Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 17
Geocaching HQ

Pause on New Challenge Caches

Recommended Posts

 

Most of the non forum regulars say they do not like ... challenges that require a lot of travel.

 

This is one of my favorite parts of geocaching, the travel, be it local, regional, national, or international. I like the idea of possibly completing a challenge based on travel. Our state's 92 county challenge, DeLorme challenge, virtual challenge, and history (caches placed in the first year of geocaching) challenge took me to parts of Indiana I wouldn't have gone had it not been for geocaching. Why would you limit a challenge based on travel and keep things local when there's a big world out there to explore? Heck, there's a big world to explore in most towns, cities, and states. You don't have to go too far to find unique and interesting locations and I have geocaching to thank for that.

Share this post


Link to post

Most of the non forum regulars say they do not like ... challenges that require a lot of travel.

 

This is one of my favorite parts of geocaching, the travel, be it local, regional, national, or international. I like the idea of possibly completing a challenge based on travel. Our state's 92 county challenge, DeLorme challenge, virtual challenge, and history (caches placed in the first year of geocaching) challenge took me to parts of Indiana I wouldn't have gone had it not been for geocaching. Why would you limit a challenge based on travel and keep things local when there's a big world out there to explore? Heck, there's a big world to explore in most towns, cities, and states. You don't have to go too far to find unique and interesting locations and I have geocaching to thank for that.

 

You are so fortunate. I would love to do a lot of geocaching travel, but circumstances are not in my favour. I bet that's true for most geocachers - limited money, time, priorities, and the support of family.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Most of the non forum regulars say they do not like ... challenges that require a lot of travel.

 

This is one of my favorite parts of geocaching, the travel, be it local, regional, national, or international. I like the idea of possibly completing a challenge based on travel. Our state's 92 county challenge, DeLorme challenge, virtual challenge, and history (caches placed in the first year of geocaching) challenge took me to parts of Indiana I wouldn't have gone had it not been for geocaching. Why would you limit a challenge based on travel and keep things local when there's a big world out there to explore? Heck, there's a big world to explore in most towns, cities, and states. You don't have to go too far to find unique and interesting locations and I have geocaching to thank for that.

 

You are so fortunate. I would love to do a lot of geocaching travel, but circumstances are not in my favour. I bet that's true for most geocachers - limited money, time, priorities, and the support of family.

 

So your answer is to take it away from everyone?

Share this post


Link to post

I've been keeping up with the Challenge Cache feedback. The thing that strikes me are the many comments like "I think it is a great shame and a sad day for the game that challenge caches have been cancelled for so long".

It hasn't been cancelled. There are still challenge caches out there to work towards and go find. Plan a trip to Ontario, Canada. We have 100s to qualify for. Here's a comprehensive bookmark list - over 700 challenge caches. Many challenge seekers are big on challenges that involve travel. This is an opportunity.

It seems the biggest lament about the moratorium are from people who want to hide challenges, not from people who want to find them.

Do challenge caches mostly appeal to people who own, or want to own them?

Edited by L0ne.R

Share this post


Link to post

I've been keeping up with the Challenge Cache feedback. The thing that strikes me are the many comments like "I think it is a great shame and a sad day for the game that challenge caches have been cancelled for so long".

It hasn't been cancelled. There are still challenge caches out there to work towards and go find. Plan a trip to Ontario, Canada. We have 100s to qualify for. Here's a comprehensive bookmark list - over 700 challenge caches. Many challenge seekers are big on challenges that involve travel. This is an opportunity.

It seems the biggest lament about the moratorium are from people who want to hide challenges, not from people who want to find them.

Do challenge caches mostly appeal to people who own, or want to own them?

 

I think it's more about feeling like big brother is controlling us.

Share this post


Link to post

 

You are so fortunate. I would love to do a lot of geocaching travel, but circumstances are not in my favour. I bet that's true for most geocachers - limited money, time, priorities, and the support of family.

I am fortunate and realize that, which is why I attempt to offer my time and car to anyone who might want to tag along that might not be able to under normal circumstances. I attempt to do that for any caching specific trip, local or otherwise. Sometimes cachers take me up on it and sometimes they don't.

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's more about feeling like big brother is controlling us.

 

So true.

 

Challenges

Mysteries involving Placespotting

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's more about feeling like big brother is controlling us.

Now THAT'S a stretch. Really? Geocaching is a game. A sport. An activity. It's something we choose to do for fun. Or not do. It's entirely optional in life. No one forces anybody to play.

 

Groundspeak is a private corporation. They're not owned by the Government. They own a website people can list geocaches on. Since it's their site, they can make the "rules" on which caches they want to list. Or not list. I can assure you with total confidence that they didn't receive marching orders from the Feds to put a one year moratorium on Challenge caches, to control and make life miserable for people that play an optional game.

 

Seriously. This isn't TEOTWAWKI. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post

It seems the biggest lament about the moratorium are from people who want to hide challenges, not from people who want to find them.

Do challenge caches mostly appeal to people who own, or want to own them?

 

For me, I'm more interested in finding them. I've found quite a few; I've not hidden any.

 

I don't mind a 1 year pause; there are enough out there and they are only one part of the game. I'm more concerned about them going away (no new ones) forever, or changing into something less fun for me. But will have to wait and see.

 

I did have a vague ambition to hide a challenge cache. In the UK we have something sort of like the Delorme challenges. There are ~400 "Explorer" maps which cover whole of the UK. There are challenges for some of these maps to find caches in a number of "cells" on the map, so it's not an original idea. Some of the bordering "map areas" have them and I've done them.. but my home map area doesn't have one. But that will need to wait.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Most of the non forum regulars say they do not like ... challenges that require a lot of travel.

 

This is one of my favorite parts of geocaching, the travel, be it local, regional, national, or international. I like the idea of possibly completing a challenge based on travel.

 

Exactly the ones I like most. I've traveled since I was 7 (long time ago :lol: ) and since we've been geocaching we always try to find a few caches during our travels. We've now come to a point that when preparing for a trip we are looking for special cachelocations near our route since there are a lot of hidden gems that we wouldn't have been too if not for a cache (EC's are a great source for special locations).

Traveling also makes you qualify for for challenges without much effort :lol: Most Northern/Southern/Eastern/Western found, total distance, countries cached...

Share this post


Link to post

 

It seems the biggest lament about the moratorium are from people who want to hide challenges, not from people who want to find them.

Do challenge caches mostly appeal to people who own, or want to own them?[/size][/color]

 

I guess that's pretty simply to explain. The moratorium is about hiding challenge caches and not about finding them or working on qualifying for them.

 

Imagine the uproar if all of a sudden all challenge caches were blocked for a year.

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

It seems the biggest lament about the moratorium are from people who want to hide challenges, not from people who want to find them.

I'm guessing more lament comes from potential hiders rather than finders because, as you noted, "It hasn't been cancelled. There are still challenge caches out there to work towards and go find."

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's more about feeling like big brother is controlling us.

 

If little brothers and sisters were not constantly pushing the limits and running to big brother complaining, big brother would not have to take a breather to figure out how to make all it's siblings get along and play nice.

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's more about feeling like big brother is controlling us.

 

If little brothers and sisters were not constantly pushing the limits and running to big brother complaining, big brother would not have to take a breather to figure out how to make all it's siblings get along and play nice.

Wisdom.

Share this post


Link to post

As a company making money out of this hobby, Groundspeak probably want to appeal to the majority and putting an end to challenge caches is a way to attain that goal. You/I may like or not, it's their business. You can always try to influence, but you can also play with their rules or opt out and move on. Disclaimer: I don't like what challenge caches are becoming (and puzzle caches too).

 

Just like puzzle caches (actually, any caches that will require something else than just walking to a coordinate, finding a container and signing your name in a logbook), challenge caches can be annoying to the casual geocacher who has to ignore/skip all the geocaches around his/her home that he/she cannot solve, complete or meet the requirements. Yes, they can ignore these caches, but human nature makes it difficult to ignore what you know (you need to be aware of them before being able to ignore them). I guess the silent majority doesn't like to be told there are caches they are denied to find, especially when the new caches are becoming sparse in their respective areas. It happened in the past with difficult puzzles and multis, but people started to circumvent this difficulty by asking the final coordinates to previous finders or friends. Once a logbook was signed, it could be "found". Challenge caches remediated this "issue" by allowing the COs to have the power to decide who could log their caches online.

 

And when you put humans in the equation, it can only go wrong... If Groundspeak let the challenge caches continue, it will end up as a mini-game within geocaching for a selected few, it will entice people to cheat (I've seen a lot of date logging tweaks and the like) and it will most likely continue to spark rounds of appeal calls from both the finders and the COs.

 

One way to solve the issue is to not allow any kind of caches where the CO has the final say on who can log a find on a cache, except for the monitoring/auditing of the logbook for "fake" finds. Or another way is to let everybody sign the logbook and log a find on any kind of cache, but allow the CO to assign a "star" (or any kind of virtual mark) to those who demonstrated they met the requirements of the cache (yes, I'm including puzzle, multi and any other kind of caches that require some work to obtain the final coordinates, as well as challenge caches that require someone to meet some requirements).

 

You think it's "unfair" to let everybody sign the logbook of any caches? Thinks about group finds where only one person climbed the tree, only one person was on the boat, only one person solved the puzzle, etc. In reality, nothing is unfair. It's just a game, isn't it? Personally, I would probably find puzzles and challenges without completing the requirements (for many reasons), but I would still do the multis as intended as this is something that appeals to me. I'm sure others would do differently and it's fine by me.

 

This would be a positive solution to the problem. This would let those who like to be challenged collect the find and the virtual rewards, and those who prefer to just cache around collect their finds. This should not deprive either COs or challenge/puzzle/multi/whatever cache aficionados from the joy of placing/finding a cache. Eliteness has never been well received in the geocaching community. I don't see why it would be different for challenge caches.

Edited by cron

Share this post


Link to post

One way to solve the issue is to not allow any kind of caches where the CO has the final say on who can log a find on a cache, except for the monitoring/auditing of the logbook for "fake" finds.

So, you're also going to eliminate EarthCaches, virtuals, and webcam caches?

 

Or another way is to let everybody sign the logbook and log a find on any kind of cache, but allow the CO to assign a "star" (or any kind of virtual mark) to those who demonstrated they met the requirements of the cache (yes, I'm including puzzle, multi and any other kind of caches that require some work to obtain the final coordinates, as well as challenge caches that require someone to meet some requirements).

And you don't think people who are denied the "star" will appeal those decisions to Groundspeak, including those who haven't provided sufficient proof that they satisfactorily solved puzzles or found all the stages of multis?

 

This would be a positive solution to the problem.

I'm guessing this "solution" would be far worse than any current problems.

 

Eliteness has never been well received in the geocaching community.

"Eliteness" has always been accepted in the geocaching community. Not everyone can solve difficult puzzles, climb mountains, repel cliffs, SCUBA dive, kayak, ride quads, hike long distances, climb trees, etc. Different aspects of geocaching appeal to people with different interests/strengths/talents/abilities, and most geocachers respect that.

Edited by CanadianRockies

Share this post


Link to post

"I guess the silent majority doesn't like..."

 

Got stats to back that up?

 

"One way to solve the issue is to not allow any kind of caches where the CO has the final say on who can log a find on a cache"

 

Aka: Geocaching Challenges. Failed.

 

"Or another way is to let everybody sign the logbook and log a find on any kind of cache, but allow the CO to assign a "star" to those who demonstrated they met the requirements of the cache"

 

See Challenge Stars discussion & distinguishing the qualification as separate from the Find log.

 

"(yes, I'm including puzzle, multi and any other kind of caches that require some work to obtain the final coordinates..."

 

That won't fly. Way too many disputes, no way to objectively verify a puzzle was solved by the finder or every multi stage physically visited by the finder.

 

"...as well as challenge caches that require someone to meet some requirements)"

 

As currently, qualification results must already be publicly verifiable without requirement of 3rd party tools.

Share this post


Link to post

With the existing reward mechanism for challenge caches (you get to log a find on another cache) the online log is the only indicator that one has completed the challenge, and it's buried amongst the logs from everyone else that has completed it. With a separate "Challenges/Achievement" tab on can see every challenge/achievement they've completed all in one place.

I view qualifying for a challenge to be more a personal accomplishment rather than a feat to be publicly boasted about. So, I'm happy with the current system. There's already plenty of people complaining about how challenges promote competition, cheating, and eliteness.

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's more about feeling like big brother is controlling us.

 

If little brothers and sisters were not constantly pushing the limits and running to big brother complaining, big brother would not have to take a breather to figure out how to make all it's siblings get along and play nice.

 

I'm voting this post from GeoBain my post of the day - hit the nail square and hard, right on the head B)

Share this post


Link to post

Of course, the challenges bring excitement to the game but I see several problems.

 

The nature of challenges push on the ground rules. Reviewers, being human, see the boundaries differently. This sees a challenge published here and a duplicate challenge denied there. This leads to frequent appeals for Groundspeak to deal with. This is a big problem.

 

Duplicates, everyone sees there are many duplicates of the same type of challenge. Does there really need to be?

 

The container. A challenge needs a container but it really doesn't matter what it is, doesn't matter if the cache gets signed.

 

I believe challenges should be removed from the map. A physical location is not needed. An index of challenges should be created instead, managed by Groundspeak, perhaps submitted by users, would solve the duplicate issue and solve the container issue. Everyone would be playing under the same Fizzy Challenge across the world, the same A - Z name challenge. I could submit an A - Z with 0 - 9 but not another A - Z.

 

After I've found my first Fizzy Challenge, what is the point of finding 20 more spread about? I've done the challenge, every other one is just another find. Instead, some type of badge or achievement system should be created to recognize the challenges that have been completed. This encourages me to find different challenges, not more of the same challenge.

 

Challenges can now be categorized. Make it much easier to find those types that I like. Make hundreds and hundreds of challenges available to everyone, not dependent on how close you might be to an actual cache. Challenges could be ranked based on number of completions, number of favorites, etc.

 

Challenges no longer count as a find. They get their own stat.

 

I drafted a very articulate position on challenges . When I read this, I revised my whole thought process, I concur with the above.

 

Sounds good on the surface, but on closer inspection it sounds almost exactly like the now defunct "Challenges" that Groundspeak tried to implement a couple of years ago that, ummmm... didn't work out so well.

 

Writing software to cover all possible challenge types and recognize when the challenge has been met would be brain-boggling. Nice thought, but I don't think it would be practical.

 

The other challenges, say "Climb this hill", "Water this plant", "Take this picture" .. they had nothing to with geocaching. They were in the same bed as Waymarking. Who is surprised that they didn't work? How many people waymark compared to geocache?

 

Moving the geocache based challenge system away from physical containers and being map listed does not turn it into anything like the defunct challenges.

 

Of course, there would be 'challenges' with determining what duplicates existing challenges. It is possible to design a system that weeds out duplication and mediocrity over time through automated analysis.

 

This is more than just a "Challenges Completed" stat counter. This gets an entire "Challenges" tab next to the "Souvenirs". Some badges from popular challenge types would be here. Some stats based on various challenges. Some progress stats perhaps. Instead of Groundspeak offering a souvenir for finding a mystery cache on Pi day, they now can, also, throw out geocaching challenges that gain a challenge badge on this page. Really, many souvenirs are just challenges. In fact, this system should probably replace souvenirs. We could just look at it as expanding out the souvenir system to be Groundspeak "special" challenges combined with all of the challenges submitted by cachers. The cacher challenges could be voted on to bump them to badge status or they could gain badge status after they get completed so many times.

 

I just cannot imagine writing the database or the query necessary to cover every possible challenge that people could come up with, even with new rules. About the ONLY conceivable way would be to design the database, and then use said database as the constraints for people designing a new challenge cache. Give them dropdowns, checkboxes, or radio buttons based on the possible criteria that your database can deal with, and nothing more. Wouldn't take long for folks to start griping about what it does not allow, because the database design didn't account for it.

Of course it would be challenging to expect the system to be able to recognize duplication. The reviewers would recognize some as duplicates. The rest, say they get published, would be flaggable as a potential duplicate by the community. The new "Challenges" team would review the flagged cache and its potential duplicate. If deemed a duplicate, it would be merged into the pre-existing cache so that any that have completed the duplicate would now get their find marked on the pre-existing challenge. There are ways to work with the problem of maintaining a database of distinct challenges. If you go along with the idea that having duplicates is okay as long as we work towards recognizing and merging them then it could work.

Edited by fbingha

Share this post


Link to post

Another thought, all of this may end up just being Groundspeak allowing challenge caches to be marked as 'found' by anyone who signs the log and a separate 'challenge completed' mark for those who meet the criteria. If challenges are to remain as caches then this is what probably should have happened all along. You find a cache, you sign a log, you found it.

 

I hope the goal is more along the lines of what I have already posted.

Edited by fbingha

Share this post


Link to post

Is this an inappropriate location to shill for the Challenge Stars feature?

 

Should GS decide it's ok for a challenge cache to be logged as found by those not meeting the challenge I would immediately archive my challenge caches. I put in a lot of effort to qualify for my challenges before publishing them and will not let anyone that hasn't log them.

 

You'd better go and archive them now, because they all appear to have been found and logged by a number of people who haven't qualified.

 

http://coord.info/GLGZ423F

http://coord.info/GLGBV5V1

http://coord.info/GLGBDRPH

http://coord.info/GLGZ40GT

 

Those are notes and I clearly stated logged as found. Big difference, but you already knew that. .

 

So in the context of those challenges, a "Found It" log really means "Challenge Completed" and a "Note" can mean the container was found and the log signed.

 

It sounds like there should be some system to separate the finding of the container from the completion of the challenge.

 

A "Found It" log means you have completed all the requirements for the cache, whether it is a challenge, a puzzle, a multi, an earthcache, or a traditional. A "Note" log can be used for when you have not yet completed all the requirements for the cache. Challenges and puzzles are both two stage caches: one stage to meet the requirements, and the other stage to sign the physical log. For puzzles most people do stage one (solve the puzzle) and then stage two. For challenges you can do either stage first, and it does not matter in the grand scheme of things which you do first.

 

I have used Note logs on challenges, puzzles, multis, and earthcaches to indicate that I have done some, but not all, of the requirements for the cache.

 

If you do not like to post Notes, then you do not have to. If you are a Cache Owner (CO), you should appreciate people telling you through Notes that they are working on your cache.

Share this post


Link to post

Another thought, all of this may end up just being Groundspeak allowing challenge caches to be marked as 'found' by anyone who signs the log and a separate 'challenge completed' mark for those who meet the criteria. If challenges are to remain as caches then this is what probably should have happened all along. You find a cache, you sign a log, you found it.

 

Exactly. Hopefully people understand none of us are trying to convince the others, but we're just proposing ideas for Groundspeak to come to a decision (they don't have the same biaised views we all have, pro and anti challenge caches alike).

Share this post


Link to post
How could the challenges be virtual? How could they be bound to the listing coordinates like EarthCaches do?
This has been discussed before:

[FEATURE] Challenge Stars

[FEATURE] Replace Challenge Caches with Achievements

 

As an example, if I complete a virtual version of the Bay Area quad challenge, then I could post a Completed log with a link to my bookmark list as evidence. There would be no need to make another trip to find a container to sign a log to acknowledge that I had completed the challenge.

 

As another example, if I complete a streak, or if I complete a grid in my statistics (e.g., each day of the year, or difficulty-terrain), then I could post a Completed log, or the challenge could be automatically marked completed for me (the way Souvenirs are awarded).

Share this post


Link to post
A "Found It" log means you have completed all the requirements for the cache, whether it is a challenge, a puzzle, a multi, an earthcache, or a traditional. A "Note" log can be used for when you have not yet completed all the requirements for the cache. Challenges and puzzles are both two stage caches: one stage to meet the requirements, and the other stage to sign the physical log. For puzzles most people do stage one (solve the puzzle) and then stage two. For challenges you can do either stage first, and it does not matter in the grand scheme of things which you do first.

Not necessarily true. Cachers have found, signed, and logged the final of a multi without finding the intermediate steps, and it's allowed to stand. They've logged puzzle caches without solving it the way the CO intended (by brute force or luck, or by getting the coords from another cacher), and that is allowed - CO's cannot delete finds made in a way they didn't foresee. So no - a "found it" does not mean you have completed all the requirements of a cache the way the CO intended.

Share this post


Link to post
A "Found It" log means you have completed all the requirements for the cache, whether it is a challenge, a puzzle, a multi, an earthcache, or a traditional. A "Note" log can be used for when you have not yet completed all the requirements for the cache. Challenges and puzzles are both two stage caches: one stage to meet the requirements, and the other stage to sign the physical log. For puzzles most people do stage one (solve the puzzle) and then stage two. For challenges you can do either stage first, and it does not matter in the grand scheme of things which you do first.

Not necessarily true. Cachers have found, signed, and logged the final of a multi without finding the intermediate steps, and it's allowed to stand. They've logged puzzle caches without solving it the way the CO intended (by brute force or luck, or by getting the coords from another cacher), and that is allowed - CO's cannot delete finds made in a way they didn't foresee. So no - a "found it" does not mean you have completed all the requirements of a cache the way the CO intended.

 

I was going to reply the exact same way and then decided to delete my reply.

 

Unfortunately, the only true requirement of a puzzle, multi or traditional cache is to sign the logbook (CO's intentions have no value). But I'd like to see the same logic applied to Challenge caches as well.

Share this post


Link to post

Unfortunately, the only true requirement of a puzzle, multi or traditional cache is to sign the logbook (CO's intentions have no value). But I'd like to see the same logic applied to Challenge caches as well.

 

Yes, this is why the suggestion of separating the Found It log from the Qualified log. You can get the Find count without qualifying (for those who don't care about challenges), but you only get the challenge completion recognition if you post the Qualified log/requirement and the Found It. (to keep challenge caches as they are currently for challenges, and not allow couch logging the challenge of challenge caches all over the world without finding the container).

 

See Challenge Stars for more.

 

Hate challenges, and want ignore them entirely? Then all those Challenge Caches on the map become physical caches you can still find and log, even with relevant D/T ratings.

Share this post


Link to post

I think if Groundspeak does figure out some nifty way to acknowledge a find on a cache separate from figuring out the challenge completion, I would be okay with that as the challenge cache owner. Not sure that is what they would do, but I would be okay with that. They would just need to make it clear and figure out some sort of mechanism that gives the challenge finisher some sort of separate credit or stat or something for said challenge.

 

I know there have been some folks over the years that have been annoyed by the fact they cant log a find on a challenge and newbies occasionally find them so if a system could be worked out, I would be okay with that.

Share this post


Link to post
A predictable poll result from our area...

I can see clear definitions. That should have been a given anyway.

- But who's gonna be responsible for "extreme oversight"?

 

Edit. had the wrong one. :laughing:

Edited by cerberus1

Share this post


Link to post

Unfortunately, the only true requirement of a puzzle, multi or traditional cache is to sign the logbook (CO's intentions have no value). But I'd like to see the same logic applied to Challenge caches as well.

So, because puzzles and multis are broken and don't always work the way they were intended, we should break challenge caches, too. A race to the bottom, indeed.

Share this post


Link to post

Unfortunately, the only true requirement of a puzzle, multi or traditional cache is to sign the logbook (CO's intentions have no value). But I'd like to see the same logic applied to Challenge caches as well.

So, because puzzles and multis are broken and don't always work the way they were intended, we should break challenge caches, too. A race to the bottom, indeed.

 

Call it what you want. When I opposed to that, I was called "elitist", "geopure" and the like.

 

Over time, I understood this game is not for the few, it's for the many. Eventually, it all boils down to satisfy more people. I don't see what you loose by allowing everyone to log a cache they "found" (by signing the logbook), be it a puzzle, multi or so-called "challenge" cache. Your loss will be my gain. Sorry.

Share this post


Link to post

Most of the non forum regulars say they do not like ... challenges that require a lot of travel.

 

This is one of my favorite parts of geocaching, the travel, be it local, regional, national, or international. I like the idea of possibly completing a challenge based on travel. Our state's 92 county challenge, DeLorme challenge, virtual challenge, and history (caches placed in the first year of geocaching) challenge took me to parts of Indiana I wouldn't have gone had it not been for geocaching. Why would you limit a challenge based on travel and keep things local when there's a big world out there to explore? Heck, there's a big world to explore in most towns, cities, and states. You don't have to go too far to find unique and interesting locations and I have geocaching to thank for that.

 

You are so fortunate. I would love to do a lot of geocaching travel, but circumstances are not in my favour. I bet that's true for most geocachers - limited money, time, priorities, and the support of family.

 

Everybody has limited time and money. Even though we all do not have the same limits, we all have to set priorities. I would love to go to the space station and get the geocache there. I would love to go to Brazil and the the one remaining Project Ape cache. I would love to go get the northernmost cache in Canada. But I have to set my priorities within the time and money I have available, so I may never get to do any of those.

Share this post


Link to post

I think if Groundspeak does figure out some nifty way to acknowledge a find on a cache separate from figuring out the challenge completion, I would be okay with that as the challenge cache owner. Not sure that is what they would do, but I would be okay with that. They would just need to make it clear and figure out some sort of mechanism that gives the challenge finisher some sort of separate credit or stat or something for said challenge.

 

I know there have been some folks over the years that have been annoyed by the fact they cant log a find on a challenge and newbies occasionally find them so if a system could be worked out, I would be okay with that.

 

Go have a look at the Challenge Stars proposal. It addresses the scenarios you describe.

Share this post


Link to post

I think if Groundspeak does figure out some nifty way to acknowledge a find on a cache separate from figuring out the challenge completion, I would be okay with that as the challenge cache owner. Not sure that is what they would do, but I would be okay with that. They would just need to make it clear and figure out some sort of mechanism that gives the challenge finisher some sort of separate credit or stat or something for said challenge.

 

I know there have been some folks over the years that have been annoyed by the fact they cant log a find on a challenge and newbies occasionally find them so if a system could be worked out, I would be okay with that.

 

Go have a look at the Challenge Stars proposal. It addresses the scenarios you describe.

 

Not going to respond on any of those specifics here except one thing, I hope any solution regarding challenge caches never uses the icon from the horribly named challenges. I did 100 of them and then they were wiped off like they did not happen and then to crazily call them "challenges" just to confused "challenge caches". Nothing with that icon ever please.

Share this post


Link to post

How about this icon for a challenge cache attribute?

2ecf464b-e3e2-44a2-886b-b10d2a84043b_l.png

Share this post


Link to post

How about this icon for a challenge cache attribute?

2ecf464b-e3e2-44a2-886b-b10d2a84043b_l.png

 

Just do not think relying on people using an attribute is ever going to work. Imagine relying on folks to use attributes to have a cache be a Wherigo or a virtual.

Share this post


Link to post

Just do not think relying on people using an attribute is ever going to work. Imagine relying on folks to use attributes to have a cache be a Wherigo or a virtual.

The guidelines could require that a "Challenge" attribute be used, just as they require the appropriate attribute be used for beacon caches. I believe all/many reviewers also require the "Wheelchair Accessible" attribute when a cache is rated T1.

Share this post


Link to post
Just do not think relying on people using an attribute is ever going to work. Imagine relying on folks to use attributes to have a cache be a Wherigo or a virtual.
The guidelines could require that a "Challenge" attribute be used, just as they require the appropriate attribute be used for beacon caches. I believe all/many reviewers also require the "Wheelchair Accessible" attribute when a cache is rated T1.
And the challenge cache guidelines currently require the word "challenge" in the geocache name, and the mystery/puzzle type, and several other criteria that are at least as difficult to enforce as a Challenge Cache attribute.

Share this post


Link to post
Just do not think relying on people using an attribute is ever going to work. Imagine relying on folks to use attributes to have a cache be a Wherigo or a virtual.
The guidelines could require that a "Challenge" attribute be used, just as they require the appropriate attribute be used for beacon caches. I believe all/many reviewers also require the "Wheelchair Accessible" attribute when a cache is rated T1.
And the challenge cache guidelines currently require the word "challenge" in the geocache name, and the mystery/puzzle type, and several other criteria that are at least as difficult to enforce as a Challenge Cache attribute.

 

Maybe so, even if in theory you had every reviewer in the world on board to enforce that and no COs to ever uncheck their attribute afterwards, but you have 1000s and 1000s of challenge caches already existing, no attribute is going to solve that.

Share this post


Link to post

With the existing reward mechanism for challenge caches (you get to log a find on another cache) the online log is the only indicator that one has completed the challenge, and it's buried amongst the logs from everyone else that has completed it. With a separate "Challenges/Achievement" tab on can see every challenge/achievement they've completed all in one place.

I view qualifying for a challenge to be more a personal accomplishment rather than a feat to be publicly boasted about. So, I'm happy with the current system. There's already plenty of people complaining about how challenges promote competition, cheating, and eliteness.

 

I wasn't suggesting such a mechanism for public boasting. If we had the ability to hide that entire pages (as we can do with our statistics page) I'd probably do so. Having a Challenge/Achievements tab would allow me to see what personal accomplishments I have achieved.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Just do not think relying on people using an attribute is ever going to work. Imagine relying on folks to use attributes to have a cache be a Wherigo or a virtual.
The guidelines could require that a "Challenge" attribute be used, just as they require the appropriate attribute be used for beacon caches. I believe all/many reviewers also require the "Wheelchair Accessible" attribute when a cache is rated T1.
And the challenge cache guidelines currently require the word "challenge" in the geocache name, and the mystery/puzzle type, and several other criteria that are at least as difficult to enforce as a Challenge Cache attribute.

 

Unfortunately, they don't require that a cache is a challenge cache if it has the word "challenge" in the cache name. Of the 27 caches within 50 miles of me with challenge in the title, more than half of the are not challenge caches.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

"Challenge" in the title isn't a workable metric. It's a guide for people looking for challenges, who still need to filter out non-challenges, but is not helpful at all for someone filtering out challenges. An required attribute tied to the added features that make a classifiable "challenge" (such as a star rating or new log type) would be optimal; alternative to a new cache type entirely.

Share this post


Link to post

Another thought, all of this may end up just being Groundspeak allowing challenge caches to be marked as 'found' by anyone who signs the log and a separate 'challenge completed' mark for those who meet the criteria. If challenges are to remain as caches then this is what probably should have happened all along. You find a cache, you sign a log, you found it.

 

I hope the goal is more along the lines of what I have already posted.

 

Now, there is an idea that I can sink my teeth into! And the "Challenge Completed" flag gets counted on a separate counter (or with badges or whatever). I like it, and it seems like a simple, workable solution. I wonder if the challenge cache devotees would agree with something like that.

Share this post


Link to post

Unfortunately, the only true requirement of a puzzle, multi or traditional cache is to sign the logbook (CO's intentions have no value). But I'd like to see the same logic applied to Challenge caches as well.

 

Yes, this is why the suggestion of separating the Found It log from the Qualified log. You can get the Find count without qualifying (for those who don't care about challenges), but you only get the challenge completion recognition if you post the Qualified log/requirement and the Found It. (to keep challenge caches as they are currently for challenges, and not allow couch logging the challenge of challenge caches all over the world without finding the container).

 

See Challenge Stars for more.

 

Hate challenges, and want ignore them entirely? Then all those Challenge Caches on the map become physical caches you can still find and log, even with relevant D/T ratings.

 

Again, I like this idea.

 

The only problem is that it won't fix the problem of 1% of caches causing the majority of appeals, will it? That's the stated reason for the moratorium, not whether we love or hate challenge caches. How does your solution address that?

Share this post


Link to post

Unfortunately, the only true requirement of a puzzle, multi or traditional cache is to sign the logbook (CO's intentions have no value). But I'd like to see the same logic applied to Challenge caches as well.

 

Yes, this is why the suggestion of separating the Found It log from the Qualified log. You can get the Find count without qualifying (for those who don't care about challenges), but you only get the challenge completion recognition if you post the Qualified log/requirement and the Found It. (to keep challenge caches as they are currently for challenges, and not allow couch logging the challenge of challenge caches all over the world without finding the container).

 

See Challenge Stars for more.

 

Hate challenges, and want ignore them entirely? Then all those Challenge Caches on the map become physical caches you can still find and log, even with relevant D/T ratings.

 

Again, I like this idea.

 

The only problem is that it won't fix the problem of 1% of caches causing the majority of appeals, will it? That's the stated reason for the moratorium, not whether we love or hate challenge caches. How does your solution address that?

 

I think the high number of appeals happens because of the fact these are physical geocaches and people can't log them (that includes the normal geocacher who doesn't care/understand the challenge part and the hardcore geocachers when the requirements are not clear). If the "challenge" part would become virtual, people would still get their find and most would be happy with that. The pool of potential appeals would lower for sure.

Share this post


Link to post

Another thought, all of this may end up just being Groundspeak allowing challenge caches to be marked as 'found' by anyone who signs the log and a separate 'challenge completed' mark for those who meet the criteria. If challenges are to remain as caches then this is what probably should have happened all along. You find a cache, you sign a log, you found it.

 

I hope the goal is more along the lines of what I have already posted.

 

Now, there is an idea that I can sink my teeth into! And the "Challenge Completed" flag gets counted on a separate counter (or with badges or whatever). I like it, and it seems like a simple, workable solution. I wonder if the challenge cache devotees would agree with something like that.

 

Wouldn't do the challenges and wouldn't publish challenges, last thing we need is a second scoreboard, haven't we learnt anything from the last time?

Share this post


Link to post

I think the high number of appeals happens because of the fact these are physical geocaches and people can't log them (that includes the normal geocacher who doesn't care/understand the challenge part and the hardcore geocachers when the requirements are not clear). If the "challenge" part would become virtual, people would still get their find and most would be happy with that. The pool of potential appeals would lower for sure.

 

Then what's the use of the challenge if people can just log them no matter what.

 

It's bad enough people log traditionals, multis, mysteries... without signing the log (a basic requirement to log online) because they didn't find the cache (cache missing/broken...)

What is there not to understand? If you did this, you can log the challenge, if you didn't, you can't. Not caring is even worse than not understanding.

I don't climb trees, do I want to log a challenge that requires at least x T5 caches found? No. Does it bother me the icon remains on the map, no. Plenty of other caches to find.

Share this post


Link to post

Wouldn't do the challenges and wouldn't publish challenges, last thing we need is a second scoreboard, haven't we learnt anything from the last time?

 

YOU wouldn't do them so others should be allowed too?

The "challenges" GS once published (go to xxx,stand on one leg and take a picture) were not challenges but plain stupid childsplay at best that had nothing to do with geocaching. I didn't bother doing them but didn't try to stop others from doing them.

Share this post


Link to post

I think the high number of appeals happens because of the fact these are physical geocaches and people can't log them (that includes the normal geocacher who doesn't care/understand the challenge part and the hardcore geocachers when the requirements are not clear). If the "challenge" part would become virtual, people would still get their find and most would be happy with that. The pool of potential appeals would lower for sure.

 

Then what's the use of the challenge if people can just log them no matter what.

 

It's bad enough people log traditionals, multis, mysteries... without signing the log (a basic requirement to log online) because they didn't find the cache (cache missing/broken...)

What is there not to understand? If you did this, you can log the challenge, if you didn't, you can't. Not caring is even worse than not understanding.

I don't climb trees, do I want to log a challenge that requires at least x T5 caches found? No. Does it bother me the icon remains on the map, no. Plenty of other caches to find.

 

A signed log is a cache found. You don't climb trees? You don't have a boat? You can't solve puzzles (because you don't have time, experience, interest)? Then send a friend to do it for you. It's happening a lot and I don't care anymore if people do that on my caches or other people's caches. I realized this hobby is for the most, not the few. Let anyone having their name in the logbook log a find on any caches. Point. If people want to play a sidegame (challenge), they could with a virtual feat.

 

People logging finds when they don't have their name in the logbook is lame, but do you really care? The CO should take care of that if they care.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 17

×