Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Wildguineapig530

Introducing "Log Expressions" example included

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

This is what I'm worried about too.

 

In no way am I worried about it,  just saying that if there's a "point" or total on anything, it's a new side game soon.  :D

Share this post


Link to post

There are a couple of completely-foreseeable and inevitable side effects that will arise from this:

  1. Those who don't want their logs judged in any way, and have been given no way to opt out, will choose not to log online. This will deprive the community of the description of their experience and any feedback they may have about the cache.
  2. This will become a stat, leading to people gaming the system to improve their stats.
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, The A-Team said:
  • Those who don't want their logs judged in any way, and have been given no way to opt out, will choose not to log online. This will deprive the community of the description of their experience and any feedback they may have about the cache.
  • This will become a stat, leading to people gaming the system to improve their stats.

 

To me, #1 seems much more extreme than logging DNFs. Not logging finds takes you out of the web stuff almost entirely; find count would need to become irrelevant, at least as it pertains to your online profile. It would take a VERY dedicated and frustrated geocacher to not log finds just because they don't like the voting system - compared to the amount of desire it takes not to log DNFs because they don't like the CHS :)

As for #2, as long as GS doesn't put the stat in the log download data and leaves it a web-ONLY feature, then it'll have a tough time becoming anything near a popular side game. A 3rd party would have to break the TOS and scrape the site to keep updated stats or retrieve a user's log stats.  So again, highly unlikely, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

To me, #1 seems much more extreme than logging DNFs. Not logging finds takes you out of the web stuff almost entirely; find count would need to become irrelevant, at least as it pertains to your online profile. It would take a VERY dedicated and frustrated geocacher to not log finds just because they don't like the voting system - compared to the amount of desire it takes not to log DNFs because they don't like the CHS :)

Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not quite sure how DNFs come into play here.

 

Quote

As for #2, as long as GS doesn't put the stat in the log download data and leaves it a web-ONLY feature, then it'll have a tough time becoming anything near a popular side game. A 3rd party would have to break the TOS and scrape the site to keep updated stats or retrieve a user's log stats.  So again, highly unlikely, IMO.

A third-party app and its countless users have been scraping the site for years, so it isn't hard to believe that other scraping could occur. Even if there wasn't any scraping, it's likely that HQ would want to include this functionality in the official apps, which means making it available through the API. The data would then be available for stat use.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, The A-Team said:
24 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

To me, #1 seems much more extreme than logging DNFs. Not logging finds takes you out of the web stuff almost entirely; find count would need to become irrelevant, at least as it pertains to your online profile. It would take a VERY dedicated and frustrated geocacher to not log finds just because they don't like the voting system - compared to the amount of desire it takes not to log DNFs because they don't like the CHS :)

Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not quite sure how DNFs come into play here.

 

I just made the comparison of the DNF (non-)logging issue due to CHS with the Find (non-)logging issue due to Log ratings. A similar effect, imo, once it was suggested people might stop logging Finds because of the ratings.

 

 

11 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

A third-party app and its countless users have been scraping the site for years, so it isn't hard to believe that other scraping could occur. Even if there wasn't any scraping, it's likely that HQ would want to include this functionality in the official apps, which means making it available through the API. The data would then be available for stat use.

 

Yep, said 3rd party app employs a number of tricks to get data, which annoys a lot of people (mainly at HQ); but that's a whole different drama.  Point is, if GS doesn't provide a way for people collect log rating stats, then people would have to make use of a method that is not condoned or suppported, presuming a 3rd party developer comes up with an efficient and/or effective way to get all of that data. If the ratings are web-only and shown only on logs and listings, it's going to be one hefty website or app process to gather all the needed info. If someone creates that sort of 3rd party process, they pretty much are giving HQ the finger just to play a numbers game.  I don't see that being much of an issue.  I mean, you can pretty much gamify anything, and right now the above 3rd party app is at least mimicking common funcionality even without the behest or support of Groundspeak. It would take some hefty cahonas to gamify the individual log stats which can change minute to minute in a very sparsely distributed limited selection of web pages.

 

But sure, I could still be wrong about that, who knows... I just don't see it happening any time soon :)

 

ETA: There may perhaps be a bigger chance of easier scraping if they provide the data for mobile apps (or at least the official app) since a request for recent cache logs would need to include that stats for mobile display. That could be an 'in' for scraping with successful spoofing.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

When we post a Found It, we often had the CO email us, thanking us for the nice or kind log.   I thought that was a shame, that just saying something, to them, was a nice log. 

 - But yet another "point" system,  just to say more than TFTC seems odd to me.   Positive reinforcement? 

 

I remember the site said  "Ignore CO" for searches wasn't gonna happen, as they didn't want to say anything negative about someone. 

A line of uplifting, well-meaning logs, saying they enjoyed the area may not see one story "point".  I believe that shows as a negative towards them.

 - I just see "helpful" as someone got an extra hint from another's log,  if it wasn't an outright spoiler...

 

But I expect the cut n paste overly-long  loggers might now figure a way to get these silly "great story" "points"  (when many don't really bother to even read 'em anymore), to combine "great story" totals to their word/length totals on one of the third-party stat sites.     :D

 

I've made (actual, not virtual)  friends with several CO's who have thanked me for logs ( the thanks often include something along the lines of "Reading your log took us back to the old days of caching ...") and with folk who in turn I've thanked for logs on my caches. These have always turned out to be pleasant and thoughtful people well worth searching out at events.

 

'Helpful' , hmm, suggesting a good parking place, mentioning any current local conditions which may be a problem , outlining a good route or approach, they would be helpful logs which would get my vote. I suspect, however, 'helpful' may be construed by many as helpful with finding the cache, i.e. a spoiler. Give the cache owner the ability to 'un-helpful' logs on their hides to avoid this. In fact, make the whole thing an opt in choice on the cache setting page and avoid annoying COs with the inevitable 'helpful' spoilers.

 

Those 'copy/paste screeds of pointless rubbish + 30 smiley' loggers, well, in my area they tend to hunt in packs, so I look forward to seeing their (awful) logs where a gang of 4 found a cache, I'm betting each copy/paste log will have 3 votes for everything good  ... unless you can vote fror your own log of course, in which case, 4 .

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, The A-Team said:

There are a couple of completely-foreseeable and inevitable side effects that will arise from this:

  1. Those who don't want their logs judged in any way, and have been given no way to opt out, will choose not to log online. This will deprive the community of the description of their experience and any feedback they may have about the cache.
  2. This will become a stat, leading to people gaming the system to improve their stats.

I can be quite verbose with my logs.  But if others start judging them, I'll start logging TFTC.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

The experiences we've had of people who never logged online seemed more in tune to what  the hobby used to be, before it changed for the sake of it.   They left wordy logs in the log book, with drawings and poems too.  Swag traded.

 - Try getting similar in an online log. Most don't even mention swag or trackables online anymore. 

The only reason I log is so the system removes that cache from my searches.  I don't claim a good percentage of caches/events now...

 

Why does someone with an opinion  have to be frustrated ?   Just because they don't cache the same?  Sheesh...

I've dropped my PM a couple times over the years (once as simple as Newest caches removed from the profile), and still won't cache during certain time periods.     That's conviction...        :)

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, The A-Team said:

There are a couple of completely-foreseeable and inevitable side effects that will arise from this:

  1. Those who don't want their logs judged in any way, and have been given no way to opt out, will choose not to log online. This will deprive the community of the description of their experience and any feedback they may have about the cache.
  2. This will become a stat, leading to people gaming the system to improve their stats.

You forgot the third option:

 

3.  People will continue doing what they've always done, without regard to what people think.  This is the group of cachers that represent the vast majority of active Users on the website, I would guess.

 

We've survived the introduction of Attributes, Favorite Points, and Health Scores.  Seems likely that the game will survive this trauma as well.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, The A-Team said:
  1. Those who don't want their logs judged in any way, and have been given no way to opt out, will choose not to log online. This will deprive the community of the description of their experience and any feedback they may have about the cache.

 

There sure will be such people. But I guess more people stop logging everyday because they die.

 

Edited by Pontiac_CZ
a new line
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, The A-Team said:

There are a couple of completely-foreseeable and inevitable side effects that will arise from this:

  1. Those who don't want their logs judged in any way, and have been given no way to opt out, will choose not to log online. This will deprive the community of the description of their experience and any feedback they may have about the cache.
  2. This will become a stat, leading to people gaming the system to improve their stats.

 

On the other hand...

 

Adding a "helpful" or "great story" reaction may provide an incentive for people to write more helpful or entertaining logs.  

Has anyone written an app that shows a "leaderboard" for those that post on the forums based on the number of reputation points? 

 

Remember Geocaching Challenges?   Before they were wiped off the face of the internet I made a feature request asking for the ability to "upvote" logs.  While there were a lot of things to complain about,  since Challenge completions did not count as "a find" I thought that the logs could (or should) be about *how* one completed a challenge rather just a "check box" which indicated that the challenge was completed.  For example, for a "take a picture at a waterfall" challenge, someone completing the challenge with a photo of a particularly impressive waterfall might get an "upvote".  The idea was to encourage better logs.  I actually got a direct response from rather famous lackey indicating that it was something they'd consider.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

×