Jeremy

There were a few more tweaks for performance, etc. that caused a longer downtime.

Benchmarks and waymarks are much closer to the true intent of geocaching than these challenges are, yet neither of those count towards your find total while challenges do? Really makes no sense to me... After release we could see a lot of confusion around what is a valid challenge, so we'll be addressing this early in the activity and encouraging the community to help us guide the activity in a place that fits in the realm of geocaching, mirroring virtuals. For clarity, we'll be introducing the idea of "Challenge Worthy" to help guide people in creating new challenges and reporting on them when they don't fit the definition. We'll also be readdressing Worldwide challenges to reflect these 4 pillars of challenges, so we'll be archiving the "kiss a frog" challenge from the site. What is Challenge-worthy? Location-specific The location of a challenge should be directly related to the action. "Take a picture of yourself with the Eiffel Tower" is location-specific, while "Take pictures of the night sky in Seattle" or "Find this/a geocache" are not. The goal of Challenges, and Geocaching, is to explore the world around you. There should only be one location where you can complete the challenge. Worldwide Challenges are only issued by Groundspeak, but you can recommend new Worldwide Challenges on our feedback site. Straightforward The Challenge should be easy to understand and not too complicated to do. Appropriate Keep Challenges clean so it reflects the family-friendliness of Geocaching. Fun! Like geocaching, Challenges should be a light and fun activity. Create Challenges that reflect this.

So which listings are caches then, and which ones aren't? Let me guess: if it says "virtual cache" or "earthcache" and if it counts towards your find count, then it is, otherwise it isn't. Right? I rest my case. Great. You two should switch to a private conversation from here then.

See, and I only agree with the first part. Benchmarks also have listings, and they're not caches, right? Milk has a physical container, and that's not a cache either, right? Right, but according to you, if I made a listing for it, it would be. Sure. Hide a milk jug in the woods and post the coordinates for it in a listing. Poor choice of container, but still a cache. Of course. It doesn't make "milk" a cache though - the jug is the cache. Assuming it's got a log inside. So yeah, a cache doesn't "have" a container, a cache is a container, a physical object. In that situation, the cache is a combination of a container and a listing. Just because that particular situation has a container does not mean that all caches have to. Should you guys get a room?

First of all, thanks for your kind offer even though I am not sure whether it is a real offer or rather a sarcastic comment because you misunderstood what I wrote (because I was not clear enough). As the cost of a PM-ship is not at all my reason for not being a PM, it does however play no role how your offer is meant. The offer was given because you will need a Premium Membership, at least initially, to submit a challenge. If you are worried that the challenge won't be enjoyed by everyone, I still would like to see what kind of challenge you could submit to give me an idea of what would not disappoint you. It was not sarcastically given. I genuinely want your input.

I was working on the premise that they would be unreviewed non-listings, so unlikely to have any long-term interest/value. Recognising this by making the challenge disposable is great! It means I can meet other cachers whinging about how rubbish the new challenges are! Well, now I understand your perspective better. A few weeks ago I still had some hope that it would at least be possible to come across some interesting challenges (even if it would be only with a 1:1000 chance), but the new announcements have made my hope disappear. It is hard for me to understand how one can advertise these challenges as exciting evolution in geocaching. Cezanne To increase the chance and hope, I am happy to offer you a free annual premium membership so you can show us an interesting challenge that everyone can enjoy. Deal?

That's why it's good to be proactive. The more suggestions and ideas we throw out, the better chance Groundspeak will come out with something we like. It's way easier to change things before they're implemented than after. It isn't possible to make any significant changes to challenges in a week prior to release. It is good to know what people's concerns may be so we can, say, address them in a FAQ. However, making suggestions on how things could work won't be helpful until people start using the new system.

(Unfortunately) is has been said that they will count towards your find count (does that make them geocaches? ). With no review process in place, people can (and probably will) create hundreds or thousands of them. From the information available so far, I'd estimate that the number and density of those "challenges" will quickly surpass the number and density of caches. The find count will become even more meaningless than it already is. i read in the other topic that only premium members will submit at first... maxing out at 1 per day, and once they are happy with the system to then open the flood gates.... so at first it won't be too bad We're not opening the flood gates unless it makes sense to do so.

The definition of a cache is irrelevant to the discussion of challenge caches. However you define a cache, it is the challenge + cache which is the problem. A challenge is great, a cache is great, but forcing someone to accomplish some challenge for the privilege of getting the coordinates of a cache from the cache owner is not great. It is akin to the Goonies having to ask permission from One Eyed Willie to find his treasure instead of following the clues and solving puzzles to find it. A cache should be set up so everything is available for the geocacher to figure out the puzzle and/or follow the GPS to the cache on their own, not prove their worth to a geocacher to get the permission to find and/or log it.

ow ow ow ow ow ow Thanks! Basically +∞ What does any cache without a cache have to do with geocaching? I cant believe that I didn't see that as soon as I saw this. SO solving the "what ever a CO wants" for an EC or VC doesn't solve the location...It is just some arbitrary hoop you make a geocacher jump through for you to allow them a I went to your spot I mean found it on the cache listing.The lack of a cache forces them to have no more relation to caching than the next rock, statue or lamp post that I can get a set of coords for. Now I really wanna see how challenges are going to work because so far, from all the speculation the seem even more vaporous then the "Don't have a cache" cache types. I didn't understand any of this.

Well, we don't know for sure yet what the new challenges will be like. There's a chance that they're all gonna be location based, at least for the time being. The whole comparison with challenge caches was a bit of an unrelated side discussion. I don't think there was an official confirmation that the new challenges could be used for concepts similar to challenge caches. At least not yet, they might be in the future. Yes. Challenge caches are an unrelated discussion to the replacement for virtuals (or at least on the fringes). However, since people kept bringing it up, I addressed it as a problem.

"to generate GPS coords is no more location based than finding a cache 100 days in a row" I'm not sure how generating GPS coordinates is not location based.

(1) The problem is you can't claim a found it log, even though you found it. You may not have a problem with that, but I do. A found it log means you found it. That's why it is called a found it log. (2) If the things you do result in finding the cache (code breaking, math, etc), it isn't arbitrary. The task results in a solution that takes you to a cache. It is the personal whim of a geocacher to decide whether you completed a challenge cache, therefore it is arbitrary. (3) The puzzle location is near the final location, so it has a connection to the cache. A challenge like finding a cache every day for 366 days doesn't have a connection to any location. I'm trying to be as leading as possible here. I don't know how I can be any clearer.

There is no puzzle cache listed where the final is 2,000 miles away. I know you don't see the harm. But I do. Geocaching isn't about creating arbitrary hoops to jump through so someone can give you coordinates to a container hidden somewhere. There is no relation between the challenge and the cache, and that's the problem. Actually Jeremy, there is one. The listed coordinates are deep into the Pacific Ocean but the final is probably in Bothell or Woodinville WA. Still unfound, listed in 2007. I know that one is rare and an extreme example, but it IS an example of a puzzle cache listed 1000s of miles away. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=671c7cb1-a682-4ba1-aa1c-16592580cd81 6100 KM Southwest of me yet Bothell is only 10 miles away. I think that qualifies as 2000 miles away. I was hesitant to post the link but the CO appeared on a recent other board and acknoledged it so he does not seem to mind it being known its out there. This is a pretty good example of a pretty bad idea for a cache location for a mystery (though the cache puzzle may be excellent) - it really should be changed. There's a good reason why it is a rare and extreme example. No wonder it hasn't been found.

I think I was not clear enough in my example. I have a mystery cache GC22PXN where a person in lets say Nome Alaska could solve the puzzle and get the final coordinates. The location of the final would be well over 3000 miles away from where they solved the puzzle aspect of the cache. Now while they may have solved the puzzle aspect of the cache they can not complete the cache unless they travel to Indiana and find the solved coordinates. The coordinates for the puzzle should be close to the actual location of the cache, and the puzzle gives you the location of the cache. I see that you don't see the difference. Completing the challenge doesn't solve the location for the cache. It is just some arbitrary hoop you make a geocacher jump through for you to give them the coordinates of the cache listing. The location of the cache has no relation to the challenge.

There is no puzzle cache listed where the final is 2,000 miles away. I know you don't see the harm. But I do. Geocaching isn't about creating arbitrary hoops to jump through so someone can give you coordinates to a container hidden somewhere. There is no relation between the challenge and the cache, and that's the problem.

1 obviously makes sense, since it is a traditional geocache. Posting a log on a cache you never physically found in option #2 doesn't make sense. We already have plenty of issues with cachers that say "sure. log my cache in any country if you solve this puzzle" - then we get complaints when users have caches in their statistics that show they found a cache in a country they have never been to. Yeah, well, don't log that cache then. You didn't find it there.

I'd rather be known as liking challenges, not challenge caches. So strike the cache part and it makes sense. I understand the idea of having the local community engaged in completing a challenge, but I don't think it needs to be through a cache listing. It is just the current "hack" to make it work.

I am not asking the task be changed. Let me clear up my post on this. The task is To claim a find on this cache, you will need to first find at least one cache of every difficulty/terrain combination (81 unique combinations/caches). The rest are rules that apply to the task, the additional logging requirements. This is probably one of the best examples of a challenge cache that doesn't make any sense, since anyone in the world could attempt and complete it. So why do they need to travel to X location to log the cache? Couldn't someone create one in every city, town, or hobbit village? Why not just focus on a devious puzzle instead?

The problem with challenge caches is that the challenge has no relation to the location of the geocache. The problem has nothing to do with the "fairness" of the challenge. If you remove the cache from the challenge, there is some similarities to the replacement for virtuals, except that the location is directly linked to the challenge. There may be worldwide challenges at some point that mirror some of the challenge caches today (find a cache every day for 366 days, etc), but not in the first iteration, since we're focusing on locations, just like the geocaching core activity. I like the Delorme challenge, and as an Xbox 360 user I love achievements, so I understand the fun behind trying to accomplish a hard earned goal. What doesn't make sense, even in the early Delorme Challenge days, is the cache you find after completing the challenge. At least in the case of the Delorme challenge, the "prize" cache is in the region of the challenge.

What I mean is there are no guidelines, though there will be some encouraging text. How do we list them here? I'm confused. That's ok. It will be clearer when we launch the feature.

They are location-based and for everyone to do.

What I mean is there are no guidelines, though there will be some encouraging text.

To clarify, it isn't going to be a cache listing at all, so posting a new cache listing as a placeholder for a virtual would have no point to it. I'm following so far. I have virtual listings on another site, and listed waymarks. Just who will be allowed to list virtual listings on this site? Lacky's? PM's? Any member? Premium Members during the initial release will have the ability to post them, and even then they only post one every 24 hours (max). This will open up later, based on how the system is holding up. I'm more than ready to give them a try. Can't wait to see the guidelines. I'd like to try and list a few with a good WOW factor. Guidelines? What guidelines?

To clarify, it isn't going to be a cache listing at all, so posting a new cache listing as a placeholder for a virtual would have no point to it. I'm following so far. I have virtual listings on another site, and listed waymarks. Just who will be allowed to list virtual listings on this site? Lacky's? PM's? Any member? Premium Members during the initial release will have the ability to post them, and even then they only post one every 24 hours (max). This will open up later, based on how the system is holding up.