Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
dennistubaplayer

Virtual rewards 3.0

Recommended Posts

Hey everybody! I had a quick question that may be a little strange-Is geocaching HQ planning on doing Virtual rewards 3.0? I did not get a virtual reward last time and I was wondering if Groundspeak was going to do another one. Does anyone know? Thanks! -Dennis

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, dennistubaplayer said:

Hey everybody! I had a quick question that may be a little strange-Is geocaching HQ planning on doing Virtual rewards 3.0? I did not get a virtual reward last time and I was wondering if Groundspeak was going to do another one. Does anyone know? Thanks! -Dennis

 

Were most of the last "rewarded" ever created ?  Maintenance (fake logs mostly) seems like a good chunk of your time with those things.

Noticed you haven't found one yourself, to get an idea what they are.  Why not ?  Thanks.  :) 

If a next one would be similar to the last, by HQ's eligibility requirements , you don't seem to meet the criteria for "Your owned geocaches must have at least 25 total Favorite points."

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, dennistubaplayer said:

Hey everybody! I had a quick question that may be a little strange-Is geocaching HQ planning on doing Virtual rewards 3.0? I did not get a virtual reward last time and I was wondering if Groundspeak was going to do another one. Does anyone know? Thanks! -Dennis

Did you change account? According to this one you created it recently.

 

Currently Adventure labs pretty much replaced virtual in HQ plans even if they are flawed. In my area there are 238 lab cache and only 13 virtuals.

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, dennistubaplayer said:

Hey everybody! I had a quick question that may be a little strange-Is geocaching HQ planning on doing Virtual rewards 3.0? I did not get a virtual reward last time and I was wondering if Groundspeak was going to do another one. Does anyone know? Thanks! -Dennis

 

It's my guess that they wouldn't announce this at all as there would then be some COs who would begin to take their maintenance more seriously than they currently are, all in the hopes to be awarded the opportunity to place a virtual reward.  By not announcing it, there's a better chance that they'll be able to filter out those COs who haven't shown any interest in maintaining their caches, at least in my opinion.  

 

I wouldn't be surprised if there's another round but I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't another round as well.

Share this post


Link to post

I honestly think there may not be a 3rd round. Virtuals came back very numerous and they uniqueness went down drastically. Giving even more virtuals would only aggravate this problem.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

With the advent and proliferation of the AL and the chatter of them beings integrated into the regular map/app, there is no need for future Virtual rewards, is there?

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, sernikk said:

I honestly think there may not be a 3rd round. Virtuals came back very numerous and they uniqueness went down drastically. Giving even more virtuals would only aggravate this problem.

 

That depends on where you live. In my region, there were no grandfathered ones, none from the first round and three from the second. Yes, I can see how that second round aggravated the problem of their proliferation here, after all one is unique but three, well...

 

image.png.b6db26865cb727c343522018a3f3abb3.png

Edited by barefootjeff
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, sernikk said:

I honestly think there may not be a 3rd round. Virtuals came back very numerous and they uniqueness went down drastically. Giving even more virtuals would only aggravate this problem.

Very numerous? In my province there are a grand total of 13 virtuals (G+1+2) versus 238 lab caches.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Lynx Humble said:

Very numerous? In my province there are a grand total of 13 virtuals (G+1+2) versus 238 lab caches.

It depends on the interpretation. If virtuals are common like Mystery or Multi caches I think the quality will drop. I prefer virtuals to be a rare opportunity to cache differently. Lab caches is a different (tough) topic.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, K13 said:

With the advent and proliferation of the AL and the chatter of them beings integrated into the regular map/app, there is no need for future Virtual rewards, is there?

 

Lab caches have at least one big disadvantage over Virtuals: they require a live app.

 

Didn't the deadline for Virtual Rewards 2.0 get extended to the end of the year because of the pandemic?

 

Also, VR1 was in 2017 and VR2 was 2019. It would seem likely to me that even if there is a VR3 it wont happen until 2022.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/23/2020 at 11:06 PM, JL_HSTRE said:

 

Lab caches have at least one big disadvantage over Virtuals: they require a live app.

 

Didn't the deadline for Virtual Rewards 2.0 get extended to the end of the year because of the pandemic?

 

Also, VR1 was in 2017 and VR2 was 2019. It would seem likely to me that even if there is a VR3 it wont happen until 2022.

The  deadline didn't get extended. bummer!

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, dennistubaplayer said:

The  deadline didn't get extended. bummer!

New deadline: December 31, 2020

In response to COVID-19, Geocaching HQ is extending the deadline for all unpublished Virtual Reward 2.0 Caches. The last day to submit your Virtual Cache for review is now December 31, 2020 (5:00pm Pacific Daylight Time).

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

If there will be a third round, I'm hoping it's more like 1.0, rather than 2.0. The quality of the 1.0 virtuals is WAY higher than the 2.0 ones, at least in my area. Despite all the criticism Groundspeak took for picking the top XXX cache owners, in hindsight it was a very good idea. Letting 'everyone' place a virtual is just a bad idea.

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
59 minutes ago, Vooruit! said:

If there will be a third round, I'm hoping it's more like 1.0, rather than 2.0. The quality of the 1.0 virtuals is WAY higher than the 2.0 ones, at least in my area. Despite all the criticism Groundspeak took for picking the top XXX cache owners, in hindsight it was a very good idea. Letting 'everyone' place a virtual is just a bad idea.

 

My region didn't receive any 1.0 rewards but got three 2.0 ones, which is a far cry from letting 'everyone' place one. Of the other ten reward virtuals I've found, six were in Sydney, three were in Newcastle and the other further north. I can't say I noticed any difference in quality between the six 1.0 and seven 2.0 ones I found; most were at interesting locations that I wouldn't have otherwise known about or visited and were fun to do.

 

I threw my hat into the ring for the 2.0 release but was unsuccessful. I had a couple of possible locations in mind, both in national parks where the placement of a physical cache wouldn't have been allowed under their current geocaching policy. One I've since made into a multi with virtual stages inside the park and the physical cache outside, and the other I was considering making an Adventure Lab until I discovered that the map in the AL app doesn't show any of the trails in there. So if there's a 3.0 release and I get one, that's probably where it'll go.

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Vooruit! said:

If there will be a third round, I'm hoping it's more like 1.0, rather than 2.0. The quality of the 1.0 virtuals is WAY higher than the 2.0 ones, at least in my area. Despite all the criticism Groundspeak took for picking the top XXX cache owners, in hindsight it was a very good idea. Letting 'everyone' place a virtual is just a bad idea.

The quality of 1.0 might have been higher than 2.0 in your area because they grabbed the best spot and then those that got a 2.0 had to choose something else.

 

I really hope if there are a 3.0 Groundspeak will do similar as 2.0 and choose X number of people willing to put one. Their algorithm of 1.0 had so many flaws that they gave it to people not playing anymore or with only 5 hides.... Not what I call ''Top player''

 

 

  • Upvote 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, dennistubaplayer said:

That may be true. I thought I heard somewhere that They were based off who has the most owner maintnance logs though.

 

 

I'd hope not as that would exclude those COs who hide good quality robust caches with good-sized logbooks that are fit for their environment and simply don't need constant maintenance. Of my 41 active caches, 24 have never needed maintenance and some of those are more than 5 years old.

 

The criterion for each of the Virtual Rewards was in the blog announcement. For the first one:

 

Quote

Starting today, approximately 4,000 geocachers in 63 countries around the world will receive emails with information about their Virtual Reward. This group is made up largely of top quality cache hiders from countries with at least 100 hiders. We created an algorithm to identify these people based on overall cache quality and cache health. Active community volunteers are also receiving a Virtual Reward as a thank you for giving their time and talent to support the geocaching community.

 

We are not sharing the algorithm. But we can say it factors in geocaching activity, geocache quality, and geocache health. The algorithm heavily favors cache quality over quantity. The algorithm was created by Geocaching HQ without direct input from community volunteer reviewers.

 

Cache quality means many things to a hider, a finder, and the community. For this promotion, the algorithm included many factors but it heavily favored cache quality over quantity. Among these factors were percentage of Favorite points on active caches (not the total number of Favorite points) and current geocache Health Score.

 

For the second round, which was an opt-in release, the criterion was:

 

Quote
To be eligible to apply, you must meet the following criteria:
Virtual Reward: You did not receive a previous Virtual Reward.
Ownership: You must own at least two active non-event geocaches.
Hidden: You must own at least one geocache published within the past four years (May 14, 2015 to May 14, 2019).
Activity: You must have posted a log on a geocache within the past four months.
Quality: Your owned geocaches must have at least 25 total Favorite points.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, dennistubaplayer said:

That may be true. I thought I heard somewhere that They were based off who has the most owner maintnance logs though.

 

That's wrong for sure. Don't take everything for granted what you here. Logging owner maintenance often doesn't mean anything and Groundspeak knows that....

 

If I hide several nano caches I'll have to change the logbook more often so I log owner maintenance - while the ammo box hider doesn't have to maintain the cache!? So perhaps I'll leave the full logbook for a month, exchange it (or someone else does) and log needs maintenance and my "good hider count" encreases!?

Some cachers use to log owner maintenance "I will check" after 10 DNF logs. Instead temporarily disable the cache would be correct so in this case the OM log is even wrong!

 

I think you mixed that up with cache owners that have good maintained caches. That is independent of the number of owner maintenance logs but obviously having logs with "needs maintenance" active - don't disable or repair them - decreases the "good hider count".

 

I got a Virtual reward in phase 1.0, so it's easy to say that I do not want round 3 (sorry). But that's for one reason: It was an honour for me to get one from round 1 and with each new round the virtuals will get less rare and so less "valuable". It's like the adventure labs: as nowadays so many are created each one loses in begin special (<-- that's poor English, I am sorry, hopefully you'll understand what I want to say). I don't want my virtual to go down between many others so please don't make a new round. Keep the virtuals special!

Edited by frostengel
typo
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, frostengel said:

I got a Virtual reward in phase 1.0, so it's easy to say that I do not want round 3 (sorry). But that's for one reason: It was an honour for me to get one from round 1 and with each new round the virtuals will get less rare and so less "valuable". It's like the adventure labs: as nowadays so many are created each one loses in begin special (<-- that's poor English, I am sorry, hopefully you'll understand what I want to say). I don't want my virtual to go down between many others so please don't make a new round. Keep the virtuals special!

 

It depends on where you are. My region had no old grandfathered virtuals, got no Virtual Rewards 1.0 and three Virtual Rewards 2.0.

 

Virtuals.jpg.83b2b76b1d2347f4ff57a95cdc5d0dfa.jpg

 

Much the same goes for Adventure Labs. With my two that have recently gone live, we now have four of them here.

 

AdventureLabs.jpg.9db96e0a9320debe39df663f94409f68.jpg

 

Those should keep the locals busy for, what, a couple of weekends?

 

Share this post


Link to post
52 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

It depends on where you are. My region had no old grandfathered virtuals, got no Virtual Rewards 1.0 and three Virtual Rewards 2.0.

 

Virtuals.jpg.83b2b76b1d2347f4ff57a95cdc5d0dfa.jpg

 

Much the same goes for Adventure Labs. With my two that have recently gone live, we now have four of them here.

 

AdventureLabs.jpg.9db96e0a9320debe39df663f94409f68.jpg

 

Those should keep the locals busy for, what, a couple of weekends?

 

 

That's not too bad, really. For my local area, say roughly 15km in diameter things look similar.  How many more similar sized places are there around the world? Should every smaller place have 5 of them, or 10? Where do you draw the line with regards to saturation? Are there enough interesting places at all? What if those selected locals decide that there's just nothing interesting nearby and they'd rather place the caches in Sydney?

Edited by terratin
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:

It depends on where you are. My region had no old grandfathered virtuals, got no Virtual Rewards 1.0 and three Virtual Rewards 2.0.

 

Hi Jeff,

 

in my hometown (not too small) there was one old virtual cache. It was something special next to two webcam caches (one archived by now). This one virtual cache had an easy - and I would say boring - task of taking a picture and naming a tree looking like what kind of animal!? But this one was a special cache and I think before virtual round 1 cachers just visited the city to do these caches, virtuals and webcams.

 

Nowadays you'll find five virtual caches in a circle area with 5 kilometres radius (three V1.0 (including mine), one V2.0 plus the old one of course) with three more if you are ready to go away only about 15 kilometers.

Funnily enough I know of two local cachers who were rewarded in round 1.0 but listed there virtual far away so there might be even more....

 

But that's not the point. Let's just take the old virtual cache (17 years old) that was always something special. Today it is not special any more as there are too many (better!) virtuals. I think the numbers are okay - but I don't think we need more (here).

 

I like these old cache types that are really rare - perhaps they should be kept rare or at least don't make them too common again! That's my point but it may be unfair as we have many virtuals (in my eyes)!

 

Best wishes

Jochen

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, frostengel said:

 

That's wrong for sure. Don't take everything for granted what you here.

That's one of the reasons that Geocaching forums was created to check to make sure that your info is correct, right?:antenna: I agree that Virtual rewards make other virtuals less special, but not every area recieved virtual rewards. I don't think anyone in my area got rewards from either round. Maybe (If Groundspeak does another) They will base it off of wich area areas need more virtual rewards.

Edited by dennistubaplayer

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, dennistubaplayer said:

That's one of the reasons that Geocaching forums was created to check to make sure that your info is correct, right?:antenna: I agree that Virtual rewards make other virtuals less special, but not every area recieved virtual rewards. I don't think anyone in my area got rewards from either round. Maybe (If Groundspeak does another) They will base it off of wich area areas need more virtual rewards.

In the last round GS asked COs to self nominate to receive a virtual. Perhaps there were no COs in your area that wanted the responsibility?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, dennistubaplayer said:

That's one of the reasons that Geocaching forums was created to check to make sure that your info is correct, right?:antenna:

The best way to get an answer to a question in a forum is to post the wrong answer.  There's always going to be someone that will correct an answer that might not otherwise answer directly.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, terratin said:

 

That's not too bad, really. For my local area, say roughly 15km in diameter things look similar.  How many more similar sized places are there around the world? Should every smaller place have 5 of them, or 10? Where do you draw the line with regards to saturation? Are there enough interesting places at all? What if those selected locals decide that there's just nothing interesting nearby and they'd rather place the caches in Sydney?

 

Yeah, you're right, there nothing interesting here, just boring old seascapes, secluded beaches, waterfalls, lookouts, rock formations, sandstone caves, Aboriginal rock art, etc.

 

Boring.thumb.jpg.3c2d681f490a321bd6c9b6ce30e68390.jpg

 

There's even a convict-built road in the hinterland for anyone wanting to be bored with a bit of history.

 

this-is-worth-the-walk.jpg.d9051318ae29ad375761fea2f9219b00.jpg

 

All these are in places physical caches aren't allowed so would be well suited to virtuals, or even ALs if it wasn't for the difficulties of getting mobile data access and a map that doesn't show the walking trails. But no, why would anyone bother with places like these when there are car parks and shopping malls gallore in the big smoke?

 

Edited by barefootjeff
  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, dennistubaplayer said:

Maybe (If Groundspeak does another) They will base it off of wich area areas need more virtual rewards.

 

That was my first idea, too: adding virtuals to areas without or with a small number of existing virtuals, but there is a problem: the awards are given to cachers not to areas. And if there is a beautiful or historical interesting place in your country perhaps the new awards will go there instead of the home coordinates of the cachers which were still be left empty.

So in this case you needed the cachers to tell where they want to place the virtual cache with the process of application but I think that's impossible (for both sides: hiders and Groundspeak).

But in fact if you could not just apply "I want one." but "I have this idea ...." the results would surely be better and better spread out if the right ones are chosen. But who does the job of sorting through millions (!?) of applications?

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, frostengel said:

But in fact if you could not just apply "I want one." but "I have this idea ...." the results would surely be better and better spread out if the right ones are chosen. But who does the job of sorting through millions (!?) of applications?

 

That's one of the reasons virtuals were discontinued in the first place, the "wow factor" criterion that was supposed to determine which person's "I have this idea" got a virtual published and which didn't.

 

From what I've seen here, most who've received the new virtuals have placed them within an hour's drive of home, and even in the Sydney region there are only 15 (rewards 1 and 2 combined) so it's not as if all worthwhile possibilities have been exhausted.

 

I won't lose any sleep if there are no more virtuals (or ALs for that matter) published in my region, but I think it would be sad if that happened because there were deemed to be too many in a few European or North American cities.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/22/2020 at 11:17 PM, frostengel said:

 

Hi Jeff,

 

in my hometown (not too small) there was one old virtual cache. It was something special next to two webcam caches (one archived by now). This one virtual cache had an easy - and I would say boring - task of taking a picture and naming a tree looking like what kind of animal!? But this one was a special cache and I think before virtual round 1 cachers just visited the city to do these caches, virtuals and webcams.

 

Nowadays you'll find five virtual caches in a circle area with 5 kilometres radius (three V1.0 (including mine), one V2.0 plus the old one of course) with three more if you are ready to go away only about 15 kilometers.

Funnily enough I know of two local cachers who were rewarded in round 1.0 but listed there virtual far away so there might be even more....

 

But that's not the point. Let's just take the old virtual cache (17 years old) that was always something special. Today it is not special any more as there are too many (better!) virtuals. I think the numbers are okay - but I don't think we need more (here).

 

I like these old cache types that are really rare - perhaps they should be kept rare or at least don't make them too common again! That's my point but it may be unfair as we have many virtuals (in my eyes)!

 

Best wishes

Jochen

 

This HAS to be Karlsruhe you're talking about; that was actually my first virtual ever, and man, how special that one was indeed!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Vooruit! said:

This HAS to be Karlsruhe you're talking about; that was actually my first virtual ever, and man, how special that one was indeed!

 

100 points for you, that's right! :-)

And that is exactly what I mean. Virtuals were rare some years ago and so you remembered them all....

 

Greetings to the Netherlands

Jochen

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, frostengel said:

And that is exactly what I mean. Virtuals were rare some years ago and so you remembered them all....

 

Virtuals still are rare here and yes, I remember all three of the local ones as well as the handful I've done on trips further afield.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh yes, Virtuals used to be special. Hey, they were even special when I started caching.
I went to Germany on Friday specifically for a webcam. Wow, that was super special as I only have one left in NL, on an island that I can't get to easily. Without the special thing attached most Virtuals are just, well.. caches without a container.

  • Surprised 3

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...