Cache Difficulty Rating

[nobby.nobbs]

i thought i'd open this topic as i have seen several requests for info on wheelchair accessible caches and i have a disabled father who i would like to take to some caches.

i would suggest we change the rating to out of ten for the terrain. at the moment there isn't much between 1, wheelchairs and 5, summit mount everest.

 

if we changed it to out of ten each level could have a guideline to say what it is for. this would mean it's easier to rate and very obvious whether you are able to do it.

 

you can see if specialist equipment or skills are needed. this would stop those people who are determined to kill themselves through stupidity blaming the cache owner! " oh i didn't realise that climbing up a mountain in mid winter in shorts wasn't clever, you never said it was dangerous!"

 

seriously though, it wouldn't be hard for us all to rerate our caches and then people would be able to plan their enjoyment with a little more accuracy and ease.

 

what do people think?

[+Jamie Z]

Because of the half-star system, there are already 9 different rating levels. That said, another advantage of the 1-10 system would be that the rating could be expressed as one byte of data, rather than two.

 

However, I don't think there is any real advantage to expanding the ratings. Too many caches are already mis-rated, and the rating system is highly subjective anyway. Making a wider range would only cause more room for subjective variation.

 

Yes, the 1-5 system covers a lot of territory, but in reality caches usually range from wheelchair accessible to several mile hike. The "Mount Everest" caches are very rare, and not worthy of rating expansion.

 

Jamie

[+Stem]

What if the site added a finder rating system. Still have the rating from the hider, but have a separate one from the people that find the cache, and avg. them together. The rating system as it is implemented now is based on 1 persons opinion. To allow an avg of many opinions could more accurately determine a caches rating. Perhaps set a minimum number of finds a cacher has to have before he could add to the rating. By setting said minimum, it ensures those rating the cache have some experience.

 

As much as I think this is an idea worth considering, the new servers are much higher on my wish list.

[+briansnat]

I'd like to see a system where you answer a few questions about your cache. Terrain, length of hike, type of trail (or whether one exists), difficulty of finding the cache, etc.... Then it spits out a rating for you. That would be great!,

[WH]

I'd like to see a system where you answer a few questions about your cache. Terrain, length of hike, type of trail (or whether one exists), difficulty of finding the cache, etc.... Then it spits out a rating for you. That would be great!,

Actually, there is.

[+New England n00b]

I'd like to see a system where you answer a few questions about your cache. Terrain, length of hike, type of trail (or whether one exists), difficulty of finding the cache, etc.... Then it spits out a rating for you. That would be great!,

Actually, there is.

Whoah... hey brian look at that! Bet you've never seen that before!

[WH]

I'd like to see a system where you answer a few questions about your cache. Terrain, length of hike, type of trail (or whether one exists), difficulty of finding the cache, etc.... Then it spits out a rating for you. That would be great!,

Actually, there is.

Whoah... hey brian look at that! Bet you've never seen that before!

Theres actually a link to it on the cache submission page. Its right next to where you decide the D/T of the cache you are placing.

[+New England n00b]

Briansnat has busted my you-know-whats on this very question. At least I'm pretty sure it was him...

[CoyoteRed]

I think the 5 star rating is fine, but I think the ClayJar system is slightly broken.

 

First the five stars. As mentioned, there are are half stars for inbetweens. Plus, if you look at each star as getting exponentially harder then it covers a lot of ground. Plus, given the fact it's very subjective AND too many folks don't follow any guide for rating their cache, then 5 stars is fine.

 

The Clayjar system with it's requirement of specialized equipment for 5 terrain rating jumps the difficulty artificially. A nice easy boat ride gives it a 5 star terrain and it just ain't 5 stars hard. I've had a project rolling around in my head about modifying the CJ system and removing specialized equipment from consideration and only considering specialized skills. I'd also define what is to be considered in the difficulty and what is to be considered in terrain because of some grey areas.

 

As Brain would point out, now that we had many tens of thousands of caches out there, now we change the system? Well, if it's broken...

 

Actually what I'd do considering that some use the CJ system and some use no system at all, I'd make available the MCJS (Modified CJ System) and encourage folks to put a small code at the bottom of their discriptions similar to the a typist would put a short series of letters at the bottom of a letter to indicate the intials of the person signing the letter and the person who actually prepared the letter. This would tell people how the rating was calculated. It would also tell them a ?/5 on the MCJS is not just an easy boat ride or requires a wrench to remove the lid, but something that might require special skills like rock climbing or SCUBA, or might be a really long hike. The only time specialized gear comes into play is when used in conjunction with the specialized skill.

[+blazerfan]

I think the 5 star system is fine, but I feel many cachers do not know that a 1 is suppose to be wheelchair accessible and 5 is suppose to be for special equipment. I think instead of relying on the difficulty rating these items should be seperate check boxes when submitting a cache. After you fill out the rating as you see fit there should be the following questions.

 

is special equipment required to reach or retrieve this cache?

is the cache wheelchair accessible?

 

With these check boxes an icon could be put right on the page to let people know. Just an idea that I'm sure has been sugested before... even these check boxes would be subjective to peoples personal opinions. I am not an expert on what is wheelchair accessible... I can only put my opinion of if it is or not.

[+Renegade Knight]

I've been thinking about the rating system and thinkthe ClayJar system is a great starting point for an accessable rating system.

 

It would take a couple of tweaks but you could have a modified ClayJar system that spits out two bits of information. The rating as we know it and a quick summary of information that would help people who need more specific terrain information than *** to know if they can do the cache.

 

Edit: A star rating by itself doesn't give the specific information needed. For exmaple a hard pack dirt trial that is smooth and flat should be wheel chair accssable with minimal extra effort. However in the rain when it turns to clay mud it would eat wheelchairs and mountain bikes.

Edited April 20, 2004 by Renegade Knight

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

I'd like to see a system where you answer a few questions about your cache. Terrain, length of hike, type of trail (or whether one exists), difficulty of finding the cache, etc.... Then it spits out a rating for you. That would be great!,

It might be nice if this were incorperated into the log creation page. Most cachers are too lazy to go actually check on what the terrain should be. If it was easy for them, then it must be a one.

[+javamutt]

I'm a big fan of the concept of a finder-based rating system. I view my caches as something I've created, and like to see feedback. The logs are great, but a standardized feedback mechanism is a nice supplement. The hider's opinion is important, but I think finder input could even out the under and over-rated ones. The key, of course is to have a # of ratings posted with it.

 

Keenpeople.com offers a basic rating system for caches, although it doesn't parallel gc.com's terrain/difficulty system. If you have a keenpeople login (free) you can use the link below to check it out:

 

http://www.keenpeople.com/index.php?option...evote&Itemid=86

 

It's not a perfect system, but I like it.

[WH]

I'd like to see a system where you answer a few questions about your cache. Terrain, length of hike, type of trail (or whether one exists), difficulty of finding the cache, etc.... Then it spits out a rating for you. That would be great!,

It might be nice if this were incorperated into the log creation page. Most cachers are too lazy to go actually check on what the terrain should be. If it was easy for them, then it must be a one.

The link for the clayjar cache rating page can be found on the cache submission form right next to where you select the d/t for the cache you are hiding.

[n0wae]

I think the 5 star system is fine, but I feel many cachers do not know that a  1 is suppose to be wheelchair accessible and 5 is suppose to be for special equipment.

I agree that for the most part the 5 star system is fine. What I have a problem with is putting 5 stars on anything that needs special equipment. For example a ski cache or a 4x4 cache needs a better rating system than just 5 stars. Having a beginers trail and a triple black diamond trail both get 5 stars just because special equipment is needed doesn't make any sense to me.

[+JeepCachr]

Here is a site that will let you easily add more attributes to your cache. http://www.9key.com/selector.asp

 

Here is a site proposing a user rating system.

http://www.digger.net/projects/gcrfs/

 

Here is a Handicap Accessibility Guideline Generator.

http://www.britishideas.com/geocaching/handicap.php

 

Keenpeople.com allows you to place a button on your cache that allows people to rate it. Its a popularity poll though, not a difficulty rating.

 

A question I have is should a 1 terrain cache be handicapped accessible? If so what defination of handicapped accessible should be followed. I've seen places where some people say yes and others where they say no.

 

Changing the rating system would be a monumental task.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Here is a Handicap Accessibility Guideline Generator.

http://www.britishideas.com/geocaching/handicap.php

 

...A question I have is should a 1 terrain cache be handicapped accessible? If so what defination of handicapped accessible should be followed. I've seen places where some people say yes and others where they say no.

 

Changing the rating system would be a monumental task.

Good site.

 

A 1 is wheelchair assessable per the classic definition of a wheel chair.

[+djwini]

i didn't know that a 1 star is supposed to be wheelchair accessable. i wouldn't think very many caches could get that rating. as soon as you have to go off the trail to find the cache hidden under a tree, or wherever, you lose that rating. i once went to a one star, that you actually had to climb the tree, not far, but not possible for me.

[+RichardMoore]

There are some things that I feel should be said about the rating system:

1) It is not perfect, but then no system would be. Rating the terrain and difficulty is not an exact science. Clayjar's system does an excellent job.

2) The Clayjar system is not officially part of gc.com. Yes, a link is provided, but the system was not developed by gc.com. The definitions of the various ratings are not part of the gc.com guidelines. I would like to see it "brought on board" as a regular part of the cache submittal, instead of as a suggestion.

3) As I understand it, the Clayjar rating system was developed by Clayjar with the input and assistance of several other experienced cachers. In case no one has told them lately: Thank you! Your work if greatly appreciated. I'm glad that you put in the time and effort to develop the system. There is no way that I could have even started to come up with something like it.

[+blazerfan]

A question I have is should a 1 terrain cache be handicapped accessible? If so what defination of handicapped accessible should be followed. I've seen places where some people say yes and others where they say no..

It is my understanding that a 1 terrain is wheelchair accessable. Like I said before I'm not an expert since I don't use a wheelchair, and I havn't always labled my caches how I now feel is correct. If I where to hide a cache today to give it a 1 it has to be on a fairly level paved or hard packed surface, and should be a few inches above ground level, but no higher than 4 feet or so. And of course you should be able to get close enough to reach it in a wheelchair. Anything else gets a 1 1/2 at least

[+bons]

A 1 star rating is called "handicapped accessable" by the clayjar system. It's fully possible to answer the questions honestly and get a 1 on a cache that is not accessable by someone in a wheelchair. Some people here have proposed the "40 pounds in a shopping cart without lifting the wheels" test for terrain=1. These people also tend to tell others to use the clayjar system which doesn't say anything about pushing shopping carts or lifting wheels.

 

Personally, I think wheelchair accessabilty should be something separate from the terrain/difficulty ratings. I don't care if it's part of Groundspeak's system or if someone creates a separate listing for them. My main reason is that it's obvious that many cachers seem to feel the D/T ratings are either subjective or they're using clayjar (see above). The number of people placing caches who actually know how to insure a cache is wheelchair accessable is a clear minority and probably the ONLY person with a reasonable set of guidelines for everyone else is RK.

 

Personally, I'm getting tired of claims that terrain:1 needs to be wheelchair accessable when there isn't a clear understanding of what that actually means. Does it mean you can get to the location with a wheelchair or with a wheelchair and assistance or does it mean you can physically reach the cache from a wheelchair? How good of a wheelchair pilot would you have to be and what type of cache, how high, etc.

 

When I see a clear set of guidelines that tells me how to insure my cache is wheelchair accessable, I'll use them. Until then I'm using the set of guidelines that tells me a cache is handicapped accessable and I'll note wheelchair accessabilty separately.

[CoyoteRed]

A 1 star rating is called "handicapped accessable" by the clayjar system. It's fully possible to answer the questions honestly and get a 1 on a cache that is not accessable by someone in a wheelchair.

This is correct.

 

The more I do research on wheelchair accessibility the more I realize there is more consideration than just a flat hard surface and a short distance. You could most certainly meet the definition of 1 star terrain and still have wheelchairs denied access. All it would take is a pole gate with the poles 24 inches apart or a turnstile.

 

Making sure a cache is wheelchair accessible is a lot of work and takes a lot more consideration that how flat and hard the trail is.

 

It might be too much to ask every cache owner of an easy cache to consider all of the variables to ensure that their cache is wheelchair accessible or not.

 

Might want to consider a 1 star as terrain that is generally accessible, but there is no guarantees.

 

Even if you did change the rating system to reflect 1 terrain as accessible, you'd not be able to look at a 1 terrain and know it's accessible. Far too many caches out there whose owners would never change the rating. In short, until the long awaited attributes function is implemented, with the ability to search on an attribute, will there be an effective way to find them without looking at each discription--then there are already effective ways to describe those as mentioned above.

[+briansnat]

The more I do research on wheelchair accessibility the more I realize there is more consideration than just a flat hard surface and a short distance. You could most certainly meet the definition of 1 star terrain and still have wheelchairs denied access. All it would take is a pole gate with the poles 24 inches apart or a turnstile.

 

True. This takes some common sense. I just placed a cache that was along a very flat, hard packed path. Easily negotiable in a wheelchair, but there is a locked across the entrance that would keep someone in a wheelchair out. It gets 1.5 stars because of that.

[Leoness]

I just upgraded the difficulty on one of my caches having read this thread. It was previously a 1 star but now it's a 2 star as the route is a dirt track across moorland and is therefore unaccessible for wheelchair users.

[+JeepCachr]

Is a 1 supposed to be handicap accessible or wheelchair accessable? Is there a difference?

[+briansnat]

Is a 1 supposed to be handicap accessible or wheelchair accessable? Is there a difference?

 

I think the basic qualification for handicap accessability is that it can accommodate a wheelchair. Which is why handicap parking spots have ramps, even if the people who use them aren't necessarily confined to one.

 

A blind person is considered to be handicapped, but could probably climb Mt Everest.

Edited April 22, 2004 by briansnat

[+Stem]

Is a 1 supposed to be handicap accessible or wheelchair accessable? Is there a difference?

 

I think the basic qualification for handicap accessability is that it can accommodate a wheelchair. Which is why handicap parking spots have ramps, even if the people who use them aren't necessarily confined to one.

 

A blind person is considered to be handicapped, but could probably climb Mt Everest.

Actually a blind man has climbed Mt. everest. I can't remember his name, but I saw a special called "farther than the eye can see" on a HD channel that chronicled his accomplishment. This man is truly amazing, and proves that a disability doesn't have to prevent you from accomplishing your goals

[nobby.nobbs]

i agree with stem about handicaps not stopping people from achieving their goals and that also the problems we have are that the rating is very subjective. that's why i hope that some form of guideline can be written up so that each level is given a description. it won't be perfect but it will allow people to have a better idea what they're setting out to do.

someone on a wheelchair may well try a level two if they think they can do it, but if they want an easier one or are just unable to then they can find level one caches.

at the other end of scale people will know when setting out for the day that ropes climbing gear and oxygen is needed for "yeti's home" nepal 10/10!!