Is this an ALR on a challenge cache?

2.9k · February 17, 2015

I was wondering something and maybe you can help. In a discussion on Facebook about ALR's it reminded me of one local cache that makes me wonder if it contains an ALR. This example (GCZPRB) is a local county challenge that requires you to post a note saying you're doing it before you can even attempt the cache or log it. There are many people (myself included) that have completed the all-county challenge in our state who did it before this cache and we have found out that none of our work (half of the needed counties) would count since we didn't "opt in" at all.

Does this constitute an ALR or is it legit? It seems to me that a challenge should be open to anyone to attempt at any time. I know there used to be date restrictions on cache finds in the past, but I think even those were banned.

6k · February 17, 2015

ALR only applies to traditional caches so has no application to this cache. This is a challenge for two reasons: it is a mystery and has the ? as its marker and it says in the title "Challenge".

That pretty much means he can make most any requirement he wants as long as the reviewer approves it. So post and go or put it on ignore list. Your choice.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Walts Hunting

3.1k · February 17, 2015

I know there used to be date restrictions on cache finds in the past, but I think even those were banned.

Those were banned for challenge caches published on or after 12 March 2012. Previously published challenge caches were grandfathered in and are allowed to retain their date restrictions. The cache in question was published on 23 Oct. 2009, so it is grandfathered.

Here are Groundspeak's challenge cache guidelines.

3.7k · February 17, 2015

I've seen several challenges with a similar requirement. I don't think they would publish one with such a requirement now...much like the date restrictions they used to allow but no longer do.

2.9k · February 17, 2015

Thanks for the replies. I was just curious since it's the only challenge in my area that really has such a requirement.

10.2k · February 17, 2015

I know there used to be date restrictions on cache finds in the past, but I think even those were banned.

Those were banned for challenge caches published on or after 12 March 2012. Previously published challenge caches were grandfathered in and are allowed to retain their date restrictions. The cache in question was published on 23 Oct. 2009, so it is grandfathered.

Here are Groundspeak's challenge cache guidelines.

That date of 12 March 2012 is correct. You know how I know that? I actually had a challenge cache published the day before, on March 11th, 2012.

The challenge in question is essentially a "all finds must be after the publication date of this challenge" ALR. I've just never seen it phrased in that manner; you can't very well post a note to it's page until after it's published, right? It's also a textbook example of why TPTB decided the challenge cache guidelines needed to be tightened up. Did you see all the "rules" on this one? One within a mile of a major river, and one on an Island? Geesh.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Mr.Yuck

2.9k · February 17, 2015

The challenge in question is essentially a "all finds must be after the publication date of this challenge" ALR. I've just never seen it phrased in that manner; you can't very well post a note to it's page until after it's published, right? It's also a textbook example of why TPTB decided the challenge cache guidelines needed to be tightened up. Did you see all the "rules" on this one? One within a mile of a major river, and one on an Island? Geesh.

Yeah, I am not fond of all the rules, either, but hey...it's their cache and they can do what they want. I can do what I want by not doing it, for which I have been successful.

7.5k · February 17, 2015

I assume you had fun visiting all the counties the first time, so I'd hope it will be fun a second time. Just don't forget to post your start log.

14k · February 17, 2015

I assume you had fun visiting all the counties the first time, so I'd hope it will be fun a second time. Just don't forget to post your start log.

It seems to me if they're going to be called "Challenge caches" that it would make more sense to have "all finds must be after the publication date of this challenge" be in the guidelines. Otherwise, it's not really a challenge to do something, but more of an achievement after someone has done something.

10.2k · February 17, 2015

The challenge in question is essentially a "all finds must be after the publication date of this challenge" ALR. I've just never seen it phrased in that manner; you can't very well post a note to it's page until after it's published, right? It's also a textbook example of why TPTB decided the challenge cache guidelines needed to be tightened up. Did you see all the "rules" on this one? One within a mile of a major river, and one on an Island? Geesh.

Yeah, I am not fond of all the rules, either, but hey...it's their cache and they can do what they want. I can do what I want by not doing it, for which I have been successful.

The record shows that after March 12, 2012, they can't do what they want. :lol:

2.9k · February 17, 2015

The challenge in question is essentially a "all finds must be after the publication date of this challenge" ALR. I've just never seen it phrased in that manner; you can't very well post a note to it's page until after it's published, right? It's also a textbook example of why TPTB decided the challenge cache guidelines needed to be tightened up. Did you see all the "rules" on this one? One within a mile of a major river, and one on an Island? Geesh.

Yeah, I am not fond of all the rules, either, but hey...it's their cache and they can do what they want. I can do what I want by not doing it, for which I have been successful.

The record shows that after March 12, 2012, they can't do what they want.

Touché... :lol:

2.7k · February 17, 2015

I assume you had fun visiting all the counties the first time, so I'd hope it will be fun a second time. Just don't forget to post your start log.

It seems to me if they're going to be called "Challenge caches" that it would make more sense to have "all finds must be after the publication date of this challenge" be in the guidelines. Otherwise, it's not really a challenge to do something, but more of an achievement after someone has done something.

I'm with you here.

The way it is now, the challenge is to parse your finds to list the qualifying caches.

7.5k · February 17, 2015

It seems to me if they're going to be called "Challenge caches" that it would make more sense to have "all finds must be after the publication date of this challenge" be in the guidelines. Otherwise, it's not really a challenge to do something, but more of an achievement after someone has done something.

I know what you mean, and I certainly enjoyed challenges more when I had few enough caches that most of them were challenging in that way whether they specified a start date or not.

On the other hand, now that I have enough caches that I automatically qualify for any run-of-the-mill challenge, I can imagine the politics that led to banning start dates. It's ever so much easier when you can get full, undeniable credit without lifting a finger. In fact, I'm sometimes embarrassed for myself when I realize I'm ignoring a challenge because I'd have to work for it, especially when I realize it would be far less work than I used to do routinely to achieve some of the challenge caches I satisfied in my earlier days when there was no chance of meeting the challenges from my past finds.

2.6k · February 18, 2015

It seems to me if they're going to be called "Challenge caches" that it would make more sense to have "all finds must be after the publication date of this challenge" be in the guidelines. Otherwise, it's not really a challenge to do something, but more of an achievement after someone has done something.

I understand the logic in this, but the issue is this can make it impossible (or more difficult) for cachers who have already "completed it" (pre-publication) to do it.

An example challenge cache for which this would be an issue:

GC519C9 BS94: Historic Caches Challenge

Part of the qualification is the need to find 10 caches hidden in 2001 or 2002 in a specific region. Many experienced cachers would have already found all of these, so it would be impossible to qualify. I guess they could find them again and post a note.

I suppose as an alternative, the guidelines could be changed to not allow one like the example above, and that the challenge must be possible for all cachers to do only counting post-publication finds.

But I think the current system is OK.

2.7k · February 18, 2015

Perhaps the answer is to change the name of Challenge caches to Achievement caches. Many interpret the word challenge to be something like "see if you can do this'', not "show me you have accomplished this already"

15.3k · February 19, 2015

Perhaps the answer is to change the name of Challenge caches to Achievement caches.

Or perhaps, just change Challenge Caches to Achievements, and stop holding the online Find log hostage until the challenge/achievement requirements are met.

2.7k · February 19, 2015

Perhaps the answer is to change the name of Challenge caches to Achievement caches.
Or perhaps, just change Challenge Caches to Achievements, and stop holding the online Find log hostage until the challenge/achievement requirements are met.

I sort of remembered that thread. Great ideas there.

2k · February 19, 2015

Well, I have not read the details on the cache page but if its just asking you to opt in, ie initiate a start date for the challenge, I personally despise those things if its something as simple as basic cache finds, but they do exist on challenge caches in our area. You have to say you are starting the challenge. There is a cool challenge I am working on in the area and I just resisted hitting that note for years, then I finally started. I will finish some day but I would have finished this year if I had just started it officially with the note when it started.

When in doubt you will ever start a challenge that has one, make the note.

3.6k · February 21, 2015

Didn't the rules also want to prevent the "contact me for the final coords". Sometimes you can't reach the CO or they are no longer that active. Now Challenges have to either be at the posted coords or you can solve a puzzle.

2k · February 23, 2015

Didn't the rules also want to prevent the "contact me for the final coords". Sometimes you can't reach the CO or they are no longer that active. Now Challenges have to either be at the posted coords or you can solve a puzzle.

You can also list a challenge cache at different coordinates than listed (say parking) and put the final coordinates in a separate visible final coordinates waypoint if you can provide reason why in my area. Doing that on one of my challenge caches has prevented a lot of newbie finds than before I was allowed to do this on one. Not sure if its automatically allowed on any challenge cache, but have seen many that way.

3.1k · February 25, 2015

Didn't the rules also want to prevent the "contact me for the final coords". Sometimes you can't reach the CO or they are no longer that active. Now Challenges have to either be at the posted coords or you can solve a puzzle.

You can also list a challenge cache at different coordinates than listed (say parking) and put the final coordinates in a separate visible final coordinates waypoint if you can provide reason why in my area. Doing that on one of my challenge caches has prevented a lot of newbie finds than before I was allowed to do this on one. Not sure if its automatically allowed on any challenge cache, but have seen many that way.

That's been my experience (granted, I've only found 2 or so "challenge caches", and not placed one myself)...

1.3k · February 27, 2015

Maybe I am not reading the responses carefully enough, but I can't see where anyone answered the OP question in the context of the specific challenge indicated.

Lets say someone completed all of the challenge's requirements, found and signed the log and posted a Found It.

But they didn't post a note indicating they were attempting it.

Could their Found It be legitimately deleted?

2.7k · February 27, 2015

Maybe I am not reading the responses carefully enough, but I can't see where anyone answered the OP question in the context of the specific challenge indicated.

Lets say someone completed all of the challenge's requirements, found and signed the log and posted a Found It.

But they didn't post a note indicating they were attempting it.

Could their Found It be legitimately deleted?

Nope.

6.1k · February 27, 2015

Maybe I am not reading the responses carefully enough, but I can't see where anyone answered the OP question in the context of the specific challenge indicated.

Lets say someone completed all of the challenge's requirements, found and signed the log and posted a Found It.

But they didn't post a note indicating they were attempting it.

Could their Found It be legitimately deleted?

Yes it could, because they did not complete all of the challenge requirements, which was to place a note. Although that qualification would prevent it from being published today, it is grandfathered and part of the challenge. It really isn't a challenge anyhow if you don't have to do anything other than prequalify. Many of these challenges exist only to pad stats with high D/T combos for not doing anything at all. An LPC is suddenly a 5/5 because of existing stats? :rolleyes:

3.6k · February 27, 2015

Maybe I am not reading the responses carefully enough, but I can't see where anyone answered the OP question in the context of the specific challenge indicated.

Lets say someone completed all of the challenge's requirements, found and signed the log and posted a Found It.

But they didn't post a note indicating they were attempting it.

Could their Found It be legitimately deleted?

Yes it could, because they did not complete all of the challenge requirements, which was to place a note. Although that qualification would prevent it from being published today, it is grandfathered and part of the challenge. It really isn't a challenge anyhow if you don't have to do anything other than prequalify. Many of these challenges exist only to pad stats with high D/T combos for not doing anything at all. An LPC is suddenly a 5/5 because of existing stats?

If it were me I would log it whether I plan on attempting it or not

1.3k · February 27, 2015

Maybe I am not reading the responses carefully enough, but I can't see where anyone answered the OP question in the context of the specific challenge indicated.

Lets say someone completed all of the challenge's requirements, found and signed the log and posted a Found It.

But they didn't post a note indicating they were attempting it.

Could their Found It be legitimately deleted?

Yes it could, because they did not complete all of the challenge requirements, which was to place a note. Although that qualification would prevent it from being published today, it is grandfathered and part of the challenge. It really isn't a challenge anyhow if you don't have to do anything other than prequalify. Many of these challenges exist only to pad stats with high D/T combos for not doing anything at all. An LPC is suddenly a 5/5 because of existing stats?

I found a challenge cache in Las Vegas that was a 5/5. For the Difficulty...eh, hard to say. It was for finding 100 puzzle/mystery caches, which to me, isn't very difficult. Personally, I'd think something a bit more ambitious (like 500-1000 puzzle cache finds) would merit a 5* difficulty, but there are those who don't do puzzle caches and 100 of them would be years worth of work.

But, for the terrain, no idea how the CO justified that rating since the cache was hidden on a railing along a sidewalk. It was barely more than a 1 star terrain.

3.1k · February 27, 2015

I found a challenge cache in Las Vegas that was a 5/5. For the Difficulty...eh, hard to say. It was for finding 100 puzzle/mystery caches, which to me, isn't very difficult. Personally, I'd think something a bit more ambitious (like 500-1000 puzzle cache finds) would merit a 5* difficulty, but there are those who don't do puzzle caches and 100 of them would be years worth of work.

But, for the terrain, no idea how the CO justified that rating since the cache was hidden on a railing along a sidewalk. It was barely more than a 1 star terrain.

Ooow, ooow! I can top that one. There's a 5/5 challenge in Utah for finding 100 traditional caches. Also located on easy terrain. Of course, I've also found many non-challenge caches with strange D/T ratings.

15.3k · February 27, 2015

If it were me I would log it whether I plan on attempting it or not

I wonder whether anyone has a list of grandfathered challenge caches that require a "note of intent" like this one.

3.1k · May 28, 2016

Yes. Additional ALR, not unlike asking for a photo, or a headstand, or a haiku log, or... <_<

7.3k · May 28, 2016

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=206

Last Updated: May 27, 2016

Note: At this time, challenge caches published prior to April 21, 2015 are grandfathered into the game. As with any grandfathered cache, Geocaching HQ may archive caches which become problematic.

B.

May 28, 2016

An LPC is suddenly a 5/5 because of existing stats?

D/T ratings on any cache are entirely subjective, and seem to have always been so. Challenge caches are no different from other caches in that regard.

Is this an ALR on a challenge cache?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation