There are some further issues with the regions it seems. Probably incomplete list: * Iceland should check for the region "Capital Region" instead of the icelandic name (line 172) * GC does not have regions for Cambodia, so you should probably just check for the country (line 32) * The Guragon District in India is in Haryana, not Delhi (line 51). However there is also another one inby PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
https://coord.info/GCJDGM This one also has the cactii attrubute set but also has four blanks. The API returns dangerous animals (18) correctly, but also thorns (39), which is not set according to the website. Idk whether cactii is returned obviously, since you filter it. Any idea why (1) you didn't catch this one when searching for this attibute, (2) why thorns is returned but not displaby PattuX - Script development
Here you go: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC4722B/51115 I couldn't do the "independent city" restriction, since project-gc (and this means likely also gc.com) give the county as "St. Louis city (MO)". Let us know if it works.by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
I changed the two. The link is still https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC84ZY5/47041 Let us know if it works as intended.by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Here you go: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC8NGMG/50243 Let us know if it's suitable. PS: The Most Westerly cache found and Most Easterly cache found are not necessarily the ones contributing to the biggest longitude difference. For you that is the case, but for example you could find your most westernly cache at W179° and your most easternly at E179° but they'd of courseby PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Alright, working on a script.by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
QuoteIn order to log a successful find, geocacher must find one geocache separated by at least 75 degrees of latitude and one geocache separated by at least 50 degrees of longitude. I don't fully understand that requirement. Separated from which cache? From your challenge? In that case this is not allowed. Just requiring two caches 75 degree lat apart and another two 50 degrees lon apart wby PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
This challenge is not acceptable under the guidelines I think, specifically rule 14: QuoteNot finding caches: design that limits or punishes any element of finding caches. Say your oldest found cache is also your most nothern find, your most favorited find and the most eastern wind. Then you would be punished wrt this challenge if you find a cache that is older or more favorited/northern/easby PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)
Has anyone checked with HQ in which way Labs may or may not be included in challenges? QuoteWe are not permitting Lab Cache challenges because Lab Caches are temporary, are generally only available to those who attend Mega- or Giga-Events, are not associated with Found It logs, and are not completely integrated into Geocaching.com stats. However, since they are included in user profile stats fby PattuX - Method requests
This doesn't need to be fixed bacuse it's working like this :) In the current checker you need to find at least one of the two oldest caches in each state. Finding both won't get you any further towards completing the challenge. Try user TriggerMN for example - they found the oldest cache in all states except West Virginia. They also found the 2nd oldest cache in Michigan, makingby PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Counting is hard :s Fixed.by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Seems to be working :) I also tried filters any everything seems fine so far. I'll let you know should I find some error.by PattuX - Checker news
Thanks, I'll have a look later when it's live. > Issue 2) Type wasn't set to anything. It will from now on be set to *Labcache* (no stars). On gc.com it's 'Lab Cache' btw. I guess it doesn't break anything but consistency is always nice.by PattuX - Checker news
Just from a technical side it would be no problem, even now. PGC.GetLabCacheFinds(profileId) works correctly and contains log dates, so you could just modify some existing calendar checker to call that insead of PGC.GetFinds().by PattuX - Checker news
Here you go: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC8M3H7/49519 Let us know if it's suitable.by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Not that easily in that script since it also allows for different amounts required per type (i.e. one type 500, another 400, another 300 etc.) and for that it's not really useful to print more than required.by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Such a challenge would surely not be published, see rule 10 of the guidelines. QuoteNot allowed: Trackable, Benchmarking, Waymarking logs, or specifying Lab Cache finds. I find "specifying" a bit vague, but I think it's fine to allow Lab Caches to count towards a challenge (i.e. as one type in "Find 100 caches for each of 7 types", or one date in "find a cache oby PattuX - Checker news
https://project-gc.com/Challenges//46972 local finds = PGC.GetFinds(profileId, { includeLabCaches = true }) works correctly. PGC.GetFinds(profileId, { includeLabCaches = true, fields = {'gccode', 'cache_name', 'visitdate','type', 'country'}, order = 'OLDESTFIRST', filter = filter }) however results in some backend error (seeby PattuX - Checker news
I'm having trouble with GetFinds. Doing local finds = PGC.GetFinds(profileId, { includeLabCaches = true, fields = {'gccode', 'cache_name', 'visitdate','type', 'country'}, order = 'OLDESTFIRST', filter = filter }) seems to set finds to true, instead of a table for some reason. I thought the fields/filters might mess it up someby PattuX - Checker news
Here's a new checker for you: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC8CQE3/49478 Let us know if it works correctly.by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Hi, sorry this took so long, had little time. Now Events are allowed and the reamining four caches don't need to have different types from each other, just different from the 18 used for the D/T ratings. The link is still the same: https://project-gc.com/Challenges//48367 Please test and reply.by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)
The script stops early and does not produce any output in case you have less than 13 days with Multi-cache finds. This is simply because it's the easiest way to prevent the script from crashing. Here's your stats tho if you're interested: (each pair is 1 - number of finds, 2 - date) ( ( [1] => 14 [2] => 2019-11-17 ) (by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)
I'm pretty sure that's against the guidelines, since it punishes you for finding a cache close to your last one on a new day (because you're only dividing by the days caching). Any challenge punishing any find won't be permitted. If you changed it to divide by "days since first cache find" there would be no rule directly forbidding such a challenge, however I feelby PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)
As vogelbird said, the Profile Stats page includes Lab caches whereas the checker does not. There are also a few other dates where the numbers dont match. On the 3rd, 20th, 22th and 31st the number of finds they are off is 4, 5, 5 and 1 respectively. This summed up matches your 15 Lab Cache finds. So on the 31st you have 119 finds + 1 Lab Cache. I assume you got the info you had 117 finds pby PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
I'm surprised this was even published then. Anyway, checker is adjusted for 13 counties now.by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
You could also exclude below sea level caches by adding "func": [ [ "select_max", [], [ [ "let", 0 ]by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
I think this one is fine. After all, "Find 2020 caches with D>=2 and T>=2" would be a valid challenge and this is just a strictly less restrictive version of that. Also finding 1/1s is not punishing you in any way here.by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Whoops, forgot to enable it. Should work now. For now I haven't implemented the changes, so it still checks for the original request. Maybe you'll actually find some people qualifying. After all you're more familiar with the people and I just looked at some users with many finds. Also I've done a run where I added a Virtual in Ruokolahti for you manually and it found a sby PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)
Ok, I think I have a first draft of this checker ready, but it's far from done. https://project-gc.com/Challenges//48367 I think it works correctly. Please try it, but consider the following as it is work in progress: The script fails if someone hasn't found a cache in all 22 muncipalities (error message ":262: bad argument #1 to 'pairs' (table expected, got niby PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)
Just a quick update, I've tried my luck on a script for this but I currently can't get it to run fast enough. I have a few more ideas I can try to implement this weekend or so. I assume you know you qualify? Could you give me an example of 22 finds that show you fulfill the challenge? Also, can you let us know the GC code?by PattuX - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)