Top voters counts

I've noticed that the "Top voters" section of the exception page usually has people listed as having voted on more caches than exist in the exceptions page. For example, there are currently 1282 caches on the page, but Pleu shows as having voted on 1284 and Deepdiggingmole shows as having voted on 1283.

How have people voted on more caches than are available for voting on?

Because caches have been removed from the list for some reason. For example I know that I've voted on a cache that was later retracted and haven't been re-published, so it's impossible for anyone else to vote on that specific cache but the vote is still counted even if the cache isn't visible in the list anymore.

Looking at the figures in the statistics box
Added challenges: 864
Removed challenges: 419
which totals 1283
my votes 1283

I cant say why others haven't got as much as the total challenges that were voted on - but obviously my figures match what has been added on to the list
I was aware of the one that Pleu voted on that got removed and it was retracted before anyone else was able to vote
Other than that if there are differences I don't know how this has come about - I have certainly only voted on what has been listed/added
Though I now see that there are only 1282 listed on that page I can't answer why I have an additional one - maybe I voted on one that got retracted too but was unaware of that



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/18/2023 01:43AM by Deepdiggingmole. (view changes)

Though in addition - As the stats box only shows top 5 and it is evident that the figures are not the same - I always wondered if the other 30 odd voters haven't always voted and have several sitting in their "Show those I haven't voted on" tab
or are they all missing a bunch that were on the list

@Sumbloke - what numbers do you get in the stats box for Added challenges and Removed challenges

Before refreshing today I got:
Added challenges: 863
Removed challenges: 419

Now (with one cache added to the page) I get:
Added challenges: 865
Removed challenges: 419

So last time I loaded the page, the totals matched with my total. Now there are more between these two counts than I've had an opportunity to vote on.

Were is the number 1282 comming from? Like DeepDiggingMole said if you add the "Added challenges: 864" and "Removed challenges: 419" together that makes 1283 so there should be 1283 in the list?

It's also easy to see that not every mod have voted on every challenge based on the statistics: With 13262 upvotes and 5189 downvotes that gives a total of 18451 votes, spread across the 1282 (?) challenges on the list that would mean there's 14,39 moderators but since there's a challenge with 36 votes the obvious conclusion would be that at least 36 accounts have at some point been able to vote in the system. (I know of one account that have been removed, not sure if their votes still count or not.)

Pleu Wrote: Where is the number 1282 coming from?

If you add up all the caches that are listed on the page (yes, I did it - though handy using excel)
it does show only 1282
So for me, curious to know where #1283 went - though I know (as I said) where your #1284 went :-)

I had deduced a while ago that there were around 36 moderators - and evidently not all vote as many of the caches listed only have half that number having been voted on.
I guess as with all things geocaching several moderators, who are cachers, may have stopped playing the game and so have stopped being involved in moderating too.

I appreciated when there was a hiatus with moderating that it was considered it may all be OK when the new attribute came in - however that has shown that moderation was still needed - so maybe if the 'powers that be' could review who is active and who is not and have a refresh of the 'team' removing inactive members and adding some new active ones

Though I acknowledge this doesnt answer the OP :-)

I don't see why it would be necessary to remove or add people just because not everybody have voted on every exceptions. There aren't many caches added nowadays and there are still enough moderators to get the job done. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" and all that.

why have people on the team who are no longer involved in geocaching ?
It is evident from this forum that very few of the moderators take part in discussion or possibly ever read anything in this forum and this can affect the outcome of a challenge cache status
As an example when there was a cache that was definitely a challenge but because of how it was laid out on the cache page it was considered it wasn't as it wasn't very obvious, so many downvoted it - the layout changed and the criteria became clearer and that it was a challenge, so a post was added to advise moderators - however the voting didn't change - so it remained as voted not to be a challenge and thus not appearing on cachers challenge tabs - this frustrated the CO but that was out of his hands - Not all voted on that (like many other caches) and that does mean for those caches that do divide opinion the number of votes and the discussion around it are important - if many of the moderators are no longer involved, the obvious ones will still get up voted or downvoted accordingly by those that do vote but it will mean those borderline decisions are affected.

as well as the numbers of moderators not voting this is probably more a question mark over the forum and how useful it is but if most of the moderators aren't using it for the purpose it is intended or voting as per the function of being a moderator then why not have a refresh ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/18/2023 02:15PM by Deepdiggingmole. (view changes)

That's your interpretation of the data. It's just a guess from you that these people have stopped geocaching. You have no real evidence of this being the situation.

An other guess could be that not everybody checks this tool daily/weekly/monthly or however often you check it. There's no harm in having people on the moderator team that aren't voting weekly since they could still log in and vote for example when they get an email about a case that's dividing the mods. This would still be helpful and they would still be needed.

Also there's no rule that says you have to vote on everything or you're kicked of the team, so you making up these rules for a tool that isn't yours is just weird.

That's your interpretation of the data. It's just a guess from you that these people have stopped geocaching. You have no real evidence of this being the situation.
Yes - I didn't say I knew these were the facts or would I be so arrogant to say they were - it was a suggestion behind why many of the caches havent been voted on as much as others - I wasn't referring to those who do vote periodically (that is your interpretation of what I have said and it was wrong!)
but if a few of the moderators have stopped visiting the site completely and so not voting and unlikely to continue to do so, why not replace them ?

I am not making up any rules, or suggesting that it be a rule - just making a suggestion for moving forward

I don't see a point in "fixing" something that's basically a legacy tool or to fix anything that ain't broken. It works as intended, it isn't an issue, dev-time is better spent else where.

Pleu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't see a point in "fixing" something that's
> basically a legacy tool or to fix anything that
> ain't broken. It works as intended, it isn't an
> issue, dev-time is better spent else where.

We all have opinions - which I respect and I understand where you are coming from
I didn't say anything was 'broken' - but was simply pointing out that it seems evident there maybe moderators who are no longer involved in caching and similarly no longer moderating so the list is being voted on by less than there used to be - possibly that lower number maybe sufficient and that is fine.
However I go back to an earlier comment - There are caches in this list, I feel that have being wrongly voted - an example GC2P995 - Alien Invasion Adventure Challenge
This was downvoted by many because, originally there was nothing in the description and so considered not a challenge (it turned out the criteria was found in a link) - I was aware the CO queried this and when it was explained he updated the cache page with the criteria
This was posted in this forum, in the hope that the vote would change. It did not - It remains that this cache has more downvotes than upvotes
Why is this - are the contents of this forum not read by all the active moderators or is it because they are no longer involved in the game ?
Surely the purpose of this forum is to discuss those borderline caches that appear on the exception list - in fact isnt this the sole purpose of this forum.
Yes, those borderline instances are few and far between - but for those challenge cache COs and also challenge cache seekers - not having caches appear on your lists because we, the moderators, have downvoted them - and not amending our votes when evidently a vote change is needed does suggest a more active team of moderators may be needed



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/19/2023 08:50PM by Deepdiggingmole. (view changes)

Going back to the OP - a cache appeared on the exception list last week, not a challenge. I voted on it (and I don't think I was the only one to vote either) and noted an issue with the cache in that it was a puzzle but required you to go to a non-geocaching third party app to play a game in order to get the co-ords - I wrote to the CO and the reviewer to clarify this (it is against guidelines)
Next day I check and can't find it - it no longer exists - the cache was completely erased not just archived (I think this is also what happened to one that Pleu voted on)
As stated earlier though - the upvoted and downvoted challenges total = 1286 (also my vote count)
Though only 1284 are now showing on the list - so there are two caches that it would seem I have voted on that have in fact been erased and not just archived (similar to Pleu)
and so it would seem this would answer the original OP as to that anomaly
Tim