Jump to content

I now own the #1 Favorite geocache in Missouri


Lacomo

Recommended Posts

If you go to "Hide & Seek a Cache" there is a pulldown menu with all of the states. Click the state you're interested in and then click the Blue Ribbon to sort by Favorites. Here's North Carolina:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=34&sortdir=desc&sort=fav

 

There is a bookmark list here that has all of the states and the start to a country-by-country list, although the numbers are a few days behind:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/bookmarks/view.aspx?guid=48fe8e5f-de53-45a9-93e0-e62ecbadb916

Link to comment

If you go to "Hide & Seek a Cache" there is a pulldown menu with all of the states. Click the state you're interested in and then click the Blue Ribbon to sort by Favorites. Here's North Carolina:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=34&sortdir=desc&sort=fav

 

 

Thanks! I'm surprised how far down that list one has to go before finding a Traditional. One could almost use it as an argument for bringing back virtuals.

Link to comment

If you go to "Hide & Seek a Cache" there is a pulldown menu with all of the states. Click the state you're interested in and then click the Blue Ribbon to sort by Favorites. Here's North Carolina:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=34&sortdir=desc&sort=fav

 

 

Thanks! I'm surprised how far down that list one has to go before finding a Traditional. One could almost use it as an argument for bringing back virtuals.

 

The 39 favorites votes the #1 virtual on that list has is only 3% of its finds. There in lies one of the flaws in the favorites system.

Link to comment

If you go to "Hide & Seek a Cache" there is a pulldown menu with all of the states. Click the state you're interested in and then click the Blue Ribbon to sort by Favorites. Here's North Carolina:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=34&sortdir=desc&sort=fav

 

 

Thanks! I'm surprised how far down that list one has to go before finding a Traditional. One could almost use it as an argument for bringing back virtuals.

 

The 39 favorites votes the #1 virtual on that list has is only 3% of its finds. There in lies one of the flaws in the favorites system.

 

I can't find the original notification and explanation of this "favorites system". Does anyone have it handy?

Link to comment

The 39 favorites votes the #1 virtual on that list has is only 3% of its finds. There in lies one of the flaws in the favorites system.

I don't quit follow why this is a flaw. The cache has 39 people who put it on their favorites list, more than any other cache in Missouri. I some cache that is hard to get to so it was only found once and has 100% of its finders putting it on it favorite list any better? Is a cache that is brand new and the FTF put it on his favorite list better?

 

Neither the absolute count or the ratio of favorites to finders tell you anything about the cache being best. The most favorites means it got on more peoples list of their top 10%. It doesn't mean all of them would have voted for it as the best cache. There are probably many caches in Missouri that any individual would like better than this cache. But finding a giant ammo can is memorable enough that 39 people put it on their favorite list.

 

If there is a flaw in the favorites system it is in calling it favorite. Maybe "recommended" would be a better name. People are trying to use it to find the most favorite cache instead of the caches that more recommendations.

Link to comment
I don't quit follow why this is a flaw. The cache has 39 people who put it on their favorites list, more than any other cache in Missouri. I some cache that is hard to get to so it was only found once and has 100% of its finders putting it on it favorite list any better? Is a cache that is brand new and the FTF put it on his favorite list better?

possibly yes, but statistically you'd have to say "not enough data available".

Link to comment

The 39 favorites votes the #1 virtual on that list has is only 3% of its finds. There in lies one of the flaws in the favorites system.

I don't quit follow why this is a flaw. The cache has 39 people who put it on their favorites list, more than any other cache in Missouri. I some cache that is hard to get to so it was only found once and has 100% of its finders putting it on it favorite list any better? Is a cache that is brand new and the FTF put it on his favorite list better?

 

Neither the absolute count or the ratio of favorites to finders tell you anything about the cache being best. The most favorites means it got on more peoples list of their top 10%. It doesn't mean all of them would have voted for it as the best cache. There are probably many caches in Missouri that any individual would like better than this cache. But finding a giant ammo can is memorable enough that 39 people put it on their favorite list.

 

If there is a flaw in the favorites system it is in calling it favorite. Maybe "recommended" would be a better name. People are trying to use it to find the most favorite cache instead of the caches that more recommendations.

 

The flaw is in the fact that it is hard to tell what the numbers mean, if anything. Yup, it is the most favorited cache in the state. But only 3% of the people who found it thought so. Puts us right back where we were before the favorites were available. I would have preferred a system that said "others who rated this cache like you did enjoyed these caches." But perhaps that is too hard to program.

Link to comment

The 39 favorites votes the #1 virtual on that list has is only 3% of its finds. There in lies one of the flaws in the favorites system.

I don't quit follow why this is a flaw. The cache has 39 people who put it on their favorites list, more than any other cache in Missouri. I some cache that is hard to get to so it was only found once and has 100% of its finders putting it on it favorite list any better? Is a cache that is brand new and the FTF put it on his favorite list better?

 

Neither the absolute count or the ratio of favorites to finders tell you anything about the cache being best. The most favorites means it got on more peoples list of their top 10%. It doesn't mean all of them would have voted for it as the best cache. There are probably many caches in Missouri that any individual would like better than this cache. But finding a giant ammo can is memorable enough that 39 people put it on their favorite list.

 

If there is a flaw in the favorites system it is in calling it favorite. Maybe "recommended" would be a better name. People are trying to use it to find the most favorite cache instead of the caches that more recommendations.

 

Even a percentage is not accurate. You'd have to weed out every nonactive member, every nonpremium member, and every member who has not gone back to old finds to award favorites to create an accurate percentage. I think the system is doing a good job of highlighting good caches that you would potentially really enjoy. I can say without a doubt that the top 10 favorites of the ones I found are all great caches.

 

Back on topic: Congrats. If I'm ever out that way I'll grab it.

 

The flaw is in the fact that it is hard to tell what the numbers mean, if anything. Yup, it is the most favorited cache in the state. But only 3% of the people who found it thought so. Puts us right back where we were before the favorites were available. I would have preferred a system that said "others who rated this cache like you did enjoyed these caches." But perhaps that is too hard to program.

Link to comment

The flaw is in the fact that it is hard to tell what the numbers mean, if anything. Yup, it is the most favorited cache in the state. But only 3% of the people who found it thought so. Puts us right back where we were before the favorites were available. I would have preferred a system that said "others who rated this cache like you did enjoyed these caches." But perhaps that is too hard to program.

It's easy to tell what the numbers mean. 39 people thought this cache was in the top 10% of the caches that they had found. It may be the most favorited cache in the state, but ZERO percent of the people who found it said so. What 39 of the finders said was that for them it was in the top 10%. Whether the 39 people are 3% of the total finders or 100% of the total finders has very little additional information. Yes, you could look at the 1141 people who found the cache and didn't put it on their favorite list. An unknown number of them are not premium members, so they can't vote. Of the premium members, some number have chosen not to participate in the favorites system. Of the remainder a certain number have not used all their favorite votes. So we really don't know the number of people who have found this cache for whom it is not in the top 10%. If we had more information on the 1141 people who didn't make this a favorite you might be able to make an argument for using percentage.

 

Now we do have more information on the 39 people who did favorite the cache. We can click the blue ribbon and see their names. If you live in the area, and keep doing this you will eventually start to recognize which cachers like the same sort of caches you do. So we have the start of the kind of system that you say you would have preferred. I believe there are a couple of suggestions in the feedback forums already to provide a way to use the favorites system to make customized recommendations based on who favorited the caches you have favorited.

 

This cache is a virtual at a famous location which gets many visitors. That explains the large number of finds. Some of the geocachers who visit may have a special interest in this location. They are likely going to remember this cache more and perhaps favorite it. A quick glance at the names and avatars of those who favorited the cache shows that many have a personal interest in aviation. If you're not interested in aviation or historic locations you may just want to pass on the cache despite the number of favorite votes. A cache with a high number of favorite vote might not be what you are looking for, But it doesn't take much effort to look at who favorited a cache and what they wrote in their logs to decide if this is a cache that might interest you. You can do the same with the caches that have a high percentage of finders who favorited too, but I think you will find this information less reliable with many high percentage caches having only one or two people favoring them. Now if you happen to like caches that don't get found as often (high terrain or difficult puzzles) then sure you want to find the caches that favorited more often among these and ignore the touristy virtuals.

Link to comment

Hmmm.. very cool. There are a few of these kinds of cache containers across the country. I started building one last fall and at sits in the garage about 75% complete. Once it warms up I plan on finishing it.

 

I believe General Mills owns a copyright and trademark on the phrase Jolly Green Giant.

Link to comment

If you go to "Hide & Seek a Cache" there is a pulldown menu with all of the states. Click the state you're interested in and then click the Blue Ribbon to sort by Favorites. Here's North Carolina:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=34&sortdir=desc&sort=fav

 

There is a bookmark list here that has all of the states and the start to a country-by-country list, although the numbers are a few days behind:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/bookmarks/view.aspx?guid=48fe8e5f-de53-45a9-93e0-e62ecbadb916

Link to comment
Thanks, I've got the ribbon but the sorting function doesn't work, it just sends me back to the previous page!

Are you by chance trying to look up caches in a foreign country? There is a bug that does that for a lot of foreign countries. If you click through again, it should bring up the list in sorted format. I don't know why it does that.

 

If you're not looking up a non-US country - what are you looking up? I can try to replicate your problem.

Link to comment
Thanks, I've got the ribbon but the sorting function doesn't work, it just sends me back to the previous page!

Are you by chance trying to look up caches in a foreign country? There is a bug that does that for a lot of foreign countries. If you click through again, it should bring up the list in sorted format. I don't know why it does that.

 

If you're not looking up a non-US country - what are you looking up? I can try to replicate your problem.

I was trying to get the "favorite" sorted for Massachusetts.

Link to comment

Congratulations, I guess the solicitation worked!

 

This.

 

Congrats on getting the number one spot, but to be fair, you pimped for votes on a local mailing list to make it happen. ;)

I wondered what was going on... the vote curve for that cache was wildly different than for almost every other cache I've been tracking. Like most caches on my list it started out with a brief flurry of votes right after Favorites were introduced, and then tailed off. But then after a week or two of no real activity (like for the rest of the caches on the list), the voting just exploded out of nowhere. If an appeal went out over a mailing list, it all makes a lot more sense to me now.

Link to comment

Congratulations, I guess the solicitation worked!

 

This.

 

Congrats on getting the number one spot, but to be fair, you pimped for votes on a local mailing list to make it happen. ;)

It was #2 favored before it was ever mentioned on a public forum.

Link to comment

Congratulations, I guess the solicitation worked!

 

This.

 

Congrats on getting the number one spot, but to be fair, you pimped for votes on a local mailing list to make it happen. ;)

It was #2 favored before it was ever mentioned on a public forum.

 

So? It still doesn't change the fact you did it...and I quote:

 

There are currantly 6640 caches in MO. My Jolly Green Giant Cache GC1MDCE is

rated #2 Favorite in MO with 59 points. Only 9 points behind the #1 Saint Louis

Arch Virtual cache. Now we can't let a little thing like an arch keep me out of

first place can we? If you havn't found Jolly Green Giant go find it. If it is

one of your favorites and you havn't voted it as one of your favorites please go

do so now...Thanks.....

Lacomo

Link to comment

Congratulations, I guess the solicitation worked!

 

This.

 

Congrats on getting the number one spot, but to be fair, you pimped for votes on a local mailing list to make it happen. ;)

It was #2 favored before it was ever mentioned on a public forum.

 

So? It still doesn't change the fact you did it...and I quote:

 

There are currantly 6640 caches in MO. My Jolly Green Giant Cache GC1MDCE is

rated #2 Favorite in MO with 59 points. Only 9 points behind the #1 Saint Louis

Arch Virtual cache. Now we can't let a little thing like an arch keep me out of

first place can we? If you havn't found Jolly Green Giant go find it. If it is

one of your favorites and you havn't voted it as one of your favorites please go

do so now...Thanks.....Lacomo

Well it must have been a lot of peoples favorite then wasn't it? LOL
Link to comment

Congratulations, I guess the solicitation worked!

 

This.

 

Congrats on getting the number one spot, but to be fair, you pimped for votes on a local mailing list to make it happen. ;)

It was #2 favored before it was ever mentioned on a public forum.

 

So? It still doesn't change the fact you did it...and I quote:

 

There are currantly 6640 caches in MO. My Jolly Green Giant Cache GC1MDCE is

rated #2 Favorite in MO with 59 points. Only 9 points behind the #1 Saint Louis

Arch Virtual cache. Now we can't let a little thing like an arch keep me out of

first place can we? If you havn't found Jolly Green Giant go find it. If it is

one of your favorites and you havn't voted it as one of your favorites please go

do so now...Thanks.....Lacomo

Well it must have been a lot of peoples favorite then wasn't it? LOL

 

Sure...but wouldn't it have been a bit more ethical to let people vote of their own accord instead of emailing them and posting to a mailing list to get them to vote for it?

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...