×

To be able to write in the forum you need to authenticate. Meanwhile it's read-only.

Re: checker for GC6TQ77 (not published)

[Resolved] checker for GC6TQ77 (not published)
September 28, 2016 10:03PM
need a checker for cited cache.
challenge requirements.

You need to have 10 or more qualifying states.

In each qualifying state, you must have found at least one cache in a group of counties which meet the following requirement.

the group of contiguous (touching) counties must have at least one cache which  touches anywhere on the western border and one cache which touches on the eastern border. This would permit traveling from the west border to the east border while remaining in a county which has at least one find.

Example in NM. 5 contiguous counties, each having at least one find,
McKinley, Sandoval, Santa Fe, San Miguel, Quay
would meet the requirement for NM.

Example in CA ; Los Angeles and San Bernardino would suffice
Re: checker for GC6TQ77 (not published)
October 15, 2016 05:08PM
The only scriptwriter who wrote something similar was Target. I think he is to only one to answer your request.
Re: checker for GC6TQ77 (not published)
November 20, 2016 11:12AM
Interesting challenge, but the rules are not well defined. The problem is "what are the east and west borders?". As the borders are not square, for some county is not clear if it touches the west border or north border.

However, the script requires a lot of data. If you can provide for each state the list of counties that touches the west border, list of couties for east border and for every county the list of adjacent counties, I can try to write the script.
Re: checker for GC6TQ77 (not published)
November 20, 2016 01:29PM
Below is some info about the data required to determine counties touching. I don't know if you can access that info, but it seems that MaxB on the River is is willing to share it. I imagine you would have to contact Maxb and confirm that he would allow you to use his data so that you could build a checker.
BTW, I really don't care whether corner touching be permitted. That implies that his data can be used without any modifications.

Thank you for taking an interest in the problem.

(Email received from Max October 3, 2016)

Stan,

The checker should show you qualified up to the 20 state level. I ran the 15 state and got output below. Then below the output, there is a map (has scaling problems, showing connected counties and other strings which are not connected to your main string.


[dagrandpa](https://www.geocaching.com/profile/?u=dagrandpa) has used [Project-GC](http://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC43JTY/21377 "Project-GC Challenge Checker") to see if he/she qualified for this challenge and he/she did.

I made it with 21 connected region and needed only 15

When you get a string from Atlantic to Pacific you would qualify for our "Golden Spike Challenge" and North to south gets the "NAFTA Challenge". As I mentioned, they are working on a checker for those but must have run into a problem. Until that problem is resolved, they likely can't provide our additional checkers.

If you read the correspondence on our checker effort, you would see that we had to provide a matric with all the county connections. (This was about 18,000 data points we created). This took us about a month to prepare. To add the East / West and North / South request, we had to provide lists of the counties along the Atlantic, Pacific, Canada, Mexico, and those along the Gulf we allowed in the challenge. I suspect you would need to create matrixes with the allowed West and East Counties for each of the States. Based on what we did, this would be a big effort for you.

If you chose to allow corner to corner as touching, then you would have to go through the Matrix and update each of those corner to corner connection.
Re: checker for GC6TQ77 (not published)
March 10, 2017 07:11PM
Howdy

MaxB data is good for the contiguous part.

The missing data is still which counties are on the eastern and western edge of a state. MaxbS data does care about that directionality. Pennsylvania touching new York is the same as vermont or massachusetts touching new york.

If someone creates this data, script writers can get started
Re: checker for GC6TQ77 (not published)
March 12, 2017 03:13AM
sloth96 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> MaxB data is good for the contiguous part.

I don't agree with that. As a reviewer I would consider this challenge to be covered by the short-term "hold" on contiguous county challenges.
Re: checker for GC6TQ77 (not published)
March 12, 2017 10:22AM
There is a short term hold on contiguous challenges?
Re: checker for GC6TQ77 (not published)
March 12, 2017 08:19PM
I got a message from Groundspeak that the contiguous county challenges are under review about the challenge conditions, Until they are able to resolve the checker issue, Groundspeak is instructing reviewers to not publish any contiguous county/region or country challenges
Re: checker for GC6TQ77 (not published)
April 26, 2017 09:31AM
GC6TQ77 got published and request archived
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login