Cache Event Co-owner

[+Mudfrog]

I imagine that most Event Caches are put together by more than one person and i think its a shame that only the first name under the title gets all the credit. Not really a big deal but i was wondering if something might be in the works for giving credit to a co-owner of an Event type cache? Any other ideas on this?

[+RPW]

Some people will band together under a one-time name such as "Indiana Geo Spring Picnic Organization." This way no one gets credit yet everyone gets credit. Unless you are real numbers hound that seems to be a good solution.

 

If you do use individual cache names then the secondary hiders can write in their profile that they helped sponsor the event.

 

I suspect that the site is not set up for multiple crediting of names for any type of cache. As a programmer it seems to me that such an addition could be fairly simple (another relational table) or extremely difficult. I'd rather see Jeremy put his efforts elsewhere.

[+Stuey]

I imagine that most Event Caches are put together by more than one person and i think its a shame that only the first name under the title gets all the credit. Not really a big deal but i was wondering if something might be in the works for giving credit to a co-owner of an Event type cache? Any other ideas on this?

If there are three of you, organise three events and take it in turns to have the "glory" of hosting an event cache in your own profile.

[+Hynr]

I imagine that most Event Caches are put together by more than one person and i think its a shame that only the first name under the title gets all the credit. Not really a big deal but i was wondering if something might be in the works for giving credit to a co-owner of an Event type cache? Any other ideas on this?

It has always seemed strange to me that events were being handled like physical caches. I think that initially (long before I became a geocacher) this was probably an easy way to add a feature. But I think that event caches need to evolve and your suggestion is one of the things that probably needs to be part of that evolution.

 

The need for the evolution is fairly simple. There are now many cachers in every region who have found all their local caches and placed as many as they care to. For such cachers events are much more important than they were initially. Also, the sizes of these events are growing, indicating that their importance is changing. I guess the Groundspring could just ignore this opportunity, but I think that that would be a shame. (Event pages generate a lot of hits, so they represent a significant income stream).

 

Here are some further ideas for changes to how geocaching events could be handled:

1. Create a separate database for Events (because the fields in the database need to be different)

2. Retain the current way of displaying events among search results, but prominently display date, time and location of the event

3. Stop calling them “Event Caches” and just call them “Geocaching Events”

4. Continue to count “attended” same as “found” (it needs to be that way for political reasons)

5. In the new database add fields for all organizer names and for each include that person's responsibility. The Event listing web page would show a table of who is doing what and provide a link to send an e-mail message to that person.

6. When someone logs that they "will attend", then have that log page request a number of persons likely to attend as part of that log entry. When that log is displayed, have it show this number right before “will attend”. Also, on the web page retain a running total of these numbers. (I know that this would be VERY helpful to every event organizer and very interesting most attendees).

7. At the event listing web page have a section where one can list all new and related geocaches that are being set up. The main organizer would simply provide a list of GC codes and the web page would assemble a table with links. If there are caches that are not yet approved, then the last line in the table would simply display “x geocaches associated with this event are awaiting approval”

 

I’m sure I could think of other useful ideas, especially in the area of supporting the organizers.

[+Jeremy]

All these suggestions because of a co-ownership request?

 

Why not just leave it as tradition?

 

eVite is perfectly capable of providing you with additional sources.

 

---

 

As for the co-ownership request, I do have it as a feature addition for the future. It does take some work but far less than rebuilding an eVite site from scratch.

[+sbell111]

Don't mess with the Grand Old Traditions of this honored activity!

[+BWidget]

But if you are the official Host 'owner' of the event cache you then shouldn't be claiming it as a find. So all the co-hosts will have an 'Attended' instead of 'Hidden'.

[+Mudfrog]

But if you are the official Host 'owner' of the event cache you then shouldn't be claiming it as a find. So all the co-hosts will have an 'Attended' instead of 'Hidden'.

I knew when i volunteered to be co-host that i probably couldnt be recognized as part owner. I also didnt feel it would be kosher to claim that i attended. It wasnt until after all the work, the money, and the time spent on the Event, that i got to thinking that there should be some provision for co-ownership. Again, its not a big deal and i dont want to come off sounding like i think im so deserving. I would imagine that there have been quite a few out there who have been in this predicament and have probably had some of the same thoughts.

 

Some of the event ideas stated above sound good too but as Jeremy said, i bet it would be a pain to implement.

[+Jeremy]

But if you are the official Host 'owner' of the event cache you then shouldn't be claiming it as a find. So all the co-hosts will have an 'Attended' instead of 'Hidden'.

Did you not attend the function? I don't understand why you can't mark it as attendance.

 

You're taking this "find count" thing a bit too seriously. It's one of the reasons why there is no "found it" for events.

[WH]

Does it really matter? So you don't have an extra number in your stats in your hide column. BIG WHOOP.

 

If thats the biggest thing you've got to worry about, I envy you.

[+briansnat]

But if you are the official Host 'owner' of the event cache you then shouldn't be claiming it as a find. So all the co-hosts will have an 'Attended' instead of 'Hidden'.

Did you not attend the function? I don't understand why you can't mark it as attendance.

 

You're taking this "find count" thing a bit too seriously. It's one of the reasons why there is no "found it" for events.

I never logged my event caches when the choice was "found it" because I thought it was silly to "find" my own cache. Since the option was changed to "attended" I probably will in the future. I guess I'm too hung up on semantics.

 

I imagine that most Event Caches are put together by more than one person and i think its a shame that only the first name under the title gets all the credit.

 

But if your name is in the title aren't you getting credit, whether you're listed first, second or last? I have several "co hides" and because my name is listed, I'm certainly getting credit.

[+BWidget]

But if you are the official Host 'owner' of the event cache you then shouldn't be claiming it as a find. So all the co-hosts will have an 'Attended' instead of 'Hidden'.

Did you not attend the function? I don't understand why you can't mark it as attendance.

 

You're taking this "find count" thing a bit too seriously. It's one of the reasons why there is no "found it" for events.

Same thing briansnat said. I would have thought that 'hiders' would then not 'find' their own cache or event.

 

That response makes me think I can 'Find' my own cache, we all know that most caches, especially non-urban caches, can migrate a bit from your original placement.