ALR’s vs Challenge caches

[Muggle B]

whats the difference between a challenge cache and an ALR?

isn’t the challenge an ALR itself?

what if I don’t want to go to 6 different states or find 10 5/5 caches, can I just sign the log and claim a find, as groundspeaks own rules states that the only requirement is to sign the log?

can I create a challenge cache that the challenge is to take a pic of yourself at a specific location or of a specific item? essentially an ALR no?

whats the difference, and why do the allow one but not the other? makes no sense, or maybe I don’t understand the difference.

I was going to post this in Zuma’s crappy log thread, but didn’t want to take it off topic.

[Team Deejay]

Well, a challenge cache is a “permtted” ALR. The idea was to allow caches like the Delorme Challenge, County Challenge, etc., that many people enjoyed finding. Unfortunately, people responded with a combination of mundane challenges (Find 10 multis) and stupid challenges (Find 100 caches with “Goldfish” in the cache title). I lobbied as hard as I could to have a list of approved challenge types (which could obviously be modified if someone comes up with a really good idea), but that was squashed because it discouraged “creativity”. From a reviewer perspective, I can tell you that we try to publish EVERY cache that gets submitted, including challenge caches. The rules are pretty complicated, but most people can adjust their page to meet the guidelines.

The only negative to these is that they sometimes take up space in areas that can’t afford it. If you don’t like these challenge caches, I suggest that you write the cache owner and express your disappointment.

[CodeJunkie]

A couple points of difference that I think apply are:

1) A challenge can’t be “Find 10 of CJ’s Caches”. The caches that apply to a challenge are supposed to be from any cacher.
2) A challenge fits an “auditable” criteria of some positive from a stats perspective. Examples: You can’t create a challenge based on DNF’s.

Photo’s are an obvious “banned ALR” as stated directly in the guidelines.

I’ll pick on my one “Find 25 5/5” cache challenge. This is “positive” because it requires finding 25 unique caches. It’s auditable because I can look in the stats (providing they aren’t hidden) and see for myself (otherwise the user has to justify).

The challenge (no pun intended) is puzzle finals though. Examples: The zeroes to heroes series in Appleton – The final can be enforced as a challenge I believe because all the other caches in the series are owned by different people. The LW series in Menasha is owned by a single person and therefore the final can’t be enforced as a challenge where you must find all the other caches first.

[Todd300]

I have to agree with Muggle B though.

I look at challenges as simply ALR’s.

There is no reason for challenge caches and should be banned. My humble opinion. Take it or leave it.

[Muggle B]

I just think its odd that they ban ALR’s but then bring them back as challenge caches and the side cache challenges. So the ALRs are still there, just presented in a different way. So anotherwords they shouldn’t have even banned them in the first place, they still exist.

I know my thread isn’t going to change anything, but I just dont’ understand their thinking process, “you can’t do that, unless you present it this way” whats the difference?

[Trekkin and Birdin]

The ways of groundspeak, as we’ve discovered, are many and strange. Things seem to happen at the whim of those who own the company, and it’s their company, even though all of us provide their product for them.

We do own some goofy challenges but have elected not to place any more of them. Trying to police the legitimate finds just leads to conflict, people in our area weren’t happy with us for placing them, and those things took the fun out of it for us as cache owners. We finally did archive the one we owned that was grandfathered in but violates the “choice” guideline. We felt it had run its course and the owners of the caches involved were being given an extra burden by virtue of those caches making our list. And it had been out for at least four years. We found the caches on the list in one year or less. Anyone who wanted dinner on us had ample time to accomplish the finds. Hopefully anyone who visited some of those caches and didn’t finish that challenge still had the great times we had with the caches they did try. That was our goal in placing it…go have some fun, explore and see what caching could be (and for the most part still was when we placed the challenge in 2008).

There are those who might argue that ALL geocaches should be banned, LOL. We look for the ones that interest us and move on by anything that doesn’t.

[zuma]

@Todd300 wrote:

I have to agree with Muggle B though.

I look at challenges as simply ALR’s.

There is no reason for challenge caches and should be banned. My humble opinion. Take it or leave it.

Yep, some people hate challenge caches. Some people love challenge caches. I happen to love them, since they are a positive way to respond to the potential burnout and boredom that caching just for numbers can bring, especially if getting those numbers limits you just to endless PNGs on road signs. Some people hate those as well, and some love them, so it works both ways.

Something for everyone.

z

[Smashing Ground]

@zuma wrote:

they are a positive way to respond to the potential burnout and boredom that caching just for numbers can bring, especially if getting those numbers limits you just to endless PNGs on road signs
z

To get some of those challenges like 5,000 finds you gotta have a few P&G’s in there 😕
The only thing I wish about challenge caches is that the person submitting the challenge also qualifies for it,I could put out a challenge that requires you to find a cache in 50 different countries…..but thats just unreal.

[CodeJunkie]

@smashing ground wrote:

The only thing I wish about challenge caches is that the person submitting the challenge also qualifies for it

I actually thought this was a requirement. I agree that it’s not right to place a challenge you don’t qualify for yourself.

[Trekkin and Birdin]

Any we’ve placed we’ve already met, but I think the guideline is something along the lines of “must show that they could reasonably qualify.”

[zuma]

@CodeJunkie wrote:

@smashing ground wrote:

The only thing I wish about challenge caches is that the person submitting the challenge also qualifies for it

I actually thought this was a requirement. I agree that it’s not right to place a challenge you don’t qualify for yourself.

I agree 100%. I am only putting out challenges that I qualify for. That should definately be the rule. Even though it is not, it is a rule that I live by.

That is, for example, why I have not put out a Jasper Challenge yet. It also explains why I waited until I did 66 ECs in June to put out a 50 ECs in a month challenge, and why I did not put out an EC alphabet challenge until I picked up that pesky Y EC by going to Yellowstone.

z

[Team Deejay]

@CodeJunkie wrote:

@smashing ground wrote:

The only thing I wish about challenge caches is that the person submitting the challenge also qualifies for it

I actually thought this was a requirement. I agree that it’s not right to place a challenge you don’t qualify for yourself.

It is not exactly a requirement. If you put out some sort of “normal” challenge, such as “find 100 multis”, it isn’t required that you complete it. On the other hand, if you put out something outrageous, such as “Find 10,000 multis”, you can bet we are going to ask you for some examples of people who have completed the challenge. I think it is technically possible to find that many multicaches, but I doubt that many have done it. And if you place something impossible (“Find 1,000,000 letterbox hybrids”), those just can’t be published at all, as the cache is technically not findable.

[rcflyer2242]

I agree with both Muggle and Smashing. With the rash of challenge caches i think they are getting out of control. What is a challenge cache but a painted over ALR. Wording on a challenge is “In order to log this you must find (insert challenge here)”. Wording on a ALR cache is ” In order for you to log this you must take a picture of (insert your request here)”. What’s the difference? Same requirement different wording.
I also agree that if a cacher publishes a challenge they should be able to prove that they them selves have completed it. Not have one published then chase around the country just to qualify for your own cache.
To me a challenge is a feat of skill. Does not take much skill for a lot of challenges out there. We found 65 puzzle caches in one day and believe me there was no challenge in solving or finding them. Just some time behind a screen and the wheel.

This is just my opinion. We all play the game in our own way, if people want to publish those types of caches so be it, just make sure you qualify for it.

[JimandLinda]

I think the Challenges were based on National Parks and Federal properties that don’t allow a physical container at GZ. Since Wisconsin is one of the few states that does NOT have a National Park, we may lack a bit of appreciation for the Challenges.

I also don’t think Groundspeak anticipated the mundane Challenges, like “post a picture of yourself on a bridge somewhere in the United States”. The challenge appears to be to own your own camera.

Time will tell, if it hasn’t already!

[LMcGisme]

I think the main difference between challenge caches and ALRs is that the challenge with a challenge cache has to do with caching – find 100 EarthCaches, find a cache that starts with each letter of the alphabet, or every county, or in all 50 states, etc. For a lot of the ALRs the additional requirements had nothing to do with caching – take a picture of yourself phooning, or wearing a stupid hat, or your log must be a poem, etc. I can see while challenge caches are allowed while ALRs are not. I echo the sentiment that the hider who places a challenge cache should have met all the requirements themselves before publication.

[Author]

Posts