geocache.com tweak

[+capetownfly]

Off my blog : ( www.geocachesa.co.za)

 

I just had a thought. What I’d like to see on the geocaching website is the ability to rate a person’s cache once you have completed it.

 

Case in point is the Canal Walk Scramble cache i completed yesterday. It was long, it was hard, it was puzzling, yet I had so much fun. Also I could plainly see the effort the cache owner put it to making this cache. There are many caches out there that have totally blown my mind. Id like the ability to rate the cache once complete as I’m logging it

 

What are your thoughts , geocachers ?

[+malo mystery]

There are scoring systems out there, usually the score is only visible to others that are using that specific add-on. There are some people around that use it but it seems very few, and it seems the less that use it, the less effective it is because you dont really get an "averaged" out score if you get any score at all. It seems reading the logs might be the way to go.

 

How do you score a cache anyway? The reason I enjoyed a cache - like a really good puzzle might make you hate that cache.

 

Here is a local thread

 

One of them is called GCvote

Edited April 21, 2010 by malo mystery

[MnCo]

Off my blog : ( www.geocachesa.co.za)

 

I just had a thought. What I’d like to see on the geocaching website is the ability to rate a person’s cache once you have completed it.

 

Case in point is the Canal Walk Scramble cache i completed yesterday. It was long, it was hard, it was puzzling, yet I had so much fun. Also I could plainly see the effort the cache owner put it to making this cache. There are many caches out there that have totally blown my mind. Id like the ability to rate the cache once complete as I’m logging it

 

What are your thoughts , geocachers ?

 

My only concern about a rating system, is that it is subjective. What you like (or the experience you had) may be very different from me.

 

At least with the logs, you can (in most cases) read why the person did or didn't enjoy a particular cache and then decide for yourself.

 

That said, I believe FF has a cache rating plugin that some people are using. But I don't know if GC fixed the problem with GreaseMonkey yet.

[+Henzz]

Firefox has an add-on called GCVote, that runs through Greasemonkey...

I'm not sure how it gets done on IE or GoogleChrome though...

 

I use the GCVote application, and it works great for me...

Yes there is not many who does rate caches this way in South Africa, but over time one there will be an average rating coming out...

We all cache differently, and we all experience caches in our own way...

What is great for me, might be a bore for someone else...

But if enough people rates a cache, one will get a "feel" for the quality of that cache...

Once again, the rating is totally subjective, as MM said....

 

It also helps if you're caching out of Town, and have limited time...

Just ignore the 1 and 2 stars... And focus on the 3,4 and 5 star caches...

 

As a cache owner.... Great logs are always welcome, and less enthusiastic logs tend to irk one a bit, but realistically one has to learn from those logs on how to improve your hides... The same applies to the GCVote add-on... I can see how others experience my cache in a different format, apart from the logs... And if there is room for improvement it will show from the ratings it gets...

 

Hope this helps...

GCVote

[+Henzz]

Another way of rating a cache is through Bookmarks...

Once again, not too many cachers uses this option, but it will also tell you something, over and above the logs...

 

Take for example... The Davinci Code (GCXBZQ)...

There is 5 bookmarks attached to this cache, and if you read through those, you will see that it is a highly rated cache...

Looking at cacher profiles, you can also see how they rated caches through their bookmark lists, and which ones stood out for them...

[+capetownfly]

Wow, thanks for all the feedback. Definately some food for thought.

Where Im coming from is Ive done alot of dash and drives lately, doing alot of driving to find a nano / magnet stuck to a pole. Id like to find out what other cachers rate quality caches, and start aiming for those.

 

It seems though that there has been development on GCVote , and it now supports all the popular browsers, and google maps. I will be checking this out later. I use google chrome almost exclusively, because its such a fast browser , with the least amount of issues.

[+malo mystery]

Capetownfly, I think you are going to get a few more of the same responses in that everyone has a different idea of quality.

 

Personally I am not a fan of a micro unless it is a last resort to get a cache at the desired location. They have their place and usually increase the difficulty ratings, but if it just a question of lazy cache placement then I often come away feeling a little let down. There is one near the new stadium in Greenpoint and one at the cable station that to me are well placed. Both areas are extremely busy muggle areas and have a lot of security nearby, both have been placed in those specific areas for a point and that makes them essential. There are a few micros around the cape on the top of mountains which to me is fairly pointless, but that is just my opinion and some might love them.

 

For me caches can be rated on several factors which can include some of the following in no particular order:

 

Cache page - is it well laid out, informative easy to follow, does it tell me what I need to know regarding the cache and any extra details that might be required to find the cache - precautions, vague routes, extra equipment needed etc this can sometimes be essential when doing difficult terrain caches where a wrong route might lead to a dangerous situation.

Cache location - is it an interesting location, maybe an amazing hike to get to the location, does it show me an interesting spot I might not otherwise have been to or known about, is there a good view, it might even be a place that we drive past every day but did not notice until a cacher pointed it out.

Learn something - did the cache teach me something maybe the history of a place or object, maybe how to decode another puzzle?

Container - is the container well disguised/hidden/secure with all the essentials - neat log book,writing equipment,geocache note and swag all dry. I have read recently about a ziplock bag with a piece of paper and a lego block inside it - that is about as close to a cache as what a match is to a bonfire.

Enjoyment - did I enjoy the cache and come away thinking - thanks, that was worth it?

cache placer who has put in the effort and maintains the cache, takes heed of logs that might be saying that the cache needs attention.

 

A cache does not need all these to be good, you can have an amazing puzzle leading to a mediocre cache but still have an enjoyable cache. You can have a simple cache page but a brilliant location with an ordinary cache container and still have an enjoyable cache.

 

This is obviously all subjective and many people enjoy to just "cache" - find a cache, enjoy the hunt no matter what kind of cache it might be, but just do it for the drive, the hunt, the find. We seem to be fairly lucky with the quality of most of our caches, and even the poorest of quality caches seemed to get their finds. Read the logs, see what the others say, read between the lines - a cacher that usually writes extensive logs might not write a scathing attacking log but purely by the fact that he might leave an unusually short log might tell you something. Longer logs are often a sign of enjoyment - more cache placer effort = more cache finder effort.

 

some that I have enjoyed include :

GC1T4ZW - King's Block House - unique puzzles, cache page and location and effort.

 

GC1ZR65 - Orpheus in the Underworld - Fantastic page, location and effort

 

GC1VRNX - The Ghost of Tokai Manor - History, page , location.

 

GC21XRQ - Quirky Quercus parts I, II and III - amazing cache hides and containers, location

 

GC21V2P Number Crunch - including any of the puzzle caches in that area that are all interesting and unique in their own way.

 

I have enjoyed most of the caching I have done and dont mean to leave anyone off the list, these ones just come to mind at the moment.

[+capetownfly]

Thanks Malo for your insightful and honest reply.

 

I hear what you and the others are saying about caching being a different experience for each and every one. All im after is some kind of a way of saying "thank you - I really enjoyed your time and effort in creating this one" as opposed to a boring pointless cache. These do exist im afraid, and im looking for a QUICK way of evaluating which are the more "adventurous" and "exciting" caches to do out there instead of having to troll through many logs. I like reading the logs, but they dont always indicate that a cache may be good or not. With a rating system , after a while, you do get a average rating.

 

Ive read so much about King's Blockhouse for example, and wanted to do it after I did rock kestrel, running out of time,but i imagine the average rating for King's would be higher, based on logs. Thus giving an indication of a really good cache.

 

I think I might reserve King's blockhouse to be my 100th find ! It sounds really incredible.

 

Thanks once again

 

capetownfly

[MnCo]

Thanks Malo for your insightful and honest reply.

 

I hear what you and the others are saying about caching being a different experience for each and every one. All im after is some kind of a way of saying "thank you - I really enjoyed your time and effort in creating this one" as opposed to a boring pointless cache. These do exist im afraid, and im looking for a QUICK way of evaluating which are the more "adventurous" and "exciting" caches to do out there instead of having to troll through many logs. I like reading the logs, but they dont always indicate that a cache may be good or not. With a rating system , after a while, you do get a average rating.

 

Ive read so much about King's Blockhouse for example, and wanted to do it after I did rock kestrel, running out of time,but i imagine the average rating for King's would be higher, based on logs. Thus giving an indication of a really good cache.

 

I think I might reserve King's blockhouse to be my 100th find ! It sounds really incredible.

 

Thanks once again

 

capetownfly

 

There is a simple way to do that already on the GC site... when you log the cache you say "thank you - I really enjoyed your time and effort in creating this one". A nano second later the cache owner will recieve it in his/her inbox and you'll both feel like a job well done

[+capetownfly]

ya ya , point taken , just think geocaching.com could easily build in something like that

[+Gr8Scot]

Just installed GCVote. Very interesting. I think all that's needed is for more local cachers to be made aware of it, as I certainly wasn't before reading this thread. Especially as it's now available for other browsers.

 

Looking at my caches found page, I largely agree with the ratings I can now see. This makes me think that the ratings on unfound caches will probably be a good guide as well.

 

My suggestion - just spread the word and it'll get more accurate.

[+trevorh7000]

I have just done the geocaching customer satisfaction survey - so if you have one pending and have not filled it in yet you could request this feature as a native website function - then everyone would see it all the time with out having to add greasemonkey and a script - the best way to make it more useful for everyone.

 

Trev

Edited April 23, 2010 by trevorh7000

[+CapeDoc]

Just installed GCVote. Very interesting. I think all that's needed is for more local cachers to be made aware of it, as I certainly wasn't before reading this thread. Especially as it's now available for other browsers.

 

Looking at my caches found page, I largely agree with the ratings I can now see. This makes me think that the ratings on unfound caches will probably be a good guide as well.

 

My suggestion - just spread the word and it'll get more accurate.

 

I really like the system and am one of the few that have been rating caches for quite a while now. In my opinion, the more people that use it the more the whole "subjective experience" gets lost and one can trust the "average" feeling about a cache.

My feeling is to USE IT, USE IT USE IT! Its easy to use, displays info quickly and unobtrusively (even on maps)....and you stand to lose nothing. I like it as an owner when I get rated on my caches. It is interesting to see others views and can inspire one to maintain a higher rated cache rather than archive it.