Challenge Cache Too Challenging

[+cache_n_out]

I just had to alter a challenge cache listing because it was going to be "too difficult" and "too few" people would qualify. The challenge was to log 12 icons in one day. (Some agreement between reviewers apparently.)

 

First off, I never challenge anyone to do anything I haven't done (unlike those silly "challenges" that bit the dirt).

 

Two, I know of about 60 people you accomplished it the same day as me. Based on the reviewer's comments I guess that was a rare occasion.

 

Three, OK if you don't want "too difficult" caches/challenges don't GUESS which ones will be difficult - MEASURE and archive those that are. If GS and their lackeys (their term - not mine) don't want the landscape littered with low volume find caches - archive those that aren't found in a year or have a average of 3 finds a year, or some other metric. I know plenty of tree hides, puzzles/mystery that are that well. In GS OWN BLOG they reveled over a traditional that took 2 years for its first to find - ironic and typical GS inconsistency.

 

Between parks and other jurisdictions limiting hides, artificial constraint due to GS, and the earth cache people making placing one of those more difficult, the game will devolve into a bunch of 1.5/1.5 light pole skirt and guardrails (how all THOSE get permission is another topic all together....) Maybe the only hope is a new icon based on the current lab cache concept.

[+baack40]

I don't understand that either. I had a very similar experience recently. I understand your frustration, I really do. That would be a VERT challenging task for sure but so what? People either go for it or they don't. If you don't mind that it wouldn't be logged very often, it really shouldn't matter. Are we in the "Everyone gets a trophy" mode or the "We don't want anyone to feel bad because they didn't win mode? I am not sure

[+palmetto]

I went looking for your listing.

 

I'm confused. You never responded to the bulk of the reviewers requests for clarification.

 

If you'd clarified the listing per request (benchmarks count? waymarks count? labs count?), offered your own qualifying finds in the way you're asking others to do them, not just stating "accomplished it on 1/18/2014" and noted some other local cachers who also qualify, you might have worked the reviewer around to your viewpoint.

 

If not, then you could go to appeals.

 

Wouldn't it make more sense to deal directly with the reviewer about this or take it to appeals?

[+Murazor]

About 20% people using the original BadgeGen GSAK macro would qualify according to the discussion on the GSAK forum. And this DOES NOT count waymarks, benchmarks and lab caches. It is hard but surely not "too hard".

[Keystone]

Two, I know of about 60 people you accomplished it the same day as me.

This would have been relevant information for the review; too bad you only mention it in your forum rant.

 

Most of the comments were around clarifying the challenge requirements. I have to "find a waypoint." OK, that's easy. Press the "mark" button on my GPS to create Waypoint 001, and I'm finished. Maybe you mean "Waymark?" Precision counts in drone strikes and challenge caches. The reviewer was guiding you towards a more precise definition of your challenge requirements -- which may very well have led to publication of the refined version. You stopped in the middle of the process to come here.

[+CacheDrone]

Also FWIW the new guidelines that prevent Event Stacking also makes any Busy Day Challenge Cache above 8 problematic. In fact one of the reasons that 8 is the suggested upper threshold is that it would take a specific day of two or more Event-type caches for people to qualify. That also encourages the creation of new caches just meets the needs of the challenge. That brings into play the guideline that a cache should not suggest others be created.

 

There are 5 physical cache types and 3 virtual cache types. Substituting 1 event type to make the 8 attainable seems reasonable in case all the local Virtuals or webcams have been used up. Above 8, now you need an event and a CITO or hope for the GPS Maze to come to town or a Mega to happen. Now we are back to event stacking, encouraging creation and also a challenge should be attainable at the time of publication which cannot be done if they rely on future event caches.

 

CD

[+lamoracke]

12 in a day is not too bad in some areas if you are traveling, but I imagine its hard for locals to do with say just one webcam in the area and they have done it already. Can see both sides, but personally it would be a nice challenge for folks to get if they travel to a new area with a Woodstock coming, especially if that area has a webcam.

Edited February 3, 2014 by lamoracke

[+WarNinjas]

We were shot down on a challenge cache once saying it was to hard. All I had to do was send in a list from a few cachers who qualified with there list and it was published. I personally would never go above any of our reviewers in our area to get it solved as we like to hide caches. I wouldn't want to cause any trouble with them and I know they are not trying to be mean just do there job they volunteer to do. Work with your reviewer to see what needs to be changed and/or send him/her a list of people who qualify and I am sure you can all work something out to get it published.

[Clan Riffster]

Thank you Reviewers for not publishing this mess. Someone who can't even be bothered to respond to a Reviewer probably isn't a good candidate for owning a complex cache listing.

[+St.Matthew]

Also FWIW the new guidelines that prevent Event Stacking also makes any Busy Day Challenge Cache above 8 problematic. In fact one of the reasons that 8 is the suggested upper threshold is that it would take a specific day of two or more Event-type caches for people to qualify. That also encourages the creation of new caches just meets the needs of the challenge. That brings into play the guideline that a cache should not suggest others be created.

 

There are 5 physical cache types and 3 virtual cache types. Substituting 1 event type to make the 8 attainable seems reasonable in case all the local Virtuals or webcams have been used up. Above 8, now you need an event and a CITO or hope for the GPS Maze to come to town or a Mega to happen. Now we are back to event stacking, encouraging creation and also a challenge should be attainable at the time of publication which cannot be done if they rely on future event caches.

 

CD

 

I couldn't agree more. As it stands, 12 cache types would have to include those convenient events that are the same day and adjacent to a Mega, now against guidelines. Therefore the challenge cannot be accomplished from here out. Under those grounds, it shouldn't be published.

[+Dame Deco]

If sixty of you did it on the same day, it's not much of a challenge, is it?

[+NYPaddleCacher]

If sixty of you did it on the same day, it's not much of a challenge, is it?

 

I'm also pretty sure that Challenge caches are not supposed to be a contest to see who can come up with the most difficult challenge and still get it published.

 

 

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

If sixty of you did it on the same day, it's not much of a challenge, is it?

 

I'm also pretty sure that Challenge caches are not supposed to be a contest to see who can come up with the most difficult challenge and still get it published.

 

+1

 

Most difficult or most ridiculous.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Also FWIW the new guidelines that prevent Event Stacking also makes any Busy Day Challenge Cache above 8 problematic. In fact one of the reasons that 8 is the suggested upper threshold is that it would take a specific day of two or more Event-type caches for people to qualify. That also encourages the creation of new caches just meets the needs of the challenge. That brings into play the guideline that a cache should not suggest others be created.

 

There are 5 physical cache types and 3 virtual cache types. Substituting 1 event type to make the 8 attainable seems reasonable in case all the local Virtuals or webcams have been used up. Above 8, now you need an event and a CITO or hope for the GPS Maze to come to town or a Mega to happen. Now we are back to event stacking, encouraging creation and also a challenge should be attainable at the time of publication which cannot be done if they rely on future event caches.

 

CD

 

I couldn't agree more. As it stands, 12 cache types would have to include those convenient events that are the same day and adjacent to a Mega, now against guidelines. Therefore the challenge cannot be accomplished from here out. Under those grounds, it shouldn't be published.

 

I think OP was adding things other than cache types. He only logged 11, not 12.

And, so it came to pass, that we visited my brother in Seattle. I'd never cached in Seattle before, which made things easier. I wanted to log as many caches types in one day as possible. We did 8! And very happy to have accomplished that! Letterbox Hybrid, GS HQ (Thanks!), Multi, EarthCache, Traditional, Mystery, Virtual and Webcam. We do not have the necessary equipment for a Wherigo, and there were no Events scheduled for that day. I think we did great to find 8 cache types! I am very happy that my brother helped us with this challenge!

I certainly could not do that within 65 miles of my home coords. I've found all the webcams, and most of the virtuals. Yes. I used a special cache type: GS HQ. OP used the Museum Exhibit. No special icons anywhere near here.

I hope the OP enjoyed the one hour CITO event (Really? One hour?) And the event at the museum cache. Dunno... When I went to the Museum Exhibit, I spent several hours there. When I went to a CITO, I spent four hours cleaning up. I've probably spent at least an hour at the events that I've attended. (Isn't that the intention of events? Spend some time socializing?)

Hi, people. Bye people. I've got 11 more cache types to find today. I picked up the cigarette butt I dropped. Goody bye. Got 10 more cache types to find today. Nice museum. Oh? There's a Geocaching Exhibit? Bye. I've got 9 more cache types to find today. Sounds like the OP had a lot of fun, learnt a lot, and met a lot of people at those events! Not. I guess one is not required to spend any time at an event or CITO, or even see the exhibit at the museum. That rather defeats the porpoise of those cache types?

Thanks! I'm happy with 8 cache types in one day! To me, that was a great accomplishment! I doubt that I'll ever be able to do that again. (And, yes, I found the local Challenge requiring 6 caches types in one day. That is doable.

[+WarNinjas]

We don't even have 12 cache types no less in one day!

[+KNAPAHOLIC]

A few of us did ten in a day when the GPS maze was in Dayton, OH. We had nine, then made the drive to Indianapolis for a late evening event for #10. Sometimes you have to go a little extra crazy for that last one or two...

[+humboldt flier]

I don't understand that either. I had a very similar experience recently. I understand your frustration, I really do. That would be a VERT challenging task for sure but so what? People either go for it or they don't. If you don't mind that it wouldn't be logged very often, it really shouldn't matter. Are we in the "Everyone gets a trophy" mode or the "We don't want anyone to feel bad because they didn't win mode? I am not sure

 

My sentiments exactly

[+narcissa]

I look forward to the day when they give up on trying to mediate the challenge madness and just stop publishing them altogether.

[+secondgunman]

Personally, I don't have an issue with this type of challenge provided the requirements are spelled out in detail. You've got to list exactly which cache types/icons count and which don't. When we went up to GW XII this summer, this was one of our goals. How we did depends on what you count. My stats page says we got ten cache types in one day, but we also did the lab caches, found several benchmarks, and a couple of waymarks. That list could fall anywhere in the 10-13 range, depending on what you count. The devil is in the details.

[+jellis]

To the OP you mean like this one?

Challenge

[Mr.Yuck]

I look forward to the day when they give up on trying to mediate the challenge madness and just stop publishing them altogether.

 

You know, just a few months ago, I speculated that we are much closer to that point them some of the challenge cache aficionado's might think, especially since they tightened up the guidelines (i.e., made them harder to get published) in March 2012. But I was shot down by more than one reviewer who said that isn't the case (yet).

 

To the OP you mean like this one?

Challenge

 

Um, unless I'm missing something, that's just a classic 2007 placed Fizzy Challenge?

[+cheech gang]

Um, unless I'm missing something, that's just a classic 2007 placed Fizzy Challenge? 

 

Did you notice all the finds must be in one state?

[+wmpastor]

If sixty of you did it on the same day, it's not much of a challenge, is it?

So is it too tough or too easy?? There's disagreement!

[Mr.Yuck]

Um, unless I'm missing something, that's just a classic 2007 placed Fizzy Challenge? 

 

Did you notice all the finds must be in one state?

 

No.

[+Colonial Cats]

I look forward to the day when they give up on trying to mediate the challenge madness and just stop publishing them altogether.

I agree. I will not go out of my way to do a challenge cache since it isn't anything much more than a cache with ALRs.

[+narcissa]

I look forward to the day when they give up on trying to mediate the challenge madness and just stop publishing them altogether.

 

You know, just a few months ago, I speculated that we are much closer to that point them some of the challenge cache aficionado's might think, especially since they tightened up the guidelines (i.e., made them harder to get published) in March 2012. But I was shot down by more than one reviewer who said that isn't the case (yet).

 

A few more forum snits might just do it. This isn't the first time that someone's stormed to the forum in a rage instead of just working through an issue with their reviewer.

[Keystone]

A happy postscript to this long-running thread: The OP's "busy day" challenge was published in February, and has eight finds logged thus far. After going back and forth with the reviewer, the challenge cache was published at the upper limit of what Geocaching HQ regards as acceptable for a "Busy Day" challenge -- ten different cache type icons (plus a waymark and a benchmark). Anything higher would likely require multiple event types in the same day, which is problematic under the listing guidelines for event caches.

 

The OP lives in Ohio, where all of the volunteer cache reviewers are fans of challenge caches. (That's not true everywhere.) So, some forum steam-venting is unlikely to cause the OP's reviewer to lobby for the abolition of this cache design.

Edited December 1, 2014 by Keystone

[+cheech gang]

 

The OP lives in Ohio, where all of the volunteer cache reviewers are fans of challenge caches. (That's not true everywhere.)

 

Yet, despite this failing, I still have respect for the Ohio Reviewers.

[4wheelin_fool]

Prequalified finders can now add a 5/1 to their stats for finding a key holder in the end of a guardrail.

[+Walts Hunting]

12 in a day is not too bad in some areas if you are traveling, but I imagine its hard for locals to do with say just one webcam in the area and they have done it already. Can see both sides, but personally it would be a nice challenge for folks to get if they travel to a new area with a Woodstock coming, especially if that area has a webcam.

 

Easy solution do the Webcam again.

[Mr.Yuck]

12 in a day is not too bad in some areas if you are traveling, but I imagine its hard for locals to do with say just one webcam in the area and they have done it already. Can see both sides, but personally it would be a nice challenge for folks to get if they travel to a new area with a Woodstock coming, especially if that area has a webcam.

 

Easy solution do the Webcam again.

 

Of course. Who says you can't log a 2nd find on any cache?

 

As far as GW in Western Maryland, I filtered the map turning off everything but webcams. There's one in D.C., although it's about 50 miles from GW. It actually is working fine as of this date. Also Towson, Maryland near Baltimore, and Annapolis Maryland. Next closest Indiana, Pennsylvania. There were only 169 webcams in the U.S. as of 1/1/2014. It's probably down to the 150's now.

[+bflentje]

I just can't get passed the irony of the thread title..

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I just can't get passed the irony of the thread title..

 

I can. To me, "Challenge" doesn't necessarily imply difficulty. The word, "Challenge" when used as a noun is simply a synonym for a "Task".

A Challenge Cache, to me, is simply a cache which requires that one complete a task before finding and logging the cache. It's only when one uses "Challenge" as an adjective does the irony come in.

[+redsox_mark]

I just can't get passed the irony of the thread title..

 

I can. To me, "Challenge" doesn't necessarily imply difficulty. The word, "Challenge" when used as a noun is simply a synonym for a "Task".

A Challenge Cache, to me, is simply a cache which requires that one complete a task before finding and logging the cache. It's only when one uses "Challenge" as an adjective does the irony come in.

 

Well the noun "Challenge" has multiple definitions and it depends on what dictionary you use... but the definition from the Oxford dictionary which I think applies is:

 

A task or situation that tests someone’s abilities

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I just can't get passed the irony of the thread title..

 

I can. To me, "Challenge" doesn't necessarily imply difficulty. The word, "Challenge" when used as a noun is simply a synonym for a "Task".

A Challenge Cache, to me, is simply a cache which requires that one complete a task before finding and logging the cache. It's only when one uses "Challenge" as an adjective does the irony come in.

 

Well the noun "Challenge" has multiple definitions and it depends on what dictionary you use... but the definition from the Oxford dictionary which I think applies is:

 

A task or situation that tests someone's abilities

 

Cache has several definitions as well. Choosing which one applies depends on the context.

 

As I said, "challenge" does not imply a high level of difficulty.

[+redsox_mark]

I understand challenge caches don't have to be difficult.

 

I still see irony in the thread title. But that's not worth discussing really.

[+jellis]

Um, unless I'm missing something, that's just a classic 2007 placed Fizzy Challenge? 

 

Did you notice all the finds must be in one state?

 

No.

And did you notice how many qualified for it over that period of time? There is also mentioned about the low number of cachers in that state. Not to many cachers are going to come from other states and spend time to try to qualify for it.

 

Then watch someone try to prove me wrong.

[+jellis]

Prequalified finders can now add a 5/1 to their stats for finding a key holder in the end of a guardrail.

Not out here. There are some Challenge caches that is a challenge to sign the cache. One CO in particular who moved from placing them on guardrails to hangin in bushes to placing them way up high in trees where you need either a ladder or long extending pole. I don't mind once in awhile finding caches like that but now it's how many and how high can you put a cache up in a tree. I found one recently I had to tape my hiking pole to my 9 ft extending pole to reach it. Looks like I may need to find a 20ft pole soon.

[+Baad Daata]

You goofballs are hilarious. Some challenges are out of my reach and I have a lot of caches to choose from. Some require me to stay in a specific state for thirty days. Who wants to stay in North Dakota for thirty days? (Why do we need two dakotas anyway?)I would be happier with two "seattles". I don't place challenges that require you to spend time in a dull place longer than necessary. The "powers" have denied my attempts to publish caches in Utah that require more than 24K total finds because it is not reachable by most. How ignorant is that? Utah is a great place to visit and many folks, with more than 24K caches, pass through the area and would love to jump off the interstate and grab some some challenges but my reviewer says, " that is not a real challenge". I just looked at one that required 40 cemetery caches but they all have to be in Arizona. 25K is more attainable for most folks. Challenges should be fun and attainable. EVERYONE can get to 25K caches.....eventually. I will never do a cache that requires me to go to the space station or requires me to technically climb the highest mountain. Let us push for 25K.

[Keystone]

I am closing this bumped thread.

 

If you cannot bump a thread without calling prior discussion participants "goofballs", and if you cannot express your opinion about challenge guidelines without calling Reviewers and Lackeys "ignorant," don't bother posting. (Not to mention your insulting the entire caching population of the Dakotas.)

 

Take a break from the discussion topic of challenges, but generally, keep in mind that forum discussions are more productive and fun when we criticize ideas, guidelines and practices rather than criticizing the people who hold those ideas or who articulate those guidelines or engage in those practices.

Edited April 17, 2015 by Keystone