Dinoprophet

It appears the log was either removed by GS, removed by the logger, or flagged into non-existence. At a minimum, I'd like to see the ability to Watch a challenge, like we can watch caches.

Well, it's sad that this whole thing happened. It didn't have to. Instead of banning virts they should have just dropped the WOW or any other quality requirement and listed virts just like they list micros in parking lots or film cans on mountaintops. They don't evaluate quality of regular caches, they didn't need to do it with virtuals. This whole multi-year debacle over virts was a self-inflicted wound. But how is that different from what we just saw? What would reviewers look for if there was no sort of standard? Challenges are virtuals without a WOW factor. They're just broken off from other finds, and thank goodness they are because the havok wrecked would have been even worse otherwise.

Once the dust has settled, I think the only ones who will be really unhappy are the ones who wanted virts in their original form. But this whole exercise should have exposed to them why that was unworkable. What you saw is what reviewers would have to deal with constantly. And that was with restrictions!

This is my attitude toward them. I was never a big fan of virts, but I'll do ones that look good. And I want my count to reflect "Go here and find/see this" finds. I probably won't do Worldwide ones -- that's what Waymarking is for.

But there is a reviewer. Or rather, there are THOUSANDS of reviewers. Someone is bound to see your challenge, say to himself "that's a geocache, not a challenge," and hit the flag button. If enough people do it, your challenge disappears. So if that's such a great idea, why aren't geocaches done that way? Because of land ownership issues and the physical container. Challenges are being evaluated by the community for their "wow" factor or other intangibles, which geocaches are not.

Having to include a reason for thumbing down or for flagging should be required somehow. I don't know how you'd prevent single character or nonsense entries though. Other than that, I think the community review process is pretty great. Assume it's good until the community says otherwise.

The Crow's Nest http://coord.info/CX36E (I didn't submit it, I just think it's a good one)

Logs can be flagged. I'm guessing (key) that enough flags can lead to deletion.

There's not a way yet. Only Groundspeak can make those. And I wish they hadn't rolled any out -- it made everyone think that's what they're supposed to be like.

This is the sort of thing I think was intended: http://www.geocaching.com/challenges/view.aspx?cx=CX36E Interesting object, nice writeup with the history, goal related to the object. Very virtual-like. According to Jeremy in the podcast, a third type will be introduced that will be even more virtual-like, in that you won't know what it's going to be until you're there.

Agreed. I wasn't around for the earliest days of geocaching, but I imagine the game wasn't born fully formed the first day.

Well, if nothing else comes of this, at least people will now understand what the reviewers had to deal with when virtuals were around.

I'm a loyal user. I'll continue to be whatever happens with these things. I may like them once they're more than a couple hours old. My finds are of exactly the same value as they were 24 hours ago.

Location-specific frog kiss. I guess that one's okay. http://www.geocaching.com/challenges/view.aspx?cx=CX3A3

Now you can kiss a German frog! http://www.geocaching.com/challenges/view.aspx?cx=CX1BE

Are you trying to suggest that people will go to a site that has minimal support only a handful of caches (most dual listed) and lots of issues just because they dislike challenges. I'm not buying that. A lot of people are showing their dislike in many ways and I'm betting there will be some changes to challenges that require them to be tied to a location. Then all they have to do is make them archive after so many negative votes. People won't leave because they dislike challenges, they'll leave because the owner of this site obviously doesn't care about what it's user's want. I just won't do a challenge unless it fulfills my criteria of being like a cache. If it takes me to some place and makes me see something, then I'd be willing to log it and take the smilie. If I can grab a smilie for taking a picture in my house, I'm not doing it. If others was to pad their numbers by doing silly challenges, that's their choice. I don't have to go for it. I'm not going to take my picture with a frog. BTW, can you delete your choice to take a challenge after you've posted it if you change your mind? That's where I am. I'm still debating a separate Challenge account. I kind of like the stance GS has taken. No rules, totally hands-off be creative. It will be interesting to see how it evolves over the next week or two. I see where it *can* be like virtuals, but I also see where Waymarking *can* be like virtuals, and that didn't happen. So: will it be possible to watch challenges?

That's the one GS created.

It sounds like the flags is what gets one removed, not thumbs down. http://www.geocaching.com/challenges/faq.aspx

Ah. Thanks.

Why? Because I'd like to participate, but I don't want them counted in my find count, as I don't think they're geocaching. I felt the same about Locationless, but I had the option of logging notes on those.

But that puts people in the awkward position of voting down a challenge that they decided to do, knowing full well that they don't like it. Of course, they could just upload a picture of whatever, I suppose.

I kind of like the avatars. But why does the layout of each log seem to be random? On some, the text is above the avatar, on some it's below. On some it's indented, on some it's not.

Then you just delete that log. Oh....right....

Yes, I'm pretty sure you have the idea that was intended. Groundspeak should not have done the Worldwide challenge. That has completely derailed it, in my opinion.

In the podcast, Jeremy suggested that only Groundspeak would be able to do that. It hasn't stopped people from making the Worldwide kind, however. It's a bit like people using virtuals to post riddles, I'd say.