Search the Community

I think we may have a difference of opinion on the definition of harder. To me, harder implies effort. Time is not a factor. I can lift a 1kg weight in one second. I can also lift a 10kg weight in one second. So, if the length of time were the definition, these tasks are equally hard. But most would say that lifting 10kg is ten times as hard as lifting 1kg. IMO, comparing a one year streak to the OP's challenge is like comparing apples to oranges. Yes, they are both fruit but beyond that, not much in common. A streak compared to the OP's challenge does have finding other caches in common. The streak will take a year. The OP's challenge does not have a length of time commitment. The streak requires caching every day for that year. The number of total caches is very different, 365 versus 66. The streak does not have a geographical (country) requirement.

I've seen people do all kinds of crazy things to make their stats look better. One of the silliest was the quest to log at least one cache a day to complete a 365 day challenge. I know at least one person that'd find several caches in a day but save some to log on days they didn't go caching. Didn't hurt me any but it still gave me the opportunity to give them the ole eyeroll when they bragged about completing the challenge. To the OP, you can do it the way you like. Just keep in mind that it may look funny to you later because you'd know it wasn't really your 1100th milestone. If stats are important to you, and you want them to be accurate, then you should probably just log it in the order you got it. Use this as a learning experience to plan ahead for your 1200th milestone.

So you expect these Volunteers to be available 24/7/365 to monitor the traveling cache? I am happy when my reviewer can approve a new cache placement in a couple days. You are expecting way too much from the Reviewers.

Not a lurker ... trying not to be one? Fairly new to forums though and same as CheekyBrit, I search out my Qs to avoid repetition! Fam and I are in Ontario, Canada and love to get out and explore new areas. We have two littles in tow, so often go after easier/traditional caches because they hold their attention more. Goals include: - 365 challenge - Getting the EarthCache badges - Finding a cache in every province and state (and beyond) - Learn how to fully utilize my GPS beyond the beginner basics - Meet more cachers!

Lasst euch nicht einreden, so wie ihr die „Challenge“ formuliert habt, beschreibt ihr euch auf keinen Fall. Ihr wollt jeden Tag eine Dose loggen, nirgendwo habt Ihr geschrieben, dass er jeden Tag eine Dose suchen und finden wollt. Nur zu, hab Spaß daran und fühlt euch gut! Solange ihr dann später nicht behauptet, dass ihr an jedem Tag 365 Tage im Jahr einen Cache gefunden habt, habe ich da überhaupt keine Probleme mit.

Jo, bescheiß dich ruhig selber. Kannst auch einfach bei 365 schon gefundenen nachträglich das Datum ändern. Macht weniger Arbeit und kommt aufs gleiche raus. Viel Spaß Irgendwie hab ich den leisen Eindruck das hier nur jemand derbe Reaktionen provozieren mag

I have a theory that might explain part of this: If a number of cachers only cache at a specific time of the year (for example during a yearly holiday), then this sort of phenomenon will show up in the numbers. (Although I described it as career length yesterday, it is important to realize that the numbers include all currently active cachers as well. So not all of them have actually stopped.) A fixed yearly caching spree is the only mechanism I can think of that will force a cacher's first and last finds to be at discrete intervals. I still can't explain why it is not 365 days. Maybe it is just noise in the data (although the peaks appear to be quite clear).

Hahahaha! thanks for the laugh this A.M. We neither of us have smart phones. Have stupid ones for emergencies. One of us used to work for the Bell System (remember that? AT&T before it became AT&T oh, so many light years ago), and worked in the international division. Think 'tethered to a land line 27/7/365' for decades. Working holidays, working crazy hours. No real interest in having anything that resembles that scenario again! And remember the techn-saur bit? That's us. No TV, either. Though yes, a computer. You have all be so! helpful and welcoming. We appreciate it. Going to try to create a new folder and move current caches to old one. Am sure we'll have a zillion more questions.

I maintain a series of bookmark lists for Lonely Caches in Florida. For those unfamiliar, a Lonely Cache has zero Found logs during the past year (365 days). To keep things simple for myself, I update the lists at the end of the year. So the update I'm doing right now will feature all Florida caches not found during calendar year 2018. Updating the list requires a time consuming process outlined here. Short version: use the old search to bring up all caches within the state, sort by Last Found, then download lots of LOCs (updated in GSAK). To make matters more difficult, geocaching.com now has reCaptcha meaning that I keep having to prove to the website that I am not a bot as I download hundreds of caches thus slowing down an already slow process. It's rather unfortunate that I'm trying to do a good deed for the geocaching community and now I have extra hurdles in the way. Pocket Queries are not an alternative as they only allow for querying via Placed Date, not Found Date. Also, keep in mind there are over 41,000 active cache listings in Florida. Does anyone have a suggestion on a better way I might go about doing this? Something through Project-GC or a similiar site using the API?

Following up on NYPaddleCacher's post, I agree that there two styles of play. However, a cacher may be one style today, and another tomorrow. It has to do with why they are going geocaching today. When I'm with the grandkids, I want to find large containers with good swag. If I am doing a reward trail, I want great containers, great locations, and well maintained caches. If I am trying for a challenge like the 365/366 day challenge, pretty much any cache will do. Searching for caches to complete a Jasmer challenge is another kind of search. If I am traveling across the country, I may seek out Virtual and Earthcaches. In other words, what is a quality cache candidate to me could change daily, or even hourly. Each reason has specific search criteria, some easier to do than others. I would like to see GS make finding relevant caches easier. Most of these searches are straight-forward, the problem is more with the data I am searching, with the biggest issue being inconsistent application of attributes. I would like to see crowd-sourced attributes. Allow for attribute corrections to be 'suggested' by loggers. If enough people suggest that the cache description should have the 'restroom nearby' attribute, then it would be added to the cache description. It should also work for removing attributes. A few new attributes would be useful, such as a power trail attribute. There are also some that could probably be eliminated.

Bissle inkonsequent, oder . Wer paranoid ist, dürfte dann konsequenter weise auch nicht loggen! Das lassen sich ja prima Bewegungsprofile erstellen... Grundsätzlich finde ich meine Statistik, und die meiner Caches, sehr interessant. Vor allem die Ausführliche von Project-GC. Aber weder die 81er Matrix oder 365 Tage Statistik interessieren mich. Gruß, Daniel

QUESTION about trackable statistics on Geocaching.com Hello everybody. Unfortunately, after my GSAK database has completely evaporated, I have to track my logged trackables manually. Hereby I noticed a difference in the statistics on Geocaching.com which unfortunately does not open to me at the moment. In my statistics on Geocaching.com 1990 trackables are listed as "have found". To see when I click on my overview of "Trackables (Deine)" and then in the right box on "have found". But if I go to "Discovered it" on the same overview page, this results in a number of 2265 TB's. Is not a big difference but still 365 pcs. What is the difference to the official statistics in 1990Stk. The other 365pcs. I also logged and discovered. Why is the statistics different here? Do I have to manually adjust the 2265 now to get the missing 365 pieces out and then somehow log them? I'm really confused Sorry. Would be grateful for explanations. Also, any new TB that I as a "discovered logge" does not increase my total number of 1990 pieces? Ok, if I go to "All Logs" I come to just under 5,000. But it is also clear then my own TB's which I logged as visited on some caches also counted here. Interesting is actually but the difference of the listed TB's in my statistics from 1990 pieces in my profile to the 2266 listed as a discovered TB's under "discovered it". I actually think that the "discovered it" and the list in the list "list trackable items you own or have found" under "have found" should be the same. Or when is a TB counted in the statistics? My 1990 somehow does not change anymore !?

FRAGE zu Trackable Statistik auf GC.com Hallo Zusammen. Nachdem meine GSAK Datenbank ja leider komplett abgeraucht ist muss ich nun meine geloggten Trackables leider händisch nachführen. Dabei ist mir nun ein Unterschied in der Statistik aufgefallen auf GC.com der sich mir leider nicht erschließt derzeit. In meiner Statistik auf GC.com sind 1990 Trackables als „have found“ gelistet. Zu sehen wenn ich bei meiner Übersicht über „Trackables (Deine)“ und dann im rechten Feld auf „have found“ klicke. Gehe ich aber nun auf der gleichen Übersichtsseite auf „Discovered it“ ergibt sich eine Anzahl von 2265 TB’s. Ist kein Großer Unterschied aber dennoch immerhin 365 Stk. Was ist hier der Unterschied zu den offiziell in der Statistik geführten 1990Stk. Die anderen 365Stk. habe ich doch auch geloggt und entdeckt. Warum unterscheidet sich hier die Statistik? Muss ich jetzt die 2265 auch noch händisch abgleichen um die fehlenden 365 Stk. herauszubekommen und die dann irgendwie nachloggen? Bin grad echt verwirrt Sorry. Wäre für Erklärungen dankbar. Zudem jeder neue TB den ich als „discovered logge“ erhöht nicht meine Gesamtanzahl von 1990 Stück?

I think we all agree that the "Challenge" in the title "solution" is a hack. The observation is that it is a solution, not that it's a better solution than a new type. I'm not sure I'd call it "resistance". What I see are people discussing the various problems with implementing it because it's a change. I don't see anyone arguing that it wouldn't have been the correct solution if GS had thought of it from the start. You got a response that talked about other challenges, but I've always assumed that if they added a challenge type, it would be a subtype of the existing unknown cache type, so I can't imagine that it would change a challenge cache from being an unknown type to some other type. And even if it did change the base type, while that would cause some annoying glitches in meeting some challenge requirements, I don't think it's enough of a problem to worry about. If a CO isn't sympathetic to that problem, I'd be more worried about that CO's attitude than the fact that someone somewhere couldn't claim a find on a 365 day mystery cache challenge. The more likely problem is that the new type causes some GPSrs to crash or fail in other ways that make the new type interfere with people's geocaching. I'm particularly sympathetic to that concern since my GPSr's software hasn't been maintained for years, so if anyone would have an unavoidable, unfixable problem with a new attribute, it would be me. But it turns out I'm not really worried about it. If someone seriously started saying there'd be a new type, I might fake a text .GPX file just to see what happens, but I'm kinda hoping GS would do that first. But in the end, if I found a problem with my GPSr, I wouldn't necessarily think that one problem would be enough to reject the idea. My guess is that the only issues will be in map icons, since a new type would not have a defined icon. I kinda suspect a new cache type would result in the cache not being displayed on the map because it would not have an icon to map it to. If that's what happens, that means that Challenge Caches which I can now see on the map wouldn't show up anymore. So that would be a negative, at least for me, since I do want to find challenge caches. Other people might consider than an advantage. ? I actually don't have any idea whether they'd change existing types. It's true that there's no precedence, but I also don't think there's been a similar situation. But never mind that: let's assume it's true that they wouldn't change old cache types, that just leads to the other part of the argument against a new type: if it doesn't include challenge caches that already exist, what's the point? It's the challenge caches that already exist that people want to filter out. If only new challenge caches are given this new type, it's almost not worth the effort since it would take years before we could filter out a significant fraction of challenge caches by type.

If you did a 365 day streak mystery challenge, and a CO deleted your find on the challenge cache because a cache that you found (when it was a mystery) cache was changed to a "challenge cache" I would take it appeals, where I am almost certain GS would tell the CO to let your log stand. I suppose that if you were working on a 365 day mystery, and had targetted a bunch of mystery caches that became challenge caches that you might have to work a little harder to complete that challenge, but the benefit being able to look at a map and easily distinguish between a puzzle cache and a challenge cache and the ability to create a pocket query of filter a search such that it only shows challenge caches (but not puzzles) far outweighs the inconvenience it may cause to someone that chooses to take on a challenge.

It would invalidate some challenges one have already qualified. For example 365 day mystery cache streak.

OK I found my real numbers. >= 365 days: 194 caches, total = 357 years >= 180 days: 454 caches, total = 537.6 years

I am at something close to 200 lonely for 365+ days now, with a total (IIRC) of around 450 years; I will have to re-check tonight. I love finding lonely caches. My longest are 2 that were a little over 5 years lonely each; I have friends who have found 8+ years lonely caches, but I have not been so fortunate.

Byłbym za drastycznym ograniczeniem znaczków, przypinek, tabelek, statystyk... Tja... już to widzę... Zatraca się chyba główny cel TEJ zabawy. Tak jak pisałem wcześniej: Na tatami to można zdobyć kolorowy pas. I tego się trzymajmy. Bo sama idea "kolorowych pasów" na bank wzięła się ze wschodnich sztuk walk, którymi zachwycili się oglądacze Bruca Lee czy innych "karacistów" ... Niestety ogromna liczba ludzi ciągnie jakieś ciągi "365 dni ze znalezieniami", a aby to osiągnąć (czytaj: zdobyć sprawność czy oznakę) gotowi są tworzyć jakieś potworki keszowe typu: "liczymydotysiąca", gdzie kesze to mikrus w mało atrakcyjnym miejscu, bądź w miejscach gdzie był już kesz tego ownera, ale został przez niego celowo, lub nie, zarchiwizowany w celu powstania nowego numerka do zaliczenia. Nawet pojemniki często zostają te same. Zmienia się tylko logbook. (patrz: GC7R55Q ) I w ten sposób można znowu zmienić "buźkę" na mapie, doliczyć punkcik, czy kontynuować zabawę "365 bez przerwy". A ja naiwny, chciałbym, jadąc w teren mi nieznany, spotykać same warte zobaczenia (i znalezienia-zaliczenia) kesze w miejscach naprawdę wartościowych. Jak odsiać ziarno od plew w nieznanym terenie...?

I don't remember why I started my largest streak, maybe it was a small challenge cache, but originally, I only wanted to do 100 days. But as that time was nearly up, I thought "that wasn't hard," and I was enjoying it more than I thought I would. So, I decided to go for 180 days instead of quitting. As I approached my 180-day goal, I thought that I needed to beat my longest slump which was and still is 265 days. I was really enjoying getting up earlier than normal, 5:30 a.m., so that I could get to work on time and not interfere with family time. I was really enjoying the dark quietness of my searches, before the noise of heavy traffic and joggers were about. As fall and winter approached I had to use a flashlight. Even though most of these finds were urban rather than forest mountain hikes, it was very serene and even spiritual. As I approached the goal of beating my slump, I thought "what the heck," I decided to go for a full 365 which of course needs to be 366 for some old challenges. But once that neared, I was enjoying myself so much, that I just kept going, although I was finding myself driving farther out of the way on the way to work. Although I did enjoy it so much, some days were tough. There were a handful of days (not many) that I couldn't find one before work, and had to find one on the way home. I did eventually quit at 420 days, a nice round number, 60 weeks exactly, and 14 (30-day) months. I decided intentionally to not find a cache the next day. I actually felt naughty. On most days, I still try to find a cache before work, but if I DNF, that's OK. I don't HAVE to find one anymore. But it is an experience, that I really enjoyed and am glad I did it.

I'm reading this thread with interest, as I am currently on day 145, with a goal of a cache-a-day in 2018. We (hubby and I) started geocaching in March 2017, cached for the enjoyment we got out of fully sharing a hobby with our son and daughter in law (we'd been peripherally involved, but didn't have our own accounts or actually gone out on our own) and were not in it for the numbers or challenges or any of that. As our find count grew, we started exploring Earthcaches, Puzzles, Virtuals, Multi caches, and very recently Wherigo's. We found a cache on the last day of 2017 and the first day of 2018 for the souvenir, just because. And then we thought it would be fun to try and find a cache every day in 2018. We set a goal, and most days we go together; there are days when we have to go individually and find a cache. There are lots of caches around us, with new ones being published daily. We haven't really had a problem with not having any close enough to find. There's a challenge cache for filling the 365 day grid; we should get that done by Dec. 30 this year. 366 will have to wait till 2020. And there's a 400 day challenge that we might just go for once we get to 12/31 - as that will be 367 consecutive days, so what's another 33 days? But we may decide to end it on December 31. We'll see how we feel then. Right now, it's still fun, and challenging. And if life happens and we don't make our goal, we'll keep on caching and say, oh well. In the meantime, it's nice to wake and ask where we are going to go find a cache today?

My cache streak of a whopping 25 days is purely un-intentional. My decision to stop a streak started before it began. I saw a streak challenge cache and said 'no way'. No fun in it. (And expensive, and a waste of time in transit.) So, I have never attempted a streak. Also, while there are lots of caches around me, most are completely uninteresting. I prefer a different set of challenges, challenges like filling my 365/366 day calendar. If that means getting one a day for a while, I might do it then. But not just to reach some arbitrary number.

My longest streak is 48 days, and that was long ago, in 2010. I was then (and still am now) a very regular cacher, going on tour essentially every(!) weekend, and finding a cache during the week (before or after work) typically on at least 2 days. But I quickly realized that finding a cache on each and every day is not for me. Family time, long working days, terrible weather, low number of unfound caches in my home zone ... after about 40 days I more or less had enough. I couldn't persuade myself to simply quit the streak here and now, but I defined a very near-term target where I would definitely end it. I chose to complete the current month (giving me my first, and still only, calendar month with a find on each day). That was it, any I never tried to do a streak ever since. Not even during "Souvenir August" (when I found it both amusing and slightly irritating to see to what lengths other cachers may go if they just have to get every souvenir ). Bottom line: When you realize, that it's really no fun anymore, set a short-term cut-off date (next "round" number, or whatever), enjoy the last few days of the streak ... and look forward to the future, where geocaching is leisure-time hobby and not an obligation for 365 days a year .

New challenge caches can require a streak up to 365 days: https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=127&pgid=206 But when the guidelines for challenge caches were changed, older challenge caches that required longer streaks were grandfathered. I stopped my streak at 366 days because I had seen 366 day challenge caches, but the next "level" that I had seen was a fairly significant jump above that.