Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Ragnemalm

  1. 2 hours ago, frostengel said:

    It didn't take me too long to create my own idea and in the end I created https://coord.info/GC7B76A. It is a rather long journey through my home town but not just going from coordinate to coordinate (which I have also seen) but with picture searches or following a textual description. So far the finders had fun and probably those who wouldn't have fun just don't do it. :-)


    How on earth did you get that through?! I have drafted on similar things (hard to make JavaScript do good positioning though), but with the ambition to do it as a mystery or Wherigo, but I am not sure if the reviewers would like the demand of of accessing a web page even for that. For a virtual, the thought didn't even cross my mind! I don't think that would be allowed by our reviewers.


    Did you have any arguments with reviewers? No objections about this way to do a virtual?

  2. 9 minutes ago, dprovan said:

    If your wish is truly fun, and your motive is truly for people to have fun, why would it need to be mandatory? The people you want to have fun would do it voluntarily, wouldn't they? Why do you care about the people that will claim the find but don't want to have fun? You aren't making the cache for them, anyway.


    True, I definitely make caches to be enjoyable, but I am quite fed up with "this was one more during the trip"-logs (in other words, couldn't care less for the point with the cache) and I fear that a virtual would be one. Especially now that they are rather many.


    I will have to think twice whether my original idea can work as a non-mandatory one or not.

  3. 1 hour ago, IceColdUK said:


    Thanks, I have seen that list, but the only thing *close* to fun is a mountain top, but a physical cache is usually a better choise for those places.


    I have seen what the local virtuals are about, and the new ones are generally rather boring. "Go to a somewhat famous place and take a photo there." I wish I could do something better.


    Sorry for being negative, I just don't want to make something that the visitors find dull.

  4. Quote


    The purpose of the required logging task is

    to show that the geocacher was at the location. Anything other than that should be optional.

    Acceptable logging tasks:

    • Questions that can only be answered by visiting the location.
    • Tasks for the finder to fulfill at the location (for example, find five statues on the buildings around you and post the picture of the tallest one with your log).
    • Photos of the geocacher at the location; a face cannot be required in the photo.
    • Photos of a personal item at the location. Examples include a trackable or a piece of paper with the geocacher’s username.



    I can't remember the exact reason why I talked about this with a reviewer but he confirmed that a photo may be required but you can't force cachers to do anything special here. The photo's reason is only to prove that the cacher is at the right place nothing more.

    This takes away several creative ideas (and that's why it should be allowed) but it takes away some over creative ideas about people making fools of them (and that's why it may be good that this isn't allowed).

    But my experience tells me that most cachers try to fulfill the optional wishes by the owners and that's great! :-)

    (In my humble opinion forming a C is not that creative but I would do it, of course.)



    I need some help. I was given a virtual reward, and this quote summarizes my problems with it. I had some fun ideas, but... what can I do? Ask people to go and look at this church/whatever? Nothing more? Must a virtual be a D1?


    In what way is this something I would want to create? Is there any way that I can make this *fun* to visitors? Is it impossible to make a fun virtual? Should I just reach for "archive" and get it over with?


    I am not angry, I just feel helpless. I am given a once-in-a-lifetime to create... nothing?


    Or should I go for the last statement and humbly hope that people follow my non-mandatory wish? Are there other COs with odd virtuals that share that experience?


    Suggestions, please!

  5. On 2018-06-23 at 12:20 PM, Brad&Janet said:

    One question at a time. This may take a while :D


    What is a high quality geocache?


    Some like to chase total numbers – the more finds the better.


    I absolutely agree that people are different and the variety is a great asset to the hobby. But that is where power trailing, quantity caching and multiple "filler" caches cause a problem: They fill all available space with same-same-same, they block many great locations with a film canister in a roadsign. And, maybe worst of all, they give a clear signal to beginners that the hobby is really all about the quantity!


    So, should we really promote lack of variety in the name of variety? I have no problem at all with simple caches, as long as they are not same-same-same space fillers, packing identical caches all along all possible routes in an area.

    • Upvote 4
  6. 6 hours ago, º said:

    · Stop discouraging caching purely for the numbers. The current promotion (hidden creatures) is a prime negative example.


    You mean "encouraging", right?


    6 hours ago, º said:

    · Have reviewers for different type of caches (puzzles, power-trails, T5s, ...) who actually understands this category and give useful advice to the less experienced hiders. 


    This is to some extent already the case. I know that earth caches have a separate reviewer here.

  7. On 2018-06-19 at 12:13 AM, Geocaching HQ said:

    What steps can Geocaching HQ take to improve geocache quality?


    One particular issue came to mind: Challenge quality. There were rule changes made for making it easier to review challenges. I understand that, but the result was that (1) many fun and beneficial challenges are no longer allowed and (2) a considerable number of very bad challenges have arrived.


    So what is a good challenge? It is *challenging*. It is a reasonable but not trivial task that you can perform in a limited time. It may also be one that is beneficial for the hobby as a side effect. Great example: Find one of the 10 caches in an area that have not been found in the longest time. Other decent challenges: Find 10 multis in a week. Find at least 6 types in one day. Having done it before accepting the challenge should *not* count!


    And what is a bad challenge? "Look what I have done after caching for 8 years. You can't do that! Ha-ha!" This is what many challenges feel like. Double calendar? Full calendar with multis? That is not a challenge, it is a humiliation against beginners. They get a "challenge" that takes years to complete! Also, those non-challenge challenges are often solved *effortlessly* by experienced cachers. Oh, a new challenge. Click in checker. Done! Not a challenge!


    Challenges should pose a reasonable challenge to *anyone*. Harder for some, easier for some, but not trivial to some and unreasonable for others. Working hard for a challenge for several years is not a challenge, it is *work*. And they should *never* be auto-fulfilled beforehand with no effort. Challenges are *accepted*, then fulfilled. What you did three years ago should not matter.

    • Upvote 1
  8. 8 hours ago, Beultjes said:
    What steps can Geocaching HQ take to improve geocache quality?

    The last souvenir hunts have been about numbers instead of quality. The coming hunt requires 100 caches to be found. That makes people trying to find as many as possible instead of finding one good multicache. Because of trying to find as many instead of trying to find good caches cache owners place rounds with a bonus instead of a nice multicache with a good story.


    I second that! Souvenirs that encourage power trailing are not good for the hobby. They encourage areas packed full with D1.5T1.5 petlings. How about finding caches of varying D/T? Varying types? Sizes?

    • Upvote 1
  9. On 2018-06-19 at 12:13 AM, Geocaching HQ said:


    • In your mind, what is a high quality geocache?

    Anything that has a *point*. Location, gadget cache, high D, high T, beautiful containers, unusual constructions, clever hiding place... doesn't matter which as long as the CO had a *reason* to make it, more than making "just another one".

    • In your mind, what is a low quality geocache?

    Simple same-same-same caches. Several identical trivialities after each other, all alike. Pointless fillers are not good but the worst are the repetitive ones.

    • What steps can the community take to improve geocache quality?

    Use your FPs and use them sensibly, place each FP as recommendation for a specific cache. Give good feedback (not necessarily long, just relevant) to good caches.

    • What steps can Geocaching HQ take to improve geocache quality?

    Not sure. Is there some way to disencourage bad trails? Limit the number of new caches per month? But there are often workarounds for such rules.


  10. Groundspeak,  can you please remember that geocaching is a highly diverse hobby that is not only about quantity? This campaign seems like a power trail promotion to me. I that what you want to promote, quantity?


    I have suggestions for future quests/challenges:


    - Log 10 different D/T combinations in a week. Or 15-20 in a month. 10 is nice, you can do that even on a wheelchair!

    - Log 20 different attributes in a week. Or month.

    - Log one multi every week for a month.


    The numbers are not so important. The diversity and some level of challenge is. One more thing: Make souvenirs interesting. Getting a souvenir for logging one cache is a bit too easy, right? Even for a beginner.


    Just a suggestion.

    • Upvote 7
    • Helpful 1
  11. [potty language removed by moderator.]

    The remainder of the post had no meaning so I remove it. Sorry about the language, it will not happen again.

    • Upvote 1
  12. 5 hours ago, Keystone said:

    Sorry, but no.  A Wherigo cache requires a link to an active cartridge on Wherigo.com; otherwise, it can't be published.  Thanks for your patience during the maintenance window.

    But if it is published as a mystery cache and not a Wherigo?

  13. Intercaching has been suggested to me (see my post from tuesday) but it isn't really in my plan to rebuild my complete and tested Wherigo to an Intercache slightly more than one week before the deadline. I was *done* and now I can't pass the finish line one step ahead...

    I havn't tried Intercaching but from what I understand it is doesn't give much more freedom than Wherigos, right?

  14. Speaking of lack of progress on Wherigos, the documentation is a major point where it is lacking. There are most likely big possibilities that I just don't know how to access.

    And too many Wherigos are junk Wherigos. You can slap one together in Wherigo\\kit in no time at all, but it will be rubbish. With my first, I went far beyond that, and with my second, that I now try to upload, I am still doing things that are sadly uncommon, although basically just using the "inventory" a tiny bit. That shouldn't be hard, and it isn't, but most Wherigos don't touch on even such basic functionality, and that gives the whole concept a bad name.

    And I am still waiting for the compiler to come back. :(

  15. 18 hours ago, Isonzo Karst said:

    A  cache published on Geocaching.com that requires running a Wherigo cart is  a Wherigo, not a Mystery. And the cart must be loaded to Wherigo.com. 

    But does that imply that a Wherigo on another site would be legal as a mystery cache? And, for that matter, programs (e.g. web scripts) that do something similar? Like that... whatever it was called. I don't think it is legal to demand installation of programs on your computer or phone, but running a web script seems fine. And downloading a Wherigo could be, too.

    And now it is tuesday and it still isn't working. :/

  16. This is BAD news for me. I have a working, tested Wherigo that I need to upload for an event in two weeks where I promised to have it ready. It already exists in a compiled version, runs just fine on my phone, tested live in the woods. But I can't upload it!

    Is it possible to get a temporary OK to upload it to my own site, strictly only until HQ gets it together and I can upload it properly? Or are new wherigos simply locked out for an unknown amount of time?

  17. What do you like most about challenge caches?


    I like challenges that encourage me to do something fun, in a limited time. It should be a challenge, but be fair, equally hard for all people. Especially, equally challenging for beginners and experienced alike! They can take some time, but a good challenge should be solved in a handful of challenge-specific cache visits.


    What do you not like about challenge caches?


    Challenges that can be pre-solved if you have been caching long enough. Example: A challenge that requires a full D/T matrix. All experienced geocachers have that, making it a non-accomplishment. No challenge! Those challenges can be extremely hard for beginners. It is unfair when a challenge is pre-solved or trivial for the experienced but can not be solved in a long time (even several years!) for the beginner! As it is now, most (!) challenges are impossible for the beginner and just a D1T1 for the experienced! Unfair, not fun!


    What would you like to see changed about challenge caches?


    Absolutely no more pre-solved challenges! Good challenges should be accepted (a note log is great), and then solved.


    If you could describe your favorite challenge cache type, what would it be?


    The best challenge I have logged was one that required me to list the caches in the region that have been unlogged the longest time, and then find one of them. Specific, can't be pre-solved, does not extend in time. You accept the challenge by listing the current situation and then act on that and solve the problem.


    What types of challenge caches do you avoid?


    Unfair ones! Anything that counts what I have already done. Also all challenges that are too extended in time. Typical avoid: "Full calendar with traditionals" (can take 4 years for a beginner - 8 if you happen to be ill on 29th of february - and ten seconds for the experienced). "365 consecutive days" (again ten seconds for the experienced, plus that it is a typical killer for the beginner, who might try for two months and then decide never to log another cache because it became a must instead of fun.)


    One more thing: I would like some kind of guideline on the D/T rating of challenges. Does it rate the actual hide or the difficulty of the challenge?


    I find the challenge concept very appealing, can be very fun when done right, but as the rules are now, most challenges are annoying black holes on the map.

  • Create New...