Make Lab Caches show up in MY FINDS PQ

[+gvsu4msu]

While they made them part of the statistics as finds, they do not show up in your "My Finds" PQ.

 

Anyone know if this will ever be done?

 

I have to believe this is going to screw up a lot of stats for people using Stats programs.

 

Wish you could get the GPX file of the Lab Cache to "fake it" in those Stats programs.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

While they made them part of the statistics as finds, they do not show up in your "My Finds" PQ.

 

Anyone know if this will ever be done?

 

I have to believe this is going to screw up a lot of stats for people using Stats programs.

 

Wish you could get the GPX file of the Lab Cache to "fake it" in those Stats programs.

 

I would prefer that Lab Caches didn't count as a find, in the stats, or anywhere else in my profle (not that I've actually found any).

 

To me, Lab Caches are experimental, and thus should not impact stats, finds counts or anything else that is associated with existing cache types. If a specific Lab Cache type became a "real" geocache type the it's going to require guideline changes and integration into stats, find counts, etc, but the half baked implementation is just confusing.

 

I could support the idea that if one participates in a Lab Cache experiment, that some sort souvenir (digital artwork) could be awarded to recognize participation, but apparently GS feels that users need further motivation in the form of additions to their find count, and counting in some (but not all) of the various stats associated with our profiles.

[+lamoracke]

While they made them part of the statistics as finds, they do not show up in your "My Finds" PQ.

 

Anyone know if this will ever be done?

 

I have to believe this is going to screw up a lot of stats for people using Stats programs.

 

Wish you could get the GPX file of the Lab Cache to "fake it" in those Stats programs.

 

Will it ever be done? No idea. I would think they (GS) would just have to assign a GC# to each lab cache that has already been created and then update all the lab caches, maybe some others. I wish they would, but will it ever be done? Do not know.

 

I am in the camp that these caches should fully count, including whatever is needed to have them show up in your "my finds" or just leave them out like they do with benchmarks. Please do not delete them like "challenges" but at worst, count them like benchmarks.

 

However, you can put these caches in your 3rd party stats. Mine are in GSAK. I made up some GC#s for them, like GC-Earth1, GC-Earth2, etc, owner ids, etc and they are in there just fine. However, I imagine many folks will not go through the trouble. I like to my stats match.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

While they made them part of the statistics as finds, they do not show up in your "My Finds" PQ.

 

Anyone know if this will ever be done?

 

I have to believe this is going to screw up a lot of stats for people using Stats programs.

 

Wish you could get the GPX file of the Lab Cache to "fake it" in those Stats programs.

 

Will it ever be done? No idea. I would think they (GS) would just have to assign a GC# to each lab cache that has already been created and then update all the lab caches, maybe some others. I wish they would, but will it ever be done? Do not know.

 

I am in the camp that these caches should fully count, including whatever is needed to have them show up in your "my finds" or just leave them out like they do with benchmarks. Please do not delete them like "challenges" but at worst, count them like benchmarks.

 

However, you can put these caches in your 3rd party stats. Mine are in GSAK. I made up some GC#s for them, like GC-Earth1, GC-Earth2, etc, owner ids, etc and they are in there just fine. However, I imagine many folks will not go through the trouble. I like to my stats match.

 

Even if you have to game the system to do it? Waymarks don't show up in 3rd party stats. When I was in Seattle a couple of weeks ago the traditional cache at the Space Needle was disabled (and apparently missing). But since I was there I could prepend GC- to the code for the waymark located there (WM150D) and count it as an existing geocache type.

[+Walts Hunting]

In order to,put them in PQ's you would have to add a new name to the field for type which would break every device and application in the world when it tried to read that file. Look at the huge issues recently when the for some reason renamed the unknown/puzzle type.

 

Not as simple as previously mentioned. The same reason they can't "just add nano" to the size field.

[+lamoracke]

While they made them part of the statistics as finds, they do not show up in your "My Finds" PQ.

 

Anyone know if this will ever be done?

 

I have to believe this is going to screw up a lot of stats for people using Stats programs.

 

Wish you could get the GPX file of the Lab Cache to "fake it" in those Stats programs.

 

Will it ever be done? No idea. I would think they (GS) would just have to assign a GC# to each lab cache that has already been created and then update all the lab caches, maybe some others. I wish they would, but will it ever be done? Do not know.

 

I am in the camp that these caches should fully count, including whatever is needed to have them show up in your "my finds" or just leave them out like they do with benchmarks. Please do not delete them like "challenges" but at worst, count them like benchmarks.

 

However, you can put these caches in your 3rd party stats. Mine are in GSAK. I made up some GC#s for them, like GC-Earth1, GC-Earth2, etc, owner ids, etc and they are in there just fine. However, I imagine many folks will not go through the trouble. I like to my stats match.

 

Even if you have to game the system to do it? Waymarks don't show up in 3rd party stats. When I was in Seattle a couple of weeks ago the traditional cache at the Space Needle was disabled (and apparently missing). But since I was there I could prepend GC- to the code for the waymark located there (WM150D) and count it as an existing geocache type.

 

Right now lab caches count in my finds, if I do not put them into GSAK, my GSAK finds and 3rd party stats will not match what my Geocaching.com finds are. Some folks I know do not give a care about this, but I do personally. You can download the GPX file while the lab caches are there and import that into your find database but really its not any different than manually placing them yourself, they just do not populate all the fields so I like to personally edit them a bit to make them more congruous. I do not want 4 caches saying GC7. I never found GC7 but I did DNF it. Not sure its gaming, its putting a small bandaid on a system where the 3rd party stats do not match what Groundspeak currently considers a find.

 

As far as the next poster, the icon, I just use other. Clyde or whoever the GSAK guy is will not add a lab icon until they show up in "my finds" so its the best I can do.

Edited June 24, 2014 by lamoracke

[+NYPaddleCacher]

In order to,put them in PQ's you would have to add a new name to the field for type which would break every device and application in the world when it tried to read that file. Look at the huge issues recently when the for some reason renamed the unknown/puzzle type.

 

Not as simple as previously mentioned. The same reason they can't "just add nano" to the size field.

 

It wouldn't break every device and application. It might break devices and applications that are sloppily programmed and had made the assumption that a field which the specification declares as containing any string would only contain one of a specific list of strings.

 

I modified a GPX file such that the element for the cache size was changed from Micro to Nano and sent it to my Garmin Oregon. Not only did it not break the device but it displayed "Nano" as the cache size on the "details" screen. There was a thread awhile back about this where I and others posted screen shots of their GPS when "Nano" was specified as the cache size. Some units even correctly displayed the cache size as Micro.

[jholly]

While they made them part of the statistics as finds, they do not show up in your "My Finds" PQ.

 

Anyone know if this will ever be done?

 

I have to believe this is going to screw up a lot of stats for people using Stats programs.

 

Wish you could get the GPX file of the Lab Cache to "fake it" in those Stats programs.

 

Will it ever be done? No idea. I would think they (GS) would just have to assign a GC# to each lab cache that has already been created and then update all the lab caches, maybe some others. I wish they would, but will it ever be done? Do not know.

 

I am in the camp that these caches should fully count, including whatever is needed to have them show up in your "my finds" or just leave them out like they do with benchmarks. Please do not delete them like "challenges" but at worst, count them like benchmarks.

 

However, you can put these caches in your 3rd party stats. Mine are in GSAK. I made up some GC#s for them, like GC-Earth1, GC-Earth2, etc, owner ids, etc and they are in there just fine. However, I imagine many folks will not go through the trouble. I like to my stats match.

 

Even if you have to game the system to do it? Waymarks don't show up in 3rd party stats. When I was in Seattle a couple of weeks ago the traditional cache at the Space Needle was disabled (and apparently missing). But since I was there I could prepend GC- to the code for the waymark located there (WM150D) and count it as an existing geocache type.

 

Right now lab caches count in my finds, if I do not put them into GSAK, my GSAK finds and 3rd party stats will not match what my Geocaching.com finds are. Some folks I know do not give a care about this, but I do personally. You can download the GPX file while the lab caches are there and import that into your find database but really its not any different than manually placing them yourself, they just do not populate all the fields so I like to personally edit them a bit to make them more congruous. I do not want 4 caches saying GC7. I never found GC7 but I did DNF it. Not sure its gaming, its putting a small bandaid on a system where the 3rd party stats do not match what Groundspeak currently considers a find.

 

As far as the next poster, the icon, I just use other. Clyde or whoever the GSAK guy is will not add a lab icon until they show up in "my finds" so its the best I can do.

 

It is Clyde and it is primarily because to date Groundspeak refuses to fully support lab caches. They don't have codes or ID's which mean they can not be uniquely identified and they don't provide any information in a full gpx file, be it the MyFinds, PQ or a download from the page. And once they are gone they are gone for good. It has been pointed out they have less information than a benchmark. I consider Lab Caches to be Groundspeak's better mistake on replacing Challenges. Best I can tell they were "invented" to replaced the temporary caches and Challenges used for caches for folks to find during the Block Party. When the Challenges were archived they needed a replacement for temporary caches. You now have Lab Caches. I simply don't waste time on them since they are not real caches and their only current function is to screw up my stats.

[+Sages]

Groundspeak added Lab Caches to our totals and statistics page and I am totally in favor of that. Now they need to get them in the My Finds pocket query too. They need to finish the job - not stop half way.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Groundspeak added Lab Caches to our totals and statistics page and I am totally in favor of that. Now they need to get them in the My Finds pocket query too. They need to finish the job - not stop half way.

 

Lab caches are not real caches. So, I delete most of mine 'finds'. Keeps my stats better.

[jholly]

Groundspeak added Lab Caches to our totals and statistics page and I am totally in favor of that. Now they need to get them in the My Finds pocket query too. They need to finish the job - not stop half way.

 

Lab caches are not real caches. So, I delete most of mine 'finds'. Keeps my stats better.

I agree that lab caches are not real caches. But my approach is simpler and easier, I don't bother wasting time finding them.

[+Roman!]

Groundspeak added Lab Caches to our totals and statistics page and I am totally in favor of that. Now they need to get them in the My Finds pocket query too. They need to finish the job - not stop half way.

 

Lab caches are not real caches. So, I delete most of mine 'finds'. Keeps my stats better.

I agree that lab caches are not real caches. But my approach is simpler and easier, I don't bother wasting time finding them.

 

That's a sound strategy I choose to employ as well.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

I don't really care either way, but I feel that if they are going to count them as finds, they should also be included in the My Finds PQ.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I don't really care either way, but I feel that if they are going to count them as finds, they should also be included in the My Finds PQ.

 

And that's the point: If they are actually caches then they will appear where ever 'real' caches appear. If they don't, then the are not really caches.

[+Roman!]

I don't really care either way, but I feel that if they are going to count them as finds, they should also be included in the My Finds PQ.

 

And that's the point: If they are actually caches then they will appear where ever 'real' caches appear. If they don't, then the are not really caches.

 

1.5. Are there rules?

 

We like to keep things fun for everyone, so we have a few rules we encourage everyone to follow:

 

Sign both the logbook and log your find online to get your smiley. Geocache owners love reading about your experience.

 

Lab caches have no owner and no one can read about your experience finding one because you can't write a log.

 

Actually I guess GS owns lab caches, does that make them legally responsible as in this case they are no longer just a listing service.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Roman!

[+ArtieD]

Groundspeak added Lab Caches to our totals and statistics page and I am totally in favor of that. Now they need to get them in the My Finds pocket query too. They need to finish the job - not stop half way.

 

Lab caches are not real caches. So, I delete most of mine 'finds'. Keeps my stats better.

 

Using your logic, virtual caches aren't real caches, and as such they should not count, either...

[jholly]

Groundspeak added Lab Caches to our totals and statistics page and I am totally in favor of that. Now they need to get them in the My Finds pocket query too. They need to finish the job - not stop half way.

 

Lab caches are not real caches. So, I delete most of mine 'finds'. Keeps my stats better.

 

Using your logic, virtual caches aren't real caches, and as such they should not count, either...

Is there some reason your overlooking earthcaches and webcam caches?

[+Crow-T-Robot]

I don't really care either way, but I feel that if they are going to count them as finds, they should also be included in the My Finds PQ.

 

And that's the point: If they are actually caches then they will appear where ever 'real' caches appear. If they don't, then the are not really caches.

 

Does that rule apply to Virtuals, E/C's, webcams, CITO's, events and Adventure Maze Exhibit caches as well? I can't seem to find any of those containers either....but those all count in your statistics and show up on your My Finds PQ.

[+irisisleuk]

Geocaching:

1) enjoy preparing for a day out by choosing which geocaches you want to do: reading cache pages, reading other people's logs, making a route, solving a puzzle, collect special tools if needed etc.

2) go to the coordinates

3) find what needs to be find, a container, a webcam, a specific location, a geological phenomenon etc.

4) do whatever is needed to be able to log the cache: sign the paper, find answers, have a photo taken etc.

5) log you find on internet so everyone can enjoy reading your experiences

 

No log for everybody to enjoy with labcaches, so a labcache isn't a geocache.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Groundspeak added Lab Caches to our totals and statistics page and I am totally in favor of that. Now they need to get them in the My Finds pocket query too. They need to finish the job - not stop half way.

 

Lab caches are not real caches. So, I delete most of mine 'finds'. Keeps my stats better.

 

Using your logic, virtual caches aren't real caches, and as such they should not count, either...

 

Virtual, webcam, and earth caches are all just as real as traditional, puzzle, and multi-caches. Other than the fact that they don't have a container and physical log sheet all of the same processes (publishing, ownership, d/t ratings, maintenance, logging, discovery and downloading of waypoints, and so on) apply to virtual, webcam, earth, and even event caches. Most importantly, Groundspeak defines them as a type of geocache and defines specific guidelines to account for the differences between other types.

 

Lab caches follow an entirely different set of [experimental] processes, but for some reason they felt they had to count them in "some" of the statistics. IMHO, the experimental nature of these cache types should have been the focus rather than the heavy promotion (for only some of the lab cache types) and partial inclusion into our user profiles. I would have preferred that they never started integrating them into find counts, and other areas in our stats, and just treated them as experimental concepts.

[+ArtieD]

Is there some reason your overlooking earthcaches and webcam caches?

 

No...just forgot about them.

 

Does that rule apply to Virtuals, E/C's, webcams, CITO's, events and Adventure Maze Exhibit caches as well? I can't seem to find any of those containers either....but those all count in your statistics and show up on your My Finds PQ.

 

Bingo.

 

No log for everybody to enjoy with labcaches, so a labcache isn't a geocache.

 

No log for everyone to enjoy? Please. Most people don't read online logs unless they need a hint. I know plenty of cache owners who rarely read the logs unless it's something like a NM or NA log. Besides, some people never log their finds online...does that mean they weren't really caching?

 

No online log does not make them any less of a geocache.

 

I would have preferred that they never started integrating them into find counts, and other areas in our stats, and just treated them as experimental concepts.

 

Why not? People found these lab caches, so why should they not get credit? Should your very narrow view of the caching world be the gauge of what's acceptable?

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I would have preferred that they never started integrating them into find counts, and other areas in our stats, and just treated them as experimental concepts.

 

Why not? People found these lab caches, so why should they not get credit? Should your very narrow view of the caching world be the gauge of what's acceptable?

 

I'm not sure what leads you to believe that I have a narrow view of the caching world. In fact, I frequently point out that the caching world extends beyond what some see in their local environment. I'm not, at all, objecting to people getting credit for participating in the lab cache experiments. I just don't think the only way to give credit is to count them as finds and only partially effect ones statistics.