pinkunicorn

The previous checker may well have other challenges using it. It may be that the checker has several modes of operation and that the bug only happens in one of them, so this scenario doesn't even mean that the old checker is useless, just that there are cases where it is. That said, a checker script can only be removed by the script author (or Project-GC itself, but we still would have to make sure that nothing else is using it). We are hoping to implement other ways of handling multiple checkers, like a voting system of some sort.

That is, indeed, how the already existing checker for words in cache names already works.

If a checker is written and that checker writer becomes inactive, maybe they become busy with other things or are otherwise unable to continue as a checker writer, then can another checker writer 'take over' the checker? Is there an Activity Log for each individual checker? Can you point out where to find that, as I'm having a hard time finding such a link? Not sure I'm looking in the right place. All the code of all challenge checkers on Project-GC is available to all challenge checker developers. Thus, if some checker developer loses interest and someone later finds a bug in code left by that person, they can just copy the code to a new checker script, fix the problem, and make a new checker from that.

The checker system only has access to the posted coordinates for caches.

Actually, that is already the case in the old guidelines. They include this bit of text: "The requirements for meeting the challenge should be succinct and easy to explain, follow, and document. A lengthy list of "rules" would be sufficient reason for a challenge cache to not be published."

And indeed they will be. No one will be forcing anyone to use the checker system. What is the new thing here is that it will be mandatory to offer every cacher the choice whether to check if they are qualified manually or automatically - without being technical enough to set up GSAK to do this, assuming there is a GSAK script available and it can be found. My experience is that challenge caches seldom if ever link to GSAK macros, and finding one yourself involves sifting through the GSAK forum for something that may possibly fit. In contrast, future challenges will have a link to the checker directly on the page that only needs to be clicked (and if you install the Project-GC browser extension, existing checkers will be linked on the cache page even for old challenges).

What's wrong with a CO depending on the seeker's integrity? That bothers me about the checker requirement: it prevents a CO from having a challenge cache with a requirement that only the seeker can verify, and then trusting seekers when they say they have. When I point to a list of caches that could reasonably result in hiking 20km and then say I hiked 20km to get them, it seems almost offensive to me that you or GS would step in and demand that the CO not believe me. One of my absolute favorite challenge caches required me to visit 50 different parks or hiking trails maintained by the regional park district. The requirement is concrete, and it's straightforward for the CO to confirm that the 50 finds I list satisfy the requirement. So that one doesn't even require trust, but it would be utterly impossible to write a checker for it. Actually no, in two different ways. Having a challenge requirement that is "straightforward for the CO to confirm" does not mean that it would be enjoyable or even feasible in the long run for a CO to check the cache pages of each cache of a 50-cache list for each logger. However, since you said regional, I assume you are talking about only parks within a reasonably limited area. It is possible to write a checker for that, as long as you supply map definitions of the parks (polygons defining the parks geographically). I have seen a checker for a challenge that required X number of finds within nature reserves located in the Swedish region of Stockholm. That sounds like pretty much like the same thing.

I'm not sure I agree, but hey, English is not my first language.

I'm being unclear here. When I say "checker", I mean something that is specifically targeted at a specific challenge. First one writes a checker script. This is not really connected to any challenge (although it is, of course, written with one in mind). Then the checker script needs to be connected to a challenge. This is done by tagging it. The tag contains information about what script to use, what checker script to use, and (optionally) what parameters to send to the script for this particular challenge. A finished checker that an end user can run is (from Project-GC's point of view) a tag. So no, you don't need to figure out which of the 15000 checkers to use for your challenge. What you need to do is figure out which of the 600 checker scripts to use. Scripts have names and (optionally) labels, so they can be searched for rather easily. If I search for "jasmer", for instance, I get five hits. These five scripts are all documented so you can read a paragraph or two for each to see what they do differently. Also, two of them are marked "old, do not use" meaning that the author has made a better version but where the old version is still available since there are (presumably) old challenges around that use these old scripts.

If they don't want people to log their cache then I'd say that they need to seriously reconsider if they should indeed be hiding caches. If you put out caches, they are for everyone (unless they are premium caches, obviously). Are you suggesting that a cacher who has a particular target audience in mind when placing a cache is unfit to be a cache owner? For having a particular audience in mind but happily accepting logs from anyone? No. For having a particular audience in mind and actively trying to make no one else log the cache? Yes.

If they don't want people to log their cache then I'd say that they need to seriously reconsider if they should indeed be hiding caches. If you put out caches, they are for everyone (unless they are premium caches, obviously).

Some additional data here: Project-GC currently has a total of 15133 checkers for 13675 different challenges (yes, it's possible to create multiple checkers for the same challenge). This covers 65.64% of the total world population of challenge caches. I'm sure that some of the remaining challenges could have checkers made for them, but there are also a fair number that can't since the conditions are such that they simply can't be checked by a computer. Here in Sweden there is, for instance, a bingo challenge where one of the squares is "have you been intercepted by police or security while caching". The really interesting bit, though, is this: these 15133 checkers have been done with only 667 checker scripts (written by 85 people) that have then been reused lots of times. There are lots of fizzy challenges, lots of calendar challenges, and so on. Once someone has written a checker script for a general type of challenge like that, it's simple to make that script generally useful. When that is done, it's a minute's work to apply the same checker script to yet another challenge. All these figures can be found on the challenge checker top page at http://project-gc.com/Tools/Challenges Disclosure: I am the author of a few of these checkers (including the general calendar checker which is currently servicing 508 different challenges) and also do Project-GC tech support. Edit: link to the right page

The mega events in my newsletter are sorted by distance, except that the list is headed by the 2013 Geocaching Block Party despite that being very far off. I suppose this has to do with this being its own cache type.

Yesterday the new map was unusable due to tiles not loading. This morning it is snappy, perhaps even more so than Google Maps usually is. I assume this is because you Americans are sleeping at the moment. If the speed I'm seeing now is what we'll get, it's good. As for the overview map itself, the new one is somewhat different from the old but possibly better. What is bad is that there is no satellite imagery! If I zoom out so far that almost nothing is distinguishable anyway, I can get satellite images, but they are all grayish and appear to be taken at night or something where Google's are nice and crisp. More importantly, Google's images are available down to the level where I can count the parking spots near the cache site and really plan my trip. With the new maps, nothing even remotely like that. This is a *major* problem. When doing a major impairment like this, why not bundle it with an improvement? For instance, stop fighting third-party tools like c:geo and GeoToad. They are created by people that like geocaching for people that love geocaching, and are used because they add value that can't be had via official tools. You should help them (which will get you more satisfied users which in turn will get you more users), not hinder them. What I'm talking about is removing limits like only a couple of PQs per time period and no robots. Instead of just saying no, offer working alternatives or allow the existing ones that already work at no cost to you.

Yeah, right. Any TB that doesn't have it's mission physically attached to it in effect has the default mission of "travel far and wide". [sometimes TBs move where they're not supposed to move. My TB that is supposed to tour EU countries recently made a detour to Afghanistan. Some years ago a friend of mine accidentally brought a geocoin that was supposed to go to Singapore from Thailand to Sweden. I brought it back to Singapore a few weeks later. These things happen, and without a mission on the TB (as my EU TB has) they happen more often. People simply don't always read the notes. Just live with it.]

Haven't tested this myself yet, but somebody said (if I understood correctly) that the small map on the cache page will indeed show the new location, but that the large geocaching map does not. Hopefully it will, soon, as that is where it would be most useful. I'm aware of this, but doesn't really help. I can use Google Maps to see where the cache is. What I want is the overview to show me where all the caches in the area are.

Will there be a later update to this feature that will move the caches with updated coordinates to their updated position? Will caches with updated coordinates get separate icons on the map?

(I wrote more or less the same thing in the release notes forum, but apparently that's the wrong place.) Being able to enter solutions for mysterys and multis is a great feature, but it feels like it's only half-done. As far as I can tell, even though I update the coordinates for a cache, it still appears on the map on its original coordinates. It would be much more helpful for my planning if it appeared where the cache really is (or, as the case may be, where I left off solving a multi-stage cache). It would also be very nice if caches with updated coordinates got an icon on the map to indicate this. I suggest that they get a green checkmark added onto their original icon, so that I can tell which caches are solved and which are not. Once again, that makes it easier to plan my routes in areas where I don't know all the caches by heart. Furthermore, I think the same feature would be useful for WhereIGos as well, and probably (due to caches with bad coordinates and coordinate updates in logs) for traditionals as well.

This is a great feature, but it feels like it's only half-done. As far as I can tell, even though I update the coordinates for a cache, it still appears on the map on its original coordinates. It would also be very nice if caches with updated coordinates got an icon to indicate this. I suggest that they get a green checkmark added onto their original icon, so that I can tell which caches are solved and which are not.

That doesn't work for me. When I find caches with really sad (or no) contents I put some stuff in, and sometimes I trade for stuff that shouldn't have been placed in caches to begin with (perfume today, for instance; candy, old leaves, etc). The swag bag definitely needs replenishing occasionally.

Assumption: All geocachers are from the US. Status: faulty

OT: Finding and placing caches in Sweden is very nice, since we have a blanket right-to-roam (including one night of camping), regardless of who owns the land. Asking the land owner for permission to geocache is simply not an issue. ;-)

I have 2.4 km to my nearest unfound, and it's a mystery that I've DNF:ed once but I have a number of other caches unfound at approximately the same distance from home.

I collect dice, which means that I tend to buy dice in lots now and then and get all sorts of extras. These extras tend to go into caches. They are small, inexpensive, and (since I go for obscure kinds) don't always look like the ones people are used to. At least children like them. My son trades for all coings he can find and adds them to his collection, so they are also good swag, especially if you're caching in a foreign country. Then just get rid of your pocket change, a few coins in each cache. Reflex badges are another useful item that I try to put in caches, expecially now for the darker season. They tend to get lost or matte, so you need new ones regularly.