Talk:Networking achievement

I know the idea itself isn't exactly new, but I think this could be taken serious.

You would get the achievement for being part of a meetup that connects previously unconnected groups of at least two people each. Or, which is the same, for reducing the number of unconnected groups on the graph. If several meetups accomplish the same connection on the same day, all of them count.

Connecting just yourself to a group or another single person which is not member of a group yet to your group wouldn't count. It will give the newcomer the meetup achievement anyway, since this only can happen if it's someone's first meetup in any case.

It may also happen that not everyone participating in the connecting meetup contributes to the connection - namely if it's a meetup of at least three, where one (A) is a first-time meetupper and the other two (B and C) members of unconnected groups. However, since that results in an indirect connection between B and C via A at the same time B and C are connected directly, I would accept giving the achievement to A as well. Kind of a bonus for attending larger meetups as your first.

It might be difficult to dig through the archives to find the old qualifying meetups, but probably worth it. It's an interesting part of geohashing history to see how the main group grew together.

--Ekorren 04:29, 15 April 2012 (EDT)

---

Hijackal likes the idea of a "connecting things" achievement, although it may be too detached from actual hashing - too "meta". Thoughts:

• It should be awarded due to changes to the way the graph appears on the page, not due to actual order of meetups. If you connected two huge groups years ago, but it only gets added to the graph today, after the groups have been connected by someone else: bad luck. Otherwise, there would be ugly un-awarding edits.
• As a corollary from that, retroactive awards are not as hard to find - they only need to take into account past versions of the Meetup Graph page. Koepfels first graph was already quite large, it seems impossible to work backwards from there to find out who connected which parts when without making mistakes (which would result in aforementioned ugliness).
• Ekorrens criteria for awarding the graph are well thought through. "The achievement is awarded to all geohashers involved in a meetup that connects two previously disconnected subgraphs of the Meetup Graph." hopefully covers everything in one acceptably short sentence: there are no unmet nodes on the graph, so fist-time meeters will get the award iff they are part of a larger meetup involving people already on the graph, in different groups.
• A simple score could be awarded: the size of the smaller group.

--Hijackal 12:02, 15 April 2012 (EDT)

Agreed with the scoring based on the size of the smaller group, and no retroactive scoring. A good part of the idea is to "meet" other people, right? --Thomcat 16:44, 31 May 2012 (EDT)

Because it wasn't clear before that edits to the meetup graph can have an influence on achievement awarding, I think it would not be fair to give this achievement retroactively. Apart from that I like the idea and support it. --Crox 12:25, 3 June 2012 (EDT)

I keep meaning to comment on this achievement idea, and keep forgetting to... anyhow, as an avid meetup graph enthusiast, I heartily support this achievement and the scoring idea, though I'm with Crox in thinking that retroactive wins perhaps shouldn't count. -Haberdasher (talk) 14:45, 13 April 2013 (EDT)

Support, I like it even though it's likely rare nowadays HeNeArXn (talk) 18:52, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Do not oppose but clarification or rewording of the achievement conditions may be beneficial if approved. --KerrMcF (talk) 02:49, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Needs Work. I like the idea, but I don't like the constraint that the order of edits to the meetup graph is authoritative rather than the reality on the ground. As a result, I also don't oppose giving out the achievement retroactively. The meetup graph is generally up-to-date these days, but I still think the act of meeting someone should count as connecting rather than the edit to the meetup graph's page. --Fippe (talk) 02:41, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Essentially agreed, though partly also for other reasons; I would fairly strongly prefer some kind of retroactive award of the achievement for times before it was created, rather than only awarding it afterwards (as funny as it is to have an achievement created effectively just for me and maybe a couple of other people, it is not my preference to have it be so restrictive), and in that case it would be a lot more convenient to do it via expedition dates rather than having to rely on wiki edit dates (or, worse, on the historically-spotty edit history of the official meetup graph, which would have been the only option under the current rules). --January First-of-May (talk) 06:54, 16 May 2024 (UTC)