Advanced

Change History

Once a checker request has been fulfilled and the challenge owner (or checker requester) is satisfied the thread should be moved here by a moderator. Please allow some time before moving the thread, to allow feedback from the requester.

Message: Re: GC5WGKX Calgary's Favorites (or 20 in 20) Challenge

Changed By: JanlarC
Change Date: June 07, 2016 03:01AM

Re: GC5WGKX Calgary's Favorites (or 20 in 20) Challenge
Too bad it can't be done since at least one of the cachers who own caches in the list might not have a chance to qualify at this time without logging some of her own caches (4 on the list). She is the type of person that probably would not want to log her own caches as found.

I suppose I could go with the found only option. She might not even be interested in getting the challenge. If she is interested, she has been caching for some time and might have enough of the archived caches that fit the criteria anyway. Alternatively, I could allow her log the challenge cache, if her found and owned caches meet the criteria, even if the checker says no.

There are several caches in the defined area sitting at 59 FPs, so soon there will be more on the qualifying list, making this a non-issue.

How do I ask SeekerSupreme to modify his script for the "Generic location proximity checker" as mentioned in your first post? Does this script use a radius algorithm?

I was just looking at the sandbox and wondered if this function could work to include caches owned:
static PGC_LUA_Sandbox::GetFavorites

Thanks for your help,
Janice
Changed By: JanlarC
Change Date: June 07, 2016 02:32AM

Re: GC5WGKX Calgary's Favorites (or 20 in 20) Challenge
Too bad it can't be done since at least one of the cachers who own caches in the list might not have a chance to qualify at this time without logging some of her own caches (4 on the list). She is the type of person that probably would not want to log her own caches as found.

I suppose I could go with the found only option. She might not even be interested in getting the challenge. If she is interested, she has been caching for some time and might have enough of the archived caches that fit the criteria anyway. Alternatively, I could allow her log the challenge cache, if her found and owned caches meet the criteria, even if the checker says no.

There are several caches in the defined area sitting at 59 FPs, so soon there will be more on the qualifying list, making this a non-issue.

How do I ask SeekerSupreme to modify his script for the "Generic location proximity checker" as mentioned in your first post?
Does this script use a radius algorithm?

Thanks for your help,
Janice

Original Message

Author: JanlarC
Date: June 07, 2016 01:09AM

Re: GC5WGKX Calgary's Favorites (or 20 in 20) Challenge
Too bad it can't be done since at least one of the cachers who own caches in the list might not have a chance to qualify at this time without logging some of her own caches (4 on the list). She is the type of person that probably would not want to log her own caches as found.

I suppose I could go with the found only option. She might not even be interested in getting the challenge. If she is interested, she has been caching for some time and might have enough of the archived caches that fit the criteria anyway. Alternatively, I could allow her log the challenge cache, if her found and owned caches meet the criteria, even if the checker says no.

There are several caches in the defined area sitting at 59 FPs, so soon there will be more on the qualifying list, making this a non-issue.

How do I ask SeekerSupreme to modify his script for the "Generic location proximity checker" as mentioned in your first post?

Thanks for your help,
Janice