frinklabs
-
Posts
1318 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by frinklabs
-
-
I carry a pile of pencil stubs that I have been leaving as pseudo-swag, in an effort to alleviate these occurrences.
It doesn't always help; forensic analysis of cache logs subsequent to mine will show I-forgot-my-pen entries from cachers who clearly didn't open the container (if they were even there).
-
-
.png)
4
-
-
-
This is another manifestation of the fatal flaw of having an officially-sanctioned ALR within the Challenge cache guidelines.
You can have Found It logs on Challenge caches after they are archived which aren't really finds at all.
https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC44EBQ_latitude-43-challenge
Of course it behooves me to mention there is a system that would fix this.
-
2
-
-
I went back and read the original thread and maybe the reason I am so "dismissive" (besides my lack of tact, diplomacy or a verbal filter) is that the discussion there was obfuscated by several now-banned pedants.
From there, this:
Quote"Challenge caches" are ALRs. ALRs aren't supposed to exist. Groundspeak got lazy and used this good, pleasing, interesting, challenging idea and stuck it where it doesn't fit. They took a square peg and put it in a knife fight. (Failed mixing of metaphors to say it was a bad fit where it shouldn't be anyway? meh, I tried...)
Any time I link the Challenge Stars thread, it is to address a specifically-stated objection or suggestion.
Many times this turns into a debate regarding the fallout of the dogmatic contradiction of an officially-sanctioned ALR within the framework of a system whose rules do not allow ALRs.
I never seem to get any feedback regarding the C* system itself, other than generalized "change is scary/bad/difficult" and "it is fine the way it is now".
What's the fatal flaw?
-
.png)
5
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:
In this scenario, what purpose does the physical cache actually serve? It's now completely divorced from the challenge. You might just as well have a completely separate virtual entity that you log Challenge Completed on when you qualify and that's it. For me, and the sort of challenge caches I enjoy doing, it doesn't sound anywhere near as much fun or as enticing.
The virtual entity you are describing was the failed Challenges system that was poorly deployed and supported. This system does not disconnect the challenge from a physical location and container.
The key to this system is that you are not awarded the Challenge Stars until you log both the Found It and the Challenge Completed.
Even if they implemented this system, all my Challenge Completed logs would still be simultaneous with the Found It. And that is because a big part of the gratification of the challenge is the final hide.
I find that, so far, really good challenges have had hides and containers and locations that matched. Making the hike and search gives you time to reflect on everything you had to do to get there in the first place.
Pro tip: Try not to be mentally composing your log at this time or you will lose critical situational awareness.-
4
-
-
3 hours ago, The Jester said:
There really isn't any use "discussing" this with him, he will not hear anything against his idea (like any parent, he doesn't like to be told his baby is ugly) so that he can log any and every cache. There have been long threads before with all sorts of arguments against, but he lumps them all into "it's too hard".
He awaits legitimate addressable objections.
He suggests reading the original thread to see how the system evolved from somone else's idea to its current state through (constructive, directed) feedback from other users.
He also wonders why someone would visit his intentions without checking the public record first. Since they clearly show that his quality-over-quantity caching style refutes the allegation, he would be embarrassed for those who made it.
He doesn't want to derail this thread so he looks forward to presentation of the one of these alleged "all sorts of arguments against" which is most on-topic to the OP.
-
5
-
-
Wow geez, I hadn't realized how long it's been since this thread was bumped.
Many threads have referenced it since then, including this one:
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, fizzymagic said:
You know (or at least you should know) that the issue has nothing to do with technical difficulty.
-
5 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:
I find challenges even if I don't qualify, sign the log, but log a note. If you are so keep to log it, do that. No need to log a find. Then one day if I qualify I log a find. I like challenges, but if anyone could claim a find without doing the challenge it would cheapen other people's effort and make their effort worthless. Some challenge caches take a lot of effort. The toughest I have done, was to log a cache in every state and territory in Australia in one calendar year. I drove over 12,000kms to complete that (sigh, in the days when the state borders were open); plus took the ferry to Tasmania. I would not appreciate if all someone had to do was take a walk (if they lived nearby), and sign the log to get a find. What use then for others going to the effort?
The Challenge Stars system fixes, and even enhances this.
The current (weak) system conflates the meaning of the Found It log to represent two (possibly temporally) different events.
Add the Challenge Completed log type, which would only used by those who have completed the requirements of the challenge. The Found It log type would be used by those who have signed the log. Those who have log both will have their efforts recognized, in proportion to the difficulty of the cache. The Challenge Stars present an opportunity to quantify and recognize the effort to complete (as opposed to the current monolithic conflated Found It).-
4
-
-
9 hours ago, MtnGoat50 said:
I like the idea of an attribute more than a new cache type.
I'm probably the only one that feels this way but what I'd really like is for challenge caches to be brought in line with every other physical cache type. Make the challenge optional (like any other ALR). Find the cache, sign the log, log your "found it" online. If you complete the challenge, great, you get recognized on the cache page for the accomplishment (like a Hall of Fame or Honor Roll cache).
This is how the Challenge Stars system works -- there is an actual Challenge Completed log type, that you log when you have completed the Challenge requirements. Which may or may not be at the same time that you have located the container and signed the log (for which the normal Found It log can be used, by anyone who signs). By separating the Find from the Challenge you solve many issues, including two from this thread:
QuoteWe organize geocaching camps for children and it is difficult to explain to them that they cannot log this cache
because they do not meet the conditions and at the same time it is a type of mystery. If the challenge cache
were separated by an icon, it would definitely be clearer.
Quoteit's bad enough now with PM muggles-with-apps logging challenges without knowing what they are.
The other half of the solution is Challenge Stars which work like D and T and are assigned to every cache. This solves all the searching and filtering issues including two mentioned in this thread:
Quotethe website search tools don't have a way of excluding caches with "challenge" in the title.
Quoteif your goal is to search for Mystery caches that aren't challenges (usually puzzles) then you're out of luck
Don't want to see Challenges? Set the filter to 0 Challenge Stars.
As mentioned, this has been hashed and rehashed so many times and no one ever is able to refute the viability of these suggestions with anything other than "It is hard to do"
It is not.-
2
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
-
Sorry I am late.
I can't think of a better way to address every issue with the Challenge caches than implementation of a system that extends existing features.
Two simple additions. A new log type and cache rating gauge. This fixes all.
Maybe its time to bump this thread to see if anyone can convince me there's a simpler alternative:
-
1
-
3
-
.png)
2
-
-
Any API programmer working from fixed lists where there's a call to get a list of elements is weak.
One of the differences between the schemas relates specifically to cache types, where the old method was a fixed list (enum) of types. They fixed this by creating a unique field type called Type, a list of which you can get with its GetGeocacheTypes API call.
The list of Log types is extensible and can be retrieved with the geocachelogtypes API method.You would need these additional extensions to the schema and API -- simply adding a new cache type does not address the issues that exist around the way Challenges are currently (mis)handled.
Specifically around the chewing-gum-and-baling-wire "solution" for allowing pre-signing of Challenge cache physical logs.
Which would be fixed with implementation of features that bifurcated the Find from the Challenge completed events.-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:
The lack of a separate Challenge cache type suggests to me that Groundspeak is really trying to avoid introducing any new types
There's no need for a new cache type for Challenges.
Any needed functionality could be provided through implementation of a system that would only require a new rating attribute and log type.
For a Challenge cache type to work, it would need the additional log type or else you are back to pounding square pegs into round holes with post ipso facto log-type alterations which render your stats meaningless.-
1
-
1
-
-
23 hours ago, thebruce0 said:
the issue of find logs on challenges that are 'found this a year ago, finally qualified' where the find log type now implies the wrong thing: the cache wasn't found a day ago; it may not have been found in the past year, despite 40 find logs and 75 notes
Tangentially, this would not be an issue if there was some system that properly distinguished the Found It event from the challenge completion event.
-
2
-
-
Quote
Found it
Forgot a pen so didn't open it to sign.
Had they opened it, they would have found the contingency pencil. This seems wilfully obtuse. No photolog either. Hm.-
1
-
1
-
-
Technically not a murder, but one wonders...
https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCHM4W_the-talented-mr-bean
-
On 7/5/2019 at 9:08 PM, Calkids said:
Is there a attribute for challenge caches? I travel & would like to bring up challenge caches in cities/counties.
12 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:I've read a lot of the previous posts about having a separate cache type for challenges - I think at this point it would be hard to change existing challenges to the new cache type, and mess up some challenge qualifications in the process.
10 hours ago, barefootjeff said:If a challenge cache type could be created that was a subtype of mystery caches that might work, as they'd still be classed as mysteries in any statistics.
Clearly the single best solution for these, and many other issues with Challenge caches, is implementation of the Challenge Stars feature.
No changing cache type -- you are just layering on a new rating (whose framework already exists as D and T, so no additional programming required for that).
That rating would be searchable, so not only would you be able to see a map of only Challenges, you would also have the option of filtering out based on degree of difficulty.
As I have mentioned before, if you are going to say nay to this, please include a cogent and addressable objection.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
16 hours ago, niraD said:
How's that for a specific objection besides "no one wants this"? Anyway, further discussion probably belongs in the Challenge Stars thread.
Thank you! That's exactly the kind of sensible objection that can be addressed. And I don't want to bump the original thread because it lives in the Website subforum and there's not alot of traction over there -- and these issues have all been discussed and resolved therein. So better to sumarize and continue here.
16 hours ago, niraD said:The whole idea of a Challenge Completed log type for caches seems like an extra level of unnecessary complication.
The extant shoehorn solution is already unnecessarily complicated -- asking a single log type to perform two roles, depending on its location in the process's temporal timeline.
16 hours ago, niraD said:you should go all the way and break the link between completing a challenge and finding a cache.
Yes! The Found It will mean that you found it. The Challenge Completed will mean that you completed the challenge. The fabric of space-time is maintained.
-
2
-
1
-
-
On 5/22/2019 at 7:08 AM, hzoi said:
23 hours and frinklabs hasn't yet quoted their challenge stars idea. Should we send someone over to check on them?
I don't have to quote it -- clearly it is such an obvious solution to these issues that others will mention it for me.
For the record:
And before all the sayers-of-nay jump in, I want to hear specific objections besides "no one wants this"
I know that I can't pre-sign challenge caches because when I have to pound the square peg into the round hold by changing it to/posting a find, it will mess up the geography of where I _actually_ was located. This solution addresses that.
As for the OP's issue, the Stars solution would provide a map filter based on the number of Challenge Stars applied to a cache.
-
1
-
-
-
These would be non-issues if a system were implemented that separated the finding of the container from the completion of the challenge requirements with proper log types.
-
1
-
1
-
-
When you edit the uploaded image there is a field labelled "Date Taken"
-
1
-
-
On 10/30/2018 at 3:03 AM, barefootjeff said:
Challenge caches are different in that completing the challenge is an Additional Logging Requirement, whereas solving the puzzle for a mystery or visiting all the stages of a multi isn't allowed to be and for those, if you sign the logbook you can log the find. If you find and sign the log of a challenge cache but haven't yet fulfilled the challenge, you should log a WN which you can later change to a find when you've qualified.
Irksome right now is my inability to figure out how to include all the stuff that got quoted in this post. I miss the old forums that allowed manipulation of the raw text/links etc.
Meanwhile, using notes and then a found-it is irksome. The time at which the challenge is completed and the found-it is logged might not correlate with the container still being extant. You end up with spurious found-its in the midst of DNFs: https://coord.info/GC7HRFX
There should be some feature that includes a discrete log type for challenge completion. This would also eliminate another's irk which I was unable to quote, which was n00bs logging a Found when they haven't completed the challenge requirements.
The only officially-sanctioned Additional Logging Requirement should have an additional unique log type.
-
1
-
.png)
.png)
.png)
Challenge Caches - Time for an Upgrade
in General geocaching topics
Posted
The OP's issue is easily fixed by implementing a system that separates the Found It from the challenge completion, with the simple addition of another log type.