Virtual and Earth Caches is it just me…

[+captnemo]

First I like both Virtual and Earthcaches, what bug me is the way the write up is organized.

 

It seems that most Earthcaches and some Virtual caches go with a long, usually interesting write up and the requirements to log are at the very end of the text.

 

Many times I’ll be out caching with my NUVI 2595 and an Earth or Virtual cache will show up close to where I am but the GPS will cut off the last part of a listing that contains the logging instructions!!! So of course I don’t know what I’m looking for and have to pass on the cache.

 

If the CO would just put the questions first at the top of the listing I could get the answers I need and read the balance of the description latter on the computer.

[+The_Incredibles_]

You're right, questions should be at the top of the page. Thanks for the reminder, I had been meaning to fix my EarthCache and now it's done. There's nothing more annoying than scrolling through pages and pages of text, trying to get to the questions.

 

This is a good reminder for cache pages in general. Important information should be at the top of the cache page, preferably in the 'short description' area.

[AZcachemeister]

I see your point.

 

Once I was out doing a twelve-stage multi with lots of interesting details posted for each stage...but the details in my phone were truncated at about stage eight.

 

Reading the background information provided for each stage made the whole cache much more interesting, and I wouldn't have wanted it any other way (went back when internet access was better on the phone).

 

In the same way, many EarthCaches provide the basis for what you will be doing in the write-up, so you will be able to actually answer correctly, and indeed any EarthCache worthy of the title should be more than 'send me the wording of the third line on the interpretive sign' or 'send me a picture of...'. Moving the logging requirements to the beginning of the listing should not (IMNSHO) make it any easier to complete an EarthCache (if it is a well-constructed EarthCache).

[+K13]

Truly a great suggestion! Maybe even worth suggesting it be implemented as a Feature or Enhancement. (I'm being serious, not sarcastic.)

[+Corfmania]

One issue with that is then some of the writeup that may be useful or necessary to answer the questions will then be cut off on some devices. To help mitigate that problem, I'll put the questions in the hint section also, with a brief note at the top saying so. That keeps the writeup higher in the listing, and still let's folks with affected devices see the questions.

For example: http://coord.info/GC2Q4RT

[+SwineFlew]

I heard ya!

 

I really dislike it when the questions arent easy to find on the GPS, especially when it is way down on the bottom of the list.

[+ngrrfan]

I really dislike it when the questions arent easy to find on the GPS, especially when it is way down on the bottom of the list.

And that is why I print out the descriptions for both types and carry them with me. GPSrs only hold so much and it sure is a bunch easier to write the answers on paper.

[+WRASTRO]

I really, really, really think and believe cachers need to read the entire cache page before they attempt to find a cache. Many of the ills we suffer could be solved if this was the common or required practice. If a cacher doesn't know what is required to find a cache he/she should not attempt to find it. I don't understand how any serious cacher could object to this concept. Every cache is unique and every cache page deserves to be read in its entirety before someone tries to find it. There is simply no excuse for not reading a cache page. People make excuses. They are nothing more than lame excuses.

[+SwineFlew]

I really, really, really think and believe cachers need to read the entire cache page before they attempt to find a cache. Many of the ills we suffer could be solved if this was the common or required practice. If a cacher doesn't know what is required to find a cache he/she should not attempt to find it. I don't understand how any serious cacher could object to this concept. Every cache is unique and every cache page deserves to be read in its entirety before someone tries to find it. There is simply no excuse for not reading a cache page. People make excuses. They are nothing more than lame excuses.

Thats not always the case when you are caching on the go. When I pulled up a earthcache, the first thing I read is the requirements, if I cant do it, I will move on. When you are on the road for 5 weeks like I did this past winter, many plans do changed and you dont always have a printer with you. I did print out all the virtual and earthcaches I want to do once I was at my sister's place for two weeks. But when you are on the roll and decided to take a different or new route, you might not have a print out of what you need.

 

It would be really nice to see the requirements that's really easy to see or lookup on a GPS.

 

I find a good share of earthcache cache pages a little too much reading. Many of them are copy and paste. LOL.

[+Kacher82]

One issue with that is then some of the writeup that may be useful or necessary to answer the questions will then be cut off on some devices. To help mitigate that problem, I'll put the questions in the hint section also, with a brief note at the top saying so. That keeps the writeup higher in the listing, and still let's folks with affected devices see the questions.

For example: http://coord.info/GC2Q4RT

One suggestion: If you put [brackets] around your questions in the hint section, they won't get encrypted. Might make it easier for people to read them.

[+NeverSummer]

My local geoaware emphasizes the need to have the questions at the beginning, and the end.

 

Add in that it makes for a good lesson when the expectations are covered early, and it sounds like it might be a good thing for all to consider.

 

 

 

 

 

Then again, I remember when I used to print off all of the cache listings for the ones I was going out to find.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

I really, really, really think and believe cachers need to read the entire cache page before they attempt to find a cache. Many of the ills we suffer could be solved if this was the common or required practice. If a cacher doesn't know what is required to find a cache he/she should not attempt to find it. I don't understand how any serious cacher could object to this concept. Every cache is unique and every cache page deserves to be read in its entirety before someone tries to find it. There is simply no excuse for not reading a cache page. People make excuses. They are nothing more than lame excuses.

 

In the case of a traditional/multi/mystery, I'd say you're right.

 

But earthcaches and virtuals require you to answer questions or perform tasks correctly before you can log a find. It doesn't do a cacher much good to read eight detailed and descriptive paragraphs on the history or geology of a site and then realize that the logging tasks have been cut off. Why not have the questions at the top of the page so that when you're in the field, you'll at least know what info you'll need to provide to log the find? If you have to glean that info from the page itself and that part gets cut off because of length, you can always go back and read the page at home to answer that question.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I really, really, really think and believe cachers need to read the entire cache page before they attempt to find a cache. Many of the ills we suffer could be solved if this was the common or required practice. If a cacher doesn't know what is required to find a cache he/she should not attempt to find it. I don't understand how any serious cacher could object to this concept. Every cache is unique and every cache page deserves to be read in its entirety before someone tries to find it. There is simply no excuse for not reading a cache page. People make excuses. They are nothing more than lame excuses.

Thats not always the case when you are caching on the go. When I pulled up a earthcache, the first thing I read is the requirements, if I cant do it, I will move on. When you are on the road for 5 weeks like I did this past winter, many plans do changed and you dont always have a printer with you. I did print out all the virtual and earthcaches I want to do once I was at my sister's place for two weeks. But when you are on the roll and decided to take a different or new route, you might not have a print out of what you need.

 

It would be really nice to see the requirements that's really easy to see or lookup on a GPS.

 

I find a good share of earthcache cache pages a little too much reading. Many of them are copy and paste. LOL.

 

I think that the suggestion to put the questions that need to be answered at the top of a listing for earth caches and virtuals is a good one, however, I find myself agreeing with Wrastro.

 

If one wants to cache on the go, there are a gazillion traditional caches that can be found. If someone wants to find earth caches or virtuals I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that the price that one must pay is to require reading and understanding the entire cache listing. Unlike a traditional cache, one of the purposes of the an earthcache is to educate those that find it about a bit of earth science. Although not a requirement for virtual caches most of the best ones have an educational component as well. In both cases, it's not just about answering the questions to provide proof that one was actually at the location and, thus, can get the smiley. If the educational text for an earthcache is cut off when trying to view it while on the go then one of the primary purposes of that cache has not been fulfilled. Yes, some earthcache listings can get pretty long, but I disagree that it's just a bunch of cut-n-paste. The creator of an earthcache has to do a fair amount of research to meet the requirements for it to be published, and I think they deserve to have their work read and understood.

[+Walts Hunting]

I really, really, really think and believe cachers need to read the entire cache page before they attempt to find a cache. Many of the ills we suffer could be solved if this was the common or required practice. If a cacher doesn't know what is required to find a cache he/she should not attempt to find it. I don't understand how any serious cacher could object to this concept. Every cache is unique and every cache page deserves to be read in its entirety before someone tries to find it. There is simply no excuse for not reading a cache page. People make excuses. They are nothing more than lame excuses.

 

I disagree. Do you really think people need to read the cache page as they pull up,to the lamp post at Walmart?

 

I probably read 5% (maybe) of the cache descriptions. And that is only if I have a problem finding it and after I read the last few logs.

 

Now for Earthcaches I prepare ahead and print out the description but all others not necessary.

 

I was wondering how you would enforce your making it a "required practice"

 

And then of course there are power trails. This requirement would really slow that down.

[+ShaunEM]

I really, really, really think and believe cachers need to read the entire cache page before they attempt to find a cache. Many of the ills we suffer could be solved if this was the common or required practice. If a cacher doesn't know what is required to find a cache he/she should not attempt to find it. I don't understand how any serious cacher could object to this concept. Every cache is unique and every cache page deserves to be read in its entirety before someone tries to find it. There is simply no excuse for not reading a cache page. People make excuses. They are nothing more than lame excuses.

 

I disagree. Do you really think people need to read the cache page as they pull up,to the lamp post at Walmart?

 

I probably read 5% (maybe) of the cache descriptions. And that is only if I have a problem finding it and after I read the last few logs.

 

Now for Earthcaches I prepare ahead and print out the description but all others not necessary.

 

I was wondering how you would enforce your making it a "required practice"

 

And then of course there are power trails. This requirement would really slow that down.

 

Add to that, the environment can change over time making some of the details confusing. Some write ups are just structured weird. I have also experienced cases of "reading what I wanted to read" rather than what the cache page said.

 

Requirements at the top. I like that..

 

Forcing "any serious cacher to read every cache page". Why do you think they sell GPS with paperless caching... Read on the go!

 

Shaun

[Andronicus]

I don't want to sound harsh, but why would I change my cache page because of your outmoded equipment. I don't expect to have all the details on my old eTrex Legend. I make sure I have the info avaialble from another source. You should too. Deal with the limitations of your own hardware, and stop complaining.

 

PS, yes, a GPS can be outmoded even when originaly reliesed. e.g. eTrex10.

[+The A-Team]

I don't expect to have all the details on my old eTrex Legend.

Even some of the newest handhelds like my Oregon 450 will truncate long descriptions. For that matter, are there any handhelds that won't truncate a long description? If the problem is affecting every handheld-GPSr user, why not make a simple change to make things easier on them?

I'd never considered doing it before, but I'll be moving the questions to the top of my EarthCache description when I go home tonight.

[+SwineFlew]

I wonder if GS can add an extra place for questions. Like they did for hints. I know the GPS manufacturers will have to do some programing works to make it work.

 

On my unit, when I click on hint, I see the hint and I was wondering if they can add another button just for questions.

[+The_Incredibles_]

I don't want to sound harsh, but why would I change my cache page because of your outmoded equipment. I don't expect to have all the details on my old eTrex Legend. I make sure I have the info avaialble from another source. You should too. Deal with the limitations of your own hardware, and stop complaining.

 

PS, yes, a GPS can be outmoded even when originaly reliesed. e.g. eTrex10.

 

My opinion is you're not hiding a cache for yourself, you're hiding it for other people. I think it's a cache owner's job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. It's not going to kill you to move the questions to the top of the cache page, is it?

 

Even with an Oregon 550 and no personal experience with truncation problems, I would like the questions to be at the top. Sure, I read the cache page thoroughly before I go out, but once I'm there, I don't fancy scrolling through pages and pages of text to get to the questions. It's annoying. Similarly, when I look for a traditional, while I may be interested in reading about the history of the area, I don't want to have to scroll through it all to find out what type of container I'm looking for. Important information should be at the TOP of the cache page.

Edited April 17, 2013 by The_Incredibles_

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I don't want to sound harsh, but why would I change my cache page because of your outmoded equipment. I don't expect to have all the details on my old eTrex Legend. I make sure I have the info avaialble from another source. You should too. Deal with the limitations of your own hardware, and stop complaining.

 

PS, yes, a GPS can be outmoded even when originaly reliesed. e.g. eTrex10.

 

My opinion is you're not hiding a cache for yourself, you're hiding it for other people. I think it's a cache owner's job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. It's not going to kill you to move the questions to the top of the cache page, is it?

 

It's not going to kill you (the general you) to read the full cache description on a web site on this small subset of caches either.

 

I disagree with the notion that it's the cachers job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. There are lots of things that a cache owner to make the seekers experience pleasant but constructing their cache and the listing such that it can be found as fast as possible is, in my opinion, not one of them.

 

As I see it, the cache owner should get to decide what kind of cache they want to create and not have that dictated to them from the entitled, instant gratification, "must find a gazillion caches as fast as possible" generation of geocachers that are becoming so common. If someone wants to find a gazillion caches there are millions of them out there that can be found without ever looking at a cache listing. If I want to create a cache with a 4 star difficulty and 4 star terrain, I"m not creating it for (all) other people. I'm creating it for those that like a challenge. If I create an Earthcache, I'm creating it for those that appreciate the unique aspects of the an earthcache; it's educational value, highlighting a interesting earth sciences location, and not to give someone an opportunity to increase their find count as possible.

[+The_Incredibles_]

I don't want to sound harsh, but why would I change my cache page because of your outmoded equipment. I don't expect to have all the details on my old eTrex Legend. I make sure I have the info avaialble from another source. You should too. Deal with the limitations of your own hardware, and stop complaining.

 

PS, yes, a GPS can be outmoded even when originaly reliesed. e.g. eTrex10.

 

My opinion is you're not hiding a cache for yourself, you're hiding it for other people. I think it's a cache owner's job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. It's not going to kill you to move the questions to the top of the cache page, is it?

 

It's not going to kill you (the general you) to read the full cache description on a web site on this small subset of caches either.

 

I disagree with the notion that it's the cachers job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. There are lots of things that a cache owner to make the seekers experience pleasant but constructing their cache and the listing such that it can be found as fast as possible is, in my opinion, not one of them.

 

As I see it, the cache owner should get to decide what kind of cache they want to create and not have that dictated to them from the entitled, instant gratification, "must find a gazillion caches as fast as possible" generation of geocachers that are becoming so common. If someone wants to find a gazillion caches there are millions of them out there that can be found without ever looking at a cache listing. If I want to create a cache with a 4 star difficulty and 4 star terrain, I"m not creating it for (all) other people. I'm creating it for those that like a challenge. If I create an Earthcache, I'm creating it for those that appreciate the unique aspects of the an earthcache; it's educational value, highlighting a interesting earth sciences location, and not to give someone an opportunity to increase their find count as possible.

 

This is not what I mean and like I said, I do read the cache page before going out to an earth cache. I don't think it's a cache owner's job to make the cache a 5 second find. I'm all for challenging caches. However, scrolling through pages of text to get to the questions is neither 1) educational nor 2) challenging, it's 3) annoying. Rather than subject 100+ people to this, why not take 5 minutes and move the questions to the top of the page?

Edited April 17, 2013 by The_Incredibles_

[+dprovan]

Gee, I always thought that was a requirement for EarthCaches or something. "We can't make you read all this, but at least we can make you scroll through it all before you can log the find."

 

I know what you mean about truncation, although I don't recall ever running into that on an EarthCache. But I almost always look at EarthCaches and Virtuals in advance, so I'd probably have a fighting chance to remember what info to collect. And if I didn't, I wouldn't lose much sleep over it, since the part you can read is more important than the smilie.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I don't want to sound harsh, but why would I change my cache page because of your outmoded equipment. I don't expect to have all the details on my old eTrex Legend. I make sure I have the info avaialble from another source. You should too. Deal with the limitations of your own hardware, and stop complaining.

 

PS, yes, a GPS can be outmoded even when originaly reliesed. e.g. eTrex10.

 

My opinion is you're not hiding a cache for yourself, you're hiding it for other people. I think it's a cache owner's job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. It's not going to kill you to move the questions to the top of the cache page, is it?

 

It's not going to kill you (the general you) to read the full cache description on a web site on this small subset of caches either.

 

I disagree with the notion that it's the cachers job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. There are lots of things that a cache owner to make the seekers experience pleasant but constructing their cache and the listing such that it can be found as fast as possible is, in my opinion, not one of them.

 

As I see it, the cache owner should get to decide what kind of cache they want to create and not have that dictated to them from the entitled, instant gratification, "must find a gazillion caches as fast as possible" generation of geocachers that are becoming so common. If someone wants to find a gazillion caches there are millions of them out there that can be found without ever looking at a cache listing. If I want to create a cache with a 4 star difficulty and 4 star terrain, I"m not creating it for (all) other people. I'm creating it for those that like a challenge. If I create an Earthcache, I'm creating it for those that appreciate the unique aspects of the an earthcache; it's educational value, highlighting a interesting earth sciences location, and not to give someone an opportunity to increase their find count as possible.

 

This is not what I mean and like I said, I do read the cache page before going out to an earth cache. I don't think it's a cache owner's job to make the cache a 5 second find. I'm all for challenging caches. However, scrolling through pages of text to get to the questions is neither 1) educational nor 2) challenging, it's 3) annoying. Rather than subject 100+ people to this, why not take 5 minutes and move the questions to the top of the page?

 

Yes, scrolling through pages of text isn't educational. It's can only be educational if you read it.

 

As I said earlier, I'm not against moving the questions to the top of the page, but realize that if the cache description is long enough such that some of it will be cut off while trying to view the listing in the field, instead of the questions getting cut off, some of that educational material will get cut off. Although I haven't created an earthcache myself, I've done enough of them (an in every case, knew what questions I had to answer *before* I got to GZ) to see that a considerable about of research effort is put into most of them (and is required in order for it to be published). Some of the responses come across as "we don't care that you put in a lot of time and effort to create an earth cache. Just give us the questions so that we can provide the obligatory answers and get our smiley".

 

I haven't placed a new cache in a long time. Part of that is because I just don't have as much time as I used to for maintaining more caches. The other reason is the growing sense of entitlement, manifested in many ways, that I observe from a larger percentage of cache finders.

[+geodarts]

Sure, I read the cache page thoroughly before I go out, but once I'm there, I don't fancy scrolling through pages and pages of text to get to the questions. It's annoying. Similarly, when I look for a traditional, while I may be interested in reading about the history of the area, I don't want to have to scroll through it all to find out what type of container I'm looking for. Important information should be at the TOP of the cache page.

 

Perhaps it depends on your perspective. The important information I am seeking (and want to convey) relates to why there is a cache at a particular location. If people want to scroll past that, it is their choice. But if you can't convince me from the start that there is something interesting at that particular location, I may never get around to going there. And to me, the earthcache and virtual questions, or the details of the hide, are probably the least interesting thing about a cache.

 

In particular, the virtual and earthcache questions may make sense only in the context of the page information. Although I do not consider the earthcache questions to be a test, in most test situations I read the article first before getting to the questions. I have talked with earthcache owners who have complained about people who misinterpreted the question because they did not read the text. Based on some of the answers I have been given, I occasionally wonder the same thing.

 

I think that questions should be easily identified. And the point about truncation is something to be considered. I use geosphere for all virtuals and earthcaches so that is not a problem, but I have encountered truncated multis with my handheld. I don't know off the top of my head if there is an average length that should not be exceeded -- I suppose it depends on the unit -- but if any of my earthcaches had a number of logs complaining about truncation I would try to reduce the listing accordingly.

[+FunnyNose]

First I like both Virtual and Earthcaches, what bug me is the way the write up is organized.

It seems that most Earthcaches and some Virtual caches go with a long, usually interesting write up and the requirements to log are at the very end of the text.

 

And in European countries it is even worse. Sometimes earthcaches are in 2,3 or even more languages.

 

Luckily I have a 62s so can store the whole cache page, It just takes time to get to the correct place.

[+SwineFlew]

First I like both Virtual and Earthcaches, what bug me is the way the write up is organized.

It seems that most Earthcaches and some Virtual caches go with a long, usually interesting write up and the requirements to log are at the very end of the text.

 

And in European countries it is even worse. Sometimes earthcaches are in 2,3 or even more languages.

 

Luckily I have a 62s so can store the whole cache page, It just takes time to get to the correct place.

Thats really annoying. I see a few of those out there. Wish the CO make it into a tab style of which lauange you want. Not sure how it would work on the GPS or GASK.

Edited April 18, 2013 by SwineFlew

[AZcachemeister]

 

Yes, scrolling through pages of text isn't educational. It's can only be educational if you read it.

 

As I said earlier, I'm not against moving the questions to the top of the page, but realize that if the cache description is long enough such that some of it will be cut off while trying to view the listing in the field, instead of the questions getting cut off, some of that educational material will get cut off. Although I haven't created an earthcache myself, I've done enough of them (an in every case, knew what questions I had to answer *before* I got to GZ) to see that a considerable about of research effort is put into most of them (and is required in order for it to be published). Some of the responses come across as "we don't care that you put in a lot of time and effort to create an earth cache. Just give us the questions so that we can provide the obligatory answers and get our smiley".

 

I haven't placed a new cache in a long time. Part of that is because I just don't have as much time as I used to for maintaining more caches. The other reason is the growing sense of entitlement, manifested in many ways, that I observe from a larger percentage of cache finders.

 

And this is where I'm coming from as well.

 

An EarthCache is supposed to teach you (me, us) something about Earth Science, not provide the quickest smiley (and a new icon!) as fast as possible.

 

If it is a well-constructed EarthCache, you will need to read the entire write-up before the questions will even make sense.

 

I think my next EarthCache will nearly max out the available characters of the description, and the questions will be randomly inserted in places where the material of the question is not even being discussed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or, maybe not.

[+The A-Team]

Just give us the questions so that we can provide the obligatory answers and get our smiley

I'll reiterate again on behalf of The_Incredibles that the above quote does not accurately reflect the position of those posting in the discussion. Basically, you're missing the point.

 

I read through every EarthCache description ahead of time. I learn about the topic at hand. However, once I'm at the site and wanting to complete the EarthCache, what I want to see are the questions to answer or tasks to complete. I've already read the description ahead of time, so I have little need to see it all again (unless a question requires it). Sometimes the tasks will require that I exit the description several times (ie. to move to another waypoint to answer another question, like for GC1QP20). Scrolling through the entire description just to get to the tasks each time is a pain. It has nothing to do with trying to get it done as quickly as possible, it's just annoying.

 

To use an analogy, what would you think if the "Log your visit", "Watch listing", "Ignore listing", etc. links were buried at the bottom of every cache listing rather than at the top? You'd find that annoying, wouldn't you?

 

Anyway, I don't make empty promises. As a result of this discussion, I've moved the questions for my EarthCache to the top of the listing. Mine probably isn't long enough to truncate on most paperless GPSrs, but I've done it anyway to be on the safe side. I've personally run into truncation problems in the past, so I'll do whatever I can to prevent other people from running into the same frustration.

[+6NoisyHikers]

As a side note, it would be great if pictures weren't embedded in the cache text. There are two cachers in our area that create lovely cache pages with several screens full of pictures of the area the cache is placed in. The information about the cache container itself is at the bottom of the page. It is time-consuming enough to scroll down the page on the computer. On our GPS, which doesn't show pictures correctly but is happy to load the big square gap they would show up in, it takes forever.

 

We normally read cache pages online before we go out. We are not averse to extensive descriptions. But these are cut and paste descriptions for a hiking trail series. Once I've read all the fun facts for the first cache, I'd rather not have to scroll through them over and over for the next ten caches. Please?

[+NeverSummer]

As a side note, it would be great if pictures weren't embedded in the cache text. There are two cachers in our area that create lovely cache pages with several screens full of pictures of the area the cache is placed in. The information about the cache container itself is at the bottom of the page. It is time-consuming enough to scroll down the page on the computer. On our GPS, which doesn't show pictures correctly but is happy to load the big square gap they would show up in, it takes forever.

 

We normally read cache pages online before we go out. We are not averse to extensive descriptions. But these are cut and paste descriptions for a hiking trail series. Once I've read all the fun facts for the first cache, I'd rather not have to scroll through them over and over for the next ten caches. Please?

But what's to say which is the first one you started to look for? #1 of 10? #7 of 10?

[cezanne]

My local geoaware emphasizes the need to have the questions at the beginning, and the end.

 

Add in that it makes for a good lesson when the expectations are covered early, and it sounds like it might be a good thing for all to consider.

 

 

Actually, I'm glad that quite a while ago I decided to never come up with an Earthcache due to the restrictive language requirements. It's annoying that every now and then more restrictions come up and one is not any longer free to write up the cache page in the way one intends to do it. The type of caches I come up with are not suitable for paperless caching. Whoever wants to do one of my caches, can make his/her decision at the beginning. Cachers on a trip are not an argument for me as my caches are not designed for that target audience anyway.

 

I'd rather suggest an attribute "printout needed/recommended". As there are tons of caches which require smartphones, this should be ok as well.

 

Cezanne

Edited April 18, 2013 by cezanne

[+SwineFlew]

Just give us the questions so that we can provide the obligatory answers and get our smiley

I'll reiterate again on behalf of The_Incredibles that the above quote does not accurately reflect the position of those posting in the discussion. Basically, you're missing the point.

 

I read through every EarthCache description ahead of time. I learn about the topic at hand. However, once I'm at the site and wanting to complete the EarthCache, what I want to see are the questions to answer or tasks to complete. I've already read the description ahead of time, so I have little need to see it all again (unless a question requires it). Sometimes the tasks will require that I exit the description several times (ie. to move to another waypoint to answer another question, like for GC1QP20). Scrolling through the entire description just to get to the tasks each time is a pain. It has nothing to do with trying to get it done as quickly as possible, it's just annoying.

 

To use an analogy, what would you think if the "Log your visit", "Watch listing", "Ignore listing", etc. links were buried at the bottom of every cache listing rather than at the top? You'd find that annoying, wouldn't you?

 

Anyway, I don't make empty promises. As a result of this discussion, I've moved the questions for my EarthCache to the top of the listing. Mine probably isn't long enough to truncate on most paperless GPSrs, but I've done it anyway to be on the safe side. I've personally run into truncation problems in the past, so I'll do whatever I can to prevent other people from running into the same frustration.

A one star in difficulty? That would keep me from giving them a fav point. Thats way too low for that amount of works to do. I am sure its a wonderful place to be, but I always give fav point base on how its rated and how the questions are layout. Everything count. Being really low in difficulty will automatic docked the CO from getting a fav point from me.

 

Now what about those pictures requirement?

[AZcachemeister]

...I've moved the questions for my EarthCache to the top of the listing.

...

 

Bummer.

Now, after reading the informative text, I have to scroll ALL THE WAY BACK to the top to see the questions.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

...I've moved the questions for my EarthCache to the top of the listing.

...

 

Bummer.

Now, after reading the informative text, I have to scroll ALL THE WAY BACK to the top to see the questions.

 

Maybe they need to go top & bottom!

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

As a side note, it would be great if pictures weren't embedded in the cache text. There are two cachers in our area that create lovely cache pages with several screens full of pictures of the area the cache is placed in. The information about the cache container itself is at the bottom of the page. It is time-consuming enough to scroll down the page on the computer. On our GPS, which doesn't show pictures correctly but is happy to load the big square gap they would show up in, it takes forever.

 

We normally read cache pages online before we go out. We are not averse to extensive descriptions. But these are cut and paste descriptions for a hiking trail series. Once I've read all the fun facts for the first cache, I'd rather not have to scroll through them over and over for the next ten caches. Please?

But what's to say which is the first one you started to look for? #1 of 10? #7 of 10?

 

How about on listings #2-#x they have a (much) reduced description, plus a link that says "For more detailed information on the area and its history, see Series Cache #1"?

[4wheelin_fool]

I don't want to sound harsh, but why would I change my cache page because of your outmoded equipment. I don't expect to have all the details on my old eTrex Legend. I make sure I have the info avaialble from another source. You should too. Deal with the limitations of your own hardware, and stop complaining.

 

PS, yes, a GPS can be outmoded even when originaly reliesed. e.g. eTrex10.

 

My opinion is you're not hiding a cache for yourself, you're hiding it for other people. I think it's a cache owner's job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. It's not going to kill you to move the questions to the top of the cache page, is it?

 

It's not going to kill you (the general you) to read the full cache description on a web site on this small subset of caches either.

 

I disagree with the notion that it's the cachers job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. There are lots of things that a cache owner to make the seekers experience pleasant but constructing their cache and the listing such that it can be found as fast as possible is, in my opinion, not one of them.

 

As I see it, the cache owner should get to decide what kind of cache they want to create and not have that dictated to them from the entitled, instant gratification, "must find a gazillion caches as fast as possible" generation of geocachers that are becoming so common. If someone wants to find a gazillion caches there are millions of them out there that can be found without ever looking at a cache listing. If I want to create a cache with a 4 star difficulty and 4 star terrain, I"m not creating it for (all) other people. I'm creating it for those that like a challenge. If I create an Earthcache, I'm creating it for those that appreciate the unique aspects of the an earthcache; it's educational value, highlighting a interesting earth sciences location, and not to give someone an opportunity to increase their find count as possible.

 

This is not what I mean and like I said, I do read the cache page before going out to an earth cache. I don't think it's a cache owner's job to make the cache a 5 second find. I'm all for challenging caches. However, scrolling through pages of text to get to the questions is neither 1) educational nor 2) challenging, it's 3) annoying. Rather than subject 100+ people to this, why not take 5 minutes and move the questions to the top of the page?

 

Yes, scrolling through pages of text isn't educational. It's can only be educational if you read it.

 

As I said earlier, I'm not against moving the questions to the top of the page, but realize that if the cache description is long enough such that some of it will be cut off while trying to view the listing in the field, instead of the questions getting cut off, some of that educational material will get cut off. Although I haven't created an earthcache myself, I've done enough of them (an in every case, knew what questions I had to answer *before* I got to GZ) to see that a considerable about of research effort is put into most of them (and is required in order for it to be published). Some of the responses come across as "we don't care that you put in a lot of time and effort to create an earth cache. Just give us the questions so that we can provide the obligatory answers and get our smiley".

 

I haven't placed a new cache in a long time. Part of that is because I just don't have as much time as I used to for maintaining more caches. The other reason is the growing sense of entitlement, manifested in many ways, that I observe from a larger percentage of cache finders.

 

Perhaps map images and trailhead waypoints could be removed from the cache pages, and pocket queries could be eliminated, making the find more difficult as well. The site could be returned to the way it looked in 2000, and all of the angry entitled numbers cachers could leave in a huff. :ph34r:

Edited April 18, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+captnemo]

A big Thank you to those who have moved the questions.

 

Some replies have missed the point of my original post. As you can tell it's been 2 days and 500 miles since my original post due to lack of internet. That's because I'm traveling and have been for over 3 months. It is not always possible to return to the location.

 

A large number of the places we have visited have been National Parks which with a few exceptions mean Vitural and Earth Caches. At the last park we stayed at I had maped out an earthcache as part of our tour and I found it. Well we decided to look at more atractions while out driving around and when we got there an Earthcache poped up but because of the way it was written up I had no idea what I needed to look for. No chance to be educated or make a find. This is at least the 4th time it's happened on this trip.

 

I like Earthcaches because of what they teach me. If the questions were at the top I would still be educated and have a find. That's is not too much to ask for. It would not cheapen your cache one bit. I am not about thousands of finds. I do not seek out every cache, I avoid certain ones. However I would love to be able to get that unplaned cache that pops up and would make my visit that much more special.

[+The A-Team]

A one star in difficulty? That would keep me from giving them a fav point. Thats way too low for that amount of works to do. I am sure its a wonderful place to be, but I always give fav point base on how its rated and how the questions are layout. Everything count. Being really low in difficulty will automatic docked the CO from getting a fav point from me.

I assume you're referring to the Botanical Beach EarthCache? I should point out that the one star refers to the difficulty level of completing the EarthCache, not the level of effort required. This site doesn't have an effort rating on caches. The difficulty and terrain ratings are accurate for that cache. You have to walk to a few different locations to complete it, but none of it is particularly difficult to complete. You can feel free to award Favourite Points in any way you see fit, but nearly 50% of the finders of that cache disagree with your assessment of the quality level of that cache.

[+6NoisyHikers]

As a side note, it would be great if pictures weren't embedded in the cache text. There are two cachers in our area that create lovely cache pages with several screens full of pictures of the area the cache is placed in. The information about the cache container itself is at the bottom of the page. It is time-consuming enough to scroll down the page on the computer. On our GPS, which doesn't show pictures correctly but is happy to load the big square gap they would show up in, it takes forever.

 

We normally read cache pages online before we go out. We are not averse to extensive descriptions. But these are cut and paste descriptions for a hiking trail series. Once I've read all the fun facts for the first cache, I'd rather not have to scroll through them over and over for the next ten caches. Please?

But what's to say which is the first one you started to look for? #1 of 10? #7 of 10?

 

How about on listings #2-#x they have a (much) reduced description, plus a link that says "For more detailed information on the area and its history, see Series Cache #1"?

 

NeverSummer - that is a very good point. We've started in the middle of a series more often than not. However, with the information not being vital to finding the cache, I think I prefer BBWolf's idea of providing a link to the first in the series. I enjoy reading the information, just not every time

 

And the more prominent issue is actually the embedded pictures. It would be helpful to have the descriptions in "plain text" once they are loaded into a GPS unit.

 

Here is an example of what I mean: Debouville Slough Series

[+hzoi]

All 11 of our earthcaches have the logging requirements in the hint section, in brackets, for this exact reason. I'm seeing more other cachers doing this, but I wish everyone did. If nothing else, it makes it much easier to find them, even when the description isn't cut off.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I don't want to sound harsh, but why would I change my cache page because of your outmoded equipment. I don't expect to have all the details on my old eTrex Legend. I make sure I have the info avaialble from another source. You should too. Deal with the limitations of your own hardware, and stop complaining.

 

PS, yes, a GPS can be outmoded even when originaly reliesed. e.g. eTrex10.

 

My opinion is you're not hiding a cache for yourself, you're hiding it for other people. I think it's a cache owner's job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. It's not going to kill you to move the questions to the top of the cache page, is it?

 

It's not going to kill you (the general you) to read the full cache description on a web site on this small subset of caches either.

 

I disagree with the notion that it's the cachers job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. There are lots of things that a cache owner to make the seekers experience pleasant but constructing their cache and the listing such that it can be found as fast as possible is, in my opinion, not one of them.

 

As I see it, the cache owner should get to decide what kind of cache they want to create and not have that dictated to them from the entitled, instant gratification, "must find a gazillion caches as fast as possible" generation of geocachers that are becoming so common. If someone wants to find a gazillion caches there are millions of them out there that can be found without ever looking at a cache listing. If I want to create a cache with a 4 star difficulty and 4 star terrain, I"m not creating it for (all) other people. I'm creating it for those that like a challenge. If I create an Earthcache, I'm creating it for those that appreciate the unique aspects of the an earthcache; it's educational value, highlighting a interesting earth sciences location, and not to give someone an opportunity to increase their find count as possible.

 

This is not what I mean and like I said, I do read the cache page before going out to an earth cache. I don't think it's a cache owner's job to make the cache a 5 second find. I'm all for challenging caches. However, scrolling through pages of text to get to the questions is neither 1) educational nor 2) challenging, it's 3) annoying. Rather than subject 100+ people to this, why not take 5 minutes and move the questions to the top of the page?

 

Yes, scrolling through pages of text isn't educational. It's can only be educational if you read it.

 

As I said earlier, I'm not against moving the questions to the top of the page, but realize that if the cache description is long enough such that some of it will be cut off while trying to view the listing in the field, instead of the questions getting cut off, some of that educational material will get cut off. Although I haven't created an earthcache myself, I've done enough of them (an in every case, knew what questions I had to answer *before* I got to GZ) to see that a considerable about of research effort is put into most of them (and is required in order for it to be published). Some of the responses come across as "we don't care that you put in a lot of time and effort to create an earth cache. Just give us the questions so that we can provide the obligatory answers and get our smiley".

 

I haven't placed a new cache in a long time. Part of that is because I just don't have as much time as I used to for maintaining more caches. The other reason is the growing sense of entitlement, manifested in many ways, that I observe from a larger percentage of cache finders.

 

Perhaps map images and trailhead waypoints could be removed from the cache pages, and pocket queries could be eliminated, making the find more difficult as well. The site could be returned to the way it looked in 2000, and all of the angry entitled numbers cachers could leave in a huff. :ph34r:

 

If I was calling for making every cache more difficult to find by intentionally omitting information you might have a point, but I didn't do that. This thread isn't about every cache, but I get the feeling that you're post wasn't an attempt to address facts, as much as it was to be frivolous and condescending.

[cezanne]

 

I'm seeing more other cachers doing this, but I wish everyone did.

 

I do not agree. I rather wish the converse. Duplicate information creates extra work to delete it when printing the descriptions.

In the same way as hardly any cacher who comes up with a cache series with copy and paste descriptions will turn his/her caches into one multi cache

to make life easier for paper cachers, I do not think it is appropriate to require or expect that everyone will adapt to the preferences of paperless

cachers.

 

Cezanne

[+SwineFlew]

A one star in difficulty? That would keep me from giving them a fav point. Thats way too low for that amount of works to do. I am sure its a wonderful place to be, but I always give fav point base on how its rated and how the questions are layout. Everything count. Being really low in difficulty will automatic docked the CO from getting a fav point from me.

I assume you're referring to the Botanical Beach EarthCache? I should point out that the one star refers to the difficulty level of completing the EarthCache, not the level of effort required. This site doesn't have an effort rating on caches. The difficulty and terrain ratings are accurate for that cache. You have to walk to a few different locations to complete it, but none of it is particularly difficult to complete. You can feel free to award Favourite Points in any way you see fit, but nearly 50% of the finders of that cache disagree with your assessment of the quality level of that cache.

It may be easy but think of all the time to go to each location and answer the questions. It takes more time so I would upped the D because of that. Think of a few people that might have to enter all the coordinates by hand.

[cezanne]

 

It may be easy but think of all the time to go to each location and answer the questions. It takes more time so I would upped the D because of that. Think of a few people that might have to enter all the coordinates by hand.

 

Actually, I often enter many coordinates by hand, but I have never regarded this is a difficult task. I do not regard the D-stars as a reward for the invested time.

 

Cezanne

[+NYPaddleCacher]

A one star in difficulty? That would keep me from giving them a fav point. Thats way too low for that amount of works to do. I am sure its a wonderful place to be, but I always give fav point base on how its rated and how the questions are layout. Everything count. Being really low in difficulty will automatic docked the CO from getting a fav point from me.

I assume you're referring to the Botanical Beach EarthCache? I should point out that the one star refers to the difficulty level of completing the EarthCache, not the level of effort required. This site doesn't have an effort rating on caches. The difficulty and terrain ratings are accurate for that cache. You have to walk to a few different locations to complete it, but none of it is particularly difficult to complete. You can feel free to award Favourite Points in any way you see fit, but nearly 50% of the finders of that cache disagree with your assessment of the quality level of that cache.

It may be easy but think of all the time to go to each location and answer the questions. It takes more time so I would upped the D because of that. Think of a few people that might have to enter all the coordinates by hand.

 

I've always been under the impression that the D rating reflects the difficulty in locating the cache once at GZ (which includes determining the coordinates as is the case for an unknown/mystery) and the T rating reflective of the physical effort required to reach GZ.. However, I've also seen some interpretations that if the terrain is "difficult" (i.e. it takes a long time or requires a lot of physical effort) that it could have a higher "D" rating as well. I personally think that the latter interpretation just muddies the distinction between the two independent ratings.

 

In the case of an earthcache, once one is at GZ, no matter how far one has to travel to get there, locating the cache would usually be pretty easy. Since the Earthcache guidelines require that the cache description accurately explain what one will find once they get to the site, an increase in the D rating could really only come from the difficulty of the tasks that must be completed.

 

For example, there is an earthcache about 1/2 a mile from where I live that's about fossils. One of the tasks to be completed is to actually find a fossil, describe what kind it is (all the possibilities, with photos, are described in the cache listing), and to post a photo of the fossil that was found. It took me about 5 minutes to find a fossil and complete all the tasks so the D2 rating is pretty accurate. If the task was to find a specific type (and less common) fossil I could see the D rating going up.

[4wheelin_fool]

I don't want to sound harsh, but why would I change my cache page because of your outmoded equipment. I don't expect to have all the details on my old eTrex Legend. I make sure I have the info avaialble from another source. You should too. Deal with the limitations of your own hardware, and stop complaining.

 

PS, yes, a GPS can be outmoded even when originaly reliesed. e.g. eTrex10.

 

My opinion is you're not hiding a cache for yourself, you're hiding it for other people. I think it's a cache owner's job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. It's not going to kill you to move the questions to the top of the cache page, is it?

 

It's not going to kill you (the general you) to read the full cache description on a web site on this small subset of caches either.

 

I disagree with the notion that it's the cachers job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. There are lots of things that a cache owner to make the seekers experience pleasant but constructing their cache and the listing such that it can be found as fast as possible is, in my opinion, not one of them.

 

As I see it, the cache owner should get to decide what kind of cache they want to create and not have that dictated to them from the entitled, instant gratification, "must find a gazillion caches as fast as possible" generation of geocachers that are becoming so common. If someone wants to find a gazillion caches there are millions of them out there that can be found without ever looking at a cache listing. If I want to create a cache with a 4 star difficulty and 4 star terrain, I"m not creating it for (all) other people. I'm creating it for those that like a challenge. If I create an Earthcache, I'm creating it for those that appreciate the unique aspects of the an earthcache; it's educational value, highlighting a interesting earth sciences location, and not to give someone an opportunity to increase their find count as possible.

 

This is not what I mean and like I said, I do read the cache page before going out to an earth cache. I don't think it's a cache owner's job to make the cache a 5 second find. I'm all for challenging caches. However, scrolling through pages of text to get to the questions is neither 1) educational nor 2) challenging, it's 3) annoying. Rather than subject 100+ people to this, why not take 5 minutes and move the questions to the top of the page?

 

Yes, scrolling through pages of text isn't educational. It's can only be educational if you read it.

 

As I said earlier, I'm not against moving the questions to the top of the page, but realize that if the cache description is long enough such that some of it will be cut off while trying to view the listing in the field, instead of the questions getting cut off, some of that educational material will get cut off. Although I haven't created an earthcache myself, I've done enough of them (an in every case, knew what questions I had to answer *before* I got to GZ) to see that a considerable about of research effort is put into most of them (and is required in order for it to be published). Some of the responses come across as "we don't care that you put in a lot of time and effort to create an earth cache. Just give us the questions so that we can provide the obligatory answers and get our smiley".

 

I haven't placed a new cache in a long time. Part of that is because I just don't have as much time as I used to for maintaining more caches. The other reason is the growing sense of entitlement, manifested in many ways, that I observe from a larger percentage of cache finders.

 

Perhaps map images and trailhead waypoints could be removed from the cache pages, and pocket queries could be eliminated, making the find more difficult as well. The site could be returned to the way it looked in 2000, and all of the angry entitled numbers cachers could leave in a huff. :ph34r:

 

If I was calling for making every cache more difficult to find by intentionally omitting information you might have a point, but I didn't do that. This thread isn't about every cache, but I get the feeling that you're post wasn't an attempt to address facts, as much as it was to be frivolous and condescending.

 

Factually, it was a extreme version of your idea to keep the info more difficult to access for no other reason than to punish those who cache differently than you do. Annoying people with purposely hidden info will not make things better.

[+captnemo]

This has drifted far from what it was suspossed to be about. Moderator please close thread.

 

And again THANKS to those who got it and made some changes.

[+The A-Team]

Moderator please close thread.

You have to click the "Report" button below your post and ask there for the thread to be closed.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I don't want to sound harsh, but why would I change my cache page because of your outmoded equipment. I don't expect to have all the details on my old eTrex Legend. I make sure I have the info avaialble from another source. You should too. Deal with the limitations of your own hardware, and stop complaining.

 

PS, yes, a GPS can be outmoded even when originaly reliesed. e.g. eTrex10.

 

My opinion is you're not hiding a cache for yourself, you're hiding it for other people. I think it's a cache owner's job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. It's not going to kill you to move the questions to the top of the cache page, is it?

 

It's not going to kill you (the general you) to read the full cache description on a web site on this small subset of caches either.

 

I disagree with the notion that it's the cachers job to make things as pleasant for the seeker as they can. There are lots of things that a cache owner to make the seekers experience pleasant but constructing their cache and the listing such that it can be found as fast as possible is, in my opinion, not one of them.

 

As I see it, the cache owner should get to decide what kind of cache they want to create and not have that dictated to them from the entitled, instant gratification, "must find a gazillion caches as fast as possible" generation of geocachers that are becoming so common. If someone wants to find a gazillion caches there are millions of them out there that can be found without ever looking at a cache listing. If I want to create a cache with a 4 star difficulty and 4 star terrain, I"m not creating it for (all) other people. I'm creating it for those that like a challenge. If I create an Earthcache, I'm creating it for those that appreciate the unique aspects of the an earthcache; it's educational value, highlighting a interesting earth sciences location, and not to give someone an opportunity to increase their find count as possible.

 

This is not what I mean and like I said, I do read the cache page before going out to an earth cache. I don't think it's a cache owner's job to make the cache a 5 second find. I'm all for challenging caches. However, scrolling through pages of text to get to the questions is neither 1) educational nor 2) challenging, it's 3) annoying. Rather than subject 100+ people to this, why not take 5 minutes and move the questions to the top of the page?

 

Yes, scrolling through pages of text isn't educational. It's can only be educational if you read it.

 

As I said earlier, I'm not against moving the questions to the top of the page, but realize that if the cache description is long enough such that some of it will be cut off while trying to view the listing in the field, instead of the questions getting cut off, some of that educational material will get cut off. Although I haven't created an earthcache myself, I've done enough of them (an in every case, knew what questions I had to answer *before* I got to GZ) to see that a considerable about of research effort is put into most of them (and is required in order for it to be published). Some of the responses come across as "we don't care that you put in a lot of time and effort to create an earth cache. Just give us the questions so that we can provide the obligatory answers and get our smiley".

 

I haven't placed a new cache in a long time. Part of that is because I just don't have as much time as I used to for maintaining more caches. The other reason is the growing sense of entitlement, manifested in many ways, that I observe from a larger percentage of cache finders.

 

Perhaps map images and trailhead waypoints could be removed from the cache pages, and pocket queries could be eliminated, making the find more difficult as well. The site could be returned to the way it looked in 2000, and all of the angry entitled numbers cachers could leave in a huff. :ph34r:

 

If I was calling for making every cache more difficult to find by intentionally omitting information you might have a point, but I didn't do that. This thread isn't about every cache, but I get the feeling that you're post wasn't an attempt to address facts, as much as it was to be frivolous and condescending.

 

Factually, it was a extreme version of your idea to keep the info more difficult to access for no other reason than to punish those who cache differently than you do. Annoying people with purposely hidden info will not make things better.

 

I don't know where you're getting the idea that I'm advocating keeping information and intentionally hiding information. If you look at the bolded section above you'll see that I specifically wrote that I am not against putting the lists of tasks which must be accomplished at the top. In any case, someone that creates an earthcache listings isn't purposely hiding information. The cache finder is purposely making the choice to use a viewing technology that limits the amount of information that can be displayed. The information is *not* hidden on the web site when using a browser. if, for example, the cache listing contains 40 lines of educational text (which the earthcache guidelines *require* a CO to provide) and the viewing technology cuts it off at 30 lines, placing five lines of task information at the top means that 5 fewer lines of educational material will be shown *if* the cache seeker insists on using a technology which limits the amount of text that will be displayed.

 

My argument is more about the notion that a cache owner is always obligated to make as easy as possible for all cache seekers. Groundspeak gives us a variety of cache types that we can hide and also a difficulty rating system. Presumably, Groundspeak thinks I ought to have the choice of the type of cache I create and how difficult it should be or they wouldn't offer all these different options. I see it sort of like a professional musician that chooses to play jazz music instead of recording pop music and becoming indistinguishable from all the Justin Beiber and Beyonce wannabes. The jazz musician understands that they could be more popular and sell their music to a larger audience if they played pop music but it's their choice not to sell-out and to create the kind of music that they want to play and for an audience that appreciates jazz. Similarly, there are a gazillion park-n-grab caches placed by thousands of cache owners that cater to numbers hounds that don['t seem to care about any aspect of a cache as long as they can quickly find it and go on to the next one. A potential cache owner is under no obligation to cater to the masses. If they want to create difficult puzzle caches or caches that require miles of hiking up a mountain, like the jazz musician, they're going to satisfy a smaller audience but that is a choice that the cache owner is free to make and is under no obligation to sell-out to the numbers crowd that insist on finding every cache as quickly as possible.

[+captnemo]

Moderator please close thread.

You have to click the "Report" button below your post and ask there for the thread to be closed.

thanks