A little tale that contains a reflection about Geocaching, Adventure Labs, and the relations between them

[+Tshio 45]

Let's say there are two friends, Benny and Teddy. 

Teddy is an enthusiastic tennis player, while Benny loves bowling. Once in a while, Teddy accepts to go with Benny at the bowling alley, and sometimes Benny likes to have a tennis match with Teddy. They are good friends, and enjoy spending time with each other, talking about their hobbies. But Benny always prefers bowling, and Teddy always prefers tennis. They both feel the other's hobby is not really for them, they are ok with this, and things are just going nicely for everyone.

But suddenly, something happens that changes this idyllic condition.

Teddy says: "Hey Benny, do you know I made twelve strikes yesterday?"

Benny is really surprised: "Really? You must have made great progress since you couldn't help but throw the bowl on your feet!"

Teddy: "Actually, i didn't. I haven't stepped on the bowling alley since the last time you took me there."

Benny is increasingly perplexed: "So, how in the hell did you manage to make twelve strikes yesterday?"

Teddy shows his smartphone, smiling: "Look! Look at my stats: I played a tennis match yesterday, and they say I've made twelve strikes..."

 

By now, most of you should have caught the message yet.

Geocaching and Adventure Labs are two distinct games, that are similar in many ways, but different in many others. Some people would prefer Geocaching, some people would prefer Adventure Labs, and many others would enjoy playing both. 

The thing that I can't understand is why, why a completed step of an Adventure Lab should count as a found geocache. Can you win a chess game playing poker? Can you have a high score at darts playing pool? Can you find a geocache playing Fruit Ninja? Of course not. So I can't understand why you can find a geocache playing an Adventure Lab. This really makes no sense, and what's more it generates confusion in many people. Please note that it's not about "if you don't like it, don't play it". To the opposite: things being as they are, it's impossible for an AL player not to play Geocaching. And Geocaching players see AL players reach their same achievements playing another game. 

Like Waymarking and Benchmarking, Adventure Labs should be kept separate from Geocaching.

  

I think GS made things this way to promote their new product, but this is not helping any of the two games. Well, I ask you to upvote and share this post, to make GS aware of the mistake. 

Keep Geocaching and Adventure Labs separate.

Thank you.

[+The Leprechauns 319]

A key difference between bowling and tennis is that bowling has containers to find, and tennis doesn't.  So if you don't want tennis statistics mixed in with your bowling, I trust that you are OK with not counting virtual caches and earthcaches and event caches?

 

For that matter, I think that sitting at home and solving puzzles in order to find out where a cache is located is a separate game.  I rarely find those caches.  So, I don't look for them very often.  To me, that's an easier solution than advocating to split out these caches onto puzzlecaching.com with separate statistics.

[+IceColdUK 1040]

1 hour ago, The Leprechauns said:

A key difference between bowling and tennis is that bowling has containers to find, and tennis doesn't.  So if you don't want tennis statistics mixed in with your bowling, I trust that you are OK with not counting virtual caches and earthcaches and event caches?

 

Of course it's not a perfect analogy - they rarely are! - but it actually works quite well...

 

A game in bowling is made up of ten frames.  A tennis match is made up a number of games - e.g. first to six in a one set match.  Assuming you did want to keep a combined 'score' for bowling and tennis, would you count games won?  Surely, it would be more appropriate to equate a game in bowling with a tennis match?

 

Similarly, finding a cache is more like completing an adventure.

 

1 hour ago, The Leprechauns said:

For that matter, I think that sitting at home and solving puzzles in order to find out where a cache is located is a separate game.  I rarely find those caches.  So, I don't look for them very often.  To me, that's an easier solution than advocating to split out these caches onto puzzlecaching.com with separate statistics.

 

If you don't want to do a cache type for any reason that's fine, but I would like to do both - caches and ALs.  It's just that I'd be much happier if those ALs didn't have such a skewed - and illogical - impact on my found count.

Edited October 28, 2020 by IceColdUK

[+HoochDog 66]

2 hours ago, The Leprechauns said:

I trust that you are OK with not counting virtual caches and earthcaches and event caches?

 

If it means getting rid of Adventure Labs as part of geocache stats... then yes, but let's be real.
People keep bringing these up as an excuse to have this adventure lab abomination be part of geocaching statistics, so let's look at each in turn.

1) Virtual caches aren't allowed anymore, so it's a moot point.  The reason they aren't allowed is because they aren't geocaches.  Just like Adventure Labs aren't geocaches.

2) Earth caches are generally rare and most take some effort or research.  Also, 1 Earth Cache here and there is much more preferable than 1 AL equaling 5 or 6 geocaches.  So it isn't the statistical aberration  that adventure labs are.

3) Event's build community and are good for geocaching.  Also, they just aren't overly common.  If you go to 1/month you're looking at 12 finds.  Something that you can knock out in a couple of hours doing just 2 adventure labs.

 

Lastly, all 3 of these caches types are actually integrated into geocaching.com, show up on the map etc.  They aren't this other app that just dumps its statistics into my geocaching account for no reason.

If you like Adventure Labs, fine.  But adventure labs are not geocaches and their stats and history should not be inter-mingled with our geocaching stats.

 

[+igator210 237]

Lets see... Bowling and Tennis are both classified as a sport. Personally I've tried both, and while I like both, I prefer one over the other. Because of this fact, I choose not to do one of them. 

 

Now, this doesn't invalidate the one I don't participate in. And I don't shake my head at those people that choose to do the one I don't. I have my preference and they have theirs. 

Edited October 28, 2020 by igator210

[+mustakorppi 146]

In a scenario where tennis isn't a kind of bowling, a bowling enthusiast might ask awkward questions about his membership fees when the bowling alley has toilets that don't flush and flaking paint while the company running it is busy marketing its brand new tennis courts.

[+ecanderson 586]

When the number of tennis matches I've won start showing up in my USBC bowling average, there's going to be trouble.

 

[+Viajero Perdido 873]

5 hours ago, The Leprechauns said:

I trust that you are OK with not counting virtual caches and earthcaches and event caches?

 

I'm not the person you asked, but yes I'd be okay with that.  Much like ALs, they are irrelevant to the core game of finding hidden containers.  You don't "find" any of these things; they're not even things.  It's new-speak, and if you repeat it often enough, you don't even realize how silly it is.

 

I'd make an exception for events because they're vital for building a strong community.

[+CAVinoGal 656]

3 hours ago, IceColdUK said:

I'd be much happier if those ALs didn't have such a skewed - and illogical - impact on my found count.

But at this point, they do.  I know my total find count includes 40 Lab Cache finds; my goal of finding 2000 (or 2020) caches by the end of 2020 has been met by my find count showing on my profile (currently 2022).  But in my head, and to satisfy myself, I need to get to 2040, or 2060 to meet my goal.  But that's only for myself; others will be satisfied with the profile find count that shows and it's legit according to HQ, as they have counted the finds.

 

Whatever - in the end it's a hobby, its just numbers that mean nothing to anyone but me, and I can count the labs or not as part of my geocaching goal for 2020.  I don't get a prize or anything else because I reached 2000 with or without the lab cache count.  We've usually found the Lab Caches while out seeking other caches too - it's all part of our day and we get a pleasant (and I'll admit, a bit guilty) bump in our numbers when we do include the caches.  But I'm not going to crusade to have the counts changed - it's how GS has decided to award finds for the Adventure Labs.  It's not skewing my count too significantly; it only would if I were to do a lot more AL's.  Some choose to do a lot of them and inflate their count - so be it.It's a hobby, a pleasant past time, people!  Let the find counts go up!!  And, as has been said multiple times, if you don't want that impact, don't do the AL's, or do them and enjoy, but delete the completion so it DOESN'T impact your count, if it means that much to you.  I choose to do them, and enjoy them, and I am enjoying creating one for others to enjoy as well.

[+RocTheCacheBox 208]

Let's say there are three friends, Me and Ted and Ben.

 

Ben would NEVER use a cell phone to cache. He insists that if your not using a handheld GPS'r, printing cache information to take with you and looking for 5 gallon buckets that are burred in the woods and contain software, canned food and books to trade, along with a spiral notebook to write about your caching experience and log your visit, then your NOT ACTUALLY geocaching.

 

Ted geocaches for numbers. Runs power trails, Competes with others for FTFs. Brags about how many caches he's found of each different type and loves any cache that will run up his numbers. Ted talks about how he's traveled the world and how many countries he's found caches in. Proudly displays and goes after as many of those little digital souvenirs he can get. Logs each cache with a TFTC! because he's in such a hurry to get to the next one.

 

I go geocaching for fun and don't care about how many I've found. I may find 100 one year and 5 the next. Out of interest I occasional look at my stats to see how many caches I've found, where or how far away they are. But I don't care in the least how my finds compare to Teds or Ben's or what they consider to be “Geocaching”

 

Who's right?

[+IceColdUK 1040]

15 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

in the end it's a hobby, its just numbers that mean nothing to anyone but me

 

You're right of course, it is just a hobby, and it is only numbers.  It's not going to stop me from caching; it just irritates me that HQ implemented it in this illogical way.

 

Had they added +1 to the find count per adventure (rather than per location), would we even be having this discussion?  Would anybody have thought, "hang on, why didn't I get 5 finds for completing that adventure?"  I doubt it.

 

Change it now, and I imagine there would be an outcry.

[+IceColdUK 1040]

24 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

if you don't want that impact, don't do the AL's, or do them and enjoy, but delete the completion so it DOESN'T impact your count

 

I haven't really explored this option, mainly because I was hoping against hope that HQ would come to their senses, and I did want my +1 for those completed adventures! ;-)

[+dprovan 1557]

Meh. Not to dismiss your points, but the closer analogy is Teddy got his 10 strikes at a bowling alley, but he was playing with the kiddie bumpers in place. Geocaching and Adventure labs are played on the same "court", after all, even as they are entirely different.

 

What Benny has to ask himself is if it's better or worse for Teddy to enjoy bowling more and feel more successful at it at the expense of sometimes playing with him on the kiddie lanes even though Benny recognizes that as a game that isn't really bowling.

 

(Duck pin vs. 10 pin might be the even more accurate analogy, but I think that blurs one of the objections in the OP that I read as being that it's too easy to get finds with ALs.)

[+IceColdUK 1040]

8 minutes ago, dprovan said:

What Benny has to ask himself is if it's better or worse for Teddy to enjoy bowling more and feel more successful at it at the expense of sometimes playing with him on the kiddie lanes even though Benny recognizes that as a game that isn't really bowling.

 

If I was Benny, I honestly wouldn't be worried about Teddy (so long as he was enjoying himself).  However, if for some reason I did bowl with the kiddie bumpers up, then I wouldn't expect that game to affect my USBC bowling average!

 

(I should admit here, I don't bowl very often - with or without the kiddie bumpers - and I have no idea what a USBC bowling average is!) 

Edited October 28, 2020 by IceColdUK

[+MartyBartfast 791]

All of the above, then add into the mix that Teddy's tennis club now has occasional competitions that are only open to people who played in last weeks Bowling League competition...

 

(Adventure Lab bonus caches if the analogy escaped you).

 

 

[+Viajero Perdido 873]

It will be argued, of course, that since both bowling and tennis are location-based involve moving balls around, they're just aspects of the same thing, and thus it's perfectly natural for the numbers to be mixed in the blender.

[+dprovan 1557]

1 hour ago, IceColdUK said:

If I was Benny, I honestly wouldn't be worried about Teddy (so long as he was enjoying himself).  However, if for some reason I did bowl with the kiddie bumpers up, then I wouldn't expect that game to affect my USBC bowling average!

Yes, I think this is a valid objection to ALs. I bowl to have fun, so I never submit my scores to USBC to begin with. But I know lots of people do submit their scores, and I understand why they're annoyed when their kiddie lane scores are included.

 

1 hour ago, IceColdUK said:

(I should admit here, I don't bowl very often - with or without the kiddie bumpers - and I have no idea what a USBC bowling average is!) 

(Me, too, but it's still a great addition to the analogy. But my comment does reflect my actual behavior when I golf. The important point is that for both bowling and golf, scores from kiddie lanes or putt-putt courses aren't automatically added to your average. No one could even imagine such a thing, but the equivalent is automatic and beyond our control in geocaching.)

 

By the way, just to be clear: I understand the argument and think it's perfectly valid, but I don't really care about it. I've found ALs as fun and interesting, so I'm fine with them being part of geocaching even though I wouldn't miss them if they left. I also don't care about the scoring even though I think one find per AL is more reasonable. And I also want to acknowledge that setting up ALs as completely independent of geocaching would be a sure why to make sure ALs die a swift death, so I am willing to put up with any non-geocaching aspects of ALs to alow them to last long enough to see if they're worth it. Maybe if they catch on, they can be spun off into their own game.

[+cerberus1 3313]

9 hours ago, Tshio said:

 ... Geocaching and Adventure Labs are two distinct games, that are similar in many ways, but different in many others. Some people would prefer Geocaching, some people would prefer Adventure Labs, and many others would enjoy playing both. 

The thing that I can't understand is why, why a completed step of an Adventure Lab should count as a found geocache.

Can you win a chess game playing poker? Can you have a high score at darts playing pool? Can you find a geocache playing Fruit Ninja?

Of course not. So I can't understand why you can find a geocache playing an Adventure Lab.

This really makes no sense, and what's more it generates confusion in many people.

Please note that it's not about "if you don't like it, don't play it". To the opposite: things being as they are, it's impossible for an AL player not to play Geocaching.

And Geocaching players see AL players reach their same achievements playing another game. 

 

Guess I'm a little (but just a little...  ;-) curious how you feel it affects anyone else in any way. 

You do realize odd  "smiley point" stuff has been going on well-before this one instance, right ?   

 

We're fine with someone racking up "points".   We've seen how many have come by them for years   

 -When someone could log their own cache as a Found It every time they did maintenance ,  you'd understand numbers mean nada.   

When we hear someone mention their numbers, we smile and sometimes laugh.  

[+Viajero Perdido 873]

29 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

We're fine with someone racking up "points".   We've seen how many have come by them for years

 

Now it's officially sanctioned.

[+Tshio 45]

13 hours ago, RocTheCacheBox said:

Who's right?

Everyone is right, obviously. Everyone should grab from Geocaching and other location-based games the things they like most. Stats are not an essential part of the game. But they exist. And we must admit that for some people they are the main reason of being, but this is another topic, so let's go on...

And I couldn't help but wondering why every step of an Adventure Lab, that I can't see on the Geocaching map, and to play which I have to open another app, should count as a found geocache.

It's more a technical issue: or they are part of the same game, and then you can access both from the same page, or they are separate games, and then their stats should be kept separate.

Even so, as @IceColdUK cleverly pointed out, the majority of us would have accepted it if every AL have counted as a found, and not five. It's a really illogical inflation, that remembers me of the famous Yu-Gi-Oh effect: it's basically Magic, but everything is multiplied x100, so people are happier with bigger numbers.

[+Mausebiber 495]

2 hours ago, Tshio said:

Stats are not an essential part of the game. But they exist. And we must admit that for some people they are the main reason of being, but this is another topic, so let's go on...

 

Quite obviously, at least for you, stats is not another topic but the main topic. 

 

Prove:  

 

Quote

And I couldn't help but wondering why every step of an Adventure Lab, that I can't see on the Geocaching map, and to play which I have to open another app, should count as a found geocache.

 

I have not seen your statistic and probably never will.  Same for the remaining 400000 other cacher here in Germany.

So, the statistic is for one person only, mine for me and yours for you. So, it doesn't matter to anyone if you get 1 or 5 points, it does not affect me or anyone else in any way.  The number of points you get playing ALs is a separate number in your statistic, your numbers of tradies, multies a.s.o. is not altered.

 

2 hours ago, Tshio said:

the majority of us would have accepted it if every AL have counted as a found, and not five.

 

Who is "US"?  Are you talking for all cachers of the world or just the US?  The majority has already accepted the ALs and the number they get.  Many cachers like it and I have to ask you, why do you want to ruin someone else's fun?

.

 

 

 

Edited October 29, 2020 by Mausebiber

[+coachstahly 682]

3 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

Who is "US"?  Are you talking for all cachers of the world or just the US?  The majority has already accepted the ALs and the number they get.  Many cachers like it and I have to ask you, why do you want to ruin someone else's fun?

 

It's not so much about ruining someone else's fun.  It's more about the reason for why a single "cache" can now garner up to 5 finds while every other cache, regardless of the number of stages (both virtual and physical), only garners you 1 find.

 

The only other cache types that are even close to an AL are ECs and virtuals.  However, even they still only award a single find to the cacher who completes one, according to the wishes of the CO, regardless of the number of waypoints it may require you to visit.

 

I believe this is a big enough departure from what many of us (even those cachers that enjoy ALs) would consider a geocache to be, that it's a logical step to ask if they need to be separated from the statistics, like benchmarks and waymarks. They're not part of the "regular" geocaching maps, there's no signature for the CO to verify a questionable find (or any find for that matter), apparently the owner can only see the 10 most recent "logs", doing multiple stages of a single AL nets you more than 1 find,  and apparently the CO doesn't get notified when it's found/completed (true?). 

 

I don't think they're going to go away and I don't really see any reason for them to go away.  They seem to be enjoyed (mostly) by those I know who have done them.  They appear to be easy to create in the sense that there's not much of a learning curve like there was with a Wherigo.  They're all virtual which renders the saturation guidelines as irrelevant.  Maintenance isn't an issue, although I suspect that if a physical object at one of the stops goes missing, it might become an issue.  (Aside - can the creator edit their AL if such an issue arises?) I just question the logic behind creating something that's called a geocache (for statistical purposes) that differs so greatly from what many of us would consider a geocache to be and yet it isn't incorporated in such a manner that merits fully integrating it into the geocaching site, like every other geocache.

[+MartyBartfast 791]

5 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

 

7 hours ago, Tshio said:

the majority of us would have accepted it if every AL have counted as a found, and not five.

 

... why do you want to ruin someone else's fun?

So are you saying that it's only fun because you get multiple finds for 1 AL, and that it would ruin your fun if you only got 1 find for 1 AL ?

 

Interesting

[+Mausebiber 495]

1 hour ago, coachstahly said:

apparently the owner can only see the 10 most recent "logs", doing multiple stages of a single AL nets you more than 1 find,  and apparently the CO doesn't get notified when it's found/completed (true?). 

 

Yes, true.  The big difference is, I can chose the date and time I want to log a cache, I don't have this option with ALs.  I even think, showing the first 10 is not correct, my privacy, my right to chose when I want to be present at a any location is by far more worth than your idea of watching me what I do and when I do it.

When I come home and log from home, the AL Owner knows that I have been there.

 

But let me come back to the numbers, yes, an Adventure with 5 Lab Cache will generate 5 statistic points in your Groundspeak statistic.

Now the question I have is, are you concerned it will ruin your own statistic or do you just don't like the idea that someone is getting 5 points for very little effort?

 

 

[+Mausebiber 495]

Quote

Interesting

Yes, indeed,

 

15 minutes ago, MartyBartfast said:

So are you saying that it's only fun because you get multiple finds for 1 AL, and that it would ruin your fun if you only got 1 find for 1 AL ?

 

I said: "Many cachers like it and I have to ask you, why do you want to ruin someone else's fun? "

Where exactly do you see that you would ruin MY fun, did I talk about me anywhere?

 

Same question for you as above: are you concerned it will ruin your own statistic or do you just don't like the idea that someone is getting 5 points for very little effort?

 

Edited October 29, 2020 by Mausebiber

[+cerberus1 3313]

1 hour ago, coachstahly said:

It's not so much about ruining someone else's fun.

 It's more about the reason for why a single "cache" can now garner up to 5 finds while every other cache, regardless of the number of stages (both virtual and physical), only garners you 1 find.

 

Which just seems odd to me,  when multiple logging one cache over the years was canned sorta recently (finalized in May '17). 

I thought it was a "playing fair" thing.  Guess not.  Now the same whining's going on over this thing.   

Whenever the subject comes up at events, multis aren't placed, or searched for as often because of "one smiley".

I don't get that...

It's not like you're gettin' paid piece rate, or profiting any way with a "smiley count".  I don't see how gaining "points" is even a feel-good thing.

We feel good completing it, like every other cache we've done.  Hopefully all stages are there...         

[+Mausebiber 495]

Thanks cerberus1, +1

 

I guess, far too many here are just focused on numbers which I really don't understand.  Numbers mean absolutely nothing.

[+dprovan 1557]

8 hours ago, Tshio said:

Even so, as @IceColdUK cleverly pointed out, the majority of us would have accepted it if every AL have counted as a found, and not five. It's a really illogical inflation, that remembers me of the famous Yu-Gi-Oh effect: it's basically Magic, but everything is multiplied x100, so people are happier with bigger numbers.

I think you're right about acceptance. I'd go even further, I think every single one of us was surprised when we got 5 finds for each AL instead of just one. It's so illogical that, in my opinion, it's just an artifact of the implementation, not an intentional feature.

 

On the other hand, I don't think anyone does ALs to get the 5 finds. ALs are just too futzy for people that just wants numbers. Those people can find 10 or 20 caches in the time it takes to do a typical AL.

[+GeoElmo6000 249]

18 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

We feel good completing it, like every other cache we've done.

 

I think labs are interesting but unsatisfying, but that's my personal opinion.  I enjoy writing logs, relating my experience of finding the cache, and sometimes I'll see an old log of mine and it'll bring me back to that geocaching experience.  I wait to get home before I enter a log, so that I can take my time and write something meaningful.  Leaving it as just typing in a keyword isn't satisfying for me.

 

I don't want them to go away, I'd like to see them have a separate find count.  Like the old challenges.

[+Mausebiber 495]

9 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

I wait to get home before I enter a log, so that I can take my time and write something meaningful.

Agree, that how I do it, I write a meaningful log at home for the ALs I just did.

[+GeoElmo6000 249]

17 minutes ago, Mausebiber said:

Agree, that how I do it, I write a meaningful log at home for the ALs I just did.

 

You write an activity log for the adventure as a whole; you cannot write a log for a lab location.  And if you could, most likely you couldn't at home due to geofencing unless you spoof your GPS information.

[+dprovan 1557]

1 hour ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

I think labs are interesting but unsatisfying, but that's my personal opinion.  I enjoy writing logs, relating my experience of finding the cache, and sometimes I'll see an old log of mine and it'll bring me back to that geocaching experience.  I wait to get home before I enter a log, so that I can take my time and write something meaningful.  Leaving it as just typing in a keyword isn't satisfying for me.

Well, I find ALs satisfying, but I agree it's not because of the "logging". That's why I'm glad to see that it's become common for the ALs flooding out in my area to have bonus caches associated with them where I can write about my experience.

 

1 hour ago, Mausebiber said:

Agree, that how I do it, I write a meaningful log at home for the ALs I just did.

Do you think anyone reads them? I have a hard time believing anyone pulls up the app and digs around in it just to peruse other people's AL logs.

[+CAVinoGal 656]

3 hours ago, coachstahly said:

apparently the owner can only see the 10 most recent "logs", doing multiple stages of a single AL nets you more than 1 find,  and apparently the CO doesn't get notified when it's found/completed (true?). 

 

14 minutes ago, dprovan said:

Do you think anyone reads them? I have a hard time believing anyone pulls up the app and digs around in it just to peruse other people's AL logs.

 

As the CO of an AL, I do not get notified when someone completes my AL.  On the builder, and the Leaderboard, I can only see the "Top 10", or the first 10 to complete it.  The only way I can see all the finders, and read their final logs, is to pull up the AL on the app.  Then I can look at the activity and see all the logs and dates when folks completed the lab, just as I can for any other lab.

 

To answer dprovan's question, yes, I DO read previous logs, on mine, and usually on ones that I have completed just to see what people wrote and if their experience compared with mine.  If we are planning to go do an AL, yes, I will "pull up the app and dig around in it just to peruse other people's AL logs"!  Call me nosy, or curious, or whatever, but yes, I do that.

[+Mausebiber 495]

1 hour ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

And if you could, most likely you couldn't at home due to geofencing unless you spoof your GPS information.

 

No, this is not correct, you can log at home or change you log later on at any time.  Please open any of you ALs and on top you can click on "activity"

 

Quote

You write an activity log for the adventure as a whole; you cannot write a log for a lab location.

 

Of course you can, what is preventing yo to write f.i. "The church we were visiting on Lab 1 was very interesting and we even went inside"  "Lab 2 was too far off and unfortunately blocked by construction" and so on.

 

 

Edited October 29, 2020 by Mausebiber

[+Mausebiber 495]

1 hour ago, dprovan said:

Do you think anyone reads them? I have a hard time believing anyone pulls up the app and digs around in it just to peruse other people's AL logs.

 

No, but what different to any other log you find on Groundspeak?

[+TmdAndGG 334]

2 hours ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

I don't want them to go away, I'd like to see them have a separate find count. 

This.

I think this is what needs to be done. I have mentioned this before in some other threads, but I'll give my idea again.

I think Adventure Labs should be like benchmarks. You can log them, and they show how many you've found on your profile, but they aren't included in your total find count. 

Adventure labs are a good concept, but tied with geocaching in the wrong way. 

[+barefootjeff 3827]

6 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

Same question for you as above: are you concerned it will ruin your own statistic or do you just don't like the idea that someone is getting 5 points for very little effort?

 

My first concern is that it's inflating my own statistics well beyond what I consider reasonable. I've now completed 7 ALs in the last two months and it feels like I've done 7 caches yet my find count has gone up by 35, so even though it's been a pretty quiet couple of months in terms of caching activity, my stats show they've been very active months. They're throwing it out of kilter with everything else. Likewise, when my next milestone at 2000 finds rolls around, I'd like it to represent 2000 caching tasks completed, including 2000 online logs written, but unless I delete my AL finds (which I probably will when it draws closer), it won't, it'll be some lesser number inflated by the oddball scoring of one cache type.

 

My other concern is the impact ALs will have on other cache types, particularly multis with virtual waypoints which are essentially equivalent to an AL plus bonus. Same process, same requirements (answer a question about something at each location) but totally different outcome. Most people have a limited amount of time they can devote to caching, so if there's a choice between a multi and an AL, which will they do? I'm not saying the number of smileys is the only factor in such a decision, but it's likely to be a factor for some. So if interest in multis wanes, people will stop creating them and all we'll be left with will be traditionals, puzzles and ALs. The same is likely true for Earthcaches, as again something very similar can be done with an AL (visit the geological features at a location and answer questions about them) but, for what are likely to be questions with much less depth (you're really limited to one or two word unambiguous answers in an AL) you get a much higher statistical reward.

 

I've enjoyed those seven ALs I've completed and the two I've created, it's added another dimension to the game whose big attraction for me is its diversity. Statistics are a part of that, though for me a fairly small part, but all the same I can already see them being unreasonably distorted by the way ALs are scored compared to everything else. If multis gave you a smiley for each waypoint visited, puzzles gave you a smiley for each element of the puzzle solved, ECs and virtuals gave you a smiley for each question answered and events gave you a smiley for each person you meet, then maybe the AL scoring would feel reasonable and consistent. But that's not the way those other cache types work, and I hope that's not how they ever become since the caches I enjoy the most are the ones where a lot of effort goes into getting that elusive smiley.

Edited October 29, 2020 by barefootjeff

[+Mausebiber 495]

I see your point and I agree to your concern, that ALs impacting other types of cache, in particular multi cache.  In your location, the situation is probable much more critical than where I live.  Since I started in 2006, I have seen so many things come and go so many things have changed and I’m sure, even the way ALs are implemented will change sooner or later.

 

 

 

[+baer2006 787]

5 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

Of course you can, what is preventing yo to write f.i. "The church we were visiting on Lab 1 was very interesting and we even went inside"  "Lab 2 was too far off and unfortunately blocked by construction" and so on.

The "... and so on" won't go on very long. The length of the log is limited to 400 characters, which is not much if you want to write a sentence about each location + a summary.

[+Mausebiber 495]

2 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

The "... and so on" won't go on very long

 Yes, you are right, there is plenty to do, this is one shortfall for anyone who want to write about their experience they made.

 

[+JustFindingOurWay 58]

It's interesting to me that in this whole thread no one mentioned Wherigo. Wherigo, built by HQ and then abandoned as an infant is essentially the same as AL except that you get just one "find" when you sign the log at the end of the completed WIG cartridge. In my humble opinion, HQ blew it when they concocted AL with the inflated find count instead of investing more effort into WIG.

[+baer2006 787]

4 minutes ago, JustFindingOurWay said:

Wherigo, built by HQ and then abandoned as an infant is essentially the same as AL

I disagree. WIG cartridges can be much more complex and interactive than ALs! A WIG creator has a full-fledged programming language at his disposition, which can be used to build WIGs which can e.g. offer different paths to the final depending on decisions of the player. Then you have "hidden" zones for unexpected turns in the story, the option for audio feedback, etc.

[+Jimrky 53]

I love how many different posters have defined what is, and what is not, Geocaching® to their hearts desire - and in so many different ways. And, yes - I put that Registered Trademark in for a reason: Geocaching is defined by Groundspeak, period. Bryan Roth has stated that A.L.'s are coming into the main app in its' next iteration. So, like them, don't like them, do them, don't do them - they aren't going away no matter what you personally may think of them.

 

On the subject of non-physical caches there is a long history of Groundspeak maintaining a presence, and even promulgating different types. At some point it may represent another Revenue Stream for them, or maybe not, but the continued interest of the Corporation is there to be seen. They have had several iterations and still don't kill the idea. Personally, I like A.L.'s a lot better than trackables, and a lot less than placing or finding a physical cache, going to an Event or watching my best Geocaching friend (who has 10,000+) learn to relax when he goes caching with Bethie_Biker and me, and even get a good meal while caching. We're still dubbing at less then 3K finds - but it's OK. Geocaching® is one place where you can take whatever you want and leave the rest without suffering at all, or taking a single thing away from anyone else.

[+Harry Dolphin 1164]

If it cannot be found with a GPSr, it's not a geocache.

[+MartyBartfast 791]

6 minutes ago, Jimrky said:

Geocaching is defined by Groundspeak, period.

Indeed, and here's their definition:

 

Quote

Geocaching is a real-world, outdoor treasure hunting game using GPS-enabled devices. Participants navigate to a specific set of GPS coordinates and then attempt to find the geocache (container) hidden at that location.

Doh!

[+Mausebiber 495]

Let's see if I can bring some enlightenment to MartyBartfast concerns:

 

outdoor treasure hunting game:  All Als I have played so far were outside, some downtown, some in the woods.

GPS enabled device:  Today, all smartphones are GPS enabled devices.

Participants navigate to a specific set of GPS coordinates:  That exactly what everyone is doing, maybe not noticing it. 

Here is a screenshot:  Red dot is the Al, on the bottom the coordinates of the red dot and the option if you want to drive, using a bicycle or if you would like to walk.

.

[+The Jester 576]

1 hour ago, Mausebiber said:

Let's see if I can bring some enlightenment to MartyBartfast concerns:

 

outdoor treasure hunting game:  All Als I have played so far were outside, some downtown, some in the woods.

GPS enabled device:  Today, all smartphones are GPS enabled devices.

Participants navigate to a specific set of GPS coordinates:  That exactly what everyone is doing, maybe not noticing it. 

Here is a screenshot:  Red dot is the Al, on the bottom the coordinates of the red dot and the option if you want to drive, using a bicycle or if you would like to walk.

.

And you ignored the final part of the definition (which is where AL's "lose" to Geocaches):  "and then attempt to find the geocache (container) hidden at that location".  Yes, they share some characteristics, but that doesn't make them geocaches.

[+Jimrky 53]

3 hours ago, MartyBartfast said:

Indeed, and here's their definition:

 

Doh!

 

Well, gee. Marty - so if Groundspeak, through their wholly-owned entity Geocaching® counts a construct as a cache YOU are going to tell them it's not? Especially when 'no decision made regarding one geocache is binding on any other' - the Great exception that has allowed Groundspeak/Geocaching to do literally ANYTHING since Day 1? 

 

Can I be a fly on the wall (or cc'd on the email you send) to inform Bryan Roth of that?? Hmmm??

 

Rhetoric will get you nowhere. But it's fun to watch folks try that again, and again, and again - as if rhetoric mattered 🤣 I think a "Doh!" here is appropriate. 😎

At least you have the good taste to appreciate Danny Kaye - I wonder if you're familiar with his recordings?

 

1 hour ago, The Jester said:

And you ignored the final part of the definition (which is where AL's "lose" to Geocaches):  "and then attempt to find the geocache (container) hidden at that location".  Yes, they share some characteristics, but that doesn't make them geocaches.

 

Please see above 😎

[+JL_HSTRE 581]

On 10/28/2020 at 9:33 AM, HoochDog said:

2) Earth caches are generally rare and most take some effort or research.  Also, 1 Earth Cache here and there is much more preferable than 1 AL equaling 5 or 6 geocaches.  So it isn't the statistical aberration  that adventure labs are.

3) Event's build community and are good for geocaching.  Also, they just aren't overly common.  If you go to 1/month you're looking at 12 finds.  Something that you can knock out in a couple of hours doing just 2 adventure labs.

 

It's almost like the real problem isn't that Adventure Labs are counted with geocaches, but that they inflate numbers by counting each stage as a find. 

 

I like Adventure Labs, but agree this is a major problem. 

[+JL_HSTRE 581]

On 10/28/2020 at 1:19 PM, dprovan said:

Meh. Not to dismiss your points, but the closer analogy is Teddy got his 10 strikes at a bowling alley, but he was playing with the kiddie bumpers in place. Geocaching and Adventure labs are played on the same "court", after all, even as they are entirely different.

 

Bowling with bumpers in the gutters is still bowling, just easier. You could break your bowling scores down into bumper and regular games, much like your stats have a breakdown of caches found by type.