[Resolved] challenge idea in the works, unpublished. Every digit in the coordinates string.

As the topic suggests, My (unpublished) challenge idea is to find, let's say 30 caches that contain every digit (0-9) in the string of coordinates. I was wondering if this is possible and or allowed according to current guidelines? Seems like the idea would be ok under the new rules.
I was just wondering if there is a script for this? of if it could be done easily enough?

For my challenge idea I would like these specifications.
-Find 30 caches
-4 of them having different icon types
-Each cache containing every digit 0-9 in the string of (posted) coordinates.

It is possible and quite easy to code.
But for the question is it allowed? It is not obvious against the guidelines. But create the challenge and send it to the reviewer without a checker and ask.

One more thing to think about:
Project-GC only sees the listed coordinates. So multi-caches and mystery caches in particular will not have their actual location checked. You may want to exclude those sort of types and reduce the icon limit.

I was interested and wrote a test script
http://project-gc.com/Challenges//22716

I noticed that the ‰ of ok caches diffed between the posters in this thread. The last numbers is the coordinate of first ok find
sumbloke 74 35 17898 149 07256
target 54 58 26037 015 34891
Psychoticjester 26 37 53896 122 19405

I suspect the reason for the difference is what degree and minute.
Different digits in the degrees and numbers >5 will help. The same for the minutes

A guess it is hard to find caches with all digits near the prime meridian with low longitude in both degree and minute in both directions



By the way why do challenges in some areas talk about number of different icons and not cache types?
I think it is a strange way to put it. Groundspeek talks about cache types in all places.

I was intrigued to see how I performed but looks like the checker is disabled.

I guess whether cache types or icons is used is probably partly a matter of history and if you are used to thinking about caching based on what you see on the map (different icons) or in the cache description more. I wouldn't be surprised if the terminolgy from gc hq has morphed over time so older cachers may have started when they were being referred to as icons more commonly? In the UK at least there were also various mega's which encouraged to get n icons in a day which may have encouraged/popularised the terminology

Upps now enables

Wow it appears I have much less qualifying finds for this idea than I expected! :O

Script revision request?
-10 "cache types" ;) since I only seem to have 10 myself.
-would it be possible to show the qualifying caches in the checker results?
-could/does the checker also accept
DDD° MM.MMM' style coordinates as well?


The "icons" reference may be a regional thing. Many challenges in my area are for number of "icons" in a day. That and random trackable/caching gear I've seen:
http://islandbuttons.com/images/trkblPair03.jpg
The term "Icons" and "cache types" seem to be used interchangeably, as I've heard both used.

I'm ok with the idea of multi and mystery caches Posted Coords being used in the challenge idea.

Thanks to everyone for the input and quick responses! :)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/15/2016 11:48AM by Psychoticjester. (view changes)

That it not a complete checker. no tesing is done.
You likely to show that there are a sufficient number of caches that meet the requirement and likly "near" the challenge

The coordinates looked for are in degrees and decimale minute.
I did not att a decimal point since i cpoied the format i used in the checker and added blankspace
37 53896 122 19405 sould have been formatet N37 53.896 W122 19.405
All gc.com GPX and API and the checker api uses decimal degrees that are simpler for the computer and is only converted when outputed to the user

Ok, I tried seeing if the challenge was acceptible but didn't get much of a response. It sounds like I will need to have a checker before it's really looked at.

So, the name of my challenge GC6T33C:
Diverse Digits Coordinates Challenge
(I'm open to suggestions on a better name for this lol)
I am requesting a checker that lists 30 caches (I will have to run the checker to see if I qualify with 30 myself) of at least 4 cache types, that have every digit 0-9 in the caches posted coordinates.
I would like the checker to list the qualifying 30 caches. So cachers can see which caches helped them to qualify.

No you can asks for a review before adding the checker.
Create it as it would be except adding a checker and send it in with a reviewer note asking if it is OK and that a checker will be added if it is.

An reasont it might take time is if the reviewer is unsure it is ok and have asked other reviwers /groundspeek

This was the response I got from the reviewer when submitting the cache. I had posted a reviwer note asking for verification before creating the checker too.

"Hi Psychoticjester,

Thanks for the Challenge Listing. Right off, I can see at least 2 obvious issues with your Listing, which leads me to believe that you haven't even bothered to read the Help Center article regarding Challenge submissions.

I'm Disabling your Listing to give the opportunity to go through the Help Center article and get up to speed on submissions of this sort. If you have any questions after you've read the article, please feel free to ask.

Thanks for your patience,
Nomex
Northern California Volunteer Reviewer"

I had also tried sending a personal message but didn't get a response. Should I try again?
I'm not sure what the 2 obvious issues are unless they are the lack of checker and not posting if I qualify (which I would need to verify with a checker lol)

Did you write a reviewer note asking if it was ok challenge?

I suspect that you did not or that the reviewer missed it.

I would resubmit it with a new reviewer note where you note that you know that the checker is missing but you want to know if it is ok before someone will spend time and write a script. It would be unnecessary work to write one if it will not be allowed. And to answer the question if the challenge would be ok if you hade a checker the checker is not needed.

What the other problem is I have no idea without access to the cache listing. But read the help center article and try to find out what it is

Thank you, i did post a reviewer note asking butbI guess they didn't see it. I'll try again.

Ok, we have the greenlight! Just got the following ok from the reviewer. This will be published once I have a checker for it. :)

Reviewer note:
Hi Pj,

Thanks for the resubmission. You are correct, the PGC Checker was one of the missing elements. The other one was the Cache Type: All Challenge Listings must be submitted as Puzzle/Mystery cache types.

I don't see any restrictions that would prevent me from Publishing this Challenge concept (i.e. These listing elements: cache titles, cache owner, GC Codes, publishing Reviewer or listing text.). Although now that someone has put your Listing on their Watchlist, I reserve the right to be contradicted on this point and have a "teachable moment", as they say.

Aside from your required self-qualification, which you stated, under standard number 5, I have noticed that most Reviewers are asking for a list of qualifying cachers, who have already met the Challenge. A very common number that is batted around is 10. Unless you know of some Users right off the top of your head, my advice would be to have the Checker built and installed on the page, and then go through a list of likely local candidates (I would consider California to be local, and Northern California would be even better).

The Final question to be answered regarding your Challenge is availability. I will need you to post how many Listings there are in the general area in order to complete this Challenge. If this requires crossing some State lines or going to other Countries, I do reserve the right to get input from the Reviewer Community regarding the feasibility of the Challenge.

Thanks for your patience,
Nomex

Resolved, see http://project-gc.com/forum/read?8,3649