Deepdiggingmole

Are you saying the guidelines "Challenge caches need to be attainable at any time." and "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that there are plenty of qualifying caches to meet the challenge at the time of publication." have not been there since the changes post moratorium - I'd like to see what amendments have been made to the guidelines over that time Interesting I don't like to have a go at 'reviewers' specifically as I think they do a great job and have always had respect for what they do - but I do know that not all reviewers are up to speed with challenge cache criteria even now and I would not say that reviewers in particular are any more an expert than other experienced caches on what makes a good or bad challenge cache - I have come across many challenges that didn't comply with post moratorium criteria yet still got published.

This isn't an issue of precedents - if the guidelines are used to make a decision about the suitability then surely it needs to be used on all challenges particularly if the criteria are the same On mine I was quoted that the reason a Mega event can't be used is "using criteria and attainability guidelines "Challenge caches need to be attainable at any time." and "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that there are plenty of qualifying caches to meet the challenge at the time of publication." With MEGA Events not being available at all times, they should not be part of your challenge criteria. OK so - I accept that (I dont necessarily agree with it - but have to accept it) So why are other challenges (post moratorium) allowed to include Megas - I submitted mine on the basis that other challenges have Megas within the criteria I don't want to hear locality arguments, I understand that too - I am referring to challenges in my locality I am aware of a challenge cache relatively near to this one where the criteria is to find 1 mega in two different countries, that's 2 megas - surely if using criteria and attainability guidelines (as above) is applied this should not have been allowed either, But it was !! I am not looking for an answer to this as there isnt one - just pointing out that if a reviewer uses guidelines to refuse a challenge he should use that same on all challenges that have the same criteria - it smacks of inconsistency and favouritism

Well - I have had the 11 type (icon) idea refused and this has been backed up by a refusal on appeal. Unfortunately it does smack of one rule for one and another rule for another as I am aware of 11 icon challenges (post moratorium) out there and also challenges which rely on having attended mega events - it was around this factor (the mega event attendance) that my 11 type was refused The citing of the following guidelines - the same source of criteria and attainability guidelines "Challenge caches need to be attainable at any time." or "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that there are plenty of qualifying caches to meet the challenge at the time of publication." are the reasons that mine was refused as mega events are not that readily available - so on that basis no challenge where the criteria involves attending mega events should be allowed - but they have and I am sure they will Very frustrating - but there we go

There are many, many much simpler challenges and most range in the lower D rating for that reason - this is a hard challenge (and is a 5*D for a reason) and is for those who do travel (and there are a lot who do) and appreciate a more challenging challenge to award the efforts made while doing so

I have submitted my idea with 11 and it has been rejected - I also ensured there was a checker, it isn't a hard one to create a checker for The reason for the rejection seems to lean on having to find 'mega events' however I feel the argument is weak and can justify why. I gave a list of 10 cachers who have already qualified and of course I do to - when I submitted the cache I am waiting on a reply to my appeal to the reviewer

I acknowledge the issue around rarity, though I disagree with it, as there is a link with the time factor. The argument that Megas are rare is due to how many there are in a year , but when it comes to time span compare it to a challenge like, for example, 'find 20,000 caches' (a challenge I know has been published) which can take the majority of cachers over 10 years or much longer to complete. looking at both challenges -- both achievable ? yes but to argue that Megas are rare when you are likely to see at least 20 or 30 or more in the UK over the time span it would take to complete the 20,000 caches challenge doesn’t make them so rare.

Hi with regard to the last - I am ware that locationless etc are not allowed - my point was - to qualify for a challenge you cant just rely on caches being available in the future as past finds do count

I am wanting a 11 to 1 challenge where you have to have found 11 types in one country, 10 in a second down to 1 in the 11th I acknowledge that 11 would include mega - but where I am most cachers have been to one or both of the two megas we have held locally in the last few years. Or even to the several megas held in the UK over the last few years I do not think that many cachers would have trouble with 11 icons in their own country if they are interested in this sort of challenge - going to country number 2 requiring 10 again is very achievable.... and so on This sort of challenge would not be for everyone but how many challenge caches are. As far as "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that there are plenty of qualifying caches to meet the challenge" - Megas are not going to go away, certainly in the UK With regard to the above quote - yup, a list of 10 qualifiers supplied I also feel that challenges are not future based - past finds do counts and many cachers do have the 'mega' ticked off and so it wont matter that there are only 3 or so a year in the UK (my locality) in the future

I am aware that several years ago HQ dictated that the number of icons allowed to be used in a challenge would be limited to 8. I am under the impression that since the moratorium this was relaxed and 11 icons is now allowed Am I wrong ? Is there a maximum number of types allowed ? Is there anything written to verify any 'ruling' around this Many thanks Tim

OK So I discover the program is not efficient in dealing with deleted logs - any deleted logs whether by the 'finder' or ANother (such as HQ) dont get dropped from the Stats page, (viewable by the CO) - in the words of HQ " there is no way to "unplay" an adventure at this point." - I have managed to get all 4 fake loggers to delete their logs - I am taking their word for it and I am quite happy they have done this, but this is not something the stats can verify - which is a shame as the genuine FTF cachers are not given that accolade due to the previous fake logs

Has HQ looked into this and changed anything ? I received a new ad lab only recently and have just made it live, end of July 2019, so that's 4 months down the road - the first 4 'finders' have all cheated and seeing the stats from yours above - I doubt that'll end there

How does this disciplinary action take place Does the CO have to report the fake finders - I have just had an adventure lab go live and the first 4 finders are all from their 'armchairs' - though one has since deleted their 'finds' In addition - can a CO delete adventure lab logs just as they can on GC and finally - as mentioned there are 4 finders of my Adventure lab totalling 7 locations (as per the stats page) (1 finder finding 4 locations, 3 finders finding 1 location each) - one finder (the one finding 4 locations) has deleted their finds, which should take the log count down to 3, however the stats page still shows 7 finds - why hasn't the deletions been reflected in the stats ?

I have just had my Adventure Lab go live and the first 4 finders were all Fake

If you have created an Adventure Lab - does the ownership of one get credited anywhere (other than in the Adventure Lab App) I was under the impression these are similar to Lab caches and as such finding them gets you another lab cache smiley, noted in your stats Does ownership get noted in your owned caches list on the GC website as well ?

My Tester has completed the 5 locations (I only got 5 ) all good there - as you say no history, nothing saved - The tour is now public, so hopefully all will be good

Similar to another thread regarding Adventure lab cache in testing stage and geofencing - this query is with regard to program saving My tester has informed me that she did 2 of the 5 locations today and following discussion around the questions and answers - that bit all worked OK - however back at home she realised that the app had not saved these two locations - she plans to do the other three tomorrow - not to bothered about the saving aspect as she is really testing the locations/questions etc My question, however, is :- Will this be an issue once the tour is published - will the completed locations be saved/locked in - are each of these independent of each other even though they are all part of the same 'tour' and will it matter if they are not saved - again is this a test phase glitch Tim

Saved me doing that if you have already tried it ?

I echo this question I am in the process of getting one tested and this very issue was raised by my tester - other than having to go to the locations to get the answers to questions - when discussing a couple of the locations my tester stated she was able to go into the app and could answer the questions from home over a mile away - I had set the geo-fencing at 500m Need to know if this is just a glitch in testing phase or will it happen once made live

Its not location issue - its website vs app issue website doesn't work - app does I don't use the app as I have a GPS - so waiting to see what happens

So what does it look like when there is the detective clue When I filtered for those that DO have the detective clue I got a cache which had the following :- and I expected that when I found that cache this would change to 1/1

I don't have the mobile app and have never needed to as I use a GPS - I don't see why i should have to download the APP just to get involved in this hunt

Based on what has been said above - I fuilly understood what was required - however having filtered those caches with 'detective' clue and then went on a 30 mile round trip to find the nearest cache on the resulting list (which had the second of the two images shown) to then log the cache and BOOM ..... nothing happened, it didn't go 1/1, tit didn't go youv'e found this one, it didn't go youv'e got the sounvenir !!!!

I am not sure if this has been raised before so apologies if it has (tried searching - couldn't find anything) I had an issue with a new cache I own where a trailhead waypoint ended up being the same as the cache location once the cache was published - I am sure that when the cache page was written up prior to submission and the waypoint added it was given the correct trailhead co-ords. Now, I wouldn't have thought anymore of it and would have put it down to operator (me) error, except for the fact that we have come across several other caches where additional waypoints (mainly parking) have been shown to be at the cache co-ords and not at the location the the CO intended. We have advised those COs each time we have spotted this and every time they have said the same as us - that they are sure they put the correct co-ords when writing up So I feel that a glitch somewhere is reverting the additional waypoint co-ords back to the cache co-ords - I appreciate that this is not happening all the time and maybe only happening on a very small percentage of occasions (this only occurred on one of four caches in the new series (of 12) I submitted that did have additional waypoints) I checked with my reviewer who advised me that on submission the trailhead co-ords did show the same as cache - I asked as I wanted to try and ascertain at what point the error occurred Has anyone else noticed this either on their own new caches or on caches they have found where there are aditional waypoints Could this be a weird - not happening most of the time - glitch Tim

Thank you all - I know see that with the change of the three icon names a description has now come up on the site. So all been helpful

I mentioned this in another forum - and the reply was that it is an event to be held every 10 years - I think they have missed a trick not incorporating a 20 as it is the 20th anniversary and in 2020