Jump to content

Jeremy

Site Wide Moderators
  • Posts

    9363
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jeremy

  1. I concur with Keystone. We don't host these kinds of ads on the site.
  2. As of today it should now show a broken image instead of the JavaScript error message. The image slowdown issue occurred recently when we removed the database bottleneck (to scale for the summer). We upgraded the memory on the image server which should help but we're working on a more permanent solution.
  3. This image is coming up in ways unrelated to missing images from our own servers (which is very rare). I'm looking into it.
  4. Wow! Great work to get to half a million Waymarks. I'm impressed with the breadth of unique locations that have been collected over the years.
  5. Or Firefox 149? There has been no commitment to put it on the schedule to develop, so there's no real status update to offer you.
  6. No. The last code update was last Tuesday, May 8.
  7. We were expecting to release on Tuesday this week but our primary developer on the project was out for the last 2 1/2 weeks. Our hope is to have it in the next site update. Sounds like the time out was not planned. I hope the developer is recovering well and will be back and on top of his game soon. Health is more important than maps. Thanks for the concern but it wasn't a health issue - it was Jury duty. It is done when it is done, but our releases are usually 3-4 weeks apart. The last update was last Tuesday.
  8. We were expecting to release on Tuesday this week but our primary developer on the project was out for the last 2 1/2 weeks. Our hope is to have it in the next site update.
  9. If you didn't attend, no. Let me point out the appropriate sentence in the guidelines: An event cache can be logged online if the cacher has attended the event. That seems to indicate you have to attend an event in order to log that you attended it. It seems pretty straightforward but I hope this helps clarify the sentence. To sum up, if you didn't do something you don't say that you did it. Or to simplify further, don't lie. Thanks. Greetings from Seattle. Works for me. Though you may have just ruined DGS Day for potential out of town attendees. Why do you think it ruined it? I must be missing something. They tend to stream events online and let whoever catches the stream log as attending. They crave attention which is why they do that. They understand the position Groundspeak has on attendance.
  10. When you log in via Facebook, you connect to Facebook and tell them you are logging into Geocaching.com. When you share your find on Facebook, Facebook knows about it. Other than that, I don't know what assurances you are seeking. I don't know what they do with the information you are sharing with them.
  11. Jeremy

    Montana and Wherigo

    We'd be happy to offer a free license to Garmin to add Wherigo to their Montana units. The specification for building cartridges is also pretty straightforward, which is why we fully support others creating builder tools. Personally I don't consider that "worse" since we have back-burnered the project and those options are actually quite strong. The main reasons why we have not continued our development of Wherigo, specifically on Garmin devices: Limited resources - Geocaching needs more attention and we have limited resources to work on Wherigo Lack of control - Garmin limits their device updates and it was near impossible to make updates to Wherigo on Garmin devices Evolving Wherigo on Garmin devices was a futile effort. To make updates we had to rely on Garmin being willing to release updates. We always had pushback on getting timely updates of Wherigo on Garmin devices, or updates at all. We finally gave up trying to make updates since it works in its current form. After Garmin decided to go in the direction of Opencaching they have had no interest in doing anything with us, which seems to be the true reason for not incorporating Wherigo on Montana. They are more than welcome to add Wherigo to the Montana. They already have the code to do so and there should be no problem running it on the new device. If they have no interest in adding Wherigo to the Montana, that's fine, but indicating that there's a licensing issue is absurd.
  12. If you didn't attend, no. Let me point out the appropriate sentence in the guidelines: An event cache can be logged online if the cacher has attended the event. That seems to indicate you have to attend an event in order to log that you attended it. It seems pretty straightforward but I hope this helps clarify the sentence. To sum up, if you didn't do something you don't say that you did it. Or to simplify further, don't lie. Thanks. Greetings from Seattle.
  13. Totally agree. If you don't link your Facebook account to your Geocaching.com account, a hacked Facebook account wouldn't be able to log in. So if you have problems getting your Facebook account hacked, don't link your account. The option isn't required to log into the web site and it is very convenient for those who want the option.
  14. There is no plan to increase the cost of a Premium Membership so we can provide the Google Maps feature. Of course we retain the right to increase the cost of a Premium Membership at some time in the future (though we haven't in 10 years), but there are no immediate plans to. We'll just absorb the cost and hope others will upgrade to help us support the feature and the web site. When we implement Google Maps you will have to decide either to a ) look at Google Maps (map, hybrid, aerial) or b ) look at OSM/Leaflet (with various display options). As part of the agreement with Google they will be entirely separate implementations at the same Url. In other words, Google Map tiles will not be displayed in Leaflet. You decide what version you want to use and it will be your default setting when you look at the page (though you can always switch between options). This is why it is taking a while to implement than just pulling a switch. There will also be some added upkeep with supporting both Google Maps and Leaflet, but we recognize the benefit of continuing to have Google Maps. To clarify on a previous statement, the cache details page will continue to have links to additional map options, but the maps displayed on the page will only have OSM tiles and Leaflet.
  15. On Friday of last week, we reached an Agreement with Google to bring Google Maps back to Geocaching.com in a limited capacity. Until our removal of Google Maps from Geocaching.com, map functionality was provided for both basic and Premium Members because those maps were free to us. Since we now have to pay for maps, this will be a Premium Member feature. We're currently working on incorporating Google Maps back to Geocaching.com and expect to have the main map page re-enabled with Google Maps in the next 4-5 weeks. Google Maps will only be available on the main map page; not on the cache detail pages or other areas of the site. We are still committed to the new Open Street Map system for all users. OpenStreetMap is freely and publicly editable in a similar way as Wikipedia. Anyone can change or add to the maps and thousands of people worldwide contribute on a regular basis. Once the Google Maps are available on the main map page, we'll post an entry to our blog. We're looking forward to bringing back Google Maps as an additional service to support our Premium Members.
  16. I fixed it for you. If anything it should help you to understand and appreciate that ultimately APIs are neither "open" nor "free."
  17. That's what I meant. I don't think this is one person doing that. But maybe you should check if maybe all the Viennese challenges were flagged by the same people or these accounts are sockpuppets Especially the CX330 (Stephansdom) was clearly within the rules. The two Challenges that were flagged today within a few hours were: CX1AA7 - Lachwurzn's CX1AA6 - mine CX1AA6 is for an entire street, not a specific location. I can see why it was reported and archived, though it is definitely a grey area. CX1AA7 is a Challenge with a few paragraphs of commentary about Challenges, challenge flagging, etc. I can see why this one was reported as well since that sort of information should remain off the page. Maybe if it was simply a challenge for the alley it would have remained.
  18. My understanding is that too many flags will cause a Challenge to be archived while lots of thumbs down only will cause it to be rated lower in some future search process. You might be right, but I am not sure. It would also be interesting what means too many flags and whether a single user can flag a challenge more than once and if this counts more than once. I can easily imagine that some childish people are experimenting and try to see what happens. Cezanne The same questions came to my mind and I will add another one: Why is Groundspeak making a secret of all that? A secret of what? How the reporting system works? Why would we tell potential abusers the best way to abuse a system? Yes. A user could flag his own challenge. Unplayable, for example, would be useful to report on when the thing at the location is no longer there. Now hold on. Didn't I say we were reviewing archived Challenges? We'll be doing lots of things to experiment with reporting, rating, etc. The first go we'll be showing Challenges even when they are archived so you can see them, and allowing folks to unflag a Challenge is definitely on the list of options. But as I noted above, we're scrutinizing every archival right now to understand how the community feels about certain types of Challenges, and how it is being abused.
  19. "legitimate" - what ? How would they ever know for any challenges that are written in local language ? We're pretty smart like that. Well, yeah. It isn't going to work efficiently the first time around. We're obviously not going to tell you about the algorithm though, and when we change it.
  20. We review every reported challenge, though currently we're going through a move so we can't be as quick as we normally are. It helps us to understand which ones are being reported and archived and we do unarchive them when they don't fit the report. When we receive the report we see exactly who reports them, so there is no anonymous reporting happening on the back side. If we see abuse we deal with it on an individual basis. In the case of CX330, listed above, it was reported two separate times, archived, and subsequently unarchived again. Both times there were different users reporting this particular Challenge.
×
×
  • Create New...