Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 9
cb82

Challenges

Recommended Posts

So are challanges a type of virtual listings like the failed scavanger hunt on the failed Waymarking site? :unsure:

I'm confused. Do you like or dislike Waymarking?

I like Waymarking. Problem is that I'm one of the only few active waymarkers in my area. I get discouraged trying to list waymarks for others to enjoy. I want my listings to be viewed and logged. And yes, I feel like the Waymarking site has failed or these new virtuals would not exist in the form that they seem to be taking. It's just wait and see for now. The new virtuals here may not be able to compete with the ones on other sites, or they could be better. From what I can gather they will more than likely suck, but seems alot of work from Groundspeak has went into this, so I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post

i just wondering then if the caches called challenge caches will turn into the new challenge cache?

Share this post


Link to post

Life is not fair.

Caching is life.

Caching is not fair.

 

If we totally level the playing field, then the LPC in the Walmart parking lot is all that will be left.

 

Personally, I don't see that as an improvement of the game.

 

I can't speak for everyone but caching is not my life. It is something I like to enjoy. I don't use it to define who I am.

 

How does leveling the playing field reducing caching to LPC caches in Walmart parking lots have anything to do with challenge caches being fair? I am seeing more examples of how some challenge caches are not fair to everyone and yet nothing to the contrary.

 

Here is another example. This is also from a real cache listing. Only new finds, found on or after September 9, 2009 (09/09/09), will qualify for this challenge. Why should this matter? The only thing that this ALR does is limit what caches qualify based on when people found the cache. This cache was mine and this is one of the reason it was archive by my own choice along with another challenge I owned that had a similar unfair date restriction.

 

I challenge other challenge cache owners to open up the date restrictions on their caches and let more cachers claim a find based on core of the challenge and not the additional requirement imposed by the cache owners. What or who is it going to hurt? A win win as I see it. People get credit for what they have achieved and the owner get people finding his cache which is why caches are placed. To be found.

Share this post


Link to post

i just wondering then if the caches called challenge caches will turn into the new challenge cache?

 

I don't think so according to Jeremy's post. It would look like they are going to be dealt with separately.

 

I also agree that the "challenge cache" is an abused form of the former ALR, or "additional logging requirements." It makes very little sense to restrict a cache find in this way, especially since a geocacher can accomplish many of the tasks on the opposite side of the world but could never find this particular cache. This needs to be dealt with, but shouldn't be in the context of this new activity, and it won't be restricted at the same time this new activity is launched, or because this new activity is launched.

Share this post


Link to post

I find some challenges unfair by their restrictions. I also agree that they are nothing more that ALS's which have been allowed by using the puzzle/unknown icon and including the word challenge. I owned two of my own and archived them be cause I came to believe that they were indeed not fair to everyone which caching should be. As for finding the cache, signing the log book, and not being able to claim a find because of someone's over restrictive rules, I would love to see challenges moved to their own area and treat existing ones as what they really are, another cache with ALR. This way any cache that show's up on the radar is there for all to find.

 

What is an ALS?

Share this post


Link to post

I find some challenges unfair by their restrictions. I also agree that they are nothing more that ALS's which have been allowed by using the puzzle/unknown icon and including the word challenge. I owned two of my own and archived them be cause I came to believe that they were indeed not fair to everyone which caching should be. As for finding the cache, signing the log book, and not being able to claim a find because of someone's over restrictive rules, I would love to see challenges moved to their own area and treat existing ones as what they really are, another cache with ALR. This way any cache that show's up on the radar is there for all to find.

 

What is an ALS?

 

An ALR with a typo.

Share this post


Link to post

I find some challenges unfair by their restrictions. I also agree that they are nothing more that ALS's which have been allowed by using the puzzle/unknown icon and including the word challenge. I owned two of my own and archived them be cause I came to believe that they were indeed not fair to everyone which caching should be. As for finding the cache, signing the log book, and not being able to claim a find because of someone's over restrictive rules, I would love to see challenges moved to their own area and treat existing ones as what they really are, another cache with ALR. This way any cache that show's up on the radar is there for all to find.

 

What is an ALS?

 

Its an acronym for Additional Logging (ummm...) Stuff.

Share this post


Link to post

1) To claim a find on this cache, you will need to first find at least one cache of every difficulty/terrain combination (81 unique combinations/caches).

2) must be on caches that were published before this cache (to avoid 'dummy qualifying caches' being listed just to meet the requirements)

3) The only exceptions are CITO or EVENT caches with a D/T of 2/2 or less. Because these are short-lived you may log these after the published date to earn the qualifying icons.

 

I can understand the first as this is the challenge. It makes perfect sense.

 

The third part is the one I don't think should be allowed. Why are some cache types exempt from the date restriction yet limited to specific d/t ranges?

The limit to specific d/t ranges was for the same reason as for #2 "to avoid 'dummy qualifying caches' being listed just to meet the requirements".

 

If people didn't cheat then none of those restrictions would be necessary. Unfortunately the "I'll do whatever I feel like" attitude prevails many aspects of this hobby. Everything from short circuiting multis, PAFing puzzles, going after posted hours for an FTF, throw downs, etc.

 

The one rule the CO can employ to try to keep people a little honest and the same crowd is up in arms "How DARE you keep me from my smiley". Sigh. :(

 

If anyone believes so strongly that all challenge caches are fair to everyone, give me compelling evidence that your are right.

They're not fair to everyone. Who said they had to be?

 

There are many regular caches that are not fair. The vast majority are unfair to those in a wheelchair. Others are unfair to those who can't climb/swim/whatever. But all these are rationalized away somehow. "If they were physically fit they could do it" is a lame justification. They're not, they can't so it's not fair to them.

Share this post


Link to post

It seems like challenges are a way for stat-freaks to push themselves. Create a challenge for yourself to find caches once a day for 5 months? But what do you get out of it?

 

I'm confused. Your forum title is

 

one of every state that's my goal...

 

What do you get out of that? (Rhetorical question.)

 

For me, challenge caches can give me a goal where I may not have had one before. I'm competitive, I really enjoy completing challenges when we can. I didn't push myself to fill in my difficulty/terrain chart until I found out about well-rounded/Fizzy challenge caches. I didn't start getting serious about filling in our caching calendar until I saw the 366 days of caching challenges. When we lived in Charlottesville, I probably never would have visited as much of Virginia as I did without having the Delorme Challenge. Same thing goes for right now, I'm not sure I would be trying to visit every county in Alabama, but for the 67-county challenge and Delorme challenges.

 

Since your goal is to get at least one cache in every state, you'll be glad to know that there's at least one challenge cache for that.

Share this post


Link to post

Actually, I do believe that all non-challenge caches are 100% fair to everybody. Everybody has to go through the same trouble to get each cache. Not everybody may be equally capable of doing that, but that's not a problem of the cache itself, it's a problem of each individual cacher. Somebody in a wheelchair can't do that T4 cache. That's not because that cache is unfair, it's because they just can't do it.

The exact same argument applies to challenge caches. It's not a problem with the challenge, it's a problem of each individual cacher. They started late, didn't put in the effort, etc. Because of their decisions they can't complete the challenge. That's nobody's fault but their own. That's not because that cache is unfair, it's because they just can't do it.

 

The only thing that prevents you from completing a challenge is the choices you made or are going to make. Somebody in a wheelchair that can't do a T4 not because they choose not to but because life threw them a curve ball is unfair.

Share this post


Link to post

The limit to specific d/t ranges was for the same reason as for #2 "to avoid 'dummy qualifying caches' being listed just to meet the requirements".

 

If people didn't cheat then none of those restrictions would be necessary. Unfortunately the "I'll do whatever I feel like" attitude prevails many aspects of this hobby. Everything from short circuiting multis, PAFing puzzles, going after posted hours for an FTF, throw downs, etc.

 

When anyone places a cache they accept the chance that people will "cheat" or do the cache other than the way the cache owner wants them two. The old way of enforcing this was to place and ALR on the cache. Some people abused the ALR to the extent that Groundspeak had to step in and put an end to it. The problem with placing an ALR because some may "cheat" limits others from playing honestly by blocking caches that are legitimately rated in the cache of a cache based on D/T. I don't think limiting honest people is in the spirit of the game.

 

If anyone believes so strongly that all challenge caches are fair to everyone, give me compelling evidence that your are right.

They're not fair to everyone. Who said they had to be?

 

There are many regular caches that are not fair. The vast majority are unfair to those in a wheelchair. Others are unfair to those who can't climb/swim/whatever. But all these are rationalized away somehow. "If they were physically fit they could do it" is a lame justification. They're not, they can't so it's not fair to them.

 

Your argument does not relate to the issue of the ALR on challenge caches. It is true that it can be applied to the physical cache it self for a challenge as many would agree. What i am talking about is the ALR placed in some challenge caches that do not exist for other caches. If you can prove that the ALR itself for the examples I have provided are fair to every that would be something else.

Share this post


Link to post

It's the challenge cache's fault that the rules are written so that it becomes increasingly difficult to complete the challenge. And the rules are completely up to the CO, so that makes it the CO's fault.

I agree that some COs have gone overboard. Happens with other caches as well. That's why there's an ignore list.

 

In other words, most challenge caches depend not on the capabilities of each individual cacher (as all other caches do), but on their caching history. Some become easier when you have found lots of caches, others become harder, and vice versa. This is where the perceived unfairness stems from.

I like how you included "perceived" in there. It's funny that the cachers actually doing the challenges don't complain about the unfairness.

 

In fact, fairness only comes into play when you're competing with someone. I find it funny that many here are quoting Jeremy saying it's not a competition...

 

Even if you do make it a competition having it a completely level playing field makes it boring. It's like in sports, the rules are enforced evenly but the players capabilities are different. Some are faster, some are stronger, some are more accurate, etc. Makes it munch more interesting.

 

Same with card games. Rules are the same but the cards you're dealt are different. It's how you use what you've been dealt with which makes it interesting.

Edited by Avernar

Share this post


Link to post

There are many regular caches that are not fair. The vast majority are unfair to those in a wheelchair. Others are unfair to those who can't climb/swim/whatever. But all these are rationalized away somehow. "If they were physically fit they could do it" is a lame justification. They're not, they can't so it's not fair to them.

 

But that isn't entirely true. Challenge caches aren't about finding a cache, it is about a different set of limitations. With a puzzle or a multi, if you find the final cache you get your smiley, whether you did it in a way that was planned or not. A challenge cache isn't about finding that cache, it is usually related to some other aspect of the game. So even if you are able to find this cache (which is essentially what geocaching is) you still can't log it because you have to jump through a bunch of hoops first. I can see how this is a bit of an abuse of the guideline.

Share this post


Link to post

What i am talking about is the ALR placed in some challenge caches that do not exist for other caches. If you can prove that the ALR itself for the examples I have provided are fair to every that would be something else.

 

I believe that they do not have to meet your definition of fair.

 

You don't seem to mind the ALR of a cache found in each of 81 counties, but you do mind the date restriction.

So the only ALR's that should be allowed are ones that you think are fair.

Now the next cacher comes along and can't get a cache in county #73 because they are all too high of a terrain rating in that county. So now to them needing to get all 81 counties is not fair and they challenge the CO to open the challenge cache up to people who only get a few of the counties. It is a win win right?

 

The CO gets to decide what criteria they want to use for their challenge cache. It does not matter if that challenge becomes more difficult over time. If you decide to work on completing a challenge cache and then discover that it is more difficult then you anticipated you can either accept the more difficult burden or abandon the challenge. Decrying to the CO to modify the challenge because you feel it is too difficult cheapens the challenge for those who have accepted the added difficulty and are working to meet the challenge as it was originally listed.

Share this post


Link to post

When anyone places a cache they accept the chance that people will "cheat" or do the cache other than the way the cache owner wants them two.

And people are getting upset that there's a rule in place that prevents them from cheating. So sad.

 

The old way of enforcing this was to place and ALR on the cache. Some people abused the ALR to the extent that Groundspeak had to step in and put an end to it.

That was because people were requiring tasks that had nothing to do with geocaching. Requiring proof you climbed the tree or whatever would be in the "prevent cheating" category. Requiring funny hats or whatever is in the "CO Power Trip" category.

 

Fortunately Groundspeak has a rule that the challenge requirements are geocaching related and that the CO or most cachers can qualify.

 

The problem with placing an ALR because some may "cheat" limits others from playing honestly by blocking caches that are legitimately rated in the cache of a cache based on D/T. I don't think limiting honest people is in the spirit of the game.

So you're arguing that if challenges didn't exist people have more traditionals to find. That assumes the cache would have been placed if it wasn't a challenge. Plus it also implies that the supply of traditionals has been exhausted.

 

Your argument does not relate to the issue of the ALR on challenge caches. It is true that it can be applied to the physical cache it self for a challenge as many would agree. What i am talking about is the ALR placed in some challenge caches that do not exist for other caches. If you can prove that the ALR itself for the examples I have provided are fair to every that would be something else.

As I wrote before, I don't think the concept of "fairness" applies to challenge caches as it depends on the choices you've made.

 

I chose not to go to medical school. Is it fair that they won't let me be a doctor? Fairness has nothing to do with it. I made a choice and have to live with the restrictions it puts on me. Same with challenges.

Share this post


Link to post
The exact same argument applies to challenge caches. It's not a problem with the challenge, it's a problem of each individual cacher. They started late, didn't put in the effort, etc. Because of their decisions they can't complete the challenge. That's nobody's fault but their own. That's not because that cache is unfair, it's because they just can't do it.

The difference is that they can't do it because of choices they made in the past, before they even knew about the challenge (or before it even existed). You can't blame them for that.

 

Someone who can't do that T4 cache can't do it not because of choices they made, it's because they just are what they are. Big difference there.

 

I like how you included "perceived" in there. It's funny that the cachers actually doing the challenges don't complain about the unfairness.

 

In fact, fairness only comes into play when you're competing with someone. I find it funny that many here are quoting Jeremy saying it's not a competition...

There's varying degrees of fairness and unfairness. I agree that almost all challenge caches are unfair to a certain degree, but most of them are designed to minimize the unfairness and attempt to keep it as fair to everyone as possible. They can't achieve 100% fairness, because that's just not possible under those rules, but they try at least somewhat. I haven't got a problem with that. I do have a problem with those that don't even try to be fair at all.

 

But why do you need competition for fairness? That's not true at all. All you need is comparison with other people. If the task given is the same for everyone, then it's fair. Has nothing to do with competition.

Edited by dfx

Share this post


Link to post

With a puzzle or a multi, if you find the final cache you get your smiley, whether you did it in a way that was planned or not.

I love how cheating has become so socially acceptable in Geocaching. Any other sport or game people would be ostracized for such behavior.

 

The anti-ALR language in the guidelines has just made things worse.

 

A challenge cache isn't about finding that cache, it is usually related to some other aspect of the game. So even if you are able to find this cache (which is essentially what geocaching is) you still can't log it because you have to jump through a bunch of hoops first. I can see how this is a bit of an abuse of the guideline.

Neither are most puzzles. For many the puzzle is the primary focus and the cache/smiley is the "reward".

 

The ONLY difference is that for one you can cheat and the other you can't. So most of the arguments here boil down to "I can cheat for other caches, why can't I cheat on challenge caches". Just because you can cheat on other caches doesn't justify you being able to cheat on challenge caches.

Share this post


Link to post

It seems like challenges are a way for stat-freaks to push themselves. Create a challenge for yourself to find caches once a day for 5 months? But what do you get out of it?

 

I'm confused. Your forum title is

 

one of every state that's my goal...

 

What do you get out of that? (Rhetorical question.)

 

For me, challenge caches can give me a goal where I may not have had one before. I'm competitive, I really enjoy completing challenges when we can. I didn't push myself to fill in my difficulty/terrain chart until I found out about well-rounded/Fizzy challenge caches. I didn't start getting serious about filling in our caching calendar until I saw the 366 days of caching challenges. When we lived in Charlottesville, I probably never would have visited as much of Virginia as I did without having the Delorme Challenge. Same thing goes for right now, I'm not sure I would be trying to visit every county in Alabama, but for the 67-county challenge and Delorme challenges.

 

Since your goal is to get at least one cache in every state, you'll be glad to know that there's at least one challenge cache for that.

 

I agree with this. IT is one of the interesting parts of caching. I don't understand why people get mad about certain caches. If you don't like what is asked then don't do it. As of this writing there is 1,480,000 ACTIVEcaches out there. If I had to guess I would say that 1,300,000 of those are normal caches. For each of those you just have to get to the cache sign your name and log online. So why does it bother some people if you have to do more stuff for certain other caches. One of my friends on here just does ignore on caches that he does not want to look for. You can do the same. No one here is going to find all the caches. I too am going for the delorme, county, and fizzy challenges. I love that once I complete those I will probably have qualified for some other caches. By the way you can still go look for the cache at these challenges, you just can't log them. So if it bothers you so much then it seems that it is more about the numbers. So go find some powertrails.

 

I found a cool cache yesterday, I thought for sure I would qualiify for it. They even have a micro for GSAK to check. I thought I have over 1000 caches this one should be simple. I had three of the ten I needed. So now I am pumped I am going to try and grab these. THe cache is GC22KME. The answer and maybe I am naive but is simply to bypass those you don't want to work toward and quit whining about them.

Share this post


Link to post

With a puzzle or a multi, if you find the final cache you get your smiley, whether you did it in a way that was planned or not.

I love how cheating has become so socially acceptable in Geocaching. Any other sport or game people would be ostracized for such behavior.

 

Wait up, my BS-O-Meter just went through the roof, :lol: . I am not talking about cheating, if I find a puzzle cache, or the end of a multi, I get the smiley. It isn't cheating, the entire purpose of the listing is to help you find the cache. It may guide you or entertain you, but in the end the goal is getting the final coords. Whether you did the puzzle for your own enjoyment has nothing to do with the smiley. If you know where it is and sign the logbook then you can claim it. You are only cheating yourself out of a experience, you aren't hurting anyone else. No matter what is said about it. If the COs intention is to not have cachers find it then why did he put it out?

 

A challenge cache isn't about finding that cache, it is usually related to some other aspect of the game. So even if you are able to find this cache (which is essentially what geocaching is) you still can't log it because you have to jump through a bunch of hoops first. I can see how this is a bit of an abuse of the guideline.

The ONLY difference is that for one you can cheat and the other you can't. So most of the arguments here boil down to "I can cheat for other caches, why can't I cheat on challenge caches". Just because you can cheat on other caches doesn't justify you being able to cheat on challenge caches.

 

Calm down, this is not about cheating. It is about keeping the game we all love on track. Jeremy already posted his thoughts on these types of caches. Don't throw down condescending remarks to flame on conversation. Just because some (obviously not all) disagree with something, doesn't make them evil cheaters :blink: . It just is an issue of perspective... and your wrong, so nanny nanny booboo! :grin:

Share this post


Link to post

The difference is that they can't do it because of choices they made in the past, before they even knew about the challenge (or before it even existed). You can't blame them for that.

I don't blame them. But I'm not going to give them any sympathy if they start pouting and crying it's not fair. That's bordering on childish behavior. "I didn't get a cookie because I didn't clean my room. That's not fair! Waaah!"

 

Like I said, I can't get a locationless cache because I joined too late. I missed it because I chose to do something else with my life. If I chose to get involved with GPS equipment earlier I would have found out about Geocaching much sooner. My choice, my consequences.

 

Someone who can't do that T4 cache can't do it not because of choices they made, it's because they just are what they are. Big difference there.

Yes it's a big difference. When dumb luck affects your life then you have my sympathy. Most disabled people however don't sit there and cry how unfair things are, they just make the best of their situation.

 

I do have a problem with those that don't even try to be fair at all.

So do I.

 

I put them on my ignore list. Same with unsolvable puzzles that the CO only gives the solution out to their friends.

 

But why do you need competition for fairness? That's not true at all. All you need is comparison with other people. If the task given is the same for everyone, then it's fair. Has nothing to do with competition.

Because it doesn't matter if it's not a competition. There has to be some kind of reward (monetary, bragging rights, etc) for fairness to be something significant.

 

If you're just comparing things the a "fair comparison" is just a short form of "we're comparing the same thing here". What does it matter if it's fair?

Share this post


Link to post

If the task given is the same for everyone, then it's fair. Has nothing to do with competition.

Exactly!

The challenge cache in question is the same task for all who wish to seek it. Find 81 differently rated caches that were listed prior to the publication of the challenge. It is the same task now as it was 2 years ago. It may be more difficult to complete the task now then it was when the cache was listed, but the actual task has not changed. Keith is asking for the task to be changed.

 

Or to use another challenge cache example; find a traditional cache in 5 different States in a 24 hour period. Pretty straight forward challenge and the task is the same for everyone. However completing the task might be easier for someone who lives in Connecticut then it would be for someone who lives in the Florida Keys.

 

Would it be 'fair' for the person in Florida to ask the CO to change the challenge to only be one State because the person in Connecticut only needs to travel 400 miles to meet the challenge but the Florida resident is still in only one State after going 400 miles?

 

It is the same basic principle in both challenges, the challenge is going to be easier for some folks and harder for others but the actual task is the same for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post

What does it matter if it's fair?

 

It matters a lot if it is not fair. Do you have any input on the other additional logging requirements I provided such as allowing exceptions for some cache types but limiting what the D/T are? Can you prove that was is fair?

Share this post


Link to post

I am not talking about cheating, if I find a puzzle cache, or the end of a multi, I get the smiley. It isn't cheating, the entire purpose of the listing is to help you find the cache. It may guide you or entertain you, but in the end the goal is getting the final coords.

Is it? Who said? You're goal may be to get the final coords. If everyone thought that way all we'd have is Traditionals. Boring. That fact that people put out multis indicate that there's something more to Geocaching than "just finding the box".

 

If the COs intention is to not have cachers find it then why did he put it out?

Same could be said for the person who puts a cache deep in the wilderness where it may get one or two finds. Sometimes it's the journey, not the destination.

 

Calm down, this is not about cheating. It is about keeping the game we all love on track. Jeremy already posted his thoughts on these types of caches. Don't throw down condescending remarks to flame on conversation. Just because some (obviously not all) disagree with something, doesn't make them evil cheaters :blink: . It just is an issue of perspective... and your wrong, so nanny nanny booboo! :grin:

I am calm. I'm just stating my opinion. You're the one getting a little emotional about it. Relax. I'm not trying to flame things. Just writing what I think.

 

You're taking the word "cheater" way to seriously. Shall I call them the "play it my way I don't care what you think crowd"? Those are the people that if there isn't a rule against it they'll just do what they want. I have no problem with that because there isn't a rule against it.

 

What bugs me is, and here is where I find fault with their actions, is those same people start crying when there IS a rule against it and the can't do what they want.

Share this post


Link to post

Exactly!

The challenge cache in question is the same task for all who wish to seek it. Find 81 differently rated caches that were listed prior to the publication of the challenge. It is the same task now as it was 2 years ago. It may be more difficult to complete the task now then it was when the cache was listed, but the actual task has not changed. Keith is asking for the task to be changed.

 

I am not asking the task be changed. Let me clear up my post on this. The task is To claim a find on this cache, you will need to first find at least one cache of every difficulty/terrain combination (81 unique combinations/caches). The rest are rules that apply to the task, the additional logging requirements.

Share this post


Link to post

The problem with challenge caches is that the challenge has no relation to the location of the geocache. The problem has nothing to do with the "fairness" of the challenge.

 

If you remove the cache from the challenge, there is some similarities to the replacement for virtuals, except that the location is directly linked to the challenge. There may be worldwide challenges at some point that mirror some of the challenge caches today (find a cache every day for 366 days, etc), but not in the first iteration, since we're focusing on locations, just like the geocaching core activity.

 

I like the Delorme challenge, and as an Xbox 360 user I love achievements, so I understand the fun behind trying to accomplish a hard earned goal. What doesn't make sense, even in the early Delorme Challenge days, is the cache you find after completing the challenge. At least in the case of the Delorme challenge, the "prize" cache is in the region of the challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Exactly!

The challenge cache in question is the same task for all who wish to seek it. Find 81 differently rated caches that were listed prior to the publication of the challenge. It is the same task now as it was 2 years ago. It may be more difficult to complete the task now then it was when the cache was listed, but the actual task has not changed. Keith is asking for the task to be changed.

The bolded part means that the task is not the same as it used to be. If it was, it would be equally difficult now than before.

The task may seem to be same superficially, but you need to break it down and look at what's actually required to finish it. Take it to the extreme, fast forward to when all qualifying caches are archived. The task is still the same, but now it's impossible to do? How is that possible?

 

How is it possible that some challenge caches become much easier for me to do if I delete certain past finds, even though nothing has changed for me personally? How is it possible that other challenge caches suddenly become much easier if I create a new account and start logging finds there, even though it's the same person finding the caches? All that doesn't make sense.

Share this post


Link to post

It matters a lot if it is not fair.

To some it seems. I still want to know why.

 

I don't care if it's fair. Makes it more interesting. Here's an example. My friend qualified for a challenge before me because he started caching before me. I didn't care that it's fair. It meant I had to work harder to achieve what he did.

 

I'm actually glad it worked out that way because I got an amazing adventure out of it. :)

 

Do you have any input on the other additional logging requirements I provided such as allowing exceptions for some cache types but limiting what the D/T are? Can you prove that was is fair?

That particular rule applied to everyone equally so I actually do think it fair. Events with high D/T are super rare anyways so it wouldn't have too much effect except for those listing events to purposefully get hard D/T combos.

 

If there was a legit high D/T event then you could always ask the CO for an exception.

Share this post


Link to post

Exactly!

The challenge cache in question is the same task for all who wish to seek it. Find 81 differently rated caches that were listed prior to the publication of the challenge. It is the same task now as it was 2 years ago. It may be more difficult to complete the task now then it was when the cache was listed, but the actual task has not changed. Keith is asking for the task to be changed.

 

I am not asking the task be changed. Let me clear up my post on this. The task is To claim a find on this cache, you will need to first find at least one cache of every difficulty/terrain combination (81 unique combinations/caches). The rest are rules that apply to the task, the additional logging requirements.

 

This is probably one of the best examples of a challenge cache that doesn't make any sense, since anyone in the world could attempt and complete it. So why do they need to travel to X location to log the cache? Couldn't someone create one in every city, town, or hobbit village? Why not just focus on a devious puzzle instead?

Share this post


Link to post

The problem with challenge caches is that the challenge has no relation to the location of the geocache. The problem has nothing to do with the "fairness" of the challenge.

I agree with you there.

 

There is one good thing about putting the challenge location/icon at a specific point on the map however. It gets the local community all working on the same challenges. Makes it more fun that way. I'd have no probalem if challenge caches became virtual but still had a map location attached to them.

 

My only concern is that without the trouble of putting out a physical container the challenge caches would explode out of control. It's probably the same problem you had trying to bringing out virtuals the way they were before: how to keep the map from being flooded with virtual.

 

If you remove the cache from the challenge, there is some similarities to the replacement for virtuals, except that the location is directly linked to the challenge. There may be worldwide challenges at some point that mirror some of the challenge caches today (find a cache every day for 366 days, etc), but not in the first iteration, since we're focusing on locations, just like the geocaching core activity.

So the new virtuals are tied to a location? Cool. :)

 

I like the Delorme challenge, and as an Xbox 360 user I love achievements, so I understand the fun behind trying to accomplish a hard earned goal. What doesn't make sense, even in the early Delorme Challenge days, is the cache you find after completing the challenge. At least in the case of the Delorme challenge, the "prize" cache is in the region of the challenge.

That's good to hear. I'm glad you like the concept of challenge caches. While I wouldn't miss the physical cache at the end of the challenge I like still being able to log the challenge and not just a "checkmark, I'm done" kind of thing. I like sharing my experiences I had doing the challenge.

Share this post


Link to post

That's good to hear. I'm glad you like the concept of challenge caches. While I wouldn't miss the physical cache at the end of the challenge I like still being able to log the challenge and not just a "checkmark, I'm done" kind of thing. I like sharing my experiences I had doing the challenge.

 

I'd rather be known as liking challenges, not challenge caches. So strike the cache part and it makes sense.

 

I understand the idea of having the local community engaged in completing a challenge, but I don't think it needs to be through a cache listing. It is just the current "hack" to make it work.

Share this post


Link to post

Is it? Who said? You're goal may be to get the final coords. If everyone thought that way all we'd have is Traditionals. Boring. That fact that people put out multis indicate that there's something more to Geocaching than "just finding the box".

Try publishing it without a cache at the end.

 

Same could be said for the person who puts a cache deep in the wilderness where it may get one or two finds. Sometimes it's the journey, not the destination.

 

Which is true for puzzle caches and multis, but still ends with a destination. A funny little man once said: "There is no achievement without goals." and you cannot dispute that the goal plays into the decision to go on the journey.

 

I am calm.

 

I could just see your face when you read that, :lol: !

 

You're taking the word "cheater" way to seriously. Shall I call them the "play it my way I don't care what you think crowd"? Those are the people that if there isn't a rule against it they'll just do what they want. I have no problem with that because there isn't a rule against it.

 

I know you are fan of words so:

cheat-er/CHētər/Noun

 

1. A person who acts dishonestly in order to gain an advantage.

 

I don't know how to take that positively, your rewording doesn't leave much to be desired either, lol.

 

What bugs me is, and here is where I find fault with their actions, is those same people start crying when there IS a rule against it and the can't do what they want.

 

I can understand that totally!!

Share this post


Link to post

As an owner of a number of different challenge caches I'm obviously biased in favour of them - some of them are good, some not so good (I'm referring to my own challenges - not anyone else's). I also enjoy meeting the requirements of other CO's challenge caches - in fact some of my most memorable caching experiences have been the direct result of teaming up with others to go and find one or more caches that are required for a challenge.

 

Having said that, I am of two or more opinions as to whether or not one needs to have a physical container and a log book to sign after completing a challenge.

 

Perhaps a challenge cache could have two options: 1) as a normal cache that anyone can find and log without meeting the challenge, and 2) as a challenge cache that you can find and log AND meet the challenge (yeah, yeah I know... just another ALR).

 

I would of course suspect that folks who choose to go with option 2 would want some sort of recognition for their efforts - perhaps a different coloured smiley, a list of challenges met, etc.

 

Folks could treat the challenge cache as per option 1) and at some point in time switch to option 2) if they later decide to and wind up completing the challenge.

 

Just throwing my 2 cents worth in - as I couldn't find any penny candy to spend my allowance on today.

 

P.S. No sooner did I hit the reply the reply button that I realized this could open up a whole can of worms re: the D/T rating of the cache as per option 1) vs. option 2).

Edited by entogeek

Share this post


Link to post

 

Perhaps a challenge cache could have two options:

 

1) as a normal cache that anyone can find and log without meeting the challenge

 

2) as a challenge cache that you can find and log AND meet the challenge (yeah, yeah I know... just another ALR).

 

 

1 obviously makes sense, since it is a traditional geocache. Posting a log on a cache you never physically found in option #2 doesn't make sense.

 

We already have plenty of issues with cachers that say "sure. log my cache in any country if you solve this puzzle" - then we get complaints when users have caches in their statistics that show they found a cache in a country they have never been to. Yeah, well, don't log that cache then. You didn't find it there.

Share this post


Link to post
Perhaps a challenge cache could have two options: 1) as a normal cache that anyone can find and log without meeting the challenge, and 2) as a challenge cache that you can find and log AND meet the challenge (yeah, yeah I know... just another ALR).

 

I would of course suspect that folks who choose to go with option 2 would want some sort of recognition for their efforts - perhaps a different coloured smiley, a list of challenges met, etc.

 

Folks could treat the challenge cache as per option 1) and at some point in time switch to option 2) if they later decide to and wind up completing the challenge.

 

Yeah I like that idea, and has already been suggested in post #61 here. Obviously, geocachers like geocaching and so like finding caches. Trying to have cachers go after non-cache things may not work out so well.

Share this post


Link to post

So why do they need to travel to X location to log the cache? Couldn't someone create one in every city, town, or hobbit village? Why not just focus on a devious puzzle instead?

 

They need to travel to X location because that is where the cache containing the log is located. Needing to go to a specific location and incorporating a GPS is a basic tenet of this activity. Just filling in the D/T grid does not give one a specific location to attempt to find.

Also to many the extra travel distance to the challenge cache final is part of the challenge. It also gives people reasons to go to areas that they wouldn't normally venture into during their typical geocache hunts. I personally have planned trips specifically for logging a completed challenge in areas I would not have cached in otherwise.

 

It seems no different then if I solve a devious puzzle cache that is listed 2000 miles away. I have not completed the cache until I find the final location.

 

I also do not see the harm if this same 81 D/T combo was listed in every town in the nation. There are probably identical LPC hides in every Hobbit village so why should challenge caches be different in that regard?

Share this post


Link to post

 

It seems no different then if I solve a devious puzzle cache that is listed 2000 miles away. I have not completed the cache until I find the final location.

 

 

There is no puzzle cache listed where the final is 2,000 miles away.

 

I also do not see the harm if this same 81 D/T combo was listed in every town in the nation. There are probably identical LPC hides in every Hobbit village so why should challenge caches be different in that regard?

 

I know you don't see the harm. But I do. Geocaching isn't about creating arbitrary hoops to jump through so someone can give you coordinates to a container hidden somewhere. There is no relation between the challenge and the cache, and that's the problem.

Share this post


Link to post

This is probably one of the best examples of a challenge cache that doesn't make any sense, since anyone in the world could attempt and complete it. So why do they need to travel to X location to log the cache? Couldn't someone create one in every city, town, or hobbit village? Why not just focus on a devious puzzle instead?

 

i'm sorry but that its not a good argument against challenges caches, we need to travel to an X location for any cache, doesn't mean we have to though

 

i see more of a problem with challenge caches that have requirements that send you to lalaland to complete them, i.e. get the APE Cache in Brasil

 

for the most part i like challenge caches, as long as the requirements are not ridiculous, i.e. get two "challenge cache" icons...well hello, why was that even published when there is no such thing as a "challenge cache" icon?

having said that, the ignore list works wonderful because my goal with geocaching is to have fun and not frustrate myself

 

ooh and for the record, i really don't want challenge caches, as they are now, to be gone, perhaps just have the guidelines polished a bit

Edited by t4e

Share this post


Link to post

 

There is no puzzle cache listed where the final is 2,000 miles away.

 

I think I was not clear enough in my example.

 

I have a mystery cache GC22PXN where a person in lets say Nome Alaska could solve the puzzle and get the final coordinates. The location of the final would be well over 3000 miles away from where they solved the puzzle aspect of the cache. Now while they may have solved the puzzle aspect of the cache they can not complete the cache unless they travel to Indiana and find the solved coordinates.

I am not seeing the difference between this and if that puzzle solver in Nome put out a 81 D/T challenge cache in Nome. I may have filled the grid aspect of the cache, just like they solved my puzzle but neither cache is complete until the final location is visited.

Share this post


Link to post

I'd rather be known as liking challenges, not challenge caches. So strike the cache part and it makes sense.

Hopefully there will be an icon on the map somewhere. I've already mentioned one reason. The other is that the map is a big part of caching for many people. I like being able to see the found/completed caches on the map and probably others do as well.

 

I understand the idea of having the local community engaged in completing a challenge, but I don't think it needs to be through a cache listing. It is just the current "hack" to make it work.

I doesn't have to be a cache listing but I still would like to be able to write a log about my adventure completing the challenge.

Share this post


Link to post

 

It seems no different then if I solve a devious puzzle cache that is listed 2000 miles away. I have not completed the cache until I find the final location.

 

 

There is no puzzle cache listed where the final is 2,000 miles away.

 

I also do not see the harm if this same 81 D/T combo was listed in every town in the nation. There are probably identical LPC hides in every Hobbit village so why should challenge caches be different in that regard?

 

I know you don't see the harm. But I do. Geocaching isn't about creating arbitrary hoops to jump through so someone can give you coordinates to a container hidden somewhere. There is no relation between the challenge and the cache, and that's the problem.

 

Actually Jeremy, there is one. The listed coordinates are deep into the Pacific Ocean but the final is probably in Bothell or Woodinville WA. Still unfound, listed in 2007. I know that one is rare and an extreme example, but it IS an example of a puzzle cache listed 1000s of miles away.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=671c7cb1-a682-4ba1-aa1c-16592580cd81

 

6100 KM Southwest of me yet Bothell is only 10 miles away. I think that qualifies as 2000 miles away. I was hesitant to post the link but the CO appeared on a recent other board and acknowledged it so he does not seem to mind it being known its out there.

 

(edited to fix a typo but too late as someone already quoted me)

Edited by lamoracke

Share this post


Link to post

 

There is no puzzle cache listed where the final is 2,000 miles away.

 

I think I was not clear enough in my example.

 

I have a mystery cache GC22PXN where a person in lets say Nome Alaska could solve the puzzle and get the final coordinates. The location of the final would be well over 3000 miles away from where they solved the puzzle aspect of the cache. Now while they may have solved the puzzle aspect of the cache they can not complete the cache unless they travel to Indiana and find the solved coordinates.

 

 

The coordinates for the puzzle should be close to the actual location of the cache, and the puzzle gives you the location of the cache.

 

I am not seeing the difference between this and if that puzzle solver in Nome put out a 81 D/T challenge cache in Nome. I may have filled the grid aspect of the cache, just like they solved my puzzle but neither cache is complete until the final location is visited.

 

I see that you don't see the difference. Completing the challenge doesn't solve the location for the cache. It is just some arbitrary hoop you make a geocacher jump through for you to give them the coordinates of the cache listing. The location of the cache has no relation to the challenge.

Share this post


Link to post

 

It seems no different then if I solve a devious puzzle cache that is listed 2000 miles away. I have not completed the cache until I find the final location.

 

 

There is no puzzle cache listed where the final is 2,000 miles away.

 

I also do not see the harm if this same 81 D/T combo was listed in every town in the nation. There are probably identical LPC hides in every Hobbit village so why should challenge caches be different in that regard?

 

I know you don't see the harm. But I do. Geocaching isn't about creating arbitrary hoops to jump through so someone can give you coordinates to a container hidden somewhere. There is no relation between the challenge and the cache, and that's the problem.

 

Actually Jeremy, there is one. The listed coordinates are deep into the Pacific Ocean but the final is probably in Bothell or Woodinville WA. Still unfound, listed in 2007. I know that one is rare and an extreme example, but it IS an example of a puzzle cache listed 1000s of miles away.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=671c7cb1-a682-4ba1-aa1c-16592580cd81

 

6100 KM Southwest of me yet Bothell is only 10 miles away. I think that qualifies as 2000 miles away. I was hesitant to post the link but the CO appeared on a recent other board and acknoledged it so he does not seem to mind it being known its out there.

 

This is a pretty good example of a pretty bad idea for a cache location for a mystery (though the cache puzzle may be excellent) - it really should be changed. There's a good reason why it is a rare and extreme example. No wonder it hasn't been found.

Share this post


Link to post

Try publishing it without a cache at the end.

That's why people want virtuals back. :anibad:

 

Which is true for puzzle caches and multis, but still ends with a destination. A funny little man once said: "There is no achievement without goals." and you cannot dispute that the goal plays into the decision to go on the journey.

That's funny considering that this debate is about removing the destination from challenge caches. :laughing:

 

That's why some people like the cache at the end of the challenge, it gives them a final goal at the end. Like crossing the finish line. The problem with just letting anyone log the cache is that it cheapens this goal for those who put in the effort.

 

It's kind of like getting a medal for running a marathon then finding out your friend got one too but he parked next to the finish line and just walk 10m to cross it.

 

I am calm.

 

I could just see your face when you read that, :lol: !

I've learned not to write replies when emotionally charged up. Causes too much drama. Unfortunately my writing style tends to do that anyways sometimes.

 

I know you are fan of words so:

cheat-er/CHētər/Noun

 

1. A person who acts dishonestly in order to gain an advantage.

 

I don't know how to take that positively, your rewording doesn't leave much to be desired either, lol.

The trick is not to take the meaning too seriously. It's like playing solitaire and flipping one extra card to get yourself unstuck. You "cheated" a little but it's harmless. Others may not approve as there's a proper way to play the game but you're not hurting anyone.

 

What bugs me is, and here is where I find fault with their actions, is those same people start crying when there IS a rule against it and the can't do what they want.

 

I can understand that totally!!

That's good as it's my main point! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

I see that you don't see the difference. Completing the challenge doesn't solve the location for the cache. It is just some arbitrary hoop you make a geocacher jump through for you to give them the coordinates of the cache listing. The location of the cache has no relation to the challenge.

 

So to complete a Challenge (note the Capital "C"), the location will have to be visited. Which is unlike in a DeLorme, where you can complete the challenge, but just not claim the "find" without visitng the final location.

Share this post


Link to post

The coordinates for the puzzle should be close to the actual location of the cache, and the puzzle gives you the location of the cache.

I think you misunderstood. The cache is close to the posted coords.

 

What he was saying is that if you solve a puzzle in Europe you have to travel thousands of miles to Europe to find the container to log your find. Same as a challenge cache.

 

I've actually solved a few puzzles in Europe and one in Australia because of people posting links in the forums. I have yet to go find the caches and sign the log books. But who knows, one day I might be in the area...

Share this post


Link to post
... as an Xbox 360 user I love achievements ...

:antenna:alarm bells ringing :antenna: (OK, icon doesn't quite cut it)

 

<speculation>Likes achievements. Dislikes (or won't implement) listings. What's left for the CO to create? A checklist of caches that must be visited to earn the challenge (and maybe a CO-defined icon/souvenir to go with it?). Huh, I hope not: that would be just reinforcing the numbers game.</speculation>

Share this post


Link to post
... as an Xbox 360 user I love achievements ...

:antenna:alarm bells ringing :antenna: (OK, icon doesn't quite cut it)

 

<speculation>Likes achievements. Dislikes (or won't implement) listings. What's left for the CO to create? A checklist of caches that must be visited to earn the challenge (and maybe a CO-defined icon/souvenir to go with it?). Huh, I hope not: that would be just reinforcing the numbers game.</speculation>

 

I think he is looking to make the location to be a requirement for/integral to the Challenge.

 

(Edit: Grammar)

Edited by BBWolf+3Pigs

Share this post


Link to post
I think he is looking to make the location to be a requirement for/integral to the Challenge.

Evidently. My speculation concerned how this might be achieved in the absence of listings. I know I should let it drop, but this guesswork might be the maximum fun I get out of Challenges <_< Or not :)

Share this post


Link to post

Challenge caches have a interesting history. Like other historic cache types (moving caches, virtual, Project APE, etc.) sometimes the better way forward is to modify the guidelines and/or replace the cache type with some other feature.

 

Challenge caches began with Delorme challenges and county/state challenges. These were just another type of mystery/unknown. To get the coordinates of the final you had to show you had completed the challenge. The existing guidelines at the time precluded these challenges (since they involved emailing the cache owner for coordinates, and in the Delorme instance had a commercial component). However someone at Groundspeak (Jeremy?) thought these were a neat idea that many geoacachers would appreciate. The first caches were given exemptions to allow them to be published. The reviewers were told that these challenges could be published but only one or two per state (one Delorme and one county). A few reviewers may have allowed some other challenge caches, but they were pretty much limited.

 

Then Groundspeak changed the guidelines to specifically allow additional logging requirements for mystery/unknown caches. Geocachers realized that you could create all sorts of additional logging requirements. Reviewers had to accept almost every challenge cache, because these now neatly fit in the ALR category. Simply list the coordinates on the cache page and make doing the challenge a condition of logging.

 

Now, Groundspeak soon decided that not all challenges could be listed. For example they didn't allow a challenge that required the placement of caches, or challenges that required finding archived caches. But as different challenge ideas were proposed, the list of banned ideas became harder to define. The reviewers soon were complaining that dealing with ALRs and challenges was taking up too much of their time. Groundspeak decided that ALRs were no longer allowed - that once someone found a cache they should be allowed to log it online without having to meet some challenge.

 

But within the community, including many Groundspeak lackeys and volunteer reviewers, the idea of geocaching based challenges was still seen a worthy. An exception to no ALRs was carved out for geocaching related challenges. A few weeks later, the guidelines were clarified as to what a geocaching challenge was. These clarifications keep most of the challenges sensible. Still, there are always geocachers who try to push the guidelines and think up of challenges that are seen as limiting the ability of some large group of geocachers to complete them.

 

Many of the problems with challenge caches could probably be avoided if some other mechanism for challenging geocachers was used instead of the ALR cache. For one, you wouldn't need the exception to the ALR rule. Nobody is saying that it isn't fun to try to meet some geocaching goal. When there is a cache near you, and the only thing that keeps you from logging a find on it is some ALR, people will complain. And if the goal appears to be crafted to exclude significant numbers of geocachers from even being able to consider going for it, you will have even more complaints.

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 9

×
×
  • Create New...