Unofficial statement about STATS

1.7k · September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Renegade Knight:
Now if you are anti stats thats another ball of wax.

I am anti-stats. So should be anyone who's tired of all of the threads about "so and so is cheating by logging things he didn't find/logging his own cache/logging finds on caches he's already found/logging every find of a recurring event/logging locationless/hiding caches and then archiving them/whatever else got him a point ahead of me in the stats." Anyone who says those threads don't happen is fooling himself.

pirate.cgi.gif

24.7k · September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - ...I am anti-stats. So should be anyone who's tired of all of the threads about "so and so is cheating by logging things he didn't find/logging his own cache/logging finds on caches he's already found/logging every find of a recurring event/logging locationless/hiding caches and then archiving them/whatever else got him a point ahead of me in the stats." Anyone who says those threads don't happen is fooling himself.

http://parkrrrr.com/pirate.cgi.gif

Oh hell, and to think I didn't come up with a good word for that. Maybe StaTic free?

9.1k · September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by SpongeRob:
Bottom line - we've all sat here and talked about it yet the one person that has the power to either appease or displease remains silent. I see Jeremy pipe up for lesser conversations why does he avoid this one?

Where's Jeremy in all this? Your customers are calling...

Could you maybe go back and read Jeremy's prior posts on this topic, and report back your findings for the benefit of others who haven't done so?

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

Next time, instead of getting married, I think I'll just find a woman I don't like and buy her a house.

September 5, 2003

I just don’t understand the stat haters. I wouldn’t call them mindless drones. If you don’t have anything good to say, don’t say anything at all. I don’t know the pro/anti breakdown for a stats page. I do know that many people want stats. For many people this would be useful information for the better enjoyment of this activity we all love. If you don’t like stats, just don’t look at them. How hard it that?

GF

********************************************

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

1.7k · September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by GeoFool:
If you don’t like stats, just don’t look at them. How hard it that?

I'll agree to do that if you can get every single person who wants stats to agree not to come here and b!tch about whoever's beating them in the stats. Deal?

pirate.cgi.gif

September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy:

quote:
Originally posted by GeoFool:
If you don’t like stats, just don’t look at them. How hard it that?

I'll agree to do that if you can get every single person who wants stats to agree not to come here and b!tch about whoever's beating them in the stats. Deal?

http://parkrrrr.com/pirate.cgi.gif

I don’t remember hearing anyone complaining here before about Dan’s stat page.

GF

********************************************

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

1.7k · September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by GeoFool:
I don’t remember hearing anyone complaining here before about Dan’s stat page.

Then you weren't paying attention. I already said it, but I'll say it again: anyone who says those threads don't happen is fooling himself.

September 5, 2003

I know I haven't been around here very long and maybe I wasn't paying attention, but I don't remember hearing anything about Dan's stat page in the forums until it was shut down.

GF

********************************************

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

September 5, 2003

if youre refering to ...

quote:
Scoring, as a result, is pointless. Simply with find counts people have issues with only getting one find for a multicache. Others complain that Jack is logging his own cache to bump up his *score*. The pitch of competitive whine is more than sufficient without thrusting upon everyone ranking on the site.

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.

I understand *HE* thinks "Scoring, as a result, is pointless" others do not. Some of the others include paying customers who really want this as a service. Inclusion, exclusion what does it really matter. For those who want points read it. For those that don't then once again... get over it.

--

SpongeRob

rwmech@keenpeople.com

www.keenpeople.com

WPWU826

Cache'n Retrievers

1.7k · September 5, 2003

How about you get over it? Why is it that I am the one who has to suck it up and accept the nastyness and flamewars and hurt feelings and cache plundering and deleted logs that come with stats, and you get everything you want?

pirate.cgi.gif

September 5, 2003

quote:
How about you get over it?

I would if I was in the minority.

--

SpongeRob

rwmech@keenpeople.com

www.keenpeople.com

WPWU826

Cache'n Retrievers

1.7k · September 5, 2003

How do you know you're not in the minority?

pirate.cgi.gif

September 5, 2003

Stat information might be kind of fun. Some of us could start a new game. Let's call it "home many caches can you log in 4 hours". Prizes for the most caches and the farthest distance between caches. I'm sure we can think up other catagories for prizes. Maybe we should set a rule that you can't use more than 3 computers at one time.

Byron

September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy:
How about _you_ get over it? Why is it that _I_ am the one who has to suck it up and accept the nastyness and flamewars and hurt feelings and cache plundering and deleted logs that come with stats, and _you_ get everything you want?

http://parkrrrr.com/pirate.cgi.gif

I suppose these things can happen, but I really doubt it. What would be the point? If you are cheating, your just cheating yourself. This could happen now without a stats page. Currently GC.com does keep total counts of cache finds.

GF

********************************************

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Byron & Anne:
Stat information might be kind of fun. Some of us could start a new game. Let's call it "home many caches can you log in 4 hours". Prizes for the most caches and the farthest distance between caches. I'm sure we can think up other catagories for prizes. Maybe we should set a rule that you can't use more than 3 computers at one time.

Byron

The problem with prizes is it would promote cheating.

GF

********************************************

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

September 5, 2003

OK! No prizes.

Byron

September 5, 2003

The stats are already there for anyone who wants to go to the trouble of finding them.

Sherri's Stats:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?ul=sherkanz

Mark's Stats:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?ul=Mark+42

It might be nice if it were easier to access them.

BTW, I may have created a monster... my wife got two FTF's in the last two days. The first one was my fault for calling her and telling her that a new cache had just been placed in a location we intended to use.

"I'm not Responsible... just ask my wife, She'll confirm it"

September 5, 2003

How do we take something that was so uncomplicated and unfettered and turn it into something so competitive? The amusement factor alone is worth watching threads like this one, you have no idea how these serve as a study in human behaviour. No controls of course, but like a television drama, they are born, struggle for attention, and come to a conclusion in a predictable style and amonut of time. Please, keep it up!!

It's great!

"There's no need to be afraid of strange noises in the night. Anything that intends you harm will stalk you silently."

September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by MacDaddy:
How do we take something that was so uncomplicated and unfettered and turn it into something so competitive? The amusement factor alone is worth watching threads like this one, you have no idea how these serve as a study in human behaviour. No controls of course, but like a television drama, they are born, struggle for attention, and come to a conclusion in a predictable style and amonut of time. Please, keep it up!!

It's great!

"There's no need to be afraid of strange noises in the night. Anything that intends you harm will stalk you silently."

I'm glad your enjoying yourself. What do you think about the topic?

GF

********************************************

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

September 5, 2003

quote:
Taking only the first few columns into consideration, a stats list like http://www.azgeocaching.com/team_stats.php would be great. It would also be wonderful if the stats could be regionalized by state, which can be done easily given parameters found http://www.netstate.com/states/index.html, checking the geography link for each state.

That's absolutely great! That's it, I'm moving to Arizona!

-beatnik-

September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by GeoFool:
I just don’t understand the stat haters. I wouldn’t call them mindless drones. If you don’t have anything good to say, don’t say anything at all. I don’t know the pro/anti breakdown for a stats page. I do know that many people want stats. For many people this would be useful information for the better enjoyment of this activity we all love. If you don’t like stats, just don’t look at them. How hard it that?

Wow, mindless drones. I'm adding that to the list of things I've been called because I like stats.

- Mindless Drone

- Unemployed

- Must be Single

- Liar

- Cache Thief

- Prone to do dumb things

- Has too much time on his hands

I can feel the love!

-beatnik-

September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by GeoFool:
I suppose these things can happen, but I really doubt it. What would be the point? If you are cheating, your just cheating yourself. This could happen now without a stats page. Currently GC.com does keep total counts of cache finds.

They can and do happen. They've been happening since the beginning of the site. Still, I prefer to have stats available. They're fun to look at, and you can see how everyone else is doing. I see some think it's unfair to those that only have a few finds compared to those with a lot (30 finds vs. 3000 finds, etc.) You just learn to compare against those that are close to you--either in cache numbers or location. Whatever is more fun to check. If you compare against those with similar numbers, it gives you an incentive to find more caches to catch up if you like.

But then there are those that cheat, and those that need to complain about the cheaters in the forums. I don't worry about either one. If you're comparing with someone that's cheating, all you have to do is get a look at what caches they've logged to see how they got those numbers. If they cheated to get those numbers, either ignore them or mentally adjust their numbers to what you think they should be. There's no official count. Even if there was and the #3 person faked half of their finds, you'd just move yourself up one spot and move them down to where they belong. Let someone else do the complaining about the cheaters, and you can just skip that post or thread.

So we have people that hate stats, people that love stats, and people that need stats so they have some way to catch 'cheaters.'

September 5, 2003

I haven't read all 3 pages on the stats issue but as a new geocacher I check the stats of folks in the forums to see how they do on finding caches as a reference for how much they might really know about this sport. One thing I have noticed though is that the stats don't qualify the finds by the difficulty ratings on them. Seems someone with 20 5/5 finds has worked a bit harder than someone with 20 1/1 finds. If anyone really cares, which I don't. I just like numbers. 8 is one of my favorites.......

__________________________

What are you looking for?

September 5, 2003

where does that arizona stats page get its data? does it datamine the site? isn't that kind of extra traffic the kind of things that slows down posting of logs, pages, pq's, etc for everyone?

The majority of the world is stupid, and the rest of us are in danger of contagion.

24.7k · September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy: ...Then you weren't paying attention. I already said it, but I'll say it again: anyone who says those threads don't happen is fooling himself.

WF is right on this Variations on "my stats are wrong" or "someone logged wrong" "someone cheated" are a fairly common thread topic.

The issue of "Do I delete this log" ect. will always be around.

1.5k · September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy:
How do you know you're not in the minority?

http://parkrrrr.com/pirate.cgi.gif

The way I see it, he's in the majority of people who actually take the time to have a voice. There's probably a few thousand out of the almost 70k geocachers (active/not active) who peruse the forums. There's probably much less that actually post. Is it anyone's fault but their own if they choose not to participate in the forums and voice their opinions on anything going on, whether it be about geocaching or muggles?

Brian

Team A.I.

1.5k · September 5, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by TeamSJ1:
where does that arizona stats page get its data? does it datamine the site? isn't that kind of extra traffic the kind of things that slows down posting of logs, pages, pq's, etc for everyone?

The majority of the world is stupid, and the rest of us are in danger of contagion.

They have a process that grabs specific information to support the stats, and the underlying db's that provide us with our instant .pdb queries viewable with programs like Mobi (ew) or PalmReader. There's also this, which shows my personal page, the find dates, cache status, and at the top you have several different file formats of data that are invaluable when planning cache trips, especially to locations not in my immediate area.

In all reality, what the azgeocaching admins grab is going to have little impact due to the fact that only text is pulled. As I stated in another thread about this (possibly this one), data is highly compressible, allowing for huge transfers in a short period of time, consuming little bandwidth. For example, if you have 4MB of text data, it could transfer as though it's 42k of data because it compresses SO well.

Brian

Team A.I.

September 5, 2003

How to implement the stats so as to make it fair to all:

Count the number of caches completed by a cacher then multiply by the difficulty figures for each cache. Divide the number arrived at by the length of time (in months) that the player has been registered on the site. Now take that number and double it if the player is married. Divide by two if the player is unemployed. Add the size of the players shoes to the result of the above calculation then multiply by the square root of the players age times the number of family pets. Multiply the current figure by 2.67549372 for every cache found (and logged) before 6am. Subtract the number you first thought of and post the number on any website except this one!

But seriously, I don't care what happens regarding stats, I won't be looking at them - 'sides, I'll never make the top and you know, I don't really care. Caching is a fine excuse for me to get my lazy butt outside for a change. Truth is, I am slightly disabled and I can't go caching as much as I would like and I can't go for the difficult ones. However, I never saw caching as a competetive sport. I prefer the word 'pastime' and if that removes the competitive aspect from it then so be it. You are very welcome to think of it in any way that you wish, as I am. Counting finds seems sort of silly to me anyhow and will be so until every cache is of the same difficulty rating.

Just a few thoughts.....

Only nuts eat squirrels,

Snake

September 6, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy:

quote:
Originally posted by SpongeRob:
Regardless of an individuals view on this, I think the majority of people here have spoken on what they want.

I think you can't substantiate this claim of a "majority."

There are a lot of us who don't want stats but have given up on wasting time trying to explain the problem with stats to the mindless drones who do want them.

You've got a lot of nerve and arrogance to call me a mindless drone. I made my point earlier in this thread with no insults to you. You gripe about people that leave whining emails regarding their stats - how about your insulting emails? That's OK? You may be a touch more intelligent than average but it is clear you have yet to grasp the fact that your IQ doesn't make your opinion the right one. It is still only your opinion. With this in mind, can you please keep the tone of your messages at a lower arrogance level? No offense intended - I tried to think of a more tactful way to ask my last question but failed.

BTW.... you really must stop with these tired arguments e.g. "you can't substantiate... etc.". Of course he can't substantiate that the majority want stats because we do not have the opinion of EVERY geocacher in writing, signed by a notary, etc. It is quite clear that the majority of POSTERS are in favor of stats. Note I didn't say the majority of posts. It seems that those against them are quite vehement in their disapproval of such a politically incorrect thing such as competition.

Jim

Can I get an Amen!?

38.2k · September 6, 2003

quote:
Why is it that I am the one who has to suck it up and accept the nastyness and flamewars and hurt feelings and cache plundering and deleted logs that come with stats, and you get everything you want?

There were hurt feelings, cache plundering, deleted logs and flame wars before Dan's stats page, they happened while it was up and don't seem to have stopped since it went away.

"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

September 6, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy:
How about _you_ get over it? Why is it that _I_ am the one who has to suck it up and accept the nastyness and flamewars and hurt feelings and cache plundering and deleted logs that come with stats, and _you_ get everything you want?

Are you not continuing the nastyness and flamewars by calling people mindless drones?

As for threads on the forum whining about stat problems (cheaters, deleted logs, etc.), I have a simple solution to that. I ignore them and they cause me no grief, hurt feelings, etc.

Jim

Can I get an Amen!?

September 6, 2003

Amen!

quote:
Originally posted by paintfiction:

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy:
How about _you_ get over it? Why is it that _I_ am the one who has to suck it up and accept the nastyness and flamewars and hurt feelings and cache plundering and deleted logs that come with stats, and _you_ get everything you want?

Are you not continuing the nastyness and flamewars by calling people mindless drones?

As for threads on the forum whining about stat problems (cheaters, deleted logs, etc.), I have a simple solution to that. I ignore them and they cause me no grief, hurt feelings, etc.

Jim

Can I get an Amen!?

September 6, 2003

quote:
How about _you_ get over it? Why is it that _I_ am the one who has to suck it up and accept the nastyness and flamewars and hurt feelings and cache plundering and deleted logs that come with stats, and _you_ get everything you want?

Why is it that I???? Look below. Sure there are others that feel your pain, but looks as if YOU do have to suck it up and da da da, since you went ballistic first.

But in a previous post by fuzzy:

posted September 05, 2003 02:00 PM

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are a lot of us who don't want stats but have given up on wasting time trying to explain the problem with stats to the mindless drones who do want them .

Sorry, fuzzy, but sounds like you are the one that went all crappy first.

I hate picking on fuzzy, but you are being reiterative and your beef doesn't lean toward the well being of others as much as it does to yourself.

US WE I .......

Yup. That's MY goat!

September 6, 2003

What a long thread, long enough to include lots of opinion and flaming.

I like stats. But then, I like the thrill of the find, as many times during the day as I can get. And though some caches are more interesting than others, a find is a find, just as a single waypoint is a single waypoint. That micro in the lightstand base at Walmart counts just as much as that half day trail in the mountains at 10000 feet.

It would be most expeditious for GC.com to enable the Total Find tally on the profile page and to that data available easily exchangeable into a database.

September 6, 2003

grammar and spellcheck:

and to have that data item available in an easily exchangeable format for a database.

September 7, 2003

why is there a score in anything? Because for some it does matter. All it is worth is braging rights so for those that do not care just ignore it and let the ones who get some fun out of it enjoy it. No one complained when the other stats page was up and going but now all of a sudden its going to be such a bad thing and bad cachers are the only ones who will participate? Please people, let me enjoy this my way and I will let you enjoy it your way. As long as neither way interferes with the other, whats the problem? I enjoy the friendly rivalry that certain cachers have developed because in my unique case it ensures that I get to go out caching more often and further away. Since there are no iron clad rules in this game lets just all get along.

Life is like being on a dog sled team. If you are not the lead dog the view is always the same.

Complacancy is feeding a tiger steaks while waiting for him to become a vegitarian.

September 7, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Sabaharr:
why is there a score in anything? Because for some it does matter. All it is..... etc .....away. Since there are no iron clad rules in this game lets just all get along.

Spot on Sabaharr, and it's the lack of too many rules that makes it so good... Be nice if it can be kept that way.

Only nuts eat squirrels,

Snake

September 7, 2003

While I personally like the stats page I can see why others do not. While posting my opinion on another topic I got slammed and the first thing most slammers said was "while not being an elitest", that showed me right up front that those people count themselves better then the rest of us with fewer finds. Not all mind you, but alot do consider themselves better then you since they have more finds. If we did away with stats these people would be lost. I tend to ignore these people but it does show that stats matter to alot of poeple.

I see your lips moving but all I hear is blah blah blah

1.3k · September 7, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Xitron:
While I personally like the stats page I can see why others do not. While posting my opinion on another topic I got slammed and the first thing most slammers said was "while not being an elitest", that showed me right up front that those people count themselves better then the rest of us with fewer finds. Not all mind you, but alot do consider themselves better then you since they have more finds. If we did away with stats these people would be lost. I tend to ignore these people but it does show that stats matter to alot of poeple.

I see your lips moving but all I hear is blah blah blah

The stats page is gone and there is still an elitist attitude about totals. There always will be. They are still tracked on profile pages, jsut not totalled. There are also people with an elitist attitude about posts. There are still people who claim fake logs are being posted - there's a new thread about that on the forums today.

I can't say that the lack of a leaderboard has or will prevent any of that.

southdeltan

"Man can counterfeit everything except silence". - William Faulkner

5k · September 7, 2003

So I just spent the last hour reading the three pages of existing posts.

I was gone when this all went down (pun, heh) so I want my chance to thank Dan for the stats site.

I was surprised to see my name come up in the conversation (it was a few pages back) with reference to PaterQuest.

Yup. I like stats. Looking at the Mississippi rankings more than a year ago, I decided I could put myself in the lead, if only temporarily. Sure, I wanted to see my name at #1, but moreso, I'm a goal oriented person. I wanted some hurdle--some method of quantifying my geocaching. I wanted a finish line.

Thus, PaterQuest.

You know, for a few months afterwards, Pater and I exchanged the lead a number of times, and then I was hopelessly passed. As was pointed out earlier, when Dan's site went down, I was number 12 or 13. I think PaterQuest sparked a little something in the cachers in Mississippi. That wasn't my intention, but it was exciting to see, and tough to keep up.

You know what sparked PaterQuest? A little listing of names on insidecorner.com.

Stats are dead. Long live stats.

Jamie

2.6k · September 8, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy:

quote:
Originally posted by GeoFool:
If you don’t like stats, just don’t look at them. How hard it that?

I'll agree to do that if you can get every single person who wants stats to agree not to come here and b!tch about whoever's beating them in the stats. Deal?

If you don't like those threads, just don't look at them.

- I just got lost in thought. It was unfamiliar territory. -

September 8, 2003

[This message was edited by opey one on September 08, 2003 at 09:00 AM.]

[This message was edited by opey one on September 08, 2003 at 07:19 PM.]

1.1k · September 8, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Z:
I think PaterQuest sparked a little something in the cachers in Mississippi. That wasn't my intention, but it was exciting to see, and tough to keep up.

You know what sparked PaterQuest? A little listing of names on insidecorner.com.

Stats are dead. Long live stats.

True, in Miss. PaterQuest probably sparked our other early state leaders Leatherneck and Topher72 back then (seems so long ago!), and then it was a ripple effect from there; I won't deny that seeing those state stats certainly sparked me, and I know for a fact some others in-state got sparked as well.

I will re-state again what I've stated elsewhere on this thread and others: The stats competition in Miss. was/is a friendly competition only, a motivator to get out and do some caching, an excuse to get to know other state cachers and give them a good-natured hard time, and a way to see what others in the area have been up to. We've never cut throats, and we've never worried about anyone "cheating" (and lemme tell ya, I took more than my fair share of cr*p for the one log entry I made where I admitted forgetting to sign a log book...so much so that I went back to that cache to do so just to shut everyone up - it was all in good fun).

I'll probably get flamed for this, but: I am so eff'ing tired of folks bashing the idea of stats. There are no prizes; only bragging rights, and as Jamie's experience after PaterQuest shows, that can only be fleeting. Even if many folks really do not look at others' find numbers, I'm guessing that almost everyone looks at at least their own. And even if it's frowned upon when a few folks do the ol' "Well I have x number of finds so I'm qualified to say this and you're not..." on the forums, it's also true that many folks also click on forum posters' profiles to see their Find counts to determine if they're at least marginally credible in what they're saying, or not.

Stats have so many other uses besides competition; the information they provide makes this a better game/sport/pastime. Non-competitive people can either choose not to view them as such, or not view them at all...I'm so frustrated by the all-or-nothing resistance to stats that's been voiced (although I respect those folks' right to their opinions), both from other posters here as well as by the gc.com owners.

End of rant.

-Dave R. in Biloxi

[This message was edited by drat19 on September 08, 2003 at 08:06 AM.]

1.2k · September 8, 2003

I agree with you Dave, you are probably going to get flamed...LOL.

Just kidding. I'm at the point where I am going to give up on the stats. Either gc.com is going to do it or they're not. Either someone else is going to pick up where Dan left off, or they're not, and nothing I have to say is going to make one bit of difference.

It has been interesting to see the various opinions, and to see the fanaticism on both sides of the issue. Keeps the blood pumping to get all worked up about such issues, eh?

Look forward to caching with you again sometime old friend, let's see if we can't set something up.

"Trade up, trade even, or don't trade!!!" My philosophy of life.

September 8, 2003

AMEN!

quote:
True, in Miss. PaterQuest probably sparked our other early state leaders Leatherneck and Topher72 back then (seems so long ago!), and then it was a ripple effect from there; I won't deny that seeing those state stats certainly sparked me, and I know for a fact some others in-state got sparked as well.

I will re-state again what I've stated elsewhere on this thread and others: The stats competition in Miss. was/is a friendly competition only, a motivator to get out and do some caching, an excuse to get to know other state cachers and give them a good-natured hard time, and a way to see what others in the area have been up to. We've never cut throats, and we've never worried about anyone "cheating" (and lemme tell ya, I took more than my fair share of cr*p for the one log entry I made where I admitted forgetting to sign a log book...so much so that I went back to that cache to do so just to shut everyone up - it was all in good fun).

I'll probably get flamed for this, but: I am so eff'ing tired of folks bashing the idea of stats. There are no prizes; only bragging rights, and as Jamie's experience after PaterQuest shows, that can only be fleeting. Even if many folks really do not look at others' find numbers, I'm guessing that almost everyone looks at at least their own. And even if it's frowned upon when a few folks do the ol' "Well I have x number of finds so I'm qualified to say this and you're not..." on the forums, it's also true that many folks also click on forum posters' profiles to see their Find counts to determine if they're at least marginally credible in what they're saying, or not.

Stats have so many other uses besides competition; the information they provide makes this a better game/sport/pastime. Non-competitive people can either choose not to view them as such, or not view them at all...I'm so frustrated by the all-or-nothing resistance to stats that's been voiced (although I respect those folks' right to their opinions), both from other posters here as well as by the gc.com owners.

End of rant.

-Dave R. in Biloxi

[This message was edited by drat19 on September 08, 2003 at 08:06 AM.]

and AMEN!

Can I get an Amen!?

Unofficial statement about STATS

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation