I like the idea of keeping it as is with one series of the month for the whole state and one cache of the month for each of the five sections of the state.  The benefits of it are up to six quality caches are highlighted each month, and those six cache owners get to put a nifty graphic on their respective cache pages.  Consolidating it into one winner per month doesn’t seem to me to solve the main issue, with that issue being people actually voting for and nominating caches.

Another benefit is that people will hopefully be eligible to actually vote!  Since you can only vote for caches that you’ve actually found, to a certain extent if there was only one winner per month, the only people who could consistently vote would be those who are well traveled around Wisconsin.  Imagine what it would be like if a cache in the north woods vs. a cache in West Bend were nominated.  The north woods cache may have only a handful of finds, while the WB cache may have had hundreds.  Therefore the north woods cache only would have a relatively small amount of potential voters, while the WB cache could have dozens or even hundreds of potential voters.  If one were going to vote for a potential COTM and the choices were all unfamiliar and outside of their area, they’d potentially move on to something else.

So if we keep it with the same format (5 regional caches + 1 series of the month), how do we promote it and increase voter traffic?  The general membership hasn’t been very proactive, so I guess it is going to have to start with the board of directors.  If each BOD member would nominate a cache or three every other month, that right there would be a big improvement.  I nominate caches almost every month, sometimes in all 5 regions since the whole state is our playground.  🙂  Secondly, giving a shout out to the COTM winners (maybe with pictures) at WGA events would help bring awareness.  Thirdly, promoting the COTM on social media can help, and it’s already being done to a certain extent from what I’ve seen in the past year or two.

It’s great that the issue has been brought up here (actually I saw the question posed on FB and followed the link here, nice).  I look forward to following the discussion.

John, good stuff here.  Ideas and moving the conversation ahead is what’s important.

Bennycams wrote:

Newbie’s $0.02 here. Having never nominated a cache for COTM, I don’t know what the submission form looks like, but does it state WHY the cache is being nominated? If so, can that glowing praise be shared on the page? If not, why not? Just seeing the name/link to the cache page might not be enough to get people interested enough to check it out. To use an out of state one as an example of what I mean, since it cannot be nominated itself, I gave a favorite point to GC23XQ9, “Little Flyer.” Why? Because it was a cute container just off the freeway that made it more than the expected end of the road barrier cache. If I knew that about a COTM nominee, it’d get me interested in finding it, and possibly voting for it.and get me pumped up to nominate one in the future. Am I making sense?

You’ve cultivated some ideas here, probably gonna be a while before I can really dig into it but thanks for posting your thoughts.

Any thoughts on cutting down or eliminating the three month waiting period before a new cache can be nominated? It’s been awhile since I’ve nominated a cache but I do remember thinking that the rule that a cache has to have been published for three months before it is eligible was kind of a deterrent. I might find a cache and realize it’s only been out a few weeks or a month. I probably won’t forget the cache but remembering to go back and nominate it does slip my mind.

I don’t attend events so I’m not sure if this happens, but does the subject of COTM and getting member to nominate/vote come up? If not, this is something the WGA board members could actively start at sanctioned events. Using the camp-out and Cache Bash events would be good platforms to encourage members to think about COTM.

How about adding in a Cache of the Year tournament? All COTM winners from the past year would be eligible.

Crow-T-Robot wrote:

Any thoughts on cutting down or eliminating the three month waiting period before a new cache can be nominated?

I was thinking the same thing today, but then I realized that the reason for the 3 month period is probably to make sure that enough people have found the cache, so that it can receive enough ballots, kind of a way to keep it fair.

I wouldn’t mind seeing POTM added to the site (photo of the month). New contest; new submissions; new viewers!