Favorite points rule

[+bipbip09]

I just want to submit an idea...
This is one of the premium features: favorite points.

When we are looking more and more for the "beautiful" caches, the most favoured, especially when we go abroad, we try to aim for the essentials, the stock of points of favorites drops very quickly, because we want also reward this cache (essential spot, pretty clever cache...).
Similarly, when you place an entire circuit of beautiful, well-worked caches, you generally only collect a few favorite points, the researchers specifying that each one deserves a pf but that it is impossible for them to give as many... is also frustrating for the owner.

Which brings me to this idea: make sure to earn more favorite points, by a simple idea too, here it is: finding beautiful caches should also bring back favorite points, this could be done by integrating a gain of 1 pf every 1000 pfs logged.
This will allow the player to more easily "reward" caches without having to constantly watch his pf counter.

With 1 pf every 10 caches found + 1 pf every 1000 pfs logged, the volume of favorite points would be more substantial, would encourage the placement of good caches (not only 10 poor boxes for one big nice bonus), and also the search for good caches.

[+Max and 99]

31 minutes ago, bipbip09 said:

With 1 pf every 10 caches found + 1 pf every 1000 pfs logged, the volume of favorite points would be more substantial,

Would it? Not unless you've given away thousands of favorite points. 

Edited March 21, 2022 by Max and 99

[+sloth96]

This sounds like an interesting idea.  It certainly helps folks who chase high favorite point caches not have to decide which is the best. And you are right that someone who blankets an area with high quality caches may be penalized with the current system. 

 

A beautifully constructed puzzle can also deserve a favorite point even if it is a substandard container.

 

Looking at it from the other side, what are the implications for someone who can only grab a single cache in an area?  They may have a harder time finding the one best cache in the area.  

 

Just to clarify, if I find a cache with 6000 favorite points, I would get another 6 favorite points?  Also what happens when a cache that had 6000 favorite points later gets 7000, do I get another favorite point? And if a cache has 7000 and drops to 6999 what happens?

 

There may be a philosophical point here.  Are favorite points to reward hiders or help seekers?

[+Max and 99]

1 minute ago, sloth96 said:

Just to clarify, if I find a cache with 6000 favorite points, I would get another 6 favorite points? 

Maybe I misunderstood the suggestion. I thought the suggestion was an extra favorite point to me to give away, for every 1,000 I give?

[+sloth96]

12 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

Maybe I misunderstood the suggestion. I thought the suggestion was an extra favorite point to me to give away, for every 1,000 I give?

Rereading, I understand your confusion.  "logged" could be "logged by finder", "logged on cache", or "logged on hider cache".

[+MartyBartfast]

50 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

I thought the suggestion was an extra favorite point to me to give away, for every 1,000 I give?

But that would mean at most you would get 1 extra FP for every 10000 finds, so would be insignificant and even unachievable for most cachers.

I also took it to mean if I log a cache which had 6000 FPs then I would get an extra 6 FPs for me to award.
I expect the upshot of this would be to encourage finders who want more FPs to go in search of the high FP hides, and overlook those with few FPs. While this could be seen as a positive thing it could also have unintended negative consequences  so would need careful consideration before implementing.

 

As someone who's only awarded about half of my FPs it's not a problem I need fixing anyhow.

[+Max and 99]

1 hour ago, bipbip09 said:

With 1 pf every 10 caches found + 1 pf every 1000 pfs logged, the volume of favorite points would be more substantial,

 

1 hour ago, Max and 99 said:

Would it? Not unless you've given away thousands of favorite points. 

 

2 minutes ago, MartyBartfast said:

But that would mean at most you would get 1 extra FP for every 10000 finds, so would be insignificant and even unachievable for most cachers.

Yes, exactly. That's why I'm wondering if I'm misunderstanding the suggestion.

[+bipbip09]

Sorry, if it isn't clear

 

Currently, there is only one rule:

- 1 point earned each 10 caches logged

 

The 2nd rule I suggest is:

- 1 point earned each 10 000 favorite points logged.

For example : someone who logged 3509 caches and 2654 associated favorite points to this cache , has got a total of 35 + 2 favorite points to give

Edited March 21, 2022 by bipbip09

[+Max and 99]

3 minutes ago, bipbip09 said:

Sorry, if it isn't clear

 

Currently, there is only one rule:

- 1 point earned each 10 caches logged

 

The 2nd rule I suggest is:

- 1 point earned each 10 000 favorite points logged.

For example : someone who logged 3509 caches and 2654 associated favorite points to this cache , has got a total of 35 + 2 favorite points to give

I still don't understand.

[+bipbip09]

In fact, the total of logged favorites points evolves over time of course, which can lead to earn new additional points ..

And concerning the deletion of favorite points on certain caches that can increase from 7000 to 6999, if we think in terms of the total number of logged favorite points, we should rarely find ourselves in this case. Hoping that the deletion of favorite points on a cache remains on the sidelines...

[+Max and 99]

Okay so I get more favorite points to give away if I log a cache that has thousands of favorite points already? My head is spinning with the number of ways that could be abused.

[+bipbip09]

Every rule can be abuse in fact.

But yes, you understand what I want to mean.

This idea is issue of personal thinking, when I came in Amsterdam, I targeted most of caches with at least 100 favorites points, so for me with only a stock ok 42 favorite points, it was hard to give a point to each one ...
 

[+niraD]

Any significant change to the way people earn Favorite Points is going to change the meaning of Favorite Points. Changing the meaning of all the Favorite Points that have been given over the years is a bad idea.

 

Any insignificant change to the way people earn Favorite Points is useless, and Groundspeak's development efforts should be spent elsewhere.

[+sloth96]

7 hours ago, bipbip09 said:

Every rule can be abuse in fact.

But yes, you understand what I want to mean.

This idea is issue of personal thinking, when I came in Amsterdam, I targeted most of caches with at least 100 favorites points, so for me with only a stock ok 42 favorite points, it was hard to give a point to each one ...
 

That could be viewed as a feature.  It made you think about which caches were better than others.

[+barefootjeff]

Correct me if I'm wrong, maybe I'm not understanding the suggestion properly, but I think what you're saying is that caches with the most FPs are the cream of the crop and deserving of more FPs than the present system can provide. I have two problems with that, firstly that the raw number of FPs on a cache is heavily biassed towards older caches and secondly it's also heavily biassed towards caches in popular tourist areas that get lots of finds and a proportionately larger number of FPs. In my state (New South Wales, Australia), the caches with the most FPs are mainly around the Sydney Harbour tourist precincts, like the magnetic key holder on a guardrail overlooking the ferry wharves that has 162 FPs from 2383 finds or the old 2004 virtual nearby that has 356 FPs from 4274 finds.

 

Consider two of my caches: GCMHXX, a traditional hidden in 2005 that I adopted a few years back, which is at a tourist attraction near a lighthouse on Sydney's northern beaches and has 53 FPs from 653 finds, and my most recent multi, GC9M6X5, which was published in mid January with similarly scenic views from the not-so-touristy Phegans Bay near Woy Woy and has 2 FPs from 3 finds. Both caches take about an hour to complete from the nearest parking, but while the multi's terrain is a bit more challenging, it's also, in my opinion, a more rewarding experience for anyone game enough to take it on.

 

 

As I understand your suggestion, the MKH at the harbour would earn the finder 152/1000th of an FP, the nearby virtual 356/1000th of an FP, my traditional 53/1000 of an FP but my multi would only get them 2/1000 of an FP. it would thus encourage people to find older touristy caches with higher numbers of FPs so they can earn themselves more FPs to give out, putting newer more off-the-beaten-track caches at an even greater disadvantage than they already are. Might as well not have bothered with the multi.

Edited March 22, 2022 by barefootjeff

[+mustakorppi]

3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

As I understand your suggestion, the MKH at the harbour would earn the finder 152/1000th of an FP, the nearby virtual 356/1000th of an FP, my traditional 53/1000 of an FP but my multi would only get them 2/1000 of an FP. it would thus encourage people to find older touristy caches with higher numbers of FPs so they can earn themselves more FPs to give out, putting newer more off-the-beaten-track caches at an even greater disadvantage than they already are. Might as well not have bothered with the multi.

 

That would be the math, but would anyone actually care about how many thousandths of an FP they're going to earn when selecting which caches to go for? I think the op's suggestion would be mostly meaningless for these caches (as it's intended to be).

 

While I don't think there are any serious negatives to the suggestion, I can think of multiple other things I'd rather Groundspeak devs spend their time on rather than find ways to help FP magnets get even more FP.

 

 

[+cerberus1]

On 3/21/2022 at 10:26 AM, Max and 99 said:

Okay so I get more favorite points to give away if I log a cache that has thousands of favorite points already? 

 

Seems odd to me too...   I stopped "piling on" FPS for those caches. 

Many we've found had mediocre containers, were in substandard condition, but they're old...

[+cerberus1]

On 3/21/2022 at 10:35 AM, bipbip09 said:

This idea is issue of personal thinking, when I came in Amsterdam, I targeted most of caches with at least 100 favorites points, so for me with only a stock ok 42 favorite points, it was hard to give a point to each one ...

 

You seem to be looking to solve a problem that doesn't exist.     There's no requirement for anyone to match everyone else...

If you didn't have enough FPs to match all caches you found, which caches did you think were the best?   Simple.

[+CAVinoGal]

On 3/21/2022 at 5:21 AM, bipbip09 said:

finding beautiful caches should also bring back favorite points, this could be done by integrating a gain of 1 pf every 1000 pfs logged.

I'm not sure I understand how this would work - I would log caches with high favorites, and when that total reaches 1000 favorite points, I would gain 1 point to award?  This would likely take me much longer and many more caches than just gaining 1 Favorite to award for every 10 caches I find.  And I have plenty to give out - I "earn" them faster than I give them away.

 

On 3/21/2022 at 7:35 AM, bipbip09 said:

This idea is issue of personal thinking, when I came in Amsterdam, I targeted most of caches with at least 100 favorites points, so for me with only a stock ok 42 favorite points, it was hard to give a point to each one ...

Just because a cache has over 100 favorite points does not necessarily mean I need to give it another one - we've targeted highly favorited caches when traveling, and not always given them favorite points - only if they were really outstanding to US. And hubby gives to caches I don't, and vice versa.  Plus, you can always bookmark those you were unable to give a favorite to, and award it later when you have earned more points.

 

I think there is only a minority of cachers that don't have enough favorite points to hand out.  Most, probably, like me, have plenty and can give them when I do come across a "favorite".  I doubt I would award every cache found in a day or in a city a favorite, even if I targeted highly favorited ones.

[+barefootjeff]

5 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

I think there is only a minority of cachers that don't have enough favorite points to hand out.  Most, probably, like me, have plenty and can give them when I do come across a "favorite".  I doubt I would award every cache found in a day or in a city a favorite, even if I targeted highly favorited ones.

 

I don't recall any time in my caching career when I've had a surplus of FPs to give out, but maybe that's because where I live there are no power trails and micros make up less than a quarter of the caches. Mysteries and multis also seem to make up a higher proportion of the caches around here than I've seen in other places I've visited where they're mostly traditionals, so maybe that's a factor too. So I don't know how unique my situation is or whether it's fairly common outside the larger population centres.

[+bipbip09]

On 3/22/2022 at 4:15 PM, cerberus1 said:

 

Seems odd to me too...   I stopped "piling on" FPS for those caches. 

Many we've found had mediocre containers, were in substandard condition, but they're old...

 

In fact  , in Amsterdam, many of them are in this case, I didn't give fp for those one

 

5 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:

I think there is only a minority of cachers that don't have enough favorite points to hand out.  Most, probably, like me, have plenty and can give them when I do come across a "favorite".  I doubt I would award every cache found in a day or in a city a favorite, even if I targeted highly favorited ones.

Seems to be, when I read all answers...