Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 17
TwistedCube

Adventure Lab Caches

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, p0cy said:

I mean every geocacher is equal and can place a cache or find one

 

This is not the case here. Only some geocachers are allowed to place these problematic caches.

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, arisoft said:

 

This is not the case here. Only some geocachers are allowed to place these problematic caches.

Correct, but I guess this is only during this limited test period.

I hope that after that test period, the ALC concept will improved and that the final version will be for every geocacher. Or stopped for everyone if no satisfactory solution is found.

Share this post


Link to post

 

8 hours ago, p0cy said:

But for me, it is against the spirit of openness of geocaching. And my fear that the private feature could be restricted to paying members or organizations.

 

Why not? We have premium memberships. Geocaching doesn't provide 100% of its features for 0% cost.  The general act of geocaching is free (look up a listing, go to the coordinates, find the cache) - that will always be free, as far as we know of HQ's mission.

But lab caches are explicitly a Groundspeak thing. If they'd want to make them private (direct link only), they could. If they want to make them for paying members only, they could. I don't know if the former would solve the problem (we'd start to find lists of 'private' lab caches with their find codes).  And the latter would only restrict the number of viewers, not the keep out 'cheaters' [who are paying members].  However, at least then if being a paying member requires agreeing to a term of use that restricts 'bad behaviour' (for lack of a better term) such as indefensible virtual logging of lab caches, then their membership can be revoked.  Labs would have a smaller audience, but also a much less abused system.

That said, I wouldn't recommend either of those options though anyway, since the former wouldn't be effective, and the latter really only reduces the amount of general activity and doesn't make them accessible to general public at events, which was pretty much the intent.

 

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

However, at least then if being a paying member requires agreeing to a term of use that restricts 'bad behaviour' (for lack of a better term) such as indefensible virtual logging of lab caches, then their membership can be revoked. 

 

This doesn't look very plausible. Decisions made by HQ seems to base the least possible amount of disputes. (Disputes have direct effect on income.) Creating voluntarily an unnecessary situation where you have to ban your users is not very likely from this base. I have not seen any BOFH here :) but I have seen this kind of behaviour somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, arisoft said:

This doesn't look very plausible. Decisions made by HQ seems to base the least possible amount of disputes. (Disputes have direct effect on income.) Creating voluntarily an unnecessary situation where you have to ban your users is not very likely from this base. I have not seen any BOFH here :) but I have seen this kind of behaviour somewhere else.

In my observation they try to avoid disputes that can't easily be resolved. Virtual lab cache finds can be more easily be tracked and dealt with, better than he-said-she-said arguments, given the automated system they're enforcing, and the context being an explicitly agreed-upon set of use terms in a paid membership. But again, I didn't recommend this strategy anyway =P

Share this post


Link to post

My .02. 

 

I attended the Texas Challenge and Geocaching Festival Mega yesterday in Seguin, Texas.  There were 10 Adventure Lab caches throughout the area and our group did them all during the day.  Looking at the online leaderboard I can confirm that almost every single person in the top three finders list for the caches were folks that were at the event.  That is, they are names of local cachers I recognize.  When I put out lab caches for the Space City Geocoinfest in 2014, several of the FTF's went to armchair loggers from a certain European country, so maybe this is a step in the right direction.  For the event yesterday, the TXGA put unique find codes at each stop that were basically un-guessable gibberish words.

 

Problems we ran into:

* If you put in a wrong answer, the app would lock up and you had to shut it down and start over.  This happened on both the iOS and Android apps.  Wrong answers are easy when typing in long gibberish words on a phone!

* One in our group has Sprint as his cell provider and couldn't get a signal at one of the stops.  By the time we got to where he could get a signal, the app said he was too far away to enter the answer.  We went back and I let him log it from my phone (AT&T).  Maybe the app could let you log it from a distant location if it recognized that you HAD been at the required locale previously? (that's probably easier said than done).

* It would be nice if the map in the app had a satellite view option.

* It would also be nice if the app had the option of linking to Waze or Google Maps, like the official Geocaching app allows, for navigating to the stop.  Some were way out in the country on unfamiliar roads, especially for out-of-towners.

* Apparently, GPX download functionality for the Adventures has been retired.  I always downloaded a GPX of the labs caches I've done just to store in my GSAK My Finds database.  Guess I'll have to figure out a work-around...

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I too attended Texas Challenge and our group made a run of the Adventure Labs Sunday. I use an Android phone, and friends use iPhones.

My observations:

The Adventure Lab app really sucked the battery from my phone. With 23% battery, I started the app, and was down to 5% within 3 minutes (running no other apps at that time. Usually I can cache for an hour with 25% battery,

I had no issues, when the phone was plugged into the charger. When misspelling the code words, I got an error message and was able to try again with success.

My friend wasn't so lucky when he entered wrong code. 15 minutes of stopping app & restarting and restarting phone. Finally it allowed him to enter code after rebooting phone and restarting app (which he had done at least two times prior).

Overall, I enjoyed the experience, but it was not impressive in any way whatsoever. The placer could just as easily taken me to the same experience with a series of traditional caches.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, K13 said:

 The placer could just as easily taken me to the same experience with a series of traditional caches.

And at least with a serie of tradis, you'd been looking for boxes and you could, with your log,  give some feedback to the CO and share your experience with friends. And no need of a GSM network, nor of an additional (and still buggy) app. And if you weren't available to attend the event, you caould still look for the caches one week, one month later.

Where is the improvment with ALC ?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, K13 said:

I too attended Texas Challenge and our group made a run of the Adventure Labs Sunday. I use an Android phone, and friends use iPhones.

My observations:

The Adventure Lab app really sucked the battery from my phone. With 23% battery, I started the app, and was down to 5% within 3 minutes (running no other apps at that time. Usually I can cache for an hour with 25% battery,

I had no issues, when the phone was plugged into the charger. When misspelling the code words, I got an error message and was able to try again with success.

My friend wasn't so lucky when he entered wrong code. 15 minutes of stopping app & restarting and restarting phone. Finally it allowed him to enter code after rebooting phone and restarting app (which he had done at least two times prior).

Overall, I enjoyed the experience, but it was not impressive in any way whatsoever. The placer could just as easily taken me to the same experience with a series of traditional caches.

Using the iPhone, I cached all day with the Adventure Lab app running in the background and didn't have battery issues.  I geocache with a GPSr so I wasn't using the phone for that too.  When the app locked up after entering a wrong answer, I just shut the app down and restarted it -- took maybe 20 seconds and no rebooting required.  My one friend with an Android phone had the same issue, but it was a Google Pixel phone, if that makes any difference.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, p0cy said:

And at least with a serie of tradis, you'd been looking for boxes and you could, with your log,  give some feedback to the CO and share your experience with friends. And no need of a GSM network, nor of an additional (and still buggy) app. And if you weren't available to attend the event, you caould still look for the caches one week, one month later.

Where is the improvment with ALC ?

I can see the reasoning behind lab caches or adventure caches (or whatever they call them next week) in conjunction with mega events.  They're temporary and designed to take attendees to unique locations in the area that may or may not be suitable for a traditional geocache.  When I placed the lab caches for Geocoinfest a few years ago, I personally didn't want to take ownership of 10 more traditional caches in that area to maintain into the future.  Many would've been in violation of Groundspeak placement guidelines for trads -- three were inside of businesses (including the host hotel), two were only about 300' apart from each other, two were on the grounds of the Johnson Space Center at Rocket Park.  They have their place, IMHO.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

I tried the new app.  It is OK.  Must allow for lack of cell reception.  I like the older version better.  I could enjoy the area, write down the answer, and log them all later.

 

Next question:  I'm not finding a map in the app that shows the general location of all the lab caches.  Something like the regular cache map page where I can get an idea of how many hundreds of miles they are away from me.  Evidently I must go to every lab and look within it to find their location.  Just on spot would be good.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, peacefrog77 said:

I tried the new app.  It is OK.  Must allow for lack of cell reception.  I like the older version better.  I could enjoy the area, write down the answer, and log them all later.

 

Aside from an App or two that, except to load a PQ, function entirely offline, they all fail in unexpected ways when the signal is lost or intermittent.  The Official Geocaching App allows downloading a cache or PQ or List for offline use, and even saves the map tiles for the cache locations.  Even if you're using "offline data", Apps call other Apps that require a connection.  Adventure Lab Caches tend to be more of an "online" thing, but I've previously logged ordinary "Lab Caches" by noting the code word and logging it once back at my PC (because I had no smartphone).

 

Save shorthand logs as "Drafts" (there's a switch for that, in the log window), and you may type a real log later.  The Draft you typed shows up on the PC at home.

 

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post

Having a map on the app to show, visually, the locations would be helpful.  Yes the front page gives the labs and number of miles away from me.  Not helpful unless one knows their geography quite well.  In my case, 1000 miles away can be at least 3 directions away.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, peacefrog77 said:

Having a map on the app to show, visually, the locations would be helpful.  Yes the front page gives the labs and number of miles away from me.  Not helpful unless one knows their geography quite well.  In my case, 1000 miles away can be at least 3 directions away.

 

 

I agree there needs to be a way to see where an Adventure Lab Cache is.  The Adventure Lab App will certainly become fancier over time.

 

 

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, peacefrog77 said:

Having a map on the app to show, visually, the locations would be helpful.  Yes the front page gives the labs and number of miles away from me.  Not helpful unless one knows their geography quite well.  In my case, 1000 miles away can be at least 3 directions away.

 

Or at least a distance and bearing. I suggested that to GS in their feedback form in the app.

Share this post


Link to post

We completed two of the Adventure caches this weekend both were very interesting.  They took us to places we probably wouldn't have gone.  It reminded me of a multi virtual.  Only one problem:  The app shows I completed all 10 stops on one of them but if you look at my stats on geocaching.com it only shows I completed 9 stops.  Seeing the app says I completed it I can not go back to the site and do it again.  Any fixes?

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

Or at least a distance and bearing. I suggested that to GS in their feedback form in the app.

I do see distance and direction, although the direction appears to be limited to N E W S. Going to an 8 or 16 point system would be better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

Or at least a distance and bearing. I suggested that to GS in their feedback form in the app.

 

I was curious and loaded the app. I can see the distance and the cardinal point for Adventures. The nearest is 451km West.

 

I travelled there and found an Adventure Lab cache. Hurrah!

Edited by arisoft

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, GHBuccaneers said:

We completed two of the Adventure caches this weekend both were very interesting.  They took us to places we probably wouldn't have gone.  It reminded me of a multi virtual.  Only one problem:  The app shows I completed all 10 stops on one of them but if you look at my stats on geocaching.com it only shows I completed 9 stops.  Seeing the app says I completed it I can not go back to the site and do it again.  Any fixes?

 

I spoke to one of our devs and he is not sure what may have happened, but it likely involved a server error on our part. If you write in to customer support through the Help Center, they can work with you to get the issue corrected.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I found two Adventure lab caches in a few minutes after downloading the app. These Adventures seems to be interesting experience with some puzzle solving challenge. I didn't see  "rules" or instructions how I am supposed to play this game. It is easy to understand that this kind of experience may hook some players. I am not interested in collecing more unjust finds but it is fun to explore these distant places which I propably will never visit physically.

 

My simple question is: Should I stop playing this virtual Adventure game?

 

 

 

 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, arisoft said:

I found two Adventure lab caches in a few minutes after downloading the app. These Adventures seems to be interesting experience with some puzzle solving challenge. I didn't see  "rules" or instructions how I am supposed to play this game. It is easy to understand that this kind of experience may hook some players. I am not interested in collecing more unjust finds but it is fun to explore these distant places which I propably will never visit physically.

 

My simple question is: Should I stop playing this virtual Adventure game?

You should at least read Lab Cache Guidelines, where it says:

"To log a Lab Cache, finders are required to visit the location, discover the find code, and then enter the code to mark the cache as found."

 

Also, if you think about going into "virtual" logs big time, you might have a look at a post by Frau Potter in this thread, where she says:

"We have received feedback from past and current Adventure creators that they are very frustrated with users who log their experience, but have not visited the Locations they set up. With the most recent launch to geocaching organizations and opt-in participants, we felt that it was a good time to clarify the expectations. There are no plans to punish geocachers for past “couch logging” of Lab Caches, but certain circumstances may call for action in the future."

 

So, GS suggests that yes, you should stop playing Adventure Labs that way. OTOH, virtually "visiting" the locations and figuring out some find codes by yourself is better than just copying the find codes from, say, a shared list on FB.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, baer2006 said:

You should at least read Lab Cache Guidelines, where it says:

"To log a Lab Cache, finders are required to visit the location, discover the find code, and then enter the code to mark the cache as found."

 

Ordinary players doesn' even t know that there are guidelines. I know and I found that nothing about guidelines is displayed in the app, which should be the best place for such information.

I also noted that there was no warnings or disclaimer for accidents etc. that could happen while playing.

 

7 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

There are no plans to punish geocachers for past “couch logging” of Lab Caches, but certain circumstances may call for action in the future.

 

That's very good. I consider myself as a test player for the App at this moment if I am not going to get punished for playing. If there are future plans for punishments I would suggest to delete all Lab cache finds when a punishment is needed. I hope that the App will warn about sanctions in this case.

 

13 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

We have received feedback from past and current Adventure creators that they are very frustrated with users who log their experience, but have not visited the Locations they set up

 

I visited locations virtually to get information needed to answer correctly. I am very glad when some foreigner solves my puzzlecache and leave a note because can not sign the cache but not very pleased when anyone signs the cache without solving the puzzle at all. I fear that spreading correct answer is the way this goes as it does with other caches.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Once the Web side logging of Lab Caches goes away, hopefully the app can incorporate as many GPS spoofing safeguards as possible. Maybe tie in GPS and Cell reporting together and if they don't match, deny access to the app. Throw in LAN reporting too to track GPS, Cell and Internet location simultaneously.

 

Edited by igator210
  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, igator210 said:

Once the Web side logging of Lab Caches goes away, hopefully the app can incorporate as many GPS spoofing safeguards as possible. Maybe tie in GPS and Cell reporting together and if they don't match, deny access to the app. Throw in LAN reporting too to track GPS, Cell and Internet location simultaneously.

Hmm. Is my irony detector malfunctioning, or are you really suggesting such overkill?

 

For me, it would be perfectly fine when "geofencing" (i.e. you must be near the location) and "linear game play" (i.e. you must visit the location is a certain sequence, and you can only see a location once you completed the previous one) are actually enforced. Currently, you can easily work around both, either with the web player or by other means. GPS spoofing is not without effort, and I'm quite sure that the number of armchair logs will drop significantly. And if not ... well, so be it. I don't expect GS to go out of their way to make cheating as difficult as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, baer2006 said:

Hmm. Is my irony detector malfunctioning, or are you really suggesting such overkill?

 

I suggested this earlier. It really is overkill for a system developer and there is great possibility that the system is not reliable enough. It is an option if there is a problem to be solved. Do we have a problem?

 

1 hour ago, baer2006 said:

GPS spoofing is not without effort

 

My first test run with the App happened immediatelly with spoofing with zero effort. Spoofing is already needed to solve many Wherigo caches because they crash so often. Tools are easy to use and available free. Only effort is to know that it is possible and geocachers are keen to share this kind of helpfull knowledge. :)

 

For me the situation is very interesting because for many years a similar problem has deeply disturbed many cache owners without support from the HQ and now there is a similar problem to be solved in a different context. If the HQ solves the issue the same way as before, there will be a guideline that an Adventure cache is completed when it is accepted by the Application. It is the minimum verifiable event in the same way as  the signing of the logbook is a minimum verifiable event for physical caches. Who cares about the experience planned by the CO?

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, arisoft said:

My first test run with the App happened immediatelly with spoofing with zero effort. Spoofing is already needed to solve many Wherigo caches because they crash so often. Tools are easy to use and available free. Only effort is to know that it is possible and geocachers are keen to share this kind of helpfull knowledge. :)

oooh trust me, there is a level of technical intelligence and proclivity and desire that's also needed, and I know plenty of people who wouldn't bother; but rather ask someone who would.  Yes, it's "easy" for someone who knows how to do stuff like that (or enjoys stuff like that) and does it often, or has done it at least once or twice. Not for the average joe.

 

 

3 hours ago, arisoft said:

Who cares about the experience planned by the CO? 

The CO.

 

That's why there's a 'spirit' of geocaching, which is much more vague and far-reaching than the enforcible guideline/rule set.  You can be 'that guy' who only cares about his own experience while abiding only by the rules, or you can be the one who thinks less of himself and more about other people by doing what's possible to help everyone have a good experience.  That choice can't be forced. (and yes, that choice applies to finders and hiders)

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

That choice can't be forced.

 

Well... assume that CO could rule who earns the point or not. No appeals possible. Different game, indeed, but what is the problem here? That would be easier for the HQ because there is no possibility for any dispute. Sure, this will not happen, but can you give a reasonable explanation why not?

Edited by arisoft

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, arisoft said:
24 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

That choice can't be forced.

 

Well... assume that CO could rule who earns the point or not. No appeals possible. Different game, indeed, but what is the problem here? That would be easier for the HQ because there is no possibility for any dispute. Sure, this will not happen, but can you give a reasonable explanation why not?

 

First, the choice that can't be forced is whether a person thinks about himself or others more.

Second, if you're positing a solution, assuming you are, whereby the lab owner can decide which logs stay or don't - I'm 100% confident that there will be disputes which HQ would not want to adjudicate, exactly the same as with certain aspects of geocaching.  So I'm sure that they will not simply let the CO be the last decision for whether logs stay. Not without an appeals process; which won't take on anything more than the current appeals process does. And virtual Lab logs are very different from cache logs with signatures.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

So I'm sure that they will not simply let the CO be the last decision for whether logs stay. Not without an appeals process;

 

How do you reason this hypothesis? If the CO decides, what is the problem? Who needs a way to appeal?

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, arisoft said:

Who cares about the experience planned by the CO?

I read that and was about to post a rather annoyed response, but then thought maybe arisoft has used the phrase "who cares" in a different way to the colloquial useage : saying "who cares ? " in  the UK  implies a dismissive "nobody, including me, cares at all " .  I suspect it may be used similarly in the  US.

 

I'm hoping it was more of a rhetorical question , implying Groundspeak will not care about those logs

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, arisoft said:

How do you reason this hypothesis? If the CO decides, what is the problem? Who needs a way to appeal?

 

Really?

This is why we have an appeals process and one of the parts of the hobby it's there to address is logging disputes. Whatever the reason, whatever the cause, between finders and owners. If one player makes a decision, and it's not enforcible by a rule, and another player doesn't like it, it's likely to go to an appeal. If HQ simply says "no appeals, CO makes the call" there will be a whole lot of unhappy 'players' when things don't go their way.  So they set it up (just like Geocaching Challenges) so that a player doesn't make the decision. No player decision, no appeals. The app, technology, makes the decision, and HQ controls the technology. There's another channel for complaining about what HQ makes :ph34r:.

 

Player vs player goes to appeals.

If HQ allows the CO to make final calls, without an appeals process, it will flop.

If HQ doesn't allow anyone to make the final call, but has lax rules/restrictions about logging, it will flop.

HQ is tightening the rules/restrictions in the technology so that players don't make the final call and there doesn't need to be an appeals process.  Will it flop?  That remains to be seen.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, hal-an-tow said:

I'm hoping it was more of a rhetorical question , implying Groundspeak will not care about those logs

 

It was a rhetorical question. But if you have the answer I would like read about it. What comes to Adventures, I have feeling that HQ have some intention to enforce the experience.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

one of the parts of the hobby it's there to address is logging disputes

 

Really?

 

I read your answer twice but I have to disagree in almost every part mostly because lack of reasoning. For example, you wrote that something will fail without telling why do you think so.

 

Can you explain why it will flop if the CO is the only authority.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, arisoft said:

What comes to Adventures, I have feeling that HQ have some intention to enforce the experience.

 

You know what, I kind of want to change the language a bit since it sounds kind of like HQ is the 'bad guy' for 'forcing' something.

It's not that HQ is "forcing an experience". It's the people who are virtually logging from afar that are forcing a cheat.  In this context, it's absolutely clear that you're intended to be there and do the experience as intended. That's written and official. HQ isn't "forcing" anyone to do it the way it was intended - it's assumed that's how it should be done. Rather they are doing what they can to ensure people aren't taking advantage of a technological loophole just to get a +1 in their stats.  Even if you can 'visit the location virtually'.

In that latter case though, maybe the lab owner could set a toggle as to whether it can be played from anywhere or must be done on location (you know, like the AR caches, which also suffered similar issues if they couldn't be location-locked; and just as wherigoes suffer because they can easily be hacked and spoofed).

 

 

1 minute ago, arisoft said:

I read your answer twice but I have to disagree in almost every part mostly because lack of reasoning. For example, you wrote that something will fail without telling why do you think so.

 

Can you explain why it will flop if the CO is the only authority. 

 

Drama. Arguments. Forums. Geocaching Challenges (addressing the structure of no appeals, no rules, no final judge)

Players demand things. Owners demand things. Giving the owner final authority will cause problems. It has in the past with geocaches. That is why there is appeals, to act as a higher authority.  I obviously say it will fail without proof - I can't see the future - it is an educated guess based on the way geocaching has been played up to this point.

So yes, "really".  As I said, one of the parts of the hobby that appeals is there to address is logging disputes.  Without an Appeals process, people will not enjoy the game because of disagreements if there is no strict set of rules, or especially if one side only and always gets final blanket judgment without a clear ruleset. It's human nature.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Drama. Arguments. Forums. Geocaching Challenges (addressing the structure of no appeals, no rules, no final judge)

Players demand things. Owners demand things. Giving the owner final authority will cause problems. It has in the past with geocaches. That is why there is appeals, to act as a higher authority.  I obviously say it will fail without proof - I can't see the future - it is an educated guess based on the way geocaching has been played up to this point.

So yes, "really".  As I said, one of the parts of the hobby that appeals is there to address is logging disputes.  Without an Appeals process, people will not enjoy the game because of disagreements if there is no strict set of rules, or especially if one side only and always gets final blanket judgment without a clear ruleset. It's human nature.

 

Neither I can see the future but I can see the past and I am not convinced that the Appeals process is the only and the best solution for all issues. That's why I put this idea into consideration. Lab caches is the best playground to test what happens. If it doesn't work it can be cancelled, but otherwise it could save lots of time from the Appeals team.

Share this post


Link to post

The more I think about these adventure lab caches, their implementation , lack of a physical container, owner limitations (surely those who make them and set them free in the world with so little subsequent control would be better named setters or creators ?) and their ability to be logged by any tech savvy person in the world  (or any person who is a member of a facebook group with at least one tech savvy person .... ) the more I think , this is not geocaching as I understand it.

 

Yes, I know earthcaches, virtuals, webcams ... but they have owners with responsibility for them, owners who invest time and effort in checking the online logs, deleting bogus ones, reading the answers sent to them. Groundspeak maintains a database, and uses volunteers to run a lot of the administrative tasks associated with that database. If they are going to step in and actually police the logging of adventure lab caches themselves, how will they do that ? Employ extra staff , recruit more volunteers , come up with an algorithm (that'll be fun ... ) No, I can't see any of that happening.

 

How about making the app secure then ? That's a comical idea, hugely underestimating the enjoyment people with a particular mindset have. To imagine that a few developers at Groundspeak will ever be able to come up with an app which will not have its safeguards circumvented by the very many folk who see a supposedly secure system to validate location as an enjoyable challenge to their skills.

 

I don't know how invested Groundspeak are in this adventure lab cache idea, but it looks to me like a laboratory experiment which has shown the idea has major flaws.

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, baer2006 said:

Hmm. Is my irony detector malfunctioning, or are you really suggesting such overkill?

 

 

I'm actually being serious. In this thread people have talked about how easy spoofing the app is.  It maybe overkill, but write it into the code once and take all subjectivity out of the issue. Either you are there or your aren't.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, igator210 said:

I'm actually being serious. In this thread people have talked about how easy spoofing the app is.  It maybe overkill, but write it into the code once and take all subjectivity out of the issue. Either you are there or your aren't.

 

Or - revolutionary thought here - have a container of some kind with a log book to sign ....

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Neither I can see the future but I can see the past and I am not convinced that the Appeals process is the only and the best solution for all issues. That's why I put this idea into consideration. Lab caches is the best playground to test what happens. If it doesn't work it can be cancelled, but otherwise it could save lots of time from the Appeals team.

 

I don't know what you're arguing.

I didn't say Appeals is the only and best solution for all issues.

I didn't say let's not play with Labs as a testing ground for ideas.

I only said that I'm confident that if HQ lets owners be the final authority on which logs stay, without having a clear set of rules (and by extension a means of disputing if/when an owner breaks one), then it will fail. Either because players will abuse the system, or because player swon't have fun because of bad owners, or because HQ is so hands off of the experience that it has no meat or structure.

If you can convince HQ to employ the "owner can delete logs as they wish, no appeals provided" strategy for playing adventure labs, I will be super impressed.

 

No, this is why they're tightening the platforms to play them on.  Set the rules in the technology. Reduce cheating. No need for owner intervention, no need for appeals. That's the strategy I believe they're running with. And as I said - will it work?  That remains to be seen.

 

Geocaching Challenges had an app and a very simplistic mobile and web interface, no owner maintenance (no appeals), and was very lax on rules. It flopped.

Adventure Labs has an app and an experience strategy with some clearer rules, and still no owner maintenance (no appeals). We'll see.

 

(and there can always be exceptions - obviously hq can step in at any time if there is a major dispute; by Appeals I mean a well-defined system provided for streamlined reporting and resolution of conflicts)

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

I only said that I'm confident that if HQ lets owners be the final authority on which logs stay, without having a clear set of rules (and by extension a means of disputing if/when an owner breaks one), then it will fail. Either because players will abuse the system, or because player swon't have fun because of bad owners, or because HQ is so hands off of the experience that it has no meat or structure.

 

Your opinion is noted.

 

40 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

If you can convince HQ to employ the "owner can delete logs as they wish, no appeals provided" strategy for playing adventure labs, I will be super impressed.

 

I would be impressed too. But that does not mean that I see a flaw in this procedure I presented.

 

"players will abuse the system": How?

"player swon't have fun because of bad owners": It is the player or the CO who won't have fun or both in the worst case. Which one of them is more important to the game?

"HQ is so hands off of the experience that it has no meat or structure": no stucture or meat needed it the CO have both of them.

 

 

Edited by arisoft

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, igator210 said:

Either you are there or your aren't. 

 

Or you're there but the app thinks you're not 'cos there's no mobile signal, so you can't log it 🙄

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, arisoft said:
1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

Drama. Arguments. Forums. Geocaching Challenges (addressing the structure of no appeals, no rules, no final judge)

Players demand things. Owners demand things. Giving the owner final authority will cause problems. It has in the past with geocaches. That is why there is appeals, to act as a higher authority.  I obviously say it will fail without proof - I can't see the future - it is an educated guess based on the way geocaching has been played up to this point.

So yes, "really".  As I said, one of the parts of the hobby that appeals is there to address is logging disputes.  Without an Appeals process, people will not enjoy the game because of disagreements if there is no strict set of rules, or especially if one side only and always gets final blanket judgment without a clear ruleset. It's human nature.

 

Neither I can see the future but I can see the past and I am not convinced that the Appeals process is the only and the best solution for all issues.

 

Yeah, look at the FTF game, which GS has chosen to stay out of regarding an appeals process.  

 

No drama there, ever.  :ph34r:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Yeah, look at the FTF game, which GS has chosen to stay out of regarding an appeals process.  

 

No drama there, ever.  :ph34r:

 

This is a good and new view to the situation. Did geocaching flop because players must agree FTF disputes themselves without possibility to appeal to the higher authority?

 

I am thinking about the worst case scenario what could happen if a Lab cache find gets deleted by the CO. Is there anything worse than a one point less in the statistics?

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, arisoft said:

I am thinking about the worst case scenario what could happen if a Lab cache find gets deleted by the CO. Is there anything worse than a one point less in the statistics?

You wouldn't believe how serious some players take every single "point" in their stats.

 

I agree with @thebruce0 that complete CO control over logs without any way to appeal would lead to "trouble". Maybe it's a German thing, but there are some cachers here, who take geocaching and their stats way too seriously. There is one owner, where I always photograph the log sheet after I signed it, just in case the CO gets strange ideas...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

I agree with @thebruce0 that complete CO control over logs without any way to appeal would lead to "trouble". Maybe it's a German thing, but there are some cachers here, who take geocaching and their stats way too seriously. There is one owner, where I always photograph the log sheet after I signed it, just in case the CO gets strange ideas..

 

Lets assume that you are the one who takes stats too seriously and I just deleted your log to a Lab cache and you have no way to appeal. What trouble you could do? Will you muggle my other geocaches?

Edited by arisoft

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, arisoft said:

What trouble you could do?

Well as we've seen before someone would be on here or on facebook attacking you for it, that can sometimes turn very nasty particularly on  non moderated fora such as Facebook.

 

19 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Will you muggle my other geocaches? 

It's happened before, and I'm certain it would happen again.

Or maybe that CO would just delete all your finds on their caches.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, arisoft said:

 

Lets assume that you are the one who takes stats too seriously and I just deleted your log to a Lab cache and you have no way to appeal. What trouble you could do? Will you muggle my other geocaches?

How should I know? While I'm definitely interested in my stats, I'm not one of those for whom they are everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I admit that I have armchair-logged Labs in the past. I thought that it was an "easy" way to easily rake in some finds. 

 

That said, I do like the idea that CO's should be able to delete finds on their Lab Caches. The ability to appeal should be available to finders, although that could get out of hand very quickly. My logic is that people who found it legitimately would (probably) have sufficient evidence to prove they were present in the vicinity of the Lab Cache at some point, while "cheaters" would be unable to prove their honesty and would simply have to forget about it and move on.

Edited by Hügh
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

Taking some situations to the extreme can point out issues with an idea. For example, assume that the CO is the final authority. That would mean there is no process to appeal any arbitrary policy that the CO decided to make up. I could easily make my own personal policy that no one with a username that begins with a vowel is allowed to log one of my adventure caches. No user would be able to appeal my arbitrary policy, because the CO is the final authority. Even if I had to agree to a set of rules for when deleting logs is appropriate when I placed the adventure cache, if no one knows about my personal policy, then no one can appeal my decision. To me, that just seems wrong.

 

I think the CO should be allowed to delete bogus finds, and the finder should have the right to appeal that.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

I think the CO should be allowed to delete bogus finds, and the finder should have the right to appeal that.

 

I agree with @Wet Pancake Touring Club here, or at least the general structure proposed. More specifically, here is my suggestion for the deletion process.

  1. CO deletes the log if they feel that somebody has found it illegitimately.
  2. If the finder wants to fight the claim, they can send proof to HQ for processing.
  3. If the log is deemed "valid" by HQ, then the log is restored. At this point, the log is "locked", so that the CO can't delete it a second time.

In other words, the Lab Caching system should be identical to the regular system. Why change it?

Edited by Hügh
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 17

×