Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
brendan714

Cachers not answering questions

Recommended Posts

On 9/16/2019 at 12:01 PM, hzoi said:

I don't think a math problem is off limits here.  And I don't think that requiring folks to at least attempt a math problem is unreasonable.

 

I will admit, though, that I was a little intimidated by reading through the cache description and seeing this:

 

 

7ce3ba7b-eb3f-4e2f-a2e5-24b2fc55cbde_l.j

 

If that's the simplified formula, I can only guess what the more complex version looks like.  I wonder how many cachers are intimidated by this first equation and miss that you break down the math problem more simply in the text and the next image:

 

 

e1a0ddc2-cfc6-4523-afb0-db415f679e5e_l.j

 

I sent a forum message to see if I got the math right.  I'm pretty sure I did - but that's from the comfort of my computer.  I don't know that I'd be as confident in the field.

 

It's also worth noting that the text in the cache description can be translated on a phone using text recognition software - but the text in your formula images cannot.  Google Translate has image recognition that might work, I haven't tried it.  But international cachers without cell data may not have the ability to test this in the field.

 

Have you considered clarifying the cache description to reassure cachers that they only need to do the bit at the end, and perhaps spelling out the final formula in text to aid in translation? That could possibly clear up some confusion.

 

 

THIS. I know math so I'd attempt it. But probably 99% of everyone else I know would look at those equations and instantly go into cardiac arrest. I am not suggesting you delete or not delete. But ask yourself.. is this an earth science lesson or a math lesson.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think people are freaking out at the first equation, but you've derived the final equation eloquently and presented it in a form I could show my 10 year old how to do with a quick lesson, so I think people should be able to work this out. I'd be less inclined to actually delete found-it logs though if they posted pics confirming their attendance at GZ.....

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎9‎/‎17‎/‎2019 at 6:55 AM, hzoi said:

 

I ran through the math, and brendan714 confirmed I got it right.  It's so easy even a lawyer can do it.  :laughing:  But that first formula would look pretty daunting in the field.  (I know this has a high difficulty and warrants looking at before arrival at ground zero.  But I fall into the trap often of neglecting to read through ahead of time, and I know I'm not the only one.)

 

Except for deciding whether to even attempt the cache, it seemed to me that I could visit the site and do everything, and work on the word problem later.  Is there something that I'd need to measure on site, to put into that formula?

 

If I go there and put work into a cache and can't solve it (or if I don't feel like solving it), I might make a note that I visited the place, but don't have the answers to send.  I hope the OP allows that, because that should be a viable option for people who can't figure it out. A Note log, not a "Found It".

 

I don't like having the equation in images.  On my Garmin Oregon, I'd have no “equation” in view when I arrive, and if I need to work on the math while I'm standing there, I can't do that.

 

However, the fact that it is in images means I'd be forced to print or save the formulas in advance.  I greatly prefer that to having the formula show up in text in whatever weird way the Garmin displays it.  That has bitten me before, when even a simple formula like

A=B
shows up on my Garmin as A=B3.

 

As for the math, The D rating is fine, and people should skip it if they can't or won't do it (or they can log a Note).  I'm not saying that the average person could not eventually figure this out on site while sitting in mud and writing formulas on a pad of paper.  I'm not at all questioning the purpose of that math problem.  I'm just saying 'Dear Grid, WHY?!!', while pounding my head against the wall. 

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I just had a look at this one and, for sure, I'd give it a miss having seen the math. I may be there next year so I'll look for another. I was there in 2016 and from memory there was another EC which isn't there now or maybe my memory is playing tricks. I think it was about water flow and its velocity and formation of pot holes, something like that.

This cache has a lot of finds for such a recent listing. If all these finds have legitimately done the math (or tried to) then tough luck for those trying to claim a D4.5 find by moaning the math is too hard.

Share this post


Link to post

Has anyone mention this recommendation yet?

https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=51&pgid=292

 

Quote

Assume no prior knowledge of geology, and write at age 14 reading level. Some geocachers use GPS devices with a limited amount of text. If your cache page is long, place the logging tasks near the top.

 

You may want to consider and use a bit simplified language in description.

 

Disclaimer:

  • I think that logging tasks of your Earthcache are interesting and attractive to solve.
  • I think the math Q is good integral part of the lesson and it should not be beyond capability of 14 year old to understand and solve it.
  • If someone "does not like the math" or can't answer these question, they may log Note or DNF, or ignore this EC completely.
  • Invalid log deletions belong to standard owner maintenance tasks.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I had a funny situation recently - on one of my earthcaches I ask finders to measure the diameter of something (it's right beside the track, easy to measure).  A recent finder's answer to this measurement task was "im not good at math Don’t know how work out".

  • Funny 1
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, funkymunkyzone said:

measure the diameter of something

I had to measure a section of path once for a multicache with no measuring tool. I counted number of shoe lengths (a lot) and went into a shop where they had a tape measure so I could find out the length of my shoe. I didn't get the correct answer but I was close enough to make the find. Needing to measure something in the field is tricky if you have nothing to measure with.

With an earthcache I wonder how some COs would accept say five hands wide. Hands do vary in size, so not an accurate measurement.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

Needing to measure something in the field is tricky if you have nothing to measure with.

Yeah, I have a small tape measure as part of my EDC, but not everyone does.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

With an earthcache I wonder how some COs would accept say five hands wide. Hands do vary in size, so not an accurate measurement.

 

I've used a measurement app on my phone in the past. Obviously that could only be done for small things though. 

 

For my earthcaches, when I ask for measurements for big things if the cacher gets anywhere in the ballpark of the right answer I let it slide. Those usually aren't the most important logging requirements on my caches. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

With an earthcache I wonder how some COs would accept say five hands wide. Hands do vary in size, so not an accurate measurement.

 

I've submitted an answer like that before. It was fine - but then I find I don't often hear back from earth cache owners and that probably fell into that category.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I had to measure a section of path once for a multicache with no measuring tool. I counted number of shoe lengths (a lot) and went into a shop where they had a tape measure so I could find out the length of my shoe. I didn't get the correct answer but I was close enough to make the find

 

That would be difficult for me :unsure:.

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post

It's uncommon that "measure something" tasks actually support the earthcache lesson being taught.  These usually end up being more "prove you were there" questions.  Now that photos can be required, I'd argue that the majority of measurement tasks do not add to an earthcache.  I think I've removed most measurement tasks from our earthcaches, though some may still linger.

 

Not singling you out, @funkymunkyzone, just making an observation since you brought up a measuring task.

Edited by hzoi
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, hzoi said:

It's uncommon that "measure something" tasks actually support the earthcache lesson being taught.  These usually end up being more "prove you were there" questions.  Now that photos can be required, I'd argue that the majority of measurement tasks do not add to an earthcache.  I think I've removed most measurement tasks from our earthcaches, though some may still linger.

 

Not singling you out, @funkymunkyzone, just making an observation since you brought up a measuring task.

I suppose you're right, but usually when I'm answering a measurement question, it occurs to me it's getting me focused on the scale and the relation of the feature to both me and the surroundings, so they always seem to be a good part of the lesson. But I'm thinking of measurement chores that use the word "estimate" and are likely to get frequent answers that are way off the true value -- "How high is that waterfall you're looking at from half a mile away?" -- that wouldn't be that useful for confirming I was there, anyway, since any dumb guess is likely to be within the accepted range. Indeed, in some cases I've wondered if the CO isn't looking a clue about an armchair log with an overly precise answer suggesting someone looking at on-line info instead of looking at the actual falls.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I had to measure a section of path once for a multicache with no measuring tool. I counted number of shoe lengths (a lot) and went into a shop where they had a tape measure so I could find out the length of my shoe. I didn't get the correct answer but I was close enough to make the find. Needing to measure something in the field is tricky if you have nothing to measure with.

With an earthcache I wonder how some COs would accept say five hands wide. Hands do vary in size, so not an accurate measurement.

11 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

That would be difficult for me :unsure:.

:D

When I'm shopping for boots, my size (11W) is almost always out.  We figured it must be the average here, and the sole at each end makes it a foot.

 So guess we were just "close enough" with answers.    :)

 That was always incorrect.  IIRC, on average, a  male's foot that measures 12" long  will wear a U.S. size 14 shoe

Your "barefootjeff" size would be the accurate one.   No errors.  :laughing: 

 

Here, a US dollar is 6.14 inches long and 2.61 inches wide, so in a bind we have another rough means to measure.

The other 2/3rds messenger bag does have a sharpie dot along the strap, an inch apart for 3 feet of the 52" length. 

I haven't been that picky, but know the length of every knife blade I'd carry, and a UFP Sharpie is roughly 5 1/4". 

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/19/2019 at 3:26 AM, hzoi said:

It's uncommon that "measure something" tasks actually support the earthcache lesson being taught.  These usually end up being more "prove you were there" questions.  Now that photos can be required, I'd argue that the majority of measurement tasks do not add to an earthcache.  I think I've removed most measurement tasks from our earthcaches, though some may still linger.

 

Not singling you out, @funkymunkyzone, just making an observation since you brought up a measuring task.

 

I totally get that.  This particular task is more of a "wow - look at the size of that thing" and I don't need an accurate measurement.  I know exactly the diameter of the basalt column in question, but I accept basically any, because the usual estimate of 1m is only 10cm out anyway.

 

But seriously, can't guesstimate a size of 1m without maths?  I just LOL.

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

×
×
  • Create New...