Cache Rating System

[tomandtom]

Hey, i dont usually visit this forum, but while reading about other cachers amazing and horrible experiences at cache sites, it gave me an idea.

Perhaps, there could be a way where those who visited the cache can rate the overall experience and environment at the cache in question. It could be on the five star system much like difficulty/terrain, but people rate their experience based on wildlife, views, unique features, cleanliness, etc.

 

It could give cachers a clue as to some of the caches that are must-see's and others that are purely "meh".

 

Has anyone ever pitched this idea before? What does everyone think about it?

[+The Jester]

I think it's been mention before...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Once or twice...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

to mixed reviews...

[+flask]

 

Has anyone ever pitched this idea before? What does everyone think about it?

 

someone starts a new thread on this about every six days.

 

you are right on schedule.

 

the thread started last tuesday is still active.

[+DatCrazyMongoose]

Without getting into discussing the merits of it (dead horse), give this link a try. I use it and love it.

 

www.gcvote.com

[tomandtom]

Without getting into discussing the merits of it (dead horse), give this link a try. I use it and love it.

 

www.gcvote.com

 

i just recently tried that, there are no caches anywhere near me that have been rated.

[+DatCrazyMongoose]

I've rated 162 of them in WA, ID, and OR. It gives you an option of putting a link to the site in each of your find logs. That's what I do. Maybe more people will pick up on it. Give it a try and some time. Who knows.

[+Annie & PB]

Yep, it's been mentioned 2673 times .... no, make that 2674 if you count this thread.

 

A rating system would be practically pointless, as over time pactically every cache would average out to a middle of the road rating.

 

Why ...... because there are so many different people with different caching preferances. A cache which one person loves, the next person will hate, be it a LPC, suburban park, rural cemetary or what ever type of cache.

 

Perhaps the only caches that would get a consistantly high positive rating are those that involve a long hike, or special skills such as rock-climbing or caving, due to the fact that only the people who have those skills and abilities will actually do those caches, and those type of caches by there nature are almost always in beautiful scenic areas.

 

So, as far as I'm concerned, a rating system would be a waste of time.

 

Annie

[+cache_n_out]

If the name can be spken here ---- terracaching works with such a system. Not a totally bad idea for those who are competitive. Hard finds are more points. The GC.com method is competitive too, but its just raw total numbers, so to compete is a game of thoasands of PnG and urban micros.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

As indicated above, this is an often-discussed, rarely-agreed upon subject.

 

Check out this existing 3 page thread in the Website forum.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...227916&st=0

[Rhialto]

Check out this existing 3 page thread in the Website forum.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...227916&st=0

Was about to send OP there also and if I had Moderator options I would have closed the thread too...

[+PirateKatz]

I can almost guarantee that somebody has brought this up but here is a system I wouldn't mind seeing...

 

Instead of a rating, you give each cache you visit a "thumbs up" or a "thumbs down" and based on how you personally rate caches (vs. known cache attributes), caches can be recommended for you in a given search area. It could be a very simple predictive model that would simply highlight certain caches w/out eliminating others. If it were to go one step further, the data could also take into account how other similar cachers view them.

 

I guess it might be just too complicated to setup but I would picture the system more akin to Amazon or Netflix websites saying "since you liked X, you might like Y".

 

Regardless, any system would have to take cache attributes into account and provide an individualized rating for each person. As has been previously mentioned, if it doesn't work like this then every cache would ultimately average out a rating right in the middle.

[+Knight2000]

+1 on the OP idea.

 

Without getting into discussing the merits of it (dead horse), give this link a try. I use it and love it.

 

www.gcvote.com

i just recently tried that, there are no caches anywhere near me that have been rated.

If everyone thought like that then no one would ever rate any. You have to start somewhere.

[+cache_n_out]

If the name can be spken here ---- terracaching works with such a system. Not a totally bad idea for those who are competitive. Hard finds are more points. The GC.com method is competitive too, but its just raw total numbers, so to compete is a game of thoasands of PnG and urban micros.

 

Actually, TC is more of a scoring system than rating. Rating would be difficult as mentioned by others. Everyone has their preferences.

 

But I think you could get reasonable consensus on difficulty of terrain and hide. It would be up to GC.com to implement a "scoring" tally to reward those folks who want a high "score". I guess external software could do the same thing with a pocket query.

[+L0ne.R]

As indicated above, this is an often-discussed, rarely-agreed upon subject.

 

Check out this existing 3 page thread in the Website forum.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...227916&st=0

 

An important part of the above thread is this post:

 

Post #57 OpinioNate:

 

I'll chime in quickly here to say that Groundspeak actually has been tossing around the idea of badges or awards that can be given by users to other users or caches. The nature of those awards are not yet known but will be intelligently discussed and implemented in a positive way that promotes caches/users instead of criticizing "bad" caches/users.

 

Something that has been successful in other areas of the interweb is the suggestion engine (Since you like X, maybe you'll like X). There must be some way to integrate awards/badges with a suggestion engine that would offer very personalized results and accomplish what the OP is seeking.

 

I have to stress that we have no specific plans yet for anything like this. As with any other feature we will first explore in excruciating detail all of the ins and outs a feature like this entails. We're definitely open to feedback from the community, so feel free to continue your healthy debate. smile.gif

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Hey, i dont usually visit this forum...

Then let me point you to the "Search" feature on the upper right corner of the forum page. Most forums have this feature. It's usually used to "search" for things people have posted before.

[+tango501]

Rate this cache

 

I use this as a tool to see how others perceive and adjust as nec

[+Scubasonic]

Hey, i dont usually visit this forum, but while reading about other cachers amazing and horrible experiences at cache sites, it gave me an idea.

Perhaps, there could be a way where those who visited the cache can rate the overall experience and environment at the cache in question. It could be on the five star system much like difficulty/terrain, but people rate their experience based on wildlife, views, unique features, cleanliness, etc.

 

It could give cachers a clue as to some of the caches that are must-see's and others that are purely "meh".

 

Has anyone ever pitched this idea before? What does everyone think about it?

 

AGAIN !!!!

[+Coozers]

I can't say I have a solution, but driving out on a boring road to find a string of 10 P&G where I learned nothing new about the area or the people who live there is a waste of my time, and gas. Not to mention wear and tear on the car. I fell in love with GC when I was taken on trip to a remote location of local historic value. I also love finding a cache that someone put thought into and used creativity. An altoids tin with a log in a light pole for the sake of boosting numbers makes caching a to do list. A rating system would be appreciated, especially one that compares your likes to others like you. There's my soapbox.

[+Walts Hunting]

Coozers is right on in his first post. His logic is why people get premium membership then buy GSAK. Load the PQ in there and look at them before making the drive. Easy solution.

[+L0ne.R]

Coozers is right on in his first post. His logic is why people get premium membership then buy GSAK. Load the PQ in there and look at them before making the drive. Easy solution.

 

GSAK isn't easy for me.

• First, I don't have a Palm. I have an old iPAQ. Last I heard it won't work with an iPAQ. I don't really even want to use the iPAQ, I would prefer to use it via my Blackberry.
  
• Second, I don't want to spend more money on the purchase of a Palm and I don't want to spend more money on GSAK.
  
• Third, I once considered spending more money because everyone was raving about GSAK, so I had a look (downloaded the nag version) -- it was complicated. I have trouble understanding what I see on the screen and then to add to my trouble I"m supposed to create macros. I just don't understand how to get it to work for me. I can't be the only technically-challenged person out there.
  

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Coozers is right on in his first post. His logic is why people get premium membership then buy GSAK. Load the PQ in there and look at them before making the drive. Easy solution.

 

GSAK isn't easy for me.

• First, I don't have a Palm. I have an old iPAQ. Last I heard it won't work with an iPAQ. I don't really even want to use the iPAQ, I would prefer to use it via my Blackberry.
  
• Second, I don't want to spend more money on the purchase of a Palm and I don't want to spend more money on GSAK.
  
• Third, I once considered spending more money because everyone was raving about GSAK, so I had a look (downloaded the nag version) -- it was complicated. I have trouble understanding what I see on the screen and then to add to my trouble I"m supposed to create macros. I just don't understand how to get it to work for me. I can't be the only technically-challenged person out there.
  

No, it isn't easy to use. Even after using it for several years, I don't use most of the features. I never learned how to do macros and such. I don't have a Palm either, although I did when I first downloaded GSAK. I mainly use it to keep track of puzzles and multis that I'm working on as I can save the "corrected coordinates" in a database and export them to my GPSr along with my weekly PQ.

[Dinoprophet]

Without getting into discussing the merits of it (dead horse), give this link a try. I use it and love it.

 

www.gcvote.com

i just recently tried that, there are no caches anywhere near me that have been rated.

If everyone thought like that then no one would ever rate any. You have to start somewhere.

Yup. Once, not long ago, there were no geocaches near you, either.

[+mchaos]

Do I have to put my answer to this question again?? I feel like I just did that a week ago..

[+sbell111]

Coozers is right on in his first post. His logic is why people get premium membership then buy GSAK. Load the PQ in there and look at them before making the drive. Easy solution.

GSAK isn't easy for me.

• First, I don't have a Palm. I have an old iPAQ. Last I heard it won't work with an iPAQ. I don't really even want to use the iPAQ, I would prefer to use it via my Blackberry.
  
• Second, I don't want to spend more money on the purchase of a Palm and I don't want to spend more money on GSAK.
  

It should be noted that GSAK isn't just a an application to dump PQ files into a pda. In fact, a pda isn't even necessary to get benefit from GSAK. That being said, you should check out cacheberry. I haven't used it, but I understand that it is a great way to cache paperlessly on a blackberry (and it accepts GSAK exports-as well as straight PQ GPX files.)

• Third, I once considered spending more money because everyone was raving about GSAK, so I had a look (downloaded the nag version) -- it was complicated. I have trouble understanding what I see on the screen and then to add to my trouble I"m supposed to create macros. I just don't understand how to get it to work for me. I can't be the only technically-challenged person out there.
  

It is complicated to become a GSAK power user. Frankly, I doubt that I will ever take the time to learn half of what teh program can do. Still, the basics are pretty simple.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Without getting into discussing the merits of it (dead horse), give this link a try. I use it and love it.

 

www.gcvote.com

i just recently tried that, there are no caches anywhere near me that have been rated.

If everyone thought like that then no one would ever rate any. You have to start somewhere.

Yup. Once, not long ago, there were no geocaches near you, either.

I placed a cache in 2003 and put a rating system link on the page. I've had a whopping 6 votes on the cache after 4800 page views and 214 finds.

[+L0ne.R]

...you should check out cacheberry. I haven't used it, but I understand that it is a great way to cache paperlessly on a blackberry (and it accepts GSAK exports-as well as straight PQ GPX files.)

 

Thanks for that recommendation sbell. Cacheberry looks like the right program for me.