The Wisconsin Geocaching Association

  Login or Register

Website Navigation

62.png Home

49.png Information Center
26.png WGA Newsletters
24.png Reviewer's Words
53.png Presentation Resources
39.png Geocaching Files
27.png Bookmarks
56.png Location Rules and Regs
49.png BOD Info Center

17.png Forums
16.png New Posts
20.png Unanswered Posts

calendar_day.png Upcoming Events
mapicon.png Map
29.png Calendar
11.png Submit Event

mapicon.png WGA State Park CachesNew content !

shield_star.png Cache of the Month
mapicon.png Past Winners Map

LonelyCache.png Lonely Cache Game
mapicon.png Current Map
26.png Scoreboard
11.png Submit Report

rescueiconsm.png Cache Rescue
11.png Submit a Mission

icon_community.gif Members
27.png Your Account
47.png Private Messages
contact_blue.png WGA Member Map
Geocaching_LIVE_poweredby_16.png GC.COM Authorization

icon_members.gif News
tree-T.gif Topics
tree-T.gif Archives
tree-L.gif Submit News

image_cultured.png Photo Gallery
tree-T.gif Updates
tree-L.gif Popular

shield.png Fun Stuff
28.png Recent Logs
TB.gif Picnic to Picnic TB Race Standings
TB.gif WGA Hauler

49.png Board of Directors
 
Contact Us

 
Facebook

Wisconsin Geocaching Association

 
Follow Us

Twitter Button

 
Subscribe to Newsletter

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required
 
Geocaching.com Search
View Search Syntax
 
COTM
Winner -
July 2014 Northern Zone:
Call Box

Winner -
July 2014 Northeast Zone:
Twisted Metal

Winner -
July 2014 West Central Zone:
The Island

Winner -
July 2014 South Central Zone:
Puzzle of Books

Winner -
July 2014 Southeast Zone:
Make do with what you have

Winner -
July 2014 Series of the Month:
Door County Barn Quilt Series


More Info >>>

 
 
Wisconsin Geocaching Association: Forums
 

 

View next topic
View previous topic
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Author Message
Lostby7
WGA Member



Joined: 2005-06-07
Posts: 3190
Location: Lake country area, WI

PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 7:41 am Reply with quote Back to top

Let me first apologize for the tone of my post. While I知 clearly irritated by the new review process for ECs, I do think the experience detailed below might be useful to others attempting to get an EC published...in short make darn sure your listing is strong and preferably have a geology prof write it. I知 also not attacking the regional reviewer, but stating facts.

Well I have tried to publish three new ECs under the new review teams watchful eye. The first listing was denied by the regional reviewer then without me doing anything (not even posting a note on the page), the listing was approved by another reviewer. The regional reviewer is clearly WAY more unforgiving of the submissions.

The second listing I attempted to publish was also deemed to be unfit. These are not the first listings I have attempted....I had 30 prior ECs published, and now suddenly I can't get one passed. The second listing was deemed to generic. I frankly lost my cool and had them just archive the listing as I wasn't willing to make changes...and I could see their point to a limited extent.

The current listing I'm working on I felt was very strong but the feature is not directly visible to someone while parked due to the fact that the only access to the exposure of the 80 mile long feature is 33 feet on private property. I came up with what I felt were good questions based on the feature and on the terrain surrounding it. The feature is a fault and part of the data to be collected was elevation data. I was told by the regional reviewer that elevation data on a fault does not relate to the feature. So, let me get this straight a fault which is a feature which the earth thrusts one side of the earth higher than the other side thus creating different elevations is not something that can be measured for a logging req? Color me confused. I知 gonna fight for this one to get approved but I知 again dealing with the regional reviewer who seems to have higher expectations for the logging requirements than I have dealt with in the past.

What burns me the most is I have seen several listings (even newly approved ones) which ask questions that can be answered from the cache page text alone...

In the end, while I considered just giving up and archiving all my ECs in protest, I have decided if they refuse to publish my listing, I will publish it as a traditional cache and call it 的t痴 Waukesha痴 Fault: A failed EarthCache submission so that the 20 hours I spent researching and writing up the listing didn稚 completely go to waste.


Last edited by Lostby7 on Fri Feb 05, 2010 7:55 am; edited 1 time in total 
View user's profile Send private message
RSplash40
WGA Member



Joined: 2006-12-23
Posts: 6259

PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 7:55 am Reply with quote Back to top

Sounds like fun Question I hope you don't give up, I've had fun getting to and exploring a few ec's that have your name tagged on them.
 
View user's profile Send private message
uws22
WGA Member



Joined: 2007-07-20
Posts: 526
Location: Madison, WI

PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 9:06 am Reply with quote Back to top

i have heard and read much of the same experiences you speak of. frankly, it has spooked me enough that i haven't pursued the single EC that would get me my platinum status (it's the only one i have left on the hide or find side) because it just seems like too much of a hassle just to get that last pin. I have a few great places up north for it, but being more than 100 miles away will just make it even more difficult.

_________________
there are two motivations in sports... which one is yours? 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Lostby7
WGA Member



Joined: 2005-06-07
Posts: 3190
Location: Lake country area, WI

PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 9:39 am Reply with quote Back to top

Regarding the third listing I'm attempting to get published, I got this response from a different EC reviewer (the names are withheld to protect the super secret identities of those involved).

"The bottom line for us is that is that is is harder now to get published....we are insisting that people have good logging tasks. So I guess you have to be prepared for some questions to be asked...and some to and fro between reviewers to get the process right."

So clearly it is not just my perception that it is harder to get published recently.

...and after some wrangling, I got the following response:

"I have consulted with (approver X) on this one and we feel that if you just add a sentence explaining.....then it shoud be ok and can be published."

I'm happy about the outcome but bummed about the added difficulty of getting published...in particular the difference in views as to what constitutes a publishable listing.
 
View user's profile Send private message
sandlanders
WGA Member



Joined: 2008-01-18
Posts: 19296
Location: Adams, WI

PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 2:03 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Saw that this one got published as an EC just a bit ago. Congrats on that, LB7. Hope any others of yours go a bit smoother. It's not like you're a newbie on this and need to be told what to do to make a god earth cache, but if tougher standards keep some of the poorer quality ECs from getting published, maybe that's a silver lining.

Thanks for hanging in there!
 
View user's profile Send private message
benny7210
WGA Member



Joined: 2006-04-01
Posts: 501
Location: Manitowoc,Wi,USA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 7:11 pm Reply with quote Back to top

NOTICE: Disclaimer The text below is NOT referring to any specific individual or cache owner. OR earth cache listing. This is only my humble opinion.
I am ecstatic that the rules for earth cache placement have been tightened up. I feel it is long overdue. I have noticed that the quality seems to be sacrificed for quantity. Ever since they came out with the earth cache owner pins ever one thinks that they need to place enough earth caches to earn a platinum pin. When I first started doing earth caches they were something special to do. But now there seems to be one or two on ever block corner. Not very far from where I live there is a small county park (75 acres). In that park there are two earth caches (.1 miles apart). Talk about over kill.
Wisconsin is a very beautiful state with many natural wonders. But do we need nearly 200 earth caches to show it off? The answer is NO. The example that I will use is the Water Fall series that Lil Otter used to have. To show these off she would place a traditional cache near the falls or the path to the falls. You got to see one of Wisconsin痴 wonders and a smiley to boot.
Let痴 look at our neighboring states for comparison. To see how we as a state would rank.
Minnesota 88 Earth Caches
Iowa 83 Earth Caches
Illinois 97 Earth Caches
Wisconsin 175 Active and 9 Archived
As Sandlanders said in a previous post may be there is a silver lining to the tough new standards. I sure hope that they are correct. Wisconsin does have some great quality earth caches. BUT also some that are pure junk!

_________________
Vincit Qui Patitur 
View user's profile Send private message
Lostby7
WGA Member



Joined: 2005-06-07
Posts: 3190
Location: Lake country area, WI

PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 7:17 pm Reply with quote Back to top

benny7210 wrote:
Wisconsin does have some great quality earth caches. BUT also some that are pure junk!

You'd PM me if one (or many) of mine was on the junk list right.....I'd honestly appreciate the feedback particularly from you as you have 281 EC finds...I'd love to know what you think of them and would certainly respect your honest opinion. I sure don't want to add to the excess if I'm putting out crap...and yes I read the part where you stated this was not aimed at anyone in particular and I don't take it to mean you in any way referred to me.

I will say this about my newest listing though, if you come to the site and expect to see something truly amazing you will be disappointed as the feature is only 24 feet long and not in the public view. If you come to learn about the area and it's geology you will more than likely learn something new...at my most current EC you will stand on an 80 mile long fault.

Not all ECs are about the amazing view, some are simply about learning. I have a mix of both kinds but my favorites are those which show you some thing truly spectacular....and there are some cool things to see...just not all the time.

First and foremost EarthCaches are about education...

"Visiting an EarthCache site is a great way to learn more about our wonderful world. It can take you to many places that you would not normally visit, and teach you about why those places are special or unique."
-from the EC site.

If the site is also awesome to look at we're talkin bonus.
 
View user's profile Send private message
gotta run
WGA Member



Joined: 2007-11-26
Posts: 3306

PostPosted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:35 am Reply with quote Back to top

benny7210 wrote:
The text below is NOT referring to any specific individual or cache owner. OR earth cache listing.

Well, of course except that:

benny7210 wrote:
Not very far from where I live there is a small county park (75 acres). In that park there are two earth caches (.1 miles apart). Talk about over kill.


I'm going to assume you are speaking of the Maribel Caves GC1DH1H
earthcaches because although there are other nearby places with multiple earthcaches, Cherney is a Manitowoc county park listed at 75 acres and the next-nearest two-fer is in Kewaunee. Perhaps I'm wrong.

In this case, these were the result of an unintentional simultaneous submission highlighting different caves in the park. As a result of discussions between the cache owners and geoaware whether one or the other should be withdrawn, it was decided at the time that--since they focused on different caves in the park--to publish two caches rather than force them together somehow.

This is the first complaint I've heard about there being two caches there and, speaking for our cache, the logs I've received on it are overwhelmingly positive.
 
View user's profile Send private message
lone_gunman
WGA Member



Joined: 2008-04-12
Posts: 1928
Location: The Grassy Knoll, WI

PostPosted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 8:05 am Reply with quote Back to top

I think benny's more worried about this, again.
http://www.wi-geocaching.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=7209&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=earthcache

_________________
There is no point in driving yourself mad trying to stop yourself going mad. You might just as well give in and save your sanity for later.

What\'s life? Life\'s easy. A quirk of matter. Nature\'s way of keeping meat fresh 
View user's profile Send private message
gotta run
WGA Member



Joined: 2007-11-26
Posts: 3306

PostPosted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 8:09 am Reply with quote Back to top

Perhaps, but why single out our and Wiskey33's caches to make the point? Unless there's another 75-acre Manitowoc county park with two earthcaches .1 miles apart that I missed.
 
View user's profile Send private message
JimandLinda
WGA Member



Joined: 2008-08-14
Posts: 5385
Location: Rosendale WI

PostPosted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:48 am Reply with quote Back to top

He did post a DISCLAIMER so he could inform us of his opinion, and show us an example that he was aware of. I have gleened the info. Where the ECs are, I really don't care! And who owns them, I really don't care.

But his opinion has been shared.
 
View user's profile Send private message
gotta run
WGA Member



Joined: 2007-11-26
Posts: 3306

PostPosted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 11:56 am Reply with quote Back to top

I'm sorry, but there was no need to single out these caches in such an explicit way that anyone could figure out what they are, and then denigrate them as "overkill."

Putting a "disclaimer" on something doesn't give you license to hide behind it--especially when you go and do exactly what you said you weren't going to do in the disclaimer! The point could have, and should have, been made without singling out specific caches.

To Bob's point specifically, I say the more earthcaches the merrier. What's junk to one person is a gem to another. They're not taking up any valuable caching real estate because proximity guidelines don't come into play (or at least didn't the last time I checked). And that's just my opinion.
 
View user's profile Send private message
Lostby7
WGA Member



Joined: 2005-06-07
Posts: 3190
Location: Lake country area, WI

PostPosted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:08 pm Reply with quote Back to top

gotta run wrote:
They're not taking up any valuable caching real estate because proximity guidelines don't come into play (or at least didn't the last time I checked). And that's just my opinion.

There has been one "change" to the EC rules. Now the EC review team has the option to deny EC listings if another EC listing is "too close" and shares the same subject matter. I was under the impression that this ruling always existed but apparently not as they (the EC rule-making folks) pointed it out as a new rule. The two listings in question would today be harder to get published so close together (assuming they share the same topic; I didn't look to see if that was the case).

And no the ECs will not come into play against any physical caches proximity rules.

Ah found the written new rule:
Quote:
EarthCaches should highlight a unique feature. EarthCaches that duplicate existing EarthCache information about the site or related sites may be rejected. EarthCaches should be developed to provide a unique experience to the visitor to the region. Multiple EarthCaches on the same feature should be avoided and content rather than proximity will be the guiding principle.
 
View user's profile Send private message
gotta run
WGA Member



Joined: 2007-11-26
Posts: 3306

PostPosted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:51 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Yeah, it doesn't look like those two caches would be published as is today. As I mentioned it was a case where geoaware had two submissions at the same time and we and Wiskey33 didn't really know what was going on until they had published both and then tried to sort it out.

I've actually thought about archiving ours in the past because of the subject overlap, but just decided why bother? And, based on the supportive PM's I've received from past finders about the cache, received since this thread took a rather unexpected turn, I certainly going to keep it active now! Very Happy
 
View user's profile Send private message
Lostby7
WGA Member



Joined: 2005-06-07
Posts: 3190
Location: Lake country area, WI

PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:50 am Reply with quote Back to top

gotta run wrote:
Yeah, it doesn't look like those two caches would be published as is today. As I mentioned it was a case where geoaware had two submissions at the same time and we and Wiskey33 didn't really know what was going on until they had published both and then tried to sort it out.

I've actually thought about archiving ours in the past because of the subject overlap, but just decided why bother? And, based on the supportive PM's I've received from past finders about the cache, received since this thread took a rather unexpected turn, I certainly going to keep it active now! Very Happy

I plan to do those caches (Maribel Caves) this July....woot.
 
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:       
Post new topic   Reply to topic

View next topic
View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001-2008 phpBB Group
:: Theme & Graphics by Daz :: Ported for PHP-Nuke by nukemods.com ::
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
 
Forums ©
 
Legal Notice | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Parental Consent Form | contact | Comments ]

All content © 2013 Wisconsin Geocaching Association, except comments and forum entries which are property of their posters.

The Groundspeak Geocaching Logo is a registered trademark of Groundspeak, Inc. Used with permission.
 


Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the WGA Terms of Use


Distributed by Raven PHP Scripts
New code written and maintained by the RavenNuke™ TEAM


(Original PHP-Nuke Code Copyright © 2004 by Francisco Burzi)
Page Generation: 0.21 Seconds

:: fisubice phpbb2 style by Daz :: PHP-Nuke theme by www.nukemods.com ::
:: fisubice Theme Recoded To 100% W3C CSS & HTML 4.01 Transitional & XHTML 1.0 Transitional Compliance by RavenNuke™ TEAM ::

:: W3C CSS Compliance Validation :: W3C HTML 4.01 Transitional Compliance Validation :: W3C XHTML 1.0 Transitional Compliance Validation ::