Return of virtuals on GC, well sot of

[caughtatwork]

I'm going to hide a PHYSICAL cache at a location on the weekend, less than 161m from an exisiting cache and list it as a challenge. No reviewer approval needed. Wheeeeeee, open slather on listing physical caches now in place.

Except no one will bother to go find the cache... instead you'll just get hundreds of logs from people in the US and elsewhere 'completing it'.... and nothing you can do about policing it. This is such a friggin joke it makes OpenCaching look like the sensible alternative

Good.
Maybe I'll list one fake cache a day.
Then thousands of people can get their joy from fake logging fake cache planted all over the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequences

Let them eat friggen' cake.
What a bunch of arrogant tards.

[cantanga]

On the plus side people rate stupid ones down pretty quickly. Only took 2 minutes for the first rate down.
http://www.geocaching.com/challenges/view.aspx?cx=CX59E

[blossom*]

The question is whether GCA will import these "caches" and how they'd be marked though?

And could you do a PQ for them? No, I thought not. Well, how do you "list" them then???

[Alansee]

I fully support the return of some sort of virtual so that one can log a cache where otherwise it would be impossible (eg. at an historic site) but these are just rubbish as far as I am concerned, and the claims to date just show it!

[cantanga]

The question is whether GCA will import these "caches" and how they'd be marked though?

And could you do a PQ for them? No, I thought not. Well, how do you "list" them then???

According to the info page there will be but not yet

Is this it?

Not even close. Some ideas for the next phases include:

Highly rated Challenges displayed in geocache search results
Pocket Queries for Challenges (and GPX downloads)

[Happy Chappies]

The question is whether GCA will import these "caches" and how they'd be marked though?

And could you do a PQ for them? No, I thought not. Well, how do you "list" them then???

According to the info page there will be but not yet

Is this it?

Not even close. Some ideas for the next phases include:

Highly rated Challenges displayed in geocache search results
Pocket Queries for Challenges (and GPX downloads)

NOoooooo!!!! For the sake of all that's holy, I hope they don't do that. If you're going to keep Challenges (and it looks like that's the plan) at least keep them quarantined away where we don't have to see them unless we want to. I don't want wanna-be caches (even if they are highly rated) cluttering up my search results unless I ask for them.

[blossom*]

The question is whether GCA will import these "caches" and how they'd be marked though?

And could you do a PQ for them? No, I thought not. Well, how do you "list" them then???

According to the info page there will be but not yet

Is this it?

Not even close. Some ideas for the next phases include:

Highly rated Challenges displayed in geocache search results
Pocket Queries for Challenges (and GPX downloads)

That seems silly, how do you get to see them to rate them highly if you can't get them displayed in the search results?

[iamapom]

I think that it's really wrong to judge them in the same context as our existing geocaching experiences. They aren't counting towards geocache find totals, they aren't geocaches. They aren't "new" virtuals, they aren't Where I Go. They aren't part of the main game. They are something outside the rest of the game, they are new and different. They won't ruin your game.

So why be so anti challenges ? If you don't like it - just don't do it. The sun will still rise tom'w. Honestly it will. Geocaching, as we know it, has not been spoiled.

Groundspeak have a commercial reason for doing this - to appeal to a broader audience and sell more premium "groundspeak" accounts. That will work - no doubt.

Give a challenge a go, you might just enjoy it.

[blossom*]

I think that it's really wrong to judge them in the same context as our existing geocaching experiences. They aren't counting towards geocache find totals, they aren't geocaches.
Give a challenge a go, you might just enjoy it.

They WILL count towards your geocache finds total. That's one of the things that are annoying.

But you are right that you can ignore them or that you might enjoy some of them. It's just that having them unlisted from the site for no visible reason and with no warning (lots seem to have been removed by GC today already), not being able to edit the listing you created, and a number of other negative aspects make the implementation of the idea rather ho-humish.

[caughtatwork]

This is a quote from Jeremy.

I think "Challenge Caches" is a poor choice in naming (or maybe a poor concept), so I don't really care if there is some initial confusion about the difference between the replacement for virtuals, called "Challenges," and the "challenge cache." The use of "challenge" is appropriate in the context of the replacement for virtuals, so that's what it is. It is my belief that the large majority of geocachers don't even know what a challenge cache is.

[rubai]

I don't see how any of the challenges published so far incorporate the use of a GPS. I thought alll of the listings on geocaching.com had to use of a GPS in some way.

[MtnLioness]

I don't see how any of the challenges published so far incorporate the use of a GPS. I thought alll of the listings on geocaching.com had to use of a GPS in some way.

EXACTLY!!
Otherwise you won't get it published!!
oh... but hang on there... YOU can publish your own junk Challenge yourself now.... hmmmm

[Facitman]

Podcacher.com has a 30 min interview with Jeremy on these, worth a listen if you want to hear how they see them fitting in.

I've been caching for 7 years, haven't found a virtual, haven't found a locationless, haven't found a Earthcache, haven't found a Trigpoint. None of these match my way of playing, if others want to "find" them and "inflate" their "score", go for it. The same goes for Challenges, I get Groundspeak's reason to do it. They needed to do this years ago and if they had then they might be as big as Foursquare.... they missed the boat, trying to catchup.

BTW, challenges published by the community are location based and at a particular co-ordinates like a virtual cache, Groundspeak can create worldwide challenges that can be claimed at many locations like a locationless cache

[caughtatwork]

Podcacher.com has a 30 min interview with Jeremy on these, worth a listen if you want to hear how they see them fitting in.

I've been caching for 7 years, haven't found a virtual, haven't found a locationless, haven't found a Earthcache, haven't found a Trigpoint. None of these match my way of playing, if others want to "find" them and "inflate" their "score", go for it. The same goes for Challenges, I get Groundspeak's reason to do it. They needed to do this years ago and if they had then they might be as big as Foursquare.... they missed the boat, trying to catchup.

BTW, challenges published by the community are supposedly location based and and at a particular co-ordinates like a virtual cache, Groundspeak can create worldwide challenges that can be claimed at many locations like a locationless caches

If I may add a word in your sentence, please. Therein lies the challenge. They're not being listed that way. The law of unintended consequences is getting in the way. They annoyed their customer base and they are paying the penalty.

[Facitman]

Podcacher.com has a 30 min interview with Jeremy on these, worth a listen if you want to hear how they see them fitting in.

I've been caching for 7 years, haven't found a virtual, haven't found a locationless, haven't found a Earthcache, haven't found a Trigpoint. None of these match my way of playing, if others want to "find" them and "inflate" their "score", go for it. The same goes for Challenges, I get Groundspeak's reason to do it. They needed to do this years ago and if they had then they might be as big as Foursquare.... they missed the boat, trying to catchup.

BTW, challenges published by the community are supposedly location based and and at a particular co-ordinates like a virtual cache, Groundspeak can create worldwide challenges that can be claimed at many locations like a locationless caches

If I may add a word in your sentence, please. Therein lies the challenge. They're not being listed that way. The law of unintended consequences is getting in the way. They annoyed their customer base and they are paying the penalty.

Unintended consequences? or just poor coding?
The explanation was very much bring you to a specific defined location, challenge types available today are "photo", much like old virtuals or "action" where you have to do something. Jeremy spoke of a type that requires "proof", eg a code word or to solve something, can't recall what he called it. not available yet but will be. The intention is to take you someone specific.

I do think the lack of review is an issue but it depends on how the "voting down" pans out. Will probably generate more angst than benefit me thinks.
But to be honest I have for a long time shaken my head about how we as a community happily discuss in the forums how we are saddened by the low quality of caches being placed but continue to find them. If we don't like, don't find (I have a few cachers who caches I don't find,why would I reward someone with a smilie and thus encourage more trash?) [hmmm I'm grumpy for a Friday night?]