'

2. Click on 'browse' and select the photo from your computer you wish to upload. This is the part where you have to know where the photo is on your computer. If you can email a photo to someone you have to know how to find the photo on your computer. Know how you browse to the photo when you are attaching it to the email?--you browse to the photo the exact same way when you want to upload it to the cache log.

 

Try practicing on one of your own caches, especially if you have one that is archived or that no one else is watching. That's what I did when I first learned how to upload photos. That way, I didn't annoy anyone else with my uploading and deleting.

 

The only way it won't work is if the photo isn't saved as the right kind of file (a TIF or a JPG). Since you've said you can send the photos to others in emails, I'm betting they are saved in one of those formats. If that is the case, email me and I can tell you how to change it.

[cezanne]

The directions for how to post a photo are here. I can tell you are frustrated, but really, it's something you can learn. The only 'tricky' part is knowing where your photo is located on your computer. Trust me. That's it. I promise I'm not patronizing you, I am confident you can do this.

 

On the one hand I like your answer to elvenkeeper as I am also convinced that she can manage to solve her problem with uploading photos and I think that it will be a nice feeling for her to realize that she can achieve things that seemed so hard to her. (I know that feeling from my own experience and am thankful for the moments in my life when I received encouragement from outside.)

 

On the other hand, I am missing in your reply the fact that almost no photo requirement for Earthcaches is legitimate under the new EC guidelines.

There are so many EC owners who never took the effort to change their EC pages and to remove the photo requirement and so many visitors of ECs are not aware of the fact of the change of the guidelines.

 

To conclude, while it might make sense for elvenkeeper to try to solve her problem with uploading photos on gc.com (gc.com is much pickier on file formats than e-mail programs that pretty much allow each sort of attachment), I'd like to mention that for most ECs photos are not required and would like to encourage ECs to fight for their right for a log without a photo (except special cases where the photo requirement is legitimate).

 

 

Cezanne

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Good grief, here comes the muddy water!

[+hzoi]

...I am missing in your reply the fact that almost no photo requirement for Earthcaches is legitimate under the new EC guidelines.

There are so many EC owners who never took the effort to change their EC pages and to remove the photo requirement and so many visitors of ECs are not aware of the fact of the change of the guidelines.

 

I mistakenly thought that older caches requiring photo logs were grandfathered and that this rule only applied to new caches. But when I checked the rules, yup, you're right.

 

7. Requests for photographs must be optional. Exceptions to this guideline will only be considered if the requested photograph is related to an Earth Science logging activity such as recording a phenomenon. This particular guidelines was updated on 1 January 2011. All EarthCaches must conform to this guideline as photo requests are considered "additional logging requirements" (ALRs) and follow the guidelines set forth by Geocaching.com. Existing EarthCaches that do not meet this guideline must be updated to comply. Cache owners may not delete the cacher's log based solely on optional tasks.

 

I guess the word still hasn't gotten out to some cache owners -- several of the caches we've found since January still have a mandatory photo requirement, or did at the time we logged 'em.

[+Chokecherry]

...I am missing in your reply the fact that almost no photo requirement for Earthcaches is legitimate under the new EC guidelines.

There are so many EC owners who never took the effort to change their EC pages and to remove the photo requirement and so many visitors of ECs are not aware of the fact of the change of the guidelines.

 

I mistakenly thought that older caches requiring photo logs were grandfathered and that this rule only applied to new caches. But when I checked the rules, yup, you're right.

 

7. Requests for photographs must be optional. Exceptions to this guideline will only be considered if the requested photograph is related to an Earth Science logging activity such as recording a phenomenon. This particular guidelines was updated on 1 January 2011. All EarthCaches must conform to this guideline as photo requests are considered "additional logging requirements" (ALRs) and follow the guidelines set forth by Geocaching.com. Existing EarthCaches that do not meet this guideline must be updated to comply. Cache owners may not delete the cacher's log based solely on optional tasks.

 

I guess the word still hasn't gotten out to some cache owners -- several of the caches we've found since January still have a mandatory photo requirement, or did at the time we logged 'em.

 

I've passed by many older caches that continue to have the "take a picture of yourself" in the photo requirement which I believe was like 2 policy changes ago.

 

I was under the impression from previous threads about this that people have to do the dirty work on their own and report caches in violation of these policies and they will address them after they are reported.

[+Flintstone5611]

I've passed by many older caches that continue to have the "take a picture of yourself" in the photo requirement which I believe was like 2 policy changes ago.

 

I was under the impression from previous threads about this that people have to do the dirty work on their own and report caches in violation of these policies and they will address them after they are reported.

 

I have also seen tons of caches with this (now taboo) LR. The problem is that I love posting pics with my EC logs so it isn't an "issue" for me. Wondering if TPTB want us to rat on those "guideline breaking" rebels.

[Neos2]

I've passed by many older caches that continue to have the "take a picture of yourself" in the photo requirement which I believe was like 2 policy changes ago.

 

I was under the impression from previous threads about this that people have to do the dirty work on their own and report caches in violation of these policies and they will address them after they are reported.

 

I have also seen tons of caches with this (now taboo) LR. The problem is that I love posting pics with my EC logs so it isn't an "issue" for me. Wondering if TPTB want us to rat on those "guideline breaking" rebels.

If you have a cache log deleted simply because you did not supply a photograph of yourself, you should report that deletion. The best place to report it would be the reviewer who published the cache.

 

I haven't seen an EarthCache that requires 'a photo of yourself' in months. I have seen some that ask for photos of some feature as part of your answer. I have seen some that invite you to add a photo of yourself. I have a couple like those myself.

 

Personally, I love to see photos taken at the location, and always add them to EarthCaches I visit (avoiding spoilers, of course!). I use the photos on the EarthCache pages in my classroom so the kids can see features we don't have around here. They are much more curious about features when they know that 'actual people' traveled to those places to see those things--as opposed to seeing photos from a textbook. In that case, I actually prefer the photos of the actual feature or ones with just tiny people as part of the larger scene. The closeups of someone's face or a hand with a GPS in it doesn't entertain my students or teach them anything.

[+Flintstone5611]

If you have a cache log deleted simply because you did not supply a photograph of yourself, you should report that deletion. The best place to report it would be the reviewer who published the cache.

 

Good to know the protocol, but again it will probably never happen to me.

 

I haven't seen an EarthCache that requires 'a photo of yourself' in months.

 

Would it be wrong to post the ones I have found here?

 

I have seen some that ask for photos of some feature as part of your answer. I have seen some that invite you to add a photo of yourself. I have a couple like those myself.

 

Most of mine are like that, lol.

 

Personally, I love to see photos taken at the location, and always add them to EarthCaches I visit (avoiding spoilers, of course!). I use the photos on the EarthCache pages in my classroom so the kids can see features we don't have around here. They are much more curious about features when they know that 'actual people' traveled to those places to see those things--as opposed to seeing photos from a textbook. In that case, I actually prefer the photos of the actual feature or ones with just tiny people as part of the larger scene. The closeups of someone's face or a hand with a GPS in it doesn't entertain my students or teach them anything.

 

That is a pretty awesome application of EC log photos. Very cool!

[Neos2]

If you have a cache log deleted simply because you did not supply a photograph of yourself, you should report that deletion. The best place to report it would be the reviewer who published the cache.

 

Good to know the protocol, but again it will probably never happen to me.

 

I haven't seen an EarthCache that requires 'a photo of yourself' in months.

 

Would it be wrong to post the ones I have found here?

 

I think it would be wrong to list those EarthCache here in the forums.

 

It doesn't really serve the intended purpose. The forum readers can't 'do' anything about it anyway and the people who can do something about it don't check the forums for that sort of issue. It's easier for them to keep track of things they need to check into if they get the official report notification.

 

Plus, there may be extenuating circumstances we don't know about. The reviewer might already be on it, the owner might be trying to figure out a new activity, and the time limit hadn't passed yet, etc. I'd rather see us help each other and support each other.

[+Flintstone5611]

I think it would be wrong to list those EarthCache here in the forums.

 

Just checking, lol.

 

Plus, there may be extenuating circumstances we don't know about. The reviewer might already be on it, the owner might be trying to figure out a new activity, and the time limit hadn't passed yet, etc. I'd rather see us help each other and support each other.

 

Well put.

 

But I should warn you, this is a forum and here speculation is practically gospel . I thought you would know that being a moderator and all . All this patient, tactful, well thought out reasoning is making it unbareable in here.

[+Ambrosia]

I haven't seen an EarthCache that requires 'a photo of yourself' in months. I have seen some that ask for photos of some feature as part of your answer. I have seen some that invite you to add a photo of yourself. I have a couple like those myself.

Out of the last 11 earthcaches that I've done, 8 of them asked for a photo of the cacher with or without their gps. One of them asked for a picture of the area. So only 2 didn't have a photo requirement. And these earthcaches were spread out over different ends of Washington State, and also in Florida, Louisiana and Texas.

 

I don't make a big deal about it for myself, because I've gotten into the habit of taking my picture at earthcaches. But I always wonder about the poor cachers that don't realize that they don't have to keep to photo requirements and so either don't do the earthcache, or get their logs deleted and think they don't have any recourse. Should I report these caches even though I haven't had a log deleted?

 

edit: forgot a couple caches I haven't logged yet.

Edited July 3, 2011 by Ambrosia

[Neos2]

I haven't seen an EarthCache that requires 'a photo of yourself' in months. I have seen some that ask for photos of some feature as part of your answer. I have seen some that invite you to add a photo of yourself. I have a couple like those myself.

Out of the last 11 earthcaches that I've done, 8 of them asked for a photo of the cacher with or without their gps.

...

Should I report these caches even though I haven't had a log deleted?

 

edit: forgot a couple caches I haven't logged yet.

 

Let me do some checking before we report 10,000 EarthCaches and clog up the system! LOL!

 

I remember getting a note for one of my EarthCaches a few months back about the change in the guideline suggesting I check my pages for compliance. I think it was a mass email sent to every EarthCache owner, but I don't know that for sure. (At the time I had one EarthCache I made early in the game when lots of people asked for a photo as part of the tasks--though I was never a stickler for a photo of a face). As I recall it had a deadline for the changes to be made.

 

I'll hunt that up and read it again if I still have it --and ask 'the bosses' for clarification. I'll get back to you (all) --but it's a holiday weekend here in the states, it may take some extra time.

 

ETA

After reading my note, I'm not sure every EarthCache owner got one (There was a different reason they were writing to me at that point and they may have just noticed my EC with the photo requirement). But my note said this:

Notification of the new guidelines has been posted in the EarthCache forum at geocaching.com, and another note will be included in an upcoming Groundspeak newsletter, which will be sent to all EarthCache owners.

 

I'm still planning to ask for some guidance and will get back to everyone.

Edited July 3, 2011 by Neos2
add info

[+Ambrosia]

I haven't seen an EarthCache that requires 'a photo of yourself' in months. I have seen some that ask for photos of some feature as part of your answer. I have seen some that invite you to add a photo of yourself. I have a couple like those myself.

Out of the last 11 earthcaches that I've done, 8 of them asked for a photo of the cacher with or without their gps.

...

Should I report these caches even though I haven't had a log deleted?

 

edit: forgot a couple caches I haven't logged yet.

 

Let me do some checking before we report 10,000 EarthCaches and clog up the system! LOL!

 

I remember getting a note for one of my EarthCaches a few months back about the change in the guideline suggesting I check my pages for compliance. I think it was a mass email sent to every EarthCache owner, but I don't know that for sure. (At the time I had one EarthCache I made early in the game when lots of people asked for a photo as part of the tasks--though I was never a stickler for a photo of a face). As I recall it had a deadline for the changes to be made.

 

I'll hunt that up and read it again if I still have it --and ask 'the bosses' for clarification. I'll get back to you (all) --but it's a holiday weekend here in the states, it may take some extra time.

 

ETA

After reading my note, I'm not sure every EarthCache owner got one (There was a different reason they were writing to me at that point and they may have just noticed my EC with the photo requirement). But my note said this:

Notification of the new guidelines has been posted in the EarthCache forum at geocaching.com, and another note will be included in an upcoming Groundspeak newsletter, which will be sent to all EarthCache owners.

 

I'm still planning to ask for some guidance and will get back to everyone.

Thanks for the response. No worries, just something I've been curious about.

 

A couple of my recent earthcache finds are owned by a local, and I was just talking to him at an event a few days ago and forgot to bring up the guidelines. I'll have to remember next time I see him. I'm sure he just doesn't realize the change.

[+hzoi]

I haven't seen an EarthCache that requires 'a photo of yourself' in months.

 

They're still around. We logged two just this weekend that still required cacher photos.

 

Policy changed on 1 January 2011, per the guidelines I quoted above. Of the 25 earthcaches we've logged since then, 17 still have mandatory photo of self/GPSr requirements, 6 are photo optional. (The other two didn't mention photos at all.)

 

We logged 31 earthcaches prior to the policy change, 30 of which are still active (1 was archived). Of those 30, 21 still have mandatory photo of self/GPSr requirements, 1 requires a photo of the site itself, 5 are photo optional, 3 don't mention photos at all.

 

So out of the active caches we've logged, all of which predate the policy change, about 70% are not compliant with the policy change. Taking our finds as a sample, I'd argue that the word isn't exactly out there to existing cache owners.

 

I have started including information about the change as a "p.s., FYI" in my logs. So far we've complied with photo requirements regardless.

[+junglehair]

I have started including information about the change as a "p.s., FYI" in my logs. So far we've complied with photo requirements regardless.

 

That's what I usually do too. I don't mind posting the photo, so I will usually comply with their request, but include a friendly FYI to let them know about the change in the guidelines in case they are unaware.

[+A & J Tooling]

I didn't log a bunch of earth caches I did on Mackinaw Island a while back because of the photo requirements. Wish I would of read this section 1st. If wishes were fishes...