Jump to content

Past Find D/T changed yesterday, D/T grid now incomplete


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

The entire point of ratings is to provide searchers with an accurate measure of the D/T difficulty of the cache. If some finders choose to use these ratings for other purposes that is their problem. I always have and always will adjust my cache D/T ratings based on feedback from finders and the conditions of the area. I strive to serve searchers by providing them with realistic D/T ratings and I'm not concerned with someones side game.

 

The D/T grid is not a side game, it's on your stats page.

 

I'm not concerned with someones side game, isn't not concerned the same as inconsiderate? Not caring someone may have undertaken a great journey to find your cache for their own personal reasons and then you taking that away from them because you are not concerned = inconsiderate.

 

I'm considerate of those who attempt my cache. I'm not considerate of those who choose to use the D/T ratings for a purpose other than what it is meant to be.

 

I, as well as many other people find caches for a variety of reasons, one is D/T combos, if you had a rare D/T combo I needed to fill my grid and it was the closest to my home I'd visit your cache for that reason and I'd mention why in my log. If you chose to change your rating after I found it I'd go find the next closest combo but think to myself, boy is that CO inconsiderate.

 

Bottom line, change the rating on a rare combo, you will impact people, some negatively but since you sony care it really is a moot point.

 

I'm sorry that you choose to seek caches specifically because of their D/T ratings rather than the fun element but that is not my problem as a cache owner.

Link to comment

I started out thinking that it was the Cache Owner's business but this thread is convincing me that I really should stick my nose in and request that they change it back to 4.5T

Had it been listed as a 5T on the day I first saw it, I would not have considered it for my "daily walk with the dog". People are probably missing out on this cache because they won't try it since they don't have a kayak. That's sad.

I'm on the side of "truth in ratings" .. I wouldn't want something called a 1.5 if you can indeed get there by wheelchair. I also don't want something rated as 2 and I go there with a VBS class only to lose two of them in the volcano.

Link to comment

If I take my time to write a nice log shouldn't I expect an active CO to read it? If a cache has multiple finds mentioning the reason the cacher found their cache was for the rare D/T rating, at that point in time shouldn't the CO show some consideration to those finders by not changing it.

 

NOTE TO SELF: next time I notice a CO changing the D or T change your log to TFTC.

 

It seems unreasonable to expect your log to take precedence over someone else's log that suggests the rating is inaccurate.

 

It also seems unreasonable to place so much importance on a side game that relies on a rating that is, by its nature, ephemeral.

 

I keep all of the find logs that come to my inbox, so it's immaterial to me if a finder wants to change their log to "TFTC" in a huff. If it's one of the last five find logs, then it's kind of inconsiderate to future finders to do that, but meh, your call.

Link to comment

In other news, I've hidden a new challenge cache. It requires you to find fifteen caches that have had their terrain rating changed.

 

That sounds interesting. GC code?

 

I wanted to look at it to see how you'd actually verify something like that?

 

Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a good reason that Found It log entries don't embed the D/T rating as it was when the log was created.

 

I think this was requested awhile back but I gave up grappling with the nerfed forum search feature.

Link to comment
I started out thinking that it was the Cache Owner's business but this thread is convincing me that I really should stick my nose in and request that they change it back to 4.5T

Had it been listed as a 5T on the day I first saw it, I would not have considered it for my "daily walk with the dog"

 

If you didn't have fun finding it then note that in your log. If you had fun then what is the issue?

Link to comment

In other news, I've hidden a new challenge cache. It requires you to find fifteen caches that have had their terrain rating changed.

 

That sounds interesting. GC code?

 

I wanted to look at it to see how you'd actually verify something like that?

 

Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a good reason that Found It log entries don't embed the D/T rating as it was when the log was created.

 

I think this was requested awhile back but I gave up grappling with the nerfed forum search feature.

 

You have to verify it by taking a screen shot of the rating before and after the change. I recommend identifying the fifteen caches you want to use, taking screen shots, and then harassing the cache owners into changing the terrain ratings. They should be considerate of your request because my challenge is really important.

Link to comment

 

Bottom line, change the rating on a rare combo, you will impact people, some negatively but since you sony care it really is a moot point.

 

Good for you that you choose to seek caches specifically because of their D/T ratings rather than the fun element but that is not my problem as a cache owner.

 

I choose to find caches for many reasons one of which was D/T ratings. In the last year I have travelled 10s of thousands of miles working on the Jasmer challenge, I do this because I choose to because I have fun.

 

I am not the only one that has found caches strictly for the D/T combo, good for you that you don't care.

Link to comment

In other news, I've hidden a new challenge cache. It requires you to find fifteen caches that have had their terrain rating changed.

 

That sounds interesting. GC code?

 

I wanted to look at it to see how you'd actually verify something like that?

 

Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a good reason that Found It log entries don't embed the D/T rating as it was when the log was created.

 

I think this was requested awhile back but I gave up grappling with the nerfed forum search feature.

Ten years and two historical floods later, there are some river-side caches in my area that are definitely different terrain than they had been when they were originally placed. It is good that owners are allowed to change this, because the earth does change.

I kind of like the idea of embedding your D/T with your log, or at least making it a permanent log "9/15/2011 D/T rating changed from xxxx to xxxy due to cataclysmic natural events."

Link to comment

In other news, I've hidden a new challenge cache. It requires you to find fifteen caches that have had their terrain rating changed.

 

That sounds interesting. GC code?

 

I wanted to look at it to see how you'd actually verify something like that?

 

Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a good reason that Found It log entries don't embed the D/T rating as it was when the log was created.

 

I think this was requested awhile back but I gave up grappling with the nerfed forum search feature.

 

You have to verify it by taking a screen shot of the rating before and after the change. I recommend identifying the fifteen caches you want to use, taking screen shots, and then harassing the cache owners into changing the terrain ratings. They should be considerate of your request because my challenge is really important.

 

Ohhhh.

 

http://sadtrombone.com/?play=true

 

The original sarcasm didn't translate well out of text. Too bad; if the D/T were embedded in the log entry, that would be an easily-verifiable challenge cache.

Link to comment

In other news, I've hidden a new challenge cache. It requires you to find fifteen caches that have had their terrain rating changed.

 

That sounds interesting. GC code?

 

I wanted to look at it to see how you'd actually verify something like that?

 

Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a good reason that Found It log entries don't embed the D/T rating as it was when the log was created.

 

I think this was requested awhile back but I gave up grappling with the nerfed forum search feature.

Ten years and two historical floods later, there are some river-side caches in my area that are definitely different terrain than they had been when they were originally placed. It is good that owners are allowed to change this, because the earth does change.

I kind of like the idea of embedding your D/T with your log, or at least making it a permanent log "9/15/2011 D/T rating changed from xxxx to xxxy due to cataclysmic natural events."

 

If two floods wipe out not only the cache, but the whole area surrounding it wouldn't it make more sense to create a new listing?

Link to comment

In other news, I've hidden a new challenge cache. It requires you to find fifteen caches that have had their terrain rating changed.

 

That sounds interesting. GC code?

 

I wanted to look at it to see how you'd actually verify something like that?

 

Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a good reason that Found It log entries don't embed the D/T rating as it was when the log was created.

 

I think this was requested awhile back but I gave up grappling with the nerfed forum search feature.

 

You have to verify it by taking a screen shot of the rating before and after the change. I recommend identifying the fifteen caches you want to use, taking screen shots, and then harassing the cache owners into changing the terrain ratings. They should be considerate of your request because my challenge is really important.

 

Ohhhh.

 

http://sadtrombone.com/?play=true

 

The original sarcasm didn't translate well out of text. Too bad; if the D/T were embedded in the log entry, that would be an easily-verifiable challenge cache.

 

And it would be great for the drama as the grid challenge cachers clash with the D/T change challenge cachers.

Link to comment

In other news, I've hidden a new challenge cache. It requires you to find fifteen caches that have had their terrain rating changed.

 

That sounds interesting. GC code?

 

I wanted to look at it to see how you'd actually verify something like that?

 

Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a good reason that Found It log entries don't embed the D/T rating as it was when the log was created.

 

I think this was requested awhile back but I gave up grappling with the nerfed forum search feature.

Ten years and two historical floods later, there are some river-side caches in my area that are definitely different terrain than they had been when they were originally placed. It is good that owners are allowed to change this, because the earth does change.

I kind of like the idea of embedding your D/T with your log, or at least making it a permanent log "9/15/2011 D/T rating changed from xxxx to xxxy due to cataclysmic natural events."

 

If two floods wipe out not only the cache, but the whole area surrounding it wouldn't it make more sense to create a new listing?

 

It might. Only the cache owner can decide if the original intention of the cache has been compromised too much to warrant further maintenance of the same listing.

Link to comment

In other news, I've hidden a new challenge cache. It requires you to find fifteen caches that have had their terrain rating changed.

 

That sounds interesting. GC code?

 

I wanted to look at it to see how you'd actually verify something like that?

 

Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a good reason that Found It log entries don't embed the D/T rating as it was when the log was created.

 

I think this was requested awhile back but I gave up grappling with the nerfed forum search feature.

 

You have to verify it by taking a screen shot of the rating before and after the change. I recommend identifying the fifteen caches you want to use, taking screen shots, and then harassing the cache owners into changing the terrain ratings. They should be considerate of your request because my challenge is really important.

 

Ohhhh.

 

http://sadtrombone.com/?play=true

 

The original sarcasm didn't translate well out of text. Too bad; if the D/T were embedded in the log entry, that would be an easily-verifiable challenge cache.

 

And it would be great for the drama as the grid challenge cachers clash with the D/T change challenge cachers.

 

There's D/T change drama in the attempts to fulfill the requirements of the Tequila 81 date-restricted Fizzy (don't click the link if you are flying under the PMO audit log radar)

 

It has its own forum thread:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=190334

Link to comment

 

Bottom line, change the rating on a rare combo, you will impact people, some negatively but since you sony care it really is a moot point.

 

Good for you that you choose to seek caches specifically because of their D/T ratings rather than the fun element but that is not my problem as a cache owner.

 

I choose to find caches for many reasons one of which was D/T ratings. In the last year I have travelled 10s of thousands of miles working on the Jasmer challenge, I do this because I choose to because I have fun.

 

I am not the only one that has found caches strictly for the D/T combo, good for you that you don't care.

 

Yep, I don't care about Jasmer or Fizzy or any other challenges. Those are not my business as a cache owner. My business as a cache owner is providing the most accurate D/T ratings possible for those who are hunting my caches. Your side game is your side game and not part of my game. People can certainly partake in these side games, but to demand that I knowingly keep misrated caches in order to cater those side games smacks of entitlement.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment
I started out thinking that it was the Cache Owner's business but this thread is convincing me that I really should stick my nose in and request that they change it back to 4.5T

Had it been listed as a 5T on the day I first saw it, I would not have considered it for my "daily walk with the dog"

 

If you didn't have fun finding it then note that in your log. If you had fun then what is the issue?

My issues is I looked for it at all because it was a 4.5 T (not for a side game, but because I have no kayak). The cache owner made it a 5 based on whining from the loud minority in my area. Most of them have not even gone to find it.

 

I had a ton of fun, one of my most favorite caches yet (I wrote that in my log, which is very long and probably boring). I enjoy a difficult/long/challenging hike. I have no qualms about attempting one, and look for them. I assume there are others who do the same. I don't have a kayak. If something is a T5 (on water) I am not going to look for it. I assume there are others who do the same. The "issue" is that by making this a 5 there are people who may not ever even try it - when it is a fun hike.

Link to comment

My issues is I looked for it at all because it was a 4.5 T (not for a side game, but because I have no kayak). The cache owner made it a 5 based on whining from the loud minority in my area. Most of them have not even gone to find it.

 

I had a ton of fun, one of my most favorite caches yet (I wrote that in my log, which is very long and probably boring). I enjoy a difficult/long/challenging hike. I have no qualms about attempting one, and look for them. I assume there are others who do the same. I don't have a kayak. If something is a T5 (on water) I am not going to look for it. I assume there are others who do the same. The "issue" is that by making this a 5 there are people who may not ever even try it - when it is a fun hike.

 

Terrain 5 doesn't necessarily mean that it's on water. It can mean many things.

Link to comment

My issues is I looked for it at all because it was a 4.5 T (not for a side game, but because I have no kayak). The cache owner made it a 5 based on whining from the loud minority in my area. Most of them have not even gone to find it.

 

I had a ton of fun, one of my most favorite caches yet (I wrote that in my log, which is very long and probably boring). I enjoy a difficult/long/challenging hike. I have no qualms about attempting one, and look for them. I assume there are others who do the same. I don't have a kayak. If something is a T5 (on water) I am not going to look for it. I assume there are others who do the same. The "issue" is that by making this a 5 there are people who may not ever even try it - when it is a fun hike.

 

Terrain 5 doesn't necessarily mean that it's on water. It can mean many things.

 

Can someone photoshop this such that "MORDOR" is replaced with "A TERRAIN 5 CACHE"?

 

one-does-not-simply-walk-into-mordor.jpeg

Link to comment

In other news, I've hidden a new challenge cache. It requires you to find fifteen caches that have had their terrain rating changed.

 

That sounds interesting. GC code?

 

I wanted to look at it to see how you'd actually verify something like that?

 

Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a good reason that Found It log entries don't embed the D/T rating as it was when the log was created.

 

I think this was requested awhile back but I gave up grappling with the nerfed forum search feature.

Ten years and two historical floods later, there are some river-side caches in my area that are definitely different terrain than they had been when they were originally placed. It is good that owners are allowed to change this, because the earth does change.

I kind of like the idea of embedding your D/T with your log, or at least making it a permanent log "9/15/2011 D/T rating changed from xxxx to xxxy due to cataclysmic natural events."

 

If two floods wipe out not only the cache, but the whole area surrounding it wouldn't it make more sense to create a new listing?

It didn't wipe out the cache, it significantly changed the surrounding terrain.

FloodBook047B_366.jpg

It happened in 2006 and 2011.

Link to comment

My issues is I looked for it at all because it was a 4.5 T (not for a side game, but because I have no kayak). The cache owner made it a 5 based on whining from the loud minority in my area. Most of them have not even gone to find it.

 

I had a ton of fun, one of my most favorite caches yet (I wrote that in my log, which is very long and probably boring). I enjoy a difficult/long/challenging hike. I have no qualms about attempting one, and look for them. I assume there are others who do the same. I don't have a kayak. If something is a T5 (on water) I am not going to look for it. I assume there are others who do the same. The "issue" is that by making this a 5 there are people who may not ever even try it - when it is a fun hike.

 

Terrain 5 doesn't necessarily mean that it's on water. It can mean many things.

My quoted text in bold goes together. I know a Terrain 5 doesn't mean it is on water (there's mountain ones and outerspace ones and spelunking ones). However a T5 "on water" means it is off limits to me (usually, unless I make plans otherwise) considering I do not have a kayak.

Link to comment

My issues is I looked for it at all because it was a 4.5 T (not for a side game, but because I have no kayak). The cache owner made it a 5 based on whining from the loud minority in my area. Most of them have not even gone to find it.

 

I had a ton of fun, one of my most favorite caches yet (I wrote that in my log, which is very long and probably boring). I enjoy a difficult/long/challenging hike. I have no qualms about attempting one, and look for them. I assume there are others who do the same. I don't have a kayak. If something is a T5 (on water) I am not going to look for it. I assume there are others who do the same. The "issue" is that by making this a 5 there are people who may not ever even try it - when it is a fun hike.

 

Terrain 5 doesn't necessarily mean that it's on water. It can mean many things.

My quoted text in bold goes together. I know a Terrain 5 doesn't mean it is on water (there's mountain ones and outerspace ones and spelunking ones). However a T5 "on water" means it is off limits to me (usually, unless I make plans otherwise) considering I do not have a kayak.

 

 

You don't always need a kayak to get a T5 on-water cache:

 

93e234bc-2799-47ad-b1ce-c985a71b1bb1.jpg

Link to comment

The entire point of ratings is to provide searchers with an accurate measure of the D/T difficulty of the cache. If some finders choose to use these ratings for other purposes that is their problem. I always have and always will adjust my cache D/T ratings based on feedback from searchers and the conditions on the ground. I strive to serve searchers by providing them with realistic D/T ratings and I'm not concerned with someones side game.

 

I have to blow a raspberry on this one. I've found so dang many incorrectly rated caches, it isn't funny. T2 that should be T4, T4 that should be T2, rotten difficulty ratings, the works. Having 9 points of separation for either difficulty or terrain is kind of silly--there's not that enough difference to make it work. A straight 1-5 each way would be much better, with no half points in between. Because of that--there's not much point in changing a 4.5 to a 4. Folks got it for the Fizzy, why not leave it at that? I'd honestly say that aside from 1/1 and 1.5/1.5 caches, I've found many, many more incorrectly rated caches than ones I agree with. It's all too subjective--I know a guy that eats 5-difficulty puzzles for lunch, they really should be rated as a 2 for him. Since it's all kinda silly--the Fizzy challenge seems as good a way to enjoy caching as any. The only ratings that have true definitions are 1 terrain for wheelchairs and 5 terrain for special equipment. Everything in between is just whatever the CO thinks. I can see changing a 4 to a 2 if the terrain had truly changed, but changing a 4.5 to a 4 is disrespectful to all who spent time, gas, and money to come get it.

Link to comment

My issues is I looked for it at all because it was a 4.5 T (not for a side game, but because I have no kayak). The cache owner made it a 5 based on whining from the loud minority in my area. Most of them have not even gone to find it.

 

I had a ton of fun, one of my most favorite caches yet (I wrote that in my log, which is very long and probably boring). I enjoy a difficult/long/challenging hike. I have no qualms about attempting one, and look for them. I assume there are others who do the same. I don't have a kayak. If something is a T5 (on water) I am not going to look for it. I assume there are others who do the same. The "issue" is that by making this a 5 there are people who may not ever even try it - when it is a fun hike.

 

Terrain 5 doesn't necessarily mean that it's on water. It can mean many things.

My quoted text in bold goes together. I know a Terrain 5 doesn't mean it is on water (there's mountain ones and outerspace ones and spelunking ones). However a T5 "on water" means it is off limits to me (usually, unless I make plans otherwise) considering I do not have a kayak.

 

 

You don't always need a kayak to get a T5 on-water cache:

 

93e234bc-2799-47ad-b1ce-c985a71b1bb1.jpg

If it is summer in Upstate New York and the cache is placed on a small island and I do not have super-powers to cause large bodies of water to take on solid form then a Terrain 5 cache will generally mean I need to use a kayak. :blink:

Link to comment

The entire point of ratings is to provide searchers with an accurate measure of the D/T difficulty of the cache. If some finders choose to use these ratings for other purposes that is their problem. I always have and always will adjust my cache D/T ratings based on feedback from searchers and the conditions on the ground. I strive to serve searchers by providing them with realistic D/T ratings and I'm not concerned with someones side game.

 

I have to blow a raspberry on this one. I've found so dang many incorrectly rated caches, it isn't funny. T2 that should be T4, T4 that should be T2, rotten difficulty ratings, the works. Having 9 points of separation for either difficulty or terrain is kind of silly--there's not that enough difference to make it work. A straight 1-5 each way would be much better, with no half points in between. Because of that--there's not much point in changing a 4.5 to a 4. Folks got it for the Fizzy, why not leave it at that? I'd honestly say that aside from 1/1 and 1.5/1.5 caches, I've found many, many more incorrectly rated caches than ones I agree with. It's all too subjective--I know a guy that eats 5-difficulty puzzles for lunch, they really should be rated as a 2 for him. Since it's all kinda silly--the Fizzy challenge seems as good a way to enjoy caching as any. The only ratings that have true definitions are 1 terrain for wheelchairs and 5 terrain for special equipment. Everything in between is just whatever the CO thinks. I can see changing a 4 to a 2 if the terrain had truly changed, but changing a 4.5 to a 4 is disrespectful to all who spent time, gas, and money to come get it.

 

Sorry you didn't like my post. I've also found many misrated caches, but the answer is not to have more misrates caches just so someone can fill out his fizzy grid.

Link to comment

[

 

Sorry you didn't like my post. I've also found many misrated caches, but the answer is not to have more misrates caches just so someone can fill out his fizzy grid.

 

Can you tell me the precise difference between a 4 and a 4.5 terrain? Cuz I'd really like to know.

Link to comment

A quiet paddle

 

The excellent CO intended for this to be a T5 paddle cache but I knew better.

 

I felt bad about circumventing their intent, so when they moved it to a location to where you HAD to paddle, I returned for karmic redemption.

 

Then I tried to go back again, in the winter, to gloat at the fire ants, but the ice was freaking me out so I bailed.

 

Long-story-short, if the D/T were embedded in the log entries, the CO could change them to match the season without freaking anyone out (much).

Link to comment

[

 

Sorry you didn't like my post. I've also found many misrated caches, but the answer is not to have more misrates caches just so someone can fill out his fizzy grid.

 

Can you tell me the precise difference between a 4 and a 4.5 terrain? Cuz I'd really like to know.

 

Good point but more importantly can you tell me the difference between a cache that was rated T4.5 and changed to a T4?

Link to comment

WOW! Like someone said this is a tough forum! I like it, and all that has been said here is true.

I think all this is really for nothing. I am almost sure if the OP contacts the CO and lets them know how they went out of there way for this combo that they would more then likely change it back. I am all for keeping the D/T correct as it should be and that will likely be figured out within the first few finds. If it was a 1 Terrain and not wheelchair accessible then it should absolutely be changed for future finders. Even maybe if it was rated a 5 terrain and was not it should be changed, But really like Dame Deco said there is a fine line between a 4 and a 4.5. You should be up for some difficult stuff for both a 4 and 4.5. I wouldn't agree with if this cacher contacted them because it was already rated a 4 and said it should be a 4.5 so he could fill in his challenge, but it was already a 4.5 when he found it and I don't see the harm in asking. The CO obviously can keep it however he want though.

I have not filled in my fizzy challenge and am not working hard to do so but I would also feel the same way as the OP if I did and it was changed such a little amount on a rare find in the area that cachers went out of there way to find.

Anyways I see both sides here. As a CO of over 150 hides many of the higher terrain ratings I would have to think hard on if it was 4 or a 4.5. If it was hurting someone's game that came to find our cache I would probably error on the side of the cacher as it was my bad on listing it the other way in the first place.

Link to comment

Anyways, this topic went nowhere a year ago and it's going nowhere no, you're all going to think you're right and I'm going to think you're inconsiderate.

 

They are only opinions. Should COs be inconsiderate to all future finders or to a few past finders who have an obsession of stats?

 

I suppose the cache should just be archived and then relisted with the new D/T. Then people could have a second shot for FTF on something they already found. They could also get 2 finds on the same object with a different GC# because somehow the double logging is now fine due to the GC technicality. But then that might be inconsiderate to those who would be tasked to travel there again to reclear their radius. Some people would probably log both the active and the archived version with the same date. At some point the stats become utterly meaningless and silly if you put too much emphasis on them.

 

I would think that if someone was to go out of their way to get a certain D/T combo, they would want to find a genuine one, not something that was rated incorrectly. Really, what is the point in focusing on D/T combos anyway when many of them are wrong? :P

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment

So, you put out a 4.5/4.5 cache, the only one within a 150 miles of your big city, people come from far and wide to find it for the D/T combo, a year later you decide, hey, I was wrong, it's only a T4 and change it, if that's not inconsiderate I have no clue what is.

Link to comment

 

Bottom line, change the rating on a rare combo, you will impact people, some negatively but since you sony care it really is a moot point.

 

Good for you that you choose to seek caches specifically because of their D/T ratings rather than the fun element but that is not my problem as a cache owner.

 

I choose to find caches for many reasons one of which was D/T ratings. In the last year I have travelled 10s of thousands of miles working on the Jasmer challenge, I do this because I choose to because I have fun.

 

I am not the only one that has found caches strictly for the D/T combo, good for you that you don't care.

 

Yep, I don't care about Jasmer or Fizzy or any other challenges. Those are not my business as a cache owner. My business as a cache owner is providing the most accurate D/T ratings possible for those who are hunting my caches. Your side game is your side game and not part of my game. People can certainly partake in these side games, but to demand that I knowingly keep misrated caches in order to cater those side games smacks of entitlement.

 

As 8 time US geocacher of the year I'd think you'd be more sensitive to the reasons other people geocache and actually care, what exactly does it take to be US geocacher of the year and where can I vote?

Edited by Roman!
Link to comment
Can you tell me the precise difference between a 4 and a 4.5 terrain? Cuz I'd really like to know.
A T4.5 cache gets a lot of "thanks for filling my grid square" logs.

A T4 cache gets a lot of "thanks for the adventure" logs.

 

That in itself might be enough to make some cache owners change the terrain rating.

Link to comment

Changing a T4.5 to a T4 well after publication and after it's been found many times is just inconsiderate IMHO.

 

If the cache location has changed enough to warrant a significant change in either the difficulty or terrain then it should be published as a new cache.

 

How is 4.5 to 4 a "significant" change. And why should a cache be archived and republished just because, for example, somebody built a bridge from the mainland to an island and reduced a T5 to a T2 in the process? The cache hide itself hasn't changed in the slightest, it's just that somebody was kind enough to make it more accessible.

 

Games within a game are all well and good but it's silly to expect the primary game to revolve around the secondary game.

Link to comment

The entire point of ratings is to provide searchers with an accurate measure of the D/T difficulty of the cache. If some finders choose to use these ratings for other purposes that is their problem. I always have and always will adjust my cache D/T ratings based on feedback from finders and the conditions of the area. I strive to serve searchers by providing them with realistic D/T ratings and I'm not concerned with someones side game.

 

The D/T grid is not a side game, it's on your stats page.

 

I'm not concerned with someones side game, isn't not concerned the same as inconsiderate? Not caring someone may have undertaken a great journey to find your cache for their own personal reasons and then you taking that away from them because you are not concerned = inconsiderate.

 

I'm considerate of those who attempt my cache. I'm not considerate of those who choose to use the D/T ratings for a purpose other than what it is meant to be.

 

I, as well as many other people find caches for a variety of reasons, one is D/T combos, if you had a rare D/T combo I needed to fill my grid and it was the closest to my home I'd visit your cache for that reason and I'd mention why in my log. If you chose to change your rating after I found it I'd go find the next closest combo but think to myself, boy is that CO inconsiderate.

 

Bottom line, change the rating on a rare combo, you will impact people, some negatively but since you sony care it really is a moot point.

 

If you care so much you can always tweak your "My Finds" pocket query before uploading it to the profile analysis page. It's in plain text so it's not rocket science to find the appropriate cache and change the ratings back to what it was when you found it.

 

Come to think of it, maybe I'll write a script to do that so I can fill my D/T grid automagically before my premium membership expires. That could be fun.

Link to comment

We live in an ever changing world and D/T ratings are just one thing that can change. Deal with it.

Once you've logged a cache, take a screen capture or as I do, lock that cache in GSAK, or devise your own method of 'locking' the cache details. The CO can change the D/T rating to his/her hearts content and it won't affect my stats.

If a D/T rating needs adjusting for any reason, I believe the CO has a responsibility to change it so that the current conditions are accurately portrayed by the D/T rating for the benefit of future finders. B)

Link to comment

The entire point of ratings is to provide searchers with an accurate measure of the D/T difficulty of the cache. If some finders choose to use these ratings for other purposes that is their problem. I always have and always will adjust my cache D/T ratings based on feedback from finders and the conditions of the area. I strive to serve searchers by providing them with realistic D/T ratings and I'm not concerned with someones side game.

 

The D/T grid is not a side game, it's on your stats page.

 

Yes, it's on your stats page. Wanting to fill it in is a side game.

Link to comment

In other news, I've hidden a new challenge cache. It requires you to find fifteen caches that have had their terrain rating changed.

 

That sounds interesting. GC code?

 

I wanted to look at it to see how you'd actually verify something like that?

 

Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a good reason that Found It log entries don't embed the D/T rating as it was when the log was created.

 

I think this was requested awhile back but I gave up grappling with the nerfed forum search feature.

Ten years and two historical floods later, there are some river-side caches in my area that are definitely different terrain than they had been when they were originally placed. It is good that owners are allowed to change this, because the earth does change.

I kind of like the idea of embedding your D/T with your log, or at least making it a permanent log "9/15/2011 D/T rating changed from xxxx to xxxy due to cataclysmic natural events."

 

If two floods wipe out not only the cache, but the whole area surrounding it wouldn't it make more sense to create a new listing?

 

But what if the listing date is one of those rare old dates people need for a challenge? If you arachive it, you cheat people out of a cache hidden on that particular date.

Link to comment

If I take my time to write a nice log shouldn't I expect an active CO to read it? If a cache has multiple finds mentioning the reason the cacher found their cache was for the rare D/T rating, at that point in time shouldn't the CO show some consideration to those finders by not changing it.

 

NOTE TO SELF: next time I notice a CO changing the D or T change your log to TFTC.

 

For me that's not an issue of showing consideration.

 

Suppose that the approach to the final of a difficult puzzle cache gets temporarily more difficult to say damages caused by ice rain. In my opinion, the cache owner needs to adapt the T-rating for the time during which

the approach is more difficult in order to be considerate to the future finders. I rather want to disappoint a previous finder who ends up with a different D/T-rating than causing issues for someone who comes unprepared to the new situation at a cache. Archiving the old cache if the puzzle, the container and hideout are the same and relisting does not make sense and even less to do it several times (after the terrain became more difficult, again after the situation is back to normal ...).

 

Another example arises if additional hints are added to a puzzle cache. Then the D-rating could easily drop.

 

If anything could be done at all about the issue, then it is locking the D/T-combination for the finder at the point in time of the find.

 

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

But what if the listing date is one of those rare old dates people need for a challenge? If you arachive it, you cheat people out of a cache hidden on that particular date.

 

This is EXACTLY the discussion going on on a local geocaching group's FB page. The reviewer in our area has been cleaning house, so to speak, and had swept through and disabled any cache that looks to be in trouble - poor or no maintenance, long run of DNFs, etc.

One of them happens to be a February 2004 cache and someone posted complaining about it being endangered...then others chimed in about saving it because of Jasmer...blah blah blah. The CO has been out of the game for a fairly long time and I would argue that it should die a natural death and if the owner wants it around they should maintain it or adopt it out. Some folks are just too wrapped up in the various grid challenges and don't care how the cache is abandoned or poorly kept...just as long as they get to fill the little square on their little grid. Besides, isn't that what makes a Challenge cache a "challenge"? Anyone determined enough ought to be willing and able to find a cache necessary to round out their stats without forcing a cracked and moldy cache to hobble along, grossing out and dissapointing everyone that finds it.

Edited by J Grouchy
Link to comment

I just looked at a cache with a rare D/T rating, in fact it is one I went to find after another CO changed the their rating leaving me with a hole in my grid.

 

Since it was a puzzle in an out of the way location in the first year it was found 10 times, in the next year it was found 13 times and 9/13 mention finding it for the D/T combo.

 

This is one of the logs:

 

Visited this cache for the same reason as Roman! before me.....this is the *third* time I've completed my D/T grid, due to COs changing ratings!! Couldn't stand to see that blank square, so xxxxxx and I headed out today. It was a beautiful day and the cache is in great shape. It was awfully tempting to ignore the NO PARKING signs, but we did park at the parking co-ords and enjoyed the short walk. Beautiful spot. Thank you, RP, for the (big) hints in solving this one. It was a great puzzle....once I saw the light! Okay....now my chart is complete again.....

 

Actions have consequences, not caring about the consequences it inconsiderate.

 

That was almost a waste of a mouthful of perfectly good coffee - in the context of another recent thread :D

 

I wonder if the CO got tired of people taking short-cuts on the puzzle and decided to change the D/T to something more befitting the actual effort invested by the finders?

 

I do agree with my bold above though B)

Link to comment

[

 

Sorry you didn't like my post. I've also found many misrated caches, but the answer is not to have more misrates caches just so someone can fill out his fizzy grid.

 

Can you tell me the precise difference between a 4 and a 4.5 terrain? Cuz I'd really like to know.

 

Is there a particular geocache that you are trying to rate? Can you describe it? Have you considered looking at the Clayjar method for rating it?

Link to comment

As 8 time US geocacher of the year I'd think you'd be more sensitive to the reasons other people geocache and actually care, what exactly does it take to be US geocacher of the year and where can I vote?

 

Why don't you care about the future finders of a geocache who require the most accurate information possible on their approach?

 

Why is your secondary side game more important than an accurate geocache description?

Link to comment

[

 

Sorry you didn't like my post. I've also found many misrated caches, but the answer is not to have more misrates caches just so someone can fill out his fizzy grid.

 

Can you tell me the precise difference between a 4 and a 4.5 terrain? Cuz I'd really like to know.

 

Is there a particular geocache that you are trying to rate? Can you describe it? Have you considered looking at the Clayjar method for rating it?

 

Yes, the one in question for this thread. You know...the actual topic...

 

And as for "most accurate information"--what, really, is the difference between a 4.5 and a 4 terrain rating for this particular cache? Why was it done?

Edited by Dame Deco
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 3
×
×
  • Create New...