third party leaderboards

[+Roman!]

I have a cat. She doesn't care and is rather indifferent that she is at the top of the leaderboard for mice killed in our house, even though I bring it up from time to time. She wishes I didn't keep stats of that, as she doesn't really see it as a competition, other than between her and the mice.

 

I am beating my cat in mice killed and the cat is quite upset with me.

You're also beating Flask (and everyone else) on the leaderboard for this thread:

Roman! 39

flask 28

Chrysalides 21

jholly 15

kunarion 12

 

Oh yeah, take that flask, sucks being second, doesn't it?

[+Ambrosia]

 

Please add the trademark symbol when using the words Real Geocachers.

 

Sorry to hear that your experience at an event is so unpleasant. Might want to avoid events in Vermont as well to avoid getting accidentally punched in the face or having your gender googled, but you should be pretty safe here in the San Francisco Bay Area if you decide to visit. You know as well as I do that it's not that those guys are more "real", they're just more obsessed.

I didn't mean Real Geocacher though, I used the "sarcasm quotation marks" instead to insinuate my disdain. In this area it is not unusual for "real" cachers to get 1000 (and the Golden Ammo Can that goes with it) within a year.

I really hate when my ambiguous virtual genitalia is googled, especially by Vermontians. My job sent me to the San Francisco Bay Area many years ago, when geocaching was an infant. I would love to go again, it is quite beautiful there.

 

1000 in a year? (raspberry sound) Who do they think their kidding? What a bunch of pikers. A Real Geocacher™ can do that in less than a day. A Real Geocacher™ can do 3 or 4 thousand a year without really trying.

 

Come up here to Washington's wet side if you want to see some beautiful places. I've lived in the SF bay area, but will take the wet side any time.

*phhhht* Wetsiders.

The green of the wetside is so much prettier than the brown of your side.

Interrastate wars!!!

Fixed it for ya!

Lol, I knew there was something wrong with that word, but I was in too much of a hurry to dwell.

[+flask]

i do not have a cat.

[+TopShelfRob]

i do not have a cat.

Well, that puts you on another leaderboard... people in this thread who have cats:

 

TopShelfRob....1

Roman!.........1

flask..........0

 

Hey! I'm finally first in something! (Well, tied for first, anyway)

Edited June 23, 2014 by TopShelfRob

[+Roman!]

i do not have a cat.

Well, that puts you on another leaderboard... people in this thread who have cats:

 

TopShelfRob....1

Roman!.........1

flask..........0

 

Hey! I'm finally first in something! (Well, tied for first, anyway)

 

Sorry, we have 2 cats and 2 birds.

[+lamoracke]

i do not have a cat.

Well, that puts you on another leaderboard... people in this thread who have cats:

 

TopShelfRob....1

Roman!.........1

flask..........0

 

Hey! I'm finally first in something! (Well, tied for first, anyway)

 

Guess we win, we have 3 cats.

[+TopShelfRob]

i do not have a cat.

Well, that puts you on another leaderboard... people in this thread who have cats:

 

TopShelfRob....1

Roman!.........1

flask..........0

 

Hey! I'm finally first in something! (Well, tied for first, anyway)

 

Guess we win, we have 3 cats.

 

Updated:

 

lamoracke....3

Roman!.....2*

TopShelfRob....1

flask....0

 

Note: *-plus 2 birds

 

I'm not sure I still want to be on this leaderboard, maybe I should just leave a blank space where my name is. Of course, everyone would still know the blank space with the "1" would be me.

[+SwineFlew]

This leaderboard thread is useless.

[Keystone]

Those discussing "flask's cat" are well-advised to study their history. It is "flask's neighbor's cat" -- which changes the analysis significantly. So, perhaps, we all ought to get back to discussing leaderboards instead of cats, yes?

[+TopShelfRob]

Those discussing "flask's cat" are well-advised to study their history. It is "flask's neighbor's cat" -- which changes the analysis significantly. So, perhaps, we all ought to get back to discussing leaderboards instead of cats, yes?

OK, updated leaderboard:

 

lamoracke....3

Roman!.....2*

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....0

 

Note: *-plus 2 birds

[+frinklabs]

i do not have a cat.

Well, that puts you on another leaderboard... people in this thread who have cats:

 

TopShelfRob....1

Roman!.........1

flask..........0

 

Hey! I'm finally first in something! (Well, tied for first, anyway)

 

Guess we win, we have 3 cats.

 

Sorry -- I have five (5) cats:

 

[+TopShelfRob]

Sorry -- I have five (5) cats:

And - we have a new leader:

 

frinklabs....5

lamoracke....3

Roman!.....2*

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....0

 

Note: *-plus 2 birds

 

I'm not sure I'd want to be at the top of this leaderboard. That's a lot of litter boxes to empty.

[+TriciaG]

Those discussing "flask's cat" are well-advised to study their history. It is "flask's neighbor's cat" -- which changes the analysis significantly. So, perhaps, we all ought to get back to discussing leaderboards instead of cats, yes?

Your subtle hint didn't work.

[+TopShelfRob]

Those discussing "flask's cat" are well-advised to study their history. It is "flask's neighbor's cat" -- which changes the analysis significantly. So, perhaps, we all ought to get back to discussing leaderboards instead of cats, yes?

Your subtle hint didn't work.

We are discussing a leaderboard.

[jholly]

Sorry -- I have five (5) cats:

And - we have a new leader:

 

frinklabs....5

lamoracke....3

Roman!.....2*

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....0

 

Note: *-plus 2 birds

 

I'm not sure I'd want to be at the top of this leaderboard. That's a lot of litter boxes to empty.

 

Update

 

jholly .... 6

frinklabs....5

lamoracke....3

Roman!.....2*

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....0

[etarace]

i do not have a cat.

Well, that puts you on another leaderboard... people in this thread who have cats:

 

TopShelfRob....1

Roman!.........1

flask..........0

 

Hey! I'm finally first in something! (Well, tied for first, anyway)

 

Guess we win, we have 3 cats.

 

Sorry -- I have five (5) cats:

 

How come your white and black kitty is antisocial? Is it so he gets to be the most fat?

 

I have two cats, one dog, six chickens, and a duck.

My neighbor has at least two cats, the cats come into my yard often.

Also, there is a very fat woodchuck that roams with the chickens.

[+TopShelfRob]

 

How come your white and black kitty is antisocial? Is it so he gets to be the most fat?

 

I have two cats, one dog, six chickens, and a duck.

My neighbor has at least two cats, the cats come into my yard often.

Also, there is a very fat woodchuck that roams with the chickens.

 

Wow.

 

jholly .... 6

frinklabs....5^z

lamoracke....3

etarace's neighbor....2+

etarace....2^y

Roman!....2^x

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....0

 

Notes: x-plus two birds. y-plus six chickens, a dog, a duck and a woodchuck. z-includes one black and white kitty which is antisocial and fat.

 

(I'm still pending a ruling on whether the woodchuck should count or not.)

Edited June 23, 2014 by TopShelfRob

[+SwineFlew]

Ok ok. I gave in. No cats. But I am house sitting one cat.

 

Now. Can we just get back on topic?

 

I wont mind if this thread get locked with live cats in it.

[+TopShelfRob]

Ok ok. I gave in. No cats. But I am house sitting one cat.

 

Now. Can we just get back on topic?

 

I wont mind if this thread get locked with live cats in it.

 

jholly .... 6

frinklabs....5^z

lamoracke....3

etarace's neighbor....2+

etarace....2^y

Roman!....2^x

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

SwineFlew....0^a

flask....0

 

Notes: x-plus two birds. y-plus six chickens, a dog, a duck and a woodchuck. z-includes one black and white kitty which is antisocial and fat. a-not counting one cat being housesat for a neighbor.

 

so get out of my way. starting today, i've got heads to step on. i am about to create a very harsh adversarial environment.

 

I'm just waiting to see if we can get flask to go out and get 7 cats in an effort to dominate this leaderboard.

Edited June 23, 2014 by TopShelfRob

[+SwineFlew]

Wont happen because flask hate leaderboards. Remember?

 

Since we are on page six, what we had learned about leaderboard here?

[Mr.Yuck]

Those discussing "flask's cat" are well-advised to study their history. It is "flask's neighbor's cat" -- which changes the analysis significantly. So, perhaps, we all ought to get back to discussing leaderboards instead of cats, yes?

Your subtle hint didn't work.

We are discussing a leaderboard.

 

She's correct, the subtle hint did not work. The moderator said to study the history, didn't they? Here's a hint: Flask has a Cat.

[+TopShelfRob]

Wont happen because flask hate leaderboards. Remember?

 

Since we are on page six, what we had learned about leaderboard here?

Right, but she said since they won't let her opt out, she was going to bascially make heads roll and make it miserable for everyone else. Ergo, if we don't let her opt of of this cat leaderboard, she'll have to go out and get seven cats to take the lead.

 

She's correct, the subtle hint did not work. The moderator said to study the history, didn't they? Here's a hint: Flask has a Cat.

Oh, this leaderboard is specifically only addressing cats accounted for in this thread. If I have to go research cats that have been addressed in other threads, well, that's a Pandora's Box I don't want to open. Although, now that you have mentioned it here, I guess I have to add it:

 

jholly .... 6

frinklabs....5^z

lamoracke....3

etarace's neighbor....2+

etarace....2^y

Roman!....2^x

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....1^b

SwineFlew....0^a

 

Notes: x-plus two birds. y-plus six chickens, a dog, a duck and a woodchuck. z-includes one black and white kitty which is antisocial and fat. a-not counting one cat being housesat for a neighbor. b-including one cat originally mentioned in previous thread.

Edited June 23, 2014 by TopShelfRob

[Mr.Yuck]

Good recovery. Put me down for two, by the way.

[+TopShelfRob]

Good recovery. Put me down for two, by the way.

LOL

 

jholly .... 6

frinklabs....5^z

lamoracke....3

etarace's neighbor....2+

etarace....2^y

Roman!....2^x

Mr.Yuck....2

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....1^b

SwineFlew....0^a

 

Notes: x-plus two birds. y-plus six chickens, a dog, a duck and a woodchuck. z-includes one black and white kitty which is antisocial and fat. a-not counting one cat being housesat for a neighbor. b-including one cat originally mentioned in previous thread.

[+Bear and Ragged]

Good recovery. Put me down for two, by the way.

LOL

 

jholly .... 6

frinklabs....5^z

lamoracke....3

etarace's neighbor....2+

etarace....2^y

Roman!....2^x

Mr.Yuck....2

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....1^b

SwineFlew....0^a

 

Notes: x-plus two birds. y-plus six chickens, a dog, a duck and a woodchuck. z-includes one black and white kitty which is antisocial and fat. a-not counting one cat being housesat for a neighbor. b-including one cat originally mentioned in previous thread.

 

I'd like to Opt Out. But as there seems to be no way of doing so... (Slightly on-topic! )

 

I have NO cat.

I have NO dog either...

 

Where does that put me, on the leaderboard I'd like to opt out of?

[+TopShelfRob]

 

I'd like to Opt Out. But as there seems to be no way of doing so... (Slightly on-topic! )

 

I have NO cat.

I have NO dog either...

 

Where does that put me, on the leaderboard I'd like to opt out of?

No, there is no way to opt out.

 

jholly .... 6

frinklabs....5^z

lamoracke....3

etarace's neighbor....2+

etarace....2^y

Roman!....2^x

Mr.Yuck....2

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....1^b

SwineFlew....0^a

Bear and Ragged....0

 

Notes: x-plus two birds. y-plus six chickens, a dog, a duck and a woodchuck. z-includes one black and white kitty which is antisocial and fat. a-not counting one cat being housesat for a neighbor. b-including one cat originally mentioned in previous thread.

 

But even if you could opt out, you would still have 0 cats, just by not listing it all we would be doing would be making the leaderboard inaccurate.

 

Let's say for instance there was a leaderboard that was "Most caches found in Vermont" and another leaderboard "Most caches found in Vermont among those who have not chosen to opt out" -- both leaderboards could very well exist. If I lived in Vermont and wanted to know where I stood in Vermont, I'd want to know where I stood on the first leaderboard. The second one would be rather arbitrary and meaningless. I wouldn't care to know where I stood only among those who haven't chosen to opt out, I'd want to know where I stood among everyone in the state. I'm mean, we're all in the top 5%. 95% of the people don't even geocache.

Edited June 23, 2014 by TopShelfRob

[jholly]

 

I'd like to Opt Out. But as there seems to be no way of doing so... (Slightly on-topic! )

 

I have NO cat.

I have NO dog either...

 

Where does that put me, on the leaderboard I'd like to opt out of?

No, there is no way to opt out.

 

[-----] .... 6

frinklabs....5^z

lamoracke....3

etarace's neighbor....2+

etarace....2^y

Roman!....2^x

Mr.Yuck....2

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....1^b

SwineFlew....0^a

Bear and Ragged....0

 

Notes: x-plus two birds. y-plus six chickens, a dog, a duck and a woodchuck. z-includes one black and white kitty which is antisocial and fat. a-not counting one cat being housesat for a neighbor. b-including one cat originally mentioned in previous thread.

 

But even if you could opt out, you would still have 0 cats, just by not listing it all we would be doing would be making the leaderboard inaccurate.

 

Let's say for instance there was a leaderboard that was "Most caches found in Vermont" and another leaderboard "Most caches found in Vermont among those who have not chosen to opt out" -- both leaderboards could very well exist. If I lived in Vermont and wanted to know where I stood in Vermont, I'd want to know where I stood on the first leaderboard. The second one would be rather arbitrary and meaningless. I wouldn't care to know where I stood only among those who haven't chosen to opt out, I'd want to know where I stood among everyone in the state. I'm mean, we're all in the top 5%. 95% of the people don't even geocache.

 

I just opted out.

[+J Grouchy]

Wow. This thread has really jumped the rails...

[+flask]

usually the OP will step in and whine something about people hijacking THEIR topic, but i tend to feel that conversations are organic and they go where they go.

 

so by my count, this conversation is still about what it's about, which would be whatever it's about.

 

for the record, i LOVE leaderboards that i actually sign up to be on. if i am in a contest, i will watch those leaderboards night and day.

 

sometimes i race bicycles. i have some trophies and stuff even. if i just go for a ride along the jonesville loop on a tuesday afternoon and my local bike club posts my time in the standings with their time trial on the same loop, i'll be cranky BECAUSE I DIDN'T SIGN UP FOR THAT RACE. the analogue is sort of when you sign up for a big group ride because it's fun to go in a group and some hatwipe thinks it's the TDF and starts posting race results at the barbecue.

 

if i had a cat, i'd get it to pee in that guy's beer.

[+TopShelfRob]

 

I just opted out.

Well yes, you did opt out on that particular displaying of this leaderboard, but (and trying to tie this back into the original topic) that doesn't mean that you don't still have six cats, and when asking who has the most cats in this thread, or who has found the most caches in Vermont, or who owns the most 19th century bottles of wine in Germany, that there isn't still a factual leader, whether or not that leader is showing up on a leaderboard or not, is only a matter of how accurate people want that leaderboard to be. If you allow people to opt out, rather than just them to ignore it, it irrevocably taints the accuracy of the leaderboard.

 

As I said way back in Post #134, does the fact that one cacher who doesn't want anyone knowing that he ranks fourth supercede the fact that the cacher that ranks eighth has the right to not think he is actually seventh because there is someone above him that doesn't want to be counted?

 

We can erase jholly and her six cats from the cat leaderboard, but should we state that frinklabs has the most cats in this thread with five? That's inaccurate, and a leaderboard that let's people opt out is useless. You can look at it, but it is meaningless. jholly still has 6 cats, and flask still has how ever many caches she has in Vermont, whether it is on the leaderboard or not.

Edited June 23, 2014 by TopShelfRob

[+Chrysalides]

Wow. This thread has really jumped the rails...

Well, if you want a summary : threatening to punch people in the face when attending events, creating a highly unpleasant competitive environment, or moving to Nunavut, may get the blank spot that represents your position on some leaderboards you don't check removed.

 

I still wish flask would update us on how she managed to get her blank spot removed from cacherstats - that could actually be the one useful contribution in this entire thread.

[+TopShelfRob]

i LOVE leaderboards that i actually sign up to be on.

Well, if there is a leaderboard "Most caches found by people who specifically sign up to be counted", you can choose whether or to sign up for it. But if the leaderboard is merely "Most caches found in Vermont", I'd say by logging your finds at Geocaching.com, you have tacitly signed up.

Edited June 23, 2014 by TopShelfRob

[+Ma & Pa]

Is flask still on here. There is an anonymous in the right area

 

http://www.zinnware.com/HighAdv/Geocaching/most_caches_found.php?Orderby=finds&Ordering=DESC&Limit=All

[+Corfman Clan]

As the owner of a "third party leaderboard", two cats, and a dog, I find this discussion interesting. I'm not sure how I could ignore a cacher's finds and still maintain valid statistics. There has been requests to ignore "armchair" cachers since bogus finds do have an effect on the statistics.

[+TopShelfRob]

As the owner of a "third party leaderboard", two cats, and a dog, I find this discussion interesting. I'm not sure how I could ignore a cacher's finds and still maintain valid statistics. There has been requests to ignore "armchair" cachers since bogus finds do have an effect on the statistics.

 

I don't think you should consider ignoring even "bogus" finds. Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire aren't in the Hall of Fame because their home runs were consider bogus, yet they still count in baseball's statistics. Once you start ignoring some stats, the whole thing is virtually invalid.

 

Oh, and by the way:

 

jholly .... 6

frinklabs....5^z

lamoracke....3

etarace's neighbor....2+

etarace....2^y

Roman!....2^x

Corfman Clan....2^c

Mr.Yuck....2

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....1^b

SwineFlew....0^a

Bear and Ragged....0

 

Notes: x-plus two birds. y-plus six chickens, a dog, a duck and a woodchuck. z-includes one black and white kitty which is antisocial and fat. a-not counting one cat being housesat for a neighbor. b-including one cat originally mentioned in previous thread. c-plus one dog.

[+Chrysalides]

Didn't jholly opt out? And I'd like to be added with 3 bogus cats (my daughter's stuffed toys). Sure, it is inflating my cat count, but anything to get ahead in this leaderboard.

[+TopShelfRob]

Didn't jholly opt out? And I'd like to be added with 3 bogus cats (my daughter's stuffed toys). Sure, it is inflating my cat count, but anything to get ahead in this leaderboard.

I guess jholly's opting out didn't "hold".

 

jholly .... 6

frinklabs....5^z

lamoracke....3

Chrysalides....3^d

etarace's neighbor....2+

etarace....2^y

Roman!....2^x

Corfman Clan....2^c

Mr.Yuck....2

TopShelfRob....1

flask's neighbor....1

flask....1^b

SwineFlew....0^a

Bear and Ragged....0

 

Notes: x-plus two birds. y-plus six chickens, a dog, a duck and a woodchuck. z-includes one black and white kitty which is antisocial and fat. a-not counting one cat being housesat for a neighbor. b-including one cat originally mentioned in previous thread. c-plus one dog. d-includes daughter's stuffed animals.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

As the owner of a "third party leaderboard", two cats, and a dog, I find this discussion interesting. I'm not sure how I could ignore a cacher's finds and still maintain valid statistics. There has been requests to ignore "armchair" cachers since bogus finds do have an effect on the statistics.

 

I don't think you should consider ignoring even "bogus" finds. Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire aren't in the Hall of Fame because their home runs were consider bogus, yet they still count in baseball's statistics. Once you start ignoring some stats, the whole thing is virtually invalid.

 

 

I was in the Baseball Hall of Fame two day ago. I didn't see any cats. The fact that there isn't a virtual cache at the Baseball Hall of Fame is all I need to support the "Bring back Virtuals" threads.

[+Chrysalides]

I was in the Baseball Hall of Fame two day ago. I didn't see any cats. The fact that there isn't a virtual cache at the Baseball Hall of Fame is all I need to support the "Bring back Virtuals" threads.

Well, if you didn't see any cats there, it's clear that the cat must be virtual.

[+flask]

ok, so you "statistics are holy" people... i ride bicycles. typically my standings in the state championship isn't counted for the stats unless I ENTER THE RACE.

 

so putting me in the competition for most awesomest cacher by number of finds rankings really should be my choice, because your stats are basically unenforceable unmonitored unauthenticated tallymarks anyway and i don't want to play.

 

but because i'm compelled to play, yesterday i went out and scooped up a dozen or so firstfinds that i'm never going to log unless someone else wants to claim them as one of their firstfind stats. you know, because some of the loserboards track firstfinds, too.

 

if anyone claims them, i'll be there with photos to discredit.

 

if i can't be excluded from the leaderboard, i'll do my best to queer as much of the data as i can. not only can i call my own data into question, but i can queer other people's stats with a little effort. any thoughts from the "all data must be accurately represented or else i can't have fun" crowd?

[+flask]

ooh, ooh! and if we're going to use a baseball hall of fame analogy (thank you, "all statistics are holy" folks!), i do not believe the hall of fame keeps track of all the home runs ever scored by all people playing baseball, ever.

 

i think that leaderboard is limited to GUYS WHO WERE EMPLOYED IN PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL. none of those hallowed statistics involves regular joes who happened to have been playing the same game somewhere.

 

in you FACE, losers! you played a game of baseball somewhere and you are included in the world rankings. too bad you suck next to the bigs. yeah, you should have thought about that before you ever tossed a ball.

[etarace]

If I watch videos of cats does that count as Lab Cats and then I get to rocket to the top of the cats owned thread?

[+Chrysalides]

Can we go back to discussing how to google the gender of virtual cats on leaderboards without getting punched in the face?

[+Roman!]

If I watch videos of cats does that count as Lab Cats and then I get to rocket to the top of the cats owned thread?

 

I'd like to know Groundspeaks view on lab cats, are they real cats or aren't they, I don't like this "well, they kinda are but in a way aren't" view on them.

 

I refuse to get any lab cats until it is decided one way or the other 100%.

[etarace]

ooh, ooh! and if we're going to use a baseball hall of fame analogy (thank you, "all statistics are holy" folks!), i do not believe the hall of fame keeps track of all the home runs ever scored by all people playing baseball, ever.

 

i think that leaderboard is limited to GUYS WHO WERE EMPLOYED IN PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL. none of those hallowed statistics involves regular joes who happened to have been playing the same game somewhere.

 

in you FACE, losers! you played a game of baseball somewhere and you are included in the world rankings. too bad you suck next to the bigs. yeah, you should have thought about that before you ever tossed a ball.

I've been fully aware of the fact that I suck at team sports ever since they started forcing team sports on me in elementary school. I don't play that game.

 

I do play geocaching. I have a low "score" of number of caches found. That's fine though, because the number of magnetic key holders and film canisters I grab from next to a wasp nest has nothing to do with how well I play the game.

 

Also, I have a whole whopping two first-to-finds and neither of them count on the third-party-statistics-sites because I don't say "FTF" in my logs. I won't change it either because I don't care.

[+TopShelfRob]

ooh, ooh! and if we're going to use a baseball hall of fame analogy (thank you, "all statistics are holy" folks!), i do not believe the hall of fame keeps track of all the home runs ever scored by all people playing baseball, ever.

No, they only count major league home runs... just like Geocaching.com only counts caches found that are logged on their website.

 

If Joe Sixpack hits a home run in the beer league, the MLB won't know.

 

And if I find a pill bottle in my medicine cabinet, Geocaching.com won't know.

 

Your move.

[etarace]

If I watch videos of cats does that count as Lab Cats and then I get to rocket to the top of the cats owned thread?

 

I'd like to know Groundspeaks view on lab cats, are they real cats or aren't they, I don't like this "well, they kinda are but in a way aren't" view on them.

 

I refuse to get any lab cats until it is decided one way or the other 100%.

I enjoy watching videos of cats, particularly educational videos. I don't believe it is fair to have those views automatically inflate my cat-count.

They are real cats, but they are not cats I have ever owned. The guy who made the video owns the Lab Cat, and has already counted the cat on his cat-count.

 

I believe the test of if a cat can be counted should be "have you changed its litter?"

 

This does create additional problems of couples double counting the same cats, and house-sat cats being counted. Nevertheless, this is the best rule we have at this time.

 

What about cats that have died? Are these archived cats? Don't they still count? If so, I have a lot of cats to add to my cat count.

[+Roman!]

ooh, ooh! and if we're going to use a baseball hall of fame analogy (thank you, "all statistics are holy" folks!), i do not believe the hall of fame keeps track of all the home runs ever scored by all people playing baseball, ever.

No, they only count major league home runs... just like Geocaching.com only counts caches found that are logged on their website.

 

If Joe Sixpack hits a home run in the beer league, the MLB won't know.

 

And if I find a pill bottle in my medicine cabinet, Geocaching.com won't know.

 

Your move.

 

I was going to post the same thing. Flask can opt to cache in the minor leagues on that other website and then her stats won't show here.

 

Analogies are pointless, what it boils down to, by logging caches on this website is your find count public data that can be used by anyone for any purpose. I think it is.

[+narcissa]

If I watch videos of cats does that count as Lab Cats and then I get to rocket to the top of the cats owned thread?

 

I'd like to know Groundspeaks view on lab cats, are they real cats or aren't they, I don't like this "well, they kinda are but in a way aren't" view on them.

 

I refuse to get any lab cats until it is decided one way or the other 100%.

I enjoy watching videos of cats, particularly educational videos. I don't believe it is fair to have those views automatically inflate my cat-count.

They are real cats, but they are not cats I have ever owned. The guy who made the video owns the Lab Cat, and has already counted the cat on his cat-count.

 

I believe the test of if a cat can be counted should be "have you changed its litter?"

 

This does create additional problems of couples double counting the same cats, and house-sat cats being counted. Nevertheless, this is the best rule we have at this time.

 

What about cats that have died? Are these archived cats? Don't they still count? If so, I have a lot of cats to add to my cat count.

 

What about if my friend has a cat and I was there when he changed the cat litter? Does that count?

[etarace]

If I watch videos of cats does that count as Lab Cats and then I get to rocket to the top of the cats owned thread?

 

I'd like to know Groundspeaks view on lab cats, are they real cats or aren't they, I don't like this "well, they kinda are but in a way aren't" view on them.

 

I refuse to get any lab cats until it is decided one way or the other 100%.

I enjoy watching videos of cats, particularly educational videos. I don't believe it is fair to have those views automatically inflate my cat-count.

They are real cats, but they are not cats I have ever owned. The guy who made the video owns the Lab Cat, and has already counted the cat on his cat-count.

 

I believe the test of if a cat can be counted should be "have you changed its litter?"

 

This does create additional problems of couples double counting the same cats, and house-sat cats being counted. Nevertheless, this is the best rule we have at this time.

 

What about cats that have died? Are these archived cats? Don't they still count? If so, I have a lot of cats to add to my cat count.

 

What about if my friend has a cat and I was there when he changed the cat litter? Does that count?