wes&jen Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 The following thread is closed so I am posting this here: http://opentopic.Groundspeak.com/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1750973553&f=3350930104&m=9160913435 I see that several people are in favor of a rating system to rank caches. Why can't we have one? Is it hard to program or does Jeremy just think it is a bad idea? Some have posted that they think a ranking system for caches is a bad idea but I don't understand why; if you don't like a ranking system don't use it. Slashdot (www.slashdot.org) uses a ranking system that allows users to set the threshold at -1 so all can be seen. The even allow logged in users to hide rankings if they desire. Would it be possible to add "rate this cache" to geocaching.com cache listings? Link to comment
+brdad Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 quote:Originally posted by wes&jen:Some have posted that they think a ranking system for caches is a bad idea but I don't understand why; if you don't like a ranking system don't use it. Your actual question has been debated here a dozen times.... If we had a tax system where if we didn't like it, we didn't have to pay... If we had a legal system where if we didn't want to abide the law we didn't have to... If etc. etc. etc. The topic you posted has little to do with rating caches. At least, not until it got off topic. It has to do with helping the approvers ability to accurately verify virtual caches are not duplicate, unsafe, or otherwise innapropriate or misposted. Speaking of which, are we getting that special form field, and if so, how soon? I could have used that on my last traditional hide, but just made a note to the approver instead. Incidently, another way to have a better rating system, is post your favorites to a web site. FISUR originally convinced me to do add a "best of" page of my own which is here. This way, you know the source of the rating, you can decide if you want to beleive it. I think global warming is a big lie. Where are all those experts now, when I am freezing my *** through a long winter? Link to comment
+Dekaner Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 I thought a ranking system would be ingenious, but others thought just as strongly against it. Quite frankly, the volume of awful, even embarrassing Geocaches is starting to mount up, and I think this would be a great tool to separate the good from the bad. If they were to get enough bad ratings, maybe the owner could have the option of 're-doing' the cache and getting his slate wiped clean. - Dekaner of Team KKF2A Link to comment
+The Leprechauns Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 wes&jen, If you would like to read some of the prior discussions of this issue, check out This Thread which, in turn, contains links to no less than nine previous threads. My personal view is that there is already a fine method for rating a cache. It is called a "log entry." This is just one of those questions where reasonable minds differ. x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x Next time, instead of getting married, I think I'll just find a woman I don't like and buy her a house. Link to comment
wes&jen Posted December 15, 2002 Author Share Posted December 15, 2002 Thanks for all the links Leprechauns, I don't have time to read them all do you mind just ranking them for me Seriously I did scan the provided links but did not see where the geocaching.com owner(s) addressed the issue. I will assume that it is hard to program or they just think it is a bad idea and we will never get ranking. Link to comment
+wcgreen Posted December 16, 2002 Share Posted December 16, 2002 quote:Originally posted by wes&jen:Thanks for all the links Leprechauns, I don't have time to read them all do you mind just ranking them for me Seriously I did scan the provided links but did not see where the geocaching.com owner(s) addressed the issue. I will assume that it is hard to program or they just think it is a bad idea and we will never get ranking. You might try a search on the admins' names (Jeremy, Eric, et al.) and words pertaining to ranking/rating before you assume. New Topic--Rating Caches Your unwillingness to check should not be an excuse to put words into another's mouth if that person did not say them. -- wcgreen Wendy Chatley Green Link to comment
Rubbertoe Posted December 16, 2002 Share Posted December 16, 2002 I notice this thread has a one-star rating. Obviously that means that it sucks, right? The Toe Pages Link to comment
+welch Posted December 16, 2002 Share Posted December 16, 2002 quote:Originally posted by Rubbertoe:I notice this thread has a one-star rating. Obviously that means that it sucks, right? WOW! Someone took the time to rate a thread AND someone noticed! Has that ever happened before? Link to comment
+trippy1976 Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 I'd still go to the bad ones, so a rating system wouldn't really help for me. If a rating system /were/ to be put in place I'd prefer to see a system where you're only allowed to give positive ratings. No matter how awful you think a person's cache is - they went to the trouble of placing it and they may be very proud of it for whatever reason. Dumping negative ratings on caches will likely only lead to them being abandoned and people leaving the sport. Instead, consider contacting the person in an effort to improve the cache and mentor them if it's that horrible. My two cents. -------- trippy1976 - Team KKF2A Saving geocaches - one golf ball at a time. Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 I am generally against ratings because there are too many variables. One cacher may think that unless there is a five mile hike, the cache is awful. Another cacher may like caches that show them historic places within their town. This cacher may hate caches that require a hike and give them all low ratings. Also, interpersonal issues apply. Brutus clearly will not like my Caesar-related caches. He would certainly give these a low score. As already mentioned, a scoring system is in place currently. Use your logs to tell how you felt about a cache. Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again. Link to comment
+Sissy-n-CR Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 From what I gather, TPTB have enough on their hands. Some think it rude to rate a cache low. We've talked about a cache having to have a certain number of votes before the rating are shown. We've even talked about allowing users to pick one cache out of every ten finds to place on their "pick" list. Then these caches would show up on a list of the best caches around. That got shot down. I seems to me a number of people here just don't want caches rated. Oh, sure, you can look at the logs, but can you do a search of caches that people liked? Nope. Well, unless you wade through each and every cache manually. Besides, most people are too polite to say the cache sucked. As for, variables, hey, I can't stand Woody Allen and every one of his movies I saw I thought sucked. He still gets movies made. I can't stand Barbara Streisand, but there are a lot of people who like her. I don't care for tear-jerker movies, I like action. Most of the time I think movie critics are wrong. But all in all, the ratings are accurate. So would cache rating, IMHO. To me, there just seems to be too chiefs in the tribe, too many chefs making the soup. I'd be for a rating system for caches. CR Link to comment
+Sissy-n-CR Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 Oh, one other thing. If you think someone gave you an unfair rating just because he doesn't like you, simply delete his log. CR Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 quote:Originally posted by Sissy-n-CR:Oh, one other thing. If you think someone gave you an unfair rating just because he doesn't like you, simply delete his log. That opens a whole other can of worms. I believe that it would be totally inappropriate for me to delete someone's log just because he didn't enjoy my cache. If the find was valid and the log wasn't insulting, the log should stay. The only exception in my opinion, wiould be if the log was a total gimme for an intentionally difficult cache. Then the log should be immediately encrypted. Contact should be made with the finder to alter the log. If the log wasn't altered after a reasonable, albeit brief, amount of time, it should be deleted. Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again. Link to comment
+Sissy-n-CR Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 quote:Originally posted by sbell111:If the find was valid and the log wasn't insulting, the log should stay. I agree. The rating need not be only for letting people know what are the best caches around, but also let the owners know their's just doesn't cut it. CR Link to comment
wes&jen Posted January 3, 2003 Author Share Posted January 3, 2003 quote:Originally posted by wcgreen:... You might try a search on the admins' names (Jeremy, Eric, et al.) and words pertaining to ranking/rating before you assume. http://opentopic.Groundspeak.com/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1750973553&f=6770936793&m=1490908004&r=6080998004#6080998004 Your unwillingness to check should not be an excuse to put words into another's mouth if that person did not say them. -- wcgreen Wendy Chatley Green Wendy you are making an assumtion that I was unwilling to check the board. As I am relativity new to this discussion board I did not know you could search the board. I also did not know any admins' name other than Jeremy. I did not put words into anyone’s mouth; I just made an assumption and stated it as an assumption (Forming a theory is the 1st part of the scientific process) Thank you Wendy for helping me test (and fail) the first part of my theory but the second part of my theory holds for now because we do not have a ranking system yet. Link to comment
Recommended Posts