Who Qualifies

[+Scubasonic]

For this Daily caching Streak GC2YVG8

[+Flintstone5611]

I doubt that anyone would at this point. One year is tough, but 3, that is nuts.

[+JL_HSTRE]

How many geocaching accounts in existence would be eligible to find this Challenge Cache right now? It's certainly an achievable goal but insanely difficult.

 

Alamogul's longest streak is only 380 (albiet an active streak). TeamSnook's is only 487 and it's not an active streak.

[+briansnat]

I know one person who qualifies out of the hundreds of geocachers I've met. I don't think it's a cache that will be found very often.

Edited July 1, 2011 by briansnat

[+Flintstone5611]

I know one person who qualifies out of the hundreds of geocachers I've met.

 

I am absolutely floored. That is astounding.

[+Scubasonic]

I know one person who qualifies out of the hundreds of geocachers I've met.

 

I am absolutely floored. That is astounding.

 

There R A few in our area that are between 700-800 with active Streaks

 

SS

[+geodarts]

kablooey's last day without a find was July 15, 2003. I guess he qualifies. I never will.

[+Flintstone5611]

kablooey's last day without a find was July 15, 2003. I guess he qualifies. I never will.

 

Seriously. That requires an impressively strong will or a deep seated psychosis. Or both, lol!

[AZcachemeister]

I may be OCD, but not that bad.

[+dfx]

Am I the only one who finds that reading cache description gives them a headache?

[+Scubasonic]

Am I the only one who finds that reading cache description gives them a headache?

 

Probably!!!

 

SS

[+t4e]

For this Daily caching Streak GC2YVG8

 

a link would be much more handy for everyone, you're already there C&P works wonders

 

GC2YVG8

 

I doubt that anyone would at this point. One year is tough, but 3, that is nuts.

 

meh, we're 40 days short of 365 and it wasn't even remotely as bad as some made it sound

 

when you use geocaching to unwind after work is actually a breeze, i am quite sure, unless some unforeseen terrible things happen, that we could keep going past the 365 days

Edited July 1, 2011 by t4e

[knowschad]

I thought there was a reviewer criteria for challenge caches where there had to be a reasonable chance of the challenge being met. I guess that has gone the way of "no power caches".

[+dfx]

I thought there was a reviewer criteria for challenge caches where there had to be a reasonable chance of the challenge being met. I guess that has gone the way of "no power caches".

 

I thought so too, but then was told otherwise. The reviewer said: if the CO qualifies, then they publish it. That's it, no questions asked. It's just one of those "internal rules" I guess. A good example of this is this cache: http://coord.info/GC2C91R

Edited July 1, 2011 by dfx

[+Flintstone5611]

meh, we're 40 days short of 365 and it wasn't even remotely as bad as some made it sound

 

when you use geocaching to unwind after work is actually a breeze, i am quite sure, unless some unforeseen terrible things happen, that we could keep going past the 365 days

 

That's awesome. Did you find that it helped working as a team. I know that my finds go way up when I am caching with others regularly. In some families it is one person with the desire to cache, much less having such a tricky goal like this.

[+Flintstone5611]

I thought so too, but then was told otherwise. The reviewer said: if the CO qualifies, then they publish it. That's it, no questions asked. It's just one of those "internal rules" I guess. A good example of this is this cache: http://coord.info/GC2C91R

 

Yeah, I am still laughing about that one.

[knowschad]

I thought there was a reviewer criteria for challenge caches where there had to be a reasonable chance of the challenge being met. I guess that has gone the way of "no power caches".

 

I thought so too, but then was told otherwise. The reviewer said: if the CO qualifies, then they publish it. That's it, no questions asked. It's just one of those "internal rules" I guess. A good example of this is this cache: http://coord.info/GC2C91R

I'm sure that hasn't always been the case. But I can see their point... if the hider has accomplished the challenge, it is probably fair to say that it can be done. Will be a very lonely cache, however.

 

Scubasonic... is it true? Have you accomplished the task that you are challenging others to?

 

Edit, from SS's stats tab:

 

Longest Streak 1096 consecutive days with finds from 06/30/2008 to 06/30/2011

 

Edited July 1, 2011 by knowschad

[+Scubasonic]

I thought there was a reviewer criteria for challenge caches where there had to be a reasonable chance of the challenge being met. I guess that has gone the way of "no power caches".

 

I hate to break the news to you but just because you don't see the Challenge as reasonable does not mean that everyone else sees it that way as well, reminds me of this saying "For those that say it can't be done, get out of the way of the ones that are actually doing it"

 

SS

Edited July 1, 2011 by Scubasonic

[+addisonbr]

I thought there was a reviewer criteria for challenge caches where there had to be a reasonable chance of the challenge being met. I guess that has gone the way of "no power caches".

 

I thought so too, but then was told otherwise. The reviewer said: if the CO qualifies, then they publish it. That's it, no questions asked. It's just one of those "internal rules" I guess. A good example of this is this cache: http://coord.info/GC2C91R

I started noticing this with power runs /etc. too.

 

I saw one published a week or two ago where on the cache page the CO states clearly that only he and perhaps one other cacher on the planet would meet the requirements.

 

I miss the old days when people would just start forum threads about their caching numbers

[+niraD]

I thought there was a reviewer criteria for challenge caches where there had to be a reasonable chance of the challenge being met.

According to the guidelines for challenge caches, "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that the challenge is attainable. Reviewers may ask the cache owner to demonstrate that they have previously met the challenge and/or that a substantial number of other geocachers would be able to do so."

 

There is no requirement that the challenge be "reasonable", only that it be attainable. Completing the challenge yourself is one way to demonstrate that it is attainable. Demonstrating that a substantial number of other geocachers would be able to complete it is another way to demonstrate that it is attainable.

[+fizzymagic]

There is a cacher in my area who has had at least one find per day since July 16, 2003. As of today, that is a 2,906 day streak. So the challenge is clearly attainable. Just sounds miserable to me.

[+fizzymagic]

There is a cacher in my area who has had at least one find per day since July 16, 2003. As of today, that is a 2,906 day streak. So the challenge is clearly attainable. Just sounds miserable to me.

[+popokiiti]

I'll let someone else go for it...with my luck, 2 days from attaining the goal, I'd break something!

[+fizzymagic]

Am I the only one who finds that [the] reading cache description gives them a headache?

 

Grammar and punctuation are useful things. They often indicate the difference between a quality cache listing and, well, otherwise. In the case of this cache, I would expect that the complete lack of effort that went into the cache description may indicate a cache owner who is not going to take very good care of the cache.

Edited July 1, 2011 by fizzymagic

[+MustangJoni]

We have a local couple who qualify. I'm not sure how long their streak is, but I know last year it was 4 years.

They also completed the Texas County Challenge. Texas has 254 counties, and some are pretty desolate! LOL

 

And they are nice folks!

[+J the Goat]

kablooey's last day without a find was July 15, 2003. I guess he qualifies. I never will.

 

I was gonna mention kablooey when I read the OP. Then I saw you already did

[knowschad]

I thought there was a reviewer criteria for challenge caches where there had to be a reasonable chance of the challenge being met. I guess that has gone the way of "no power caches".

 

I hate to break the news to you but just because you don't see the Challenge as reasonable does not mean that everyone else sees it that way as well, reminds me of this saying "For those that say it can't be done, get out of the way of the ones that are actually doing it"

 

SS

I was only quoting what I had heard about previous challenge caches, SS. I was not attacking you. Relax. Personally, I don't think that just because one person (you) has met the challenge that there is a "reasonable" chance of others doing the same, but I'm not a reviewer. Just expressing an opinon.

[knowschad]

I thought there was a reviewer criteria for challenge caches where there had to be a reasonable chance of the challenge being met.

According to the guidelines for challenge caches, "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that the challenge is attainable. Reviewers may ask the cache owner to demonstrate that they have previously met the challenge and/or that a substantial number of other geocachers would be able to do so."

 

There is no requirement that the challenge be "reasonable", only that it be attainable. Completing the challenge yourself is one way to demonstrate that it is attainable. Demonstrating that a substantial number of other geocachers would be able to complete it is another way to demonstrate that it is attainable.

 

Thanks... that does clarify it, for me, at least.

[+Scubasonic]

Am I the only one who finds that [the] reading cache description gives them a headache?

 

Grammar and punctuation are useful things. They often indicate the difference between a quality cache listing and, well, otherwise. In the case of this cache, I would expect that the complete lack of effort that went into the cache description may indicate a cache owner who is not going to take very good care of the cache.

 

Your a Joke

[+Scubasonic]

I thought there was a reviewer criteria for challenge caches where there had to be a reasonable chance of the challenge being met. I guess that has gone the way of "no power caches".

 

I hate to break the news to you but just because you don't see the Challenge as reasonable does not mean that everyone else sees it that way as well, reminds me of this saying "For those that say it can't be done, get out of the way of the ones that are actually doing it"

 

SS

I was only quoting what I had heard about previous challenge caches, SS. I was not attacking you. Relax. Personally, I don't think that just because one person (you) has met the challenge that there is a "reasonable" chance of others doing the same, but I'm not a reviewer. Just expressing an opinon.

 

I know at least 5 people in my area Vancouver/Portland area that are very close to the 800 Finds in a day mark and their streak is still active so I don't really think that it is as un-obtainable as it may Seem.

 

SS

[+Flintstone5611]

I know at least 5 people in my area Vancouver/Portland area that are very close to the 800 Finds in a day mark and their streak is still active so I don't really think that it is as un-obtainable as it may Seem.

 

SS

 

That is wild. I dont think I have the will to keep a streak like that going, I just couldn't see the motivation to keep going. Besides all that, I probably couldn't afford the gas!!

[+Team Dennis]

I have a buddy here in Stilly that has scored a find every day since he started caching over a year ago. Not a bad way to start out. He says he's going to go until he feels like stopping...and he says he's having way too much fun to stop anytime soon. So maybe in 2 years you will see his name on the log.

[+The Jester]

Am I the only one who finds that [the] reading cache description gives them a headache?

 

Grammar and punctuation are useful things. They often indicate the difference between a quality cache listing and, well, otherwise. In the case of this cache, I would expect that the complete lack of effort that went into the cache description may indicate a cache owner who is not going to take very good care of the cache.

 

Your a Joke

A prime example - it should be "You're a joke"

[+geojerry7]

 

I know at least 5 people in my area Vancouver/Portland area that are very close to the 800 Finds in a day mark and their streak is still active so I don't really think that it is as un-obtainable as it may Seem.

 

SS

 

SS,

 

Did you mean days in a row? Because 800 finds in a day is an awful lot...unless you do a power trail of course.

Also, seriously you have found a cache every single day for over 3 years? Dude, that's crazy . Looks like you are having a good time.

 

Cheers

Edited July 1, 2011 by geojerry7

[+Flintstone5611]

Your a Joke

A prime example - it should be "You're a joke"

 

Did I not get that or did you not get that?

[Mr.Yuck]

Your a Joke

A prime example - it should be "You're a joke"

 

Did I not get that or did you not get that?

 

I'm not touching that one.

 

Yeah, there was an "attainable" challenge cache published in my area about 3 months ago. The Owner "demonstrated" this by doing it themselves. Something like do 7 states in two days, and they have to include 7 different cache types. A couple out of staters have found it, but no one locally. And if a local qualified, they would have found it by now, of course. Not to say a local can't go out and qualify someday. Anywho, I just plonked it on the ignore list, and I'd do the same for SS's cache if it was published in my area. I guess we've seen his is attainable, albeit by very few.

[+Scubasonic]

Am I the only one who finds that [the] reading cache description gives them a headache?

 

Grammar and punctuation are useful things. They often indicate the difference between a quality cache listing and, well, otherwise. In the case of this cache, I would expect that the complete lack of effort that went into the cache description may indicate a cache owner who is not going to take very good care of the cache.

 

Your a Joke

A prime example - it should be "You're a joke"

 

Wondered if anyone would catch that

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I thought there was a reviewer criteria for challenge caches where there had to be a reasonable chance of the challenge being met. I guess that has gone the way of "no power caches".

 

I hate to break the news to you but just because you don't see the Challenge as reasonable does not mean that everyone else sees it that way as well, reminds me of this saying "For those that say it can't be done, get out of the way of the ones that are actually doing it"

 

SS

I was only quoting what I had heard about previous challenge caches, SS. I was not attacking you. Relax. Personally, I don't think that just because one person (you) has met the challenge that there is a "reasonable" chance of others doing the same, but I'm not a reviewer. Just expressing an opinon.

 

I know at least 5 people in my area Vancouver/Portland area that are very close to the 800 Finds in a day mark and their streak is still active so I don't really think that it is as un-obtainable as it may Seem.

 

SS

 

I'm not suggesting that your challenge cache is un-obtainable or should not have been published for any reason, but I will point out that living in a cache rich area such as Vancouver/Portland, Southern California, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Denver, or some other area densely populated with cache makes maintaining such a streak a lot more sustainable than for those living in the rest of the world.

[+Scubasonic]

I thought there was a reviewer criteria for challenge caches where there had to be a reasonable chance of the challenge being met. I guess that has gone the way of "no power caches".

 

I hate to break the news to you but just because you don't see the Challenge as reasonable does not mean that everyone else sees it that way as well, reminds me of this saying "For those that say it can't be done, get out of the way of the ones that are actually doing it"

 

SS

I was only quoting what I had heard about previous challenge caches, SS. I was not attacking you. Relax. Personally, I don't think that just because one person (you) has met the challenge that there is a "reasonable" chance of others doing the same, but I'm not a reviewer. Just expressing an opinon.

 

I know at least 5 people in my area Vancouver/Portland area that are very close to the 800 Finds in a day mark and their streak is still active so I don't really think that it is as un-obtainable as it may Seem.

 

SS

 

I'm not suggesting that your challenge cache is un-obtainable or should not have been published for any reason, but I will point out that living in a cache rich area such as Vancouver/Portland, Southern California, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Denver, or some other area densely populated with cache makes maintaining such a streak a lot more sustainable than for those living in the rest of the world.

 

Oh yes I'm well aware of that fact thank you for pointing that out ONCE AGAIN, and AGAIN, and AGAIN I will make a quick note of that...........

 

SS

[knowschad]

Am I the only one who finds that [the] reading cache description gives them a headache?

 

Grammar and punctuation are useful things. They often indicate the difference between a quality cache listing and, well, otherwise. In the case of this cache, I would expect that the complete lack of effort that went into the cache description may indicate a cache owner who is not going to take very good care of the cache.

 

Your a Joke

A prime example - it should be "You're a joke"

 

Wondered if anyone would catch that

 

"YOUR AN ANIMAL !!!!"

[+GeoReapers]

Holy crap Scuba, we are working on your double century right now. I tell the missus that you got this going now, she will kill me (shortly after I suggest we can pull it off).

[4wheelin_fool]

Nude cachers have extensive caching "streaks", you know.

[+Scubasonic]

Holy crap Scuba, we are working on your double century right now. I tell the missus that you got this going now, she will kill me (shortly after I suggest we can pull it off).

 

You will find once you get that far along on a daily caching streak it is very hard to "Let it Go" when it only takes 1 more to keep it going, at least for me it was, and in our area finding another cache is not a problem with the amount coming out just a little South of us. Keep it going I know you can......

 

SS

[+grateful cacher]

Holy crap Scuba, we are working on your double century right now. I tell the missus that you got this going now, she will kill me (shortly after I suggest we can pull it off).

 

You will find once you get that far along on a daily caching streak it is very hard to "Let it Go" when it only takes 1 more to keep it going, at least for me it was, and in our area finding another cache is not a problem with the amount coming out just a little South of us. Keep it going I know you can......

 

SS

 

I stopped my streak at 409 days because I found myself starting to get burnt out on doing it. It started to seem to be more of a "have to do" rather than a "want to do" activity and was taking away from the fun of geocaching. I mean, isn't walking through a wet and muddy park in the dark, slipping on the mud in a driving rainstorm to find a bison tube on tree fun? Or driving through 6 inches of snow to a 1/1 cache only to find it missing?? I could have kept going, but the desire wasn't there for me. But I know several others in our area who do have the drive and are still keeping their streak alive. We have caches for 101, 200, 300,400 and 409 days in our area. Now there's the 1095 day cache. I guess I should have kept going.......NAW!!! No desire to go slip slidding away down into some blackberry bushes in the dark. I'm sure that someone will get this one sooner or later.....

[+The Jester]

Am I the only one who finds that [the] reading cache description gives them a headache?

 

Grammar and punctuation are useful things. They often indicate the difference between a quality cache listing and, well, otherwise. In the case of this cache, I would expect that the complete lack of effort that went into the cache description may indicate a cache owner who is not going to take very good care of the cache.

 

Your a Joke

A prime example - it should be "You're a joke"

 

Wondered if anyone would catch that

Yep, here and on the cache page.

[+Chrysalides]

Other than kablooey I've met one other cacher who qualifies (that I know of).

[+Scubasonic]

I doubt that anyone would at this point. One year is tough, but 3, that is nuts.

 

I have been getting many emails of people with daily caching streaks, and you would be surprised how many caches have way more days than 1095 some have daily caching streaks that are 5+ years and longer.

 

Scubasonic

[knowschad]

That's what geocaching is all about. Streaks.

 

For those that are new to geocaching... please understand that many of us... indeed, possibly most of us... are in this because of the places it can take us to or the clever ways of hiding caches that we sometimes see. But there are a few that couldn't care less about those things. To them, it is a race. Not that there is anything wrong with that... but you do need to understand that this isn't about the race or the streak or the numbers for many of us, and it does not need to be that for you, either.

 

That said, if you want to find a cache a day for three years, this cache will increase your count by 1.

Edited July 2, 2011 by knowschad

[+Flintstone5611]

I have been getting many emails of people with daily caching streaks, and you would be surprised how many caches have way more days than 1095 some have daily caching streaks that are 5+ years and longer.

 

The fact that you said "how many" indicating that there is more than one or two, surprises me. I love this game.

[+Flintstone5611]

That's what geocaching is all about. Streaks.

 

For those that are new to geocaching... please understand that many of us... indeed, possibly most of us... are in this because of the places it can take us to or the clever ways of hiding caches that we sometimes see. But there are a few that couldn't care less about those things. To them, it is a race. Not that there is anything wrong with that... but you do need to understand that this isn't about the race or the streak or the numbers for many of us, and it does not need to be that for you, either.

 

That said, if you want to find a cache a day for three years, this cache will increase your count by 1.

 

Well put, it just surprises me that there are that many people with an OCD related to geocaching.