Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
JL_HSTRE

Reviewers Reviewing D/T?

Recommended Posts

In the past reasonably accurate D/T ratings seemed like a request but not really a rule that was enforced. Recently, comments from several other cachers have given me the impression Reviewers are now asking cachers to raise or lower ratings. Is this a change in review policy?

 

(Not a complaint; just curious. I think D/Ts are too often inaccurate.)

Share this post


Link to post

A caching friend of mine was telling me that a reviewer in our neighboring state asked him to change the ratings on some of his newer caches. I think it's good that a reviewer might inquire about this but in my friend's case, the reviewer was insistent that he make changes. From what my friend told me, the reviewer's ratings suggestions were way off. After an email or two, my friend's caches were published with his initial ratings. It's good that they were because i ended up finding those caches and imo, believe they are accurate.

Share this post


Link to post

Now that people are senselessly treating these ratings as some sort of score, it's nice to hear that reviewers are at least looking at the D/T ratings and raising the question. I don't think there's much they can do if someone is intent on giving an inaccurate rating, but at least these COs know someone is raising an eyebrow.

Share this post


Link to post

Now that people are senselessly treating these ratings as some sort of score, it's nice to hear that reviewers are at least looking at the D/T ratings and raising the question. I don't think there's much they can do if someone is intent on giving an inaccurate rating, but at least these COs know someone is raising an eyebrow.

 

^^This

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not sure how reviewers can do much about D/T ratings. Otherwise the whole concept of "liar's caches" (which continue to be approved) goes right out the window ...

Share this post


Link to post

Beware of concluding too much from limited observations. There is a finite subset of cache types, terrain ratings and difficulty ratings for which Geocaching HQ asks the volunteer cache reviewers to question inappropriate ratings. The most common example of these is the use of the handicapped accessible attribute for a cache with a high terrain rating - reviewers will ask cache owners to correct the attribute or the rating, whichever is wrong. The same is true for caches rated one star for terrain, but for which the handicapped accessible attribute has not been selected.

 

There are other narrowly targeted situations but this one is the best-known.

 

In addition, reviewers can question ratings on other cache submissions to make sure that the owner understands what they're doing, and that the reviewer understands the cache design. A terrain 5 cache in the middle of a flat, grassy lawn might evoke a question. Are the coordinates wrong? Is the rating artificial? Or is the cache hidden with permission in a cave underneath the grassy lawn? Such conversations are meant to promote greater understanding and would not ultimately prevent publication.

Edited by Keystone

Share this post


Link to post

Is the rating artificial?

 

But as things stand, this alone being true would not merit a response one way or the other from a reviewer presumably?

Share this post


Link to post

Beware of concluding too much from limited observations. There is a finite subset of cache types, terrain ratings and difficulty ratings for which Geocaching HQ asks the volunteer cache reviewers to question inappropriate ratings. The most common example of these is the use of the handicapped accessible attribute for a cache with a high terrain rating - reviewers will ask cache owners to correct the attribute or the rating, whichever is wrong. The same is true for caches rated one star for terrain, but for which the handicapped accessible attribute has not been selected.

 

If the two are meant to go together, it almost seems like there ought to be some automatic notification during the cache creation process where only one of those cannot be selected without the other being activated...or selecting the wheelchair attribute automatically sets the terrain rating to 1 and vise versa.

 

But it raises the question...does a T1 necessarily mean it is HC accessible? I mean, what if it getting to it requires setting onto a sidewalk that has no wheelchair ramps. Does that automatically mean it's a T1.5? That's pretty much how I've always set mine up, but I'm wondering if T1 actually requires a wheelchair attribute.

Edited by J Grouchy

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting.

 

Hopefully another category that reviewers look at carefully is the 5/5. Too many caches have D = T but these are the worst because of the kudos attached to owning and finding 5/5s. I'm looking forward to a kayak trip in the spring, about 50 miles from home - all the caches in the series are T5 and it seems rightly so, but none are D5. That'll get me to 77/81...

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting.

 

Hopefully another category that reviewers look at carefully is the 5/5. Too many caches have D = T but these are the worst because of the kudos attached to owning and finding 5/5s. I'm looking forward to a kayak trip in the spring, about 50 miles from home - all the caches in the series are T5 and it seems rightly so, but none are D5. That'll get me to 77/81...

 

You should head up to the NW region - we have 5/5's here that involve tests of nerves, skill and endurance such as a 30 metre walk through a tunnel with a few inches of water running through the bottom to a cache that's in full view B)

 

Specialist equipment? Wellies and nerves of steel of course <_<

 

That would save you all that paddlin' :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

It would be nice, because my local reviewers care only about proper types and that T1=WC avail. Invalid D/T rating, as well as invalid size is automatically ignored.

 

Groundspeak should made a statement about that, if wrong D/T and size is against guidelines or not. They've made that with events - in my region all must have D=1.

Edited by GeoLog81

Share this post


Link to post

But it raises the question...does a D1 necessarily mean it is HC accessible? I mean, what if it getting to it requires setting onto a sidewalk that has no wheelchair ramps. Does that automatically mean it's a D1.5? That's pretty much how I've always set mine up, but I'm wondering if D1 actually requires a wheelchair attribute.

No. Handicapped accessibility goes to terrain, not difficulty.

 

Once when caching with a legally blind geocacher, he found an evil micro that the three others with good vision could not locate. We were on level pavement and grass.

Share this post


Link to post

Groundspeak should made a statement about that, if wrong D/T and size is against guidelines or not. They've made that with events - in my region all must have D=1.

That is another specific, targeted example where Geocaching HQ has asked reviewers to guard against artificial difficulty ratings. An event can be held on the top of a mountain, but that goes to terrain. Difficulty defines how hard it is to locate the cache once arriving at ground zero, including solving any puzzles. Event caches don't have puzzles. So what would justify an event cache difficulty rating greater than 1 star? Are the attendees hiding in the dark down in the basement of the pub? If they are in plain sight, that aligns to a rating of 1 star difficulty.

Share this post


Link to post

I have seen some strange d/t on a couple of events and figured they need ed that to fill out the grid. Also on some others I shake my head on the ratings and move on.

Share this post


Link to post

Event caches don't have puzzles. So what would justify an event cache difficulty rating greater than 1 star?

 

The guideline theoretically does not exclude puzzles. Well, the event should take place at the posted coordinates, but one could e.g. have an entry code that has to be entered at the

door (just for the fun of it). Not that I think that this will be a standard case, but I cannot see anything in the guidelines against it.

 

I also could think of something like that the attendees have to come disguised in a way fitting to the theme of the event. Even if this cannot be enforced and is just a kind request, I think that the effort which goes into complying with the request should be honored.

 

What about events where difficult quiz games are played? Certainly everyone can take part, but to attend such an event with no obvious interest into taking part in the quiz game is probably not the best idea.

 

What about having an event at 2 in the night in an area which is very hard to reach? Not all of this is included in the T-rating in my opinion.

 

I'm not a fan of artificial event ratings, but I do not think that events are automatically D=1 in particular not if one participates in the intended manner and not just wants to enforce that everyone can attend every event by just saying hi.

 

 

Cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

Is the rating artificial?

 

But as things stand, this alone being true would not merit a response one way or the other from a reviewer presumably?

 

Looks like Keystone's still ignoring me. Oh well :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post

Is the rating artificial?

 

But as things stand, this alone being true would not merit a response one way or the other from a reviewer presumably?

 

Looks like Keystone's still ignoring me. Oh well :rolleyes:

I've posted several times to this thread while juggling the demands of my day job. Sorry if I can't engage in back and forth banter for each and every post. I thought my original reply was clear.

 

As this week's Geocaching Newsletter reminds us, there are 293 volunteer cache reviewers and 52 forum moderators. I will now exit this thread in favor of someone else who might meet your definition of responsiveness.

Share this post


Link to post

Is the rating artificial?

 

But as things stand, this alone being true would not merit a response one way or the other from a reviewer presumably?

 

Looks like Keystone's still ignoring me. Oh well :rolleyes:

I've posted several times to this thread while juggling the demands of my day job. Sorry if I can't engage in back and forth banter for each and every post. I thought my original reply was clear.

 

As this week's Geocaching Newsletter reminds us, there are 293 volunteer cache reviewers and 52 forum moderators. I will now exit this thread in favor of someone else who might meet your definition of responsiveness.

 

I do apologise but having read back the thread again I still can't find the place where you answered the question I asked.

 

I suppose I should just get used to that though huh?

Share this post


Link to post

I am actually struggling with one of my submissions but on an event, not a geocache. Apparently my reviewer knows better than me and is insisting I change my 3/3 event to a 1-1.5 / 1-1.5. Not even considering publication unless I change it. While I know I can change it after the fact, I don't play those shenanigans so am trying to work it from the front. Apparently an event on a January 29th northern MN day, with an average temp of 0F and plenty of snow on the ground should be a 1 or 1.5, but the same reviewer publishes his own cito event, outside of the winter season in the metro area as a 2/2. Shrug.

 

Hey, I am all for conforming. But as I've been complaining about for years is that there is NO consistency from cache to cache, from state to state, between guideline interpretation here versus guideline interpretation there. Stop the madness.

Share this post


Link to post

I am actually struggling with one of my submissions but on an event, not a geocache. Apparently my reviewer knows better than me and is insisting I change my 3/3 event to a 1-1.5 / 1-1.5. Not even considering publication unless I change it. While I know I can change it after the fact, I don't play those shenanigans so am trying to work it from the front. Apparently an event on a January 29th northern MN day, with an average temp of 0F and plenty of snow on the ground should be a 1 or 1.5, but the same reviewer publishes his own cito event, outside of the winter season in the metro area as a 2/2. Shrug.

 

Hey, I am all for conforming. But as I've been complaining about for years is that there is NO consistency from cache to cache, from state to state, between guideline interpretation here versus guideline interpretation there. Stop the madness.

:ph34r:Oh, I hear ya... Shenanigans.

Share this post


Link to post

I've never understood how an regular event can't be anything but a 1 difficulty. Even it's on top of Mount Everest, it's still a 1 difficulty but would be a 5 for the terrain. Or 500 feet in the ocean in scuba, it's still a 1 difficulty.

 

Have you ever NOT been able to find an event once you reach ground zero?????

Share this post


Link to post

I've never understood how an regular event can't be anything but a 1 difficulty. Even it's on top of Mount Everest, it's still a 1 difficulty but would be a 5 for the terrain. Or 500 feet in the ocean in scuba, it's still a 1 difficulty.

 

Have you ever NOT been able to find an event once you reach ground zero?????

 

I always thought that an event should mean much more than just showing up and saying hi and leaving again after 30 seconds.

Staying for a longer time on a cold winter day outside e.g. certainly requires more preparation and effort than I'd expect for a D=1* rated cache/event.

Socializing does not happen in 30 seconds.

Share this post


Link to post

I've never understood how an regular event can't be anything but a 1 difficulty. Even it's on top of Mount Everest, it's still a 1 difficulty but would be a 5 for the terrain. Or 500 feet in the ocean in scuba, it's still a 1 difficulty.

 

Have you ever NOT been able to find an event once you reach ground zero?????

 

I always thought that an event should mean much more than just showing up and saying hi and leaving again after 30 seconds.

Staying for a longer time on a cold winter day outside e.g. certainly requires more preparation and effort than I'd expect for a D=1* rated cache/event.

Socializing does not happen in 30 seconds.

 

Signing the logbook doesn't need to take more than that.

Share this post


Link to post

I've never understood how an regular event can't be anything but a 1 difficulty. Even it's on top of Mount Everest, it's still a 1 difficulty but would be a 5 for the terrain. Or 500 feet in the ocean in scuba, it's still a 1 difficulty.

 

Have you ever NOT been able to find an event once you reach ground zero?????

 

I've got no problem with this philosophy if it weren't for the fact that it isn't being applied consistently, even as I work through my own event.

Share this post


Link to post

I've never understood how an regular event can't be anything but a 1 difficulty. Even it's on top of Mount Everest, it's still a 1 difficulty but would be a 5 for the terrain. Or 500 feet in the ocean in scuba, it's still a 1 difficulty.

 

Have you ever NOT been able to find an event once you reach ground zero?????

 

I always thought that an event should mean much more than just showing up and saying hi and leaving again after 30 seconds.

Staying for a longer time on a cold winter day outside e.g. certainly requires more preparation and effort than I'd expect for a D=1* rated cache/event.

Socializing does not happen in 30 seconds.

 

Signing the logbook doesn't need to take more than that.

 

Of course not, but I never thought that signing a log book or writing an attend log is the purpose of events.

In my opinion, if they enforce D=1* for all future events this is a further contribution to cheapening events to nothing more than a source of attend logs.

 

While I understand that Groundspeak does not want to have to handle debates what is a legitimate attend log for an event and thus allow attended logs for a whatever short visit, I do not think that this at the same time should mean to convey the message that events are just about finding the event location and then leaving. Some events depend for example on the willingness of a sufficiently large number of attendants to take part actively, for example by bringing along certain stuff and/or by taking part in certain activities (e.g. preparing food together). Of course noone can be forced to take part and those present and not taking part can log an attended log, but the D-rating in my opinion should be appropriate for those who spend a longer time at the event and take part actively and not just want to collect a further attended it log.

 

I think that all reduces to asking what's the goal of events? Is it really the goal of an event to find the event location and then to leave immediately?

The log type for events is called "attended it" and not "found it" since a few years. So why should the D-rating only take into account finding the event location (apart from the fact that this can be difficult in some cases too).

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

I've never understood how an regular event can't be anything but a 1 difficulty. Even it's on top of Mount Everest, it's still a 1 difficulty but would be a 5 for the terrain. Or 500 feet in the ocean in scuba, it's still a 1 difficulty.

 

Have you ever NOT been able to find an event once you reach ground zero?????

 

I always thought that an event should mean much more than just showing up and saying hi and leaving again after 30 seconds.

Staying for a longer time on a cold winter day outside e.g. certainly requires more preparation and effort than I'd expect for a D=1* rated cache/event.

Socializing does not happen in 30 seconds.

 

Signing the logbook doesn't need to take more than that.

Aha! But I seen it argued all over the forums that a logbook is not required for events. So there's no need to worry about anything! You just post an event, have people drive by and wave, and you're good to go. Another smiley! :grin:

Share this post


Link to post

I've never understood how an regular event can't be anything but a 1 difficulty. Even it's on top of Mount Everest, it's still a 1 difficulty but would be a 5 for the terrain. Or 500 feet in the ocean in scuba, it's still a 1 difficulty.

 

Have you ever NOT been able to find an event once you reach ground zero?????

 

I always thought that an event should mean much more than just showing up and saying hi and leaving again after 30 seconds.

Staying for a longer time on a cold winter day outside e.g. certainly requires more preparation and effort than I'd expect for a D=1* rated cache/event.

Socializing does not happen in 30 seconds.

 

Signing the logbook doesn't need to take more than that.

Aha! But I seen it argued all over the forums that a logbook is not required for events. So there's no need to worry about anything! You just post an event, have people drive by and wave, and you're good to go. Another smiley! :grin:

 

Event powertrail.

Share this post


Link to post

I think that all reduces to asking what's the goal of events? Is it really the goal of an event to find the event location and then to leave immediately?

Given the number of flashmob style events I see published, that seems to be the point now more than ever, yes.

Share this post


Link to post

Some events depend for example on the willingness of a sufficiently large number of attendants to take part actively, for example by bringing along certain stuff and/or by taking part in certain activities (e.g. preparing food together).

 

Not as far as Groundspeak are concerned - at least if my own admittedly limited experience of organising events is anything to go by. All that's required for an Attended log is to turn up at some point between the start and finish time and as there's no requirement to sign a logbook anyone who had a mind to could claim that they attended.

 

The event is the event and the activities are the activities and never the twain shall meet. Not a view I subscribe to but that that's not something Groundspeak seemed at all concerned about during my repeated attempts at dialogue with them on the subject.

 

Of course noone can be forced to take part and those present and not taking part can log an attended log,

 

Correct.

Share this post


Link to post

Aha! But I seen it argued all over the forums that a logbook is not required for events. So there's no need to worry about anything! You just post an event, have people drive by and wave, and you're good to go. Another smiley! :grin:

 

Event powertrail.

I've heard of it being done... <_<

Share this post


Link to post

Some events depend for example on the willingness of a sufficiently large number of attendants to take part actively, for example by bringing along certain stuff and/or by taking part in certain activities (e.g. preparing food together).

 

Not as far as Groundspeak are concerned - at least if my own admittedly limited experience of organising events is anything to go by. All that's required for an Attended log is to turn up at some point between the start and finish time and as there's no requirement to sign a logbook anyone who had a mind to could claim that they attended.

 

Yes, I know that up to now I thought that they do not require more for an attended log as everything else is hard to enforce without ending up in endless debates.

 

Up to now I have thought however that the true spirit of most events (not flash mobs) is more than claiming an attend log. What the guidelines mention about socializing should

probably also be revised then.

 

For me there is a big difference between allowing attended logs for those just saying hi and providing the impression to the community that events are just about finding the event location.

Share this post


Link to post

But it raises the question...does a T1 necessarily mean it is HC accessible? I mean, what if it getting to it requires setting onto a sidewalk that has no wheelchair ramps. Does that automatically mean it's a T1.5? That's pretty much how I've always set mine up, but I'm wondering if T1 actually requires a wheelchair attribute.

No. Handicapped accessibility goes to terrain, not difficulty.

 

Once when caching with a legally blind geocacher, he found an evil micro that the three others with good vision could not locate. We were on level pavement and grass.

 

Terrain...yes, that's what I meant. I fixed it...

 

So, back to my question...?

Share this post


Link to post

I think that all reduces to asking what's the goal of events? Is it really the goal of an event to find the event location and then to leave immediately?

Given the number of flashmob style events I see published, that seems to be the point now more than ever, yes.

I hold the opinion that Flash Mobs have played out their welcome. Whereas they used to be the internet sensation-style event (where song and dance happened, then rapidly dispursed...leaving the surrounding people confused and amused), they have devolved into a quick-and-dirty way to remove all obligation for event planning, and hand out the much-coveted easy additional smiley to one's profile.

 

I know Groundspeak can't put this genie back in the bottle, so we're stuck with a moot point. The fact remains that these types of events have changed the face of the game as we know it, and the end result is what I personally view as a poor example to set for what events are purposed for.

 

Now, if someone had a "flash mob" where people milled about, then at high noon all gather and sing Stars and Stripes Forever to run off as suddenly as they gathered to meet at a coffee shop or somesuch to debrief...that's more like what a geocaching event could be. But for the sole purpose of the event to devolve into a way to gain another smiley, another D/T combo, another date on your grid...that's a shame. It really degrades what events can (and IMO should) be.

 

Add in the idea that other events (some recently brought to the community's attention, e.g.) are put on with temporary caches with the intent to log as many smilies as one can for each in addition to their "Attended" log appear harmless, but IMO set a bad precedent for the game in general.

 

So, back to the OP, I think this may be part of why some seemingly more ethical (some can rightly argue unethical) Reviewers might ask for clarification on a D/T rating for an event. The same may go for a physical geocache. However, as was outlined above, I think this most often is the case when using a 1* T rating, or when a cursory look at the surrounding conditions of a hide on paper make it appear that the ratings are intentionally, or unintentionally inaccurate.

 

Edit

Edited by NeverSummer

Share this post


Link to post

So, back to the OP, I think this may be part of why some seemingly more ethical (some can rightly argue unethical) Reviewers might ask for clarification on a D/T rating for an event. The same may go for a physical geocache. However, as was outlined above, I think this most often is the case when using a 1* T rating, or when a cursory look at the surrounding conditions of a hide on paper make it appear that the ratings are intentionally, or unintentionally inaccurate.

 

At the beginning of the thread I would have agreed, but some later posts made me believe that the Groundspeak HQ now wishes to enforce very low difficult ratings for events and that's much more than just asking for clarification regarding a specific D/T rating for a specific event.

Share this post


Link to post

I think that all reduces to asking what's the goal of events? Is it really the goal of an event to find the event location and then to leave immediately?

Given the number of flashmob style events I see published, that seems to be the point now more than ever, yes.

I hold the opinion that Flash Mobs have played out their welcome. Whereas they used to be the internet sensation-style event (where song and dance happened, then rapidly dispursed...leaving the surrounding people confused and amused), they have devolved into a quick-and-dirty way to remove all obligation for event planning, and hand out the much-coveted easy additional smiley to one's profile.

 

I know Groundspeak can't put this genie back in the bottle, so we're stuck with a moot point. The fact remains that these types of events have changed the face of the game as we know it, and the end result is what I personally view as a poor example to set for what events are purposed for.

 

Now, if someone had a "flash mob" where people milled about, then at high noon all gather and sing Stars and Stripes Forever to run off as suddenly as they gathered to meet at a coffee shop or somesuch to debrief...that's more like what a geocaching event could be. But for the sole purpose of the event to devolve into a way to gain another smiley, another D/T combo, another date on your grid...that's a shame. It really degrades what events can (and IMO should) be.

 

Add in the idea that other events (some recently brought to the community's attention, e.g.) are put on with temporary caches with the intent to log as many smilies as one can for each in addition to their "Attended" log appear harmless, but IMO set a bad precedent for the game in general.

 

So, back to the OP, I think this may be part of why some seemingly more ethical (some can rightly argue unethical) Reviewers might ask for clarification on a D/T rating for an event. The same may go for a physical geocache. However, as was outlined above, I think this most often is the case when using a 1* T rating, or when a cursory look at the surrounding conditions of a hide on paper make it appear that the ratings are intentionally, or unintentionally inaccurate.

 

Edit

 

I dunno...August last year a local group put together a flash mob for every day of August where folks could gather at a local landmark for a group photo and any socializin' they wanted to do. To me that's perfectly acceptable. Who's to say it has to be a dinner time meet and greet or something with special activities? Now, setting up a five minute event in a Walmart parking lot is about as lame as it gets, but the landmark flash mobs here in Atlanta were a cool way to highlight various interesting places around town. It also often had the side benefit of bringing folks to those areas to grab nearby caches that they otherwise might not have gone looking for.

Share this post


Link to post

So, back to the OP, I think this may be part of why some seemingly more ethical (some can rightly argue unethical) Reviewers might ask for clarification on a D/T rating for an event. The same may go for a physical geocache. However, as was outlined above, I think this most often is the case when using a 1* T rating, or when a cursory look at the surrounding conditions of a hide on paper make it appear that the ratings are intentionally, or unintentionally inaccurate.

 

At the beginning of the thread I would have agreed, but some later posts made me believe that the Groundspeak HQ now wishes to enforce very low difficult ratings for events and that's much more than just asking for clarification regarding a specific D/T rating for a specific event.

I'm hoping you read the rest of my post...

 

But, really, I can't say I'm upset that the Reviewer might ask for clarification for a higher-than-1* D rating for an event. Most aren't about the difficulty as outlined in the guidelines--how hard is it to locate (or obtain the coordinates/location for) the geocache? Events aren't really that hard to locate. I've never seen a puzzle to find one, so a 1* D isn't that hard to fathom for events.

 

And, the flip side of the coin might be well-intentioned: Events are a great, important resource to this game. You get to meet others, get help and perspective on the game, and learn more about how to play according to official guidelines and local common practice via direct word of mouth. So, the idea might be to keep all events on the low rating scale to encourage people to attend. If an event is rafting some rapids, or scuba diving, that's the T rating, and can be clearly outlined in the description and a Reviewer note. To be able to attend any event, you really don't have to do anything other than show up. It's not "hard". Getting there might be, but "earning" that smiley really isn't.

Share this post


Link to post

I hold the opinion that Flash Mobs have played out their welcome. Whereas they used to be the internet sensation-style event (where song and dance happened, then rapidly dispursed...leaving the surrounding people confused and amused), they have devolved into a quick-and-dirty way to remove all obligation for event planning, and hand out the much-coveted easy additional smiley to one's profile.

 

I know Groundspeak can't put this genie back in the bottle, so we're stuck with a moot point. The fact remains that these types of events have changed the face of the game as we know it, and the end result is what I personally view as a poor example to set for what events are purposed for.

 

Now, if someone had a "flash mob" where people milled about, then at high noon all gather and sing Stars and Stripes Forever to run off as suddenly as they gathered to meet at a coffee shop or somesuch to debrief...that's more like what a geocaching event could be. But for the sole purpose of the event to devolve into a way to gain another smiley, another D/T combo, another date on your grid...that's a shame. It really degrades what events can (and IMO should) be.

 

Add in the idea that other events (some recently brought to the community's attention, e.g.) are put on with temporary caches with the intent to log as many smilies as one can for each in addition to their "Attended" log appear harmless, but IMO set a bad precedent for the game in general.

 

So, back to the OP, I think this may be part of why some seemingly more ethical (some can rightly argue unethical) Reviewers might ask for clarification on a D/T rating for an event. The same may go for a physical geocache. However, as was outlined above, I think this most often is the case when using a 1* T rating, or when a cursory look at the surrounding conditions of a hide on paper make it appear that the ratings are intentionally, or unintentionally inaccurate.

 

Edit

 

I dunno...August last year a local group put together a flash mob for every day of August where folks could gather at a local landmark for a group photo and any socializin' they wanted to do. To me that's perfectly acceptable. Who's to say it has to be a dinner time meet and greet or something with special activities? Now, setting up a five minute event in a Walmart parking lot is about as lame as it gets, but the landmark flash mobs here in Atlanta were a cool way to highlight various interesting places around town. It also often had the side benefit of bringing folks to those areas to grab nearby caches that they otherwise might not have gone looking for.

Local and regional exceptions certainly exist. However, the fact that the common practice in your area is to remain after a "Flash Mob" doesn't mean that other flash mob events are the same. Really, it isn't a "flash mob" per se, if people linger in that same group. It's now a misnomer, and gets misused by those who organize and then don't linger.

 

Or, I guess I can look at it for what it might be for others: a anti-social gathering; an introvert's non-social event. Other than philosophical discussions about what an event "should be", I think there can be, and are, exceptions. However, all too often, I see "flash mobs" used as an excuse to get the requirements out of the way for a souvenir, a grid spot, or the like.

Share this post


Link to post

It's not "hard". Getting there might be, but "earning" that smiley really isn't.

 

Earning the smiley is not hard, but as I said I see events as more than earning smilies. For example, if the theme of an event is about carneval and everyone is kindly asked to dress accordingly this cannot be enforced, but still I would not expect such an event to be a D=1* one.

 

Moreover, I do not think that choosing a proper way and deciding where to start are part of the T-rating. I could imagine an event at a remote location where no suggestions are provided how to approach the location. Then finding the easiest access which conforms with the T-rating may well be quite a challenge. I would expect that part to be part of the D-rating also for caches where a container has to be found and not to be part of the T-rating.

 

I'd also regard an event at an urban location with no parking lots around as more difficult at night time when no public transportation is available than during the day etc

 

There are many aspects that can increase the D-rating of an event to a value higher than 1* in my opinion.

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

It's not "hard". Getting there might be, but "earning" that smiley really isn't.

 

Earning the smiley is not hard, but as I said I see events as more than earning smilies. For example, if the theme of an event is about carneval and everyone is kindly asked to dress accordingly this cannot be enforced, but still I would not expect such an event to be a D=1* one.

Since it can't be enforced...is it really that hard to log that "Attended" log? That's still a 1* IMO.

 

Moreover, I do not think that choosing a proper way and deciding where to start are part of the T-rating. I could imagine an event at a remote location where no suggestions are provided how to approach the location. Then finding the easiest access which conforms with the T-rating may well be quite a challenge. I would expect that part to be part of the D-rating also for caches where a container has to be found and not to be part of the T-rating.

 

I'd also regard an event at an urban location with no parking lots around as more difficult at night time when no public transportation is available than during the day etc

 

There are many aspects that can increase the D-rating of an event to a value higher than 1* in my opinion.

How you get to the cache IS the terrain rating. I don't get extra D points because I don't own a car, or may not be willing to pay for parking downtown. Even for those examples, I really don't get more T points either. (I use the term "points" in jest)

 

I leave it to the ClayJar ratings if I have a question about how to rate my cache. That much is very, very simple to make consistent across the game--all countries and regions alike.

 

That plays into the other threads active right now: The ClayJar rating system seemed to be used more consistently to rate caches. Now, not so much. People are left to self-interpret the listing D/T ratings, and this creates much confusion across borders.

 

I could see rating a downtown event where parking or transportation hours are an issue as a 1.5*T--and then list those barriers on the description so people know why the T rating is worth paying attention to. But the D rating is still the same. It really isn't hard to attend an event to get your WIGAS, even if planning how to get there is more difficult.

 

Put it to you this way, cezanne, I have to travel 70 miles by road, or 10 miles by sea to get to the nearest cache I haven't found. That takes planning. Do I ask the owner to bump up the D and T ratings for those caches because I have to plan for my own travel to get near enough to the cache to find it? Nope...

Share this post


Link to post

Since it can't be enforced...is it really that hard to log that "Attended" log? That's still a 1* IMO.

 

For logging the attendance, yes. For meeting the intended purpose of such an event no.

It all boils down whether the D-rating applies just to how difficult it is to log a smilie.

Then many mysteries are also 1* as soon as the coordinates end up on a list for cheaters.

 

Think for example of a maker madness like event where everyone is encouraged to bring along tools, materials and ideas to

build creative cache containers. Obviously those who show up with no preparation and no intention at all to take part at all and

who leave after 10 seconds can log an "attended" but the true spirit of such an event is a completely different one and does not fit to

D=1* in my opinion.

 

How you get to the cache IS the terrain rating. I don't get extra D points because I don't own a car, or may not be willing to pay for parking downtown.

 

I had locations in mind where parking nearby is not possible at all and which might quite inconveniently reached in the middle of the night.

 

I leave it to the ClayJar ratings if I have a question about how to rate my cache. That much is very, very simple to make consistent across the game--all countries and regions alike.

 

ClayJar is not specific at all. It is not even defined what type of activity is part of the required time needed to find a cache.

For example, try out rating a multi cache where each of say 10 stages is in plain sight and you will not end up with a 1* rating.

 

Put it to you this way, cezanne, I have to travel 70 miles by road, or 10 miles by sea to get to the nearest cache I haven't found. That takes planning. Do I ask the owner to bump up the D and T ratings for those caches because I have to plan for my own travel to get near enough to the cache to find it? Nope...

 

Of course not, but if an event owner plans an event so that is is cumbersome to get there for everyone and not only due to terrain, why should that be a D=1 by default?

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

I've never understood how an regular event can't be anything but a 1 difficulty. Even it's on top of Mount Everest, it's still a 1 difficulty but would be a 5 for the terrain. Or 500 feet in the ocean in scuba, it's still a 1 difficulty.

 

Have you ever NOT been able to find an event once you reach ground zero?????

 

Almost missed one! We were sitting and waiting for the event owner to show up. Another cacher we knew came up to us ands said "I think the event is over there." Otherwise, we might have missed it. I think only five people attended.

 

Bad ratings (and my only 5/2 cache)was rated 5 because it occurred during a work day. That struck me as an incorrect rating. Oh, well.

Share this post


Link to post

Like it or not, the difficulty and terrain ratings reflect the minimum amount of effort required to find the cache. For example, if I hide a cache on the other side of a lake and want to rate it terrain 5 because I want people to paddle to it, but there's a trail around the lake with a terrain rating of 1.5, then the cache gets rated T1.5. Since no particular effort is required to find an event (beyond standard navigation to the coordinates), they're difficulty 1. An event organizer may encourage attendees to put more effort in for additional event-related activities, but the fact remains that all someone needs to do is show up and leave, which would qualify as D1.

 

Personal preferences regarding how much effort a finder/attendee is wished to put in have no bearing on the D/T ratings. They reflect the minimum effort required, nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post

I am actually struggling with one of my submissions but on an event, not a geocache. Apparently my reviewer knows better than me and is insisting I change my 3/3 event to a 1-1.5 / 1-1.5. Not even considering publication unless I change it. While I know I can change it after the fact, I don't play those shenanigans so am trying to work it from the front. Apparently an event on a January 29th northern MN day, with an average temp of 0F and plenty of snow on the ground should be a 1 or 1.5, but the same reviewer publishes his own cito event, outside of the winter season in the metro area as a 2/2. Shrug.

 

I can understand how harsh conditions could justify a higher terrain rating but, unless you can predict a total white out when the event occurs why would it have a D3 rating?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Like it or not, the difficulty and terrain ratings reflect the minimum amount of effort required to find the cache.

 

But then there could hardly be a D=5* mystery cache as by asking someone for whom the puzzle is easy will never require expert knowledge and lots of work.

The minimum amount of effort means making other people do the work.

 

Moreover, as I have mentioned before in my opinion the goal of an event is not finding the event location so the comparison with finding a cache does not really fit to me.

Noone would get an attendance certificate for a seminar by just showing up, saying hi and then leaving. I regarded such attendance logs as lame and against the idea of events and thought that they are only tolerated by Groundspeak as more is hard to enforce. Up to today I have believed that the true spirit of an event for Groundspeak is not just being allowed to write an attended log.

Share this post


Link to post

Like it or not, the difficulty and terrain ratings reflect the minimum amount of effort required to find the cache.

But then there could hardly be a D=5* mystery cache as by asking someone for whom the puzzle is easy will never require expert knowledge and lots of work.

The minimum amount of effort means making other people do the work.

I don't consider "cheating"-type behaviour to be a factor in determining D/T ratings. If we did, every cache would be a 1/1 because we could just armchair-log them from home.

 

Moreover, as I have mentioned before in my opinion the goal of an event is not finding the event location so the comparison with finding a cache does not really fit to me.

Noone would get an attendance certificate for a seminar by just showing up, saying hi and then leaving. I regarded such attendance logs as lame and against the idea of events and thought that they are only tolerated by Groundspeak as more is hard to enforce. Up to today I have believed that the true spirit of an event for Groundspeak is not just being allowed to write an attended log.

I agree that the intention or spirit behind geocaching events is to socialize. Every event I've organized or attended has had this in mind. Regardless, the minimum requirement on this site is to simply attend. Since "the law of the land" says that one need only attend, that's what goes.

Share this post


Link to post

Since it can't be enforced...is it really that hard to log that "Attended" log? That's still a 1* IMO.

 

For logging the attendance, yes. For meeting the intended purpose of such an event no.

It all boils down whether the D-rating applies just to how difficult it is to log a smilie.

Then many mysteries are also 1* as soon as the coordinates end up on a list for cheaters.

 

Think for example of a maker madness like event where everyone is encouraged to bring along tools, materials and ideas to

build creative cache containers. Obviously those who show up with no preparation and no intention at all to take part at all and

who leave after 10 seconds can log an "attended" but the true spirit of such an event is a completely different one and does not fit to

D=1* in my opinion.

Oh, come on. You still have to solve something or do something to get coordinates for the Mystery/puzzle (except "challenge caches"...that's another story). What you're saying is that if there's an event on a mountaintop, and someone comes in their helicopter instead of hiking, the cache's terrain should be a 1* instead? No...

 

We're talking apples and oranges here. Events are not hard to log once you get to where it is. You don't have to participate in the activities. You don't have to dress up the way the owner asks. You don't have to stand on one foot the whole time before being allowed to log that event... So it is a 1*. Show up, logged. Was it hard to get there because of distance or tough terrain? Then it gets a bigger T rating.

 

You may not like it, but that's the way it works according to the guidelines. Just like tree climbing caches, and how someone who is there, but doesn't climb the tree can still log a find when their name appears on the physical log. One would have a hard time arguing with Groundspeak to delete an "attended" log for someone who was there, but didn't participate in the way you prefer them to participate. That's the beauty of events...

 

I leave it to the ClayJar ratings if I have a question about how to rate my cache. That much is very, very simple to make consistent across the game--all countries and regions alike.

 

ClayJar is not specific at all. It is not even defined what type of activity is part of the required time needed to find a cache.

For example, try out rating a multi cache where each of say 10 stages is in plain sight and you will not end up with a 1* rating.

That's the point. It isn't specific--it's objective. One can make 0.5 adjustments one way or the other if specific circumstances might impact the rating one way or the other.

 

Put it to you this way, cezanne, I have to travel 70 miles by road, or 10 miles by sea to get to the nearest cache I haven't found. That takes planning. Do I ask the owner to bump up the D and T ratings for those caches because I have to plan for my own travel to get near enough to the cache to find it? Nope...

 

Of course not, but if an event owner plans an event so that is is cumbersome to get there for everyone and not only due to terrain, why should that be a D=1 by default?

 

How would attending an event be difficult if the only guideline is that you need to have simply been there? It isn't. Getting there may be hard (kayak trip, scuba dive, mountaintop, e.g.), but to log attended? 1*...1.5*, perhaps to account for what you're saying.

 

But a D2? D5 difficulty? Perhaps only if you put on an event where to find the actual event you have to solve field puzzles, or put together clues online to find out where it is being held--not unlike designing a multi or puzzle-style Mystery cache. But that is much more clear an example--quite specific, in fact--apart from the more common, simple events that dominate all event listings I've ever seen or likely will see.

 

And, in those infrequent and rare situations, I'll bet the Reviewer wouldn't need to intervene; it would be clear as a bell why it isn't like the other 99% of events that really should be a 1* because all you have to do to log "attended" is show up...and leave without being required to do anything at all.

 

(And you can't require anyone to do anything before logging a find anymore anyway. And you certainly can't delete the log of someone who may have found that rare "puzzle event" without completing the puzzle--they were there for the event's final location at the time period designated for that event.)

Share this post


Link to post

I've never understood how an regular event can't be anything but a 1 difficulty. Even it's on top of Mount Everest, it's still a 1 difficulty but would be a 5 for the terrain. Or 500 feet in the ocean in scuba, it's still a 1 difficulty.

 

Have you ever NOT been able to find an event once you reach ground zero?????

 

Coordinates take you to the middle of a field. You look around and see nothing. Turns out there is a well camoed entrance that takes you down into an underground bunker. No, we don't see many events held in hidden places like this but it could happen.

Share this post


Link to post

I've never understood how an regular event can't be anything but a 1 difficulty. Even it's on top of Mount Everest, it's still a 1 difficulty but would be a 5 for the terrain. Or 500 feet in the ocean in scuba, it's still a 1 difficulty.

 

Have you ever NOT been able to find an event once you reach ground zero?????

 

Coordinates take you to the middle of a field. You look around and see nothing. Turns out there is a well camoed entrance that takes you down into an underground bunker. No, we don't see many events held in hidden places like this but it could happen.

And then...only Ultra Platinum Members would know the secret knock once they find the hidden trap door to the underground bunker in the middle of a field...

 

Now that sounds like an event I'd want to attend! Super, ultra exclusive! Yeah! <_<:laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

I've never understood how an regular event can't be anything but a 1 difficulty. Even it's on top of Mount Everest, it's still a 1 difficulty but would be a 5 for the terrain. Or 500 feet in the ocean in scuba, it's still a 1 difficulty.

 

Have you ever NOT been able to find an event once you reach ground zero?????

 

Coordinates take you to the middle of a field. You look around and see nothing. Turns out there is a well camoed entrance that takes you down into an underground bunker. No, we don't see many events held in hidden places like this but it could happen.

 

A Zork Event should definitely have a high difficulty rating.

Share this post


Link to post

Coordinates take you to the middle of a field. You look around and see nothing. Turns out there is a well camoed entrance that takes you down into an underground bunker. No, we don't see many events held in hidden places like this but it could happen.

In this hypothetical situation, I'd support a difficulty rating of higher than 1. I've never even heard of such an event taking place, though, and I'd wonder whether a reviewer would even publish it.

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

×
×
  • Create New...