Challenges Counting as Finds

[4wheelin_fool]

Who cares what the actual find count is? You can check the details of a cacher by just clicking on their profile anyhow.

 

 

The fellow on the left may be concentrating on find counts.

[+Semper Questio]

 

Logging no challenges at all is at the moment the only way to demonstrate to others that one is not one of those who is logging challenges without leaving home.

 

 

(emphasis mine)

 

I don't get it. Why does this matter so much to some people? It ties in with "counting these cheapens my finds" and other such claims. Why is there such an intense interest in others' caching habits or concern with how others perceive your caching? ("You", in this post, is being used in the general collective sense and is not directed at any one individual)

 

I can only provide my personal answer (as the person whom you cited above without adressing your question to someone specific).

 

I am not concerned that my finds or those of someone else are cheapened. There are caches for which I had to work enormously hard that have been easy for almost all

others, e.g. for this cache

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=aadff77c-d9f5-4f88-be69-cc18036e6472

and there are mystery caches that are trivial for me and have been really hard for others.

Each one has different capabilities and thus comparing find counts makes no sense whatsoever.

 

It is important, however, for me not be perceived as armchair cacher and I think that it is negative for the image of geocaching if people get to believe that it is a well accepted way of geocaching to perform actions at one's PC. Like I am angry when I read logs that cachers proudly report to have ignored driving prohibited signs, as this puts geocachers into a bad light, I am not happy about armchair activities subsumed under geocaching.

 

If the challenges continue to contribute towards the find count, I'd at least want to have the option to get the list of challenges displayed that someone has logged.

 

Cezanne

 

But I don't understand why others' perception of how you cache is important to you. You know what you did or did not do. You participate in this activity for your own enjoyment, do you not? Why choose to not do something merely because of how someone else may interpret it, especially if and when it has no effect on them or you? Personally, I refuse to stop doing something I enjoy because of how someone else may perceive my activity.

 

Now, I agree that I would not like armchair logs on my challenges or any other of my caches and I hope Groundspeak does change the system so challenge "owners" can do something about bogus logs. If they want us to police these things ourselves, we need the tools and authority to do so.

[+SSO JOAT]

I want to suggest that we steal another Harry Potter term for this group of people who are concerned over other people's stats while touting their own stats as somehow important... they are "Dursleys". Concerned with appearances and what other people think of them. No doubt they are always peering over the fence to see what the neighbors are up to rather than just minding their own business and accepting life as it comes. For all I care, the Dursleys can just sit around and gossip to their heart's content over how other people choose to go out and recreate. Where they cross the line is when they run to the government (GS in this example) to have someone else's activity banned or restricted, just because they don't like it. Hopefully, GS just says "no" and proceeds forward while working to iron out the few minor issues that have surfaced on the way the Challenges are being presented on the website.

[Mushtang]

I want to suggest that we steal another Harry Potter term for this group of people who are concerned over other people's stats while touting their own stats as somehow important... they are "Dursleys".

 

I love this! I'm in.

 

I also think a Dursley should include those that are always saying that the numbers don't matter, while at the same time talking down about those that do a lot of PnGs or Power Trails just to boost their numbers.

[cezanne]

But I don't understand why others' perception of how you cache is important to you. You know what you did or did not do. You participate in this activity for your own enjoyment, do you not? Why choose to not do something merely because of how someone else may interpret it, especially if and when it has no effect on them or you? Personally, I refuse to stop doing something I enjoy because of how someone else may perceive my activity.

 

The only challenge that currently exists around me is not attracting my attention anyway. So at the moment I do not have to sacrifice that much for not logging challenges. I still hope that some improvements will be implemented, such as control over the logs for the creator of a challenge and the option to list the challenges created and completed by cacher X.

 

Certainly personal enjoyment is one aspect, but not the only one. I might enjoy to visit some location on private property where access if not allowed, but the longer I am geocaching, the more I think that it is important to also think carefully about how one's own actions effect others and the image of geocaching.

 

Now, I agree that I would not like armchair logs on my challenges or any other of my caches and I hope Groundspeak does change the system so challenge "owners" can do something about bogus logs. If they want us to police these things ourselves, we need the tools and authority to do so.

 

There are also other issues coupled with the no-ownership issue.

It appears to me that their idea about challenges is on a quite short time scale. Not allowing ownership also means that the descriptions cannot be updated. So if opening hours, entrance fees, access routes etc change, it is not even possible to update the challenges. They might argue that one can come up with a new one, but that does not seem reasonable to me.

 

Cezanne

[+northernpenguin]

 

There are also other issues coupled with the no-ownership issue.

It appears to me that their idea about challenges is on a quite short time scale. Not allowing ownership also means that the descriptions cannot be updated. So if opening hours, entrance fees, access routes etc change, it is not even possible to update the challenges. They might argue that one can come up with a new one, but that does not seem reasonable to me.

 

 

This part bugs me too. I see a lot of challenges with information such as park hours, contact numbers and URLs to information .... and it's all non-editable.

Perhaps GS could add an "additional info" block on the page to prevent people from changing the challenge definition ( there are people who will post a challenge, wait until others complete then rename/edit the challenge to something embarrassing for example). Having an editable "additional information" block would give us a spot to put that information that could change. If they want to keep the Challenge ownerless, then it should be a Wiki interface (that shows who edited what).

[+Manville Possum]

Has everyone voted in the feedback? http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/2170499-don-t-make-completions-the-same-as-finds-?utm_campaign=Widgets&utm_medium=widget&utm_source=feedback.geocaching.com

[+BuckeyeClan]

I did a cache above 12,000 feet.. so I could do the following.. 1) Find the actual physical cache 2) do an action challenge of finding a cache above 12,000 feet 3) complete the photo challenge of me being at my favorite trail 4) Do a photo challenge of taking yourself a picture at Henderson Mine.

 

WOW! 4 Smileys for 1 spot. Crazy.

 

This could literally be repeated for every physical cache.. So if you really wanted to "cheat" you could do 2-3 challenge for every spot where there was a physical cache since there are ABSOLUTELY no integration with challenges and real, actual geocaches (like they did with virtual caches).

 

Hope Groundspeak gets their act together on this quickly.

 

I don't see #2 or #3 listed in the Worldwide Challenge Tab, which makes them prohibited, as user-listed challenges must be for a specific location. Instead of logging them as completed, you should have flagged them, so that they will be archived. The (possible) good thing about this system is that it gives the community the tools to determine what is good or bad, acceptable or not acceptable. No need to wait for Groundspeak, or a reviewer, or an absentee cache owner.

[+Semper Questio]

 

The only challenge that currently exists around me is not attracting my attention anyway. So at the moment I do not have to sacrifice that much for not logging challenges. I still hope that some improvements will be implemented, such as control over the logs for the creator of a challenge and the option to list the challenges created and completed by cacher X.

 

I expect such improvements will come...or at least I dearly hope so.

 

Certainly personal enjoyment is one aspect, but not the only one. I might enjoy to visit some location on private property where access if not allowed, but the longer I am geocaching, the more I think that it is important to also think carefully about how one's own actions effect others and the image of geocaching.

 

I understand that concern and, for now, that is where the community policing come in. If I see a challenge that is in violation of guidelines, then it gets flagged just as I have done with regular caches in the past. So far, this system seems to be working fairly well, although I'm sure improvements could be made in the process. For instance, I think an owner should get log notifications. Also, an owner of an archived challenge should be notified that it has been flagged and archived and be given an opportunity to bring a challenge into compliance. Clearly, a lot of the problems we are bouncing around deal with a lack of challenge ownership and the responsibility that goes along with said ownership.

 

Now, I agree that I would not like armchair logs on my challenges or any other of my caches and I hope Groundspeak does change the system so challenge "owners" can do something about bogus logs. If they want us to police these things ourselves, we need the tools and authority to do so.

 

There are also other issues coupled with the no-ownership issue.

It appears to me that their idea about challenges is on a quite short time scale. Not allowing ownership also means that the descriptions cannot be updated. So if opening hours, entrance fees, access routes etc change, it is not even possible to update the challenges. They might argue that one can come up with a new one, but that does not seem reasonable to me.

 

Again, I concur and can only hope that they are, indeed, looking at imroving the current model.

[Mushtang]

From the request page to have the Challenges not added to the Find count:

i don't want to be talking to a cacher who has 100 finds and have to ask how many of them are finds and how many are challenges.

 

I just want to ask how this person is forced to ask such a stupid question? They haven't complained about having to ask how many are difficult finds vs easy PnGs, and they haven't complained about having to ask how many are virtuals or locationless or events that weren't really a container with a log book either.

 

This is totally a Dursley, and the person that posted this request definitely cares about other people's meaningless numbers for some reason.

[+jeffbouldin]

From the request page to have the Challenges not added to the Find count:

i don't want to be talking to a cacher who has 100 finds and have to ask how many of them are finds and how many are challenges.

 

I just want to ask how this person is forced to ask such a stupid question? They haven't complained about having to ask how many are difficult finds vs easy PnGs, and they haven't complained about having to ask how many are virtuals or locationless or events that weren't really a container with a log book either.

 

This is totally a Dursley, and the person that posted this request definitely cares about other people's meaningless numbers for some reason.

 

It is also very inaccurate. The information he\she wants is readily available on the profile page.

[+Frank Broughton]

This is an interesting and pertinent discussion about how the Prime Directive may have changed.

 

Nope it has not changed - the "Prime Directive" - which is - GET OUTSIDE & PLAY is still the prime directive!

[+SSO JOAT]

How do you vote AGAINST these "feedback" questions on the page linked in post 157 above? That's a terrible feedback question, inaccurate, and needs to be voted down, but I don't see where you can vote against it...?

[+Team Taran]

The only way to.vote against it is to start a counter topic. That had been done but hasnt attracted many votes. The problem is you have a concerted efforts by a bunch of zealots who dont or won't listen to anyone or realize that what they are demanding is what essentially already happening.

[+Lime Candy]

There seems to be an elitist view that 'caring' about other cachers' numbers is something to be scoffed at. I don't know of any cachers who 'care' about numbers, but plenty are very interested in them - me included. I consider the gathering of numbers, colouring in of D/T grids, bagging new counties/countries etc. to be akin to building a collection. I'm not competing against anyone, but it's my own personal goal to work at those stats.

 

I love looking at other cachers' stats. But it would annoy me if those stats were adulterated with data from challenges in their current form. However, if the challenge guidelines were tightened up, requiring the cacher to visit the location and take a photo/answer a question/whatever, and the challenge owners were allowed to police their challenges and delete bogus logs, I see a place for them within geocaching.

[+northernpenguin]

There seems to be an elitist view that 'caring' about other cachers' numbers is something to be scoffed at. I don't know of any cachers who 'care' about numbers, but plenty are very interested in them - me included. I consider the gathering of numbers, colouring in of D/T grids, bagging new counties/countries etc. to be akin to building a collection. I'm not competing against anyone, but it's my own personal goal to work at those stats.

 

I love looking at other cachers' stats. But it would annoy me if those stats were adulterated with data from challenges in their current form. However, if the challenge guidelines were tightened up, requiring the cacher to visit the location and take a photo/answer a question/whatever, and the challenge owners were allowed to police their challenges and delete bogus logs, I see a place for them within geocaching.

 

You can visit a cacher's profile page and have the full breakdown of exactly how they scored higher than you found their caches, by multi, traditional, virtual, challenges, etc. It's just not as obvious on the cache log pages that's all.

[+Lime Candy]

There seems to be an elitist view that 'caring' about other cachers' numbers is something to be scoffed at. I don't know of any cachers who 'care' about numbers, but plenty are very interested in them - me included. I consider the gathering of numbers, colouring in of D/T grids, bagging new counties/countries etc. to be akin to building a collection. I'm not competing against anyone, but it's my own personal goal to work at those stats.

 

I love looking at other cachers' stats. But it would annoy me if those stats were adulterated with data from challenges in their current form. However, if the challenge guidelines were tightened up, requiring the cacher to visit the location and take a photo/answer a question/whatever, and the challenge owners were allowed to police their challenges and delete bogus logs, I see a place for them within geocaching.

 

You can visit a cacher's profile page and have the full breakdown of exactly how they scored higher than you found their caches, by multi, traditional, virtual, challenges, etc. It's just not as obvious on the cache log pages that's all.

 

Yes, and I already do that, but won't completed challenges affect the stats in the same way as geocaches? E.g. suppose I notice a cacher has cached in Australia and send them a message about it, but it turns out they haven't, they just completed a challenge whose home co-ords were in Australia? Obviously wouldn't be a problem if challenges could be properly policed and bogus logs deleted.

[+Team Taran]

I would assume that completions would be shown separately in stats. They aren't finds. I personally would wait and see how it is done before I began to worry about it. Also if I was interested enough about someone's experiences in cacahing somewhere I think I would do more than simply see that they had been there.

[+Lime Candy]

I would assume that completions would be shown separately in stats. They aren't finds.

 

I would assume so too, I sincerely hope so anyway. And I totally agree, they aren't finds, and so shouldn't be included in the grand total of geocaches found.

[+Cache Sleuth]

How do you vote AGAINST these "feedback" questions on the page linked in post 157 above? That's a terrible feedback question, inaccurate, and needs to be voted down, but I don't see where you can vote against it...?

 

I agree completely. The vote count on feedback to exclude challenges from the total find count are being orchestrated by a non-representative group of activists and - based on some of the comments - disgruntled members who were against the whole idea of virtuals being brought back in the first place. There is an organized campaign under way to get the vote number on the topic up as high and as quickly as possible. I have personally received two emails encouraging me to go there and vote. Yesterday, someone created a challenge (CX10FE) where the logging requirement was for you to go to the topic and vote. As of now, there are a bit over 5000 votes to remove the numbers from your overall find count. However, each person can allocate up to 3 votes, so as few as 1700 members may have actually voted. GS is monitoring the topic, so if you are in favor of challenges completed being included in your finds, please go there and post a comment but DO NOT VOTE. Remember: "the squeakiest wheel gets the most grease". Don't allow changes to be forced on the majority by an organized, vocal minority!

[+northernpenguin]

I would assume that completions would be shown separately in stats. They aren't finds.

 

I would assume so too, I sincerely hope so anyway. And I totally agree, they aren't finds, and so shouldn't be included in the grand total of geocaches found.

 

When I look at my Geocaching Stats on my profile page, the three challenges I have completed are NOT reflected in the stats. It says I have 5361 caches on the stats page, and it says I have 5364 when I go to my Geocaching summary page.

 

So, no need to worry about the stats page being off at this time.

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

I would assume that completions would be shown separately in stats. They aren't finds.

 

 

I would assume so too, I sincerely hope so anyway. And I totally agree, they aren't finds, and so shouldn't be included in the grand total of geocaches found.

 

When I look at my Geocaching Stats on my profile page, the three challenges I have completed are NOT reflected in the stats. It says I have 5361 caches on the stats page, and it says I have 5364 when I go to my Geocaching summary page.

 

So, no need to worry about the stats page being off at this time.

 

Issue resolved. We are at peace again.

 

I don't see the big deal some are making.

[cezanne]

As of now, there are a bit over 5000 votes to remove the numbers from your overall find count. However, each person can allocate up to 3 votes, so as few as 1700 members may have actually voted. GS is monitoring the topic, so if you are in favor of challenges completed being included in your finds, please go there and post a comment but DO NOT VOTE. Remember: "the squeakiest wheel gets the most grease". Don't allow changes to be forced on the majority by an organized, vocal minority!

 

I do not think that it is a minority. Try to see what happens if you open a new feedback thread and propose to keep counting completed challenges towards the found count (if such a thread does not yet exist - I have not checked) and see how many votes you will get. I'd surprise me if you reach a comparable number of votes as the proposal to change the way challenges are counted.

 

I am a fan of virtuals and yet I prefer the challenges to be counted separately. So your theory is wrong.

 

Cezanne

[+Lime Candy]

I would assume that completions would be shown separately in stats. They aren't finds.

 

 

I would assume so too, I sincerely hope so anyway. And I totally agree, they aren't finds, and so shouldn't be included in the grand total of geocaches found.

 

When I look at my Geocaching Stats on my profile page, the three challenges I have completed are NOT reflected in the stats. It says I have 5361 caches on the stats page, and it says I have 5364 when I go to my Geocaching summary page.

 

So, no need to worry about the stats page being off at this time.

 

Issue resolved. We are at peace again.

 

I don't see the big deal some are making.

 

Great news!

 

And as for a big deal, I can only speak for myself in that if challenges had counted in the stats, it would've spoiled my enjoyment of viewing those stats. Since that won't be happening, I'll shut up whinging.

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

As of now, there are a bit over 5000 votes to remove the numbers from your overall find count. However, each person can allocate up to 3 votes, so as few as 1700 members may have actually voted. GS is monitoring the topic, so if you are in favor of challenges completed being included in your finds, please go there and post a comment but DO NOT VOTE. Remember: "the squeakiest wheel gets the most grease". Don't allow changes to be forced on the majority by an organized, vocal minority!

 

I do not think that it is a minority. Try to see what happens if you open a new feedback thread and propose to keep counting completed challenges towards the found count (if such a thread does not yet exist - I have not checked) and see how many votes you will get. I'd surprise me if you reach a comparable number of votes as the proposal to change the way challenges are counted.

 

I am a fan of virtuals and yet I prefer the challenges to be counted separately. So your theory is wrong.

 

Cezanne

 

Has someone created an opossig thread? Link? I'll go vote.

[Mushtang]

There seems to be an elitist view that 'caring' about other cachers' numbers is something to be scoffed at.

Close. My view is that looking at someone else's numbers and applying meaning where there is none, is what is to be scoffed at. To look at someone else's numbers and using them to tell that other cacher that they're doing it wrong is what is to be scoffed at. To claim that numbers don't matter in one thread, and then in the next to talk about the fact that someone has gotten credit for finding caches that they never really found is what is to be scoffed at.

 

If you look at my find count and decide that I haven't found enough caches for my opinion on a subject to matter, I'm scoffing.

 

If you have a problem with my find count being higher than yours because you see that I find mostly D1T1 Lamp Post Caches and you find mostly D3 or higher, I'm scoffing.

 

If you're one of those that regularly shout that the numbers don't matter in the forums but then you complain that people log events as being attended multiple times when they want to get credit for the temporary caches, I'm scoffing.

 

Those are all examples of someone being hypocritical about how important other people's numbers are.

 

I don't know of any cachers who 'care' about numbers, but plenty are very interested in them - me included. I consider the gathering of numbers, colouring in of D/T grids, bagging new counties/countries etc. to be akin to building a collection. I'm not competing against anyone, but it's my own personal goal to work at those stats.

I don't recall anyone having a problem with, or scoffing, that kind of interest in someone else's numbers. It's a lot of fun to see how many states someone I know has finds in, or how many APE caches they've found, etc.

 

I love looking at other cachers' stats. But it would annoy me if those stats were adulterated with data from challenges in their current form. However, if the challenge guidelines were tightened up, requiring the cacher to visit the location and take a photo/answer a question/whatever, and the challenge owners were allowed to police their challenges and delete bogus logs, I see a place for them within geocaching.

This is where we differ. It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if someone decided to fill their stats with 1,000 challenges in each state while sitting at their computer. What they do with their stats is their business.

 

And I sure as heck fire don't want anyone trying to tell me that I shouldn't find a Challenge because they don't like what it will do to MY stats!!

 

(Sorry for the bad language)

[+Castle Mischief]

The way they are being counted right now is fine. There is room for improvement in some aspects of Challenges, but how and where they are represented in relation to your physical/event/virtual/earthcache/locationless/web cam/mega/etc count is not one of those areas.

 

If the energy being spent to down-vote Challenges and creating purposely bogus Challenges and Challenges to direct people to vote in the Feedback forum was being spent doing what these people say they want only represented on this website- physical caches- then this would not even be an issue.

 

Less trashy, more cachey.

[+Team Taran]

There is an existing feedback topic supporting the status quo on challenge statistics. It would be nice to get a respectable number of supporters but it is hard to compete with organized campaigns that include sock puppets. It's not my topic and I would have worded it slightly differently. I'm not sure how to post a link but I'll try. My link

[+TL&MinBHIL]

You're rude, condescending, and attack people for simply having a differing opinion than yours. You sir, do more harm to this game than every "TFTC" log combined.

 

He attacked no person, but you did attack him..... and your last statement is pretty much ridiculous!

I suppose I have to explain my words & clarify why I said what I did. In case you missed it, he implied those voicing out against Challenges are lazy because they don't want to do them because, according to him, Challenges take more work to complete. He referred to cachers as knuckleheads (although quite the timid insult, it's still an insult) and stagnant sticks in the mud. But you're right, he didn't attack anyone. If you consider pointing out his rude behavior towards other cachers an attack, so be it. Posting a TFTC log hurts no one. Disagreeing with how others play doesn't really hurt either. But when someone chooses to come onto this public forum and berate people who hold an opposing opinion, that does do harm. Hence my last statement.

Edited August 23, 2011 by TL&MinBHIL

[+nikcap]

The only way to.vote against it is to start a counter topic. That had been done but hasnt attracted many votes. The problem is you have a concerted efforts by a bunch of zealots who dont or won't listen to anyone or realize that what they are demanding is what essentially already happening.

 

Can you link a couple of those Feedback topics.

I haven't been able to find a positive one.

 

Thanks.

[+Team Taran]

Here is a link to the positive one. IKd it but the bullying on the other topic really annoys me.keep challenges counting as founds

[+awopcxet]

What's coming next!?

World championship in geocaching?

Edited August 23, 2011 by awopcxet

[knowschad]

it is hard to compete with organized campaigns that include sock puppets.

"Organized"? How, where, and by whom? Is there a Facebook page or Twitter feed?

[+shantydaze]

it is hard to compete with organized campaigns that include sock puppets.

"Organized"? How, where, and by whom? Is there a Facebook page or Twitter feed?

 

I wondered the same thing. I do not like Challenges counting as "Finds" and voted in the Feedback topic without any organized campaign contacting me about it. It is not because I do not like Challenges or are against them. Rather, I like challenging myself to try and get to different cache locations (i.e. counties, states, etc.), certain numbers, and other stats. If Challenges are counted as finds, but not supported through GSAK, it is going to screw up the game I play against myself.

 

As I could not care less about others' stats, the easy answer is not to do Challenges. I already refuse to log the bonus finds I have for caches. The problem is that Challenges might be fun and I would not mind doing some of them.

 

In the end, there is a place for Challenges. I expect my 10 year old nephew will really enjoy them. He only gets to go caching the couple of times a year we visit and complained recently that he has not been able to update his geocaching.com account for a couple of months. The Worldwide Challenges will allow him to do enjoy the game and the site without a GPSr. But, a "find" is exactly that - finding a cache, finding a location, etc.

[tomowens]

I guess it depends on what the challenge really is.

 

If it is a challenge where I need to go to some coordinate - not an address or named place - and search for some object that may not be readily obvious, then yes, I think that would count as a 'find' even though there is no log book.

 

If the challenge is to find an address, I won't even bother.

[+Hypnopaedia]

"We are working on splitting out cache finds and challenge completion counts. Both will be displayed on the logs unless you have not found a Challenge. In that case the statistics for Challenges won't be shown. This should be done by the end of the week (August 26) (30517)

Jeremy

 

Jeremy

Admin, Geocaching"

 

I for one, am happy with this compromise and I very well may start logging them as soon as that is done. I never actually saw this suggested by anyone and I think it's good enough clearly distinguishing between finds and completes. Keep in mind I'm saying this when my ideal solution is a separate site like Waymarking, but I am very happy they are trying to address concerns of a large group of cachers. Thank you for the flexability!

 

Thank you Jeremy and all you fine Lackey's

Edited August 23, 2011 by Hypnopaedia

[+northernpenguin]

"We are working on splitting out cache finds and challenge completion counts. Both will be displayed on the logs unless you have not found a Challenge. In that case the statistics for Challenges won't be shown. This should be done by the end of the week (August 26) (30517)

Jeremy

 

Jeremy

Admin, Geocaching"

 

I for one, am happy with this compromise and I very well may start logging them as soon as that is done. I never actually saw this suggested by anyone and I think it's good enough clearly distinguishing between finds and completes. Keep in mind I'm saying this when my ideal solution is a separate site like Waymarking, but I am very happy they are trying to address concerns of a large group of cachers. Thank you for the flexability!

 

Thank you Jeremy and all you fine Lackey's

 

This I like, as it will hopefully mean the Challenge-killing-down-vote-anything-trolls will find another hobby and let the Challenges start to actually take root.

[joesdolphins]

challenges are stupid and the way they have it set up is dumb. Every one should complain..

[knowschad]

challenges are stupid and the way they have it set up is dumb. Every one should complain..

That is one of the most well thought-out arguments I have heard since the release. Thank you for your analysis of the situation and please report back if you gain any further insight.

[+Frank Broughton]

"We are working on splitting out cache finds and challenge completion counts. Both will be displayed on the logs unless you have not found a Challenge. In that case the statistics for Challenges won't be shown. This should be done by the end of the week (August 26) (30517)

Jeremy

 

Jeremy

Admin, Geocaching"

 

I for one, am happy with this compromise and I very well may start logging them as soon as that is done. I never actually saw this suggested by anyone and I think it's good enough clearly distinguishing between finds and completes. Keep in mind I'm saying this when my ideal solution is a separate site like Waymarking, but I am very happy they are trying to address concerns of a large group of cachers. Thank you for the flexability!

 

Thank you Jeremy and all you fine Lackey's

 

This I like, as it will hopefully mean the Challenge-killing-down-vote-anything-trolls will find another hobby and let the Challenges start to actually take root.

 

i HOPE SO!

[+Cache Sleuth]

As of now, there are a bit over 5000 votes to remove the numbers from your overall find count. However, each person can allocate up to 3 votes, so as few as 1700 members may have actually voted. GS is monitoring the topic, so if you are in favor of challenges completed being included in your finds, please go there and post a comment but DO NOT VOTE. Remember: "the squeakiest wheel gets the most grease". Don't allow changes to be forced on the majority by an organized, vocal minority!

 

I do not think that it is a minority. Try to see what happens if you open a new feedback thread and propose to keep counting completed challenges towards the found count (if such a thread does not yet exist - I have not checked) and see how many votes you will get. I'd surprise me if you reach a comparable number of votes as the proposal to change the way challenges are counted.

 

I am a fan of virtuals and yet I prefer the challenges to be counted separately. So your theory is wrong.

 

Cezanne

 

Some numbers (and likely consequences) that I noticed:

 

Worldwide number of geocachers (according to GS): 5,000,000

Number who voted "Bring Back Virtuals" in the feedback forum: 3843 (.0007% of total).

GS announces Challenges as a replacement for Virtuals.

Number who voted "Don't Make Completions the Same as Finds": 5358 (.001% of total).

(Members can vote up to 3 times for a topic, so number of actual members likely even less than the amounts shown above.)

GS relents and agrees to break out Challenges from total cache finds.

 

Consequences: Virtuals are not going to be brought back and Challenges are now guaranteed to meet the same fate as waymarks.

 

A couple of things come to mind:

THE SQUEAKIEST WHEEL GETS THE MOST GREASE.

TYRANNY OF THE MINORITY.

 

The 99.99% of us who rarely or never post to the forums, participate in the feedback forum, or get involved in important community issues can all learn a very important lesson from this sad experience...

[+Semper Questio]

As I just posted in another thread....

 

OK, so now that the caching purists have won that argument, are they now going to go back and split out how old locationless, old virtuals, old webcams, earthcaches, and events are counted and remove them from the total finds? They aren't "caches" either, are they? That was one of the arguments here along with "if challenges count so should benchmarks." So clearly TPTB have decided that containerless objects are not really caches, right?

[+GeoBlank]

It has been easy to want/need to post a similar message in multiple threads these days....

[Goddess of Wisdom]

I am very disappointed by the development that challenge completions will not be counted with my overall finds total. A challenge, if properly designed according to the rules, is supposed to take the participant to a specific spot to perform a specific task in order to get a "completion". This is exactly what you have to do in order to log one of the grandfathered virtuals as a find. Events, CITOs, Virtuals, Webcams, Earth caches, etc. all count as "finds". And now challenges don't. I'm sorry, but I just don't understand. It seems quite inconsistent to me. I don't believe there will be much interest in challenges now and they will soon fade away.

[+briansnat]

I am very disappointed by the development that challenge completions will not be counted with my overall finds total. A challenge, if properly designed according to the rules, is supposed to take the participant to a specific spot to perform a specific task in order to get a "completion". This is exactly what you have to do in order to log one of the grandfathered virtuals as a find. Events, CITOs, Virtuals, Webcams, Earth caches, etc. all count as "finds". And now challenges don't. I'm sorry, but I just don't understand. It seems quite inconsistent to me. I don't believe there will be much interest in challenges now and they will soon fade away.

 

I agree with you. Most of the people who were complaining that they weren't geocaches have logged finds on dozens, and sometimes hundreds of things that aren't geocaches.

 

Without incrementing the find count, challenges will be about as popular as bacon at a Bar Mitzvah. Challenges will become a niche activity like Waymarking and people will still be clamoring to bring back virtuals.

[cezanne]

 

Challenges will become a niche activity like Waymarking and people will still be clamoring to bring back virtuals.

 

Currently challenges contribute to the find count and still lots of cachers (including myself) would like to have something that comes much closer to virtual caches than challenges.

The find count is not the essential aspect.

I regard virtuals and Earthcaches as caches (there is a cache listing, an owner, a review process, etc) while I am not at all happy with the challenges and do not feel that their intent is to be something cache-like.

 

Cezanne

[cezanne]

As I just posted in another thread....

 

OK, so now that the caching purists have won that argument, are they now going to go back and split out how old locationless, old virtuals, old webcams, earthcaches, and events are counted and remove them from the total finds? They aren't "caches" either, are they?

 

As I have written elsewhere I think that there will still be the same number shown as overall number of total found/completed in the profile. As I understand it the change will only effect the logs. (Currently they show no counter there, but that's only temporary.) If really someone refrains from visiting challenges because the logs will not show

2000 found/completed as in the profile, but rather 1640 caches found and 360 challenges completed, then the proof is provided that this person is doing challenges just for the numbers.

Splitting out the numbers that way, would allow those who do not want to take part in a community-reviewed, containerless activity at a single shot. I think that this is a good compromise solution. It also has the advantage that this rough split up can be seen without logging into the site. When I am reading logs, I am hardly logged into the site (I am not using the keep me logged in option and thus get logged out relatively quickly).

 

Cezanne

Edited August 24, 2011 by cezanne

[+TL&MinBHIL]

Although it's not surprising, I find it unnecessary that those who wanted completions to count as finds, after finding out Groundspeak's decision, now resort to saying things like, These people are just going to go complain about something else because they're never happy. How many of you saying that are going to go right back to complaining about smart phones and blank/short logs? If GS banned blank logs, you'd still have a problem with short ones. See what I'm getting at here? We're not all going to be happy with every single aspect of this hobby.

 

I agree with you. Most of the people who were complaining that they weren't geocaches have logged finds on dozens, and sometimes hundreds of things that aren't geocaches.

 

Without incrementing the find count, challenges will be about as popular as bacon at a Bar Mitzvah. Challenges will become a niche activity like Waymarking and people will still be clamoring to bring back virtuals.

According to Jeremy's statement, Challenge completions will have their own count right beside the traditional find count. Those participating in Challenges WILL have a count in order to view their accomplishments. It's not going away, just separating from the typical Found count. So isn't that a happy medium?

[+Vater_Araignee]

As of now, there are a bit over 5000 votes to remove the numbers from your overall find count. However, each person can allocate up to 3 votes, so as few as 1700 members may have actually voted. GS is monitoring the topic, so if you are in favor of challenges completed being included in your finds, please go there and post a comment but DO NOT VOTE. Remember: "the squeakiest wheel gets the most grease". Don't allow changes to be forced on the majority by an organized, vocal minority!

 

I do not think that it is a minority. Try to see what happens if you open a new feedback thread and propose to keep counting completed challenges towards the found count (if such a thread does not yet exist - I have not checked) and see how many votes you will get. I'd surprise me if you reach a comparable number of votes as the proposal to change the way challenges are counted.

 

I am a fan of virtuals and yet I prefer the challenges to be counted separately. So your theory is wrong.

 

Cezanne

 

Some numbers (and likely consequences) that I noticed:

 

Worldwide number of geocachers (according to GS): 5,000,000

Number who voted "Bring Back Virtuals" in the feedback forum: 3843 (.0007% of total).

GS announces Challenges as a replacement for Virtuals.

Number who voted "Don't Make Completions the Same as Finds": 5358 (.001% of total).

(Members can vote up to 3 times for a topic, so number of actual members likely even less than the amounts shown above.)

GS relents and agrees to break out Challenges from total cache finds.

 

Consequences: Virtuals are not going to be brought back and Challenges are now guaranteed to meet the same fate as waymarks.

 

A couple of things come to mind:

THE SQUEAKIEST WHEEL GETS THE MOST GREASE.

TYRANNY OF THE MINORITY.

 

The 99.99% of us who rarely or never post to the forums, participate in the feedback forum, or get involved in important community issues can all learn a very important lesson from this sad experience...

Yeah, it is called get off your lazy butts and vote.

Anyway...

You can not find a challenge you can only complete it it. (just like a Virt, Earth or any of the FALSECACHES.) That means that completing should not count towards the find total.

[knowschad]

As of now, there are a bit over 5000 votes to remove the numbers from your overall find count. However, each person can allocate up to 3 votes, so as few as 1700 members may have actually voted. GS is monitoring the topic, so if you are in favor of challenges completed being included in your finds, please go there and post a comment but DO NOT VOTE. Remember: "the squeakiest wheel gets the most grease". Don't allow changes to be forced on the majority by an organized, vocal minority!

 

I do not think that it is a minority. Try to see what happens if you open a new feedback thread and propose to keep counting completed challenges towards the found count (if such a thread does not yet exist - I have not checked) and see how many votes you will get. I'd surprise me if you reach a comparable number of votes as the proposal to change the way challenges are counted.

 

I am a fan of virtuals and yet I prefer the challenges to be counted separately. So your theory is wrong.

 

Cezanne

 

Some numbers (and likely consequences) that I noticed:

 

Worldwide number of geocachers (according to GS): 5,000,000

Number who voted "Bring Back Virtuals" in the feedback forum: 3843 (.0007% of total).

GS announces Challenges as a replacement for Virtuals.

Number who voted "Don't Make Completions the Same as Finds": 5358 (.001% of total).

(Members can vote up to 3 times for a topic, so number of actual members likely even less than the amounts shown above.)

GS relents and agrees to break out Challenges from total cache finds.

 

Consequences: Virtuals are not going to be brought back and Challenges are now guaranteed to meet the same fate as waymarks.

 

A couple of things come to mind:

THE SQUEAKIEST WHEEL GETS THE MOST GREASE.

TYRANNY OF THE MINORITY.

 

The 99.99% of us who rarely or never post to the forums, participate in the feedback forum, or get involved in important community issues can all learn a very important lesson from this sad experience...

Yeah, it is called get off your lazy butts and vote.

Anyway...

You can not find a challenge you can only complete it it. (just like a Virt, Earth or any of the FALSECACHES.) That means that completing should not count towards the find total.

 

I thought it was the largest capital letters that got the grease. Shows what I know.