Return to Project-GC

Welcome to Project-GC Q&A. Ask questions and get answers from other Project-GC users.

If you get a good answer, click the checkbox on the left to select it as the best answer.

Upvote answers or questions that have helped you.

If you don't get clear answers, edit your question to make it clearer.

+2 votes
In "Top-Hiders/Favorite Points Over Time" we can compare owners by their absolute number of favorite points received. That's fine, but if you want to compare the "quality" of the work of two or more owners a better way would be to compare a relative value.

How about a "Relative Favorite Points Over Time (Wilson score)" feature? Favorite points received in relation to hidden caches of this owner and the time it took to collect this much fav-points. That would make owners more comparable.


Owner1: 1000 FP from 100 caches over a period of 10 years.
Owner2: 500 FP from 20 caches over a period of 2 years.
Owner3: 800 FP from 80 caches over a period of 5 years.

Who is the "better" one? Maybe a Wilson-score like statistical analysis can give us an answer.
in Feature requests by Der Grosse Baer DGB (1.9k points)

1 Answer

0 votes
First off I think that this would be extremely complex and expensive (in hardware) to implement. But there is also another reason why this most likely won't happen.

We (Project-GC) do not believe that a Geocacher should be "punished" for hiding a crap/not-the-best geocache. Maybe it had a very good purpose at the time of hiding, but it's not appriciated anymore. We do not want to "force" geocachers to avoid hiding caches that they aren't sure are state of the art.

It's also not in any way obvious who actually is the best hider of the above. I couldn't tell at least. It should also be noted that favorite points have only existed for about 5 years.

But we have actually also done quite a few tests to build something like this. But none of the tests has resulted in a list that we thought reflected the reality.
by magma1447 (Admin) (225k points)
This feature was not intended as a "punishment", just as a further (and interesting) way of interpreting "Favorite Points Over Time".

But I see your point.