Jump to content

the Seagnoid

+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by the Seagnoid

  1. I like the idea if a sock puppet account - A Needs Maintenance Autobot  that uses advanced AI (ie, me) to intelligently read Found logs to detect for maintence needed on my caches that are difficult to get to . The easy ones, of course get maintenance immediately, but as numerous others above state, needing maintenance does not necessarily mean the logbook is affected in such a way that the cache needs to be disabled.

    • Upvote 2
  2. On 5/21/2020 at 4:23 AM, coachstahly said:

    Is the only "need" for this - to be able to track your own caches that need maintenance without also maintaining a manual list?  

    Yes. What is the point of a Needs Maintenance log except to alert the CO that they need to plan a maintenance trip? Going out on the day is not always feasible, especially where the caches require significant effort to reach.

    Given that, why can I not have a single list of ALL my caches that need maintenance?

  3. 17 hours ago, coachstahly said:


    So the problem is that finders aren't logging the appropriate NM logs, which means that you want to be able to log one in order to keep better track of it.  Seems to me that your suggestion isn't addressing the issue that started the whole thing, which is finders not logging NMs when they're needed.  

    It is far easier to sort the problem myself, than to try to retrain the entire geocaching community! (or at least, all the ones that need training)

  4. When the ability to log a find on your own caches was removed (and quite rightly, too) the ability to log a Needs Maintenance on your own cache was also removed.


    However many people who log a find and state that there is a problem that needs fixing, state that in their find log and do not log a Needs Maintenance. As a result Cache owners have to maintain a manual list in addition to the one that Groundspeak so nicely provides. The Groundspeak list can be accessed via a scheduled pocket query, or through Project GC's Needs Maintenance query. But the manual entries the cache owner needs to keep (or more likely, tries to remember) - is not so nicely stored, and certainly not in the same consolidated place.


    Could we please have just one list of all caches we have that need maintenance to help us manage our maintenance trips? Could cache owners please be able to log a needs maintenance on their own caches. 


    This would help make managing maintenance easier, and so make cache maintenance more likely to happen, increasing the enjoyment for cache finders.

    • Upvote 6
    • Helpful 1
    • Love 1
  5. I am working on a new puzzle geocache, and I am after the code identifiers that geocaching uses. These can be used to construct a URL directly to a particular item (eg by using https://coord.info/xxxxxxx). Another clue is that these are the codes that tracking IDs may not start with (you will never see a tracking id that starts with GC)


    For example:

    GC - GeoCache - a geocache description

    GL - Geocache log - an individual geocache log

    TB - Travel Bug - a trackable's description 

    TL - Trackable Log - an individual log of a trackable retrieve, visit, etc.

    PR - Profile - a player profile (mine is PR5DMHT)

    BM - BookMark - an individual list

    GT - GeoTour


    There are also common travelbug tracking codes, such as OC - Oak Coins - I do not need these.


    Are there any others? Do drafts have one?


  6. I have created a challenge cache, which of course does not need a solution checker. I inadvertently left the solution checker option ticked, but now, when I edit the page, I cannot find an option to remove it. Where is the tick box? Or do I have to do something crazy like change my cache to a traditional and back to a puzzle? 

  7. 42 minutes ago, on4bam said:

    Where does this info come from?

    In GSAK there's full support for trackables (drop/retrieve/discover.....)

    GDAK supports dropping trackables.

    Both programs do this via the new API.


    For the time being I consider

    fake news because it IS in the new API (and I've used the function recently).


    The missing procedure has nothing to do with drop/retrieve/discover. Details in the thread above.

  8. 15 minutes ago, GerandKat said:

    Or to reduce the server load and keep the focus on the needs player have when using the api when playing outside?

    Good answer. Badly explains dropping trackable stats, but not taking trackables out of the GPX.

    Does not explain why there was no announcement stating this.

  9. 4 minutes ago, lee737 said:


    Can you explain what that means to us, when finding/logging a TB?

    The API (Application programming interface) is a set of queries that other applications, such as the Geocaching App, Cachly, Project-GC use to collect (or send) data. Eg to collect local caches about a set of coordinates, or to upload a find log. One of the procedures available was used by Progect-GC to collect number of trackables found by a geocacher (the missing procedure does not affect logging trackable finds, it affects the statistics Project-GC (and possibly others) use.


    Most likely it will also break the checker used by some older challenge based on trackable finds.


    7 minutes ago, noncentric said:


    Why would GS do that?  Trackables are a revenue stream for them, so reducing interest in them seems counter-productive.

    Yes! Exactly!! Why would they do that? I don't get it.

  10. Trackables are great. We all love them. And yet:


    Groundspeak have removed resident trackables from the GPX files (some time ago)

    Groundspeak have not included trackable discoveries in the new API.


    So my conclusion is - it's a conspiracy theory to slowly reduce interest in trackables so as to eventually drop support for them completely.


    I used both features. Can we have them back please?


    ADDENDUM: False alert - the trackable totals in the API *is* working. Trackables are still missing from the API.

    • Upvote 1
  11. Trackable discoveries has been removed from the new API. Please put it back in!


    (oh - and while I am talking about reduced support for trackables) - can we have resident trackables reinserted back into the GPX download file too.




    ADDENDUM: trackable totals of the API *is* working. However trackables are still missing from the GPX.

  • Create New...