Jump to content

Language Requirements for Cache Descriptions


Guest
Followers 5

Recommended Posts

Sorry for my intervention but I didn't find a better place to make my question. If not appropriate please ignore it.

Does any rule demands for English translation and description in the cache description page ?

My cache is in Greek language and despite the future enchantment for other languages (like English and French and...) right now I want the description to be in GREEK only. I can provide an English translation to the reviewer if I must do, but the page needs to start as it is. With no English on it.

Can the reviewer reject this cache only because I don't want to add English description ?

Link to comment

 

Does any rule demands for English translation and description in the cache description page ?

Can the reviewer reject this cache only because I don't want to add English description ?

 

No to both, you can publish with only one non-english language on the page.

 

Having said that many cachers (often not native English speakers) would appreciate an english translation.

Link to comment
Does any rule demands for English translation and description in the cache description page

 

Earthcaches require that the listing be available in the local language.

 

7. The EarthCache text and logging tasks must be submitted in the local language. Additional languages are encouraged, but the local language must be listed first.

 

No other cache type has a language restriction.

Link to comment

This is the answer of the reviewer to one of the colleagues in Greece. We accept his view about foreign geocachers. We even have NONE geocache in Greece without English transcription and more than 95% have the English language as first so foreigners see this description first.

But the denying of publication because this one has no English translation is outrageous. If any one can do it, why we can't ?

We do not like to start boycott or start sending e-mails to Groundspeak, disable all our caches for as long he continues denying etc.

As one of us said, we play a game and not trying to succeed in English language exams !

But we like to hear your opinions !

 

I've been thinking quite a bit about your cache. And given that no other reviewers had anything to add, this is what I decided--

 

Different reviewers have different standards and requirements for publishing a cache. I consider myself one of the less demanding ones. However, you're going to need to work with me, if you want me to publish this cache.

If you weren't able to properly write in English, that would be one thing (I would help find a way to translate it). But since you already have an English translation on file, then purposely not including it in the description seems to me exclusionary and elitist, and generally counter the global-community ethic that Groundspeak is trying to promote.

So I would like to ask you one last time. Please include the English translation into the description, or explain to me why you feel that it shouldn't be included. You're also free to petition Groundspeak directly and override my decision. However, I have never yet approved of a cache without any English, and I don't plan on doing so now.

I hope you'll reconsider your position,

Edited by Mimhs.gr
Link to comment

Well for what it's worth I agree with you that you that this is outrageous. There are no requirements in the publishing guidelines requiring an English translation, and many caches around the world are being published in just their local language. I doubt there's much you can do other than to appeal to Groudspeak. Another alternative to consider is that I don't believe there's a requirement to have ANY text on the cache page, so you could submit caches with no description whatsoever :ph34r: .

Link to comment

I split off the above posts from another thread into a topic of their own, because I found the question interesting. My understanding is the same as the above answers -- language requirements are only relevant to earthcaches and it is a requirement to use the local language, not English.

Edited by Keystone
Link to comment
Different reviewers have different standards and requirements for publishing a cache. I consider myself one of the less demanding ones.

 

I thought that the 'Standards' and 'Requirements' were those of Groundspeak?

I thought that Groundspeak wanted consistency with caches listed on their site?*

 

I have no problem with caches being in the local language, although a translation would be nice - but not compulsory!

 

*Is this not the very reason that we, in the UK, have lost some of our reviewers in recent years - Groundspeak not wanting 'local variations of the rules guidelines? :unsure:

Link to comment

I'm curious as to why it needs to have no English on it. Not that I necessarily disagree with your choice by the way, just wondering if there is any specific reason for it.

 

In terms of working with the reviewer - I know that in the UK there have been issues with reviewers feeling that they have to quit the process - both recently and in the past. Personally I think I'd be tempted to work with the reviewer here and get the cache published.

 

Someone will be able to answer my next question I'd sure - once the cache is published it is, presumably, easy to change the description? And the reviewer would, presumably, not get notification of that change?

Link to comment

I am Greek and I believe that each person and each cache must just follow the rules.

 

There is no such rule as far as I have read.

 

Many Greeks do not speak English. We make an effort to have all our caches translated even from friends for fellow geocacher but I find it very aggressive to not publish a cache due to language reason, because the reviewer doesn't speak the local language.

 

If this is the GS point of view, maybe local language speakers should be made as reviewers in countries with "strange" languages.

Link to comment

From the Guidelines:

 

At times a geocache may meet the requirements for publication on the site but the reviewers, as experienced geocachers, may see additional concerns not listed in these guidelines that you as a geocache placer may not have noticed. The reviewer may bring these additional concerns to your attention and offer suggestions so that the geocache can be published.

 

Judging from the Reviewers response that is posted above, they have a "concern" that your Description is "...exclusionary and elitist...". Since I've seen Descriptions written in Klingon and Navi, I'm not going to get into the merits of the Reviewers decision.

 

If it were me, I would probably take the Listing to Appeals and let Groundspeak have that discussion with the Reviewer, rather than waste my time going back and forth over the issue.

Link to comment

As Keystone posted ...

 

I split off the above posts from another thread into a topic of their own, because I found the question interesting. My understanding is the same as the above answers -- language requirements are only relevant to earthcaches and it is a requirement to use the local language, not English.

 

I'd submit to this reviewer with his English, and then edit after publication to whatever I saw fit.

Link to comment

As Keystone posted ...

 

I split off the above posts from another thread into a topic of their own, because I found the question interesting. My understanding is the same as the above answers -- language requirements are only relevant to earthcaches and it is a requirement to use the local language, not English.

 

I'd submit to this reviewer with his English, and then edit after publication to whatever I saw fit.

 

Let me guess...you must be on "The List" <_<

Link to comment

Is there a case with Greek that the alphabet may not render on all devices?

I don't know if this is the case or not.

Maybe there are some cases where some devices do not show correctly on them. But this is not the rule and not the reason for denial. He asks from Greek geocachers to promote " the global-community ethic that Groundspeak is trying to ..." but at the cost of not be able to use our language in one of our caches.

It is not important if this cache is published or not. Really. It is nothing special about it.

But please consider the following: I and two other Greek players, have spend thousands of work hours to translate the GC site into Greek language. That is 7.000+ sentences, 66.000+ words, 430.000+ characters. And those numbers do not include repetitions, revisions, obsolete phrases, errors, discussions, etc.

For what ? Not be able to write and read a cache page in our own language ? Or for saving that 30$ of prime membership ?

Link to comment

I am the player whose cache got rejected. Now, I have published more than 30 caches, and I have always included en english description -- some times, only english. The cache in question is a run-of-the mill micro in an urban forest; I intend for it to be easily findable, and the hint is in english, providing for, I hope, an almost immediate find, even without an english description. The greek description itself only says that the cache is placed near a water tap in the park, and that the park is a great place to walk, bike etc.

 

Having provided this information, I went ahead and submitted the cache with just the greek description, planning to go back after publication and include english, and perhaps put some more stuff about the park in both languages. I thought nothing of it, I have sought and found caches with descriptions only in french, german, flemish, italian and turkish. Caches with descriptions only in russian, japanese etc are also around.

 

Instead, this has turned into a major issue, with the reviewer refusing to publish the cache because of the lack of english description. First, because s/he could not understand it, and when I sent a translation as a reviewer note, because "the game is international". So according to the reviewer, it is OK for the french, germans, belgians, italians, turks and swedes to have caches just in their language -- but not for greeks.

 

As I said, I prefer for cache descriptions to include english, and might even be in favor of such a requirement by Groundspeak. But in this case, the review appears to have made up an arbitrary rule and enforcing it. This is, well, arbitrary, and also discriminatory for no good reason.

 

Most of the readers here have suggested that I take this up with GS. Who do I contact for this?

Link to comment

I review in New York, where English is obviously the language used by pretty much everybody, so this has never been an issue for me. But I know of no guideline requiring English text on cache descriptions, whether it is in Greece, Germany, England or the US. The only time it makes sense to force an alternative translation is if your reviewer doesn't read/speak the language of the cache. If somebody submitted a cache in Greek in my review area, I'd ask for an English translation so I could properly review it, but I wouldn't require it on the cache page. Definitely contact Groundspeak for clarification - there may be some sort of guideline I'm not aware of.

Link to comment

Let me guess...you must be on "The List" <_<

 

You lost me there ... :blink:

 

Might be a humorous comment ... might be chastising ... dunno.....

'splain yourself, Lucy.

 

Sorry, can't find an example right off. It's an old joke that comes up occasionally, referring to some non existent "List" which the Reviewers keep, of individuals that have a chronic habit of bending/breaking the Guidelines. A few problems with that philosophy:

 

1. It's not honest.

2. If you live in an area like mine, with lots of active cachers, there's bound to be a handful of tattletales that will report it.

3. In this particular situation, gaming the system in this fashion doesn't address the real issue, which is whether the Reviewer is overreaching in their interpretation of the Guidelines, in which case, Groundspeak needs to step in and correct the situation.

 

Skating around the Guidelines usually just creates more issues than it resolves.

Link to comment

Let me guess...you must be on "The List" <_<

 

You lost me there ... :blink:

 

Might be a humorous comment ... might be chastising ... dunno.....

'splain yourself, Lucy.

 

Sorry, can't find an example right off. It's an old joke that comes up occasionally, referring to some non existent "List" which the Reviewers keep, of individuals that have a chronic habit of bending/breaking the Guidelines. A few problems with that philosophy:

 

1. It's not honest.

2. If you live in an area like mine, with lots of active cachers, there's bound to be a handful of tattletales that will report it.

3. In this particular situation, gaming the system in this fashion doesn't address the real issue, which is whether the Reviewer is overreaching in their interpretation of the Guidelines, in which case, Groundspeak needs to step in and correct the situation.

 

Skating around the Guidelines usually just creates more issues than it resolves.

 

Correct on all points ... except that I'm not on "the list" that I know of.

Mine was an off the cuff comment to get the cache published.

Correcting the review is more important.

Link to comment

Dear friends,

We do not care about this or any future cache. We just want to follow the rules, but official ones.

Be certain that we know and can invent ways to create windows in every system, so we can escape any situation. But this time we want to be honest and legal.

There is a saying in this country: Cockroaches and Greeks are going to be the only ones who escape in case of nuclear war. The first by being very adaptive and Greeks because they will find a way to escape disaster.

But please keep offering your thoughts. Every contribution is counting and for GLOBAL good of geocachers.

Link to comment

Having provided this information, I went ahead and submitted the cache with just the greek description, planning to go back after publication and include english, and perhaps put some more stuff about the park in both languages. I thought nothing of it, I have sought and found caches with descriptions only in french, german, flemish, italian and turkish. Caches with descriptions only in russian, japanese etc are also around.

 

I guess it will not help you but what I noticed over many years that in countries with a reviewer who does not understand the local language, the usage of English plays a much larger role than in countries who have a reviewer who can understand the local language.

 

For a number of years most Austrian caches were reviewed by Erik and even though Erik has knowledge of German, almost all cachers made an effort back then to provide a description easily handable for him. All reviewers are volunteers and having to handle submissions in languages one does not know adds considerably to the time they have to invest. Greece is not yet even close to the state when Austria got it's own reviewer.

 

Greek is not easy to translate by automatic translation. I think that as long Greece does not have a reviewer for whom it is easy to read Greek, all Greek cachers should try their best and help the reviewer(s). It's another issue whether there are already enough caches in Greece to allow for assigning a reviewer for Greece that speaks Greek.

 

I do understand that not every Greek cacher is able to write in English, but I need to admit that I too cannot understand why you insist on keeping the English version that already exists off from your cache page. Likewise I do not understand why some of my fellow Austrian cachers are not willing to offer English versions for their cache when the translation is done by a volunteer and they do not need to invest a single minute of work.

Link to comment

Why are we having this discussion in English?? :o

 

Which other language makes sense? Certainly not Greek as neither the involved reviewer, other reviewers that happen to visit this thread, Groundspeak staff nor the big majority of cachers that use this forum are able to understand Greek and discuss in Greek. Some Greek cachers can discuss the issue among themselves in Greek in the Greek subforum or somewhere else, but that will not bring any further insight to them.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

Is there a case with Greek that the alphabet may not render on all devices?

 

I don't know if this is the case or not.

 

It probably is still the case, however as the Greek alphabet has similar characteristics to the Roman alphabet it can easily be substituted for the Roman alphabet on a letter-by-letter basis, for displaying on a device that only supports the 26 'English letters' or the western European character sets. The result will not please language purists, but a Greek speaker who knows the Roman alphabet would be able to read it.

Link to comment

Let me know if I understand this:

 

a. The reviewer does not read Greek so requests that the submittal include an English translation in order to properly review the hide.

 

b. The hider complies, does a translation, and submits it to get the cache reviewed.

 

c. The reviewer then insists the English translation be included on the cache page before it will be published. This is what is under discussion here as being purportedly beyond requirements.

 

d. The submitter feels wronged by this requirement and refuses to add his previously developed translation onto the cache page.

Link to comment

I guess it will not help you but what I noticed over many years that in countries with a reviewer who does not understand the local language, the usage of English plays a much larger role than in countries who have a reviewer who can understand the local language.

We are not asking for magic ! The owner has provided the english translation using the Note to reviewer.

For a number of years most Austrian caches were reviewed by Erik and even though Erik has knowledge of German, almost all cachers made an effort back then to provide a description easily handable for him. All reviewers are volunteers and having to handle submissions in languages one does not know adds considerably to the time they have to invest. Greece is not yet even close to the state when Austria got it's own reviewer.

Erik followed the rules and we have no problem with him. Some of my caches were with very small English but big Greek descriptions. They passed with "flying colors" easily.

Greek is not easy to translate by automatic translation. I think that as long Greece does not have a reviewer for whom it is easy to read Greek, all Greek cachers should try their best and help the reviewer(s). It's another issue whether there are already enough caches in Greece to allow for assigning a reviewer for Greece that speaks Greek.

Other languages are also difficult to translate but cachers use only their own. If it is another issue I don't see why to use that in our discussion.

I do understand that not every Greek cacher is able to write in English, but I need to admit that I too cannot understand why you insist on keeping the English version that already exists off from your cache page. Likewise I do not understand why some of my fellow Austrian cachers are not willing to offer English versions for their cache when the translation is done by a volunteer and they do not need to invest a single minute of work.

We do not use English for everyday life, and some Greek geocachers can't use it fluently (or at all).

The English translation is not keep'd off our cache page. We didn't want/be able/willing to add it on this one cache at the time of reviewing. The person who was translating was sick, dead or on vacation.

We do not have any steady volunteers to make the translations as you do in Austria.

But let me repeat the questions:

Is there any rule in Groundspeak rules, that says " The owner can't use any other language in cache name" ?

Is there any rule in Groundspeak rules, that says " The owner can't use any other language in cache description unless he also provides an English translation " ?

And the answer in my opinion can only be yes or no. All other are irrelevant to the discussion...

Link to comment

A couple things;

 

First, per the last post

 

Is there any rule in Groundspeak rules, that says " The owner can't use any other language in cache name" ?

Is there any rule in Groundspeak rules, that says " The owner can't use any other language in cache description unless he also provides an English translation " ?

And the answer in my opinion can only be yes or no. All other are irrelevant to the discussion...

]it states in the guidelines that because a geocache has been published/not published, does not a similar cache will or will not be published in the future. That means the argument that there are other caches that XXX (In this case are not in English) is not a reason to say yours should be published. Groundspeak has made it clear that there are very few "rules" only guidelines. While this may give the reviewers the ability to be lenient, it also gives them the ability to be more strict.

 

Second, as I understand it the reviewer wants the cache in English as well since you were able to communicate(and have the cache page translated for the reviewer) in English, there is no good reason not to have it in English for others.

If you weren't able to properly write in English, that would be one thing (I would help find a way to translate it). But since you already have an English translation on file, then purposely not including it in the description seems to me exclusionary and elitist, and generally counter the global-community ethic
The reviewer seems to accept that had you not been able to effectively communicate in English then he wouldn't have asked you to do what he did.

 

So I guess the question is why don't you want to put it English? It's obviously not because can't. I would think that if you have a valid reason not to-and "because I don't want to" is not valid-then the reviewer would let it go.

 

Don't get me wrong-My opinion is that any language should be acceptable, but to me it seems you don't want to work with the reviewer just because you don't like what's being asked of you...

Edited by T.D.M.22
Link to comment

Let me know if I understand this:

 

a. The reviewer does not read Greek so requests that the submittal include an English translation in order to properly review the hide.

 

b. The hider complies, does a translation, and submits it to get the cache reviewed.

 

c. The reviewer then insists the English translation be included on the cache page before it will be published. This is what is under discussion here as being purportedly beyond requirements.

 

d. The submitter feels wronged by this requirement and refuses to add his previously developed translation onto the cache page.

a. correct

b. almost correct, the hider provides the English description, but this is not the description as it should be, it needs a lot of work to do, in HTML, because he is a perfectionist and he does not like cheap text in his page.

c. correct

d. correct (as you said 'previously developed translation')

And my Question: The reviewer has to publish the cache if the - b. stage - fulfills the rules ?

Link to comment

Let me know if I understand this:

 

a. The reviewer does not read Greek so requests that the submittal include an English translation in order to properly review the hide.

 

b. The hider complies, does a translation, and submits it to get the cache reviewed.

 

c. The reviewer then insists the English translation be included on the cache page before it will be published. This is what is under discussion here as being purportedly beyond requirements.

 

d. The submitter feels wronged by this requirement and refuses to add his previously developed translation onto the cache page.

a. correct

b. almost correct, the hider provides the English description, but this is not the description as it should be, it needs a lot of work to do, in HTML, because he is a perfectionist and he does not like cheap text in his page.

c. correct

d. correct (as you said 'previously developed translation')

And my Question: The reviewer has to publish the cache if the - b. stage - fulfills the rules ?

 

My opinion is it should be published at stage "b" compliance.

 

My opinion is of no import. Your answer needs to come from the APPEALS route.

Link to comment

So according to the reviewer, it is OK for the french, germans, belgians, italians, turks and swedes to have caches just in their language -- but not for greeks.

 

Did the reviewer say this?

 

Very possibly. With the exception of Turkey, which I'll take exception to, as I'm not convinced they are allowed to have caches exclusively in their language. Geocaching is extremely popular in all the other listed Countries. Lets take the first three, and compare them to Greece: France 110,000 active caches; Germany 340,000 active caches; tiny little Belgium, 23,000 caches. Greece? 2,500 caches with an American reviewer. Greece is light years away from having their own reviewer. Said American reviewer has been reviewing caches all over the world in Countries where Geocaching is not very popular (which is, in fact, most of the Countries in the world), and I would doubt he's being rogue here, and acting independently of guidance from Frog HQ.

Link to comment

Is there any rule in Groundspeak rules, that says " The owner can't use any other language in cache name" ?

Is there any rule in Groundspeak rules, that says " The owner can't use any other language in cache description unless he also provides an English translation " ?

And the answer in my opinion can only be yes or no. All other are irrelevant to the discussion...

]it states in the guidelines that because a geocache has been published/not published, does not a similar cache will or will not be published in the future. That means the argument that there are other caches that XXX (In this case are not in English) is not a reason to say yours should be published. Groundspeak has made it clear that there are very few "rules" only guidelines. While this may give the reviewers the ability to be lenient, it also gives them the ability to be more strict.

The "no precedent" guideline shouldn't be interpreted as meaning reviewers are free to whimsically disregard existing guidelines or create new ones. A reviewer might passionately hate micro caches, but they shouldn't be allowed to simply refuse to publish nanos based upon that hatred.

 

Yes, reviewers have some discretion on how they can handle certain situations (e.g., granting exceptions to the 0.1-mile guideline). But requiring a Greek cache to have an English translation, like disallowing micros, should be far outside that range of discretion.

Link to comment

Second, as I understand it the reviewer wants the cache in English as well since you were able to communicate(and have the cache page translated for the reviewer) in English, there is no good reason not to have it in English for others.

 

If you weren't able to properly write in English, that would be one thing (I would help find a way to translate it). But since you already have an English translation on file, then purposely not including it in the description seems to me exclusionary and elitist, and generally counter the global-community ethic

The reviewer seems to accept that had you not been able to effectively communicate in English then he wouldn't have asked you to do what he did.

 

So I guess the question is why don't you want to put it English? It's obviously not because can't. I would think that if you have a valid reason not to-and "because I don't want to" is not valid-then the reviewer would let it go.

"Because I don't want to" seems like a valid reason to me. This is the cache creator's cache, not Groundspeak's cache and certainly not the reviewer's cache. If the cache owner doesn't want to paint the cache blue, then that's a good enough reason not to paint it blue. And if they don't want to add an English translation, then that's a good enough reason not to.

Link to comment

So according to the reviewer, it is OK for the french, germans, belgians, italians, turks and swedes to have caches just in their language -- but not for greeks.

Did the reviewer say this?

What the reviewer said was, "But since you already have an English translation on file, then purposely not including it in the description seems to me exclusionary and elitist, and generally counter the global-community ethic that Groundspeak is trying to promote."

 

While that might be a wonderful goal to advocate, it seems to me that forcing adherence goes beyond the duties and powers of a reviewer.

Link to comment

"Because I don't want to" seems like a valid reason to me. This is the cache creator's cache, not Groundspeak's cache and certainly not the reviewer's cache. If the cache owner doesn't want to paint the cache blue, then that's a good enough reason not to paint it blue. And if they don't want to add an English translation, then that's a good enough reason not to.

 

Thing is, I was actually coming down on the side of the reviewer on this one - they have a tough job to do which I expect can be a real struggle.

 

But CanadianRockies makes a very solid point here - and one I have to agree with - especially not Groundspeak's cache because it does seem that as time passes by, Groundspeak themselves dictate with ever greater restriction and rigidity just what constitutes an acceptable cache while still trying to maintain the position of just a listing site :ph34r:

Link to comment

A couple things;

A. While this may give the reviewers the ability to be lenient, it also gives them the ability to be more strict.

B.The reviewer seems to accept that had you not been able to effectively communicate in English then he wouldn't have asked you to do what he did.

C. So I guess the question is why don't you want to put it English? It's obviously not because can't. I would think that if you have a valid reason not to-and "because I don't want to" is not valid-then the reviewer would let it go.

D.Don't get me wrong-My opinion is that any language should be acceptable, but to me it seems you don't want to work with the reviewer just because you don't like what's being asked of you...

A . More strict. Even from the clearly stated rules and guidelines ? Make new rules ?

B . He asked for the translation and English title before any communication and translation. If the simple text ' English translation under construction ' seems 'effective' communication to you or him, you should come to Greece and start giving Proficiency diplomas to any Greek persons you meet.

C . No need to quess. The question is: Do any rules exist, about the language of the title or description? or rephrasing that: is English obligatory for title or cache description ?

D . Sorry. You confused me ! Your opinion is that any language should be acceptable but you are refusing my right to fight for that ?

Link to comment

So according to the reviewer, it is OK for the french, germans, belgians, italians, turks and swedes to have caches just in their language -- but not for greeks.

Did the reviewer say this?

What the reviewer said was, "But since you already have an English translation on file, then purposely not including it in the description seems to me exclusionary and elitist, and generally counter the global-community ethic that Groundspeak is trying to promote."

 

While that might be a wonderful goal to advocate, it seems to me that forcing adherence goes beyond the duties and powers of a reviewer.

 

That has nothing to do with the point of my question.

Link to comment

Hello everyone,

 

As a representative of HQ, I wanted you to know that I've been notified about this situation and will work directly with the reviewer to help resolve and get this cache published. I agree that it's okay for the cache page to be in Greek. To understand the cache description, a reviewer can use resources such as Reviewer Notes, Google translate or the Greek translation team to get help. This reviewer is new to reviewing caches in Greece. Sorry for the misunderstanding!

 

Cindy / Frau Potter

Link to comment

We do not have any steady volunteers to make the translations as you do in Austria.

 

I guess you misunderstood what I wrote. I meant cachers like myself who offer to translate descriptions of caches that are of interest to tourists into English and receive disappointing "no, I do not want to offer an English description" answers.

I have offered to translate cache pages for cache owners who are fluent in English because I thought maybe they are reluctant to spend the time needed for providing two language versions.

 

And the answer in my opinion can only be yes or no. All other are irrelevant to the discussion...

 

Irrelevant to you perhaps. Not irrelevant to me. I belong to those cachers who miss the old times when in most non English speaking countries the percentage of caches offered in English was so much higher than it is today and one of the reasons was that Groundspeak used US-reviewers for almost everywhere. I do not see it as progress when more and more cache pages of owners who can write in English end up monolingual.

 

Noone said that the English description would need to be part of the html cache page. The cache owner could have made it available in many other ways. While I acknowledge that there are cachers out there who are not able to come up with English cache descriptions, it really makes me sad how many cachers are well able to provide English descriptions and refrain from doing so for reasons I will never understand.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

OK. Maybe I didn't express my self and my thoughts clear enough, but forgive me. English is not my 'mothers language', and I have learned any English I know by my self only.

I a didn't start the thread for any other reason except to claim my rights for freely expressing my thoughts through geocaching. There is no gain for Greek hiders to repel the foreign people from finding their caches. We need people to know what, where & why they are going to search for.

But that is another thing. Really irrelevant to my right to publish my cache in my language. Yes, I know there are many ways to present caches in English. But what if I don't want to expose some bad historical events that Greeks are ashamed for ? A story that must be keep between locals to avoid happen again ? In your country everything is correct ? Some things, must be known but also stay in the 'family'!

This cache is not the case. Really. But was violating my rights by forcing me to do what I didn't have to.

Link to comment

OK. Maybe I didn't express my self and my thoughts clear enough, but forgive me. English is not my 'mothers language', and I have learned any English I know by my self only.

I a didn't start the thread for any other reason except to claim my rights for freely expressing my thoughts through geocaching. There is no gain for Greek hiders to repel the foreign people from finding their caches. We need people to know what, where & why they are going to search for.

But that is another thing. Really irrelevant to my right to publish my cache in my language. Yes, I know there are many ways to present caches in English. But what if I don't want to expose some bad historical events that Greeks are ashamed for ? A story that must be keep between locals to avoid happen again ? In your country everything is correct ? Some things, must be known but also stay in the 'family'!

This cache is not the case. Really. But was violating my rights by forcing me to do what I didn't have to.

 

Ummm...you do realize that Groundspeak is a private company. You really don't have any rights on this website, other than the ones that Groundspeak grants you :ph34r:

 

Nonetheless, judging from post #46, it sounds like you'll have a relatively quick resolution to the issue.

Link to comment

Let me know if I understand this:

 

a. The reviewer does not read Greek so requests that the submittal include an English translation in order to properly review the hide.

 

b. The hider complies, does a translation, and submits it to get the cache reviewed.

 

c. The reviewer then insists the English translation be included on the cache page before it will be published. This is what is under discussion here as being purportedly beyond requirements.

 

d. The submitter feels wronged by this requirement and refuses to add his previously developed translation onto the cache page.

 

And if it *is* a thorough summary (as seems to be the case), then isn't this brouhaha a "tempest in a teapot." (Hope that idiomatic English translates well.)

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 5
×
×
  • Create New...