Give favorites a chance to work

7.9k · January 27, 2011

I'm not certain what AZcachemeister thinks is really bad.

Let me help you.

A cache hidden under the dirt behind a dumpster at a fast-food joint with used needles lying all around.

A cache located 6 inches from human excrement in a homeless camp.

A cache disguised as a piece of garbage in a pile of other rotting garbage.

And yes, I have actually seen each of the above. Each had been in the described situation since it was placed. None of the owners had made any attempt to fix the problems.

FWIW, I think negative points are a bad idea, but this persistent belief you have about how "good" and "bad" are always just opinions is (IMO, as always) nonsense.

Been there, done that, got the T-Shirt.

Let me know the next time you are in my territory, I know ALL the best dumpsters!

8k · January 27, 2011

poop poop pooped poop

pooped. poop pooped poop

You seem to have a poop fetish.

My original draft used a few other words but given the extreme level of moderation and lack of cival rights in this forum, I changed them to a word that I knew the moderators would allow. :mellow:

2.2k · January 27, 2011

I like the Favorites system as it sits right now, frankly. The only change I would make would be to increase the number of caches one needs to find before earning a Favorite.

I'd be happier if you earned a Favorite for every 20 caches you Find.

Maybe I am just too picky, but I have a whack of Favorite points I'll likely never award unless I can find some magical area where every cache I find for two weeks is just freakin' fantastic.

3.2k · January 27, 2011

I like the Favorites system as it sits right now, frankly. The only change I would make would be to increase the number of caches one needs to find before earning a Favorite.

I'd be happier if you earned a Favorite for every 20 caches you Find.

Maybe I am just too picky, but I have a whack of Favorite points I'll likely never award unless I can find some magical area where every cache I find for two weeks is just freakin' fantastic.

I agree and have done something about it... I've made my own rule to not exceed 5%.

5k · January 28, 2011

I'm not certain what AZcachemeister thinks is really bad.

Let me help you.

A cache hidden under the dirt behind a dumpster at a fast-food joint with used needles lying all around.

A cache located 6 inches from human excrement in a homeless camp.

A cache disguised as a piece of garbage in a pile of other rotting garbage.

And yes, I have actually seen each of the above. Each had been in the described situation since it was placed. None of the owners had made any attempt to fix the problems.

FWIW, I think negative points are a bad idea, but this persistent belief you have about how "good" and "bad" are always just opinions is (IMO, as always) nonsense.

Kind of interesting that in my post I gave examples very close to yours. It seems I already know that sometimes caches are in areas that really aren't fit for geocaches but which may not be called out as such in the guidelines. One problem is that conditions sometimes change after a cache is hidden. When hidden, the area near the dumpster may have been clear of needles and trash (other that what's in the dumpster and it may have been covered and a significant distance from where the cache is hidden). There may not have been a homeless camp and certainly nobody had pooped on the cache. The use of camouflage that looks like trash may be controversial, but I've certainly looked for cache in areas that need CITO. Again the trash may not have been there when the cache was hidden or the cache owner may have hidden the cache there in hopes that cachers would do CITO.

People often place geocaches in locations they feel will not be found by muggles or where geocachers can search without being seen by muggles. In urban areas, these are also locations that homeless people might use for toilets or people may use as trash dumps. I believe that often the caches were placed in these area before there was a problem or the problem was not as evident on the day the cache was placed (after it rained for example). The property owner or appropriate agency will sometimes clean up these locations when brought to their attention. I've seen caches that I complained about in my log that a month or two later get glowing logs on what a great hide they were (who knows, they may even get on someone's favorite list). There may be a small number of geocahers who are not disturbed by garbage or even by excrement and they may see the opportunity to hide is such location is an advantage. Certainly, those who want to avoid these locations have a right to know what to expect so they can be avoided.

I believe the best response to these caches is to mention it in your log. If cachers are aware that there may be a problem they can decide whether to search for these caches or not, and cache owners can decide to move or archive the cache.

I have to agree with Toz on this. I hid a cache on the outside of a hairpin curve on a trail high in the mountains. The cache did great for two years and I got a lot of good logs about the view. Suddenly, I started getting logs saying that they didn't look because of all the toilet paper. Apparently, someone pooped and then everyone else decided that this was the spot to relieve themselves. I quickly archived it.

A few months ago, I hid an ammo can in a local flood control basin/park. The spot was pristine. A week later, the DNFs started. I went to check it and found the can missing and a semi fresh pile of human poop in it's place. Excrement occurs.

On the other hand, I have arrived at GZ, four hours after a new cache was posted to find an overflowing dumpster, ripped bags of garbage all over the ground, which my feet stuck to. I was out of there in five seconds.

I personally do not want to see a negative, or thumbs down added to the system, but, as a cache owner, I appreciate a heads up through logs or email, that the condition of my GZ has changed since I hid the cache.

5k · January 28, 2011

I like the Favorites system as it sits right now, frankly. The only change I would make would be to increase the number of caches one needs to find before earning a Favorite.

I'd be happier if you earned a Favorite for every 20 caches you Find.

Maybe I am just too picky, but I have a whack of Favorite points I'll likely never award unless I can find some magical area where every cache I find for two weeks is just freakin' fantastic.

I agree and have done something about it... I've made my own rule to not exceed 5%.

I spent a few hours and went through all 4600 finds, marking the ones that I thought were exceptional. When I was done, I had assigned just less than half of my votes. I think that 5% is the magic number. If I made a second pass just to use up all my votes, I'd be diluting the first pass.

January 28, 2011

I love the favorites system, I hope GS doesn't change a thing.

5k · March 5, 2011

I really don't care for it and won't use it. Why not post your like in a log. In order to put me in my place a cacher (one who has posted in this specific forum) said this about one of my posts in another forum

"After reading your "hurt feelings" posts, my curiosity got the best of me. 401 hides and no favorite votes on any of them. That is an impressive feat." I'm sure that person will call this post a "hurt feelings" as well

I've been caching for 7 years and most of my caches are archived including dozens upon dozens that were taken by someone who while not admiting to stealing any caches at all was caught on tape doing the same. My hurt feelings post on which that guy above mentioned was regarding another forum that asked people to name the cities they avoid caching in. And the OP of that thread named my area (later admitting to me he had never cached in town only heard about it from his friends, other who have similar hides to ours). Yet when you cache in his neighborhood the quality is no better than what he was bagging about in my area. So YES I TOOK offense, SUE me or Flame me as most forum chats do.

We have people that prepare lists of cities that they won't cache in because they "spawn" crappy caches even though they don't cache in that area. Other people use that as a guide based on no favorite votes on a cachers hides?

So the favoriting thing just started in the last six months and this joker is saying that I should have favorite votes on my caches? And the fact I don't means what exactly? It seems pretty subjective to me and in some cases can be used in a very negative way. The comment specifically pointed to the fact I owned 401 caches (the majority of which were archived) and no favorite on any of them - thus why I say he was putting me in my place? And yes I know it is my forum signature.

Should people go back and favorite a cache from 7,6,5,4,3,2 years ago that was archived 7,5,4,3,2 years ago? Many people from even 2 years ago are no longer caching.

So if I find caches with favorite votes but several TFTH or similar logs, average descriptions with little or nothing to say, and hidden in relatively uninteresting areas and on finding the cache it was micro hidden in a urban setting, bush hide in a park should I assume since it has a favorite vote that it is going to be awesome? And should I assume that if caches that I find have no vote they stink?

I will use the log and my judgment - if no one likes my hides then after 401 and if it boiled down to someone not looking for my caches because of the favorites system I really don't care about hiding 402. I have unused 1051 favorite votes - I wish we could trade them for merchandise. Flame away.

It looks like you have never hidden a cache above 1.5 in either difficulty or terrain. Looking at the 250 favorites that I have assigned, all are above those standards. Personally, If I were traveling through Fresno, I'd keep going. If I wanted to grab a bunch of quick numbers running caches, I'd probably go to Fresno.

Why are so many of your caches archived? It looks like you had too many caches to handle. When you arbitrarily archived them, did you go pick up the containers?

10.2k · March 5, 2011

I really don't care for it and won't use it. Why not post your like in a log. In order to put me in my place a cacher (one who has posted in this specific forum) said this about one of my posts in another forum

"After reading your "hurt feelings" posts, my curiosity got the best of me. 401 hides and no favorite votes on any of them. That is an impressive feat." I'm sure that person will call this post a "hurt feelings" as well

I've been caching for 7 years and most of my caches are archived including dozens upon dozens that were taken by someone who while not admiting to stealing any caches at all was caught on tape doing the same. My hurt feelings post on which that guy above mentioned was regarding another forum that asked people to name the cities they avoid caching in. And the OP of that thread named my area (later admitting to me he had never cached in town only heard about it from his friends, other who have similar hides to ours). Yet when you cache in his neighborhood the quality is no better than what he was bagging about in my area. So YES I TOOK offense, SUE me or Flame me as most forum chats do.

We have people that favorite caches and prepare lists of cities that they won't cache in because they "spawn" crappy caches even though they don't cache in that area. Other people won't use that as a guide based on no favorite votes on a cachers hides?

The favoriting thing just started in the last six months and this joker is ridiculing me for no favorite votes on my caches? And the fact I don't means what exactly? It seems pretty subjective to me and in some cases can be used in a very negative way. The comment specifically pointed to the fact I owned 401 caches (the majority of which were archived) and no favorite on any of them - thus why I say he was putting me in my place? And yes I know it is my forum signature, it is my badge of shame and I wear it in his honor. I can't wait to see the caches that he places they must be awesome maybe I will learn something about what a quality cache is!!

Should people go back and favorite a cache from 7,6,5,4,3,2 years ago that was archived 7,6,5,4,3,2 years ago? Whatever many people from even 6 months, (let alone 7 years) ago are no longer caching.

Do favorite votes from sock puppet accounts count?

If I find caches with favorite votes but several TFTH or similar logs, average descriptions with little or nothing to say, and hidden in relatively uninteresting areas and on finding the cache it was micro hidden in a urban setting, bush hide in a park should I assume since it has a favorite vote that it is going to be awesome? And should I assume that if caches that I find have no votes they stink?

I will use the log and my judgment - if no one likes my hides then after 401 and if it boiled down to someone not looking for my caches because of the favorites system I really don't care about hiding 402. I have unused 1051 favorite votes - I wish we could trade them for merchandise. Flame away.

Very simply (in my opinion) almost all of your caches are archived, and no one, in any significant numbers, is going back and assigning favorite votes to archived caches.

I'm no world traveler or anything, but if I sort my own finds by favorites, I've noticed only one extraordinary cache which was archived several months before the favorites feature, which has a notable number (18) of favorite votes.

I like this system, and think it works great. But I see no reason at all to vote for archived caches under it, and I have no intention of using one on that particular cache. If this bumped thread doesn't generate too much interest, perhaps a "why favorite archived caches?" thread would be in order.

Edited March 5, 2011 by Mr.Yuck

1.9k · March 5, 2011

A few possibles addtion to the PQ options would include:

favorited by (cacher or list of cachers) and meets other criteria

Has a ratio of x% of PMs or higher

Has a total number of favorites > x

has favorites

That's really something that would be a function of GSAK.

15.3k · March 5, 2011

Why not post your like in a log.

Why not do both?

Online logs provide information that favorites votes can't. But favorites votes provide information that online logs can't.

In order to put me in my place a cacher (one who has posted in this specific forum) said this about one of my posts in another forum

I'm sorry that someone was rude to you, but that doesn't affect the value of the favorites system to other cachers.

Should people go back and favorite a cache from 7,6,5,4,3,2 years ago that was archived 7,6,5,4,3,2 years ago? Whatever many people from even 6 months, (let alone 7 years) ago are no longer caching.

Do favorite votes from sock puppet accounts count?

Should they go back and favorite archived caches? That's a question each will need to answer individually. Personally, I use the favorites system to highlight particularly worthy caches for other cache seekers, so I don't mark archived caches as favorites. Others use the favorites system to document their caching experiences or to reward cache owners for hiding exceptional caches, regardless of whether those caches are available for others to find now.

What about those no longer caching, or sock puppet accounts? Only premium members can cast favorite votes.

If I find caches with favorite votes but several TFTH or similar logs, average descriptions with little or nothing to say, and hidden in relatively uninteresting areas and on finding the cache it was micro hidden in a urban setting, bush hide in a park should I assume since it has a favorite vote that it is going to be awesome? And should I assume that if caches that I find have no votes they stink?

Of course not. People cast favorites votes for all sorts of reasons. Some match my preferences; some don't. Some match your preferences; some don't. A favorites vote just means that a premium member found something about the cache that made it worthy of including in their "top 10%".

8k · March 5, 2011

If this bumped thread doesn't generate too much interest, perhaps a "why favorite archived caches?" thread would be in order.

There already is one.

March 6, 2011

I think the concept is great. I have about 1900 favorite points to award and probably have about 500 caches that I would assign. Unfortunately I have forgotten about all but of a few of the really outstanding. I also have a lot of caches hidden and some that I think folks would really enjoy for a lot of different reasons. I am sad that I can not earmark some of my caches that I think you shouldn't miss. I have a lot of braindead hides but I have a lot of hides that I think you would enjoy for more than the "smiley". Can we come up with a system to identify caches that owners are especially proud. I cannot "favorite" some of my best and because they are "old" and folks have forgotten about them. I have about 550 active cache hides. A lot of them are braindead hides but some are remakable, in my mind.

I award favorites for great cache names, remarkable containers, treks that took me to my limits, fun puzzles (that I could solve) and just stuff that made me laugh.

I would like a way for cache owners to identify their cache hides that are more remarkable than others. I know that it would be a perfect world if folks only hid remarkable caches but it is not going to happen,

March 6, 2011

[6]Implement a 1 to 5 star system ala GCVote.

[7]Use the favorites to provide a list of caches you might like if you like this one (People who favorite this cache also favorite ...)

[8]Use the favorites to provide personal recommendation based on cachers who favorited some of the same caches you favorited.

For what it's worth (which isn't much,I know), these are probably the ones that would provide the best (easiest?) way to go. That way, you can @ least look at the pages of the recommendations & see which ones to go for. If you like one particular cache better than another, you can say so, with a minimum of effort. I know it's not perfect, & since I'm not a PM, & haven't got a lot of experience & have little perspective , so my opinion will probably be shot down, but that's my 2 cents worth

Edited March 6, 2011 by jd-mitchell

March 6, 2011

I just noticed that I cannot make an event cache a favourite. I'm guessing that's because it's a one time thing, but still, I would have liked to been able to give the event host a boost by making it a favourite cache!

March 6, 2011

I just read doingitoldschool's post and I think it would be great to have a site to acknowledge some of the recurring awesome events. I travel a bunch and would like to arrange some of my trips around adventures to include memorable events. I love meeting new folks and this would make it easier for me to spot the great ones.

March 7, 2011

I actually quite enjoy the system the way it is now. I had a geotrip a couple weeks ago so I did a PQ and then ranked by Favourites. I was not disappointed.

1.4k · March 7, 2011

A few possibles addtion to the PQ options would include:

favorited by (cacher or list of cachers) and meets other criteria

Has a ratio of x% of PMs or higher

Has a total number of favorites > x

has favorites

That's really something that would be a function of GSAK.

If the number of favorites and the number of PM finders were in the pocket query data then GSAK would be able to do that, for the area you have pocket queries for. Having those as filters for a PQ lets people search a bigger area.

10.2k · March 7, 2011

I actually quite enjoy the system the way it is now. I had a geotrip a couple weeks ago so I did a PQ and then ranked by Favourites. I was not disappointed.

Nor will you be disappointed, in my opinion. I've seen a few turds get 2 or 3 votes, and people favoriting new caches just because they were FTF, but in general, this system works pretty dadgum good.

5k · March 7, 2011

A few possibles addtion to the PQ options would include:

favorited by (cacher or list of cachers) and meets other criteria

Has a ratio of x% of PMs or higher

Has a total number of favorites > x

has favorites

That's really something that would be a function of GSAK.

If the number of favorites and the number of PM finders were in the pocket query data then GSAK would be able to do that, for the area you have pocket queries for. Having those as filters for a PQ lets people search a bigger area.

To elaborate, the data is not in the GPX file that GSAK uses to populate it's database. Until it is added, or perhaps the promised API provides it, GSAK is basically dumb as far as favorites.

I can see great possibilities once there is a way to get the data into GSAK.

5k · March 7, 2011

I actually quite enjoy the system the way it is now. I had a geotrip a couple weeks ago so I did a PQ and then ranked by Favourites. I was not disappointed.

Nor will you be disappointed, in my opinion. I've seen a few turds get 2 or 3 votes, and people favoriting new caches just because they were FTF, but in general, this system works pretty dadgum good.

I put "FTF" in my log on an uninspiring cache, and I thank the owner, as I do with all caches, carpy of not. Would I place a favorite vote? No way.

I was going to write "waste" a vote, but I seem to be hanging at a steady 190 extra. I guess I have a lot to waste.

1.9k · March 7, 2011

A few possibles addtion to the PQ options would include:

favorited by (cacher or list of cachers) and meets other criteria

Has a ratio of x% of PMs or higher

Has a total number of favorites > x

has favorites

That's really something that would be a function of GSAK.

If the number of favorites and the number of PM finders were in the pocket query data then GSAK would be able to do that, for the area you have pocket queries for. Having those as filters for a PQ lets people search a bigger area.

To elaborate, the data is not in the GPX file that GSAK uses to populate it's database. Until it is added, or perhaps the promised API provides it, GSAK is basically dumb as far as favorites.

I can see great possibilities once there is a way to get the data into GSAK.

My understanding is that favorites will be integrated into PQ's soon.

1.4k · March 7, 2011

My understanding is that favorites will be integrated into PQ's soon.

Hopefully they'll include the cache find count in there as well, and eventually the PM find count.

Give favorites a chance to work

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation