The Burden of Proof

[+bflentje]

The burden of proof is on the listing geocacher as to whether his/her proposed challenge cache is attainable. I understand that. But sometimes you don't know what cachers would do for a cache until the challenge is presented to them. Especially considering the challenge just published yesterday in TX. Perhaps you can help a fellow cacher and reply as to whether YOU qualify for the following..

 

Challenge of the Century: Webcams

- Find and properly log 20 or more webcam geoaches.

- Must have webcam cache icon and not the mystery icon.

- Must have logged the webcams in accordance with listing cacher's requirements.

 

Challenge of the Century: Lincoln County

- 21 states in the union contain a county named after Lincoln.

- Find and log a cache in at least 7 counties named after Lincoln.

- Only physical, virtual and earthcaches qualify.

 

And for full disclosure.. I qualify for both challanges though I am not the listing cacher. I DO know the cacher in question.

[+The Jester]

The burden of proof is on the listing geocacher as to whether his/her proposed challenge cache is attainable. I understand that. But sometimes you don't know what cachers would do for a cache until the challenge is presented to them. Especially considering the challenge just published yesterday in TX. Perhaps you can help a fellow cacher and reply as to whether YOU qualify for the following..

 

Challenge of the Century: Webcams

- Find and properly log 20 or more webcam geoaches.

- Must have webcam cache icon and not the mystery icon.

- Must have logged the webcams in accordance with listing cacher's requirements.

 

Challenge of the Century: Lincoln County

- 21 states in the union contain a county named after Lincoln.

- Find and log a cache in at least 7 counties named after Lincoln.

- Only physical, virtual and earthcaches qualify.

 

And for full disclosure.. I qualify for both challanges though I am not the listing cacher. I DO know the cacher in question.

Neither. Nor would I be that willing to travel long distances just to log a challenge like these.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

The burden of proof is on the listing geocacher as to whether his/her proposed challenge cache is attainable. I understand that. But sometimes you don't know what cachers would do for a cache until the challenge is presented to them. Especially considering the challenge just published yesterday in TX. Perhaps you can help a fellow cacher and reply as to whether YOU qualify for the following..

 

Challenge of the Century: Webcams

 

Challenge of the Century: Lincoln County

 

And for full disclosure.. I qualify for both challanges though I am not the listing cacher. I DO know the cacher in question.

Neither. Nor would I be that willing to travel long distances just to log a challenge like these.

 

+1

[+bflentje]

Neither. Nor would I be that willing to travel long distances just to log a challenge like these.

 

But some cachers would take the challenge.

 

We already know the great debate between challenges-being-neat versus challenges-being-stupid. I am asking if you DO qualify or whether you WOULD take up the challenge.

[+Isonzo Karst]

oops wrong thread...

Edited December 12, 2011 by Isonzo Karst

[knowschad]

Aren't you referring to challenge caches, and not the new "Challenges" type of geowhateverthing?

 

OK... you are referring to the former, apparently. Most of the "stupid vs. neat" debate that I've heard is with the latter. I thought I was the only one that thought the former was stupid.

Edited December 12, 2011 by knowschad

[+Corp Of Discovery]

I like challenges. Don't qualify for either of these tho. If they were close to me I'd probably work on them over time.

[+bflentje]

Aren't you referring to challenge caches, and not the new "Challenges" type of geowhateverthing?

 

OK... you are referring to the former, apparently. Most of the "stupid vs. neat" debate that I've heard is with the latter. I thought I was the only one that thought the former was stupid.

 

Challenge caches. Like many others, I pretend the new challenges don't exist so any reference to challenges are to challenge geocaches.

[+webscouter.]

I do not qualify for the webcam cache. (11 done)

 

I do qualify for the Lincoln cache.

[+wimseyguy]

I like challenges too.

I do not like webcams and only have a few.

One for the icon, another to erase it from my nearest to home search result, and the rest because I was already with people who were doing it.

I would never take the time to complete this one.

 

The location of the 21 Lincoln County states would determine if I would make any effort to complete that cache. Since the OP is half a country away, I'll assume that the challenge cache might also be in MN which severely limits the chance that I'll log it. So I wouldn't bother trying to complete it. I do have a find or two in NC's Lincoln County which is not named for the president.

 

I think that these contrived list challenges may send challenge caches to the same place as virts and/or locationless listings. I hope not. Somehow these types do not have the same satisfaction or worth as true geographical ones like Delorme or all Counties in a state, nor the statistical significance of Fizzy/WRC grids filled in, icon busy days, 366 date grid filled in, or 100 days in a row streak types. Nor the historical pursuit of the Jasmer.

 

I do like challenges, I really do. But I wonder why some of these are being created?

Edited December 12, 2011 by wimseyguy

[Pup Patrol]

I am asking if you DO qualify

 

No. Never will qualify for any webcam challenge caches.

 

or whether you WOULD take up the challenge.

 

No. No webcams, and any counties named Lincoln are probably waaaaay out of our travel range.

Edited December 12, 2011 by Pup Patrol

[Mr.Yuck]

The burden of proof is on the listing geocacher as to whether his/her proposed challenge cache is attainable. I understand that. But sometimes you don't know what cachers would do for a cache until the challenge is presented to them. Especially considering the challenge just published yesterday in TX. Perhaps you can help a fellow cacher and reply as to whether YOU qualify for the following..

 

Challenge of the Century: Webcams

- Find and properly log 20 or more webcam geoaches.

- Must have webcam cache icon and not the mystery icon.

- Must have logged the webcams in accordance with listing cacher's requirements.

 

 

Challenge of the Century: Lincoln County

- 21 states in the union contain a county named after Lincoln.

- Find and log a cache in at least 7 counties named after Lincoln.

- Only physical, virtual and earthcaches qualify.

 

And for full disclosure.. I qualify for both challanges though I am not the listing cacher. I DO know the cacher in question.

 

I'm confused. I saw your post in the other thread before you started this one. You said the Webcam Challenge was rejected? Did it eventually get published? Is the Lincoln Challenge published?

 

I agree with the wording of the guidelines, and don't think they should publish crazy stuff that only a handful of Geocachers world wide qualify for. Such as the mentioned one in Texas. But I'll just say that here, and leave that thread alone, he's got enough grief over there already

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

The location of the 21 Lincoln County states would determine if I would make any effort to complete that cache. Since the OP is half a country away, I'll assume that the challenge cache might also be in MN which severely limits the chance that I'll log it. So I wouldn't bother trying to complete it. I do have a find or two in NC's Lincoln County which is not named for the president.

 

You bring up a good point. There may be a significant number of cachers that could theoretically claim the challenge, but how many are within striking distance of the final cache, or are willing to travel to it?

[GOF and Bacall]

I wouldn't bother with either of them. Correction, I wouldn't bother trying to qualify to log them. If I thought they might be in an interesting location I might find them and post a note saying so. But I would not go out of my way to jump through the hoops. I think they should have gone the way of the rest of the ALRs.

[+seldon]

I'm trying to understand why they are listed as "Challenge of the Century"? I was expecting them to need 100 finds of some sort, but they don't. Is this a series of some sort that has nothing to do with 100, but only that you have the current century of the 2000's to get it done?

[+bflentje]

I'm trying to understand why they are listed as "Challenge of the Century"? I was expecting them to need 100 finds of some sort, but they don't. Is this a series of some sort that has nothing to do with 100, but only that you have the current century of the 2000's to get it done?

 

I am not sure of the exact cache names as the caches weren't published. Perhaps it's supposed to be Minnesota Challenge. At the end of the day, it is just a name.

Edited December 12, 2011 by bflentje

[+NYPaddleCacher]

The location of the 21 Lincoln County states would determine if I would make any effort to complete that cache. Since the OP is half a country away, I'll assume that the challenge cache might also be in MN which severely limits the chance that I'll log it. So I wouldn't bother trying to complete it. I do have a find or two in NC's Lincoln County which is not named for the president.

 

You bring up a good point. There may be a significant number of cachers that could theoretically claim the challenge, but how many are within striking distance of the final cache, or are willing to travel to it?

 

That kind of depends on where the final caches are located. For the webcam challenge, the closest webcam is about 75 miles from me and the 20th nearest webcam is almost 250 miles away. However, it's possible that the webcam challenge listed is located in a spot where there are 20 webcams within 50 miles.

 

For the "Lincoln County" challenge there may be a lot more states within a closer proximity to a final located in Texas than there may be for a final located in New York.

 

Still, this seems like yet another case of "see who can create the most difficult challenge". I don't really don't do challenge caches but it seems that it's becoming more common to see a "I can create a harder find, bigger power trail, more difficult challenge, etc." mentality.

[+webscouter.]

Challenges can be a goal. For those of us who have been caching a while our goals need to become broader in scope. After you have cached in all 50 states, all D/T combinations, every county in your state etc you need something bigger to do. The challenge caches just become a way to mark your accomplishments.

 

At least that is why I like doing them.

[GOF and Bacall]

The location of the 21 Lincoln County states would determine if I would make any effort to complete that cache. Since the OP is half a country away, I'll assume that the challenge cache might also be in MN which severely limits the chance that I'll log it. So I wouldn't bother trying to complete it. I do have a find or two in NC's Lincoln County which is not named for the president.

 

You bring up a good point. There may be a significant number of cachers that could theoretically claim the challenge, but how many are within striking distance of the final cache, or are willing to travel to it?

 

That kind of depends on where the final caches are located. For the webcam challenge, the closest webcam is about 75 miles from me and the 20th nearest webcam is almost 250 miles away. However, it's possible that the webcam challenge listed is located in a spot where there are 20 webcams within 50 miles.

 

For the "Lincoln County" challenge there may be a lot more states within a closer proximity to a final located in Texas than there may be for a final located in New York.

 

Still, this seems like yet another case of "see who can create the most difficult challenge". I don't really don't do challenge caches but it seems that it's becoming more common to see a "I can create a harder find, bigger power trail, more difficult challenge, etc." mentality.

 

Kinda like the old ALRs? For the longest time it seemed to be a case of who can creat the most ridiculous ALR. Then they were gone. For the most part I think it is human nature to see how far we can push the boundaries.

[+Sol seaker]

I hope the old style challenge caches don't go the way of ALR's.

 

I really like some of the good challenge caches.

 

This summer I completed the challenge cache that requires you find caches on 23 islands in WA state. That was an absolute blast!!! I had a really great time!!! I traveled to a lot of places I had no idea existed, or had no idea what they were like.

I was having such a good time doing that cache I wanted to never finish it, but that would have meant not finding any more islands, and that's what I was enjoying.

I hope to keep finding island caches now.

 

Not every challenge cache is as enjoyable as that one. For me, it couldn't get much better than that.

 

Most challenges I ignore. There are a few I've completed and haven't bothered to find the final. Some day.

 

It is fun to have a goal to work toward rather than just keep racking up the numbers.

 

I enjoy a good challenge cache. I ignore those that aren't good.

 

And no, I wouldn't qualify for those two challenge caches, and no, I would probably not go for them. They just don't seem that interesting, and you've got to travel too far.

[+JL_HSTRE]

Both seem perfectly reasonable to me.

[GOF and Bacall]

I hope the old style challenge caches don't go the way of ALR's.

 

I really like some of the good challenge caches.

 

This summer I completed the challenge cache that requires you find caches on 23 islands in WA state. That was an absolute blast!!! I had a really great time!!! I traveled to a lot of places I had no idea existed, or had no idea what they were like.

I was having such a good time doing that cac he I wanted to never finish it, but that would have meant not finding any more islands, and that's what I was enjoying.

I hope to keep finding island caches now.

 

Not every challenge cache is as enjoyable as that one. For me, it couldn't get much better than that.

 

Most challenges I ignore. There are a few I've completed and haven't bothered to find the final. Some day.

 

It is fun to have a goal to work toward rather than just keep racking up the numbers.

 

I enjoy a good challenge cache. I ignore those that aren't good.

 

And no, I wouldn't qualify for those two challenge caches, and no, I would probably not go for them. They just don't seem that interesting, and you've got to travel too far.

 

Could you not enjoy all that island caching without the challenge?

[+lamoracke]

I hope the old style challenge caches don't go the way of ALR's.

 

I really like some of the good challenge caches.

 

This summer I completed the challenge cache that requires you find caches on 23 islands in WA state. That was an absolute blast!!! I had a really great time!!! I traveled to a lot of places I had no idea existed, or had no idea what they were like.

I was having such a good time doing that cac he I wanted to never finish it, but that would have meant not finding any more islands, and that's what I was enjoying.

I hope to keep finding island caches now.

 

Not every challenge cache is as enjoyable as that one. For me, it couldn't get much better than that.

 

Most challenges I ignore. There are a few I've completed and haven't bothered to find the final. Some day.

 

It is fun to have a goal to work toward rather than just keep racking up the numbers.

 

I enjoy a good challenge cache. I ignore those that aren't good.

 

And no, I wouldn't qualify for those two challenge caches, and no, I would probably not go for them. They just don't seem that interesting, and you've got to travel too far.

 

Could you not enjoy all that island caching without the challenge?

 

you could say the same for enjoying a hiking trail without finding caches on the way. The hobby is about geocaching so the goal is to make caches give a reason to go somewhere.

[+lamoracke]

and by the way, I would like the idea of finding 20 webcams and calling it a challenge. I find the one statement curious...

 

"Must have logged the webcams in accordance with listing cacher's requirements."

 

I have what, 31 webcam finds. I think 3 of them or so involved just using a picture on site, but those were in accordance with the CO's approval. I mean, if a webcam picture was against the wishes of the CO, the find would be deleted, so I think mentioning it that way seems a bit strange to me. If you wanted to say the pictures must be from an actual webcam regardless if its an okay cache find, well, that would be more strict than say finding 20 webcams, but at least that would be more understandable if you were trying to thwart folks who are not doing the webcams in their intended methods. That challenge would be better put in a state that has at least 7 webcams within reasonable range I think. For example, Arizona only had 3 last I looked and one of them has the webcam function down when I was there last month.

 

7 counties with the word Lincoln in it. I once got a cache in a city named Redmond in 3 or 4 different states (mostly by accident) but I do not think finding the same county name 7 times would be all that pleasing of a a challenge to do. Just my opinion.

[+The_Incredibles_]

I don't qualify for either and probably wouldn't be able to complete either of them, due to the travel required. The webcam one would be fun, though, if I happened to live in an area with enough of them. Unfortuanatley, there is only 1 where I live!

[+NYPaddleCacher]

For example, Arizona only had 3 last I looked and one of them has the webcam function down when I was there last month.

 

There was on at the University of Arizona in Tuscon that was the closest I've come to logging a webcam cache. I was in meetings for two days just a couple hundred feet from the webcam but it was down both days I was on campus. I came back online a couple of hours before I left for the airport to return home but I was staying several miles away and didn't have a rental car.

 

I've often thought that GS should grant a temporary exception for a webcam cache at mega events. Seems like a good way to provide a visual record of those that have attended the event and would give the opportunity for some to log their first webcam cache.

[GOF and Bacall]

I hope the old style challenge caches don't go the way of ALR's.

 

I really like some of the good challenge caches.

 

This summer I completed the challenge cache that requires you find caches on 23 islands in WA state. That was an absolute blast!!! I had a really great time!!! I traveled to a lot of places I had no idea existed, or had no idea what they were like.

I was having such a good time doing that cac he I wanted to never finish it, but that would have meant not finding any more islands, and that's what I was enjoying.

I hope to keep finding island caches now.

 

Not every challenge cache is as enjoyable as that one. For me, it couldn't get much better than that.

 

Most challenges I ignore. There are a few I've completed and haven't bothered to find the final. Some day.

 

It is fun to have a goal to work toward rather than just keep racking up the numbers.

 

I enjoy a good challenge cache. I ignore those that aren't good.

 

And no, I wouldn't qualify for those two challenge caches, and no, I would probably not go for them. They just don't seem that interesting, and you've got to travel too far.

 

Could you not enjoy all that island caching without the challenge?

 

you could say the same for enjoying a hiking trail without finding caches on the way. The hobby is about geocaching so the goal is to make caches give a reason to go somewhere.

 

That is what the caches on the islands are for. But was the challenge to find the caches really needed to get people to find those caches? What's next? A challenge to find challenges? Then what?

[GOF and Bacall]

Here's the thing. If the objection of the reviewer is that they are not obtainable then the CO only needs to prove that they are. So go out and do it. Go out and find 20 webcam caches. Go out and find a cache in all those Lincoln counties. Then there is no more doubt if they are attainable or not.

 

But I still think they are silly ALRs.

[+bflentje]

and by the way, I would like the idea of finding 20 webcams and calling it a challenge. I find the one statement curious...

 

"Must have logged the webcams in accordance with listing cacher's requirements."

 

I suspect what was meant by that is that some webcam owners have suggestions as to how the pictures should be taken. Or perhaps it is meant to say that non-webcam photos taken are not allowed? Just guessing but it doesn't sound anymore unreasonable as needing 20 or more finds.

[knowschad]

and by the way, I would like the idea of finding 20 webcams and calling it a challenge. I find the one statement curious...

 

"Must have logged the webcams in accordance with listing cacher's requirements."

 

I suspect what was meant by that is that some webcam owners have suggestions as to how the pictures should be taken. Or perhaps it is meant to say that non-webcam photos taken are not allowed? Just guessing but it doesn't sound anymore unreasonable as needing 20 or more finds.

The webcam cache in Ely, MN allows a find for both those on the camera, and for those at home, taking the screenshot. It says so right on the cache page. I guess claiming a find for taking the screencap would indeed be "in accordance with listing cacher's requirements."

[+bflentje]

and by the way, I would like the idea of finding 20 webcams and calling it a challenge. I find the one statement curious...

 

"Must have logged the webcams in accordance with listing cacher's requirements."

 

I suspect what was meant by that is that some webcam owners have suggestions as to how the pictures should be taken. Or perhaps it is meant to say that non-webcam photos taken are not allowed? Just guessing but it doesn't sound anymore unreasonable as needing 20 or more finds.

The webcam cache in Ely, MN allows a find for both those on the camera, and for those at home, taking the screenshot. It says so right on the cache page. I guess claiming a find for taking the screencap would indeed be "in accordance with listing cacher's requirements."

 

According to my understanding, if the Found It log on the webcam stands with the CO, it counts. Unfortunately there are many delinquent (webcam) cache owners out there and many webcams logged improperly with no enforcement. Fortunately, it's a game of trust. I know of my 40-something webcam finds, all but probably 3 are 100% legit. The other three involved non-working webcams, posting self taken pictures like everyone else, delinquent cache owner not enforcing the rules.

[knowschad]

and by the way, I would like the idea of finding 20 webcams and calling it a challenge. I find the one statement curious...

 

"Must have logged the webcams in accordance with listing cacher's requirements."

 

I suspect what was meant by that is that some webcam owners have suggestions as to how the pictures should be taken. Or perhaps it is meant to say that non-webcam photos taken are not allowed? Just guessing but it doesn't sound anymore unreasonable as needing 20 or more finds.

The webcam cache in Ely, MN allows a find for both those on the camera, and for those at home, taking the screenshot. It says so right on the cache page. I guess claiming a find for taking the screencap would indeed be "in accordance with listing cacher's requirements."

 

According to my understanding, if the Found It log on the webcam stands with the CO, it counts. Unfortunately there are many delinquent (webcam) cache owners out there and many webcams logged improperly with no enforcement. Fortunately, it's a game of trust. I know of my 40-something webcam finds, all but probably 3 are 100% legit. The other three involved non-working webcams, posting self taken pictures like everyone else, delinquent cache owner not enforcing the rules.

 

Yeah, I think I know what you mean: http://www.geocaching.com/bookmarks/view.aspx?guid=80500424-4f52-44cf-a250-78ea3dd87eb2

[+thebruce0]

Just because only a handful of people worldwide might qualify (for arguments sake) shouldn't be a reason not to publish. How many crazy traditional caches out there are only found once or twice a year, or less, due to the work, dedication, or time required to get to it? A Challenge cache, as long as it is attainable, should be allowed. (and polling "would you?" in a forum may produce very, very less than desirable skewed results )

However, perhaps one of the reasons might be that webcams are grandfathered caches, and as such, as they slowly disappear off the map, this challenge may quickly become unattainable? *shrug*

 

Caching in 21 states is most definitely attainable though, just requires a lot of traveling.

 

For caches like that, if I lived nearby, I might find the final and sign the log, but post a note so that once I complete the challenge (in who knows, a year down the road or more?) I can log it found. Or, I might see the challenge across the country, do my best to complete it, then if or when I'm ever in the area, I'd be able to find and log it legitimately.

 

There's no reason, really, that even a casual cacher should have sway in saying that a challenge cache shouldn't be allowed, imo.

But as stated a few times in this thread, if the challenge is attainable, that should be sufficient for it to be allowed.

[+The Jester]

Neither. Nor would I be that willing to travel long distances just to log a challenge like these.

 

But some cachers would take the challenge.

 

We already know the great debate between challenges-being-neat versus challenges-being-stupid. I am asking if you DO qualify or whether you WOULD take up the challenge.

And I answered your questions: No, I do not qualify for either; and no, I would not "take up the challenge" - I used different words with the same meaning in my first post.

[+Team Dennis]

I quallify for neither of these, although I have done every active webcam cache in Minnesota so I'm 1/20th of the way there.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again: If I had the time and funds I would not do much other than ski, hike, camp, travel and cache. And I'd do lots of challenges along the way. Delorme Challenges, County Challenges, The Jasmer Challenge, The Fizzy Challenge, etc...

[+Isonzo Karst]

Perhaps you can help a fellow cacher and reply as to whether YOU qualify for the following..

 

Challenge of the Century: Webcams

- Find and properly log 20 or more webcam geoaches. NO

- Must have logged the webcams in accordance with listing cacher's requirements. This reads as the challenge cache owner planning to allow or disallow finds based on their perception of whether the webcam log is legit. No way. If the find is on the cache page, it's good. If the cache owner isn't maintaining the cache, and there are a lot of bogus finds (on webcams, usually a pic taken with the cacher's camera or phone and sometimes no image at all), then log a Needs Archived.

 

Challenge of the Century: Lincoln County NO

 

- Find and log a cache in at least 7 counties named after Lincoln.