Challenge caches rule seven

[+Grifung]

The challenge cache rules state:

 

7.Challenge caches may not require the publication of a new cache or waymark as a challenge criteria; challenge caches must be achievable by those who do not own caches or waymarks.

 

I was hoping to publish a challenge cache that would reward people who make great caches. The challenge would have been to have 50 favourite points for active caches that you own at the time of signing. According to rule seven, "challenge caches must be achievable by those who do not own caches". To me, this seems like a rule that boils down to the lowest common denominator of laziness or lack of effort instead of rewarding people who want to be successful and make this pastime fun for everyone. Why should we not reward achievement if there is someone who doesn't try to achieve?

 

In the same vane, at a local elementry school, we can't reward someone with a Citizenship, Achedemics, Sporstmanship or Leadership award now because we don't want the kids that don't ever try to achieve to feel bad about themselves.

 

I'm not hoping that people will feel bad about themselves, but would rather try harder to make better caches. Why are we affraid to reward strong effort? What if nobody put out great caches?

 

As a side point to this, are favourite points not a way to make bad cache producers feel bad about themselves for poor quality caches? Personally, I know that some of my caches are better than some of my other caches and I expect them to earn more favourite points. I don't feel bad that some of my caches have no favourite points at all.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Grifung

[+Beach_hut]

Not everyone is cut out to hide caches. Either in terms of maintenance time they can put in or the nous/experience to hide a good cache.

 

If you have a challenge cache that forces you to own caches then people will hide caches in order to be able to meet the challenge. The wrong people as well as the right people. The consequence will be poor caches get put out.

 

I do see what you're getting at though.

 

Also your challenge criteria appears to rule out favourite points on archived caches. There might be lots of good reasons why I'd archive a good cache. E.g. I've moved a long distance and can't maintain it any more, even if I can put a similar good cache out where I've moved to. But that would penalise me in terms of your challenge.

[+Grifung]

Not everyone is cut out to hide caches. Either in terms of maintenance time they can put in or the nous/experience to hide a good cache.

 

If you have a challenge cache that forces you to own caches then people will hide caches in order to be able to meet the challenge. The wrong people as well as the right people. The consequence will be poor caches get put out.

 

I do see what you're getting at though.

 

Also your challenge criteria appears to rule out favourite points on archived caches. There might be lots of good reasons why I'd archive a good cache. E.g. I've moved a long distance and can't maintain it any more, even if I can put a similar good cache out where I've moved to. But that would penalise me in terms of your challenge.

I understand that not everyone puts out good caches but anyone that just puts out a cache and expects to get favourite points, should know that is not how it works. With any kind of experience, you would find caches that are worthy of appreciation and caches that are just there to be found.

 

As for the archived caches, I am in favour of including them in your favourite points total but the other part of team Grifung is not and wants people to have to put in some effort to claim this impossible to publish challenge cache.

 

As well, I counted 132 favourite points for your active caches. You deserve a big thank you for making great caches!

Edited July 30, 2013 by Grifung

[GrandPotentate]

I have accumulated 72 favorite points on my caches, but I would say that only 3 of them are creative containers and 1 is a creative multi, the rest only have gotten favorite points because they are puzzles and people in my area happen to like puzzles. If they were placed only 20 miles further south, I probably would have gotten about half of the points. Does that make them any less of a cache? What about CO's that live in areas that don't have a lot of premium members? Or CO's who own caches along a bike trail? I love bike trails, but I rarely give favorite points for them because how do you decide while ones get them and which ones don't? Or what about people who put out really high quality caches in areas that don't get a lot of traffic?

 

And I don't know what you mean by the rules of challenge caches rewarding laziness, because I have only come across 2 Challenge Caches that were simple to complete, one was finding a cache hidden on your geo-birthday and the other was finding a cache hidden on your birthdate. Honestly, I don't understand why Challenge Caches are allowed by GS since they have an ALR.

[+niraD]

One of the things I respect about Groundspeak is the way they avoid encouraging people to hide caches that they aren't ready to maintain. They don't offer sweepstakes entries to cache owners for hiding caches. They don't publish caches that require (or strongly encourage) new hides. They don't publish challenge caches that require cache ownership.

 

IMHO, this is a feature, not a bug. It ain't broke. It doesn't need fixing.

Edited July 30, 2013 by niraD

[GrandPotentate]

As for the archived caches, I am in favour of including them in your favourite points total but the other part of team Grifung is not and wants people to have to put in some effort to claim this impossible to publish challenge cache.

 

I wouldn't say 50 points is even mildly difficult, let alone impossible, since I've accumulated my points in just over a year of caching. If you want to make it difficult, I would suggest a minimum of 150 points.

[+niraD]

I wouldn't say 50 points is even mildly difficult, let alone impossible, since I've accumulated my points in just over a year of caching. If you want to make it difficult, I would suggest a minimum of 150 points.

He didn't say it was an "impossible to complete challenge cache".

 

He said it was an "impossible to publish challenge cache".

[GrandPotentate]

I wouldn't say 50 points is even mildly difficult, let alone impossible, since I've accumulated my points in just over a year of caching. If you want to make it difficult, I would suggest a minimum of 150 points.

He didn't say it was an "impossible to complete challenge cache".

 

He said it was an "impossible to publish challenge cache".

 

sorry, i misread that.

[+Grifung]

I wouldn't say 50 points is even mildly difficult, let alone impossible, since I've accumulated my points in just over a year of caching. If you want to make it difficult, I would suggest a minimum of 150 points.

He didn't say it was an "impossible to complete challenge cache".

 

He said it was an "impossible to publish challenge cache".

The point of the Challenge Cache that we would like to publish is to be able to reward cache producers for their efforts to make quality caches. I'm certainly aware that favourtie points are subjective. We have given out favs for new areas, great views, great containers and interesting puzzles. Still we have nearly 50 favs sitting unused because we haven't found caches that we thought were worthy. We don't want to make a challenge so difficult that most people could not hope to qualify but my point is that we should reward people who put in the effort to produce quality caches, make great puzzles or find places with incredible views or history. By stating that because some people don't publish caches at all (which is their choice and perogative), we are not able to reward people who work hard and want to make geocaching better.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Grifung

[+The_Incredibles_]

We have given out favs for new areas, great views, great containers and interesting puzzles. Still we have nearly 50 favs sitting unused because we haven't found caches that we thought were worthy.

 

If you don't think there are enough 'worthy' caches in town, how about hiding some yourself?

[+Grifung]

We have given out favs for new areas, great views, great containers and interesting puzzles. Still we have nearly 50 favs sitting unused because we haven't found caches that we thought were worthy.

 

If you don't think there are enough 'worthy' caches in town, how about hiding some yourself?

We just sent in 5 more today with a sixth cache needing a new idea as the one we're talking about can't be published according to rule 7. We also haven't found all of your caches so I'm sure that more will be headed your way like most of our finds of your caches. I don't even have to look at your caches to know that you would qualify for a challenge like the one we are discussing.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Grifung

[GrandPotentate]

We have given out favs for new areas, great views, great containers and interesting puzzles. Still we have nearly 50 favs sitting unused because we haven't found caches that we thought were worthy.

 

If you don't think there are enough 'worthy' caches in town, how about hiding some yourself?

 

good point, I think any challenge cache someone puts out should qualify for themselves.

[team tisri]

Not everyone is cut out to hide caches. Either in terms of maintenance time they can put in or the nous/experience to hide a good cache.

 

If you have a challenge cache that forces you to own caches then people will hide caches in order to be able to meet the challenge. The wrong people as well as the right people. The consequence will be poor caches get put out.

 

I do see what you're getting at though.

 

Also your challenge criteria appears to rule out favourite points on archived caches. There might be lots of good reasons why I'd archive a good cache. E.g. I've moved a long distance and can't maintain it any more, even if I can put a similar good cache out where I've moved to. But that would penalise me in terms of your challenge.

 

Not everyone is cut out to find caches either. Not everyone is physically capable of finding a cache in every D/T combination. Not everyone has the time or inclination to find caches on each of 30, or 100, or 366 consecutive days. But these things are accepted as challenge qualifiers.

 

If someone doesn't want to hide their own caches that's fine, it just means they won't qualify for the challenge cache. At least it's based on a personal decision, unlike the exclusion of less mobile cachers from challenges that require the D/T grid to be filled.

 

As one whose only cache hide was an event I hosted 8 years ago I wouldn't have a problem with being excluded from a challenge cache that required me to earn favourite points on my hides. If I wanted to qualify I'd look to place some good caches.

 

I really wouldn't worry about poor caches being placed. We've got so many wet film pots behind signs at the moment it's hard to see a few more of them making any meaningful difference.

[+Grifung]

This is a challenge cache that firstly, I would like to publish and secondly, I would like to qualify for. To qualify for it we would need to publish better caches and more of them. The Incredibles are an example of a caching team that makes great caches and earn plenty of favourite points doing so. Who wouldn't want to be more like that? It's motivation to try harder and be better. I wish all of my caches were a hit with everyone that finds them but I know that just won't happen. I would just like to be able to put out a cache that in some small way is a reward for those people that do. If rule 7 was changed then maybe we could.

 

Reward those that put in the effort, don't hold others back while we try to make everyone else feel good about themselves. We can't all be the best at everything we do. (There can only be one Prime Minister or President at a time.)

[+L0ne.R]

I'm already being rewarded with the Favorite points. That's good enough and motivational enough for me.

[+redsox_mark]

One of the things I respect about Groundspeak is the way they avoid encouraging people to hide caches that they aren't ready to maintain. They don't offer sweepstakes entries to cache owners for hiding caches. They don't publish caches that require (or strongly encourage) new hides. They don't publish challenge caches that require cache ownership.

 

I agree - this is by design. They don't offer souvenirs for cache hides either.

 

Now with this specific idea from the OP - as it is about favourite points this specific challenge seems unlikely to have a negative impact*... someone is unlikely to expect a lot of favourite points by hiding a poor cache. But I think the current principle as quoted above is valid and I don't expect the rule to change.

 

* Well I suppose one possible negative impact could be owners fishing/begging for FPs... or getting upset when someone doesn't give them an FP. This already can happen but the challenge might make it worse...

[Clan Riffster]

]

I understand that not everyone puts out good caches but anyone that just puts out a cache and expects to get favourite points, should know that is not how it works.

Maybe... I've seen some really crappy caches get awarded favorite points...

What about a slight twist? Rather than require some numbers oriented cacher to spew out 80 gazillion film cans in a desperate bid to accumulate favorite points, you could change your challenge to focus more on finds? Ask that they locate caches with X number of favorite points? Either keep the number relatively small, say, around a hundred, and require that the finds be done in one day, or make the number staggeringly high, say in the thousands, and have all past finds count?

 

Either way, I'd suggest you exclude virtuals as, locally, there is at least one virtual which is pretty lame, but has more favorite points than any other in the state. The only reason it has such a high total is because it has a butt load of finds. The percentage of premium members awarding it favorite points is actually very low. This opens up another angle you could explore. In my opinion, the measure of quality is not so much the total of favorite points, but rather, the percentage. Imagine this hypothetical; two caches. One has 300 favorite points, with only 2% of premium members awarding it points. The other has 10 favorite points, with 100% of premium members awarding it favorite points. Based just on those numbers, which would you say was the better cache?

 

If you made the finds requirement revolve around the percentage, rather than the total, you could keep virtuals in the mix, as this would eliminate places like theme parks which accumulate points simply through gobs of logs. Maybe?

[AZcachemeister]

Back in 2011, I also wanted to hide a 'Favorite Points' challenge based on ownership of quality caches.

 

In those days, the guidelines linked to on the cache submission page were very short and simple, and as far as I knew they were the 'rules' of Geocaching. The guidelines in the Knowledge Books existed, but were not prominently displayed or linked to. I knew nothing about them, since I prefer to go out caching and not spend time poking in obscure corners of the website. But, as they say, 'Ignorance of the law is no excuse.'.

 

So, the Reviewer published my challenges right away. Then someone posted a note about this (then obscure) guideline that even the reviewer didn't remember, and the caches were retracted/disabled.

 

So, (in order to have the caches published) I was compelled to create a less elegant point system that makes it possible for non-owners to qualify, but much easier to qualify if you own good caches.

 

FWIW, these are my only PM caches:

 

Favorites Challenge-Level 250

 

Favorites Challenge-Level 500

 

Anyone who wants to copy the concept I used is hereby granted formal permission to do so.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

I'm already being rewarded with the Favorite points. That's good enough and motivational enough for me.

 

+1

 

I hide caches because I like hiding them, and bringing people to cool spots or on a nice hike or paddle. I don't need a "reward" for anything.

[+Grifung]

I'm already being rewarded with the Favorite points. That's good enough and motivational enough for me.

You have zero caches so how is your statement relevant?

[+Mudfrog]

One of the things I respect about Groundspeak is the way they avoid encouraging people to hide caches that they aren't ready to maintain. They don't offer sweepstakes entries to cache owners for hiding caches. They don't publish caches that require (or strongly encourage) new hides. They don't publish challenge caches that require cache ownership.

 

IMHO, this is a feature, not a bug. It ain't broke. It doesn't need fixing.

 

The August souvenirs thingy has already, in a roundabout way, encouraged people to place some lame and probably disposable caches. Seems smilies and souvenirs are kinda like sweepstakes entries in this respect. I figure Groundspeak knows this.

 

I'm already being rewarded with the Favorite points. That's good enough and motivational enough for me.

 

+1

 

I hide caches because I like hiding them, and bringing people to cool spots or on a nice hike or paddle. I don't need a "reward" for anything.

 

I don't see it as being a reward, But i do see it as maybe, just maybe, being a way for both the hider and the finder to have fun with a challenge. I would bet that it might motivate a few people into putting a little more thought into their cache placements. Imo, the OP's idea is a win win!

[+Grifung]

I'm already being rewarded with the Favorite points. That's good enough and motivational enough for me.

 

+1

 

I hide caches because I like hiding them, and bringing people to cool spots or on a nice hike or paddle. I don't need a "reward" for anything.

We didn't want to put a Challenge Cache out there because people need to be rewarded. Anyone who does something because they expect a reward is using the wrong motivation in life in general. We feel that it is a way to motivate people for a better caching experience for everyone involved.

 

The main point though is still that because some people (for whatever reason) do not publish a cache ever, we can't make a Challenge Cache that rewards the people that do put out great caches. It is meant to be a carrot, not a whip.

[+palmetto]

Back in 2011, I also wanted to hide a 'Favorite Points' challenge based on ownership of quality caches.....

 

(in order to have the caches published) I was compelled to create a less elegant point system that makes it possible for non-owners to qualify, but much easier to qualify if you own good caches.

 

FWIW, these are my only PM caches:

 

Favorites Challenge-Level 250

 

Favorites Challenge-Level 500

 

Anyone who wants to copy the concept I used is hereby granted formal permission to do so.

 

I logged in under my reviewer account to comment on these.

Don't try to copy them, they're grandfathered, but they are not usable as a template for a new challenge.

 

When a challenge offers multiple routes to completion, all of the routes must meet the challenge caches article.

[+L0ne.R]

I'm already being rewarded with the Favorite points. That's good enough and motivational enough for me.

You have zero caches so how is your statement relevant?

 

We have a team account which we use for our cache hides (currently 7 active caches) and to record caches we find together.

[+L0ne.R]

The main point though is still that because some people (for whatever reason) do not publish a cache ever, we can't make a Challenge Cache that rewards the people that do put out great caches. It is meant to be a carrot, not a whip.

 

I still argue that the reward is already there - the Favorite point confirms that the owner put out a good caching experience.

 

I'm not understanding why someone wouldn't visit a highly Favored cache unless there's a Challenge cache to motivate them.

 

As a CO of 7 active caches with 29 FPs so far, I'm not seeing how someone's FP challenge cache rewards me. Highly favored caches would reward you with visitors to your FP challenge cache and probably reward your cache with FP points because they visited some nice caches to qualify. But wouldn't they have visited those caches anyway? I'm just not seeing the extra reward to the cache owner.

 

It's a slippery slope if GS allowed challenge caches that reward planting "good" caches, someone's going to come along and argue their challenge cache encourages hiding caches that "reward" the growth of the game.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Löne R

[GrandPotentate]

Back in 2011, I also wanted to hide a 'Favorite Points' challenge based on ownership of quality caches.....

 

(in order to have the caches published) I was compelled to create a less elegant point system that makes it possible for non-owners to qualify, but much easier to qualify if you own good caches.

 

FWIW, these are my only PM caches:

 

Favorites Challenge-Level 250

 

Favorites Challenge-Level 500

 

Anyone who wants to copy the concept I used is hereby granted formal permission to do so.

 

I logged in under my reviewer account to comment on these.

Don't try to copy them, they're grandfathered, but they are not usable as a template for a new challenge.

 

When a challenge offers multiple routes to completion, all of the routes must meet the challenge caches article.

 

Would it work ff you just simply did not separate the two groups and it read something like this:

 

Scoring points:

Own a cache that has at least 5 (but less than 10) favorites?

You score 50 FC (Favorites Challenge) points!

 

Own a cache that has at least 10 (but less than 25) favorites?

You score 100 FC (Favorites Challenge) points!

 

Own a cache that has 25 (or more) favorites?

You score 250 FC (Favorites Challenge) points!

Found a cache that has at least 5 (but less than 10) favorites?

You score 1 FC (Favorites Challenge) point.

 

Found a cache that has at least 10 (but less than 25) favorites?

You score 2 FC (Favorites Challenge) points.

 

Found a cache that has at least 25 (or more) favorites?

You score 5 FC (Favorites Challenge) points.

[+wimseyguy]

If you want to encourage people to hide better caches, lead by example. Post interesting and creative logs on better caches. Favorite points are nice, but they are simply another ding on the register. A challenge cache shouldn't and can't be used as an incentive. It's a good addition to the guidelines. I think the challenge cache guidelines are just about the best written and easiest to understand of all of the guidelines.

[+uxorious]

To me, this seems like a rule that boils down to the lowest common denominator of laziness or lack of effort instead of rewarding people who want to be successful and make this pastime fun for everyone.

 

 

Without arguing your point on rule 7, I would like to point out how unfair this part of your statement can be. Many people who have no hides, or very few finds, would like to hide a few. However, there are good reasons some people cannot.

 

Those in the military, and moving a lot. Or even those in civilian jobs who are away too much to maintain a cache. Full time RVers. Sometimes a career, or schooling may take up so much time, a person has trouble getting a little time to hunt a cache, and would not be able to maintain a cache.

 

please don't judge a person with no hides as being lazy or having a lack of effort. That may very well be true, but I feel it is just as likely they have a good reason.

[+palmetto]

....

Would it work ff you just simply did not separate the two groups ....

 

No, it would not work. How you try to write cache ownership into a Challenge cache doesn't matter. Cache ownership is off the table.

 

It's not what you own (caches, waymarks, events), or who you cache with, or how you write logs, or how you got to the cache, or how you're dressed, etc. Define a positive achievement as logs, found, discovered, attended, visited etc, and perhaps define the group of caches (or waymarks) that those are posted to.

[+Grifung]

If you want to encourage people to hide better caches, lead by example. Post interesting and creative logs on better caches. Favorite points are nice, but they are simply another ding on the register. A challenge cache shouldn't and can't be used as an incentive. It's a good addition to the guidelines. I think the challenge cache guidelines are just about the best written and easiest to understand of all of the guidelines.

I have to disagree politely with your statement about Challenge caches not being used as incentive. Every Challenge cache that I have looked at (I've not seen them all) is used as incentive in some way to do something. As an example, a Fizzy grid 81 Challenge is used to motivate people to fill in their Fizzy grid, the Baker's Dozen cache motivates people to cache a certain amount on certain days or a Holiday Challenge cache would be used to motivate people to cache on holidays. Why would there even be Challenge caches allowed if they were not there to motivate people? As an afterthought, is caching in general not used as an incentive to get people out to visit an area or a special place or to try something new?

 

Should we disallow all challenges because there are people in our community who are never going to be able to complete the requirements and we don't want them to have bad feelings? Should we ban event caches because someone who suffers from agoraphobia can never attend?

 

Additionally, I'm not judging people who, for whatever reason, don't produce caches. My initial comment about laziness was just put out there as an example of why someone may not produce a cache. There are many reasons why people don't have caches of their own and I don't have time to list them all but laziness would be only one of the many possibilities.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Grifung

[+CanadianRockies]

.

Edited July 30, 2013 by CanadianRockies

[4wheelin_fool]

Rule #7 was apparently created to prevent people from tossing out thoughtless caches to meet the challenge, but your challenge is intended to do the same thing. You could appeal, but it would set a precedent.

[+uxorious]

If you want to encourage people to hide better caches, lead by example. Post interesting and creative logs on better caches. Favorite points are nice, but they are simply another ding on the register. A challenge cache shouldn't and can't be used as an incentive. It's a good addition to the guidelines. I think the challenge cache guidelines are just about the best written and easiest to understand of all of the guidelines.

I have to disagree politely with your statement about Challenge caches not being used as incentive. Every Challenge cache that I have looked at (I've not seen them all) is used as incentive in some way to do something. As an example, a Fizzy grid 81 Challenge is used to motivate people to fill in their Fizzy grid, the Baker's Dozen cache motivates people to cache a certain amount on certain days or a Holiday Challenge cache would be used to motivate people to cache on holidays. Why would there even be Challenge caches allowed if they were not there to motivate people? As an afterthought, is caching in general not used as an incentive to get people out to visit an area or a special place or to try something new?

 

Should we disallow all challenges because there are people in our community who are never going to be able to complete the requirements and we don't want them to have bad feelings? Should we ban event caches because someone who suffers from agoraphobia can never attend?

 

Additionally, I'm not judging people who, for whatever reason, don't produce caches. My initial comment about laziness was just put out there as an example of why someone may not produce a cache. There are many reasons why people don't have caches of their own and I don't have time to list them all but laziness would be only one of the many possibilities.

 

I think you took his comment out of context. He seems to be saying, "If you want to encourage people to hide better caches, A challenge cache shouldn't and can't be used as an incentive." Not that a challenge can't be used as an incentive in general.

[team tisri]

Imagine this hypothetical; two caches. One has 300 favorite points, with only 2% of premium members awarding it points. The other has 10 favorite points, with 100% of premium members awarding it favorite points. Based just on those numbers, which would you say was the better cache?

 

No way of knowing, the 300 favourites from 2% of premium members could still mean 100% of premium members awarding a favourite point since it was possible to award a favourite point, while the 10 favourites could just mean the CO'd buddies dived out and grabbed the cache and all gave it a favourite point despite it being a film pot behind a sign that was soggy within two days of being placed.

[+fizzymagic]

The challenge cache rules state:

 

7.Challenge caches may not require the publication of a new cache or waymark as a challenge criteria; challenge caches must be achievable by those who do not own caches or waymarks.

 

Don't you hate it when official rules are not even grammatically correct?

 

It's not the first time Groundspeak has been in need of a copy editor.

 

(it's criterion, not criteria)

[+briansnat]

One of the things I respect about Groundspeak is the way they avoid encouraging people to hide caches that they aren't ready to maintain. They don't offer sweepstakes entries to cache owners for hiding caches. They don't publish caches that require (or strongly encourage) new hides. They don't publish challenge caches that require cache ownership.

 

IMHO, this is a feature, not a bug. It ain't broke. It doesn't need fixing.

 

Very close to what I was going to say, so I'll give a +1.

 

That and I don't think those who hide quality caches want any reward other than perhaps the logs that show how much others enjoyed their efforts.

Edited July 30, 2013 by briansnat

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

I'm already being rewarded with the Favorite points. That's good enough and motivational enough for me.

 

+1

 

I hide caches because I like hiding them, and bringing people to cool spots or on a nice hike or paddle. I don't need a "reward" for anything.

We didn't want to put a Challenge Cache out there because people need to be rewarded. Anyone who does something because they expect a reward is using the wrong motivation in life in general. We feel that it is a way to motivate people for a better caching experience for everyone involved.

 

I don't need any motivation to hide quality caches beyond my own desire to hide quality caches.

 

For some (many?) I don't think any kind of motivation will get them to hide higher quality caches.

[+The_Incredibles_]

The challenge cache rules state:

 

7.Challenge caches may not require the publication of a new cache or waymark as a challenge criteria; challenge caches must be achievable by those who do not own caches or waymarks.

 

Don't you hate it when official rules are not even grammatically correct?

 

It's not the first time Groundspeak has been in need of a copy editor.

 

(it's criterion, not criteria)

 

I think you should apply to Groundspeak, fizzy, so you can whip them into shape.

[+The_Incredibles_]

Should we disallow all challenges because there are people in our community who are never going to be able to complete the requirements and we don't want them to have bad feelings?

 

Actually there are some who think that EVERY cache must be available to them to find and they will complain bitterly if you make a challenge that is too difficult.

 

Groundspeak won't be changing the rules. However, if they'd did, you'd find alot of people cheating to complete this challenge. i.e. getting their friends to give them favorite points for mediocre caches. There are already enough people here giving out favorite points at random; we don't need any more of that.

[+Beach_hut]

Snip...

 

Not everyone is cut out to find caches either. Not everyone is physically capable of finding a cache in every D/T combination. Not everyone has the time or inclination to find caches on each of 30, or 100, or 366 consecutive days. But these things are accepted as challenge qualifiers.

 

If someone doesn't want to hide their own caches that's fine, it just means they won't qualify for the challenge cache. At least it's based on a personal decision, unlike the exclusion of less mobile cachers from challenges that require the D/T grid to be filled.

 

As one whose only cache hide was an event I hosted 8 years ago I wouldn't have a problem with being excluded from a challenge cache that required me to earn favourite points on my hides. If I wanted to qualify I'd look to place some good caches.

 

I really wouldn't worry about poor caches being placed. We've got so many wet film pots behind signs at the moment it's hard to see a few more of them making any meaningful difference.

 

That first point has been debated in other threads. Without wishing to stray too far off topic, a less mobile cacher can team up with a more mobile cacher to go for any D/T combination. I'm not going to go into the procedure of that here, to keep on topic. As for lacking time and inclination, that's perfectly fair enough that it would rule you out from qualifying for a challenge.

 

Back on topic, I do think the OP's idea is laudable and coming from a good place but it's only right that guidelines forbid it from coming to pass, because of the unintended consequences.

 

If I see the challenge published near me, and I had zero hides at that time, I'd hide one or most probably lots of caches to get up to the fifty mark. There's no legislation for the sort of cacher who puts out lots (potentially hundreds) of mediocre caches as opposed to a few great caches.

 

Also, this cache would set a precedent for less laudable challenges based on hiding caches to be published, like "hide a hundred caches", with no regard for quality.

 

In any case, what happened to the idea that the favourite point is reward in itself? If you make it the means to the end, rather than the end itself, then you get people soliciting favourite points, or colluding with their friends to give each other favourite points on unworthy caches. (Mind you, I bet that happens in places now)

 

EDIT: great minds think alike, I see others wrote similar while I was contemplating that essay

Edited July 30, 2013 by Beach_hut

[+The_Incredibles_]

I don't need any motivation to hide quality caches beyond my own desire to hide quality caches.

 

For some (many?) I don't think any kind of motivation will get them to hide higher quality caches.

 

Agreed. I enjoy being creative and reading logs. That's about all the motivation I need. I used to really look forward to favorite points until I noticed some totally lazy hides getting as many favorite points as some of my creative hides. Now I don't put much stock in them. As for challenges, I'm not particularly interested in them.

[+Beach_hut]

Snip..

As well, I counted 132 favourite points for your active caches. You deserve a big thank you for making great caches!

 

Thanks for your thanks!

[+Planet]

I don't think I want to live in a world where every cacher hides caches. There would be no room to walk.

I do not think the rules need changing.

 

 

+2 on niraD's post.

[+Mudfrog]

Rule #7 was apparently created to prevent people from tossing out thoughtless caches to meet the challenge, but your challenge is intended to do the same thing. You could appeal, but it would set a precedent.

 

Ok, we don't want to encourage thoughtless. I definitely understand and agree with this. So why isn't there a guideline like this for traditional caches? There must be a bazillion thoughtless LPCs and guardrails out there now.

[AZcachemeister]

Back in 2011, I also wanted to hide a 'Favorite Points' challenge based on ownership of quality caches.....

 

(in order to have the caches published) I was compelled to create a less elegant point system that makes it possible for non-owners to qualify, but much easier to qualify if you own good caches.

 

FWIW, these are my only PM caches:

 

Favorites Challenge-Level 250

 

Favorites Challenge-Level 500

 

Anyone who wants to copy the concept I used is hereby granted formal permission to do so.

 

I logged in under my reviewer account to comment on these.

Don't try to copy them, they're grandfathered, but they are not usable as a template for a new challenge.

 

When a challenge offers multiple routes to completion, all of the routes must meet the challenge caches article.

 

OY!

 

JESUS, JOSEPH, AND MARY SAVE US!

 

We are being regulated into oblivion.

 

No wonder the pointless lampskirts and mindless powertrails are taking over.

 

But, let's focus on quality...yeah, right.

[Clan Riffster]

Imagine this hypothetical; two caches. One has 300 favorite points, with only 2% of premium members awarding it points. The other has 10 favorite points, with 100% of premium members awarding it favorite points. Based just on those numbers, which would you say was the better cache?

 

No way of knowing, the 300 favourites from 2% of premium members could still mean 100% of premium members awarding a favourite point since it was possible to award a favourite point, while the 10 favourites could just mean the CO'd buddies dived out and grabbed the cache and all gave it a favourite point despite it being a film pot behind a sign that was soggy within two days of being placed.

Interesting hypotheticals. Have you ever seen this in person? I've got lots of friends who cache. I can't imagine any of them giving a favorite point to a crappy cache, though I know it happens occasionally. The ET Highway is a good example of this. If you randomly pick one of those copy/paste film cans, you'll probably find a favorite point on it. I certainly can't picture any ten cachers giving favorite points to stinkers. I would say it's improbable to the Nth degree.

 

But getting back to my question:

Would such a challenge work, as a compromise for the OP?

[AZcachemeister]

Imagine this hypothetical; two caches. One has 300 favorite points, with only 2% of premium members awarding it points. The other has 10 favorite points, with 100% of premium members awarding it favorite points. Based just on those numbers, which would you say was the better cache?

 

No way of knowing, the 300 favourites from 2% of premium members could still mean 100% of premium members awarding a favourite point since it was possible to award a favourite point, while the 10 favourites could just mean the CO'd buddies dived out and grabbed the cache and all gave it a favourite point despite it being a film pot behind a sign that was soggy within two days of being placed.

Interesting hypotheticals. Have you ever seen this in person? I've got lots of friends who cache. I can't imagine any of them giving a favorite point to a crappy cache, though I know it happens occasionally. The ET Highway is a good example of this. If you randomly pick one of those copy/paste film cans, you'll probably find a favorite point on it. I certainly can't picture any ten cachers giving favorite points to stinkers. I would say it's improbable to the Nth degree.

 

But getting back to my question:

Would such a challenge work, as a compromise for the OP?

 

I would suspect that both caches were pretty good.

Knowing the date of publication would also be a relevant factor.

 

In any case, it is apparently no longer possible (by any stretch of the imagination) to reward cachers for owning caches that have been selected by their owners peers as the best-of-the-best.

 

I have not been a huge fan of the Favorites Points system from the beginning...who knew my disdain could sink even lower.

[+Harry Dolphin]

All I'm hearing is: "I don't like the guidelines. They should be changed because I think so." Entitlement. How many times do we see this? "My cache was denied because it was 200' from mystery final." "My cache was denied because it doesn't require the use of a GPS." And on and on... Read the guidelines, and work within them. Cache guidelines cannot require hiding a cache. Oh, well. Should have read the guidelines better! Move on, and try something else! Such is life. "But I found a great spot for a Virtual Cache..."

Looked at OP's Cache Type Challenge. 5 Difficulty? Guess I've been caching too long. I've got 10 if you count benchmarks and Locationless. Not actually mentioned what qualifies... But I won't be getting to that section of BC when I go to my brother's wedding. Oh, well.

[+Don_J]

Not everyone is cut out to hide caches. Either in terms of maintenance time they can put in or the nous/experience to hide a good cache.

 

If you have a challenge cache that forces you to own caches then people will hide caches in order to be able to meet the challenge. The wrong people as well as the right people. The consequence will be poor caches get put out.

 

I do see what you're getting at though.

 

Also your challenge criteria appears to rule out favourite points on archived caches. There might be lots of good reasons why I'd archive a good cache. E.g. I've moved a long distance and can't maintain it any more, even if I can put a similar good cache out where I've moved to. But that would penalise me in terms of your challenge.

 

Not everyone is cut out to find caches either. Not everyone is physically capable of finding a cache in every D/T combination. Not everyone has the time or inclination to find caches on each of 30, or 100, or 366 consecutive days. But these things are accepted as challenge qualifiers.

 

If someone doesn't want to hide their own caches that's fine, it just means they won't qualify for the challenge cache. At least it's based on a personal decision, unlike the exclusion of less mobile cachers from challenges that require the D/T grid to be filled.

 

As one whose only cache hide was an event I hosted 8 years ago I wouldn't have a problem with being excluded from a challenge cache that required me to earn favourite points on my hides. If I wanted to qualify I'd look to place some good caches.

 

I really wouldn't worry about poor caches being placed. We've got so many wet film pots behind signs at the moment it's hard to see a few more of them making any meaningful difference.

 

Not everyone has the discipline to simply decide that they wouldn't be able to complete the challenge. Some will put out 50 more of your "film pots" and have a bunch of friends place a favorite point on each. The fact that in the last week, disposable caches are coming out of the woodwork simply so people can get some daily artwork in their profiles, imagine if an actual smiley was involved?

 

I think that this is another case where the idea sounds good but in reality would more than likely create a situation opposite of what was intended.

[+JBnW]

The other problem with this type of challenge cache, that has largely been missed, is that someone's ability to meet the requirements is entirely dependent on the actions of others...finders actually giving out FPs. The "quality" of the hide doesn't really matter if other cachers don't, or won't, click the link when they're logging the find.