Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
geocat_

Requiring GSAK for a Challenge Cache?

Recommended Posts

I recently read some banter on Facebook about a Challenge Cache which requires one to post a screenshot proving their qualifications after running a macro on GSAK. The CO has deleted logs of those who actually have fulfilled the challenge but posted something other than a GSAK screenshot (bookmark list, etc). This cache was published in 2007 so I assume it was OK to do this back then or it would have not been published. However, two questions have come up. First, would this be allowed today with a new cache? (I don't think it would). Second, some have claimed this type of logging requirement needs to be changed despite having been that way for all those years. Their defense? That such a requirement does not get grandfathered the way some other requirements have.

 

Personally, I think it sucks to disallow legitimate finders who qualify just because they use a Mac, LInux, or simply don't want to use GSAK. I would love a reviewer to chime in on this one. Peace!

Share this post


Link to post

First, would this be allowed today with a new cache? (I don't think it would).

Correct. I'm sure it's challenge caches like the one you describe that led to the following requirements (Help Center - Challenge Caches):

 

How will you know when the challenge cache requirements have been met?

 

Importantly, geocache owners must consider how they will substantiate claims that the geocache requirements have been met. The challenge criteria on the geocache page must reflect this consideration, and must be verifiable through information on the Geocaching.com website. Challenges relying solely on third-party software for verification will not be published.

 

Second, some have claimed this type of logging requirement needs to be changed despite having been that way for all those years. Their defense? That such a requirement does not get grandfathered the way some other requirements have.

 

Personally, I think it sucks to disallow legitimate finders who qualify just because they use a Mac, LInux, or simply don't want to use GSAK.

The Challenge Cache article does not exclude any of the clauses from grandfathering, so I think it's safe to assume that a challenge cache could be grandfathered for any of them. In short, I don't think the guidelines say that they must change it.

 

Personally, I agree with the sentiment that the owner should change the requirement. As it's being presented now, it sounds like the challenge being given to cachers is the verification of completion, not the completion itself. The owner (and the owners of many other challenge caches) needs to understand that the intention of challenge caches is to present a geocaching-related challenge, not to present a computer-programming or data-mining challenge. If someone can demonstrate adequately that they've completed the challenge requirements, it shouldn't matter in what format that occurs.

Share this post


Link to post

I think requiring use of GSAK to verify completion would be an ALR (additional logging requirement), which are no longer allowed on any caches (no grandfathering).

Share this post


Link to post

Everyone who had their log deleted needs to write to both the reviewer and Groundspeak. That was probably added after the cache was reviewed and published.

Share this post


Link to post

I have 3 challenge caches which require the finder to have found two consecutive caches on the same date local time more than 2,000, 5,000 or 10,000 Km apart.

 

When I created the first one I mentioned in the description that there was a GSAK macro which generated HTML output which could be pasted into a log for verification purposes. I did not make this a requirement, but did not offer any alternative. The cache was published in March 2014 with no problems.

 

When I flew Sydney to Vancouver and qualified for the 5,000 and 10,000Km challenges I used exactly the same wording as the first one, just changing distances and an example, but they were rejected because of mention of GSAK. Even after I included a non-GSAK option in the description I still had to delete the reference to GSAK. That was just 6 months after the first one.

 

Obviously the rules changed between March and September last year.

 

My advice, for what it is worth, is don't mention GSAK in the description.

Share this post


Link to post

do you have the GC# of the Challenge?

Share this post


Link to post

I think requiring use of GSAK to verify completion would be an ALR (additional logging requirement), which are no longer allowed on any caches (no grandfathering).

 

The Guidelines for Challenges specifically addresses the "ALR" issue.

 

The additional qualification or geocaching-related tasks are considered the basis of a challenge cache, rather than Additional Logging Requirements (ALRs).

 

Note: Challenge caches published prior to the guideline update 3/12/12 are grandfathered into the game and do not need to comply with current guidelines.

 

 

Were there Challenge Caches back in 2007? When were they first created?

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol

Share this post


Link to post
The additional qualification or geocaching-related tasks are considered the basis of a challenge cache, rather than Additional Logging Requirements (ALRs).

 

Don't they only mean what you have to do to qualify not verify.

Share this post


Link to post
The additional qualification or geocaching-related tasks are considered the basis of a challenge cache, rather than Additional Logging Requirements (ALRs).

 

Don't they only mean what you have to do to qualify not verify.

Agreed. GSAK is not the basis of the challenge cache, which is why requiring it as the sole way to verify would seem to be an ALR, or at least, an unfair advantage for those who happen to use it (like me).

Share this post


Link to post

 

Were there Challenge Caches back in 2007? When were they first created?

 

 

I don't know when they were created but the Fizzy Challenge, Jasmer Challenge, and Delorme Challenges likely all existed prior to 2007.

Share this post


Link to post

The finders should contact the reviewer and GS--I can't believe that a bookmark list or just a written list wouldn't be enough. That said--a GC code so we know what we're talking about would be helpful. And the op only mentions Facebook chatter--who knows what's really going on.

Edited by Dame Deco

Share this post


Link to post
The additional qualification or geocaching-related tasks are considered the basis of a challenge cache, rather than Additional Logging Requirements (ALRs).

 

Don't they only mean what you have to do to qualify not verify.

 

I concur. If GSAK was required to qualify for logging the cache, it would be an ALR.

 

Requiring GSAK to verify that the finder met the qualifications is wayyyyy off base. Any way they can prove to the cache owner that they met the challenge must be acceptable. I'm sure a reviewer would reinstate any logs that offered proof that the challenge was met.

 

 

(merely repeating what others have already stated)

Share this post


Link to post

I can't guarantee that this is the cache the OP is referring to, but this one states that it requires GSAK verification. What I find confusing is that they require a bookmark list, which would be just fine, but then they additionally require the GSAK verification. I can't understand why the bookmark list wouldn't be enough. The GSAK verification seems superfluous to me.

Share this post


Link to post

I can't guarantee that this is the cache the OP is referring to, but this one states that it requires GSAK verification. What I find confusing is that they require a bookmark list, which would be just fine, but then they additionally require the GSAK verification. I can't understand why the bookmark list wouldn't be enough. The GSAK verification seems superfluous to me.

 

If that is the cache in question...

 

Note special requirements to post FOUND log. 'See my profile' won't work. You must use the GSAK macro to see if you qualify, and post screenshot of those results if you do. Logs will be deleted if screenshot not attached.

 

Please NOTE: This is one of the the most difficult of Fizzy Challenges. I qualified under these requirements or I would not host it. Please use the GSAK macro to check your qualifiers. It is specific to each individual Fizzy/state. Not all states are the same. Post a screenshot of your completed terrain/difficulty chart from the GSAK Fizzy Browser.gsk macro using this Kentucky Fizzy Challenge from the drop-down menu. If you do not qualify, please don't ask for a bye. I have geo-friends here and near who also don't quite qualify and they understand it's their challenge to conquer, not mine to give. It's important to me to stay friends. Thanks for understanding. Cache on.

 

How to track your caches:

 

1) Create a Kentucky Fizzy Challengebookmark list and add qualifying FINDS as you complete them.

2) Use the GSAK macro Fzzy Browser.gsk and select the Kentucky Fizzy Challenge from the drop-down menu to ensure you are testing your qualifications for the correct challenge.

When your matrix is complete for this challenge, POST the public bookmark (or a link) and a screenshot of the completed Fizzy Browser.gsk matrix macro output for the Kentucky Fizzy Challenge with your FOUND log.

 

Basic rules (to keep things simple):

 

- All caches found prior to the published date (11/2/07) of this listing DO count - you do NOT start from 'zero'.

- All finds logged after 11/2/07 must be on caches that were published before this cache date (to avoid 'dummy qualifying caches' being listed just to meet the requirements).

- The only exceptions are CITO or EVENT caches with a D/T of 2/2 or less. Because these are short-lived you may log these after the published date to earn the qualifying icons.

- No rating (D/T) changes to existing caches will be accepted as counting toward your goal.

- Generally accepted rules, guidelines and conditions for logging a cache find apply. These must be caches listed on Geocaching.com that you have personally (physically) found and logged (signed cache logbook) yourself!

- No FIND logs on caches that you own will be allowed.

- If you have others with you when you log the final cache, only those who have fulfilled ALL criteria for this cache will be allowed to log THE 81 as a FIND.

- FIND logs without accompanying documentation, or FIND logs protested by other cachers for acceptable reasons (liar caches, phony 5/5's), will be deleted IMMEDIATELY until resolved. NO EXCEPTIONS!

- This cache does not count as the 5/5 in the matrix. You must have a legitimate 5/5 before this one.

 

NOTE: All caches logged as FOUND on The KENTUCKY FIZZY CHALLENGE must have been placed by the owner with genuine intent to meet the requirements of their D/T Difficulty/Terrain) rating as outlined on Geocaching.com.

 

Caches hidden but never intended to meet their D/T rating are ineligible. They're pretty obvious!

 

Please follow these rules to maintain a level playing field for everyone. I don't intend to play the role of cache-cop so the honor system is in effect here. Please keep the spirit of The Challenge in mind.

GOLDEN RULE:If you try to sneak an ineligible D/T find (liar cache) into the matrix you'll likely be exposed by your fellow cachers. Play Fair!

 

This is the decon-container-in-a-guardrail Liar Cache that was used as the 5-5 D/T to try and grab FTF on the KY Fizzy Challenge. That log was deleted. If you don't know the difference, or need clarification on the spirit and intent of the Fizzy Challenge, Please contact me!

 

_______________________________________________________

 

To get credit for THE FIND you must post the following with your FOUND IT log:

 

A) A link to your bookmark list showing the 81 caches that meet the requirements plus this FIZZY CHALLENGE as the 82nd find; AND

B) The screenshot of your completed terrain/difficulty chart from the GSAK Fizzy Browser.gsk macro using this Fizzy Challenge from the drop-down box

 

B.

Share this post


Link to post

As someone who uses and swears by the greatness of GSAK, I still think requiring GSAK for any challenge is wrong. It will often be the easiest way to find if you qualify and prove that you do, but it should not be the only way.

Share this post


Link to post

As someone who uses and swears by the greatness of GSAK, I still think requiring GSAK for any challenge is wrong. It will often be the easiest way to find if you qualify and prove that you do, but it should not be the only way.

 

This cache was made to be challenging. The CO mentions right away that GSAK must be used. Anyone looking at the page immediately knows it's a necessary part of the find and should make the decision right then whether they want to pursue completion. No one should be complaining. If they want to accept the challenge, then go for it. Otherwise, just as with the ISS cache and the cache at the bottom of the ocean, just forget about it and move on. I honestly have to wonder why so msny people feel they are entitled to every cache out there and then get upset when one requires more effort than they can or want to expend.

 

With the newer challenge guidleines, i'm not sure a cache with this stipulation would get published these days.

Share this post


Link to post

As someone who uses and swears by the greatness of GSAK, I still think requiring GSAK for any challenge is wrong. It will often be the easiest way to find if you qualify and prove that you do, but it should not be the only way.

 

This cache was made to be challenging. The CO mentions right away that GSAK must be used. Anyone looking at the page immediately knows it's a necessary part of the find and should make the decision right then whether they want to pursue completion. No one should be complaining. If they want to accept the challenge, then go for it. Otherwise, just as with the ISS cache and the cache at the bottom of the ocean, just forget about it and move on. I honestly have to wonder why so msny people feel they are entitled to every cache out there and then get upset when one requires more effort than they can or want to expend.

 

With the newer challenge guidleines, i'm not sure a cache with this stipulation would get published these days.

 

Some caches should never be published in the first place and this is one of them.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

1. A challenge cache requiring the use of GSAK, Project-GC or any other third party resource would not be published today. All challenge caches must be verifiable from information available on the Geocaching.com website, such as profile statistics, bookmark lists, or a search of the challenge seeker's finds. If that is laborious, then that is the challenge cache owner's problem.

 

2. A challenge cache owner cannot delete finds based on the failure to use the third party verification option, but I believe that the challenge cache under discussion is grandfathered based on its 2007 publication date. Someone could test this by writing to Geocaching HQ after having their log deleted. I can't offer more guidance without knowing which challenge cache we're talking about here.

 

3. Challenge cache requirements like the quoted Kentucky cache are a good illustration of why ALR caches are no longer allowed and why the Challenge Cache guidelines have changed to prohibit such requirements (no date restrictions, etc.). Challenge caches are supposed to be fun to complete, and not an exercise by the cache owner to control the behavior of others in that amount of detail. Please note, for the quoted Kentucky challenge cache, there is no evidence of owner log deletion activity.

 

4. It is fine for a challenge cache to mention GSAK or Project-GC, and even to link to a GSAK macro or a Project-GC "challenge checker" as OPTIONAL means of verifying qualification for the challenge. Care should be taken not to go past helpful descriptions and links and into the territory of "promoting" GSAK or any other third-party resource.

Share this post


Link to post

This is truly an Abuse The Cacher situation for it places a financial burden, as well as one technological one, on potential finders.

 

1. You must be a Premium Member to have access to My Finds PQ

 

2. You must have a PC to run GSAK.

 

<_<

Share this post


Link to post

This is truly an Abuse The Cacher situation for it places a financial burden, as well as one technological one, on potential finders.

 

1. You must be a Premium Member to have access to My Finds PQ

 

2. You must have a PC to run GSAK.

 

<_<

You forgot to mention you also need to buy a GSAK license, unless your going for the 21 day free period. Really someone that got their log deleted should email Groundspeak for an official answer.

Share this post


Link to post

Seems I missed a lot of chatter on here while I was at work today. Just so everyone can rest assured, the cache mentioned IS the cache to which I was referring. Thanks Keystone for offering the information.

 

My two cents...I think this cache sucks. It is so restrictive as to be completely unenjoyable due to the GSAK requirement but also the date requirement. Seems to miss the entire point of challenge caches to me. But that's what the ignore list was created for tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post

Nothing prohibits someone from hiding a Fizzy Challenge in Kentucky that has no date restrictions and no GSAK verification requirement. A basic Fizzy Challenge can be verified from the finder's profile statistics tab, which didn't exist eight years ago.

 

And, nothing prohibits that clean and simple Fizzy Challenge from being hidden 529 feet away from the 2007 version. While there's a clause in the Challenge Cache guidelines that prevents identical challenges from being published in the same local area, that clause would not apply here.

Share this post


Link to post

Nothing prohibits someone from hiding a Fizzy Challenge in Kentucky that has no date restrictions and no GSAK verification requirement. A basic Fizzy Challenge can be verified from the finder's profile statistics tab, which didn't exist eight years ago.

 

And, nothing prohibits that clean and simple Fizzy Challenge from being hidden 529 feet away from the 2007 version. While there's a clause in the Challenge Cache guidelines that prevents identical challenges from being published in the same local area, that clause would not apply here.

 

I was wondering why no one else had created a similar Challenge, with a set of simple rules that comply with the current Guidelines.

 

I got a headache reading that cache page. :rolleyes:

 

B.

Share this post


Link to post
you also need to buy a GSAK license, unless your going for the 21 day free period

 

The GSAK license is always free.

 

However, after the initial trial period, a nag screen appears before the program will run. The display time of the nag screen increases the longer you go without paying.

 

I got the nag screen up to 420 seconds before I broke down and paid. It was the API integration which closed me, and it is worth every penny.

Share this post


Link to post

This is truly an Abuse The Cacher situation for it places a financial burden, as well as one technological one, on potential finders.

 

1. You must be a Premium Member to have access to My Finds PQ

 

2. You must have a PC to run GSAK.

 

<_<

You forgot to mention you also need to buy a GSAK license, unless your going for the 21 day free period. Really someone that got their log deleted should email Groundspeak for an official answer.

 

A PC and GSAK are much cheaper than hitching a ride to the ISS. They're both cheaper than good climbing gear. They're cheaper than scuba equipment. The list goes on.

 

I agree with many here in saying that it isn't a cache that i'm interested in. But at the same time, why on earth would i get bent out of shape about it. It's just too easy to ignore the thing.

Share this post


Link to post

GSAK doesn't work on a Mac. Since the cache was reported to GS last fall, and apparently they backed the CO, I guess that nothing can be done. A public, shared bookmark list should really suffice.

Share this post


Link to post
This cache was made to be challenging. The CO mentions right away that GSAK must be used. Anyone looking at the page immediately knows it's a necessary part of the find and should make the decision right then whether they want to pursue completion. No one should be complaining. If they want to accept the challenge, then go for it. Otherwise, just as with the ISS cache and the cache at the bottom of the ocean, just forget about it and move on. I honestly have to wonder why so many people feel they are entitled to every cache out there and then get upset when one requires more effort than they can or want to expend.

 

As I noted, I have GSAK thus could easily use the Macro to show qualification.

 

I also own a Florida State Parks Challenge Cache that requires finds in 50 different FL state parks. For most people this requires some homework: what state parks have they visited, or could they visit that have caches? You could use some GSAK queries of cache descriptions for phrases like "state park" but there is no macro.

 

The cache in discussion for this topic isn't a case of anyone being "entitled to every cache" (and do we need the E-word creeping into geocaching?), the difficulty or effort of the challenge itself, or even that determining if you qualify requires some extra work. The issue is that there is no good reason to require GSAK for this challenge. There are people who can qualify for the challenge and prove they qualify for the challenge, but will be denied a Find because they didn't prove their qualification in the narrowly-required manner. A bookmark list could demonstrate proof of qualification without the use of GSAK.

 

I am reminded of a challenge cache I completed several years ago. The challenge was to find at least 10 different cache types; didn't matter when or where. It was an old cache with a combo lock on the container; you had to prove qualification to the CO to get the combo. (This was allowed at the time.) I informed the CO that I qualified and that a quick glance at my geocaching profile (my stats are public) would show I had found the 10 different cache types. The CO ignored me; when I followed up a few weeks later asking for the combo since I told him I qualified, he responded that I had to submit a Bookmark list of the 10 cache types as stated on the cache page. He was correct that this requirement was stated on the cache page, but requiring a bookmark list was unneccesary with the information already on a user's stats page. That CO was being unreasonable and so is the one in KY who has the challenge cache in question in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post

This is truly an Abuse The Cacher situation for it places a financial burden, as well as one technological one, on potential finders.

 

1. You must be a Premium Member to have access to My Finds PQ

 

2. You must have a PC to run GSAK.

 

dry.gif

You forgot to mention you also need to buy a GSAK license, unless your going for the 21 day free period. Really someone that got their log deleted should email Groundspeak for an official answer.

 

And, of course, you may also need to buy a Windows PC.

Share this post


Link to post
But that's what the ignore list was created for
Yeah, I'd add it to my ignore list if it were near me.

Share this post


Link to post
This cache was made to be challenging. The CO mentions right away that GSAK must be used. Anyone looking at the page immediately knows it's a necessary part of the find and should make the decision right then whether they want to pursue completion. No one should be complaining. If they want to accept the challenge, then go for it. Otherwise, just as with the ISS cache and the cache at the bottom of the ocean, just forget about it and move on. I honestly have to wonder why so many people feel they are entitled to every cache out there and then get upset when one requires more effort than they can or want to expend.

 

As I noted, I have GSAK thus could easily use the Macro to show qualification.

 

I also own a Florida State Parks Challenge Cache that requires finds in 50 different FL state parks. For most people this requires some homework: what state parks have they visited, or could they visit that have caches? You could use some GSAK queries of cache descriptions for phrases like "state park" but there is no macro.

 

The cache in discussion for this topic isn't a case of anyone being "entitled to every cache" (and do we need the E-word creeping into geocaching?), the difficulty or effort of the challenge itself, or even that determining if you qualify requires some extra work. The issue is that there is no good reason to require GSAK for this challenge. There are people who can qualify for the challenge and prove they qualify for the challenge, but will be denied a Find because they didn't prove their qualification in the narrowly-required manner. A bookmark list could demonstrate proof of qualification without the use of GSAK.

 

I am reminded of a challenge cache I completed several years ago. The challenge was to find at least 10 different cache types; didn't matter when or where. It was an old cache with a combo lock on the container; you had to prove qualification to the CO to get the combo. (This was allowed at the time.) I informed the CO that I qualified and that a quick glance at my geocaching profile (my stats are public) would show I had found the 10 different cache types. The CO ignored me; when I followed up a few weeks later asking for the combo since I told him I qualified, he responded that I had to submit a Bookmark list of the 10 cache types as stated on the cache page. He was correct that this requirement was stated on the cache page, but requiring a bookmark list was unneccesary with the information already on a user's stats page. That CO was being unreasonable and so is the one in KY who has the challenge cache in question in this thread.

 

The stipulation to use only gsak seems silly to me as well. But i've come across plenty of caches that require people to do silly and unreasonable things before a find can be claimed on them. I simply look at this as being part of the challenge to claim a find on the cache. Guess it's just me but i have no problem at all ignoring a cache if it or some part of it is not to my liking.

Share this post


Link to post

I am probably a rare animal that finds the whole "challenge cache" concept to be very distasteful, at best. They are absolutely an ALR. ALRs are no longer allowed, unless they are this one particular flavor of ALR. They cause all sorts of lame hides to be placed simply so that people can more easily claim the challenge. We have dozens of "Welcome to <name the town." caches here because of a challenge cache. We have dozens of caches named after an element, simply because of a challenge cache, and most are stop sign hides. Etc. etc. etc. Remember when "cache factory" or "seed caches" were popular, and then banned because they required a cache to be hidden in order to claim a find, and that resulted in a glut of meaningless hides, simply hidden so the cache owner could log the seed cache? Many of these challenge caches have the same result. Caches hidden for no reason other than to help somebody (often the cache owner) to log a challenge cache.

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry about my last... had nothing to do with GSAK as a requirement. Just a generic rant against challenge caches. Hate it when I get a log like, "Needed a cache that started with 'S'" on my carefully planned and constructed hide.

Share this post


Link to post

I find myself with a fundamental question - what onus lies on whom?

 

Reading through this page I see:

 

A challenge cache requires that geocachers meet a geocaching-related qualification or series of tasks before the challenge cache can be logged.

 

There's no mention there of any onus on geocachers to prove that they meet the required qualification - only that they are required to have met the required qualification.

 

Importantly, geocache owners must consider how they will substantiate claims that the geocache requirements have been met.

 

Indicating that the onus to substantiate claims is on the challenge cache owner rather than the finder.

 

So - is it sufficient having qualified for a challenge cache to simply refer the challenge cache owner to one's statistics on the geocaching website so that the owner can substantiate the claim for themselves?

Edited by Team Microdot

Share this post


Link to post

 

So - is it sufficient having qualified for a challenge cache to simply refer the challenge cache owner to one's statistics on the geocaching website so that the owner can substantiate the claim for themselves?

 

I think both sides have some responsibility. It also says on that page

 

"Geocache owners will need to ensure that geocachers can verify that they have completed the geocache requirements without compromising their privacy."

 

So I read this that the cache owner should ensure it is possible to verify.. but that the geocachers may have to provide some verification themselves.

 

If the answer is easily seen from the statistics (and they are visible), then pointing to the statistics should be sufficient. E.g if the challenge is to have found 200 multi caches (ever). That number is easily seen.

 

If the challenge is "find at least one cache starting with all letters of the alphabet A-Z on a single day", then I DON'T think it would be sufficient for me to say "I did it; look at my finds and figure it out". I would expect at least to say what day I did it, and really would expect to provide the list of caches in some form.

Share this post


Link to post

 

So - is it sufficient having qualified for a challenge cache to simply refer the challenge cache owner to one's statistics on the geocaching website so that the owner can substantiate the claim for themselves?

 

I think both sides have some responsibility. It also says on that page

 

"Geocache owners will need to ensure that geocachers can verify that they have completed the geocache requirements without compromising their privacy."

 

So I read this that the cache owner should ensure it is possible to verify.. but that the geocachers may have to provide some verification themselves.

 

If the answer is easily seen from the statistics (and they are visible), then pointing to the statistics should be sufficient. E.g if the challenge is to have found 200 multi caches (ever). That number is easily seen.

 

If the challenge is "find at least one cache starting with all letters of the alphabet A-Z on a single day", then I DON'T think it would be sufficient for me to say "I did it; look at my finds and figure it out". I would expect at least to say what day I did it, and really would expect to provide the list of caches in some form.

 

Accepting everything you say I'd like my original question to stand and hopefully a mod or lackey will chime in to give the official viewpoint :)

 

As far as the privacy thing goes I expect that relates to the fact that we can make a choice to keep our stats private if we want to - and so the challenge cache owner must accept 'proof' in some other form - presumably agreed in advance?

 

All challenge caches must be verifiable from information available on the Geocaching.com website, such as profile statistics, bookmark lists, or a search of the challenge seeker's finds. If that is laborious, then that is the challenge cache owner's problem.

 

If I felt that the laborious side of the gathering of sufficient evidence was down to the challenge cache owner, I might find more challenge caches - as it's the admin side of things that drains the life out of me and puts me off doing them.

Share this post


Link to post

I find myself with a fundamental question - what onus lies on whom?

 

Reading through this page I see:

 

A challenge cache requires that geocachers meet a geocaching-related qualification or series of tasks before the challenge cache can be logged.

 

There's no mention there of any onus on geocachers to prove that they meet the required qualification - only that they are required to have met the required qualification.

 

Importantly, geocache owners must consider how they will substantiate claims that the geocache requirements have been met.

 

Indicating that the onus to substantiate claims is on the challenge cache owner rather than the finder.

 

So - is it sufficient having qualified for a challenge cache to simply refer the challenge cache owner to one's statistics on the geocaching website so that the owner can substantiate the claim for themselves?

 

Haha! This changes a lot for me!! Guess I'll be going out and logging all those challenge caches that I ignored in the past, before the guidelines get revised. Thanks! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

So - is it sufficient having qualified for a challenge cache to simply refer the challenge cache owner to one's statistics on the geocaching website so that the owner can substantiate the claim for themselves?

 

I think both sides have some responsibility. It also says on that page

 

"Geocache owners will need to ensure that geocachers can verify that they have completed the geocache requirements without compromising their privacy."

 

So I read this that the cache owner should ensure it is possible to verify.. but that the geocachers may have to provide some verification themselves.

 

If the answer is easily seen from the statistics (and they are visible), then pointing to the statistics should be sufficient. E.g if the challenge is to have found 200 multi caches (ever). That number is easily seen.

 

If the challenge is "find at least one cache starting with all letters of the alphabet A-Z on a single day", then I DON'T think it would be sufficient for me to say "I did it; look at my finds and figure it out". I would expect at least to say what day I did it, and really would expect to provide the list of caches in some form.

 

As far as the privacy thing goes I expect that relates to the fact that we can make a choice to keep our stats private if we want to - and so the challenge cache owner must accept 'proof' in some other form - presumably agreed in advance?

 

All challenge caches must be verifiable from information available on the Geocaching.com website, such as profile statistics, bookmark lists, or a search of the challenge seeker's finds. If that is laborious, then that is the challenge cache owner's problem.

 

Yeah the requirement is that the cacher's qualification should be verifiable using the website - not just using the profile stats which may be private. So bookmark lists would be the next answer. A CO can reqest a bookmark list as proof since it's a feature of the website.

 

I have a feeling though that a challenge requiring a bookmark list itself, rather than just a list of caches as evidence, wouldn't get publish, as it once again places the challenge on completing a technical task instead of the geocaching task. I haven't seen one, at least, that requires a bookmark list only (and enforced). Most allow you to include the list in your log if you want (text or image). This is of course referring to highly complex challenges, or challenges requiring a very long list of qualifying caches.

 

If it's not readily visible in the statistics, then the cacher needs to provide, using some method (website features included, 3rd party tools allowed but not required), their qualifications. They can't require the CO to use a 3rd party app to verify, but the cacher can if they post the results of that tool with the log. At that point, even if the verification process is highly complex, the CO has all they need to check each cache, using whatever tool they wish, to verify the qualification.

 

Basically, as long as the finder's log either includes the necessary proof for verification, or points to where the proof can be determined and verified on gc.com, then the requirements (as long their fulfillment does not require 3rd party tools) would be allowable.

 

At least as the guidelines stand now... :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah the requirement is that the cacher's qualification should be verifiable using the website - not just using the profile stats which may be private. So bookmark lists would be the next answer. A CO can reqest a bookmark list as proof since it's a feature of the website.

 

I have a feeling though that a challenge requiring a bookmark list itself, rather than just a list of caches as evidence, wouldn't get publish, as it once again places the challenge on completing a technical task instead of the geocaching task. I haven't seen one, at least, that requires a bookmark list only (and enforced). Most allow you to include the list in your log if you want (text or image). This is of course referring to highly complex challenges, or challenges requiring a very long list of qualifying caches.

 

If it's not readily visible in the statistics, then the cacher needs to provide, using some method (website features included, 3rd party tools allowed but not required), their qualifications. They can't require the CO to use a 3rd party app to verify, but the cacher can if they post the results of that tool with the log. At that point, even if the verification process is highly complex, the CO has all they need to check each cache, using whatever tool they wish, to verify the qualification.

 

Basically, as long as the finder's log either includes the necessary proof for verification, or points to where the proof can be determined and verified on gc.com, then the requirements (as long their fulfillment does not require 3rd party tools) would be allowable.

 

At least as the guidelines stand now... :ph34r:

 

Just for clarity / context - is this just your personal take on what's actually required by whom under the current guidelines, or are you employed by or otherwise affiliated with Groundspeak and thus in a position to provide an official response?

Share this post


Link to post
If I felt that the laborious side of the gathering of sufficient evidence was down to the challenge cache owner, I might find more challenge caches - as it's the admin side of things that drains the life out of me and puts me off doing them.

 

I've seen bunches of caches, challenges, virtuals, and earthcaches, which required, imo, too much work for verification. If you ask me, writing an essay for an earthcache, figuring out just what the owner wants for some virtuals, and having to spend alot of time figuring out which caches qualify you for a certain challenge are all similar to the topic at hand. They require finders to put in more effort for completion of a cache. The thing is, i'm not going to get upset about them because they're not to my liking and i choose not to do everything the CO wants.

 

I love doing virtual and earthcaches but i'll tell you now that there's been a few that i didn't log find on because of the verification process. Just like this gsak thing, i knew that i met the qualifications but didn't feel like jumping through all the hoops that some of those cache owners wanted me to. Again, it was easy to just walk away from these and have fun finding something else.

Edited by Mudfrog

Share this post


Link to post
If I felt that the laborious side of the gathering of sufficient evidence was down to the challenge cache owner, I might find more challenge caches - as it's the admin side of things that drains the life out of me and puts me off doing them.

 

I've seen bunches of caches, challenges, virtuals, and earthcaches, which required, imo, too much work for verification. If you ask me, writing an essay for an earthcache, figuring out just what the owner wants for some virtuals, and having to spend alot of time figuring out which caches qualify you for a certain challenge are all similar to the topic at hand. They require finders to put in more effort for completion of a cache. The thing is, i'm not going to get upset about them because they're not to my liking and i choose not to do everything the CO wants.

 

I love doing virtual and earthcaches but i'll tell you now that there's been a few that i didn't log find on because of the verification process. Just like this gsak thing, i knew that i met the qualifications but didn't feel like jumping through all the hoops that some of those cache owners wanted me to. Again, it was easy to just walk away from these and have fun finding something else.

 

I'm not going to get upset either - and I'd like to be able to do the fun part of the challenge and leave the admin side of things to the CO - so they can make things as complex as they like and I can just get out there and have fun caching :)

Share this post


Link to post
If I felt that the laborious side of the gathering of sufficient evidence was down to the challenge cache owner, I might find more challenge caches - as it's the admin side of things that drains the life out of me and puts me off doing them.

 

I've seen bunches of caches, challenges, virtuals, and earthcaches, which required, imo, too much work for verification. If you ask me, writing an essay for an earthcache, figuring out just what the owner wants for some virtuals, and having to spend alot of time figuring out which caches qualify you for a certain challenge are all similar to the topic at hand. They require finders to put in more effort for completion of a cache. The thing is, i'm not going to get upset about them because they're not to my liking and i choose not to do everything the CO wants.

 

I love doing virtual and earthcaches but i'll tell you now that there's been a few that i didn't log find on because of the verification process. Just like this gsak thing, i knew that i met the qualifications but didn't feel like jumping through all the hoops that some of those cache owners wanted me to. Again, it was easy to just walk away from these and have fun finding something else.

 

I'm not going to get upset either - and I'd like to be able to do the fun part of the challenge and leave the admin side of things to the CO - so they can make things as complex as they like and I can just get out there and have fun caching :)

 

Gotta agree,, that would be nice. B)

Share this post


Link to post

Guidelines, Logging of all Physical Caches http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#logging

 

Quote below, relevant to the challenge cache logging speculation going on in this thread.

 

...Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the log is signed and the challenge tasks have been met and documented to the cache owner as per instructions on the published listing.

Share this post


Link to post

Guidelines, Logging of all Physical Caches http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#logging

 

Quote below, relevant to the challenge cache logging speculation going on in this thread.

 

...Challenge Caches, which may only be logged online after the log is signed and the challenge tasks have been met and documented to the cache owner as per instructions on the published listing.

 

Thanks for that information :)

 

That would appear to clear that one up - the finder has to complete the challenge tasks and do the CO's homework for them as well.

 

I guess my challenge cache find rate will remain at the current level.

Share this post


Link to post

Just for clarity / context - is this just your personal take on what's actually required by whom under the current guidelines, or are you employed by or otherwise affiliated with Groundspeak and thus in a position to provide an official response?

That's my understanding and experience to date of what is required under the current guidelines. No I'm not otherwise affiliated with Groundspeak and can't make an official response. :P

Share this post


Link to post

Remember when "cache factory" or "seed caches" were popular, and then banned because they required a cache to be hidden in order to claim a find, and that resulted in a glut of meaningless hides, simply hidden so the cache owner could log the seed cache? Many of these challenge caches have the same result. Caches hidden for no reason other than to help somebody (often the cache owner) to log a challenge cache.

 

A good comparison.

 

Edit to include something on subject. Back when challenge caches first started I thought they should be renamed GSAK caches, because most often you needed GSAK to figure out if you qualified for a challenge cache. I'm really glad, even though I think challenge caches are wrong for this pastime, that GSAK is not required, i.e. that challenge cache owners can't pile ALRs on top of the challenge ALR.

Edited by L0ne.R

Share this post


Link to post

That would appear to clear that one up - the finder has to complete the challenge tasks and do the CO's homework for them as well.

 

I guess my challenge cache find rate will remain at the current level.

 

Well, it's the difference between qualifying, providing proof of qualifying, and verification of the qualifications.

 

A cacher who knows they've qualified for the challenge has already done the work to verify that they have, themselves, qualified. The next task is providing those results for the CO to verify - whether it's as little as saying "see my profile stats", or doing whatever work is necessary to provide the list of qualifying caches (if it's not readily, publicly visible data; like the My Finds PQ which is private). The CO at that point has the choice to put the effort into actually verifying the results, or just shrugging and letting the log stand anyway.

(Disclaimer: That is how I underst and the requirements)

 

As the finder we can't be required to use a 3rd party app to produce the qualification list, nor can we require the CO to use a 3rd party app to seek out and verify the qualification list. But if we provide that list, as long as the CO can verify it any way they choose, then the amount of work needed to verify it all is entirely up to them and the challenge they put out :P

 

I'm not sure what the official 'ruling' would be on something like an alphabet challenge, since a CO can peruse the user's public find history to verify the results. But afaik the CO can still require the qualification list to be posted in the log (image or text or bmk list). *shrug*

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not sure what the official 'ruling' would be on something like an alphabet challenge, since a CO can peruse the user's public find history to verify the results. But afaik the CO can still require the qualification list to be posted in the log (image or text or bmk list). *shrug*

 

From the link provided by Isonzo Karst to the relevant guideline it seems that the CO can request that the finder provide a list of qualifying caches and the finder must comply or face having their log deleted - whether they qualify or not.

 

It seems that the burden of providing evidence of qualifying is on the finder. Irrefutable proof would be a whole different ball game.

 

I guess I read too much into the earlier post from Keystone:

 

All challenge caches must be verifiable from information available on the Geocaching.com website, such as profile statistics, bookmark lists, or a search of the challenge seeker's finds. If that is laborious, then that is the challenge cache owner's problem.

 

or just misunderstood the emphasis of it altogether :(

Edited by Team Microdot

Share this post


Link to post
If I felt that the laborious side of the gathering of sufficient evidence was down to the challenge cache owner, I might find more challenge caches - as it's the admin side of things that drains the life out of me and puts me off doing them.

 

I've seen bunches of caches, challenges, virtuals, and earthcaches, which required, imo, too much work for verification. If you ask me, writing an essay for an earthcache, figuring out just what the owner wants for some virtuals, and having to spend alot of time figuring out which caches qualify you for a certain challenge are all similar to the topic at hand. They require finders to put in more effort for completion of a cache. The thing is, i'm not going to get upset about them because they're not to my liking and i choose not to do everything the CO wants.

 

I love doing virtual and earthcaches but i'll tell you now that there's been a few that i didn't log find on because of the verification process. Just like this gsak thing, i knew that i met the qualifications but didn't feel like jumping through all the hoops that some of those cache owners wanted me to. Again, it was easy to just walk away from these and have fun finding something else.

 

I'm not going to get upset either - and I'd like to be able to do the fun part of the challenge and leave the admin side of things to the CO - so they can make things as complex as they like and I can just get out there and have fun caching :)

 

Gotta agree,, that would be nice. B)

 

We could write: "Please check to see if I qualify. Let me know. I'll change my found to a note if I don't." Then the challenge owner would have to verify if we do. Ooooh weeee that would be sweet. I bet many challenge owners like getting others to jump through hoops but wouldn't want the tables turned. rolleyes.gif

Share this post


Link to post

I guess I read too much into the earlier post from Keystone:

 

All challenge caches must be verifiable from information available on the Geocaching.com website, such as profile statistics, bookmark lists, or a search of the challenge seeker's finds. If that is laborious, then that is the challenge cache owner's problem.

 

or just misunderstood the emphasis of it altogether :(

Yes, you and others were reading too much into that post.

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 6

×