Jump to content

Challenges: Now that they are released


NYPaddleCacher
Followers 7

Recommended Posts

Wow! Jeremy's response is so offensive to people who pay to support the site. It's deliberate, stubborn and arrogant.

 

No, it's consistent. People wanted virtuals back, so they came up with something to replace them. Now them saying "ok, maybe that's not it, so we'll just move it elsewhere" would be really stupid.

Link to comment

I have to comment on the "Jeremy gets to decide what is and isn't a geocache". Undeniably true - he calls the shots.

 

But why the heck would the Jeremy as the CEO of a company care so little about the customers? Here is what I think is the epitome of not caring about customers:

 

Forum poll to Keep Challenges: 3 votes

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/2184225-keep-challenges?ref=title

 

Forum poll to Remove Challenges: 1489 votes before it was closed down

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/2170539-remove-challenges-it-has-nothing-to-do-with-geoca

 

 

1,489 votes and judging from the comments about 1,400 of them totally misunderstood the concept. I agree that there should have been more education regarding challenges, but because of a thousand of people shoot from the lip with no clue what they are talking about, it doesn't mean they have to be heeded.

 

BTW since you're throwing numbers around, of the WW challenges submitted so far "Ecosystems of the world" has 1597 accepted in a little over a day. "10,000 pieces of litter" has 3,046 accepted and 1,298 completed in just two days. "Take a Hike" has 2,987 accepted and 1,836 completed in just two days. Apparently SOMEBODY likes these things.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

IF they had some sort of approval like Waymarking it could be managed and no extra work for GC.com staffers. (Of course cache reviewers are not normally staffers anyway...)

 

Also the world wide challenge examples that Groundspeak created started a bad trend and turned the notion of good virtuals into locationless.

 

I think the vote count in the feedback tool says it all. And sadly their response says a lot also.

 

2rz80eg.jpg

 

This is my last response on the subject. I hope that between refining the implementation and listening to feedback "challenges" will not hurt the overall experience and joy that GC.com brings to "Geocachers".

Wow! Jeremy's response is so offensive to people who pay to support the site. It's deliberate, stubborn and arrogant.

 

He knows he owned the geocaching market so he can act whatever he feels like it.

Link to comment

IF they had some sort of approval like Waymarking it could be managed and no extra work for GC.com staffers. (Of course cache reviewers are not normally staffers anyway...)

 

Also the world wide challenge examples that Groundspeak created started a bad trend and turned the notion of good virtuals into locationless.

 

I think the vote count in the feedback tool says it all. And sadly their response says a lot also.

 

2rz80eg.jpg

 

This is my last response on the subject. I hope that between refining the implementation and listening to feedback "challenges" will not hurt the overall experience and joy that GC.com brings to "Geocachers".

Wow! Jeremy's response is so offensive to people who pay to support the site. It's deliberate, stubborn and arrogant.

 

He knows he owned the geocaching market so he can act whatever he feels like it.

 

To me it's a matter of fact and to the point statement. In a world where people constantly hem and haw, blow smoke and equivocate, I find that refreshing.

Link to comment

IF they had some sort of approval like Waymarking it could be managed and no extra work for GC.com staffers. (Of course cache reviewers are not normally staffers anyway...)

 

Also the world wide challenge examples that Groundspeak created started a bad trend and turned the notion of good virtuals into locationless.

 

I think the vote count in the feedback tool says it all. And sadly their response says a lot also.

 

2rz80eg.jpg

 

This is my last response on the subject. I hope that between refining the implementation and listening to feedback "challenges" will not hurt the overall experience and joy that GC.com brings to "Geocachers".

Wow! Jeremy's response is so offensive to people who pay to support the site. It's deliberate, stubborn and arrogant.

 

He knows he owned the geocaching market so he can act whatever he feels like it.

 

To me it's a matter of fact and to the point statement. In a world where people constantly hem and haw, blow smoke and equivocate, I find that refreshing.

 

This was my exact impression when I first read it, although I realize that it is impossible for some to read it and not feel offended.

 

As far as not participating, it is probably the second easiest part of the website to avoid, right behind the Friends feature.

Link to comment

I have to comment on the "Jeremy gets to decide what is and isn't a geocache". Undeniably true - he calls the shots.

 

But why the heck would the Jeremy as the CEO of a company care so little about the customers? Here is what I think is the epitome of not caring about customers:

 

Forum poll to Keep Challenges: 3 votes

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/2184225-keep-challenges?ref=title

 

Forum poll to Remove Challenges: 1489 votes before it was closed down

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/2170539-remove-challenges-it-has-nothing-to-do-with-geoca

 

 

1,489 votes and judging from the comments about 1,400 of them totally misunderstood the concept. I agree that there should have been more education regarding challenges, but because of a thousand of people shoot from the lip with no clue what they are talking about, it doesn't mean they have to be heeded.

 

BTW since you're throwing numbers around, of the WW challenges submitted so far "Ecosystems of the world" has 1597 accepted in a little over a day. "10,000 pieces of litter" has 3,046 accepted and 1,298 completed in just two days. "Take a Hike" has 2,987 accepted and 1,836 completed in just two days. Apparently SOMEBODY likes these things.

 

Exactly. The feedback site does not tell what geocachers want. It tells what geocachers who visit the feedback forums want. From the front page of the site:

 

There are 1,493,312 active geocaches and over 5 million geocachers worldwide.

 

So .... 1489 cachers are up in arms and revolting in the feedback site. That's 0.00029 % of the customer base that are complaining. Meanwhile, the rest of us are either ignoring challenges, or participating in them.

Link to comment

I've completed three challenges none of which required any great effort on my behalf. I've decided that in future I'll only attempt those that are indeed a challenge. So if I lived in the USA I'd climb the highest peak in Texas.

 

As to challenges per se I don't have a problem with them. In Australia we have our own geocaching site & locationless & virtual caches are popular. I don't see geocaching as being restricted to finding a physical container. Challenges will be something interesting to add to the mix.

Link to comment

I put out a challenge that would have people dressing up as a zombie in my hometown (Hey I'm Canadianzombie), right off the bat I get four thumbs down. Now why on God's green earth would Groundspeak allow anonymous thumbs up and down. Hey even Facebook acknowledges who has given a like. The trolls have been given power and that's not fair, according to my challenge, I've gotten four thumbs down and three thumbs up. I believe that unless you've done the challenge, you don't have a say. I say unless you speak up and aren't anonymous, you don't have a say. It totally infuriates me that the trolls have the upper hand here, very discouraging and something that I feel was a major blunder. I've recently gotten into Waymarking and will continue to do that as well as caching, but putting out challenges is an exercise in frustration and I'll not be doing any more.

Cheers

CZ

Edited by canadianzombie
Link to comment
but putting out challenges is an exercise in frustration and I'll not be doing any more.

Then the trolls got what they wanted.

 

I'm not a fan of challenges (and I'm sorry to say I don't think much of yours either - though I must admit it is funny), but I think going around giving thumbs down to all challenges just because you don't like them is rather pathetic.

Link to comment

However to belittle my explanation of why challenges should be removed by saying I log virtuals has nothing to do with my main point that Challenges will give park managers an "out" to ban physical geocaches.

Other than the argument that challenges/virtuals/waymarks give park managers an out whey they want to ban physical caches, you have not made a particularly strong case as to why there shouldn't be challenges on Geocaching.com. The fact that you have logged virtuals and waymarks doesn't help.

The fact that I've logged virtuals and waymarks indicates that I'm experienced in understanding that they're not geocaches. If I hadn't done any, you'd say I'd have no clue about virtuals. I believe that given the fact that I have logged virtuals and waymarks which essentially are the same thing, provides me a strong basis as to understanding the difference between geocaches and non-geocaches.

 

Regarding the argument that park managers can ban physical caches by allowing challenges is weak. Sure there have been cases when the response to "can I hide a cache in your park" has been "Sure but only virtuals are allowed". From the park managers point of view there is a difference. A container left by a geocacher is a non-natural object in the park. If one of the park's purposes is to preserve nature, then rules limiting what visitor leave in a park is understandable. The difference with challenges, virtual caches, and waymarks is that nothing is left in the park.

First, I have been personally told, "If there were virtual caches, all physical caches would be banned in the parks" from a local park superintendent that had complete control of whether geocaches would be allowed or not in the local county parks. In another instance, NPS also asked specifically about virtual caches, initially I was only able to create an earthcache. They wanted to do virtual history caches, and I said, "geocaching.com doesn't allow those."(I think I went on to say that geocaching.com would never allow new virtuals, except earth ones, but that appears to have changed) About a year later, after a routine meeting, the superintendent said that the Federal govt. was pressuring them to support the "No child left inside" Act. Geocaching fit the bill perfectly. If there were virtual caches available, that would of been the route taken. Instead they readily agreed to 8 physical caches highlighting historical spots in the park. I really don't how much stronger I could make the case that virtuals would result in less physical caches and getting existing ones banned, unless I had actual audio or video of the conversations.

In addition as you stated in this quote, virutals, waymarks, and challenges are different than geocaches, and consequently should be segregated from geocaching.

 

I remember when the National Parks had a slogan: "Take only pictures, leave only footprints" It seems natural that some parks will make the decision to ban physical caches while allowing GPS related games that don't involve leaving something in the park. If Groundspeak decided to not have any non-physical geolocation game, that would still leave Foursquare and many others. So perhaps it is reasonable to have challenges even if someone believes it makes it harder to get permission for physical caches.

 

I agree, Groundspeak has decided that getting physical caches (on NPS land) like on the Appalachian Trail is less important than Challenges. I prefer to not have my effort thrown away. A year and a half of work getting physical caches put in National Parks, Nature Conservancy Lands, and other local park authority lands takes a lot of work and educating. The best way to ensure that my effort isn't thrown away is to break out challenges, if not on a separate website, at least on separate unrelated tab. I am voicing my concern in a clear and logical manner to try to explain the best way forward in my opinion for geocaching and for this website.

 

Now, that said, there is another thread that expresses a different concern over how land managers might perceive challenges. Since challenges are not reviewed and you don't need permission for a challenge, that thread speculates that some challenges will eventually be placed in areas where land managers don't want people going (or don't want the extra traffic that challenges might bring). The concern here is that they might lump challenges together with geocaches which are reviewed and where adequate permission is required, including meeting any explicit permitting process the land manager has state. So places that now allow geocaches might find land managers banning them if challenges appear in locations where the land manager wants to control visitors.

 

I agree NPS could get annoyed by challenges, but in the end Groundspeak will bend over backwards to make sure they're placated, but not before they've annoyed NPS. Whether it annoys them or gives them an "out", I don't see beneficial things happening in regards to park authorities over challenges.

 

Just one more thing that's not a response to you, but on topic. I wish they would of called it something else other than a "Challenge". It creates confusion between that and "Challenge caches". I like the terms "Activity" or "Experience" better, and I think it better describes the activity.

Link to comment
but putting out challenges is an exercise in frustration and I'll not be doing any more.

Then the trolls got what they wanted.

 

I'm not a fan of challenges (and I'm sorry to say I don't think much of yours either - though I must admit it is funny), but I think going around giving thumbs down to all challenges just because you don't like them is rather pathetic.

 

beyond pathetic is what i think!

Link to comment

IF they had some sort of approval like Waymarking it could be managed and no extra work for GC.com staffers. (Of course cache reviewers are not normally staffers anyway...)

 

Also the world wide challenge examples that Groundspeak created started a bad trend and turned the notion of good virtuals into locationless.

 

I think the vote count in the feedback tool says it all. And sadly their response says a lot also.

 

2rz80eg.jpg

 

This is my last response on the subject. I hope that between refining the implementation and listening to feedback "challenges" will not hurt the overall experience and joy that GC.com brings to "Geocachers".

Wow! Jeremy's response is so offensive to people who pay to support the site. It's deliberate, stubborn and arrogant.

 

Offensive - hardly! I find it refreshing and deserving!

Link to comment

So .... 1489 cachers are up in arms and revolting in the feedback site. That's 0.00029 % of the customer base that are complaining. Meanwhile, the rest of us are either ignoring challenges, or participating in them.

 

It is true 1489 votes aren't a lot percentage wise of the total number of cachers. However 1489 votes in about an hour is something of note. I don't think a single topic has risen that quickly and fast on the support page. As for the topic asking for virtuals to come back, there was 3780 votes, and that took months to get to that level of votes. If the topic to remove challenges was allowed to continue after an hour's time, it would of easily eclipsed the number of people asking for virtuals to be returned.

 

And while I'm talking about the "return virtuals" topic, take a look at the most recent comments. They're mostly made by people that voted to return virtuals, and most of them are asking in their comments to remove challenges. http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/1050805-bring-back-virtuals?ref=title

Edited by reedkickball
Link to comment

Challenges have potential. This whole thing has just been poorly executed and managed. I will be submitting some challenges that I would like to do, much like how I hide geocaches. I just wish I could manage the completed logs or I would like a way to manage them through the reveiwers. Which may even be better, since one of the problems with Virts, was the absentee CO's. One good thing, is that at least there won't be a bunch of geolitter from all the seagulls. I'll be curious to see how my challenges go, I'll need to catch up on the latest rules first, or do challenges have guidelines too?

Link to comment

To me it's a matter of fact and to the point statement. In a world where people constantly hem and haw, blow smoke and equivocate, I find that refreshing.

Exactly! I love that Groundspeak management doesn't hide behind some PR person to couch everything in politically-correct double-speak.

 

Listen to any public statement by just about any other company and it's so full of wiggle-words that you are left wondering what the company is really saying.

 

He was direct, not open to interpretation, and made it clear what the company was going to do. I like that!

Link to comment

Has anyone thought about the repercussions of performing challenges to geocaching?

 

Consider this ... when I geocache, I try to be unobtrusive and not observed by others.

And consider a challenge ... go to <some well known specific location> and take a picture of yourself doing <a handstand, or other stupid ALR type act>

 

So when you get caught, perhaps by a LawEnforcementOfficer (LEO)

 

Story 1, the geocacher:

 

LEO: What are you doing there?

Geocacher: I'm playing a game called geocaching, where I look for a little container.

LEO: Oh that's nice. Do you need help?

Geocacher: No, it's okay.

LEO: OK, have a nice day.

 

Story 2, the challenger:

 

LEO: What are you doing there?

Challenger: I'm geocaching ... I need a picture of me doing this <handstand> here.

LEO: Why? I thought geocaching was looking for a container.

Challenger: No, we have a new game now, we do stupid stuff in public places and post about it.

LEO: Hmmm. I don't really think that is a good idea. It's not really safe to do that. Please move along.

Link to comment

Has anyone thought about the repercussions of performing challenges to geocaching?

 

Consider this ... when I geocache, I try to be unobtrusive and not observed by others.

And consider a challenge ... go to <some well known specific location> and take a picture of yourself doing <a handstand, or other stupid ALR type act>

 

So when you get caught, perhaps by a LawEnforcementOfficer (LEO)

 

Story 1, the geocacher:

 

LEO: What are you doing there?

Geocacher: I'm playing a game called geocaching, where I look for a little container.

LEO: Oh that's nice. Do you need help?

Geocacher: No, it's okay.

LEO: OK, have a nice day.

 

Story 2, the challenger:

 

LEO: What are you doing there?

Challenger: I'm geocaching ... I need a picture of me doing this <handstand> here.

LEO: Why? I thought geocaching was looking for a container.

Challenger: No, we have a new game now, we do stupid stuff in public places and post about it.

LEO: Hmmm. I don't really think that is a good idea. It's not really safe to do that. Please move along.

 

Or ... how this plays out to a land manager:

 

So when you get caught, perhaps by a LawEnforcementOfficer (LEO)

 

Story 1, the geocacher:

 

LEO: What are you doing there?

Geocacher: I'm playing a game called geocaching, where I look for a little container.

LEO: What? That's littering! That's intolerable. How dare you leave stuff in this [park|ANSI|lamp post]

Geocacher: It's just tupperware ....

LEO: Please leave the property immediately.

 

Story 2, the challenger:

 

LEO: What are you doing there?

Challenger: I'm geocaching ... I need a picture of me doing this <handstand> here.

LEO: Why? I thought geocaching was looking for a container.

Challenger: No, we have a new game now, we do stupid stuff in public places and post about it.

LEO: Well, your headstand conforms to "Leave no trace" ethics, carry on.

Link to comment

"If there were virtual caches, all physical caches would be banned in the parks" from a local park superintendent that had complete control of whether geocaches would be allowed or not in the local county parks.

 

I'm not sure the most politcally correct word to describe this statement, and, be aware, I am not talking about you, but the park superintendent. This is a stupid statement. If the park superintendent has complete control of whether geocaches are allowed, and doesn't want physical caches, as he has stated as much ("all physical caches would be banned"), then he should ban them regardless if there are virtuals or not.

Link to comment

Or ... how this plays out to a land manager:

The major difference there is that caches are reviewed first and the reviewers are aware of which areas are off limits, require permits, etc. It's not perfect but it's working.

 

So after all the effort the geocaching community has spent trying to get land managers to allow caches, all it will take is someone to post a challenge to do some silly task in a sensitive habitat:

 

Conservation Officer: What are you doing in that sensitive area?!

Geocacher: I'm geocaching.

Conservation Officer: There's no cache there, they're all pre-approved by us.

Geocacher: No, this is a different type that's not reviewed and could be put anywhere.

Conservation Officer: What?!! That's it, no more geocaching in this area anymore. All caches are going to be removed.

 

Having this anarchic activity associated with Geocaching is going to bite us in the behind on this front.

Link to comment

I agree that challenges are half good and half lame right now. There's one near me where you have to be in a restaurant, make your server male a funny face. And take a pic. I did thumbs down it.

 

I wish there was a review process for challenges. I volunteer to be challenge reviewer for my area.

 

Then again, my challenge got 4 thumbs down too! Lol. Mine is to take a picture with your GPS with the sun setting over the gulf on Englewood beach.

Link to comment

Or ... how this plays out to a land manager:

The major difference there is that caches are reviewed first and the reviewers are aware of which areas are off limits, require permits, etc. It's not perfect but it's working.

 

So after all the effort the geocaching community has spent trying to get land managers to allow caches, all it will take is someone to post a challenge to do some silly task in a sensitive habitat:

 

Conservation Officer: What are you doing in that sensitive area?!

Geocacher: I'm geocaching.

Conservation Officer: There's no cache there, they're all pre-approved by us.

Geocacher: No, this is a different type that's not reviewed and could be put anywhere.

Conservation Officer: What?!! That's it, no more geocaching in this area anymore. All caches are going to be removed.

 

Having this anarchic activity associated with Geocaching is going to bite us in the behind on this front.

 

Not always. I could list a cache on OpenCaching.com quite easily in violation of the Conservation policies, or on Terracaching. Most land managers are working with Geocaching.com and completely ignore the other listing sites.

The emphasis is that Challenges are a Virtual type, not a physical type. Physical caches are way, way, way more upsetting to a Land Manager.

 

I'm aware of several places I can get a permit to fish, log, mine or blast small furry creatures into smithereens but not place a geocache. So I guess I could make a Challenge cache there to find a small furry animal and blow it to smithereens to be in compliance with the Park policies .....

Link to comment

Or you can just tell the land manager the truth, that you're completing a "challenge" there and that it's not geocaching at all. Problem solved. :rolleyes:

 

Agreed.

The confusion here is that the game is presented as a "sub game" of Geocaching, and people can't won't make that distinction.

 

Yeah, unfortunately. At least they make a bit of effort to differentiate - "caches found" vs "challenges completed", but that's probably not enough. Totally beats me why they chose to call them "geocaching challenges". :huh: I've already seen too many people referring to them as "challenge caches", brrrrrrr....

Link to comment

To me it's a matter of fact and to the point statement. In a world where people constantly hem and haw, blow smoke and equivocate, I find that refreshing.

Exactly! I love that Groundspeak management doesn't hide behind some PR person to couch everything in politically-correct double-speak.

 

Listen to any public statement by just about any other company and it's so full of wiggle-words that you are left wondering what the company is really saying.

 

He was direct, not open to interpretation, and made it clear what the company was going to do. I like that!

Oh, I think he could have found a happy middle ground betweenpolitically-correct double-speak. and rude abruptness. Most of us, in our day-to-day intercourse, have to give thought to finding that middle ground. I personally did find it honest, but rude.

Link to comment

It just occurred to me how easy it is now to get smilies while on vacation. If you're in some exotic place that doesn't have any caches, you just go be a tourist and take pictures as you always do, then go home and create challenges for exactly those places and log them as completed right after. Easy peasy!

Link to comment

Please remove the challenges from geocaching! Give them their own website away from geocaching.

Geocaching is about coordinates and logging in a logbook.

 

 

Then of course you're going to delete your finds on your 3 virtuals and 15 earthcaches because there was no logbook, right?

 

(I saw a challenge to kiss a toy crocodile....?????)

 

Is it still there? I'm willing to bet that it has been deleted or will be deleted shortly.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

It just occurred to me how easy it is now to get smilies while on vacation. If you're in some exotic place that doesn't have any caches, you just go be a tourist and take pictures as you always do, then go home and create challenges for exactly those places and log them as completed right after. Easy peasy!

 

Or you could create an account that uses local home coordinates, list 20 phony caches in that exotic place using that account, then log finds on them with your real account. Easy peasy!

 

Or you can sit home and check that exotic location for caches that have been abandoned by their owner and log finds on them.

 

Fact of the matter is that dishonest people can always game the system.

Link to comment
It just occurred to me how easy it is now to get smilies while on vacation. If you're in some exotic place that doesn't have any caches, you just go be a tourist and take pictures as you always do, then go home and create challenges for exactly those places and log them as completed right after. Easy peasy!

Why even bother going on vacation? Just look through your old photos.

Link to comment
Why even bother going on vacation? Just look through your old photos.

 

Yes! There you go. :laughing:

(Are you implying that getting smilies is more important than going on vacation? :lol:)

 

Fact of the matter is that dishonest people can always game the system.

Well that was my point: doing it that way wouldn't be dishonest. Remember, you don't own the listing, so you're not logging your own stuff, right? :anitongue:

Link to comment

To me it's a matter of fact and to the point statement. In a world where people constantly hem and haw, blow smoke and equivocate, I find that refreshing.

Exactly! I love that Groundspeak management doesn't hide behind some PR person to couch everything in politically-correct double-speak.

 

Listen to any public statement by just about any other company and it's so full of wiggle-words that you are left wondering what the company is really saying.

 

He was direct, not open to interpretation, and made it clear what the company was going to do. I like that!

Oh, I think he could have found a happy middle ground betweenpolitically-correct double-speak. and rude abruptness. Most of us, in our day-to-day intercourse, have to give thought to finding that middle ground. I personally did find it honest, but rude.

Jeremy has admitted to being snarky in the past. I wouldn't expect him to change.

Link to comment
Why even bother going on vacation? Just look through your old photos.

Yes! There you go. :laughing:

(Are you implying that getting smilies is more important than going on vacation? :lol:)

Well, you need to go on vacation to get more smilies :P

 

After posting that I went looking for caches in some place I went on vacation before, and actually found a challenge that listed something I did, and I even have photos to prove it. Posted a comment instead of a "completed" though since it wasn't explicitly stated past completions are OK.

Link to comment

To me it's a matter of fact and to the point statement. In a world where people constantly hem and haw, blow smoke and equivocate, I find that refreshing.

Exactly! I love that Groundspeak management doesn't hide behind some PR person to couch everything in politically-correct double-speak.

 

Listen to any public statement by just about any other company and it's so full of wiggle-words that you are left wondering what the company is really saying.

 

He was direct, not open to interpretation, and made it clear what the company was going to do. I like that!

Oh, I think he could have found a happy middle ground betweenpolitically-correct double-speak. and rude abruptness. Most of us, in our day-to-day intercourse, have to give thought to finding that middle ground. I personally did find it honest, but rude.

Jeremy has admitted to being snarky in the past. I wouldn't expect him to change.

I can't speak for anybody else, but I try to better myself every day. Generally, I fail, but I keep on trying.

Link to comment

It is true 1489 votes aren't a lot percentage wise of the total number of cachers. However 1489 votes in about an hour is something of note. ...

It should be noted that 1489 votes on teh feedback forum does not equate to 1489 people. Since people can use up to three votes per topic, that thread could have been voted on as few as 500(ish) people.

 

Has anyone thought about the repercussions of performing challenges to geocaching?

 

Consider this ... when I geocache, I try to be unobtrusive and not observed by others.

And consider a challenge ... go to <some well known specific location> and take a picture of yourself doing <a handstand, or other stupid ALR type act>

 

So when you get caught, perhaps by a LawEnforcementOfficer (LEO)

 

Story 1, the geocacher:

 

LEO: What are you doing there?

Geocacher: I'm playing a game called geocaching, where I look for a little container.

LEO: Oh that's nice. Do you need help?

Geocacher: No, it's okay.

LEO: OK, have a nice day.

 

Story 2, the challenger:

 

LEO: What are you doing there?

Challenger: I'm geocaching ... I need a picture of me doing this <handstand> here.

LEO: Why? I thought geocaching was looking for a container.

Challenger: No, we have a new game now, we do stupid stuff in public places and post about it.

LEO: Hmmm. I don't really think that is a good idea. It's not really safe to do that. Please move along.

Story 2, the challenger:

 

LEO: What are you doing there?

Challenger: I'm doing a handstand.

LEO: Oh. Carry on.

 

Jeremy has admitted to being snarky in the past. I wouldn't expect him to change.

I can't speak for anybody else, but I try to better myself every day. Generally, I fail, but I keep on trying.

Anyone who participated in the forums when the game was young knows that Jeremy has greatly moderated his responses. Regarding the referenced quote, I see no problem with it. In fact, I believe that many who have a problem with it would continue to do so regardless of what he typed, as long as his answer wasn't 'Yes, sir! We'll delete all traces of challenges immediately, sir.

Link to comment

Has anyone thought about the repercussions of performing challenges to geocaching?

 

Consider this ... when I geocache, I try to be unobtrusive and not observed by others.

And consider a challenge ... go to <some well known specific location> and take a picture of yourself doing <a handstand, or other stupid ALR type act>

 

So when you get caught, perhaps by a LawEnforcementOfficer (LEO)

 

Story 1, the geocacher:

 

LEO: What are you doing there?

Geocacher: I'm playing a game called geocaching, where I look for a little container.

LEO: Oh that's nice. Do you need help?

Geocacher: No, it's okay.

LEO: OK, have a nice day.

 

Story 2, the challenger:

 

LEO: What are you doing there?

Challenger: I'm geocaching ... I need a picture of me doing this <handstand> here.

LEO: Why? I thought geocaching was looking for a container.

Challenger: No, we have a new game now, we do stupid stuff in public places and post about it.

LEO: Hmmm. I don't really think that is a good idea. It's not really safe to do that. Please move along.

 

Yeah, because geocachers are the only ones out there doing silly poses! :rolleyes: Somehow planking and phooning has spread without the help of Groundspeak.

 

And in all seriousness--if there's a huge rush of headstands at the Washington Monument, and the security folks there get upset about it, then the cachers that they talk to should flag the challenge as unplayable or prohibited. That way the challenge will eventually get archived. It's up to cachers themselves to rate these challenges.

Link to comment
In fact, I believe that many who have a problem with it would continue to do so regardless of what he typed, as long as his answer wasn't 'Yes, sir! We'll delete all traces of challenges immediately, sir.'

Jeremy is capable of responding directly but politely. He merely choose not to do so in many circumstances. I don't see anything wrong with this response.

i-9VZspsf-S.jpg

Link to comment

Somehow, the advent of Challenges eluded me until today. I would have preferred a little more structure, minimally that the challenge begin at a specific set of lat/lon coordinates. And, if there were some way to police it, challenges should be restricted to locations where physical caches are verboten, such as national parks, or where physical caches are totally impractical, such as amid satellite blocking/bouncing city skyscrapers. (On the other hand, I have cached successfully in some pretty big cities, despite uncoopertive satellites.) As for the Team Old Bet, we just won't accept challenges that are insufficiently cache-like or otherwise unappealing. Others might have other standards. So be it.

Link to comment
In fact, I believe that many who have a problem with it would continue to do so regardless of what he typed, as long as his answer wasn't 'Yes, sir! We'll delete all traces of challenges immediately, sir.'

Jeremy is capable of responding directly but politely. He merely choose not to do so in many circumstances. I don't see anything wrong with this response.

i-9VZspsf-S.jpg

 

Good reply from Jeremy. I didn't find his other response rude. It was stating a fact. You don't have to play the challenges game. You have the ability to view cache count without challenges.

 

If you don't like challenges and don't do them, you won't have them added to your total. Easy enough.

Link to comment

Or ... how this plays out to a land manager:

The major difference there is that caches are reviewed first and the reviewers are aware of which areas are off limits, require permits, etc. It's not perfect but it's working.

 

So after all the effort the geocaching community has spent trying to get land managers to allow caches, all it will take is someone to post a challenge to do some silly task in a sensitive habitat:

 

Conservation Officer: What are you doing in that sensitive area?!

Geocacher: I'm geocaching.

Conservation Officer: There's no cache there, they're all pre-approved by us.

Geocacher: No, this is a different type that's not reviewed and could be put anywhere.

Conservation Officer: What?!! That's it, no more geocaching in this area anymore. All caches are going to be removed.

 

Having this anarchic activity associated with Geocaching is going to bite us in the behind on this front.

 

But for that to happen there would have to be a group of people that failed to exercise enough common sense. I'm sure no one would do something silly in a sensitive area, even if did add to their find count. I think the past few days have provided a pretty clear demonstration of the common sense exhibited by our community. :huh::blink:

Link to comment

Geocaching is about coordinates and logging in a logbook.

Judging by your profile, Geocaching is also about going to a particular spot, such as a particular stall in a marketplace, or a statue, or a cemetery, or a shrub, or a dune, or a wetland, or... Well, you get the idea.

 

Did you sign a logbook when you did your 3 virtuals and 16 earthcaches?

No?

I assume you'll be deleting those finds, right?

No?

Looks a little hypocritical from here in the cheap seats. Just sayin'... :rolleyes:

 

Then again, my challenge got 4 thumbs down too! Lol. Mine is to take a picture with your GPS with the sun setting over the gulf on Englewood beach.

Yeah. Sadly, there are a few mooks who get their jollies by going from challenge to challenge, voting thumbs down as a means to protest the concept. Sorry to see they don't give a pass to great challenges like yours. I was thinking on doing a sunrise challenge, from a kayak, over on the east coast, and I have no doubt these same mooks will vote it down. Hopefully, they'll tire of their childish behavior in time.

Link to comment

Yeah. Sadly, there are a few mooks who get their jollies by going from challenge to challenge, voting thumbs down as a means to protest the concept. Sorry to see they don't give a pass to great challenges like yours. I was thinking on doing a sunrise challenge, from a kayak, over on the east coast, and I have no doubt these same mooks will vote it down. Hopefully, they'll tire of their childish behavior in time.

 

Yes, I do hope they tire of this childish behavior.

Edited by Frank Broughton
Link to comment

 

Did you sign a logbook when you did your 3 virtuals and 16 earthcaches?

No?

I assume you'll be deleting those finds, right?

No?

Looks a little hypocritical from here in the cheap seats. Just sayin'... :rolleyes:

 

 

Don't see this as hypocritical at all. The person completed those activities, why shouldn't they log them, even if they want them separated from their geocaches? I think it's a tired argument (which I've seen repeated over and over when you don't even know the poster's complete intention for all the different type of virtual activities they've logged) against anyone that wants geocaching in one place, and other activities elsewhere. So I geocache, am I not allowed have an opinion on how things should be set up and recorded if I also do waymarks, challenges, virtuals, etc.?

Link to comment

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
Followers 7
×
×
  • Create New...