Thanks Thanks:  7
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 101 to 133 of 133

Thread: ♿- Disabled Cacher - handicaching

  1. #101

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    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.
    thank you for your input on PC terminology GC it is very helpful it is confusing for me as in magazines I read and a newsletter I receive says for people with disabilities, and on any forms I fill in eg. One recently for a hospital procedure, it asks you to list any 'disabilities' you have.

    There are so many words used like disabilities, impairments, some benefits like Incapacity Benefit, although that has now changed, severe disablement allowance, it is difficult to know what terms are acceptable.

    I didn't really think there was a significant difference between saying I have disabilities and I am disabled, but your explanation above demonstrates that there clearly is thank you

    I'm not able to think very clearly at mo - brain fog, so please forgive me if I have not explained my thoughts clearly or have misunderstood what you are saying
    As I understand it, it is the environment we are in at any one time that disables us from doing x,y,z have I understood that right?

    It is good to have the benefit of your vast experience in many areas with things like this DG thank you for sharing

    My heading on my cache is titled 'Disabled Access', do you think this I a Good title? I chose those words as I feel it refers not just to wheelchair access.

  2. #102

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Thumbs up

    [QUOTE=Mancunian;60883]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.

    Thank you also to Team Microdot for bringing this post forward for those who are adding to the thread to see

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    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:
    Thank you, This info is very helpful in putting forward a clear idea and summary of the discussion so far and outlining what we could do and how. It is very helpful with any discussion to take a moment and do this - thank you, it is clear you have put a lot of time, thought and effort Into your response, thank you

  3. #103

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    221

    Default

    Thanks to all those that have posted here and re-ignited this debate (and pricked my conscience). I started linking to HC.com some time ago, but recently stopped doing so, through lack of thought and laziness. I've 90 active caches, and will re-visit those that I haven't linked and rectify. You can count on my support from now on, whether elected to the committee or not. This is something that we can all make a difference on.
    Failures are finger posts on the road to achievement.

  4. #104

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    North Wales
    Posts
    676

    Exclamation

    Sorry Wendy but you are missing the point. The usage of the external site, is a Lever to obtain the Ultimate Goal of getting something Hard Coded into the Cache Submission Process.

    A simple analogy, someone breaks a bone, is taken to hospital, where a cast is applied. To provide a temporary support. It is never intended to be permanent.

    So the usage of a external site, is the Temporary support only. Not a permanent solution. The permanent solution is Hard Coding on each Listing Site.

    The Stats Hounds got their Wish granted, by huge Numbers using a External Stats Site. Groundspeak eventually bought out the owners of that external site, and hard coded it in to GC.

    So reach a saturation point on Handicaching, with people adding the Link directly into the description of their Caches! And when a saturation level has been reached, Groundspeak will be looking at 2 options

    Block access to the external site from GC due to the huge amount of Bandwidth used (which they have to pay for), and face a huge backlash. Not a situation they will wish to see themselves in

    or

    They either develop and incorporate a similar system into the Cache Submission Process, alternatively they can go down the same route as they did with the external Stats Site. Buy out the Owner, and bring the Site Lock Stock and Barrel into Groundspeak's own Server Farm. So that it is no longer a external site, but a Groundspeak product. Which would then move it higher up the Priority List, to be completely incorporated into the Cache Submission and Cache Logging Processes.

    So please Champion the External Site, as a Huge Tool, with which to reach the ultimate Goal, Dumping of the Current Unworkable Terrain Rating System (need a 5/5 0r a 5/1.5 0r a 4.5/1.5 for your Grid, hold a Event in McDonalds. Or have a Mate change the D/T rating on their cache, to the one your Missing. And yes these are all very real genuine examples), and have the Terrain Rating replaced by something which gives genuine access information.

    By Reaching a Saturation Level, especially if everyone adds the Link directly to "All" caches they own. Groundspeak will have the metrics on the Bandwidth being used, that is Bandwidth they are responsible for paying for, and that is a highly persuasive situation for the community to be powering.

    The more people get behind this, the quicker the lever will work. It is a solution which the community can power through to achievement, if they just get behind it today/tomorrow. The more who do the faster the result will be.

    Please do not think you'll ever reach a saturation point, re having CO's put the information in their Descriptions. Six and a Half years of being a Reviewer, have shown me personally, that will never happen. So lets all concentrate on what can be achieved, and will result in empowering those of all abilities.

    Working Smartly together, we have the tools to empower the process, and provide the Lever to Persuade Groundspeak to act. Then once they have, the other Listing Sites, because there is the Groundspeak Example to use as a Lever. Empower the Biggest Listing Site, and the Others will follow, as they will have a example of how things can be achieved, and benefit their users. That is the Win Win situation we need to be in.

    We have a extremely Smart and Passionate Community, lets all work together, and persuade them to get behind this!

    Dave
    Mancunian Pyrocacher
    Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer Groundspeak
    Full Time Carer

    I have been fighting for well over the Last six and a Half years, to empower those of all abilities, and in all that time. This is the first time, the community have started getting behind the idea, I honestly believe that if this time fizzles out. We may never see another chance to get so much community support, for something which is so important.
    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

  5. #105

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian View Post
    Sorry Wendy but you are missing the point. The usage of the external site, is a Lever to obtain the Ultimate Goal of getting something Hard Coded into the Cache Submission Process.
    .
    Dave, thank you for disregarding my opinion again, even though I have been finding geocaches using a wheelchair for longer than you have apparently been "championing" the handicaching website! At least even if you disagree with my opinion, I have a right to own it, and I do so after seven and a half years of geocaching using a wheelchair - many times alone, and thus will, more than most benefit from improved information.

    Seriously though, it hasn't gone well has it if in six and a half years not much has changed?

    It's only a few days since you felt my experience was irrelevant as it was at government level, well at least they listen!!!

    As you detailed your position as Groundspeak Reviewer at the bottom of your post, I wonder if in that capacity you have had correspondence with Groundspeak?

    I can recall times I have specifically written to UK reviewers asking for one star terrain geocaches to be looked at again (immediately after publication) as they clearly were not wheelchair accessible and was waved away ...

    At least Groundspeak changed the cache submission page and people submitting are specifically asked about the one star terrain rating and wheelchair access, so they are showing some appreciation of the problems experienced by some.

    I still believe the shorter route would be for GAGB to raise awareness for more accuracy on geocache pages and yes, maybe for Groundspeak to incorporate more terrain criteria in the rating system, but don't believe separation is a solution in the short or long term.

  6. #106

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cache on Wheels View Post
    [COLOR="Purple"] thank you for your input on PC terminology GC it is very helpful it is confusing for me as in magazines I read and a newsletter I receive says for people with disabilities, and on any forms I fill in eg. One recently for a hospital procedure, it asks you to list any 'disabilities' you have.
    Unfortunately Heather, although they try their best, hospitals are institutions and very good at the medical model of disability as opposed to the social more empowering model.

    A few years ago some staff at Poole Hospital started quoting policy at me late at night, as they'd just delivered the news my partner might not last the night, I chose not to argue.

    However, I returned the next day and asked to see that piece of hospital policy, and after investigation it did not exist, staff were acting on what they thought was correct, not what was actually correct.

    Once they understood their error, I was invited to help them move forward, and this there is one piece of hospital policy within the local NHS Trust that has my name on it as co-author!

    I say this not to big myself up, but to explain, it's very easy for these big institutions to get things wrong and for others to believe they're right and follow suit.

    You might also be interested to know that the London 2012 Gamesmaker handbook had cerebral palsy and epilepsy listed as learning disabilities until I got my hands on it!!!!

  7. #107

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    18

    Default

    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.
    What I find disappointing is that there are a whole bunch of people who have expressed an interest in championing what they think is a good cause, by raising awareness and promoting the use of a facility that will help people with disabilities by giving them more information about the difficulty/terrain of geocaches.. yet we're met with negativity and nit picking about using the right terminology.

    I posted a link to this topic on the main Geocaching groups on Facebook which seemed to be well received by a good number of people.. and then today we have someone who starts his/her reply with "Oh here we go again!.."

    If we are to to gain any kind of momentum for this we need enthusiasm and positivity, not just from those willing to jump on board to try and make a difference, but from those we're trying to help.

    I can see how having the information readily available on the cache page on publication will be the ideal..

    BUT, the caches I set are being set by someone who has no idea what trials may be faced by someone with any kind of disability/impairment and while I could write a paragraph on the cache pages which highlights how many gates/stiles I negotiated or indeed how much mud there was on the path when I set the cache, I can't possibly know which route someone else is going to take and allow for every eventuality.

    Handicaching.com may not be ideal but it does at least give a variety of reviews from individual finders who may have used a different approach, at a different time of year, when their experience may have been totally different to that of the cache setter.

    Surely, that's a good starting point and having something similar incorporated into geocaching.com will benefit all?

  8. #108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    I still believe the shorter route would be for GAGB to raise awareness for more accuracy on geocache pages and yes, maybe for Groundspeak to incorporate more terrain criteria in the rating system, but don't believe separation is a solution in the short or long term.
    Well, two out of three isn't bad

    I partially agree with two of your points - incorporating more rating data (not just terrain rating) into the geocaching websites and that integration is the best way to go in the long term. So that's probably just one point of agreement then. It'll do for now

    Do you think GAGB should just raise awareness? Or would you like their input to lead to measurable results?

    So far from this thread I'd say we've had both - which is probably what we should really be aiming for.

    I don't think anybody has disregarded your opinion - simply voiced their own, which differ in certain regards - and that's a good thing

    It's a good thing because many hands (and minds) make light work - and different perspectives on a common goal generally help to produce results which benefit the greatest number of interested parties :socool:

    I don't know how many active cachers there are in the world today but I expect it's into the millions by now. Is trying to educate them all to write cache pages which are more useful to disabled cachers or cachers with impairments going to achieve traction and measurable results in the short term? I doubt it.

    I also wonder about consistency.

    I've referenced this cache of ours previously but it makes a good example:

    http://tinyurl.com/d7ll9xm

    Think this might even have been our very first cache placement - and I was quite chuffed with the page - but I see now that I missed out the distance from parking to the cache - so that's something I might have to fix.

    Now this one was easy to do - it's a managed park, it has a carpark at one end which corresponds with a significant natural entrance and also the visitor centre - so there's one painfully obvious start point and logical route to the cache. It would even be easy to write a bread-crumb-trail style guide to this one - and possibly remove any sense of adventure completely from the experience (that being just a minor point here)

    But how should we go about providing accurate useful data where there are multiple routes to get to the cache?

    Should the cache owner travel and document every potential route before submitting the cache for publication? Sounds like rather a lot of work and probably a very long cache page to read before you can decide if the cache is within your capability. Not that I'm saying people should write the shortest cache pages possible - but I think there has to be a happy medium as there often needs to be room for other interesting information too, geographical, historical, local legend etc. etc.

    When I look at a cache page I know that I'll find the key information - coordinates, rating etc. in the same place on every page - right at the top of the page usually. I like it that way. Imagine if you had to search through the entire cache page scanning for the coordinates - wouldn't that be somewhat inefficient or even laborious? Especially as each cacher builds their cache pages according to their own ideas - which means no fixed standards at all.

    So I'd put my money on a mechanism which ensured that the key information was found in the same place every time - so that I could find it quickly, sort the wheat from the chaff and avoid wasting time trawling through data which ultimately turned out to be useless.

    And I think the handicache website does just that - so I reckon it might form a useful basis for anything the listing sites might incorporate themselves.

    Another positive aspect to the handicache website, at least I think it is, is that EACH rater rates for THEIR perception of difficulty and terrain at different times and probably via various routes - and that these are averaged out over time. Whereas if we rely on just the cache page we perhaps have data for a single route taken on a single day by the cache hider and their subjective or even retrospective view of D/T on the day in question.

    And we actually have some very good Handicache raters around my area - people who put a lot of thought, effort and detail into their ratings - and bring those vital alternative viewpoints.

    One of my caching friends - hold on - let's scroll back and find the acceptable term - has an impairment which I know as BPPV. This impairment can have significant impact on my friend's balance and can make certain types of terrain a real challenge, which usually renders them off limits for solo caching missions. And that impairment informs said friend's handicache ratings - information which wouldn't even be available if that site didn't exist - no matter how much effort the cache owner had put into the cache page.

    Sure, that information could be included in logs - but do you really want to have to trawl through a lengthy cache page, picking out useful information and then through all the found logs, hoping to see something useful from one of the previous finders? Or would you rather have that information neatly presented in a consistent, purposeful manner? I know which one I'd choose.

    And no - I'm not smitten with that particular rating site - but it's there - and it offers a workable solution - and I'm not aware of anything better - so I'll continue to use it for now and, subject to more people coming forward to prove there's a real demand for the data - will try to convince listing sites to implement something themselves.

    Apologies for the longish post - had a lot of time to think about it - and it represents a fraction of the thoughts I've had on the subject.

  9. #109

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Warfield, Berkshire
    Posts
    436

    Default

    :wub: I rather like the way this thread has taken on a life of its own and it has grown well beyond its original scope. It inspired me to do my bit - I have added handicaching ratings to the short description of each of my Groundspeak caches and a link to the corresponding ratings page at the end of each detailed description. It took a couple of hours but then I've got quite a few caches! I weeded out the last of the links to dead rating sites like G:UK whilst I was at it.

    In doing so, I rediscovered that I'd been rating caches whilst G:UK had been alive and in fact, the only ratings that were ever made by others on my oldest caches and on my older adoptions were via G:UK. I recall that G:UK had Handicaching integrated to it, exactly as is now being asked for and I think this is positive proof that integration is essential: it cannot work on its own. So, had G:UK survived and remained popular, I think we would have been in much better shape now.

    I think this also shows that a community-led approach is viable, in the absence of initiatives by the listing sites, and therefore think that it's up to our association to take the initiative and provide a rating system with greater depth and breadth than Handicaching (or GCVote, for that matter). I'm thinking about integration with phone applications like C:Geo and tools like GSAK, in addition to listing site widgets. It would be great to have an API that can be called from C:Geo and a GSAK macro to retrieve accessibility information.

  10. #110

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Land of the Bear and Ragged Staff!
    Posts
    850

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sandvika View Post
    Snipped...
    In doing so, I rediscovered that I'd been rating caches whilst G:UK had been alive and in fact, the only ratings that were ever made by others on my oldest caches and on my older adoptions were via G:UK. I recall that G:UK had Handicaching integrated to it, exactly as is now being asked for and I think this is positive proof that integration is essential: it cannot work on its own. So, had G:UK survived and remained popular, I think we would have been in much better shape now.
    ../snipped
    Back in the day of G:UK, I too used to rate my Finds...

    It was made easier as G:UK would link to Groundspeak and list the caches you had found, but not rated, and linked to Handicaching to rate the Found caches.

    Seems GS are (or at least were!) prepared to do some form of 'link up' with other sites for this purpose.
    I have a Geocaching problem...
    Work gets in the way!

    * Cache Walker -Caching by byway, not highway! CacheWalker.co.uk
    Walking and Caching in Warwickshire, Worcestershire, Gloucestershire areas

  11. #111

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Shropshire
    Posts
    322

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    Well, two out of three isn't bad

    I partially agree with two of your points - incorporating more rating data (not just terrain rating) into the geocaching websites and that integration is the best way to go in the long term. So that's probably just one point of agreement then. It'll do for now

    Do you think GAGB should just raise awareness? Or would you like their input to lead to measurable results?

    So far from this thread I'd say we've had both - which is probably what we should really be aiming for.

    I don't think anybody has disregarded your opinion - simply voiced their own, which differ in certain regards - and that's a good thing

    It's a good thing because many hands (and minds) make light work - and different perspectives on a common goal generally help to produce results which benefit the greatest number of interested parties :socool:

    I don't know how many active cachers there are in the world today but I expect it's into the millions by now. Is trying to educate them all to write cache pages which are more useful to disabled cachers or cachers with impairments going to achieve traction and measurable results in the short term? I doubt it.

    I also wonder about consistency.

    I've referenced this cache of ours previously but it makes a good example:

    http://tinyurl.com/d7ll9xm

    Think this might even have been our very first cache placement - and I was quite chuffed with the page - but I see now that I missed out the distance from parking to the cache - so that's something I might have to fix.

    Now this one was easy to do - it's a managed park, it has a carpark at one end which corresponds with a significant natural entrance and also the visitor centre - so there's one painfully obvious start point and logical route to the cache. It would even be easy to write a bread-crumb-trail style guide to this one - and possibly remove any sense of adventure completely from the experience (that being just a minor point here)

    But how should we go about providing accurate useful data where there are multiple routes to get to the cache?

    Should the cache owner travel and document every potential route before submitting the cache for publication? Sounds like rather a lot of work and probably a very long cache page to read before you can decide if the cache is within your capability. Not that I'm saying people should write the shortest cache pages possible - but I think there has to be a happy medium as there often needs to be room for other interesting information too, geographical, historical, local legend etc. etc.

    When I look at a cache page I know that I'll find the key information - coordinates, rating etc. in the same place on every page - right at the top of the page usually. I like it that way. Imagine if you had to search through the entire cache page scanning for the coordinates - wouldn't that be somewhat inefficient or even laborious? Especially as each cacher builds their cache pages according to their own ideas - which means no fixed standards at all.

    So I'd put my money on a mechanism which ensured that the key information was found in the same place every time - so that I could find it quickly, sort the wheat from the chaff and avoid wasting time trawling through data which ultimately turned out to be useless.

    And I think the handicache website does just that - so I reckon it might form a useful basis for anything the listing sites might incorporate themselves.

    Another positive aspect to the handicache website, at least I think it is, is that EACH rater rates for THEIR perception of difficulty and terrain at different times and probably via various routes - and that these are averaged out over time. Whereas if we rely on just the cache page we perhaps have data for a single route taken on a single day by the cache hider and their subjective or even retrospective view of D/T on the day in question.

    And we actually have some very good Handicache raters around my area - people who put a lot of thought, effort and detail into their ratings - and bring those vital alternative viewpoints.

    One of my caching friends - hold on - let's scroll back and find the acceptable term - has an impairment which I know as BPPV. This impairment can have significant impact on my friend's balance and can make certain types of terrain a real challenge, which usually renders them off limits for solo caching missions. And that impairment informs said friend's handicache ratings - information which wouldn't even be available if that site didn't exist - no matter how much effort the cache owner had put into the cache page.

    Sure, that information could be included in logs - but do you really want to have to trawl through a lengthy cache page, picking out useful information and then through all the found logs, hoping to see something useful from one of the previous finders? Or would you rather have that information neatly presented in a consistent, purposeful manner? I know which one I'd choose.

    And no - I'm not smitten with that particular rating site - but it's there - and it offers a workable solution - and I'm not aware of anything better - so I'll continue to use it for now and, subject to more people coming forward to prove there's a real demand for the data - will try to convince listing sites to implement something themselves.

    Apologies for the longish post - had a lot of time to think about it - and it represents a fraction of the thoughts I've had on the subject.
    Sums my thoughts up perfectly. Thank you
    "If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning."

  12. #112

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2

    Default

    I back this whole heartedly, i think the handicache rating system is a great tool to have, and opens the great outdoors to more cachers with disability's, and hope that with more people pushing this then the more use it will become, and hope that many benefit from it. :socool:i use this for my cache placements and finds, and i hope it helps fellow cachers for now and the future.

    Daz.

  13. #113

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    550

    Default

    Had already rated one or two of my caches, and will look at the others asap, although I may also take the approach that I'll add an extra para to cache pages to explain accessibility.
    Isn't it amazing what you don't see, when you don't know what you're looking for?
    The past is history; the future is a story yet to be told; write it well.

  14. #114

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6

    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.
    I disagree with both your points, above. I don't think anyone is particularly "smitten" with HC. It would appear to be the 'only game in town' for those who would like to be helpful and add access info in a standardized and clear format. I don't find it entirely easy to match the descriptions to reality at times. There are issues about definitions and how to include the actual finding of the box, or is it more important to rate the route to the site, etc etc. And you have expressed issues with the language/title etc.

    If you can point me and others at a similar site/tool/method etc for rating a cache's accessibility, I'll happily use it.

    I understand what you mean about it being a separate site, but to me that's more just mechanics. If there was a permanent link on the cache page, eg under attributes or something, does it matter where the info is held? If I put the Cache Rater Seal on my page, that gets the info out there and raises awareness, although some still find that confusing!

    As for your second point, yes, indeed. The ultimate aim is to get everyone to consider access and include accurate info in the cache page. I don't think those who have commented here have missed this point though! The question is always going to be HOW? It's hard enough to get everyone to add attributes, to rate the T & D correctly, to check, read & understand the guidelines etc etc etc. So, yes, let's have some form of rating and info about access on the cache page as part of the submitting process. Even if this happens, don't expect everyone to manage to complete it, or to complete it accurately etc.

    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
    Agreed, so perhaps a link to HC would flag it up to folk and give them a clear method for providing the info that's wanted. If many people object to HC then a different tool needs to be developed, but in the meantime ...

    Like with T&D ratings and attributes, it will need to be clear and simple, easy to use and, indeed, right there when doing the cache page. It's amazing how much variety there is in T&D scores though! And many folk seem to miss attributes off entirely.

    I think there are a lot of folk who are and would be supportive of the idea of getting access data out there. Maybe we need to be careful arguing too much about ways and means, or terminology at this stage. I can see Dave''s point about trying to get 'something' happening to create momentum, and currently HC seems to be 'it'. I can also see your points about wanting to 'set off in the right direction' rather than go down the HC route and then have to change to something more acceptable later; and that language is important. I think both of you have exactly the same goal of getting clear info integrated into the cache pages.

    Many others also support this and would act if given clear info about what's needed and an easy method to do so. Disability issues (or whatever the term is!) have moved a long way in recent years and I feel and there is more awareness in the media. Maybe the time is ripe to try and get some movement from GS and other sites.

  15. #115

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Shropshire
    Posts
    322

    Default

    I have edited all my cache pages to add a bandwidth soaking image , all my current caches have been HC rated for ages.

    I will now HC rate my favourites.

    Many thanks for the prompt Dave, i have idle time in the day when i can go through my old finds and start to rate them all.

    As you say the more links there are on the lising sites the more they will take notice and the more prominent the issue of bandwidth becomes as per the my geocaching profile website that GC actually bought a stake in as it was used so much.
    "If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning."

  16. #116

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    St Helens, Lancs, UK
    Posts
    90

    Thumbs up

    I have to confess to having been too lazy to rate my caches for handicapped use beyond using the appropriate icon when relevant, but support this effort and will try harder in future. Those of us who can get about should be thankful for that and having once hurt myself while caching I am so glad that I was only disabled temporarily.
    Enjoy your caching!

  17. #117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Stead View Post
    I have to confess to having been too lazy to rate my caches for handicapped use beyond using the appropriate icon when relevant, but support this effort and will try harder in future. Those of us who can get about should be thankful for that and having once hurt myself while caching I am so glad that I was only disabled temporarily.

    Sorry about that John

  18. #118

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Thumbs up Thank you all for your input so far :)

    it is truly fantastic how this thread has raised awareness, inspired people, enthused people into rating caches both of their own and those they have visited and developed into some great ideas of a positive way forward to benefit many Disabled Cachers, those with limited mobility, impairments ... This ultimately has raised awareness and understanding all round.
    I am so pleased and grateful for everyone's input to this discussion. :socool:

    We may not all agree with what everyone has to say, but it is important that we listen to everyone's point of view and ideas

    I thank those candidates who are up for election for their input too it has been great to hear / read your views on this subject and your ideas for increasing awareness and ideas you would like to see implemented in the short and long term

    It was also great to read some summaries and proposals of the discussion so far especially beneficial to those who have just joined the thread.
    It would be good if you could post that again please someone
    Please keep the ideas coming and let's not allow this important topic to be lost and archived once the elections have finished.

    Will these threads stay active once the elections are over gagb?
    Is it possible to keep this thread open and active for people to continue to contribute please? I don't know how these things work, so would it stay where it is or be moved under a different heading please?

    I would very much like to be involved with the new committee somehow on this subject, and know there are others who have contributed whose input would be of great benefit too
    Many thanks
    Heather aka Cache on Wheels

  19. #119

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cache on Wheels View Post


    Will these threads stay active once the elections are over gagb?
    Is it possible to keep this thread open and active for people to continue to contribute please? I don't know how these things work, so would it stay where it is or be moved under a different heading please?

    I had already thought that it would be good to move (or copy) this thread after the elections ... as it has been very active and informative. So, yes we will sort out over the weekend.
    GAGB member since 2005
    GAGB Committee member 2010 to 2016 (Chair 2012 to 2015)
    UK Mega Event Chairman 2009 (Weston-super-Mare)


  20. #120

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cache on Wheels View Post
    Please keep the ideas coming and let's not allow this important topic to be lost and archived once the elections have finished.
    The best way to convince Groundspeak to incorporate any of the suggested functionality is to prove beyond doubt that doing so will benefit lots of people - and to do that we need lots of disabled cachers or cachers with impairments to come forward and show that.

    The squeaky wheel gets the oil

  21. #121

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

    Default

    As a disabled person, who sadly has failed to get some people here to understand the importance of language to the community, including some of those who apparently self identify as disabled, I share this article for your consideration. It's a fact that newly disabled people simply don't understand the history and culture of the community - this takes time. Just as newbies to geocaching ...

    For me it's not a novelty, it's not the first thing I tell people about myself, in fact on the phone and via electronic media I'm likely not to mention it at all.

    I've said before that some of the terminology in this thread makes my toes curl, if I can do nothing else, I can share with you something that may help you understand that my opinions as expressed here about inclusion, terminology etc are not marginal, they are, within my community mainstream.


    I'm Not A "Person With a Disability": I'm a Disabled Person

    http://m.xojane.com/issues/i-am-not-...bled-person%20

    Lisa Egan - Nov 9, 2012
    Posted in Issues, disability, person-first language, disability rights, words words words
    I am not a “person with a disability.” I do not “have a disability.” Given that I look like this:


    Image Credit: ewheeling.
    You probably think I’m either delusional or in denial. I’m not, I just have a real problem with the phrase “person with a disability” and the notion of “having a disability.”

    I am disabled. More specifically, I am disabled by a society that places social, attitudinal and architectural barriers in my way. This world we live in disables me by treating me like a second-class citizen because I have a few impairments -- most obviously a mobility impairment.

    Two ways of looking at disability

    What’s the difference between “having a disability” and “being disabled”? It all comes down to two sociological theories: the medical/individual model of disability and the social model of disability.

    The medical model -- the idea that a person has a disability -- is the dominant notion in our society. It’s the idea that a person is prevented from functioning in our society by their body or brain and it’s just that person’s tough luck. If they can’t blend into this world, it’s not the world’s problem.

    The social model is the way I prefer to view the world. It’s the idea that a person with an impairment or illness is disabled by the society we live in because of all the barriers that are put in our way.

    Society disables me.

    I live in London, which has a world famous underground train network. Only around 20% of the stations have wheelchair access. Someone with a medical/individual perspective would state that I am prevented from getting around my city because I’m a person with a disability and it’s tough luck that the Tube is so inaccessible. If I want to use the Tube then I’m just gonna have to find a new skeleton from somewhere.

    The way I see it is that I’ve been disabled when it comes to travelling around my city by the architects that installed stairs and escalators instead of ramps and lifts at the majority of Underground stations. Stairs and escalators are man-made barriers put in the way by a discriminatory society that excludes me because I have impaired mobility. I continue to be disabled by a Mayor who has set the budget for improving access on the Tube to £0 for the next 3 years.

    Most people look at the word “disabled” and assume it means “less able.” It doesn’t. It means “prevented from functioning.” When I turn the wireless connection off on my computer, I get told that the connection has been “disabled”:


    Does this mean that my wifi has suddenly become less able or broken? Has my wifi acquired a disability? Of course not. It has been prevented from functioning by an external force. In a very similar way to how I’m disabled by bus drivers that just won’t stop if they see me -- a wheelchair user -- waiting at the bus stop.

    Hannah Cockroft is not someone you’d describe as “less able.” The woman is an unstoppable force on an athletics track. But she is disabled when it comes to travelling around London because of the man-made stairs and escalators at Tube stations.

    As a person with a mobility impairment I am disabled by steps, stairs, escalators, being denied computer access as I can’t write by hand, inaccessible housing, and so on. To me a flight of stairs without a lift as an alternative is the equivalent of right-clicking me and selecting “disable Lisa.”


    Once I learned about the social model, I realized that my body wasn’t the problem at all.

    There are many who would argue that they do have a disability. They point out that even if all barriers put in place by society were removed, they’d still have things they can’t do.

    Firstly in response to that: It’s a person’s right to identify however the hell they want. If they’re more comfortable as a “person with a disability” than as a “disabled person” then that’s nothing to do with me.

    Secondly, most of these people haven’t noticed the social model’s distinction between “impairment” (the things you can’t do because of your body/brain) and “disability” (the social barriers disabling you on the grounds that you have an illness or impairment). I have a mobility impairment and because of that society gets all right-clicky and prevents me from functioning to my full potential.

    Some people state that the social model is just a sociological theory; it doesn’t make a bit of difference in one’s everyday life. For me that’s just not true. I was about 17 when I learned about the social model and it radically changed how I thought about my own body.

    When I was a child I would wonder “why me?” on a daily basis. I would wonder why my spirit had been put into this body that hurt so much of the time. I hated my body when I was not allowed on school trips or when I was left in the classroom on my own while my classmates were doing something more fun. I’d get left in the classroom on my own with a math textbook -- anything is more fun than that.

    Once I learned about the social model, I realized that my body wasn’t the problem at all. The reason I spent so much time in pain was because I’d get half a paracetamol1 every 4 hours for multiple broken bones. There was no need for me to be in pain; effective painkillers existed by the 1980s. I just wasn’t given any. Denying someone needed pain meds is an attitudinal barrier making their life needlessly difficult.


    I may have been a smiley child, but those broken bones all hurt.
    It also made me realize that the reason I was treated like crap at school wasn’t my body’s fault at all. It was disablist discrimination. With hindsight, it seems so odd that I just accepted that my impaired body was to blame for all the misery I put up with during primary school2, but it was the only difference I could see between me and all the other kids. No one stopped and told me that I was being discriminated against, that it didn’t have to be happening, and that it wasn’t my body’s fault.

    No one has ever told me that I should describe myself as a “person with gayness” or a “person with womanliness.”

    The main argument in favor of the phrase “person with a disability” is that it’s “person first.” Whaaaat? No one has ever told me that I should describe myself as a “person with gayness” or a “person with womanliness.” I’m gay and I’m a woman -- no need to qualify that I’m a person too. But I have been told that I’m wrong for calling myself “disabled” rather than a “person with a disability.” Unsurprisingly my response either tends to be about as long as this article or a short string of expletives.

    We had the Paralympics here in London 2 months ago. During the games, it became the cool thing for unimpaired celebrities to tweet that the word disabled is “ridiculous” and needs to be replaced. I’d love to see if they still feel the same once they’ve been denied access to transport, housing, medical care and educational opportunities. “Disabled” is the best word in the world for describing the barriers I confront and no nondisabled person has the right to try and take that from me.

    1. Or acetaminophen as it’s called on your side of the Atlantic. Return

    2. I understand that British primary school years are the equivalent of grades K – 5 in the US. Return

  22. #122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    As a disabled person, who sadly has failed to get some people here to understand the importance of language to the community, including some of those who apparently self identify as disabled, I share this article for your consideration. It's a fact that newly disabled people simply don't understand the history and culture of the community - this takes time. Just as newbies to geocaching ...

    For me it's not a novelty, it's not the first thing I tell people about myself, in fact on the phone and via electronic media I'm likely not to mention it at all.

    I've said before that some of the terminology in this thread makes my toes curl, if I can do nothing else, I can share with you something that may help you understand that my opinions as expressed here about inclusion, terminology etc are not marginal, they are, within my community mainstream.
    Firstly, thanks for sharing that extract - I found it interesting and thought provoking - and I think I have a better appreciation of your perspective on this topic - so even if that's all I gained from it, it was worth the time and effort it took to read, digest and cogitate

    I also drilled down another level into an article linked from the one you linked in your post - which was equally thought provoking:

    --> this article here

    I've gained some insight into some of the differences between the social and medical models of disability and can see how the social model might be a more useful and relevant perspective where the objective is more information on cache pages which aims to ENable.

    For now though I'll have to take your word for it when you say that your opinions as expressed here about inclusion terminology are mainstream as that, and the two articles I've read from two other individuals, are all the evidence I have to support that at the moment.

    So a question - if I may - for my greater understanding?

    Is the terminology important because it originates in / forms part of the social model of disability?

  23. #123

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Microdot View Post
    Firstly, thanks for sharing that extract - I found it interesting and thought provoking - and I think I have a better appreciation of your perspective on this topic - so even if that's all I gained from it, it was worth the time and effort it took to read, digest and cogitate
    <snip>

    So a question - if I may - for my greater understanding?

    Is the terminology important because it originates in / forms part of the social model of disability?
    Yes, indeed it is, geocaching is a hobby not a rehabilitation course (even though for some it might serve as such), and IMHO should firmly embrace the social model of disability.

    Sadly, due to the blue font on brown background I was unable to read the article you linked to. Edit to add; I have now read it, but hold the same view as it illustrates it might be appropriate in a medical environment, but this is about a hobby in the woods ;-)

    I don't feel people can have it both ways, embrace an outdoor challenging hobby and then want it to embrace the medical (dependent) model of disability.

    If GAGB seriously wishes to embrace and promote accessible geocaching, then they owe it to the disabled community to do so by embracing the social model, otherwise it's simply a waste of time.

  24. #124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    Yes, indeed it is, geocaching is a hobby not a rehabilitation course (even though for some it might serve as such), and IMHO should firmly embrace the social model of disability.
    I'm not sure what is meant by the geocaching is a hobby not a rehabilitation course comment

    If I've understood the rest of your answer correctly you believe that geocaching should embrace the social model of disability and in doing so use the standard terminology arising from that particular model?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    Sadly, due to the blue font on brown background I was unable to read the article you linked to. Edit to add; I have now read it, but hold the same view as it illustrates it might be appropriate in a medical environment, but this is about a hobby in the woods ;-)
    Sorry - a bit lost again here

    The blue font on a brown background I'm not responsible for. I arrived there after following a link from the article you linked to earlier - and noted that your own views seemed to resonate quite strongly with those of the article you linked to and the article that article linked to (the one on the blog).

    It's only a transient issue, caused by a delay in the browser applying the CSS formatting rules put in place by the site owner arising from, I think, lots of external material being downloaded first. I did find it very slightly ironic that an article centred on being disabled by one's environment was temporarily inaccessible until the environment had been correctly configured by the web browser. Might be worth mentioning that to the site owner to see if the load order can be adjusted so as to get the white background in place first so the text can be read while the other stuff downloads in the background?

    When you say that you hold the same view - do you mean your view hasn't changed from what it was before, or that you hold the same view as the writer of the article or as the person the writer quotes in the article?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    ...as it illustrates it might be appropriate in a medical environment, but this is about a hobby in the woods ;-)
    This bit I don't follow at all. My best guess is that you're saying that the medical model of disability is inappropriate in relation to geocaching?


    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    I don't feel people can have it both ways, embrace an outdoor challenging hobby and then want it to embrace the medical (dependent) model of disability.
    Which people are we talking about here? Disabled people? Cachers? People in general?

    I embrace the outdoor challenging hobby - I'm not disabled - and I don't want geocaching to embrace any particular model in preference to any other. However - if a particular model can be used to enhance the hobby by making it available to more people then I would consider it worthy of investigation. That's not to say that other models which might be useful in different ways should be relegated or dismissed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorsetgal View Post
    If GAGB seriously wishes to embrace and promote accessible geocaching, then they owe it to the disabled community to do so by embracing the social model, otherwise it's simply a waste of time.
    I can't comment on the wishes of the GAGB - I don't have access to the data that would enable me to do so. The views I express here are purely my own.

    On balance, having learned a little more about it, I think embracing the social model of disability would be a positive step but I think dismissing anything else as a waste of time is a backwards step - and I think Lady Bracknell (author of the aforementioned blue text on brown background article) herself illustrates this:

    Under the medical model of disability, you “have a disability” if there is something fairly seriously medically “wrong with” you. Having something “wrong with” you diminishes your position in society. It reduces your rights. Under the medical model, there is no obligation on society to adapt the general environment so that it’s accessible to you. Such obligation as there is lies with the medical profession – hence, “medical model”. Their job is to normalise you; to change and improve you until you fit in. Can’t be done in your particular situation? Oh, shame. Well, in that case, you get to be hidden away, either in your own home or in an institution, so that normal people – the ones with rights – aren’t exposed to your hideous deformities and distressing tics.
    In simple terms I read this as saying that normalising people, to make them conform to a single 'acceptable' standard is undesirable.

    So if I've read that right, surely insisting that any efforts to improve the lot of disabled cachers which don't conform rigidly and only to the social model of disability is also undesirable?

    At the very least, it sounds like a good way to stifle creativity which might otherwise yield considerable benefits?

    As Lady Bracknell says:

    Let’s start with the basics. Models of disability are sociological models. In other words, they are models of the position those of us who have impairments hold within society. That is both what they are and all they are. They’re not designed to do anything.

  25. #125

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

    Default

    This thread started in the Committee candidates Q&A forum, but I have copied it to this forum so that it can continue.
    GAGB member since 2005
    GAGB Committee member 2010 to 2016 (Chair 2012 to 2015)
    UK Mega Event Chairman 2009 (Weston-super-Mare)


  26. #126

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    76

    Default

    revisiting and wondering why this got buried?

    It was an interesting read, so please continue

  27. #127

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Default

    Many thanks for your response
    This is of course an on going topic and important we all strive for positive outcomes, to make those caches that can be, more accessible.

    Obviously we're not talking about tree climbs etc, clearly not every cacher can do all the caches, whatever ones abilities are
    "Defeat may test you; It need not stop you. If at first you don't succeed, try another way. For every obstacle, there is a solution. Nothing in the world can take the place of persistance. The greatest mistake is giving up."
    Author Unknown :socool:

  28. #128

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryuchan View Post
    revisiting and wondering why this got buried?

    It was an interesting read, so please continue
    I was asked to comment on this thread for others to add to.
    There are lots of great ideas from comments.
    It would be good to know of GAGB were able to do anything to support disabled access during the last year

    Many thanks to all those who commented and contributed to this thread

  29. #129

    Default

    Heather (Cache On Wheels) sent me the link to this thread, so I could get a better understanding of handicaching.com and how people use it.

    Until recently we'd only hidden one cache and I'd forgotten all about handicaching when we hid that cache. We recently hid two more and I took the opportunity to log them on handicaching. Apologies if this is breaking the forum rules, but my son and myself went through the steps of logging a cache on handicaching on our podcast (so I don't break the rules, people can PM me if they want the link to that episode - or if a mod can confirm permission to post a link, please).

    What came out of use doing it on our show was how easy it is to do. I was expecting problems and it to take a while for us to get it right. But it was a very smooth and easy process - we actually did that segment in one take, which is a testament to how easy the logging process is.

    Has anyone heard Heather talking about handicaching on the UK Geocaching Podcast? October 2012 episode

    http://www.ukgcpodcast.com/2012/10/0...h-three-hosts/

    Anyway, Im going back to reading through all the posts on this thread.

    Thanks
    Last edited by Maple Leaf; 8th April 2014 at 06:56 PM. Reason: Added hyperlink

  30. #130

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Smile Handicaching on the Oh Beep Podcast

    Thanks very much for highlighting handicaching.com and it's benefits for all disabled cachers in your latest podcast
    http://www.ohbeep.com/podcast-episod...#disqus_thread

    Everyone caches for different reasons, but on the whole, it's for fulfilment and joy and a sense if achievement.

    It was great how you discussed the topic sensitively and also demonstrated on the show:
    - just how simple the process of rating a cache is
    - anyone can rate a cache, it just needs for cache owners to agree to add the HTML code at the bottom of the description on their cache page. Thanks to all those who have
    - how it gives 'information' which valuable to everyone to make an informed decision. This is important as a everyone's abilities are different and one persons ability can fluctuate and for some, without warning.
    This benefits people of all variety of ability levels

    Some ideas - would you want to post a link on your podcast page to this forum about disabled geocaching and handicaching.com ?
    Ask members if they have any questions, making sure they are respectful of course?
    What information would be useful to them as cachers / cache owners about tips when placing a cache that could possibly be accessible to a disabled cacher and What info would be useful? And
    How to add info on their cache pages and rating caches with handicaching.com

    Many thanks
    Heather aka Cache on Wheels
    "Defeat may test you; It need not stop you. If at first you don't succeed, try another way. For every obstacle, there is a solution. Nothing in the world can take the place of persistance. The greatest mistake is giving up."
    Author Unknown :socool:

  31. #131

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Smile New comments

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryuchan View Post
    revisiting and wondering why this got buried?

    It was an interesting read, so please continue
    Hi there
    Thank you for your comment, there have been some new comments added to this thread from the host of the 'Oh Beep' Geocaching podcast Show. He discussed handicaching on his recent show. He rated one of his caches on the show and was surprised at how straightforward it was.

    He also made reference and added a link to the October Podcast 2012 by UK Geocaching Podcast.
    Myself and the 3 hosts discussed disabled caching and how anyone can rate any cache via handicaching.com, have you had a listen?

    Please do have a listen and share your thoughts and ask questions

    Many thanks
    Heather aka Cache on Wheels
    "Defeat may test you; It need not stop you. If at first you don't succeed, try another way. For every obstacle, there is a solution. Nothing in the world can take the place of persistance. The greatest mistake is giving up."
    Author Unknown :socool:

  32. #132

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Porthcawl S Wales
    Posts
    482

    Default

    I am glad these facts have been discussed

  33. #133

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    West Dorset, UK
    Posts
    339

    Post Always happy to help when I can

    Thank you so much to all who voted for me last year and who have nominated and seconded me this year. However, I have decided not to stand again this year.

    I have enjoyed the last year on the GAGB committee.
    It has been very interesting learning more about GAGB, and how they enhance and play a vital role in Geocaching and support geocachers and land owners in the UK.

    I am delighted that I have been able to support and give information to Land Owners, cache owners and cachers in helping to make our countryside and geocaching more accessible for cachers with limited / restricted mobility.

    I am still available and happy for people to continue to contact me in the GAGB forums or various other ways.
    I will continue to strive to support others in making caching more accessible for all.

    All the best
    Heth aka Cache on Wheels
    "Defeat may test you; It need not stop you. If at first you don't succeed, try another way. For every obstacle, there is a solution. Nothing in the world can take the place of persistance. The greatest mistake is giving up."
    Author Unknown :socool:

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
  •