Challange cache survey

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Bad analogy. US-airlines don't take American passengers into account when making decisions either.

 

Right but you know what I meant

 

Of course, but I couldn't pass up the opportunity to bash US-airlines.

 

 

As I was doing the survey I was thinking, "I wonder how a geocacher from South America would answer this?"

 

Exactly. And that should have been the concept of the whole survey. Think global and take regional differences into account. Just imagine the survey was based on the situation around Seattle. I'm sure there are differences between CA, FL, NY KS too just like things are different in NA, SA, AS, EU, AF, OC.

 

Of course, one can take that too far. As several others have suggested, it's a bit of overkill to try to include every possible variation on the notion of a "State" (State, Province, Bundesland, etc) but a general term such as "geopolitical region" or administrative region would be more globally accurate.

 

As a general approach though, when GS writes some sort of announcement or survey in this case it would be nice if it even appeared to consider that they are speaking to a global audience.

 

 

[+narcissa]

I have the imagination to mentally pipe in "province" instead of "state." I'm more offended that they have an open end at the bottom of a scale battery. Weird survey design means weird survey results.

[+Manville Possum]

Sorry that you choose to not be civil with me.

 

Short and pointed does not mean uncivil. Your use of the term is uncalled for.

 

I thought one of the problems with challenge caches was that they overwealmed [sic] the appeals process...

 

You're right about that, but that's not what you originally said. Your original post:

 

Remember why challenge caches were placed on hold?

 

Because they created lots of problems between geocachers and became a real PITA for HQ.

 

That statement was wrong. That ordinarily would not be a problem; we are all wrong sometimes. However, when you encapsulate that error in a "Remember why..." know-it-all post including snickering frogs, you are likely to receive some snark in return.

 

Had your original post not been snarky, you would likely not have received a snarky response.

 

Now, let's get back to the topic:

 

As pointed out repeatedly by Groundspeak, the issue that resulted in the pause was the increasing need for reviewers to make decisions about the quality and appropriateness of the challenges in challenge caches. These decisions led to many appeals and a lot of inappropriate work for the reviewers. I agree with Groundspeak on this issue: reviewers are not in the business of judging cache quality, but only conformance with the guidelines.

 

At no time, in any communication from Groundspeak, have I seen a single mention of inter-cacher conflict about logs as a reason for the pause. There are always conflicts going on between cachers over every cache type, but that's because human nature is what it is. The notion that challenge caches are more prone to conflict appears to be an invention of the forums.

 

Your trolling here has earned you a spot on the ignored users list.

[+Team Microdot]

Can't you come up with a more pleasant way of stating your opinions once in a while? Geeze!!

 

I can be quite pleasant. I tend not to be when people post misinformation as if it were revealed truth.

 

Good, well-reasoned arguments also earn my respect and tend to result in more respectful posts from me. The arguments in this thread do not approach that threshold.

 

Were you the guy that xkcd cartoon was written about?

 

The guy in that cartoon is not nearly short and pointed enough