Jump to content

Favorites List


L0ne.R
Followers 5

Recommended Posts

Also, as one has already pointed out, the numbers of votes is going to be tied not only to the quality of the cache, but also to the number of folks who visit. This could mean a quality convenient* cache with "run away" with votes as compared to the same cache that is less convenient. I've already spot checked some ranking and this seems to hold true. The number of votes does not equal the percentage of finders who voted it as a favorite. A very inconvenient cache where everyone who finds it--and is eligible to vote--votes it as a favorite would be penalized over a very convenient cache where only 1 in a 50 votes it a favorite.

 

*Convenient meaning how close to a caching population, difficulty, terrain, special gear, puzzles, seasonal availability, etc. A more convenient cache will get more visitors than the otherwise equal cache that is less convenient to visit.

I totally agree that this will happen, but I question whether these caches are really being "penalized" or that its really a bad thing per se. Caches that are "out of the way" required research to learn about and find for most people anyway. I don't think their situation will change. I would predict that they get visited by the same small number of cachers who learned about/bothered with it before.

Either way, I don't think this will be seen as a case of "winners and losers" for very long. In their relative area they will still probably have the most "points" and thats probably enough to get the attention of anyone who just happens to be passing through.

Overall, I doubt the caches will be "penalized" so much as not receive a boon. Semantics maybe, but I think its an important distinction. Not many people were finding these things in the first place. If that doesn't change, the numbers will reflect the norm. Clearly, the average cacher prefers convenient caches over inconveneint ones, because thats what they seek. People looking for a challenge will have the same work cut out for them as before.

 

Edit: Its not a perfect system but we still have bookmark lists, local awards (at least here we do) and Lost & Found to help highlight special caches. Hopefully the full combo helps.

Edited by d+n.s
Link to comment

Anyone else have DNFs that you wish you could add to your favorites?

Yup! Its in my Cream of the Crop bookmark list, too. Just a blinkie on a bridge. But alone on that bridge at night, with fighter jets taking off and landing nearby, runway lights blinking, a train rolling past, blowing its whistle in the night, and a waterfall, and all of this in a town I had never been to before. It was awesome.

 

 

Link to comment

I also had to lower my standards a little bit when it came to distributing my votes. My feel is if it's a good cache, then why not give it a vote if you have the vote to give? I still keep what I consider to be the "best of the best caches" on a bookmark list for those that are interested in that. There are plenty of good caches that I don't mind putting my stamp of approval on. I'm sure the cache owners are happy to get the vote and see somebody enjoyed his or her cache. And you know what a happy cache owner does? He or she puts out more cool caches. :) My two cents. :)

Link to comment

Let the fun begin!

Just this morning I received my FIRST solicitation to 'favorite' a cache I found about two years ago.

 

Someone emailed you asking to Favorite their cache? Now that's Low Class.

 

Even if it was the best cache in the world, I would not add it to my List if the owner asked me to.

Shhhh!!!! It was his mother!

 

Link to comment

I also had to lower my standards a little bit when it came to distributing my votes. My feel is if it's a good cache, then why not give it a vote if you have the vote to give? I still keep what I consider to be the "best of the best caches" on a bookmark list for those that are interested in that. There are plenty of good caches that I don't mind putting my stamp of approval on. I'm sure the cache owners are happy to get the vote and see somebody enjoyed his or her cache. And you know what a happy cache owner does? He or she puts out more cool caches. :) My two cents. :)

I don't understand why you would feel you had to do that. As others have pointed out, you don't have to use all of your votes. In fact, you probably shouldn't. I have never cached anywhere where I felt that 1 cache in 10 was worth remembering, much less letting others know about it. When you feel they're special, mark 'em as special. If not, save your votes.

 

 

Link to comment
the numbers of votes is going to be tied not only to the quality of the cache, but also to the number of folks who visit.

Yeah, I can see that happening. I'm just not sure it's a problem, for me. For instance, the lamest virtual I've done, (according to my highly biased caching standards), is called Magic Kingdom. It was my first virt, and in true icon-ho fashion, I logged a find just to score the cute little ghost. I'm not a fan of tourist traps, probably less a fan of Disney as I worked there, and as such, the whole concept of Disney World as a virt just seems cheesy to me. But it's been found 3732 times, and has scored 31 favorite votes, so I guess a bunch of folks really did like it. If the number of votes was all I used as a litmus test, I would be disappointed by that one. Because of this, I'll use the number of votes to bring certain caches to my attention, then review them to see if I'll like them.

 

It's not a perfect system, but I can make it work for me.

Link to comment

It was fun going through my caching history and remembering the ones that seemed to stand out. I did not include any archived caches, although I have seen that others have done that. I know that I missed more than a few caches that should be on my list, and may expand the list at some point in the future, or will add caches as they come to mind. There are some that I have on my favorites bookmark that I did not include in my first run-through. Go figure.

 

I am not sure how the feature will play out as a practical matter. At this point, I could not rely on it take me to the local caches that I have enjoyed the most. Some of these are rarely found and will never have the numbers. And the caches that seem to be compiling the most votes (either locally or where I have traveled) are those I would have visited in any event. I suppose that if I see a cache with a lot of votes I will at least look at it online and decide if it is something I want to do. Iit won't replace the kind of research I do before any trip, but practicality is certainly not the only consideration.

Edited by mulvaney
Link to comment

With a number of ways to play the game, you are bound to have lots of different criteria people use to rate caches. No rating system is going to be perfect. No system will please everyone. I do feel that I will be able to use it effectively to determine the quality of caches in my area. In the end, I feel the data will be beneficial to those willing to do the research.

Link to comment

Favorites will likely not impact my caching style much. I will continue to hand pick the caches I do based on their pages and where they fall on my trips. I might examining a cache with any favorite votes slightly more than the average cache. It's certainly not making me not want to do the caches I have picked out for my trip next summer. However, I do like to see what other people liked as likes are so varied.

Link to comment

Near as I can tell to this point, exceptionally old caches are gathering a lot of votes. Caches that were placed in 2000, 2001 and that may have been sought out precisely *because* of their age, are bubbling to the top. Virtuals are also doing incredibly well, although I suspect a lot of that has to do with simple find totals.

 

The three Triad caches have the top three totals in the U.S., and it's not close.

Link to comment

With a number of ways to play the game, you are bound to have lots of different criteria people use to rate caches. No rating system is going to be perfect. No system will please everyone. I do feel that I will be able to use it effectively to determine the quality of caches in my area. In the end, I feel the data will be beneficial to those willing to do the research.

 

Indeed, but that's sort of the beauty of the simplicity of the system, in my opinion. Not everyone likes the same caches, but if, on average a particular cache receives a lot of favorites, chances are the majority of people are bound to like it. Instead of getting one cacher's opinion via their favorites list (which I have done in the past and is still there as a helpful tool when considering fun ones to go after), you're getting a sort of `average' of everyone's favorites list. Will you see a highly favorited cache that doesn't wow you? Absolutely. Will you see a barely if at all favorited cache that does? For sure. I think most are going to find though that that will be the exception rather than the rule.

 

I've checked a few times throughout the day as the first votes begin to pour in and an awful lot of the highly favorited caches in my area are the ones I also favorited or have been on my `to do' list. So far, there is absolutely nothing that I don't like about this.

Link to comment

I also had to lower my standards a little bit when it came to distributing my votes. My feel is if it's a good cache, then why not give it a vote if you have the vote to give? I still keep what I consider to be the "best of the best caches" on a bookmark list for those that are interested in that. There are plenty of good caches that I don't mind putting my stamp of approval on. I'm sure the cache owners are happy to get the vote and see somebody enjoyed his or her cache. And you know what a happy cache owner does? He or she puts out more cool caches. :) My two cents. :)

I don't understand why you would feel you had to do that. As others have pointed out, you don't have to use all of your votes. In fact, you probably shouldn't. I have never cached anywhere where I felt that 1 cache in 10 was worth remembering, much less letting others know about it. When you feel they're special, mark 'em as special. If not, save your votes.

I don't know... I think 1 out of 10 caches I've found have been pretty darn cool. I tend to avoid ones that look crummy and seek out areas with cool ones. Maybe mobywv does the same?

I'd say let him spend his points how he'd like. I don't think saying the top %10 of caches you've found are among your favorites breaks anything. No one said they'd be getting 20-30 votes. Just one.

Link to comment

Near as I can tell to this point, exceptionally old caches are gathering a lot of votes. Caches that were placed in 2000, 2001 and that may have been sought out precisely *because* of their age, are bubbling to the top. Virtuals are also doing incredibly well, although I suspect a lot of that has to do with simple find totals.

 

The three Triad caches have the top three totals in the U.S., and it's not close.

 

The Triad caches are also located in a place where there are a lot of geocachers. When I looked at Seattle, the 20th cache on the list had 11 votes. Searching a 50 miles radius from where I live results in the second cache on the list with only 5 votes.

 

When I look at the top 20 caches within 50 miles 9 of them are tradtionals, there are five unknown caches and the rest are split evenly between multicaches, earth caches, and virtuals. I did searches in several other cities and the results were fairly similar. I have no idea if this pattern will continue as more people become aware of the favorites feature but, if it does it provides a rather compelling rebuttal to those that claim that the reason that there are so many P&G caches is because that's what people want to find.

 

I think of it sort of like the way I think about music. There is lots of music that is popular, but that doesn't mean I think much of it is very good. In other words, Justin Bieber is the LPC of geocaches.

Link to comment

This system would be perfect if they also included 1 "gong" award per hundred finds that you can assign to your least favorite cache. The caveat being that the issuer's name is associated with the "gong" just like the blue ribbons and you have to write a "why I don't like it" log that goes with the "gong" award.

 

Tis great that this "favorites" system is not anonymous.

 

Beware of some abuse of the system. Sock puppet and CO logging (if the CO logs thier own cache as a find, can they also assign their own cache as a favorite?) and "good ol boy" clubs where friends favorite each other's caches in backscratch fashion.

 

It's not as good as the "awesomeness" concept that Garmin put forth, but it is a step forward.

Link to comment

I also had to lower my standards a little bit when it came to distributing my votes. My feel is if it's a good cache, then why not give it a vote if you have the vote to give? I still keep what I consider to be the "best of the best caches" on a bookmark list for those that are interested in that. There are plenty of good caches that I don't mind putting my stamp of approval on. I'm sure the cache owners are happy to get the vote and see somebody enjoyed his or her cache. And you know what a happy cache owner does? He or she puts out more cool caches. :) My two cents. :)

I don't understand why you would feel you had to do that. As others have pointed out, you don't have to use all of your votes. In fact, you probably shouldn't. I have never cached anywhere where I felt that 1 cache in 10 was worth remembering, much less letting others know about it. When you feel they're special, mark 'em as special. If not, save your votes.

 

"Lowering my standards" was perhaps not the right term to use. The caches I chose to favorite, that weren't on my bookmark list, are all still pretty darn good. I look at the new favorite system as a chance to recognize more than just the legendary caches. I honestly could find most of those famous caches before by simply sorting through the various bookmark lists. Now if you only want to use 10 out of your 1000 favorite votes, that's your little red wagon. Me? I'm gonna use my votes and give hiders praise when I feel it's deserved. Indeed, I want to encourage people to hide more quality caches, not discourage.

Link to comment

It was fun going through my caching history and remembering the ones that seemed to stand out. I did not include any archived caches, although I have seen that others have done that. I know that I missed more than a few caches that should be on my list, and may expand the list at some point in the future, or will add caches as they come to mind. There are some that I have on my favorites bookmark that I did not include in my first run-through. Go figure.

 

I am not sure how the feature will play out as a practical matter. At this point, I could not rely on it take me to the local caches that I have enjoyed the most. Some of these are rarely found and will never have the numbers. And the caches that seem to be compiling the most votes (either locally or where I have traveled) are those I would have visited in any event. I suppose that if I see a cache with a lot of votes I will at least look at it online and decide if it is something I want to do. Iit won't replace the kind of research I do before any trip, but practicality is certainly not the only consideration.

 

I've also been enjoying going over my list. I've included archived caches.. [would have also included a couple event caches if if was possible] because I see this list as a useful way to confirm the hiders merit as well as providing a resource for the finders.

Link to comment

Favorites will likely not impact my caching style much. I will continue to hand pick the caches I do based on their pages and where they fall on my trips. I might examining a cache with any favorite votes slightly more than the average cache. It's certainly not making me not want to do the caches I have picked out for my trip next summer. However, I do like to see what other people liked as likes are so varied.

 

I'm with you on this. Where it might make a difference is when I am on a trip and have a limited amount of time, I might give the higher scored one more consideration when looking right around an area. I'm still going to read the description though to see if it sounds like one I'd like.

 

I see it as a tool to help. No one is forcing me to go to the higher scored cache :)

Link to comment

I also had to lower my standards a little bit when it came to distributing my votes. My feel is if it's a good cache, then why not give it a vote if you have the vote to give? I still keep what I consider to be the "best of the best caches" on a bookmark list for those that are interested in that. There are plenty of good caches that I don't mind putting my stamp of approval on. I'm sure the cache owners are happy to get the vote and see somebody enjoyed his or her cache. And you know what a happy cache owner does? He or she puts out more cool caches. :) My two cents. :)

I don't understand why you would feel you had to do that. As others have pointed out, you don't have to use all of your votes. In fact, you probably shouldn't. I have never cached anywhere where I felt that 1 cache in 10 was worth remembering, much less letting others know about it. When you feel they're special, mark 'em as special. If not, save your votes.

 

"Lowering my standards" was perhaps not the right term to use. The caches I chose to favorite, that weren't on my bookmark list, are all still pretty darn good. I look at the new favorite system as a chance to recognize more than just the legendary caches. I honestly could find most of those famous caches before by simply sorting through the various bookmark lists. Now if you only want to use 10 out of your 1000 favorite votes, that's your little red wagon. Me? I'm gonna use my votes and give hiders praise when I feel it's deserved. Indeed, I want to encourage people to hide more quality caches, not discourage.

LOL! Well, I guess my little red wagon has a few more votes in it than yours. I can certainly understand you wanting to use all of yours.
Link to comment

Favorites will likely not impact my caching style much. I will continue to hand pick the caches I do based on their pages and where they fall on my trips. I might examining a cache with any favorite votes slightly more than the average cache. It's certainly not making me not want to do the caches I have picked out for my trip next summer. However, I do like to see what other people liked as likes are so varied.

I will definitely be using this feature when planning a caching trip away from home in an area I've never cached before. Based on what I've seen so far, I'll use favorites to pick a few exceptional hides in an area, and plan my caching day around them. It seems like a pretty useful tool!

Link to comment

Very interesting discussion to find just after having gone through my own find history...

 

I too already have a 'best of the best' favorites bookmark list, which includes 1.8% of my total finds. I intend to keep that list, because those are truly the cream of the crop. Interestingly relative to a previous comment, 3 of them are all very close together and were found back to back, in what was to me a truly spectacular area. I'm glad that the new system doesn't enforce something like literally 1 out of each 10 consecutive finds, instead giving a pool of votes which can be used at will.

 

Having this many votes available is nice, so that I can give recognition to other really good caches without diluting my bookmark list. So far, I ended up with 5.9% of my total finds as favorites in the new system. It is kind of tough, because there have been a lot of good caches which are worthy of recognition, but acknowledging every one of them would likely push it beyond 10%.

 

The new search is cool. Looks like virtually no LPC/MKH type hides being favorited in this area so far. Not that I have the specific dislike for them that so many have, but few of them have the sort of draw for me as a 5/5 puzzle/multi or one miles from pavement in the middle of the desert.

 

I totally understand the theoretical desire to favorite a DNF as well, though I also agree that it should not be changed. Had I not gone back and avenged it, one of mine would certainly have qualified.

Link to comment

This is also really great as a CO. A few of my caches have been favorited so far and they are exactly the ones that I personally feel were my best hides. It's good to confirm that the ones I feel were my best were the ones others really enjoyed.

 

Just for added anecdotal evidence about micros, my 3.5/4 cache hidden early this year has had 7 finds, 2 favorites. My one and only micro (which is a park and grab but at least offers some history) has had 115 finds, no favorites. Heh, no love for micros in these parts I guess.

Link to comment

I looked at the (very) few hides we thought were awesome (good hike with an exceptional location for the hide) to place one of our "fav" votes and noticed there aren't any others noted yet.

None on the upper levels in terrain either (4.5/5).

Realizing this feature's still new, looked around and saw "favorites" on numerous cache 'n dashe hides.

 

On another thread, folks have placed the most favorites on a cache in NJ. We did it and found it unremarkable.

Normally done in large groups, maybe the social interaction and not the actual hide itself deemed it a favorite.

 

I guess we won't be able to rely on "favorites" to plan for when traveling.

Link to comment

On the other hand I have already spotted one cachers cache that has been favorited by a team account. That team account is controlled by that same cacher. Um, ok. :blink:

 

I took a guess and checked out a team and guessed right. Ok, whatever. Unfortunately there is no way to prevent this sort of self serving favoriting, but fortunately this won't happen that often as creating a team account or creating a sock with lots of bogus finds seems like a lot of work just so you can favorite your own cache. But if the team or sock is well known, people won't take the favoriting seriously.

Link to comment

I'm happy 100%. :D

I just wanted to thank all involved for, what I believe, is a great addition to the site. I've always wanted to see a " rating system " and this will work fine. Looking forward to being able to load a file of only " favorite " caches in a given area.....I'll probably load my regular file as well.

The new tool gives more options.

Link to comment

I looked at the (very) few hides we thought were awesome (good hike with an exceptional location for the hide) to place one of our "fav" votes and noticed there aren't any others noted yet.

None on the upper levels in terrain either (4.5/5).

Realizing this feature's still new, looked around and saw "favorites" on numerous cache 'n dashe hides.

 

On another thread, folks have placed the most favorites on a cache in NJ. We did it and found it unremarkable.

Normally done in large groups, maybe the social interaction and not the actual hide itself deemed it a favorite.

 

I guess we won't be able to rely on "favorites" to plan for when traveling.

 

At the same time you have to take into account the caches that other people do when they're doing their favorites. I can't do 4.5/5 terrain caches since I have a partner who goes with me often that physically can't do long hikes or difficult terrains. So when I did my favorites list I did it based on the favorites of the caches we were able to do this year. Less people do caches with higher terrain ratings.

 

That being said if someone only does 4.5/5 terrain caches they will still only get to mark 10% of their finds as favorites.

 

Where I am it seems to falling slightly differently. In my area the highest in points for favorites is a 4.5 terrain cache. Then after the oldest cache in the area another 4.5 terrain cache is highest in votes. From there on out it's lots of 3's, 2's and then 1 and 1.5's.

 

For me I look at the terrain rating first when going for a cache. From there on out I look at cache pages and logs from other people to determine if I want to do it. While a favorite rating might bring it to my attention more it's not going to have huge bearing on whether or not I do a cache (even when travelling).

Link to comment
Unfortunately there is no way to prevent this sort of self serving favoriting, but fortunately this won't happen that often as creating a team account or creating a sock with lots of bogus finds seems like a lot of work just so you can favorite your own cache.

FWIW, I don't think you can vote unless you're a premium member. Might not eliminate the possibility of sock puppet voting, but I suspect it goes a long way.

Link to comment

I looked at the (very) few hides we thought were awesome (good hike with an exceptional location for the hide) to place one of our "fav" votes and noticed there aren't any others noted yet.

None on the upper levels in terrain either (4.5/5).

Realizing this feature's still new, looked around and saw "favorites" on numerous cache 'n dashe hides.

 

On another thread, folks have placed the most favorites on a cache in NJ. We did it and found it unremarkable.

Normally done in large groups, maybe the social interaction and not the actual hide itself deemed it a favorite.

 

I guess we won't be able to rely on "favorites" to plan for when traveling.

I see that more than half of the caches I have favorited, I'm the only one to do so far. These caches are either difficult hikes or difficults puzzles so they don't get found often and therefore won't get as many favorites. However, I think that eventually some of these caches will get additional votes. The system should be very helpful for someone who likes rarely visited caches when they are traveling. Look for caches with high terrain or high difficulty and then sort these by number of favorites. Of course if there is a cache n dash that gets a hundred favorite votes, you might want to check it out as there may be some reason it is standing out amoung other cache n dash hides that get only a few favorites.

 

if the CO logs thier own cache as a find, can they also assign their own cache as a favorite?

I have a few caches that I've adopted after finding. I am unable to add them to my favorites list. B)

Another silly waste of code to stop a perceived abuse.

 

Nothing is stopping a cacher from creating a sockpuppet account and logging their own cache to favorite it. Nothing is keeping a couple with separate accounts from logging and favoriting each others' caches. What happens now if you adopt a cache that you previously favorited? Does it remove your favorite vote? Does this mean that if you are adopting a cache, you should favor it just before you adopt it? Can I adopt my cache to someone else, log the find, favorite the cache, adopt the cache back, and delete my find?

Link to comment

1) Anyone able to see the "Favorites" on their own caches without having to go to each one individually? Like when you look at "Geocaches(YOUR)" own cache list?

 

2) On finding my favorites. I have over 14,000 finds. So I of course not only can't I remember each one or even go through them all, this is what I found was a little bit easier and for those with GSAK. I started with GSAK and filtered by types of caches (earthcaches, puzzles,etc )first to remind me what were my favorites. I excluded traditionals for later cause there were so many. Then I then filtered by oldest caches, caches when I first started and later I will go by terrain and difficulty. Hopefully this may also jog my memory of creative ones. But did you notice I didn't mention "by cacher" I will not do the filter by cacher unless I know they have good quality caches. I will not play favorites to my friends unless they have a cache worth rating and I would expect the same from them.

Link to comment
Nothing is stopping a cacher from creating a sockpuppet account and logging their own cache to favorite it.

I think that only premium accounts can vote probably cuts down on this. Won't technically eliminate it, but if armies of cachers want to pay $30 a year so that they can add an extra Favorite vote to their own listings I don't think I'd mind too much. Maybe the rest of us would get an extra blade server or two out of it.

 

I think it's fairly standard practice in community-generated-content systems to discourage voting on your own contributions... There are probably ways to get around it, but I can live with a couple of people doing the adopt-out-a-cache/log-the-find/favorite-the-cache/adopt-it-back/delete-the-find trick.

Link to comment
1) Anyone able to see the "Favorites" on their own caches without having to go to each one individually? Like when you look at "Geocaches(YOUR)" own cache list?

From here:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/my/

 

Click the little icon on the right under "Stat Bar" to go to your public profile. From there click the "Geocaches" tab and then "All Geocache Hides". Click the blue ribbon to sort and you're good.

Link to comment

Maybe there could be a second number provided, the ratio of favorites/finds. It's easy enough to calculate manually, but if we could sort by that ratio, it'd be even more useful. A GSAK or Greasemonkey script at least?

 

I was thinking the same thing. A cache w/ 20 favorites out of 500 finds isn't the same as a cache w/ 20 favorites out of 50 finds. However, the new ratings are definitely an overall improvement no matter which way you look at it. Thank you thank you thank you Groundspeak!

Link to comment

1) Anyone able to see the "Favorites" on their own caches without having to go to each one individually? Like when you look at "Geocaches(YOUR)" own cache list?

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?u=jellis&sortdir=desc&sort=fav

Thanks but wondering why you have to go the long way around and not be able to see it right from the Geocaches(yours) which is one step. This way you have to hit your profile -geocaches tab-all geocaches which is 3 steps.

Link to comment

2) Then I then filtered by oldest caches, caches when I first started....Hopefully this may also jog my memory of creative ones.

 

I've decided not to go back more then a couple of years, unless when reading the logs it looks like the cache is still the same and the recent logs continue to praise the cache.

 

I've gone back to a few old caches and found that they had changed and weren't quite what they used to be. For instance, one favourable cache I found about 5 years ago was in a hollow stump. When you got to the hollow stump and peered inside you would find a dead racoon. Or at least that's what I thought when I first peered in. I took a stick and poked the fur just to be sure the thing wasn't alive. Turned out to be a coon skin hat covering a nice size container. Fun cache for me. Last year I was in the area so I re-visited the cache - same cache description (the cache page still says "don't fear the keeper of the cache"), no coon skin cap anymore, the 5 year old container was battered but still functional. The find was on a nice rail-to-trail so it was still a decent but average caching experience. Not something I would currently highly recommend to other cachers.

Link to comment

Maybe there could be a second number provided, the ratio of favorites/finds.

 

We're playing with this idea too - at least as an alternate method for sorting/scoring. The data is there which is the important part.

 

The ratio will work better once more people rate their favorites, though even now it can be useful.

Link to comment

Let the fun begin!

Just this morning I received my FIRST solicitation to 'favorite' a cache I found about two years ago.

 

Someone emailed you asking to Favorite their cache? Now that's Low Class.

 

Even if it was the best cache in the world, I would not add it to my List if the owner asked me to.

Agreed, that would be an incentive to -1 it if possible.

 

Love the new Favorites feature! :blink: I have no idea how I will "spend" 702 votes, but agree with previous comments that more is better than less. (My "just right" would be about 5 percent. 1% is low, based on my personal Faves bookmark, and the 10% seems high.)

 

Also love that you can sort nearest caches by Favorite votes. This will be a great resource for my road trips. And seeing what others chose as Favorites is v. helpful, since I concur, some of my favorite caches tend to be those remote hikes that won't get as many votes.

 

Well done, Groundspeak!

 

I too doubt if I will ever empty out my little red wagon as the dog who knows a guy called it. I've had a 2% Solution of Favorites bookmark list for a few years now. I guess they picked 10% to make it easier for the mathematically challenged? :unsure:

 

I can see it now on ebay, buy your favorite votes here! :lol:

 

Yup, that nonsense has also started. :blink:

 

As I already posted in the other thread about faves, no system will be flawless. This one is off to a pretty good start IMO.

Link to comment

Maybe there could be a second number provided, the ratio of favorites/finds.

 

We're playing with this idea too - at least as an alternate method for sorting/scoring. The data is there which is the important part.

 

The ratio will work better once more people rate their favorites, though even now it can be useful.

 

Just adding a column to the cache search page that shows the number of found it logs would solve this quick and easy. Put it right next to the blue ribbon column and you have your "ratio" right there in front of you.

Link to comment

Maybe there could be a second number provided, the ratio of favorites/finds.

 

We're playing with this idea too - at least as an alternate method for sorting/scoring. The data is there which is the important part.

 

The ratio will work better once more people rate their favorites, though even now it can be useful.

 

Jeremy used the word SCORING.

Does that mean that we are allowed to keep score?

Link to comment

Maybe there could be a second number provided, the ratio of favorites/finds. It's easy enough to calculate manually, but if we could sort by that ratio, it'd be even more useful. A GSAK or Greasemonkey script at least?

 

Somewhere around here, I made a point...

Number of favorites is visible at the top. Number of find logs is right above the logs. Favorites/Finds=%

 

For example, GC28 has 25 favorites, and 729 finds - 3.4%. But many of the people that have found this cache do not still geocache. I would bet that about half of the 729 logs belong to accounts that are no longer in use, let alone premium members.

 

To get a more accurate "percentage" you would need "percentage of accounts that utilize the favorites". So come up with the number of favorites, and then look at all of the accounts that have finds on the page that have marked any cache as a favorite.

 

Hypothetical and guessing numbers: Of those 729 found logs, there may be something like 700 unique accounts. Of those 700 unique accounts, maybe 1/3 (233) are premium accounts. Of those 233 premium accounts, many have never used the favorites - maybe only 20% - so 46 accounts have used favorites on any cache. So the best percentage would be 25 of the 46 *possible* favorites have been used on this cache (54%). But that becomes VERY tedious to figure out...

 

...and I would now add to that: "But of course it's doable"

Link to comment

Didn't know whether to start a new topic or not, but I received my first solicitation today. Was the cache good? It was in a cool place, but nothing too special about the cache (not enough to mark as a favorite at least). It seems to be working though. The cache now has 7 favorites and is on my first page of results (I know it was not on my top 2 pages last I looked).

Link to comment

Didn't know whether to start a new topic or not, but I received my first solicitation today. Was the cache good? It was in a cool place, but nothing too special about the cache (not enough to mark as a favorite at least). It seems to be working though. The cache now has 7 favorites and is on my first page of results (I know it was not on my top 2 pages last I looked).

ew...

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 5
×
×
  • Create New...