Souvenirs

[+Deepdiggingmole]

When will HQ get the issue around cachers spuriously logging caches simply to get souvenirs, such as for the current group. It is a known fact that if you armchair log a cache you get the points and  ultimately the souvenirs if the CO deletes the log the souvenirs remain ?. 

Caches with high fav points are being logged on mass so that the souvenirs are obtained and if the COs can be bothered the logs are deleted. Why can't the systems identify when this occurs so that the souvenirs are deleted

[+niraD]

10 hours ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

Why can't the systems identify when this occurs so that the souvenirs are deleted

In general, it requires a lot more calculation to determine that someone no longer qualifies for a Souvenir when a log is deleted, than to determine that someone does qualify for a Souvenir when a log is posted.

 

Let's take a simple example of a location-based Souvenir. If I log a cache in Kansas, then the system checks to see whether or not I have the Kansas Souvenir. If I don't, then it awards me the Souvenir. Or maybe it doesn't even bother checking. Maybe it just sets the state of the Kansas Souvenir to TRUE, which could be a lot faster than checking the current state of the Kansas Souvenir.

 

A few months later, I discover that the film canister that I found was a throw-down, not the actual cache container, and I delete that log. The system can't just delete my Kansas Souvenir, because I might still qualify based on some other log. Instead, the system would need to check all my other Find logs (and Attended logs, etc.). For each of those logs, it would need to check whether it qualified me for the Kansas Souvenir. And I might have a LOT of logs for it to check.

 

Anyway, it makes sense to me that Groundspeak's developers might want to optimize the system to not require as much computing resources, at the expense of allowing a few people to get Souvenirs that they didn't really earn.

[+Deepdiggingmole]

In which case HQ should say no to souvenir based challenges - which is one reason why this form of cheating goes on 

[+The A-Team]

57 minutes ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

In which case HQ should say no to souvenir based challenges - which is one reason why this form of cheating goes on 

This form of cheating has been going on since souvenirs started back in 2010, on regional souvenirs, date-based souvenirs, and marketing promotion souvenirs. They could stop the promotions, but the practice would continue with the other souvenirs.

 

It's a known issue that we all just have to live with. In the end, the reality is that there are very few people doing this, so I would recommend not worrying too much about it.

[+thebruce0]

At worst, they could set up a limited resource queued checker that would continue throughout the year checking souvenirs and/or profiles behind the scenes, or by request.

But yeah, prooooobably not going to happen

[+The A-Team]

2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

At worst, they could set up a limited resource queued checker that would continue throughout the year checking souvenirs and/or profiles behind the scenes, or by request.

But yeah, prooooobably not going to happen

 

I've thought about this in the past, but you run into some wrinkles with the time-limited promotions. For example, how could it check the souvenirs for the current promotion a year from now? There's no way for such a checker to tell whether the cacher had the right number of (legitimate) leaderboard points at the previous date (the FPs will have changed by then, so it can't work backwards). There was also a souvenir from one of the earlier promotions where the cacher had to access a webpage in order to claim it. That isn't the kind of thing that can be retroactively checked.

 

With the current souvenir system, we need to just accept that false souvenirs are a thing.

[+thebruce0]

Or if they do implement some form of souvenir verification, indicate if a souvenir cannot be reinstated if it's deleted (or at least re-verified properly).

 

Technically though, even a souvenir using leaderboard points can still be verified, if the algorithm for verifying that souvenir includes how the points are scored. Finds (or whatever constitutes points as long as it's dated) within that period can be checked against the algorithm to determine qualification.

Theoretically, even points by friends can be re-calculated, and that would suck if a souvenir qualified with friends' points, but a friend deleted finds (eg) not realizing that their loss of points in that period trickles down to you losing your souvenir... :P

That said, for that algorithm, unless the date you became friends (or were unfriended) with someone are also stored, that would be an example of a souvenir that can't be reverified since it would only be based on your current friend list, not the friends you had during that promotion.

 

ALL this said, obviously the verification algorithms would be unique for most every souvenir, and many wouldn't be verifiable 100% identically to the time they were originally awarded.

So again, prooooobably not going to happen But it's fun to brainstorm

[+The A-Team]

13 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Technically though, even a souvenir using leaderboard points can still be verified, if the algorithm for verifying that souvenir includes how the points are scored. Finds (or whatever constitutes points as long as it's dated) within that period can be checked against the algorithm to determine qualification.

 

The problem is that a year from now (or whenever the checker runs), the FPs will most likely be different than they were during the promotion. There would need to be some way to work backwards to determine how many FPs existed at that earlier point in time.

 

It would just be so much work to deal with such a minor issue.

[+thebruce0]

Yes. I completely agree. Which is why I think it's prooooobably not going to happen.

[+hzoi]

On 4/2/2019 at 9:43 AM, Deepdiggingmole said:

When will HQ get the issue around cachers spuriously logging caches simply to get souvenirs, such as for the current group. It is a known fact that if you armchair log a cache you get the points and  ultimately the souvenirs if the CO deletes the log the souvenirs remain ?. 

Caches with high fav points are being logged on mass so that the souvenirs are obtained and if the COs can be bothered the logs are deleted. Why can't the systems identify when this occurs so that the souvenirs are deleted

 

 

Groundspeak isn't the morality police.  That isn't to say that they have turned a blind eye to cheaters - look at the Adventure Labs app, which was rolled out in part to address the prevalence of lab cache cheaters getting answers from lab caches half a world away, disseminating them, and logging them.

 

I don't know that there's an easy way to stop cheaters without making this process a big pain for the majority of cachers, who have integrity and log what they find.  If you have an idea for a system to identify the BS logs and not flag legitimate logs, Groundspeak may be receptive to such a suggestion.

 

[+Deepdiggingmole]

On 4/3/2019 at 6:42 AM, The A-Team said:

In the end, the reality is that there are very few people doing this

I think you will be surprised how many are doing it 

 

 

The difference with souvenir challenges is ... If a cache gets deleted on a cache number based challenge a PGC checker will pick that up on a future check (by the CO for example), but with souvenir challenges if caches get deleted the souvenir doesn't so any future checker check isnt affected - so maybe the simple answer is for souvenir challenges to be outlawed

 

[+barefootjeff]

50 minutes ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

I think you will be surprised how many are doing it 

 

 

The difference with souvenir challenges is ... If a cache gets deleted on a cache number based challenge a PGC checker will pick that up on a future check (by the CO for example), but with souvenir challenges if caches get deleted the souvenir doesn't so any future checker check isnt affected - so maybe the simple answer is for souvenir challenges to be outlawed

 

 

One of the requirements for challenge caches is that they be attainable at any time, so I doubt anything based on these short-term promotional souvenirs would be allowed under the current guidelines.

[+noncentric]

1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:

One of the requirements for challenge caches is that they be attainable at any time, so I doubt anything based on these short-term promotional souvenirs would be allowed under the current guidelines.

Souvenir-based challenges can be fulfilled without the souvenirs from short-term promos.  The challenges have requirements like "Collect 50 souvenirs on your geocaching profile".  Certainly the promotions can make it easier for someone to get the required number of souvenirs, but someone can also get the required number without promos - especially if they travel a lot.

 

Certainly, a Souvenir challenge that says "Collect all 5 Cache Carnival souvenirs" should not be publishable - but one that says "Collect 5 souvenirs" is not a problem.

[+thebruce0]

And those were more common pre-moratorium. Once the promos started, souvenir counts exploded. So those 'collect 50 souvenirs' got archived, and the cache location reused for a larger count challenge. Now it's 'collect 100 souvenirs'. And when that's too easy, the CO(s) will publish 'collect 200 souvenirs', etc. We have a couple of COs in my region who recycle their cache placements with new challenges when the old ones get too "easy".