Jump to content

Plasma Boy

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Plasma Boy

  1. Otherwise, sharing of Pocket Query data in not permitted in accordance with the licensing agreement.

    i have recently pointed out this myself to someone, but they were talking about sharing it with a group of non-premium members

     

    in this case, i really don't see what the problem is, each is a PM running their own PQ's and comparing...this situation to me doesn't qualify as sharing

    However, the license agreement states ...

     

    Uses Not Permitted:

    Licensee shall not sell, rent, lease, sublicense, lend, assign, time-share, or transfer, in whole or in part, or provide access to the Data, Related Materials, any updates, or Licensee's rights under this Agreement to any third party whatsoever.

    ...

    Licensee shall not remarket, resell, and/or redistribute the Data or any derived portion(s) of the Data in its digital form to any third party whatsoever.

     

    Well to conform to the GC agreement, I guess I will have to wait around until GC gets around to making this feature available.

  2. I have a caching buddy (PM) who I cache with a lot, but we also cache separately. When we get together now to pick cache locations, we end up with sort of a baseball card exchange. I suggest one area, he says got it. He suggests an area and I say got it.

     

    Is there any way for us to merge our cache PQs (just for statistical purposes) so that our common unfond caches could be displayed? If not this might be a feature that could be useful to cachers.

     

    If you think this is an assinine request, just ignore this thread. If there is a way already (GSAK ?)existing, then I would be interested?

  3. I have two Earthcaches and plan on more as locations and topics present themselves. I try to give them catchy names and I put a fair amount of thought into the names .

     

    One is called, "Ya Got To Know When to Holdem,Know When To Fold em..."

    Guess what? It is about geologic folding.

     

    The other is called, "Meguma and the Man"

    This is a cache in honour of a friend. He was the first geologist who proposed the theory that eastern Canada (Nova Scotia) was connected with Northern Africa (Morocco).

  4. I have an Earthcache and I have noticed that it was logged, but the answers to my required questions have not been answered. I have contacted the cacher twice and he has not submitted the answers or acknowledged that he is going to. He has not submitted answers to another local Earrthcache either.

     

    It has been a month since he logged. A week since my last email. How long do I wait? I feel it is not fair to the other cachers who fulfilled the logging requirements to let this log stand.

  5. It is all about you after all, right?

    I believe I said that you speak to me AND EVERY ONE ELSE WHO POSTED.

     

    If you were directing your comments at one person, you should have sent a message, not posted a reply on a general board.

    I answered the post I quoted. If Flask got something out of my answer fine. If anyone else did that's a bonus. If you did to, well, that's just the breaks I guess.

    Yes, you did answer, but your answer in my opinion adds to the problem on GC servers. Your method is to save the form information then delete the PQ and at a later date create it again and run it. If I am not mistaken, one of the previous posters stated that the old PQs are not removed from the server when deleted but are just archived. If this is true (and no one has refuted it), then every new PQ you create after deleting an old one is stacked onto the server, taking up more space than one PQ that you reuse. Yes, it might move you up the que, but you are basically just making the PQ list bigger.

    You are assuming that the problem, if there is one, is a lack of space. I have no idea what the problem is. Nor do I care. I know that I configure a new PQ when I am ready to cache and that it seldom takes more than a few minutes to hit my email. I'm happy.

    I think I remember a quote I heard recently, "It is all about you after all, right?".

     

    So, which are you the pot or the kettle?

  6. It is all about you after all, right?

    I believe I said that you speak to me AND EVERY ONE ELSE WHO POSTED.

     

    If you were directing your comments at one person, you should have sent a message, not posted a reply on a general board.

    I answered the post I quoted. If Flask got something out of my answer fine. If anyone else did that's a bonus. If you did to, well, that's just the breaks I guess.

    Yes, you did answer, but your answer in my opinion adds to the problem on GC servers. Your method is to save the form information then delete the PQ and at a later date create it again and run it. If I am not mistaken, one of the previous posters stated that the old PQs are not removed from the server when deleted but are just archived. If this is true (and no one has refuted it), then every new PQ you create after deleting an old one is stacked onto the server, taking up more space than one PQ that you reuse. Yes, it might move you up the que, but you are basically just making the PQ list bigger.

  7.  

    I wasn't speaking to you.

    My thread, so you are speaking to me and anyone else who has posted.

     

    Rather than requiring their members to jump through a bunch of band aid hoops, I think GC should just allow more PQs that could safely be backed up on their servers. Makes more sense and is safer.

    Requests for new features often bring suggestions for workarounds using existing features or third party programs. The people making these suggestions are trying to be helpful. They are in fact saying "Your suggestion is a good idea, here's a way to do it now instead of waiting until Grounspeak decides to implement it". Storing information on Groundspeak servers may or may not be more secure than using a FireFox add-in to save forms. I suspect that if you properly back up your system you won't have any trouble if FireFox "s***s the bed" as you so colorfully put it. It just makes me wonder what will you do if GSAK crashes and you lose your offline database. Just another reason to get fresh data in your PQ every time :laughing:

    I have not problems with work a rounds. GSAK is one of the best. The autofill forms add on does not keep the saved data anywhere I can find, so it would be difficult to back up. Th forms are hidden somewhere inside the Mozilla folder. Where I have no idea. On the other hand with GSAK it is almost impossible to loose your data. If the system crashes, it will rebuilt your database.

     

    Grundspeak already back up all of the PQs as it is, so it would be easy for them to increase the limit and then the PQs will be automatically backed up.

  8. It is all about you after all, right?

    I believe I said that you speak to me AND EVERY ONE ELSE WHO POSTED.

     

    If you were directing your comments at one person, you should have sent a message, not posted a reply on a general board.

  9.  

    I wasn't speaking to you.

    My thread, so you are speaking to me and anyone else who has posted.

     

    Rather than requiring their members to jump through a bunch of band aid hoops, I think GC should just allow more PQs that could safely be backed up on their servers. Makes more sense and is safer.

  10. here's why i'd like to be able to keep more than 40 PQs:

     

    i don't maintain a huge offline database. mostly i clear all the waypoints out of my databases and rebuild them before setting out on a long run.

     

    but i periodically return to the same areas once or twice a year and in order to cover that territory, i have to keep making new PQs. it would be really handy not to have to do that and instead just run the nine or ten saved PQs that i need for, say the month of october, and likewise those i will use in the month of may. i use the same two or three every labor day, the same two or three the second week of september, and the same two or three the first week of july.

     

    they add up, and soon i have to delete PQs that i like.

     

    Someone earlier in this thread had a way to save the information in a form filler or some such. That may be a big help for you. If I caught the gist of it with a few clicks you could recreate the old PQs with the advantage of having them be new in the eyes of the system. That puts them at the front of the to run list. You'll get 'em faster.

    That is all well and good until Firefox <potty language removed> the bed like mine did recently and I lost all of my add ons and the data that they held. You can not back up add on info. GC keeps their servers backed up quite nicely.

  11. So far in the 66 replies, there have been 25 members.

     

    13 for upping the limit

    4 against

    8 neutral (did not mention limits)

     

    I think the yes vote has it so far.

    You might be surbrised to find out that Groundspeak is not a democracy. You might also note that polls are turned off in these forums. Now you know why.

    Oh, I know only too well that Groundspeak is not a democracy. I am not under any illusion that GS listens to it's customers. But, if you do not ask, you get nothing. Result may be the same, but at least I feel like I am a member of the organization. After all I am paying a yearly membership.

  12.  

    So if you need to do an update every time you head out, what's the point of keeping all that data offline? I use GSAK and I love it, but I'm happy to let Groundspeak maintain the active database. I only need current data for the area where I'm about to go hunting.

     

    I don't think you are using GSAK to it's full potential. I know I am not, but the way I use it has improved my caching ability ten fold.

     

    When I am out and about, I do not always have a wireless connection for my netbook, so I can not always contact GC for cache info. I have created a few databases for the Atlantic provinces by province. I currently am only using the NS database. I have downloaded my base PQs for NS into GSAK and during the week, I download one or two of my last 7 days PQs which update the database. The older PQs only really need updating once a week while the PQ for the most recent caches I DL daily. This keeps my GSAK up to date and I am not bound to the internet.

     

    GSAK has a feature where you DL the PQs directly from your email account. One or two clicks of my mouse updates my database and I can then query that database in infinite ways. Gc does not offer in house data base queries that come anywhere near GSAK. If it did GSAK would not have been invented by Clyde.

     

    To stay on message, this thread is about increasing the amount of PQs that can be stored on the GC servers. It has nothing to do with databases, except PQs are integral to database managers like GSAK.

  13. Dial back the vitriol a notch, please.

     

    Those describing the official position on offline databases are summarizing that position accurately.

     

    Anyone else remember when it was just 20 queries, and got increased to 40?

    I don't. When did it happen? Maybe it is time for it to double again, as I am sure the amounts of geocaches have most likely increased a hundred fold, since it was 20 PQs.

  14.  

    You guys are clearly making this up as you go along! In searching the GC.com website, we find that GSAK is, indeed, supported software....its main purpose is to maintain a database of geocaches.

    Further, in the License Agreement on the Pocket Query page there is no restriction requiring you to use and discard your PQ data. In fact, the following clause allows you to keep it.

     

    • Licensee may make only one (1) copy of the original Data for archival purposes unless the right to make additional copies is granted to Licensee in writing by Groundspeak.

     

    The License Agreement also allows you to merge and manipulate data sets.....in effect, allowing you to create a de facto database!

     

    • Licensee may modify the Data and merge other data sets with the Data for Licensee's own internal use. The portions of the Data merged with other data sets will continue to be subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

    So, now that CP has shown that the data was clearly intended to be used in external database software, let us dispense with the BS.

     

    These clauses in the licensing agreement show that databases are expected to be created and as far as I am concerned reinforces my request for the PQ limit to be raised.

  15. I'd love to be able to store more than 40 PQs as well. Even better would be PQ folders to store a group of PQs I don't want to delete (but don't need on a regular basis) in case I need them at some future time.

    I'm in the same situation and posted about it a couple weeks ago. Prime Suspect suggested that since I use Firefox I get an auto form filler. I did, and it works great. Basically, once you create a PQ with the info you want, you save all that info which can later be filled in with one click.

     

    Yes, you have to delete some PQs to make room for the new ones, but it's no big deal. When you need one that's not in your list, delete a few old ones and create a new one, autofill in all the info and then run it.

    That is good for FF users, but what about IE? How about posting the link to get the form filler and let the rest of us try it.

     

    It still does not answer the question of why only 39 PQs. I see no reason for it.

  16.  

    Tell you what, why don't you just ask them. Contact@geocaching.com

     

    Everything that TPTB have ever said on the subject has been of the opinion that they will not support off line databases. People keep telling you the same thing. Repeatedly. Yet you choose to think that we are all lying to you. Email Jeremy Irish and ask him.

     

    Things may change in the future but I highly doubt it.

    Well, I did send them my question originally and they said that I should start a forum thread to see if their was support for the idea. They did not at the time tell me that PQs were for immediate use and should be discarded after use. I figure if that were the case they would have informed me at that time.

  17. BTW, every PQ is an "offline database" as soon as it's sent. Whether it's sent straight to a GPSr, a PDA or GSAK, it's no longer 'live' data, but a stale, offline database.

     

    Perhaps, but it is not meant to be maintained. It is meant to be used and discarded.

    Says who?

    Groundspeak

    Show me where it says that on the webpage.

  18. BTW, every PQ is an "offline database" as soon as it's sent. Whether it's sent straight to a GPSr, a PDA or GSAK, it's no longer 'live' data, but a stale, offline database.

     

    Perhaps, but it is not meant to be maintained. It is meant to be used and discarded.

    Says who?

  19. The main thrust of my post was not to get more PQs so that I could build an enormous offline data base. That is how I use the PQ data. I put a base set for my area in GSAK and then use a series of last 7 days PQs to update that so that at any given time I can run a query on the GSAK DB and output a series of caches I am interested at that time.

     

    The thrust of my post was why can I only store 39 small text forms on the GC server? These file take up little or no space. Most of them serve as archival backup, so that if I need to recreate my GSAK data base, I do not need to recalculate all of the date brackets.

     

    To date I have 14 base PQs for NS, Newfoundland is 5 PQs, PEI is 8, New Brunswick is 10 or so. So, my archival backups are already near my limit.

     

    I do a 7 day set for NS which is 11. These are my active PQs. The rest are backups, but they eat up my 39. In fact I had to delete some, because they are over 39.

     

    The question is would having more PQs available to cachers who want them hurt you as a cacher? If you do not want them don't use them. Just like I do not use watchlists that much. Would it be a hardship on the GC servers to store more than 39 PQs per cacher. I really do not see that

     

    At the moment there are 950,000 cachers (not sure how many are PM). If they all stored 39 PQs @ 50 KB , that would be ~2 terrabytes. About 500 bucks.

  20. Creating and maintaining offline databases is not supported by Groundspeak and is not the purpose of Pocket Queries

    This is the current stance of Groundspeak. Saying that you "beg to differ" and that they provide links to useful tools including a waypoint management tool doesn't mean that Groundspeak supports offline databases.

     

    From the pocket query page

    Pocket Queries are custom geocache queries you can have emailed to you on a daily or weekly basis. They are in a format you can bring along with you on cache hunts on your GPS and/or PDA. You can select a GPX or LOC text file that works with supported software applications.

     

    AND from the PM features page

    The Pocket Query Generator allows you to create custom geocache queries and have them emailed to you on a daily or weekly basis. You can also run these queries on the "seek a cache" page as a customized search query. Check the supported software applications page for updates on existing and new software that can take advantage of Pocket Queries.

     

    Both of these refer you to third party software that are used on GPSrs and PDAs. PDAs use these third party software packages as database managers. Importing PQs into a database manager whether it be on a GPSr, PDA, laptop or desktop is exactly what they are used for.

     

    What other reason would anyone want this data? You put it into a DB and sort and query it as a subset of the larger GC database.

×
×
  • Create New...