ALR or Challenge cache:

2.3k · May 30, 2009

Due to the explosion of challenge caches lately I made one that went a little against the grain: The Anti Challenge Challenge.

The validity of it as a challenge has been brought into question. I'd like to get input on it from the rank & file. Any reviewer opinions would also be more than welcome of course. It was published before the new guidelines were put into place and was meant to be tongue in cheek. Mostly. :blink:

1.5k · May 30, 2009

Reviewer response here - it's an ALR, and not a Challenge as currently defined by the listing guidelines.

7.9k · May 30, 2009

Hmmm.

It doesn't really seem to be an ALR, since the requirements preceed the finding part.

On the other hand, it really seems unfair to require finders to not have done something they might enjoy doing before they knew that doing it would exclude them from logging this cache.

Kind of like a 'challenge cache' that requires finders to have less than {some number} of finds.

May 30, 2009

To me it would seem a challenge would require you to do something to qualify. There is no way to take any action to qualify for this one, it only excludes some cachers for having found certain caches. So in my very ordinary non-reviewer opinion that is an ALR.

PS I didn't follow the no-ALR threads closely so I may have missed the answer to this: Would a non-premium member only cache be deemed an ALR? This cache reminds me of that sort of exclusion.

1.4k · May 30, 2009

I don't believe it's either one but if I had to side one way or the other, I'd go with ALR on odd numbered days and Challenge on even days. Today is the 29th so I vote ALR cache.

I'll check back in tomorrow.

Edited May 30, 2009 by BadAndy

2k · May 30, 2009

It's an ALR.

2k · May 30, 2009

(snip)
PS I didn't follow the no-ALR threads closely so I may have missed the answer to this: Would a non-premium member only cache be deemed an ALR? This cache reminds me of that sort of exclusion.

A non-PMO cache is an ALR.

1.5k · May 30, 2009

Challenge caches require a finder to have met a reasonable geocaching-related qualification.

Something which is geocaching related, but entirely exclusionary as a precondition, such as never finding a Challenge cache, not owning a micro cache, not being a Premium Member, not owning a Lowrance, does not qualify.

The idea is to post a challenge, not exclude classes of cachers based upon their preferences in geocaching.

1.4k · May 30, 2009

seems valid to me, suspect the local cachers might get pretty upset with that one though. hope it doesn't get "muggled" :blink:

5.3k · May 30, 2009

Definitely an ALR and seemingly not in compliance with the new guidelines. IMHO

7.2k · May 30, 2009

ALR

Considering Challenge caches and ALR caches aren't mutually exclusive, but a Challenge cache being a special sub-set of ALR, then all Challenge caches are, in fact, ALRs. The question becomes does your cache rise to the Challenge cache status and therefor acceptable. I say it does not. It don't see where you've requested the seeker find a defined sub-set of caches.

Besides, the mere logging of your cache would negate the loggers qualifications to log the cache--if it were a true Challenge cache.

8k · May 30, 2009

Who shaves the barber?

3.3k · May 30, 2009

A little off topic, but I have never seen a chalange cache. I guess there are not many in my area. Could someone give me links to a few? I was thinking of making a chalange cache, but would like to see how they are put together first.

May 31, 2009

It look's like an ARL to me. I'd contact your local reviewer and see what they think. That was he/she know's about it and can make the decision. That's who's going to get the complaint so it made be good to get their thought's on it.

5.6k · May 31, 2009

A little off topic, but I have never seen a chalange cache. I guess there are not many in my area. Could someone give me links to a few? I was thinking of making a chalange cache, but would like to see how they are put together first.

Here's a bookmark list of the challenge caches in WA state, that should give you an idea of what they can be about.

June 1, 2009

ALR

Besides, the mere logging of your cache would negate the loggers qualifications to log the cache--if it were a true Challenge cache.

Did someone just describe the plot to Back to the Future IV?

19k · June 1, 2009

Due to the explosion of challenge caches lately I made one that went a little against the grain: The Anti Challenge Challenge.

The validity of it as a challenge has been brought into question. I'd like to get input on it from the rank & file. Any reviewer opinions would also be more than welcome of course. It was published before the new guidelines were put into place and was meant to be tongue in cheek. Mostly.

Although its obvious (to me) that you are only kidding, I think this paragraph may be problematic for some:

In the future, if you ever do log a challenge cache (possibly even including logging this one) I may just delete your log. Nah, I wouldn't do that- too much of a challenge for me to keep up with. Simple enough?

But I LOVE the idea! I've had similar ideas, myself. I cringe whenever I see a new challenge cache come out. To me, they're just plain stupid and I won't hunt them. I'm not interested in jumping through someone's particular set of "clever" hoops just to grab a smiley. Just put out the doggone cache already!

June 1, 2009

Reviewer response here: I agree with Palmetto

it's an ALR, and not a Challenge as currently defined by the listing guidelines.

I'd request the ALR be removed and change the cache type to a traditional.

6.5k · June 1, 2009

True challenge caches shouldn't be exclusionary. It's kind of like belonging to a special club-accomplish this and you can log my cache. I do appreciate the TIC humor here, and like fund caches, but this isn't a challenge cache.

It does look like a nice one though-might have to come and look for it if I'm in the area.

Edited June 1, 2009 by wimseyguy

June 1, 2009

Just a quick question. What is an ALR?

3.2k · June 1, 2009

Just a quick question. What is an ALR?

Additional Listing Requirement. i.e. "After finding this cache and signing the log, before logging it on line you need to send me a picture of you standing on one leg waving a live chicken over your head", or something to a lesser degree.

1.2k · June 1, 2009

Not a reviewer...but I would vote ALR...

If you consider it a challenge cache to get around the ALR thing...it violates never having or never will find a challenge cache...thus, by all rights, there should be no finds on said cache...

If you consider it an ALR to get around this being a challenge cache so it can have logs...then it violates cache guidelines...

Either way it has issues...

2.3k · June 9, 2009

Thanks for the responses everyone. It seems that the consensus is ALR rather than challenge. Since the cache really isn't all that great otherwise I'm going to go ahead and archive it. I do have an idea for what will be a real challenge cache (that I don't think has been done before) so it all balances out.

20.7k · June 9, 2009

Thanks for the responses everyone. It seems that the consensus is ALR rather than challenge. Since the cache really isn't all that great otherwise I'm going to go ahead and archive it. I do have an idea for what will be a real challenge cache (that I don't think has been done before) so it all balances out.

Find all the caches in the US? Find all the caches that <some huge number geocacher> has found?

24.7k · June 9, 2009

Due to the explosion of challenge caches lately I made one that went a little against the grain: The Anti Challenge Challenge.

The validity of it as a challenge has been brought into question. I'd like to get input on it from the rank & file. Any reviewer opinions would also be more than welcome of course. It was published before the new guidelines were put into place and was meant to be tongue in cheek. Mostly.

If a challege cache is all about planning what caches you are going to find to qualify to find the challenge, this is a challenge.

You can reverse that in this case to which caches to avoid as well (thought you can do the same if you are focusing on a challenge of say all the high points in each county by avoiding all caches at the lower points)

That said it doesn't quite meet the spirit and intent of a challenge cache. It's something else.

As for ALR. Nope it fails that test. The ALR on a true ALR would exist if it were the first cache you ever found in your caching career. If this were the first cache, you would qualify with no problem. Also ALR's are about doing something extra after finding the cache to log it. This doesn't have any such qualification. At best it's an AWF (additional work to find) making it a puzzle more than anything.

It shouldnt' have been archived because of the anti ALR rule.

Edited June 9, 2009 by Renegade Knight

June 9, 2009

This reviewer says ALR.

July 7, 2009

If someones logged a mystery or puzzle cache with coordinates given to him by the previous finder and he didn't solve the puzzle can I still delete that log? Even if he passes the coords to other cachers who also logged that cache? This makes the cache a traditional. Or can I still ask for logging requirements like a prove that they solved the puzzle?

Jan

Edited July 7, 2009 by JanH

20.7k · July 7, 2009

If someones logged a mystery or puzzle cache with coordinates given to him by the previous finder and he didn't solve the puzzle can I still delete that log? Even if he passes the coords to other cachers who also logged that cache? This makes the cache a traditional. Or can I still ask for logging requirements like a prove that they solved the puzzle?

Jan

From the guidelines:

Logging of All Physical Caches

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

July 7, 2009

If someones logged a mystery or puzzle cache with coordinates given to him by the previous finder and he didn't solve the puzzle can I still delete that log? Even if he passes the coords to other cachers who also logged that cache? This makes the cache a traditional. Or can I still ask for logging requirements like a prove that they solved the puzzle?

Jan

From the guidelines:
Logging of All Physical Caches

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

Unfortunately.

24.7k · July 7, 2009

If someones logged a mystery or puzzle cache with coordinates given to him by the previous finder and he didn't solve the puzzle can I still delete that log? Even if he passes the coords to other cachers who also logged that cache? This makes the cache a traditional. Or can I still ask for logging requirements like a prove that they solved the puzzle?

Jan

Yes, Absolutly. This site however has tweaked the logging rules to be imposed on folks who use this website to publish their caches. By doing this they are blurring the lines between Puzzle (only a puzzle for the first to find) and other cache types since it all comes down to signing the log. Excpet for the exceptions like Challenge caches where you can continue to enforce the rules as the cache owner.

In a nutshell. Sbell has shown you the "if you want to keep your cache listed here" rules. In other words some of the privilidge of being an owner has been usurped by the site as they broaden their ownership (and thus responsiblity) of your cache.

24.7k · July 7, 2009

Hmmm.

It doesn't really seem to be an ALR, since the requirements preceed the finding part....

Having read the reviewer responces either they are confused as to what an ALR is, or someone forget to send us finders and owners the right memo so we understand what it is.

Right now from the reviewer side, ALR sounds a lot more like an Anti Listing Requirment than, Additional Logging Requiremnt.

We finders and owners seem to think ALR is additional rules to log the cache once found, and not additional work to find since AWR is what puzzle, multi, caches and similar caches are all about.

July 7, 2009

Yes, Absolutly. This site however has tweaked the logging rules to be imposed on folks who use this website to publish their caches. By doing this they are blurring the lines between Puzzle (only a puzzle for the first to find) and other cache types since it all comes down to signing the log. Excpet for the exceptions like Challenge caches where you can continue to enforce the rules as the cache owner.

In a nutshell. Sbell has shown you the "if you want to keep your cache listed here" rules. In other words some of the privilidge of being an owner has been usurped by the site as they broaden their ownership (and thus responsiblity) of your cache.

I'm not sure you can really delete the log of someone who found your puzzle cache without solving the puzzle. That being said, we can predict a day will come where the hidden final coordinates of puzzles and multis will be made public. The choice will be to the user to either do the work or just go and sign the logbook. No need to say this will be the end of puzzles and multis (and geocaching, in my opinion).

6.7k · July 7, 2009

Yes, Absolutly. This site however has tweaked the logging rules to be imposed on folks who use this website to publish their caches. By doing this they are blurring the lines between Puzzle (only a puzzle for the first to find) and other cache types since it all comes down to signing the log. Excpet for the exceptions like Challenge caches where you can continue to enforce the rules as the cache owner.

In a nutshell. Sbell has shown you the "if you want to keep your cache listed here" rules. In other words some of the privilidge of being an owner has been usurped by the site as they broaden their ownership (and thus responsiblity) of your cache.

I'm not sure you can really delete the log of someone who found your puzzle cache without solving the puzzle. That being said, we can predict a day will come where the hidden final coordinates of puzzles and multis will be made public. The choice will be to the user to either do the work or just go and sign the logbook. No need to say this will be the end of puzzles and multis (and geocaching, in my opinion).

GC.com is not the only place to list a cache. If you find it too restrictive go elsewhere.

July 7, 2009

I'm not sure you can really delete the log of someone who found your puzzle cache without solving the puzzle. That being said, we can predict a day will come where the hidden final coordinates of puzzles and multis will be made public. The choice will be to the user to either do the work or just go and sign the logbook. No need to say this will be the end of puzzles and multis (and geocaching, in my opinion).

GC.com is not the only place to list a cache. If you find it too restrictive go elsewhere.

Of course. You can learn to be a sheep and live like a sheep. Or you can see a trend and question it, in order to improve it. It's your choice in this free world.

2.3k · July 7, 2009

Thanks for the responses everyone. It seems that the consensus is ALR rather than challenge. Since the cache really isn't all that great otherwise I'm going to go ahead and archive it. I do have an idea for what will be a real challenge cache (that I don't think has been done before) so it all balances out.

Find all the caches in the US? Find all the caches that <some huge number geocacher> has found?

Here it is. Like I said, not sure if it's been done before or not.

20.7k · July 7, 2009

I'm not sure you can really delete the log of someone who found your puzzle cache without solving the puzzle. That being said, we can predict a day will come where the hidden final coordinates of puzzles and multis will be made public. The choice will be to the user to either do the work or just go and sign the logbook. No need to say this will be the end of puzzles and multis (and geocaching, in my opinion).

GC.com is not the only place to list a cache. If you find it too restrictive go elsewhere.

Of course. You can learn to be a sheep and live like a sheep. Or you can see a trend and question it, in order to improve it. It's your choice in this free world.

Seriously, do we really need to do that thread again?

19k · July 7, 2009

Of course. You can learn to be a sheep and live like a sheep. Or you can see a trend and question it, in order to improve it. It's your choice in this free world.

Ouch! That was a sheep shot!! If I may butt in, nobody is trying to ram their ideas down ewe throat.

Baaaaad puns!!! Baaaaad knowsChad!

Edited July 7, 2009 by knowschad

3.2k · July 8, 2009

Thanks for the responses everyone. It seems that the consensus is ALR rather than challenge. Since the cache really isn't all that great otherwise I'm going to go ahead and archive it. I do have an idea for what will be a real challenge cache (that I don't think has been done before) so it all balances out.

Find all the caches in the US? Find all the caches that <some huge number geocacher> has found?

Here it is. Like I said, not sure if it's been done before or not.

Is there a date this has to be done before, or after?

2.3k · July 8, 2009

Thanks for the responses everyone. It seems that the consensus is ALR rather than challenge. Since the cache really isn't all that great otherwise I'm going to go ahead and archive it. I do have an idea for what will be a real challenge cache (that I don't think has been done before) so it all balances out.

Find all the caches in the US? Find all the caches that <some huge number geocacher> has found?

Here it is. Like I said, not sure if it's been done before or not.

Is there a date this has to be done before, or after?

No. As long as the requirements are met past finds can count.

ALR or Challenge cache:

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation