[Cancelled] Checker needed to validate / compare FP's

Howdy,
I am setting up a challenge cache (GC7QMB2) that measures the number of Favourite Points of the finding cacher, and then displays if the FP value is 5 % or less than the total finds of that cacher.
In other words, the checker should indicate whether the person has a stockpile of less than 5 percent of their total finds.
The purpose of this is to allow only those who give FP to log the find. Hoarders will not qualify??!
Can anyone please help?

This challenge will be rejected since giving Favorite Points away is not "a geocaching achievement" despite the fact that earning Favorite Points is based upon finding caches.

Hi,
That is a pity, as I am of the opinion the motivation to give FP's is a huge motivator for the game.
But, be that as it may. Would it be plausible to have the checker simply count the FP's and the total finds (excluding events and Citos) . I shall adjust the challenge parameters to be simply have more than 25 FP's ?
Would this be in order?

I'm not completely with you have, can you make the challenge condition more clearer

Can the challenge be to have more than 25 FP's?
In checking, could the display or the output of the check record the number of FP's as a percentage of the total finds excluding Cito and events?

In other words, the challenge is > 25 FP's.
The output of the checking is Number of FP's as a percent of Number of finds (excluding Events & Cito's)

Is this possible?

I am still puzzled what you are trying to achieve maybe one of the other forum members can give a second opinion

Perhaps I have made myself a little obscure.
I started out wanting to create a challenge that only those who have given half of their FP away; only they would be able to claim this challenge find.
I understand that this criteria is not acceptable.
So now I am saying only those who earned more than 25 FP may qualify for the challenge criteria.
However, I am also asking if, in running the checker, the results of the checker could output the number of FP's as a percentage.
Thus there would still be a degree of "putting back into the game" in those that log their finds, and all people could see the status, measured by the percentage, of the individual logs and thus of the respective cachers. It is an attempt to foster the giving aspect of the game within the caching community.
I hope this has put my intentions into a better light?

WÅLDO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So now I am saying only those who earned more than
> 25 FP may qualify for the challenge criteria.

Caches with more than 25 favorites is possible criteria and the checker could also display the percentage of favorites as it can display other properties as altitude etc.

How many such caches should qualify?

Hi,
If I understand your question correctly, the finder who has more than 250 finds would qualify for this challenge cache.
But in providing the result of the check, the display would list the number of FP's as a percentage of the total number of finds the cacher has at the time of logging the find.
Could this be done? Thanks

There is no history data available to calculate when favorites were given.

Hi,
Is it possible to determine the number of FP a cacher has at the time of checking ?

Just so that we are both talking of the same FP. I am referring to the automatic granting of a FP for every 10 finds that a Premium member earns. Is this the same understanding for you? And if so, I am expecting that when a cacher checks their validation, the resultant output would be 'Correct!' with a total of more than 25 FP still in hand, along with a mathematical calculation that divides the resultant number of FP by the total number of finds( excluding event and Cito) ; and converted to a percentage.

Does this make sense?

I am not sure what do you mean. One possible problem is this guideline: "The challenge requirements should be simple, and easy to explain, follow and document." Could you try to present the idea by using mathematical equations? It may help a lot.

Hi,
Sorry for the delay - life caught up with me.
So. This might be easier.

If we could take the number of finds less the number of events and Cito's. Call this "A"
Then if we take the number of accumulated FP's earned by the cacher. Call this "B"

The qualifier would be when B divided by A is less than 0.05 ( or less than 5 %)

That is the challenge checking.
I explain it by saying the Benevolent Cacher puts back at least half of what is earned. This challenge is only for those who practice being a Benevolent cacher.

Can it be done?

Challenge criteria must be based on Found it logs. I suspect that adding this kind of criteria may change this not acceptable by the reviewer but it is not clearly disallowed nor accepted. Favorites are part of the Found it logs anyway. Maybe you should check this with your reviewer first.

In your example B is approximately A / 10. I think that you mean used favorites instead of earned ones. The checker knows how many favorites the user have earned and how many of them are left (unused). It is possible to make needed calculations and show them on results. Practically you do not need the number of finds (A) in your calculation because the total favorites are available.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2018 12:53PM by arisoft. (view changes)

Hi,
Thanks for this information. I have already sent written request to the reviewer, after having spoken to him about this issue. He has indicated that he would consult the Reviewers guide - no doubt the same guide you are referring to.
But until he responds in writing, I shall do nothing.
In the interim (the eternal optimist) it seems like a simple test. As you point out - simply calculate the FP remaining divided by the total FP's awarded, and multiply by 100 to make it a percentage. If that percentage is 50 or less, the check is successful. The cache listing will term that a benevolent geocacher - one who gives half or more of the FP they receive.
I hope to hear from the reviewer soon. Thanks
Bryan

Is there any reponse or feedback from your reviewer ?

Hi, sorry. Yes, the reviewer tabled this at a congress of reviewers for my area, or something like that.
Turns out that, although it is a great idea, and the motivation slots into the goals of the game, the aspect of using FP as a measure of challenge does not sit easily upon the shoulders of the reviewers, and so, until groundspeak alter the criteria, it is a no-go.
So. Thanks, but I've had to move on.