Flagging/Archiving Challenges

[+Tribble_Fun]

For some reason all the Challenges in and around Vienna (Austria) disappeared. Of course some of them might have been inappropriate but I know there was one "take a picture of you in front of the Stephansdom" and a similar with the Riesenrad. Both are clearly location-based challenges, and still they got archived.

 

As I completed the Stephansdom challenge, when I wanted to see the challenge (as the query returned no finds around Vienna) I am rerouted to a page telling me that it was archived (http://www.geocaching.com/challenges/view.aspx?cx=CX330)

 

So here's the question: Is there anybody who checks the archiving of Challenges. Or is it enough to find enough people who agree to flag each and every Challenge to sabotage the system (not saying that it happened that way, but it's an inherent risk of a system without anybody checking flags). I'd like to see more Challenges here, but if they are flagged immediately after release, chances are not too good I'll encounter some in the near future.

 

And question 2: Can anybody - with access to the system - explain why all the Challenges around Vienna were archived?

 

Thanks in advance

Reini

[+CanadianRockies]

Is there anybody who checks the archiving of Challenges.

According to the Challenges FAQ:

 

Are Challenges reviewed by anyone before publication?

 

... The community can "flag" inappropriate or unplayable Challenges. These are automatically removed from the website if flagged by enough geocachers....

[+Tribble_Fun]

@CanadianRockies: Thanks, that's clear so far. But this doesn't mean - in my understanding - that they are not reviewed after they were taken away. I just googled "Challenges Geocaching Wien" and found a topic in an Austrian forum stating: "My challenge disappeared about seven minutes after I had set it up". So this seems to be some kind of abuse of the system.

[+CanadianRockies]

But this doesn't mean - in my understanding - that they are not reviewed after they were taken away.

One of the reasons Groundspeak set up the Challenge system the way they did is because they didn't want to add a huge burden on the volunteer reviewers. Maybe a Groundspeak Lackey(s) is reviewing automatically archived Challenges. Maybe not. I haven't heard or read anything about this one way or the other.

[+Manville Possum]

@CanadianRockies: Thanks, that's clear so far. But this doesn't mean - in my understanding - that they are not reviewed after they were taken away. I just googled "Challenges Geocaching Wien" and found a topic in an Austrian forum stating: "My challenge disappeared about seven minutes after I had set it up". So this seems to be some kind of abuse of the system.

Many of us are seeing the system abuse on Challanges. We take risk even posting here.

[+CanadianRockies]

Has anybody seen an instance where an archived Challenge has been restored? If not, then I suspect nobody is reviewing the archived Challenges.

[+BuckeyeClan]

Wow, very sad that this is happening! There is hope though! I was browsing through some feedback topics, and came across these two responses to topics that others have posted regarding the archival of challenges:

 

Groundspeak sees every archival that happens due to reporting, and apart from a couple of challenges in grey areas (less than 3), all archivals have been legitimate. --Jeremy Irish link

 

This is what is in fact happening. If enough flagging occurs, the challenge is disabled and the Lackeys are notified. --Moun10Bike link

 

So maybe somebody will see what is happening in your area, and unarchive the ones that should be okay. You might want to post about this issue in the feedback forum. Hopefully they have a plan for dealing with this. Keep us updated if you see any changes!

[cezanne]

@CanadianRockies: Thanks, that's clear so far. But this doesn't mean - in my understanding - that they are not reviewed after they were taken away. I just googled "Challenges Geocaching Wien" and found a topic in an Austrian forum stating: "My challenge disappeared about seven minutes after I had set it up". So this seems to be some kind of abuse of the system.

 

I think that the challenge that got archived after 7 minutes was somehow problematic while the one at St Stephen's Cathedral was definitely ok. I do not know whether it got archived due too many flags or a too high number of thumbs down.

 

To provide a complete picture, one should also mention that parts of the Viennese cacher community are leading in coming up with provocating challenges that are either locationless or do not make any sense at all and just make fun about challenges. It might well be that some start to be anti challenge as counter reaction or they are just trying to be childish like those who come along with meaningless challenges, but decided to use a different approach. It appears to me that hardly any local cachers take challenges for serious. The few challenges that would make sense might well become victims of this situation.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited August 29, 2011 by cezanne

[cezanne]

Has anybody seen an instance where an archived Challenge has been restored? If not, then I suspect nobody is reviewing the archived Challenges.

 

I have not encountered any restored challenge. I believe that Groundspeak encourages new submission. However, this does not work if someone wants to sabotize certain challenges.

If Groundspeak does not start to look into the matter, they will run into troubles with challenges at least in some parts of the world.

It might work to automatize parts of the system and move over the work to the community, but it will not work without any control system.

 

Cezanne

[+lamoracke]

yeah, I once saw a challenge board saying post your cool challenges you created. I did not want to post mine because I feared folks just flagging or thumbs downing it just because.

 

I would hope a challenge reaches a point where somebody looks at it first, even if briefly before it gets archived. If that is not the case, then say a dozen folks could easily band together and remove every challenge on the website, assuming they had enough time.

[+CanadianRockies]

I do not know whether it got archived due too many flags or a too high number of thumbs down.

My understanding is that too many flags will cause a Challenge to be archived while lots of thumbs down only will cause it to be rated lower in some future search process.

[cezanne]

I do not know whether it got archived due too many flags or a too high number of thumbs down.

My understanding is that too many flags will cause a Challenge to be archived while lots of thumbs down only will cause it to be rated lower in some future search process.

 

You might be right, but I am not sure. It would also be interesting what means too many flags and whether a single user can flag a challenge more than once and if this counts more than once.

I can easily imagine that some childish people are experimenting and try to see what happens.

 

Cezanne

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Is there anybody who checks the archiving of Challenges.

According to the Challenges FAQ:

 

Are Challenges reviewed by anyone before publication?

 

... The community can "flag" inappropriate or unplayable Challenges. These are automatically removed from the website if flagged by enough geocachers....

 

It's too bad they haven't removed geocachers that are inappropriately flagging playable challenges.

[+Capt Biggins]

Have a question to how I can remove a challenge that was archived before I could complete it.. I rather not see it the rest of my geocaching life.. can someone tell me how to remove it. The challenge was the kiss a frog

[+t4e]

Have a question to how I can remove a challenge that was archived before I could complete it.. I rather not see it the rest of my geocaching life.. can someone tell me how to remove it. The challenge was the kiss a frog

 

not possible yet

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/2171419-possibility-to-delete-challenge-from-our-profile-i

[+Fandango739]

If someone accidentally gives a challenge a thumbs down (or later changes their opinion), is it possible for them to change their thumb?

[+BuckeyeClan]

If someone accidentally gives a challenge a thumbs down (or later changes their opinion), is it possible for them to change their thumb?

 

You can change a thumb up to a thumb down, or vice versa, but I don't see a way to "un-thumb". Nor do I see a way to "un-flag".

[+Tribble_Fun]

To provide a complete picture, one should also mention that parts of the Viennese cacher community are leading in coming up with provocating challenges that are either locationless or do not make any sense at all and just make fun about challenges. It might well be that some start to be anti challenge as counter reaction or they are just trying to be childish like those who come along with meaningless challenges, but decided to use a different approach. It appears to me that hardly any local cachers take challenges for serious. The few challenges that would make sense might well become victims of this situation.

 

I didn't notice that, because I checked it only the first few days, when there were 10 challenges open in/around Vienna, that seemed more or less O.K. That doesn't mean you're incorrect however. But to give another idea into it. If I wanted to sabotage a system I would be coming up with these two ideas: Overstretch the limits to make them shut it down (provocating challenges) and Use the flag to shut down all the challenges. What I wanted to say this is not necessarily a reaction. But it's possible that these were both anti-challenge activities.

 

So I think that unless somebody starts to review flagged challenges the Vienna area will not see any challenges. That's pretty sad, as Challenges should have a chance to develop to a good instrument.

 

But I can try to create a correct challenge and see how long it stays online.

[+Panther&Pine]

Don't know if it helps but I thumbs down a cache that I feel is a duplication of an exisiting cache and mark challenges that are locationless as unplayable. Generally if I thumbs down a cache I leave a note that says "If there is already a cache/event here, why place a challenge here as well?".

 

Other than that. I don't really care right now. So far the only challenge./GeoTask is a webcam one and that doesn't interest me so I have yet to do one. I do have a different account for my challenges, I just don't see them as part of my current account. So far haven't used it.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Don't know if it helps but I thumbs down a cache that I feel is a duplication of an exisiting cache and mark challenges that are locationless as unplayable. Generally if I thumbs down a cache I leave a note that says "If there is already a cache/event here, why place a challenge here as well?".

 

I considered placing a challenge at a location in Washington DC where there is already a virtual. It would have been an action challenge to do something I thought would have been unique, well beyond the "what did you see here" verification on the virtual. If someone posts a thumbs down on a challenge with the question "If there is already a cache/event here, why place a challenge here as well?" it doesn't matter what the answer is because the thumbs down has already been posted. Why bother asking the question? You've already determined that, for you, there isn't a valid reason for placing a challenge at that location. Since completed challenges no longer count as finds why would it matter if there was a challenge and cache/event at the same location?

[+Lachwurzn]

Groundspeak sees every archival that happens due to reporting, and apart from a couple of challenges in grey areas (less than 3), all archivals have been legitimate. --Jeremy Irish link

 

"legitimate" - what ? How would they ever know for any challenges that are written in local language ?

 

I strongly believe that the current algorithm (if there is one at all) does not work sufficiently. The number of required flags (before a Challenge is archived automtically) should be based on the number of views, number of thumbs up/down, consistency of flagging reasons or a combination of all. Also, if somebody is flagging a high number of Challenges, chances are high that he is just protesting/sabotaging the system.

In essence, we need the system to become more intelligent...

Edited August 30, 2011 by Lachwurzn

[+Tribble_Fun]

O.K. I can see, that the challenges that Lachwurzn and I created today were flagged. One was to go to the smallest alleyway in Vienna (and of course the location was given) and mine was to take a walk around the Ringstraße (a circular road with many important buildings in Vienna http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ringstra%C3%9Fe ) and post a picture of you and the the building you like most.

 

Lachwurzn's was flagged within less than an hour, and mine is gone now about four hours upon publication. So I think calling this legitimate is clearly off. I need now a way to inform Groudspeak so they can take appropriate measures. Any ideas?

 

So far I added an idea to Groundspeak feedback form: http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/130071-worldwide-challenge-ideas/suggestions/2219900-check-flagging-of-challenges

 

Best regards

Reini

Edited August 30, 2011 by Reini68

[Jeremy]

Has anybody seen an instance where an archived Challenge has been restored? If not, then I suspect nobody is reviewing the archived Challenges.

 

We review every reported challenge, though currently we're going through a move so we can't be as quick as we normally are. It helps us to understand which ones are being reported and archived and we do unarchive them when they don't fit the report.

 

When we receive the report we see exactly who reports them, so there is no anonymous reporting happening on the back side. If we see abuse we deal with it on an individual basis.

 

In the case of CX330, listed above, it was reported two separate times, archived, and subsequently unarchived again. Both times there were different users reporting this particular Challenge.

[Jeremy]

Groundspeak sees every archival that happens due to reporting, and apart from a couple of challenges in grey areas (less than 3), all archivals have been legitimate. --Jeremy Irish link

 

"legitimate" - what ? How would they ever know for any challenges that are written in local language ?

 

 

We're pretty smart like that.

 

I strongly believe that the current algorithm (if there is one at all) does not work sufficiently. The number of required flags (before a Challenge is archived automtically) should be based on the number of views, number of thumbs up/down, consistency of flagging reasons or a combination of all. Also, if somebody is flagging a high number of Challenges, chances are high that he is just protesting/sabotaging the system.

In essence, we need the system to become more intelligent...

 

Well, yeah. It isn't going to work efficiently the first time around. We're obviously not going to tell you about the algorithm though, and when we change it.

[+PISA-caching]

I do not know whether it got archived due too many flags or a too high number of thumbs down.

My understanding is that too many flags will cause a Challenge to be archived while lots of thumbs down only will cause it to be rated lower in some future search process.

 

You might be right, but I am not sure. It would also be interesting what means too many flags and whether a single user can flag a challenge more than once and if this counts more than once.

I can easily imagine that some childish people are experimenting and try to see what happens.

 

Cezanne

 

The same questions came to my mind and I will add another one:

 

Why is Groundspeak making a secret of all that? Maybe someone should start a fake challenge (not in or around Vienna) and experiment with it (can a user flag his own challenge?). And of course Groundspeak should take a very close look at the Viennese challenges that have been archived due to flags. PLUS, I would kick the users who did this or at least take any action that will teach them not to abuse the system.

 

AND: If Groundspeak doesn't want to invest time for reviewing archived challenges, why not provide a page that lists archived challenges and give other users the chance to "flag" a wrong flag? I have seen a similar system on a photo website and it ended up by publishing the names of the people who downrated the uploads of other users. This might be too much, but SOME changes are definitely necessary or otherwise the challenges will die sooner or later.

[+Tribble_Fun]

In the case of CX330, listed above, it was reported two separate times, archived, and subsequently unarchived again. Both times there were different users reporting this particular Challenge.

That's what I meant. I don't think this is one person doing that. But maybe you should check if

1. maybe all the Viennese challenges were flagged by the same people or
   
2. these accounts are sockpuppets
   

Especially the CX330 (Stephansdom) was clearly within the rules.

 

The two Challenges that were flagged today within a few hours were:

• CX1AA7 - Lachwurzn's
  
• CX1AA6 - mine
  

[Jeremy]

I do not know whether it got archived due too many flags or a too high number of thumbs down.

My understanding is that too many flags will cause a Challenge to be archived while lots of thumbs down only will cause it to be rated lower in some future search process.

 

You might be right, but I am not sure. It would also be interesting what means too many flags and whether a single user can flag a challenge more than once and if this counts more than once.

I can easily imagine that some childish people are experimenting and try to see what happens.

 

Cezanne

 

The same questions came to my mind and I will add another one:

 

Why is Groundspeak making a secret of all that?

 

A secret of what? How the reporting system works? Why would we tell potential abusers the best way to abuse a system?

 

Maybe someone should start a fake challenge (not in or around Vienna) and experiment with it (can a user flag his own challenge?). And of course Groundspeak should take a very close look at the Viennese challenges that have been archived due to flags. PLUS, I would kick the users who did this or at least take any action that will teach them not to abuse the system.

 

Yes. A user could flag his own challenge. Unplayable, for example, would be useful to report on when the thing at the location is no longer there.

 

AND: If Groundspeak doesn't want to invest time for reviewing archived challenges,

 

Now hold on. Didn't I say we were reviewing archived Challenges?

 

why not provide a page that lists archived challenges and give other users the chance to "flag" a wrong flag? I have seen a similar system on a photo website and it ended up by publishing the names of the people who downrated the uploads of other users. This might be too much, but SOME changes are definitely necessary or otherwise the challenges will die sooner or later.

 

We'll be doing lots of things to experiment with reporting, rating, etc. The first go we'll be showing Challenges even when they are archived so you can see them, and allowing folks to unflag a Challenge is definitely on the list of options. But as I noted above, we're scrutinizing every archival right now to understand how the community feels about certain types of Challenges, and how it is being abused.

[+PISA-caching]

I assume that putting a flag on a challenge isn't a priviledge of premium users, right?

[Jeremy]

In the case of CX330, listed above, it was reported two separate times, archived, and subsequently unarchived again. Both times there were different users reporting this particular Challenge.

That's what I meant. I don't think this is one person doing that. But maybe you should check if

1. maybe all the Viennese challenges were flagged by the same people or
   
2. these accounts are sockpuppets
   

Especially the CX330 (Stephansdom) was clearly within the rules.

 

The two Challenges that were flagged today within a few hours were:

• CX1AA7 - Lachwurzn's
  
• CX1AA6 - mine
  

 

CX1AA6 is for an entire street, not a specific location. I can see why it was reported and archived, though it is definitely a grey area.

 

CX1AA7 is a Challenge with a few paragraphs of commentary about Challenges, challenge flagging, etc. I can see why this one was reported as well since that sort of information should remain off the page. Maybe if it was simply a challenge for the alley it would have remained.

[Jeremy]

I assume that putting a flag on a challenge isn't a priviledge of premium users, right?

 

No. Anyone can flag a challenge.

[+PISA-caching]

A secret of what? How the reporting system works? Why would we tell potential abusers the best way to abuse a system?

 

Well, they found out how to abuse it without that piece of information. I just thought that we could make better suggestions for improvement, if we - the good guys - knew how it works, but to make my opinion very clear: I'm very confident, that Groundspeak will find a good solution for this problem. You're all doing a great job and that's another reason why I get so angry when such things happen. BTW, I also live in Vienna and would love to do or even create some challenges, but that will have to wait a little longer.

 

Now hold on. Didn't I say we were reviewing archived Challenges?

 

Yes, you did, but we were typing at the same time I guess. :-)

 

We'll be doing lots of things to experiment with reporting, rating, etc. The first go we'll be showing Challenges even when they are archived so you can see them, and allowing folks to unflag a Challenge is definitely on the list of options. But as I noted above, we're scrutinizing every archival right now to understand how the community feels about certain types of Challenges, and how it is being abused.

 

Very good. Like I said before, you're doing a great job.

[+Lachwurzn]

We'll be doing lots of things to experiment with reporting, rating, etc. The first go we'll be showing Challenges even when they are archived so you can see them, and allowing folks to unflag a Challenge is definitely on the list of options. But as I noted above, we're scrutinizing every archival right now to understand how the community feels about certain types of Challenges, and how it is being abused.

 

I very much applaud that you do this "behind the scenes" even though most people don't know about it.

 

One idea would be to limit the number of flags a particular user could set per day, even though that obviously does not help with fake accounts. But it would at least stop some people from just being negative to the whole idea of Challenges.

 

In trying to help you with analysis, I have just re-created the (already archived) Challenge CX1AA7 as CX1ACF.

 

CX1AA7 is a Challenge with a few paragraphs of commentary about Challenges, challenge flagging, etc. I can see why this one was reported as well since that sort of information should remain off the page. Maybe if it was simply a challenge for the alley it would have remained.

 

Statement accepted (and discarded in the Challenge text this time), but I only had added this after it was flagged/archived two times. So I strongly assume that this was NOT the reason people were flagging it.

 

By the way... I think flagging should be restricted to Premium Members. They are usually more serious about the Geocaching philosophy AND it will be one more reason for users to upgrade (i.e. more money for you ;-).

Edited August 31, 2011 by Lachwurzn

[+Panther&Pine]

Don't know if it helps but I thumbs down a cache that I feel is a duplication of an exisiting cache and mark challenges that are locationless as unplayable. Generally if I thumbs down a cache I leave a note that says "If there is already a cache/event here, why place a challenge here as well?".

 

I considered placing a challenge at a location in Washington DC where there is already a virtual. It would have been an action challenge to do something I thought would have been unique, well beyond the "what did you see here" verification on the virtual. If someone posts a thumbs down on a challenge with the question "If there is already a cache/event here, why place a challenge here as well?" it doesn't matter what the answer is because the thumbs down has already been posted. Why bother asking the question? You've already determined that, for you, there isn't a valid reason for placing a challenge at that location. Since completed challenges no longer count as finds why would it matter if there was a challenge and cache/event at the same location?

My understanding of the thumbs down just means that I don't like the idea. And so far the only idea I don't like is the double/triple dipping going on (seriously how many ways do you need to take a picture with a given landmark?)

 

I'm not going out of my way to find out if a cache is right by a challenge, but the ones that say "Take a picture of your self signing the log at GCXXXXX" seems silly to me.

[+t4e]

 

We'll be doing lots of things to experiment with reporting, rating, etc. The first go we'll be showing Challenges even when they are archived so you can see them, and allowing folks to unflag a Challenge is definitely on the list of options. But as I noted above, we're scrutinizing every archival right now to understand how the community feels about certain types of Challenges, and how it is being abused.

 

has any consideration been given to have a proximity guideline?...it really makes no sense to have 10 people listing a challenge at the same spot, which right now to my knowledge there is nothing to stop them from doing so

[+Tribble_Fun]

CX1AA6 is for an entire street, not a specific location. I can see why it was reported and archived, though it is definitely a grey area.

 

CX1AA7 is a Challenge with a few paragraphs of commentary about Challenges, challenge flagging, etc. I can see why this one was reported as well since that sort of information should remain off the page. Maybe if it was simply a challenge for the alley it would have remained.

First of all I think I understand you already are doing the right things, but it will take a bit until they are successful - I can live with that.

 

Without wanting to discuss the two Challenges (I guess it's a matter of point of view if a whole street is a single location or not, especially if you had been to the Ringstraße you might view that differently. The last paragraph on the other challenge was put into it after the same Challenge had been flagged several times if I remember right). Probably you are right that these might be the reasons, but please be aware, that it's more likely that they were flagged for the reason to keep Vienna challenge-free. Of course it's a good think to at first hand imply honest intentions in every persons acts, but it's a good think to be aware that there's a chance some people are not that honest as we might think.

 

But anyway I think the issue came to your attention and you will probably very soon find out that the system is abused to a certain degree (well I'm sure you already did and are already planning the right measures).

 

Best regards

Reini

[+Panther&Pine]

 

We'll be doing lots of things to experiment with reporting, rating, etc. The first go we'll be showing Challenges even when they are archived so you can see them, and allowing folks to unflag a Challenge is definitely on the list of options. But as I noted above, we're scrutinizing every archival right now to understand how the community feels about certain types of Challenges, and how it is being abused.

 

has any consideration been given to have a proximity guideline?...it really makes no sense to have 10 people listing a challenge at the same spot, which right now to my knowledge there is nothing to stop them from doing so

Some landmarks are getting a huge number of them. The Space Needle for example.

Edited August 30, 2011 by MooseJawSpruce

[+dfx]

A secret of what? How the reporting system works? Why would we tell potential abusers the best way to abuse a system?

 

It's a concept known as full disclosure. You tell people how it works not so that they can abuse it, but so that they can tell you how to make to immune against abuse.

Edited August 30, 2011 by dfx

[+GeoGeeBee]

A secret of what? How the reporting system works? Why would we tell potential abusers the best way to abuse a system?

 

It's a concept known as full disclosure. You tell people how it works not so that they can abuse it, but so that they can tell you how to make to immune against abuse.

I agree. Security Through Obscurity never works very well.

Edited August 30, 2011 by GeoGeeBee

[+Castle Mischief]

A secret of what? How the reporting system works? Why would we tell potential abusers the best way to abuse a system?

 

It's a concept known as full disclosure. You tell people how it works not so that they can abuse it, but so that they can tell you how to make to immune against abuse.

 

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

[+Fandango739]

I posted my first challenge last night and within the first 15 minutes, some fellow that lives over a thousand miles away accepts AND gives it a thumbs down. He has offered no explanation, not even when politely e-mailed.

 

This is not encouraging to someone trying to make a good and fun challenge.

 

Nor does it seem correct that anyone can pass judgment (bad or good) without offering some kind of explanation, let alone without completing the challenge. The current system seems to allow any yahoo with too much time on his / her hands to sit and click into as many challenges as their free time allows (withou ANY limit), and then knock the efforts made by others.

 

Would it not be more useful to challenge creators if a comment was *required* when someone passes judgment (bad or good) on a challenge, so they know how to make challenges better in the future?

 

Just saying.....

Edited August 30, 2011 by Fandango739

[+Castle Mischief]

I posted my first challenge last night and within the first 15 minutes, some fellow that lives over a thousand miles away accepts AND gives it a thumbs down. He has offered no explanation, not even when politely e-mailed.

 

This is not encouraging to someone trying to make a good and fun challenge.

 

Nor does it seem correct that anyone can pass judgment (bad or good) without offering some kind of explanation, let alone without completing the challenge. The current system seems to allow any yahoo with too much time on his / her hands to sit and click into as many challenges as their free time allows (withou ANY limit), and then knock the efforts made by others.

 

Would it not be more useful to challenge creators if a comment was *required* when someone passes judgment (bad or good) on a challenge, so they know how to make challenges better in the future?

 

Just saying.....

 

How do you know the same person gave it the thumbs down?

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

@CanadianRockies: Thanks, that's clear so far. But this doesn't mean - in my understanding - that they are not reviewed after they were taken away. I just googled "Challenges Geocaching Wien" and found a topic in an Austrian forum stating: "My challenge disappeared about seven minutes after I had set it up". So this seems to be some kind of abuse of the system.

 

I think that the challenge that got archived after 7 minutes was somehow problematic while the one at St Stephen's Cathedral was definitely ok. I do not know whether it got archived due too many flags or a too high number of thumbs down.

 

To provide a complete picture, one should also mention that parts of the Viennese cacher community are leading in coming up with provocating challenges that are either locationless or do not make any sense at all and just make fun about challenges. It might well be that some start to be anti challenge as counter reaction or they are just trying to be childish like those who come along with meaningless challenges, but decided to use a different approach. It appears to me that hardly any local cachers take challenges for serious. The few challenges that would make sense might well become victims of this situation.

 

 

 

 

Cezanne

Let's not rule out the possibility that some were archived by their creators. I almost archived one of mine because I wanted to edot it, but had accidentally accepted it, thus preventing me from making any changes.

[+Fandango739]

How do you know the same person gave it the thumbs down?

Actually, you may correct in question this and I admit that I may have been in error.

 

I had made the assumption based on that the 'accept' and the 'thumbs down' appeared at the same time. This is the internet however and 'things happen.'

 

I had also thought that one was required to take some other action (accept or post a message) in order to do a thumbing. I proved this thought false, however, soon after I had posted. By simply visiting the webpages for challenges far from my home (and thus I can safely say that I will most likey never accept nor complete), I was able to gift the challenges with 'thumbs up' without commiting, commenting, or being identified. I did at least read the descriptions before passing judgment. But I could have sat and done hundreds of these things, without limit or consequence.

 

Things that make you think, 'Hmmmmm....."

[+Tribble_Fun]

In the case of CX330, listed above, it was reported two separate times, archived, and subsequently unarchived again. Both times there were different users reporting this particular Challenge.

 

CX330 is already gone again. You still might think that this happened by chance, or you can start to investigate who is flagging the Viennese Challenges. I'm pretty sure you'll find a pattern (either sockpuppets or the same people doing it).

[+Panther&Pine]

In the case of CX330, listed above, it was reported two separate times, archived, and subsequently unarchived again. Both times there were different users reporting this particular Challenge.

 

CX330 is already gone again. You still might think that this happened by chance, or you can start to investigate who is flagging the Viennese Challenges. I'm pretty sure you'll find a pattern (either sockpuppets or the same people doing it).

I think he (Jeremy) said they are already looking at the logs of which usernames are flaging caches.

[+Lachwurzn]

EDIT: reported problem was a "PEBKAC". Sorry... I interpreted the 24-rule correctly, but fell into a personal timing trap.

Edited August 31, 2011 by Lachwurzn

[cezanne]

 

By the way... I think flagging should be restricted to Premium Members. They are usually more serious about the Geocaching philosophy

 

Are you kidding? I know a lot of PMs who like to provocate and who are not caring at all about other caches and do not treat them well at all. The cacher ethics does not depend on the member status.

 

What might happen in Vienna however is that some PM cachers have a second non PM account.

 

AND it will be one more reason for users to upgrade (i.e. more money for you ;-).

 

I do not think that anyone will upgrade to be able to flag challenges.

 

 

Cezanne

[cezanne]

In trying to help you with analysis, I have just re-created the (already archived) Challenge CX1AA7 as CX1ACF. However, I don't get a PUBLISH button for CX1ACF anywhere - so it is indefinitely kept as a draft at the moment. Either this is a bug or an undocumented feature of some type.

 

As your Engste Gasse challenge is regarded and if the text is still the same, I guess it might get new flags anyway as not everyone will appreciate the sarcastic way it is written up and some might think that it is not fitting the criteria of a light and fun entertainment.

I know you think that what you write is funny, but there are different types of humour.

NB: I did not flag your challenge.

 

Cezanne

[+Lachwurzn]

As your Engste Gasse challenge is regarded and if the text is still the same, I guess it might get new flags anyway as not everyone will appreciate the sarcastic way it is written up and some might think that it is not fitting the criteria of a light and fun entertainment.

I know you think that what you write is funny, but there are different types of humour.

NB: I did not flag your challenge.

 

I totally agree that humor is very subjective. However, exactly the same type of humor made my series of 4 Multi-Caches within Vienna become top-10 of the country - holding >1400 logs without a single complaint, but lots of applause. I therefore strongly believe that this is not the reason behind the flagging. And even if it is... would you accept that I flag your Cache just because I don't agree with a statement in the listing, don't like Nanos or find a misspelling ?

 

I still think that this is just a very local sign of community protest against anything new appearing on geocaching.com (or any changes to Geocaching at all) - compare this with the heat of discussions when semi-commercial caches by NÖ-Werbung appeared...

 

Why don't we openly show the userIDs of people who flagged something ? I sure understand the psychology reason behind it, but we do it for favorites as well, right ?

[+Castle Mischief]

Why don't we openly show the userIDs of people who flagged something ? I sure understand the psychology reason behind it, but we do it for favorites as well, right ?

 

Possibly for the same reason you can't search Challenges by who created them- to avoid the drama? It's one thing to show the people that commented positivly about a cache (Favorites) and another to show who commented negatively. Groundspeak is monitoring the excessive down-thumbing and the flagging.

Edited August 31, 2011 by Castle Mischief