Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
steben6

Challenge Caches

Recommended Posts

This is the first forum post I have done, so I apologize in advance if there is already a thread for this topic. I couldn't find one. :laughing:

 

Regarding challenge caches, I have a concern about ones that are published and the requirements include that caches must have been published before a particular date in order to complete the challenge. I totally understand the logic of doing this so as to not allow people to hide bogus caches just to meet the challenge; however, as the cache gets older, the requirements become significantly more difficult to complete. This actually changes the difficulty level for newer cachers who don't start working on challenges until, for example, three years after the challenge cache was published.

 

We have encountered this problem with many of the "Fizzy" challenges.

 

As a suggestion, it might be a good idea to make the requirement be that, in order to log a cache for the challenge, the cache must be at least a year old when you find/log it. That way, caches published after the date the challenge cache published could still be used, but would at least limit really new caches from qualifying.

 

Just a thought.

Edited by steben6

Share this post


Link to post

I've run across this issue as well.

 

There were a couple of challenge caches I looked at recently where the component caches needed to be placed before Month Something, 2006 or 2007. I don't remember the exact dates, but they were far enough in the past that just identifying active caches that would help fulfill the requirements was going to be a huge challenge.

 

I don't view it is a fairness issue - kudos to those who attacked the cache way back when. But it did make me cross the caches off my list, even though I had no intention of cheating or gaming the challenge.

Share this post


Link to post

As a suggestion, it might be a good idea to make the requirement be that, in order to log a cache for the challenge, the cache must be at least a year old when you find/log it. That way, caches published after the date the challenge cache published could still be used, but would at least limit really new caches from qualifying.

People will still cheat. They'll have friends put out those caches and wait the year.

 

And it would diminish the challenge too. Having a cache that gets more difficult to complete as time goes on makes you want to find it that much more.

Share this post


Link to post

 

People will still cheat. They'll have friends put out those caches and wait the year.

 

 

Yes they will. I have seen a local cache owner change the name of a cache to make a challenge easier, change the rating of a cache and then archive it.

 

 

 

And it would diminish the challenge too. Having a cache that gets more difficult to complete as time goes on makes you want to find it that much more.

 

 

I own a Fizzy Challenge with a date restriction on it. It was the first Fizzy challenge in Ontario and it is still the most sought after - all because of that date restriction. IN most cases, each successive finder has had to work harder than the previous finder to complete it and they take a lot of pride and sense of accomplishment in that fact. I have had the privilege of meeting most cachers at the final.

 

There are at least 3 other Fizzy Challenges in Ontario without the date restriction. So having mine with a date restriction does not hinder new cachers from finding a Fizzy Challenge.

Share this post


Link to post

I own a Fizzy Challenge with a date restriction on it. It was the first Fizzy challenge in Ontario and it is still the most sought after - all because of that date restriction. IN most cases, each successive finder has had to work harder than the previous finder to complete it and they take a lot of pride and sense of accomplishment in that fact.

I'm planning a group trip in November to get a few of the more difficult D/Ts. It's going to be around 2000km of driving and take the whole weekend for a grand total of 4 caches (I just need two of those).

 

Would I rather it have a soft date restriction on that challenge? Heck no!

Share this post


Link to post

Another option for Challenge cache owners would be to review and update the before date from time to time.

Share this post


Link to post

I have known people to hide a challenge and the reviewer request that you put a date restriction in there before they publish it.

Share this post


Link to post

Just one of many reasons why challenge caches are worthless.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Having a cache that gets more difficult to complete as time goes on makes you want to find it that much more.

 

or just add it to the Ignore List :laughing:

 

challenges with date restrictions get unreasonable to complete at some point, and i agree with the OP that the difficulty should be increased or like jeffbouldin suggested, adjust the date

 

there's currently a few challenge caches that certain D/T combinations are only available 300+kms from where i live, due to many being archived, as opposed to when it was published when many more were available near by

 

personally i can't be bothered, to me caching is supposed to be fun not a chore

but on the other hand one doesn't have to find every cache out there, so that's when the ignore list comes in handy

Share this post


Link to post

Since I own a few challenge caches, my take on it is they should be fun and not have aspects that are restrictive. None of mine have any form of date restriction and if anyone was able to log it the day it came out then that was fine by me.

 

Have some new caches come out that make my challenges a bit easier? Sure. Did I encourage that? Not in the slightest.

 

I like challenges that are basic in design. Find a cache every day for a month, one in every county, etc but once there are statements about what doesn't count then I lose interest. I've been enjoying filling in the "cache calendar" since I already had many days filled in. I missed a day in May, but all that I need to do is grab it next year. :unsure:

 

If the challenge is fun, I'll do it. But I don't think it means anything special... it's just another cache, and if it was fun then I'm glad that I did it.

 

B) BQ

Share this post


Link to post

or just add it to the Ignore List :unsure:

I've pretty much done that with one challenge already. That one didn't have a date restriction however but was just too much of a pain to do.

Share this post


Link to post

One of the special things that happened as a result of a date restricted Fizzy is that a whole bunch of elder caches suddenly started seeing visits after laying dormant for months or in some cases years.

 

In Ontario, when I published Tequila:81 Proof, there was considerable forum discussion over the challenge.

 

In the background, two cachers, quietly, took up the challenge separately. They started seeking out obscure canoe caches. In the case of one cacher, it got him back into kayaking after years away from the water. As they realized they were racing each other, they left messages for each other in caches. It was fun to see the spirit unleashed by the challenge. In the end, they shared FTF.

 

Once someone had completed it, other local cachers started going to these obscure caches. Sometimes, a cache that hadn't been visited in a year, would get three or four visits in a single weekend. I am sure the owners must have been surprised at the new activity.

 

It also distracted several cachers away from quantity towards quality. As Avernar mentioned above, people would plan weekend excursions of 1200 km to get one or two caches. One local cacher even made a trip to California to get the mother of all Fizzies. Now there are at least two other local cachers working on the California Fizzy simply because of the date restricted challenge.

 

For those that chose not to travel great distances to find obscure caches to complete a date restricted challenge, there are plenty of alternatives. Challenge caches are popping up daily. They have become the new ALR,

 

I have no intention of every removing my date restriction and I hope other CO's feel the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
I have no intention of every removing my date restriction and I hope other CO's feel the same way.

I don't think your cache is in any danger of this, since it's only a couple of years old and is not restricted geographically. But theoretically, if you were facing a situation where the only remaining cache at a particular D/T combo had been archived, would you archive your cache?

Share this post


Link to post
I have no intention of every removing my date restriction and I hope other CO's feel the same way.

I don't think your cache is in any danger of this, since it's only a couple of years old and is not restricted geographically. But theoretically, if you were facing a situation where the only remaining cache at a particular D/T combo had been archived, would you archive your cache?

 

Yes.

 

To do otherwise would cheapen the effort of those who found it with the date restriction.

Share this post


Link to post
I have no intention of every removing my date restriction and I hope other CO's feel the same way.

I don't think your cache is in any danger of this, since it's only a couple of years old and is not restricted geographically. But theoretically, if you were facing a situation where the only remaining cache at a particular D/T combo had been archived, would you archive your cache?

 

Yes.

 

To do otherwise would cheapen the effort of those who found it with the date restriction.

I can understand the purity of archiving it.

 

I'm not sure I'm completely in sync about the cheapening of effort part... It strikes me that the appeal for some (like Avernar) is that the cache keeps getting harder over time. Presumably it would be possible to adjust the date such that the cache is roughly as hard as it was for earlier finders, as opposed to unquestionably always getting harder, and eventually impossible.

 

But like I said, I can understand the decision to archive.

Share this post


Link to post

Challenge caches used to irk me. We have several ALR challenge placing cachers in the area who are trying to out-do each other on the ridiculous-ness scale. But we also have some fun ones, you just gotta filter the caches you like vs the ones you don't like - similar to any other cache type.

 

I pick the fun looking challenges. I ignore the ones I'll never reasonably qualify for. No sense getting worked up because someone else's idea of a fun challenge is different from mine. Once I got over the radius-slave caching style life got much better. I've almost finished the cache-a-day challenge to find one cache for every calendar date. Bit of poor planning means I won't get Feb 29 for a couple years.

 

I originally had Tequila's 81 Proof on my "yeah right, never gonna get it" list but managed to qualify for it after one of the most fun caching summers ever - the summer cut my annual numbers burn-rate in half but I have memories for a lifetime. The date restriction was critical for that, as I had to travel to some pretty interesting caches to qualify for the cache.

Share this post


Link to post

or just add it to the Ignore List :D

I've pretty much done that with one challenge already. That one didn't have a date restriction however but was just too much of a pain to do.

 

I love challenge caches and try to do every one I think I am capable of completing. I think it adds to the game and I believe that everyone that claims they are worthless and stupid are equivalent to those folks that hate the FTF game just because they are not capable. They have no shot so they bash the concept instead of just letting it fly.

 

But having said that, I completely disagree with the notion of time restricted challenges.. unless said challenge is actually archived once time is up. But to each their own.

Share this post


Link to post

It also distracted several cachers away from quantity towards quality.

Yup. 81 Proof was a major factor in curing my radius slave affliction. :D

 

It strikes me that the appeal for some (like Avernar) is that the cache keeps getting harder over time. Presumably it would be possible to adjust the date such that the cache is roughly as hard as it was for earlier finders, as opposed to unquestionably always getting harder, and eventually impossible.

That would be extremely difficult to do as it's not only the availability of certain D/T combinations but also how far away they area and the style of cache (canoe, long hike, off road adventure, etc). There are plenty of challenges around here that get easier so having one that gets harder is good for variety.

 

What annoys me the most is when a new challenge comes out with a "only future finds count" restriction after I've spent a lot of effort collecting hard D/T combos for existing challenges. :D

 

Challenge caches used to irk me.

Same here. I initially despised them as I really hated ALRs and that just carried over. Once I started to qualify for a few challenges and realized it was going to be fun trying to get the last few requirements my opinion on challenge caches completely changed.

Share this post


Link to post
That would be extremely difficult to do as it's not only the availability of certain D/T combinations but also how far away they area and the style of cache (canoe, long hike, off road adventure, etc). There are plenty of challenges around here that get easier so having one that gets harder is good for variety.

 

What annoys me the most is when a new challenge comes out with a "only future finds count" restriction after I've spent a lot of effort collecting hard D/T combos for existing challenges. :D

Seems like a challenge where everyone starts off with a blank slate could also be good for variety :D

 

I keed, I keed...

Share this post


Link to post

 

Seems like a challenge where everyone starts off with a blank slate could also be good for variety :D

 

I keed, I keed...

 

Within 25 km of my date restricted Fizzy, there is a "fresh start" Fizzy for those who want to start at a blank slate.

 

Ironically, for those who feel some challenges are unfair, it can be argued that the "blank slate" challenge punishes those radius slaves who have already found all the nearby caches.

Share this post


Link to post
Ironically, for those who feel some challenges are unfair, it can be argued that the "blank slate" challenge punishes those radius slaves who have already found all the nearby caches.

I've seen that suggested, especially w.r.t. special icon challenges for hard-to-get caches like Webcams. Taken to the extreme, if there were a "blank slate" challenge that required the Groundspeak HQ icon, the cache would be literally impossible to complete for thousands of cachers.

 

It's a pretty decent argument for flexibility.

Share this post


Link to post
That would be extremely difficult to do as it's not only the availability of certain D/T combinations but also how far away they area and the style of cache (canoe, long hike, off road adventure, etc). There are plenty of challenges around here that get easier so having one that gets harder is good for variety.

 

What annoys me the most is when a new challenge comes out with a "only future finds count" restriction after I've spent a lot of effort collecting hard D/T combos for existing challenges. :D

Seems like a challenge where everyone starts off with a blank slate could also be good for variety :D

 

I keed, I keed...

 

But it isn't a blank slate when you do that. You potentially wipe out the local area for experienced cachers. Why punish someone for going out geocaching before you did?

 

There's a fizzy cache here with "only finds after this was published". The cache allows your matrix to include caches from published two years after 81 Proof, but not caches you've already found.

 

Wanna guess how many visits that cache has had in it's existence? 2

81 Proof, with it's "harder" date requirement has been visited 26 times this year.

 

Then, someone will come along after I qualify for this one and it'll be rinse-repeat. Before long I'll have a local cache that I have to travel to Hawaii to qualify for. C'est la vie.

 

BUT

 

Geocaching is not Pokemon. You do not have to find them all. I drive by that cache above and say "someday. maybe" then find the 16 caches on the trail across the street.

 

The cache owner above feels that's a worthy challenge. I own a finds from before today cache doesn't count challenge - I've had lots of people log it happily, and others who are working on it. As a CO, you have to decide, what do you want from your hide? Do you want to challenge, or simply frustrate people?

 

Your hide will reflect on you.

Share this post


Link to post

Seems like a challenge where everyone starts off with a blank slate could also be good for variety :D

 

I keed, I keed...

Even though you're kidding, it's a valid point. While the CO may think he's starting everyone with a blank slate he's actually "punishing" the people who have been caching more/longer. Especially if they've gone after existing challenges and found a lot of the rarer D/T combos.

 

The real way to start everyone with a blank slate is to put "only caches published after this one count" in the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Why punish someone for going out geocaching before you did?

...

81 Proof, with it's "harder" date requirement has been visited 26 times this year.

Oh, I've never said that one style is harder or not than the other. I suspect it's situational.

 

I can see the flaws in punishing (or restricting?) people for geocaching before others, and I can also see the flaws in punishing/restricting people for geocaching after others.

Share this post


Link to post
Even though you're kidding, it's a valid point. While the CO may think he's starting everyone with a blank slate he's actually "punishing" the people who have been caching more/longer. Especially if they've gone after existing challenges and found a lot of the rarer D/T combos.

Icon challenges for a couple of the old-timers in my area are nearly impossible, because they cleared out the nearby webcam caches years ago.

 

The real way to start everyone with a blank slate is to put "only caches published after this one count" in the rules.

That makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post

I can also see the flaws in punishing/restricting people for geocaching after others.

 

Other than FTF opportunity you're not really punishing someone for starting later. The challenge is there, and there was qualifying caches a few years ago. If there are no qualifying caches in existence, post a SBA as the cache is impossible.

 

If the cache is not impossible, it must be possible.

 

Doing things like upgrading the date periodically simply means the cheaters will place 81 lame caches for the fizzy, and wait until the next "update". I'd be some kinda ticked off if my 81 Proof visit, which involved adventures in off road vehicles and canoe trips turned into an easy smash-n-grab at a local Walmart with 81 light posts once the date got upgraded.

 

I have no less than 10 local challenge caches I'll never qualify for, some due to caches getting archived locally. I tend to visit the OTHER 21,000 caches in Ontario.

Share this post


Link to post

Thankfully, Groundspeak allows us to create virtually any time of challenge cache we want.

 

AND..... allows us to ignore virtually any time of challenge cache we wish to ignore.

Share this post


Link to post

Thankfully, Groundspeak allows us to create virtually any time of challenge cache we want.

 

AND..... allows us to ignore virtually any time of challenge cache we wish to ignore.

 

I agree. Creativity should be encouraged, even if that creativity does not appeal to everyone.

 

There are plenty of tools to filter undesired cache types, so there's no reason to become upset that a particular cache exists.

Share this post


Link to post

I own a finds from before today cache doesn't count challenge - I've had lots of people log it happily, and others who are working on it.

Same here.

 

The real purpose of the "past finds don't count" rule is to actually give the old timers a challenge. Without it they'd just go find the cache and that's it. No fun.

Share this post


Link to post

Icon challenges for a couple of the old-timers in my area are nearly impossible, because they cleared out the nearby webcam caches years ago.

Only if the "no past finds" rule is also there. I don't believe there are any around me that require rare icons and also have that rule.

Share this post


Link to post
I can also see the flaws in punishing/restricting people for geocaching after others.
Other than FTF opportunity you're not really punishing someone for starting later. The challenge is there, and there was qualifying caches a few years ago. If there are no qualifying caches in existence, post a SBA as the cache is impossible.

Here is the parallel I'm seeing:

 

If I assume it's considered punishing or restricting for an old-timer not to be able to use some caches to complete a challenge (because he already found them, so they're unavailable)...

 

Then I can understand the parallel claim that it's considered punishing/restricting for a new-timer not to be able to use some caches to complete a challenge (because they were found by the old-timer X years ago, and archived Y years ago).

 

In both cases it seems to me that one group of cachers had a potentially greater catalog of caches to choose from. I'm not saying that anything is necessarily unfair, nor am I even laying claim to the term "punishing" (I prefer "restricting"). I just see the parallels, and can see both situations through a similar lens.

Share this post


Link to post

...create virtually any ......to ignore virtually any ....

 

Lets not hijack this thread with more talk of bringing back the ghost.... :D

 

As an addition to Challenge Caches (Some of which i like, and some of which I abhor) Wouldn't it be nice to have the geocaching site give us a Souvenir when we complete a full grid? Or get a cache published from every month of a certain year?

 

Here is a list of the Challenge caches in the Canadian Province of Ontario: http://www.geocaching.com/bookmarks/view.a...43-a4867b2bd5a7 - Which includes both "Published before a certain date, regardless of when it was found" and "Found AFTER a certain date, regardless of when it was published" styles of thinking

Edited by Juicepig

Share this post


Link to post
Icon challenges for a couple of the old-timers in my area are nearly impossible, because they cleared out the nearby webcam caches years ago.
Only if the "no past finds" rule is also there. I don't believe there are any around me that require rare icons and also have that rule.

A number of "Find X icons in one day" challenges have popped up lately; they can be very difficult for active old-timers.

Share this post


Link to post
Icon challenges for a couple of the old-timers in my area are nearly impossible, because they cleared out the nearby webcam caches years ago.
Only if the "no past finds" rule is also there. I don't believe there are any around me that require rare icons and also have that rule.

A number of "Find X icons in one day" challenges have popped up lately; they can be very difficult for active old-timers.

 

Option 1 - Travel to a trail outside Las Vegas

Option 2 - Ignore challenge

Option 3 - Continue caching normally until you happen upon a local power trail

Option 4 (mandatory) - Have fun however you decide to head out caching

Share this post


Link to post
Icon challenges for a couple of the old-timers in my area are nearly impossible, because they cleared out the nearby webcam caches years ago.
Only if the "no past finds" rule is also there. I don't believe there are any around me that require rare icons and also have that rule.
A number of "Find X icons in one day" challenges have popped up lately; they can be very difficult for active old-timers.

Option 1 - Travel to a trail outside Las Vegas

Option 2 - Ignore challenge

Option 3 - Continue caching normally until you happen upon a local power trail

Option 4 (mandatory) - Have fun however you decide to head out caching

I don't disagree with any of those - keep in mind, I'm the person who doesn't think that "blank slate" challenges are necessarily punishment!

Share this post


Link to post

In both cases it seems to me that one group of cachers had a potentially greater catalog of caches to choose from. I'm not saying that anything is necessarily unfair, nor am I even laying claim to the term "punishing" (I prefer "restricting"). I just see the parallels, and can see both situations through a similar lens.

It really depends on the intent of your challenge.

 

1) The result is more important: No date restrictions.

 

2) The journey is more important: No past finds.

 

3) The result and journey are equally important: No future caches.

Share this post


Link to post

 

I don't disagree with any of those - keep in mind, I'm the person who doesn't think that "blank slate" challenges are necessarily punishment!

 

I don't have a problem with "blank slate" caches. But my definition of "blank slate" matches Avernar's - "caches must be published after today". To tell someone with 10,000 finds that the caches they already visited don't count is not a blank slate. That's putting a 15,400 pound elephant on one of the scales.

 

Take this imaginary example.

You have an island. It has 82 caches on it, each of the difficulty/terrain matrix combinations and a "81 fizzy" challenge cache.

 

You find all 81 combinations then log the 82nd cache, which is the challenge. All is well. You're thinking of placing some more caches. Then a new cache appears, with a "blank slate" provision. You cannot use any caches you've already found to log the new 81 cache fizzy on the island. All caches found must be published before this new fizzy was published to be logged too.

 

Is that a blank slate? You are effectively banned from that 83rd cache, unless you can afford to leave the island.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't disagree with any of those - keep in mind, I'm the person who doesn't think that "blank slate" challenges are necessarily punishment!

That's why I put "punish" in quotes. Replace it with hinder, slow down, etc. What I was saying is that the "no past finds" rule does not create a blank slate.

Share this post


Link to post

You cannot use any caches you've already found to log the new 81 cache fizzy on the island. All caches found must be published before this new fizzy was published to be logged too.

That was going to be number 4 on my list:

 

4) CO is a sadist: No past finds and no future caches.

Share this post


Link to post

 

I don't disagree with any of those - keep in mind, I'm the person who doesn't think that "blank slate" challenges are necessarily punishment!

 

I don't have a problem with "blank slate" caches. But my definition of "blank slate" matches Avernar's - "caches must be published after today". To tell someone with 10,000 finds that the caches they already visited don't count is not a blank slate. That's putting a 15,400 pound elephant on one of the scales.

 

Take this imaginary example.

You have an island. It has 82 caches on it, each of the difficulty/terrain matrix combinations and a "81 fizzy" challenge cache.

 

You find all 81 combinations then log the 82nd cache, which is the challenge. All is well. You're thinking of placing some more caches. Then a new cache appears, with a "blank slate" provision. You cannot use any caches you've already found to log the new 81 cache fizzy on the island. All caches found must be published before this new fizzy was published to be logged too.

 

Is that a blank slate? You are effectively banned from that 83rd cache, unless you can afford to leave the island.

I can completely understand where you're coming from.

 

Here is the parallel. A Fizzy cache is published at a time when there are 157 caches with a 3.5 / 5.0 D/T combo. The first few years, old-timers are able to pick caches that are close to them, or that match their Terrain expertise (kayaking, mountain climbing, traveling to the ISS, whatever).

 

Now it's a few years later and just one 3.5 / 5.0 cache exists, and it's at the top of K2. It's only been logged twice, once by a Sherpa who stumbled across it by accident. A new, eager cacher comes along who would love to complete the challenge, but for a variety of reasons climbing K2 is out of the question.

 

I'm not saying that your island cache is necessarily unfair or punishing to any class of cachers (nor am I saying that about my Fizzy example). I'm just saying that I can see the parallels. It would be hard for me to imagine someone thinking that the island cache is restrictive in a way that my K2 Fizzy challenge isn't. To me they have tons in common.

Edited by addisonbr

Share this post


Link to post

A new, eager cacher comes along who would love to complete the challenge, but for a variety of reasons climbing K2 is out of the question.

I'd love to get an APE icon but the closest one is thousands of kilometers away. If you show up at the game late then there's going to be stuff you've missed out on.

 

I just don't get this "lets be fair to the newbie" thing. I don't know if you've seen the topic where a CO wanted to "restrict" the cache to newbies so that they could get a FTF. :D

 

The newbies will become old timers eventually. Then they can be grumpy curmudgeons like the rest of us. :D

Share this post


Link to post
I just don't get this "lets be fair to the newbie" thing.

I'm not saying that though. I'm just saying that I don't think "no caches before this date" challenges are unfair any more than I think that "no finds before this date" challenges are unfair. (I guess I could see how some people could see them as "unfair" - but I wouldn't understand why one is unfair while the other isn't.)

Share this post


Link to post
I just don't get this "lets be fair to the newbie" thing.

I'm not saying that though. I'm just saying that I don't think "no caches before this date" challenges are unfair any more than I think that "no finds before this date" challenges are unfair. (I guess I could see how some people could see them as "unfair" - but I wouldn't understand why one is unfair while the other isn't.)

 

Simple

 

The first is "all published caches, except a portion some people has found because they found it before a given date". The rule applies to the cacher

The second is "all published caches, except those that were published after this date" The rule applies to the cache

 

While there is an opportunity for a cacher to pull out an archived cache and use that one to qualify on the second rule, technically if a new cacher could find the same archived cache they could log the same thing. Archived caches don't always totally disappear (but that's another topic). It's putting a limitation on specific cachers versus putting a limitation on the caches themselves.

 

It's saying the rules are different for the same cache, based on the different experience two cachers had.

That's up to the cache owner, as mentioned earlier in this thread the intent may be to throw down a gauntlet to the experienced cachers and make it more challenging. That may be what they desire but don't call it a "blank slate", it's weighted toward beginner cachers.

Share this post


Link to post
The first is "all published caches, except a portion some people has found because they found it before a given date". The rule applies to the cacher

The second is "all published caches, except those that were published after this date" The rule applies to the cache

Isn't the net effect essentially the same?

 

It seems like in both cases, you have cachers with idiosyncratic pools of caches to choose from. In the first, it's whatever caches an individual hasn't found yet. In the second, it's whatever caches weren't archived before an individual started caching.

Share this post


Link to post
I just don't get this "lets be fair to the newbie" thing.

I'm not saying that though.

I wasn't saying you were saying that. I was referring to other COs.

 

I'm just saying that I don't think "no caches before this date" challenges are unfair any more than I think that "no finds before this date" challenges are unfair. (I guess I could see how some people could see them as "unfair" - but I wouldn't understand why one is unfair while the other isn't.)

I agree. It has nothing to do with being unfair because each challenge will be different to each person because of what they've found already. The only exception is that one rule I presented as it completely takes all past caches AND finds out of the equation.

 

I can't remember if it was on a cache page or in a pub or forum conversation the CO was saying the reason for the rule was to level the playing field.

Share this post


Link to post
The first is "all published caches, except a portion some people has found because they found it before a given date". The rule applies to the cacher

The second is "all published caches, except those that were published after this date" The rule applies to the cache

Isn't the net effect essentially the same?

 

It seems like in both cases, you have cachers with idiosyncratic pools of caches to choose from. In the first, it's whatever caches an individual hasn't found yet. In the second, it's whatever caches weren't archived before an individual started caching.

 

No, it isn't the same. Because you're invalidating a cache that a cacher has actually been to vs intent to visit.

 

If I found a 5.0/3.5 before the challenge was posted, I've still found a 5.0/3.5

If that 5.0/3.5 cache gets archived, I've still found a 5.0/3.5 - it's just not available for another person to find, they have to find a different cache.

Same cache, same rule. If you found it, it counts.

 

Now, with the previous finds not allowed scenario:

 

I found a 5.0/3.5 before the challenge was posted. I've still found a 5.0/3.5 but simply because I was there I can't qualify for it. You can walk right up and log it, and use it to qualify for a challenge. Same cache, different cachers, different rules. If you found it, maybe it counts.

 

How is that a "blank slate"?

 

How does that stop me from targeting a cacher I don't like by looking at his/her profile and specifically blocking certain dates based on their caching activity?

 

Now what I'm saying up there is just my opinion. It sure isn't guidelines, rules or anything Groundspeak is following. I guess I'm more discussing the semantics of what is a "blank slate" more than what's a fair challenge cache. A cache owner can make a challenge as difficult or as easy as they want the experience to be. If you set a ridiculous challenge then don't expect a lot of find logs. I like reading find logs on my caches.

Share this post


Link to post

It seems like in both cases, you have cachers with idiosyncratic pools of caches to choose from. In the first, it's whatever caches an individual hasn't found yet. In the second, it's whatever caches weren't archived before an individual started caching.

Which brings me to my point. Is the CO making the rules to try to balance things out between the groups (older cacher or newer cacher) or is the CO making the rules so that each group has fun?

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

×