Dru Morgan Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 Go here and tell me if you can spot the problem. If I can do that, then this site is completely useless. Since the stats have gone from here, I have changed my style completely. They just don't matter to me as much in my daily caching anymore. Ever notice how anyone that caches more than you do is a maniac, while anyone that caches less than you do is an idiot? -Dru Morgan
+planetrobert Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 dont see it Now where did I set my GPS??? planetrobert.net
+RuffRidr Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 Ya, I must be missing something as well. I'm guessing he probably just fudged his stats. Ya, I agree that that site is useless when you can do that. --RuffRidr
+Stunod Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 I'm assuming you posted bogus stats? So far it really hasn't been a problem, but it's better than whats being offered here. ______________________ Eamus Catuli! ChiTown Cachers * Keenpeople.com Stats
Dru Morgan Posted October 13, 2003 Author Posted October 13, 2003 Yes, I entered 5000 and instantly became number one. But, never mind. Ignore this. I already removed my stats there. I wrote this hours ago, but it just popped up here now. I'm already over it. Ever notice how anyone that caches more than you do is a maniac, while anyone that caches less than you do is an idiot? -Dru Morgan
+hikemeister Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 I had 10,100 finds for about an hour last Thursday night, so your 5,000 is nothing ! Kept the number there until I had a cold beer, and then adjusted it down to my meager 62 finds. Yes, the site is not of much value. The other problem is that there are so few users, that being #1 really is not that meaningful. In Florida, there are probably thousands of geocachers, but about 8 on this site.
+TMAN264 Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 Shhhhhh, right now I am ranked higher then ever over there....but of course, stats mean nothing to me, yeah, thats it! Make a sanity check.
+cachew nut Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Dru Morgan: If I can do that, then this site is completely useless. Since the stats have gone from here, I have changed my style completely. They just don't matter to me as much in my daily caching anymore. You can just as easily log 5000 bogus finds on GC.com and then this website will become just as totally useless as you claim that one is. If it doesn't matter then why bother trying to inflate the numbers?
+hikemeister Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 I don't think the issue of faking the number of finds is the real one. Yes, several of us did that just for fun early on -- and then shortly afterwards, either deleted our entries, or put in the correct numbers. The big issue will be in regard to what percentage of geocachers have stats listed on the site. What good is it to know that you are number 1 (if you care about such things) if only 0.1 % of geocachers have stats on the site?
+Prime Suspect Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Dru Morgan:Go http://www.keenpeople.com/index.php?option=com_cachestat&Itemid=87 and tell me if you can spot the problem. If I can do that, then this site is completely useless. It's well known that the stats there are on the "honor system", just like cache logging is here, and only a very small subset of actual cachers are listed. Are you just now catching on to this, or is there some other point we're missing? "Don't mess with a geocacher. We know all the best places to hide a body."
+briansnat Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 The problem with Keenpeople is that though its a nice try, its totally useless. Any stats site that doesn't include CCCooper, BruceS, Stayfloopy, Lil Otter, etc... in the top 10 is not a valid stats site. Heck, I was #1 in NJ until Bassonpilot added his stuff. Now I'm down to number 2, when I'm really somewhere around 25. For a stats site to be useful, it has to include everyone. If someone wants to opt out, "anonymous" can appear instead of their name. "You can't make a man by standing a sheep on his hind legs. But by standing a flock of sheep in that position, you can make a crowd of men" - Max Beerbohm
+Divine Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 quote:Originally posted by BrianSnat:For a stats site to be useful, it has to include everyone. If someone wants to opt out, "anonymous" can appear instead of their name. While I definitely agree with above, I must say that it's quite funny that these nicknames of ours - which are mostly pretty anonymous per se - should appear as 'anonymous' on some statistical listing. - I just got lost in thought. It was unfamiliar territory. -
+briansnat Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 quote: While I definitely agree with above, I must say that it's quite funny that these nicknames of ours - which are mostly pretty anonymous per se - should appear as 'anonymous' on some statistical listing I agree with that. Some of us locals do know each other's real names but in reality, who the heck is Divine (the geocacher, not the actor), Prime Suspect, hikemeister, etc... If that isn't anonymity, what is? "You can't make a man by standing a sheep on his hind legs. But by standing a flock of sheep in that position, you can make a crowd of men" - Max Beerbohm [This message was edited by BrianSnat on October 13, 2003 at 07:35 PM.]
+Sissy-n-CR Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 Just about any way you do stats will be inaccurate. Even if Jeremy created a no-opt-out system and all bogus logs were eliminated, the finds wouldn't be accurate. There are people who don't log online and there are caches that aren't listed on gc.com. But I guess you can have stats for "people who log caches found on gc.com" and it be fairly accurate. CR
+Renegade Knight Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Sissy-n-CR:...But I guess you can have stats for "people who log caches found on gc.com" and it be fairly accurate. Exactly.
+Squealy Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 I'm sure one of you will be able to markwell me, soooooo... Why can't GC.com set up a stats board on the home site based on what is reported there?(regardless of the who wants in or out question) So many caches, why am I on the forums?
+Stunod Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Squealy:Why can't GC.com set up a stats board on the home site based on what is reported there Because Jeremy doesn't want one Although he has stated that he plans to impliment an OPT-IN stats system sometime. ______________________ Eamus Catuli! ChiTown Cachers * Keenpeople.com Stats
Swagger Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Stunod:Although he has stated that he plans to impliment an OPT-IN stats system sometime. Where'd he say that? The only thing that I've read is where he says he'd consider it. There's a big difference and Jeremy has already stated countless times that he's philosophically against it. -- Pehmva! [sTATS IMAGE REMOVED BY OVERBEARING ADMINS] Random quote: [RANDOM QUOTE IMAGE REMOVED BY OVERBEARING ADMINS]
+Stunod Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 Yes, it was only a consideration. Here's the quote: quote: Not that I'm ignoring the rumblings in the forum, however. We have been considering two concepts which could find its way on the web site, depending on interest: 1. Users check a box that says "Yes. I think points matter." Only those people become ranked in the system. 2. People can join groups and see rankings of their stats on the web site as a group. I prefer #2. Both are opt-in and in this situation if everyone understands the complexity of "scoring" and doesn't come b!tch to me if someone cheats, we will consider adding it. Taken from THIS THREAD ______________________ Eamus Catuli! ChiTown Cachers * Keenpeople.com Stats
+Bluespreacher Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Dru Morgan:Go http://www.keenpeople.com/index.php?option=com_cachestat&Itemid=87 and tell me if you can spot the problem. If I can do that, then this site is completely useless. Since the stats have gone from here, I have changed my style completely. They just don't matter to me as much in my daily caching anymore. Ever notice how anyone that caches more than you do is a maniac, while anyone that caches less than you do is an idiot? -http://www.theheavenlyhost.com/geocache Problem? I perused the Keenpeople site and thought, "Oh, that's nice". The way they make other links to software that uses GC's info and stuff. There really is a lot of nice stuff there, but then you get to the rant part. It seems to be set up to be a place where Anonomous people can rip TPTB on this site. Like we don't have enough here already! I don't know, if someone wants to have a site that adds to Geocaching, that's great, I just don't have any interest in some bitter person ranting about *this* site that has really done a great job of establishing and nurturing Geocaching. I feel better already! Keep on caching, Bluespreacher "We've got the hardware and the software, the plans and the maps ..." -- Citizen Wayne Kramer
Cholo Posted October 13, 2003 Posted October 13, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Cruzin!: quote:Originally posted by Stunod:Although he has stated that he plans to impliment an OPT-IN stats system sometime. Where'd he say that? The only thing that I've read is where he says he'd _consider_ it. There's a big difference and Jeremy has already stated countless times that he's philosophically against it. One must read carefully. Jeremy has implied that he's a cunning linguist. I'm sure he will soon have this problem licked.
Dru Morgan Posted October 14, 2003 Author Posted October 14, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Dru Morgan:Ignore this. I already removed my stats there. I wrote this hours ago, but it just popped up here now. I'm already over it. I guess I wasn't clear enough. Please close this thread. Ever notice how anyone that caches more than you do is a maniac, while anyone that caches less than you do is an idiot? -Dru Morgan
Recommended Posts