Will you actually do challenges?

[Clan Riffster]

I did the fremont challenge course at the block party today, but I'm not going to log them unless they don't count in my find number.

 

But I did have a lot of fun.

So, you don't agree with the notion that going to a particular spot, as established by GPS coordinates, and performing some task should apply to your find count? That's fine, if you feel that way. I'm just curious why you didn't feel that way when you logged a find on an earthcache. Didn't that require that you go to a place, established by GPS coordinates and perform a particular task? Seems a bit contradictory...

[+Coldgears]

I did the fremont challenge course at the block party today, but I'm not going to log them unless they don't count in my find number.

 

But I did have a lot of fun.

So, you don't agree with the notion that going to a particular spot, as established by GPS coordinates, and performing some task should apply to your find count? That's fine, if you feel that way. I'm just curious why you didn't feel that way when you logged a find on an earthcache. Didn't that require that you go to a place, established by GPS coordinates and perform a particular task? Seems a bit contradictory...

 

It took me a while to ponder this, as I too will willingly do virtual caches and earthcaches, but I REALLY want to delete my finds on the only two challenges I did.

 

Here's why I personally don't want them to contribute to my find count. Mainly, the lacks of question answering, and the fact that ANYONE can make one.

 

Every single virtual I log, I feel comfortable that it is reviewer approved as being a great location for a virtual. With these, anyone can make them, it's a virtual in which the community decides. I don't like this. One day it could be great for the community, and stay there for years, over time people may decide they don't like it and get it archived.

 

Just doesn't feel as... Legitimate... I'm sure this is purely some sort of mental thing, but I sense it none-the-less.

[TheCacheSeeker]

I did the fremont challenge course at the block party today, but I'm not going to log them unless they don't count in my find number.

 

But I did have a lot of fun.

So, you don't agree with the notion that going to a particular spot, as established by GPS coordinates, and performing some task should apply to your find count? That's fine, if you feel that way. I'm just curious why you didn't feel that way when you logged a find on an earthcache. Didn't that require that you go to a place, established by GPS coordinates and perform a particular task? Seems a bit contradictory...

Here is my explanantion. The Earthcache is actually a "cache", a virtual with a pretty view which is considered the "cache". But the challenges, although fun, aren't really caches you can "unwrap" in one way or another.

Just my thoughts

[+Manville Possum]

Mainly, the lacks of question answering, and the fact that ANYONE can make one.

 

Only PM's can create a challange listing, but a day old basic account member can hide a geocache.

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

To answer the OP, no we do not intend to log challenges. We hadn't heard of this upgrade until just now. Basically it sounds like a very ill thought-out plan. We like picking our milestone caches and would have no faith that this implementation will not screw that up somewhere.

[Clan Riffster]

But the challenges, although fun, aren't really caches you can "unwrap" in one way or another.

How, exactly, did you "unwrap" the earthcache you logged? Your rather brief log doesn't really mention anything that specific. From here, it looks like you parked within 500' of a rock formation, (a specific location), walked to it, and gathered answers to a few questions, (a specific task). Is that "unwrapping" in your book? I'm asking because, based on your earlier interpretation, a rock formation isn't a cache and shouldn't count toward your finds. I'm not suggesting you delete your log, but if you changed it to a note, at least it wouldn't show up as a found cache in your stats. That would be less hypocritical than refusing to participate in challenges which follow the same pattern.

 

(I.e; Go to a specific spot, perform a specific task, post a log)

[TheCacheSeeker]

But the challenges, although fun, aren't really caches you can "unwrap" in one way or another.

How, exactly, did you "unwrap" the earthcache you logged? Your rather brief log doesn't really mention anything that specific. From here, it looks like you parked within 500' of a rock formation, (a specific location), walked to it, and gathered answers to a few questions, (a specific task). Is that "unwrapping" in your book? I'm asking because, based on your earlier interpretation, a rock formation isn't a cache and shouldn't count toward your finds. I'm not suggesting you delete your log, but if you changed it to a note, at least it wouldn't show up as a found cache in your stats. That would be less hypocritical than refusing to participate in challenges which follow the same pattern.

 

(I.e; Go to a specific spot, perform a specific task, post a log)

It's like this, I unwrap the view/location which is the cache, and I answer the questions to verify that I was there.

My log was brief cause I was on vacation, and I had quite a few caches to log.

[GOF and Bacall]

But the challenges, although fun, aren't really caches you can "unwrap" in one way or another.

How, exactly, did you "unwrap" the earthcache you logged? Your rather brief log doesn't really mention anything that specific. From here, it looks like you parked within 500' of a rock formation, (a specific location), walked to it, and gathered answers to a few questions, (a specific task). Is that "unwrapping" in your book? I'm asking because, based on your earlier interpretation, a rock formation isn't a cache and shouldn't count toward your finds. I'm not suggesting you delete your log, but if you changed it to a note, at least it wouldn't show up as a found cache in your stats. That would be less hypocritical than refusing to participate in challenges which follow the same pattern.

 

(I.e; Go to a specific spot, perform a specific task, post a log)

It's like this, I unwrap the view/location which is the cache, and I answer the questions to verify that I was there.

My log was brief cause I was on vacation, and I had quite a few caches to log.

 

How is "unwrapping" the view any different between a challenge and any other non-physical cache?

[+JJnTJ]

Until one is created that sounds "drop everything and go there right now" fun, I won't go out of my way to do one. But now that I know there's a mobile app (thanks, BuckeyeClan), I will certainly do one if I find one nearby.

 

The only way I could see getting the coordinates out of the challenges web site was to copy and paste them from the web page, or manually type them into a GPS*. The app will help you navigate there.

 

* which is probably how they did it 11 years ago... we're spoiled.

[+dfx]

It's like this, I unwrap the view/location which is the cache, and I answer the questions to verify that I was there.

My log was brief cause I was on vacation, and I had quite a few caches to log.

 

Here we go again. Instead of going through the whole exercise of demonstrating how earthcaches and virtuals aren't caches (which I think is really ridiculous that it needs to be done to begin with), maybe take a look at what Jeremy has to say on that issue:

 

Finding a geocache is fun and rewarding, but I've always been frustrated of the limitations of a geocache. As a physical object, some places are inappropriate for placing a cache.

...

We tried this before. Our early attempt was to support virtual caches, which weren't geocaches at all but unique locations on the world for people to discover.

 

So yeah, gc.com lists things that aren't caches. Things that aren't caches count to your find count. Deal with it.

Edited August 21, 2011 by dfx

[+zsdeng15014]

I'd love to, if they didn't affect my find count. I just think that is lame. What am I finding? A webpage? I would love to do challenges if they were counted separately from finds.

You can post a comment claiming a completion.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I have done them and will do more, but I obviously don't understand them.

 

I thought I could see the direction they were headed once the shakeout tour revealed what works, but this quote from a Block Party attendee at Groundspeak today tells me I don't have a clue about them.

 

There was a great kids area, and new challenges to do on the spot.

I did a fun one where you talk about your favorite geocache into a recorder.

 

Speak into a microphone at an event, you've completed a Groundspeak-sanctioned Challenge. Congratulations.

 

Okay, I am officially befuddled.

 

I thought the Kiss a Frog one was a mistake, especially since they archived it, but evidently when Groundspeak says 'go somewhere, do something' they mean it literally. Anything goes, anywhere. woohoo.

Edited August 21, 2011 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+zsdeng15014]

I have done them and will do more, but I obviously don't understand them...

 

There was a great kids area, and new challenges to do on the spot.

I did a fun one where you talk about your favorite geocache into a recorder.

 

Speak into a microphone at an event, you've completed a challenge. Congratulations.

 

Okay, I am officially befuddled.

Yes, but it's because... Wait. Why do you geocache? Same thing. It's fun, so it's not "befuddling".

Edited August 21, 2011 by zdeng15014

[TheCacheSeeker]

But the challenges, although fun, aren't really caches you can "unwrap" in one way or another.

How, exactly, did you "unwrap" the earthcache you logged? Your rather brief log doesn't really mention anything that specific. From here, it looks like you parked within 500' of a rock formation, (a specific location), walked to it, and gathered answers to a few questions, (a specific task). Is that "unwrapping" in your book? I'm asking because, based on your earlier interpretation, a rock formation isn't a cache and shouldn't count toward your finds. I'm not suggesting you delete your log, but if you changed it to a note, at least it wouldn't show up as a found cache in your stats. That would be less hypocritical than refusing to participate in challenges which follow the same pattern.

 

(I.e; Go to a specific spot, perform a specific task, post a log)

It's like this, I unwrap the view/location which is the cache, and I answer the questions to verify that I was there.

My log was brief cause I was on vacation, and I had quite a few caches to log.

 

How is "unwrapping" the view any different between a challenge and any other non-physical cache?

usually, there is no good view to "unwrap".

[+Mosaic55]

I did the fremont challenge course at the block party today, but I'm not going to log them unless they don't count in my find number.

 

But I did have a lot of fun.

So, you don't agree with the notion that going to a particular spot, as established by GPS coordinates, and performing some task should apply to your find count? That's fine, if you feel that way. I'm just curious why you didn't feel that way when you logged a find on an earthcache. Didn't that require that you go to a place, established by GPS coordinates and perform a particular task? Seems a bit contradictory...

 

Apparently, Challenges do not require a GPS for either setting the challenge or finding the location. Virtuals and Earthcaches require GPS coordinates for placing (at a minimum).

 

Challenges need to be at a specific place, but it's still not clear to me just how specific. The shore of lake Michigan? The Illinois shore of lake Michigan? The Lake Michigan Shore in Chicago? The North Avenue beach in Chicago? Or within 25 feet of a specific coordinate on the beach? I think it should be the latter, but it doesn't appear to be developing that way.

 

This non-GPS aspect is why I don't think Challenges deserve to be counted as "finds".

[+dfx]

Apparently, Challenges do not require a GPS for either setting the challenge or finding the location. Virtuals and Earthcaches require GPS coordinates for placing (at a minimum).

The coordinates and location requirements are the same for both of them. Maybe there's no guideline rule for challenges saying that "you must use a GPS to obtain the coordinates", but seriously, if you can pick the coords off Google for a challenge, then you can do the same for a virtual or an earthcache.

[+dfx]

usually, there is no good view to "unwrap".

 

Ok, so this virtual has a nice view, but this challenge doesn't?

[+Mosaic55]

Duplicate.

Edited August 21, 2011 by Mosaic55

[+Mosaic55]

Apparently, Challenges do not require a GPS for either setting the challenge or finding the location. Virtuals and Earthcaches require GPS coordinates for placing (at a minimum).

The coordinates and location requirements are the same for both of them. Maybe there's no guideline rule for challenges saying that "you must use a GPS to obtain the coordinates", but seriously, if you can pick the coords off Google for a challenge, then you can do the same for a virtual or an earthcache.

 

After playing around with site interface a little bit, the I don't think coordinates are required at all for setting a challenge. I just used the search box to search for a museum (as a random example) and the site is letting me just the name of a museum and street address only. Now, I don't know if the listing would get voted down for lack of coordinates, but the site isn't enforcing the use of coordinates in setting up the challenge.

[+dfx]

After playing around with site interface a little bit, the I don't think coordinates are required at all for setting a challenge. I just used the search box to search for a museum (as a random example) and the site is letting me just the name of a museum and street address only. Now, I don't know if the listing would get voted down for lack of coordinates, but the site isn't enforcing the use of coordinates in setting up the challenge.

 

Actually it does - it just translates any address or POI that you choose into coordinates. For regular cache listings you don't get that option, but you could easily do it yourself, through Google maps or whatever. If you think the coordinates determined through an address search like that are good enough for your challenge, then feel free to use them. The same applies to virtuals or earthcaches (in effect, anyway).

[+Mosaic55]

After playing around with site interface a little bit, the I don't think coordinates are required at all for setting a challenge. I just used the search box to search for a museum (as a random example) and the site is letting me just the name of a museum and street address only. Now, I don't know if the listing would get voted down for lack of coordinates, but the site isn't enforcing the use of coordinates in setting up the challenge.

 

Actually it does - it just translates any address or POI that you choose into coordinates. For regular cache listings you don't get that option, but you could easily do it yourself, through Google maps or whatever. If you think the coordinates determined through an address search like that are good enough for your challenge, then feel free to use them. The same applies to virtuals or earthcaches (in effect, anyway).

 

OK, I had to actually save the listing before I saw the coordinates. And no, I don't think those are good enough.

 

I'm not attacking the game at all, I'm just saying it's not the same GPS-using game as geocaching, so the finds should be counted separately.

[TheCacheSeeker]

usually, there is no good view to "unwrap".

 

Ok, so this virtual has a nice view, but this challenge doesn't?

True, but I said usually.

[+Shop99er]

to get back to the original question - I kissed a frog and then realized how silly that was and deleted it, but will do challenges that closely represent what "original Virtuals" were - so some photo challenges I will attempt, but not the silly ones!

How did you delete it? I was looking but couldn't find a way

[+CanadianRockies]

to get back to the original question - I kissed a frog and then realized how silly that was and deleted it, but will do challenges that closely represent what "original Virtuals" were - so some photo challenges I will attempt, but not the silly ones!

How did you delete it? I was looking but couldn't find a way

I suspect they deleted their completion before the challenge was archived. Groundspeak is planning to soon implement a fix that allows people to delete completions for archived challenges, too.

[+tomtwogates]

to get back to the original question - I kissed a frog and then realized how silly that was and deleted it, but will do challenges that closely represent what "original Virtuals" were - so some photo challenges I will attempt, but not the silly ones!

How did you delete it? I was looking but couldn't find a way

I suspect they deleted their completion before the challenge was archived. Groundspeak is planning to soon implement a fix that allows people to delete completions for archived challenges, too.

 

I did delete it before it was archived - so I was not the only one thinking it was silly! Can't find any reference to it now??

[+edscott]

Back on topic.... NO.

[+briansnat]

I did the fremont challenge course at the block party today, but I'm not going to log them unless they don't count in my find number.

 

But I did have a lot of fun.

So, you don't agree with the notion that going to a particular spot, as established by GPS coordinates, and performing some task should apply to your find count? That's fine, if you feel that way. I'm just curious why you didn't feel that way when you logged a find on an earthcache. Didn't that require that you go to a place, established by GPS coordinates and perform a particular task? Seems a bit contradictory...

 

I noticed in the feedback thread that demanded that challenge counts be removed from the find count that nearly all of those who came down on the side of removing the count "because it isn't geocaching" had finds on virtuals, earthcaches, events and in some cases CITOs. I wondered why if they are so adamant about all finds needing to be geocaches, why they don't delete all of those non geocache finds.

[cezanne]

 

I noticed in the feedback thread that demanded that challenge counts be removed from the find count that nearly all of those who came down on the side of removing the count "because it isn't geocaching" had finds on virtuals, earthcaches, events and in some cases CITOs. I wondered why if they are so adamant about all finds needing to be geocaches, why they don't delete all of those non geocache finds.

 

I regard virtuals and Earthcaches as geocaches, but indeed would prefer events not to be counted as found it (the log is called attended anyway).

 

There are several issues with challenges that are not present with all the other mentioned types. There are locationless challenges and locationless caches have never counted towards the find count. Not all people go to the same location. Moreover, a well maintained virtual had the same type of control over the logs that is available for caches with containers.

Many challenges are just recycling of photographs.

 

Both virtuals and Earthcaches are subject to a review process. That keeps/kept them from arising at every corner and appealing to the people playing the numbers game. Along the same lines as I feel that powertrails cause damage to geocaching with physical containers, I feel that letting challenges count towards the find count will make them more popular, but will have negative effects on their quality overall. Coming along with a virtual (in the wow phase) or an EC is not the product of five seconds as many challenges certainly are. Letting them count towards the find count and allowing one challenge per 24 hours is counterproductive when the idea is to get something similar as the virtuals have been. It is more like a completely separate activity.

 

There are people who have completed more than 20 challenges within the first hours of their creation and many of them are from Europa where it has been night when the challenges showed up.

 

Even if it is possible to flag inappropriate challenges and those might disappear after some time, the logs of those who finished the challenge still count, but as the challenges someone has completed cannot be listed, there is no way to see what type of cacher someone is - a honest one or someone who is just cheating.

 

Cezanne

Edited August 21, 2011 by cezanne

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I don't care what my find count is at any given point in time. If I choose to do a Challenge I'll do it because I want to complete the challenge. If it adds to my find count I don't really care. If it doesn't add to my find count I won't care either because I'm not doing challenges (or not doing a challenge) based on whether it effects my find count. I care even less about someone elses find count so if they want to do a lot of challenges because it increases their find count it doesn't effect me at all.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I noticed in the feedback thread that demanded that challenge counts be removed from the find count that nearly all of those who came down on the side of removing the count "because it isn't geocaching" had finds on virtuals, earthcaches, events and in some cases CITOs. I wondered why if they are so adamant about all finds needing to be geocaches, why they don't delete all of those non geocache finds.

Because there is excitement in the air, and folks are lining the streets to talk about Challenges, and the band wagon is passing by so they have to jump on it. Can't help themselves.

Edited August 21, 2011 by TheAlabamaRambler

[cezanne]

I don't care what my find count is at any given point in time. If I choose to do a Challenge I'll do it because I want to complete the challenge. If it adds to my find count I don't really care. If it doesn't add to my find count I won't care either because I'm not doing challenges (or not doing a challenge) based on whether it effects my find count. I care even less about someone elses find count so if they want to do a lot of challenges because it increases their find count it doesn't effect me at all.

 

I also do not care about my find count or even less about the find count of others, but I would not like to get the reputation of a cacher who is cheating and not being honest.

 

Cezanne

[Clan Riffster]

...but I would not like to get the reputation of a cacher who is cheating and not being honest.

 

Cezanne

I don't see any risk of that happening.

A person who plays a game in good faith is unlikely to be considered a cheat.

You have demonstrated that you value your player reputation.

That reputation would not be hurt by logging, or not logging, challenges.

[+imoutnabout]

The question is, "Will you actually do challenges?"

My answer (and I'm a firm believer in playing the game any way you want as long as you follow the rules set forth by Groundspeak) is ...

Not unless the challenge involves a GPSr and coordinates.

[+kunarion]

I noticed in the feedback thread that demanded that challenge counts be removed from the find count that nearly all of those who came down on the side of removing the count "because it isn't geocaching" had finds on virtuals, earthcaches, events and in some cases CITOs. I wondered why if they are so adamant about all finds needing to be geocaches, why they don't delete all of those non geocache finds.

Is it appropriate to delete such previous logs? I'm not geociding, and I'm not even sure whether Challenges are Finds or not. But IF I delete an "Attended" on an Event, should I then make a Note?

 

It's extremely unlikely that I'd have a find accidentally on a virtual, earthcache, event or CITO. But it's very likely that I'll complete plenty of "Challenges" without knowing I did. Until now, ordinary daily activities weren't considered Cache Finds. You used to use a GPS to "find" (believe it or not, it was once a requirement to even place them). Events never did seem like a Cache Find to me, but they do affect other people if I mess with the logs.

Edited August 21, 2011 by kunarion

[Clan Riffster]

Is it appropriate to delete such previous logs?

Only for those folks whose views are so narrow that they insist a Challenge is not a cache, so they won't log it, yet a Virtual asking folks to do the exact same thing is a cache, so they will log it. At this stage their options are to delete all their finds/attended on Webcams, events, locationless, CITOs, virtuals and earthcaches, or be hypocrites.

 

But it's very likely that I'll complete plenty of "Challenges" without knowing I did.

You might go through the motions of a particular challenge without being aware that the challenge exists, say, for instance, you were vacationing in Paris and took the prerequisite Eiffel Tower picture after someone created a "Take a picture of the Eiffel Tower" Challenge. But you would not complete the challenge without going to the Challenge page and logging it as complete.

[Krydos]

Question: Will you do Challenges?

 

Probably at some point, I kinda like the ones we have nearby, very reminiscent of virtuals. So if I see one that appeals to me, I'll do it, just like any other cache that looks interesting. If it's one of those locationless "post a photo of a fuzzy animal" type things I'll flag it and not touch it.

 

Before we do any Challenges though I'd really like to know how they work with milestones. Do they add to my total and change where my milestones are or not? It's a little confusing to me since it says total, but also separates it out.

[+kunarion]

Before we do any Challenges though I'd really like to know how they work with milestones. Do they add to my total and change where my milestones are or not? It's a little confusing to me since it says total, but also separates it out.

That's an excellent point. Some consistency in what gets separated would be helpful. I've previously counted actual container/log/GPS "Finds" to mention a milestone in a cache log, and placed a fun Milestone souvenir into the milestone container. Some may say find counts don't affect anybody, but when I say "My 100th Find!", and the number displayed is 112, I look like a nut. Okay, I always look that way.

 

I've also eventually given in, and allowed the Stat system to do the count its way (some of my Milestones aren't really accurate due to finds being listed slightly out of sequence). My thought is, whatever the system counts as a Find, well that's a Find. With Milestones (unless you maintain your own system), it must be the grand total shown, for tally purposes, or nothing.

Edited August 21, 2011 by kunarion

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

I don't care what my find count is at any given point in time. If I choose to do a Challenge I'll do it because I want to complete the challenge. If it adds to my find count I don't really care. If it doesn't add to my find count I won't care either because I'm not doing challenges (or not doing a challenge) based on whether it effects my find count. I care even less about someone elses find count so if they want to do a lot of challenges because it increases their find count it doesn't effect me at all.

 

Yup. I rarely know what my find count even is since I use the Android app to log.

[AZcachemeister]

 

Only for those folks whose views are so narrow that they insist a Challenge is not a cache, so they won't log it, yet a Virtual asking folks to do the exact same thing is a cache, so they will log it. At this stage their options are to delete all their finds/attended on Webcams, events, locationless, CITOs, virtuals and earthcaches, or be hypocrites.

 

I don't like the texture of this new calamari ice cream, and I'm NOT going to eat any!

 

Looks like the Riffster has been too busy defining hypocrite to gulp down any himself.

[+dfx]

OK, I had to actually save the listing before I saw the coordinates. And no, I don't think those are good enough.

 

I'm not attacking the game at all, I'm just saying it's not the same GPS-using game as geocaching, so the finds should be counted separately.

 

Well, if you don't think the coordinates generated through an address are good enough, then you just provide your own (taken with your GPS) and use those. I still don't see the difference. Not to virtuals, anyway. I know it's not geocaching, but neither are virtuals.

Edited August 21, 2011 by dfx

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

Neither are earthcaches, nor events, nor CITO...yet we all log them.

[+kunarion]

I still don't see the difference. Not to virtuals, anyway. I know it's not geocaching, but neither are virtuals.

I'll take your word for it that Virtuals are separate from Geocaching, since I can't look at a listing (the site's down), and I never hunted one. But for everything else, earthcaches, events, CITO, I could run a Pocket Query, and have them sorted and filtered how I like, right on my GPSr, and go find the nearest one. The coordinates are on screen, and there was no requirement to first convert a street address. Could Challenges ever be on my GPSr? With the ones like "stick out your tongue at a beech tree", you're likely to not have a suitable address to convert to coords.

[+dfx]

I'll take your word for it that Virtuals are separate from Geocaching, since I can't look at a listing (the site's down), and I never hunted one. But for everything else, earthcaches, events, CITO, I could run a Pocket Query, and have them sorted and filtered how I like, right on my GPSr, and go find the nearest one. The coordinates are on screen, and there was no requirement to first convert a street address. Could Challenges ever be on my GPSr? With the ones like "stick out your tongue at a beech tree", you're likely to not have a suitable address to convert to coords.

 

Something being queryable through PQs doesn't make it geocaching. Challenges could be too, and they said they have it planned (which of course doesn't mean much). So yeah, you could have challenges on your GPS, they're just as much location-bound as virtuals were (i.e. listed at a specific location). The whole address conversion thing only applies to listing them: If you have a challenge at the Rogers center in Toronto (there is one, can't pull up the CX code right now), you really don't need to go there with your GPS to take the coords, now do you? The same would be true for creating an identical virtual. But the challenge still ends up being listed at a specific location with specific coordinates.

[Tahosa and Sons]

I will do them when the creation is open up to us non premium cachers. But I would want to put a D & T rating on them, and correlate them to some of my Old Virtuals and or some of my back country caches.

[+uxorious]

Only for those folks whose views are so narrow that they insist a Challenge is not a cache, so they won't log it, yet a Virtual asking folks to do the exact same thing is a cache, so they will log it. At this stage their options are to delete all their finds/attended on Webcams, events, locationless, CITOs, virtuals and earthcaches, or be hypocrites.

 

I do not consider any of those a cache. But from my point of view the new challenges go much farther afield.

No review, you don't own it, and despite what you say, they seem to have less need of a GPS then Webcams, locationless, virtuals or earthcaches.

 

Throwing out the hypocrite label is just stupid. If someone really feels one of these is a cache and the others not they are not a hypocrite for feeling that way. ( I invite you to look up the word.)

 

As to the topic, I really don't think I will be doing any challenges as long as they are set up the way they are. I like to geocache, and they ain't geocaching. IMHO. But then I have done a couple virtuals, and an earthcache. While they were fun, they were not Geocaching to me. I most likely won't be doing to many of those either.

 

Don't get me wrong, there seems to be a lot of people that will like them. Good for them. Those of us that don't like them can just ignore them. I just wish I didn't have to see any mention of them on "my" personal page or stats.

[+Rakete_OB]

To answer the original question:

No, I won't do challenges. In my opinion, geocaching is about searching, finding and signing a logbook in a container. Nothing less. I don't even do earthcaches because I don't consider them being real geocaches.

 

Only thing I could imagine as a worthwhile challenge would be e.g. "Find soandso many caches in thisandthat area" or "Find all caches of a series" or something like that. But not tasks like "Take a photo of a specific landmark". That hasn't much to do with caching anymore.

Edited August 22, 2011 by Rakete_OB

[+Tuena]

Have done them, will continue to do those that are indeed a challenge.

[+hairball45]

Will I do challenges? Hmmm. Lemme think.... Yeah, probably some of them. I have no problem with virts, earth caches, events, or other non container cache derivatives being on the website or counting in one's find count. As stated many times, if you don't want them in your find count don't log them as found or attended.

OK, that said, some of the first "challenges" are obviously created to make fun of the concept.(I did kiss a frog statue as an ALR once when they were allowed. Posted the picture too.) I suspect that as the initial fuss dies down that will stop or at least slow down. Hopefully the folks who are randomly giving challenges nowhere near their purvey thumbs down will lose interest and let the thing settle out.

Now. Which ones will I do? I'll do challenges that require you to actually go someplace and do something. I won't stick my tongue out at a tree or pick up trash in my back yard as a challenge. I might well take my own picture at the top of a hill by a particular monument, but, hey, that's a virtual. I might post a picture of a yellow Jeep and say where I saw it, complete with coords but, Oh wait! that's a locationless cache and it too has a history around here. Do I really care if they count as finds or not, but if virts and locationless caches, so do challenges. So, bring 'em on, make them searchable and put out GPX files for them so that I can put them in my Garmin or Droid. And oh yeah, show us who made them.

[+--Wendel]

not likely. I cache to find the interesting and pretty places when I am on the road. Caching has shown me some very cool places. Challenges could address those same goals.

 

The problem is locating challenges. I look up what is around me when I get to town using the maps and just simple searches on the web page. From what I have seen so far it will just be too much extra effort to locate and then filter out what I consider "good" challenges. Other than the types (photo, action) there is no other classification like the terrain and difficulty numbers we get on caches. Would be useful to search/filter by ratings as well, but I think Garmin's awesome rating would be better than the thumbs.

 

So, I am not likely to do challenges. Mostly because of the amount of effort required to find "good"* ones.

 

*good is purely my one subjective measure and my vary depending on time of day, season and location.

[+fuzziebear3]

Yep, I already have and I will do more.

 

But I'll pick which ones I do. It should take me somewhere interesting, show me something worthwhile. I won't kiss a frog unless it is actually Signal. I'm not really likely to do stupid ALR type things. If they require a picture of me doing something, it is unlikely, as I usually go hiking and caching by myself.

 

The website doesn't really help me a lot right now, as some of the features are still broken (like find a nearby challenge, and control of the radius). If I don't know about them, I certainly can't do them. And they are not designed for 'on a whim, I was driving by', which is how I often do caches. I'll probably check them on occasion, and if it seems like a nice adventure, I'll go do one and get the nearby caches too.