Place your own Lab Cache!?!?!

February 3, 2014

I guess the invitations come in waves, because there are people who already made or a busy making a Lab cache.

(link1 Globalcaching)

(link2 Globalcaching)

Well ... patience is a virtue, but I'm too exited!!! Hahaha ...

I'll take your word for it since I don't read...Dutch, is it?...

It's Dutch indeed. 2 people who already had an invitation by GS for building their Lab Cache. One of the 2 is almost done, the other is struggling with it. :anibad:

9k · February 3, 2014

funkymunky, I don't think you get at all what toz and I and others are saying.

Lab Caches are not standard geocaches in that their storage in the database is completely different, and they do not have the properties associated with the listings that standard geocaches do (and from which statistics are generated).

Your find count is a summary of all your find logs on standard geocaches (whether they're physical or not) because the find log is a tangible piece of data in the database. They then increment your find count by however many Lab Caches for which you've correctly entered the code.

That's it. That's the fundamental difference. That's why Lab Caches are not standard geocaches -- even though your experience in completing one may be one that could be created as a mystery or virtual or whatever other standard cache. The problem is, the Lab Cache is not created, in the database or in practice as a standard geocache.

A Lab Cache might not be like a Mystery Cache, or a Multi Cache or an Event Cache, but they're all caches. Like all of those other cache types, they are called caches, and they are found by using your GPS while geocaching.

This is precisely the confusion we're referring to in the past couple of pages.

They are most like the Mystery Cache type, because the Mystery Cache type also includes many different types of caches, just as over time the Lab Caches category will include many different types of experimental concept caches.

As I referred to, in practice, the experience is similar. But technically, they are fundamentally different. Including the fact that no, you can't search for lab caches by searching for a difficulty or terrain or cache type or size. Even logging is completely different. There is no find log. There is only a code and a record of completion.

That seems to be tail wagging the dog logic. Because some data properties have not been defined for something then that something does not exist.
...

We may have to agree to disagree about whether a Lab Cache is a cache. You can't get less "cache-like" than an event, a virtual, a webcam or an earthcache - all accepted cache types. Lab caches are clearly, given there is something to find at some coordinates, a geocache.

Yep, you can. Events, Virtuals, Webcams and Earthcaches all have associated properties (the same as physical-log caches) that aid in filtering and searching and deciding whether to make the attempt to do what's necessary to qualify and post a "Find" log online. Lab Cache? Do whatever the creator tells you, your reward is a code that gets you +1 find count increment. "What the creator tells you" is highly flexible and can mimic the experience of any other standard cache type, but it's all arbitrary, precisely so that lab caches can present a much wider variety of experiences under one label, so thus require fewer technical/enforceable rules.

The only way Lab Caches 'are caches' is that it provides a +1, and the process by which you may qualify (depending on the experiment) to consider it 'found'. Everything else, even how you mark it 'found' - fundamentally different.

why, in reality and outside the abstract world of IT and statistics, [is] a Lab Cache not a geocache?
...

>> The statistics aren't incorrectly generated, they are completely accurate for what they analyze.

Following your logic then, Virtuals, Earthcaches, Events (all types) and Webcams should not count as finds.

Nope. See above re standard geocache listing properties (both technical/"abstract" and practical/"reality").

I'm hopeful that the lab caches get incorporated properly in time.

At this point, they are. There is no other property that can be incorporated into the stats. They are technically empty shells.

In time, as they've indicated they are working on, perhaps Groundspeak will add additional listing properties like current standard geocaches (yes I keep purposefully using that term as the distinction has been made clear numerous times in this thread), at which point they could be incorporated more consistently into the stats.

Personally, I feel that takes away from the whole purpose of the lab cache 'experimental container' concept, since the purpose really is to see whether the experiments themselves would be worth incorporating into the collection of 'standard geocaches', or some other geocaching.com experience.

And this distinction is a big reason why Benchmarks would be about the closest match, practically speaking, for the inclusion of Lab Caches (as they currently stand) in profile statistics.

I had to wait for another 22 cache finds for it to even recognise I'd got there, and to allow me to then correct for the missing 22, and select the cache that was the 5000th. It's not hugely important, but if it's there on my profile, I want it to be right.

And again, they've provided that way to modify your milestones, because lab caches aren't the only thing that can mess up your find count / cache statistics synchronicity. If your finds are one off because of a lab cache, or a duplicate log, or a re-dated find log, or even just personal preference, or whatever other reason, then you can manually adjust it (if you don't otherwise fix the cause of the error)

Anyway, we'll soon see what differences there are in creating these I <3 Geocaching lab caches. And then, provide the feedback that Groundspeak is looking for.

And yes, 100% agreed: Happy caching! (well, once all this snow and winter clears away; go'way already!)

February 3, 2014

It's Dutch indeed. 2 people who already had an invitation by GS for building their Lab Cache. One of the 2 is almost done, the other is struggling with it.

I don't think they are making lab caches for this promotion. They may have had a invitation to build a lab cache for a MEGA event or some other test of lab caches. But from what I can tell, the URL for the February promotion is not live yet, so I don't know what they could be building.

6.1k · February 3, 2014

From YouTube:

Breaking news! On Feb 3rd, 2014 Geocaching.com is allowing premium members to hide a lab cache for one person! Watch the video for details!

Is this real? Can't seem to find anything on here about it.

geocat, your friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age. They do not believe except they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, geocat, whether they be men's or children's, are little. In this great universe of ours man is a mere insect, an ant, in his intellect, as compared with the boundless world about him, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.

Yes, geocat, there are lab caches! They exist as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no lab caches. It would be as dreary as if there were no geocats. There would be no geocaching faith then, no bison tubes, no ammo cans to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which geocaching fills the world would be extinguished.

Not believe in lab caches! You might as well not believe in fairies! You might get your papa to hire men to watch all the websites on February 3rd to catch lab caches, but even if they did not see any, what would that prove? Nobody sees lab caches, but that is no sign that there is none. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that's no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen and unseeable in the world.

You may tear apart the baby's rattle and see what makes the noise inside, but there is a veil covering the unseen world which not the strongest man, nor even the united strength of all the strongest men that ever lived, could tear apart. Only faith, fancy, poetry, love, romance, can push aside that curtain and view and picture the supernal beauty and glory beyond. Is it all real? Ah, geocat, in all this world there is nothing else real and abiding.

No lab caches! Thank God! they live, and they live forever. A thousand years from now, geocat, nay, ten times ten thousand years from now, they will continue to make glad the heart of geocaching.

9k · February 3, 2014

lol

February 3, 2014

From YouTube:

Breaking news! On Feb 3rd, 2014 Geocaching.com is allowing premium members to hide a lab cache for one person! Watch the video for details!

Is this real? Can't seem to find anything on here about it.

geocat, your friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age. They do not believe except they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, geocat, whether they be men's or children's, are little. In this great universe of ours man is a mere insect, an ant, in his intellect, as compared with the boundless world about him, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.

Yes, geocat, there are lab caches! They exist as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no lab caches. It would be as dreary as if there were no geocats. There would be no geocaching faith then, no bison tubes, no ammo cans to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which geocaching fills the world would be extinguished.

Not believe in lab caches! You might as well not believe in fairies! You might get your papa to hire men to watch all the websites on February 3rd to catch lab caches, but even if they did not see any, what would that prove? Nobody sees lab caches, but that is no sign that there is none. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that's no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen and unseeable in the world.

You may tear apart the baby's rattle and see what makes the noise inside, but there is a veil covering the unseen world which not the strongest man, nor even the united strength of all the strongest men that ever lived, could tear apart. Only faith, fancy, poetry, love, romance, can push aside that curtain and view and picture the supernal beauty and glory beyond. Is it all real? Ah, geocat, in all this world there is nothing else real and abiding.

No lab caches! Thank God! they live, and they live forever. A thousand years from now, geocat, nay, ten times ten thousand years from now, they will continue to make glad the heart of geocaching.

Ok... that was profound. And entertaining. Are you trying to get a job with GS coming to the forums regularly and sprinkling happy dust on the posters??

Thanks for the laugh!!!

(although some part of me... deep inside... really wants to say.. "Dude... it's puff puff pass man."

February 3, 2014

None of this waffle is helpful. Either there is a link or an app or there's not. If not make an announcement to kill all this speculation.

14k · February 3, 2014

It's 6AM in Seattle. Let the guy's come in to work to flip the switch on lab caches. Besides they probably were up late last night at a Superbowl party.

Is that a drinking house, then maybe there is an excuse. Maybe the computers have been drinking as well.

It's a well known fact that hamsters can't hold their liquor.

7.4k · February 3, 2014

The link is now live: http://www.geocaching.com/iheartgeocaching/

2.8k · February 3, 2014

"You're among the first adventurers to test a brand new feature that lets you flex your geocaching creativity like never before."

Just not seeing how this lets me be any more creative than with the other cache types. Except maybe that I can make people go into a business and force them buy something to get the code word.

9k · February 3, 2014

"You're among the first adventurers to test a brand new feature that lets you flex your geocaching creativity like never before."

Just not seeing how this lets me be any more creative than with the other cache types. Except maybe that I can make people go into a business and force them buy something to get the code word.

Think outside of the box.

You can do anything (abiding by laws and regulations and using common sense), for a specific ("special") person. Or for a group of people to compete (or decide) who gets to enter the code (or win)... anything else? up to you.

13.7k · February 3, 2014

skywriting, carved in ice, singing telegram... you could get pretty creative - if you wanted...

2.8k · February 3, 2014

"You're among the first adventurers to test a brand new feature that lets you flex your geocaching creativity like never before."

Just not seeing how this lets me be any more creative than with the other cache types. Except maybe that I can make people go into a business and force them buy something to get the code word.

Think outside of the box.

You can do anything (abiding by laws and regulations and using common sense), for a specific ("special") person. Or for a group of people to compete (or decide) who gets to enter the code (or win)... anything else? up to you.

I am always thinking outside the box. No need for a special cache type.

2k · February 3, 2014

skywriting, carved in ice, singing telegram... you could get pretty creative - if you wanted...

That gives me an idea about "writing" a message in snow.

9k · February 3, 2014

I am always thinking outside the box. No need for a special cache type.

Then don't make one.

Simple.

February 3, 2014

The link is now live: http://www.geocaching.com/iheartgeocaching/

I didn't see anything there about visibility of the found/archived cache. Once found, will others be able to see it? I couldn't see the Lab Cache finds on your profile (for example).

2.8k · February 3, 2014

The link is now live: http://www.geocaching.com/iheartgeocaching/

I didn't see anything there about visibility of the found/archived cache. Once found, will others be able to see it? I couldn't see the Lab Cache finds on your profile (for example).

I asked the question earlier in the thread, and no, no one will be able to see it.

[edit: typo]

Edited February 3, 2014 by BBWolf+3Pigs

1.7k · February 3, 2014

funkymunky, I don't think you get at all what toz and I and others are saying.

No, you're totally wrong. I 100% understand what you are saying but I disagree with it. You say they are not geocaches because they don't have some database properties (yet) and there's no online log (yet). That's back to front "tail wagging the dog" logic. That's truly the tree fell and made no sound because someone wasn't there to hear it and write about it online.

I honestly think you don't understand what I was saying about how a Lab Cache is like a Mystery Cache. It doesn't mean that all the lab cache experiments will be like Mystery Caches - it means that Mystery Caches can be any type of cache within a broad framework, and Lab Caches can be any type of cache within the experimental framework defined by Groundspeak. But they definitely are geocaches. There's no sensible argument as to why they aren't.

BTW, I also know they are stored on a different database, etc etc... but again, this does not mean they are not geocaches.

Anyway, that's my last post on the topic. I hope my invite comes through soon, if that is indeed how it's going to work. Not sure what I'm going to do with it, but I'll have a think about it...

Cheers

February 3, 2014

I asked the question earlier in the thread, and no, no one will be able to see it.

Ah, right. Then (and I suppose this has been said before too) it's not really a cache, is it? Geocaching is a community game. This seems like ... I don't know ... groundspeaking?

6.8k · February 3, 2014

I hope my invite comes through soon, if that is indeed how it's going to work. Not sure what I'm going to do with it, but I'll have a think about it..

There is no invite. Just click on the link that has been provided above.

Cezanne

3.7k · February 3, 2014

I asked the question earlier in the thread, and no, no one will be able to see it.

Ah, right. Then (and I suppose this has been said before too) it's not really a cache, is it? Geocaching is a community game. This seems like ... I don't know ... groundspeaking?

I dunno...in many instances (where the link is sent to multiple people) it will become a Groundspeak-sanctioned FTF game.

6.8k · February 3, 2014

You can do anything (abiding by laws and regulations and using common sense), for a specific ("special") person.

I disagree about the "anything". There are a number of limitations that come from the system that reminds of me of challenges.

Of course as a single person is involved one could move major parts outside of the lab cache site, but the idea hopefully is not

just to provide a "+1" for the invited person on gc.com.

6.8k · February 3, 2014

I dunno...in many instances (where the link is sent to multiple people) it will become a Groundspeak-sanctioned FTF game.

I guess in many cases it will end up as code exchange game (in order to earn the icon cheaply which is certainly quite a temptation for cachers in areas where no lab caches have been available).

3.7k · February 3, 2014

I dunno...in many instances (where the link is sent to multiple people) it will become a Groundspeak-sanctioned FTF game.

I guess in many cases it will end up as code exchange game (in order to earn the icon cheaply which is certainly quite a temptation for cachers in areas where no lab caches have been available).

...though I guess 'FTF' is also 'OOTF' (only one to find).

February 3, 2014

I dunno...in many instances (where the link is sent to multiple people) it will become a Groundspeak-sanctioned FTF game.

I guess in many cases it will end up as code exchange game (in order to earn the icon cheaply which is certainly quite a temptation for cachers in areas where no lab caches have been available).

I think the idea is to send it to a friend, not much else. I will be sending one to thank Nomad for walking Darcy and Max whilst I've spent the last two weeks in hospital.

6.8k · February 3, 2014

I think the idea is to send it to a friend, not much else. I will be sending one to thank Nomad for walking Darcy and Max whilst I've spent the last two weeks in hospital.

What you have in mind seems to fit to what the people at Groundspeak had in mind.

I referred to something else: Someone told me that in a local forum cachers already discuss about how they could form pairs and make sure that everyone who wants it gets the rare icon.

I think that the experiment might have got much more interesting if no new icon could get earned.

Edited February 3, 2014 by cezanne

2.8k · February 3, 2014

I referred to something else: Someone told me that in a local forum cachers already discuss about how they could form pairs and make sure that everyone who wants it gets the rare icon.

Yep, seeing it here as well. A "Secret Santa" sort of exchange - everyone puts their name in a hat, and people get a random person they need to set one up for.

9k · February 3, 2014

I 100% understand what you are saying but I disagree with it.

uhh... Round and round we go - I don't think you understand what I'm saying. And what I'm saying does not make you wrong - it's classifying what you are saying as the practical viewpoint, as what you experience when you take on the task of completing a lab cache.

You say they are not geocaches because they don't have some database properties (yet) and there's no online log (yet).

That's precisely what it means. Whether you say that's "tail wagging the dog" logic or not. They are not treated as official geocaches because they cannot be, precisely because they are not set up to be treated that way. Your experience completing one may be just like any other geocache, but they are, in the context of the website, fundamentally not a geocache listing.

I honestly think you don't understand what I was saying about how a Lab Cache is like a Mystery Cache.

I do. It means someone can create a Lab Cache, and have it function exactly like a Mystery cache (up until the code-needed-to-find thing, oh and the listing content and properties). No denying that! But it's not a mystery cache. It's not any kind of existing standard geocache. It's functionally, programmatically, and technically different in every way.

it means that Mystery Caches can be any type of cache within a broad framework...

Within the framework of all the geocache listing properties available, and all the rules and guidelines defined by Groundspeak for geocache listings, yes. This not true of Lab Caches.

...and Lab Caches can be any type of cache within the experimental framework defined by Groundspeak. But they definitely are geocaches.

You described precisely why Lab Caches are fundamentally not equivalent to standard (existing) geocache listings.

BTW, I also know they are stored on a different database, etc etc... but again, this does not mean they are not geocaches.

Practically, no. Technically, yes. (and thus, also statistically incompatible, as they exist right now)

Anyway, that's my last post on the topic. I hope my invite comes through soon, if that is indeed how it's going to work. Not sure what I'm going to do with it, but I'll have a think about it...

Just go to the page linked above by Moun10Bike - you can create a Lab Cache without an invite, as long as you're a premium member (as has been mentioned above).

9k · February 3, 2014

You can do anything (abiding by laws and regulations and using common sense), for a specific ("special") person.

I disagree about the "anything". There are a number of limitations that come from the system that reminds of me of challenges.

Of course as a single person is involved one could move major parts outside of the lab cache site, but the idea hopefully is not

just to provide a "+1" for the invited person on gc.com.

Keep in mind I wrote that before visiting the Lab Cache construction page...

At first glance, it's basically a blank slate for a description, except that you choose a visual theme, and posted coordinates are optional. The code and success message are of course specific to this as well.

Similar to geocaching challenges, but somewhere between that and a cache listing. Sort of like a mix with elements from both. Perhaps more closely linked to the never-started QR code geocaching challenge type :laughing:

I guess in many cases it will end up as code exchange game (in order to earn the icon cheaply which is certainly quite a temptation for cachers in areas where no lab caches have been available).

...though I guess 'FTF' is also 'OOTF' (only one to find).

...if we were allowed to post a log with text when entering the code

I think that the experiment might have got much more interesting if no new icon could get earned.

Agreed... the Lab Cache icon and +1 find for recognition, I think is doing a bit more harm to the experimental beta testing concept than need be...

Yep, seeing it here as well. A "Secret Santa" sort of exchange - everyone puts their name in a hat, and people get a random person they need to set one up for.

I think that's perfectly fine to Groundspeak though... now if that was just a code exchange, that might not be what they're looking for (but they can just ignore those cases, if they want); but if those 'secret santa' exchanges end up encouraging people still to actually create a lab cache (experience), then that's still in line with what they're hoping to see... how people are given the lab cache listing I don't think is necessarily of concern to them; presuming there's an actual setup involved to determine/find the code . I think they're more looking for feedback from people who actually take up the presented challenge and create something for someone to find.

Heck people could just make a puzzle to solve if they wanted, without a physical cache at all. I'd be surprised if Groundspeak didn't think people would resort to that, let alone just giving the code to someone else. They'd be blind if they didn't think people would do that. I'm 100% confident they would have seen that coming, and likewise don't care if people do - it's not like the find counts for anything more than a +1 and an icon :laughing:

Edited February 3, 2014 by thebruce0

6.8k · February 3, 2014

Keep in mind I wrote that before visiting the Lab Cache construction page...

I was not aware of that when I wrote my post.

At first glance, it's basically a blank slate for a description, except that you choose a visual theme, and posted coordinates are optional.

Have you looked at the length restriction?

Perhaps more closely linked to the never-started QR code geocaching challenge type

Yes, that and the m.... game also came up to my mind.

4.6k · February 3, 2014

I wasn't at all sure I was going to bother making one - but in the last hour I've come up with several ideas around a theme that would make for, I think, an interesting experience.

The results though would be somewhat disconnected from geocaching as I've come to know it. Not very surprising though given that as far as the provided setup mechanism is concerned - GPS coordinates are completely optional.

3.7k · February 3, 2014

Do these expire at the end of the month or will they stick around until they are "found"?

4.6k · February 3, 2014

Do these expire at the end of the month or will they stick around until they are "found"?

I am fairly certain they will expire if not found by the end of February.

1.9k · February 3, 2014

And to my way of thinking, a Secret Santa is one of the better to do this; or to otherwise pair up or create a loop. Otherwise, someone is going to get left out and feelings will get hurt.

The other issue that got pointed out, is even if it is done as a 'lovers cache', many of those lovers/couples/families actually share one account, so that doesn't work for them either.

February 3, 2014

Sense says it's time to stop watching this. It's turning into the usual he said she said.

9k · February 3, 2014

The other issue that got pointed out, is even if it is done as a 'lovers cache', many of those lovers/couples/families actually share one account, so that doesn't work for them either.

heh, I was about to post an 'aha' moment, and say that one solution for those cases could be that the person creates a 2nd account just to make the lab cache for their partner... but then, only premium members can create one

One could, though, maybe ask another premium friend if they'd be willing to let them create the cache for their partner under their account. I don't believe there's anything rewarded for creating, so there's no "loss" (ymmv) there.

1.1k · February 3, 2014

Do these expire at the end of the month or will they stick around until they are "found"?

I am fairly certain they will expire if not found by the end of February.

See post #218

14k · February 3, 2014

Keep in mind I wrote that before visiting the Lab Cache construction page...

I was not aware of that when I wrote my post.

At first glance, it's basically a blank slate for a description, except that you choose a visual theme, and posted coordinates are optional.

Have you looked at the length restriction?

Perhaps more closely linked to the never-started QR code geocaching challenge type

Yes, that and the m.... game also came up to my mind.

It seems to me that if someone wants to create a Lab cache like that never started QR code geocaching challenge type they're free to do so. If the want to write their name in the snow they can do that as well. If they want to hide an ammo can under a pile of sticks and put a log book with the code word on it and filled it up with swag or slap a nano cache on a guard rail, well, the platform allows for that as well.

I saw the character length description (1000) and think that for experimental purposes that's quite reasonable. If one really needed more than that their is nothing stopping them from putting into a link to a Google doc or youtube video (Mission Impossible anyone?)

I created a lab cache that described going to a specific spot where one could see a code word in my office window. I didn't actually place the code word in my window because I don't plan on sharing the URL with anyone. Then I went to the URL and it allowed me to "Test the Lab Cache" (I assume that it recognized that I was logged in as the same user that created it) and entered in the code word. It all worked pretty much as one would expect, though using the map to select the location wasn't as intuitive as it could be. It suggested "using the map" so I zoomed and panned the map until I found building and assumed I could click on the map and it would drop a pin. I then discovered that if I typed in a place name it would geocode the location, return a set of coordinates and put a pin on the map. It even recognized the name of the building in which I work and dropped a pin right in the middle of it.

1.1k · February 3, 2014

While you were talking here I made my Lab Cache, and after some time it has been found.

It works I guess...

3.1k · February 4, 2014

I honestly think you don't understand what I was saying about how a Lab Cache is like a Mystery Cache.

I do. It means someone can create a Lab Cache, and have it function exactly like a Mystery cache (up until the code-needed-to-find thing, oh and the listing content and properties). No denying that! But it's not a mystery cache. It's not any kind of existing standard geocache. It's functionally, programmatically, and technically different in every way.

You don't seem to understand his comment in the same way I understand it. I don't think Funkymunkyzone is saying that a Lab Cache is like a Mystery Cache in the sense that one can create a puzzle that needs to be solved in order to find it. I think he's saying a Lab Cache is like a Mystery (i.e., Unknown) Cache in the sense that both of these cache types include a wide variety of different kinds of caches.

In the case of a Mystery/Unknown Cache type, these can include puzzle caches, night caches, Chirp caches, bonus caches, challenge caches, etc. In the case of a Lab Cache type, these can include Mega event temporary caches, I <3 Geocaching caches, and whatever else Groundspeak might dream up in the future. Or, as Funkymunkyzone put it:

it means that Mystery Caches can be any type of cache within a broad framework...

Edited February 4, 2014 by CanadianRockies

8k · February 4, 2014

funkymunky, I don't think you get at all what toz and I and others are saying.

No, you're totally wrong. I 100% understand what you are saying but I disagree with it. You say they are not geocaches because they don't have some database properties (yet) and there's no online log (yet). That's back to front "tail wagging the dog" logic. That's truly the tree fell and made no sound because someone wasn't there to hear it and write about it online.

I honestly think you don't understand what I was saying about how a Lab Cache is like a Mystery Cache. It doesn't mean that all the lab cache experiments will be like Mystery Caches - it means that Mystery Caches can be any type of cache within a broad framework, and Lab Caches can be any type of cache within the experimental framework defined by Groundspeak. But they definitely are geocaches. There's no sensible argument as to why they aren't.

BTW, I also know they are stored on a different database, etc etc... but again, this does not mean they are not geocaches.

Anyway, that's my last post on the topic. I hope my invite comes through soon, if that is indeed how it's going to work. Not sure what I'm going to do with it, but I'll have a think about it...

Cheers

It will be my last post on the topic as well.

Since I don't define "geocache" by whether or not something appears in my stats, or even if it counts as a find, I might find it hard to understand why someone would make such a big deal over whether a cache appears in certain statistics. I may consider a geocache on another website, or a private cache hidden by a friend just for me to find (and not using the I <3 Geocaching site), or even finding a QR code from the game who must not be named, all to be caches.

But still I'm willing to accept that if Groundspeak says something is a cache that appears in your total find count, then they could treat the cache in the statistics the same way as any other cache that counted in your total find count in past.

What I have trouble accepting in the argument that this is necessary to make statistics "accurate and consistent".

The existing statistics are so full of bad statistical practices that they have little use beyond entertainment and meaningless challenges (i.e. the challenge is not for finding certain types of caches, but for finding caches that the statistics [mis]count as certain types of caches based on the current snapshot used. You could add the lab caches to these meaningless statistics, and that may make some people happy. On the other hand, I strongly suspect that the developers understand that the statistics that are currently generated are so crappy that they would rather not spend time updating them to include lab caches. They may prefer to wait till they have more of the geocaching labs developed and then start thinking about new statistics that are more meaningful, in addition to being more efficienlty generated.

to thebruce0 - While lab caches exist on a separate site and use a diffent logging mechanism, that doesn't mean they couldn't hypothetically be counted in the statistics like any other cache. :lol:

I think part of the problem is that TPTB have muddied the waters. First they count lab caches in the total find count - so already they count just like any other cache in one statistic. Second they have made remarks that indicate that at some time in the future, at least some lab caches may get promoted to where they will participate in the statistics. I suspect that the lackeys making such statements have a misunderstanding of the developers' plans for adding statistics to Geocaching labs code.

3.3k · February 4, 2014

Sorry, but I just could not watch. Now I have a headache.

You're right - the video was flat-out over-the-top unwatchable goofiness.

3.3k · February 4, 2014

skywriting, carved in ice, singing telegram... you could get pretty creative - if you wanted...

And how is a gps involved?

13.7k · February 4, 2014

skywriting, carved in ice, singing telegram... you could get pretty creative - if you wanted...

And how is a gps involved?

Unless you've got a chip implanted, I'd think a GPSr or cell would be involved to get those coords...

- But why can't it be similar to a letterbox?

Or none needed at all...

"You can use this space to customize the experience and lead the player to the find code. Tell a story, write a riddle, offer clues -- whatever you want."

Edited February 4, 2014 by cerberus1

February 4, 2014

The other issue that got pointed out, is even if it is done as a 'lovers cache', many of those lovers/couples/families actually share one account, so that doesn't work for them either.

heh, I was about to post an 'aha' moment, and say that one solution for those cases could be that the person creates a 2nd account just to make the lab cache for their partner... but then, only premium members can create one

One could, though, maybe ask another premium friend if they'd be willing to let them create the cache for their partner under their account. I don't believe there's anything rewarded for creating, so there's no "loss" (ymmv) there.

I actually thought of this as well. Our account is my family (although I certainly do the majority of the caching). If I wanted to create a cache that was special for my wife. It could be something Valentine Day's related (not sure if that will be seen as a good thing or not ). She opens a VD card, special message, the website takes her to the box that held her engagement ring, she opens it, finds the code. She uses the code. I "get" the hide, she "gets' the find - but our account would register both (no that would not be her only Valentines Day gift) I know its bad form to log your own caches (I have never done so) but here - with the limit of a single person finding it, and she would not know GZ or code or anything else in advance……and since I Heart Geocache Lab Cache is without rules (mostly) and are open to new creativity, it would appear to fall within the definition.

But on the other hand, I was going to place the url in a cache container and publish that cache as a traditional or multi with the fact that there is a Lab url for the FTF in it so that the FTF has a chance to get the Lab find also.

Don't know. Still toying around with it.

February 4, 2014

ok, I made my Lab cache for this month, gave them my feedback via the survey, and it was "found" by its intended recipient. Granted, there was some thought put into it, the little I know the recipient and his friend referanced in the puzzle I setup for it. Overall I am not entierly impressed with them in their current form. However, I know that they are in the experimental stage and if implemented on a more permenant basis, would likely not look and feel they way they do now. I am on the fence as to the concept, and think that limiting them to one per PM is not enough to give accurate feedback as to the concept and mechanics of the this experiment. IMHO, I would need to create several more and try different ideas out that I had rather than be limited to just one single person and one single idea. I also, like others, would like to be able to create one where it can be out there for more than a single person to find. I have a few decent ideas, but given the constrains of the month of Feb, I can not work on them or set them up to be found given the time I would need to obtain permission, design, make and place the container.

I had to choose a new caching friend as the recipient rather than my signifigant other since she dont geocache. I also made this decision because 2 of my 5 kids cache with me and being only able to create one, it would not be fair for me to pick one over the other. Yes, I could upgrade their accounts to PM and we could all create one for each other, but that still means I have to pick one of my 2 lil caches to recieve mine and to me that still is not fair.

I could see GS implimenting in the future the use of a find code to curve the arm chair loggers on new and future caches. I would be fine with that, so long as I get to share my cache with the caching public like I can now with the normal cache types.

Again, depending on your POV, these are or are not caches. IMO, if a GS requirment were that there had to be a container to be found with coords of that container to be provided, these could absolutly be considered to be a goecache by the majority. I like some others, do not define a cache to be by what shows up on my stats and could care less if they are dead on or off by a country mile. Heck, they are already off due to some archived caches and events I have "found." For me there cache is what I find at the end of the hunt, be it a container with a log, a statue or other POI, or new knowledge. What I fail to understand myself, and this is a subject for another thread, is those who will place a micro or nano container in a place that can be home to a larger container that can be deisgned to be a little more elaborate or cleaverly hid. I get that some locations may warrent a micro or nano container, especially in an urban enviornment. Oh well, time to end this before I get too off topic. I do look forward however, to the dedicated thread/area where people can post and share thier lab cache experiences. Once that thread/area is open, I may go into the little detail about my lab cache building. till then, it will be my ranting and generalized opinion in this thread.

February 4, 2014

The other issue that got pointed out, is even if it is done as a 'lovers cache', many of those lovers/couples/families actually share one account, so that doesn't work for them either.

heh, I was about to post an 'aha' moment, and say that one solution for those cases could be that the person creates a 2nd account just to make the lab cache for their partner... but then, only premium members can create one

One could, though, maybe ask another premium friend if they'd be willing to let them create the cache for their partner under their account. I don't believe there's anything rewarded for creating, so there's no "loss" (ymmv) there.

I actually thought of this as well. Our account is my family (although I certainly do the majority of the caching). If I wanted to create a cache that was special for my wife. It could be something Valentine Day's related (not sure if that will be seen as a good thing or not ). She opens a VD card, special message, the website takes her to the box that held her engagement ring, she opens it, finds the code. She uses the code. I "get" the hide, she "gets' the find - but our account would register both (no that would not be her only Valentines Day gift) I know its bad form to log your own caches (I have never done so) but here - with the limit of a single person finding it, and she would not know GZ or code or anything else in advance……and since I Heart Geocache Lab Cache is without rules (mostly) and are open to new creativity, it would appear to fall within the definition.

But on the other hand, I was going to place the url in a cache container and publish that cache as a traditional or multi with the fact that there is a Lab url for the FTF in it so that the FTF has a chance to get the Lab find also.

Don't know. Still toying around with it.

In regards to this particular lab cache, you can not log your own... if you attempt to log it from the account it is created from it stays in a test loop and does not log a find. Also, I have 2 caches hid in my area, and after creating my Lab cache, I still have only 2 caches on my profile, so there is no reward given to the "hider" at this time. I do like your idea though of making it a FTF prize in another cache, you only need to make sure that the cache is found before the end of the month so the FTF has time to seek your lab cache.

February 4, 2014

In regards to this particular lab cache, you can not log your own... if you attempt to log it from the account it is created from it stays in a test loop and does not log a find. Also, I have 2 caches hid in my area, and after creating my Lab cache, I still have only 2 caches on my profile, so there is no reward given to the "hider" at this time. I do like your idea though of making it a FTF prize in another cache, you only need to make sure that the cache is found before the end of the month so the FTF has time to seek your lab cache.

Thanks - I was unaware of that restriction on logging - makes sense though (although I thought it was shown that you created a Lab….guess I was mistaken). So my wife ends up with flowers and a gift instead of a code….and the FTF gets the url. But the url may be something of an adventure, meaning so long as a few cachers find the cache and url within, say, an hour of each other, then there may still be a race for the final. Something like "I <3 Geocaching's Amazing Race"

5.7k · February 4, 2014

Awesome! But limited to 1000 characters? :unsure: Mine is a hiking family/history virtual waymark for my son. :anibad:

9k · February 4, 2014

1)

to thebruce0 - While lab caches exist on a separate site and use a diffent logging mechanism, that doesn't mean they couldn't hypothetically be counted in the statistics like any other cache.

2)

I think part of the problem is that TPTB have muddied the waters. First they count lab caches in the total find count - so already they count just like any other cache in one statistic. Second they have made remarks that indicate that at some time in the future, at least some lab caches may get promoted to where they will participate in the statistics. I suspect that the lackeys making such statements have a misunderstanding of the developers' plans for adding statistics to Geocaching labs code.

Per #1, yeah agreed, the problem for lab caches in statistics is - what stats would be counted? Again, technically, there's only the fact that you've entered the correct code for a lab cache 'find'. That's all that could be included in the generated stats. ie, +1 find, and an icon, and perhaps posted coordinates if they were saved with the listing. If they were also to include the classification of lab cache (like I <3 Geocaching, or mega-temp cache or whatever) then perhaps another property would be available. But Lab Caches have nowhere near the amount of info as regular caches to make the inclusion of its stats worthwhile (which I realize is a matter of opinion). The way I see it, the lab caches as they stand are already included almost as much as they can be - aside from the icon being considered a cache type (technically not feasible at this point as it's a different type of 'data') and possibly in the geo-location summaries (feasible, but requires another minor workaround like the +1 find count adjustment).

Per #2, that 'muddied water' is part of the confusion I think. I was hoping to get a bit better of an idea a while back in asking what specifically Groundspeak intends to add or change to make Lab Caches a worthwhile addition to the statistics summary... but I don't think they've even figured that part out yet-- IF they even meant Lab Caches as becoming official geocaches, or the experimental cache ideas they were trying out.

My point was that a statistical breakdown of say, Difficulty rating of all cache 'finds' would leave Lab Caches in a N/A slot currently as they have no Difficulty rating. Currently the find count includes Lab Cache finds; no other statistic includes Lab Cache finds. If they were to add the icon as a cache type statistic, then the find count would match the sum of all cache "types". But without the N/A value, the sum of all Difficulty ratings would not match the Find count. So in that regards, there wouldn't be consistency in the statistics, which generally is a summary of 'All Finds'. (which comes back to the 'unique geocache finds' versus 'all find logs')

Including lab caches in the general statistics generation means either providing a value slot for Lab Caches in each overall generated stats so everything (theoretically) 'adds up' consistently to the total find count, or Lab Cache listings would need to be given the same properties of standard geocache listings so they could be incorporated in the stats generation... otherwise the values would all need to be presumed or defaulted to something that's static and essentially still irrelevant (basically resulting in what we have now - nothing meaningful in the stats, but only the find count +1 and icon).

Or they could just not include Lab Caches in the find count, and treat them like Benchmarks in the profile view.

blah...

Place your own Lab Cache!?!?!

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment