Jump to content

challenges should be changed


Recommended Posts

I wouldn't worry about it, either, just tell them that's the rules. But that doesn't mean I'd expect them to not find it confusing.

 

I don't think it would be confusing in the slightest!

Not unless someone has some weird hard time grasping the concept that games have rules or guidelines.

It wouldn't be confusing. It would be enlightening. Unless of course in this hypothetical rare instance they already felt somehow entitled allowed to log it found online, even though they've never cached before and merely stumbled across this container.

Link to comment

I wouldn't worry about it, either, just tell them that's the rules. But that doesn't mean I'd expect them to not find it confusing.

 

I don't think it would be confusing in the slightest!

Not unless someone has some weird hard time grasping the concept that games have rules or guidelines.

It wouldn't be confusing. It would be enlightening. Unless of course in this hypothetical rare instance they already felt somehow entitled allowed to log it found online, even though they've never cached before and merely stumbled across this container.

Maybe.

 

My guess is that someone accidentally finding a cache who has never heard of geocaching would be very accepting if some told them that these are the rules for using an online WIGAS log.

 

But someone who had been introduce to geocaching as a fun activity using GPS to locate caches, and perhaps had been informed that the "rules" were simple:

  1. If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.
  2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.
  3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

might be taken aback to learn that the rules have rules and that in particular logging your experience at www.geocaching.com may be limited for some caches to those who have completed a challenge.

 

I will be the first to admit that in 14 years, the activity has changed a lot. In particular what used to be an informal way for geocachers to share experiences online, has been given a bunch of rules to turn it into a scoring mechanism for those who feel a game needs to have a score.

 

I am definitely missing the old days. Sure there were controversies from the very beginning over whether you could actual claim you found a cache if you hadn't written in the cache logbook. My impression though is that back then there were few puritans who thought that you should delete someone online find because they forgot a pencil. <_<

Link to comment

My impression though is that back then there were few puritans who thought that you should delete someone online find because they forgot a pencil. <_<

"Forgot a pencil" doesn't hold much water with me. Ther's always something sharp around you can find to prick your finger with and sign it with blood.

Link to comment

I will be the first to admit that in 14 years, the activity has changed a lot. In particular what used to be an informal way for geocachers to share experiences online, has been given a bunch of rules to turn it into a scoring mechanism for those who feel a game needs to have a score.

 

Online?

 

The logbook in the cache was the primary way to share the experience. While staying at a cabin in Gatlinburg TN, we found a logbook. Many visitors had written plenty about their stay and what they felt. In Acadia National park in Maine there was the same thing, with each visitor filling out an entire page of multiple paragraphs. In the Catskills, NY there was an unlisted cache on a trail with an interesting logbook. Most early geocaches were just like this. The experience ended when the online part was emphasized. Most of today's logbooks don't have anything of interest like they used to. We found a puzzle cache on a mountaintop a few months ago. The only interesting logs were written by a group of teenage muggles who were hiking in memory of a friend who had died in car crash. They revisited the cache more than a few times, drew a few pictures, and even complained because the CO removed the cigarette they left without trading. :P

 

Micros have turned it into a scoring mechanism, and now challenges are reinforcing it. I like challenges, but the find log should not be used as a reward. A find is a find. The challenge completion should be tabulated with a checkbox on the find log page. Comparing them to non-container caches does not have any correlation.

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment

I will be the first to admit that in 14 years, the activity has changed a lot. In particular what used to be an informal way for geocachers to share experiences online, has been given a bunch of rules to turn it into a scoring mechanism for those who feel a game needs to have a score.

I don't thnk the game really needs to have a score, but it does -- with every log we post, down below our name it indicates a "smiley" count. Show me a way to disable that from showing up, and perhaps it'd be easier to play the game without always taking into consideration everyone's score.

 

If that number didn't show up there (or could be opted-out of displaying), I think that would make it more palatable for challenge cache non-qualifiers to consider logging a note instead of a find. Heck, if there wasn't a smiley count, I'd say a note would be as good as a find in any case.

Link to comment

My guess is that someone accidentally finding a cache who has never heard of geocaching would be very accepting if some told them that these are the rules for using an online WIGAS log.

 

But someone who had been introduce to geocaching as a fun activity using GPS to locate caches, and perhaps had been informed that the "rules" were simple

...

might be taken aback to learn that the rules have rules and that in particular logging your experience at www.geocaching.com may be limited for some caches to those who have completed a challenge.

Then they were informed incorrectly.

So, if they were confused in this (also) very rare possible case, it's because they were told incorrectly by someone that the game is simply to find physical containers, then you can log it found online. That's not what geocaching is (entirely) about. So, hopefully, someone would gently and respectably increase their knowledge and enlightenment about all that geocaching can and does entail, if they so please to take advantage of its variety of play styles.

Link to comment

My guess is that someone accidentally finding a cache who has never heard of geocaching would be very accepting if some told them that these are the rules for using an online WIGAS log.

 

But someone who had been introduce to geocaching as a fun activity using GPS to locate caches, and perhaps had been informed that the "rules" were simple

...

might be taken aback to learn that the rules have rules and that in particular logging your experience at www.geocaching.com may be limited for some caches to those who have completed a challenge.

Then they were informed incorrectly.

So, if they were confused in this (also) very rare possible case, it's because they were told incorrectly by someone that the game is simply to find physical containers, then you can log it found online. That's not what geocaching is (entirely) about. So, hopefully, someone would gently and respectably increase their knowledge and enlightenment about all that geocaching can and does entail, if they so please to take advantage of its variety of play styles.

To me the game is still basically about finding containers. I know many people who never log their finds online and they are enjoying geocaching just fine. Too bad that the rest of us have know way of sharing their experiences unless we know the URL for their personal geocaching blogs.

 

Over the years, what was once just a social media feature to let cachers share experiences has become a scoring system. It has changed geocaching from a simplefun activity to a competitive sport with complex rules that some people believe get in the way of those who just want to go out and find caches. Of course we could just stop logging online and solve that problem.

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

I like challenges, but the find log should not be used as a reward.

You're sounding like a broken record. Why should we provide a smiley "reward" to people who find a Traditional and sign its physical log but not provide a smiley "reward" to people who find a Challenge Cache, sign its physical log, and complete its requirements?

 

A find is a find.

There's that broken record again. You're being too literal. A "find" in the context of Groundspeak geocaching has never been a "find" in the dictionary sense. To be sure you get that smiley, you don't only have to locate the Traditional cache, but you also have to sign its log book. To "find" an EarthCache, you have to go to the posted location and send in appropriate answers. To "find" a Challenge Cache, you have to locate its container, sign its physical log, and complete its requirements.

Link to comment

I like challenges, but the find log should not be used as a reward.

You're sounding like a broken record. Why should we provide a smiley "reward" to people who find a Traditional and sign its physical log but not provide a smiley "reward" to people who find a Challenge Cache, sign its physical log, and complete its requirements?

 

A find is a find.

There's that broken record again. You're being too literal. A "find" in the context of Groundspeak geocaching has never been a "find" in the dictionary sense. To be sure you get that smiley, you don't only have to locate the Traditional cache, but you also have to sign its log book. To "find" an EarthCache, you have to go to the posted location and send in appropriate answers. To "find" a Challenge Cache, you have to locate its container, sign its physical log, and complete its requirements.

 

It's an opinion which is in contrast to your own broken record. Comparing them to non container caches has no correlation.

Link to comment

It's an opinion which is in contrast to your own broken record. Comparing them to non container caches has no correlation.

I have no problem once I learned the the online Found log is really the WIGAS log. Unlike the simple activity of geocaching which involves finding hidden containers(or in the case of virtual caches, finding some existing physical object) at some location, online WIGAS logging has it's own set of peculiar rules for various kinds of caches. Challenge caches are just one example of a cache type with special rules for entering a WIGAS log. Get with the program, if you want to play the WIGAS log game you have to follow the rules. :ph34r:

Link to comment

It's an opinion which is in contrast to your own broken record. Comparing them to non container caches has no correlation.

I have no problem once I learned the the online Found log is really the WIGAS log. Unlike the simple activity of geocaching which involves finding hidden containers(or in the case of virtual caches, finding some existing physical object) at some location, online WIGAS logging has it's own set of peculiar rules for various kinds of caches. Challenge caches are just one example of a cache type with special rules for entering a WIGAS log. Get with the program, if you want to play the WIGAS log game you have to follow the rules. :ph34r:

 

I know there's some tongue-in-cheek with this comment, but this is exactly right.

 

Look, if you want to find containers, go and do that! You can locate them, check contents if it's big enough, trade up swag, etc... If you want to log it online, then you have to sign the logsheet, look up the cache, and therein find out what kind of geocache it is, and thus determine if there's anything else that needs to be done before posting the Find Log.

 

If you just want to find containers, do it.

 

If you want to post your find online, if you want to share your experiences, then you technically should know/understand/accept what's entailed in that process - from creating an account to accepting the TOS and privacy policy to being aware of guidelines to the simple act of "Post Log".

 

A "Find Log" is not just a record of "I found a container". It is necessarily much more than that, yet it can be as simple as that.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

My guess is that someone accidentally finding a cache who has never heard of geocaching would be very accepting if some told them that these are the rules for using an online WIGAS log.

 

But someone who had been introduce to geocaching as a fun activity using GPS to locate caches, and perhaps had been informed that the "rules" were simple

...

might be taken aback to learn that the rules have rules and that in particular logging your experience at www.geocaching.com may be limited for some caches to those who have completed a challenge.

Then they were informed incorrectly.

So, if they were confused in this (also) very rare possible case, it's because they were told incorrectly by someone that the game is simply to find physical containers, then you can log it found online. That's not what geocaching is (entirely) about. So, hopefully, someone would gently and respectably increase their knowledge and enlightenment about all that geocaching can and does entail, if they so please to take advantage of its variety of play styles.

To me the game is still basically about finding containers. I know many people who never log their finds online and they are enjoying geocaching just fine. Too bad that the rest of us have know way of sharing their experiences unless we know the URL for their personal geocaching blogs.

 

Over the years, what was once just a social media feature to let cachers share experiences has become a scoring system. It has changed geocaching from a simplefun activity to a competitive sport with complex rules that some people believe get in the way of those who just want to go out and find caches. Of course we could just stop logging online and solve that problem.

 

Not logging online with a WIGAS for all caches may be the way to go. I just need to get serious about understanding GSAK and how to filter my finds (whatever I consider to be a find). I'm already using a journal app for writing and photographing my geocaching experiences. Then I'll leave notes instead of finds for all of my finds. I am going to have a closer look at GSAK.

Link to comment

A "Find Log" is not just a record of "I found a container". It is necessarily much more than that, yet it can be as simple as that.

Or you can view it another way.

 

Geocaching.com is just a listing site. It lists caches that meet certain guidelines. It provides a mechanism through online logs for people to post comments about these caches. In posting logs people may select a log type (Found, DNF, Note, etc.).

 

Being a internet/social media site, there is always the issue of people posting logs which are bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or otherwise inappropriate. To deal with this issue, the aforementioned guideline for listing caches imposes on the owners of listed caches the responsiblity to monitor posts to their cache pages and to delete logs which appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or otherwise inappropriate.

 

Once Groundspeak gave cache owners the ability to delete logs, each cache owner was free to chose what made a log bogus. In the original guidelines, the phrase "not within the stated requirements" was unsed instead of "otherwise inappropriate." Some cache owners took this to mean they could state additional requirements for posting an online Found log. Groundspeak pretty much allowed cache owners to do as they pleased though they indicated that signing the physical log was expected and could be used to determine if a log was bogus without any need to state so on the cache page.

 

Overtime, people complained about additional logging requirements, especially when they were used on traditional caches. Some people would go and find a cache with just the coordinates loaded into their GPS and only discover that there were additional requirements when they went to log a find online. So TPTB changed the guideline requiring ALRs to be list as Mystery/Unknown caches. Among the ALRs were many caches that said in order to log a find you must have completed some geocaching related accomplishment.

 

Eventually, TPTB decided to limit what ALRs would be allowed. For the first time they added a section to guidlines on the logging of physical caches. In it they indicated that physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. The meaning of this was that cache owners could no longer enforce addition requirements for using of the online Found log. At about the same time "not within stated requirements" was replace with "otherwise inappropriate". However, TPTB also decided that challenge caches (those that required completing some geocaching related accomplishment) would be exempt from the new guideline.

 

The find log is not just a record of your finds or a way to share your geocaching experience, only because TPTB have decide to make the owners of caches resposible for the quality control of posts to their cache page. By using the implied threat that your online Found log can be deleted, cache owners are able to create their own rules for awarding a WIGAS point.

 

Overtime, TPTB have made changes to guideline that restrict the cache owner's ability to delete logs. For almost all physical cache, owners can no longer have additional requirements; generally, they must accept online Found logs if the physical log was signed. Challenge caches are an exception. Owners of these caches may delete logs if the challenge was not met and documented to the cache owner. However, even here, the newer restrictions on challenge caches require that "geocache owners must consider how they will substantiate claims that the geocache requirements have been met. The challenge criteria on the geocache page must reflect this consideration, and must be verifiable through information on the Geocaching.com website."

 

I think some of the discomfort supporters of challenges caches feel is that that history has shown that guidelines have always been changed to restrict the cache owner's ability to delete logs. The challenge supporters feel that the incentive of the WIGAS is necessary for a challenge to be effective. Any additional restrictions on the ability of owners of these type of caches to delete logs could result in losing this incentive and render challenge caches ineffective.

Link to comment
I think some of the discomfort supporters of challenges caches feel is that that history has shown that guidelines have always been changed to restrict the cache owner's ability to delete logs. The challenge supporters feel that the incentive of the WIGAS is necessary for a challenge to be effective. Any additional restrictions on the ability of owners of these type of caches to delete logs could result in losing this incentive and render challenge caches ineffective.

 

You are completely correct. As I said before, many times, you are trying to ruin this part of the game. I enjoy challenges because they are a challenge. To see the unlogged challenge cache presents a challenge. Having some lame "challenge completed" checkbox instead does not present a challenge.

 

I enjoy challenge caches because I've been caching a long time and, for the most part, I find traditionals boring. The vast majority of traditionals don't involve a fun hike or something interesting. Challenge caches give me something to work toward. I enjoy puzzle caches for the same reason.

 

I think the real problem here is that numbers hounds can't cheat and log the caches the way they can with puzzles (Facebook page where you can get the answers), multis (get your friends to give you the final coords), etc. Instead of leeching off someone else's work, they actually have to do something. And in this age of entitlement, the notion of actually earning something is untenable.

 

Anyway, I would like to politely request (for the nth time) that you quit trying to ruin my enjoyment of caching and take your obsessive need for rules elsewhere.

Edited by fizzymagic
Link to comment

A find is a find.

There's that broken record again. You're being too literal. A "find" in the context of Groundspeak geocaching has never been a "find" in the dictionary sense. To be sure you get that smiley, you don't only have to locate the Traditional cache, but you also have to sign its log book. To "find" an EarthCache, you have to go to the posted location and send in appropriate answers. To "find" a Challenge Cache, you have to locate its container, sign its physical log, and complete its requirements.

It's an opinion which is in contrast to your own broken record. Comparing them to non container caches has no correlation.

Of course non-container caches have a correlation to what you wrote. You didn't write: "A physical find is a physical find." And it's certainly hard to "find" a non-physical container in the dictionary sense of the word.

 

Even if you restrict your comment to only physical containers, you're still being too literal. A physical "find" in the context of Groundspeak geocaching has never been a simple "find" in the dictionary sense. Just "finding" the physical container isn't enough to be assured of that online smiley. For physical caches, you also need to sign the log, even though signing has nothing to do with dictionary "finding." For Challenge Caches, you not only have to find the physical container and sign the log, but you also need to complete the challenge requirements.

 

In the context of Groundspeak geocaching, "find" isn't intended in its literal sense. Instead, "find" is a shorthand way of saying something along the lines of "located a Traditional cache and signed its log" or "located a Challenge Cache, signed its log, and completed its requirements."

 

Similarly, when Groundspeak's guideline says "Physical caches can be logged online as 'Found' once the physical log has been signed," the word "signed" doesn't literally mean "writing one's name on the log." Instead, "signed" is Groundspeak's shorthand way of saying "signed, stamped, stickered, or otherwise left some indication that you've put your hands on the log."

 

Words have context.

Link to comment

A find is a find.

There's that broken record again. You're being too literal. A "find" in the context of Groundspeak geocaching has never been a "find" in the dictionary sense. To be sure you get that smiley, you don't only have to locate the Traditional cache, but you also have to sign its log book. To "find" an EarthCache, you have to go to the posted location and send in appropriate answers. To "find" a Challenge Cache, you have to locate its container, sign its physical log, and complete its requirements.

It's an opinion which is in contrast to your own broken record. Comparing them to non container caches has no correlation.

Of course non-container caches have a correlation to what you wrote. You didn't write: "A physical find is a physical find." And it's certainly hard to "find" a non-physical container in the dictionary sense of the word.

 

Even if you restrict your comment to only physical containers, you're still being too literal. A physical "find" in the context of Groundspeak geocaching has never been a simple "find" in the dictionary sense. Just "finding" the physical container isn't enough to be assured of that online smiley. For physical caches, you also need to sign the log, even though signing has nothing to do with dictionary "finding." For Challenge Caches, you not only have to find the physical container and sign the log, but you also need to complete the challenge requirements.

 

In the context of Groundspeak geocaching, "find" isn't intended in its literal sense. Instead, "find" is a shorthand way of saying something along the lines of "located a Traditional cache and signed its log" or "located a Challenge Cache, signed its log, and completed its requirements."

 

Similarly, when Groundspeak's guideline says "Physical caches can be logged online as 'Found' once the physical log has been signed," the word "signed" doesn't literally mean "writing one's name on the log." Instead, "signed" is Groundspeak's shorthand way of saying "signed, stamped, stickered, or otherwise left some indication that you've put your hands on the log."

 

Words have context.

 

I could go along with that if Challenges had their own icon, which they should. But until they do, I think its silly. That's just my opinion, so don't get all defensive about it.

 

Logging a find on any container should be as simple as signing the log. If the cacher wanted to edit their log later to include "Challenge completed", then they should be able to. The CO could receive a second email to check to see if the requirements were met. A new icon, as well as a tally of number of challenges completed would be welcome by many, and very popular. However, I suspect that it hasn't been accomplished yet simply because TPTB dont like challenges and Ive noticed that Jeremy's definition of a find quoted from 3 years ago is similar to mine. Also, a new icon would trigger many more Challenges to be published, and which up take more time to review. Perhaps there could be dedicated Challenge reviewers, who knows? Its nice that they have their own guidelines, but without that icon they are more of an abnormal growth out of ALRs which have only been tolerated, but not really recognized as they should be. Caches which share the same icon should also share the same logging requirements IMO.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...