+Frankolas Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 I want to propose a new Geocaching feature: Everybody releasing a travelbug/-coin will get one "FAV-Point"-type token plus another one for every 1000km (number to be discussed) the TB traveled. This token can be given to a cacher contributed to the TBs milage collection. The number of tokens collected would show up on the cachers profile etc. Reason: This would motivate cacher to keep TBs for a shorter period and to move TBs to farther locations / locations more related to the TBs aims. What do you think? Quote Link to comment
+frinklabs Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 The distance would have to be calculated against distinct cacher names to prevent abuse. A lone cacher could "dip" a traveller in as many not-visited caches as they wanted. Quote Link to comment
+Gitchee-Gummee Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 I don't......... think, that is. I mostly just scheme. I understand the premise behind the suggestion, I just don't think it would contribute. Those that move travelers do so because they like to. Those that don't move trackables do so because thy don't like to. I also think the reasoning given has a flaw: It actually would entice folks with certain smart phone apps to use the auto-log option to "visit" each and every cache with all trackables they have in possession. This would do nothing beyond the creation of hundreds pages of purely blank "visit" logs. As proposed, this suggestion would provide reason to never place a trackable, but to hold on to it for as long as they can. The trackables mission/aims be "darned". Moving a trackable and assisting it towards it's goal is a somewhat personal issue -- to help other cachers with a virtual tour or trip. Assigning a bonus to the person based solely on accumulated mileage would ultimately be self-serving. It would do little, if anything (as the suggestion stands), to promote "proper" retrieval and placement. With some minor changes to the suggestion -- namely, retrieval and placements (eliminating the "visit" logs) as a means of points accumulation, just may sway me. That way it keeps the ball within the realm of helping the trackable, rather than to just provide more "stats" to the person moving the trackable. It may also assist in the prevention of holding onto a trackable forever and ever, as it sometimes now occurs. Personal trackables -- those that are used for caching mileage accumulation and never released into the wild, should also be excluded, as well as vehicle TB's used to "visit" caches. As far as the garnering of points for the release of new trackables.... well, no. Again, it would be meaningless self-service. Don't get me wrong, I am not shooting it down. It is a fair suggestion, but I think it needs some fine tuning. Quote Link to comment
+Frankolas Posted July 1, 2012 Author Share Posted July 1, 2012 I guess I should have expressed more clearly: The "TB owner" is still the one that decides which "TB Logger" gets the token-point(s), so it is possible to give the point to someone contributing very good to the TB's aim or sending in a nice picture etc. It should not be an automatism that the "TB Logger" that produced the "1000 km"-marks will get the points! Quote Link to comment
+niraD Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 No thank you. If you don't have enough favorites points, then try being more selective about which caches you give favorites points to. I don't think there should be any way to get favorites points other than by finding geocaches. Quote Link to comment
+Gitchee-Gummee Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 I guess I should have expressed more clearly: The "TB owner" is still the one that decides which "TB Logger" gets the token-point(s), so it is possible to give the point to someone contributing very good to the TB's aim or sending in a nice picture etc. It should not be an automatism that the "TB Logger" that produced the "1000 km"-marks will get the points! Sorry.... but I don't think that would work at all. It would represent anarchy at it 'best'. If you want a game such as that, you gotta have an umpire, or at least an administrator that follows a singular program. Quote Link to comment
cezanne Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 (edited) No thank you. If you don't have enough favorites points, then try being more selective about which caches you give favorites points to. I don't think there should be any way to get favorites points other than by finding geocaches. I guess you misunderstood the suggestion. The way I understand the idea it is not about earning further favourite points that can be distributed to one's finds, but about offering some kind of award to those who pleased the owner of a trackable. Cezanne Edited July 2, 2012 by cezanne Quote Link to comment
cezanne Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 I guess I should have expressed more clearly: The "TB owner" is still the one that decides which "TB Logger" gets the token-point(s), so it is possible to give the point to someone contributing very good to the TB's aim or sending in a nice picture etc. It should not be an automatism that the "TB Logger" that produced the "1000 km"-marks will get the points! Sorry.... but I don't think that would work at all. It would represent anarchy at it 'best'. If you want a game such as that, you gotta have an umpire, or at least an administrator that follows a singular program. Why? Cachers can hand out favourite points for their cache finds in any way they want. Why shouldn't the same work for owners of trackables? Cezanne Quote Link to comment
+Frankolas Posted July 2, 2012 Author Share Posted July 2, 2012 I guess I should have expressed more clearly: The "TB owner" is still the one that decides which "TB Logger" gets the token-point(s), so it is possible to give the point to someone contributing very good to the TB's aim or sending in a nice picture etc. It should not be an automatism that the "TB Logger" that produced the "1000 km"-marks will get the points! Sorry.... but I don't think that would work at all. It would represent anarchy at it 'best'. If you want a game such as that, you gotta have an umpire, or at least an administrator that follows a singular program. To be honest I dont understand your concerns! It works for the established Favorite Point for caches already without any external administration. I think, this could work the same way: The "TB Owner" can reward any cacher that carried his TB by assigning him one ore more Favorite-Point-like token. Quote Link to comment
+Frankolas Posted July 2, 2012 Author Share Posted July 2, 2012 No thank you. If you don't have enough favorites points, then try being more selective about which caches you give favorites points to. I don't think there should be any way to get favorites points other than by finding geocaches. I am not suggesting to use the same "Favorite Points" earned by collecting caches, but to introduce a new type of "Favorite Point". I called it "Token" (better names are highly welcome!!!) to highlight that they are NOT the same "Favorite Points"! Quote Link to comment
+Don_J Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 I guess I should have expressed more clearly: The "TB owner" is still the one that decides which "TB Logger" gets the token-point(s), so it is possible to give the point to someone contributing very good to the TB's aim or sending in a nice picture etc. It should not be an automatism that the "TB Logger" that produced the "1000 km"-marks will get the points! Sorry.... but I don't think that would work at all. It would represent anarchy at it 'best'. If you want a game such as that, you gotta have an umpire, or at least an administrator that follows a singular program. To be honest I dont understand your concerns! It works for the established Favorite Point for caches already without any external administration. I think, this could work the same way: The "TB Owner" can reward any cacher that carried his TB by assigning him one ore more Favorite-Point-like token. Honestly, I'd rather be caching then spending my time auditing my TBs to see who I need to dole out points to. Quote Link to comment
+Frankolas Posted July 2, 2012 Author Share Posted July 2, 2012 Honestly, I'd rather be caching then spending my time auditing my TBs to see who I need to dole out points to. Well, this is of course optional, like many other things in our hobby... I thought it might produce some motivation to a)help TBs moving, b)shorten the TBs time in someones possesion c)help fullfill the TBs aim Quote Link to comment
+NYPaddleCacher Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Honestly, I'd rather be caching then spending my time auditing my TBs to see who I need to dole out points to. Well, this is of course optional, like many other things in our hobby... I thought it might produce some motivation to a)help TBs moving, b)shorten the TBs time in someones possesion c)help fullfill the TBs aim In the first post you indicated that one of the purposes would be to reward someone for adding to the mileage on a TB. I have in a few cases moved some TBs thousands of miles at a time, sometimes just dipping the item in a cache far from home, then returning it back to my local area. That's resulted in as mach as 16,000 miles added to a TBs travels, but the cache ended up in a safer spot where it could be be easily moved. Often that means that I've held onto the TB longer than normal and it doesn't always help fullfill the TBs goal. The problem, as I see it with the suggestion, is that it wouldn't necessarily motivate someone to meet those criteria, but more that the criteria would be used by someone motivated to increase the number of tokens they receive. Sometimes holding onto a TB longer will ensure the longevity of a TB more than just placing it in the next cache you visit to keep the TB moving. Quote Link to comment
+Frankolas Posted July 9, 2012 Author Share Posted July 9, 2012 In the first post you indicated that one of the purposes would be to reward someone for adding to the mileage on a TB. I have in a few cases moved some TBs thousands of miles at a time, sometimes just dipping the item in a cache far from home, then returning it back to my local area. That's resulted in as mach as 16,000 miles added to a TBs travels, but the cache ended up in a safer spot where it could be be easily moved. Often that means that I've held onto the TB longer than normal and it doesn't always help fullfill the TBs goal. The problem, as I see it with the suggestion, is that it wouldn't necessarily motivate someone to meet those criteria, but more that the criteria would be used by someone motivated to increase the number of tokens they receive. Sometimes holding onto a TB longer will ensure the longevity of a TB more than just placing it in the next cache you visit to keep the TB moving. Well, I assumed that someone taking a TB is aware of its goals and at least tries helping to reach them. Since TBs have different goals one might be to collect lots of miles the other might be to reach a certain country/place etc. The TB-Owner could now award with the suggested "Token/Fav.Point" a TB-carrier for helping to get closer to the set goal. E.g. for a TB that is out there to collect miles it might be helpful if someone keeps it while he does a lot of traveling. Quote Link to comment
+Hurricane Luke Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 No thanks. That's unnecessarily complicated. Ease of use is key. If you don't have enough favorite points - maybe you need to be more selective. Quote Link to comment
+Don_J Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 No thanks. That's unnecessarily complicated. Ease of use is key. If you don't have enough favorite points - maybe you need to be more selective. Or, go find a bunch of P&G micros. But, that's not what this thread is about, is it? The fact that so many still can't figure out that the proposal has nothing to do with favorites for geocaches illustrates just how confusing the proposal really is. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.