would you rather log aTraditional cache or a Earthcache

[+Viajero Perdido 351]

41 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

Dropping a stick or leaf in a stream, timing its passage to another spot, and calculating it's speed (and so the speed of the stream) at the time of my visit is a bit more math than I feel is necessary.

 

It can be a bit sillier than I find necessary too.  Here I'm helping my bud FT"F" an EC that was - get this - published in winter. 

 

 

Dunno what he submitted for speed.  Probably zero, but a breeze did blow it around a bit.

[+humboldt flier 25]

2 hours ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

Would I like to log a traditional or an Earthcache?

 

Why yes, yes I would. It's certainly better than working!!! 

 

Good one LOL

[+Clancy's Crew 4]

We have done a few Earth Caches over the years, since they are intellectually stimulating and almost always in unusual locations.  Most recent was an EC in central Mexico, at a cave that we were visiting to rappel anyway.  Although the rappelling wasn't required for logging, we got some interesting pictures on the bottom that people never get a chance to see from the edge, 1,100 feet above.  Nine foot pile of bird guano at the bottom of the pit; you don't see that too often!

 

Sótano de las Golondrinas, https://coord.info/GC3JMJ7

 

 

[+mertat 11]

4 hours ago, Clancy's Crew said:

We have done a few Earth Caches over the years, since they are intellectually stimulating and almost always in unusual locations.  Most recent was an EC in central Mexico, at a cave that we were visiting to rappel anyway.  Although the rappelling wasn't required for logging, we got some interesting pictures on the bottom that people never get a chance to see from the edge, 1,100 feet above.  Nine foot pile of bird guano at the bottom of the pit; you don't see that too often!

 

Sótano de las Golondrinas, https://coord.info/GC3JMJ7

 

 

Awesome pictures!  Not something I'd ever be able to do.

[+coachstahly 233]

Tradtional caches are a dime a dozen while ECs are much less pervasive.  If given a choice, I'd choose the EC.  When I first started caching in 2010, I avoided ECs like the plague and tradtional caches were my mainstay.  Now, along with virtuals, ECs are the first type I scope out when traveling to new places.  Yes, they can sometimes be a bit confusing but that doesn't scare me off.  Even if I get the wrong answer (which has happened on occasion), I usually get a note from the CO thanking me for my visit and occasionally get some brief feedback about my answers.  However, if the EC is too far out of the way and the traditional cache makes more sense (time, family commitment, location, etc...), I'll opt to go with the traditional cache.

[+Clancy's Crew 4]

16 hours ago, mertat said:

Awesome pictures!  Not something I'd ever be able to do.

 

The way we chose to do this particular earthcache, i.e., actually going into the pit, was not required, but what I've noticed about most of the ECs we've done is that the locations they take us to are unique (geologically, etc.; kind of the point), and they challenge you to think about the location in a different way.  Many regular caches also have taken us to special places, e.g., unknown waterfalls, etc., but the ECs seem to have a higher probability of generating intellectual interest and photo opportunities.

 

Having said that, I suspect that there are really boring ECs out there, but we haven't come across one yet.

[+Hitman9956 25]

I would like to add my two penny worth: I visited an Earthcache on holiday in the Northeast of England. The cache listing indicated the nearby notice boards would help with answering the questions. I could not see anything obvious so went with the only one I could think of. I took a selfie and awarded an FP to the cache and duly sent my answer to the CO. I went back to my holiday caravan only to receive a blunt patronising and insulting remark from the CO along the lines of “try again” only aimed to anger me. He succeeded, so I replied apologising knowing I would not be returning to GZ ever, so duly removed my find log and FP, and left a courtesy write note. Sadly, I refuse to do anymore caches from this CO again unless trads. So in short, there are COs who are generally abusive and insulting - it’s sad but they are out there. 

Edited February 17 by Hitman9956

[+niraD 1308]

10 minutes ago, Hitman9956 said:

a blunt patronising and insulting remark from the CO along the lines of “try again” only aimed to anger me.

Blunt? Yes. And terse. And concise, succinct, and laconic.

 

Patronizing? Insulting? Only aimed to anger you? From where I'm sitting, that seems to be only your interpretation of what he wrote, not necessarily what he intended.

[+arisoft 397]

18 minutes ago, Hitman9956 said:

I took a selfie and awarded an FP to the cache and duly sent my answer to the CO.

 

I understand the reaction. This is how some players try to get finds without really earning one. Photolog and FP but failing to do what is expected to do. The CO may take this as an insult and reply accordingly.

[+Touchstone 540]

21 minutes ago, Hitman9956 said:

I would like to add my two penny worth: I visited an Earthcache on holiday in the Northeast of England. The cache listing indicated the nearby notice boards would help with answering the questions. I could not see anything obvious so went with the only one I could think of. I took a selfie and awarded an FP to the cache and duly sent my answer to the CO. I went back to my holiday caravan only to receive a blunt patronising and insulting remark from the CO along the lines of “try again” only aimed to anger me. He succeeded, so I replied apologising knowing I would not be returning to GZ ever, so duly removed my find log and FP, and left a courtesy write note. Sadly, I refuse to do anymore caches from this CO again unless trads. So in short, there are COs who are generally abusive and insulting - it’s sad but they are out there. 

 

Could be that the CO has had to deal with their fair share of armchair logs, which is an issue that I would guess is more prevalent with cache types that do not have a physical log to sign.  I try not to assume the worst in people until they've earned it with a pattern of bad behavior.

[+Hitman9956 25]

1 hour ago, arisoft said:

 

I understand the reaction. This is how some players try to get finds without really earning one. Photolog and FP but failing to do what is expected to do. The CO may take this as an insult and reply accordingly.

 

I’m sorry but this is rather what is wrong with caching at the moment. Justifying negativity is exactly why cachers avoid certain caches. Do you honestly think that I attempted that earthcache to cheat? To try to get a find without earning one? Really? Well, if that is what floats your boat then we live in separate worlds. There is a certain way to behave and being negative is not it.

 

1 hour ago, niraD said:

Blunt? Yes. And terse. And concise, succinct, and laconic.

 

Patronizing? Insulting? Only aimed to anger you? From where I'm sitting, that seems to be only your interpretation of what he wrote, not necessarily what he intended.

 

Oh he did intend it - otherwise why write it? Given other cachers have told me that they are not surprised about it says it all. If you think it’s ok for him to be that way, then that’s your view. However, me personally, I have been things in life to worry about than insulting other cachers. 

[+Touchstone 540]

43 minutes ago, Hitman9956 said:

 

I’m sorry but this is rather what is wrong with caching at the moment. Justifying negativity is exactly why cachers avoid certain caches. Do you honestly think that I attempted that earthcache to cheat? To try to get a find without earning one? Really? Well, if that is what floats your boat then we live in separate worlds. There is a certain way to behave and being negative is not it.

 

 

Oh he did intend it - otherwise why write it? Given other cachers have told me that they are not surprised about it says it all. If you think it’s ok for him to be that way, then that’s your view. However, me personally, I have been things in life to worry about than insulting other cachers. 

 

No offense, but I think it might be best to drop the issue and move on.  If my assumptions are correct, the CO has lost posting privileges on the Forum, and at the very least, it would be considered bad form to call them out in the Forum, where they have no ability to defend themselves.

[+LFC4eva 98]

3 hours ago, Hitman9956 said:

So in short, there are COs who are generally abusive and insulting - it’s sad but they are out there

 

It's not just CO's who can be abusive and insulting.. some cachERS feel the need to behave that way too.

I had a couple of unfound EC's on my watchlist (potential FTF's) and only last week a local cacher posted a Write Note one each which said (FTRN) is that a project GC statistic another boring earth cache answers to follow - how rude when an ECO has gone to the effort of putting together an interesting earth science lesson for others to enjoy - especially when it later transpired that the cacher slating them as boring, hadn't been anywhere near GZ.

I've no problem with anyone preferring a traditional to an Earthcache.. but if Earthcaches don't float your boat.. ignore them.  Don't belittle the efforts of Earthcache owners just because they aren't your thing.

In answer to the OP - I have no preference.  There are good and bad in all cache types.. and variety is the spice of life.  One of the great things about geocaching is that it caters for everyone, whatever your preference.

As an aside.. does anyone know what the acronym FTRN means?  It's not one I have come across before.

Edited February 17 by LFC4eva
correcting typo

[+arisoft 397]

2 hours ago, Hitman9956 said:

Do you honestly think that I attempted that earthcache to cheat?

 

I didn't put a word about what I think your intentions. Please, read my reply again. You are not mentioned. I gave a reason why CO may respond rude in such circumstances.

 

This makes me curious, did you give correct answers to claim your find?

Edited February 17 by arisoft

[+MNTA 104]

Couple of my favorite caches ever were Earth Caches. Though i have to admit many I have no clue how to answer. But like Traditionals there are great ones and ok ones. I am grateful someone brought me to a cool spot that most times I never would have bothered to even look.

 

Last summer I was looking to take my middle school kids on some awesome adventures. https://coord.info/GC2MNZA  Eliot Glacier Earthcache al I can say wow. The hike up was the hardest hike Ive done in years and the views and experience was amazing. My second favorite one was https://coord.info/GC1HWTV Oregon Sunstone Earthcache Took hours of driving to get out into the middle of nowhere to a public mining spot run by the BLM and the goal take a picture of what you found. So much fun had a blast. Both ECs I would never known to do but because someone took the time to research and bring us to we had a memorable experience. To those amazing ECs out there thanks!

[+bflentje 147]

18 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

This makes me curious, did you give correct answers to claim your find?

 

How vindictive.

[+Gill & Tony 181]

I own 4 EC's and have found 116.  Which is fewer than traditionals and mysteries, but more than any other type.

 

I enjoy finding a good EC more than a boring traditional.  I enjoy finding a great traditional over a poor EC.  At home I tend to go for traditionals, but on holiday I go for EC's and virtuals because they often take us to a great location.

[+colleda 202]

11/2/19. I have just spent the last 10 days on a tour of Egypt (I fly home tomorrow) and, if it wasn't for ECs I would be logging zero finds for this country. Today I had my one and only opportunity to log a Traditional and I DNF'd it (El Alamein}. It was the only trad that was anywhere near where our tour went. I haven't logged the ECs I've done as it will take time to collate my answers and information collected so I will be doing this when I get home.

19/2/19. Today I logged a find for a virtual at the Kufu (Cheops) pyramid tp give me my first Egypt find. I had a little to say about it In the "Irk" thread. I still have two EC's to log, one for Valley of the Kings and the other for the temple of Luxor.

[+papu66 19]

I don't mind visiting EC, they are always at worthwhile spots.However, there's usually a traditional cache or multi next to it so I can't say which one took me there.

 

I don't like logging caches in general so I surely prefer tradis for logging. ECs feel like taking an exam. The ones I have done were hovering between D 1.5 - 2, but I consider

D3 mysteries less work. I have logged 4 EC's so far and a few that was rejected either by CO or by  self-critisism.

 

 

[+Hitman9956 25]

On ‎2‎/‎17‎/‎2019 at 7:42 PM, Touchstone said:

 

No offense, but I think it might be best to drop the issue and move on.  If my assumptions are correct, the CO has lost posting privileges on the Forum, and at the very least, it would be considered bad form to call them out in the Forum, where they have no ability to defend themselves.

 

You're clearly not familiar with the geography of the said cacher - the individual not on the forums at present is on the west side of the UK whereas this earthcache is near Newcastle (over 100 miles away on the east coast!), with no caches placed by this cacher in that region. Assumptions are dangerous when clearly can be incorrect - I made a simple point above, and others decided to question me, so please do not focus on me only! There is nothing to drop for me here - my point is made, and like you I will move on but needed to make things clearl to avoid confusion.

[+on4bam 499]

I prefer any other cachetype (except CITO and events) over a traditional. Unfortunately traditionals are the most common types so if they are not "special" in any way we can easily walk passed without logging them when doing a multi.

 

[+geodarts 54]

In the last year I have found over twice the number of earthcaches as I have traditionals - and the difference in favorites list is probably even greater - so perhaps that answers the original question.  

 

Earthcaches have been an important part of our trips to national parks and foreign countries.  I am happy to find a traditional if it brings me to a unique location, can be reached by kayak, or provides a way to mark an area that we are visiting for other reasons,  I simply don't see that many traditionals that give me a reason to stop. 

[+Oxford Stone 11]

I'm looking forward to doing GC5ZVYD near me, where you have to measure the flow of the river in 3 different places. Makes a change. One that I like, near home, gets you looking (at what street number is the ammonite embedded in the wall. that sort of thing).

I studied geology at school so I generally find earth caches interesting and fun. But it can be a bit like going back to school.

We went to Portsmouth a while ago, there are a dozen earth caches there. Many of them want you to go to multiple locations so are quite time consuming. We did one of them, that was enough!

Out placing caches last week I crossed a brook on a plank and wondered why there seemed to be a crossroads of water - on closer inspection, it's an oxbow lake starting to form, it's just started to breach the neck of the meander. I've messaged the local earth cache reviewer to find out how we go from an interesting feature to an earth cache...

[+Goldenwattle 351]

3 hours ago, papu66 said:

ECs feel like taking an exam.

That's why I am not fond of them.

[+hzoi 802]

On 2/17/2019 at 9:52 PM, LFC4eva said:

I had a couple of unfound EC's on my watchlist (potential FTF's) and only last week a local cacher posted a Write Note one each which said (FTRN) is that a project GC statistic another boring earth cache answers to follow - how rude when an ECO has gone to the effort of putting together an interesting earth science lesson for others to enjoy - especially when it later transpired that the cacher slating them as boring, hadn't been anywhere near GZ.

 

I saw those.  The author of those notes is the original poster here, which confirms my above suspicion that this thread was really aimed as a dig against the recipient of those notes.  And so, yet again, regional infighting spills over to the message boards.  But at least we've gotten a decent discussion out of it, even if the OP intended only to stir the pot.

 

On 2/17/2019 at 9:52 PM, LFC4eva said:

As an aside.. does anyone know what the acronym FTRN means?  It's not one I have come across before.

 

I saw it as FTWN - which I am guessing stands for "first to write note."  Which explains the project-GC comment as perhaps an attempt at humor, or perhaps a separate dig against statistic seekers.

[+Bundyrumandcoke 54]

Nope, I don't bother with Earthcaches anymore, as the "find" is purely up to the decision of the cache owner. After doing a few, and having a couple of finds rejected because we didn't give the EXACT answers that the owners wanted in order to log the find, even though, both times, we have supplied photos to prove our attendance at the location, I just cant be bothered expending the time, energy and data to get more rejections. So nope, its a big fat NO from me towards earthcaches. I have the answers to an earthcache that we visited just on 2 years ago, never bothered submitting the answers to the owner. I DNFed a traditional today There is an Earthcache at the same location. I didn't even bother opening the cache page. 

Edited February 19 by Bundyrumandcoke

[+LFC4eva 98]

1 hour ago, hzoi said:

I saw it as FTWN - which I am guessing stands for "first to write note."  Which explains the project-GC comment as perhaps an attempt at humor, or perhaps a separate dig against statistic seekers.

 

He must have edited it when he realised he couldn't spell.

 

1 hour ago, hzoi said:

I saw those.  The author of those notes is the original poster here, which confirms my above suspicion that this thread was really aimed as a dig against the recipient of those notes.  And so, yet again, regional infighting spills over to the message boards.  But at least we've gotten a decent discussion out of it, even if the OP intended only to stir the pot.

 

Funny thing is there is no regional infighting as such, I don't think the two have ever met.. it's just a geostalking troll who uses the forum to try and get the community to rubber stamp his vendetta by agreeing with him.. and the sad thing is this forum is facilitating this cyber-bullying by allowing him to use this platform, despite the fact that personal attacks are against the TOU.

Maybe he can hide behind the fact that he hasn't actually named names.. but everyone local to the OP knows exactly who he is referring to and even those across the pond have their suspicions.

It was an interesting discussion though.   We all have our favourites whether that be cache types / containers / locations.  One man's meat is another man's poison.

[+hzoi 802]

16 minutes ago, LFC4eva said:

Funny thing is there is no regional infighting as such, I don't think the two have ever met.

 

I guess that's just the impression that I've gotten from past forum threads.  Fair enough.

[+arisoft 397]

2 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

I didn't even bother opening the cache page. 

 

This is a very good solution for your problem. I do exactly the same when I feel some cache or the owner too "complicated". I put the cache to ignore list and it doesn't bother me any more at all.

 

2 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

we have supplied photos to prove our attendance at the location

 

Some cache owners see red when someone is trying to photolog caches because taking a photo to prove that you have visited the coordinates is not allowed task for earthcaches.

[+coachstahly 233]

3 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Some cache owners see red when someone is trying to photolog caches because taking a photo to prove that you have visited the coordinates is not allowed task for earthcaches.

 

I don't understand this sentiment at all, unless it's the ONLY manner in which a "finder" chooses to claim credit for the find.  If they send the answers, the photo shouldn't matter at all, unless it's a photo that provides some of the answers (a spoiler). I take the photo as an additional and extra "task" to help provide proof that I actually was at GZ, not just armchair logging it.  That way also helps alleviate some concern the CO might have if my answers are incorrect.

[+hzoi 802]

17 hours ago, coachstahly said:

17 hours ago, arisoft said:

Some cache owners see red when someone is trying to photolog caches because taking a photo to prove that you have visited the coordinates is not allowed task for earthcaches.

 

I don't understand this sentiment at all, unless it's the ONLY manner in which a "finder" chooses to claim credit for the find.  If they send the answers, the photo shouldn't matter at all, unless it's a photo that provides some of the answers (a spoiler). I take the photo as an additional and extra "task" to help provide proof that I actually was at GZ, not just armchair logging it.  That way also helps alleviate some concern the CO might have if my answers are incorrect.

 

I've had a couple finders who just posted a log and a photo like it was a virtual.  Most didn't know better, and though they may have had personal gripes with my log deletion, I at least took the time to explain how earthcaches work, why I was asking for questions, and why since they had collected zero information at the site I had to delete their log. 

 

One finder didn't even bother with a photo, and blew off the questions - in the found it log, they even pointed out they didn't take time to answer the questions.  When I had the temerity to ask for the logging questions, they privately messaged me to "take my panties out of the wad" and changed the find to a sulky note:

 

Quote

Found it while taking a break from a very long road trip. No time to stop and observe to discover and email the answers. So, just making note, I was here and read up on how these cool rocks came to be all jumbled up here. Originally marked as found, but because I didn't answer the questions the "owner" has required me to list this as a note only.

 

They had a few hundred finds at this point, including several earthcaches.  And I know they knew how earthcaches worked by this point, because they'd mentioned sending in answers in their found it logs.  So they knew better - they just didn't care.

 

Other than that, I will give some leeway to a finder who posts pictures, but then I try to give some leeway to all finders who at least take a stab at the answers.  I don't expect a 100% score.  But it's gotta be at least somewhat in the ballpark - not just a photo and "cool spot, TFTC."

[+coachstahly 233]

8 hours ago, hzoi said:

Other than that, I will give some leeway to a finder who posts pictures, but then I try to give some leeway to all finders who at least take a stab at the answers.  I don't expect a 100% score.  But it's gotta be at least somewhat in the ballpark - not just a photo and "cool spot, TFTC."

 

Yep.  100% agree.  I've been fortunate enough that everyone has sent me answers to mine, although I had to send a reminder about a week after they logged it as found.  I've not yet been "fortunate" enough to have a picture only log as evidence that they found the EC.

[+Hitman9956 25]

On 2/19/2019 at 12:28 PM, LFC4eva said:

Funny thing is there is no regional infighting as such, I don't think the two have ever met.. it's just a geostalking troll who uses the forum to try and get the community to rubber stamp his vendetta by agreeing with him.. and the sad thing is this forum is facilitating this cyber-bullying by allowing him to use this platform, despite the fact that personal attacks are against the TOU.

 

As someone who has nothing against anyone on the forums or in the caching world, I tend to stay out of any such so called instances of in fighting. However, it is very very dangerous to class what is going on as “cyber bullying”. I mention this not to attack but point out that I myself personally have been “bullied” years ago online in a chat room no less but a group of cold disgraceful individuals who sought to orchestrate a plan to befriend me, gain my trust, pretend to be my friend, after confiding in one of the group I watched that individual spill out my confided issues out into an open group where they laughed and mocked everything I had said in confidence. Needless to say it scarred me for life and made me cynical to folks in general, so those I get on well with personally are those I trust very selectively. 

 

Whilst you are free to say what you feel on what happens in the caching world, and it’s your right to point out something that you disagree with, please as a personal plea from me do not brand the words “cyber bullying” in such a trivial way to describe what has been happening. Unfortunate yes but it most definately is NOT cyber bullying. I should know what that is from past experience - it is one horrific experience that I pray no one on here ever goes through in life and it upsets me personally when those phrases are applied to disputes willy nilly.

 

Again, I tend to stay out of disputes in general, but I needed to highlight the meaning behind the words above to demonstrate the true gravitas behind those words in comparison to the situation itself.

 

Enough of a lecture - apologies for rambling, but cyber bullying is something I abhor vehemently so I hope you can understand my comments above.

[+LFC4eva 98]

3 hours ago, Hitman9956 said:

please as a personal plea from me do not brand the words “cyber bullying” in such a trivial way to describe what has been happening.

 

I'm sorry you have suffered at the hands of cyber-bullies - these cowards really are despicable.. but believe me, I wouldn't ever use these words in a trivial manner.  Cyber-bullying can take many forms, and when someone embarks on a deliberate and sustained vendetta against someone they have never met, using social media, in my eyes, that is cyber-bullying.. and while I understand your desire to defend your friend, I am surprised that someone who has been a victim of this kind of torment them-self would try and justify these actions and pass them off as something trivial.
 

[+redsox_mark 137]

On 2/19/2019 at 12:05 PM, Bundyrumandcoke said:

Nope, I don't bother with Earthcaches anymore, as the "find" is purely up to the decision of the cache owner. After doing a few, and having a couple of finds rejected because we didn't give the EXACT answers that the owners wanted in order to log the find, even though, both times, we have supplied photos to prove our attendance at the location, I just cant be bothered expending the time, energy and data to get more rejections. So nope, its a big fat NO from me towards earthcaches. I have the answers to an earthcache that we visited just on 2 years ago, never bothered submitting the answers to the owner. I DNFed a traditional today There is an Earthcache at the same location. I didn't even bother opening the cache page. 

 

I'm sure this will happen to me sometime, but luckily it hasn't yet.   Whilst I can't find an explicit guideline saying this, I believe the spirit of the caches is education.    If it is clear that someone was at the location and made an honest attempt to answer, but didn't get it 100% correct, what has happened to me is the CO told me where I went wrong (so further education), but told me that my find should stand.    

 

If you don't attempt some of the questions, or the CO has reason to believe you were not there, that's different.   

[+Venus Loon 0]

I do them when passing as long as the answers don't require a degree in Geology that some do. It still seems like being at school though and answering questions set by teachers. In fact I have a theory that earth caches are set by teachers to annoy 57 yr old men like me.

[+Goldenwattle 351]

1 hour ago, Venus Loon said:

I do them when passing as long as the answers don't require a degree in Geology that some do. It still seems like being at school though and answering questions set by teachers. In fact I have a theory that earth caches are set by teachers to annoy 57 yr old men like me.

I have long suspected this too. One of the reasons I am not keen on Earth caches.

[+arisoft 397]

I would like to see examples of earthcaches which requires degree in geology to answer correctly.

[+papu66 19]

Maybe you should search for earthcaches that have difficulty 5 rating?

 

I understood it so that people dislike more of the ECs that require mind reading skills to be answered "correctly"

[+hal-an-tow 174]

Leaving aside the obvious agenda of the OP (read back through their threads, you really can't miss it ) it seems to me that there are two differing views developing of what earthcaches are for.

 

First we have the folk who feel an earthcache is just another smiley to tick off. They don't want to learn anything about the geology, be led to some unique feature by someone who knows a bit about how to interpret it, or spend any significant time or effort on it. Why bother, when you could find half a dozen damp micros in that time and increase the smiley count ?

 

Second we have the people who feel an earthcache is an opportunity to learn something new, be shown a unique feature and have it explained, and spend some time thinking about it. Why not see and understand a little more about our planet ? There will always be plenty of damp micros to find another time .

 

If you fall into the first camp, fine,  just ignore earth caches, and don't try to subvert their stated purpose (" An EarthCache provides an earth science lesson through a visit to a unique geological feature ") by wafting past, taking a selfie, offering no credible attempt at answers and whining when your log is deleted. Just like the cachers who loudly rubbish puzzle caches because they can't do them, such overt antagonistic behaviour advertises their own feelings of inadequacy to the world. Me, I'm no good at climbing trees, but I dont moan about those caches and demand they be moved down within my reach, I just walk by with a wry smile. I'd never want to stop the availability of tree climbing caches for those who like them.

 

Having a geology degree can be a positive handicap when trying to answer earthcache quuestions: for instance at one E.C. the fossil I was supposed to identify in a Jurassic rock  was obviously a brachiopod , but the CO told me it was a trilobite fragment and my answer was wrong. I was allowed the find though,  just as well because when that particulat rock had formed trilobites had been extinct for at least 80 million years . Then  at another earthcache (different C.O.)  there was the church wall I examined for ages looking for the fossils referred to in the questions. There were none, but after some time I realised that the .C.O. had mistaken the weathered,  regular little circles of ooliths for something of biological origin . Difficult to word my answer there . Neither of those people had any formal geology education ,  both were prolific cache setters who apparently wanted to add an E.C.to their hides.

 

So, I'm very happy to see any earthcaches set by folk with geology degrees : I've found at least one that I know of , and it was pleasingly well constructed with clear tasks and accurate information, and the C.O. responded to my answers politely and thanked me for my log later too. I am not saying you need a geology degree to set a good earthcache, but without an interest in the subject, or a friend who has some background in it to help, it's not easy to construct a good earthcache. Good geology teachers would be the ideal earthcache setters : subject knowledge plus the ability to frame questions unambiguously to lead people towards the right answer. *

 

Like arisoft, would be very interested in seeing these earthcaches that need a degree to complete., please post links, I like a challenge.

 

* No, I am not, and have never been, a geology teacher.

[+IceColdUK 371]

58 minutes ago, hal-an-tow said:

Like arisoft, would be very interested in seeing these earthcaches that need a degree to complete., please post links, I like a challenge.

 

Surely we can all see this was hyperbole, and move on.

[+arisoft 397]

5 hours ago, hal-an-tow said:

Good geology teachers would be the ideal earthcache setters : subject knowledge plus the ability to frame questions unambiguously to lead people towards the right answer. *

 

I have heard lots of complaints from cache makers that they have not managed to publish an earth cache due to difficulties with the reviewer. I can just guess their motives to make a new ones but your answer got me thinking about their competence for a such task.

Edited February 24 by arisoft

[+TerraViators 16]

If presented the choice, I'll choose an EC over a traditional.

[+Goldenwattle 351]

I have just come upon one of the reasons I am not keen on Earth caches. I am about to go on a road trip and one of the towns I am visiting I found the traditional caches on a previous visit. There are three Earth caches, so with no other caches I will tackle these. One of them asked the logger to refer to text. I use a Garmin. The screen is small, which makes reading this text really time consuming and tricky.  Not sure if I will do this one.

[+on4bam 499]

1 minute ago, Goldenwattle said:

 One of them asked the logger to refer to text. I use a Garmin. The screen is small, which makes reading this text really time consuming and tricky.  Not sure if I will do this one.

 

That's the reason I never (really never) go caching without preparation, even on holiday.

We always make a selection of caches we want to do, read listings and logs and for virtuals and Earthcaches try to find as much as possible in advance up to making a list of the caches in the right order. If needed I also carry a tablet with GDAK so I can read on a decent screen and look at included photographs. Worst case I can even go online and look at logpictures.

Eventough we are 100% paperless we sometimes have a printout of just questions, reading of listings on our Oregon600 is almost never necessary.

 

[+hal-an-tow 174]

1 hour ago, on4bam said:

 

That's the reason I never (really never) go caching without preparation, even on holiday.

We always make a selection of caches we want to do, read listings and logs and for virtuals and Earthcaches try to find as much as possible in advance up to making a list of the caches in the right order. If needed I also carry a tablet with GDAK so I can read on a decent screen and look at included photographs. Worst case I can even go online and look at logpictures.

Eventough we are 100% paperless we sometimes have a printout of just questions, reading of listings on our Oregon600 is almost never necessary.

 

As is so often the case, there is a rather neat GSAK macro which deals with the problem .  Copy Earthcache requiremenst to user notes,   here

It  looks for key phrases that probably start the logging  task text, and places what it finds in a note (editable like any GSAK note) , which will show up as the most recent log in a GPS.

Sometimes it finds no key words, sometimes it puts too much irrelevant text in the note, but you can run it on every earthcache in your database in seconds and see how many ECs get automatic notes added, then edit them or add missed ones by copy/pasting to a note .

I love GSAK.

[+The Jester 94]

6 hours ago, on4bam said:

 

That's the reason I never (really never) go caching without preparation, even on holiday.

We always make a selection of caches we want to do, read listings and logs and for virtuals and Earthcaches try to find as much as possible in advance up to making a list of the caches in the right order. If needed I also carry a tablet with GDAK so I can read on a decent screen and look at included photographs. Worst case I can even go online and look at logpictures.

Eventough we are 100% paperless we sometimes have a printout of just questions, reading of listings on our Oregon600 is almost never necessary.

 

There are times I'll do something similar - but only for short trips.  The last few years traveling with our trailer that just isn't reasonable.  When you're out for over three months, and covering 12-15,000 miles, reading every listing along the way would take as much, or more, time than the trip.  Add to that task, we often don't know our actual route (will we be on Highway 2 or State Route 97?) just the general direction we're heading.  We generally know various spots we will get to, but the path is flexible (last year we knew we'd be getting to St. Louis - originally on the way outbound, but mid trip it was 'slid' a few weeks & thousands of miles later).  So I mostly just load the higher (at least 10, sometimes 20) Fav Point trad & LBH caches for each state, plus Virts, WC's & WIG's.  If we stop for a time someplace, I'll load additional local caches, which may include EC's if they sound interesting.  Right now, I'm planning for a 5 week long trip, covering 20 states & about 9,000 miles - at an average of a 1000 caches per state, that's 20, 000 cache pages to read...

 

[+Goldenwattle 351]

10 hours ago, on4bam said:

 

That's the reason I never (really never) go caching without preparation, even on holiday.

We always make a selection of caches we want to do, read listings and logs and for virtuals and Earthcaches try to find as much as possible in advance up to making a list of the caches in the right order. If needed I also carry a tablet with GDAK so I can read on a decent screen and look at included photographs. Worst case I can even go online and look at logpictures.

Eventough we are 100% paperless we sometimes have a printout of just questions, reading of listings on our Oregon600 is almost never necessary.

 

I do preparation too, but I don't want to have to print out pages just for one cache, especially when Earth caches, to use an expression, don't float my boat.

[+NYPaddleCacher 893]

19 hours ago, The Jester said:

Right now, I'm planning for a 5 week long trip, covering 20 states & about 9,000 miles - at an average of a 1000 caches per state, that's 20, 000 cache pages to read...

 

Nobody is forcing you to find 1000 caches per state.  It's okay not to find some of them.

[+on4bam 499]

15 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

Nobody is forcing you to find 1000 caches per state.  It's okay not to find some of them.

Yup. For our NZ holiday we had about 2000 caches loaded, most were "in case of", there were at most 200 on our "really want to do if possible" list, mostly oldies, virtuals, EC's or special locations. All were read up in advance (I start the selection months in advance). For our 3 week holiday in Denmark I had all caches loaded (26000 at that time), we found only 65 and often didn't bother. For an upcoming trip I have about 200 selected, EC's, virtuals, mysteries and multi's are already read, traditionals at special locations too. The rest.. we'll see, it's not a geocaching trip (it never is).

I don't think you need to read listings of "run of the mill" trads.