KaiserVonChina Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- "some number of finds per day, week, month, or year." is in the NO column, not the yes column. I did actually put that this was in the No column ?? quote - But in the 'No' column - where it says 'Some number of finds per day, week, month, or year. Examples: Busy Day, 50 finds in a day, 5by Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
geoPetros Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- Where in the guidelines do you see this? I was referring to the 'yes' column - and it was an interpretation of that guideline - there is nothing specific anywhere about being able to or not being able to use an average number of finds over a particular period of time However as I later stated "Unlikeby Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
One response I have had which will probably mean this will not be permitted Unlike many numbers / time based challenges where you have to allow ANY year - this challenge would involve EVERY year which is then time based. Also anything more than an average of 365 a year would require more than 1 find per day which isn’t permitted either. So I may have already answered my own question - bby Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
I was asked this question and I am of two minds so putting it out there to see what the general concensus is The question asked .. "Is it permitted to have a challenge that asks for an average number of finds per year?" Having looked at the guidelines under the category '9-Time limited' It would appear acceptable in the 'yes' column where you are asking to fby Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
vogelbird Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Double responce 111837 removed Notedby Deepdiggingmole - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Thank youby Deepdiggingmole - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
The checker https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCB2PD3/97312 for https://coord.info/GCB2PD3 is showing as "This checker script is disabled" and appears to have been for a while Obviously you would normally go to the script writer and email them but unable to ascertain who that is can anyone helpby Deepdiggingmole - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
This cache appeared on the challenge exception list - probably because it doesn't have the attribute I know the CO so messaged him about this and his reply was - this is not a challenge cache He put It is, in fact not a challenge cache. Challenge caches must have a specific challenge which must conform to certain rules that were in place at the time - not the same strict criteria in plby Deepdiggingmole - Challenge checker exceptions
LOL - thats OK then because this wasn't just for you !by Deepdiggingmole - Challenge checker exceptions
"It was published as a challenge" by mistake - as it didn't fulfil challenge cache criteria - and the reviewer acknowledged that and so quickly archived it The fact that the instructions from Project-GC is to not make a judgement about if the cache follows the challenge guidelines or not, only if it's a challenge or not - could potentially mean that some caches that haby Deepdiggingmole - Challenge checker exceptions
This is for exception list moderators :- I am bringing this to the front again as I occasionally look at those exceptions which go against the vote flow Though there are a few upvotes there are more downvotes It was shown that this cache does comply with all the challenge cache requirements - and in particular criteria for qualifying now seen on the cache page (it was hidden in a .pdf beforeby Deepdiggingmole - Challenge checker exceptions
I have just noted the checker output gives 2000 as the first year and for me misses out 2013 - although I can list 26 different countries from 2000-2025 If I read the above correctly the challenge was 2001 to 2025 so shouldn't include the year 2000 I may have mis-read but thought it should be pointed outby Deepdiggingmole - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
I checked with another cacher (Amberel) and unlike TBear though they had 26 out of 25 countries/years but only 2 of the 3 continents - it was a red cross with them - so has the false positive issue been amendedby Deepdiggingmole - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
To Rubyshoos - did you want to include locationless caches in this challenge ,- I show as passing this one with 25 countries etc but it does include a locationless - I may possibly qualify without it but would have to trawl gsak to verify Timby Deepdiggingmole - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Just a query - I was checking out this one out and when I tried the checker for the UK county one ( https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCB2MGK/96493 ) For me it did return with the following cache for 2002 (as per output) 2002 - : (https://coord.info/GC4C35) Cuckoo Cache (could be anywhere) on 2014-05-04 It isn't specifying a county which means it could be a duplicate of any of the oby Deepdiggingmole - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Hi Looking through specific challenges - looking for 'Events attended in December' and this thread came up - the request was "can someone please help me with a checker for this cache GCAM4DK. to log this you must have participated in events on at least 15 different dates in December, year does not matter." yet, when I click on the linked challenge and the cache it refersby Deepdiggingmole - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Checked - all good now Many thanks VB from both moles ;-) (ddm and 125)by Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
Cheers Doneby Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
I have read the cache page - It says The cache must be large enough to accept Travel Bugs & trade items. Micro Caches DO NOT qualify. So if it is listed as a Micro on the cache page, find another qualifying cache yes, no micros - but nothing mentioned about 'other' if the CO didn't want to include 'other' - then I would have thought this should be mentioned onby Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
The above challenge is listing far more than is required I have clarified the below with the CO The original challenge was supposed to be 10 Church micros in 10 different counties (thus 100 caches) - however the above checker was created (incorrectly) really early on and listed individual Church micro finds in different counties - it was used by almost everyone and has got to the point whereby Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
Pleu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Tag 16093 removed, tho it would have been better > if the old tag was updated instead of making a new > tag. I agree - I was surpised to see two different checkers for the same cache (not mine by the way) Thanksby Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC5BBWG/16093 is a checker for BS96: Little Bridges # 300 - A County Challenge : GC5BBWG However the output is incorrect https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC5BBWG/69726 is also a checker for the same challenge and does give the correct output can 16093 be removed as it is incorrect and there is a correct one with 69726 so no new one need be made Tby Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
@bmuzzin - thanks for that - as said I recalled the issue being raised before and there were differences of opinion with this particular type of challenge and as you say it more often than not boils down to local reviewer decision (and it does get frustrating when one reviewer will say yes, another, no - which comes down to a personal preference rather than linking to a specific guideline)by Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
Some while ago I recall seeing the term 'Grid Art' being used with reference to challenges and in particular completing certain portions of the DT or calendar grids that form a shape like an 'X' criteria such as "To qualify for this challenge you need to have completed both of the diagonals on your D/T grid." being of this nature With no clear or specific referencby Deepdiggingmole - Miscellaneous
To all Moderators a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year Let 2024 be a great year moderating :-) ddmby Deepdiggingmole - Challenge checker exceptions
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 guidelinby Deepdiggingmole - Challenge checker exceptions
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 fromby Deepdiggingmole - Challenge checker exceptions
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 wby Deepdiggingmole - Challenge checker exceptions
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 considby Deepdiggingmole - Challenge checker exceptions
