More than 100% "top found percent"

Question

It seems that people who log their own caches can find more than 100% of all the caches in a region, because they have more founds than caches that are from someone else.

Answer 1

Having logged your own cache can be valid (I have a number of such logs, for caches I have logged and later adopted). Unfortunately there is no way to tell afterward that a cache has been adopted.

Comments

Of course such a log can be valid, but you can never find more than 100 percent of caches in an area. In the statistics own caches are not counted, but the founds are, so the percentage is not always correct, because it is calculated as ("founds in area")/("caches not owned in area")*100

---

It should probably be calculated as ("found unique caches not owned by this cacher")/("caches not owned in area")*100

---

Yes, or  "unique founds and owns in area"/"active caches in area"*100

Answer 2

The problem still exists. I do agree that people can have a reason to log their own caches, but why are these caches counted as founds and not counted as caches that have to be found. I will give an example. In a certain county are 10 caches, 5 of them are placed by cacher X, 5 of them are found by cacher Y. Cacher X logs the 5 caches of Y, but also logs his own caches. Cacher Y logs the 5 caches of cacher X. Both have found all the caches in the county. But in the "top found percent" statistics, cacher X will have found 200 percent of the caches and cacher Y 100 percent. Isn't that strange ? In my opinion, both have found 100% of the caches in that county.

Answer 3

The problem still persists, it can't be that difficult to correct this in my opinion, two possible solutions are posted here already.

Comments

Yes, it's odd. But other than an individual's need to see their name at the top of a list, what is the impact of this, and why do you feel it needs to be a higher priority than other bug fixes? Justifying the need may lead to the issue being resolved sooner.

---

What is the meaning of statistics if they are not correct ? Although logging your own caches is not possible anymore, old own logs still affect wrong results.

After more than one year nobody has mentioned yet that this issue will be solved. The moderator was just answering that own logs can be justified. I agree, but this is a bug report, not a discussion about if it is ok to log your own caches or not. Groundspeak has ended that discussion.

If I find a bug in a challenge checker I can communicate with the one who wrote the script, I even can suggest a solution. But for this, I don't know who to address to. Although it is only a minor issue, I don't think my effort to report it should be laughed away.

---

And maybe the strongest argument is that this is a Membership feature.

---

I didn't laugh your question away.  I pointed out that fixing this might be a low priority and suggested that providing additional justification might make fixing this a higher priority.

I know that the forums here can be direct, or even catty, but in this case, there's no need to be defensive.  I was suggesting you provide the "so what" that a developer might be looking for.