Jump to content

The "Time Flies" Geocaching Challenge


McFlyAway

Recommended Posts

Something new I have come up with. In honor of my one-year cache-versary, I will be starting (probably within the next couple of weeks) the "Time Flies" Geocaching Challenge.

 

This is a challenge for anyone who has at least 75 finds (I'm almost at that milestone), from beginners to expert cachers.

 

To complete the challenge, you must meet this criteria:

 

CACHE TYPES: Have 62 Traditional Caches, 2 Letterbox Hybrids, 2 NGS Benchmarks, 2 Events, 1 Multi-cache, 1 Unknown Cache, and 1 Earth Cache.

 

As for GPS Adventure Mazes, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO ATTEND ONE, even though I have.

 

MISCELLANEOUS: Favorite Points on all found caches must add up to 138 or more.

 

Have 16 Regulars, 16 Smalls, 32 Micros, 5 Not Chosen, and 1 Other (as this equals 70, the other 5 may be whatever cache you choose).

 

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, FIND A CACHE HIDDEN IN EVERY YEAR BETWEEN 2005 AND 2012.

 

Container: The container will be a homemade wooden box with an interesting lock.

 

Have fun with it, and keep your eyes peeled.

Link to comment

You mean go through any combination of your past or future finds to find 69 (67 not counting the benchmarks) that meet the combined size, type, favorite, and publish year criteria that you specified by your random stats you laid out?

 

This challenge seems kinda arbitrary, but obviously if one can use any of their 67 or so past finds, they could probably accomplish this with some spreadsheet work.

Edited by lamoracke
Link to comment

Something new I have come up with. In honor of my one-year cache-versary, I will be starting (probably within the next couple of weeks) the "Time Flies" Geocaching Challenge.

 

This is a challenge for anyone who has at least 75 finds (I'm almost at that milestone), from beginners to expert cachers.

 

To complete the challenge, you must meet this criteria:

 

CACHE TYPES: Have 62 Traditional Caches, 2 Letterbox Hybrids, 2 NGS Benchmarks, 2 Events, 1 Multi-cache, 1 Unknown Cache, and 1 Earth Cache.

 

As for GPS Adventure Mazes, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO ATTEND ONE, even though I have.

 

MISCELLANEOUS: Favorite Points on all found caches must add up to 138 or more.

 

Have 16 Regulars, 16 Smalls, 32 Micros, 5 Not Chosen, and 1 Other (as this equals 70, the other 5 may be whatever cache you choose).

 

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, FIND A CACHE HIDDEN IN EVERY YEAR BETWEEN 2005 AND 2012.

 

Container: The container will be a homemade wooden box with an interesting lock.

 

Have fun with it, and keep your eyes peeled.

 

I may be wrong but I don't think you can use finding benchmarks as a criteria for logging a challenge cache.

Link to comment

I may be wrong but I don't think you can use finding benchmarks as a criteria for logging a challenge cache.

 

Benchmark finds can be included in a Challenge cache:

 

2.2. Additional Listing Guidelines that Apply to Specific Geocache Types

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=308

 

4.15. Challenge Caches

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

 

A challenge cache requires that geocachers meet a geocaching-related qualification or series of tasks before the challenge cache can be logged. Waymarking, Benchmarking, Challenges and Wherigo-related tasks also qualify. The additional qualification or geocaching-related tasks are considered the basis of a challenge cache, rather than Additional Logging Requirements (ALRs).

 

Not sure why this thread is in the Geocaching Topics forum. Seems like it would be better suited in its appropriate regional subforum.

 

 

B.

Link to comment

Something new I have come up with. In honor of my one-year cache-versary, I will be starting (probably within the next couple of weeks) the "Time Flies" Geocaching Challenge.

 

I think you mean it's a Challenge Cache, because "Geocaching Challenges" are different:

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com//index.php?pg=kb.page&id=329

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showforum=119

 

 

B.

Link to comment

This challenge seems kinda arbitrary...

That was my first thought as I kept reading. It seems like you just kept adding more rules for the sake of adding more rules, and pulled some random numbers out of the air (why 138 favourite points?). I could probably qualify (except for the benchmarks), but I'd probably need a GSAK macro to figure out which ones I could use to fit all that criteria. Your challenge cache is certainly publishable (IMO), but my opinion is that you might want to consider cutting out some of the red tape. It's entirely up to you, though.

Link to comment

This challenge seems kinda arbitrary...

That was my first thought as I kept reading. It seems like you just kept adding more rules for the sake of adding more rules, and pulled some random numbers out of the air (why 138 favourite points?). I could probably qualify (except for the benchmarks), but I'd probably need a GSAK macro to figure out which ones I could use to fit all that criteria. Your challenge cache is certainly publishable (IMO), but my opinion is that you might want to consider cutting out some of the red tape. It's entirely up to you, though.

 

I'm guessing that the challenge is to get the same or better stats as the CO at the time he created it.

 

Like I said in another thread, these things are getting really silly, and not really challenging. I don't even need to check to be sure that I'm already qualified.

Link to comment

This challenge seems kinda arbitrary...

 

That was my first thought as I kept reading. It seems like you just kept adding more rules for the sake of adding more rules

I'm guessing that the challenge is to get the same or better stats as the CO at the time he created it.

 

Linked is the Challenge Caches article (rules).

I think this is somewhat on the wrong side of this statement, "The requirements for meeting the challenge should be succinct and easy to explain, follow, and document. A lengthy list of "rules" would be sufficient reason for a challenge cache to not be published."

 

Consider not trying to create a match for your own stats, with so many specific numbers of types, sizes, favorite points, publication years, and instead focus on posting something fun that is simpler to pursue and document.

Link to comment

I'm guessing that the challenge is to get the same or better stats as the CO at the time he created it.

In that case, it would be nice if the OP added a blurb to their description explaining this. Otherwise, cachers will be wondering about all the seemingly random criteria.

 

I still feel some criteria needs to be removed. As it sits right now, cachers will probably spend more time at home trying to find a valid combination than they will going out and finding the actual caches.

Link to comment

Something new I have come up with. In honor of my one-year cache-versary, I will be starting (probably within the next couple of weeks) the "Time Flies" Geocaching Challenge.

 

This is a challenge for anyone who has at least 75 finds (I'm almost at that milestone), from beginners to expert cachers.

 

To complete the challenge, you must meet this criteria:

 

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, FIND A CACHE HIDDEN IN EVERY YEAR BETWEEN 2005 AND 2012.

 

Container: The container will be a homemade wooden box with an interesting lock.

 

Have fun with it, and keep your eyes peeled.

You will have a problem with your Last and Least criteria. From the guidelines; "Challenge caches cannot include restrictions based on 'date found';" Otherwise I like your idea.

Link to comment

Something new I have come up with. In honor of my one-year cache-versary, I will be starting (probably within the next couple of weeks) the "Time Flies" Geocaching Challenge.

 

This is a challenge for anyone who has at least 75 finds (I'm almost at that milestone), from beginners to expert cachers.

 

To complete the challenge, you must meet this criteria:

 

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, FIND A CACHE HIDDEN IN EVERY YEAR BETWEEN 2005 AND 2012.

 

Container: The container will be a homemade wooden box with an interesting lock.

 

Have fun with it, and keep your eyes peeled.

You will have a problem with your Last and Least criteria. From the guidelines; "Challenge caches cannot include restrictions based on 'date found';" Otherwise I like your idea.

 

am reasonably sure all he meant was publication date here, which is perfectly fine, but probably could be re-stated to avoid your confusion. Like the Jasmer challenge. You need to find at least one cache from 2005, from 2006, etc etc to 2012.

Link to comment

You mean go through any combination of your past or future finds to find 69 (67 not counting the benchmarks) that meet the combined size, type, favorite, and publish year criteria that you specified by your random stats you laid out?

 

This challenge seems kinda arbitrary, but obviously if one can use any of their 67 or so past finds, they could probably accomplish this with some spreadsheet work.

It's a bit confusing, but I don't interpret it that way. I read it as saying that of ALL your found caches, you must have at least the specified number of cache types, at least the specified number of size types, a find for a cache placed in each of the specified years, and the total number of favorite points on all your finds must be at least 138.

 

Again, I could be wrong. But if I'm not, then this should be an easy challenge for most cachers with 500 or more finds.

Link to comment

Something new I have come up with. In honor of my one-year cache-versary, I will be starting (probably within the next couple of weeks) the "Time Flies" Geocaching Challenge.

 

This is a challenge for anyone who has at least 75 finds (I'm almost at that milestone), from beginners to expert cachers.

 

To complete the challenge, you must meet this criteria:

 

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, FIND A CACHE HIDDEN IN EVERY YEAR BETWEEN 2005 AND 2012.

 

Container: The container will be a homemade wooden box with an interesting lock.

 

Have fun with it, and keep your eyes peeled.

You will have a problem with your Last and Least criteria. From the guidelines; "Challenge caches cannot include restrictions based on 'date found';" Otherwise I like your idea.

 

am reasonably sure all he meant was publication date here, which is perfectly fine, but probably could be re-stated to avoid your confusion. Like the Jasmer challenge. You need to find at least one cache from 2005, from 2006, etc etc to 2012.

Now that I've finished my coffee and reread it I agree it's publication date. :laughing:

Link to comment

It's not that I don't appreciate your efforts but it's silly challenges such as this which will be the inevitable downfall of challenge geocaches. And again, I qualify my statement by saying that I am not innocent. If it were to be published in my area, you can be sure I'd go find it.

Link to comment

another challenge i cant do because of the yr needed find in

 

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, FIND A CACHE HIDDEN IN EVERY YEAR BETWEEN 2005 AND 2012.

 

This is no where near as confusing as everyone has made it out to be.

 

FIND A CACHE [That was] HIDDEN IN EVERY YEAR BETWEEN 2005 AND 2012.

Link to comment

I think I have come up with better requirements:

 

Be a member (or premium member) of Geocaching.com for at least one year.

-In that time, find at least one hundred geocaches.

--AND Find a geocache that was hidden in every year between 2005 and 2012.

 

How's that sound?

Link to comment
I think I have come up with better requirements:

 

Be a member (or premium member) of Geocaching.com for at least one year.

-In that time, find at least one hundred geocaches.

--AND Find a geocache that was hidden in every year between 2005 and 2012.

 

How's that sound?

I'm not sure what the point of the "at least one year" requirement is. Do you really care whether someone takes 12 months or 6 months or 9 months to complete the other requirements?

 

Other than that, it sounds like a "kinder, gentler" version of the Jasmer Challenge (hide dates in every year since 2005 vs hide dates in every month since May 2000), combined with a relatively easy milestone (100 finds). It's much easier to understand than the initial version. It's much easier to explain (e.g., at an event, when you mention that you're working on the "Time Flies" challenge and someone asks what that is). And the start date of 2005 makes it much more approachable than the Jasmer Challenge, which requires significant travel for most people.

Link to comment
I think I have come up with better requirements:

 

Be a member (or premium member) of Geocaching.com for at least one year.

-In that time, find at least one hundred geocaches.

--AND Find a geocache that was hidden in every year between 2005 and 2012.

 

How's that sound?

I'm not sure what the point of the "at least one year" requirement is. Do you really care whether someone takes 12 months or 6 months or 9 months to complete the other requirements?

 

Other than that, it sounds like a "kinder, gentler" version of the Jasmer Challenge (hide dates in every year since 2005 vs hide dates in every month since May 2000), combined with a relatively easy milestone (100 finds). It's much easier to understand than the initial version. It's much easier to explain (e.g., at an event, when you mention that you're working on the "Time Flies" challenge and someone asks what that is). And the start date of 2005 makes it much more approachable than the Jasmer Challenge, which requires significant travel for most people.

 

It does seem a cache with random requirements. Might as well make it 'caches starting with 12 letters of the alphabet." or "Six of one or half dozen of another."

Hey! I found a cache with 176 favorite points! "Find a cache with more than 175 favorite points." What's the point? Oh, well. Good try.

Am working on the Jasmer Challenge (though I don't know of any challenge cache nearby...) It's my brother's fault! I need May, July, August, September and December 2000. December we're going for over Thanksgiving. May is a short vacation trip next year. July, August and Spetembr are going to be more challenging (read long trip, with a boat!) Oh, well. One can dream. But we found the oldest cache in Canada,and the second oldest in Massachusetts on our last vacation. That filled in two months! Ah! Three is an old oe in westrn PA for next year's vacation!

Just saying that OP seems to be calling for random numbers of various caches, and that seems a meaningless challenge cache.

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...