Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
Rock Chalk

Cache Quality Survey results

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, AnTsInRpAnTs said:

If the hint is viewed, the remote device application would have to create a record that would be uploaded to Geocaching.com somewhere linked to , or on, the user profile noting the cache GC code and a "hint viewed" flag, the D penalty for which would be applied at the time, or retrospectively if the cache is logged later.

 

I could see some then creating a sock account to look at the hints, while logging on their own account which they don't look at the hint.

 

Also for this to work you would have to prevent hints being downloaded in .GPX files - how could you tell that I read the hint on my Etrex, on in GSAK on my PC?

 

I could also see people using this to fill their DT grids - the cache is a 4/4 but I already have a 4/4 and need a 3.5/4 - ah I know I'll read the hint to manipulate the D rating.

 


I can't see this taking off.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

However, a clear guideline in the cache creation process on things recommended to be taken into account when setting the difficulty rating could improve cache quality overall with some impact on the quality of statistics  as side benefit. 

 

Also, a reminder that creating caches with false Terrain ratings (e.g. we have 8 5/5 finds most of which are nonsense) is not the way the game should be played might ping the conscience  system of those who abuse the system with intent.  

 

Over and Out!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, AnTsInRpAnTs said:

 

If the hint is not viewed, nothing would happen. 

If the hint is viewed, the remote device application would have to create a record that would be uploaded to Geocaching.com somewhere linked to , or on, the user profile noting the cache GC code and a "hint viewed" flag, the D penalty for which would be applied at the time, or retrospectively if the cache is logged later. Similarly, if the cache is logged directly online, the penalty would be applied immediately if the record had been extracted from the user's remote device / application, or retrospectively when it was later extracted.

 

I have to say, this does sound a wee bit convoluted and barefootjeff's comment "I'm sure I've seen something somewhere that said the D rating should assume that both the description and hint have been read by the searcher, but I can't put my finger on the reference ", if correct, is how it should work.

 

As regards  "Statistics (different or otherwise) are not the point of the difficulty and terrain ratings", I totally agree. And with reference to geostats, too many cachers abuse them as a form of self-aggrandizement and the manipulation of D ratings to enable grid completion is only one of many ways that can be achieved. I read somewhere that a.o. Mark Twain attributed the great and well-used quotation "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics" to Benjamin Disraeli. Geostats fall into all three :)

 

 

No, I had no idea. :(

 

re: Different stats on the same cache, based on whether someone reads the hint, I think deep-down you realize just won't work.  

 

It could work but given the propensity of many cachers for self-promotion based on stats manipulation anyway Per your other allegation, it's probably a complete waste of time. Hey-ho! 

 

No, it couldn't  work ... but if attempted it would push up sales of GPS devices which are entirely offline, and third party apps which swerved the process ... Garmin would be very happy, official app customers ( and therefore Groundspeak) would not ...

Then, if fairness is the target, what about people who find a cache in a group or a pair  ? Surely it's only fair that the difficulty should be divided by the number of searchers in the group ? And of course, the app  should watch for,  and suitably penalise any PAFs (phone .e mail or message centre) from GZ ... Then there needs to be a 24 hour a day watch on all aspects of the cachers life to ensure they solve that D5 puzzle without any outside help whatsoever ....

Yes, I'm being silly here to highlight the flaws .

A simpler answer to your problem (which I don't see as a problem myself ) would be, stop showing D/T grids on stats , or allowing challenges based on them. But that would demotivate some folk, therefore damage business too, so that's not going to happen.

 

I reckon your only hope to achieve what you want is to change human nature to eliminate competition for social status, fondness for collecting complete sets, boasting and dishonesty.

Sounds like a religion, not an amendment to an app 😀

 

Or you could just not be concerned by anyone else's stats, because how they got them really doesn't matter .Comparing them with your own , flawlessly honest ones ( because you found all caches solo, never did a PAF, never got a hint on a puzzle or were handed a container by someone who spotted it first ,etc etc ) and feeling peeved that they didn't earn them 'properly' is a waste of effort and will just make you feel negative.

Smile and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, AnTsInRpAnTs said:

It could work but given the propensity of many cachers for self-promotion based on stats manipulation anyway Per your other allegation, it's probably a complete waste of time.

 

Not an allegation.   :)   

Here's a fun read...     Adventure labs   

Caches come out, and only a week later there's already hundreds of fakers.  A number of COs experiencing the same.

With the Cache Carnival  promotions, many people reported numerous FPs on caches for no reason other than needed for the promotion.

 - Some also say they noticed once those FPs were added for their stats, some of the FP fakers were deleting them again from their archived caches.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

But... The hint is encrypted. So, all we need to do is modify the decryption algorithm to flag if the hint is decrypted. And, let's add eyeball tracking, so we can determine how much of the hint was read. If I only read half of the hint, I shouldn't get as much of a difficulty penalty. 

 

Just kidding. IMO, altering difficulty based on whether or not the hint was read is completely unworkable.

Share this post


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

Just kidding. IMO, altering difficulty based on whether or not the hint was read is completely unworkable.

 

Glad you were kidding ;-)  If a cache has some higher difficulty that needs to be maintained then perhaps the CO should just eliminate the hint. Problem solved for EVERYONE :-)

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/21/2019 at 1:51 AM, dprovan said:
On 5/20/2019 at 9:33 PM, L0ne.R said:

I can only vouch for my area, I’m not seeing quality caches (caches containers in relatively good shape with no ongoing issues) being archived by reviewers. The stuff that gets archived have ongoing problems. Missing for months, broken, missing lid for months, soaked for months, throw downs over and over. Caches that look like this get archived but only after months of neglect:

There's a solution to that: people visiting the cache post an NA. The problem with the war against "inactive COs", is that a cache that doesn't look like this and that no one's complaining about should also get archived under the "must visit regularly" rule.

 

Sometimes posting NAs just doesn't seem to work. There's an old cache (2007) I just saw a notification on that has 9 unanswered NMs dating from 2014 and now 3 NAs (the first over a year ago) but the only reviewer response to date was to post yet another NM after the first NA in March last year. It'll be interesting to see if the latest NA fares any better than the first two.

Needs ArchivedNeeds Archived

25/05/2019

This geocacher reported that this geocache should be archived. A community volunteer reviewer has been notified.

Needs MaintenanceNeeds Maintenance

25/05/2019

Needs maintenance or archiving

Needs ArchivedNeeds Archived

06/12/2018

This geocacher reported that this geocache should be archived. A community volunteer reviewer has been notified.

Write noteWrite note

06/12/2018

I have counted 8 needs maintenance logs on this cache since it was first reported being broken in 2014 . The CO has not logged online since 2015 . while I am all for keeping the history of caching alive, I don't think that applies for all caches. This ones location seems to be in question

Needs MaintenanceNeeds Maintenance

21/03/2018

Based on the previous logs this one needs some love

Needs ArchivedNeeds Archived

07/03/2018

This geocacher reported that this geocache should be archived. A community volunteer reviewer has been notified.

Needs MaintenanceNeeds Maintenance

18/11/2016

Needs to be replaced but preferably archived.

Needs MaintenanceNeeds Maintenance

15/11/2016

Found but lid broken so log was drenched, sorry we didn't have a replacement on us

Needs MaintenanceNeeds Maintenance

24/03/2016

Severely water damaged. Lid broken. Needs replacing.

Needs MaintenanceNeeds Maintenance

10/10/2015

Container lid is broken

Needs MaintenanceNeeds Maintenance

26/04/2015

Needs new container and log book.

Needs MaintenanceNeeds Maintenance

11/10/2014

Container broken

Needs MaintenanceNeeds Maintenance

20/02/2014

Container has a massive hole in lid!

  • Surprised 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:

Sometimes posting NAs just doesn't seem to work.

Where is this cache?

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Where is this cache?

 

It's on the New South Wales Central Coast.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

It's on the New South Wales Central Coast.

So, not in some outback, remote place with no other cache for over a hundred or more kms. Yes, should be archived.

 

A remote cache in the outback would likely have been fixed by now too by a traveller.

Edited by Goldenwattle

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/24/2019 at 9:34 AM, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

So, all we need to do is modify the decryption algorithm to flag if the hint is decrypted

You mean this decryption algorithm?

2b8ea460-a049-4bc1-a4ae-0c72d9745a2b_l.j

 

:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/24/2019 at 2:00 AM, AnTsInRpAnTs said:

the remote device application

:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

So, not in some outback, remote place with no other cache for over a hundred or more kms. Yes, should be archived.

 

A remote cache in the outback would likely have been fixed by now too by a traveller.

 

No, it's in an area with a reasonable population of caches and there's nothing particularly special about it, just a Sistema traditional in a patch of urban bushland.

 

image.png.e7febe0aae0682beccfb155052c41b74.png

 

The most recent photo of the cache, posted in 2016, shows the lid completely disintegrated and the container body has also split, so either it's been crushed or was sitting in the sun and the plastic's gone brittle.

 

eb35440b-6db5-4264-870d-5f5d4ea16a65_l.jpg

 

The found logs (204) still way outnumber the NMs and NAs and there've been no recent DNFs so I suspect the CHS thinks it's fine and that seems to be the sole arbiter of cache health these days.

 

Edited by barefootjeff
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

The found logs (204) still way outnumber the NMs and NAs and there've been no recent DNFs so I suspect the CHS thinks it's fine and that seems to be the sole arbiter of cache health these days. 

Contact the reviewer directly and include that photograph.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Contact the reviewer directly and include that photograph.

 

The latest NA was only logged yesterday so I'll wait a few weeks to see if that elicits any response, if not I'll drop by there next time I'm over that way and take an up-to-date photo of what's left of it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:

 

No, it's in an area with a reasonable population of caches and there's nothing particularly special about it, just a Sistema traditional in a patch of urban bushland.

 

image.png.e7febe0aae0682beccfb155052c41b74.png

 

The most recent photo of the cache, posted in 2016, shows the lid completely disintegrated and the container body has also split, so either it's been crushed or was sitting in the sun and the plastic's gone brittle.

 

eb35440b-6db5-4264-870d-5f5d4ea16a65_l.jpg

 

The found logs (204) still way outnumber the NMs and NAs and there've been no recent DNFs so I suspect the CHS thinks it's fine and that seems to be the sole arbiter of cache health these days.

 

 

You said it’s a 2007 cache. More then a decade old. Many cachers value old listings. Maybe your reviewer does too. 3 NAs and no response from the reviewer. Wow. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 

You said it’s a 2007 cache. More then a decade old. Many cachers value old listings. Maybe your reviewer does too. 3 NAs and no response from the reviewer. Wow. 

 

There are 78 caches in my region that were hidden in 2007 or earlier (out of a total of 565) so they're not exactly rare and most are in far better condition than this one.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:

 

The latest NA was only logged yesterday so I'll wait a few weeks to see if that elicits any response, if not I'll drop by there next time I'm over that way and take an up-to-date photo of what's left of it.

When you visit the cache, if it's in the same condition (ie not replaced), take the container with you and say the container had deteriorated so much as to be unusable (supply photo) and as the CO has continued to leave the container there as rubbish, that you have taken the container with you to dispose of responsibly. Add, that unless the CO does maintenance and supplies a new container and log, there is no cache and log to be found there now.

Edited by Goldenwattle
  • Upvote 1
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

When you visit the cache, if it's in the same condition (ie not replaced), take the container with you and say the container had deteriorated so much as to be unusable (supply photo) and as the CO has continued to leave the container there as rubbish, that you have taken the container with you to dispose of responsibly.

 

I guess what concerns me more about this is the message it sends to those who thought they were doing the right thing by logging NMs and NAs on a cache that's clearly abandoned and derelict, and to anyone else who might be looking at the logs. It seems as long as it's still capable of generating smileys everything's fine, but on the other hand the reviewer seems keen to pre-emptively pounce on tricky caches that "might be missing" due to a few DNFs. It's just a game of collecting smileys now and as long as there's enough of the cache left to claim one, that's all that matters.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I guess what concerns me more about this is the message it sends to those who thought they were doing the right thing by logging NMs and NAs on a cache that's clearly abandoned and derelict, and to anyone else who might be looking at the logs. It seems as long as it's still capable of generating smileys everything's fine, but on the other hand the reviewer seems keen to pre-emptively pounce on tricky caches that "might be missing" due to a few DNFs. It's just a game of collecting smileys now and as long as there's enough of the cache left to claim one, that's all that matters.

Then take the cache. That will stop the smilies.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Then take the cache. That will stop the smilies.

And likely invite a throwdown with no chance of it being maintained either.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, colleda said:

And likely invite a throwdown with no chance of it being maintained either.

Not if along with taking the cache, it is explained that the cache was now just broken, wet junk; unusable and unsignable and needed to be cleared away. No cache there now. If anyone now logs they didn't find the cache. And contact the reviewer directly. I know the cache has had lots of ignored NMs and NAs, but surely you don't expect the reviewer to ignore it forever.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

 

You said it’s a 2007 cache. More then a decade old. Many cachers value old listings. Maybe your reviewer does too. 3 NAs and no response from the reviewer. Wow. 

Is a reviewer allowable at all to leave a cache with 3 NAs without any action? As far as I know there are some rules/guidelines which have to be followed by reviewers, too.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, rapotek said:

Is a reviewer allowable at all to leave a cache with 3 NAs without any action? As far as I know there are some rules/guidelines which have to be followed by reviewers, too.

Must be. 6 NA, 116 NM (12 OM) CO (living in another country) "gone" for 1.5 years, numerous throwdowns that disappeared and no reviewer activity. And this is for a cache in a popular tourist spot where I'm sure some local could place and maintain a cache without a problem.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, rapotek said:

Is a reviewer allowable at all to leave a cache with 3 NAs without any action? As far as I know there are some rules/guidelines which have to be followed by reviewers, too.

 

Third time lucky or is someone listening here? The reviewer's just disabled that cache and given the long-gone CO 28 days notice.

  • Upvote 5
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, rapotek said:

Is a reviewer allowable at all to leave a cache with 3 NAs without any action? As far as I know there are some rules/guidelines which have to be followed by reviewers, too.

 

In this thread , a couple Reviewers respond to a similar question.

In that thread, there was an example of someone placing bogus NAs on another's caches.

We see NAs placed when NM or DNF should have been used as well. 

Maybe it'd make some folks happy to see a Reviewer note of "move on folks, nothing to see here...", but I feel many realize that no action does the same thing.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

In this thread , a couple Reviewers respond to a similar question.

In that thread, there was an example of someone placing bogus NAs on another's caches.

We see NAs placed when NM or DNF should have been used as well. 

Maybe it'd make some folks happy to see a Reviewer note of "move on folks, nothing to see here...", but I feel many realize that no action does the same thing.  :)

One NA placed instead of NM or DNF (by mistake or not) is one thing. Three NAs during more than year (not including even more NMs) without any reaction from cache owner or reviewer is another thing. As for a NA where NM or DNF should be - the single Owner Maintenance should close the case.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 2

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 6

×