Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
pantadeusz

logging an earthcache late?

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, pantadeusz said:
48 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

Your question is a binary question - the glacier is either moving or it's not - one of those answers has to be correct - ergo, if forced to, I can just guess until I get it right.

It's not about whether the glacier is moving (all glaciers move...) but about the direction in which it is moving. But yes, you can guess until you get it right. As I said, this will not help you get your answers accepted, as the question specifically asks for an argument to support your answer.

I see what Team Microdot is getting after.  While I agree that many folks may be able to spot things in order to articulate whether it's advancing or retreating, some may not have an idea and would have to take a stab in the dark -- or not log it.

You could address it by adding another paragraph on glacial movement and what can cause it.  In the paragraph, list some of the signs of glacial advance and some signs of glacial retreat.  The finder can then look at that, look at the scene, say, "OK, I see X, Y, and Z," and then they're better armed to answer the question.  You're not spelling out the answer, but you're giving people more tools to be able to determine the answer for themselves.  Those that don't need the help can answer the question, but it helps those who aren't sure and might feel uncomfortable asking what, at least per your cache description, is knowledge you assume they should have.

(Or, per your last post, if you don't want to spell it out, it's your cache, and I'm not a geoaware, so I'll just leave my two cents on the counter.)

Edited by hzoi
sp
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, pantadeusz said:

Ok, I understand now where our disagreement lies. I believe not everything needs to be laid out step by step in a lesson - sometimes you can expect the student to think for himself or herself a bit. I get that you disagree and believe that if I want the cacher to do something I should explicitly explain how to do it. In my listing this is purposefully not done.

 

So you 're assuming prior knowledge and your Earth Science lesson is - exactly as I explained earlier - missing fundamentally essential information.

Infact I see that hzoi understands perfectly well what I'm getting at so it seems I wasn't communicating poorly after all.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

So you 're assuming prior knowledge and your Earth Science lesson is - exactly as I explained earlier - missing fundamentally essential information.

No, I am not and it is not. Not explicitly telling someone what to do is rarely equivalent to keeping fundamentally essential information from them. You must see the this. I guess you and I have very different ideas of what a perfect lesson looks like. For me it is something that makes me think intensively and often out of the box - and this is how I've learned the most in the past. By the way, in the case of my cache I don't think it's necessary to think out of the box or very intensively. Just a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, pantadeusz said:
23 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

So you 're assuming prior knowledge and your Earth Science lesson is - exactly as I explained earlier - missing fundamentally essential information.

No, I am not and it is not. Not explicitly telling someone what to do is rarely equivalent to keeping fundamentally essential information from them. You must see the this. I guess you and I have very different ideas of what a perfect lesson looks like. For me it is something that makes me think intensively and often out of the box - and this is how I've learned the most in the past. By the way, in the case of my cache I don't think it's necessary to think out of the box or very intensively. Just a bit.

Your lesson needn't be perfect. Adequate would suffice.

In summary, if you rejected my log on the basis you've outlined above I'd appeal directly with Groundspeak and point out where your Earth Science lesson is inadequate and offer suggestions on how it could be made adequate - in a way probably not dissimilar to the suggestions offered by hzoi in his post.

I'd also urge anyone else who had their log rejected to do the same.

Edited by Team Microdot
typo

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, pantadeusz said:

Yes, I get that you would. Now can we move back to the question I asked?

For the avoidance of doubt would you be kind enough to re-state the question you'd now like responses to?

Share this post


Link to post

Mate, I already got the answer from you. Thanks for your input. Now I will appreciate it if you stop spamming. I trust in the ability of other users of this forum to browse it efficiently and realise I am interested in what they think of logging earthcaches by users who visited them before they were published.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post

This appeared in a different thread.  Rather appropriate, and it shows that each cache owner can do as he pleases.

 

On an Earthcache:
 
 
Found it Found it          07/01/1961

The cache owner has allowed me to log this as of my first visit when I spent quite some time playing around the rocks. Probably there was a different sign then but the same rocks. Apparently even the experts didn't know this was a rock glacier for another 20 years. I have been back twice since but didn't stay as long. Because all my visits were before the cache was posted I'm claiming -1TF

Publish Listing Publish Listing     09/16/2016

Published

 

Yes. Those are the same dates as posted.

Good thing they kept good notes. It's hard to remember things for 55+ years.

Share this post


Link to post

  

On 10/4/2017 at 2:14 PM, pantadeusz said:

I am interested in what they think of logging earthcaches by users who visited them before they were published.

In one of the previous threads on this topic, GeoawareGSA1 endorsed the view that "logging an EarthCache that you didn't truly visit (after it was published, and after knowing about its existence)" is "cheesy."  As he wrote, "the person didn't 'really do the EarthCache,' in the true sense" but the Earthcache FAQ allows the CO to use their discretion.  

That sums up both the earthcaching policy - "somebody has not actually visited an EarthCache if there was no EarthCache there at the time of their visit" but the owner can do what they think is right - and my view.  There are some earthcaches in places I once visited that I probably could answer, but it seems rather cheesy.  

Edited by geodarts

Share this post


Link to post

And on that great note, I think we can end this thread. The question has been answered.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

×