Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
frinklabs

[FEATURE] Challenge Stars

Recommended Posts

I'm with Roman for once. Challenges wouldn't be the same for me with challenge stars. I hide challenge caches so that cachers who qualify could complete a challenge, find and log it. Not because I wanted to hide a traditional. Like I've said previously in this thread, if I wanted to hide a traditional cache that everybody could find and log, then I would've done just that.

 

In the current system, yes that is indeed why I too, like every challenge cache hider, hides challenge caches - so that you can't log it found without qualifying for the caches.

Which completely ignores legitimate comments regarding the standard geocaching concept (and basic terminology) surrounding 'find it, sign it, log it online', plus the very clear exception granted for challenge caches being traditional physical caches with an ALR.

 

SO, this concept is an attempt to address all those outlying concerns, while keeping the core of challenge caching exactly the same, except that the smiley is no longer a Find-with-exception-to-challenge-caches-requiring-ALR-completion-as-well, or rather the "WIGAS". A find can now be a find. And challenge completions are still rewarded, distinctly.

 

AND my other suggestion (conveniently overlooked) to allow for challenge caches to be placed by the CO with the option to require completion as well before a find is allowed. Because the categorization of the cache as a challenge cache (there is an associated challenge), such caches can now be explicitly filtered out of searches by people who just want to 'find it, sign it, log it online'.

 

So now, everyone can get what they want.

Hide challenge caches as they are now - Find AND qualify to log found? Yup.

Allow people to find and log it found without qualification, if desired? Yup.

Don't want to see caches you can't log found even if you found it? Yup.

Official metric for display challenge qualification statistics? Yup.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm with Roman for once. Challenges wouldn't be the same for me with challenge stars. I hide challenge caches so that cachers who qualify could complete a challenge, find and log it. Not because I wanted to hide a traditional. Like I've said previously in this thread, if I wanted to hide a traditional cache that everybody could find and log, then I would've done just that.

 

In the current system, yes that is indeed why I too, like every challenge cache hider, hides challenge caches - so that you can't log it found without qualifying for the caches.

Which completely ignores legitimate comments regarding the standard geocaching concept (and basic terminology) surrounding 'find it, sign it, log it online', plus the very clear exception granted for challenge caches being traditional physical caches with an ALR.

 

SO, this concept is an attempt to address all those outlying concerns, while keeping the core of challenge caching exactly the same, except that the smiley is no longer a Find-with-exception-to-challenge-caches-requiring-ALR-completion-as-well, or rather the "WIGAS". A find can now be a find. And challenge completions are still rewarded, distinctly.

 

AND my other suggestion (conveniently overlooked) to allow for challenge caches to be placed by the CO with the option to require completion as well before a find is allowed. Because the categorization of the cache as a challenge cache (there is an associated challenge), such caches can now be explicitly filtered out of searches by people who just want to 'find it, sign it, log it online'.

 

So now, everyone can get what they want.

Hide challenge caches as they are now - Find AND qualify to log found? Yup.

Allow people to find and log it found without qualification, if desired? Yup.

Don't want to see caches you can't log found even if you found it? Yup.

Official metric for display challenge qualification statistics? Yup.

 

People who will grouse at any change, no matter how logical? Yup.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm with Roman for once. Challenges wouldn't be the same for me with challenge stars. I hide challenge caches so that cachers who qualify could complete a challenge, find and log it. Not because I wanted to hide a traditional. Like I've said previously in this thread, if I wanted to hide a traditional cache that everybody could find and log, then I would've done just that.

 

I would also geocide my challenges if this were implemented and the majority of the community would probably be thrilled.

 

Edited for spelling

 

And there's the rub again. You can't post a challenge without essentially hiding a traditional cache (though it can also be a mystery cache...but my point is the same). You essentially HAVE hidden a traditional cache that everybody could find and log...they just can't claim the +1 in their counts.

 

At least with the stars option, those that have qualified now have a publicly recognized distinction above just finding a container.

Challenge seekers - more often than not - are competitive sorts who like stats and comparisons. Giving them one more stat opens up all sorts of other ways to compete (or not) with one another. Eventually there would probably even be challenges based on challenge stars.

 

I'm wondering if most of the angst is coming from challenge owners. I think you may be right about challenge finders perhaps enjoying a new set of stats specifically for challenge achievements.

Share this post


Link to post

IMHO, challenge stars would pretty much be the end of challenge caches but thats what the goal is anyways.

Clearly it is not, as those of us supporting the idea are entirely for and big promoters of challenge caching.

So. No.

 

You don't like the idea, point taken. Got any suggestions for improvements, OTHER than trashing the whole idea? If not, then.....

 

There is no indication this is an idea that Groundspeak will be be considering at any time in the future. So let us enjoy hashing out the concept. :P

 

Well, if no one opposed GS might start to think its a good idea. The only change to challenges I see as being needed is a separate icon.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Which completely ignores legitimate comments regarding the standard geocaching concept (and basic terminology) surrounding 'find it, sign it, log it online', plus the very clear exception granted for challenge caches being traditional physic

 

 

Don't lab caches do that as well, even worse.

 

Come to think of it these caches at the earth cache mega had you panning for gold and other stuff to claim it, that's an ALR too.

Edited by Roman!

Share this post


Link to post
Don't lab caches do that as well, even worse.

 

Come to think of it these caches at the earth cache mega had you panning for gold and other stuff to claim it, that's an ALR too.

 

Lab Caches aren't geocaches.

Different system, different concept, only a test framework for a variety of temporary ideas.

 

The only change to challenges I see as being needed is a separate icon.

Problems with just a separate icon have been addressed earlier in the thread as well. A new icon has been suggestion for a very long time, probably the earliest idea related to distinguishing challenge caches. But addressing the problems raised with that idea was what spawned much of the challenge stars concept.

There's no perfect solution.

Share this post


Link to post

There's no perfect solution.

 

To me, the "perfect" solution would be breaking it out into its own separate game site altogether, linked directly into the user's GC profile but not a part of the standard geocache map. Not having challenges on the map with the other caches doesn't seem like an issue since challenges typically require planning and data-gathering for fulfilling the requirements.

 

At that point it wouldn't matter if it didn't fit with the general guidelines against ALRs since it would be a separate game altogether. They could have their own separate "challenge rating" in addition to the standard D & T ratings. Then the user 'find' counts could be based on +1s like geocaching or use a 'star' system...or both...or neither.

Share this post


Link to post

To me, the "perfect" solution would be breaking it out into its own separate game site altogether, linked directly into the user's GC profile but not a part of the standard geocache map. Not having challenges on the map with the other caches doesn't seem like an issue since challenges typically require planning and data-gathering for fulfilling the requirements.

 

At that point it wouldn't matter if it didn't fit with the general guidelines against ALRs since it would be a separate game altogether. They could have their own separate "challenge rating" in addition to the standard D & T ratings. Then the user 'find' counts could be based on +1s like geocaching or use a 'star' system...or both...or neither.

 

We have that. It's the custom profile page :P

 

Other sites had already provided ways to give yourself banners and awards for completing certain tasks that you could show off in your profile (from copying your own html, to uploading your find PQ to be analyzed as per MyGeocachingProfile). It seems that challenge caches were perhaps inspired by that idea. Instead of an arbitrary, unchecked, unauthoritative list of 'badges', you could now show your list of 'official' completed challenges from within your actual cache finds, because they were technically verified by the COs. It's a step towards a verifiable metric. But that's a state of limbo not without its own issues...

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post

To me, the "perfect" solution would be breaking it out into its own separate game site altogether, linked directly into the user's GC profile but not a part of the standard geocache map. Not having challenges on the map with the other caches doesn't seem like an issue since challenges typically require planning and data-gathering for fulfilling the requirements.

 

At that point it wouldn't matter if it didn't fit with the general guidelines against ALRs since it would be a separate game altogether. They could have their own separate "challenge rating" in addition to the standard D & T ratings. Then the user 'find' counts could be based on +1s like geocaching or use a 'star' system...or both...or neither.

 

We have that. It's the custom profile page :P

 

Other sites had already provided ways to give yourself banners and awards for completing certain tasks that you could show off in your profile (from copying your own html, to uploading your find PQ to be analyzed as per MyGeocachingProfile). It seems that challenge caches were perhaps inspired by that idea. Instead of an arbitrary, unchecked, unauthoritative list of 'badges', you could now show your list of 'official' completed challenges from within your actual cache finds, because they were technically verified by the COs. It's a step towards a verifiable metric. But that's a state of limbo not without its own issues...

 

Not really the same thing, since all the caches are still within geocaching.com...

Share this post


Link to post

Not really the same thing, since all the caches are still within geocaching.com...

Not sure how a separate site tracking challenge/task completion and rewarding profile content would be any different than a third party site analyzing your find PQ and providing HTML for your profile.

Other than, of course, this external site being Groundspeak-run, with perhaps direct DB access on the backend. Everything would still be arbitrarily defined (stat analysis and rewards).

 

But let's say this is a 'perfect' solution, all it technically does is remove challenge caches from the standard geocaching process and the website.

I doubt challenge cache owners would like to have challenge caches go the way of Waymarking :sad:. I think a key draw to it is that it's part and parcel with the geocaching experience.

Dunno.

Share this post


Link to post

Not really the same thing, since all the caches are still within geocaching.com...

Not sure how a separate site tracking challenge/task completion and rewarding profile content would be any different than a third party site analyzing your find PQ and providing HTML for your profile.

Other than, of course, this external site being Groundspeak-run, with perhaps direct DB access on the backend. Everything would still be arbitrarily defined (stat analysis and rewards).

 

But let's say this is a 'perfect' solution, all it technically does is remove challenge caches from the standard geocaching process and the website.

I doubt challenge cache owners would like to have challenge caches go the way of Waymarking :sad:. I think a key draw to it is that it's part and parcel with the geocaching experience.

Dunno.

 

And that's bad how?

 

Did you not notice the part of my post that was bolded and underlined? The part that says "to me"...?

Everyone has their own idea of a "perfect" solution. For many, challenges don't require any solution at all. I just happen to believe that anything that is an exception to the guidelines should become it's own thing. It takes away any reason for debate about ALRs, the need (or lack thereof) of a physical cache container, etc...and sends it over to its own quirky corner of the web.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I like the system the way it is now. The only change I would make is something that somebody else mentioned where those who don't qualify can't "pre sign" the log. That's my personal opinion though. I'll never agree with the challenge stars idea. I do understand why some like the concept and think it's beneficial to challenge caching, however I don't share these views. As somebody who regularly hides and finds challenge caches, I think that everybody being able to claim a find on a challenge whether they get "completion stars" or not devalues the challenge cache.

 

I theme my challenge caches with my challenge hides and I look at it as a "victory" of sorts at the end of a challenge to go find that cache. For example, I have a large nontraditional finds challenge and the final is....you guessed it....a very large, well stocked and well kept ammo can with a big log book, and big items. I hid that cache specifically for those who went above and beyond (or jumped through hoops, as many here will put it) and completed that challenge. Not so any cacher who wants can come claim a find on it. That's what regular caches are for. Challenges are not that, they're different. They're a long running exception to the rules that I rather like having around. I get that many of you don't share this point of view, but I stand by it.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I like the system the way it is now. The only change I would make is something that somebody else mentioned where those who don't qualify can't "pre sign" the log. That's my personal opinion though.

I don't see how that's possible at all - you can't stop someone from finding your physical challenge cache. And that's the reason why some complain about the ALR. They've found the cache, and signed the log, why can't they log it online? Your dislike for this proposed resolution is noted. I also like the system as it is now. I also certainly believe there are ways to improve it, and I'm open to throwing around ideas about that.

 

I'll never agree with the challenge stars idea. I do understand why some like the concept and think it's beneficial to challenge caching, however I don't share these views.

As somebody who regularly hides and finds challenge caches, I think that everybody being able to claim a find on a challenge whether they get "completion stars" or not devalues the challenge cache.

As somebody who owns and loves finding challenge caches, opinion noted.

 

I theme my challenge caches with my challenge hides and I look at it as a "victory" of sorts at the end of a challenge to go find that cache.

But you're missing the point - right now, people still can find that cache without having completed the challenge. They can have the entire experience of that single cache. Their complaint is that they can't log it online. In essence what you're saying is you want to hold back the smiley from them as the reward, because they haven't complete the requirements, and perhaps never will. That's the whole point of their complaint, and frankly I sort of agree with that because it's a single exception to the basics of geocaching for the sake of the pseudo-defined challenge cache ALR.

Notice again: The suggestion I proposed was allowing those very same types of caches to exist, which now can because there is a specific metric that separates a 'challenge' cache from a regular one, so they can now filter these ALR-style caches from their PQs and searches, if you've decided to lock the find and qualification together. Point - nothing changes for you as a challenge cache owner who wants to lock the smiley find and challenge together.

 

I get that many of you don't share this point of view, but I stand by it.

It's great that there's a variety of points of view. Really, it's great.

 

all it technically does is remove challenge caches from the standard geocaching process and the website

And that's bad how?

It's a regression instead of a progression. We have the ability to do what an 'external website' does right now, but that also moves the current challenge caching concept/process out of the existing site.

 

Did you not notice the part of my post that was bolded and underlined? The part that says "to me"...?

I did, and I didn't say you were wrong :P I was addressing points you made.

 

Everyone has their own idea of a "perfect" solution. For many, challenges don't require any solution at all. I just happen to believe that anything that is an exception to the guidelines should become it's own thing. It takes away any reason for debate about ALRs, the need (or lack thereof) of a physical cache container, etc...and sends it over to its own quirky corner of the web.

When I said perfect I meant an objectively perfect solution, not perfect for me, or for you, or for that person, to exclusion of all others. I meant perfect in the sense that it's the best compromise to address as many concerns as possible for as many people as possible. That's why I love when people bring new points to the conversation we can attempt to address, instead of just shooting everything down :P

Progress! Yay, right?

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post

When I said perfect I meant an objectively perfect solution, not perfect for me, or for you, or for that person, to exclusion of all others. I meant perfect in the sense that it's the best compromise to address as many concerns as possible for as many people as possible. That's why I love when people bring new points to the conversation we can attempt to address, instead of just shooting everything down :P

Progress! Yay, right?

 

Well...if you're going down THAT particular road, then it's easy to argue that the current geocaching.com website is extremely flawed in many ways and that the game itself leaves much to be desired. The fact that this particular 'Website' corner of the forums exists is testament to that fact. If you don't want an individual's idea of a perfect solution to challenges, it's best if you just ask for the "the best possible compromise". Problem is, though, you can clearly see that folks like Roman and Traditional Bill will never be willing to meet anywhere near the middle from frinklabs and myself.

Share this post


Link to post

 

But you're missing the point - right now, people still can find that cache without having completed the challenge. They can have the entire experience of that single cache.

 

I have a challenge cache that to be able to publish I travelled from Vancouver to Maine. Certainly anyone not completing my challenge would not have the entire experience I intended.

Share this post


Link to post

Well...if you're going down THAT particular road, then it's easy to argue that the current geocaching.com website is extremely flawed in many ways and that the game itself leaves much to be desired. The fact that this particular 'Website' corner of the forums exists is testament to that fact. If you don't want an individual's idea of a perfect solution to challenges, it's best if you just ask for the "the best possible compromise". Problem is, though, you can clearly see that folks like Roman and Traditional Bill will never be willing to meet anywhere near the middle from frinklabs and myself.

Ok, not sure what point you're making here, but ... I agree? But this is more like hurling an elephant... yep, lots of issues and problems, lots of ideas... this thread is about challenge caching. And I did say there's no 'perfect solution' (note: objectively). Not every person will be 100% satisfied. That means that any suggested resolution may well be acceptable to someone and disliked by others. C'est la vie.

But I think discussing to find a way forward that is generally better for as many people as possible is better than remaining stagnant just because status quo. *shrug*

 

But you're missing the point - right now, people still can find that cache without having completed the challenge. They can have the entire experience of that single cache.

 

I have a challenge cache that to be able to publish I travelled from Vancouver to Maine. Certainly anyone not completing my challenge would not have the entire experience I intended.

I think the argument there would be if you want people to have that very experience, then you should make it a multi-stage where the cache coordinates require doing prior tasks/puzzles/etc.

As a challenge cache, There is nothing stopping anyone from finding your challenge cache and signing it, if they have the coordinates. You can't force someone to have the experience you intend in challenge cache form. You can only tell them they need to, and hold back that smiley until they're forced to go the extra mile. That is the feel from their perspective.

 

I fully understand as a CO that we intend for cachers to enjoy the experiences we've had by promoting the experience in order to log it found. But the challenge cache form isn't best way, necessarily, to accomplish that - as demonstrated by those complaints about the ALR exception on this physical cache type.

Share this post


Link to post

Well...if you're going down THAT particular road, then it's easy to argue that the current geocaching.com website is extremely flawed in many ways and that the game itself leaves much to be desired. The fact that this particular 'Website' corner of the forums exists is testament to that fact. If you don't want an individual's idea of a perfect solution to challenges, it's best if you just ask for the "the best possible compromise". Problem is, though, you can clearly see that folks like Roman and Traditional Bill will never be willing to meet anywhere near the middle from frinklabs and myself.

Ok, not sure what point you're making here, but ... I agree? But this is more like hurling an elephant... yep, lots of issues and problems, lots of ideas... this thread is about challenge caching. And I did say there's no 'perfect solution' (note: objectively). Not every person will be 100% satisfied. That means that any suggested resolution may well be acceptable to someone and disliked by others. C'est la vie.

But I think discussing to find a way forward that is generally better for as many people as possible is better than remaining stagnant just because status quo. *shrug*

 

But you're missing the point - right now, people still can find that cache without having completed the challenge. They can have the entire experience of that single cache.

 

I have a challenge cache that to be able to publish I travelled from Vancouver to Maine. Certainly anyone not completing my challenge would not have the entire experience I intended.

I think the argument there would be if you want people to have that very experience, then you should make it a multi-stage where the cache coordinates require doing prior tasks/puzzles/etc.

As a challenge cache, There is nothing stopping anyone from finding your challenge cache and signing it, if they have the coordinates. You can't force someone to have the experience you intend in challenge cache form. You can only tell them they need to, and hold back that smiley until they're forced to go the extra mile. That is the feel from their perspective.

 

I fully understand as a CO that we intend for cachers to enjoy the experiences we've had by promoting the experience in order to log it found. But the challenge cache form isn't best way, necessarily, to accomplish that - as demonstrated by those complaints about the ALR exception on this physical cache type.

 

I have yet to meet anyone in real life with that perspective, every cacher I know doesn't have an issue with having to meet a challenge to log a find. I however do know several cachers that would archive their challenge caches if meeting the challenge became optional.

 

I do not believe there is any compromise, change to rules and you'll kill challenge caches, maybe that's the comprimise, just ban them.

Share this post


Link to post

I have yet to meet anyone in real life with that perspective, every cacher I know doesn't have an issue with having to meet a challenge to log a find. I however do know several cachers that would archive their challenge caches if meeting the challenge became optional.

*sigh*

I don't know anyone in my real life that has an issue with that either. But the forum shows that they do exist. This thread was begun precisely because of them. So.

Share this post


Link to post

If they actually impimented the star system I would immediately archive my challenge caches and never again bother qualifying for another, the path of least resistence, but that's just me, I'm sure I'm the only one.

 

It's too bad you feel you have to take your ball and go home. All your active challenges are PMO so I can't see them, but the one you have archived is a perfect example of how the Challenge Stars system would be an enhancement.

 

It demonstrates how the Challenge doesn't necessarily have to lead to a Traditional.

 

It would have been a perfect 5/5/1 (D5 T5 C1) where the difficulty is proportional to the required puzzle solution. Without the final coordinates (I can't figure out the puzzle) I can only assume that it is really terrain 5. And the difficulty of the challenge warrants one Challenge Star.

 

From what I can tell, the active PMO challenges you have would probably be 5/5/3 or 5/5/4

 

If we don't have fractional Challenge Stars then the 81 grid logically progresses to a 405 cube.

 

Fun!

Share this post


Link to post

I have yet to meet anyone in real life with that perspective, every cacher I know doesn't have an issue with having to meet a challenge to log a find. I however do know several cachers that would archive their challenge caches if meeting the challenge became optional.

*sigh*

I don't know anyone in my real life that has an issue with that either. But the forum shows that they do exist. This thread was begun precisely because of them. So.

 

So......that makes what, 3, 4 people?

Share this post


Link to post

If they actually impimented the star system I would immediately archive my challenge caches and never again bother qualifying for another, the path of least resistence, but that's just me, I'm sure I'm the only one.

 

It's too bad you feel you have to take your ball and go home. All your active challenges are PMO so I can't see them, but the one you have archived is a perfect example of how the Challenge Stars system would be an enhancement.

 

It demonstrates how the Challenge doesn't necessarily have to lead to a Traditional.

 

It would have been a perfect 5/5/1 (D5 T5 C1) where the difficulty is proportional to the required puzzle solution. Without the final coordinates (I can't figure out the puzzle) I can only assume that it is really terrain 5. And the difficulty of the challenge warrants one Challenge Star.

 

From what I can tell, the active PMO challenges you have would probably be 5/5/3 or 5/5/4

 

If we don't have fractional Challenge Stars then the 81 grid logically progresses to a 405 cube.

 

Fun!

 

It's not taking my ball and going home, I see no point in having a challenge that is optional, it's just a cache I would not want to own.

Share this post


Link to post

I have yet to meet anyone in real life with that perspective, every cacher I know doesn't have an issue with having to meet a challenge to log a find. I however do know several cachers that would archive their challenge caches if meeting the challenge became optional.

*sigh*

I don't know anyone in my real life that has an issue with that either. But the forum shows that they do exist. This thread was begun precisely because of them. So.

You think that the forums show people have a problem. The issue is more subtle.

 

Historically, challenges caches were set up as: after you compelete the challenge you can find the cache. Originally, the only challenges were a limited number of Delorme and county challenges that were allowed to require that cachers email the owner to get the coordinates. It was only when Groundspeak developed new guidelines for ALRs that reviewers began publishing a lot of new challenges using the ALR formula. The cache was at the location (or the location could be determined without emailing the cache owner) and essentially you could find cache whenever you wanted but could only log a find online after you both found the cache and completed the challenge.

 

Challenge owners never wanted to accept this formulation. In their view completing the challenge is a prerequisite to finding the cache, not a prerequisite for logging the find online. And when Groundspeak changed the guidelines to prohibit ALRs and said challenges caches are exempt because they're not really ALRs, that just muddied the waters.

 

So which is it? Can you 'find' the cache and sign the log without completing the challenge? Clearly you can, despite what the cache owner thinks. On the other hand, perhaps cache owners can convince enough people that proper etiquette is to avoid going to look for the challenge cache till you qualify. Maybe if they delete notes from people who signed the log but are waiting till they complete the challenge to log a find, that will get others to abide by their beliefs? We only know that Groundspeak has said you can find the cache and complete the challenge in any order but that you need to do both and to provide evidence you qualify before you log a find online.

 

I'm not sure what problem the challenge stars really solves. Sure, some people who find the cache and sign the log may want to get credit for a find. I find it silly to associate the online log so closely with finding a cache. I wish the online logs didn't come in flavors like Found, DNF, and note. Perhaps if Found was called WIGAS it would make more sense. Star for completing a challenge whether scored separately or as bonus for those who find the cache and have also completed the challenge seem a bit complex. About all this system does is to remove any possibility that the cache itself is the reward for completing the challenge, and instead turn the challenge prize to into WIGAS (Woohoo! I got another star!) points. For those cache owners who are still able to make believe that the cache is the prize and not the online log, I can understand the objection. :santa:

Edited by tozainamboku

Share this post


Link to post

I'm wondering if most of the angst is coming from challenge owners. I think you may be right about challenge finders perhaps enjoying a new set of stats specifically for challenge achievements.

I'm a challenge finder and not a challenge owner, and I don't care for the stars idea at all. For me, the angst isn't coming from challenge people at all, it's coming from traditional cache people that can't stand the idea that they can physically find a cache that they can't log a find for.

 

To me, the "perfect" solution would be breaking it out into its own separate game site altogether, linked directly into the user's GC profile but not a part of the standard geocache map. Not having challenges on the map with the other caches doesn't seem like an issue since challenges typically require planning and data-gathering for fulfilling the requirements.

Despite several pages of discussion, I really still don't understand what this would accomplish. So challenge caches would be ostracized. There are still lots of caches that you can't find for one reason or another. What have you accomplished by eliminating that one class? For you, very little. For those of us that enjoy challenge caches and don't care that we can't find every one, it eliminates a fun part of geocaching at geocaching.com.

Share this post


Link to post

 

AND my other suggestion (conveniently overlooked) to allow for challenge caches to be placed by the CO with the option to require completion as well before a find is allowed. Because the categorization of the cache as a challenge cache (there is an associated challenge), such caches can now be explicitly filtered out of searches by people who just want to 'find it, sign it, log it online'.

 

So now, everyone can get what they want.

Hide challenge caches as they are now - Find AND qualify to log found? Yup.

Allow people to find and log it found without qualification, if desired? Yup.

Don't want to see caches you can't log found even if you found it? Yup.

Official metric for display challenge qualification statistics? Yup.

 

Of course, this would be dependent upon Challenge caches getting the own cache type. As it stands now, challenge cachers are the only category of caches which have specific guidelines but are not a specific cache type.

 

People will probably still argue whether finding the cache before completing the challenge should be allowed.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Of course, this would be dependent upon Challenge caches getting the own cache type. As it stands now, challenge cachers are the only category of caches which have specific guidelines but are not a specific cache type.

 

People will probably still argue whether finding the cache before completing the challenge should be allowed.

If you read my suggestion again, no, it doesn't give challenge caches their own type. I moved away from challenge caches being their own type long ago. The idea is that since a challenge cache could be a traditional with an ALR, or a mystery with an ALR, potentially even a multi with an ALR, my suggestion was that the challenge be a property of physical cache listings. A flag. Create any standard physical style cache, and you have the option to make it a challenge cache by associating a challenge with it, and defining whether it's locked to the find or not.

Share this post


Link to post

I have yet to meet anyone in real life with that perspective, every cacher I know doesn't have an issue with having to meet a challenge to log a find. I however do know several cachers that would archive their challenge caches if meeting the challenge became optional.

*sigh*

I don't know anyone in my real life that has an issue with that either. But the forum shows that they do exist. This thread was begun precisely because of them. So.

 

So......that makes what, 3, 4 people?

 

What do you think is the proportion of active forum members from the geocaching user base? Really, the forums don't represent anything close to the reality, it's just the people that are making the most noise (and that proportion will be biased by those who are in the fear of loosing something).

 

That being said, Groundspeak understood this and the user insight thread is perfect to get ideas on how to make challenge caches better. I don't think it will be a popularity contest (e.g. "oh, there are so many people upset, we shouldn't change the way challenge caches are..."). Even if you'd get 10,000 hardcore geocachers rooting for keeping the challenge caches in their current state, this is still a negligible number out of the total number of geocachers. The point is to get ideas on how to make them better for everyone.

 

I'm not sure if the challenge star system is the best because from all the noise, I understand challenge aficionados don't want to loose an exclusive find and challenge COs don't want to allow finds on their caches from undeserved finders.

 

thebruce0 proposed to attach the challenge completion feature to a property of the cache, but as this would still be a physical cache and it would still allow the CO to decide only those who qualify can log the cache as a find, I don't think it would work either as we'd be back to the same situation we used to be.

 

If I understand correctly:

 

- challenge cache COs want to keep the exclusivity of the finds on their caches

- challenge cache finders want to keep the exclusivity for their finds on challenge caches

- the ordinary geocachers want to be able to log a find on any physical cache they put their hands on OR they'd like to be able to really ignore those that have ALRs

 

Let's give a new icon to challenge caches, so they can be properly ignored from notifications, PQs and maps. They would also be easier to sort for the aficionados that want to show their stats or use them to qualify for other challenges. Let's make the challenge caches virtual so no one can stumble on a physical cache to later discover it has ALR and his find is denied (for those worried about their past statistics, this is all data and it can be somewhat easily managed by a good programmer at Groundspeak). Really, the pride of completing a challenge is not to find a lamppost cache and then log it. It's about completing the challenge (finding so many caches in so many places). Logging a virtual should not diminish the pleasure of completing the challenge.

 

The new icon and the virtual state of the challenge caches would satisfy the three points I listed above.

Share this post


Link to post
I'm not sure if the challenge star system is the best because from all the noise, I understand challenge aficionados don't want to loose an exclusive find and challenge COs don't want to allow finds on their caches from undeserved finders
this would still be a physical cache and it would still allow the CO to decide only those who qualify can log the cache as a find

Challenge Stars separate the physical find from the challenge completion. Only those who have met the requirements would be allowed to log the exclusive Challenge Completed log type, after which they would get their deserved Stars (whose quantity would be proportional to the difficulty of the challenge).

 

By using the Found It as it was originally intended (find-sign-log) and not as reward for completing the challenge, there will never be a need to log challenge caches with a Note log type.

 

 

- challenge cache COs want to keep the exclusivity of the finds on their caches

- challenge cache finders want to keep the exclusivity for their finds on challenge caches

- the ordinary geocachers want to be able to log a find on any physical cache they put their hands on OR they'd like to be able to really ignore those that have ALR

A five-star Challenge Completed is more exclusive than a monolithic Found It. The Stars enhance the exclusivity of these challenges.

 

 

Let's give a new icon to challenge caches, so they can be properly ignored from notifications, PQs and maps.

The Challenge Stars system proposes enhancing existing icons to provide this functionality. For example, see post 8 for what the map filter could look like.

Share this post


Link to post

Let's give a new icon to challenge caches, so they can be properly ignored from notifications, PQs and maps. They would also be easier to sort for the aficionados that want to show their stats or use them to qualify for other challenges.

Challenges may or may not be at the posted coordinates. Right now they are all pushed into one (mystery) icon, while they could be at the posted coordinates, require solving a puzzle, or even mimick a multi-stage cache. Making it one new icon is less effective in making the cache listing relevant to the actual cache. Separating the challenge rating from D and T addresses inaccurate D (and/or T) being influenced by the challenge, and making it an additional listing property allows the cache type to remain relevant to the physical cache itself and not the challenge task (eg, a multicache is still a multicache (not a mystery with a challenge)) - a new Challenge Cache type means one icon must still serve to identify the Traditional, Mystery, and Multi style physical geocache type that it may be.

 

Let's make the challenge caches virtual so no one can stumble on a physical cache to later discover it has ALR and his find is denied

By virtual you must mean locationless. Otherwise what's the importance of the posted location if nothing has to be done or found at GZ? Posted coordinates would be entirely arbitrary, effectively meaningless. If it's locationless, well, that's been discussed ad nauseum in this thread and the 'Pause'/moratorium thread. :)

Share this post


Link to post
A five-star Challenge Completed is more exclusive than a monolithic Found It. The Stars enhance the exclusivity of these challenges.
Maybe I missed it somewhere in the rest of this thread, but does anything prevent me from listing a 5-star challenge cache that requires someone to find only 2 caches in 1 day (and the challenge cache would count as one of the two)?

Share this post


Link to post
A five-star Challenge Completed is more exclusive than a monolithic Found It. The Stars enhance the exclusivity of these challenges.
Maybe I missed it somewhere in the rest of this thread, but does anything prevent me from listing a 5-star challenge cache that requires someone to find only 2 caches in 1 day (and the challenge cache would count as one of the two)?

 

heh, I could see that working, if the other cache were ridiculously hard to find; like a great distance away, or rare (but achievable). Cache could be low D/T with high C.

Share this post


Link to post
A five-star Challenge Completed is more exclusive than a monolithic Found It. The Stars enhance the exclusivity of these challenges.
Maybe I missed it somewhere in the rest of this thread, but does anything prevent me from listing a 5-star challenge cache that requires someone to find only 2 caches in 1 day (and the challenge cache would count as one of the two)?

 

There is nothing in the thread that addresses this issue.

 

Whatever mechanisms exist to prevent bad D/T ratings would also apply to the C rating, to which they are akin.

Share this post


Link to post

By virtual you must mean locationless. Otherwise what's the importance of the posted location if nothing has to be done or found at GZ? Posted coordinates would be entirely arbitrary, effectively meaningless. If it's locationless, well, that's been discussed ad nauseum in this thread and the 'Pause'/moratorium thread. :)

 

Yes, I meant there's no container at the posted coordinates. Really, the meat of a challenge cache is working towards the completion of the requirements which (hopefully) include finding more than one cache. At the moment, once the hard work is done, you can armchair log a challenge cache you previously visited some time ago to sign the logbook, or you can get out to sign the logbook, then log. If they would be "locationless", you would still get an extra find for the challenge you just accomplished. Those not meeting the requirements would not be allowed to log it as a find. If the type of challenges would be contained, this could also be automated (like the souvenirs).

 

This is interesting how even if such a solution would still provide an exclusive find to those who like challenge caches, they are not happy about it. It's like if for them, all that is important, is that the cache has to be accessible to everyone (physical box), luring people to "find a cache", but to keep a way for the CO to deny the find to those who are not interested by the sidegame. The virtual attribute of the challenge in itself would prevent the luring aspect of the challenge caches. Is this really what challenge caches are all about?

Share this post


Link to post

This is interesting how even if such a solution would still provide an exclusive find to those who like challenge caches, they are not happy about it.

That's right, I would not be happy about it -- well, more to the point, I probably wouldn't do them anymore -- and for 2 main reasons. First, as I just explained, finding a physical cache is what's important, the challenge is just an extra flair comparable to the added fun of climbing or kayaking for a cache. And second, by fixing the cache at a particular place that people have to travel to, the finds in the log are limited to people caching in that geographic area. In other words, while satisfying the requirement is not necessarily a local phenomenon, my main interest as an observer are the geocachers that are in that area.

 

It's like if for them, all that is important, is that the cache has to be accessible to everyone (physical box), luring people to "find a cache", but to keep a way for the CO to deny the find to those who are not interested by the sidegame.

Challenge caches don't lure people to look for a cache that can't be found any more than puzzle caches lure people to look for a cache in the wrong place. Otherwise, yes, they allow the CO to limit finds to people interested in satisfying the requirements in the same way puzzle caches, climbing caches, water caches, hard to find caches, and caches at the end of 10 mile hikes are limited to people willing to satisfy those requirements. The difference you're complaining about is that with those other cache types, if you find a way to sign the log by "cheating", you're allowed to claim the find.

Share this post


Link to post

This is interesting how even if such a solution would still provide an exclusive find to those who like challenge caches, they are not happy about it.

That's right, I would not be happy about it -- well, more to the point, I probably wouldn't do them anymore -- and for 2 main reasons. First, as I just explained, finding a physical cache is what's important, the challenge is just an extra flair comparable to the added fun of climbing or kayaking for a cache. And second, by fixing the cache at a particular place that people have to travel to, the finds in the log are limited to people caching in that geographic area. In other words, while satisfying the requirement is not necessarily a local phenomenon, my main interest as an observer are the geocachers that are in that area.

 

Huh? I don't see the value of "finding" a local cache under a lamppost vs the work required to complete a challenge cache. It's probably even anticlimatic to "finish" a challenge like that. Oh well...

 

It's like if for them, all that is important, is that the cache has to be accessible to everyone (physical box), luring people to "find a cache", but to keep a way for the CO to deny the find to those who are not interested by the sidegame.

Challenge caches don't lure people to look for a cache that can't be found any more than puzzle caches lure people to look for a cache in the wrong place. Otherwise, yes, they allow the CO to limit finds to people interested in satisfying the requirements in the same way puzzle caches, climbing caches, water caches, hard to find caches, and caches at the end of 10 mile hikes are limited to people willing to satisfy those requirements. The difference you're complaining about is that with those other cache types, if you find a way to sign the log by "cheating", you're allowed to claim the find.

 

Wrong. The reason it's wrong is there are no ALRs for all other physical cache types. Log signed, cache found. Don't ask me what people will do to put their names in the logbook, but they do. So yes, the ALR aspect of the challenge cache is just a lure to deny a find. I wish challenge caches don't go away for the people that like them, but I hope Groundspeak will go back to the basics and virtualize them so the same "log signed, cache found" rule applies to all physical caches.

Edited by cron

Share this post


Link to post

 

By virtual you must mean locationless. Otherwise what's the importance of the posted location if nothing has to be done or found at GZ? Posted coordinates would be entirely arbitrary, effectively meaningless.

 

Sort of like how people create geoart made up of unknown caches? If challenge caches became locationless the coordinates would only be used to place an icon on a map...and could be placed such that they created geoart without blocking the area for the placement of traditional or other cache types

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

By virtual you must mean locationless. Otherwise what's the importance of the posted location if nothing has to be done or found at GZ? Posted coordinates would be entirely arbitrary, effectively meaningless.

 

Sort of like how people create geoart made up of unknown caches? If challenge caches became locationless the coordinates would only be used to place an icon on a map...and could be placed such that they created geoart without blocking the area for the placement of traditional or other cache types

 

But.... the geoart are puzzles, which - lead to a physical cache.

A geoart of challenge caches would just be couch-logged, worldwide (or region-wide) without having to do anything, if you've already qualified for the outlined challenge. Any physical cache still requires you to go out and find it.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post

By virtual you must mean locationless. Otherwise what's the importance of the posted location if nothing has to be done or found at GZ? Posted coordinates would be entirely arbitrary, effectively meaningless.

 

Sort of like how people create geoart made up of unknown caches? If challenge caches became locationless the coordinates would only be used to place an icon on a map...and could be placed such that they created geoart without blocking the area for the placement of traditional or other cache types

 

But.... the geoart are puzzles, which - lead to a physical cache.

A geoart of challenge caches would just be couch-logged, worldwide (or region-wide) without having to do anything, if you've already qualified for the outlined challenge. Any physical cache still requires you to go out and find it.

 

Which is why I support a system that breaks up the "worldwide" challenges (grids, stat-based, etc) and those that are geographically-based or something that requires one to be in a particular area to achieve the required goals. The former would not be something one has to "log" and therefore the couch-logging argument doesn't apply. The latter would be as currently set up, with COs (or even some tool via the GS site...like macros similar to what Project-GC can do) that can check the logger's qualifications.

With the former, the challenge is achieved once and any other cache logged is not another achievement. With the latter, the challenge may vary from place to place and therefore IS another achievement. I'm not against the a physical cache in the latter case, with challenge stars in addition to the physical cache. Seems superfluous to have a physical for the worldwide challenges, though. If you have qualified for the Jasmer in Georgia, then you have accomplished something. If you then go to California and log one over there, the only thing you have accomplished is a four-hour ride in an airplane.

Edited by J Grouchy

Share this post


Link to post

With the former, the challenge is achieved once and any other cache logged is not another achievement.

Which is why we don't think this is a desireable solution. It takes away from what makes Challenge Caches, in their current form, desireable. (see comments above re finding the physical cache in addition to completing the challenge)

 

With the latter, the challenge may vary from place to place and therefore IS another achievement. I'm not against the a physical cache in the latter case, with challenge stars in addition to the physical cache. Seems superfluous to have a physical for the worldwide challenges, though. If you have qualified for the Jasmer in Georgia, then you have accomplished something. If you then go to California and log one over there, the only thing you have accomplished is a four-hour ride in an airplane.

 

I can see what you're getting at. Essentially splitting up and segmenting location-based tasks from virtual tasks which can completed anywhere.

 

Unfortunately that greatly reduces the amount of challenge ideas that can be made, or makes them a little more convoluted.

eg, what about a challenge to find a cache in all 50 states. In which state should it be posted and owned? Could there be only 50 'duplicates' of this challenge, published in each state? Or should it be a single worldwide locationless challenge? Or would it no longer qualify? What if someone wants to spice it up a bit and add another qualification property to the caches? Is that a new challenge? Would it be flagged as a duplicate? What if a challenge already exists as a worldwide one but someone wants to make a physical published version, should that be allowed?

Those could of course all be legitimate questions that may get asked in this system, and be an acceptable issue, but they wouldn't exist (or at least would exist in another form) without that location/locationless determination factor.

 

And again, are you saying that you propose a challenge can exist within a region, as physical caches, yet have no duplicates in the region? Or are you not considering duplicates as a limitation at all? Maybe I mis-read that... hm

 

Let me start over... :P

 

- You propose to disallow physical challenge caches that do not require a location-specific task, but rather publish those as unique, single-qualification worldwide virtual 'achievements' (essentially using the current souvenir reward mechanic).

- Additionally, you propose to limit physical challenge caches to tasks that require location-specific accomplishments. They don't have to be unique, and can still be duplicated elsewhere, because there's a physical cache to be found, tied to qualification.

 

So, would GS exclusively publish the worldwide challenges?

Would a 50-state challenge be a worldwide challenge? If not, would two COs be able to publish the same challenge in the same state?

Would COs be able to require certain worldwide challenges to be complete in addition to a location-specific task for their challenge cache (have the badge and qualify for the rest of the challenge)?

Would COs be able to publish variant challenges based on worldwide challenges but that are tied to a location (eg, complete a fizzy with California caches)?

Would COs be able to request challenges of various flavours of worldwide challenges (eg, complete a fizzy of Mystery caches)?

 

Consider the questions and what sorts of line-pushing might arise from this variation in the challenge cache mechanic. How much does it improve the core issue of reviewer/appeal overload? Does it help? Or does it just change things up a bit?

 

It's an interesting proposal, but in addition to reducing the slightly limiting the creativitity for challenge COs, I don't think it'll make things easier on TPTB... IMO.

 

Also, maybe this was because a ways back the stats coding didn't exist, but GS allowed people to edit their public profile to put in their own 'achievement' badges if they wished as defined by 3rd party websites, for things like fizzies, jasmers, cache series completions, etc. That doesn't seem to be as popular nowadays, I don't think, now that there are stats and generators, but the only difference here would be GS auto-generating such badges and rewarding them as they do souvenirs. So that mechanic technically already exists.

Share this post


Link to post

Boiling it all down, the purpose of a challenge is to complete one specific challenge...no?

If that is true, how does having multiple versions of what is technically one challenge make any sense aside from the ability to add a +1 to one's cache finds? It's not another achievement, not another challenge met. It essentially dilutes the value of the challenge, in my opinion.

 

Would COs be able to require certain worldwide challenges to be complete in addition to a location-specific task for their challenge cache (have the badge and qualify for the rest of the challenge)?

Would COs be able to publish variant challenges based on worldwide challenges but that are tied to a location (eg, complete a fizzy with California caches)?

Would COs be able to request challenges of various flavours of worldwide challenges (eg, complete a fizzy of Mystery caches)?

 

To all three of those I'd say "why not?".

 

Honestly, I think the examples you gave make for some interesting variations that many folks would enjoy going after. I don't find it particularly convoluted...and adding in the GS-based verification system would surely help limit the number of appeals.

Share this post


Link to post

Boiling it all down, the purpose of a challenge is to complete one specific challenge...no?

If that is true, how does having multiple versions of what is technically one challenge make any sense aside from the ability to add a +1 to one's cache finds? It's not another achievement, not another challenge met. It essentially dilutes the value of the challenge, in my opinion.

 

 

I wouldn't say that it dilutes the value of the challenge but I agree with everything else. I think that essence of a challenge is completing the challenge, and that requiring one to find an additional physical cache, to me, doesn't really add anything to the accomplishment of completing the challenge.

 

One of the factors that I think is important to consider in a discussion about any implementation of challenge caches, whether it's challenge stars or souvenirs or a locationless cache is that more than any other category of cache, the popularity of challenge caches is very regional. The notion of setting a goal (or having a goal defined by the specification of criteria for a challenge) is global. I think that the notion of working toward a goal certainly adds something to the game and whether it's "find a cache with 10 or more favorite points" or "find an unknown cache 366 days in a row" geocachers can get a sense of accomplishment for completing the goal. However, because the popularity of challenge caches is very regional, those that live in areas where they are popular can go out and find a cache to get "credit" for completing the challenge, while those that don't have to travel to some place where challenge caches are popular in order to get "credit" for completing the exact same challenge.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Huh? I don't see the value of "finding" a local cache under a lamppost vs the work required to complete a challenge cache. It's probably even anticlimatic to "finish" a challenge like that. Oh well...

A cache under a lamppost is equally disappointing whether a traditional or a challenge cache. And, in fact, I see it the opposite way: if the actual hide is particularly uninteresting, well, then, at least there was the fun of the challenge.

 

Anyway, I'm not expecting you to adopt my attitude, I'm just explaining why I find the physical cache an important part of challenge caches.

 

Wrong. The reason it's wrong is there are no ALRs for all other physical cache types. Log signed, cache found. Don't ask me what people will do to put their names in the logbook, but they do. So yes, the ALR aspect of the challenge cache is just a lure to deny a find.

I think we have different ideas about what makes something a lure. For all unknown caches, a seeker has to presume additional actions are required to find the cache. If they aren't interested, they just shouldn't do them. These people you're so concerned about are looking for and signing logs that they know full well they don't qualify for, and then they complain about being lured, as if it's a big surprise that there's an ALR.

 

Hey, wait a minute. Isn't your position that the physical cache for a challenge cache has no independent value? Why are people that don't qualify so excited about finding them, then?

 

Boiling it all down, the purpose of a challenge is to complete one specific challenge...no?

If that is true, how does having multiple versions of what is technically one challenge make any sense aside from the ability to add a +1 to one's cache finds? It's not another achievement, not another challenge met. It essentially dilutes the value of the challenge, in my opinion.

A big part of geocaching is the community. Challenge caches with a physical component in a particular place are connected to the community. The fact that different challenge caches in different communities can share the same challenge is not much more interesting than the fact that caches in different communities can be ammo cans.

Share this post


Link to post
Boiling it all down, the purpose of a challenge is to complete one specific challenge...no?

If that is true, how does having multiple versions of what is technically one challenge make any sense aside from the ability to add a +1 to one's cache finds? It's not another achievement, not another challenge met. It essentially dilutes the value of the challenge, in my opinion.

A big part of geocaching is the community. Challenge caches with a physical component in a particular place are connected to the community. The fact that different challenge caches in different communities can share the same challenge is not much more interesting than the fact that caches in different communities can be ammo cans.

 

That argument (if that indeed is what it is) makes no sense. How is a Fizzy Challenge in Atlanta "connected to the community"? What does that even mean?

Share this post


Link to post

That argument (if that indeed is what it is) makes no sense. How is a Fizzy Challenge in Atlanta "connected to the community"? What does that even mean?

It means that people that log finds on the Fizzy Challenge in Atlanta have been to Atlanta.

Share this post


Link to post

It means that people that log finds on the Fizzy Challenge in Atlanta have been to Atlanta.

I want to *like* this muchly. :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

That argument (if that indeed is what it is) makes no sense. How is a Fizzy Challenge in Atlanta "connected to the community"? What does that even mean?

It means that people that log finds on the Fizzy Challenge in Atlanta have been to Atlanta.

 

It has a connection to a place, but a "connection to a community" is quite a stretch. "Community" is more than just an area defined on a map. Don't make it any warmer or fuzzier than it is.

 

Besides, you completely ignored my point about universal challenges vs. those that are tied to a particular city, state or region.

Share this post


Link to post

It has a connection to a place, but a "connection to a community" is quite a stretch.

We have different ideas about communities. My caching community is made up of the people that have found the same caches I have. Anyway, can we continue having our community's local challenge caches even if you don't believe they're connected to our community?

 

It's really very simple: I want to see which of the cachers in my area have accomplished the challenge; I'm not so interested in any cachers in Germany that have accomplished the challenge, unless, of course, they come into my community to sign the log of my community's version.

Share this post


Link to post

It's really very simple: I want to see which of the cachers in my area have accomplished the challenge; I'm not so interested in any cachers in Germany that have accomplished the challenge, unless, of course, they come into my community to sign the log of my community's version.

 

I think you're making Groundspeak's point about challenge caches. Everyone is looking at their own belly button and it creates a mess for GS to manage CO's requests. That's a good thing as it will most likely help them to streamline challenge types.

Share this post


Link to post

It has a connection to a place, but a "connection to a community" is quite a stretch.

We have different ideas about communities. My caching community is made up of the people that have found the same caches I have. Anyway, can we continue having our community's local challenge caches even if you don't believe they're connected to our community?

 

It's really very simple: I want to see which of the cachers in my area have accomplished the challenge; I'm not so interested in any cachers in Germany that have accomplished the challenge, unless, of course, they come into my community to sign the log of my community's version.

 

And for a second time in a row, you completely ignore my point about making a distinction between universal challenges and regional challenges.

Share this post


Link to post

As I understand this suggestion:

 

For each challenge cache, the difficulty of the challenge requirements would be rated on a scale of 1-5, and represented as challenge stars (similar to the 1-5 difficulty stars and the 1-5 terrain stars).

 

The challenge caches that someone has logged as "Challenge Completed" would be represented by the sum of all the challenge stars of the completed challenges (similar to representing finds by adding up the difficulty stars and/or the terrain stars of all the found caches).

 

Is this correct?

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

×