Jump to content

Challenges: Now that they are released


Followers 7

Recommended Posts

I think most of the problems with the challenges, have a lot to do with kissing a frog.

 

I've written a challenge, it is very much like a virtual and involves visiting a place which is hard to get to, and taking photographic proof. It is what I wanted, and what I think everyone else wanted. I'm hoping it will become a quality challenge.

 

By setting the 'kiss a frog' challenge as an example of what a challenge should be, Groundspeak have set a very low benchmark which others are happy to replicate to prove how ludicrous challenges can be. The net result is a load of crappy challenges and frustrated geocachers. If the first challenge had been to "Visit Groundspeak HQ and have your photo taken outside", then I think a whole different attitude to challenges would have emerged.

 

I'm fighting against it by publishing what I would like to see as a good challenge. I suggest others do the same, and hopefully the dross will get filtered out and challenges will mature into something sensible. I'm prepared to give it a month to see how it pans out.

 

Good post. Lead by example. Here's one I created last night: http://www.geocaching.com/challenges/view.aspx?cx=CX59B

 

The problem that I see with the "Kiss the Frog" challenge is not so much that it's "not what a challenge should be". The problem is that they don't have any proactive controls for enforcing a distinction between Worldwide (location non-specific) and location specific challenges. Only Groundspeak can create Worldwide challenges but there was nothing in the controls preventing anyone else from create a location based challenge that was location non-specific. As a result, they have only been able to react by archiving a lot of challenges created by lots of people which abused the loophole. An hour or so before Challenges were released I wrote that if challenges fail it will because there will a be a lot of people that just can't behave. Sure, the loophole exists but it wouldn't be as much of an issue if we didn't have people creating challengs such as "Take a picture of your car (or your shoes if you don't have one)" and listing it as a location specific challenge.

 

I also think some sort of filtering mechanism would be helpful. Although there aren't enough challenges in my area for it to be a problem (the only one that shows up is one I created), being able to filter out challenges which have more thumb down than thumb up votes might help. Why don't challenges have a difficulty rating? If the did, and the creator of challenges were honest about the difficulty in complete it, one could filter for challenges which had a difficulty of 3 or higher and remove a lot of fluff.

Link to comment

GS says, "The mission of Groundspeak is to inspire outdoor play using location-based technology." however Jeremy says, "What are the guidelines for issuing a challenge? Unlike caches, there aren't any official guidelines."

 

That is the cope problem with Challenges IMO. Challenges need some guidelines to ensure they are "outdoor" and require the use of "location-based technology" (coordinates to a specific location which is a component of everything that is geocaching.

Edited by geocating
Link to comment

BTW: YOu will have to accept logs even if they come from Tokyo and post a picture of a milk can.

 

Cezanne

Actually I hope that this is one of the first things they change. i do not understand the creator not owning the Challenge, and I do not understand why the creator who wrote the rules for completing the Challenge cannot control/edit/delete the logs to assure that Completed logs are legit.

 

Nevertheless at this point you do have some options for fake logs. You can flag a Completed log and you can comment on it.

 

If someone posts a bogus completed log on mine I intend to verify that it is in fact bogus, flag it and post a comment that the poster did not in fact complete the Challenge properly.

 

I think at least for now that is sufficient.

 

I think it will turn out that the sky is not falling on this issue and after the initial angst and tomfoolery dies down bogus logs won't be much of a problem. And as Groundspeak makes clear in the FAQ, a bogus log hurts no one but the poster.

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment

The beauty of this system is community policing. The flag and vote system will see bad Challenges die and good ones survive. I do wish they would elaborate on how this system of flags and votes works rather than just having Challenge listing disappear for no stated reason.

 

I think a thumbs-down vote should require a comment explaining why it got a down vote, and I wonder if Groundspeak couldn't track down votes by account so spoilers who want to spend their day voting everything down would be identified.

 

There is a limit to creating one Challenge a day, perhaps there should be a limit to 5 down-votes per account per day.

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment

i take back what I said when we were speculating, when I said challenges would be pointless unless they counted to your find count. When I said that, I thought they would actually make you go hike or do something that required a GPSr. the challenges been posted are crap and pointless. I have turned into the challenge police and thumbing down every challenge that you dont have to leave the house for....hopefully the thumbing down will get rid of them.

Link to comment

Just for the record:

 

I do NOT like the concept of challenges (at least how they are implemented now). My biggest concern is, that the challenges are NOT verifiable. In addition there is no GPS relation. \

I would have appreciated if Groundspeak would have concentrated their efforts on improving the geocaching experience instead of implementing (with a lot of effort, I assume) a disputed feature.

 

I still do not have an iPad app. I would love to see ways of improving the Geocache quality (there are some suggestions with this). I would love to have badges, etc... Now I get Challenges :-(

 

I will try to keep my finds statistic clean and from now on I will add "Challenge FREE statistic!" as a headline to my public profile.

 

Just my two cents....

 

Meridos42

Link to comment
I think Jeremy's response is appropriate to an inappropriate request.

Groundspeak at some point decided to move virtuals / locationless caches to another site. It's not clear to me why a request to move challenges to another site would be considered so inappropriate that the thread be curtly locked, and a couple of hours later, deleted entirely. It seems odd for Waymarking to be appropriate, but to suggest challenges follow a similar path, not.

Link to comment
I said it was silly because it asked Groundspeak to abandon a lot of work rather than improve it.

Ed, I'm mostly on your side here, but I'll have to agree to disagree on this point. Groundspeak created a platform for folks to offer their opinions, and for others to vote on those opinions. The suggestion to get rid of challenges or move them to another site was a valid opinion, even if you and I don't necessarily agree with it. While I'm usually considered a straight shooter, as I am no fan of political correctness, I think tact is important when dealing with paying customers.

 

Jeremy was faced with negative feedback which was growing at a geometric rate as folks fed off of each other's angst, growing more heated by the moment. It was probably a good thing to close that particular feedback topic, as it was devolving. But I think that door should have been closed gently, not slammed in the customer's faces. By slamming the door, Jeremy creates the perception that they don't care about their customer base. We both know that's not the case, but that is how folks are seeing it. Perception becomes reality for many folks. Just my $0.02.

 

My vote is to give it a few months. Let it go through a shakedown process. If, after a few months, someone still doesn't like the concept of challenges, they can treat them the same way as folks who don't like urban P&G micros. Ignore them. While many have argued that the mere existence of urban micros is a detriment to the overall game, I can't say the same for challenges. Other than possibly bogging down the servers, making PQs take 5 seconds to reach my inbox instead of 4, I really can't see how these things can have any impact on the other aspects of this game.

 

As for the whole lip locking with amphibians thing, I'm getting more ambiguous toward that as the day goes on. Is it silly? Of course it is. But I'm not diametrically opposed to silly. Does it have anything to do with geocaching? Well, I suppose they could have made their first world wide challenge focusing on whatever that blue critter is at OpenCaching, but change kissing to some other physical act... But they incorporated the Groundspeak mascot instead, doing so in a light hearted way. I'm no longer certain that this is a bad thing. While I haven't completed that challenge, it sure does seem to be popular, judging by the number of folks who have completed it. I do gotta say I like the notion of worldwide challenges, as it has the feel of locationless caches, though I'll likely be fairly picky regarding which ones I accept. I just accepted the "10,000 less pieces of litter" challenge, because CITO, in any form, is an idea I support. I'll have to mull over the idea of getting amorous with a frog... Not sure I want that visual out in public. :lol:

Link to comment

I do gotta say I like the notion of worldwide challenges, as it has the feel of locationless caches, though I'll likely be fairly picky regarding which ones I accept. I just accepted the "10,000 less pieces of litter" challenge, because CITO, in any form, is an idea I support.

 

Like you I support the idea of collecting litter - I am supporting also a lot of other non-geocaching related activities.

However, I do not want to have a litter collection action among my cache finds. If you want, fine for you. They could offer two options of participation - one that contributes to the find count and one which does not.

 

What currently happens is that many of the challenges that show up and that are not deemed to get archived within a few hours because being locationless, are parodies on challenges. They are all created by people being angry about how challenges got implemented.

 

The newest from Vienna

http://www.geocaching.com/challenges/view.aspx?cx=CX859

 

I do not think that this extreme vague of negative energy will do any good to challenges and I doubt that they will have a chance to become what Groundspeak has naively hoped for. I have never ever felt pity for Groundspeak before, but I do now. They simply have been much too naive with respect to what cachers will make out of the challenge idea just to provocate and to show others how absurd challenges are.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

I do gotta say I like the notion of worldwide challenges, as it has the feel of locationless caches, though I'll likely be fairly picky regarding which ones I accept. I just accepted the "10,000 less pieces of litter" challenge, because CITO, in any form, is an idea I support.

 

Like you I support the idea of collecting litter - I am supporting also a lot of other non-geocaching related activities.

However, I do not want to have a litter collection action among my cache finds. If you want, fine for you.

 

What currently happens is that many of the challenges that show up and that are not deemed to get archived within a few hours because being locationless, are parodies on challenges. They are all created by people being angry about how challenges got implemented.

 

The newest from Vienna

http://www.geocaching.com/challenges/view.aspx?cx=CX859

 

I do not think that this extreme vague of negative energy will do any good to challenges and I doubt that they will have a chance to become what Groundspeak has naively hoped for. I have never ever felt pity for Groundspeak before, but I do now. They simply have been much too naive with respect to what cachers will make out of the challenge idea just to provocate. Of course, the problem is aggravated by the missing information and the fact that most cachers learn by examples they see around them and not by reading some hidden text in a FAQ (in many cases in a language they do not like to read or do not even understand at all).

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

There is a lot of dross out there !!! Most of which has been identified in earlier threads.

 

I've seen just 1 challenge that seems to live up to the expectations of what this is all about.

 

Sail Away

 

It has three key ingredients for me;

- its very location specific

- it requires a GPSr to complete

- it is in a place where a physical cache would be impossible.

 

However, without D/T ratings and without a pre-publication review process, I fear that challenges will sink to the lowest common denominator and the dross will prevail.

Link to comment

Personally, I believe that ALL these challenges are DUMB!

 

Ok, let's do a tribute to 911. Then all these foreign geocachers come and mark it completed!

The original Idea was good but the resulting outcomes are so severely OFFENSIVE that I just

wish that they would all just disappear!

 

No rules doesn't work!

PLEASE delete any named cacher with only challenges and BAN THEIR IP address!

 

Give me a break!

 

9/11 Memorials exist outside the United States you know. The event had an effect well beyond New York city.

 

There are a lot of challenges being posted where people have already done that sort of thing. The Take a Hike challenge - I have thousands of photos of me on a hiking trail, as I am an avid hiker. Do I not qualify for the challenge?

 

If you post a challenge to visit the memorial at Ground Zero in New York, and someone was there last week paying their respects from, say, Europe, do they not qualify for the challenge?

 

If this sort of thing bothers you, either - word your challenge to state that the challenge must be accepted and completed AFTER the date you posted it, or don't post the challenge as you'll be disappointed by people who think along the lines I describe above.

Link to comment

I do not think that this extreme vague of negative energy will do any good to challenges and I doubt that they will have a chance to become what Groundspeak has naively hoped for. I have never ever felt pity for Groundspeak before, but I do now. They simply have been much too naive with respect to what cachers will make out of the challenge idea just to provocate. Of course, the problem is aggravated by the missing information and the fact that most cachers learn by examples they see around them and not by reading some hidden text in a FAQ (in many cases in a language they do not like to read or do not even understand at all).

 

Cezanne

 

Exactly. And lack of any edit process to clarify or prevent inappropriate logs.

 

Plus...

 

At Epcot, Disney World.. already one there plus: "Take a photo that looks as if you are holding spaceship earth in your hands or over your head... " http://coord.info/CX4E3

 

...a general sense of IQ drop ;)

 

I guess I have the same empathy for the rabid anti-power trail cacher now. At least they required signing logs and being out with friends.

Link to comment

Personally, I believe that ALL these challenges are DUMB!

 

Ok, let's do a tribute to 911. Then all these foreign geocachers come and mark it completed!

The original Idea was good but the resulting outcomes are so severely OFFENSIVE that I just

wish that they would all just disappear!

 

No rules doesn't work!

PLEASE delete any named cacher with only challenges and BAN THEIR IP address!

 

Give me a break!

 

9/11 Memorials exist outside the United States you know. The event had an effect well beyond New York city.

 

There are a lot of challenges being posted where people have already done that sort of thing. The Take a Hike challenge - I have thousands of photos of me on a hiking trail, as I am an avid hiker. Do I not qualify for the challenge?

 

If you post a challenge to visit the memorial at Ground Zero in New York, and someone was there last week paying their respects from, say, Europe, do they not qualify for the challenge?

 

If this sort of thing bothers you, either - word your challenge to state that the challenge must be accepted and completed AFTER the date you posted it, or don't post the challenge as you'll be disappointed by people who think along the lines I describe above.

 

Yes, a nice 9/11 Memorial in St. Catharines, Ontario for the 31 Canadians who died at the WTC. There used to be a cache there (archived) and amazingly, this memorial is not a Waymark.

 

Anywho can people actually state the challenge must be accepted and completed after the date it was issued? Because I'm seeing dozens and dozens of "been there before" or "done that before" logs in the first 24 hours. If you see this NP, are you going to complete a hiking challenge with an old photo?

Link to comment
However, I do not want to have a litter collection action among my cache finds.

The system is set up to address that concern. For those not wanting litter removal displayed on their statistics tab, the solution is simple; Go pick up litter. Don't log the challenge. Unless Sioneva's Blue Bow, (my favorite Deity... Sorry FSM!), intervenes with its Divine goodness, that challenge won't autolog to your account just because you happened to pick up some beer cans. ;)

 

I guess I have the same empathy for the rabid anti-power trail cacher now. At least they required signing logs and being out with friends.

At the very least, they required that you "claim" you drove down a road. With the general acceptance of leap frogging, combined with the attitude of power trail owners regarding verifying signatures, signing logs to claim a find went out the window. <_<

Link to comment
I said it was silly because it asked Groundspeak to abandon a lot of work rather than improve it.

 

Many of us asked for the return of virts, we got them. Go somewhere, do something, post proof of completion (a picture of you at the site). That's a virtual cache. That's exactly what we asked for.

 

It would be silly of them to cancel Challenges on their first day because a few folks don't like them or how they were implemented.

1800+ votes within hours, giving feedback, and that's silly?

 

Just because Groundspeak put in a lot of work doesn't mean we have to like it. And if we don't, we should make it known. That's feedback.

 

Expecting Groundspeak to just shut it down immediately would be silly. But having to accept it just because Groundspeak put in a lot of work, would be equally silly.

Link to comment

If these things count, why don't benchmarks count? It was harder to take a pic of a legit benchmark than some of this stuff, but I didn't get a count for it.

 

Agreed. If these challenges count, then benchmarks should count as well.

 

Thank you Tadpole! :rolleyes:

. Edited by Schizoid2k
Link to comment

How are challenges remotely connected to geocaching? Seems to be a variant of Waymarking... maybe? nahhh.

 

I would recommend bringing back virtual geocaches over challenges...

Better yet, bring back webcam caches.

 

I won't be doing any of these "so-called" challenges at this time.

Link to comment

How are challenges remotely connected to geocaching?

Discounting the whole worldwide challenge thing, as they more closely resemble locationless;

 

Virtual: Go to a place. (used to log a picture) Log your experience.

Challenges: Go to a place. Take a picture. Log your experience.

 

Okay. That's remote heh.

Link to comment
Challenges need some guidelines to ensure they are "outdoor" and require the use of "location-based technology" (coordinates to a specific location which is a component of everything that is geocaching.
Why are you keying on 'outdoor'? There has never been a rule that geocaches had to be outdoors. I've found several that were indoors.
When 3000+ people voted for bringing back virtuals, I'm sure they didn't mean "post a photo of you kissing a frog." I didn't.
Worldwide challanges are more of an analogue for LC caches. If you are not interested in these, you probably should stick to the regular ones.
i take back what I said when we were speculating, when I said challenges would be pointless unless they counted to your find count. When I said that, I thought they would actually make you go hike or do something that required a GPSr. the challenges been posted are crap and pointless. I have turned into the challenge police and thumbing down every challenge that you dont have to leave the house for....hopefully the thumbing down will get rid of them.

I definitely think that you should continue reporting those 'regular' challenges that should actually be listed as 'worldwide'. Having those remain as-is gums up the process for those people who are trying to look for 'virtuals' and makes it appear that the challenge concept is broken, when in fact it is just an issue of people misusing it.
Groundspeak at some point decided to move virtuals / locationless caches to another site. It's not clear to me why a request to move challenges to another site would be considered so inappropriate that the thread be curtly locked, and a couple of hours later, deleted entirely.
Perhaps it is considered inappropriate because the entire point to the challenge concept is to satisfy those who wanted virts and LCs brought back to GC.com.
At Epcot, Disney World.. already one there plus: "Take a photo that looks as if you are holding spaceship earth in your hands or over your head... " http://coord.info/CX4E3

 

...a general sense of IQ drop ;)

I'm not understanding your hate for challenge caches at WDW. I guess the fact that I have owned a virt at Disneyland for a decade or so must really burn you up.

I would recommend bringing back virtual geocaches over challenges...

Better yet, bring back webcam caches.

Challenges are a viable replacement for both virts and webcam caches (and LCs). I can't imagine a single virtual cache or webcam cache that cannot be a challenge cache. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

 

Yes, a nice 9/11 Memorial in St. Catharines, Ontario for the 31 Canadians who died at the WTC. There used to be a cache there (archived) and amazingly, this memorial is not a Waymark.

 

Anywho can people actually state the challenge must be accepted and completed after the date it was issued? Because I'm seeing dozens and dozens of "been there before" or "done that before" logs in the first 24 hours. If you see this NP, are you going to complete a hiking challenge with an old photo?

 

I thought about it yes actually. I go hiking a lot. I just finished a 6 day backpacking trip which produced very nice photos actually. But I'm going hiking tonight so I'll use that instead.

I posted a challenge to do that 6 day hike to others. Two people have logged that they completed the challenge and I'm perfectly fine with that.

 

Right now it's being treated like Waymarking - where past logs DO count, and are even encouraged. You've been there, done that. Why do you have to do it all over again just because of a published date on a website.

 

Gets much easier to digest when you remember the find count isn't a score count.

Edited by northernpenguin
Link to comment

I would recommend bringing back virtual geocaches over challenges...

Better yet, bring back webcam caches.

Challenges are a viable replacement for both virts and webcam caches (and LCs). I can't imagine a single virtual cache or webcam cache that cannot be a challenge cache.

 

Pretty much spot on... Then why get rid of them at all and re-introduce them in a "challenge type of thing"?

Link to comment
However, I do not want to have a litter collection action among my cache finds.

The system is set up to address that concern. For those not wanting litter removal displayed on their statistics tab, the solution is simple; Go pick up litter. Don't log the challenge. Unless Sioneva's Blue Bow, (my favorite Deity... Sorry FSM!), intervenes with its Divine goodness, that challenge won't autolog to your account just because you happened to pick up some beer cans. ;)

 

What you propose is exactly what I will do anyway (it is not hard to figure that out), but that also keeps me from supporting those challenges that make sense from my point of view. i am not anti-challenge.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

I would recommend bringing back virtual geocaches over challenges...

Better yet, bring back webcam caches.

Challenges are a viable replacement for both virts and webcam caches (and LCs). I can't imagine a single virtual cache or webcam cache that cannot be a challenge cache.

 

Pretty much spot on... Then why get rid of them at all and re-introduce them in a "challenge type of thing"?

 

Because the new concept places the burden of reviewing them on the community instead of the reviewers.

Link to comment

How are challenges remotely connected to geocaching?

Discounting the whole worldwide challenge thing, as they more closely resemble locationless;

 

Virtual: Go to a place. (used to log a picture) Log your experience.

Challenges: Go to a place. Take a picture. Log your experience.

 

It's not a geocache.

Link to comment

Sure, Jeremy can be snarky, even rude, but I have yet to see him be inappropriate. The suggestion to eliminate Challenges was silly. He responded with what he thought of the suggestion. I respect that.

 

I think he is being a saint putting up with all the garbage he has to. I mean, state what one does not like and even state it several times, but to get personal over a game, one you can easily start one of your own even, is beyond my tolerance level, I would ban some of you over posting loud mouths! But that is just me, making Jeremy a saint!

Link to comment

I'm going to hide a container, then post the coordinates as a Challenge. You can log the challenge when you find the container, open it, and sign the log. No reviewer! This will be great.

 

But there is a reviewer. Or rather, there are THOUSANDS of reviewers. Someone is bound to see your challenge, say to himself "that's a geocache, not a challenge," and hit the flag button. If enough people do it, your challenge disappears.

Link to comment

How are challenges remotely connected to geocaching?

Discounting the whole worldwide challenge thing, as they more closely resemble locationless;

 

Virtual: Go to a place. (used to log a picture) Log your experience.

Challenges: Go to a place. Take a picture. Log your experience.

 

It's not a geocache.

 

Neither are virtuals.

Link to comment

I would recommend bringing back virtual geocaches over challenges...

Better yet, bring back webcam caches.

Challenges are a viable replacement for both virts and webcam caches (and LCs). I can't imagine a single virtual cache or webcam cache that cannot be a challenge cache.

 

Pretty much spot on... Then why get rid of them at all and re-introduce them in a "challenge type of thing"?

 

Because the new concept places the burden of reviewing them on the community instead of the reviewers.

 

Virts and webcam caches, in my experience, are so specific that I can't imagine the CO being concerned of there being a burden. If there was a burden, the CO would simply archive the cache... I still believe they should be brought back.

Link to comment
Virts and webcam caches, in my experience, are so specific that I can't imagine the CO being concerned of there being a burden. If there was a burden, the CO would simply archive the cache... I still believe they should be brought back.

No, they both follow the same concept. You think that virtuals and webcams are specific because there's only so many left of them today, and most of those are good. But most everything that you see submitted as challenges today (minus the invalid locationless ones) could have been submitted as virtuals. Imagine a herd of reviewers having to wade through all that carp.

Link to comment

I think a thumbs-down vote should require a comment explaining why it got a down vote, and I wonder if Groundspeak couldn't track down votes by account so spoilers who want to spend their day voting everything down would be identified.

 

There is a limit to creating one Challenge a day, perhaps there should be a limit to 5 down-votes per account per day.

 

Excellent suggestion. It is readily apparent that some are determined to do their level best to undermine this project.

Link to comment

I think a thumbs-down vote should require a comment explaining why it got a down vote, and I wonder if Groundspeak couldn't track down votes by account so spoilers who want to spend their day voting everything down would be identified.

 

There is a limit to creating one Challenge a day, perhaps there should be a limit to 5 down-votes per account per day.

 

Excellent suggestion. It is readily apparent that some are determined to do their level best to undermine this project.

 

+1 here. I've seen plenty of down-vote-them-all-without-bothering-to-even-read-it type activity going on.

Link to comment

Because the new concept places the burden of reviewing them on the community instead of the reviewers.

They could have done that by bringing the grandfathered types back (possibly with a different icon) and putting a half a dozen lines of code in the site to auto publish them when submitted. :ph34r:

Link to comment

Because the new concept places the burden of reviewing them on the community instead of the reviewers.

They could have done that by bringing the grandfathered types back (possibly with a different icon) and putting a half a dozen lines of code in the site to auto publish them when submitted. :ph34r:

 

Well, that's pretty much what we have now, isn't it? :unsure:

Link to comment

I do not think that this extreme vague of negative energy will do any good to challenges and I doubt that they will have a chance to become what Groundspeak has naively hoped for. I have never ever felt pity for Groundspeak before, but I do now. They simply have been much too naive with respect to what cachers will make out of the challenge idea just to provocate. Of course, the problem is aggravated by the missing information and the fact that most cachers learn by examples they see around them and not by reading some hidden text in a FAQ (in many cases in a language they do not like to read or do not even understand at all).

 

Cezanne

 

Exactly. And lack of any edit process to clarify or prevent inappropriate logs.

 

Plus...

 

At Epcot, Disney World.. already one there plus: "Take a photo that looks as if you are holding spaceship earth in your hands or over your head... " http://coord.info/CX4E3

 

 

What's the problem with that one? It's tied to a specific location (although it's certainly doable without a GPS) and poses a challenge to provide proof that you were at that location.

 

If you find the idea lame, nobody is forcing you to accept the challenge. There's a worldwide challenge that is similar called "Show Us Your Landmark" where we are challenged to "Take a picture of yourself putting the tip of your finger on the top of the most recognizable landmark near you." Many of the photos are quite creative and some of them really funny. I think that challenge is a good example of exactly what GS intended to create. Present a challenge which provides some latitude to those that choose to accept such that they can be creative in how they complete it. Sure there are going to be some lame completions but they'll be shown in context with those that tried to be creative and have some harmless fun with it.

Link to comment

The beauty of this system is community policing. The flag and vote system will see bad Challenges die and good ones survive. I do wish they would elaborate on how this system of flags and votes works rather than just having Challenge listing disappear for no stated reason.

 

I think a thumbs-down vote should require a comment explaining why it got a down vote, and I wonder if Groundspeak couldn't track down votes by account so spoilers who want to spend their day voting everything down would be identified.

 

There is a limit to creating one Challenge a day, perhaps there should be a limit to 5 down-votes per account per day.

 

I took the liberty:

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/2175755-require-thumbs-down-vote-comment-limit-votes-per

Link to comment

I think a thumbs-down vote should require a comment explaining why it got a down vote, and I wonder if Groundspeak couldn't track down votes by account so spoilers who want to spend their day voting everything down would be identified.

 

There is a limit to creating one Challenge a day, perhaps there should be a limit to 5 down-votes per account per day.

 

Excellent suggestion. It is readily apparent that some are determined to do their level best to undermine this project.

 

+1 here. I've seen plenty of down-vote-them-all-without-bothering-to-even-read-it type activity going on.

 

+1 for me to. We've already seen one instance where a challenge was archived (an possibly flagged) where the creator tried be creative on a location specific. When others systematically post a thumbs down on any challenge they're punishing those that are actually trying to make this work in a manner similar to what many that have advocated "Bring Back Virtuals" asked for.

Link to comment

How are challenges remotely connected to geocaching?

Discounting the whole worldwide challenge thing, as they more closely resemble locationless;

 

Virtual: Go to a place. (used to log a picture) Log your experience.

Challenges: Go to a place. Take a picture. Log your experience.

 

It's not a geocache.

I've found many virtual caches and still own one. Every one of those were geocaches. Every one of those could also be easily set up using the new challenge functionality. The geocaching evperience would be exactly the same.

 

That being said, I understand your point. You are taking the position that unless you find a box with a logbook, it isn't a geocache. THat's not an invalid viewpoint. It is overly narrow and simplistic, in my opinion, but it's not invalid.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
Virts and webcam caches, in my experience, are so specific that I can't imagine the CO being concerned of there being a burden. If there was a burden, the CO would simply archive the cache... I still believe they should be brought back.

No, they both follow the same concept. You think that virtuals and webcams are specific because there's only so many left of them today, and most of those are good. But most everything that you see submitted as challenges today (minus the invalid locationless ones) could have been submitted as virtuals. Imagine a herd of reviewers having to wade through all that carp.

 

I guess I would need to see some specific examples because I don't see it that way.

Link to comment
I said it was silly because it asked Groundspeak to abandon a lot of work rather than improve it.

Ed, I'm mostly on your side here, but I'll have to agree to disagree on this point. Groundspeak created a platform for folks to offer their opinions, and for others to vote on those opinions. The suggestion to get rid of challenges or move them to another site was a valid opinion, even if you and I don't necessarily agree with it. While I'm usually considered a straight shooter, as I am no fan of political correctness, I think tact is important when dealing with paying customers.

 

Jeremy was faced with negative feedback which was growing at a geometric rate as folks fed off of each other's angst, growing more heated by the moment. It was probably a good thing to close that particular feedback topic, as it was devolving. But I think that door should have been closed gently, not slammed in the customer's faces. By slamming the door, Jeremy creates the perception that they don't care about their customer base. We both know that's not the case, but that is how folks are seeing it. Perception becomes reality for many folks. Just my $0.02.

 

My vote is to give it a few months. Let it go through a shakedown process. If, after a few months, someone still doesn't like the concept of challenges, they can treat them the same way as folks who don't like urban P&G micros. Ignore them. While many have argued that the mere existence of urban micros is a detriment to the overall game, I can't say the same for challenges. Other than possibly bogging down the servers, making PQs take 5 seconds to reach my inbox instead of 4, I really can't see how these things can have any impact on the other aspects of this game.

 

As for the whole lip locking with amphibians thing, I'm getting more ambiguous toward that as the day goes on. Is it silly? Of course it is. But I'm not diametrically opposed to silly. Does it have anything to do with geocaching? Well, I suppose they could have made their first world wide challenge focusing on whatever that blue critter is at OpenCaching, but change kissing to some other physical act... But they incorporated the Groundspeak mascot instead, doing so in a light hearted way. I'm no longer certain that this is a bad thing. While I haven't completed that challenge, it sure does seem to be popular, judging by the number of folks who have completed it. I do gotta say I like the notion of worldwide challenges, as it has the feel of locationless caches, though I'll likely be fairly picky regarding which ones I accept. I just accepted the "10,000 less pieces of litter" challenge, because CITO, in any form, is an idea I support. I'll have to mull over the idea of getting amorous with a frog... Not sure I want that visual out in public. :lol:

 

Not snipping any of your post above because they are excellent well written words! I feel that same about the frog thingie. It is the mascot of the game for them. To say it set a bad precedent is hogwash, people fully tried to make this project falter with bogus challenges and used that one as an excuse. The first challenge was kind of like the first sovouner for the online apps - a freebee to show how it works and feels!

 

May cooler heads prevail here... give this some time to work! TRY TO MAKE IT WORK, and stop voting down excellent challenges as some are bent to do!

Link to comment

 

Ok, the Kiss a Frog World-wide Challenge I agree isn't geocaching and just created angst and confusion...

 

 

I kissed a frog. I'm not ashamed to admit it. (Still waiting for my prince in tights to appear)

 

My guess is that that was chosen as a first Worldwide Challenge because Groundspeak wanted something really easy that anybody could do if they just wanted to "try out" how a challenge would work in practice. Yes, it's a bit silly but at least frogs have an special status within geocaching.

 

As for the rest... I think it's a pity that within the first hour of the Challenges being released some cachers were already throwing out the Challenge equivalent of the film pot in the bush. Maybe the mistake that Groundspeak made was in thinking that geocachers would take the time to consider the full potential for creating interesting/engaging/clever/amusing challenges and would police the standards themselves?

 

MrsB :)

Link to comment

Because the new concept places the burden of reviewing them on the community instead of the reviewers.

They could have done that by bringing the grandfathered types back (possibly with a different icon) and putting a half a dozen lines of code in the site to auto publish them when submitted. :ph34r:

The beauty of their plan is that challenges need not affect anyone who is not interested in them. You have to actively seek them out on the website. They don't interfere with geocache placement. They aren't bogging down the reviewers. They aren't cluttering the maps or PQs.

Link to comment

Sure, Jeremy can be snarky, even rude, but I have yet to see him be inappropriate. The suggestion to eliminate Challenges was silly. He responded with what he thought of the suggestion. I respect that.

 

I think he is being a saint putting up with all the garbage he has to. I mean, state what one does not like and even state it several times, but to get personal over a game, one you can easily start one of your own even, is beyond my tolerance level, I would ban some of you over posting loud mouths! But that is just me, making Jeremy a saint!

 

:blink:

Link to comment

I'm going to hide a container, then post the coordinates as a Challenge. You can log the challenge when you find the container, open it, and sign the log. No reviewer! This will be great.

 

But there is a reviewer. Or rather, there are THOUSANDS of reviewers. Someone is bound to see your challenge, say to himself "that's a geocache, not a challenge," and hit the flag button. If enough people do it, your challenge disappears.

Reminds me of the way another site reviews geocaches.

Link to comment

They could have done that by bringing the grandfathered types back (possibly with a different icon) and putting a half a dozen lines of code in the site to auto publish them when submitted. :ph34r:

 

Well, that's pretty much what we have now, isn't it? :unsure:

No. A GC listing page would allow CO's to retain ownership, delete bogus logs, create a better listing page. They would appear in the existing PQ/search function and on the map. The logs would download in my my finds. I could put them in a bookmark list, put watches one them and get notifies.

 

We have nothing like that now.

Link to comment
No. A GC listing page would allow CO's to retain ownership, delete bogus logs, create a better listing page. They would appear in the existing PQ/search function and on the map. The logs would download in my my finds. I could put them in a bookmark list, put watches one them and get notifies.

 

We have nothing like that now.

 

And those things are your only complaint? Big deal, mostly things they can still implement. Ownership and control over the logs is the only big difference I can see, and my gut feeling is that they chose to do it that way because a lot of those challenges will sooner or later become effectively ownerless, as it happened with a lot of the virtuals. So as a preventive measure, their solution was to not let the owners have any control to begin with. Maybe not a good solution, but worth a shot.

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...