cache placement challenges?

[+Storming Jericho]

In my home base city (Grand Rapids, Mi) there are a lot of challenge caches (not be confused with challenges, which I am not talking about here). An example would be the Jackpot challenge cache (GC2AE6A), or some other probably familiar challenges like the fizzy and jasmer challenges, all of which have challenge caches near where I live.

 

Here are the rules that I initially drafted, in order to make it possible:

1) You must place at least one cache for each possible difficulty and terrain rating, none of which can be counted more than once for the challenge. This will lead to a total of 18 unique caches.

2) Six of your 18 caches must be traditionals

3) Three of your 18 caches must be multi stage.

4) Three of your 18 caches must be unknown type.

5) One of your 18 caches must be a letterbox.

6) One of your 18 caches but be an earthcache.

7) One of your 18 caches must be a Wherigo.

8) Four of your 18 caches must be micro sized.

9) Four of your 18 caches must be small sized.

10) Four of your 18 caches must be regular sized.

11) One of your 18 caches must be large sized.

12) The caches on your list must have a total of at least 25 favorite points.

13) Archived caches will count, provided that the cache was active for at least three months before it was archived.

14) “Liar’s caches” or other caches with repeated complaints on the cache page that they do not fit their listed criteria will not be accepted for the challenge.

 

Obviously, I got pretty into this challenge and trying to make a good one. Then I emailed a friend about it and he told me that Groundspeak does not allow challenge caches that require you to place particular types of caches. I was wondering why this is.

 

Best,

Jacob from Storming Jericho

Edited September 5, 2011 by Storming Jericho

[Pup Patrol]

Knowledge Books:

 

4.14. Challenge Caches

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=206

 

Point #5:

 

5. Challenge caches may not require the publication of a new cache as a logging requirement. Challenges must be achievable by those who do not own caches.

 

It would be prudent to read through the Guidelines and the Knowledge Books prior to submitting any type of cache.

Edited September 5, 2011 by Pup Patrol

[+Bear and Ragged]

Groundspeak dis-like Seed Caches and Curse of the FTF Caches, because they encourage people to set caches, possibly without thinking about 'where' and 'why' they are hiding a cache there...

 

I think a Challenge Cache would fall into the same category, and not be allowed.

[+mpilchfamily]

Check out the cache placement guidelines.

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx

 

Read through them fully a few time. You can't have a cache that requires others to place a cache. Trying to make a challenge that requires the same is not allowed either. This type of thing is really bad for the sport and encourages bad caches, over saturation, and often results in caches that the CO don't maintain. Its good that your trying to find a new idea for a cache. But you need to fully understand the placement guidelines before you try to place a cache.

[+keehotee]

.... because they encourage people to set caches, possibly without thinking about 'where' and 'why' they are hiding a cache there...

 

Yeah, like some people even need encouragement to follow that line. :laughing:

[+Storming Jericho]

I understand the idea that challenge caches that require placement could encourage the flooding of an area with bad caches, but I personally feel that a well made one wouldn't have to. The problem I see is that a lot of cachers just place within their comfort zone. I see a lot of GR cachers who do nothing anymore except place incomprehensible "unknown" caches. It would be interesting to try to push them to place other types. I don't think that would result in bad caches, especially from a difficult challenge that only dedicated geocachers are likely to take up in the first place.

 

The worst problem I could see would be bad earthcaches or Wherigo caches occuring because someone who knew nothing about either decided to place one in order to "fill the requirement," but if that were really a problem then the piece of it about placing types could be removed.

 

Curse of the FTF caches are actually a good example, I think. In our county, the curse of the ftf caches are mostly really good. They have encouraged more people who have never placed a cache to go out and place a good one than they have forced people to place junk caches who would have been placing nothing.

 

I guess the way I see it is: junk caches are always going to be there. And its not really unfair to people who don't place caches if there is a challenge they "can't" do without starting -- There are all kinds of challenges that require things of me that I can't or won't do in my current situation, and I'm responding to that by not doing them right now.

 

Well -- that was a rant. Sorry to all the people who basically just told me to read the rules. I should have rephrased. I was trying to start a discussion about something I found out to be true, not trying to encourage people to tell me to go read the rulebook again

[Pup Patrol]

I was wondering whether this is true or if anyone else has heard anything about it.

 

Well -- that was a rant. Sorry to all the people who basically just told me to read the rules. I should have rephrased. I was trying to start a discussion about something I found out to be true, not trying to encourage people to tell me to go read the rulebook again

 

Yes, you phrased your original post asking "if it's true". Well, yeah, it's true.

 

You said nothing about knowing full-well that your idea for a Challenge Cache would not be published, because you had read the Guidelines and understood them.

 

If you wanted to post a rant against the Guidelines, you should have edited your original post to reflect that.

 

I agree with the Guidelines regarding seed caches, and Challenge Caches that rely on people creating new caches.

 

A Challenge Cache must be open to cachers who don't own caches to keep things as fair as possible.

 

I don't see why there is a problem with that Guideline, or why one would want to rant about it.

[+Storming Jericho]

Alright -- you have taught me well -- thanks -- now GOODBYE : ) : ) : )

Edited September 5, 2011 by Storming Jericho

[Tahosa and Sons]

Other than guidelines (rules), really think from previous experiences. How hard is it to really create a true 5 x 5. And you would want a cacher, then another cacher, etc. etc. etc. to try and hide these type of caches.

[AZcachemeister]

I tried to create three challenge that required qualifiers to own caches with high numbers of favorite points, thus attempting to encourage quality caches.

I soon ran afoul of the 'Knowledge Book Guideline' (at the time, there was NO indication in the 'Regular Guidelines' that this would be a problem).

 

So, I was forced to dilute my challenges by allowing qualification for those who had found caches with LOTS of favorites points, but didn't own any.

[+Storming Jericho]

Other than guidelines (rules), really think from previous experiences. How hard is it to really create a true 5 x 5. And you would want a cacher, then another cacher, etc. etc. etc. to try and hide these type of caches.

 

Well it wouldn't require a 5/5. It would require one cache with a terrain of five and one cache with a difficulty of five. The former could be, among many things, an island cache, which many people have placed. The latter could be that particular user's most difficult puzzle.

 

But the point of a challenge that I'm really hitting here that I guess most people are just disagreeing with me on is that a challenge cache doesn't have to be logged by a lot of people. We have challenge caches here for logging a percentage of states in the U.S. The upper ends of those challenges (the 40 state seeker and 50 state seeker challenges) only have about five finds after a year. Some people don't have the resources to create a cache with a five for terrain. That's fine. I don't have the time or money to take a tour of all fifty states in the U.S. That doesn't mean someone can't place a challenge cache... Does that make sense to others or is my analogy a poor one?

[cezanne]

Trying to make a challenge that requires the same is not allowed either.

 

Groundspeak could do such a challenge as it would be a worldwide one, but I am quite sure that they will not come up with such a challenge.

I cannot find anything that excludes such challenges on the basis of having to hide caches, but rather because it would be hard to couple it to a fixed location.

 

Cezanne

[AZcachemeister]

I don't think there is necessarily anything wrong with your idea as far as how many cachers would want to (or be able to) qualify for it.

 

The problem is that the guidelines don't allow challenges requiring cache ownership, and the reviewers won't publish one that does.

 

So, any discussion here is pointless.

[AZcachemeister]

Trying to make a challenge that requires the same is not allowed either.

 

Groundspeak could do such a challenge as it would be a worldwide one, but I am quite sure that they will not come up with such a challenge.

I cannot find anything that excludes such challenges on the basis of having to hide caches, but rather because it would be hard to couple it to a fixed location.

 

Cezanne

 

We're talking about a physical cache here...

[+mpilchfamily]

Obviously, I got pretty into this challenge and trying to make a good one. Then I emailed a friend about it and he told me that Groundspeak does not allow challenge caches that require you to place particular types of caches. I was wondering whether this is true or if anyone else has heard anything about it. That would sort of ruin things for my idea (although I could always post my challenge as a forum post, or, god forbid, make it a challenge a la the new feature, but that would not be until I have completed it myself).

 

Best,

Jacob from Storming Jericho

 

The OP has considered making it a challenge rather then a cache.

[AZcachemeister]

Obviously, I got pretty into this challenge and trying to make a good one. Then I emailed a friend about it and he told me that Groundspeak does not allow challenge caches that require you to place particular types of caches. I was wondering whether this is true or if anyone else has heard anything about it. That would sort of ruin things for my idea (although I could always post my challenge as a forum post, or, god forbid, make it a challenge a la the new feature, but that would not be until I have completed it myself).

 

Best,

Jacob from Storming Jericho

 

The OP has considered making it a challenge rather then a cache.

 

OOPS! Missed that tidbit.

[+baloo&bd]

Other than guidelines (rules), really think from previous experiences. How hard is it to really create a true 5 x 5. And you would want a cacher, then another cacher, etc. etc. etc. to try and hide these type of caches.

 

Not hard at all, which is why the OP's cache would not work. I can take any of my caches, a 1/1 for example, and give it a 5/5 or whatever I need to meet the challenge. Since D/T ratings are subjective, there is nothing that could be done about it

 

Well it wouldn't require a 5/5. It would require one cache with a terrain of five and one cache with a difficulty of five. The former could be, among many things, an island cache, which many people have placed. The latter could be that particular user's most difficult puzzle.

 

But the point of a challenge that I'm really hitting here that I guess most people are just disagreeing with me on is that a challenge cache doesn't have to be logged by a lot of people. We have challenge caches here for logging a percentage of states in the U.S. The upper ends of those challenges (the 40 state seeker and 50 state seeker challenges) only have about five finds after a year. Some people don't have the resources to create a cache with a five for terrain. That's fine. I don't have the time or money to take a tour of all fifty states in the U.S. That doesn't mean someone can't place a challenge cache... Does that make sense to others or is my analogy a poor one?

 

It makes sense and yes, the analogy is a poor one for the reasons I stated above.

 

I personally know 20 or 25 cachers that have cached 40 or more states and at least 5 who have all 50. It is common for many in the course of their normal lives to have the ability to do this with little or no effort, however it still requires you ACTUALLY do it to qualify.

 

With cache placement, in particular using difficulty or terrain as a guideline, I can put a film canister on a guardrail and satisfy the 5/5 requirement. In this way, you will have encouraged poor placements with little or no thought.

[+L0ne.R]

Then, among these eighteen caches, you would also need to have placed caches of various types (six traditionals, three mystery, three multi, a letterbox, an earthcache, and a Wherigo) and of various sizes (four small, regular, and micro; two other; one large).

 

Thanks for an opportunity to talk about letterbox hybrids. Challenging people to plant letterbox hybrids concerns me. I love letterbox hybrids when they are done right. But letterbox hybrids have become a pet peeve of mine because so many are simply wrong or done poorly.

 

The point of a letterbox is the unique stamp in the box that identifies the box. Most often someone will plant a letterbox with a dollar store stamp that has no relation to the theme of the box or the location. Some COs don't even include a stamp but think that directions to the box, instead of coordinates, make the cache a letterbox. Not so. Without at stamp it should be classified as a Puzzle (Unknown) cache. Also, if that stamp goes missing, please disable the cache until you can replace the custom stamp since it is no longer a letterbox hybrid when the box does not contain a stamp.

Edited September 5, 2011 by Lone R