Talk:Red spider achievement

From Geo Hashing
Jump to: navigation, search


Proposed achievement relating to spiders only: Do not oppose, but I really can't see that there's much point to it. You don't have to do anything; you just score a ribbon if you happen to see a spider at some point en route. But I'm willing to be convinced otherwise.

Proposed achievement relating to the whole animal kingdom: Oppose. It would just be too easy to get -- I think every single one of my expeditions has involved going past sheep or horses in a field, or someone out dog-walking, or just seeing some birds in a tree. -- Benjw 16:14, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. All of the above, and that not everything xkcd is inherently interesting. -- relet 16:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Benjw, would it help any if it had to be a wild creature, not raised/herded/domesticated by humans and you must have a photo of it? I think that might make it more difficult. Not that difficulty should be the measure of an achievement. I can get the frozen achievement just by doing a normal geohash during a whole 4-5 months of a year where I live. relet, I chose to use a oft used image from xkcd to name the achivement, but if you think that the achievement should be called something different, you should say this needs work, and suggesting the change in addition to opposing on Benjw's points. Splitdipless 12:24, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. No, I think the picture fits the achievement. I was just thinking that just because red spiders are a recurring theme in xkcd does not mean we need a red spider achievement. I got the impression that the definition is a bit forced... I mean, I do not recall an expedition where I did not run into "a member of the animal kingdom". Especially if you take spiders and ants into account. -- relet 08:39, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Indeed. And birds. It's difficult to imagine an expedition where I could not get a photo of some birds. As for excluding 'domesticated' creatures, that does indeed make it harder, but I still don't really see the point of the achievement. You have to ask "what does this achievement add to people's hashing adventures?" and the answer seems to be that it might get people to look more closely at the insects around them. Or, most people would just take a photo of a bird or a beetle and leave it at that. I just don't see that it adds much to the experience. It doesn't grab me by the arm and make me want to go out on an expedition just to win it. -- Benjw 12:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm coming back to this after a few weeks. You compare it to the frozen geohash achievement, but I think that's a little different. There is a point to rewarding people for braving the cold and going geohashing despite snow and ice. That, to me, actually seems to be an achievement, which "hey, I saw a bug" doesn't. — Benjw  [talk] 11:45, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
If there is no support for the achievement, and opposition that can not be swayed, then this proposed achievement is now rejected. Splitdipless 22:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
If you want to leave it a little longer, and find some other people to comment, then please do. There's nothing wrong with leaving it several months between proposing it and deciding on an outcome. If you do, though, I suggest adding Category:Needs discussion to this page, as that will probably help get people involved. Or directly ask certain people to comment. — Benjw  [talk] 04:28, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Actually, not a bad idea Benjw. I just read the proposed achievement page and noticed some zoological awards suggested there. I'll add a link there too.Splitdipless 20:42, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Support Needs a fair bit more work, though. I don't see how a spider is any more random than a Hashcat_achievement, and arguably more related to XKCD than that one. I would think that a picture would an absolutely necessary step, though. I hadn't even seen this page before today, but you can check my photo of the scorpion that I ran into this morning 2010-08-28_35_-106 for a start. Maybe it should be called the creepy-crawly achievement for running into bugs, spiders, and other such creatures that give folks the willies? I think the rattlesnake I ran into last month would fall under than definition, although I assure you I was too busy running away to have the presence of mind to get a picture of that one! (Comment left by User:Redaragorn, 05:01, 29 August 2010 (UTC))

Support Agree with ^^^ as long as its of the creepy crawly variety that people are generally wary of. Greenslime 22:04, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Needs work - I like the idea of restricting it to the "creepy-crawly achievement for running into bugs, spiders, and other such creatures that give folks the willies", but still think that just spotting one and taking a picture is to easy! If you look for it you'll always find some kind of bug in a forest, etc. My idea would be to add the requirement of some kind of interaction with the creepy-crawly animal at least in the cases of non-dangerous ones. There are quite a few snakes can be handled without danger for example, let alone bugs, and I'd love to see a couple of "silly grin with snake" shots! (Comment left by User:HiroProtagonist, 01:49, 31 October 2010 (UTC))

Yes, but you won't get any "silly grin with snake" shots. All you'll get is a series of photos of people holding beetles and ants. Oh, and please remember to sign your comments, HiroProtagonist and Redaragorn! — Benjw  [talk] 11:45, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Well, I'm also happy with "silly grin with ant/snail/beetle" shots, and personally I do have some pics of me with snakes (though not while geohashing) and don't believe we wouldn't get any of those. What do the other people who were opposing on the grounds that "you don't really have to do anything for it" say to this proposed change? --HiroProtagonist 14:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC) (oh and thanks Benjw for adding the signature for me on my last comment!)

Oppose as currently worded. If reworked to require active interaction with a creepy-crawly, then I would "upgrade" my decision to Do not oppose. The passive seeing of "wildlife" is something that pretty much every expedition would have, and having an achievement for it seems excessive. The wording in general needs to be clarified to make a firm definition of what is required to earn the achievement. If it is changed to include active interaction with a creepy-crawly (such as picking it up, petting it, or trapping it (humanely) somehow), then this is a better achievement than many of our early ones. That doesn't necessarily make it worthy, in my opinion, because a lot of those early achievements are very generic, and not at all interesting. We had a rash of "crazy coincidence" and "interesting once, but is a common occurence" achievements in the early days. We have solved the former with gratuitous ribbons, and the latter we have been attempting to keep to a minimum with the voting process. All in all, it wouldn't be bad as an achievement, but I find it a bit too common to really be worth its own achievement. --aperfectring 02:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

It's tough to determine exactly what the criteria for the achievement should be. As cool as handling wildlife is, the problem is that a lot of wildlife does not care to be handled. Not all snakes will be happy to be picked up for instance, and some are not good for you if you get bitten. I also don't want to make this ribbon so easy that you can get it as simply as the Land achievement. What about photos of wildlife at distances that are uncomfortable for you, the wildlife or both? Such as a deer at 10 paces (the deer wouldn't like), a scary spider at 1 pace (the geohasher wouldn't like) or skunk at 5 paces (neither will be happy in that situation, although more then likely the geohasher will be more upset after the encounter). This rules out the pictures of ants problem. Splitdipless 16:13, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Oppose or at least Needs work. It's too easy and not very interesting. You can find spiders anywhere, even though we don't have any scary ones where I live. Maybe if you must identify and document the exact species, but I don't see any connection to the core of the game - reaching hashpoints. The ru 06:46, 20 August 2012 (EDT)