Jump to content

Unsolicited suggestions for Virtual Reward Caches


PeoriaBill

Recommended Posts

Here are my unsolicited suggestions for the new virtual caches to be released as “Virtual Rewards”.

Should be able to complete at one site.  No geocaching tours, chaining, linking or driving between sites to complete.

Should be interesting, take less than 1 hour and not be a MENSA level endeavor.

No puzzles

No cost or admission.  Open to the public and accessible.

Weather neutral as much as possible.

Physical effort no greater than level 3.

Not require special equipment e.g. climbing gear, scuba, etc.

Consider looking at archived virtuals for good candidates to reactivate.

Need a succession plan in case the OP is unable to continue in geocaching.

Archive and take off life support virtuals that are substantially altered from their original state due to construction, demolition or natural forces.

Thanks for any consideration and look forward to new virtual caches.

Link to comment
Quote

Archive and take off life support virtuals that are substantially altered from their original state due to construction, demolition or natural forces.

You talking about current ones? Log NAs, or contact the local reviewer for the area by private message, if you don't want the drama of posting a public NA log.

Link to comment

Here are my unsolicited suggestions for the new virtual caches to be released as “Virtual Rewards”.

Should be able to complete at one or more related sites.  Geocaching tours, chaining, linking or driving between sites are all fine when the locations are related to each other.

Should be interesting. Can take more than 1 hour, and even be a MENSA level endeavor as long as it's rated accordingly.

Puzzles are great.

Complies with guidelines against commercial caches. Parking fees and admission fees for public spaces are fine.

Weather appropriate to the location in all cases.

Physical effort no greater than the terrain rating indicates.

Not require special equipment e.g. climbing gear, scuba, etc. unless rated accordingly.

Consider looking at archived virtuals for good candidates to reactivate. Especially the "local treasures" that were archived because the owner was no longer able to maintain them.

Acknowledge that they'll be archived in case the CO is unable to continue in geocaching.

Edited by niraD
  • Upvote 8
Link to comment

I think the CO's that were selected are among the best and know what they are doing.  The reason they might have been picked is because everyone loves there puzzles,  or high terrain caches. It is there cache to do what they want with.

  I do agree that I prefer one I can figure out at the spot but it is up to them on how they want to do it.

Link to comment

And here I thought by the title that this was going to be a thread listing really cool suggestions for locations of Virtuals in case any recipient wasn't sure what to create. :)  Alas, it was an attempt at suggestions for rules limiting what could be placed and how.  Fortunately there are already many listing properties in place to help indicate what may be required in order to log them as found, on top of the standard guidelines for geocache listings.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, irisisleuk said:

I hope there will appear some virtuals in countries where there are no virtual caches to be found at the moment. 

^This!

The Virtual cache type allows for "Vacation" caches, as long as the CO visited within 2 months of submitting the cache, so this could be an opportunity to place caches somewhere that lacks a lot of local cachers. Of course, there is still the potential of needing maintenance that requires a visit to the location, but hopefully that would rarely happen and/or the CO could work with a local cacher to help them check things out if an issue arises.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, irisisleuk said:

I hope there will appear some virtuals in countries where there are no virtual caches to be found at the moment. 

I was very excited to read that Virtual Rewards were handed out in 63 countries.  And, I'm excited to see where some of the early published Virtuals are popping up on the map -- places like Turkey, Croatia, Serbia, Uganda, China, Japan, Okinawa and Taiwan.

When "old virtuals" were allowed (pre-2005), geocaching was far more US-centric so there were many countries that had few or none.  I'm hoping the Virtual Rewards will even things out a bit, either through placements by local residents or by people who recently visited on vacation.  For example, had my trip to Israel occurred this summer instead of 2015, I would have used my Reward at Masada - clearly a location where a physical cache would be impossible/inappropriate.  But, I did not travel anywhere special in the past two months, so I'll be hiding mine in my hometown.  At least I won't have maintenance worries if any of the verification information should change.

Mine will require multiple stops to locations which share a related theme, and it will likely require more than an hour to complete (but visitors will be able to find other existing caches along the way).  That may not make the OP happy, but the design I have in mind will meet many of the OP's other suggested criteria.  It will be available at all times, it will be free, it will have easy terrain requiring no special skills or equipment, and it will be as interesting as I can possibly make the subject to be!

Edited by Keystone
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
36 minutes ago, Aquacache said:

Remember, you have a year to travel to someplace special.

^Yes!

I hope that some of the reward recipients will wait a while before choosing their virtual locations. For example, if they have an upcoming trip to somewhere that doesn't have a lot of caches.  Also, it would be great to see some 'new' Virtual caches come out over the year, rather than just a huge burst of publications in these first couple months.

Link to comment
On 8/27/2017 at 6:19 PM, Peoria Bill said:

Here are my unsolicited suggestions for the new virtual caches to be released as “Virtual Rewards”.

 

So... up to 4000 new Virtual caches placed around the world and you want every single one of them to follow your suggestions? That's a bit selfish, and could lead to a lot of boring park and look Virtuals. Let the CO place the type of Virtual cache they want to. If it doesn't fall within your personal criteria, skip it. There are plenty of other people that would gladly go for it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, noncentric said:

 

I hope that some of the reward recipients will wait a while before choosing their virtual locations. For example, if they have an upcoming trip to somewhere that doesn't have a lot of caches.  Also, it would be great to see some 'new' Virtual caches come out over the year, rather than just a huge burst of publications in these first couple months.

I am not seeing a rush at all. We have two in our state that are new. One took an old favorite that the cache owner archived because he was not caching anymore and recreated it.  The other was a volunteer that had a bit of a heads up.  I know five other locals that have announced their luck, they are all giving it some thought and some are asking for input.

The nice thing is the many different options that people are considering. I am sure we will see a others that may be a reincarnation of an older virtual cache. However, many seemed to be giving it serious thought to come up with something creative, or at an interesting location

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
5 hours ago, mvhayes1982 said:

I noticed that several of the new Virtual Rewards have been placed as PMO caches. While certainly within the CO's rights --  I'm not really sure what to think of that. Were there existing grandfathered Virts that were PMO? 

Some, yes.

Of the 4,568 virtual that seem to be extant and were placed previously, 49 are PM only.

Of the 172 new ones that Project GC is reporting have been placed as of now, 10 are PM only.

So proportionally rather a lot more. It is of course entirely the cache owners right to do that. I can think of a few situations where they may need to limit footfall to such an extent that it becomes a condition of the placement permission - although, to be honest with you, I see increasing numbers of people with less than 10 finds as PM status since the new app, so I'm no longer sure that many of the old reasons for making any cache PM only really apply anymore.

But, eh, - up to them. They want to do that, it's their right to do so. I imagine things will even out a bit more over the year - we really don't have many virtual placed in this new tranche yet and there will probably be different owner characteristics in the first tranche to the later placements.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, kanchan said:

I'm one of those 4,000, and have been thinking hard what I could do with it. After reading all of the hatred in the forum, I have to wonder why I'm doing it.

Congrats !  :)

I haven't seen "hatred" on the subject , but if you  somehow feel there is, hopefully it gets straightened out for you.

 - But I'm just a little curious what the forums would have to do with your cache at all anyway.    :)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
22 minutes ago, J Grouchy said:

Two things:

  1.  I'm not seeing "hatred".
  2.  You're talking about the forums, where this stuff tends to get talked about far more...ummm...intensely...than in the real world.

 

Agree with this ^ 

 

Also would add

3. Participants in any given thread here represent a very small sample size of all geocachers.

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, BlueRajah said:

I would say 99% Are happy or they do not care. 

I'll throw out some swag numbers too:

  • 58% are happy
  • 24% are ambivalent
  • 15% have no idea virtual caches are back
  • 2.5% are angry, but they would be happy if they were selected as one of the 4k
  • 0.5% think 'this is a sign that geocaching is going downhill'
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
49 minutes ago, noncentric said:

I'll throw out some swag numbers too:

  • 58% are happy
  • 24% are ambivalent
  • 15% have no idea virtual caches are back
  • 2.5% are angry, but they would be happy if they were selected as one of the 4k
  • 0.5% think 'this is a sign that geocaching is going downhill'

Which algorithm did you use to determine these numbers?

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, niraD said:

It looked like a set of SWAG numbers to me.

I hope you know that I was being sarcastic, when I first heard about virtual rewards I thought hell froze over. I wouldn't have thought so many people have a problem with this and/or their ego.  But thanks for the link, I had to implement that quite a few times.

Edited by Rebore
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Rebore said:

I hope you know that I was being sarcastic, when I first heard about virtual rewards I thought hell froze over. I wouldn't have thought so many people have a problem with this and/or their ego.  But thanks for the link, I had to implement that quite a few times.

Yeah, I figured you weren't seriously asking for noncentric's detailed analysis to produce those numbers.

And I've been surprised at the number of complaints from people who seem to feel that Groundspeak has personally insulted and humiliated them by not including them in the 4000.

Link to comment
31 minutes ago, Rebore said:

I hope you know that I was being sarcastic, when I first heard about virtual rewards I thought hell froze over. I wouldn't have thought so many people have a problem with this and/or their ego.  But thanks for the link, I had to implement that quite a few times.

I agree that people's egos were hurt when they were not one of the rewarded group. Human nature tends to kick in for some when they are not part of a selected group. I never considered myself in the running as I don't geocache that much anymore but I can understand being frustrated if you feel you give quality maintained caches to the community and you felt you were left out. Personally I would have just given everyone a virtual to place out there to add new life to the game .

Edited by TahoeJoe
Link to comment
53 minutes ago, Rebore said:

Which algorithm did you use to determine these numbers?

Sorry, it's a secret.  :ph34r:

 

9 minutes ago, niraD said:

Yeah, I figured you weren't seriously asking for noncentric's detailed analysis to produce those numbers.

And I've been surprised at the number of complaints from people who seem to feel that Groundspeak has personally insulted and humiliated them by not including them in the 4000.

I've been pretty disappointed by some of the complaints I've read in various places, not just the forums, about the Virtual Rewards. Most of the complaints are about the algorithm and how some cachers think that they, or other cachers, deserved the reward more than the cachers that did receive it. I can see how some reward recipients would be discouraged about placing their Virtual, for fear that they'd be 'outed' and other cachers would analyze whether they 'deserved' the reward or not.  It's really unfortunate and I hope it doesn't discourage GS from doing something like this again in the future.

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
12 hours ago, noncentric said:

Most of the complaints are about the algorithm and how some cachers think that they, or other cachers, deserved the reward more than the cachers that did receive it. I can see how some reward recipients would be discouraged about placing their Virtual, for fear that they'd be 'outed' and other cachers would analyze whether they 'deserved' the reward or not.  It's really unfortunate and I hope it doesn't discourage GS from doing something like this again in the future.

Indeed. Keeping the list of recipients secret was a good idea. But, there's no getting around the fact that once the listings are published, the public can scrutinize them. The plan was almost perfect :P Alas, human nature kicks in and ruins everything again. heh

Link to comment
23 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

Congrats !  :)

I haven't seen "hatred" on the subject , but if you  somehow feel there is, hopefully it gets straightened out for you.

 - But I'm just a little curious what the forums would have to do with your cache at all anyway.    :)

I've seen no hatred but lots of sour grapes.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...