Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
TrailGators

Finder Assigned Attribute: The Gong!

Recommended Posts

There has been so must talk about lame caches lately that I had an idea that I thought I would throw out there. :wub:

 

What if we had a Gong button for caches!

It could be kind of like the old Gong Show! :wub:

barris.jpg

So if you found a lame cache you could simply "GONG" it by clicking on a Gong button on the cache page! Then if a cache got 5 GONGS from 5 different "finders" then it gets an official "GONG" attribute! Then you could set your PQs to not download any GONGed caches! :wub:

 

If a cache got "GONG"ed I'm hoping they would archive it and release a better cache! :unsure:

 

I also think GC would have to limit the number of GONGs that each cacher would get so the system would not be abused by some Gong happy people! Maybe you would only be allowed to GONG like 3 caches per month or something like that. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post

There ought to be some kind of reprieve from the GONG if, for instance, your cache stinks because it has been muggled, moved, or otherwise disturbed or downgraded. I mean alot of caches really stink because some moron has put something disgusting in them, or has failed to replace the cache properly. That seems like it might cause a bad cache experience, but can't be attributed to the owner--unless he or she just hasn't made any reasonable effort to maintain it.

Share this post


Link to post
There ought to be some kind of reprieve from the GONG if, for instance, your cache stinks because it has been muggled, moved, or otherwise disturbed or downgraded. I mean alot of caches really stink because some moron has put something disgusting in them, or has failed to replace the cache properly. That seems like it might cause a bad cache experience, but can't be attributed to the owner--unless he or she just hasn't made any reasonable effort to maintain it.
I doubt people are going to waste their limited GONGs on a cache like that! But I agree! If someone has logged a "cache needs maintence" log then the GONG button should disappear! :wub:

Share this post


Link to post

I like the GONG idea. Locally, there are some hiders who consistently put their caches in terrible locations. :unsure:

 

Several I haven't even bothered to look for after driving to the location . . . :wub: Others I won't revisit to resolve a DNF (micro in ivy in busy dog park). Geocaching for me is finding new places. I don't need to ever return to that location . . .

 

A GONG attribute would hopefully alert a hider to the fact that they haven't quite figured out what Geocaching should be.

 

I don't know how to keep the GONG from being abused, like if someone doesn't like someone else, but other than that, I think it is a good idea. thumbsup.gif

Share this post


Link to post

If you gong my cache and I delete your log, will the gong remain? Or will it be a gone gong?

Or is the gong going to be anonymous so the gongers have no accountabilty for their gong?

Share this post


Link to post

Heheh...

 

add9a38e-b10e-4f85-b241-7001c360bb55.jpg

 

I'm sure THAT would go over well.

Share this post


Link to post

If you gong my cache and I delete your log, will the gong remain? Or will it be a gone gong?

Or is the gong going to be anonymous so the gongers have no accountabilty for their gong?

 

Is a gone GONG gone forever? Or is there some kind of permanent GONG record?

 

I don't think there should be anonymous GONG's. If you're going to GONG then you should GONG with pride. :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
If you gong my cache and I delete your log, will the gong remain?

As Led Zeppelin once sang: "The Gong Remains the Same...." :wub:

Edited by TrailGators

Share this post


Link to post

Gong show participants signed up to be heckled. I don't really think the same goes for geocachers listing caches on the site. I'm not Politically-Correct crazy but at the same time I don't think we all need to make people cry like they do on American Idol.

Share this post


Link to post
Gong show participants signed up to be heckled. I don't really think the same goes for geocachers listing caches on the site. I'm not Politically-Correct crazy but at the same time I don't think we all need to make people cry like they do on American Idol.

"There's no crying in ........geocaching!" :unsure: Anyhow, I didn't seriously think this would ever happen because the "GONG" would make some people cry and some already are... :wub:

 

An approach that would work is to have a user assigned attribute that gives a thumbs up to the better caches.... thumbsup.gif

Edited by TrailGators

Share this post


Link to post
Gong show participants signed up to be heckled. I don't really think the same goes for geocachers listing caches on the site. I'm not Politically-Correct crazy but at the same time I don't think we all need to make people cry like they do on American Idol.

"There's no crying in ........geocaching!" :unsure: Anyhow, I didn't seriously think this would ever happen because the "GONG" would make some people cry and some already are... :wub:

 

An approach that would work is to have a user assigned attribute that gives a thumbs up to the better caches.... thumbsup.gif

 

2cdd1951-4e56-4b2d-b457-df9272fb8fe2.jpg

 

It's a cruel world.

Share this post


Link to post

Gong show participants signed up to be heckled. I don't really think the same goes for geocachers listing caches on the site. I'm not Politically-Correct crazy but at the same time I don't think we all need to make people cry like they do on American Idol.

 

Isn't American Idol the most popular show on TV? :wub:

Share this post


Link to post

Gong show participants signed up to be heckled. I don't really think the same goes for geocachers listing caches on the site. I'm not Politically-Correct crazy but at the same time I don't think we all need to make people cry like they do on American Idol.

 

Isn't American Idol the most popular show on TV? :wub:

It is for my wife.... :unsure: I wish they had a Gong for that show too! :wub:

Share this post


Link to post

Gong show participants signed up to be heckled. I don't really think the same goes for geocachers listing caches on the site. I'm not Politically-Correct crazy but at the same time I don't think we all need to make people cry like they do on American Idol.

 

Isn't American Idol the most popular show on TV? :wub:

It is for my wife.... :unsure: I wish they had a Gong for that show too! :wub:

 

There is a great example why a gong system would not work...ones man's trash yadda yadda yadda

Share this post


Link to post

like a small market sports team We take whatever caches we can get here. I think that when it's a cacher's market there must be more to fuss about. Our one micro was recently archived, gladware gets wet but it still takes me places I haven't been before. While puzzles puzzle me I have still managed to, with a little prodding figure out a few. I tend to look at my maps before I go out. If I don't like where it seems to be I don't go.

 

And we already have a gong, past logs. lots of people say things that would make simon blush in their logs.

 

bwmick

Share this post


Link to post

Gong show participants signed up to be heckled. I don't really think the same goes for geocachers listing caches on the site. I'm not Politically-Correct crazy but at the same time I don't think we all need to make people cry like they do on American Idol.

 

Isn't American Idol the most popular show on TV? :wub:

It is for my wife.... :unsure: I wish they had a Gong for that show too! :wub:

 

There is a great example why a gong system would not work...ones man's trash yadda yadda yadda

I meant that the show needs a gong for for some of the contestants........

Anyhow, I know I could find caches that 99% of the people would gong!

Share this post


Link to post

I think it is a dumb idea.

ditto

A large problem with this idea is that everyone's tastes and preferences in caches varies, and what you love about a cache may be what I hate about it, and vice versa. And worse, to compound the problem, we are entering an era where many geoachers brag that they simply download "waypoints" from the GC website to their GPSr, without ever having paid attention to D/T rating nor having read the cache listing page. So yes, such folks are gonna end up in lots of "surprise" situations which they may not like a as result of such practices, and yet why should a cache suffer a GONG hit just because some lame-brain member of the lumpen proletariat failed to read the cache listing description, or failed to look at the D/T rating?

 

There are a few other flaws with this suggestion as well, some related to factors that I have discussed above, and some independent, but I think that I have said enuf for now!

Share this post


Link to post

Heheh...I'm sure THAT would go over well.

Just don't put anything in the description, so the hider ignores it. All the people who want a lameness filter will have it, and nobody will ever know!

 

(Wasn't there something like this a long time ago? I remember some french phrase that was a secret code for "beware - this cache sucks!")

Share this post


Link to post

I think it is a dumb idea.

ditto

A large problem with this idea is that everyone's tastes and preferences in caches varies, and what you love about a cache may be what I hate about it, and vice versa. And worse, to compound the problem, we are entering an era where many geoachers brag that they simply download "waypoints" from the GC website to their GPSr, without ever having paid attention to D/T rating nor having read the cache listing page. So yes, such folks are gonna end up in lots of "surprise" situations which they may not like a as result of such practices, and yet why should a cache suffer a GONG hit just because some lame-brain member of the lumpen proletariat failed to read the cache listing description, or failed to look at the D/T rating?

 

There are a few other flaws with this suggestion as well, some related to factors that I have discussed above, and some independent, but I think that I have said enuf for now!

 

We shouldn't have to read every cache description to figure out if it is totally lame or not! Anyhow, when I say lame I mean LAME. Let's be honest! There are some really lame caches out there and everyone knows it! When I started doing this there weren't any lame caches but now they are spreading like a cancer. Are you telling me that you can't think of one lame cache? So let's do nothing. Let the cancer spread....

Share this post


Link to post

The first "lame" cache that will get the GONG from me was hidden in the ivy, recently sprayed for ants :D, in the back of a parking lot where homeless people regularly get rousted out by city employees. In fact, we were there so long trying to find the 35mm film canister, the people came over to see what we were up to and roust us out of there. :unsure:

 

Another one was a regular-sized container, but it was hidden in a difficult-to-access, dead-end Suburban alley. The "cammo" was an icky black plastic bag. :D When I turned around in the alley, I drove over a deck screw and got a flat tire. :D

 

If I could somehow prevent others from going through what I went through by giving those caches the GONG, I would like to. :o

Share this post


Link to post

"Hey kids, how would you like to go with Dad to find an empty Centrum vitamin bottle behind a fast food restaurant under a lamp post cover near a smelly garbage dumpster?"

 

GONG!!!

Edited by TrailGators

Share this post


Link to post

"Hey kids how would you like to go with Dad to find a film canister near a migrant's home in the woods? There is all kinds of trash there and it's smells like urine. If we are really lucky we might even get to see a pile of human feces!"

 

GONG!!!

Share this post


Link to post

How many gongs do I get to hand out? I'll gong every cache, except my own, in a 50 mile radius. Because no one can hide a cache as well as I can. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
How many gongs do I get to hand out? I'll gong every cache, except my own, in a 50 mile radius. Because no one can hide a cache as well as I can. :unsure:
You only get 5 gongs per year with a premium membership. So only use them on the lamest caches! Edited by TrailGators

Share this post


Link to post

 

We shouldn't have to read every cache description to figure out if it is totally lame or not!

 

I find that reading the cache pages is part of the fun, If you don't want to read them you get what you get. I don't understand how you can assume that every cache will be a wonderful experience. I realize that we cache more often than we do a lot of other things but really... people read the TV quide so they know what shows they want to watch and which ones to avoid. Book reviews so they can find books that might be of interest to them. The cache pages serve the same function. If ya'll don't read them you get what you get and in places with lots of "lame" caches i guess you just play a game of geocachers roulette.

 

bwmick

Share this post


Link to post

 

We shouldn't have to read every cache description to figure out if it is totally lame or not!

 

I find that reading the cache pages is part of the fun, If you don't want to read them you get what you get. I don't understand how you can assume that every cache will be a wonderful experience. I realize that we cache more often than we do a lot of other things but really... people read the TV quide so they know what shows they want to watch and which ones to avoid. Book reviews so they can find books that might be of interest to them. The cache pages serve the same function. If ya'll don't read them you get what you get and in places with lots of "lame" caches i guess you just play a game of geocachers roulette.

 

bwmick

You can't tell it's a lame cache by reading the cache description:

 

Cache X description:

This is is lovely cache located in North County. It is right next to a migrant's home in the woods. Once you arrive a the cache site you will see garbage strewn everywhere and also be greeted by the fresh aroma of urine! Mmmmm! If you are really lucky you might even get to step in some human feces! I hope you enjoy the cache!

Edited by TrailGators

Share this post


Link to post

you are of course right, as I have said earlier I have a much smaller number of caches to hunt in a 50 mile radius than many others. I have found some caches to be less exciting than others but have never been turned away from a cache because it was too nasty. In your above description would you continue in even aftter you saw where it was and the state of evrything around the site or would you back out and write a note warning other cachers away? If you write a note guess what you just gonged the cache. I believe most people read the logs. If they don't they are missing an important aspect of the game.

 

bwmick

 

one the other hand you could search for it and then cito :mad:

Share this post


Link to post
...When I started doing this there weren't any lame caches but now they are spreading like a cancer. Are you telling me that you can't think of one lame cache? So let's do nothing. Let the cancer spread....

Ummm..... Did you forget to add a smiley to your post?

 

Obviously, I don't know what your definition of lame is, but it is a common misconception that all caches were awesome in the before time.

Share this post


Link to post
...When I started doing this there weren't any lame caches but now they are spreading like a cancer. Are you telling me that you can't think of one lame cache? So let's do nothing. Let the cancer spread....

Ummm..... Did you forget to add a smiley to your post?

 

Obviously, I don't know what your definition of lame is, but it is a common misconception that all caches were awesome in the before time.

I made my definition of "lame" very clear. Read the two actual examples I have above.....

Share this post


Link to post
...When I started doing this there weren't any lame caches but now they are spreading like a cancer. Are you telling me that you can't think of one lame cache? So let's do nothing. Let the cancer spread....
Ummm..... Did you forget to add a smiley to your post?

 

Obviously, I don't know what your definition of lame is, but it is a common misconception that all caches were awesome in the before time.

I made my definition of "lame" very clear. Read the two actual examples I have above.....
In that case, 'lame' caches are definitely nothing new.

Share this post


Link to post
you are of course right, as I have said earlier I have a much smaller number of caches to hunt in a 50 mile radius than many others. I have found some caches to be less exciting than others but have never been turned away from a cache because it was too nasty. In your above description would you continue in even aftter you saw where it was and the state of evrything around the site or would you back out and write a note warning other cachers away? If you write a note guess what you just gonged the cache. I believe most people read the logs. If they don't they are missing an important aspect of the game.

 

bwmick

 

one the other hand you could search for it and then cito :mad:

Trust me you do not want to CITO somebody's home! Plus, I would have needed a crew of people to CITO those areas! They are extremely gross. I did write in my logs what I found to warn other cachers. After seeing the reactions to this I am starting to think that the one way the gong idea might work is if only the admins saw the gongs and the gong count. Then the admins could decide which caches need to be archived for the good of the game. I know admins are busy but I'm sure we could get some volunteers to review caches with a lot of gongs! I would volunteer! :(

Share this post


Link to post
...When I started doing this there weren't any lame caches but now they are spreading like a cancer. Are you telling me that you can't think of one lame cache? So let's do nothing. Let the cancer spread....
Ummm..... Did you forget to add a smiley to your post?

 

Obviously, I don't know what your definition of lame is, but it is a common misconception that all caches were awesome in the before time.

I made my definition of "lame" very clear. Read the two actual examples I have above.....
In that case, 'lame' caches are definitely nothing new.

Speak for yourself. It took me a long time to run into one out here. I'm telling the truth.....

Share this post


Link to post
...When I started doing this there weren't any lame caches but now they are spreading like a cancer. Are you telling me that you can't think of one lame cache? So let's do nothing. Let the cancer spread....
Ummm..... Did you forget to add a smiley to your post?

 

Obviously, I don't know what your definition of lame is, but it is a common misconception that all caches were awesome in the before time.

I made my definition of "lame" very clear. Read the two actual examples I have above.....
In that case, 'lame' caches are definitely nothing new.

Speak for yourself. It took me a long time to run into one out here. I'm telling the truth.....

I must have read your post wrong. I didn't realize that you actually typed, 'Until recently, I hadn't happened across a lame cache.'

Share this post


Link to post
...When I started doing this there weren't any lame caches but now they are spreading like a cancer. Are you telling me that you can't think of one lame cache? So let's do nothing. Let the cancer spread....
Ummm..... Did you forget to add a smiley to your post?

 

Obviously, I don't know what your definition of lame is, but it is a common misconception that all caches were awesome in the before time.

I made my definition of "lame" very clear. Read the two actual examples I have above.....
In that case, 'lame' caches are definitely nothing new.

Speak for yourself. It took me a long time to run into one out here. I'm telling the truth.....

I must have read your post wrong. I didn't realize that you actually typed, 'Until recently, I hadn't happened across a lame cache.'

Sorry about that! "Recently" is a vague word. I'll try to be clearer. :mad: In the last year or so, I have noticed that due to cache saturation, that some caches are being put into some very questionable areas (see examples above). They meet all the guidelines but they are very poor or 'lame" places to place a cache. Does that help? :(

Share this post


Link to post
...When I started doing this there weren't any lame caches but now they are spreading like a cancer. Are you telling me that you can't think of one lame cache? So let's do nothing. Let the cancer spread....
Ummm..... Did you forget to add a smiley to your post?

 

Obviously, I don't know what your definition of lame is, but it is a common misconception that all caches were awesome in the before time.

I made my definition of "lame" very clear. Read the two actual examples I have above.....
In that case, 'lame' caches are definitely nothing new.

Speak for yourself. It took me a long time to run into one out here. I'm telling the truth.....

I must have read your post wrong. I didn't realize that you actually typed, 'Until recently, I hadn't happened across a lame cache.'

Sorry about that! "Recently" is a vague word. I'll try to be clearer. :mad: In the last year or so, I have noticed that due to cache saturation, that some caches are being put into some very questionable areas (see examples above). They meet all the guidelines but they are very poor or 'lame" places to place a cache. Does that help? :(

Bunches. Thanks.

 

I'm somewhat jealous that you have only recently become affected by this issue.

Share this post


Link to post

I just had a brilliant idea idea.gif For the past few weeks, I've been playing around with Waymarking. :( To log a Waymark in some of the Categories, you have to include Variable requirements. If you don't include the correct information, some of which can be quite esoteric faint.gif, you get an error message. :laughing: Until you get it right, you cannot submit your Waymark. :mad:

 

What if on the cache submission page there were some Variable dropdown lists you were required to address? These would be more specific than simply checking the boxes for

[ ] Yes. I have read and understand the guidelines for listing a cache.

[ ] Yes. I have read and agree to the terms of use agreement.

One Variable could say:

"Does this location offer the finder a reward in terms of the location?"

Some of the dropdown choices could be:

  • View
  • Waterfall
  • Trailhead
  • Shopping
  • None. . . so why do you want to place a cache there?

Another Variable could say:

"Is the container waterproof and not a 35mm film canister or Gladware container?"

The drop down list could offer:

  • Yes
  • No . . . so why do you want to use that as a container?"

Another Variable could say:

"Is this location safe to visit at night?"

The drop down list could offer:

  • Yes
  • No . . . so why would you want to endanger fellow cachers by putting a cache there?"
  • NA

Another Variable could be: "Is there a homeless habatation nearby?"

The drop down list could say:

  • Yes . . . so why would you want to place a cache there? :anibad:
  • No
  • NA

Maybe that would make people think about their cache placements a little more. :laughing:

 

Since this programing is on Waymarking, something like this shouldn't be too difficult to implement. :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

(Wasn't there something like this a long time ago? I remember some french phrase that was a secret code for "beware - this cache sucks!")

 

Yes....I think it goes something like this: TFTC :mad:

Share this post


Link to post

I just had a brilliant idea idea.gif For the past few weeks, I've been playing around with Waymarking. :( To log a Waymark in some of the Categories, you have to include Variable requirements. If you don't include the correct information, some of which can be quite esoteric faint.gif, you get an error message. :laughing: Until you get it right, you cannot submit your Waymark. :mad:

 

What if on the cache submission page there were some Variable dropdown lists you were required to address? These would be more specific than simply checking the boxes for

[ ] Yes. I have read and understand the guidelines for listing a cache.

[ ] Yes. I have read and agree to the terms of use agreement.

One Variable could say:

"Does this location offer the finder a reward in terms of the location?"

Some of the dropdown choices could be:

  • View
  • Waterfall
  • Trailhead
  • Shopping
  • None. . . so why do you want to place a cache there?

Another Variable could say:

"Is the container waterproof and not a 35mm film canister or Gladware container?"

The drop down list could offer:

  • Yes
  • No . . . so why do you want to use that as a container?"

Another Variable could say:

"Is this location safe to visit at night?"

The drop down list could offer:

  • Yes
  • No . . . so why would you want to endanger fellow cachers by putting a cache there?"
  • NA

Another Variable could be: "Is there a homeless habatation nearby?"

The drop down list could say:

  • Yes . . . so why would you want to place a cache there? :angry:
  • No
  • NA

Maybe that would make people think about their cache placements a little more. :laughing:

 

Since this programing is on Waymarking, something like this shouldn't be too difficult to implement. :laughing:

 

Great idea!!! Email me when it gets implemented....will you? :anibad::mad::angry:

Share this post


Link to post

I just had a brilliant idea idea.gif For the past few weeks, I've been playing around with Waymarking. :( To log a Waymark in some of the Categories, you have to include Variable requirements. If you don't include the correct information, some of which can be quite esoteric faint.gif, you get an error message. :laughing: Until you get it right, you cannot submit your Waymark. :mad:

 

What if on the cache submission page there were some Variable dropdown lists you were required to address? These would be more specific than simply checking the boxes for

[ ] Yes. I have read and understand the guidelines for listing a cache.

[ ] Yes. I have read and agree to the terms of use agreement.

One Variable could say:

"Does this location offer the finder a reward in terms of the location?"

Some of the dropdown choices could be:

  • View
  • Waterfall
  • Trailhead
  • Shopping
  • None. . . so why do you want to place a cache there?

Another Variable could say:

"Is the container waterproof and not a 35mm film canister or Gladware container?"

The drop down list could offer:

  • Yes
  • No . . . so why do you want to use that as a container?"

Another Variable could say:

"Is this location safe to visit at night?"

The drop down list could offer:

  • Yes
  • No . . . so why would you want to endanger fellow cachers by putting a cache there?"
  • NA

Another Variable could be: "Is there a homeless habatation nearby?"

The drop down list could say:

  • Yes . . . so why would you want to place a cache there? :laughing:
  • No
  • NA

Maybe that would make people think about their cache placements a little more. :laughing:

 

Since this programing is on Waymarking, something like this shouldn't be too difficult to implement. :anibad:

 

This type of info is about the only way to make ratings useful. You can find the best of the waterfall caches, or all the hiking caches.

 

As for the OP since I've placed intensionally bad caches, I'd take the GONG as a compliment, at least on those caches. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post

I wish my TV had a gong button.

I'd get me one of them drinking birds and set it up to peck away at it ALLLL day long.

Share this post


Link to post
As for the OP since I've placed intensionally bad caches, I'd take the GONG as a compliment, at least on those caches. :mad:
I think your thick-skin and good attitude are not so common these days! :( I know we would have many people crying if this idea were ever implemented. Unfortunately there so many people that are incredibly thin-skinned these days. The idea was meant to provide a way to get rid of very undesirable caches. But I can see now that the only way this idea would ever fly is if the gongs were only visible to the admins. The admins could sort out the local caches in order by ones with the most gongs and then ask trusted volunteers to check out the top vote getters. I'm sure they would find that many of them should be moved or archived! Anyhow, if this alternative idea was implemented, you would have a trusted fair impartial judge making the final decisions. I'm not sure how that process could be abused or offensive to anyone.....

Share this post


Link to post
As for the OP since I've placed intensionally bad caches, I'd take the GONG as a compliment, at least on those caches. :mad:
I think your thick-skin and good attitude are not so common these days! :( I know we would have many people crying if this idea were ever implemented. Unfortunately there so many people that are incredibly thin-skinned these days. The idea was meant to provide a way to get rid of very undesirable caches. But I can see now that the only way this idea would ever fly is if the gongs were only visible to the admins. The admins could sort out the local caches in order by ones with the most gongs and then ask trusted volunteers to check out the top vote getters. I'm sure they would find that many of them should be moved or archived! Anyhow, if this alternative idea was implemented, you would have a trusted fair impartial judge making the final decisions. I'm not sure how that process could be abused or offensive to anyone.....

If you want the admins to archive a cache that you think is undesirable, why don't you just log an SBA on the cache?

Share this post


Link to post
As for the OP since I've placed intensionally bad caches, I'd take the GONG as a compliment, at least on those caches. :mad:
I think your thick-skin and good attitude are not so common these days! :( I know we would have many people crying if this idea were ever implemented. Unfortunately there so many people that are incredibly thin-skinned these days. The idea was meant to provide a way to get rid of very undesirable caches. But I can see now that the only way this idea would ever fly is if the gongs were only visible to the admins. The admins could sort out the local caches in order by ones with the most gongs and then ask trusted volunteers to check out the top vote getters. I'm sure they would find that many of them should be moved or archived! Anyhow, if this alternative idea was implemented, you would have a trusted fair impartial judge making the final decisions. I'm not sure how that process could be abused or offensive to anyone.....

If you want the admins to archive a cache that you think is undesirable, why don't you just log an SBA on the cache?

Because then it's just my opinion. The idea was to get a consensus.

 

Edit: Plus we can do it that way now and nobody ever does. But that's understandable because most people don't like being the bad guy! :laughing:

Edited by TrailGators

Share this post


Link to post
As for the OP since I've placed intensionally bad caches, I'd take the GONG as a compliment, at least on those caches. :mad:
I think your thick-skin and good attitude are not so common these days! :( I know we would have many people crying if this idea were ever implemented. Unfortunately there so many people that are incredibly thin-skinned these days. The idea was meant to provide a way to get rid of very undesirable caches. But I can see now that the only way this idea would ever fly is if the gongs were only visible to the admins. The admins could sort out the local caches in order by ones with the most gongs and then ask trusted volunteers to check out the top vote getters. I'm sure they would find that many of them should be moved or archived! Anyhow, if this alternative idea was implemented, you would have a trusted fair impartial judge making the final decisions. I'm not sure how that process could be abused or offensive to anyone.....

If you want the admins to archive a cache that you think is undesirable, why don't you just log an SBA on the cache?

The thing about the GONG attribute is that it would have to be received by a particular cache several times, submitted by different cachers, before a Reviewer would be notified. Maybe after five GONGS, an SBA would be automatically sent to the Reviewer. Then they could look into the problems with the cache.

 

An example: Last week I went to a cache hidden in someone's front yard. There were stinky garbage cans in the driveway and the noisy trash truck was coming up the narrow alleyway. Plus, even though the cache was rated a 1/1, I couldn't find it. Any cache rated a '1' for Difficulty should practically be in plain sight.

 

I had a terrible experience at that cache, but that doesn't mean it deserves an SBA. However, I could give it a GONG. If four more cachers also feel uncomfortable searching in that location and also believe it is a "lame" cache and give it a GONG, then the cache owner can be notified by the Reviewer to either improve, move, or Archive their cache.

Share this post


Link to post
As for the OP since I've placed intensionally bad caches, I'd take the GONG as a compliment, at least on those caches. :unsure:
I think your thick-skin and good attitude are not so common these days! :unsure: I know we would have many people crying if this idea were ever implemented. Unfortunately there so many people that are incredibly thin-skinned these days. The idea was meant to provide a way to get rid of very undesirable caches. But I can see now that the only way this idea would ever fly is if the gongs were only visible to the admins. The admins could sort out the local caches in order by ones with the most gongs and then ask trusted volunteers to check out the top vote getters. I'm sure they would find that many of them should be moved or archived! Anyhow, if this alternative idea was implemented, you would have a trusted fair impartial judge making the final decisions. I'm not sure how that process could be abused or offensive to anyone.....

If you want the admins to archive a cache that you think is undesirable, why don't you just log an SBA on the cache?

Because then it's just my opinion. The idea was to get a consensus.

 

Edit: Plus we can do it that way now and nobody ever does. But that's understandable because most people don't like being the bad guy! :blink:

But if 5 or 6 people log SBA's wouldn't that be the same as your gongs?

Having it be viewable only to the admins makes them out to be the bad guys ("Everyone who's gone to my cache likes it. The admin hates me so he archived my cache and is just saying that it was gonged."). They already take enough abuse for a job they don't get paid to do.

Share this post


Link to post
As for the OP since I've placed intensionally bad caches, I'd take the GONG as a compliment, at least on those caches. :unsure:
I think your thick-skin and good attitude are not so common these days! :unsure: I know we would have many people crying if this idea were ever implemented. Unfortunately there so many people that are incredibly thin-skinned these days. The idea was meant to provide a way to get rid of very undesirable caches. But I can see now that the only way this idea would ever fly is if the gongs were only visible to the admins. The admins could sort out the local caches in order by ones with the most gongs and then ask trusted volunteers to check out the top vote getters. I'm sure they would find that many of them should be moved or archived! Anyhow, if this alternative idea was implemented, you would have a trusted fair impartial judge making the final decisions. I'm not sure how that process could be abused or offensive to anyone.....

If you want the admins to archive a cache that you think is undesirable, why don't you just log an SBA on the cache?

The thing about the GONG attribute is that it would have to be received by a particular cache several times, submitted by different cachers, before a Reviewer would be notified. Maybe after five GONGS, an SBA would be automatically sent to the Reviewer. Then they could look into the problems with the cache.

 

An example: Last week I went to a cache hidden in someone's front yard. There were stinky garbage cans in the driveway and the noisy trash truck was coming up the narrow alleyway. Plus, even though the cache was rated a 1/1, I couldn't find it. Any cache rated a '1' for Difficulty should practically be in plain sight.

 

I had a terrible experience at that cache, but that doesn't mean it deserves an SBA. However, I could give it a GONG. If four more cachers also feel uncomfortable searching in that location and also believe it is a "lame" cache and give it a GONG, then the cache owner can be notified by the Reviewer to either improve, move, or Archive their cache.

An SBA does not automatically mean that the cache will be archived. It means that a reviewer will look into it. If you SBA'd that cache, the reviewer could work with the owner to get the problem resolved with the first complaint rather than waiting until there were five complaints and then it being brought to their attention.

I still have the problem with accountability. Will the cache owner know who is making the complaint against their cache? An SBA is right there for everyone to see, whereas a gong would not be.

Share this post


Link to post
As for the OP since I've placed intensionally bad caches, I'd take the GONG as a compliment, at least on those caches. :unsure:
I think your thick-skin and good attitude are not so common these days! :unsure: I know we would have many people crying if this idea were ever implemented. Unfortunately there so many people that are incredibly thin-skinned these days. The idea was meant to provide a way to get rid of very undesirable caches. But I can see now that the only way this idea would ever fly is if the gongs were only visible to the admins. The admins could sort out the local caches in order by ones with the most gongs and then ask trusted volunteers to check out the top vote getters. I'm sure they would find that many of them should be moved or archived! Anyhow, if this alternative idea was implemented, you would have a trusted fair impartial judge making the final decisions. I'm not sure how that process could be abused or offensive to anyone.....

If you want the admins to archive a cache that you think is undesirable, why don't you just log an SBA on the cache?

Because then it's just my opinion. The idea was to get a consensus.

 

Edit: Plus we can do it that way now and nobody ever does. But that's understandable because most people don't like being the bad guy! :blink:

But if 5 or 6 people log SBA's wouldn't that be the same as your gongs?

Having it be viewable only to the admins makes them out to be the bad guys ("Everyone who's gone to my cache likes it. The admin hates me so he archived my cache and is just saying that it was gonged."). They already take enough abuse for a job they don't get paid to do.

Rather than argue this point. I think we can agree that nobody likes to be the bad guy. So another idea would be to have the system send (after 5 gongs) an automated email notifying the person that concerns about this cache have been raised by several cachers in the area and that he should take care of the cache or archive it.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

×
×
  • Create New...