Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
Geocaching HQ

Release Notes (Website: Public Profile displays total Favorite points received) - February 10, 2020

Recommended Posts

Release Notes (Website: Public Profile displays total Favorite points received) - February 10, 2020
 
With today’s release, we have updated the new Public Profile on Geocaching.com. You can now view your total Favorite points received on geocaches you own, both active and archived. This release is part of an ongoing effort to celebrate and thank geocache hiders. The total Favorite points replaces the stat of total trackable discoveries/moves. (The Trackable tab on this page continues to display statistics about trackables.)
 
With this release, you can also view how many total Favorite points another geocacher has earned on the geocaches they own by visiting their Public Profile. See Geocaching HQ as an example. If you do not see the Favorite points, then select “Go to new public profile” on the blue banner.
 
Updated Profile page, with total Favorite points earned on geocaches owned:

 

yZxLUgz7p15RqM6j_Q9YM_1vg1KNsQgxW8SUGKw8

 

 

To learn more about how Favorite points are earned, rewarded, and received, please visit the Help Center.
 
Erin (Oceansazul), is watching this thread to answer questions whenever possible.
 
Any posts in this thread should relate to features in this release. Comments unrelated to the release may be removed. Please direct unrelated comments to other appropriate threads. Thanks!

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 3

Share this post


Link to post

I'm guessing this is another thing just added to the "new" profile page, as on my "older,  but (to me) better" one it still shows my trackables log total, just as I like.  :)

 

Edited by cerberus1
just
  • Upvote 4
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

I'm guessing this is another thing just added to the "new" profile page

 

No need to guess. ;)

 

17 hours ago, Geocaching HQ said:

With today’s release, we have updated the new Public Profile on Geocaching.com.

...

If you do not see the Favorite points, then select “Go to new public profile” on the blue banner.

 

I'm amazed they're still running two versions of an essentially identical page.  At  least there is now a real (rather than aesthetic) difference - one shows FPs awarded, the other Trackables Logged.

Edited by IceColdUK
Messed up the quote

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, Geocaching HQ said:

With today’s release, we have updated the new Public Profile on Geocaching.com. You can now view your total Favorite points received on geocaches you own, both active and archived.

 

If an overall 'Percentage FPs' could be displayed too, it would be even more useful. :-) 

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post

I don't get it. Why it has replaced the trackable moved/discovered number, instead of just being added extra?

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, sernikk said:

Why it has replaced the trackable moved/discovered number, instead of just being added extra?

 

I'd prefer FP over TB stats if it's one or the other. TB stats are bragging values, or perhaps inform people how much someone interacts with TBs; FP points are relevant and informative about the person as a cache owner, and is useful information to others (to whatever degree) who might be curious about their caches. If we could have both, I'd not be against that. But FP > TB

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

I'd prefer FP over TB stats if it's one or the other. TB stats are bragging values, or perhaps inform people how much someone interacts with TBs;

FP points are relevant and informative about the person as a cache owner, and is useful information to others (to whatever degree) who might be curious about their caches. If we could have both, I'd not be against that. But FP > TB

 

Sorry to add to this veering off-topic post, but you forgot to say "in my opinion...".     :)

The Help Center still says " Geocaching Favorite points are a simple way to track and share the geocaches that you enjoyed the most."

There's one heck-of-a-lot of older cachers, with long-time "pioneer" and "legacy" caches with only a couple favorite points, simply because they were there years before FPs were a thing, and few back-logged them.

There's also a lot of nondescript hides with FPs for everything from FTF to they're a friend.  

I'd bet a good number of FP  caches are now "community maintained" as well.  Guess I don't understand why FPs seem to matter all of a sudden...

  • Upvote 4
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, cerberus1 said:

There's one heck-of-a-lot of older cachers, with long-time "pioneer" and "legacy" caches with only a couple favorite points, simply because they were there years before FPs were a thing, and few back-logged them.

True enough.

I was focusing more about the concept of FPs than the current status of their implementation in practice, which certainly doesn't have a universal standard.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, IceColdUK said:

If an overall 'Percentage FPs' could be displayed too, it would be even more useful. :-) 

 

This would make more sense to me.  For instance, my profile shows 70 favorite points awarded to my hides - but it's just a number.  Is that one one hide?  Or 200 hides?  Percentage would not give you that either, but it would be a "more" relevant number. (Those 70  points are on 14 hides, 3 have earned 0, and one has 40, the rest are scattereda mong my other hides).  

 

Would the % be for the # of finds recorded on all hides?  Does GSAK or Project-GC have that info?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

We would love to also see percentage of FPs shown. We have a high percentage of favorite points, but our hides don't draw huge crowds of finders due to their complexity.  They aren't exactly what one would consider "popular."  However, those who take the time to complete our caches, for the most part, tend to love them & add fave points. For example, one of them was number 1 in the state percentage-wise for quite a long while there. It is relatively easy to wrack up a ridiculous number of fave points when you have thousands of caches, not as easy to hide a hundred really stellar ones that generate blue ribbons.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, CAVinoGal said:

 

This would make more sense to me.  For instance, my profile shows 70 favorite points awarded to my hides - but it's just a number.  Is that one one hide?  Or 200 hides?  Percentage would not give you that either, but it would be a "more" relevant number. (Those 70  points are on 14 hides, 3 have earned 0, and one has 40, the rest are scattereda mong my other hides).  

 

Would the % be for the # of finds recorded on all hides?  Does GSAK or Project-GC have that info?

Project-GC has that number, and they calculate it over all logs by premium members over all non-event caches if I remember correctly. It can be found in the "Hides" tab.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not sure how meaningful this number is, as it favours COs with hides in more populous areas, and even within the one region would favour those who hide more low D/T urban caches over those whose specialty is high D/T ones. For example,

 

Cacher A (city central, low D/T): 39 caches, 1173 FPs from 21496 finds

Cacher B (outer suburban, high D/T): 54 caches, 618 FPs from 1669 finds

Cacher C (regional area, low D/T): 58 caches, 122 FPs from 9962 finds

Cacher D (regional area, high D/T): 66 caches, 460 FPs from 2188 finds

Me (regional area, mostly higher T): 48 caches, 387 FPs from 2042 finds

 

If it starts being used to rank COs it will produce some very skewed results. Even with all the stats, how do you tell who hides the better caches?

  • Upvote 7
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

I'm not sure how meaningful this number is...

 

I agree. On its own as just a raw number, it really isn't all that meaningful. Let's say I look at someone's profile and they have 50 FPs. Is that good? Was that on one cache or a hundred? Were they over the course of the last six months, or the last 10 years? How does that number compare to other hiders in that area?

 

With the increasing levels of abuse in the trackable side-game, I support the removal of the trackable count from the public profile. I'm not sure there's much benefit to be gained from the total FP number, though, at least in the public profile. Maybe it would be more useful to have it in the private stats for the member, since they're the ones with sufficient context for the number to be more meaningful.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

If it starts being used to rank COs it will produce some very skewed results. Even with all the stats, how do you tell who hides the better caches?

 

Do we even want to be ranking COs at all? Let alone with a horribly flawed method such as favourite points.

 

Expect a lot more whiney messages from COs explaining that "favourite points are important, you know" and asking why you "didnt have a great experience at my cache". And then of course as revenge they won't give your hides favourite points.... this *already* happens.  Friends give friends favourite points... so what is this stat really showing?

 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post

With a common practice of removing Favorite Points from Archived Caches, and considering the sheer number of caches placed and Found before FP existed, I place such little value in this statistic. I want it off my public profile. 

 

Archived caches keep their Favorite points. You can choose to remove a Favorite point from an archived geocache to award it to a new one. Visit your Favorites List to find out which of your Favorited caches are archived

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

 

FP points are relevant and informative about the person as a cache owner

Really, that is just a load of nonsense in my opinion.........

Edited by lodgebarn
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

I'm not sure how meaningful this number is

[...]

If it starts being used to rank COs it will produce some very skewed results.

(and similar sentiments from others)

 

Are we ranking cachers based on their find and hide counts? Are those other numbers in the public profile any more meaningful than this? Somehow less skewed?

Share this post


Link to post

How about adding Travel Bugs with an own icon in the list of geocaches? Because for most geocachers discovering a travelbug is just finding another geocache.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, mustakorppi said:

(and similar sentiments from others)

 

Are we ranking cachers based on their find and hide counts? Are those other numbers in the public profile any more meaningful than this? Somehow less skewed?

 

Cachers have direct control over their find and hide counts, but rely on the size of their audience for their FP count.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Gill & Tony said:
20 hours ago, IceColdUK said:

I'm amazed they're still running two versions of an essentially identical page.  At  least there is now a real (rather than aesthetic) difference - one shows FPs awarded, the other Trackables Logged.

Why can't we have both?


We do have them both ... split between two versions of the same page.  That’s what I find really bizarre.


I’d be quite happy to see them both on the same page, but still I think some form of FP percentage would be better - not perfect, but far more informative.

 

7 hours ago, Gill & Tony said:

Why can't we have DNF count as well?

 

No problem with that.

 

7 hours ago, Gill & Tony said:

Why can't we configure what we want to show?


Personally, I’d rather that the information displayed was consistent across all users.

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, sernikk said:

I don't get it. Why it has replaced the trackable moved/discovered number, instead of just being added extra?

Agreed!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Gill & Tony said:

Why can't we have both?

Why can't we have DNF count as well?

Why can't we configure what we want to show?

Perfect!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Gill & Tony said:

Why can't we have both?

Why can't we have DNF count as well?

Why can't we configure what we want to show?

 

I'm glad TB log count is not longer displayed there.

This is step right direction. FP% would be nice to have, good comment.

 

Back to above questions ... Why? Just my opinion:

Because in general, measurements motivate people* to do something what is measured and presented.

* not all the people, and not the same way - of course!

 

  • Number of trackables logged.

Sadly, this measurement (besides other numbers and rankings) motivated many people to share lists of trackable codes with others and mass-log everything what had 6 digits, no matter if they ever seen that trackable. Sorry - but having discovered as many trackables as possible is not a point of their existence. Stats are making people to do silly things.

 

  • Number of DNF logs

I'm proud of my 1386 DNF logs (you may see your own count here). I have no problem to display it to others in my profile. 

But what would happen, if DNF logs count will be added as new profile statistics?

We are back to motivation - there are players, who would take it as a challenge to break all the records. You only need few ill-motivated players who will start to log inappropriate DNFs, just because of some ranking, or number. How much harm it can do to others, you can surely imagine.

 

  • Number of FPs

Compared to 2 measurements above, I can't see any significant harm, or ill-motivation here. I'm absolutely sure there are many players, who will look at their number and start their quest to make it raising. Either they will try to hide more quality geocaches, or more popular ones - both are good for the game. Or they may ask friends to exchange FPs - I admit this would be wrong and I hope there won't be many such owners. Overall, it will have positive impact on the game for all of us.

  • Why can't we configure?

I tried to explain my opinion, why it is important to think about motivation of players - why they are doing some actions and if are those actions healthy for the nature of the game. Of course you may have different opinion, I just explained why I think this is step right direction.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Cachers have direct control over their find and hide counts, but rely on the size of their audience for their FP count.

True, but I don't immediately see the relevance to my questions. Should you be considered a "lower ranking CO" than someone who has hidden a 50 cache power trail?

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, lodgebarn said:
21 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

 

FP points are relevant and informative about the person as a cache owner

Really, that is just a load of nonsense in my opinion.........

 

Another out of context quote. If you read the whole quote:

 

21 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

I'd prefer FP over TB stats if it's one or the other. TB stats are bragging values, or perhaps inform people how much someone interacts with TBs; FP points are relevant and informative about the person as a cache owner, and is useful information to others (to whatever degree) who might be curious about their caches. If we could have both, I'd not be against that. But FP > TB

 

I was not saying that favourite points effectively define who is and isn't a good cache owner.  The value is "relevant and informative...to whatever degree" -- TBs are not, at all. Therefore FP > TB.

 

This was also before suggesting a better variant was raised, such as FP%, and comments about how relevant the FP number is - all of which I agree with.

 

So, sure, what you quoted is a load of nonsense if you quote it alone and out of context :P (as can be much of what is said in this forum)

 

To put it another way: There is more value in showing a user's favourite point -related statistic than trackable discovery related statistics when it comes to the act of deciding which geocache to find.

 

Ultimately I don't think it would be a bad idea at all to allow people to customize which summary statistic(s) gets shown in that top level cover block and I'd advocate for that addition. Especially if all the stats would be visible anyway in more detail elsewhere in their profile.

Share this post


Link to post
On 2/11/2020 at 6:04 AM, Geocaching HQ said:

Release Notes (Website: Public Profile displays total Favorite points received) - February 10, 2020
 
With today’s release, we have updated the new Public Profile on Geocaching.com. You can now view your total Favorite points received on geocaches you own, both active and archived. This release is part of an ongoing effort to celebrate and thank geocache hiders. The total Favorite points replaces the stat of total trackable discoveries/moves. (The Trackable tab on this page continues to display statistics about trackables.)
 
With this release, you can also view how many total Favorite points another geocacher has earned on the geocaches they own by visiting their Public Profile. See Geocaching HQ as an example. If you do not see the Favorite points, then select “Go to new public profile” on the blue banner.
 
Updated Profile page, with total Favorite points earned on geocaches owned:

 

yZxLUgz7p15RqM6j_Q9YM_1vg1KNsQgxW8SUGKw8

 

 

To learn more about how Favorite points are earned, rewarded, and received, please visit the Help Center.
 
Erin (Oceansazul), is watching this thread to answer questions whenever possible.
 
Any posts in this thread should relate to features in this release. Comments unrelated to the release may be removed. Please direct unrelated comments to other appropriate threads. Thanks!

 

Edited by wazza9
put reply in the wrong place.

Share this post


Link to post
On 2/11/2020 at 6:04 AM, Geocaching HQ said:

Release Notes (Website: Public Profile displays total Favorite points received) - February 10, 2020
 
With today’s release, we have updated the new Public Profile on Geocaching.com. You can now view your total Favorite points received on geocaches you own, both active and archived. This release is part of an ongoing effort to celebrate and thank geocache hiders. The total Favorite points replaces the stat of total trackable discoveries/moves. (The Trackable tab on this page continues to display statistics about trackables.)
 
With this release, you can also view how many total Favorite points another geocacher has earned on the geocaches they own by visiting their Public Profile. See Geocaching HQ as an example. If you do not see the Favorite points, then select “Go to new public profile” on the blue banner.
 
Updated Profile page, with total Favorite points earned on geocaches owned:

 

yZxLUgz7p15RqM6j_Q9YM_1vg1KNsQgxW8SUGKw8

 

 

To learn more about how Favorite points are earned, rewarded, and received, please visit the Help Center.
 
Erin (Oceansazul), is watching this thread to answer questions whenever possible.
 
Any posts in this thread should relate to features in this release. Comments unrelated to the release may be removed. Please direct unrelated comments to other appropriate threads. Thanks!

Discriminates against those who have their caches available to and get more finds from basic members. When they get Premium, they don't go back and add a FP to good caches.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post

Discriminates against those who have their caches available to and get more finds from basic members. When they get Premium, they don't go back and add a FP to good caches.

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, mustakorppi said:
14 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Cachers have direct control over their find and hide counts, but rely on the size of their audience for their FP count.

True, but I don't immediately see the relevance to my questions. Should you be considered a "lower ranking CO" than someone who has hidden a 50 cache power trail?

 

The point I was trying to make is that you can hide the greatest, most fantastic of caches but if it's in a place that gets few visitors it's never going to rack up many FPs. My D3/T4 Nemophilist Challenge published last October has had just two finds, both giving it FPs, and my latest D2/T3.5 multi published a few weeks ago has only had one find and received one FP. They're never going to compete on FP tallies with the MKHs placed in the tourist hotspots around Sydney harbour or even a good urban P&G cache around my area.

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

The point I was trying to make is that you can hide the greatest, most fantastic of caches but if it's in a place that gets few visitors it's never going to rack up many FPs. [...] They're never going to compete on FP tallies with the MKHs placed in the tourist hotspots around Sydney harbour or even a good urban P&G cache around my area.

 

And my two points are that 1) the existing numbers in your profile, hide count and find count, are also "unfair" in similar ways. And that doesn't matter because 2) since when are any of the numbers a competition or a ranking system? There is no leaderboard. Someone finding 5000 caches a year might see themselves as winning and that's fine. In the game I play they haven't even found the board.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Cachers have direct control over their find and hide counts, but rely on the size of their audience for their FP count.

 

It was this way of thinking that had me assuming it referred to the number of FPs allocated by the individual when I discovered it just now. That's something I have some control over. I seriously spent a minute or two wondering why there was a slight discrepancy between this new number and the number of items in my Favourites list. :)


It seems a bit tacky to me. And possibly misleading. I mean, my total looks fairly healthy, but in part because I inherited FPs on adopted caches placed 4 years before I even signed up!

 

 

Edited by BendSinister
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, mustakorppi said:

 

And my two points are that 1) the existing numbers in your profile, hide count and find count, are also "unfair" in similar ways. And that doesn't matter because 2) since when are any of the numbers a competition or a ranking system? There is no leaderboard. Someone finding 5000 caches a year might see themselves as winning and that's fine. In the game I play they haven't even found the board.

 

If I want to boost my find count I can go visit somewhere that has lots of caches or power trails. If I want to boost my hide count I can create a power trail. But if I want to boost my FP count I'd have to hide my caches in a place where there are lots of cachers to find them and award FPs, but to do that and satisfy the maintenance requirements I'd likely have to move house. Those caching hotspots also generally have the highest housing prices so that's not really an option even if I wanted to.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, mustakorppi said:

 since when are any of the numbers a competition or a ranking system? There is no leaderboard.

 

Since all the geocaching.com blog posts telling people to seek out highly favourited caches...

Since Groundspeak judged all COs by a number of factors including favourite points when handing out rewards...

 

Like it or not, but geocaching has become a popularity contest, and favourite points are one of the biggest factors in that.

  • Upvote 3
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, funkymunkyzone said:

Like it or not, but geocaching has become a popularity contest, and favourite points are one of the biggest factors in that.

Today I took a detour on my way to work and found a cache. I wasn't here in 2000 or even in 2010, but I believe that was called geocaching back then too. The metagames you and barefootjeff describe are optional.

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, mustakorppi said:

And my two points are that 1) the existing numbers in your profile, hide count and find count, are also "unfair" in similar ways. And that doesn't matter because 2) since when are any of the numbers a competition or a ranking system?

 

I think an issue may be that - while it's not a competition - I might look at a cache owner's page and see 50 FP, and another cache owner's page and see 5000 FP. With no other information, I might be more tempted to find CO#2's cache, but less tempted to find CO#1's.  *this no other information - that's key.  I'm not ranking them as one better than the other, but making an independent decision based on FPs. (this is just for arguments' sake, I don't actually do this)

 

On their own, the FP display isn't a good indicator as to whether or not the question "Will I enjoy this CO's cache?" can be answered, at all.  The numbers are just .. numbers.  What 5000FP tells me is that the cache owner either has 5000 1xFP caches that don't get a lot of traffic, 50 100xFP that get a lot of probably related traffic, or 1 amazing (maybe) cache that's likely a tourist destination.  50FP tells me they either have very few caches, or a decent cache, or maybe they merely live in an area with a local community who don't even think of awarding favourites and this CO's caches are amazing.  Or other interpretations.

 

It's a presentation number that looks better when it's bigger. Bigger is more likely to be better, but it's so unbelievably vague that it's really not super helpful on its own.  That number needs context to have any real value.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

 

....

 

It's a presentation number that looks better when it's bigger. Bigger is more likely to be better, but it's so unbelievably vague that it's really not super helpful on its own.  That number needs context to have any real value.

 

And this is a GREAT argument for making the presentation number reflect a FP percentage instead of a raw number. (FP received/(hides - events & labs)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

It's a presentation number that looks better when it's bigger. Bigger is more likely to be better, but it's so unbelievably vague that it's really not super helpful on its own.  That number needs context to have any real value.

Is the profile About page intended to be helpful in this scenario? Do the other elements there meet your criteria? Would it have been ok for CO#2 to advertise their 5000 FP (while providing no context) in the user supplied section of the About page?

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, mustakorppi said:

Would it have been ok for CO#2 to advertise their 5000 FP (while providing no context) in the user supplied section of the About page?

 

Yes, because it's their choice to do that. What about the poor cacher who has put out, say, a dozen P&G caches, all well-made and well-maintained but they just don't have the wow factor to get any FPs? Now their profile is telling all the world that nobody loves their caches.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, mustakorppi said:

Is the profile About page intended to be helpful in this scenario? Do the other elements there meet your criteria? Would it have been ok for CO#2 to advertise their 5000 FP (while providing no context) in the user supplied section of the About page?

 

The situation I'm using as an example is if I'm curious about the owner of a cache, for whatever reason.  If I view their profile and stop at the FP count (which is more helpful than TB count), I'm told contextually very little; just given a quantity of premium member visits where they felt their visit to a cache warranted rewarding a point.  It tells me nothing of quality (to my standard), how many caches, how many total visit, how long they've been around, etc. My next step would be to view their Owned caches list, and so on.  A high FP count tells me there's a lot of activity on their cache(s). A low FP count can tell me any number of things, and any indication of possible 'quality experience' is completely lost.

 

A custom about page allows a user to showcase whatever they wish. Being 100% customizable I know the content isn't necessarily as trustworthy as generated statistics, but it tells a lot about the user, and their owner habits if they choose to share their strengths. Statistics though are the most informative - the breakdown - if I'm interested; and the single FP count is one data point, and has absolutely no breakdown.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

It's a presentation number that looks better when it's bigger. Bigger is more likely to be better, but it's so unbelievably vague that it's really not super helpful on its own.  That number needs context to have any real value.

 

This. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, K13 said:

 

And this is a GREAT argument for making the presentation number reflect a FP percentage instead of a raw number. (FP received/(hides - events & labs)


I was thinking FPs received / PM Found logs, shown as a percentage - in the same way as (hidden) on the cache page.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, mustakorppi said:

Today I took a detour on my way to work and found a cache. I wasn't here in 2000 or even in 2010, but I believe that was called geocaching back then too. The metagames you and barefootjeff describe are optional.

 

No, that's the point I was making.  I wish they were optional, but there are not.

(PS - when you quoted me, you snipped out the lines that provide the context)

Edited by funkymunkyzone
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, funkymunkyzone said:

No, that's the point I was making.  I wish they were optional, but there are not.

(PS - when you quoted me, you snipped out the lines that provide the context)

I found a cache again today. But AFAIK it wasn't a cache recommended by geocaching.com blog, and I managed to find it without receiving rewards from the HQ.

 

I read your context, it just seemed alien. Maybe the blog, podcast etc. seem more relevant in the Anglosphere, but I don't really care, and rarely see others care, about what Groundspeak thinks about stuff except when they force the local reviewers to enforce a rule.

 

17 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

What about the poor cacher who has put out, say, a dozen P&G caches, all well-made and well-maintained but they just don't have the wow factor to get any FPs? Now their profile is telling all the world that nobody loves their caches.

I have 3 FP but 2 of those are from my mother-in-law so they don't count. I'm going to be charitable and assume you don't mean to imply I should feel sorry for myself. (But do consider that I didn't even think about being a poor cacher, boohoo until you said it.) I can speak for myself, and you can find all the issues I have with this change below:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, mustakorppi said:

 

I read your context, it just seemed alien. Maybe the blog, podcast etc. seem more relevant in the Anglosphere, but I don't really care, and rarely see others care, about what Groundspeak thinks about stuff except when they force the local reviewers to enforce a rule.

 

Hahaha thanks for the LOL.  I suppose next you'll be telling me that those *extremely* highly favourited caches in Germany continue to get *loads* of finds and consequently more favourite points because they are not just good but truly the best caches in the world, and all those Anglosphere cachers popping over to find them and add more FPs....

 

image.thumb.png.7b806fa4397d4ce4bc7557fe3652df65.png

 

Wow look at all those Anglosphere cache names amongst the most favourited caches in the world..... :laughing::laughing:

 

Edited by funkymunkyzone
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

×
×
  • Create New...