Finds to Founds ratio

[+The HERB5]

After 3 years of caching and NOT setting any caches, I decided to set some.

 

Would it be reasonable to have as many Finds as the number of times you own caches have been Found.

 

If so, I've got a bit of catching up to do...

[+Jonovich]

After 3 years of caching and NOT setting any caches, I decided to set some.

 

Would it be reasonable to have as many Finds as the number of times you own caches have been Found.

 

If so, I've got a bit of catching up to do...

 

Erm... I think it would be reasonable to do whatever the heck you like... Doesn't make a blind bit of difference to anything. Set one, if you enjoy it, set some more. If not, archive it and stick to finding. Basically, whatever floats your boat. It's your life, you live it! If you want to please the masses, then I'd give up now, coz it ain't gonna happen.

 

I've set a few, adopted a couple and found a few. If I didn't enjoy any of it, I wouldn't do it.

 

J

[+Renegade Knight]

...Would it be reasonable to have as many Finds as the number of times you own caches have been Found....

 

If you can maintain them. Yes. If you can't, you should probably stop at the number you can maintain.

[+Amberel]

After 3 years of caching and NOT setting any caches, I decided to set some.

 

Would it be reasonable to have as many Finds as the number of times you own caches have been Found.

 

If so, I've got a bit of catching up to do...

This comes up quite regularly.

 

You find caches if you want to find caches.

 

You set caches if you want to set caches. I would suggest that setting caches because you feel obliged to is a very bad reason to set them.

 

It is totally pointless doing any comparisons - actually, it's worse than that, it's detrimental to the game. The number of hits you get will depend largely on where you live and what sort of caches you put out. If you put out a ring of very easy caches in the south east, you will get lots of hits. If you take the same amount of time to put out a well thought out, but long and difficult multi, you will only get a few hits. But you can't say that the ring of easy caches is "better" than the difficult multi. Most of us value a variety of caches, but if we rate cachers simply on the number of "hits" their caches get, we will end up with only easy caches.

 

There are plenty of people who like placing caches, and we have no shortage of new ones. If you WANT to place some caches, great, just don't do it because you feel you ought to.

 

Rgds, Andy

[+dino-irl]

I think the OP is referring to having as many people log a find on one of your caches as the number of found logs you have on other people's? It's also referred to as "Cache Karma" and the GSAK stats macro calculates this for you. If you check my (slightly out of date!) profile you'll see it about halfway down the stats under "Owned Cache Statistics"

Edited September 20, 2008 by dino-irl

[+Amberel]

I think the OP is referring to having as many people log a find on one of your caches as the number of found logs you have on other people's? It's also referred to as "Cache Karma" and the GSAK stats macro calculates this for you. If you check my (slightly out of date!) profile you'll see it about halfway down the stats under "Owned Cache Statistics"

Yes, I realised that, and was trying to point out why this statistic was just as pointless as any other.

 

Edited to make it clearer: stats themselves are fine, it's the comparison of stats that is meaningless (and this ratio involves comparison).

 

Rgds, Andy

Edited September 20, 2008 by Amberel

[Deceangi]

Personally I'd say the Finds to Maintenance on owned caches is the most important stat!

 

Needs Maintenance log-Cache Disabled/10 finds/maintenance visit is ok [as long as those finds are not spaced out over a extended period]

 

Needs Maintenance log-Cache Disabled/100-200 finds/No maintenance visit is not acceptable. And you run the risk that the cache is Archived for Non Maintenance.

 

Needs Maintenance log-Cache Disabled/100- 200 finds/No maintenance visit/ New Cache Submitted you might just find the Reviewer refuses to publish the cache on the grounds that your unable to maintain your current caches, until all maintenance issues are dealt with.

 

Deceangi

[+JeremyR]

This comes up quite regularly.

So frequently in fact that it was last discussed in depth less than a week ago...