Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Deepdiggingmole

Number of cache types allowed in challenges

Recommended Posts

I am aware that several years ago HQ dictated that the number of icons allowed to be used in a challenge would be limited to 8.
I am under the impression that since the moratorium this was relaxed and 11 icons is now allowed 
Am I wrong ?

Is there a maximum number of types allowed ?
Is there anything written to verify any 'ruling' around this

Many thanks

 

Tim

Share this post


Link to post

The answer depends on the type of challenge and where the challenge cache owner is located (because of availability of certain cache types).

  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post

Relevant portion from guidance in the Help Center:

 

Quote

Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that there are plenty of qualifying caches to meet the challenge at the time of publication.

 

Seems like there are two criteria in play in determining the acceptability of a Challenge based on cache types: availability and how reasonable it is log them (setting aside the Jasmer issue, which requires extensive travel for most people).

 

I think that most areas could easily qualify for 9 types:

  • traditional
  • multi-cache
  • mystery/unknown
  • event
  • earthcache
  • webcam
  • letterbox
  • Wherigo
  • virtual

These are readily available in most areas, although Webcam's might be a stretch in some areas.

 

The following would be a bit sketchier to add to the list in my opinion (although we have lots of CITO's in my area, but other areas may have too infrequent CITO's to qualify):

 

  • CITO
  • mega
  • giga
  • maze
  • Block Party
  • Community Celebration
  • Geocaching HQ Celebration
  • Groundspeak HQ (only available one location)
  • Ape (unavailable in most of the world)

Out of the mix for consideration would be:

  • Locationless
  • Lab

The other portion of this proposal would probably have to include the number of local Users who qualify, to bolster the argument that the Challenge is achievable.  In my area, 10 Users is a pretty common metric to determine how reasonable a Challenge is. 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 3

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Touchstone said:

The other portion of this proposal would probably have to include the number of local Users who qualify, to bolster the argument that the Challenge is achievable.  In my area, 10 Users is a pretty common metric to determine how reasonable a Challenge is. 

 

 

I am wanting a 11 to 1 challenge where you have to have found 11 types in one country, 10 in a second down to 1 in the 11th
I acknowledge that 11 would include mega - but where I am most cachers have been to one or both of the two megas we have held locally in the last few years. Or even to the several megas held in the UK over the last few years 
I do not think that many cachers would have trouble with 11 icons in their own country if they are interested in this sort of challenge - going to country number 2 requiring 10 again is very achievable.... and so on
This sort of challenge would not be for everyone but how many challenge caches are.

 

As far as "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that there are plenty of qualifying caches to meet the challenge" - Megas are not going to go away, certainly in the UK 

With regard to the above quote - yup, a list of 10 qualifiers supplied 

I also feel that challenges are not future based - past finds do counts and many cachers do have the 'mega' ticked off and so it wont matter that there are only 3 or so a year in the UK (my locality)  in the future 

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

I also feel that challenges are not future based -

This would be contrary to the spirit of the following guidance:

 

Quote

Challenge caches need to be attainable at any time.

For this reason, cache types no longer available would not be allowed (e.g. Locationless), as these cache types are not available to people who started after the cache type was discontinued.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi with regard to the last - I am ware that locationless etc are not allowed -

my point was - to qualify for a challenge you cant just rely on caches being available in the future as past finds do count 

Share this post


Link to post

Guessing you're in Europe where there are plenty of countries in which to qualify easily.  If it had 'in one day' as a qualifier for each cache type, I'd find that less likely. But in total? I don't see why it wouldn't be allowed, but that's my perspective as coming from North America, where it might be limited to 2 or 3 countries up to 11 types, or some variant.

A baker's dozen-style cache type total per country though, that's a cumulative challenge which I can see being not too difficult... an asusmption on my part, but your local reviewers would have to make that 'reasonably attainable' judgment, and based on the guidelines Touchtone quoted above.

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

Hi with regard to the last - I am ware that locationless etc are not allowed -

my point was - to qualify for a challenge you cant just rely on caches being available in the future as past finds do count 

Too true, and that is why the "qualifiers" list is sometimes asked for, at least in particularly difficult Challenges where it might not be apparent that it is achievable.  My point being, that past finds are a good gauge of whether a Challenge is achievable, but some of those past Finds might be based on International travel, requiring thousands of miles, to get to that point.  Therefore, all Challenges need to be addressed on local reality.  This is why I can understand some exclusions, such as Mega's and Giga's in some situations.  They are so infrequent (or not at all) that it may require extensive travel ($$$$) to complete.  Almost like having a Challenge based on Leap Day, which require Finders to wait 4 years to log a Challenge.  Just doesn't seem reasonable or fair to me.

Share this post


Link to post

I acknowledge the issue around rarity, though I disagree with it, as there is a link with the time factor. The argument that Megas are rare is due to how many there are in a year ,  but when it comes to time span compare it to a challenge like, for example,  'find 20,000 caches' (a challenge I know has been published) which can take the majority of cachers over 10 years or much longer to complete.

looking at both challenges -- both achievable ? yes 

but to argue that Megas are rare when you are likely to see at least 20 or 30 or more in the UK over the time span it would take to complete the 20,000 caches challenge doesn’t make them so rare.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Touchstone said:

These are readily available in most areas, although Webcam's might be a stretch in some areas.

 

There are only four webcams in Australia, three in South Australia and one in Victoria, so not very readily available especially for those in other states. New Zealand has only one webcam which is located in Canterbury on the South Island.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I did a challenge cache that required ten cache types.  I had eleven.  But I had found the APE cache in Maryland.  I now have Whereigos.  New Webcam caches have not been permitted in fifteen years.  Go visit mine.  It is very popular.  Well, for half the year...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Harry Dolphin said:

New Webcam caches have not been permitted in fifteen years.  Go visit mine.  It is very popular.  Well, for half the year...

When I finally get around to doing a roadtrip around that part of the US, I will make a point of doing it! :)

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, funkymunkyzone said:

When I finally get around to doing a roadtrip around that part of the US, I will make a point of doing it! :)

US is the place to go if you need a webcam for a challenge. There's only 3 in Australia and 1 in New Zealand For those up north that aren't aware, Australia is a land mass similar to lower 48 US.

There was an archived webcam cache near me that I was unaware of until it was suddenly discovered by somebody that it was still working. After a rush of Finds it got locked just days before I found out.

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

I am wanting a 11 to 1 challenge where you have to have found 11 types in one country, 10 in a second down to 1 in the 11th

 

I like the basic idea of counting down. (And that is much better than "do xyz icons in ony day".) *thumbs up*

 

But I think 11 is very much. 11 shouldn't be a problem in your home country but finding 10 icons in another country isn't too easy. And if you got this you need a third one with 9 icons!?

Why not make it a smaller number? "Magic 7" perhaps? (I still would not fulfil it with 7, 6, 5, ...., 1 icons in seven countries. ;-)))

 

If I were you I'd submit the challenge with the number I like (e. g. 11) and the names of local cachers fulfilling it. If the reviewer does not want to publish the cache you can still lower the number to anything "reasonable". ;-)

 

In any case don't forget that you need a project-gc checker for your challenge. Is this one easy to create? I don't know...

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, frostengel said:

 

I like the basic idea of counting down. (And that is much better than "do xyz icons in ony day".) *thumbs up*

 

But I think 11 is very much. 11 shouldn't be a problem in your home country but finding 10 icons in another country isn't too easy. And if you got this you need a third one with 9 icons!?

Why not make it a smaller number? "Magic 7" perhaps? (I still would not fulfil it with 7, 6, 5, ...., 1 icons in seven countries. ;-)))

 

If I were you I'd submit the challenge with the number I like (e. g. 11) and the names of local cachers fulfilling it. If the reviewer does not want to publish the cache you can still lower the number to anything "reasonable". ;-)

 

In any case don't forget that you need a project-gc checker for your challenge. Is this one easy to create? I don't know...

 

I have submitted my idea with 11 and it has been rejected - I also ensured there was a checker, it isn't a hard one to create a checker for
The reason for the rejection seems to lean on having to find 'mega events' however I feel the argument is weak and can justify why.
I gave a list of 10 cachers who have already qualified and of course I do to - when I submitted the cache

I am waiting on a reply to my appeal to the reviewer

Share this post


Link to post

Why not make a challenger most coachers could even try? Not every one has the finances to travel to one country other than their own let alone eleven.

Edited by Jayeffel
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

I have submitted my idea with 11 and it has been rejected

 

Then why not reducing the difficulty level? If the problem is just the mega event then probably reducing the challenge to 9, 8, 7, ... will do for the reviewer.

 

Just something to think about: If you have done something great let other do a little less. Challenges are not to show how great you are but to give others something to work on (if they like). I don't like "I have done exactly...... and you should reach the same."

 

You have 11, 10, 9, ... icons? Let others have 9, 8, 7, ... icons and show them that you were able to do it (and even got more)! Why not make a little compatition or "rating" system and encourage your finders to beat you?

Who ever makes the challenge with 9 icons is allowed to log the challenge cache but you make a list (for those who want) who made the most icon-countdowns.

Or give a gold and silver status for people who reached more. Just for the fun.

 

Just one example: a friend of mine visited 7 countries in one day. She wanted to list a challenge like that but she could be convinced to only do 5 countries a day. Still impressive (and out of my reach) but it is not "look what I have done".

 

By the way: your challenge with 9 icons would still be out of reach for me, too. Still a difficulty 5. No need to have more.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

There is another guideline that might impact the acceptance of this particular challenge, and that is the restrictions on time-limited challenges. For example, you cannot have a challenge that requires a find on Feb 29th. With Mega and Giga events, these do not happen on just any day of the year. There are a very limited number of days in the year where they will be available. So, it might be this restriction that you are bumping up against.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, frostengel said:

Just something to think about: If you have done something great let other do a little less. Challenges are not to show how great you are but to give others something to work on (if they like). I don't like "I have done exactly...... and you should reach the same."

 

I wanted to give a +1 to this.

We have a challenge to find two caches of same cache type separated by 6250 miles and to do that for 5 different cache types.   When we submitted the challenge, we were actually at seven types at 7000 miles.   We went with 6250 miles because it seemed like less of an arbitrary number since it represented 1/4 of the Earth's circumference at the equator.   We went with 5 because it seems like after Traditional, Earth, Unknown, Virtual, and Multi you see a big drop off in availability.         

 

On your challenge concept, my opinion is 8 cache types in a foreign country is kind of a dividing line.   At 8 you leave the cacher the choice if they want to go for the event types or for webcam/wherigos/letterboxes.  As Wet Pancake Touring Club points out, event/CITOs/Megas are fairly limited on the dates they are available.  On the surface we would love to try for a challenge like you describe - but above 9 the event/CITO requirement in foreign countries would be a deal breaker.   

 

(BTW - for full disclosure, we would qualify at 6.   At 7 we would be a DNF on a Multi in Canada short.)     

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/17/2019 at 1:30 PM, Jayeffel said:

Why not make a challenger most coachers could even try? Not every one has the finances to travel to one country other than their own let alone eleven.

 

In the US, one could make the same argument on "find x cache types in x states," yet those abound.  They're easier for folks in the Northeast to get, where the states are smaller, than, say, Alaska or Hawaii.

 

The OP here is in the UK, and following the relaxation of travel requirements through the Schengen Agreement, traveling among countries in Europe is more like traveling through states.  (Understanding the local dialect can be a little more challenging, of course.) 

 

We visited 32 countries in Europe in a three year period the last time we were here, and that was as a captain, not exactly swimming in cash.  We're currently tied as far as states and countries cached with 41 each, and we'll have more countries cached than states by the time we leave next summer. 

 

Back to the original topic, I don't think I'd ever qualify for the challenge proposed, but that's more because the way we cache would limit us, not because of access to available venues.  I know I have 11 cache types in the US and Germany, and I could use my one traditional cache find in Mexico on the low end of the scale, but there's probably a significant gap in the middle, as I lack the events I'd need to really stack my numbers - the other two thirds of hzoi don't really enjoy events, so while I go to local events solo, I usually lack time to attend them when I am traveling on business, and we always skip those when we travel as a family.

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/17/2019 at 2:13 AM, frostengel said:

Why not make it a smaller number? "Magic 7" perhaps? (I still would not fulfil it with 7, 6, 5, ...., 1 icons in seven countries. ;-)))

This thread makes me think of a "9 to 5" challenge cache:

  • one country/state with 9 cache types
  • one country/state with 8 cache types
  • one country/state with 7 cache types
  • one country/state with 6 cache types
  • one country/state with 5 cache types

And "9 to 5" has a nice ring to it too.

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/17/2019 at 1:22 PM, Deepdiggingmole said:

I also ensured there was a checker, it isn't a hard one to create a checker for

 

I'm curious to see how close I would have come - can you post a link to the checker?

 

edit - found it.  Or at least something similar.  As I suspected, a hole at the top, I go from 11 and 10 to 7.  

Edited by hzoi

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/17/2019 at 1:22 PM, Deepdiggingmole said:

I have submitted my idea with 11 and it has been rejected - I also ensured there was a checker, it isn't a hard one to create a checker for
The reason for the rejection seems to lean on having to find 'mega events' however I feel the argument is weak and can justify why.
I gave a list of 10 cachers who have already qualified and of course I do to - when I submitted the cache

I am waiting on a reply to my appeal to the reviewer


Your idea with 10 would be OK without any major doubt.

The only realistic additional type to make it 11 is Mega Event, yes. Other types are even more rare, but lot of them are available choices too.

Now. The key question can be reduced to this one: 

"Are there plenty of caches (from pool of rare type Mega, Giga, Maze, etc) available at time of publication? Let's say, now?"

 

If I believe quick search on Project-gc.com, there 51 of them at the moment:
https://project-gc.com/Tools/MapCompare?profile_name=Deepdiggingmole&nonefound=on&onefound=on&bothfound=on&ownfound=on&type[]=GPS+Adventures+Exhibit&type[]=Giga-Event+Cache&type[]=Groundspeak+Block+Party&type[]=Groundspeak+HQ&type[]=Groundspeak+Lost+and+Found+Celebration&type[]=Mega-Event+Cache&type[]=Project+APE+Cache&submit=Filter

 

Are 51 "plenty" of options?

My personal opinion is YES and I would guess that your Appeal have chance to be successful.

If not, we have to accept it. Borders are blurry and interpretations are different, sometimes.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Following on from Rikitan's research, of those 51 rare type caches, 13 are in the US, two in Australia, one in Brazil, and the rest in Europe. And, this is for the next year. I'm going to re-phrase Rikitan's question differently; is having this category of caches available one day a week "plenty" of options? IMO, no. Of course, it gets worse if you regionalize the question.

  • In the US, it is just over one cache a month.
  • Europe is better, it is one every 9 days or so.

That is why I think this bumps up against the time restrictions section of the Challenge Cache guidelines. My interpretation of that guideline is that Challenge Caches cannot have onerous time restrictions. IMO, only 51 days out of the year is too onerous.

 

Looking at regular events in the US for the next two months, Project-GC shows me just over 700 events. On average, that is over 10 a day.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

That is why I think this bumps up against the time restrictions section of the Challenge Cache guidelines. My interpretation of that guideline is that Challenge Caches cannot have onerous time restrictions. IMO, only 51 days out of the year is too onerous.

 

Harder than one year streak which is allowed? You can do both in one year - right?

Share this post


Link to post

 

2 hours ago, arisoft said:

Harder than one year streak which is allowed? You can do both in one year - right?

I think we may have a difference of opinion on the definition of harder. To me, harder implies effort. Time is not a factor. I can lift a 1kg weight in one second. I can also lift a 10kg weight in one second. So, if the length of time were the definition, these tasks are equally hard. But most would say that lifting 10kg is ten times as hard as lifting 1kg.

 

IMO, comparing a one year streak to the OP's challenge is like comparing apples to oranges. Yes, they are both fruit but beyond that, not much in common. A streak compared to the OP's challenge does have finding other caches in common. The streak will take a year. The OP's challenge does not have a length of time commitment. The streak requires caching every day for that year. The number of total caches is very different, 365 versus 66. The streak does not have a geographical (country) requirement.

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, hzoi said:

 

I'm curious to see how close I would have come - can you post a link to the checker?

 

edit - found it.  Or at least something similar.  As I suspected, a hole at the top, I go from 11 and 10 to 7.  

 

Hmm...  I've only cached in two countries.  I have 15 cache types in the US and 6 in Canada.  

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, Harry Dolphin said:

 

Hmm...  I've only cached in two countries.  I have 15 cache types in the US and 6 in Canada.  

 

After six years of caching in Australia (and a week in New Zealand) I have 8 cache types. The only others I'm likely to get are CITO and Wherigo as we're unlikely to get any Gigas and all but one of the four webcams in this country are over a thousand kilometres away (the other one is 600km away in the Victorian Alps).

Share this post


Link to post
44 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

After six years of caching in Australia (and a week in New Zealand) I have 8 cache types. The only others I'm likely to get are CITO and Wherigo as we're unlikely to get any Gigas and all but one of the four webcams in this country are over a thousand kilometres away (the other one is 600km away in the Victorian Alps).

 

Which is why this would be a very regional challenge.  I'll never go caching in nine other countries.  I've been caching for fifteen years.  So we were able to find the APE Cache in Maryland.  Flew to my brother's wedding in Seattle, and he took me to Groundspeak HQ.  Drove to the Connecticut for the GPS Adventures Exhibit.  

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/17/2019 at 12:30 PM, Jayeffel said:

Why not make a challenger most coachers could even try? Not every one has the finances to travel to one country other than their own let alone eleven.

There are many, many much simpler challenges and most range in the lower D rating for that reason - this is a hard challenge (and is a 5*D for a reason) and is for those who do travel (and there are a lot who do) and appreciate a more challenging challenge to award the efforts made while doing so 

Share this post


Link to post

Well - I have had the 11 type (icon) idea refused and this has been backed up by a refusal on appeal. Unfortunately it does smack of one rule for one and another rule for another as I am aware of 11 icon challenges (post moratorium) out there and also challenges which rely on having attended mega events - it was around this factor (the mega event attendance) that my 11 type was refused 
The citing of the following guidelines - the same source of criteria and attainability guidelines "Challenge caches need to be attainable at any time." or "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that there are plenty of qualifying caches to meet the challenge at the time of publication." are the reasons that mine was refused as mega events are not that readily available - so on that basis no challenge where the criteria involves attending mega events should be allowed - but they have and I am sure they will 

Very frustrating - but there we go 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

Unfortunately it does smack of one rule for one and another rule for another

Yeah, Keystone wrote as much:

On 9/16/2019 at 8:14 AM, Keystone said:

The answer depends on the type of challenge and where the challenge cache owner is located (because of availability of certain cache types).

 

 

4 hours ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

as I am aware of [existing caches]

And as the guidelines state:

 

"There are no precedents for placing geocaches."

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎9‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 3:58 PM, barefootjeff said:

 

After six years of caching in Australia (and a week in New Zealand) I have 8 cache types. The only others I'm likely to get are CITO and Wherigo as we're unlikely to get any Gigas and all but one of the four webcams in this country are over a thousand kilometres away (the other one is 600km away in the Victorian Alps).

After 19 years of caching I have 18 cache types in the US - but then I live near HQ so Block Party, HQ, Lost and Found and APE were 'easy' to get.  In UK I have 10, then it drops to 4/3/2/1 in a few other countries.

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, niraD said:

Yeah, Keystone wrote as much:

 

 

And as the guidelines state:

 

"There are no precedents for placing geocaches."

This isn't an issue of precedents - if the guidelines are used to make a decision about the suitability then surely it needs to be used on all challenges particularly if the criteria are the same 
On mine I was quoted that the reason a Mega event can't be used is  
"using criteria and attainability guidelines "Challenge caches need to be attainable at any time." and "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that there are plenty of qualifying caches to meet the challenge at the time of publication." With MEGA Events not being available at all times, they should not be part of your challenge criteria. 
OK so - I accept that (I dont necessarily agree with it - but have to accept it) 

So why are other challenges (post moratorium) allowed to include Megas - I submitted mine on the basis that other challenges have Megas within the criteria 
I don't want to hear locality arguments, I understand that too - I am referring to challenges in my locality 

I am aware of a challenge cache relatively near to this one where the criteria is to find 1 mega in two different countries, that's 2 megas - surely if using criteria and attainability guidelines (as above) is applied this should not have been allowed either, But it was !!
I am not looking for an answer to this as there isnt one - just pointing out that if a reviewer uses guidelines to refuse a challenge he should use that same on all challenges that have the same criteria - it smacks of inconsistency and favouritism 

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

I am not looking for an answer to this as there isnt one - just pointing out that if a reviewer uses guidelines to refuse a challenge he should use that same on all challenges that have the same criteria - it smacks of inconsistency and favouritism 

Or, it could simply be that guidance on fine details of challenge acceptability have developed over time, and reviewers learn of those developments at different times.

 

For those wondering why the scope of acceptable challenge caches was reduced severely post-moratorium, look no further than this post.  We Reviewers saw it all the time and sometimes still do.

  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Keystone said:

Or, it could simply be that guidance on fine details of challenge acceptability have developed over time, and reviewers learn of those developments at different times.

Are you saying the guidelines 

"Challenge caches need to be attainable at any time." and "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that there are plenty of qualifying caches to meet the challenge at the time of publication."
have not been there since the changes post moratorium - I'd like to see what amendments have been made to the guidelines over that time 

 

1 minute ago, Keystone said:

For those wondering why the scope of acceptable challenge caches was reduced severely post-moratorium, look no further than this post.  We Reviewers saw it all the time and sometimes still do.

Interesting
I don't like to have a go at 'reviewers' specifically as I think they do a great job and have always had respect for what they do - but I do know that not all reviewers are up to speed with challenge cache criteria even now and I would not say that reviewers in particular are any more an expert than other experienced caches on what makes a good or bad challenge cache - I have come across many challenges that didn't comply with post moratorium criteria yet still got published. 

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

I have come across many challenges that didn't comply with post moratorium criteria yet still got published. 

 

Some of them have already archived by the HQ. The reviewer do not have the final decision-making powers. If they fail the HQ will correct the outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

I have come across many challenges that didn't comply with post moratorium criteria yet still got published. 

You make it sound like "post moratorium criteria" are static and unchanging. They aren't. The guidelines have changed. The current interpretations of the guidelines have changed.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

Some of them have already archived by the HQ. The reviewer do not have the final decision-making powers. If they fail the HQ will correct the outcome.

Many of them actually got archived by the relevant reviewers, not HQ, once the issue was pointed out to them.
I'll add at this point that as a moderator with PGC I have reviewed over 2000 caches that purport to be challenge caches - many are, many are not and several should not have been. My comments are not said blindly 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, niraD said:

You make it sound like "post moratorium criteria" are static and unchanging. They aren't. The guidelines have changed. The current interpretations of the guidelines have changed.

As I mentioned in another reply I am a moderator with PGC I have reviewed over 2000 caches that purport to be challenge caches - many are, many are not and several should not have been. My comments are not said blindly. I have not seen that much of a change in the guidelines since everything was changed. TBH the guidelines are not that grey that there is a scope for much interpretation. 
taking "
Challenge caches need to be attainable at any time." and "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that there are plenty of qualifying caches to meet the challenge at the time of publication." as an example they seem fairly black and white, and you would hope that a reviewer would not interpret them one way one year and then interpret them differently the next.
Taking the example - Mega events - one year they are not available enough so not allowable to be included in a challenge, and another year they are. 
I do understand guidelines changing and interpretations changing - but when they are as black and white as this you would hope for some consistency.

 

That is all I had hoped for - it hasn't happened - I have said my piece
And so the matter can now rest 

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

Many of them actually got archived by the relevant reviewers, not HQ, once the issue was pointed out to them.
I'll add at this point that as a moderator with PGC I have reviewed over 2000 caches that purport to be challenge caches - many are, many are not and several should not have been. My comments are not said blindly 

 

Yes, we are both in the dark side :ph34r: I also pre review some challenges and I know those mixed feelings because in many cases I can not say whether the idea will be accepted or not.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

taking "Challenge caches need to be attainable at any time." and "Challenge cache owners must demonstrate that there are plenty of qualifying caches to meet the challenge at the time of publication." as an example they seem fairly black and white, and you would hope that a reviewer would not interpret them one way one year and then interpret them differently the next.

 

The closer I look at the guidelines the more confused I become. How many is "plenty" and spread over what area? There are 247 webcam caches left in the world, so for a challenge requiring ten would that be considered "plenty"? Yet in the whole southern hemisphere there are four in Australia, one in New Zealand, one in Fiji and one in Antarctica, so finding ten of them for someone on this side of the world would be rather challenging.

 

Then there's "A challenge cache needs to appeal to and be attainable by a reasonable number of cachers. Your reviewer may ask for a list of cachers from your area who qualify." How do I know if my challenge will appeal to someone or not? How big is my "area"? Is it my local government area (equivalent to county), my state or somewhere in between? That's an important question for me as my own LGA (New South Wales Central Coast) has very few active cachers now, but the adjoining areas (Sydney and Newcastle) have plenty. And how many is a reasonable number? The concensus from what I've read on the forums is ten, but I'd be struggling to name ten active cachers in my LGA, let alone the subset of those that might find a T4 cache appealing.

 

And there's the one I raised in another thread, "The challenge requirements should be simple, and easy to explain, follow and document. A long list of rules or restrictions may prevent publication." How long does a list of rules and restrictions need to be before it's considered too long? I put this question to my reviewer but the only reply so far has been "I would first check to see if the required checker code can be written." I've done that, I have a checker, I've sent him the link to it, but no further response. I can understand the reviewers being reluctant to say yay or nay before they've seen the complete cache submission, but the one I'm working on is taking a fair bit of effort, including getting approval from National Parks and constructing a themed container, so I'll be a tad disappointed if after I hit the submit button I get told my list of qualification conditions is too long and, say, only one criteria is allowed.

 

So no, not very black and white at all when you start getting into the grey areas.

Edited by barefootjeff

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

"I would first check to see if the required checker code can be written."

 

Normally script writers will wait until the reviewer accepts the idea. The process seems to be upside down. Why should a voluntary script writer start working before a voluntary reviewer accepts the idea?

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

So no, not very black and white at all when you start getting into the grey areas.

 I agree with all that you have said - I argued that the majority of cachers who would be appealed by this sort of cache (challenge caches) are likely to have already attended a mega - so the fact that there wont be another for 10 months isn't really an issue (and I proved that fact too) and if someone hasn't attended then they will make sure they will. This sort of challenge takes some time to complete if you start from scratch and there will be plenty of megas during that time, though you only need one !!!
 

'Appeal and be attainable to a reasonable number of cachers' - yes, but not everyone likes challenge caches and so I am not going to create a hard challenge that everybody can achieve - caches are found 20 metres up a tree, not everyone has the equipment to reach it so they dont do it - but does that stop those types of caches being published - of course not. Oh! and I did provide a list of 10 cachers who qualified and could have provided a list of 50 who were part way through (and had mega ticked off) 

 

I also had the checker ready 

As far as 'not very black and white' - what frustrates me is that if I lived in a different region - I know that that region's reviewer would have published the original concept without issue. I understand interpretation, but I don't think that two or more reviewers (in the same country) should have interpretations to the extent that one will publish and one wont because they read the guidelines differently 

 

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

Normally script writers will wait until the reviewer accepts the idea. The process seems to be upside down. Why should a voluntary script writer start working before a voluntary reviewer accepts the idea?

 H'm - I requested the checker for my original concept prior to it being reviewed - checker was created straight away. No request for reviewer confirmation 
I didn't think there would be an issue with the challenge criteria and so got the whole kit and caboodle ready, cache placed, page created, checker added etc etc before submission 

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/17/2019 at 12:49 AM, funkymunkyzone said:

When I finally get around to doing a roadtrip around that part of the US, I will make a point of doing it! :)

I have a webcam in the UK too - its 12 years since they were stopped. It wont be long before they are rarer than a mega ;)

Share this post


Link to post

Deepdiggingmole, try going to appeals.  It's not hard, it won't hurt, and it's your opportunity to get the challenge that you want.

 

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Isonzo Karst said:

Deepdiggingmole, try going to appeals.  It's not hard, it won't hurt, and it's your opportunity to get the challenge that you want.

 

You may have missed the OPs post from last Friday that said, in part:

 

"I have had the 11 type (icon) idea refused and this has been backed up by a refusal on appeal"

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/22/2019 at 4:17 AM, Deepdiggingmole said:

I have a webcam in the UK too - its 12 years since they were stopped. It wont be long before they are rarer than a mega ;)

 

As GS stated, challenge caches need to be attainable at any time. While there will come a time when the number of webcam caches is less than the number of mega events in a year, the remaining webcam caches will still be attainable 365 days of the year. The mega event lasts a day or two, and is not attainable for 314 days out of the next 365. Heck, even the remaining APE cache is available 365 days of the year. The only thing stopping me from going and finding it on any particular day of the year is me.

 

Which is more rare? It depends on your definition of rare. To me, rare has multiple meanings, and your statement that webcam caches will be rarer than mega events is mixing the meanings. Rare as in few remaining, versus rare as in having limited availability. 

Share this post


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

Which is more rare?

 

We have just a debate about attainability. There was an opinion that event caches are not attainable because you may need to wait for a while until the next event. The issue was solved by HQ by allowing events desipite that they are not available 24/7/365.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

×
×
  • Create New...