Talk:XKCD-100
Is this 100 miles as in "it took over 100 miles of travel just to get the hash", or "getting to the hash and back involved over 100 miles of travel in total"? I sort of assume the former, but some explicit disambiguation wouldn't hurt any. :) --Youhas 20:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- Well, my intention was 100 miles one way -- basically, to the far end of the graticule via windy roads -- but I suppose the whole achievement thing is "honor system", so folks can award them to themselves however they see fit. But my intention was "100 mi [one way] for the express purpose of making xkcd meetup." That is, vacationing in another state and then deciding "hey, I'm bored, I should geohash..." isn't in the spirit of the award, which is intended for a more "I'm going to make the xkcd meetup no matter what, dammit!" mindset. 192.42.249.12 21:14, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- I'd figured that "100 miles one way" was the intention, but just got slightly confused when I saw the link to Ted's achievement, which was approximately half that. Turns out that the answer was "the link was underselling Ted's accomplishment", to the tune of about 50 miles - Modesto being way further afield than Newark, coming from Santa Cruz. Fixed the link, convinced myself that I am not losing my mind - successes all around, really. :) --Youhas 23:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm taking a trip this weekend to my hometown, which is 140 miles away from where I currently live. I might try to make it to the Saturday meetup in my hometown, so I'm wondering if I'd be worthy of this achievement. Something tells me that intended destination plays a role in winning this prize. --Alex 20:21, 16 June 2008 (EST)
- Yeah, I'd guess that whether one qualifies or not sort of hinges on one's primary reason for traveling. "I'm (out of town on business / traveling about on vacation / whatever) and incidentally happened to stumble upon a conveniently-located hash point!" is probably qualitatively different than "there's a geohash at a far-flung location, and by golly, we are going to make the trek out there to get it!" The latter seems much more in the spirit of the accomplishment. --Youhas 23:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Honorable mention?
What about a honorable mention for meetups which are not saturday 4 pm meetups because they take place at another day or time, but still are meetups where several people travelled independently to meet at the hashpoint? This refers to 2009-02-22_51_10 where six people started from four different regions, all of them travelling for more than 161 km one way (more than 500 for myself, actually). Only, it was on a sunday.
- I'd guess that the achievement was thought up in the early days of hashing, perhaps assuming that people would only want to go hashing on a Saturday. It probably needs a slight tweak now that we've collectively shown that it's just as good on any other day of the week! -- Benjw 15:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'd support the honourable mention. I do think we need to retain awards that emphasize the Saturday 4 p.m, MEET UP to increase the likelihood that we'll actually meet. I met two geohashers who had arrived at 4 p.m. on a Saturday by coincidence, not even realizing that it was the right time, and as Uglystick, whom I discovered last night, has shown, there are people out there happily geohashing and not reporting nor being part of the wiki community. -Robyn 16:44, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- Fair enough: I hadn't thought of it like that. It would indeed be nice to actually meet another geohasher while on an expedition, so anything to make that more likely is great. -- Benjw 17:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, the argument of raising the possibility of random meetups doesn't really hold in this case, and there is the Centurion achievement to point out the saturday 4 pm time. IMHO, this achievement is not about random meetups, it's about planning out and going where you will meet people at the time they are there, although it's an awful long way to go, and this is something which is not connected to some time or day. Of the five people who took that achievement by now, two really went to a planned (!) many months ago in the "old times", two just timed it appropriately but did no attempt to meet anyone, and one wasn't even there at 4 pm. So currently it's just the other way round, people rather take that achievement for doing a longer trip to a neighbouring graticule and time it to 4 pm although there is noone to meet, and collect this achievement on the way if it's convenient together with Centurion, Minesweeper, Graticule Hopper, Virgin graticule or whatever else comes in. I actually think Benjw was quite right in his first reply that this achievement is old style thinking from times where geohashing was structured entirely different than today. --Ekorren 17:53, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- The reason I say that it increases the chance of a random meet up is this. Let's say I'm willing to travel hundreds of miles to get to a point (I am, and I have, just not on a Saturday). If there is no difference what day of the week I do it, I'll do it the first time a good point comes up in that graticule and be done with it. But if Saturday is special, I'll make a greater effort to be there on a Saturday, in order to get the award, and then I have a better chance of meeting those people who say "let's try that Saturday geohashing thing." There are people, I personally have met them, and I don't meet a lot of people, who geohash and never read the wiki. They aren't arranging meetups. They are spontaneously going there. Arguably that's real geohashing, and I want to do everything in my power to increase the chances that when they get there, we the wiki people will be there too. -Robyn 18:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- I see your point, I support it in general, I just don't see how this achievement works into it. For meeting unknown random people who you don't know about, going >161 km probably doesn't really change anything to just going to the most convenient spot nearby. For meeting people who you know about, at an arranged time, it does. None of those who met last sunday would have gone there without the chance to meet another. We all took a long journey for this meetup. While on the other hand, those who were able to get this achievement during the last months, did not meet anyone but just choose another graticule than usual to collect a centurion point. As it is now, and the state of geohashing is at the moment, this achievement does not actually encourage meetups, neither it effectively raises the chance on a random meetup. It just is a side effect to travels which are already honoured by a number of other achievements. --Ekorren 18:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- And I see your point. (Literacy is fabulous.) Would you prefer that it be changed to require the person to make the journey to meet someone they know will be there, or just to keep it the same, but allow an honourable mention for non-Saturday travel? I'd be happy with either, as long as people who took the ribbon under the old rules got to keep it. -Robyn 19:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- I see your point, I support it in general, I just don't see how this achievement works into it. For meeting unknown random people who you don't know about, going >161 km probably doesn't really change anything to just going to the most convenient spot nearby. For meeting people who you know about, at an arranged time, it does. None of those who met last sunday would have gone there without the chance to meet another. We all took a long journey for this meetup. While on the other hand, those who were able to get this achievement during the last months, did not meet anyone but just choose another graticule than usual to collect a centurion point. As it is now, and the state of geohashing is at the moment, this achievement does not actually encourage meetups, neither it effectively raises the chance on a random meetup. It just is a side effect to travels which are already honoured by a number of other achievements. --Ekorren 18:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
After a nights sleep, I'm still not entirely sure about which rules I would favour but still sure that the rules need to be elaborated and adjusted to the development of Geohashing, and that I'd like to see rules that emphasize the meetup aspect rather than the expedition aspect. After all, the achievement is called XKCD-100, and not e.g. "Traveller". For the "official XKCD meetup" aspect we should apply the rules of the Centurion. That is: ( Saturday 4 pm on spot XOR different weekly time according to long term graticule rule ) OR ( different time/place on saturday according to primary graticule agreement AND meet someone, travelling independently ).
Gathering this, I came upon three possible rulesets, which I would like to see some more opinions about:
A) similar to the current ruleset, adding clarifications and honorable mention:
- True achievement for all Centurion-like saturday visits
- Honorable mention for actual meetups on other days
B) The other way round would emphasize the meetup aspect but drop the "official XKCD (random) meetup" aspect, and also make it difficult for people in low-activity areas:
- True achievement for actual meetups, regardless of day and time
- honorable mention for Centurion-like visits without actually meeting someone
C) The most restricted option would be to combine both:
- True achievement only for actual saturday meetups (Centurion meetup clause)
- Honorable mention for saturday 4 pm non-meetups (Centurion timing clause)
- Honorable mention for actual meetups which don't count as official XKCD meetups
About the current holders of the achievement: I think that's how it was always done - you may keep an achievement earned to the rules valid at the time of the expedition, no matter how and how often they get changed afterwards. --Ekorren 10:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- 1. I don't want to see the Centurion changed at all. I think it is correct as it is. I know you didn't suggest changing it.
- 2. I like option A) best. It extends the eligibility for people in poorly accessible graticule areas (e.g. all the nearby graticukes are mostly mountains/water/desert and they have to wait a year to get a meetable Saturday), and exactly preserves the full achievement. I don't like B) because it both turns this into an achievement for members of the xkcd social club who met on the Internet and completely loses the DJI aspect, and downgrades the full on Saturday travel to an actual point. Option C) is just too complicated. So A. -Robyn 17:58, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- Can we make Option A official (i.e. Honorable Mention for going over 100 miles (one way) to meet other geohashers at the day's hashpoint on a day other than Saturday)? And can we modify the template so it will work for an honorable mention? If I figure out how to modify the template, I'll make the modifications, or perhaps someone else will do it who already knows how. Thanks! I am actually somewhat ashamed of having driven so far, so I may also claim a "facilitating climate change" gratuitous ribbon. Sara 01:00, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Template:Xkcd-100-Honorable-Mention
 |
This user earned the XKCD-100 Honorable Mention Achievement
|
TunezNZ 12:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Straight line or travel distance?
I wonder how the 100 miles should be counted. Do we count the direct distance between the geohash and the home, "as the crow flies"? Or the actual distance that was travelled?
This is not always the same. For example, 2018-09-01 53 11 is ~75 miles away from my city, but considering that there is not a direct connection, the actual distance I travelled was more. Just the Hannover-Uelzen-Lüneburg-Dannenberg distance is 104+ miles, and that does not even include the considerable distance between my house and the city center, the distance between Dannenberg and the geohash, as well as the fact that train tracks also are not always straight lines. Similarly, 2018-08-20 51 7 is ~97 miles away from my city, but the Hannover-Rheine-Münster distance alone is 120 miles.
I'm not advocating for one variant or the other, but I think we should define which measurement should be used. --Fippe (talk) 14:11, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- "Anyone who treks over hill & dale" - These words in the specification suggest a wandering path and not a straight line distance. As always an interesting story trumps a boring rule. Can I still use the verb To Trump, as the word is becoming more toxic by the day! --Sourcerer (talk) 16:25, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- As long as you don't capitalize it, I think you're good. Otherwise we'll be talking about the T-word soon, this is Voldem-, I mean He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named all over again.
- Hm, but as long as we're talking about the specific wording, doesn't "trek" imply that the journey was on foot? So using a train, car, bike or plane disqualifies the XKCD-100. Surely this is not intended, I hardly think the intension was to get someone to walk for 161km. --Fippe (talk) 19:24, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
