Logs in understandable language

[+MAntunes]

Do you trust in an automatic translator to say to a geocache owner that a log, written in a language he/she doesn't understand, "appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate. " ?

This is not merely a matter of cache maintenance because it is not needed that a log be "bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate". It is only needed that a log appear to be "bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate. " And, how do you check if a dnf is "bogus" or "counterfeit"? Any kind of log (found, dnf, note) specially if generated by an automatic translator, can be interpreted as being "off-topic or otherwise inappropriate"! Do you trust in an automatic translator for this task?

 

Do you think it's fair that a geocache owner, that has all the responsabilities he/she accepted when submitting a listing to be published, still has to do the effort to translate a log written in a language he/she doesn't understand and, in some situations, he/she may not even recognize the language in order to pick the correct settings in the automatic translator for, at the minimum, to try to understand it? Do you think this is a fair situation? If the geocache owner decides to ask for the translation, directly to the author of the log, isn't fair that Groundspeak should support the geocacher that is being complying with the point 2.1 of the guidelines (Geocache maintenance/page upkeep) if the author of the log refuses to change it or, at least, to supply an english version to the cache owner?

 

Have your say and, if you agree, give your votes here in this suggestion in the Feedback area: http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/2255734-logs-in-understandable-language (don't miss the clarification/aditional points I added yesterday as a result of the first comments and doubts that appeared).

 

This is not a request for an alr. This is a request for a guideline change, promoting readability of all logs by geocache owners and, in case of a conflict, that Groundspeak supports the geocache owner and not the person who made the log and refuses to supply a translation or to change the log to a language that can be undoubtedly understood by the geocache owner.

 

Even if you have English as mother language, you may, some day in the future, receive a log in one of your geocaches, written by a foreing geocacher, in a language you don't even know what it could be, and you may want to know what he exactly wrote, no matter if it is a found, dnf or note.

 

Thank you.

 

ps: I was authorized by two of the forum leaders/moderators, to make a post promoting a suggestion in the Feedback area.

[+The Blorenges]

I think your proposal is totally unnecessary. We've had a few logs in various European languages on our caches and, with the aid of on-line translation tools, it's easy enough to get the general gist of what's being said. Many visiting cachers seem to end their log with a few words in English anyway, which is appreciated.

 

I think this is sufficient: "Thanks for the cache" in different languages.

 

MrsB

[+DanOCan]

Do you think it's fair that a geocache owner, that has all the responsabilities he/she accepted when submitting a listing to be published, still has to do the effort to translate a log written in a language he/she doesn't understand and, in some situations, he/she may not even recognize the language in order to pick the correct settings in the automatic translator for, at the minimum, to try to understand it? Do you think this is a fair situation?

 

Very few things in life are fair.

 

I don't see a problem. If I am caching in a different country and I wanted to leave a log in the local language I would be using the same automatic translators to create the log as the cache owner would be using if I left the in English.

 

The danger for me as the seeker is that the automatic translator may translate something that comes across as insulting or offensive. If the log is written in the local language, the cache owner may not realize I do not speak the language and take it badly. At least if the log is written in my own language the CO will understand I don't speak his/her language and will likely be more forgiving if the translator puts something wrong in there.

 

I've had foreign language logs on my caches and always rather enjoyed them as it provided something unique vs the standard TFTC.

[+germanybert]

IMHO a person should log their find, DNF, note or whatever in language they are most comfortable with. I am American but live in a country that's primary language is not English. I speak and understand the local language but an unable to express myself as well in the local language. Therefore I log in English. I have a few times used the local language to warn locals about hazards around the cache that are not in the decsription.

 

There is no need for there to be an automatic translator on GC.

 

Automatic translators don't do a very good job at translating. I see you are from Portugal and it appears to me that you used some kind of translator for your original post. I don't want to offend you but the translation in your post is a prime example and is difficult to read. I understand what you are trying to say but it is not correctly translated.

[+t4e]

 

Do you think it's fair that a geocache owner, that has all the responsabilities he/she accepted when submitting a listing to be published, still has to do the effort to translate a log written in a language he/she doesn't understand and, in some situations, he/she may not even recognize the language in order to pick the correct settings in the automatic translator for, at the minimum, to try to understand it? Do you think this is a fair situation?

 

from your feedback thread...

 

Logs in understandable language

 

Suggestion that the logs on the geocache listings should always be written ​​in one of the languages ​​in which the geocache page is written or done in English - the language in which Groundspeak sites are available for submission of geocaches and accounts creation

 

funny you're talking about being "fair"

 

how exactly is your request fair that everyone on this planet speaks english or that they should be a polyglot?

 

regardless of where Groundspeak is located and the language they use on their sites they created a global game available to anyone no matter what language they speak

[+germanybert]

I don't think he is saying that they all should be written in English. I think he is saying in the language the cache is writting in or English.

 

Regardless, it is still a ridiculous request.

 

Say someone from China that does not write English or French visits France. Would that mean that the Chinese person would not be able to log the cache?

 

Thanks for the new word - Polyglot. I will try to use it everyday now!

[+t4e]

I don't think he is saying that they all should be written in English. I think he is saying in the language the cache is writting in or English.

 

 

i didn't claim he did...hence the either "speak english or be polyglot"

 

we can just use Pidgin to communicate

[+Cache! Eh?]

Is this an international game? Yes.

 

Is it reasonable for anyone who plays it to post in a language that they are comfortable with? Yes.

 

Should anyone have the right to assume that the whole world should speak English? No. After all, English is a minority language.

 

If you are playing an international game, should you be prepared on occasion to engage with unfamiliar languages, for example to ask for a translation in a forum? Yes. If you can't translate, should you give the benefit of the doubt? Your answer to this will probably indicate how uptight you are about playing a game.

 

Are automatic translation tools to be relied upon? No. Can they give a rough guide to meaning? Sometimes.

[Mr.Yuck]

I think your proposal is totally unnecessary. We've had a few logs in various European languages on our caches and, with the aid of on-line translation tools, it's easy enough to get the general gist of what's being said. Many visiting cachers seem to end their log with a few words in English anyway, which is appreciated.

 

I think this is sufficient: "Thanks for the cache" in different languages.

 

MrsB

 

Agreed. I have had several international logs (mainly at my only cache in Niagara Falls), although I believe every one was in English. I always joke that I've had a few "Greetings from Germany" logs. That being said, I'm about 300 miles from Quebec, and I'll get back up there to find some caches one of these years. I would fully intend to log a French language cache page in English, as many do in Quebec. I have never had a problem with people logging caches in their native language, and I don't think it is a problem for Groundspeak, in my opinion.

[cezanne]

Is this an international game? Yes.

 

There are different ways of looking at this. Personally, I think that the internationality is the best argument for using English wherever possible.

I started geocaching nine years ago and I feel that geocaching has been much more international back then - it is not uncommon at that time to write all logs in English (a habit I am still sticking to, but I'm an exception). Nowadays bi/multilingual cache descriptions become more and more rare in Europe and unfortunately almost most logs are written in the local language, also if authored by people who are fluent in English.

 

After all, English is a minority language.

 

English is not a minority language if not viewed upon from the mother tongue perspective, but from the perspective how many people have English lessons at school.

In Europe it is common that English is a compulsory subject for several years.

 

If you are playing an international game, should you be prepared on occasion to engage with unfamiliar languages, for example to ask for a translation in a forum?

Yes. If you can't translate, should you give the benefit of the doubt? Your answer to this will probably indicate how uptight you are about playing a game.

 

I agree as the issue of checking for bogus logs is regarded as it does not matter that much if a bogus log slips through. I do not agree, however, in a wider context as in the current situation selecting caches based on their logs in Europe becomes very difficult. There are simply too many languages. For that reason, I am not voting for Mantunes suggestion, but would very much welcome a truly international platform where all descriptions and logs are in English. It does not matter at all if the number of participants will be much smaller. I rather have only 4 caches in a city that I can understand than have to search whether among 500 caches there are 1-2 that I can understand (including the logs).

 

Groundspeak does not seem to show any interest in the situation of geocachers in Europe as otherwise they would already have implemented support for multilingual descriptions years ago (including attributes that make it possible to filter for language versions). They are interested only in getting as many people into geocaching as possible and in this way earn more money - to that end, letting everyone use whatever language he wants to use is clearly a requirement. It is not true, however, that this contributes to the internationality of geocaching.

 

Cezanne

Edited September 19, 2011 by cezanne

[+germanybert]

I think that the language attribute is a great idea.

 

But I have found caches in many EU countries with non-English descriptions and still had a great time finding them.

 

Wasn't it at one time a requirement for Earth Caches (EC) to have an English description? I have even been asked to help some Germans translate their EC cache description to English so it would get published. The EC CO could use their own language but it also had to have English. I am finding the some of the new ECs are only in the local language.

Edited September 19, 2011 by GermanyBert

[cezanne]

But I have found caches in many EU countries with non-English descriptions and still had a great time finding them.

 

Of course, most traditionals can be found also without understanding the description. Moreover, I can read a number of European languages, but their number is small in comparison to all existing ones.

I do want to make my choice however based on descriptions and logs and not just visit arbitary places - for me it is about the location and the experience on the way to the location and not about finding and logging a container. Moreover, I am a fan of multi caches.

 

 

 

Wasn't it at one time a requirement for Earth Caches (EC) to have an English description?

 

Unfortunately, these times are long gone. Now they even force the owners to provide a local language version. For that reason, I am not creating any ECs as the GSA has no right to tell me which language I have to use unless it plays a role for reviewing which English does not. If I place a container at a location, I can go along with an English only cache description if I wish to do so, if I leave out the container, I can't - that's pretty much absurd.

 

Cezanne

Edited September 19, 2011 by cezanne

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Is this an international game? Yes.

 

There are different ways of looking at this. Personally, I think that the internationality is the best argument for using English wherever possible.

...

After all, English is a minority language.

 

English is not a minority language if not viewed upon from the mother tongue perspective, but from the perspective how many people have English lessons at school.

In Europe it is common that English is a compulsory subject for several years.

 

...

 

Cezanne

 

I haven't looked at high school requirements in the U.S. lately, but for as long as I can remember it, taking a foreign language course was compulsory. At the school I went to I think we could choose between Spanish, French, German, or Latin. From my travels, and working internationally, it was my understanding that in most other countries, study in a foreign language was compulsory in secondary (high) school, except that the only choice is English.

 

I assume term "minority language" in reference that English in not the most spoken language in the world. However, English is the official language in more countries than any other. Although Mandarin is spoken by more people worldwide than English during my two visits to China, which included participants from many different countries, all business was conducted in English.

 

That said, as a courtesy to cache owners, whenever I find a cache in a country where the primary language is *not* English I try to find out how to say "Thanks for the cache" it the owners native language, write my log in English but express my thanks in the native language.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I think your proposal is totally unnecessary. We've had a few logs in various European languages on our caches and, with the aid of on-line translation tools, it's easy enough to get the general gist of what's being said. Many visiting cachers seem to end their log with a few words in English anyway, which is appreciated.

 

I think this is sufficient: "Thanks for the cache" in different languages.

 

MrsB

 

Agreed. I have had several international logs (mainly at my only cache in Niagara Falls), although I believe every one was in English.

 

I as at Niagara Falls yesterday. I don't think I've ever been in one place where I heard more different languages being spoken.

[+lynx pardinus]

From my comment to the feedback:

 

I strongly agree with this proposal, for a number of reasons:

- the refered overview by the owner of any comment / log against Groundspeak's terms of service;

- the need to make the log understandable to the geocacher (the owner) who is giving his time and money to provide a positive experience to the finder. The only reward an owner is asking is a log - shouldn't we respect it and write a log he / she is able to understand;

- make the log understandable to a large number of geocachers

 

It is as simple as so. The request is not asking everyone to be a polyglot (really, guys, read the proposal before you start saying so). It is asking that you provide a log in a language that the owner understands - don't you think he deserves it?

[+mpilchfamily]

Does the OP really find it that difficult to use a translator to read the logs? Maybe he is using a difficult translator. All you need to do is copy the text and place it in Google Translate and it will figure out what language it is and translate it for you. Sure the translation is in broken English since the gamer structure of each is a little different. Even if the cacher is required to translate there log into the same language as the cache is posted it will be through a translator and be broken and difficult to understand. Eventually the technology behind the translators will improve and they will be able to compensate for the differences in grammer.

 

If i find myself in a different country and find a cache i will use a translator to post my log but i will also post it in English and mention i used a mention a translator was used for the log so any over sites i the language can be forgiven. Ive answered a few questions in the regional forums. Using google translate to see what the question was and to post my answer in the appropriate language. At then end mentioning what translator was used.

[+Ike 13]

I recently had a cacher from Germany do one of my caches. His log had a few small errors that made it confusing, but I got the overall meaning of the log. I don't know if he used translate or just is a little rusty on his English. I couldn't care less if the log was in German. I just thought it was cool he did my cache

[+CanadianRockies]

If this type of requirement was ever imposed by Groundspeak, then I would anticipate seeing many more blank logs or logs that are the local language equivalent of "TFTC."

 

As a cache owner, I'd prefer to get some sort of feedback (even in a foreign language) rather than none at all. This is especially true if the cacher notes problems about my cache. At least with an automatic translator, I'd have a chance of learning what the issue is. With a blank log, the problem would continue to be unknown to me.

[cezanne]

Does the OP really find it that difficult to use a translator to read the logs? Maybe he is using a difficult translator. All you need to do is copy the text and place it in Google Translate and it will figure out what language it is and translate it for you.

 

That's not always true not even for the languages available in Google translator. One of the reasons is that missing accents and other special characters that are hard or even impossible to use on gc.com might corrupt the result.

 

Sure the translation is in broken English since the gamer structure of each is a little different.

Even if the cacher is required to translate there log into the same language as the cache is posted it will be through a translator and be broken and difficult to understand. Eventually the technology behind the translators will improve and they will be able to compensate for the differences in grammer.

 

I very much doubt that automatic translators will ever become good enough to satisfy my personal expectations.

I enjoy reading logs that tell a story and I am not only interested into understanding a few words.

Grammar is only a side issue here - the different contexts in which words are used is a much more difficult issue.

 

Cezanne

[cezanne]

It is asking that you provide a log in a language that the owner understands - don't you think he deserves it?

 

Not necessarily. Personally, I would prefer a geocaching site based exclusively on English.

 

I log in English also at home as I want to offer at least one English log for each cache I am visiting - I am happy about each English log for caches abroad as well. My appraoch complies with Mantunes suggestion as he included English as an option, but not that your question implies that English can only be used if the cache owner understands English which differs from the original suggestion.

 

Cezanne

Edited September 19, 2011 by cezanne

[+mpilchfamily]

Very true they may never be perfect since everyone has there own way of saying basically the same thing but phrasing it very differently.

[+The Blorenges]

I had a log a while back that said something about, "Haben sie Tomaten auf den Augen". The translation about having tomatoes over the eyes was funny but the meaning was obvious enough - It just means something like "I must be blind"!

 

MrsB

[+NYPaddleCacher]

 

It is as simple as so. The request is not asking everyone to be a polyglot (really, guys, read the proposal before you start saying so). It is asking that you provide a log in a language that the owner understands - don't you think he deserves it?

 

No, I don't think a cache owner "deserves" or is entitled to all logs being posted in a language that they understand. However, geocaching is a social game that exists due to the "relationship" been those that hide caches and those that find them (and most importantly, those that provide access to property where they are hidden). Posting a log in the owners native language would be the polite/courteous/respectful thing to do. It shouldn't *require* a mandate.

[+germanybert]

Most people don't even write in the proper form of their own language and that is why automated translation will never work. Look at German. There so many dialects that people that live no more the 50 KM from each other sometimes have a hard time to understand each other. I have hard time understanding Americans that may have a strong drawl.

 

The bottom line IMHO is that no translation is needed.

[cezanne]

I had a log a while back that said something about, "Haben sie Tomaten auf den Augen". The translation about having tomatoes over the eyes was funny but the meaning was obvious enough - It just means something like "I must be blind"!

 

Yes, that's the correct meaning.

 

It gets, however, more difficult if one really wants to fully understand a log.

 

Take e.g. this log

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=b6910525-06fb-4be8-a5a9-7ae6080d94c2

 

It translates to

 

Very nicely done night treasure. It is a pleasure to know that this is only the beginning of the series. When we returned from Kriška mountains, yet we turned in Udin Borst. Dark has been just right, so follow the right direction there was no problem. It is interesting to watch two retro-reflectors with a clean and just when praskaš head, what to serve ... to begin moving well worth the read instructions, we 're up to zakladka (final stage) Rila clean without the need for sludge. That we were banging on the head when we later showed the owner where I can walk gracefully. Evening lomastenje Mon hostel has ended with a pleasant meeting and final radlerjem in Senicnem. Really sector toll! FTF!

Realy nice (night) multi! No Problems Tues find the way, Stages and final location.

Out: flashlight, TB

Notes: pišuka, body milk, GC

 

That's enough to get a rough gist, but not sufficient for a real understanding.

 

Cezanne

[cezanne]

Posting a log in the owners native language would be the polite/courteous/respectful thing to do.

 

I do not agree as I regard geocaching as an international activity and thus have used English right from the beginning and not my native language (like many others that started back then). Scientific papers also tend to be written in English and computer codes are often documented in English, both regardless of the native language of the authors.

 

Cezanne

[+geodarts]

Would I rather have a log written in a language other than my own (English), or a TFTC or blank log? Personally, I would take a log written in another language over an acronym or a blank. But if a guideline change is made along the lines of this suggestion, I might switch to an acronym for all my logs. A simple "T" seems enough.

 

How much of a problem are inappropriate logs that it should require a guideline change so that a cache owner can monitor what is being written? I have had to delete a log now and then, but never because a log is off topic or inappropriate. Although I take a wide view as to what is considered "on topic" (in the logs that I write, I occasionally delve into a stream of consciousness based on a particular title, location, or the latest results of a darts match), I have never seen an "inappropriate log" and wonder how many foreign visitors would try to slip something past a CO.

 

And no, I do not think that a CO is entitled to a log in any particular language. Caching is an international game and I place my caches for the enjoyment of others. If a foreign cacher finds it easier and more enjoyable to use a language other than my own, I have no problem with that in any way.

[+Too Tall John]

Do you trust in an automatic translator to say to a geocache owner that a log, written in a language he/she doesn't understand, "appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate. " ?

This is not merely a matter of cache maintenance because it is not needed that a log be "bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate". It is only needed that a log appear to be "bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate. " And, how do you check if a dnf is "bogus" or "counterfeit"? Any kind of log (found, dnf, note) specially if generated by an automatic translator, can be interpreted as being "off-topic or otherwise inappropriate"! Do you trust in an automatic translator for this task?

If this is really about the cache owner being able to see if the log is bogus or not, maybe we should work on getting Groundspeak to disallow blank logs first. Seems to me if someone wants to make bogus logs, it'd be a much simpler way to go. If they aren't going do stop blank logs, why in the world would they stop logging in languages non-native to cache owners?

[cezanne]

 

Caching is an international game and I place my caches for the enjoyment of others. If a foreign cacher finds it easier and more enjoyable to use a language other than my own, I have no problem with that in any way.

 

It is interesting that so many write "caching is an international game" and mean quite different things with that.

 

If someone logs in German or French and to some extent also in Italian and Spanish, I can understand the log, but still my personal preference is that everyone who is able to write a readable English log should write an English log. This of course still allows those that are not able to write readable English to use other languages. I am not suggesting to change the guidelines. I am only saying that I would welcome if as many cachers as possible log in English as it this makes the log accessible to a much larger group.

 

I have never had any issues with the logs for my caches, but that's not surprising as all my caches require knowledge of German or English (two require English as a must) and so can only be done by cachers with a good command of one of these languages. So my interest in this topic comes not from my ownership of caches, but from my interest into the logs of caches hidden by other cachers.

 

Cezanne

[cezanne]

If this is really about the cache owner being able to see if the log is bogus or not, maybe we should work on getting Groundspeak to disallow blank logs first. Seems to me if someone wants to make bogus logs, it'd be a much simpler way to go. If they aren't going do stop blank logs, why in the world would they stop logging in languages non-native to cache owners?

 

I agree as the suggestion of the OP is regarded, but for most of the caches where I would like to understand the logs empty logs are not an issue.

Find enclosed a somehow arbitrarily selected example that I came across recently when I was looking for caches in Brno

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=90083b7e-dec0-46bc-a242-b4c94056a6b9

 

Cezanne

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Posting a log in the owners native language would be the polite/courteous/respectful thing to do.

 

I do not agree as I regard geocaching as an international activity and thus have used English right from the beginning and not my native language (like many others that started back then). Scientific papers also tend to be written in English and computer codes are often documented in English, both regardless of the native language of the authors.

 

Cezanne

 

But in the cases you point out, confusion arising from translations (whether by an online or professional human) drives them to be written in some "standard" language, such as English.

 

In geocaching, I'm not sure there would be any issues if logs are not translated 100% correctly.

 

Personnally, I welcome logs in whatever language the finder wants to use (and I get quite a few in European languages from travelers to Newport). Google Translate works well enough for me.

[cezanne]

Posting a log in the owners native language would be the polite/courteous/respectful thing to do.

 

I do not agree as I regard geocaching as an international activity and thus have used English right from the beginning and not my native language (like many others that started back then). Scientific papers also tend to be written in English and computer codes are often documented in English, both regardless of the native language of the authors.

 

Cezanne

 

But in the cases you point out, confusion arising from translations (whether by an online or professional human) drives them to be written in some "standard" language, such as English.

 

That's not the only reason for doing so. It is just much more convenient as it allows direct communcation without anyone inbetween and moreover, one can avoid having to invent terminology in each language from scratch. The same holds true for oral communication. I am having regular conversations with people where English is the only language known to all participants.

 

In geocaching, I'm not sure there would be any issues if logs are not translated 100% correctly.

 

It depends. I agree that it does not play an important role for the issue mentioned by the OP as it does not really matter if a few bogus logs remain undetected.

As selecting caches are regarded that fit one's personal preferences and abilities and deciding whether a cache has maintenance issues and it might not be a good idea to visit it as e.g. all the last visitors had difficulties with a certain stage, things get quite different.

 

Personnally, I welcome logs in whatever language the finder wants to use (and I get quite a few in European languages from travelers to Newport). Google Translate works well enough for me.

 

Actually, my greatest interest is in logs for caches that are not mine. As I mentioned before, I would prefer if there exists a really international geocaching site based on English. I do not mind if there exist other sites where people typically use their local language. I like the idea of being able to understand cache descriptions and logs regardless of where the caches are located, and currently it is almost impossible to select those few caches for which this is the case because the main target of most cachers are only local cachers. I have even encountered cache descriptions and logs written in dialects where even people with the same native language will end up with troubles if they come from a different area than the cache owner. That's simply not my idea of an international activity.

 

Cezanne

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Actually, my greatest interest is in logs for caches that are not mine. As I mentioned before, I would prefer if there exists a really international geocaching site based on English. I do not mind if there exist other sites where people typically use their local language. I like the idea of being able to understand cache descriptions and logs regardless of where the caches are located, and currently it is almost impossible to select those few caches for which this is the case because the main target of most cachers are only local cachers. I have even encountered cache descriptions and logs written in dialects where even people with the same native language will end up with troubles if they come from a different area than the cache owner. That's simply not my idea of an international activity.

 

But requiring a single language for all cache descriptions and logs doesn't solve the problem. Not everyone speaks/writes English, and everyone that does, does not do it with the same fleuncy. In a technical community I might expect to have fairly fleunt speakers, but not the general commuity at large (regardless of the fact that English may required in European schools).

 

I will be in Europe next summer for two weeks (not the first time), and have started looking for caches along my intended route through 4-5 countries. I have looked at many caches that are in the local tongue (German, French and Czech), with only a small number also having an English translation right on the listing. Most of the English translations were no worse or better than if I plugged them into Goolge Translate.

 

And guess what? I was able to pick through caches and have strated building a bookmark list of possible caches.

[cezanne]

But requiring a single language for all cache descriptions and logs doesn't solve the problem. Not everyone speaks/writes English, and everyone that does, does not do it with the same fleuncy.

 

It depends on how you define "problem". In the early years of geocaching it has been common to use English in Austria and for many years Erik has been our reviewer. Countries like Slovenia still do not have a local reviewer and as a consequence almost all cache descriptions there are in English. The cache density there is smaller there of course than in Austria and or in Germany, but this also means that there are much less caches which are there just for the sake of numbers.

 

I would not mind to have a much smaller number of caches available. I guess that at least 80% of the caches I really like have been hidden by cachers whose English is fluent enough. Among the caches I do not like the percentage of hiders with weak English is considerably larger, but there is hardly any loss for me. That's why I would prefer to have an international platform available that is based only on English. Those who prefer to use other languages still could do so.

 

 

I will be in Europe next summer for two weeks (not the first time), and have started looking for caches along my intended route through 4-5 countries. I have looked at many caches that are in the local tongue (German, French and Czech), with only a small number also having an English translation right on the listing. Most of the English translations were no worse or better than if I plugged them into Goolge Translate.

 

And guess what? I was able to pick through caches and have strated building a bookmark list of possible caches.

 

I guess that you mainly selected traditionals in not too hard terrain (not longer mountain hikes where understanding possible dangers is important) and are not too picky about the location. I'm preferring multi caches and puzzle caches and need to make sure that the terrain is ok for me.

 

The needs of cachers who are just driving through an area and want to search for a few quick caches and those who live within reach of several countries with different languages or stay at a place for a bit longer are quite different. In my case, e.g. Slovenia and Hungary are quite close (much closer than Vienna e.g.) and my experiences with automatic translations are very bad, in particular as Hungarian texts are regarded. I tried to follow some of the discussions in the Hungarian subforum - no chance at all to understand even the main points (I tried to translate to English, German and French and failed in a similar way each time). It is a bit better with Czech, but still not enough for many multi caches. I do not need any translator for German and French.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited September 19, 2011 by cezanne

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Posting a log in the owners native language would be the polite/courteous/respectful thing to do.

 

I do not agree as I regard geocaching as an international activity and thus have used English right from the beginning and not my native language (like many others that started back then). Scientific papers also tend to be written in English and computer codes are often documented in English, both regardless of the native language of the authors.

 

Cezanne

 

I fully agree that English is the de facto language for conducting most business worldwide. My comments are more related to a suggestion that we should not need a mandate for common courtesy. Maybe I'm naive, but I think that many non-English speaking would appreciate the attempt to express thanks in the native language of the cache owner. In three weeks I'll be heading to Rome for a week and will also have an overnight layover in Belgium. In my previous three visits to Rome I haven't *needed* to understand or speak Italian but I can't help but think that making an attempt to communicate using the native language is appreciated.

[+fluoro]

Online translation is sufficient. When I cached in Germany all my logs were written in English, my own feeble attempts at German would have been worse than an automated translation, most likely

[+Harry Dolphin]

I think that I should start requiring logs in Spanish, since half my caches are hidden in places where the majority of the people speak Spanish! And my caching partner can translate them for me.

The majority of non-English logs I get are in French or German. I can generally get the gist, with the aid of a dictionary. Polish and Czech are a different story. No idaea what's happening to my travel bugs in The Netherlands or Sweden. Oh, well. At least they are moving. Should we require TB logs in English too?

[+MAntunes]

... Should we require TB logs in English too?

 

Of course, from the point of view that a owner deserves to know what the others write in their trackables, yes.

 

But, as guidelines doesn't require that TB owners should check logs for "off-topic or otherwise inappropriate" content, I agree that translators are enough for the task - if the owner succeeds in identifying the language he doesn't understand.

 

btw: I already said that in a PM to GermanyBert but now in public; no, I haven't used a translator to write all these posts. I am sorry if my english skills are not as good as they should be. But these words are mine and I assume all responsibilities for them.

[+t4e]

It is as simple as so. The request is not asking everyone to be a polyglot (really, guys, read the proposal before you start saying so). It is asking that you provide a log in a language that the owner understands - don't you think he deserves it?

 

hmmm care to explain how that is not asking everyone to be a polyglot if everyone speaks their native language only?

 

how should i know what languages the CO speaks?

 

and come to think of it i think everyone on this planet deserves that every CO write their cache description in a language that can be understood by any possible visitor from around the world

Edited September 20, 2011 by t4e

[+MAntunes]

...

how should i know what languages the CO speaks?

 

The idea posted in the Feedback area suggests to use the language in which the cache listing was written (not the local language!) or english.

 

and come to think of it i think everyone on this planet deserves that every CO write their cache description in a language that can be understood by any possible visitor from around the world

 

Completely agree! In my country the older cachers are consistently suggesting newer ones that every geocache should have an english version or at least the important instructions to find the cache and the hints translated to english.

 

Some years back, when there was not this boom of newer caches every day, everywhere, we had a team that wrote human translations and sent them to the owners of caches listed only in our language. I was part of that team.

 

We, defend that any cache in the world should be understandable to any visitor geocacher and english is the language for that task. In the suggestion posted in the Feedback area, it is defended that logs from any visitor should be understandable to the cache owner, especially when the cache owner has the responsibilities presented in the guidelines. If an online/automatic translator is enough for a visitor to understands the important part to find a cache written in a local language, I think that it is not enough for a cache owner to decide correctly if a log written by a foreign cacher can be considered as being "off-topic or otherwise inappropriate".

[cezanne]

It is as simple as so. The request is not asking everyone to be a polyglot (really, guys, read the proposal before you start saying so). It is asking that you provide a log in a language that the owner understands - don't you think he deserves it?

 

hmmm care to explain how that is not asking everyone to be a polyglot if everyone speaks their native language only?

 

Offtopic question: Does polyglot in North America really apply if someone speaks his native language and English? In continental Europe it does not.

I do not regard myself as polyglot as the number of foreign languages I speak is too small. (I do not count those where I just understand a little bit and cannot talk myself.)

 

and come to think of it i think everyone on this planet deserves that every CO write their cache description in a language that can be understood by any possible visitor from around the world

 

When I started geocaching on gc.com, I have regarded this is an international activity performed in English, the exclusive language of the site for many years. My target audience therefore have always been those been who speak English and not everyone on this planet.

 

Cezanne

Edited September 20, 2011 by cezanne

[cezanne]

In my country the older cachers are consistently suggesting newer ones that every geocache should have an english version or at least the important instructions to find the cache and the hints translated to english.

 

That's close to my own philosophy. I have given up however as most of my fellow cachers whose English is excellent are simply too lazy to come up with English versions and some even object against including them if written by someone else (e.g. with arguments like "the cache description" gets too long). I constantly feel very ashamed when I realize that the majority of caches in my region close to the Slovenian border are only available in German while the caches on the other side of the border almost all have an English version (clearly, Slovenia does not yet experience this insane vague of caches and cachers).

 

We, defend that any cache in the world should be understandable to any visitor geocacher and english is the language for that task.

 

I guess this is a statement that many will argue on and many other will not understand.

On the one hand, there are of course people with no command of English who are travelling around and on the other hand,

the role of English in most non-English speaking countries is so different to the role of a foreign language in the English speaking countries that the majority of those with English as mother tongue (and that's the vast majority here) will not understand your intent. I have made similar experiences in my fight against the new EC language rules. The only ones understanding my arguments came from continental Europe and those are hardly represented in this part of the forum.

 

In the suggestion posted in the Feedback area, it is defended that logs from any visitor should be understandable to the cache owner, especially when the cache owner has the responsibilities presented in the guidelines.

 

Personally, I think that it is has been not wise to argue for your suggestion with regard of the need to delete inappropriate logs.

Groundspeak does not really care about such logs any longer.

 

If an online/automatic translator is enough for a visitor to understands the important part to find a cache written in a local language, I think that it is not enough for a cache owner to decide correctly if a log written by a foreign cacher can be considered as being "off-topic or otherwise inappropriate".

 

Except the case when you delete a log where there is no log entry in the log book, you will end in up in troubles anyway with deleting logs. The formulation of the guidelines is outdated. There are very few cases where Groundspeak would decide that it is your right to delete a log when the cacher who got a log deleted appeals.

 

Cezanne

Edited September 20, 2011 by cezanne

[+MAntunes]

Quoting myself.

 

This is not a request for an alr. This is a request for a guideline change, promoting readability of all logs by geocache owners and, in case of a conflict, that Groundspeak supports the geocache owner and not the person who made the log and refuses to supply a translation or to change the log to a language that can be undoubtedly understood by the geocache owner.

 

If the guidelines are outdated update them, so the cache owners knows exactly what to expect when submitting a listing for approval.

 

Please note that, by the actual guidelines, the owner is also in charge of...

 

It is one of your maintenance duties ss the cache owner to monitor quality control of post to the cache page. To this end, you have the power to delete logs.

 

Then it follows,

 

Use your powers carefully,...

 

How can a cache owner monitors the quality of the logs, and use his powers of deleting logs carefully, based in a log that he doesn't understand or based in its online/automatic translation?

 

Isn't it safer that the log is written in a language he understands (*) or in a human translation supplied by the author of the log?

 

But, I still think that cache owners should have the right to ask to the author of the log for a human translation and, in case of a conflict, GS should support the cache owner. Even for the sake of a reward of his effort of having created the cache and maintaining it.

 

(*) the language in which the cache listing was written or english.

[cezanne]

But, I still think that cache owners should have the right to ask to the author of the log for a human translation and, in case of a conflict, GS should support the cache owner. Even for the sake of a reward of his effort of having created the cache and maintaining it.

 

There are so many caches around - the loss of a cache or a cache hider does not really hurt Groundspeak nowadays.

 

As the deletion of offtopic logs is regarded, I had an issue many years ago with a cache owner who had deleted my log because I have told a story around my experience as I often do and not only wrote about finding the container (a traditional cache at a parking lot). For example, I often provide reasons why I selected a particular cache on that day, which cache I did before, which cache thereafter, which associations I had on my way to the cache etc. I would strongly object against the deletion of such a log of mine and I would strongly object against translating 6000 characters and more into German just because the cache owner wants me to do that work. (All my logs except maintenance logs for my own caches and logs that need to be understood by everyone are in English only.)

 

There is quite a famous incident where a renowned EC hider got involved in a hot debate with Groundspeak over the right to delete logs. He was deleting logs that did not contain photos and where he believed that the logs could be armchair ones. This ended up in a nasty story and this person being banned from gc.com and later on all his ECs got archived. Of course, ECs have their own guidelines, but still the attitude of Groundspeak towards deleting logs has been changed. The new approach is much more to the favour of the person who wrote the log.

 

Cezanne

Edited September 20, 2011 by cezanne

[+MAntunes]

the loss of a cache or a cache hider does not really hurt Groundspeak nowadays.

 

I'm sorry to know that. I think that every individual, every person counts.

 

The new approach is much more to the favour of the person who wrote the log.

 

That's what I think is unfair. Cache owners and log authors should be treated equally.

 

The suggestion in the Feedback is not asking any type of ALRs. It is asking for the readability of the logs by cache owners when they have to monitor the quality of the logs - accordingly to the actual guidelines. Please note that I already dropped the term 'rule' and accepted a suggestion to change it to a "recommendation" or guideline that the logs should be written in english.

[+redsox_mark]

I fully agree that English is the de facto language for conducting most business worldwide. My comments are more related to a suggestion that we should not need a mandate for common courtesy. Maybe I'm naive, but I think that many non-English speaking would appreciate the attempt to express thanks in the native language of the cache owner. In three weeks I'll be heading to Rome for a week and will also have an overnight layover in Belgium. In my previous three visits to Rome I haven't *needed* to understand or speak Italian but I can't help but think that making an attempt to communicate using the native language is appreciated.

 

I agree it is common courtesy to try to communicate in the local language. If I know any of the local language I will write some of my logs in it. I at least try to say "sorry I don't speak (the local language)" in the local language. And also "thank you".

 

But I don't agree with the OP. If the finder doesn't know the local language, I don't think it makes sense to force them to use it (which would likely mean using a translation tool). I think is better for the cache owner to run the translation tool. As has been said, that way if the tool doesn't translate well it is less likely to cause offense.

[+MAntunes]

Please, I never meant 'local language'. I said, language in which the cache listing was written ...or english.

[cezanne]

The suggestion in the Feedback is not asking any type of ALRs. It is asking for the readability of the logs by cache owners when they have to monitor the quality of the logs - accordingly to the actual guidelines. Please note that I already dropped the term 'rule' and accepted a suggestion to change it to a "recommendation" or guideline that the logs should be written in english.

 

It is not me you would need to convince. I have been writing all my logs in English since 2002.

 

I have a question however for you: How do you define the notion quality for logs?

 

I have chosen two of my recent logs (the first one is split into two parts)

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=3304e2d0-f5f9-4d9d-9cf6-653ad11fc625

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=751f3de2-4a26-4c85-b7ea-68f8817b21de

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=00cb9ece-eb3e-49d3-8d3d-202ab5927da5

 

They are in English, so you can read and understand them. I guess you could argue that all of them contain some offtopic parts, but still I would not accept any log deletion for these logs or other logs of mine.

 

I need to admit that I did not understand what you are really concerned about? Foul language? Armchair logs? (In that case, visiting the log book suffices)

 

I prefer to understand the logs (for my caches and for caches of others) because I am curious and not due to any guideline part.

 

Cezanne

[+MAntunes]

I'm not trying to define quality of the logs. I'm not the one who asks cache owners to "monitor quality control of post to the cache page".

 

I'm trying to fight for the readability of the logs by cache owners when they have that responsability. And for the right of the cache owner to ask for a human translation from the author of the log, and for the right to be treated equaly by Groundspeak when a conflict arises because of this particular situation.

 

It is not me you would need to convince. I have been writing all my logs in English since 2002.

 

So, do I have your votes?

[cezanne]

I'm not trying to define quality of the logs. I'm not the one who asks cache owners to "monitor quality control of post to the cache page".

 

You could tell me, however, what logs you would want to delete in case you are able to understand them.

Do my example logs fall in this category?

 

And for the right of the cache owner to ask for a human translation from the author of the log,

 

As I have already mentioned, I am not willing to invest the work to translate my typically very long English logs in any other language. Typically, my logs are written as kind of entries in my geocaching diary and most of what I write is only of relevance to myself and a few other people and not for the cache owner who will not care about my thoughts that much except he knows me.

 

and for the right to be treated equaly by Groundspeak when a conflict arises because of this particular situation.

 

I still would like to understand what might be a conflict for you. Please provide an example of what types of logs you would delete.

 

Cezanne