jholly

Do you have any idea what that would do the 9,000 new accounts we get each day? I'm sure of the names have to go through a purity test the number would drop dramatically. And then where would be be in being able to claim 9,000,000 users worldwide?

Well that does bring up and interesting question. GS is pretty tough on CO's that delete logs that are legitimate logs. If ponie**** actually found the cache and signed the log and then had their log deleted would GS side with ponie#### and reinstate the log and give the CO a site wide ban while invalidating the CO's email and disabling all their caches? Or would GS side with the CO and ban and lock poini####'s account because it is inappropriate? Interesting ethical conundrum.

Does this mean Alamogul is in trouble?

Your in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.

Fixed for ya'.

Really? Never noticed that, of course I use GSAK.

WRONG. The consent was given only to geocaching.com and Groundspeak, NOT PUBLIC. Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you saying you believe the Groundspeak has no right to display your cache logs for others to see? I'm pretty sure we all knew when we signed up that our cache logs would be available for others to read, since that's the whole point of them. They've been doing it for 14 years now anyway, so I would hope their ToU would allow this. Access to the information doesn't equal usage. There is many articles regarding the laws and ethics about this. Most likely Groundspeak does not allow public usage of their data (which our logs are). However, users of a website are entitled to clear terms of usage by outside companies. Groundspeak may, if they desire to make the information part of the public domain. I don't believe they have. They do have the right. It has to be spelled out specifically, not an automatic thing. I often use the example of posting photos and video because it is an area I know well. Unlike what most teens and idiots, just because it is on the "internet" doesn't make it public domain. Copyright still exists with the photographer unless you agreed to a websites TOS that says that you agree that posting on their site makes it open to public domain (or to third party clients of theirs). This was a big issue with Facebook and still is mostly when they decided that they can use your pictures to sell to third party users to use in their ads. Initially it was to sell to be used outside the website, but I believe thanks to a huge member backlash it is only for internal ads. And of course....regardless of the laws/rules, the sites/groups should ask permission of the members being ranked since they are using the information beyond the normal scope of the game/hobby. finding out how many finds you have and then comparing it to my number of finds is certainly within the normal scope of the hobby. Sites like cacherstats and project-gc just make easier, that's all.

Moving your home coordinates will accomplish nothing other than give you grief when you go to hide a cache. Your home coordinates are not visible to anyone outside of Groundspeak and will not affect cacherstats, project-gc or any of a number of GSAK macros. Write to cacherstats and be asked to be moved to California and don't tell anyone you moved. As for project-gc about the only thing you can do is log notes instead of found it logs. Like it or not, if you log them your logs are publicly visible and cacherstats can enumerate your finds against others. If you log anything on Groundspeak the api can find and display and and all logs you make. The only way to become invisible is stop logging anything.

For me geocaching is definitely not about the numbers and never has been. I agree with you on the other aspect you mentioned that by logging online, those who want to perform comparisons will be able to do so. All the unique experiences geocaching has provided me with are not associated with anything one can measure with numbers. For example, last weekend I hiked over 45km to start with this cache http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC2XY7N_steirischer-02-gleinalpe?guid=ab012590-1233-4c8f-b43a-bd79f1b415f6 and two further days of hiking are waiting for me. The two days I have already spent with this cache are unforgettable. Experiences like this one are what makes geocaching unique to me. I have no doubt it's not about the numbers for you, just in general geocaching is geared as a numbers game, just have a look at any page on GC.com and you'll see your find count plastered all over the place. Shouldn't the OP be concerned about their post count here being visible and rankable? Now there is an idea. Now not only can we compare your find count with others but also your post count. Wow what great things. Not only has the OP inflated their post count, but practically everyone that read this thread and trundled off and checked the OP's find count to their count and made a comparison. To bad the OP doesn't have a page counter on their profile page, that sucker would have been clicking away today.

Well, there are two blank entries for Vermont, which one is yours? As long as your found it logs are public, your "stats" are public. One way to deal with the problem is turn all your found it logs into write notes. Since write notes are not tracked, you won't be. That takes care of cacherstats and the API users. There are a couple ways to deal with cacherstats. One is suddenly move to California and ask that your stats be moved to California. Folks in California will go nuts trying to figure out who the new blank cacher is and folks in Vermont will wonder what happened to Flask. The other way to deal with cacherstats is get the list of trigger caches and delete your finds or change them to write notes. If you have not found the trigger caches you won't be listed. This means giving up a count or two, but that does not seem like a big deal. You may need to confirm with the GrandHighPoopah on this one. Of course if he changes the trigger cache because of archiving or other activity you might need to adjust your finds. Or he picks you up on one that is not the nearest your still listed. But this is probably iffy at best. For API based sites, the only way to deal with them is to ask to be dropped, which they may or may not be able to. And as for asking Groundspeak to institute some sort of security, I personally don't think that is a good idea.

You calibrate the 76CSx just like you did with your 60CSx. They are both basically the same unit.

When you get a reviewer signing your petition you might stand a chance. Until then, ain't going to happen.

I would start you book now showing your right in deleting the log. If this persistent person brings it to the attention of the log god at GC.com and you don't have your ducks in a row your liable to get a site wide ban, your email invalidated and all your caches disabled. And then after your ban ends your faced with cleaning up the mess and a locked log you can't delete.

True, but if you check their recent finds and the last find was a year or more ago you can probably draw the conclusion that the CO is not very active, or for some reason, decided not to log online anymore.

Just because the cache is old is no reason to archive it. God forbid, or we would never be able to complete the Jasmer challenge. Putting a new log in a viable container if the old log is full or wet is fine. Once you cross the line on replacing the container then your accepting the maintenance responsibilities for the cache. This is bad because you don't have access to the page if something needs to be updated. Once the container is no longer viable (cracked, broken, dented beyond repair) it is time to start thinking about NM and NA. If it is a cache that has a CO that seems to have left the game I will post a NM and in about a month if nothing is noted or done I'll post a NA. Bear in mind I don't go looking for cache specifically for this reason, but if I come across one in my normal activity I really don't care what others may say. If it needs to be removed from the game, it needs to be removed from the game.

Wet. Slimy. Water damaged. Items in it beyond repair. But apparently no one thinks the CO should be alerted with an NM. People are hesitant to post NM or NA logs, because they're worried that a CO or another cacher will hassle them for it. It seems weird so many would note the maint issues in their logs, but not post a NM. Maybe because the log is still viable? My feeling is if the CO does not react to my information in my found it log the CO probably won't react to my NM log. About the only time I post a NM is prior to posting a NA.

No, there is a *BIG* difference between a NM and a NA. The NM only goes to the CO and if not set, sets the NM flag. A NA goes to not only the CO but also the reviewer(s) for the area. Even if the CO deletes the NA log the email has already been sent. The reviewer can step in and disable the cache and post a 30 day fix it notice with the warning the cache will be archived at the end of the period if things are not fixed. Or if the reviewer deems nothing needs to be done will just leave as is.

Sure, I like stats stuff! Total number of accounts with at least one find in the past year: 1,333,325 Average number of finds (all-time) for those accounts: 217 Median number of finds (all-time) for those accounts: 19 What would be real interesting is the number of accounts with say 50, 100 and 500 finds during the last year. For real giggles you might also run it for 1,000 and 2,000. If you want to do the average and median for those levels it would be dynamite.

The Draft 2 bookmark is posted. The data file on cachemachine.hollenback.org is updated. Problems: #53 GC22WFH - A string of DNF's, the one found it was a DNF in the log. Last NM says the container is rusted shut. #63 GCRJ9D - From the last log sounds like cache fell into a hidey hole and can't be retrieved. #69 GC22WFH - Temp Disabled. Container broken, CO says will fix this week. Need to keep an eye on it. #95 GC39AAX - Two DNF's and a NM saying it might be gone. #97 GC39K1M - Last Found it said log was very wet and then two DNF's #102 GC4FNP0 - Three DNF's in a row. #108 GC3DFM2 - Basically four DNF's in a row. #120 GC4CRZ5 - Basically five DNF's in a row. The Found it sprinkled in was found a while back with someone that did not log it. #123 GCZXQK - Sring of DNF's. CO seems time crunched but promised to fix in June. #127 GCZXQK - Several DNF's, one DNF says it is behind a fence on private property. #141 GC4G8EV - NM for soaked log and broken container and then 3 DNF's

I'll post the updated bookmark and data file Sunday 6/8

I believe Toz was referring to hiding just this single stat, not all of them. I'm pretty sure it was removed because it was broken. When they added the Lab cache stats earlier this week, that count was no longer accurate and I think they just decided to scrap it entirely rather than spend the time investigating how to fix it. If we convince them it's still desired, then they'll spend the time figuring out how to make it work with the Lab caches. All the problems with Lab caches seem to come back to one common flaw: the Lab caches are stored in a different way and in a different database than the geocaches. I think this was one of the big problems with the short-lived Geocaching Challenges, too. They were designed to be so different from regular geocaches that they just can't be integrated into the existing system/website in a coherent manner. If they had put them in the same database and just made some tweaks to add functionality (ie. add new columns or tweak existing columns to accept new data), things would be a lot easier. Now, I don't profess to be an expert in database design, and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, so I don't know if this is really the best way to do things. However, the way it's been done for Lab caches and Challenges doesn't appear to work well either. Personally, I think it's time to bite the bullet and increase the membership rates, hire the required developers, and build a well-designed and more sustainable site from the ground up. The current one is just too broken to be salvageable. Probably a simpler solution is to deep six the lab caches, or at least have them live a separate life and not be mingled in with real caches.

Without a doubt, bring back the distinct.

Didn't read what Lep said? You shouldn't just take pornographic materials, instead you should trade for them. Perhaps some really nice religious tracks wouild be a good trade.

Don't the staples hurt?

Doesn't that just frost your doughnuts? Believe or not, I have found two nanos with trade items in them. I was flabbergasted. I will take a tongue lashing from Lep because I took them with out trading because they were preventing the lid from screwing on all the way. Will it even things up if I swap two or three broken McToys for the three wheel hot wheel in the next couple smalls I find? I'm fresh out of moldy business cards.