Jump to content

Thumbs Down Votes for Challenges


nigel/liz

Recommended Posts

After a few days of publishing a challenge (Here), I have 1 person completed it, 4 People accepted it 3 thumbs up (one of which is mine) and 5 thumbs down.

I followed the guide lines on creating it, kept it simple with requirement of just a photo as proof of visiting. It's a popular/interesting place to visit with a history attached to it.

 

So why the 5 thumbs down votes?

 

Are people going through and voting down challenges just because they can and they don't like the concept of the challenges. Or is my challenge that bad?

 

Should people only be able to vote on challenges they have completed?

Edited by nigel/liz
Link to comment

I followed the guide lines on creating it, kept it simple with requirement of just a photo as proof of visiting. It's a popular/interesting place to visit with a history attached to it.

 

So why the 5 thumbs down votes?

 

Are people going through and voting down challenges just because they can and they don't like the concept of the challenges. Or is my challenge that bad?

 

It might be that folks are abusing the ability to vote because they don't like challenges, but perhaps in this case those "thunbs-down" votes reflect people that have seen your challenge and declined it because it doesn't interest them?

 

You may have followed the guidelines but that doesn't mean it is a challenge that will be to everyone's taste.

Link to comment

IMO your challenge is just dandy. As stated earlier there are the element of those "cachers" out there that seem to love expressing their opinions on the challenges from behind their screens (gutless) and thumbs down is their way of just being themselves...in other words, SMALL AND NOT WORTH PAYING MUCH ATTENTION TO. I'm not sure why so many out there are against the challenges other than they hate change and are not sharp enough to realize that change is good. Anyhoooo, challenges are here so go out and enjoy them and just stick to your principles and don't let the "hide behind the screen crowd" dampen your day.

 

CHEERS

Link to comment
Are people going through and voting down challenges just because they can

Yes. Sad, but true. There are a pathetic few who are still pouting because Groundspeak didn't give them back virtuals exactly the way they used to be, so they are going to every single challenge and voting it down. Karma will catch up to them some day. I went to yours and enjoyed the write up enough to add a thumbs up.

Link to comment

After a few days of publishing a challenge (Here), I have 1 person completed it, 4 People accepted it 3 thumbs up (one of which is mine) and 5 thumbs down.

 

Actually I feel 5 down in relation to 3 up is not bad when you read it as "5 would not enjoy your challenge" and "3 would enjoy it".

What do you guess how the votes would look like for a typical drive in guard rail cache even if the votes were restricted only to those that visited it? You might be surprised that the overall majority will be thumbs down.

 

 

I followed the guide lines on creating it, kept it simple with requirement of just a photo as proof of visiting. It's a popular/interesting place to visit with a history attached to it.

 

So why the 5 thumbs down votes?

 

Are people going through and voting down challenges just because they can and they don't like the concept of the challenges. Or is my challenge that bad?

 

I looked at your challenge. I think you did everything right.

 

I am sure however that for local cachers who already know the location, your challenge has nothing special to offer. (There is also a multi cache nearby that leads to the house

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=de2d54a2-ab02-46db-ba80-4ebf1eb9f337 )

It is a nice location to visit for tourists and for those who have not been there before.

It is different when going for a cache container: Then there might be something new also for the locals as they find something physical, the container.

 

I am observing a similar development in Vienna. There exist some challenges at famous sights, like St Stephen's cathedral and the Ferris Wheel. The big majority of the voters come from Vienna (they are seeing the challenges when they do a search around their coordinates) and have visited these locations numerous times in their life. It is simply very boring for most of them to go there to fulfill a challenge. (The exeptions are those who are into the numbers game and who use old photos.)

For tourists the challenges are quite ok, but the local cachers, even those interested into vitual caches, expect something different and new to them as well.

 

I think that there is a major difference between Waymarking and what people expect from virtuals. In Waymarking e.g. it is ok to have a waymark for all the famous sights of a city. In cities with a high cache densities nowadays there exist however caches at or near almost all these sights. So local people (and in cities with many cachers they are the clear majority) expect something different from virtuals/challenges. A second container at a known location is at least a new container.

When virtuals were still existing, they have been subject to the saturation guideline, they could only be placed at locations where no container can or should be placed and the wow factor has been introduced.

 

I think that challenges that are at places where no cache with a container is nearby and where no container can/should be hidden

will end up with higher acceptance rates as those challenges that are more akin to Waymarking. Many geocachers are not interested

into a directory of sights to visit. They regard containerless caches as the exception for cases where a container is not possible or problematic.

 

 

Should people only be able to vote on challenges they have completed?

 

A clear no. I do not need to run around a park 20 times and hug two lamp posts in order or kiss a frog in order to realize that I do not enjoy them.

 

I rather would like to know what is the ratio of thumbs up to thumbs down when a challenge will disappear from the list.

That ratio should be well chosen.

 

Moreover, they should add an ignore option or something like do not show this challenge any more to me.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

Cezanne, thank you for that response.

 

I've been internally whiny about a couple of challenges near me, near existing caches. (I'm not voting them down, however).

 

I think your point is well taken; for me, they're nothing new, and I suspect I've been applying the old Virtual metric of "only where a physical cache cannot be placed". But you're right, for tourists and newer cachers, they may well be fun, and unlike the container caches, they're definitely going to be doable.

Link to comment
I am observing a similar development in Vienna. There exist some challenges at famous sights, like St Stephen's cathedral and the Ferris Wheel. The big majority of the voters come from Vienna (they are seeing the challenges when they do a search around their coordinates) and have visited these locations numerous times in their life. It is simply very boring for most of them to go there to fulfill a challenge. (The exeptions are those who are into the numbers game and who use old photos.)

For tourists the challenges are quite ok, but the local cachers, even those interested into vitual caches, expect something different and new to them as well.

 

I've seen a lot of thumbs down on non location based challenges, but the OP's looks like an excellent one. The sort of thing I think Groundspeak had in mind when they developed them as a replacement for virtuals.

 

I don't buy Cezenne's "been there, done that" argument for the thumbs down. Thumbs down means "this challenge sucks" or "this challenge is not location based". Knowing the area a local would know that it is an interesting spot and worthy of a challenge.

 

I've seen challenges pop up in places I've already visited but have no interest in going back to complete a challenge. Does that mean I'm giving them a thumbs down? No way, I'm giving them thumbs up because I know they are great places for a challenge. To say a challenge sucks simply because you've been there is not logical unless you actually think the location sucks (an unlikely scenario for the famous sights in Vienna, or the ruins of a house built in 1615).

 

There seems to be a segment of people who are going around giving all challenges thumb down regardless of their quality simply because they dislike the concept and want to muck things up for everyone else.

 

I think your point is well taken; for me, they're nothing new, and I suspect I've been applying the old Virtual metric of "only where a physical cache cannot be placed". But you're right, for tourists and newer cachers, they may well be fun, and unlike the container caches, they're definitely going to be doable.

 

The virtual metric of "only where a physical cache cannot be placed" was not always there. It was introduced with the "wow factor" For the first several years there was no such rule. In fact in the years after it was introduced very few virtuals where published, so most existing virtuals had no such restriction when they were published.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I'd like to see a requirement to explain why a thumbs down was given.

 

I've created one challenge to see how it goes. It's got 2 thumbs down and no thumbs up. It would be valuable to know what the faults were for future reference. A thumbs down with no comment is as useless as it is lazy IMO.

Link to comment

I agree that those giving this one a thumbs down are just doing so because they don't like the new challenges. It's put together they way challenges should be and does not deserve the thumbs down. unlike the types of challenges near me that tell you to go to a red box and take a picture holding a dollar and hugging the machine. for those of you outside the US that might not know what a Red Box is, it's a DVD rental vending machine usually found at local stores.

Link to comment

We had one person that was quickly thumbing down new challenges but they got bored after a couple of days.

 

Your challenge looks fine to me. It's similar to some I've done and don't have several negative votes.

 

Around here several negative votes tends to indicate some problem such a the challenge being locationless.

Link to comment
There seems to be a segment of people who are going around giving all challenges thumb down regardless of their quality simply because they dislike the concept and want to muck things up for everyone else.

...with the full blessing of Groundspeak. They know that such a system is subject to abuse, yet did it anyway. Do they at least show names for the votes?

Link to comment

I'd like to see a requirement to explain why a thumbs down was given.

 

I've created one challenge to see how it goes. It's got 2 thumbs down and no thumbs up. It would be valuable to know what the faults were for future reference. A thumbs down with no comment is as useless as it is lazy IMO.

 

That would be useless. "Because it sucks", "Because challenges suck", "Because I was in a bad mood", "TFTC", stuff like that... totally useless data.

Link to comment

 

I don't buy Cezenne's "been there, done that" argument for the thumbs down. Thumbs down means "this challenge sucks" or "this challenge is not location based". Knowing the area a local would know that it is an interesting spot and worthy of a challenge.

 

 

pretty much what i said from the beginning...the thumbs down is used more as a witch hunt...i honestly hope that Groundspeak will remove this, its not being used as they intended it

 

there is someone in a Feedback thread that admitted of going around voting all challenges down as their way of getting back at GC, and i am sure the majority do the same, i will refrain from expressing my opinion about those people and their behavior

Edited by t4e
Link to comment
Are people going through and voting down challenges just because they can

Yes. Sad, but true. There are a pathetic few who are still pouting because Groundspeak didn't give them back virtuals exactly the way they used to be, so they are going to every single challenge and voting it down. Karma will catch up to them some day. I went to yours and enjoyed the write up enough to add a thumbs up.

 

Yea I am sure Karma is going to get them for that. That is to me like a team praying to win a game. I sure don't speak for God but I do wonder if he has the time to care for fixing a game of sports.

Link to comment

There are many reasons why people could give a thumbs down to a particular challenge.

 

1. Protest. Some people give a thumbs down to all challenges they see as a way to protest challenges in general. I'm guessing your challenge probably received some of these.

 

2. Inappropriate. I flag inappropriate challenges and also give them a thumbs down (in case not enough other people flag them). I'd be surprised if your challenge received any of these.

 

3. Not my taste. Some challenges are perfectly fine but just don't appeal to a person's specific interests. If a geocacher finds history to be boring, then they might give your challenge a thumbs down.

 

4. Bad requirements. A challenge location could be okay but the required action could turn some people off (e.g., kiss a frog while you're at that location). Your photo requirement probably isn't an issue.

 

5. Other. I'm sure there are many other reasons as well.

 

Another thing to keep in mind is there isn't much guidance being offered about how to rate challenges. Do we give thumbs up to the top 10 percent? 50 percent? One of my yardsticks is: Would I go out of my way to complete this challenge? If yes, then I'll likely give it a thumbs up. If no, then I'll probably lean towards a thumbs down.

Link to comment

There are many reasons why people could give a thumbs down to a particular challenge.

 

1. Protest. Some people give a thumbs down to all challenges they see as a way to protest challenges in general. I'm guessing your challenge probably received some of these.

 

2. Inappropriate. I flag inappropriate challenges and also give them a thumbs down (in case not enough other people flag them). I'd be surprised if your challenge received any of these.

 

3. Not my taste. Some challenges are perfectly fine but just don't appeal to a person's specific interests. If a geocacher finds history to be boring, then they might give your challenge a thumbs down.

 

4. Bad requirements. A challenge location could be okay but the required action could turn some people off (e.g., kiss a frog while you're at that location). Your photo requirement probably isn't an issue.

 

5. Other. I'm sure there are many other reasons as well.

 

Another thing to keep in mind is there isn't much guidance being offered about how to rate challenges. Do we give thumbs up to the top 10 percent? 50 percent? One of my yardsticks is: Would I go out of my way to complete this challenge? If yes, then I'll likely give it a thumbs up. If no, then I'll probably lean towards a thumbs down.

 

That's "many reasons" to vote Down, and one reason to vote Up. The trend would be expected to be mostly Down votes.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

 

 

Should people only be able to vote on challenges they have completed?

 

A clear no. I do not need to run around a park 20 times and hug two lamp posts in order or kiss a frog in order to realize that I do not enjoy them.

 

I rather would like to know what is the ratio of thumbs up to thumbs down when a challenge will disappear from the list.

That ratio should be well chosen.

 

Moreover, they should add an ignore option or something like do not show this challenge any more to me.

 

Cezanne

 

Well I would argue that for a world wide challenge you should vote on it. But maybe show a little respect if it is a place your not going maybe the people there have a different view of caches. I mean if I lived in Austria which if you are not sure where that is, it is across the ocean from the United States. I say that because it seems like you have decided not to come do a challenge here in the state of Alabama. I am ok with that but don't understand why a challenge offended you all the way over there. Maybe I need to check the challenges over there and go ahead and give a thumbs down to all the challenges that I plan not to complete for whatever reason, yet I never plan to go to Austria anyway, so why would I spend my time doing that?

Link to comment

I've seen a lot of thumbs down on non location based challenges,

 

In a city like Vienna with lots of cachers those disappear within a day.

 

I don't buy Cezenne's "been there, done that" argument for the thumbs down.

 

Buy it or not. I do know however that in the case of Vienna it is true as I am familiar with what is written in local forums.

I also need to admit that even though I am a fan of virtuals and I am not living in Vienna, I feel that photo challenges at the most famous sights are extremely boring for me.

 

The only challenge in my home town has a much better ratio of thumbs up and down for the single reason that it asks the cachers to go there at 24:00 in the night and so most visits ended up in social events adding something that had some value also for locals (I have not been there).

 

Thumbs down means "this challenge sucks" or "this challenge is not location based". Knowing the area a local would know that it is an interesting spot and worthy of a challenge.

 

That's your personal interpretation of "thumbs down". For non location based challenges and challenges not meeting ethical standards etc the flagging option is available. There is no need to vote thumbs down on such challenges.

 

My personal interpretation of "thumbs up" and "thumbs down" is in the sense of "I like it"/ "I do not like it".

Banana ice cream would get thumbs down and lemon ice cream thumbs up.

A challenge at St Stephen's cathedral does not suck at all, but it boring for local geocachers.

 

I've seen challenges pop up in places I've already visited but have no interest in going back to complete a challenge. Does that mean I'm giving them a thumbs down?

 

That's up to you. If I encounter a boring challenge in Rome, I am not going to vote on it - if it in my own town, I will vote on it. Groundspeak does not provide any explanation of what thumbs up and thumbs down, respectively mean.

It also depends what your expectations are and whether you look at challenges from your personal view or the point of view of others.

Most cachers around here check whether a challenge has something to offer for them and not whether it could offer something of interest to others.

 

As long as challenges are completely separated from caches and have their own site, the situation is similar as for Waymarking. As soon they get integrated into the geocaching site and are displayed among caches in the nearest searches (that is the planned way), it gets very important whether local cachers feel that they are offered something of interest/value to them.

 

 

 

No way, I'm giving them thumbs up because I know they are great places for a challenge. To say a challenge sucks simply because you've been there is not logical unless you actually think the location sucks (an unlikely scenario for the famous sights in Vienna, or the ruins of a house built in 1615).

 

I fully agree with you, but where is it is written that thumbs down means that the challenge sucks?

If that is the intended meaning, then Groundspeak needs to explain this somewhere.

 

There seems to be a segment of people who are going around giving all challenges thumb down regardless of their quality simply because they dislike the concept and want to muck things up for everyone else.

 

That might well be the case. In the local examples in Austria I have looked at this is however not true.

 

The virtual metric of "only where a physical cache cannot be placed" was not always there. It was introduced with the "wow factor" For the first several years there was no such rule. In fact in the years after it was introduced very few virtuals where published, so most existing virtuals had no such restriction when they were published.

 

I think that this policy can only work in areas where there are very few caches. Back in the first years that has been the case almost everywhere. Now with hundreds of caches within a small area, in order to get local cachers excited more than sending them to locations they pass many times a year is required.

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

I'd like to see a requirement to explain why a thumbs down was given.

 

I've created one challenge to see how it goes. It's got 2 thumbs down and no thumbs up. It would be valuable to know what the faults were for future reference. A thumbs down with no comment is as useless as it is lazy IMO.

 

That would be useless. "Because it sucks", "Because challenges suck", "Because I was in a bad mood", "TFTC", stuff like that... totally useless data.

 

Speak for yourself ;)

 

Some people do sometimes offer constructive criticism and it's not hard to recognise useless comments.

Link to comment

 

Well I would argue that for a world wide challenge you should vote on it. But maybe show a little respect if it is a place your not going maybe the people there have a different view of caches. I mean if I lived in Austria which if you are not sure where that is, it is across the ocean from the United States. I say that because it seems like you have decided not to come do a challenge here in the state of Alabama. I am ok with that but don't understand why a challenge offended you all the way over there. Maybe I need to check the challenges over there and go ahead and give a thumbs down to all the challenges that I plan not to complete for whatever reason, yet I never plan to go to Austria anyway, so why would I spend my time doing that?

 

I guess I need to clarify a few things. I admit that I have voted on the Kiss a frog challenge, but that's a worldwide one.

I have not voted at all on the challenge the thread openener has asked about and I have not voted on a challenge in Alabama.

The thread openener asked about reasons for thumbing down and I have provided a reason which I have not seen brought up in this forum.

 

I can understand that someone regards a thumb down as respectless if he/she interprets it as "the challenge sucks". Personally, I interpret it as "I would not enjoy it". I have mentioned in my original posting that challenges at the main sites in Vienna have their value for tourists, but it is not surprising that local cachers are not excited about them.

 

When challenges have been introduced, cachers that are not overly negative about any form of containerless caching activities have eben curious whether the new activity had something to offer for them and what most of them realized is simply that at the moment the answer is no.

 

In my opinion, we need to rethink what it means to have a challenge with say 30 thumbs up and 60 thumbs down. There are 30 people who would enjoy that challenge - so it has its place and why should it not be there. What needs to be worked on is how to intrepret these ratios.

 

I have chosen my examples of well known tourist sites intentionally because it should demonstrate that a challenge could be perfectly ok and appeal to those to have not been there before and at the same time being very boring for locals. There is nothing bad about that.

 

The only challenge in my home town is more attractive to local cachers than the ones I mentioned in Vienna, but at the same time it is less well suited for short time tourists and for people who do not dare to go to the location at mid night. I would not want to make the decision which of these challenges is the better one. It is just evident which of them appeals much more to the local cachers.

So actually I even think that there existed more thumbs up for challenges dedicated to tourists if people from far away would vote as well.

 

I believe that many thumbs down votings can also be seen as a message to the challenge creators that the majority of the cachers prefer to go for a container if one can be placed. Coming up with challenges is typically easier both as the set up process and maintenance is regarded. So if challenges are equally welcome than caches with containers, many hiders might change over to containerless variants. Waymarking is a different activity - challenges have been marketed as the new virtual geocaches so it is not that surprising that people compare their experience with challenges to their experience with caches with containers.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

There are many reasons why people could give a thumbs down to a particular challenge.

 

1. Protest. Some people give a thumbs down to all challenges they see as a way to protest challenges in general. I'm guessing your challenge probably received some of these.

 

2. Inappropriate. I flag inappropriate challenges and also give them a thumbs down (in case not enough other people flag them). I'd be surprised if your challenge received any of these.

 

3. Not my taste. Some challenges are perfectly fine but just don't appeal to a person's specific interests. If a geocacher finds history to be boring, then they might give your challenge a thumbs down.

 

4. Bad requirements. A challenge location could be okay but the required action could turn some people off (e.g., kiss a frog while you're at that location). Your photo requirement probably isn't an issue.

 

5. Other. I'm sure there are many other reasons as well.

 

Another thing to keep in mind is there isn't much guidance being offered about how to rate challenges. Do we give thumbs up to the top 10 percent? 50 percent? One of my yardsticks is: Would I go out of my way to complete this challenge? If yes, then I'll likely give it a thumbs up. If no, then I'll probably lean towards a thumbs down.

 

Just my opinion, but I think you are being too stringent. My personal method: If I think a challenge is interesting, or I think a certain segment of people would enjoy it, I give it a thumbs up. If I'm on the fence about it--good location, but I don't like the action requirement, or I just think it is too general--I don't vote at all. And if I think the challenge is downright bad, then I vote it down. And if it doesn't meet challenge listing requirements, I flag it. I might not go out of my way to visit a particular museum or plank at a particular statue, but I'm not going to vote it down and risk ruining somebody else's fun.

 

I think it's sad that people are out there voting down every single challenge--I've seen evidence of this too. But I also wonder if there is some "behind the scenes" computer magic going on that takes this into account. Surely the system can detect when an account is down-voting every single challenge they view. Perhaps the system can discount these negative votes without giving an outward sign that it is doing so, at least when it comes to possibly archiving the challenge.

 

nigel/liz, I like your challenge, and gave it a thumbs up. :) It looks like others have read this thread and done the same!

Link to comment
I also wonder if there is some "behind the scenes" computer magic going on that takes this into account. Surely the system can detect when an account is down-voting every single challenge they view.

Probably not. It relies more on people eventually getting tired of Down Voting everything and moving on.

 

The voting system is designed to "replace reviewers", so it would make sense to vote as if you were a reviewer, objectively, based on specific guidelines. If the Challenge is within guidelines, it should be voted Up -- and being a mob rule vote, every cacher must vote every Challenge, or votes are meaningless (yet I've not voted on any, and have seen only about 20 total). A vote should not mean "This is not exactly the ease and difficulty I require", because if it does, it would naturally have mostly Down votes.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

After a few days of publishing a challenge (Here), I have 1 person completed it, 4 People accepted it 3 thumbs up (one of which is mine) and 5 thumbs down.

I followed the guide lines on creating it, kept it simple with requirement of just a photo as proof of visiting. It's a popular/interesting place to visit with a history attached to it.

 

So why the 5 thumbs down votes?

 

Are people going through and voting down challenges just because they can and they don't like the concept of the challenges. Or is my challenge that bad?

 

Should people only be able to vote on challenges they have completed?

 

Argh, I'm replying to a "Challenge" thread! :blink:

 

I've read various Challenges and found many of them to be stupid.

 

HOWEVER...I read your Challenge and am disappointed that it's pretty much impossible for me to "accept" and "complete" it. Your Challenge is what I thought these things were supposed to be.

 

Soooo....I stepped in and posted a "thumbs up" on your Challenge. Not sure if I'm "supposed" to or not, but the down-thumbs annoyed me.

 

It's not fair that voting up or down can be done unless one has completed the Challenge. It's like posting a "Needs Archived" without ever visiting the cache.

 

Jeremy said that they would rely on the honesty of the users and on "community review" of Challenges.

 

I guess we can see just how well that's working out.

Link to comment

I personally follow the policy of flagging challenges that violate the rules. I flag those that are not location based, are obviously designed to promote an agenda or a commercial interest, or are offensive. I vote thumbs up on ones that look interesting, clever or creative even if I wouldn't do them and I vote down on ones that are extremely uninteresting or mean spirited. Mostly I vote thumbs up. I don't vote at all on ones that seem routine run of the mill challenges. My take is that flagging is needs archiving, thumbs up is a sort of a favorite point. I'm not sure what the equivalent of a thumbs down is but what I'm saying is I can't imagine anyone having fun doing this,

Edited by Team Taran
Link to comment

I personally follow the policy of flagging challenges that violate the rules. I flag those that are not location based, are obviously designed to promote an agenda or a commercial interest, or are offensive. I vote thumbs up on ones that look interesting, clever or creative even if I wouldn't do them and I vote down on ones that are extremely uninteresting or mean spirited. Mostly I vote thumbs up. I don't vote at all on ones that seem routine run of the mill challenges. My take is that flagging is needs archiving, thumbs up is a sort of a favorite point. I'm not sure what the equivalent of a thumbs down is but what I'm saying is I can't imagine anyone having fun doing this,

+1

Link to comment

I read your Challenge and am disappointed that it's pretty much impossible for me to "accept" and "complete" it. Your Challenge is what I thought these things were supposed to be.

 

A question to you: Would you be equally interested into the challenge if you had visited the location 10 times before?

It appears to me that the challenge is a typical example that will appeal to those who have not been there at all or whose last visit is quite a while ago.

 

The fact that you and others living far from the location added thumbs up, supports my theory.

 

I also would visit the challenge mentioned in the first post in case I am in the area, but if I lived there the challenge would not appeal to me.

 

I think it depends what one expects from challenges. Two quite different ways of using challenges are the following: one could use them as a guide for locations to visit in unknown places or one could expect them to offer attractive experiences for locals in their leisure time. The expectations of these two groups are very different.

 

It's not fair that voting up or down can be done unless one has completed the Challenge.

 

But it is absurd to force e.g. someone in Vienna who passes St Stephen's Cathedral every day to take a photograph there just to be able to provide the feedback that he/she regards the challenge as boring from his/her personal point of view (one still can think that it is a nice place for tourists - that's no contradiction).

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

 

But it is absurd to force e.g. someone in Vienna who passes St Stephen's Cathedral every day to take a photograph there just to be able to provide the feedback that he/she regards the challenge as boring from his/her personal point of view (one still can think that it is a nice place for tourists - that's no contradiction).

 

Cezanne

 

If you have a nice tourist attraction on your doorstep it would be downright churlish to give it a thumbs down because you would find it boring due to the fact you've been there before.

Link to comment

My personal method: If I think a challenge is interesting, or I think a certain segment of people would enjoy it, I give it a thumbs up.

 

I guess that the real problem is that there is no explanation what "thumbs up/down" means. It would not occur at all to me to take into account whether a segment of people might enjoy a challenge when deciding whether I would enjoy it.

If 30 vote up and 60 vote down and everyone votes just on his/her own enjoyment, I think that the result provides a much clearer picture on how many cachers enjoy it and how many do not enjoy it. There is nothing bad with a challenge that is liked by 30 and disliked by 60. If it is liked by 0 or 1 and disliked by 80 - that's a different issue. Even 20 likes and 200 dislikes does not mean that the challenge needs to be bad. It can be one that appeals to a minority.

 

I might not go out of my way to visit a particular museum or plank at a particular statue, but I'm not going to vote it down and risk ruining somebody else's fun.

 

Why should it ruin someone else's fun if you vote?

 

 

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

I read your Challenge and am disappointed that it's pretty much impossible for me to "accept" and "complete" it. Your Challenge is what I thought these things were supposed to be.

 

A question to you: Would you be equally interested into the challenge if you had visited the location 10 times before?

 

Short answer to long question:

 

Yes, I would be interested in the Challenge if I had been to the location 10 times previously.

 

In fact, I would probably be very happy to return to a beautiful, historic site just to complete an interesting Challenge.

Link to comment

 

If you have a nice tourist attraction on your doorstep it would be downright churlish to give it a thumbs down because you would find it boring due to the fact you've been there before.

 

Why? My personal understanding of the votes is not that I am voting on whether I think that the challenge might be interesting to other people (and even less on whether I think that a challenge is good or bad), but just about whether or not it is interesting for me. Others can vote about their interest and in the end we can see how many people find it interesting and how many boring.

 

What's absurd to me is rather to let challenges disappear if say 30 people vote thumbs up and 100 local people vote thumbs down.

30 interested people is enough to warrant the existence of a challenge at least if those votes are honest ones.

 

I do not understand why I should use a different approach for challenges than for caches. If I have visited a cache that I do not like, but that is excellent, my log still will be about the fact that I did not enjoy it. My logs are not evaluations of cache quality. I do not care whether a cache is good or bad, just whether I enjoy it or not. I take on a different point of view if others ask me for recommendations. Then I have a close look at the preferences of those who ask me for help and try to come up with suitable suggestions. As it comes to challenges, I have hardly seen any up to now that really appeal to local cachers who have found most of the caches around them and are waiting for new caches/challenges to pop up to provide them with new experiences.

 

On the one hand people argue that one should vote only on local challenges and not ones far away, but on the other hand it appears to me that for challenges at well known tourist locations the thumb up votes will come from non locals and most thumbs down from locals.

 

I have come across a number of challenges abroad that I would enjoy as I have not been there before. I would not enjoy them if I lived there.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

yeah, I can see why the thumbs up and downs are anonymous, but would be nice to know what reasons folks do it. Perhaps its that one mean sect of geocachers in your area. Perhaps its folks not even from the area who consistently give challenges thumbs down...or maybe its just folks in your area giving their honest opinions. Right now, I have no clue.

Link to comment

In fact, I would probably be very happy to return to a beautiful, historic site just to complete an interesting Challenge.

 

Does taking a photograph at a location you pass by several times a month meet your definition of completing an interesting challenge?

It still may be a beautiful and historic place - there are tons of such places in cities like Vienna. That's nothing special for locals.

It belongs to their daily life. Historic places are nothing rare around here - they are much more common than places of geological interest. This is also one of the reasons why typically Earthcaches lead to more interesting places in the US than around here.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

In fact, I would probably be very happy to return to a beautiful, historic site just to complete an interesting Challenge.

 

Does taking a photograph at a location you pass by several times a month meet your definition of completing an interesting challenge?

It still may be a beautiful and historic place - there are tons of such places in cities like Vienna. That's nothing special for locals.

It belongs to their daily life. Historic places are nothing rare around here - they are much more common than places of geological interest. This is also one of the reasons why typically Earthcaches lead to more interesting places in the US than around here.

 

Cezanne

 

This is why I didn't want to get involved in these threads. :rolleyes:

 

I answered your question. If you want to micro-analyze YOUR reasons for doing certain things in life, that's fine. That's got nothing to do with my opinion / reasoning / belief / desire to complete Challenges. Repeating the same words over and over again just makes my eyes & brain glaze over.

 

Ugh, I'm out of this thread.

 

To the OP, it's looks TO ME that it's a reasonable Challenge and a lovely location.

Link to comment

I do think you should be able to vote a challenge up or down, even if you haven't completed it. However, I am not sure you should be able to vote on it if you have no plans to ever do a challenge.

 

Perhaps it would work better if you couldn't vote unless you had completed a challenge or two. Not sure if it could be set up that way, but it might be better.

 

I have no desire, at this time, to do any challenges. I also have no problem with them being out there. Like a lot of other types of caches, if I don't like them I don't do them. However, I don't try to take them away from those that will do them.

 

A question to you: Would you be equally interested into the challenge if you had visited the location 10 times before?

 

If a challenge is the same as a cache in your mind, why not? I have done a lot of caches that are hidden in areas I have been to before. I have even done some that were replacements for caches that have been in areas I have been before. The number of times I have visited a location has little effect on my interest in new caches in the area.

Link to comment

I don't buy Cezenne's "been there, done that" argument for the thumbs down. Thumbs down means "this challenge sucks" or "this challenge is not location based". Knowing the area a local would know that it is an interesting spot and worthy of a challenge.

 

 

pretty much what i said from the beginning...the thumbs down is used more as a witch hunt...i honestly hope that Groundspeak will remove this, its not being used as they intended it

 

there is someone in a Feedback thread that admitted of going around voting all challenges down as their way of getting back at GC, and i am sure the majority do the same, i will refrain from expressing my opinion about those people and their behavior

 

Perhaps, like favorite points, thumbs-down votes should be rationed out?

Link to comment

I'd like to see a requirement to explain why a thumbs down was given.

 

I've created one challenge to see how it goes. It's got 2 thumbs down and no thumbs up. It would be valuable to know what the faults were for future reference. A thumbs down with no comment is as useless as it is lazy IMO.

 

That would be useless. "Because it sucks", "Because challenges suck", "Because I was in a bad mood", "TFTC", stuff like that... totally useless data.

 

Speak for yourself ;)

 

Some people do sometimes offer constructive criticism and it's not hard to recognise useless comments.

"Sometimes" is the operative word.

Link to comment

If a challenge is the same as a cache in your mind, why not? I have done a lot of caches that are hidden in areas I have been to before. I have even done some that were replacements for caches that have been in areas I have been before. The number of times I have visited a location has little effect on my interest in new caches in the area.

 

It makes a difference to me whether a hiking cache leads me again to a summit I have been to already (the experience there is the hike) or whether a challenge or cache makes me visit the local church for the 1000-th time.

 

For those who like to search for a container and enjoy the experience of finding it, a cache at a well known urban site might offer at least the experience of the hunt. Moreover, the saturation guidelines do not allow two caches at the same church. Challenges and caches do not exclude each other, however, but are directed to the same audience.

 

A containerless cache can also offer something new about a well known location, but certainly these are not typical tourist caches. For example, sometimes Earthcaches teach something about a site one has visited before, but have not taken notice about what's special about the location.

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

Perhaps, like favorite points, thumbs-down votes should be rationed out?

 

Rationed out with respect to what? Overall votes or overall completed challenges?

 

In the first case it would mean that I need to search around for challenges in locations far away from my home that I would enjoy and vote with thumbs up for them to be allowed to vote thumbs down to the local ones I would not enjoy.

 

In the second case it would mean that I am not allowed to vote thumbs up for challenges I like, but are not able to visit them right now unless I am visiting first the local ones I do not enjoy.

 

None of the two scenarios makes sense to me.

 

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

I personally think that what was intended by Jeremy when he said everyone should vote, was that you should do so based on subjective opinions of what is a good or bad, challenge not necessarily what you would enjoy, For example, before I retired I was a librarian with responsibilities for selecting books. I selected books I thought were well written, would fill a gap in the collection, or be popular with our users. Which books I wanted to read was irrelevant because I was not choosing books for me.

Link to comment

After a few days of publishing a challenge (Here), I have 1 person completed it, 4 People accepted it 3 thumbs up (one of which is mine) and 5 thumbs down.

I followed the guide lines on creating it, kept it simple with requirement of just a photo as proof of visiting. It's a popular/interesting place to visit with a history attached to it.

 

So why the 5 thumbs down votes?

 

Are people going through and voting down challenges just because they can and they don't like the concept of the challenges. Or is my challenge that bad?

 

Should people only be able to vote on challenges they have completed?

Seems all that have posted their challanges here in the forums, they have been voted down by system abusers. :mad: I agree that you should complete/try a challange before you can vote on it. The system is a failure.

Link to comment

There are many reasons why people could give a thumbs down to a particular challenge.

 

1. Protest. Some people give a thumbs down to all challenges they see as a way to protest challenges in general. I'm guessing your challenge probably received some of these.

 

2. Inappropriate. I flag inappropriate challenges and also give them a thumbs down (in case not enough other people flag them). I'd be surprised if your challenge received any of these.

 

3. Not my taste. Some challenges are perfectly fine but just don't appeal to a person's specific interests. If a geocacher finds history to be boring, then they might give your challenge a thumbs down.

 

4. Bad requirements. A challenge location could be okay but the required action could turn some people off (e.g., kiss a frog while you're at that location). Your photo requirement probably isn't an issue.

 

5. Other. I'm sure there are many other reasons as well.

 

Another thing to keep in mind is there isn't much guidance being offered about how to rate challenges. Do we give thumbs up to the top 10 percent? 50 percent? One of my yardsticks is: Would I go out of my way to complete this challenge? If yes, then I'll likely give it a thumbs up. If no, then I'll probably lean towards a thumbs down.

Nice list. Here's mine

 

1. I hate challenges, I vote them all down

 

2. It's not "wow" enough

 

If you have a nice tourist attraction on your doorstep it would be downright churlish to give it a thumbs down because you would find it boring due to the fact you've been there before.

 

This is the problem with defining "wow". With the old virtual caches wow was defined as something novel, of interest to other players, and having a special historic, community or geocaching quality that sets it apart from everyday subjects. Signs, memorials, tombstones, statues or historical markers are among the items that are generally too common to qualify.

 

So certainly someone might find some location they see everyday as not being novel or unique. The OP's challenge could easily be see as just another burned down old manor house. There must be quite a few in the UK.

 

In coming up with the Best Kept Secrets Waymarking category we defined "wow" as a place that most people don't know about but has enough general interest for most people to want to visit. The idea is for visitors to say "Wow!, I didn't know this was here". Of course this could be something you pass everyday but just never stopped to take a look at it or to learn what it was.

 

Challenges also have the challenge of not just whether the location is "wow" but also if the activity is "wow". It could be that some people don't like having to take a picture while others may feel thay having to stand on your head is stupid.

 

There are many definitions that people will use for deciding whether a challenge is "wow". Right now the voting allows everyone to use their own definition. People will create challenges they feel are "wow" and then discover that their challenge is getting mostly thumbs down votes. This simply means that other cachers have a different definition of "wow".

 

I might suggest getting rid of the negative votes and make it more like Favorites. Challenges with lots of thumbs up are "wow" for more people so it's more likely they will be "wow" for you. But in the case of challenges, if a large percentage of votes are negative, the challenges can be hidden. While this will hide some "wow" challenges, it will serve somewhat the role of the reviewer in not publishing many virtual cache submissions. The challenges that remain will be "wow" according to some vote that represents the view of the voting cachers.

Link to comment

 

I might not go out of my way to visit a particular museum or plank at a particular statue, but I'm not going to vote it down and risk ruining somebody else's fun.

 

Why should it ruin someone else's fun if you vote?

 

 

Cezanne

 

Because, right now, it is unclear if a certain number of down votes might lead to the archival of a challenge. I personally don't have much interest in historical markers, so I'm not really interested in challenges that involve them. But I realize that some people *do* like them, and *would* enjoy such challenges. I would hate to see a challenge archived simply because some people don't like them. As such, I reserve a "thumbs down" vote for challenges that I subjectively deem to be "bad".

 

I personally think that what was intended by Jeremy when he said everyone should vote, was that you should do so based on subjective opinions of what is a good or bad, challenge not necessarily what you would enjoy, For example, before I retired I was a librarian with responsibilities for selecting books. I selected books I thought were well written, would fill a gap in the collection, or be popular with our users. Which books I wanted to read was irrelevant because I was not choosing books for me.

 

THIS!!!! Wonderful example, too! I especially like your point of "filling a gap in the collection." I see that possibly coming into play as certain areas (such as the Washington DC monuments) get a lot of challenges listed. I can see some challenges getting down votes because it is repeating a challenge that is already listed, or just because it is deemed inferior to others in the area that are already listed. What is deemed "good" or "bad" may vary by region.

 

 

Seems all that have posted their challanges here in the forums, they have been voted down by system abusers. :mad: I agree that you should complete/try a challange before you can vote on it. The system is a failure.

 

Are you saying that the ones posted in the forums have gotten archived, or simply that they have gotten a few extra down votes? As long as the good ones listed here don't get archived, I don't see how you can deem the system a failure. I've seen bad challenges and challenges that don't meet the guidelines disappear before my eyes. All the challenges listed in my area I would rate as "okay" to "really great"; I don't see a stinker among them. (Though we don't have that many yet.) From what I can see, the system is actually working okay. YMMV

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...
×
×
  • Create New...