This topic contains 22 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by 
-
Posts
-
Just looking for comments on the low amount of nominations for Cache of the Month (COTM).
Did the new system get too diluted that cachers lost interest?
Was it the timing of GC to introduce Favorite Points on caches at about the same time that the WGA changed from statewide nominating to a 5 district system?
Did cachers stop nominating caches once the ballot box couldn’t be stuffed?
Aren’t there any Wisconsin caches worth nominating anymore?
Are the new nomination criterias too limiting?
Should the WGA use the Favorite Points to determine COTM?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Disclaimer : Always answering to a higher power.
Just did my part to add to the choices.
I personally, just became busy and use the shortcut bookmark to go straight to the forums, skipping the rest of the site. Oops 😯
Following the signals from space.
Here’s just a collection of my thoughts.
I use COTM and Groundspeaks favorites to make sure we hit the popular caches when we travel.
I like the amount of zones in the new system, but I have noticed that by having more caches nominated each month there have been some real duds in there.
The 90 day rule is good as some caches do die off quickly, but at the same time I think people forget about a cache that they may have nominated without the rule. Maybe a few of these caches or series would’ve had more hits if they could’ve been nominated.
I think it’s too soon to consider changes after all of the effort that went into the new format.Let’s give it a little more time and everyone should remember to place quality hides.
Good points J&L. My thoughts are that most of the “best” caches have been recognized. With 14000 caches, no single cache is able to get the attention of a significant number of cachers statewide.
With all the work that has gone into it, and all of the history, I would hate to see the COTM go away.Still being relatively new to the WGA forums, I don’t even know how to vote for a cache of the month. ❓ So I’m guessing there must be more people like me. Here’s what I did:
About 2 minutes ago, I clicked on cache of the month, followed by southeast zone July 2011. There are no caches listed. Not only that, but July 2011 isn’t even finished yet, so it seems like we should be voting for the June 2011 caches, but evidently that is not the case. Why should one vote for a July 2011 cache now when there’s two more weeks remaining in July for an even better one to be introduced.
As for series of the month, the 45-cache series called Star Wars was published June 26 in Waukesha county with much fanfare and rave reviews. It’s fantastic, and was launched with an event cache attended by over 115 cachers. I looked and it wasn’t listed for July. Then I figured out how to look in June and it wasn’t listed there either. So I guess I (and maybe others?) need a tutorial…
The rules are posted on the main COTM page. It is clearly stated that to be eligible to be nominated, a cache must have been published more than 90 days prior.
The reason for that rule is because the Cache of the Month was becoming “Some New Cache in a High Population Area” of the month.You can change your vote if a better cache comes up after you have voted. Also you must have found the cache in order to vote for it. Many of the rules were developed to eliminate solicitation of votes from cachers who had not or may never find a nominated cache. COTM should be for interesting and fun hides that have stood the test of time. Popularity doesn’t neccesarily equate to quality.
Granted, that for some of the newer cachers who were not around prior to the COTM revamp, it may be hard to understand what was occurring with the old system. Many of those issues have been brought to light already in this thread. The popularity of one cache coupled with some “vote for my cache” emails had caused some other, perhaps more challenging or quality, caches to be overlooked or greatly out-voted when there was only one “winner” for the month statewide. The changes are intended to allow regional winners to get the recognition deserved. Perhaps the change has soured some of the voting for some users, but that may not be a bad thing as it may have curbed the popularity votes. Also, the 90 day longevity clause allows for the test of time. If it was memorable, then they may get nominated.
Personally, any cache that gets nominated is a winner in my world.
Disclaimer : Always answering to a higher power.
The 2nd one in the list for NE Wisconsin is not the right cache ID. It’s pointing to an archived cache of a different name?
I think the “90 day rule” has done well to curb the popularity contest aspect but it’s also slowed down the “action”.
There may be less action but I suspect COTM is still highlighting great caches and series.
Perhaps a front-page and forum article on WGA COTM might not be a bad idea from time to time to “re-introduce” newer members to this feature of the site.
I’m sure the submittee goofed. Should read GC2N9V2
Following the signals from space.
I stopped nominating because I was voting for the same cache over and over again and it never got chosen. Then that cache was disabled because of constant muggling. 🙁 I will give it a try again though.
Not all who wander are lost. -J.R.R. Tolkien
@-cheeto- wrote:
Perhaps a front-page and forum article on WGA COTM might not be a bad idea from time to time to “re-introduce” newer members to this feature of the site.
Like the one that has been in the slider for the past four or five months? We can do that. 🙂
I really think the biggest issue has been the implementation of the Favorites issue on gc.com. As much as I liked the COTM, this seems to be a better way of identifying great caches. There is still a popularity aspect to this, but every cache I have found with 10 or more favorite votes has been a winner in my opinion.
Is there a way yet where you can search by favorite points?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.