Jump to content

It's official? FTF recognized by Groundspeak


slukster

Recommended Posts

Take a look at the monthly newsletter and you will find the following article:

6849332829_cda3d92a34_z.jpg

 

Does this mean that the FTF "side-game" is officially recognized by Groundspeak? Will this competitive part of the game be added to the website in some way? Oh the possibilities. :ph34r:

 

I believe some will point out it (in their opinions) that it was already "sanctioned" when they advertised premium memberships and the instant notification feature could be used for "chasing FTF's". :laughing:

 

I didn't see this was in the newsletter, but it was tweeted by the official Geocaching.com blog today as a short blog post. I think, in my opinion, they're just pointing out to people that they can have the standard cache notification email converted (via an email to SMS gateway that is provider specific) to a text message, which I'm sure many people don't know. Standard text message rates apply (I always wanted to say that). :lol:

Link to comment

Groundspeak "recognized" it a while ago...

We were one of a bunch who got a coin when asked for Premium Member "testamonials".

I mentioned my cache partner's instant notifications and FTFs in mine. Old enough, I was still calling her my other half (call her my other 2/3rds now.) :laughing:

 

- And why I always get a chuckle when some mega-poster from years ago adds his half cent on FTF questions. Usually begins with "This is a side-game..." and ends with "...not officially recognized by Groundspeak." :rolleyes:

Link to comment

I think the mere fact that Groundspeak mentions FTFs proves that they recognize their existence! :D

I'm sure they have been aware of the side game for a number of years. But the weekly letter spot and the blog article strike me as a marketing message to sell more premium subscriptions.

Link to comment

GC knows it exists to us but it's still not an official GC stat catagory. GC's stats don't and will not show FTFs.

I would imagine that is because the site does not have any method of accurately tracking FTF's without user input. In order to tag them in GSAK, you have to click a check box, and other stats programs search logs for FTF, but it's not always accurate.

Link to comment

GC knows it exists to us but it's still not an official GC stat catagory. GC's stats don't and will not show FTFs.

I would imagine that is because the site does not have any method of accurately tracking FTF's without user input. In order to tag them in GSAK, you have to click a check box, and other stats programs search logs for FTF, but it's not always accurate.

As I said I doubt they will. For one it is too hard to prove who was FTF. I was FTF on a cache and someone put their name over mine. Luckily I had two witnesses to me being FTF. And there is the issue of Co-FTFs. I would think GC just wants us to have it as our own private game and I don't think they want to get involved but still acknowledge it exists.

Link to comment

Groundspeak "recognized" it a while ago...

We were one of a bunch who got a coin when asked for Premium Member "testamonials".

I mentioned my cache partner's instant notifications and FTFs in mine. Old enough, I was still calling her my other half (call her my other 2/3rds now.) :laughing:

 

- And why I always get a chuckle when some mega-poster from years ago adds his half cent on FTF questions. Usually begins with "This is a side-game..." and ends with "...not officially recognized by Groundspeak." :rolleyes:

 

This is unbelieveable. You call her your better 2/3's, and you're still physically able to post to the forums? :ph34r:

 

Hey, is that really what the newsletter looks like? That's pretty nice. Perhaps I should get with the 21st Century, and receive the HTML version.

 

3rd EDIT: Of course the same newsletter last summer suggested finding several Geocaches before hiding one of your own. We know that's never going to be a sanctioned policy. :o

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

I'm sure they have been aware of the side game for a number of years. But the weekly letter spot and the blog article strike me as a marketing message to sell more premium subscriptions.

 

Last week's newsletter featured the new "Recently Viewed Geocaches", the week before that was "Flex Your Geocaching Creativity", the week before that was announcing the Leap Year souvenir and the partnership with Tomb Raider.

 

Archive of the weekly newsletters:

http://blog.geocaching.com/category/groundspeaks-weekly-newsletter/

Link to comment

3 friends go on a hunt, lets call them A,B,C

 

A found the cache first.

B got the log first and signed it.

C logged it online first.

 

I have seen this several times.. that is why the "system" cant handle FTF logs.

and that is why we say B is the FTF no matter what.

there can be only ONE true FTF, if you ask me..

Link to comment

3 friends go on a hunt, lets call them A,B,C

 

A found the cache first.

B got the log first and signed it.

C logged it online first.

 

I have seen this several times.. that is why the "system" cant handle FTF logs.

and that is why we say B is the FTF no matter what.

there can be only ONE true FTF, if you ask me..

THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE!

 

:laughing:

Link to comment

3 friends go on a hunt, lets call them A,B,C

 

A found the cache first.

B got the log first and signed it.

C logged it online first.

 

I have seen this several times.. that is why the "system" cant handle FTF logs.

and that is why we say B is the FTF no matter what.

there can be only ONE true FTF, if you ask me..

THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE!

 

:laughing:

Great! <_<

 

Now I have visions of Juan Sánchez Villa-Lobos Ramírez preparing a cacher for the FTF race. :rolleyes:

 

You have the manners of a goat. And you smell like a dung-heap! And you have no knowledge whatsoever of how to use your GPS!
Edited by Totem Clan
Link to comment

There's a large gap between officially recognized to sanctioned and tracked on the website. A forum search will show other threads that expose every reason why FTF will not be officially tracked by Groundspeak.

 

There are no less than FIVE FTF based challenge caches in our area. Not sure how they managed to slip through the cracks. <_<

 

GC2JDTJ

GC2JDTG

GC2JDTK

GC2JDTF

GC2JDTH

 

Wow those are all against the guidelines. Plus the picture is not exactly 'family friendly'.

Link to comment

3 friends go on a hunt, lets call them A,B,C

 

A found the cache first.

B got the log first and signed it.

C logged it online first.

 

I have seen this several times.. that is why the "system" cant handle FTF logs.

and that is why we say B is the FTF no matter what.

there can be only ONE true FTF, if you ask me..

 

D showed up and arrested them all for being in the park after hours.

E showed up the next morning and replaced the log with his own, then signed it.

C gets bailed out and sees that his online log has been disputed, so he starts a thread about it in the forums

A gets bailed out, discovers the forum thread and starts a very angsty debate with C about who really found it first.

B gets bailed out and immediately goes back to get a photograph of his name in the log so he can post it with his online log, only to find that E's name is the first one on it.

Link to comment

Challenge Caches

 

"A challenge cache should recognize the completion of an achievement, rather than the winner of a competition. For example, a challenge based on "First to Finds" is dependent on the actions of other cachers, is a competition, and cannot be verified, so would likely not be published."

 

Likely???

 

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

 

4.14. Challenge Caches

 

[updated 12/12/2011]

 

As with all caches, each challenge cache is reviewed and published or denied on its own merits. Some grandfathered caches do exist which would not be published today.
Link to comment

3 friends go on a hunt, lets call them A,B,C

 

A found the cache first.

B got the log first and signed it.

C logged it online first.

 

and that is why we say B is the FTF no matter what.

:blink:

Isn't the whole point of Geocaching to find the cache? It seems pretty clear to me that A is FTF, and that's how it's always worked with any FTF hunt I've been a part of.

I've never seen people grabbing the log from others so they can sign first...

 

Anyway, there will never be an officially sanctioned FTF stat on this website.

 

Now I'm going to go out and get a FTF! :laughing:

Link to comment

3 friends go on a hunt, lets call them A,B,C

 

A found the cache first.

B got the log first and signed it.

C logged it online first.

 

and that is why we say B is the FTF no matter what.

:blink:

Isn't the whole point of Geocaching to find the cache? It seems pretty clear to me that A is FTF, and that's how it's always worked with any FTF hunt I've been a part of.

I've never seen people grabbing the log from others so they can sign first...

 

Anyway, there will never be an officially sanctioned FTF stat on this website.

 

Now I'm going to go out and get a FTF! :laughing:

 

My guess is that A spotted it, but couldn't retrieve it for some reason. B did, and signed the log, so A loses.

Link to comment

3 friends go on a hunt, lets call them A,B,C

 

A found the cache first.

B got the log first and signed it.

C logged it online first.

 

I have seen this several times.. that is why the "system" cant handle FTF logs.

and that is why we say B is the FTF no matter what.

there can be only ONE true FTF, if you ask me..

 

The drama happens when three non-so-good-friends go on a hunt.

Link to comment

The site could support FTF by means of verification codes. Upon setting up the listing, the CO gets a secret code word/number/whatever. If the CO wishes to support an FTF race on his cache, he writes that code on a slip of paper placed prominently in the cache. FTOTC (first to open the container) takes the slip of paper and logs the code on the website with a special "Found It First" log type.

Link to comment

The site could support FTF by means of verification codes. Upon setting up the listing, the CO gets a secret code word/number/whatever. If the CO wishes to support an FTF race on his cache, he writes that code on a slip of paper placed prominently in the cache. FTOTC (first to open the container) takes the slip of paper and logs the code on the website with a special "Found It First" log type.

....and if the CO gives the code to their friend(s), the first finder does not take it, the CO does put it in, then there will be a huge fuss. Then who's going to sort that all out?

 

Not a bad idea on the surface but I think there are too many worms in that can to justify opening it.

Link to comment
Not a bad idea on the surface but I think there are too many worms in that can to justify opening it.

I wondered about that. I would be inclined to accept that there's always going to be some (hopefully little) abuse of the system, and that on the whole the idea is worthwhile. But I can imagine that's a view not widely shared.

Link to comment

3 friends go on a hunt, lets call them A,B,C

 

A found the cache first.

B got the log first and signed it.

C logged it online first.

 

and that is why we say B is the FTF no matter what.

:blink:

Isn't the whole point of Geocaching to find the cache? It seems pretty clear to me that A is FTF, and that's how it's always worked with any FTF hunt I've been a part of.

I've never seen people grabbing the log from others so they can sign first...

 

Anyway, there will never be an officially sanctioned FTF stat on this website.

 

Now I'm going to go out and get a FTF! :laughing:

 

My guess is that A spotted it, but couldn't retrieve it for some reason. B did, and signed the log, so A loses.

Clearly only P can determine who is FTF <_<

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

Place an FTF challenge cache and see if they publish it. :ph34r:

+1

 

There are no less than FIVE FTF based challenge caches in our area. Not sure how they managed to slip through the cracks. <_<

 

GC2JDTJ

GC2JDTG

GC2JDTK

GC2JDTF

GC2JDTH

 

The fact that there are 5 tells me they probably didn't slip through the cracks. :lol:

 

The fact they wouldn't be published by most reviewers elsewhere is yet another example of the inconsistency inherent to the volunteer reviewer system. :o

 

The fact that you've compiled a list means many people probably think you need something better to do. Not me, of course. B)

Link to comment

3 friends go on a hunt, lets call them A,B,C

 

A found the cache first.

B got the log first and signed it.

C logged it online first.

 

and that is why we say B is the FTF no matter what.

:blink:

Isn't the whole point of Geocaching to find the cache? It seems pretty clear to me that A is FTF, and that's how it's always worked with any FTF hunt I've been a part of.

I've never seen people grabbing the log from others so they can sign first...

 

Anyway, there will never be an officially sanctioned FTF stat on this website.

 

Now I'm going to go out and get a FTF! :laughing:

 

My guess is that A spotted it, but couldn't retrieve it for some reason. B did, and signed the log, so A loses.

Clearly only P can determine who is FTF <_<

 

Yeah, but that would require expensive and time-consuming DNA testing. :lol:

Link to comment

Place an FTF challenge cache and see if they publish it. :ph34r:

+1

 

There are no less than FIVE FTF based challenge caches in our area. Not sure how they managed to slip through the cracks. <_<

 

GC2JDTJ

GC2JDTG

GC2JDTK

GC2JDTF

GC2JDTH

 

The fact that there are 5 tells me they probably didn't slip through the cracks. :lol:

 

The fact they wouldn't be published by most reviewers elsewhere is yet another example of the inconsistency inherent to the volunteer reviewer system. :o

 

The fact that you've compiled a list means many people probably think you need something better to do. Not me, of course. B)

 

All of them were published on the same day, 11/23/2010, by the same reviewer.

 

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

 

4.14. Challenge Caches

[updated 12/12/2011]

 

As with all caches, each challenge cache is reviewed and published or denied on its own merits. Some grandfathered caches do exist which would not be published today.

 

Sure is a lot of conclusion-jumping going on around here. :rolleyes:

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
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...