Thanks Thanks:  7
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 133

Thread: ♿- Disabled Cacher - handicaching

  1. #51

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Warfield, Berkshire
    Posts
    436

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    Who seriously, when looking up a geocache on a phone or gpsr is going to then log on to another site?
    That's a very good point. The strength of GCvote is that it integrates with the dominant listing site. Handicaching might be better served by adopting the same approach.

    How about a listing site that gives the distance for each cache, the elevation gain, % off trail, % moderate overgrowth, % heavy overgrowth, estimates for physical challenge, mental challenge and camouflage? It's TerraCaching, the Betamax of listing sites! I don't know why they are alone in having adopted this years ago, as good ideas should be infectious, but it shows that GAGB should make adding information like this, and the handicaching ratings a campaign to take to all listing sites. I'm definitely up for this - anything that makes planning of caching trips easier for those with restricted mobility.

  2. #52

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    15

    Default

    I think the integration of handi caching into gc.com is a great idea the reason why I don't use it is because its currently a complete faff.

  3. #53

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Poole, Dorset
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Many people with alternate access needs have a fear of admitting their needs so often do not thank people they don't know for their help. I have seen people harassed due to admitting their alternative needs. I would read reviews for access in many environments but wouldn't want to reveal that I had a disability.

    Many people with alternative access needs have problems with revealing such needs due to the complexity of their health issues. For many months I denied to others my issues and wouldn't have posted anything that may have caused people to know of them.

    Because the way that some people treat people with alternative needs they never reveal them to anyone often to the detriment of themselves. If society in general was more alternative needs friendly this wouldn't happen and people would be more open to say thank you and not worried about the consequences of admitting to having alternative access needs.

    SO FAR EVERYONE I HAVE HAD CONTACT WITH IN GEOCACHING HAS BEEN ALTERNATIVE ACCESS NEED FRIENDLY, WE DO KNOW THAT NOT ALL CACHES WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE TO US THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN NOT ALWAYS ACHIEVE FOR MANY REASONS.

    THANK YOU TO ANYONE THAT RATES THEIR CACHES ON HANDICACHING.COM, OR ADDS RELEVANT ENTRIES TO THEIR CACHE PAGE ON GEOCACHING.COM ITS A HELP TO ME AND MANY OTHERS.


    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    Admittedly though I haven't done any Handicache reviews for a few months, and I'll tell you why. Never once have I had any feedback that anyone ever has benefited from a single one of those reviews.

  4. #54

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Poole, Dorset
    Posts
    111

    Default

    The Dorset County section of the Ramblers Association would be a good first port of call for access issues connected with Rights of Ways.

    They have a website at http://www.dorset-ramblers.org.uk/ they keep a good eye on developments Right of Way wise throughout the County.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cache on Wheels View Post
    That's very good advice, thank you do you think I would be better going straight to the rights of way, whom I have a named contact, or thorough] the parish council first by requesting it in the agenda for an upcoming meeting?

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    18

    Default

    I have handicache rated some of my hides and was regularly rating my finds until a couple of months ago when I read on Facebook that the ratings on Handicaching.com weren't useful because they required a link through to a different website..

    I don't have any specialist knowledge nor am I qualified to speak on behalf of disabled cachers, but if the GAGB want to campaign for trying to get some kind of Handicache rating facility incorporated in the listing sites, which will make it more user friendly and of benefit to those who need it then you have my full support and I am happy to help in any way I can.

  6. #56

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by countrymatters View Post
    Dave raises many valid points that are worth following through.

    But I think that part of the problem may lie in the lack of real understanding that those of us not disabled have of the issues facing those who are. Of course, we all realise that you can't get a wheelchair over a stile, and when I 'Terrain rate' any of my caches, I use a system I understand, even if no one actually know about it. But it means that I'm consistent, although I'm conscious of the fact that it's a purely arbitrary thing, and probably not much better than useless.

    If, however, I had clear guidance on how to rate a cache for less abled people, I'd more than happily revise all my caches on that basis.
    . Thank you for your reply. If you look at handicaching.com, what you are rating is the distance to cacher, height if cache, obstructions etc and not the abilities of the cacher are you are basically given options on the drop down list to choose from which are broken down more so than on GC.com, thus providing more in depth info for the cacher reading it. Having this extra info then helps on make a more informed decision on if they are happy to try and find that particular cache

  7. #57

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6

    Cool Caution - long!

    I thought Iíd share my take on this issue, both as a hider who has rated (some) of their caches, and someone with limited experience of helping my aged mother about in a wheelchair.

    For me, the main reason the Handicaching rating system hasnít taken off is confusion over definitions and relevance. Yes, there are other reasons such as itís Ďtucked awayí and perhaps some folk find the terms unhelpful, and itís not been much promoted by listing sites.

    I think it is primarily about, Ďwhat are we talking about when we think about disabilities?í It tends to get limited to ďwheelchairsĒ IMHO. Thereís an attribute for wheelchair accessibility, so is that the focus?

    There are obviously a whole range of abilities but getting to a cache on a set of wheels is quite specific, and either you use a wheelchair or you donít. In theory, it should be fairly easy to say, yes, you can get to it in a wheelchair or no you canít. Iím sure many wheelchair users find that, in practice it isnít that clear cut as raters forget the 3 steps up or the narrow gap or whatever!

    Those who use other means, or who have other abilities can be the only judge of what is suitable for them. Just like anyone in fact - we all have to look at a map, read the cache page, look at the terrain stars etc and decide if we want to go for the cache.

    So, I do support using some form of rating, currently Handicaching appears to be the only option, but not all my caches are rated for accessibility. Some because I wasnít aware of Handicaching.com when they were placed. Others because of my own confusion about terms and things. In more recent times I do endeavour to rate any cache that has the potential to be accessible for a limited cacher. If it appears to be a roadside cache, or it is in fact a good surface and I can imagine getting to it in a wheelchair, or for some similar reason, I will rate it and include the Handicaching code on the page.

    If the cache is 2* or above, for me that means itís off pavement, on a usual sort of muddy footpath, through a wood, or up a small hill etc. I see 2* caches as being in places where there is no way of getting there with a wheelchair, not even one with off-road tyres. If I place a cache on a walk in the countryside like this, then Iím afraid I donít see a lot of relevance in rating it on Handicaching. The terrain stars give a good indication, as does my cache description, as does a quick look at the map. For me there is quite a clear divide between being wheelchair accessible and ďeverything elseĒ. Some of my caches have 1.5* terrain but Iíve included the wheelchair icon cos itís a maybe, or you could get most of the way and enjoy the location, but may not be able to get the box. I often include more info on the cache page if this is the case. Iíve also offered to supply more detail if anyone wants it.

    Anything over 2* seems to me to be the same process for all seekers - get the info off the page and the map and decide if it looks within your ability. I canít know, only you can. Iím happy to describe the route and stuff, and I would be very happy to supply further info if asked via email. But generally, it will involve mud, sticks, slopes, gates, stiles etc since most countryside does. Look at the map to find out the distance involved etc.

    What to do?
    In the short term I would be happy to see Handicaching added to the margin of the cache page, like the attributes, or at the top with the terrain and difficulty. It would then make it easy to rate by finders, draw attention to it so people know itís there, and so it gets completed by hiders along with attributes.

    I would like Handicaching to improve itís system a bit cos some of it isnít entirely clear. I would be quite happy if an alternative system was used, which could lead to a change of terminology and better integrate it into the Terrain system.

    It would be good to promote the whole agenda and discuss and educate so there is greater understanding of access issues, whatís important, how to describe it etc. It would be great to have more detail in a clear and unambiguous way on the cache page, especially for the low terrain caches.

    The reality is that the majority of rural caches are not accessible unless you can go for a walk in the countryside. Given that most of my caches are out in the Ďwildsí access will always be tricky if youíre not very mobile. Urban caches can be a different matter. I know from planning trips with my mum that finding truly accessible trips out is very tricky.

    It would be good to have a discussion about what aspects might be worthwhile rating when going 'beyond the tarmac'. Currently, I generally donít feel there is much point in doing a separate rating when the info is on the cache page. The info that isnít on the page is the stuff about using a wheelchair: is it paved, is it steep slopes, are there steps or narrow bits. That to me is what is currently missing and why I do include Handicaching on my pages, where it feels useful.

    It would be good to Ďcampaigní for Groundspeak and other sites to include Handicaching or an alternative. Also to spread the word and encourage cache hiders to include ratings where appropriate. GAGB could certainly lead the way with these aspects.

    I hope I have shed some light on how I understand and use the current system. Yes, it would be good to include it and make it Ďmainstreamí but some work on clarity, definitions and purpose needs to happen I feel.
    (Sorry it's a bit long!)

  8. #58

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Post Handicaching rates the terrain not the ability of the cacher

    I agree with you Dave, just because something has not worked before, does not mean we should stop trying.
    For those who are interested, we need to come up with a plan of action at moving forward.
    I posted a thread on the Groundspeak forums about handicaching at the beginning of the year and io the whole, people were very supportive of it, went off and rated caches, some took groups on routes to find caches ...
    Here is the link to that forum thread: http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/ind...&#entry5157839

    The difference with handicaching rating is there are options from drop down lists that you choose from in order to rate the cache that are more detailed than on GC.com so one does not need to know the ability of a cacher, just the terrain split down into sections of the general route to the cache. Eg distance to cache, route surface, height from ground ...

    Is there are routes we have taken that I have used my old mobility scooter that came apart easy, into lighter pieces that my hubby and friends had to take apart and lift over a gate that was locked when we came back.
    We have also used routes that we knew beforehand after enquiring that there were a couple of kissing gates: I was able to walk through the kissing gate and my hubby collapse a lift over my wheelchair, so that was not impossible, as the rest if the route surface was easy for me to use my scooter / wheelchair on.

    Thank you all so much for your input so far, it's great to see so many responses and good to hear people's different points of view
    Positivity is contagious, nothing is impossible

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Post Handicaching rates the terrain not the ability of the cacher

    I agree with you Dave, just because something has not worked before, does not mean we should stop trying.
    For those who are interested, we need to come up with a plan of action at moving forward.
    I posted a thread on the Groundspeak forums about handicaching at the beginning of the year and io the whole, people were very supportive of it, went off and rated caches, some took groups on routes to find caches ...
    Here is the link to that forum thread: http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/ind...&#entry5157839

    The difference with handicaching rating is there are options from drop down lists that you choose from in order to rate the cache that are more detailed than on GC.com so one does not need to know the ability of a cacher, just the terrain split down into sections of the general route to the cache. Eg distance to cache, route surface, height from ground ...

    Is there are routes we have taken that I have used my old mobility scooter that came apart easy, into lighter pieces that my hubby and friends had to take apart and lift over a gate that was locked when we came back.
    We have also used routes that we knew beforehand after enquiring that there were a couple of kissing gates: I was able to walk through the kissing gate and my hubby collapse a lift over my wheelchair, so that was not impossible, as the rest if the route surface was easy for me to use my scooter / wheelchair on.

    Thank you all so much for your input so far, it's great to see so many responses and good to hear people's different points of view
    Positivity is contagious, nothing is impossible

  10. #60

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Dorset ... of course!
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cache on Wheels View Post
    I agree with you Dave, just because something has not worked before, does not mean we should stop trying.
    For those who are interested, we need to come up with a plan of action at moving forward.
    The handicaching website has been going for years, at least seven and a half to my knowledge, and even when the geocaching community was much smaller than it is now, it was impossible to get people to move away from the geocaching.com website to use it.

    How many years would you wish to waste flogging it? I think it's time to try a different tack, and go for raising awareness of increased information on cache pages from the get go, rather than some bolt on that not many people use, and that some find divisive anyway.

    Access information shouldn't be about "those who are interested" it should be the responsibility of the community. People often shy away from providing such information as they aren't sure what's needed, that's why an awareness drive might help.

  11. #61

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Dorset ... of course!
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Weaver View Post
    I have seen people harassed due to admitting their alternative needs. I would read reviews for access in many environments but wouldn't want to reveal that I had a disability.
    I trust this is not in a geocaching environment?

    In seven and a half years I have only come across negativity from one person, that person is still active now, they know who they are and I suspect given my caching record they recognise their error.

    As a person who has recently been victim of disability hate crime (a serious offence last week), I am very well aware of the magnitude of discrimination in society, but I wish to stress it IS NOT IN THE GEOCACHING COMMUNITY, so please, rest easy, you won't get any trouble from people within this game. They will respect you for what you can do, but I have learned the best way is to integrate and be a part of the larger community, I have no wish to be separate because I may or may not have a wish for accurate access information.

  12. #62

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Dorset ... of course!
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    So - next question(s) then.

    Your preference seems center on encouraging individual cachers to include more information on their cache pages which is useful to disabled geocachers rather than incorporating specific additional features into the interface of the listing site itself?
    I don't necessarily think its an either or, and would be happy with the exploration of both.

    Inclusion is my main concern, for two reasons, firstly, I play this game to be part of the community, as indeed I lead my life, and don't wish to visit a separate site, and secondly, the information is not just useful to those who self declare as disabled, lots of other people in the community might benefit from additional info.

  13. #63

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Poole, Dorset
    Posts
    111

    Default

    No it wasn't in a geocaching environment that I was referring to but the same fears would apply to the possibility it would happen in the geocaching environment.

    I would say that with the thousands of geocachers I am unsure how you could be sure it never happens in the geocaching environment. You just need to take proper safety precautions to protect yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    I trust this is not in a geocaching environment?

    In seven and a half years I have only come across negativity from one person, that person is still active now, they know who they are and I suspect given my caching record they recognise their error.

    As a person who has recently been victim of disability hate crime (a serious offence last week), I am very well aware of the magnitude of discrimination in society, but I wish to stress it IS NOT IN THE GEOCACHING COMMUNITY, so please, rest easy, you won't get any trouble from people within this game. They will respect you for what you can do, but I have learned the best way is to integrate and be a part of the larger community, I have no wish to be separate because I may or may not have a wish for accurate access information.

  14. #64

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Shropshire
    Posts
    322

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    The handicaching website has been going for years, at least seven and a half to my knowledge, and even when the geocaching community was much smaller than it is now, it was impossible to get people to move away from the geocaching.com website to use it.

    How many years would you wish to waste flogging it? .
    If enough people used it then GC would see the demand and probably consider including it in the website.

    Dont say they wont as they allready have included stats when they purchased a stake the my geocaching profile website after seeing how popular it was.

    As for how many years thats a daft argument, you have to put the number of people caching into that equation for it to make sense, if 1% use it then you will get more rated now than 7 years ago.

    Promote the tool we have and use those stats to beat down a listing sites door.

    After all GC are a for profit company give them a business case rather than a lone voice in the wilderness.
    "If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning."

  15. #65

    Default

    I might not have much time to post today, but I wanted to try to set a ball rolling.

    As always, I'm going to speak plainly - if I were digging a swimming pool I'd start with a shovel or even an excavator, rather than a teaspoon

    So far in this thread we've had input from three cachers with disabilities. That demonstrates to the listing sites that at least three cachers would benefit from what we are seeking.

    Three cachers isn't many - a bit like using that teaspoon I mentioned earlier to crack a walnut :

    I'm looking for ideas on how we can encourage more disabled cachers to come forward and demonstrate real demand for useful rating data and information on cache pages themselves.

    Taking Groundspeak as the biggest player by several orders of magnitude, how do we in Great Britain, as probably only their fourth largest customer on a global scale, build a large enough voice to convince them to take positive action?

  16. #66

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Warfield, Berkshire
    Posts
    436

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    Taking Groundspeak as the biggest player by several orders of magnitude, how do we in Great Britain, as probably only their fourth largest customer on a global scale, build a large enough voice to convince them to take positive action?
    Regrettably, I don't think they'll care about this from a UK perspective; it's really up to our global community to put pressure on them, particularly from the US. This should be achievable because there is already a legal precedent in case law where hotel booking web site operators have been required to add web site features to search for and reserve hotel rooms that have accessible accommodation. This is the precise analogue of Groundspeak having to add web site features to search for accessible geocaches. GS might argue that the searchable wheelchair accessible attribute meets this requirement, however, I think the very different criteria on handicaching demonstrate clearly that this is not enough.

  17. #67

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    6

    Default

    I have followed the discussion here and on thread on other forums, and it made me think.

    I have always be supportive of inclusion, but as an able bodied individual I have never actively done anything to support/help complete the inclusion of everyone in the game. I have seen handicaching.com and previously never gave it much thought. What a complacent view and one I set about changing.

    This morning I started to rate all my caches on handicaching.com, granted I do not have many, but it doesn't take long and is a painless process. I have also ensured I link to Handicaching.com via my cache pages. I will make a point of rating all my caches, both current and future going forward.

    Why the change? Well we see here and in other forums individuals talking of the merits of inclusion in the game and in the same breath stating Groundspeak will be slow in making changes. Why slow? Well from what I can see there is a lot of talk but no real action. If we want Groundspeak to recognise the significant support then we ALL need to take some small action, lots of small actions will quickly become a very large statement of support and one Groundspeak will find it hard to ignore.

    Rather than continually debating, lets all make a small contribution and start to rate our caches. A few minutes investment in our own time could result in a much improved game for EVERYONE.

  18. #68

    Default

    :wub:

    I think I wub you!

    :lol:



    Quote Originally Posted by mantonclan View Post
    I have followed the discussion here and on thread on other forums, and it made me think.

    I have always be supportive of inclusion, but as an able bodied individual I have never actively done anything to support/help complete the inclusion of everyone in the game. I have seen handicaching.com and previously never gave it much thought. What a complacent view and one I set about changing.

    This morning I started to rate all my caches on handicaching.com, granted I do not have many, but it doesn't take long and is a painless process. I have also ensured I link to Handicaching.com via my cache pages. I will make a point of rating all my caches, both current and future going forward.

    Why the change? Well we see here and in other forums individuals talking of the merits of inclusion in the game and in the same breath stating Groundspeak will be slow in making changes. Why slow? Well from what I can see there is a lot of talk but no real action. If we want Groundspeak to recognise the significant support then we ALL need to take some small action, lots of small actions will quickly become a very large statement of support and one Groundspeak will find it hard to ignore.

    Rather than continually debating, lets all make a small contribution and start to rate our caches. A few minutes investment in our own time could result in a much improved game for EVERYONE.

  19. #69

    Default

    I'm aiming for friendly cooperation - not capitulation.

    And yes - I rather than we - as this is something I've been interested in for quite a while now - and it's something I'd like to pursue - if there is proof of sufficient need - regardless of my status within the GAGB - elected or not.

    So again I would ask again - please - that more cachers with disabilities come forward and speak up and help build a case to convince listing sites to invest the required resource to move things forward :cheers:


    Quote Originally Posted by sandvika View Post
    Regrettably, I don't think they'll care about this from a UK perspective; it's really up to our global community to put pressure on them, particularly from the US. This should be achievable because there is already a legal precedent in case law where hotel booking web site operators have been required to add web site features to search for and reserve hotel rooms that have accessible accommodation. This is the precise analogue of Groundspeak having to add web site features to search for accessible geocaches. GS might argue that the searchable wheelchair accessible attribute meets this requirement, however, I think the very different criteria on handicaching demonstrate clearly that this is not enough.

  20. #70

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    15

    Default

    I know micro and lfc rate every cache they find with the script provided by Jeremyr. I find a lot of caches and hide a lot of caches imagine how many handi caching ratings that would be overall

    Sorry my point is do you have a link to the Jeremy r script and how do I use it thanks

  21. #71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The magna defender View Post
    I know micro and lfc rate every cache they find with the script provided by Jeremyr. I find a lot of caches and hide a lot of caches imagine how many handi caching ratings that would be overall

    Sorry my point is do you have a link to the Jeremy r script and how do I use it thanks
    Not strictly true on a couple of counts.

    I've rated a bunch of the caches I've found but have done none now for a few months for reasons mentioned earlier - I want to know that it is of use - hence asking more disabled cachers to come forward

    I know that LFC4eva has done lots too and also Schnuz - his ratings are particularly excellent - plenty of detail

    I did try out the script you mention and it worked pretty well as I remember - but for reasons I don't recall I reverted back to doing it the way I'd got used to.

    I'd have my notepad open with the notes I'd made while out in the field - not pages and pages, just a few key notes about things like nearby parking, path surfaces and widths, an idea of the inclination of any slopes, how many stiles / kissing gates / ladder stiles etc.

    I find the concept of a mountain bike a good indicator of how suitable a path is for anything on wheels i.e. this would be a doddle on a mountain bike or a fully fit person on a mountain bike could manage this but anything else with wheels would struggle.

    As far as computer stuff goes, if I'm logging finds I'll have the cache page open in one browser tab, the Handicache site on a second, probably the OS map of the location open in a third and probably Google Earth running in the background so I can use the ruler tool to measure distances.

    I'll rate the cache before logging it - that way I can paste a hyperlink to the rating right there in my log, so anyone reading my log just has to click on the link to get to the rating on the Handicache site.

    It does take effort, but it's not difficult once you get a rhythm going - especially if you're logging and rating caches along a trail as a lot of the information from one rating can be copy/pasted to the others.

    I will try to find the script - think it was a Greasemonkey script and post a link here if I can

  22. #72

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Yeah got me thinking as I find a tonne of caches every year and got 200 last month which is a poor month for me. Just think how many ratings would be done over the years

  23. #73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The magna defender View Post
    Yeah got me thinking as I find a tonne of caches every year and got 200 last month which is a poor month for me. Just think how many ratings would be done over the years
    Why not start by rating all the caches on your favourites list?

    It's vitally important - at least as far as I'm concerned - that we try to assist disabled cachers in getting to quality caches - not just easy drive-bys which they can probably already get to with no Handicache rating at all

  24. #74

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    I will try to find the script - think it was a Greasemonkey script and post a link here if I can
    This is what you're looking for http://www.nwcaching.co.uk/forum/vie...t=5575&p=75445


    I pretty much follow the same format as Microdot.. the main reason for stopping using the Greasemonkey script is because it doesn't work when you are logging your finds via the field notes option.

    I have my log open in one tab.. handicache open in another.. and the clayjar ratings website open in another, just to remind myself of the suggested D/T ratings. I use Google Earth and the ruler to measure distances from parking to cache and/or from cache to cache if doing a series.

    It might sound like a bit of a faff, but once you get into the swing of it and make it part of your routine, it's not too bad... and it's worth the effort if it helps others.

  25. #75

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6

    Default

    I posted a long reply yesterday evening but it's disappeared into the void / review Q.

  26. #76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by martlakes View Post
    I posted a long reply yesterday evening but it's disappeared into the void / review Q.


    I'm not aware that there is a review Q on here - although unfortunately the server which hosts the website seems to be creaking a bit at the moment

    I don't suppose you could try again please?

    Might be a good idea to type it up in notepad or something and then copy/paste here - just in case the web server farts again when you hit Submit

  27. #77

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    The Mendips, Somerset
    Posts
    2,776

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by martlakes View Post
    I posted a long reply yesterday evening but it's disappeared into the void / review Q.
    Sorry, didn't spot that it needed approving ... perhaps because it was so long

    It is there now ... post #57
    GAGB member since 2005
    GAGB Committee member 2010 to 2016 (Chair 2012 to 2015)
    UK Mega Event Chairman 2009 (Weston-super-Mare)


  28. #78

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    North Wales
    Posts
    676

    Exclamation

    Ok lets list a few points and add suggestions on how we achieve them

    1: We wish to see a "All Physical Abilities" Terrain rating, on all Listing Sites. By persuading the Largest Listing Site to do so, we have a extra tool to persuade, the Other Listing Sites who have not yet done so at that point.

    So how to achieve this?

    Groundspeak have specifically stated that they would love to incorporate such a system, but (and there is always a but) they do not have the available Bandwidth, nor do they currently have the available Developer Resources. Yet they both Purchased a Independent Stats Site, and Incorporated it into GC. So with a large % of the community, having that on their wish list, they found both for that.

    2:So to move things forward, we as a community have to show to Groundspeak, that this is a hight priority on the communities wish List

    So how to achieve this?

    Create a Saturation Point for caches in the UK rated on Handicachig.com (lets all agree to throw out the issues over the name for now, we as a group could agree to simply refer to it as HC.com), then once Saturation is reached in the UK. The GAGB reaches out to other Geocaching Associations in the World (the elections already show one link, with the Returning Officer, being a Officer in the Alaska Geocaching Association) and persuade them to come on board with the idea, and build up Saturation around the world.

    Once we start getting to that level, then Groundspeak will have to move the priority from the bottom of the List to the top.

    Will this be easy? No it will be a sheer bloody climb to achieve the goal. But the end result will be worth it.

    So yes at first it would entail, using a Off GC or other Listing Site Resource, but please look at that as a tool to achieve the end goal. There is the saying "No Pain, No Gain", well using HC.com is the pain, the Goal, every Listing Site Incorporating a "All Physical Abilities" Terrain rating system.

    Lets instead of a small shout, all get together and give All Listing Sites a Roar!

    Together we can do it, where a small group will never achieve it. Lets create a Giant Snow Ball on it's way down the slope, and not a tiny one being pushed up the slope.

    Personally I've been pushing the Snow Ball up the slope, for the last 6 years. Lets see the next 12 months for the GAGB, change that to a Giant Snow Ball on it's way down the slope. If everyone just rates just 10% of the finds they make, just think of the affect that alone would have.

    Please, Please get behind this and help push!

    Dave
    My post is my personal opinion and as such you do not have my permission to quote me outside of these forums!

    Dave
    Brenin Tegeingl
    Formerly known as Mancunian Pyrocacher on GC

  29. #79

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    15

    Default

    I've done a few of my recent driveby hides and have done my Earthcaches which are all over the place: Somerset, Yorkshire, Northumberland so maybe thatll spread awareness down there. Its not as hard a process as I thought. I'll try do one for all my cache hides. That'll get the numbers up :P

  30. #80

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    6

    Default

    I thinks its great we now have a growing number of cachers who are actively going to rate their caches (and finds) on HC

    Could I also point out (I know you all already to know but it never hurts to mention it) that when you do rate the cache at then end of the raring process you are give a unique piece of code that allows you to add a HC rated seal to your cache page that will link your GC listing to the rating page on HC

    It only takes a few minutes to update the cache page and the seal adds a great prompt for others to go over to HC and see what its all about. It might even encourage others to rate their own caches and finds if they start to see the seal appearing more often.

  31. #81

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Surrey, near Heathrow
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mantonclan View Post
    I thinks its great we now have a growing number of cachers who are actively going to rate their caches ...
    For several years I did rate all my caches on HC. But I found it difficult to answer some of the questions because of different routes, different weather conditions, different disabilities. I know people would not necessarily mention it, but in several years I never saw any indication that it had been the slightest use to anybody. And when I read a while back that DorsetGal discouraged it, I stopped doing it. I will reconsider my position on this.

    On the subject of which words to use to describe disability, I feel it is the same as it is for racial issues - the intention is far more important than the actual words. The problem is that each new word picks up associations from badly intentioned usage, at which point it becomes non-PC and a new word gets invented. The "PC-life" of each new variation seems to be getting shorter and shorter. Add in regional differences that can't keep up with the changes and the written word which still shows yesterday's PC word and it's clear to me that we should get out of this cycle of PC change.

    Rgds, Andy

  32. #82

    Default

    Our earliest cache hide is GC26YW3 Weir could it be? and that's also probably the most decent cache we have which is easily accessible to less able cachers

    The handicache rating code for that cache - which is automatically generated for you each time you rate a cache looks like this:

    <!--start of handicaching link-->
    <p>
    <a href="http://www.handicaching.com/show.php?waypoint= GC26YW3" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.handicaching.com/images/seal_rater2.gif" border="0" alt="View the ratings for GC26YW3"></a>
    </p>
    <!--end of handicaching link-->

    And on the cache page that code is copied into, the result looks like this (unfortunately I don't know how to make this image a clickable hyperlink in this forum - easy enough on the NW Cacher's forum but not sure how I would do it here) :


  33. #83

    Default

    I think Mongoose39UK summed it up rather nicely - it's about outcomes - not words

    Quote Originally Posted by amberel View Post

    On the subject of which words to use to describe disability, I feel it is the same as it is for racial issues - the intention is far more important than the actual words. The problem is that each new word picks up associations from badly intentioned usage, at which point it becomes non-PC and a new word gets invented. The "PC-life" of each new variation seems to be getting shorter and shorter. Add in regional differences that can't keep up with the changes and the written word which still shows yesterday's PC word and it's clear to me that we should get out of this cycle of PC change.

    Rgds, Andy

  34. #84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The magna defender View Post
    I've done a few of my recent driveby hides and have done my Earthcaches which are all over the place: Somerset, Yorkshire, Northumberland so maybe thatll spread awareness down there. Its not as hard a process as I thought. I'll try do one for all my cache hides. That'll get the numbers up :P
    Excellent news

    I never even thought about Earthcaches - but now you mention them they potentially lend themselves perfectly as accessible caches as they can usually be completed without a physically demanding hunt :socool:

    Nice one Mangna

  35. #85

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kings Lynn, Norfolk
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mantonclan View Post
    I thinks its great we now have a growing number of cachers who are actively going to rate their caches (and finds) on HC
    Actually it's after reading this thread I decided to rate those of mine which maybe suitable for disabled cachers.

  36. #86

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by mantonclan View Post
    I thinks its great we now have a growing number of cachers who are actively going to rate their caches (and finds) on HC

    Could I also point out (I know you all already to know but it never hurts to mention it) that when you do rate the cache at then end of the raring process you are give a unique piece of code that allows you to add a HC rated seal to your cache page that will link your GC listing to the rating page on HC

    It only takes a few minutes to update the cache page and the seal adds a great prompt for others to go over to HC and see what its all about. It might even encourage others to rate their own caches and finds if they start to see the seal appearing more often.
    Thanks for pointing that our again, I have it in my profile and when I rate a cache, I email the link to the CO and ask if they could add it to the description part in their cache page. So far all if them have thank you all you have to do is then click on the yellow icon which takes you directly to the rating, no logging on required

  37. #87

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by eusty View Post
    Actually it's after reading this thread I decided to rate those of mine which maybe suitable for disabled cachers.
    thank you very much for doing that, it's great to read that others are becoming more aware of the facility

  38. #88

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    Our earliest cache hide is GC26YW3 Weir could it be? and that's also probably the most decent cache we have which is easily accessible to less able cachers

    The handicache rating code for that cache - which is automatically generated for you each time you rate a cache looks like this:

    <!--start of handicaching link-->
    <p>
    <a href="http://www.handicaching.com/show.php?waypoint= GC26YW3" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.handicaching.com/images/seal_rater2.gif" border="0" alt="View the ratings for GC26YW3"></a>
    </p>
    <!--end of handicaching link-->

    And on the cache page that code is copied into, the result looks like this (unfortunately I don't know how to make this image a clickable hyperlink in this forum - easy enough on the NW Cacher's forum but not sure how I would do it here) :

    and the best bit is tgere is no need to log in to another site, you just click on the big yellow icon and its as quick as clicking on the hint button

  39. #89

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Post Handicaching chat with UK Geocaching Podcast Show and grease monkey

    for those who may have missed the post, I had a chat on the UK Geocaching podcast show with 3 hosts on their October show about handicaching and the benefits of it. The whole show is a great listen, especially where 2 of the hosts cut off ore recording in the hope of a FTF of a new cache published, but to keep on topic, it starts at 20 mins in and explains a bit about how handicaching.com works to rate a cache using the drop down menus on their site. Sure it would be great to have the more detailed facility for anyone to rate a cache on GC.com but as Dave points out, maybe we need to go with what is already there at the moment, (hope I understood that correct Dave)
    I have just submitted some new caches, and whilst I was able to add some useful disabled access info to the main page on one eg Church Micro Puddletown, there is only minimal space so had to add extra useful info on the description part on handicaching rating eg Church Micro Dewlish.

    Here is the link to the show:http://www.ukgcpodcast.com/2012/10/0...h-three-hosts/

    They also added show notes on grease monkey about rating the caches, but technically I'm not understanding that part about Firefox etc but it may mean something to a lot if others who have posted about band width etc. the link for that part is: http://www.ukgcpodcast.com/2012/10/0...-handicaching/

    I hope some of you will find this info useful.

    Ps I'm still not seeing a Thank button which is the only reason I have not thanked people for their posts. Do I have to earn points to do that?

  40. #90

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    Excellent news

    I never even thought about Earthcaches - but now you mention them they potentially lend themselves perfectly as accessible caches as they can usually be completed without a physically demanding hunt :socool:

    Nice one Mangna
    thats a great idea, I never thought of that either

  41. #91

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kings Lynn, Norfolk
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cache on Wheels View Post

    Ps I'm still not seeing a Thank button which is the only reason I have not thanked people for their posts. Do I have to earn points to do that?
    Now sure as I looked for it the other day and couldn't find it...but noticed it at the bottom right of a post the next day!

  42. #92

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cache on Wheels View Post

    Ps I'm still not seeing a Thank button which is the only reason I have not thanked people for their posts. Do I have to earn points to do that?
    I think it magically appears after you've made a certain minimum number of posts - not sure how many it is though - sorry

  43. #93

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by eusty View Post
    Now sure as I looked for it the other day and couldn't find it...but noticed it at the bottom right of a post the next day!
    looks like you made it appear by magic it is just a plain empty box 2 to the rhs of the quite box, I just clicked it and hey presto, a thanks popped up thank you

  44. #94

    Default

    I'm bringing this post forward by quoting it, as I think it fell foul of sitting in queue and might not be spotted otherwise as the thread has moved on quite a bit - and that would be a shame as there's obviously a lot of thought and effort gone into it :cheers:

    Quote Originally Posted by martlakes View Post
    I thought Iíd share my take on this issue, both as a hider who has rated (some) of their caches, and someone with limited experience of helping my aged mother about in a wheelchair.

    For me, the main reason the Handicaching rating system hasnít taken off is confusion over definitions and relevance. Yes, there are other reasons such as itís Ďtucked awayí and perhaps some folk find the terms unhelpful, and itís not been much promoted by listing sites.

    I think it is primarily about, Ďwhat are we talking about when we think about disabilities?í It tends to get limited to ďwheelchairsĒ IMHO. Thereís an attribute for wheelchair accessibility, so is that the focus?

    There are obviously a whole range of abilities but getting to a cache on a set of wheels is quite specific, and either you use a wheelchair or you donít. In theory, it should be fairly easy to say, yes, you can get to it in a wheelchair or no you canít. Iím sure many wheelchair users find that, in practice it isnít that clear cut as raters forget the 3 steps up or the narrow gap or whatever!

    Those who use other means, or who have other abilities can be the only judge of what is suitable for them. Just like anyone in fact - we all have to look at a map, read the cache page, look at the terrain stars etc and decide if we want to go for the cache.

    So, I do support using some form of rating, currently Handicaching appears to be the only option, but not all my caches are rated for accessibility. Some because I wasnít aware of Handicaching.com when they were placed. Others because of my own confusion about terms and things. In more recent times I do endeavour to rate any cache that has the potential to be accessible for a limited cacher. If it appears to be a roadside cache, or it is in fact a good surface and I can imagine getting to it in a wheelchair, or for some similar reason, I will rate it and include the Handicaching code on the page.

    If the cache is 2* or above, for me that means itís off pavement, on a usual sort of muddy footpath, through a wood, or up a small hill etc. I see 2* caches as being in places where there is no way of getting there with a wheelchair, not even one with off-road tyres. If I place a cache on a walk in the countryside like this, then Iím afraid I donít see a lot of relevance in rating it on Handicaching. The terrain stars give a good indication, as does my cache description, as does a quick look at the map. For me there is quite a clear divide between being wheelchair accessible and ďeverything elseĒ. Some of my caches have 1.5* terrain but Iíve included the wheelchair icon cos itís a maybe, or you could get most of the way and enjoy the location, but may not be able to get the box. I often include more info on the cache page if this is the case. Iíve also offered to supply more detail if anyone wants it.

    Anything over 2* seems to me to be the same process for all seekers - get the info off the page and the map and decide if it looks within your ability. I canít know, only you can. Iím happy to describe the route and stuff, and I would be very happy to supply further info if asked via email. But generally, it will involve mud, sticks, slopes, gates, stiles etc since most countryside does. Look at the map to find out the distance involved etc.

    What to do?
    In the short term I would be happy to see Handicaching added to the margin of the cache page, like the attributes, or at the top with the terrain and difficulty. It would then make it easy to rate by finders, draw attention to it so people know itís there, and so it gets completed by hiders along with attributes.

    I would like Handicaching to improve itís system a bit cos some of it isnít entirely clear. I would be quite happy if an alternative system was used, which could lead to a change of terminology and better integrate it into the Terrain system.

    It would be good to promote the whole agenda and discuss and educate so there is greater understanding of access issues, whatís important, how to describe it etc. It would be great to have more detail in a clear and unambiguous way on the cache page, especially for the low terrain caches.

    The reality is that the majority of rural caches are not accessible unless you can go for a walk in the countryside. Given that most of my caches are out in the Ďwildsí access will always be tricky if youíre not very mobile. Urban caches can be a different matter. I know from planning trips with my mum that finding truly accessible trips out is very tricky.

    It would be good to have a discussion about what aspects might be worthwhile rating when going 'beyond the tarmac'. Currently, I generally donít feel there is much point in doing a separate rating when the info is on the cache page. The info that isnít on the page is the stuff about using a wheelchair: is it paved, is it steep slopes, are there steps or narrow bits. That to me is what is currently missing and why I do include Handicaching on my pages, where it feels useful.

    It would be good to Ďcampaigní for Groundspeak and other sites to include Handicaching or an alternative. Also to spread the word and encourage cache hiders to include ratings where appropriate. GAGB could certainly lead the way with these aspects.

    I hope I have shed some light on how I understand and use the current system. Yes, it would be good to include it and make it Ďmainstreamí but some work on clarity, definitions and purpose needs to happen I feel.
    (Sorry it's a bit long!)

  45. #95

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Shropshire
    Posts
    322

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by markandlynn View Post
    If enough people used it then GC would see the demand and probably consider including it in the website.

    Dont say they wont as they allready have included stats when they purchased a stake the my geocaching profile website after seeing how popular it was.

    As for how many years thats a daft argument, you have to put the number of people caching into that equation for it to make sense, if 1% use it then you will get more rated now than 7 years ago.

    Promote the tool we have and use those stats to beat down a listing sites door.

    After all GC are a for profit company give them a business case rather than a lone voice in the wilderness.
    As i said use the existing site as a tool to get the other sites to listen.

    Its a for profit organisation money and numbers works lone voices do not
    "If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning."

  46. #96

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Thumbs up

    that was very useful info, thank you. I would like to add to your point you make about your either in a wheelchair or your not.
    My mobility scooter has got me to lots of places, over 2*
    We look on the map and if it is unclear, I will emailtge cacher owner and ask if there are any stiles or locked gates that prevent access. Sometimes they can offer me an alternative route. Sometimes I can get round the route but need help to retrieve the cache or use crutches or a helpers arm to get in the woods bit where the cache is hidden so I can enjoy the hunt too.

    Like you say though, by using the rating system on handicaching I and others can choose from the drop down lust and so others can see the more detailed info like obstructions. One eg of a rating I put words to effect of : there is a kissing gate to gain access to the next part, however, 30 meters to your right is a gate that is never locked and you can get your scooter through '

    At least if the cache has been rated by other Cachers and the Cache owner is happy to put the link on the description part of their cache page, it will benefit others.
    If course it's not just people in wheelchairs, scooters, the ratings include distance to the cache too which helps especially on multis when you don't have a lot if energy. This will also benefit those needing to use pushchairs and having children with them.

    It will of course take thinking about the details of terminology etc but if the lines if communication are open,and people are willing to get behind it as a project, maybe we could see it as a general part of the Geocaching page with Groundspeak in the not too distant future.

    I for one am willing to be part of that and would like to work with the new gagb committee on this project if they are willing to do this

    It's great to see so much interest in this subject and that lots if people have already done handicaching ratings as a result of this thread
    Thank you maybe you could add a link to handicaching.com on your Geocaching profile like I have, you can get it from their site.
    Off to bed now - night all and thank you

  47. #97

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Dorset ... of course!
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post

    So again I would ask again - please - that more cachers with disabilities come forward and speak up and help <snip>
    Firstly, let me say, thi sis not a nit picking comment, as I know some will perceive it to be, but meant to be helpful and informative from someone who works in the field of access.

    Please use the term disabled cachers. That follows the social model of disability, and describes cachers who are disabled by their environment.

    Nowadays, the parlance is impairment not disability to describe a condition or illness, so it would become cachers with impairments.

    I know this is confusing as at least two people here have been describing themselves as having disabilities, but if we are going to have this discussion, we should be progressive and contemporary in our language use.

    Many thanks for understanding.

  48. #98

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Dorset ... of course!
    Posts
    99

    Default

    What is disappointing, is that you all seem so smitten with this external site, that you are missing the main point, which, I believe is to get cache setters to consider access when they get the cache page published.

    The cache submission page does now question a setter if they select terrain 1, but I feel the effort should be to raise awareness for people to consider terrain settings at the point of publication, rather than as an afterthought.

    At this point, they may consider adding to the cache page, there are a number of stiles, there's a gate which requires a RADAR key etc.

    The key to the problem is awareness, so many people never consider anything other than the route they walked to the geocache as being accessible simply because they walked it. Even adding patches may be very muddy after heavy rain would be helpful.

  49. #99

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Dorset ... of course!
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Weaver View Post
    No it wasn't in a geocaching environment that I was referring to but the same fears would apply to the possibility it would happen in the geocaching environment.

    I would say that with the thousands of geocachers I am unsure how you could be sure it never happens in the geocaching environment. You just need to take proper safety precautions to protect yourself.
    I don't think you need take any greater precautions than you would on a daily basis in a similar environment Paul.

    You started this theme on a local forum and I thought had been reassured?

  50. #100

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    What is disappointing, is that you all seem so smitten with this external site, that you are missing the main point, which, I believe is to get cache setters to consider access when they get the cache page published.

    The cache submission page does now question a setter if they select terrain 1, but I feel the effort should be to raise awareness for people to consider terrain settings at the point of publication, rather than as an afterthought.

    At this point, they may consider adding to the cache page, there are a number of stiles, there's a gate which requires a RADAR key etc.

    The key to the problem is awareness, so many people never consider anything other than the route they walked to the geocache as being accessible simply because they walked it. Even adding patches may be very muddy after heavy rain would be helpful.
    thank you for your input DG, on the correct terminology for Disabled Cachers and above: your comments prompted me to add the following on one of my caches that is fully W/C accessible and has the W/C attribute.:

    I have written the following on my cache page of one of the church micros that has recently been published, however I still did a handicaching rating because it includes much more info than I could fit on the page. I will go and amend and add some info where I can to the others I own. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache...a-61369ac938fa

    Disabled Access
    This Cache is fully wheelchair accessible if you do not go through the church yard from the coords to WP1. Instead go to WP1 via WP2. There is wheelchair access to the church room and the church through the gates at WP1. For more in depth details of disabled access via a handicaching rating, please click on the icon below:
    I hope this will be helpful when people come to do the cache, there is the option for them to gain further info should they require it.
    i feel when rating a cache, t's not just about showing if one is able to get a wheelchair to the WP / GZ, it also helps people who may struggle on uneven ground to know there is an alternative route that is flat

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •