Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Delta68

  1. Looks like a solution to a problem which doesn't exist!


    PQs work great at the moment. I can set one up and within minutes it will be available for download. If the process struggles Groundspeak can probably just chuck another server at it. The PQ server is separate from the web servers.


    Apart from that, why would anyone want to download a list of 5-10,000 caches which would include all their finds and hides as well? :)





    Yup....once I send a cache to the ignore list, I intend to be done with it forever. Forever and ever. I never want to see the cache again.

    I think I have 2 or 3 caches on my list? And for just the reason you say above.


    If sending a cache to my ignore list makes them invisible and nonexistent, ...then GS is doing its job.


    But like I said, it's inconsistent. They still show on the map.

    I add caches to the ignore list so I can exclude them from PQs and I suspect this is the main reason for most people.

    Why would being able to see them on someone's Owned Caches list be a problem?


    There is a prolific puzzle cache setter within my '1000 closest to home' area. I am working through the puzzles slowly but 99% of the time I don't need them clogging up PQs and there is no other way to exclude them. I DO want other puzzle caches in the area so using cache type isn't an option.


    I still want to be able to see them if I look at his profile though.




  3. I do not feel that it is up to the users to take care of such issues.



    Get used to it!

    You are wasting your time asking Groundspeak to back-out a change. They NEVER do!!


    I use Adblock Plus to block all the rubbish and I use GreaseMonkey to make the pages more usable.


    Adblock,Greasemonkey and Stylish are both free of charge and there are dozens of users who WILL actually listen to what you want and help with any tweaks




  4. I thought I remembered they had changed. I mean, I can see they haven't, but did I just totally make that up? Was there some other change recently to make geocaching a bit more "free play"?


    There was a recent change to the Event logging requirements. There does not have to be a log book and if there is, you don't have to sign it.

    Is that what you're thinking of?




  5. I deleted a bookmark list earlier and got the page saying 'bookmark list xxxxx successfully deleted'


    I didn't realise that this messgae is actually at the top of the list of bookmark lists (because I increased the font size earlier today to make the cache pages readable) and clicked the back button to take me back to the list of lists.


    Are you following this?

    I got the usual annoying 're-post' message box which seems to appear randomly when clicking the back button on any page, and clicked OK


    I then realised that one of the other bookmark lists got deleted!! :mad:


    I can see now that clicking the 'Delete' link identifies and deletes the list according to its position on the page rather than by its name or guid etc :o

    So clicking the 're-post' message box meant that the next list down gets deleted


    Not good!



  6. Look at this user's profile (I've chosen this one because it illustrates all aspects of the problem).


    In the "Geocaches Found" column, the 63 "All Event Cache Types" have four subsections: Event, CITO, Mega, and L+F. But, the links for "Event" and "Mega" are the same as the "All Event Cache Types" link. So I can't (quickly) see (only) which Mega (or "vanilla") events this user has attended. CITO and L+F correctly give a subset of the events.


    Works OK for me!

    All five links are different (I've highlighted the differences)and the sub types are displayed as expected :blink:








    (urls trimmed to prevent conversion to hyperlinks)





    I guess he just types "PC" followed by a random four digits until he hits one.


    This is quite possible. If I remember rightly, Groundspeak dropped the numeric tracking codes in 2004 because it was too easy to guess the numbers


    There are simply SO MANY trackables out there now that you stand a pretty good chance of guessing a valid four character alpha-numeric code (to follow 'PC')


    I suspect that the fact that you only have to enter the code once now has made this sort of thing easier as well. :(


    I found an 'unactivated' code last week when I misread a tracking code for a coin I'd picked up and I could have requested an activation code if I wanted to :blink:





    Additionally, you get notifications on them if they meet the rest of the criteria. This is the last thing that I would expect. If I am ignoring a cache, I sure don't want to be notified that people are finding it.


    That sounds correct to me though


    Surely, you only get notifications if

    1. The cache is on your watchlist
    2. It's on a bookmark list for which you've requested notifications
    3. You own it!


    There are caches (tough puzzles etc) which I have on the ignore list to remove them from PQs but I still have them on the watchlist to see who finds them



  9. ... but what do I tell the TB owners?



    The cache hasn't actually been muggled so just wait and see

    We've had TBs go missing for over a year and turn up safe and well


    I also found a TB in my rucksack once which I had picked up about six months earlier :anicute:



  10. If I add a cache to the Ignore List, it's usually because I don't want it included in a Pocket Query


    If I click on someone's profile and then click on 'Geocaches Owned' it's because I WANT to see their cache listings; yet they are not visible

    Why would anyone not want to see something they go looking for?

    Perhaps a 'show/hide ignored caches' option is required here


    If I click on a pocket query while viewing the map, ignored caches are displayed! :blink: Other PQ options seem to work. Why not this one?






  11. My advice: Set the 'Hidden before' feature when doing a PQ and select 2003 or 2004. You'll miss out on many newer, excellent caches, but 95% of the geocrud too. Or do what I did in 2008; lower your expectations :)


    My theory is not that 'all caches were great in the early days' but that 'only the good ones have survived'.


    I know of a cache set not too far from us which was basically lobbed under a bush outside a hotel. It was muggled and archived before anyone even found it.

    'A familiar story these days' I hear you all say with a sigh...

    Yet this one was set in May 2001!! :D




  • Create New...