Jump to content

third party leaderboards

flask

By flask
in General geocaching topics

Followers 6

Recommended Posts

Ambrosia

+Ambrosia

Posted
Posted

Thanks to your choice of venue, even people who couldn't care less - like me - now know that the blank space on a state-level bar chart represents YOU.

 

Were you trying to hide this detail somehow?

 

Lordy, I can't believe what a firestorm of a thread this has become. Here's my contribution. VP out.

Now you have to drop your mic dramatically and walk out.

Link to comment
kunarion

+kunarion

Posted
Posted (edited)
as for simply avoiding conversations in which some hatwipe wants to compare numbers, i already do that. "how many caches have you found?" is the surest way for me to back quietly away from you and find somebody worth talking to.

So it's a whole lot more than just seeing your cacher name online? You also won't talk to people who bring up "Geocaching" within earshot? Or is there a fine line between "Have you found X Cache" and "I see you've found X Cache"?

 

Because most people enjoy mentioning milestones not as a competition, but as cause for celebration. If your close-knit Geocaching group of Nanuvutian knee smellers creates an Event for your one-thousandth find (I know that sounds like a crazy number, but it could happen), and they're all meeting at El Ranchero for lunch, would you "back away"? Who knows where they discovered the Stat, maybe on a Leaderboard. I hope you're making it clear at least locally, what your wishes are.

 

There was an Event cache here where two cachers were celebrating a milestone in their marriage. It wasn't even a Geocaching Stat. I don't know what Leaderboard it was from. But the friends might celebrate not knowing that these two can't stand such Stats being made public.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment
redsox_mark

+redsox_mark

Posted
Posted

 

Second, they aren't leaderboards, they're stat sites. A leaderboard implies a competitive aspect, which we've already established is not the aim of geocaching, nor is it the aim of these sites. If these sites are being used as a part of a competition, I think it's pretty few and far between. The intent of them is simply to show you where you stand as a matter of personal interest.

 

This is also how I see it.

 

I am not competing. But I like project-gc, as there are all sorts of stats there I find interesting. Many of which don't mention individuals at all; like cache density, number of active cachers in my country, etc. For those which do list cachers, I don't even notice the names. The list of total number of finds overall is just one stat. E.g. Full D/T counting multi-caches only has been completed by 3 geocachers in the world. (I'm not one of them!).

 

In my area I know lots of other cachers who enjoy the stats of project-gc; but we don't discuss "leaderboards".

 

Now, there are a couple of local sites where there is a sort of "competition". One example is "Church Micro" caches. This is a set of caches nationwide (in the UK) hidden by churches. It has it's own "leaderboard". I know several cachers who like to seek these out specifically and like to move up in the list. When you talk to them they are not really making it a competition, just something they like to do.

 

Now I don't understand the legal aspects of the TOU etc. And it certainly doesn't bother me to see my name in various stats (if you look down the list far enough!). But if it bothers some, on that site at least you can block your stats.

Link to comment
flask

+flask

Posted
  • Author
Posted

to get back to the original point: i don't WANT to block my stats from view because some stats are pleasing to me.

 

what is not pleasing to me is that there is a ranking of players that i can't opt out of. one site has lamely told me i can be anonymized, but since it was announced to me by leaderboard watchers that everyone knows who those two blank spots are, i wanted something done about it.

 

to repeat: i just want my data removed from the leaderboards. for those with poor reading comprehension, i don't want to become invisible, just off the leaderbords which DO rank players by caches found. and if you think it's not a competition, you've never been in that top slot and heard what people will say to you.

 

so i wrote to Groundspeak about it, and i opened a discussion about it here. the newsletters they send out have stressed that it's all about community. well, i've seen it be very much about those dadgum cache counts and who's ahead of whom. i'd like to be able to pull out of the contest and let the people below me all move up a slot.

 

alternately, i'm just going to have to take that number one spot for myself and step on however many heads i have to to do it. if i'm being forced into the game, i'm going to wipe up the field, just because. and then from up there i will loudly announce that the leaderboard doesn't really matter and and nobody's using it for competition anyway. i will tell the people who WANTED to be #1 that i asked to be removed from the board entirely, but wasn't allowed. you know, because it's about community.

 

apparently i can block all of my stats from view EXCEPT that all important total finds for the rankings, because if we judge by which statistics we can control display of, it is in fact the rankings that are most important.

 

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.

Link to comment
cezanne

cezanne

Posted
Posted (edited)

apparently i can block all of my stats from view EXCEPT that all important total finds for the rankings, because if we judge by which statistics we can control display of, it is in fact the rankings that are most important.

 

Actually, you cannot block any statistics. You can just block that others can see your stats on gc.com.

As long as we can list all caches found by someone (which is a very useful and important feature in my opinion) or all people that have found a certain cache,

everyone can set up stats and rankings on his own easily. It is not even a question of offering such rankings on the internet. If someone wants to address you regarding your find count and

how it relates to the finds counts of the other caches in your area, he/she can do that regardless of leaderboards or whatever in the internet.

I do not need any rankings to know which cachers in my area have high numbers and who cares about numbers. I know if from the logs for caches in my area and I'm not even dependent on displayed find counts for those with larger numbers who are not new to geocaching.

 

Opting out of rankings is no solution to the issue you have. If someone wants to compare him/herself with you, he/she will find ways to do that anyway. Any ranking where certain cachers are missing will motivate new rankings. You might not like this, but it is part of the geocaching reality.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment
K'J'

+K'J'

Posted
Posted

 

it makes me feel icky to be playing one game- a game i love- and to be placed against my will in a competitive version of that game from which there is no escape.

 

 

Add me to the confused crowd. How can you view it as a competition if YOU are not participating? Otherwise it's just your name on a list somewhere. Well apparently, a blank on a list somewhere.

Link to comment
jholly

jholly

Posted
Posted

<snip>

alternately, i'm just going to have to take that number one spot for myself and step on however many heads i have to to do it. if i'm being forced into the game, i'm going to wipe up the field, just because. and then from up there i will loudly announce that the leaderboard doesn't really matter and and nobody's using it for competition anyway. i will tell the people who WANTED to be #1 that i asked to be removed from the board entirely, but wasn't allowed. you know, because it's about community.

<snip>

Does this mean Alamogul is in trouble?

Link to comment
kunarion

+kunarion

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

it makes me feel icky to be playing one game- a game i love- and to be placed against my will in a competitive version of that game from which there is no escape.

 

 

Add me to the confused crowd. How can you view it as a competition if YOU are not participating? Otherwise it's just your name on a list somewhere. Well apparently, a blank on a list somewhere.

Don't be confused. Refer to DanOCan's hotshot kid at the red light. The OP's issue is the kid was racing the OP, as a challenge to prove how great the hotshot kid is. In fact the OP won the race and wasn't even racing, just driving as usual. The OP got trophies and a ticker-tape parade over this. All while not participating. Perhaps the issue is the notoriety. The competition is defined, the race is on, and the OP is included in the race.

 

Now the name is scratched off the trophies. That wasn't exactly the problem.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment
team tisri

team tisri

Posted
Posted

i've thought about it a lot, because originally i simply asked for my account to be removed from one site years ago and i just assumed that it was done until recently when i resumed going to events after a long absence and right out of the gate someone had to talk to me about the leaderboard, which was disturbing to me.

 

so i didn't say anything about it and took a month or two to calm down about it before writing to the owner of that leaderboard and today i finally got the answer that he's very sorry, but that big blanks space everyone can already identify as me is the best that he can do.

 

well, what REALLY stands out in a crowd is a BIG BLANK SPACE and since everyone knows who that blank space represents, it sort of undermines me asking to be taken off the list at all.

 

it makes me feel icky to be playing one game- a game i love- and to be placed against my will in a competitive version of that game from which there is no escape.

 

do not tell me that if i were allowed to withdraw from the contest it would ruin other people's contest results and i should not be allowed it, because the game AS DEFINED BY THE PARENT ORGANIZATION specifically and repeatedly excludes this competition and as much as it is not my business whether people wish to compete against each other, it is not their business to force me into their contest by virtue of my having found some geocaches.

 

i should not have to quit geocaching to be excused from competitive leaderboards.

 

you get the geocaching newsletter, right? the ones where they try to tell you it's all about community? well, it's not. it really IS all about the numbers, and your numbers go on the leaderboard whether you want them to or not. if Groundspeak allows data scraping by its partners to force us into third party rankings, then Groundspeak should just admit it really is about the numbers and rank us.

 

it is cowardly to take one position and allow the API partners to force your own users into a different position behind the screen.

 

I'm struggling to understand the problem here.

 

If people can see that you've found 3,000 caches and they've found 2,500 caches they can mentally note that you're "winning", until they realise that they've now found 3,200 and you've found 3,100 at which point they are satisfied that they are "winning". The fact you aren't competing changes nothing.

 

If people can see your total find count on every single one of your logs, why is it a problem that someone is putting you in a leaderboard with other people? To me it's like when I overtake someone or get overtaken on the road - if it were a race it would matter but I'm not racing (I can't speak for the other guy) it makes little difference who is in front. If people are into numbers above all else they can take in powertrails - to the numbers hounds a smiley is a smiley whether it was cache 583 in a power trail if 1200 film pots along a guard rail or a 12-stage multi that took in 15 miles of hiking along mountain ridges. To the people who value quality over quantity the 15 miles of hiking beats any number of lame micros.

 

But since I assume you don't quit driving just because some unknown drivers might consider that they are "winning" when they overtake you, why do you need to quit caching just because some other people worry over whether you or they are "winning"?

Link to comment
TriciaG

+TriciaG

Posted
Posted

I'm not the OP, but if I am reading his mind correctly...

 

But since I assume you don't quit driving just because some unknown drivers might consider that they are "winning" when they overtake you, why do you need to quit caching just because some other people worry over whether you or they are "winning"?

There's a difference between someone thinking they or you are "winning" and people coming up to you at an event to discuss who is "winning."

Link to comment
jholly

jholly

Posted
Posted

I'm not the OP, but if I am reading his mind correctly...

 

But since I assume you don't quit driving just because some unknown drivers might consider that they are "winning" when they overtake you, why do you need to quit caching just because some other people worry over whether you or they are "winning"?

There's a difference between someone thinking they or you are "winning" and people coming up to you at an event to discuss who is "winning."

But they can only discuss it if you participate. A simple "I don't care about that stuff." should quickly end any discussion.

Link to comment
Roman!

+Roman!

Posted
Posted

I'm not the OP, but if I am reading his mind correctly...

 

But since I assume you don't quit driving just because some unknown drivers might consider that they are "winning" when they overtake you, why do you need to quit caching just because some other people worry over whether you or they are "winning"?

There's a difference between someone thinking they or you are "winning" and people coming up to you at an event to discuss who is "winning."

 

I don't think the OP will have to worry about anyone talking to them after this:

 

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.

Link to comment
Chrysalides

+Chrysalides

Posted
Posted

I don't think the OP will have to worry about anyone talking to them after this:

 

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.

 

This is Flask you're talking about. She hasn't been any different over the years, and people still like talking to her.

 

We like talking about her too, especially when she doesn't like to be talked about. Do you know she's #1 on the Nunavut Leaderboard?

Link to comment
Roman!

+Roman!

Posted
Posted

I don't think the OP will have to worry about anyone talking to them after this:

 

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.

 

This is Flask you're talking about. She hasn't been any different over the years, and people still like talking to her.

 

We like talking about her too, especially when she doesn't like to be talked about. Do you know she's #1 on the Nunavut Leaderboard?

 

And she has a clean nose and nice smelling knees but I have more finds. I win.

Link to comment
terrkan78

+terrkan78

Posted
Posted

I thought about clicking on your siggy link yesterday. I thought about it again a few minutes ago when I came back to this thread. Then I read this post:

 

<snip>

i base this largely on the fact that my signature here is linked to my totally awesome blog, which has not seen an increase in traffic today at all. views of my profile page and views of my blog are not necessarily linked, but there is some correlation between my interactions at gc.com and views of my blog, my flickr account, and my youtube channel.

<snip>

Now I can't click on your siggy link. Cuz you'll know. :D (or at least your traffic counter will know) *sigh*

Link to comment
TopShelfRob

+TopShelfRob

Posted
Posted (edited)

Does it matter if it is an automated system "scraping" the data? What if just an ordinary cacher who happened to live in your county wanted to know where he ranked among all cachers in the county and were to manually tabulate all the "found it" logs on every cache in the county and set up a spreadsheet and published a list. Should cachers on the list have the right to opt out of having their actual rank appear on that list? 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?

 

If you don't want your smiley count "counted" by anyone publicly there is an easy way to do that -- don't log the cache publicly. If you don't want to show up as the fourth-highest ranked cacher in Vermont, don't have the fourth-highest amount of caches found logged in Vermont.

 

Maybe they can put your name up there, but that can't force you to play. Just ignore it. But don't try to force others to not play. If certain people at events knowing that the "blank space is you" bothers you that much, then don't go to events with those people.

Edited by TopShelfRob
Link to comment
team tisri

team tisri

Posted
Posted

I'm not the OP, but if I am reading his mind correctly...

 

But since I assume you don't quit driving just because some unknown drivers might consider that they are "winning" when they overtake you, why do you need to quit caching just because some other people worry over whether you or they are "winning"?

There's a difference between someone thinking they or you are "winning" and people coming up to you at an event to discuss who is "winning."

But they can only discuss it if you participate. A simple "I don't care about that stuff." should quickly end any discussion.

 

That was my thought. How is it any different if someone sees one of my find logs, sees I've got 2,300-odd cache finds, and approaches me to comment on how they finally overtook me last week? As you say, "I wasn't racing" should end the discussion. It would be little different if someone overtook me and I caught up to them at the next traffic light to hear them telling me that they won.

 

Winning and losing are only relevant constructs if everyone involved is competing under the same terms. Discussing who is winning with someone who isn't competing is irrelevant.

Link to comment
team tisri

team tisri

Posted
Posted
but if it's worth anything to you about the theory of how many people are going off to click my profile, i am going to suggest that not as many people are doing this as one might think. i base this largely on the fact that my signature here is linked to my totally awesome blog, which has not seen an increase in traffic today at all. views of my profile page and views of my blog are not necessarily linked, but there is some correlation between my interactions at gc.com and views of my blog, my flickr account, and my youtube channel.

 

so no, this thread does not seem to be functioning well as an attention getting device for purposes other than this discussion, which was the primary point of it: hey, this thing is happening and i do not like it and i wish to discuss it.

 

 

I would have clicked on your blog but couldn't cope with the idea that you might end up with more hits than me. You might even approach me at an event and tell me you were winning, were that ever to happen. So maybe I'll go and find a puppy to kick as well to vent my frustration at... well, I'll think of something. Nanos in trees seems like a good an issue as any.

Link to comment
qtbluemoon

+qtbluemoon

Posted
Posted

This is Flask you're talking about. She hasn't been any different over the years, and people still like talking to her.

Well, I know I'm not going to be making any friends with this comment, but here goes. The whole time I've been reading this thread, I'm thinking "What's the big deal, I don't get it." But now that I know Flask is a 'she', it all makes perfect sense. Well, maybe not perfect sense, but it's not surprising now.

 

Oink oink

Link to comment
kunarion

+kunarion

Posted
Posted

This is the leaderboard of persons who don't understand what the OP is talking about, ranked by replies:

 

1. [--------]: 21

 

2. cezanne: 7

 

3: Chrysalides: 7

 

4: J Grouchy: 3

 

5: The A-Team: 3

 

6: Viajero Perdido; 2

 

7: etarace 2

 

8: narcissa: 2

 

9: team tisri: 2

 

10: TopShelfRob: 2

 

11: qtbluemoon: 2

 

12: Walts Hunting: 1

 

13: KoosKoos: 1

 

14: lamoracke: 1

 

15: redsox_mark: 1

 

16: terrkan78: 1

 

17: K'J': 1

 

18: DanOCan: 1

 

19: emmett: 1

 

20: eightwednesday: 1

 

But the numbers aren't important. There are no winners in this list. :anibad:

Link to comment
Chrysalides

+Chrysalides

Posted
Posted

This is the leaderboard of persons who don't understand what the OP is talking about, ranked by replies:

I think most of us know what the OP is talking about. We just don't understand the OP :)

But the numbers aren't important. There are no winners in this list. :anibad:

Woo hoo! I've moved up to #2 with this comment! Take that, cezanne!

Link to comment
DanOCan

+DanOCan

Posted
Posted

Time for this infamous quote.

 

Bickering over the rules of a cache "find" was never the intent of Geocaching.com. There's no prize, no leaderboard, and no trophy, so there's no reason to get your knickers in a twist about anyone else's definition of a find.

But apparently there is a leaderboard.

Da-da-da-dum

The game's afoot.

Link to comment
team tisri

team tisri

Posted
Posted

This is the leaderboard of persons who don't understand what the OP is talking about, ranked by replies:

 

1. [--------]: 21

 

2. cezanne: 7

 

3: Chrysalides: 7

 

4: J Grouchy: 3

 

5: The A-Team: 3

 

6: Viajero Perdido; 2

 

7: etarace 2

 

8: narcissa: 2

 

9: team tisri: 2

 

10: TopShelfRob: 2

 

11: qtbluemoon: 2

 

12: Walts Hunting: 1

 

13: KoosKoos: 1

 

14: lamoracke: 1

 

15: redsox_mark: 1

 

16: terrkan78: 1

 

17: K'J': 1

 

18: DanOCan: 1

 

19: emmett: 1

 

20: eightwednesday: 1

 

But the numbers aren't important. There are no winners in this list. :anibad:

 

Positions 6 through 9 all have two posts so should be 6th equal. I move up three places with that observation alone. Plus a few more with this reply. Now I feel good, maybe I'll gloat over those losers with only reply when I see them, and I might even go and cuddle the puppy I kicked earlier in frustration at nanos in the woods.

Link to comment
team tisri

team tisri

Posted
Posted

Time for this infamous quote.

 

Bickering over the rules of a cache "find" was never the intent of Geocaching.com. There's no prize, no leaderboard, and no trophy, so there's no reason to get your knickers in a twist about anyone else's definition of a find.

 

Awesome quote! My definition of a find is "Looked up the cache page on geocaching.com". Nobody else needs to get their knickers in a twist when they realise I'm winning. And it's so much cheaper to fill in the counties and countries on my map if I don't have to deal with the time and expense of actually going there. But of course I'll turn my map off, because I don't want anyone to put me on the leaderboard. Until I'm winning of course.

Link to comment
Ambrosia

+Ambrosia

Posted
Posted

This is Flask you're talking about. She hasn't been any different over the years, and people still like talking to her.

Well, I know I'm not going to be making any friends with this comment, but here goes. The whole time I've been reading this thread, I'm thinking "What's the big deal, I don't get it." But now that I know Flask is a 'she', it all makes perfect sense. Well, maybe not perfect sense, but it's not surprising now.

 

Oink oink

I'm not really sure what to make of this post.

Link to comment
narcissa

+narcissa

Posted
Posted

This is Flask you're talking about. She hasn't been any different over the years, and people still like talking to her.

Well, I know I'm not going to be making any friends with this comment, but here goes. The whole time I've been reading this thread, I'm thinking "What's the big deal, I don't get it." But now that I know Flask is a 'she', it all makes perfect sense. Well, maybe not perfect sense, but it's not surprising now.

 

Oink oink

I'm not really sure what to make of this post.

 

I know exactly what to make of it.

Link to comment
etarace

etarace

Posted
Posted

:)Found It!

I came across this thread at the top of Geocaching Topics discussions. My third post on this rainy day while my Beloved Husband continues to refuse to do the Experience Cortland Geo-Tour with me. My duckling is waddling around in mud puddles in the driveway. I left the window open on my Jeep.

That's one more post for me! Moving up on the list of people not understanding what the OP is talking about leaderboard! TN/LN/SL/TFTT (thanks for the topic)

Link to comment
Don_J

+Don_J

Posted
Posted

those are the only two sites to which i was referring, but the general concept applies to all such sites.

 

i really, really want not to be included in any competitive leaderboard rankings. since gc.com does not rank us and has consistently declined to rank us, i believe it is reasonable for them not to allow us to be placed in public rankings without our consent.

 

i wish to geocache. i do not wish to have my rank worldwide, or nationwide, or part of my state a matter for others to enter into competition with.

 

to use an imperfect analogy, it's as if i decided to use a GPS tracker to record my mountain bike rides and a third party concern scooped up al the data and gave me a rating in some race field i didn't agree to be in. maybe i just wanted to go for a bike ride?

 

since gc.com has consistently taken the position that geocaching is non-competitive and that they do not rank us nor have plans to rank us, i feel my confidence in their system is betrayed somewhat if third parties are allowed as partners to rank me and enter me into competitions to which i did not agree.

 

simply leave me out of it and i'll be a happy, happy person. give me a way to be left out of the rankings that does not force me to quit geocaching.

 

and yes, i know, i could simply stop logging my finds, but if i don't log my finds, i'm not really playing the game. sure, i can find them and not tell anyone i found them, but the game as presented involves logging my finds,. it say so right in geocaching 101. the game as presented there says nothing at all about "compete with others for state and national rankings!"

 

i don't want other people to not be able to compete for stats with other people who wish to enter into competition. i just want to be left out of it.

 

You have another alternative. Simply ignore it. If I'm at a stop light and a car pulls up next to me and the driver wants to drag race, I ignore him and go on about my business.

Link to comment
kunarion

+kunarion

Posted
Posted

Simply ignore it. If I'm at a stop light and a car pulls up next to me and the driver wants to drag race, I ignore him and go on about my business.

Are you sure this is the analogy you wish to use? Because both DanOCan’s hotshot kid, and now you, have pulled up to either side of the OP and are revving your engines and shouting “Hey! If you don’t wanna race, ignore us!!”, yet regardless of whether the OP ignores you, in your mind she’s an active participant in the race, and despite not even noticing you, won the race, beating you, and therefore other contenders will arrive at other streets, rev their engines and shout, “Hey! If you don’t wanna race, ignore us!!”, and now she uses her winnings to buy some fancy European knee deodorizer and is using way too much of it, but nobody says anything, because they’re too embarrassed to mention it. The End.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
Followers 6
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...