ShotgunPR

Thanks for your support in our request! We (local PR geocachers) all received the following "template" email from GS:

Yes, I'm in favor of more country souvenirs! Specially one for Puerto Rico! This post is the petition for a souvenir for Puerto Rico.

Since I began Geocaching in 2009, I've been advocating for the growth and development of Geocaching within my homeplace: The island of Puerto Rico. Back in 2009, there were about 20+ active geocachers, and just over 250 caches. Now in 2013, that number might easily be over 100+ (and maybe more) geocachers and over 1,000 geocaches! The growth of the Geocaching activity here has been skyrocketing since 2002, and we would love to have our own souvenir since many many geocachers from all the world come here each year to experience the many natural wonders Puerto Rico has to offer. We have over 2 million visitors each year!. I believe a short description of Puerto Rico (could be used for the souvenir), speaks of what our country has to offer: The history of Puerto Rico predates the landing of the Mayflower on Plymouth Rock by over 100 years. When the Spanish settled the island in the early 1500s, they realized that Puerto Rico’s value lay not in gold or silver, but in its strategic location and deep natural harbor. When you are looking for exotic locations, miles upon miles of white sand beaches, plus an unbelievable rain forest and mountains, you come to Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is a modern progressive and civilized vacation spot that maintains the charm and hospitality of days gone by. You will find everything that the Caribbean has to offer in this all around family destination - and with it is a people whose warmth is equaled only by the sunshine that graces its shores. Its natural wonders include tropical and dry forests, five star white sand beaches, bioluminiscent bays, and numerous cave and underground river systems. There is a great variety of places to explore in an area that while might seem small at first glance, is full of wonders to amaze and enjoy. Even the US mint made a special design of the quarter coin dedicated to Puerto Rico in 2009! This island/country in the middle of the Caribbean has much to offer its visitors, creating an unique and lifelasting memory of the many wonders they can find within all its natural beauties.

Hi. I would like to upload many pictures on each of my geocaching logs. From a recent event I assisted, I want to upload 50+ pics. Is there a way or is this a hidden feature?

Is there a way to log trackables (e.g. Visit, Dropped off, etc.) using field notes?

I searched high and low the forums, but since FTF, log, time and other words are below the 5-letter minimum for searches, the job was a bit daunting! So I create the thread to ask this (maybe has been asked thousands of times) Let's supposse: Someone is the first to find (FTF) of a determined cache, and the owner knows the geocacher in fact was the FTF because the geocacher sent a photo of the FTF prize thru a tweet (proving the find and internet access, at least mobile). A week goes by and the CO sees the geocacher in question sending emails, posting "status updates" and photos on social networks, sending emails, posting topics on local forums and STILL does not log the find. Is there a guideline/rule that the FTF HAS to log the find in a determined time-span? I understand that some time might be conceded in case a geocacher is "away from civilization" under some circumstances, but if the geocacher evidently has the capability (internet access, computer, he/she is evident returned to his/her home, etc.) to log his/her find... Why delay it? I believe this attitude is detrimental on geocaching and creates concern for those geocachers close to the area of the cache, since they are not certain if the cache has been found or not. At least for the FTF hunters it is. I do not hunt for FTF, but if luck strikes I definitely get happy with it.

For us in Puerto Rico, the 50 mile limit is somewhat of a problem. Can it be raised to 100 mile? If not, is there a limit on notifications as the one in PQs? I already had 6 notifications set (98 mile radius) before the 50 mile limit. Those are: new traditional, new mystery, new multi, trad archived, mystery archived, multi archived. Since the PR main island is about 100x35, the 98 mile radius allowed to cover the whole island and adjacent islands (that belong to PR) like Mona, Vieques and Culebra; by centering the coordinates in a strategic place. Creating a larger radius, included caches from the US Virgin Islands or the Dominican Republic, something NOT needed for Geocachers in PR. With the change in limit, many geocachers are not getting notified of new caches. The particularity of PR is that we can easily drive to any part of the island in 2-3 hours (or less), so losing that convenience has been somewhat that many geocachers here miss. Many enjoyed getting notified of any caches in the whole PR jurisdiction, and making a weekend plan to visit most of those new places. Guess we have to start all over setting the notifications again.

I love my berry too. My berry beats an iPhone in geocaching everytime! I won't start a holy war on that (some would love to) I'll just say my BB is a faster tool for geocaching. All I'm asking (as so do a LOT of other geocachers) is that we ALL be treated equally. Why cripple/avoid providing additional features/conveniences to everyone, that are given specifically to certain groups. Why supporting just a specific, closed platform when there are many others that are completely capable of providing the same features/conveniences? Android, Palm, Windows Mobile, Blackberry, etc. are just as powerful as the iPhone platform, rendering "other methods to get the data" (as the macro banned in the OP) completely unnecessary. If other platforms were supported just as equally, the need for such macros won't have any justification at all. At least there is some light ahead with the announcement that the Android platform will get an official Geocaching app. That is what I've been waiting for the Blackberry platform too. At least, it is a positive step in the right direction.

Exactly where on the terms does it mention "right" devices or software? By paying (or requiring) a Premium membership they generate money (and all the sales from the Geocaching stores and licensed products). The motivation for the Premium membership IS to facilitate Geocaching for their Premium members over non-paying users (PQs, Caches in a route, Instant notify, bookmark lists, etc.).

Yes. The email opening, download of the PQ (zipped) and importing of the zip into CacheBerry has to be done by the user. iPhone just avoids the user from doing all the things (convenience) which is part of my argument. Opening the email requires at least one keypress, downloading the attachment another 2, exiting the email another keypress, getting to CacheBerry another, opening the import function another, importing the zip file another... you get the idea. There is not a direct linkage of the attachment sent thru email-to CB (so far). I already expressed it is not business-like to announce something that is a partial truth. I just hope this practice does not hurt the sport in the future.

1 - I also do have CacheBerry 2 - Sometimes Instant Notification does not work at all! Been the case with over 20-30 caches since I've been Geocaching. 3 - I live in an island that has around 300 caches (overall). I really doubt I need to put all those caches in a watchlist if I decide to go weekend caching. I can reach any part of the island in a weekend, so having the updated info on ALL PR caches is a must here! 4 - "instantly"? Really? Maybe you have 4G. And you HAVE to initiate the download so NO, it does not reach your BB unless YOU initiate the download. Some will argue "works the same under coverage area" but the iPhone can retain the caches information even on out of coverage area. If it is in the phone, it remains there. On the iPhone, its automatic. You do not have to ACTUALLY download anything. Everyone else HAS to download it to the unit (or browse to get the GPX). 5 - IF you upload the field notes to GC, THEN post them. No direct posting AFAIK. It is not what "more" I need (or others who share my same line-of-thought). The issue is that I AM A PREMIUM USER and other paying members have some conveniences others do not have. Why is that? I do not see the sense of "paying more" (e.g. Trimble's Geocache Navigator) to get the same convenience. Or to have to use a a specific device (because of licensing, merchandising campaign, advertisement, etc.) to benefit from some conveniences OVER any other device. Its monopolistic and like putting a fence around for everyone else!.

I want to contribute a bit to the OP: I use a Nuvi 205 for both car navigation and for geocaching (in off-road mode). So far, I've found over 200 caches with it and I'm pretty satisfied with the precision of the unit. Always gets me to within 5 ft of the cache. I use the advanced nuvi macro with GSAK to transfer geocaches (with all info) to the unit. If I get a new GPS (maybe next year) I would consider an Oregon unit. Mostly because of the waterproofing of the unit and the Wherigo capability. I also use CacheBerry (I have a Blackberry Curve 8900) for the hunts, but I do not rely on any electronic compass for getting to a cache. I prefer the "Radar" display of the CacheBerry, I have gotten to many many caches before any iPhone user that I know! That is when I just use the CacheBerry for searching, over 90% of the time I just rely on the Nuvi and its been wonderful! My 2 cents.

There is one. It is called CacheBerry. However due to the lack of an API, it cannot get data directly from GC.com without violating the terms of service like the iPhone App can. I am a premium member, but would be willing to actually pay even more for the capability of logging from the field or getting updated cache information without downloading from the site, etc. I agree 100% with you! I have expressed my opinion on this subject a LOT of times and every time there is someone that tries to be either an advocate or unsolicited lawyer for GS and the issue is dropped down. An API (controlled with per-user API keys or other methods) would give the Geocaching community a wider range of tools and indirect support on many devices, not just the "trusted" 3rd parties that GS allows access to the private API and no one else! It is easy to criticize people who want immediate up-to-the-minute information from GS, instead of having to download everything from the site at snail-pace. There is a "fairness" and "priviledges" that Premium members are "supposed" to have, but as an user of a "simple" GPS (Nuvi 205) and a non iPhone cell phone I've had to recur to GSAK scripts and third-party apps for my cellphone to enjoy my primary hobby/sport of geocaching just the same as other Premium members who have the "trusted" 3rd party devices/software. It seems like there is a difference in what Premium membership really "gives" the user.

If having all data available immediately is NOT an "edge" over users who have to go to each and every cache manually/go to the WAP site/access an Internet page from the phone (provided you are on coverage area)/etc. to get the same functionality... then why we all pay a premium membership? Maybe I am under the belief that we pay a premium membership for the betterment of the geocaching experience for ALL, not just for some users to have a benefit/advantage/edge/convenience OVER other users who paid for the "same" status. Or is it that the money I paid is geared toward developing/providing some users a more "enjoyable" experience over users like me who are "left behind" ignored and then told "You can do the same, but do it on your own! [if you know how]". Ask any disabled person if accessibility is and "edge" or not. Accessibility, convenience, immediateness, are an "edge" some users are provided where others from the same "group" (premium users) are not. That is what I mean. In any case, it is unfair. Just my opinion... some will share it, some will be against. I do not worry about that. I just hope TPTB really have something good for EVERYONE up their sleeve and they provide some way to equalize "features" in the future. Right now, it does not look that way. I maybe wrong on that one, but sure hope that this might change. BTW, Insta-notify is NOT working as expected. There are many periods when it is simply NOT working. This month alone, from 8 caches published recently where I live, I only received notification on 2. Other geocachers from the same area have even reported they NEVER received any notification at all.

I am NOT under the intention to make a debate about Groundspeak or their actions (good/bad), I still feel that just that some groups of users have some benefits other users do not (e.g. not at the same priority level). dino-irl states that the cache page IS the database, that is incorrect. I will not delve into details but the database is where the cache pages, apps and everything else gets their information from. The cache page just pulls everything together for a particular cache and to present everything for a specific cache "organized" for a person browsing the webpage, but the info is pulled by db-calls (or PQs), each call to the db is a granular piece of information requested from a server (db server) NOT the cache page. Taking into consideration the popularity of sql, transactional, scalable DB applications and technologies; I do not understand why some specific platforms/models/devices get a preference over others. Scalable DBs are made to be accessed by thousands (maybe millions) of users and still keep working. I do not understand why an iPhone user zooming in/out of a map can hit the GC.com db just as much as somebody using Google Earth (banned/limited) to update coordinates and basic info for caches in a certain region. And yes, Cacheberry (for me) is a superior app. Many users (just as me) feel discriminated because no other apps are allowed to access the db information automatically, just the trimble and Apple apps. And if you benefit just some users from a whole, larger group; you are discriminating the rest since they do not share those same benefits.

So do I when I pay for CacheBerry or for any other app. Trimble's app you pay a monthly fee, iPhone app is just ONE time (exactly the case as for CacheBerry [or any other app]) BUT iPhone gets the benefit of LIVE data. To do the same on (almost) all the other apps you have to get yourself manually, or use one of the ill-mentioned scripts to have the same "edge" those two priviledged apps have. Yes they do. But those apps mentioned have the benefit of getting that data in a way condemned with other apps: automatically. So, basically I must imply that to get the data on my Blackberry LIVE I have to pay another premium? If there are comparably powerful devices in the market (Blackberry, Android, Droids, Palm Pre, etc.) WHY Groundspeak only caters iPhone users and not others? There is no indication they would do otherwise. BTW, the addition of support to gps-enabled phones will be troublesome, the wider the variety of phones will make it more difficult to support everything. The action of just supporting ONE specific device/OS just creates more controversy. An "edge" in the sense that they can IMMEDIATELY check if a cache (or group) has been disabled or not, or the latest DNFs, or FTF for a cache. To do the same on almost every other device you have to go to the webpage of EACH cache and check, when the users with those "priviledged apps" can just click and check the live data (updated directly from the db at gc.com). That gives a certain advantage to those users, and when that advantage is given just to a specific group, it becomes a case of reverse discrimination to other premium users who paid their PMs to have a certain degree of advantage over non-paying users. Exactly, why benefit JUST ONE specific brand/type of phone when there are plenty of comparably powerful phones where the same capability CAN be provided. Catering just a specific group is discriminatory. And you are incorrect with: "same ability to read the cache page". I DO NOT have the same ability to read automatically the cache pages as some users can, even when we both pay the same premium membership. Everyone can access the cache page manually (if that is what you imply) but NOT everyone has access to the gc.com database (PQs are short in the accessibility to the database). Any other access BUT the privileged one (available to just a specific group of users) is condemned. When you read cache information or listing with the iPhone app you are accessing (afaik) directly from the database, NOT the cache page.

WHY exactly this has to be done that way? Doesn't iPhone users and Trimble GCNAV hit the database as much (or even heavier) than users of the script? I am not defending Clyde or the way the script gets the data, but there should be a way for users NOT using iPhone or the Trimble software to get updated data on the caches they are interested. It should not be a one-way street here, ALL premium users pay the money to get the GPX files. Why only a specific group of users get more benefits than the rest? All benefits should be accesible by all premium users in equal terms, not benefit some because they use a specific/approved application (or specific phone brand/model). I feel this is very unfair. Those who have used these type of scripts are looking to get the same benefit as the users who have access to specific technology items that give them an "edge" over the rest. Every premium user should have the same benefits as everyone else, regardless if they have a specific brand/model of an approved device/software or not.

This in a certain way, looks something similar to what I posted here about unifying the image uploads functionality

One step forward, three steps backwards! This feature is the kind of development/advance many paying users would like to see become part of gc.com. Right now, we just see some really "minor" features added as a result of paying, and some rather biased development towards geocaching apps (Iphone only? what about Blackberrys, Androids, etc.) Fact is, Iphone Geocaching app is the ONLY gc.com heavily sponsored app.

Well if you like duplicating the same picture... fine. But what about those who like to document their personal GC's or TB's travels with photos of the caches? With each picture uploaded to a cache, you have to do the same for each and every TB and GC you would like to "share" those same photos. Rather pointless if you already have the picture uploaded to a cache log, but have to upload the same pic again for each trackable you would like to share the same photo. Being an IT professional, it also consumes unnecessary server space, effectively duplicating storage. Even if a pic is under 300k, if you share the pic on three different logs you are looking at 600k of overhead (with 2 trackables), and more if you do the same with other trackables (TB t-shirt, personal GCs, etc.) If there were a way to link to externally hosted pictures, the space savings on the GC.com server would even be greater. Considering the fear of data loss that recently struck us all, it is something to consider seriously.

Another THANK YOU Jeremy and Elias for your great work, and for keeping everyone posted with up-to-the-minute news of what was happening, and what was being done to restore the websites. Never really found any "useful" thing about Twitter until Jeremy started using it to post updates on the situation. I am now one of the 800+ followers! BTW, my first name is also Elias. And I also work in IT. LOL

Thank you for that small, concise and helpful stash note! I believe it is the most "condensed" one I've seen yet.

Does anyone from TPTB has read this post?

Hi, I do not know if this issue/feature has already been mentioned so here I go: It would be VERY beneficial that once you upload images for a cache log, you could be able to select (either by a list like the TB inventory that shows up when you create a new log entry for a cache, or some other method) those same images already uploaded for a a cache to be used as images for TB and GC logs. Sort of using the same guids references (internally) for the pictures that are already uploaded in the logs by the same user, so if you already uploaded images related to the cache the TB/GC has been placed/retrieved, those same images could be (somehow) referenced in the cache log and/or viceversa. It is repetitive to upload the images to the cache logs, THEN the TB, THEN the GC if you want to have the same images shown in the different logs. I also believe it could represent a space-saving for the server that hosts the images, since this "feature" surely eliminates repeated images. It is a daunting task to upload images to a cache log, and THEN upload those same images to the TB and GC logs so that if someone views the TB/GC log they see some images of their whereabouts. There could be an option to have separate pictures (just as it is NOW) but if you are going to upload a bunch of images that are the same ones you are going to use for the TBs/GCs you are logging.... WHY upload again the same images?

I downloaded both BlackStar and CacheBerry. CacheBerry wins hands down! I registered it and has been a lifesafer more than once. Really helpful to have the last logs, hints and cache listings offline when you are in cellphone "deathzones". The ability to log finds using field notes is also a lifesaver when you do a geocaching run and don't remember precisely the find order, specially when in the mountains far away from cell phone/data coverage.