Where have the Challenge caches gone?

[team tisri]

I can see the point on some challenge caches for removing the date requirements - things like having to find certain milestones, or specific caches.

 

However, there is also a certain element of laziness I'm seeing in these responses for the type of cache I'm talking about. It's not a past-date requirement - having to find caches in 2010, which means someone who just started 3 days ago will never qualify. It's an encouragement to get out and get involved with the geocaching community each year. But it sounds like some of you just don't get that. How sad.

 

Believe it or not, some of us are involved with the Geocaching Community all the time, and the the only smiley that we get is on the faces of our friends.

 

I could care less what the guidelines are. I have the mentality that I don't need to find every cache, and if a challenge is too great because I have already found the requisite caches, and they don't count, oh well.

 

What bothers me is that you seem to want to create a challenge that excludes, or makes it extremely hard for the long time cachers to complete. You want to disregard their past accomplishments and the very fact that they built the Geocaching Community that you say that you want to support.

 

I don't think you read my original post. I am not the one creating this challenge, nor do I intend to. I was talking about an annual challenge that is very popular and highly supported in our area, but that got archived for the 2013 year because of a lot of issues involving someone coming in and logging a find before anyone participating in the SPIRIT OF THE CHALLENGE could have logged it. Our long-time cachers do participate and have a good time doing it as well. You might take a look at the cache I'm talking about (GC432W3) before saying that it would have been too hard for you to accomplish without dipping into past finds.

 

So why does it matter if someone comes in and logs a find before anyone participating in the spirit could have logged it? Does their smiley face on the cache page detract in any way from the experience of those who completed the challenge and logged it in the spirit of the cache? Is their achievement in any way diminished by someone who they don't believe took part in the spirit of the challenge?

[+thebruce0]

If the CO really wishes to award the first-to-complete as per a real "challenge" cache (as opposed to an "achievement"), then they can mention the first actual completer in the cache description, even if the first to find is someone who completed it long ago. Then it's up to those cachers whether they want to consider it an FTF or not - the first finder might do so anyway, while the first to complete may consider it an FTF because they were the first to complete the challenge after the date.

 

Why, again, force a date restriction? The geocaching format of single-finds make active challenges (date restricted) for caches incompatible and necessarily restrictive. If it were possible to publish with a date restriction, but allow re-finding old caches, it could be possible. But in this system, there's no guarantee someone will actually re-find an old cache.

 

So as I said earlier, the best option for date-restricted challenges is simply for the CO to take the spirit of the "challenge" out of the Find logs, and into the cache listing itself. Otherwise, it's simply, by definition, an open "Achievement" cache (which is fair for everyone).

[+Cynsayshi]

Obviously, I'm never going to change lazy people's minds on this.

 

I was warned (after the fact) that the GS forum community was too close-minded. I guess they were right. I'm done.

[+The A-Team]

Obviously, I'm never going to change lazy people's minds on this.

 

I was warned (after the fact) that the GS forum community was too close-minded. I guess they were right. I'm done.

It's unfortunate that you feel that those that don't agree with you need to be labelled as "lazy". If you came here hoping to change all of our minds, it was never going to happen. Several people have given reasons why the current guideline (no date restrictions) makes the most sense. If someone wants to complete a challenge cache with an unofficial date restriction, there's nothing stopping them. It just can't be an enforced rule.

 

Many of us in here are very open-minded. I'll change my mind if I'm given evidence that allowing date restrictions would be better than not allowing them. You've just failed to convince me that date restrictions would work.

 

In the future, if I'm in a position where I can complete a challenge cache using past finds, I'll happily log it knowing that I've done just as much work as everyone else that logged it.

[+Don_J]

Obviously, I'm never going to change lazy people's minds on this.

 

I was warned (after the fact) that the GS forum community was too close-minded. I guess they were right. I'm done.

 

If you challenged me to climb Mt Everest and I informed that I already had and saw no point in doing it again, would you call me lazy?

 

The name calling is really out of line, but since I'm not a lazy person, I figure I'd let you know that you are not going to change my mind either.

 

I also figured out what you mean when you say that this particular challenge cache helped build the caching community. What you really mean is that a bunch of caches were placed just so people could go and quickly meet the challenge. I certainly can't speak for those caches, but when this happens around here, it is usually a bunch of junk caches that do not last long, are not maintained and it's left to us so called lazy people to report them to the reviewer and then clean up the mess after they are archived.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Don_J

[+niraD]

I was talking about an annual challenge that is very popular and highly supported in our area, but that got archived for the 2013 year because of a lot of issues involving someone coming in and logging a find before anyone participating in the SPIRIT OF THE CHALLENGE could have logged it.

Regardless of the "SPIRIT OF THE CHALLENGE", the letter of the challenge complies with Groundspeak's current guidelines. My reading matches that of Prime Reviewer: "If the cache owner wants to offer a special prize for doing something extra, that, with a few exceptions, is not a concern of Groundspeak. You can do it or not. It has nothing to do with the actual Challenge, which can be completed using finds from ANY year."

 

It seems to me that the CO worked out a way to continue the challenge cache series within Groundspeak's current guidelines. So someone met the stated challenge, found the cache, and logged it online. So far, so good.

 

But then the CO deleted the log, the finder appealed, and Groundspeak restored the deleted log. From the cheap seats, it's starting to like the CO listed a challenge that met the guidelines, while planning to enforce requirements that did not meet the guidelines. Does that seem right to you?

[team tisri]

Obviously, I'm never going to change lazy people's minds on this.

 

I was warned (after the fact) that the GS forum community was too close-minded. I guess they were right. I'm done.

 

I suppose, if you're too lazy to present an argument in a way that convinces people you're right.

 

Sometimes people are stuck in their ways, other times they just find an opposing argument to be unconvincing. If you can't be bothered to figure which I have to wonder who is the lazy one. As a rule if "everyone else" is the problem then it's usually closer to home.

Edited January 29, 2013 by team tisri

[Keystone]

Since the thread has degenerated into name-calling, I'm closing it. If you can't have a discussion without name-calling, don't bother posting.