Jump to content

Post to Find Quotent (PFQ)


briansnat
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

Here is a formula to identify those who spend too much time on this message board and not enough time placing or finding caches. As I see it, anybody with a PFQ higher than 1.5 is spending way too much time here and not enough outside.

 

The forumula is:

posts / (finds + hides)

 

Lets see, using this I have

484 / (50 + 27) = 6.2

 

Uh oh, I had better get out there and find me some caches!

 

"Life is a daring adventure, or it is nothing" - Helen Keller

Link to comment

58/(101+3)=.56 rounded.

 

Whew, I need to take a break! No wonder the dog has starved to death, my electric has been shut off, and btw, where is my wife? icon_eek.gif

 

KYtrex

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

A "Buckeye" is just a "Hillbilly" that ran out of money on the way to Michigan jpshakehead.gif

Link to comment

58/(101+3)=.56 rounded.

 

Whew, I need to take a break! No wonder the dog has starved to death, my electric has been shut off, and btw, where is my wife? icon_eek.gif

 

KYtrex

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

A "Buckeye" is just a "Hillbilly" that ran out of money on the way to Michigan jpshakehead.gif

Link to comment

Markwell,

 

Your posts in the forums are always helpful. Whenever someone has a question or problem you post the answer/solution or indicate where the info can be found. You are the perfect example of how forums such as these get information to those who need it. I, for one, thank you.

 

Your numbers indicate that the PFQ is indeed flawed. Perhaps a 1.5 PFQ indicates that someone is spending TOO much time caching.

 

For some of us, caching is a fun weekend event. My wife and I will pick an interesting cache if the weather looks good, print some maps, and head out for a picnic/geocache hunt. We're not in it for the numbers.

 

I will admit, however, that I do spend WAY too much time in the forums!

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by FullOn:

Not a bad average, but I think I need to place some more caches!

 

224 Found / 8 Placed = 28 Found/Hid ratio. Something around 10 seems more inline.


 

Be careful of this logic. I recently had a very long discussion off-line regarding this issue. (I know, it is shocking to some to imagine that I am ever off-line.) You will always have the capacity to find one more cache. There is only so many caches that you can properly maintain, however.

 

Certainly an uber-cacher like a BruceS can not be expected to place and maintain 100 quality caches.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Marty Fouts:

Oh. Good. Another competition to ignore. icon_wink.gif

 

Maybe we can ask Jeremy to put the Q in our profiles so everyone can comment on it.

 

I'd give mine here, but I don't know, off hand, how many posts I've made.


 

oh. wait. now i know the ratio, because the # is on the bottom of my last post. it's 139/192. too bad i can't remember how to divide.

 

does this mean i get to make a bunch of posts before i have to go geocaching again?

 

tune in tomorrow for an update

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Marty Fouts:

Oh. Good. Another competition to ignore. icon_wink.gif

 

Maybe we can ask Jeremy to put the Q in our profiles so everyone can comment on it.

 

I'd give mine here, but I don't know, off hand, how many posts I've made.


 

oh. wait. now i know the ratio, because the # is on the bottom of my last post. it's 139/192. too bad i can't remember how to divide.

 

does this mean i get to make a bunch of posts before i have to go geocaching again?

 

tune in tomorrow for an update

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Marty Fouts:

Oh. Good. Another competition to ignore. icon_wink.gif

 

Maybe we can ask Jeremy to put the Q in our profiles so everyone can comment on it.

 

I'd give mine here, but I don't know, off hand, how many posts I've made.


 

I agree that it isn't about the numbers. I don't think anyone is taking all of these formulas seriously. It's all in fun.

 

Of course, I have heard people passionately argue the 10/1 find to hide ratio. That's why I added my comment on how this breaks down as finds increase.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Marty Fouts:

Oh. Good. Another competition to ignore. icon_wink.gif

 

Maybe we can ask Jeremy to put the Q in our profiles so everyone can comment on it.

 

I'd give mine here, but I don't know, off hand, how many posts I've made.


 

I agree that it isn't about the numbers. I don't think anyone is taking all of these formulas seriously. It's all in fun.

 

Of course, I have heard people passionately argue the 10/1 find to hide ratio. That's why I added my comment on how this breaks down as finds increase.

Link to comment

quote:
Originaly posted by BrianSnat

It was a joke

 

Guys/Gals,

My original post here was tongue in cheek. I was sort of poking fun at myself and I guess, others like me. Heeeelllllooooo Mcfly!


 

I for one though it was very funny Brian, well done!!! icon_wink.gificon_wink.gificon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gificon_razz.gificon_razz.gif

 

Lapaglia icon_cool.gif

"Muga Muchu" (forget yourself, focus).

Link to comment

quote:
Originaly posted by BrianSnat

It was a joke

 

Guys/Gals,

My original post here was tongue in cheek. I was sort of poking fun at myself and I guess, others like me. Heeeelllllooooo Mcfly!


 

I for one though it was very funny Brian, well done!!! icon_wink.gificon_wink.gificon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gificon_razz.gificon_razz.gif

 

Lapaglia icon_cool.gif

"Muga Muchu" (forget yourself, focus).

Link to comment

How about 1.5 for each hide? Also, shouldn't we get a 1/4 point or something no-finds? After all, we are out doing the geocaching thing!

 

Of course I only argue these points because I have a poor ratio...

 

129/(18+5)=5.6

 

Under my system, the ratio would only improve slightly (to 5.0) so I guess it's a moot point anyway... At least mine's not infinite! icon_razz.gif

 

Oh well, I'll be finishing up the last of my hides (for awhile anyway) and will be once again on the cache hunt trail. I'll have to work on this ratio thing! icon_biggrin.gif

 

GeoMedic - team leader of GeoStars

Link to comment

How about 1.5 for each hide? Also, shouldn't we get a 1/4 point or something no-finds? After all, we are out doing the geocaching thing!

 

Of course I only argue these points because I have a poor ratio...

 

129/(18+5)=5.6

 

Under my system, the ratio would only improve slightly (to 5.0) so I guess it's a moot point anyway... At least mine's not infinite! icon_razz.gif

 

Oh well, I'll be finishing up the last of my hides (for awhile anyway) and will be once again on the cache hunt trail. I'll have to work on this ratio thing! icon_biggrin.gif

 

GeoMedic - team leader of GeoStars

Link to comment

Lets see 223/7 (hey I don't live where there is a million caches within a few hundred miles of me) that's 31.85. But I usually don't post on cache items, just posts about GPSr and their software. But I guess there are 17 available within those hundred miles that I could eventually do.

 

Wyatt W.

 

The probability of someone watching you is directly proportional to the stupidity of your actions.

Link to comment

I know, I know -- it's all a joke, but still I was thinking this same thing just the other day.

 

Here's me:

22 / (37 + 0) = 0.59

 

Whew! I made it into the club! icon_smile.gif

 

But I think there should be limits -- BrianSnat, sbell, and Markwell (and a bunch of others) all make *good* contributions to the forums. So maybe if you've had more than 100 finds, or more than 10 hides, then you deserve a higher quotient. That gets you all off the hook. (sbell already was, of course...)

 

Or we can start an individual post rating! Every single post gets a 1-5 star rating, culminating in a score for each geocacher, weighted by finds, hides, bugs placed, bugs found (bugs found but not moved! icon_smile.gif ) etc. etc.

 

Okay, I'm kidding. I just gotta get out more.

Link to comment

I know, I know -- it's all a joke, but still I was thinking this same thing just the other day.

 

Here's me:

22 / (37 + 0) = 0.59

 

Whew! I made it into the club! icon_smile.gif

 

But I think there should be limits -- BrianSnat, sbell, and Markwell (and a bunch of others) all make *good* contributions to the forums. So maybe if you've had more than 100 finds, or more than 10 hides, then you deserve a higher quotient. That gets you all off the hook. (sbell already was, of course...)

 

Or we can start an individual post rating! Every single post gets a 1-5 star rating, culminating in a score for each geocacher, weighted by finds, hides, bugs placed, bugs found (bugs found but not moved! icon_smile.gif ) etc. etc.

 

Okay, I'm kidding. I just gotta get out more.

Link to comment

This does not look good for me then!

 

166/(11+0) = 15.090909090909090909090909090909 etc...

 

Not only am I spending too much time here, but does this mean I repeat myself a lot in these forums?

 

Maybe if I were in snat's shoes, I could do better. Umm, forget that, I'll stick to my own shoes even with the crappy "score".

 

Me and that dog are gonna take a walk in the woods, and only one of us is coming back...

Link to comment

I recall a post a long time back where somebody stated that they didn't have any time for anyone whose posts were more than 5 times their finds. That has stuck in my mind, and I have found myself making sure I keep below that ratio.

 

I don't however think that any such ratio is important or fair (I don't doubt that some would rather have me keep well below a 5:1 ratio!) Constructive posts that add to Geocaching is what is really important. (O.K. - I agree - this post probably doesn't meet that test)

 

You may not agree with what I say, but I will defend, to your death, my right to say it!(it's a Joke, OK!)

Link to comment

My post/find ratio was just a silly exercise. Of course there is a hint of truth to it, as there is to almost any joke.

 

Generally speaking, a Geocacher with a lot of finds/placements has valuable experience that can useful to anybody who visits these forums. The higher your counts, the more experience you have; hence the more weight your comments may have.

 

Still, I've seen many insightful and interesting posts from new Geocachers.

 

And uh oh, since my original post I've found 2

caches and added about 30 more posts. I don't even want to look at my PFQ now...

 

[This message was edited by BrianSnat on August 24, 2002 at 03:45 AM.]

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...