<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
    <channel>
        <title>Show those where I have voted against the crowd</title>
        <description> Just clicked on the list (in the filter section) to see what I have done differently to others 

One on my list is - Well-Traveled Cacher: Degree Squares GC99AE7

I had downvoted this because it had not complied with the guidelines and so should not have been published and in fact was archived by the reviewer 4 days after it was published for that very reason.

Now I acknowledge the Challenge exception list has the following statement as an instruction on how to vote :-

&amp;quot;..Note that your vote shall not be based on today&amp;#039;s Challenge guidelines but rather on the fact that the Geocache requires you to do something before/when logging it. You shall not take into consideration if it&amp;#039;s a good challenge or not, neither if you like it as a challenge.&amp;quot; 

However, in my opinion (and this only applies to any challenge caches post-moratorium) if a challenge does not comply with today&amp;#039;s guidelines then it should not be published and therefore would never be considered for inclusion on the list of challenges - if one slips through the net, such as the example above but is quickly archived due to that fact being noted, the way it won&amp;#039;t end up on someones list in the challenge tab would be to have it voted upon (down vote) 
We know that reviewers do make mistakes sometimes - hard enough job as it is, but to give the thumbs up on a cache that shouldn&amp;#039;t have been allowed in the first place is kind of saying, &amp;#039;well despite all of that we are saying it is a challenge cache&amp;#039;  

I am not disputing that the above cache would pass all the tick boxes if it had complied with the criteria guidelines - but it hadn&amp;#039;t 

thoughts</description>
        <link>/forum/read.php?12,64031,64031#msg-64031</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 16:41:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Phorum 5.2.23</generator>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?12,64031,106567#msg-106567</guid>
            <title>Re: Show those where I have voted against the crowd</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?12,64031,106567#msg-106567</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ Then don&#039;t reply to my comment]]></description>
            <dc:creator>Pleu</dc:creator>
            <category>Challenge checker exceptions</category>
            <pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2025 17:19:09 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?12,64031,106566#msg-106566</guid>
            <title>Re: Show those where I have voted against the crowd</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?12,64031,106566#msg-106566</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ LOL - thats OK then because this wasn&#039;t just for you !]]></description>
            <dc:creator>Deepdiggingmole</dc:creator>
            <category>Challenge checker exceptions</category>
            <pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2025 17:13:09 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?12,64031,106565#msg-106565</guid>
            <title>Re: Show those where I have voted against the crowd</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?12,64031,106565#msg-106565</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ You&#039;re replying to a 3 year old thread. I don&#039;t care.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>Pleu</dc:creator>
            <category>Challenge checker exceptions</category>
            <pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2025 17:08:06 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?12,64031,106563#msg-106563</guid>
            <title>Re: Show those where I have voted against the crowd</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?12,64031,106563#msg-106563</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ &quot;It was published as a challenge&quot; <br />
<br />
<b>by mistake</b> - <b>as it didn&#039;t fulfil challenge cache criteria</b> - and the reviewer acknowledged that and so quickly archived it <br />
<br />
The fact that the instructions from Project-GC is to not make a judgement about if the cache follows the challenge guidelines or not, only if it&#039;s a challenge or not - could potentially mean that some caches that have a task written within the description but are not challenges end up being listed in cachers challenge cache tab <br />
<br />
Another example of a cache which started as a challenge but that changed - GC740G6 has a task written within the description and yet was fully downvoted. Why ? because it was shown to be a puzzle - it had challenge cache criteria initially (its all got quite confusing tbh) <br />
However based on &quot;The instructions from Project-GC is to not make a judgement about if the cache follows the challenge guidelines or not&quot; this should have been upvoted - it wasn&#039;t because folk saw that it was a challenge cache]]></description>
            <dc:creator>Deepdiggingmole</dc:creator>
            <category>Challenge checker exceptions</category>
            <pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2025 16:50:06 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?12,64031,64049#msg-64049</guid>
            <title>Re: Show those where I have voted against the crowd</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?12,64031,64049#msg-64049</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ I don&#039;t think you understand my point or my example here. It was published as a challenge, it was a challenge when people logged it, it should be in the challenge-tab. The instructions from Project-GC is to <i>not</i> make a judgement about if the cache follows the challenge guidelines or not, only if it&#039;s a challenge or not. You&#039;re clearly making a judgement about if it follows the guidelines.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>Pleu</dc:creator>
            <category>Challenge checker exceptions</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2022 13:25:16 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?12,64031,64048#msg-64048</guid>
            <title>Re: Show those where I have voted against the crowd</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?12,64031,64048#msg-64048</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ <i>&quot;If you&#039;ve logged a traditional that shouldn&#039;t have been published and is later archived it&#039;s still a cache you&#039;ve logged&quot;</i><br />
<br />
Any cache that has been published that quickly gets archived will remain on stats - even the  caches that I am referring to - my point is with regard to whether they remain on PGC challenge cache lists - The find remains - The one in the example should never have been published, because of the criteria - a mistake by the reviewer which was quickly rectified. If it had not been published it would never have entered the stats. It is not a challenge as it does not fulfil the criteria. It is not a cover up by any means.<br />
<br />
FTFs don&#039;t have guidelines to comply to and are not recognised by HQ <br />
<br />
<i>&quot;I don&#039;t see why challenges should be downvoted just because they don&#039;t follow the guidelines&quot;</i> - it is because of just that surely.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>Deepdiggingmole</dc:creator>
            <category>Challenge checker exceptions</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2022 13:01:34 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?12,64031,64045#msg-64045</guid>
            <title>Re: Show those where I have voted against the crowd</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?12,64031,64045#msg-64045</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ The voting should be based on if it&#039;s a challenge or not. Your example has a task so it&#039;s a challenge. My opinion is that Project-GC should report the actual stats, not try to &quot;cover up&quot; things that shouldn&#039;t have been published. <br />
<br />
If you&#039;ve logged a traditional that shouldn&#039;t have been published and is later archived it&#039;s still a cache you&#039;ve logged. I have an FTF that&#039;s like that, I&#039;m the only one that found it because it should never have been published and I removed it for the CO so they could reuse the container for an other cache. Should that be removed from my FTF&#039;s because it should never have been published? I don&#039;t think so and therefor I don&#039;t see why challenges should be downvoted just because they don&#039;t follow the guidelines. Doesn&#039;t make sense to me.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>Pleu</dc:creator>
            <category>Challenge checker exceptions</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2022 12:38:40 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?12,64031,64031#msg-64031</guid>
            <title>Show those where I have voted against the crowd</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?12,64031,64031#msg-64031</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ Just clicked on the list (in the filter section) to see what I have done differently to others <br />
<br />
One on my list is - Well-Traveled Cacher: Degree Squares GC99AE7<br />
<br />
I had downvoted this because it had not complied with the guidelines and so should not have been published and in fact was archived by the reviewer 4 days after it was published for that very reason.<br />
<br />
Now I acknowledge the Challenge exception list has the following statement as an instruction on how to vote :-<br />
<br />
<i>&quot;..Note that your vote shall not be based on today&#039;s Challenge guidelines but rather on the fact that the Geocache requires you to do something before/when logging it. You shall not take into consideration if it&#039;s a good challenge or not, neither if you like it as a challenge.&quot;</i> <br />
<br />
However, in my opinion (and this only applies to any challenge caches post-moratorium) if a challenge does not comply with today&#039;s guidelines then it should not be published and therefore would never be considered for inclusion on the list of challenges - if one slips through the net, such as the example above but is quickly archived due to that fact being noted, the way it won&#039;t end up on someones list in the challenge tab would be to have it voted upon (down vote) <br />
We know that reviewers do make mistakes sometimes - hard enough job as it is, but to give the thumbs up on a cache that shouldn&#039;t have been allowed in the first place is kind of saying, &#039;well despite all of that we are saying it is a challenge cache&#039;  <br />
<br />
I am not disputing that the above cache would pass all the tick boxes if it had complied with the criteria guidelines - but it hadn&#039;t <br />
<br />
thoughts]]></description>
            <dc:creator>Deepdiggingmole</dc:creator>
            <category>Challenge checker exceptions</category>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2022 15:32:41 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
