Earning Favorite Points

[+Judique Flyer]

In Atlantic Canada we have a yearly Fall Favorites event (3rd year currently running) where cache creators are challenged to create better caches.  The quality of caches had dropped, and it was becoming a pill bottle in the woods haven.  The basis of the event is you submit a cache for publication between the 1st day of fall and Nov 1, then at the actual event held in the first of Dec, cachers can win prizes for most Fav points, best log left, voted best cache etc.

 

The issue many cachers are faced with is a lack of Favorite Points, not everyone chases after 1000's or even 100's of caches a year, and Points are given out when you find a cache worthy of it.  This year there are over 50 caches entered into the competition, and it has raised discussions about removing points from active or archived caches (which has been proven to be highly frowned upon).  One member who consistanly puts out high quality caches that get lots of favorite points mentioned that because he spends so much time creating caches, he has no points available to give the caches he would like to give to.   I thought it would be good if the hiders amoung us could earn favorite points based on the favorite points their caches earn from others.  Now I have no idea how many FP's a cache should have before it earns the creator a an FP, but even if it were something like 1 for 10, it would allow them to practice the game they way they like and still be able to show appreciation to others that put out high end quality caches.  Its just an idea, and it would certainly help promote better cache building amoung some circles.  I'll just leave that here and see what people think.

[+niraD]

So someone who hides a number of caches with lots of Favorites points, but who doesn't go geocaching much, could theoretically give a Favorite point to every cache he/she found?

 

Wouldn't that make Favorites meaningless?

[+Max and 99]

19 minutes ago, Judique Flyer said:

In Atlantic Canada we have a yearly Fall Favorites event (3rd year currently running) where cache creators are challenged to create better caches.  The quality of caches had dropped, and it was becoming a pill bottle in the woods haven.  The basis of the event is you submit a cache for publication between the 1st day of fall and Nov 1, then at the actual event held in the first of Dec, cachers can win prizes for most Fav points, best log left, voted best cache etc.

 

The issue many cachers are faced with is a lack of Favorite Points, not everyone chases after 1000's or even 100's of caches a year, and Points are given out when you find a cache worthy of it.  This year there are over 50 caches entered into the competition, and it has raised discussions about removing points from active or archived caches (which has been proven to be highly frowned upon).  One member who consistanly puts out high quality caches that get lots of favorite points mentioned that because he spends so much time creating caches, he has no points available to give the caches he would like to give to.   I thought it would be good if the hiders amoung us could earn favorite points based on the favorite points their caches earn from others.  Now I have no idea how many FP's a cache should have before it earns the creator a an FP, but even if it were something like 1 for 10, it would allow them to practice the game they way they like and still be able to show appreciation to others that put out high end quality caches.  Its just an idea, and it would certainly help promote better cache building amoung some circles.  I'll just leave that here and see what people think.

 

Sorry to rain on your parade, but I'm not a fan of contests like these. An award should not be the sole motivation for placing a better/ more creative cache or for writing a log.

Your idea of giving Fav points based on number Fav points in your caches seems like going in circles and making the points less valuable. Just how I see it.

 

I think it's great that there have been discussions among you to create a better system. The concerns you mentioned are valid.  Good job asking for feedback. I hope you get some good suggestions on this thread.

[+Judique Flyer]

6 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

 

Sorry to rain on your parade, but I'm not a fan of contests like these. An award should not be the sole motivation for placing a better/ more creative cache or for writing a log.

Your idea of giving Fav points based on number Fav points in your caches seems like going in circles and making the points less valuable. Just how I see it.

 

It has to start somewhere, and the contest is making more people appreciate better caches, making people think about what they are putting out a bit more.  Believe me, we are aware of its imperfections, but so far it has been working.  The event would have prizes regardless, donations from many venders, there are prize draws just for entering a cache, regardless of the FPs it gains (many rural out of the way locations that can take a year or so for someone to venture out to). 

Edited October 22, 2018 by Judique Flyer

[+Judique Flyer]

37 minutes ago, niraD said:

So someone who hides a number of caches with lots of Favorites points, but who doesn't go geocaching much, could theoretically give a Favorite point to every cache he/she found?

 

Wouldn't that make Favorites meaningless?

I did say I do not know what rate of reward would work, maybe it would be more like 1 for 100, I don't know.  but when you think about it if not for those spending their time building the better, more intricate caches, we could all be looking for pill bottles hanging in a spruce.  If they choose to change and just look for caches, who would put the effort forward?  The idea certainly would not intend to make the point meaningless, but if someone chooses to find only 100 caches a year but build and publish 100 in the same year, and of course those being caches that are quality enough to earn favorite points,

 

Maybe instead of Favorite points they should create a new point system for the Makers, Who earn their points by earning favorites. 

Edited October 22, 2018 by Judique Flyer

[+Lynx Humble]

3 hours ago, niraD said:

So someone who hides a number of caches with lots of Favorites points, but who doesn't go geocaching much, could theoretically give a Favorite point to every cache he/she found?

 

Wouldn't that make Favorites meaningless?

I am pretty sure that he/she wouldn't give favorite to a guardrail or lamp post cache. So IMO that wouldn't make the favorite meaningless because they would still choose worthy cache.

 

2 hours ago, Judique Flyer said:

I did say I do not know what rate of reward would work, maybe it would be more like 1 for 100, I don't know.  but when you think about it if not for those spending their time building the better, more intricate caches, we could all be looking for pill bottles hanging in a spruce.  If they choose to change and just look for caches, who would put the effort forward?  The idea certainly would not intend to make the point meaningless, but if someone chooses to find only 100 caches a year but build and publish 100 in the same year, and of course those being caches that are quality enough to earn favorite points,

 

Maybe instead of Favorite points they should create a new point system for the Makers, Who earn their points by earning favorites. 

1 for 10 seems fair for me to give a little incentive to hider. 1 for 100 is really low.

[+cerberus1]

6 hours ago, Judique Flyer said:

  I thought it would be good if the hiders amoung us could earn favorite points based on the favorite points their caches earn from others.  Now I have no idea how many FP's a cache should have before it earns the creator a an FP, but even if it were something like 1 for 10, it would allow them to practice the game they way they like and still be able to show appreciation to others that put out high end quality caches.  Its just an idea, and it would certainly help promote better cache building amoung some circles.  I'll just leave that here and see what people think.

 

Add me for thinking competition and FPs not a good idea.  I think it odd that folks feel they should be "rewarded" to remain active in a hobby.

You enjoy the hobby,  or you quit...

Many caches these days that are easy to get to, find, and access,  already get tons more FPs than possibly the same cache, but on a lengthy walk in higher terrain.

It's simply that fewer people want to walk these days. 

I give a FP for the area presented.  The container is secondary.  A nice container in a poor location gets nada from me...

 

 

[+cerberus1]

5 hours ago, Judique Flyer said:

Maybe instead of Favorite points they should create a new point system for the Makers, Who earn their points by earning favorites. 

 

If you recall, HQ did award each cache owner with a souvenir last year.     

[+cerberus1]

3 hours ago, Lynx Humble said:

I am pretty sure that he/she wouldn't give favorite to a guardrail or lamp post cache.

 

You're kidding, right ? 

[+Max and 99]

2 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

If you recall, HQ did award each cache owner with a souvenir last year.     

I have no recollection of that. My mind is on the decline.

[+Vooruit!]

This one: https://www.geocaching.com/souvenir/?guid=d591a4a7-c2d3-491d-bfcf-5bdb2df826c5

[+hzoi]

2 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

4 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

If you recall, HQ did award each cache owner with a souvenir last year.     

I have no recollection of that. My mind is on the decline.

 

It was the 3 million active geocaches: Thank you! souvenir.

 

 

You have one, it's (currently) in the top row of your souvenirs.

[+hzoi]

10 hours ago, Judique Flyer said:

In Atlantic Canada we have a yearly Fall Favorites event (3rd year currently running) where cache creators are challenged to create better caches.  The quality of caches had dropped, and it was becoming a pill bottle in the woods haven.  The basis of the event is you submit a cache for publication between the 1st day of fall and Nov 1, then at the actual event held in the first of Dec, cachers can win prizes for most Fav points, best log left, voted best cache etc.

 

The issue many cachers are faced with is a lack of Favorite Points, not everyone chases after 1000's or even 100's of caches a year, and Points are given out when you find a cache worthy of it.  This year there are over 50 caches entered into the competition, and it has raised discussions about removing points from active or archived caches (which has been proven to be highly frowned upon).  One member who consistanly puts out high quality caches that get lots of favorite points mentioned that because he spends so much time creating caches, he has no points available to give the caches he would like to give to.   I thought it would be good if the hiders amoung us could earn favorite points based on the favorite points their caches earn from others.  Now I have no idea how many FP's a cache should have before it earns the creator a an FP, but even if it were something like 1 for 10, it would allow them to practice the game they way they like and still be able to show appreciation to others that put out high end quality caches.  Its just an idea, and it would certainly help promote better cache building amoung some circles.  I'll just leave that here and see what people think.

 

There is an easier way to do this without changing the favorite point system: come up with your own award process.

 

In our last location in Virginia, there was an annual "Hidey Awards" event with various categories.  Geocachers could nominate caches that they had found.  The organizers then put together the nomination list and announced them, then cachers had a set period to vote in each category (you could only vote once for each category, and you could only vote for a particular cache if you had found it).  There was then a nice potluck event where awards were given to the top three in each category, as well as a "Hall of Fame" category, and milestone certificates were given out to cachers who had celebrated milestones.

 

If you check out the 2018 event page, or the Hidey Awards facebook group, they have links to the spreadsheets and such.

[+arisoft]

10 hours ago, Judique Flyer said:

it has raised discussions about removing points from active or archived caches

 

I automatically remove favorites from all archived caches. There is no reason to recommend archived caches to anyone.

 

10 hours ago, Judique Flyer said:

I thought it would be good if the hiders amoung us could earn favorite points based on the favorite points their caches earn from others.

 

Even I am a sort of cache creator myself, I do not see the logic in this suggestion. How could I recommend a cache if I do not even search them?

 

[+barefootjeff]

2 minutes ago, arisoft said:

I automatically remove favorites from all archived caches. There is no reason to recommend archived caches to anyone.

 

My FPs aren't recommendations to anyone, as I expect each cacher has their own tastes which are often quite different to mine. They're to give something back to the COs of the caches I've really enjoyed and as a list I can look back on in my dotage to see what great fun I had. Removing them from archived caches spoils both of those, so I don't, but that's just my choice.

[+Goldenwattle]

7 hours ago, Lynx Humble said:

I am pretty sure that he/she wouldn't give favorite to a guardrail or lamp post cache.

I have a guard rail cache that is running at 46% favourite points.GC7AWYW Depends on the cache.

 

I believe the percentage of favourite points is more important than the actual number to indicate how good a cache is. A remote cache with say ten finds and ten FPs (100%) is better than an often found cache with 500 finds and 200 FP. Also some countries have big populations which means a cache can get many favourite points easier. Percentage is a better indication.

[+schmittfamily]

We use the number of favorite points pretty heavily as a guide when we are traveling and caching as a tourist.    One of the first things we do when visiting a new city is sort the caches by favorite points to see what is there.  The result is we are sitting at 1783 finds of which 185 have 100+ favorite points.   At the 10 to 1 rate of earning favorite points, we actually have more finds with 100+ favorite points than favorite points earned.  We never have favorite points to give out despite being heavy users of the feature.  I wouldn't mind seeing favorite point bonuses for every 1000 favorite points found.      That way people who use the system to filter caches have more weight in the system.

 

 

[+IceColdUK]

7 minutes ago, schmittfamily said:

I wouldn't mind seeing favorite point bonuses for every 1000 favorite points found.      That way people who use the system to filter caches have more weight in the system.

 

I’d prefer to be able to filter by FP% to be able to find better caches, rather than popular ones.

[+schmittfamily]

1 minute ago, IceColdUK said:

 

I’d prefer to be able to filter by FP% to be able to find better caches, rather than popular ones.

 

I find it to be situational.

When caching as a tourist I prefer popular ones.

When caching at home I prefer %.

 

Either/or I would prefer for the people who sort caches based on the favorite point system to have more favorite points to give out.  Right now the people with most favorite points to give out are the people who don't use the system and find everything.

[+justintim1999]

Thanks for sharing this idea with us.   I think it's worthy of discussion. 

 

I'm  Actually in the same boat as the person you mentioned.     Life's been busy and most of the caching related time I spend is on cache maintenance.    As of today I don't have a favorite point to give even if I wanted to. 

 

It would be nice to acknowledge good cache owners is some way.  I don't see anything wrong in offering some sort of incentive to place better caches.     

[+niraD]

Personally, one of the things I respect about Groundspeak is that they generally discourage providing any incentive for hiding caches other than the desire to own and maintain caches. They prohibit challenges that require cache ownership, or seed caches, or "Curse of the FTF" caches, or other caches that encourage/pressure others to hide caches before they're ready to own and maintain them for the long term.

 

Awarding cache owners additional Favorite points (or anything else) is a step in the wrong direction, IMHO.

 

16 hours ago, Judique Flyer said:

The idea certainly would not intend to make the point meaningless, but if someone chooses to find only 100 caches a year but build and publish 100 in the same year, and of course those being caches that are quality enough to earn favorite points,

To some degree, Favorite points have meaning because premium members can award them to at most 10% of the caches they find. Awarding some people more Favorite points (for any reason) will change that meaning.

 

If Groundspeak wants to let people give good caches a "thumbs up" more than 10% of the time, then that's fine, but it's no longer the current Favorite points system, and it no longer has the same meaning. It becomes something more like YouTube, where anyone can give a "thumbs up" or a "thumbs down" to any video, and there are no restrictions on the number of either that can be awarded.

 

But the key to such a system is a mechanism to correlate the preferences of different members, so the system can show me options that were enjoyed by people with similar preferences to my own. Groundspeak doesn't have such a system. All it has is the total number of Favorites points a cache receives, and the percentage of premium member finds that those Favorites points represent. So the Favorites points need to have some kind of meaning on their own.

 

Groundspeak can't control which caches receive Favorites points (e.g., only "quality hides", whatever someone might think "quality hides" are). So the meaning of Favorites points is that each premium member can award them to only 10% of their Finds. If that restriction is removed, then they have no meaning.

[+cerberus1]

7 hours ago, arisoft said:

I automatically remove favorites from all archived caches. There is no reason to recommend archived caches to anyone.

 

When  we were first awarded favorite points, the first thing I did was place one on each of our favorite caches since starting.

Almost half were archived.  They were our favorites... 

The help center says, "Geocaching Favorite points are a simple way to track and share the geocaches that you enjoyed the most".

 

[+arisoft]

1 minute ago, cerberus1 said:

The help center says, "Geocaching Favorite points are a simple way to track and share the geocaches that you enjoyed the most".

 

My enjoyment stops immediatelly after the cache is archived. If you want to keep my favorites you must maintain your caches.

[+cerberus1]

2 minutes ago, arisoft said:

My enjoyment stops immediatelly after the cache is archived. If you want to keep my favorites you must maintain your caches.

 

That's how you want to play, cool...  

 - But the COs of long-gone, archived caches appreciate the fact that we still remembered them as the fine caches they were. 

[+niraD]

59 minutes ago, arisoft said:

If you want to keep my favorites you must maintain your caches.

Some of my Favorites have been archived by the CO. In some cases, the best maintenance a CO can do is to archive the cache.

[+thebruce0]

8 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I believe the percentage of favourite points is more important than the actual number to indicate how good a cache is. A remote cache with say ten finds and ten FPs (100%) is better than an often found cache with 500 finds and 200 FP. Also some countries have big populations which means a cache can get many favourite points easier. Percentage is a better indication.

 

I believe the percentage is more relevant the more finds there are (like having a smaller margin of error). That's made apparent especially around here when there's a monthly group often of 30-40 people or more who go out for a day to find loads of caches. Usually the first half of the list get oodles of copy/paste "thanks for adding to our day" logs with zero favourites.

 

A cache with 5 finds and 100% FP that gets hit by this group loses a whole lot when it comes to favourite points, both by mere quantity and by percent, only because of that annoying group-cache mentality.

A cache with 700 finds has the score hurt much less by a large group, and percentage is barely affected at all.

 

I'd say a cache quality is most likely actually pretty good either when it reaches a certain threshold of favourite points regardless of finds - or - if the FP percentage is high.

 

 

Actually, I think maybe another metric that could be really informative is by FPs by find days. A ratio of how many days on which the cache has been found (not # finds) to how many of those days a FP was awarded.  Looked at alone, the only misleading interpretation could occur on a not-so-good cache that's found a lot every day (quick tourist caches?) where it could get 1 FP for every 20 finds, yet still have a 100% daily FP rate coupled with a 5% FP/find rate. In those cases seeing the FP-per-log stats alongside the FPDay stat would shed light on it.

 

Just brainstorming another perspective on the stats, which could thwart the mass-group-find mentality that can kill FP stats.

Edited October 23, 2018 by thebruce0

[+barefootjeff]

4 hours ago, schmittfamily said:

We use the number of favorite points pretty heavily as a guide when we are traveling and caching as a tourist.    One of the first things we do when visiting a new city is sort the caches by favorite points to see what is there.  The result is we are sitting at 1783 finds of which 185 have 100+ favorite points.   At the 10 to 1 rate of earning favorite points, we actually have more finds with 100+ favorite points than favorite points earned.  We never have favorite points to give out despite being heavy users of the feature.  I wouldn't mind seeing favorite point bonuses for every 1000 favorite points found.      That way people who use the system to filter caches have more weight in the system.

 

 

 

Gosh, in all of Sydney (Australia's biggest city) there are only 14 active caches with more than 100 FPs and they're mostly clustered around the CBD. On most of those, the percentage FPs are fairly low, below 30%, it's just purely location in the tourist hotspots around the harbour that gets them lots and lots of finds.

[+Judique Flyer]

If nothing else, this has certainly brought out the view points from different areas, we did a poll within our association and the majority response to removing FPs from archived caches was leave them, with one having the point of view that if they couldn't actually remember why they gave it, they would take it back, but leave it if the cache still remained memorable.  Some feel the points are there to give and take back based on how you feel, which is valid, if I feel a cache I just found is more memorable then another I already gave a point too, why couldn't I retract and award to the better cache. 

 

As far as points being earned by favorited caches, I think I can see where that is headed, lol.  As in most parts of this game, regional differences can play a big role, people that organize themselves into regional groups develope guidelines, and each group can have hugely different guidelines, (ie winter friendly cache attribute generally means 4 feet or more off the ground here, but 2 hours north of here it would mean 10 to 15 feet off the ground, as 8 feet of snow pack is normal on the highland plateau).  And it would seem the use, and meaning of FPs varies just as much.  Good to hear the differences of opinion and points of view on how FPs are looked upon.

[+Goldenwattle]

4 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

 

I believe the percentage is more relevant the more finds there are (like having a smaller margin of error). That's made apparent especially around here when there's a monthly group often of 30-40 people or more who go out for a day to find loads of caches. Usually the first half of the list get oodles of copy/paste "thanks for adding to our day" logs with zero favourites.

 

A cache with 5 finds and 100% FP that gets hit by this group loses a whole lot when it comes to favourite points, both by mere quantity and by percent, only because of that annoying group-cache mentality.

A cache with 700 finds has the score hurt much less by a large group, and percentage is barely affected at all.

 

I'd say a cache quality is most likely actually pretty good either when it reaches a certain threshold of favourite points regardless of finds - or - if the FP percentage is high.

 

 

Actually, I think maybe another metric that could be really informative is by FPs by find days. A ratio of how many days on which the cache has been found (not # finds) to how many of those days a FP was awarded.  Looked at alone, the only misleading interpretation could occur on a not-so-good cache that's found a lot every day (quick tourist caches?) where it could get 1 FP for every 20 finds, yet still have a 100% daily FP rate coupled with a 5% FP/find rate. In those cases seeing the FP-per-log stats alongside the FPDay stat would shed light on it.

 

Just brainstorming another perspective on the stats, which could thwart the mass-group-find mentality that can kill FP stats.

I get what you mean, but 700 finds where I live would be extraordinary. My most visited cache, placed in 2013, has just over 200 finds, and it's in a place many tourists visit. Just shows the different big populations make to numbers and what is expected. WOW 700 finds!

[+thebruce0]

11 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

I get what you mean, but 700 finds where I live would be extraordinary. My most visited cache, placed in 2013, has just over 200 finds, and it's in a place many tourists visit. Just shows the different big populations make to numbers and what is expected. WOW 700 finds!

 

I just threw out numbers to depict how find count can change the relevance of the percentage metric with the example of a group caching with 30-50 people. Same could be said with the difference between 2 and 40 finds.

[+barefootjeff]

2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

 

I just threw out numbers to depict how find count can change the relevance of the percentage metric with the example of a group caching with 30-50 people. Same could be said with the difference between 2 and 40 finds.

 

The biggest "group" I've ever had descend on one of my hides is three. Even the nearby mega last Easter (well 50km away is about as nearby as one is ever likely to get) didn't have any influence. On the other side of the coin, I've occasionally gone out caching with a group of half a dozen to a dozen from the region, but we've been doing higher terrain caches (including a T4.5 350-metre climb up Mount Royal) and many FPs were awarded along the way each time.

 

We just don't seem to get busloads of cachers doing the rounds and not leaving any FPs in their wake for it to be a problem in this neck of the woods.

[+CachedIronSkillet]

I use my favorite points as a way of saying "I enjoyed this cache and think you will too."  I reward based on location only if the location isn't a tourist hotspot... to earn one based on location the cache has to take me to someplace awesome that few people see.  Gadgets, on the other hand, I almost always grant favorite... 

 

I remove favorites from archived caches.

 

I often use favorites and/or favorite percentage as a guide.  

 

I don't think cache owners should get favorite points to distribute based on the favorites their caches get.  Instead, just give them forum decorations based on having highly favorited caches...  perhaps on total ownership favorite ratio?

[+funkymunkyzone]

1 hour ago, CachedIronSkillet said:

I use my favorite points as a way of saying "I enjoyed this cache and think you will too."  I reward based on location only if the location isn't a tourist hotspot... to earn one based on location the cache has to take me to someplace awesome that few people see.  Gadgets, on the other hand, I almost always grant favorite... 

 

I remove favorites from archived caches.

 

I often use favorites and/or favorite percentage as a guide.  

 

I don't think cache owners should get favorite points to distribute based on the favorites their caches get.  Instead, just give them forum decorations based on having highly favorited caches...  perhaps on total ownership favorite ratio?

 

These two sentences I have made bold seem to be at odds with each other.  You take favourites away from cachers that archive a cache, but think that cachers should be recognised, in your example with forum decorations.

 

To be honest, I don't really get the idea of taking away the favourite points from an archived cache.  Did the cache suddenly become a bad/meh memory?  Did the cache owner's efforts somehow become worthless just because the cache has now become history?  Kind of seems like saying "thank you" when someone serves you up a nice dinner and then when everyone has finished eating taking it back.

 

 

[+Goldenwattle]

6 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

 

I just threw out numbers to depict how find count can change the relevance of the percentage metric with the example of a group caching with 30-50 people.

I have never had a group that size, or close, find any of my caches. Four would be a big group. However, once I did go caching with an organised group of 20 to 30, but we only found two hard to get to caches, not a power trail say. That's the only large group I have even known, and that was only formed to get those two special caches. One leg of those caches was a km walk underground in storm-water pipes for instance. and that wasn't the only underground walk, and some people stayed up top for safely, following those from ground opening to next opening. It was done for safety (as well as the adventure) and it isn't a common occurrence.

Edited October 24, 2018 by Goldenwattle

[+L0ne.R]

10 hours ago, funkymunkyzone said:

To be honest, I don't really get the idea of taking away the favourite points from an archived cache.  Did the cache suddenly become a bad/meh memory?

 

Sometimes the cache becomes junk. Sometimes the owner turned out to be not deserving of the FP by ignoring issues with the cache. When I needed to get more FPs to award to good active caches (and recommend to finders), I would go over the archived FP'd caches on my list and remove them from caches that were archived by a reviewer.

[+L0ne.R]

10 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I have never had a group that size, or close, find any of my caches. Four would be a big group.

 

Where I am, groups of 10 are normal. Most finds on my current caches are visited by groups. 30+ groups are not unusual. One time I had a 50+ group come through, it was a travelling event (allowed in Ontario), to celebrate a milestone for their club.

[+Max and 99]

3 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 

Where I am, groups of 10 are normal. Most finds on my current caches are visited by groups. 30+ groups are not unusual. One time I had a 50+ group come through, it was a travelling event (allowed in Ontario), to celebrate a milestone for their club.

Whoa!!

[+thebruce0]

Yup.  It's an ongoing point of contention with some in the community, for a number of obvious and practical reasons

[+CachedIronSkillet]

12 hours ago, funkymunkyzone said:

 

These two sentences I have made bold seem to be at odds with each other.  You take favourites away from cachers that archive a cache, but think that cachers should be recognised, in your example with forum decorations.

 

To be honest, I don't really get the idea of taking away the favourite points from an archived cache.  Did the cache suddenly become a bad/meh memory?  Did the cache owner's efforts somehow become worthless just because the cache has now become history?  Kind of seems like saying "thank you" when someone serves you up a nice dinner and then when everyone has finished eating taking it back.

 

 

 

I don't need favorites to help me member.   The cache owners efforts did become worthless, however...  the cache can no longer be found.  

 

Some lists of favorites represent "all time favorites" - favorite friends, for instance, may include some who are no longer alive.  But other lists, such as favorite sports teams, are often restricted to your "current favorites" - Favorite sports teams is a good example.   You don't typically say "my top 3 favorite teams include 1994's Gougers, the 2003-2010 Mofos, and this years Tridents." 

 

And what about a cache that was changed without the listing changing?   I know of a cache that had an awesome regular sized container that was stolen.  The owner replaced it with a film container - didn't update the site with new size information at all.   You bet I didn't give it a favorite but, having seen pictures of the original container, I would have if it was still there.   So how is that different from a cache that was archived?   Did the cache owner's efforts somehow become worthless just because the original container has now become history?   Should I reward the owner based on his/her original effort?

Edited October 24, 2018 by CachedIronSkillet

[+barefootjeff]

5 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

 

Sometimes the cache becomes junk. Sometimes the owner turned out to be not deserving of the FP by ignoring issues with the cache. When I needed to get more FPs to award to good active caches (and recommend to finders), I would go over the archived FP'd caches on my list and remove them from caches that were archived by a reviewer.

 

Seven of my favourites have been archived, six by their owners following repeated muggling of the container. The seventh one, archived by a reviewer after it had been left disabled for too long without frequent-enough updates from the CO, is a bit of a sad story. Last December, a couple of workers were killed when a rock wall next to the track that they were trying to stabilise collapsed on them. The CO immediately dsabled the cache, then after the initial reviewer prompt about it being disabled for too long, posted a note saying the track would remain closed for a few more months. A month and a half later the reviewer archived it without any further warning. The track still remains closed. Yes, maybe the CO was a bit slack in not posting monthly updates or archiving it himself when it looked like the track was likely to remain closed indefinitely, but that cache, which involved a full day's hiking through the Valley of the Waters in the Blue Mountains, is still one of my all-time favourites.

[+Harry Dolphin]

38 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

Last December, a couple of workers were killed when a rock wall next to the track that they were trying to stabilise collapsed on them. The CO immediately dsabled the cache, then after the initial reviewer prompt about it being disabled for too long, posted a note saying the track would remain closed for a few more months. A month and a half later the reviewer archived it without any further warning. The track still remains closed. Yes, maybe the CO was a bit slack in not posting monthly updates or archiving it himself when it looked like the track was likely to remain closed indefinitely, but that cache, which involved a full day's hiking through the Valley of the Waters in the Blue Mountains, is still one of my all-time favourites.

 

My reviewer sends monthly notices on disabled caches.  I check the cache, and post a note that the park is still under reconstruction.  

[+funkymunkyzone]

4 hours ago, CachedIronSkillet said:

 

I don't need favorites to help me member.   The cache owners efforts did become worthless, however...  the cache can no longer be found.  

 

Some lists of favorites represent "all time favorites" - favorite friends, for instance, may include some who are no longer alive.  But other lists, such as favorite sports teams, are often restricted to your "current favorites" - Favorite sports teams is a good example.   You don't typically say "my top 3 favorite teams include 1994's Gougers, the 2003-2010 Mofos, and this years Tridents." 

 

And what about a cache that was changed without the listing changing?   I know of a cache that had an awesome regular sized container that was stolen.  The owner replaced it with a film container - didn't update the site with new size information at all.   You bet I didn't give it a favorite but, having seen pictures of the original container, I would have if it was still there.   So how is that different from a cache that was archived?   Did the cache owner's efforts somehow become worthless just because the original container has now become history?   Should I reward the owner based on his/her original effort?

 

I didn't say you need FPs to remember a good cache.  FPs are a teeny tiny virtual reward point you are giving to the cache owner.  A special "thank you".  One that also others can see.

 

I award FPs based on how *I* enjoy finding their cache, when I found it.  Why would anyone give (present tense) a FP because a cache *used to be* a great cache?  The suggestion of that, and the possible implication that I somehow suggested that, is bizarre!  But taking away a FP seems rather curmudgeonly to me.  But YMMV obviously.

[+funkymunkyzone]

6 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

 

Sometimes the cache becomes junk. Sometimes the owner turned out to be not deserving of the FP by ignoring issues with the cache. When I needed to get more FPs to award to good active caches (and recommend to finders), I would go over the archived FP'd caches on my list and remove them from caches that were archived by a reviewer.

 

I guess I see that as sad because I can think of so many reasons why a cache that was fantastic and well deserving of FPs could become neglected and get archived... and none of which took away from the amazing experience I had finding the cache when I found it...

 

[+L0ne.R]

1 hour ago, funkymunkyzone said:

 

I guess I see that as sad because I can think of so many reasons why a cache that was fantastic and well deserving of FPs could become neglected and get archived... and none of which took away from the amazing experience I had finding the cache when I found it...

 

 

I have created bookmarks to remember those favorites and why I gave them a favorite. But once they become neglected and abandoned they are not the kind of cache and cache owner I want my name to be attached to. 

Edited October 24, 2018 by L0ne.R

[+funkymunkyzone]

17 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 

I have created bookmarks to remember those favorites and why I gave them a favorite. But once they become neglected and abandoned they are not the kind of cache and cache owner I want my name to be attached to. 

 

Like I said... so many reasons... like a cache owner passing away.  It was still a great find.

 

Re the bit I made bold - to me that seems rather schoolyard.  But that's totally just my take on FP and I understand yours - which is more like Recommendation Points rather than Favourite Points.

[+hzoi]

Side comment to the side issue that has come up, on removing favorite points from archived caches.  I don't do this, because I base whether the cache was a favorite of mine or not on my experience at the time, not what subsequently happened to the cache.  I don't hand out favorite points to every 10th cache, so I have more than enough stacked up and don't have to worry about running out.

 

I move around every couple years due to the job, so I archive our physical caches every time I move.  I've seen favorite points removed as a result, and while I'm a little disappointed when that happens, such is life - I don't go begging for favorite points, either to get them or to keep them.