Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
Love Cachers

Challenge Caches Returning?

Recommended Posts

I suppose overly romanticised could equate to disingenuous but I think I was referring more to the romance of viewing something through rose tinted spectacles. You asked for an example where a view was considerably devalued by being over romanticised and I gave you one. Negative aspects of used car sales include portraying the car as of greater value than its true worth. Other similar phrases might include exaggerating for effect and over egging the pudding.

I didn't ask for examples. I asked for justification of the claim that my specific over romanticized viewpoint has less value than your viewpoint. Your example of used car sales and your alternative phrases all imply that I'm trying to convince you or someone else of my viewpoint, but I'm just pointing out that advantages I see. It does not matter to me or to my argument whether you agree they are advantages since all I have to show is that someone -- namely me -- sees value in challenge caches. Unless your position is that you are the only one qualified to judge whether something is valuable?

 

That's what you meant when you asked for a reference? Maybe if you'd used the same words you've used above instead of the words you actually used I'd have got that :)

 

And if it doesn't matter to you or your argument whether I agree with you - why ask for justification at all? This really is becoming a rather topsy-turvy thread :blink:

 

Either way, I don't agree with your viewpoint and it sounds to me as though it's a viewpoint through rose tinted spectacles - but you don't care so that should be the end of that :)

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think saying someone's viewpoint has less value is same as (respectfully) disagreeing to it. I think both viewpoints are equally good, and it's not rightful to judge one has more value than the other. I think this thread should be locked.

Share this post


Link to post

If you can avoid reading into my posts something which isn't there ...

Sounds like excellent advice that you should take yourself. What you quoted of my reply that you claim proves your point is only part of what I said, which was saying you point wasn't true. Nice way to twist others words while insisting others not to do that to you.

 

You keep claiming nobody needs Challenge Caches to meet challenges. I beleive you are wrong, many need the Challenge Cache to get the idea for the goal, myself include at times. I never would have puahed for the third Aug 2000 if I hadn't heard about the Jasmer and Double Jasmer Challenges - I'm still looking to see if there is a Triple out there (there is an unofficial Triple Jasmer Challenge in the Colorado Springs area, which I hope to get to this fall).

As for the oldest-in-the-state caches I working on, I'd have done a lot more work towards that - stayed on-site or returned so I wouldn't have a DNF on Vermonts, or skipped NJ's due to time - if I had a Challenge Cache to log.

So, no matter how many times you repeat "nobody needs them" I'll know you're wrong, because I know I do need them for the idea and the "deadline" to finish the challenge.

 

Upon farther thought, I get the feeling you're just trolling this topic - incomplete quotes, dissisng others opinions and arguments and backpeddling when confronted - maybe I'll just leave you to that and not feed you anymore.

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder if one possible way to improve Challenge Caches would be to define the difference (in the guidelines) between a challenge task (such as Jasmer or Delorme) and a bookkeeping task (list the 25 caches with different colors in title). It seems that the type that gets labelled 'silly' in the forums is more the latter than the former.

 

I can see where there could be some 'fun' (i.e.. dufficulty) placing some types on one side or another of the line. One type that I can think of is the Baker's Dozen I've done (thirteen days of caching with one find only on one day, two finds another day, three another, up to 13 - some times with a puzzle or multi needed each day). Is it more of a challenge or bookkeeping task?

 

I'm not against the bookkeeping task's as such, I, personally, just don't like work of finding the caches that fit the catagory and listing them, most of the time. I've done a few, in fact one caught my eye the other day - 100 'SHOUTING' caches (all cap cache names). I went thru my list in GSAK and found over 200, but I'm not going thru the effort of making a list to post for that cache.

Share this post


Link to post

I like the name of "bookkeeping caches". That fits them well. I hate bookkeeping challenges. Well maybe "hate" is too strong. Maybe it's close.

 

I like caching because it gets me outdoors and gets me to hike farther and see things I've never seen. I don't even like the part of caching where I have to sit at the computer to create pocket queries (although I love those compared to loading my GPS any other way). I want to get out and cache, I don't want to sit for hours counting how many cache titles I can find that start with the letter "L" or any other such silly (dumb) thing.

 

I love challenges that get me outside.

 

I still say probably the best cache I've ever done was the challenge where I had to find caches on something like 25 islands in Washington STate. I went to the most amazing places because of that cache. There were MANY places I went because of that challenge that I would have not otherwise gone to. Islands are now my favorite place to cache.

 

I have so many great memories because of that challenge. THANK YOU LAMORACKE!!!

 

I really enjoyed that. That was amazing.

Share this post


Link to post

If you can avoid reading into my posts something which isn't there ...

Sounds like excellent advice that you should take yourself. What you quoted of my reply that you claim proves your point is only part of what I said, which was saying you point wasn't true. Nice way to twist others words while insisting others not to do that to you.

 

I didn't twist your words - simply extracted in order to highlight those where you've confirmed that you have successfully set challenges for yourself and completed them in the absence of a dedicated challenge cache - proving that it can and does happen.

 

On reflection I should have quoted you in entirety and just bolded the points I wanted to highlight - not that it would have made any difference to what was written. I'll bear that in mind in the future. It does make for much longer posts but if it's essential then so be it.

 

You keep claiming nobody needs Challenge Caches to meet challenges. I beleive you are wrong, many need the Challenge Cache to get the idea for the goal, myself include at times. I never would have puahed for the third Aug 2000 if I hadn't heard about the Jasmer and Double Jasmer Challenges - I'm still looking to see if there is a Triple out there (there is an unofficial Triple Jasmer Challenge in the Colorado Springs area, which I hope to get to this fall).

As for the oldest-in-the-state caches I working on, I'd have done a lot more work towards that - stayed on-site or returned so I wouldn't have a DNF on Vermonts, or skipped NJ's due to time - if I had a Challenge Cache to log.

So, no matter how many times you repeat "nobody needs them" I'll know you're wrong, because I know I do need them for the idea and the "deadline" to finish the challenge.

 

Upon farther thought, I get the feeling you're just trolling this topic - incomplete quotes, dissisng others opinions and arguments and backpeddling when confronted - maybe I'll just leave you to that and not feed you anymore.

 

I, unsurprisingly, believe I am right. So far I've not been convinced otherwise. Nor have I engaged in backpedalling in any way shape or form.

 

For the avoidance of doubt the points I've made so far and am sticking to are:

 

  1. The world of geocaching continues to trundle along just fine in the absence of any new challenge caches - the sky has not fallen
  2. People can do all of the things they claim they need challenge caches for - without them.
  3. People throw out new caches in order to make challenges easier.

 

Also, for the avoidance of doubt, at no point have I advocated for getting rid of challenge caches - simply stated that I wouldn't miss them if that happened.

 

Hopefully that makes my position clear :)

 

I'm awfully glad I'm not a geocaching volunteer reviewer :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

  1. The world of geocaching continues to trundle along just fine in the absence of any new challenge caches - the sky has not fallen
  2. People can do all of the things they claim they need challenge caches for - without them.
  3. People throw out new caches in order to make challenges easier.

 

1. The world of geocaching was trundling along just fine before there was a moratorium on challenge caches - the sky was not falling. That does NOT mean that there weren't issues with challenge caches. That also does not mean that there weren't issues with Geo-Art caches, power trails, and any other cache types that have had complaints. It was trundling along fine before and it's trundling along fine now too.

 

2. Sure, I could have done Marooned on my own. However, why would I travel over 500 miles to go to a paddle cache when I have enough paddle caches within 100 miles to keep me busy for quite some time? I went to find Marooned BECAUSE of a challenge cache. I planned a three day trip around finding this one cache in order to complete my Jasmer. Without the challenge, there's no way I plan and do the trip. There are too many caches of a similar nature that are much closer, take less time, and cost much less money to try to find. Just because I CAN do caches without the impetus of a challenge, it does not mean I WILL do them.

 

3. I don't have a problem with this argument.

Share this post


Link to post

If you can avoid reading into my posts something which isn't there ...

Sounds like excellent advice that you should take yourself. What you quoted of my reply that you claim proves your point is only part of what I said, which was saying you point wasn't true. Nice way to twist others words while insisting others not to do that to you.

 

I didn't twist your words - simply extracted in order to highlight those where you've confirmed that you have successfully set challenges for yourself and completed them in the absence of a dedicated challenge cache - proving that it can and does happen.

 

On reflection I should have quoted you in entirety and just bolded the points I wanted to highlight - not that it would have made any difference to what was written. I'll bear that in mind in the future. It does make for much longer posts but if it's essential then so be it.

 

You keep claiming nobody needs Challenge Caches to meet challenges. I beleive you are wrong, many need the Challenge Cache to get the idea for the goal, myself include at times. I never would have puahed for the third Aug 2000 if I hadn't heard about the Jasmer and Double Jasmer Challenges - I'm still looking to see if there is a Triple out there (there is an unofficial Triple Jasmer Challenge in the Colorado Springs area, which I hope to get to this fall).

As for the oldest-in-the-state caches I working on, I'd have done a lot more work towards that - stayed on-site or returned so I wouldn't have a DNF on Vermonts, or skipped NJ's due to time - if I had a Challenge Cache to log.

So, no matter how many times you repeat "nobody needs them" I'll know you're wrong, because I know I do need them for the idea and the "deadline" to finish the challenge.

 

Upon farther thought, I get the feeling you're just trolling this topic - incomplete quotes, dissisng others opinions and arguments and backpeddling when confronted - maybe I'll just leave you to that and not feed you anymore.

 

I, unsurprisingly, believe I am right. So far I've not been convinced otherwise. Nor have I engaged in backpedalling in any way shape or form.

 

For the avoidance of doubt the points I've made so far and am sticking to are:

 

  1. The world of geocaching continues to trundle along just fine in the absence of any new challenge caches - the sky has not fallen
  2. People can do all of the things they claim they need challenge caches for - without them.
  3. People throw out new caches in order to make challenges easier.

 

Also, for the avoidance of doubt, at no point have I advocated for getting rid of challenge caches - simply stated that I wouldn't miss them if that happened.

 

Hopefully that makes my position clear :)

 

I'm awfully glad I'm not a geocaching volunteer reviewer :laughing:

I didn't look it up but saying that "the world of geocaching continues to trundle along" makes it sound like geocaching is rolling along, but in slow motion. For me, this would sum it up. Part of my waning interest of our hobby is because of this moratorium.

 

It should not make any difference whether a challenge cache is easy, difficult, fun, boring, or tedious. People who look at them can decide for themselves if they want to accept the challenge.

 

Reducing reviewers workload and headaches are what need to be addressed. Reviewers shouldn't have to try and determine how challenging a cache is. They shouldn't be required to try and determine how many people can qualify for a cache. Reviewers, and Groundspeak as well, shouldn't have to get involved with cacher's disputes over finds, deletion of logs, etc,,,.

 

Yes i know there are lots of existing CCs out there now that can keep people busy for a bit. Still, there are cachers who enjoy placing them and cachers who like seeing new challenges pop up. I'm fairly certain that most of these cachers would disagree with you when you say geocaching is rolling along just fine right now.

 

I do agree with your third. I've seen caches placed for the sole purpose of helping with challenge completion. Not something i care for but and honestly, something i don't want to see happen with any CC of mine. Here again, this is something that can and should be ironed out between the CC's owner and the CCHC's owner.

Share this post


Link to post

y'all remember when Hardee's/Carl's Jr served hamburgers & chicken & ham sandwiches & hot dogs & whatever else they could cram on the menu and everything ranged from so-so to not good at all? Then they decided to cut out all the crap and just go back to burgers and fries, and they were some awesome burgers, and now they are just adding more and more burgers, and things are getting mediocre again?

Share this post


Link to post

y'all remember when Hardee's/Carl's Jr served hamburgers & chicken & ham sandwiches & hot dogs & whatever else they could cram on the menu and everything ranged from so-so to not good at all? Then they decided to cut out all the crap and just go back to burgers and fries, and they were some awesome burgers, and now they are just adding more and more burgers, and things are getting mediocre again?

A restaurant can mess up a menu and end up not focusing on, and in fact, take away from the food item that made them great. I've seen a few go out of business when the got greedy and somehow forgot what had been working.

 

Your analogy would fit well if we were talking about power trails and the such. Groundspeak used to preach against them but because numbers are now promoted, they're fine and dandy. They are evidently fun for many people but they've definitely had an impact on geocaching because the vast majority of them promote quantity rather than quality.

 

I remember those cache challenges that came out some time ago. My opinion was that they weren't really geocaching and that they were not something i ever wanted to mess with. Still, i never thought i needed to call for a ban on them either. I knew they were things that didn't affect other cache types. With challenge caches, nobody is pushing any other caches aside. No one is pulling the good stuff away from other cache types to make CCs work. There is room for different cache types to coexist without affecting each other.

Share this post


Link to post

  1. The world of geocaching continues to trundle along just fine in the absence of any new challenge caches - the sky has not fallen
  2. People can do all of the things they claim they need challenge caches for - without them.
  3. People throw out new caches in order to make challenges easier.

 

2. Sure, I could have done Marooned on my own. However, why would I travel over 500 miles to go to a paddle cache when I have enough paddle caches within 100 miles to keep me busy for quite some time? I went to find Marooned BECAUSE of a challenge cache. I planned a three day trip around finding this one cache in order to complete my Jasmer. Without the challenge, there's no way I plan and do the trip. There are too many caches of a similar nature that are much closer, take less time, and cost much less money to try to find. Just because I CAN do caches without the impetus of a challenge, it does not mean I WILL do them.

 

Without wishing to appear combative, that's a very good question - why would you travel over 500 miles to go to a paddle cache when you have enough paddle caches within 100 miles to keep you busy for quite some time?

 

Was it just so you could log the challenge cache at the end?

 

And of course you're free to do whichever caches please you - with or without the impetus of a challenge - it just comes down to personal choice and you don't NEED a challenge cache in order to make personal choices.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes i know there are lots of existing CCs out there now that can keep people busy for a bit. Still, there are cachers who enjoy placing them and cachers who like seeing new challenges pop up. I'm fairly certain that most of these cachers would disagree with you when you say geocaching is rolling along just fine right now.

 

I expect they would disagree and that's fine - but it's also why I'm trying so hard to remind them of the fact that anything that can be claimed to be BECAUSE of challenge caches still goes on every day without any new ones - and would continue to do so for as long as geocaching remains popular.

 

It's not that, as some posters have tried their level best to claim, I think people SHOULDN'T feel a need for challenge caches - rather it's the fact that they DON'T need challenge caches. There's a world of difference between enjoying something and NEEDING that same thing.

 

I can't really make it any clearer than that.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Was it just so you could log the challenge cache at the end?

 

 

Yes it was, and that particular challenge created some great memories along the way. There's no way I would have done the many in the Atlanta, GA area that filled in 3-4 months and Tombstone (TX) without this challenge in mind. I would have loaded other caches up in the area, but not those specific ones.

 

As far as the other paddle caches in my area, I plan on doing them without the need for any challenge because I enjoy them, they're close, and they won't cost me nearly as much money to get to. They're much more accessible to me and will take a day (or two because there's one series I might have to camp out on the river to do) to do.

Share this post


Link to post

I expect they would disagree and that's fine - but it's also why I'm trying so hard to remind them of the fact that anything that can be claimed to be BECAUSE of challenge caches still goes on every day without any new ones - and would continue to do so for as long as geocaching remains popular.

 

It's not that, as some posters have tried their level best to claim, I think people SHOULDN'T feel a need for challenge caches - rather it's the fact that they DON'T need challenge caches. There's a world of difference between enjoying something and NEEDING that same thing.

 

I can't really make it any clearer than that.

 

Anything that can be claimed BECAUSE of challenge caches can still occur without any new ones. I'm not debating that point. You're right. However, how many people are going to do some of the caches on their own if it's going to require a dedicated plan and trip to go find? Would you have found all the caches on 9/19/15 that qualified you for the Chorley Challenge #20 - The Power of 5 on your own, many of those being challenge caches in their own right? Would you have found all the required caches for those challenges without the impetus of those challenges? Would you really have gone after these 5 caches in a single day (A 1/1, a 5/1, a 5/5, a 1/5, and a 3/3) without knowing about the Chorley Challenge #25 Pudding? I would have skipped the 1/1, seeing as how I don't find them that enjoyable. On the other hand, if there were a challenge, I would have found the 1/1 to qualify myself for the challenge. I would NEED the challenge to find a 1/1 because I don't do them much anymore, the lone exception being events.

Share this post


Link to post

I expect they would disagree and that's fine - but it's also why I'm trying so hard to remind them of the fact that anything that can be claimed to be BECAUSE of challenge caches still goes on every day without any new ones - and would continue to do so for as long as geocaching remains popular.

 

It's not that, as some posters have tried their level best to claim, I think people SHOULDN'T feel a need for challenge caches - rather it's the fact that they DON'T need challenge caches. There's a world of difference between enjoying something and NEEDING that same thing.

 

I can't really make it any clearer than that.

 

Anything that can be claimed BECAUSE of challenge caches can still occur without any new ones. I'm not debating that point. You're right. However, how many people are going to do some of the caches on their own if it's going to require a dedicated plan and trip to go find?

I can't answer that question. I doubt anyone can, but what does it matter?

 

I don't know about you but pretty much all of my caching requires a dedicated plan and trip to go find. I've never been an armchair logger B)

 

Would you have found all the caches on 9/19/15 that qualified you for the Chorley Challenge #20 - The Power of 5 on your own, many of those being challenge caches in their own right? Would you have found all the required caches for those challenges without the impetus of those challenges? Would you really have gone after these 5 caches in a single day (A 1/1, a 5/1, a 5/5, a 1/5, and a 3/3) without knowing about the Chorley Challenge #25 Pudding?

 

Would I have done them all in one day? Probably not. That was a highly unusual day where we decided to knock as many challenge caches off the map as possible without doing a ridiculous number of miles. I think it ended up being one of the days that convinced me this wasn't a style of caching I found enjoyable.

 

I would have skipped the 1/1, seeing as how I don't find them that enjoyable. On the other hand, if there were a challenge, I would have found the 1/1 to qualify myself for the challenge. I would NEED the challenge to find a 1/1 because I don't do them much anymore, the lone exception being events.

 

You still don't NEED the challenge to find a 1/1 - you can find a 1/1 without the challenge - but you typically choose not to - because you don't find them that enjoyable.

 

But you end up doing caches you don't find enjoyable because you feel compelled to sign a piece of paper in another cache.

 

The really disappointing part is when, having done caches you don't find enjoyable, or caching in a style you don't find enjoyable, just so you can sign that piece of paper in that particular cache and that particular cache ends up being a massive anti-climax.

Share this post


Link to post

I expect they would disagree and that's fine - but it's also why I'm trying so hard to remind them of the fact that anything that can be claimed to be BECAUSE of challenge caches still goes on every day without any new ones - and would continue to do so for as long as geocaching remains popular.

 

It's not that, as some posters have tried their level best to claim, I think people SHOULDN'T feel a need for challenge caches - rather it's the fact that they DON'T need challenge caches. There's a world of difference between enjoying something and NEEDING that same thing.

 

I can't really make it any clearer than that.

 

Anything that can be claimed BECAUSE of challenge caches can still occur without any new ones. I'm not debating that point. You're right. However, how many people are going to do some of the caches on their own if it's going to require a dedicated plan and trip to go find? Would you have found all the caches on 9/19/15 that qualified you for the Chorley Challenge #20 - The Power of 5 on your own, many of those being challenge caches in their own right? Would you have found all the required caches for those challenges without the impetus of those challenges? Would you really have gone after these 5 caches in a single day (A 1/1, a 5/1, a 5/5, a 1/5, and a 3/3) without knowing about the Chorley Challenge #25 Pudding? I would have skipped the 1/1, seeing as how I don't find them that enjoyable. On the other hand, if there were a challenge, I would have found the 1/1 to qualify myself for the challenge. I would NEED the challenge to find a 1/1 because I don't do them much anymore, the lone exception being events.

 

The only challenge caches I've logged as found have been CCs I already qualified for after checking Project-GC. There's no challenge in them for me. I doubt I'm the only one.

 

I create my own "challenges" by searching for caches I think I might enjoy, and not because there's a Q in the title.

I spend a week's vacation each year trying new locations in my province. But I don't make it my goal to drive to every county to grab any cache just so I can qualify for a CC (which may end up being a leaky micro that hasn't been maintained since it was hidden).

 

My goal is to find some hopefully well-maintained swag-size caches in pleasant locations. I have no interest in spending my time in parking lots finding LPCs I would rather not find, just to fulfill an LPC (1/1) challenge (where's the challenge in that anyway?). Or spend my time hunting for a D/T rating than for a quality cache. Or go with a group of people on a numbers hunt, where I don't end up actually finding half the caches, or solve any of the puzzles or see any of the stages of a multi, or don't climb the tree. Where's the challenge in that?

Edited by L0ne.R

Share this post


Link to post

 

Was it just so you could log the challenge cache at the end?

 

 

Yes it was, and that particular challenge created some great memories along the way. There's no way I would have done the many in the Atlanta, GA area that filled in 3-4 months and Tombstone (TX) without this challenge in mind. I would have loaded other caches up in the area, but not those specific ones.

 

As far as the other paddle caches in my area, I plan on doing them without the need for any challenge because I enjoy them, they're close, and they won't cost me nearly as much money to get to. They're much more accessible to me and will take a day (or two because there's one series I might have to camp out on the river to do) to do.

 

I might be reading this wrong but it sounds to me as though for you challenge caches mean finding caches you wouldn't normally find - because you don't enjoy them.

Share this post


Link to post
It's not that, as some posters have tried their level best to claim, I think people SHOULDN'T feel a need for challenge caches - rather it's the fact that they DON'T need challenge caches. There's a world of difference between enjoying something and NEEDING that same thing.

 

And yet you persist in refusing to understand that geocaching is about having fun.

 

According to your (incorrect) definition of the word "need," nobody NEEDS to geocache at all -- they could perfectly well go to the same spots without it and bring along little toys with which to reward themselves. Thus, according to your argument, the world would be just as good without geocaching.

 

Face it -- you used a bad argument, got called on it, and are now trying desperately to backpedal away from it. You initial post in this thread established your position: you don't care either way, and would be perfectly content to have no challenge caches at all. In other words, as long as you get your way, nobody else's enjoyment particularly matters to you.

 

If you really don't care, as you say, then why have you posted so often in this thread arguing with people who do care? The answer seems pretty simple to me.

 

Think about it and see what you come up with.

Edited by fizzymagic

Share this post


Link to post

People throw out new caches in order to make challenges easier.

My first thought: So what?

 

That only works on some Challenge Caches. There are only three caches in the US left placed during Aug 2000, how is anyone going to make the Jasmer Challenge easier by placing more of them? When the Delorme Challenge first came out for WA, there were pages that had no caches on them, people had to put out caches for it to be completed.

 

Instead of blaming Challenge Caches for poor quality hides, blame the person really responsible - the cache hider.

Share this post


Link to post

I, unsurprisingly, believe I am right. So far I've not been convinced otherwise.

Even when at least two of us in this thread have stated that we need the Challenge Cache to be motivated? Thaks for making me out to be a liar.

Share this post


Link to post
It's not that, as some posters have tried their level best to claim, I think people SHOULDN'T feel a need for challenge caches - rather it's the fact that they DON'T need challenge caches. There's a world of difference between enjoying something and NEEDING that same thing.

 

And yet you persist in refusing to understand that geocaching is about having fun.

 

According to your (incorrect) definition of the word "need," nobody NEEDS to geocache at all -- they could perfectly well go to the same spots without it and bring along little toys with which to reward themselves. Thus, according to your argument, the world would be just as good without geocaching.

 

Face it -- you used a bad argument, got called on it, and are now trying desperately to backpedal away from it. You initial post in this thread established your position: you don't care either way, and would be perfectly content to have no challenge caches at all. In other words, as long as you get your way, nobody else's enjoyment particularly matters to you.

 

If you really don't care, as you say, then why have you posted so often in this thread arguing with people who do care? The answer seems pretty simple to me.

 

Think about it and see what you come up with.

 

Not this again, surely? :rolleyes:

 

Now I'm persisting in refusing to understand that geocaching is about having fun? No, I am not - I wouldn't do it myself if it wasn't fun.

 

This ongoing campaign to paint me into a corner is a waste of everyone's time - because I was already in my corner when I joined the thread and I've been standing firmly in the same corner the whole time - I even re-affirmed my position in writing in post #106.

 

The reason I've posted so often is that people keep on quoting me and insisting that the facts don't apply.

 

If this is the sort of thing challenge caches inflict on volunteer reviewers I can certainly appreciate why they'd want nothing more to do with them.

Share this post


Link to post

I, unsurprisingly, believe I am right. So far I've not been convinced otherwise.

Even when at least two of us in this thread have stated that we need the Challenge Cache to be motivated? Thaks for making me out to be a liar.

 

Facts don't change just because at least two people don't believe them.

 

FACT: People need to breathe air to stay alive

 

FACT: People do not need challenge caches in order to set and complete geocaching challenges.

 

Even playing the Thaks for making me out to be a liar card doesn't change the facts - it just sours the whole discussion.

Share this post


Link to post

 

I might be reading this wrong but it sounds to me as though for you challenge caches mean finding caches you wouldn't normally find - because you don't enjoy them.

 

You are. I wouldn't find them if they weren't part of a challenge, but not because I don't enjoy them. I would probably pass over them because there are other caches I would enjoy more. I keep going to Marooned because it's the best example I can give you that rebuts the argument that people WOULD find a cache if there wasn't a challenge involved. If your argument is that people COULD find a cache if there wasn't a challenge cache, that really isn't an argument at all. All of us have the option to go find any cache placed. Just because we CAN find a cache does not mean that we WILL find the cache.

 

I enjoy all paddle caches, whether or not I get them by motorized boat or kayak. A chance to be on the water AND find a cache? Awesome. Without the Jasmer challenge, I don't go down to GA for this cache, not because I wouldn't enjoy the cache, but because it's over 500 miles away, costs me money for gas, rental, and lodging, and takes 3 1/2 days to complete the trip along with the other caches we found. I go because it's the last hole in my Jasmer that needs to be filled and this particular cache, at that particular time was the best option for a trip. If I don't know about the challenge, do I even care if my Jasmer is filled? If I live within 100 miles, you bet I'd be doing ALL the caches out there. It's logistically easier, not to mention a lot cheaper. Also, there's MUCH less of a chance that my wife would get angry with me because it's a one day trip instead of a 3 1/2 day trip. It was an awesome experience. Upper 60s, sunshine, good friends, and a really neat area to find a cache placed in 2000. What's not to enjoy about a day like that and I owe it all to the challenge because it motivated me to go the extra mile and actually get to GZ to do the cache. Yes, I COULD have done this cache on my own without the lure of the challenge, but there's no way I WOULD have done this cache on my own.

 

Our vacation time is family time, not caching time, so I have to pick which caches I might be able to do when we're traveling. So, I look for ECs, virtuals, high FP caches (% and #), and multis. The last thing I look at is if there are any caches in the area that might help me complete a challenge I might be working on at the time. There's really only one I'm working on now and it's the KY Fizzy challenge, which has a really early publication date restriction. I'm down to 10 left and all of them will require some travel plans. If I'm in the area and have the OK from the wife, I'll go after the target cache. If not, then there's no way I'd be trying that particular cache without knowledge of the challenge. I prefer caching in a certain way (we all do, as it pertains to our proclivities) but there aren't any caches I dislike. I don't mind the 1/1s, the LPCs, or the power trails. I'll do them on my own if the mood strikes me. It just that most of the time, the mood doesn't strike me.

 

For me, challenge caches provide that extra little bit of incentive to do some caches I might not have otherwise thought about going after. That does NOT mean I wouldn't/don't enjoy them on their own merit. It does NOT mean that I'm not a self-motivated cacher. It does NOT mean that if I lived in the area I wouldn't have found it on my own. I enjoy all caches, even if it's the simple 1/1 or LPC, because someone put something out for a cacher to find. Even if I know it's under the skirt, it doesn't detract from the fun in the find for me. I have no urge to do the ET highway right now, but if I were to do it, it would still be fun and enjoyable because there's a cache to be found and signed. You can't find everything so you have to pick and choose which ones you want to find. I want to find caches that I enjoy (which is still all of them) and will target some specific types or specific caches because I will enjoy them more, not because I dislike or detest the other caches in the area.

Share this post


Link to post

 

I might be reading this wrong but it sounds to me as though for you challenge caches mean finding caches you wouldn't normally find - because you don't enjoy them.

 

You are. I wouldn't find them if they weren't part of a challenge, but not because I don't enjoy them. I would probably pass over them because there are other caches I would enjoy more. I keep going to Marooned because it's the best example I can give you that rebuts the argument that people WOULD find a cache if there wasn't a challenge involved. If your argument is that people COULD find a cache if there wasn't a challenge cache, that really isn't an argument at all. All of us have the option to go find any cache placed. Just because we CAN find a cache does not mean that we WILL find the cache.

 

I enjoy all paddle caches, whether or not I get them by motorized boat or kayak. A chance to be on the water AND find a cache? Awesome. Without the Jasmer challenge, I don't go down to GA for this cache, not because I wouldn't enjoy the cache, but because it's over 500 miles away, costs me money for gas, rental, and lodging, and takes 3 1/2 days to complete the trip along with the other caches we found. I go because it's the last hole in my Jasmer that needs to be filled and this particular cache, at that particular time was the best option for a trip. If I don't know about the challenge, do I even care if my Jasmer is filled? If I live within 100 miles, you bet I'd be doing ALL the caches out there. It's logistically easier, not to mention a lot cheaper. Also, there's MUCH less of a chance that my wife would get angry with me because it's a one day trip instead of a 3 1/2 day trip. It was an awesome experience. Upper 60s, sunshine, good friends, and a really neat area to find a cache placed in 2000. What's not to enjoy about a day like that and I owe it all to the challenge because it motivated me to go the extra mile and actually get to GZ to do the cache. Yes, I COULD have done this cache on my own without the lure of the challenge, but there's no way I WOULD have done this cache on my own.

 

Our vacation time is family time, not caching time, so I have to pick which caches I might be able to do when we're traveling. So, I look for ECs, virtuals, high FP caches (% and #), and multis. The last thing I look at is if there are any caches in the area that might help me complete a challenge I might be working on at the time. There's really only one I'm working on now and it's the KY Fizzy challenge, which has a really early publication date restriction. I'm down to 10 left and all of them will require some travel plans. If I'm in the area and have the OK from the wife, I'll go after the target cache. If not, then there's no way I'd be trying that particular cache without knowledge of the challenge. I prefer caching in a certain way (we all do, as it pertains to our proclivities) but there aren't any caches I dislike. I don't mind the 1/1s, the LPCs, or the power trails. I'll do them on my own if the mood strikes me. It just that most of the time, the mood doesn't strike me.

 

For me, challenge caches provide that extra little bit of incentive to do some caches I might not have otherwise thought about going after. That does NOT mean I wouldn't/don't enjoy them on their own merit. It does NOT mean that I'm not a self-motivated cacher. It does NOT mean that if I lived in the area I wouldn't have found it on my own. I enjoy all caches, even if it's the simple 1/1 or LPC, because someone put something out for a cacher to find. Even if I know it's under the skirt, it doesn't detract from the fun in the find for me. I have no urge to do the ET highway right now, but if I were to do it, it would still be fun and enjoyable because there's a cache to be found and signed. You can't find everything so you have to pick and choose which ones you want to find. I want to find caches that I enjoy (which is still all of them) and will target some specific types or specific caches because I will enjoy them more, not because I dislike or detest the other caches in the area.

 

Oh.

 

I was just going off this:

 

I would have skipped the 1/1, seeing as how I don't find them that enjoyable. On the other hand, if there were a challenge, I would have found the 1/1 to qualify myself for the challenge. I would NEED the challenge to find a 1/1 because I don't do them much anymore, the lone exception being events.

 

Moving on (or not, as the case may be)

 

If your argument is that people COULD find a cache if there wasn't a challenge cache, that really isn't an argument at all. All of us have the option to go find any cache placed. Just because we CAN find a cache does not mean that we WILL find the cache.

 

You're absolutely correct on all points - not least of which is the one being that it's not an argument - it's a fact (is there an echo in here?).

 

And if it's not an argument AGAINST challenge caches it certainly isn't an argument FOR them - which is also what I've been saying all along (there's that echo again).

 

The fact that some people have come to rely on challenge caches doesn't mean they need them.

 

It really is about time we moved on.

Share this post


Link to post

 

  1. People can do all of the things they claim they need challenge caches for - without them.

 

 

I really don't see that as an argument against or for challenge caches (or any type of disputed cache for that matter - put in power trail, geo-art, or virtuals in place of challenge caches). If it doesn't support either side, it's a neutral fact and really has no value either way.

 

The can vs. will debate is where I see challenge caches providing some value. It moves cachers from a "can" state (where every cacher resides) to a "will" state (where many less reside) more often than not.

 

Why do people do anything? Not because they can, but because they want to. Everyone in this world can geocache but only those that want to will geocache.

Edited by coachstahly

Share this post


Link to post

 

  1. People can do all of the things they claim they need challenge caches for - without them.

 

 

Can

kan/

verb

1.

be able to.

 

2.

be permitted to.

 

Of course we CAN. We all have the option to be able to find any cache. I really don't see that as an argument against challenge caches

 

I never offered it as an argument against challenge caches - merely pointed out that it wasn't a strong argument FOR them.

 

In fact, I never offered it as an argument - just a fact - which is what it is (I'm getting bored of the sound of my own voice now).

 

My question is WILL we?

 

Who knows? That's up to you.

 

That's where I see challenge caches providing some value. It moves cachers from a "can" state (where every cacher resides) to a "will" state (where many less reside) more often than not.

 

It doesn't - people move themselves based on liking the idea. Think of all the grids people had already deliberately filled - for fun - before challenge caches ever existed.

 

Why do people do anything? Not because they can, but because they want to.

 

Absolutely correct - because they want to. There's your reason.

Share this post


Link to post

 

It doesn't - people move themselves based on liking the idea. Think of all the grids people had already deliberately filled - for fun - before challenge caches ever existed.

 

 

I wasn't around before challenge caches came into existence so I don't know what geocaching was like before then. Perhaps that's some of the trouble I have with people believing they have no worth or value to geocaching. The challenges introduced me to some ideas that I would have never thought about trying with my caching experiences. They provided some value to me and I liked the ideas, so I did many of them. The fact that I could have done all those things on my own without them doesn't devalue the challenge caches in my eyes. They were impetuses for many an experience that I wouldn't have done on my own because I had no idea that I could have done those things. They opened many an avenue that was worth exploring. They also opened some I had no interest in going down. They're not all great, but they're not all bad either. They fall into some other spectrum, depending upon the individual.

 

Do you have any facts to help support the supposition that many people filled grids on their own before challenges existed?

Share this post


Link to post

Do you have any facts to help support the supposition that many people filled grids on their own before challenges existed?

 

No - maybe I'm wrong on that one - maybe challenge caches have existed for longer than I thought they had - I know I'd never heard of them before someone gave me the idea of placing my first one.

Share this post


Link to post

I know the first Jasmer was placed in 2008 and even then the CO hadn't qualified. There are some from 2007 I know about but not sure when the first one officially came into being. The first fizzy was in 2007. I see one in Norway from 2006.

Edited by coachstahly

Share this post


Link to post

I know the first Jasmer was placed in 2008 and even then the CO hadn't qualified. There are some from 2007 I know about but not sure when the first one officially came into being.

 

Then I stand corrected on that point :)

Share this post


Link to post

I never offered it as an argument against challenge caches - merely pointed out that it wasn't a strong argument FOR them.

The argument for challenge caches is the same -- and just as strong -- as the argument for puzzle caches or, for that matter, caches in Canada: people enjoy them.

Share this post


Link to post

I never offered it as an argument against challenge caches - merely pointed out that it wasn't a strong argument FOR them.

The argument for challenge caches is the same -- and just as strong -- as the argument for puzzle caches or, for that matter, caches in Canada: people enjoy them.

 

OK - so we've moved forward from people need them to people enjoy them as being an argument for challenge caches.

 

That's fair enough :)

 

And if we accept your argument it puts all caches on an equal par.

 

None of the other cache types are under moratorium - so assuming that TPTB accept people enjoy them as a valid argument for any cache type, that clearly doesn't override the issues which brought the moratorium on in the first instance.

Share this post


Link to post

Man.

Are you advocating their removal?

If not, then you've made your point - your opinion about them stands. Ok.

But you constantly emphasizing how valid your opinion is and condescending against people who think differently (you've been quoted diong such) implies that you are advocating that they not return, not that you don't care either way. So which is it? Because if you are using your opinion as reason for their not returning, then this debate will never end. And if you are not advocating their removal, then please simply respect that the fact people enjoy them (whether or not they need them) and that it's a valid opinion to hold and use defending why such people would like to see them return.

 

Some people don't want them to return.

Some people would be fine if they don't return.

Some people would be fine if they do return (this should be the same people as the previous category).

Some people want them to return.

 

All are preferences.

If you have objective issues with them and can defend why they are problematic, then let's discuss that. If you just want to keep shouting your opinion which differs from others', we'll be going round and round and round and round and round and... eventually this thread like others will get locked.

Share this post


Link to post

I never offered it as an argument against challenge caches - merely pointed out that it wasn't a strong argument FOR them.

The argument for challenge caches is the same -- and just as strong -- as the argument for puzzle caches or, for that matter, caches in Canada: people enjoy them.

 

I've found a few puzzle caches, and I own a few puzzle caches. As a finder, I don't particularly enjoy them. Most puzzles are frustrating unless the owner wants you to solve it and provides some good clues as to how to solve them. Most of the time I have to contact the owner for a hint, and most of the time I still don't get it.

I hate to say this but I think that's also true for my puzzles, although I think they are fairly easy and will tweak them when questions come in. But it can be a challenge to create something easy enough without giving away the answer.

 

I think the appeal is mostly in the ownership, more specifically it adds another level of creativity for the cache owner. It also gets more favorite points and better logs. And then there are the merits of fewer visitors and often a more experienced group of cachers.

 

I think it's true for challenge caches too. It seems the most vocal pro-CCers are owners who want the moratorium lifted so they can hide more (based on looking at accounts and some areas where there are already a lot of challenges).

Edited by L0ne.R

Share this post


Link to post

I don't want to hide more. I'm happy with the few I've got and will probably archive one as it's more of a bookeeping challenge than anything else. At the time, I was really getting into challenges and thought it was neat. Not so much now. I DO like the location so might use it for something else.

Share this post


Link to post

Man.

Are you advocating their removal?

 

Posts #2 and #106 should have cleared that up.

 

If not, then you've made your point - your opinion about them stands. Ok.

 

Yay - at last! :D

 

But you constantly emphasizing how valid your opinion is and condescending against people who think differently (you've been quoted diong such) implies that you are advocating that they not return, not that you don't care either way. So which is it? Because if you are using your opinion as reason for their not returning, then this debate will never end. And if you are not advocating their removal, then please simply respect that the fact people enjoy them (whether or not they need them) and that it's a valid opinion to hold and use defending why such people would like to see them return.

 

Post #133 should demonstrate that I respect the fact people enjoy them. I've enjoyed a few myself - never contested otherwise.

 

If you have objective issues with them and can defend why they are problematic, then let's discuss that. If you just want to keep shouting your opinion which differs from others', we'll be going round and round and round and round and round and... eventually this thread like others will get locked.

 

Believe me - I'd love to move on but just when I think we've beaten that particular horse to death someone comes along a tries to breathe new life into it - either to deny the facts or to attempt some form of character assassination.

 

Unlike some here I'm not big on taking an argument into tomes that would prop up a three-legged coffee table, nor arguing in microscopic detail just because I want to be right - so if I've finally made my point and we're accepting that people enjoy challenge caches, utilise challenge caches and have come to rely on challenge caches - and that there are alternatives which would facilitate their requirements - then we're done here.

 

I did say it was time to move on several posts back :P

Share this post


Link to post

Believe me - I'd love to move on but just when I think we've beaten that particular horse to death someone comes along a tries to breathe new life into it - either to deny the facts or to attempt some form of character assassination.

What facts?

Your opinions aren't facts outside the fact that you hold them; they are your opinions that others disagree with.

We've discussed potential problems with challenge caches - no one denies those. What people keep getting on your case about is the insinuation that our enjoyment of challenge caches holds no value simply because we "don't need them" to enjoy doing challenges. That's it. That's arguing opinions, and particularly yours which you keep pushing against ours.

Even if that's not your intent, that's how you come across, and that's why you have so much pushback.

 

so if I've finally made my point and we're accepting that people enjoy challenge caches, utilise challenge caches and have come to rely on challenge caches - and that there are alternatives which would facilitate their requirements - then we're done here.

Good.

 

Now let's talk about how challenge caches can be improved. I'd love to read and participate in a discusison like that.

Share this post


Link to post

But you constantly emphasizing how valid your opinion is and condescending against people who think differently (you've been quoted diong such) implies that you are advocating that they not return, not that you don't care either way. So which is it? Because if you are using your opinion as reason for their not returning, then this debate will never end. And if you are not advocating their removal, then please simply respect that the fact people enjoy them (whether or not they need them) and that it's a valid opinion to hold and use defending why such people would like to see them return.

 

Post #133 should demonstrate that I respect the fact people enjoy them. I've enjoyed a few myself - never contested otherwise.

 

I have enjoyed some myself. Those that had a nice cache at the end, in a nice location.

The one that comes to mind was an ammo can on a trail. Couldn't log it as found though, never will be able to. The instructions are: In one day find 11 Traditional caches, 12 multi caches and 11 Puzzle/Mystery caches within about 8 hours.

On principle I won't do it because I don't want to race through caches. I don't want to find caches I wouldn't enjoy finding, like micros or caches with NMs in bad shape. I don't want to ask fellow cachers for final coordinates to save me some time in order to accomplish this in a day. And I don't want to treat the geocaching experience like all that matters is that I find the cache to qualify for someone else's cache.

Edited by L0ne.R

Share this post


Link to post

Now let's talk about how challenge caches can be improved. I'd love to read and participate in a discussion like that.

 

Personally I like Frinklabs suggestion. But I think he's been tarred and feathered for it.

Edited by L0ne.R

Share this post


Link to post

Believe me - I'd love to move on but just when I think we've beaten that particular horse to death someone comes along a tries to breathe new life into it - either to deny the facts or to attempt some form of character assassination.

What facts?

Your opinions aren't facts outside the fact that you hold them; they are your opinions that others disagree with.

We've discussed potential problems with challenge caches - no one denies those. What people keep getting on your case about is the insinuation that our enjoyment of challenge caches holds no value simply because we "don't need them" to enjoy doing challenges. That's it. That's arguing opinions, and particularly yours which you keep pushing against ours.

Even if that's not your intent, that's how you come across, and that's why you have so much pushback.

 

I believe I referred you to post #106. Post #123 also applies.

Share this post


Link to post

Believe me - I'd love to move on but just when I think we've beaten that particular horse to death someone comes along a tries to breathe new life into it - either to deny the facts or to attempt some form of character assassination.

What facts?

Your opinions aren't facts outside the fact that you hold them; they are your opinions that others disagree with.

We've discussed potential problems with challenge caches - no one denies those. What people keep getting on your case about is the insinuation that our enjoyment of challenge caches holds no value simply because we "don't need them" to enjoy doing challenges. That's it. That's arguing opinions, and particularly yours which you keep pushing against ours.

Even if that's not your intent, that's how you come across, and that's why you have so much pushback.

 

I believe I referred you to post #106. Post #123 also applies.

The only FACT in Post #123 is about breathing and air (and what does that have to do with the topic and why bring it up?). The other statement you cite as "fact" is just your opinion which (as quoted in that post) you "believe". Repeating a claim that opinion is fact never makes it so.

 

Here:

 

FACT: Some people need Challenge Caches to find, set and complete geocaching challenges.

 

Now any time you claim nobody needs them, I can cite this post to prove that claim is against the facts.

 

As a side note, I ran across a quote from Philanthropist Melinda Gates today that seems to fit the topic:

"Goals are only wishes unless you have a plan."

Share this post


Link to post
Personally I like Frinklabs suggestion. But I think he's been tarred and feathered for it.
What is the current state of the challenge stars proposal?

 

The last I recall, it had some challenge caches behaving one way (log a find before qualifying, then log a completed when you qualify), and others behaving a different way (log a find and a completed only after you qualify). If so, then I think the inconsistency is just going to create problems.

Share this post


Link to post

Believe me - I'd love to move on but just when I think we've beaten that particular horse to death someone comes along a tries to breathe new life into it - either to deny the facts or to attempt some form of character assassination.

What facts?

Your opinions aren't facts outside the fact that you hold them; they are your opinions that others disagree with.

We've discussed potential problems with challenge caches - no one denies those. What people keep getting on your case about is the insinuation that our enjoyment of challenge caches holds no value simply because we "don't need them" to enjoy doing challenges. That's it. That's arguing opinions, and particularly yours which you keep pushing against ours.

Even if that's not your intent, that's how you come across, and that's why you have so much pushback.

 

I believe I referred you to post #106. Post #123 also applies.

The only FACT in Post #123 is about breathing and air (and what does that have to do with the topic and why bring it up?). The other statement you cite as "fact" is just your opinion which (as quoted in that post) you "believe". Repeating a claim that opinion is fact never makes it so.

 

Here:

 

FACT: Some people need Challenge Caches to find, set and complete geocaching challenges.

 

Now any time you claim nobody needs them, I can cite this post to prove that claim is against the facts.

 

OK - so we've made it as far as agreeing that at least some people don't need Challenge Caches to find, set and complete geocache related challenges - and we've heard from people in this thread who have demonstrated that to be fact - so that's progress :)

 

So, turning to those people who you still believe need Challenge Caches - what is it specfically that is unique about challenge caches that can't be achieved by some other means?

 

As a side note, I ran across a quote from Philanthropist Melinda Gates today that seems to fit the topic:

"Goals are only wishes unless you have a plan."

 

This is one of those expressions which sounds profound until you look at what it actually says.

 

Fact is, goals are still only goals until you act on them. Tack on a plan and now you have....... a goal with a plan. Not much cause for celebration - unless you make the decision and invest the required effort to actually reach that goal.

 

In other words, an idea with a plan is still only an idea - similar to a Challenge Cache in many ways, which is why I struggle with the idea that challenge caches MAKE people go out and achieve goals, because they don't. Challenge caches don't MAKE people do anything - it's making the decision and investing the required effort that makes them meet the goal. People make themselves achieve goals.

 

On that basis Challenge Caches are just ideas - and ideas can be communicated in all sorts of alternative ways.

Edited by Team Microdot

Share this post


Link to post

The only FACT in Post #123 is about breathing and air (and what does that have to do with the topic and why bring it up?).

 

In a bid to illustrate the very real difference between something that people need and something that people don't need.

 

Can't really make it any clearer :)

Share this post


Link to post
Personally I like Frinklabs suggestion. But I think he's been tarred and feathered for it.
What is the current state of the challenge stars proposal?

 

The last I recall, it had some challenge caches behaving one way (log a find before qualifying, then log a completed when you qualify), and others behaving a different way (log a find and a completed only after you qualify). If so, then I think the inconsistency is just going to create problems.

Not sure what the difference is you're pointing to.

* Log a find before qualifying, then log a completed when you qualify

* Log a find and a completed only after you qualify

If I read right, the only difference is whether you log the find alone (without yet qualifying) before qualifying. I think I'm the main proponent of the option to find-without-qualifying as a side-benefit of separating the challenge property into its own metric for challenge caches. The way I see it, the ability would exist, if GS sees the value in it, of letting the CO decide if users can earn the smiley for finding the physical cache without qualifying, but they don't earn the 'challenge stars' (like D and T) for the qualification until they qualify.

 

If that option isn't feasible, then really the challenge stars would just be 'locked' to the find to work exactly the same way as challenge caches do now. You only earn the find (and thus the C stars) when you also qualify, in which case the find log implies both find and qualify (as it does now).

 

Or to put it another way, challenge stars give COs the choice to decide to let people treat their cache like a physical cache that can be Found like any other towards their find count (addressing the complaint about CCs that people can't log them found even though they found them). But while D and T are chained to the Found It log, C is chained to the Qualified property.

 

Implementation could be as simple as a new a log type in the log posting dropdown for Challenge Caches (those flagged as having a challenge, or rated with Challenge Stars). The first time a person logs, there could be "Found It", plus "Qualified" options. In the "Found It" log the form would include option to toggle "Qualified". For CCs as they are right now, "Found It" implies that "Qualified" is locked to 'on'. If the CO lets users log it found w/o qualifying, then "Qualified" is toggleable. If someone qualifies first, they can post a separate "Qualified" log (effectively the same as a note), but when they return later, posting a "Found It" would have the "Qualified" option locked 'on'. Found It logs with Qualified toggled on are the only logs that count towards the challenge stars stats. Just as the Found It log is used to tally D and T stars, the FI+Q log is used to tally C stars.

 

Nonetheless, of course, this doesn't touch directly on anything to do with what we know about the moratorium :P but the C stars suggestion wasn't specifically to address that, just to look at solutions to known problems/concerns with challenge caches.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
Or to put it another way, challenge stars give COs the choice to decide to let people treat their cache like a physical cache that can be Found like any other towards their find count (addressing the complaint about CCs that people can't log them found even though they found them).
Yep. And I think that's the problem with the proposal. Challenge caches are confusing enough, without adding the inconsistency that would occur when some COs do allow finds without qualification (i.e., without the challenge star) and other COs don't allow finds without qualification.

Share this post


Link to post
Or to put it another way, challenge stars give COs the choice to decide to let people treat their cache like a physical cache that can be Found like any other towards their find count (addressing the complaint about CCs that people can't log them found even though they found them).
Yep. And I think that's the problem with the proposal. Challenge caches are confusing enough, without adding the inconsistency that would occur when some COs do allow finds without qualification (i.e., without the challenge star) and other COs don't allow finds without qualification.

 

Perhaps a simpler two-tiered system - which would rely on standardised challenges and some automated means to demonstrate qualification.

 

  • All challenge caches can be logged as found if the log is signed - qualified or not
  • Challenge star automatically awarded on qualification - possibly illuminating a star icon on your found log to differentiate standard finds from qualified finds
  • Allow finders to opt-in or opt out i.e. those who have no interest in or dislike the idea of challenge stars are never awarded any - unless they opt in at some future point

 

The way I see it, this would allow those who like challenges to go all out at qualification, those that can take them or leave them to accrue stars by default off the back of their standard caching patterns - without having to do the 'book-keeping' and those who have zero interest to opt out completely.

 

Yes? No?

Share this post


Link to post

For the two perspectives (and this was covered in that thread):

 

1] Someone who doesn't care for challenge caches can do a regular search, and if choosing to ignore/hide challenge caches (this could perhaps even be a profile setting), all Challenge Cache listings that require qualification to "Find" (earn the D and T) would not be included in any search. That includes the latter type (as currently, no Find without Qualification); and in theory can also hide any reference to challenge stars. Because it's now set as a specific listing property, challenge caches can be distinguished from other caches. This would allow them to see any caches where the CO has said it's findabe without qualification - they would appear in the search results to be like any other regular cache: go out, find it, log it found online.

 

2] Someone who does enjoy challenge caches is already on a different 'tier', as it were, and I don't think the added featureset of challenge stars and find-with-qualification is really all that complex at all. The terms are self-explanatory, and if implemented nicely in the UI, fit in with the standard flows of how one might log a find, a qualification, or both together.

 

I think we may look at the system behind a concept and think 'too complex' for a user, but it's the front end that matters to the user, not how it works under the hood.

For my part at least, I've tried to envision a process that is as similar to the current method of logging challenge caches in various ways as possible. It's what we're used to, so how can we incorporate challenge stars to have as little impact on the process as possible?

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post

I think we may look at the system behind a concept and think 'too complex' for a user, but it's the front end that matters to the user, not how it works under the hood.

For my part at least, I've tried to envision a process that is as similar to the current method of logging challenge caches in various ways as possible. It's what we're used to, so how can we incorporate challenge stars to have as little impact on the process as possible?

 

I read through your description of the logging options / processes a second time, slowly and could follow how it might work.

 

Had I been a newbie though I think I'd have struggled with knowing which option(s) to select.

 

How can we incorporate challenge stars to have as little impact on which process as possible?

 

I think I'd quite like them to have an impact as I can see further challenge related uses for them further down the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

×