drives

If anyone is interested, here are some easy replacement logs to carry: Replacement Logs

I don't know what happened. I don't care what your excuses are, but I don't like whatever it was that has changed and caused me to have to log back in 100 times a day. It sucks....it's absurd and it's stupid and I'm sick and tired of it. Fix it.

I disagree

I disagree

I disagree. They all know.

I disagree.

I'm glad I could get out of the way for you.

So how's that blazing speed GC website working for you now that all of us GE *panners* have been kicked out?

I just don't understand why the desires of the paying members are never taken into account. This was just a slap in the face to us Premium Members who asked that this feature not be removed. No compromise, just cut it off and let them complain. No attempt to make it work, just cut it off and walk away. What you need is some real competition so that you would have to learn what it means to please your customers or else they just go away.

The GE kml browser was a valuable tool to me for use in routing and selecting caches for county and other challenges because I could visiually determine the borders and city limits. Also as a cache hider, I used it on every cache hide as a quick reference to spot surrounding caches, even though I knew the placements were not exact. I find it extremely hard to believe this was taxing the servers to the point of impacting performance. And I don't believe the population of users was as small as has been mentioned. I think I personally know of 200 cachers that used the tool. Maybe if PQs were opened up a little bit, we could use them to give us back some of the same look and feel. It sure would be nice to be able to get more than 500 caches at a time or more than 5 PQs a day. I always enjoyed using GE to tour other regions and areas quickly while seeing all the caches at the same time. To me, the tool was valuable and what I've seen so far being offered as a replacement, does not do it for me.

Those (options 2 & 3) are both new to me too. I did not notice them when publishing my one and only cartridge.

Best I could figure out was that it contained some special character that caused the failure. I wound up just publishing the GC number without an actual link to it.

I would start by eliminating everything in the long description and see if works then. If it does, then sart adding back in the pieces until it breaks again. Yours is not that lengthy so it won't take long to find out.

Well I for one am pretty disappointed and disillusioned with the EarthCache publishing process. After a long process of having to submit an EarthCache before the city council, I finally got the approval I needed. I submitted my cache and received the EarthCache Submission notice on November 24, 2008. It sits there for two weeks with no response, then on December 6, 2008 I receive a notice to make changes to the cache before they will publish it and the adoption request. On December 7, 2008, changes to the web page were made and a reviewer note posted stating as such. Not being familiar with the ineptness of this process, I posted another reviewer note on December 11, 2008 reminding them that I had made an update and asking how long I should expect to wait. Nothing happened. I waited and waited and waited. Finally, on December 19, 2008 I sent an email directly to the reviewer asking them to either approve the listing or tell me what needed to be done. Four days go by with no response whatsoever from anyone until December 23, 2008 when I receive a smarta** response that says "This is a copy of the email I sent you" and it's the same $#%& email they sent back on December 6th that I had immediately responded to. That tells me that no one even looked at what they were doing, they just fired off a smarta** letter to get me off their backs. So as of today, I sit here, over a month since the city council approved this, not knowing what the heck is going on with it. I have now been put into the embarrasing position of trying to explain to the city council the inefficiencies of our own process and trying to keep our sport from getting any more negative publicity.

I confirmed that the trouble all along was with special characters in the Long Description and Starting Point text blocks. I used a character counter to confirm the length and both were within the listed limit. I removed all the special characters and the cartridge downloads just fine now. So that explains whyit worked when emailed to users, but it is still a mystery as to why something like that on the web page would create an error message when downloading what should have been nothing more than the GWC file.

You're right. But then why would the thing work just fine when you email the GWC files directly to the users? That just boggles me. And yes, it should work like Alice's Restaurant. There was, and till is, an ampersand(&) and number sign(#) in the Starting Location and Long Description. But it seems to be working with those in there.

Well, the problem wasn't with the dialog or message boxes. I pared it down to almost a blank cartridge with one zone and it still wouldn't work. So I renamed the cartridge and uploaded it without adding any of the description on the Wherigo webpage. Everything worked. So then I put back in the Short Description, Long Description and Starting Point and I got the same error message. I took out some of the Starting Point information and the thing worked. Something doesn't quite seem right, but now it is working. So I renamed the original one and took it out of service, and then renamed the new back to the old name and put it in service. Seems to work. But before I claim victory here, I'm going to need to download it and give it a field trial because over the course of time I've been in there changing all kinds of stuff. Thanks for all the responses, and as for Groundspeak support, well.....read my lips

You just might be on to something there because I do have some lengthy dialog and message boxes.

Absolutely right. I whole heartedly agree that it's something wrong with my coding, but I don't have a clue as to where to begin to look for the error. The entire cartridge was created in the builder program and published that way as well. I have used the compiler but got the same result. I'm in the process of going through the LUA file line by line now looking for something that might cause the problem. But right now, to me the biggest issue is the lack of response. Email to Groundspeak through the Wherigo website as well as this posting in the forums have brought me a big fat *ignore*. I would just throw in the towel and delete the whole thing if I could.

That's always a possibility although I'm on a Dell that is less than a year old, running Vista, and using AT&T as my ISP. If the opportunity arises, I would certainly give that a try. There are a couple of other things worth attempting, but I would need the option of being able to delete a cartirdge, which we apparently do not have at this time. I would prefer that someone from the Wherigo team actually interpret the error message and/or the actual file iteself to pinpoint the problem. Afterall, isn't that what those messages are for?

Well, now we're on version 1.8 which means I've uploaded the file now a total of nine times. So guess what? That didn't work. ....(again). The GWC file works just fine when I send it to users via email. I'd really like to see some option for deleting everything on the Wherigo page so in cases like this, we can start all over again. I know it'probably something that I've done wrong, but how do I go about finding out what that is?

I recently uploaded a new cartridge using the Builder and users are getting this lengthy error messsage when they attempt to download it. Any idea what it means? System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException: System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException: Server was unable to process request. ---> System.ApplicationException: Exception of type 'System.ApplicationException' was thrown. at Groundspeak.Wherigo.ZonesEngine.ZonesEngineDll.LuaDoFile(String filename) at Groundspeak.Wherigo.ZonesLinker.ZonesLinker.CreateZonesFile(String luaFilename, String binaryFilename, String cartridgeId, String playerName, Int64 playerId, String completionCode, DeviceType targetDevice, EngineVersion engineVersion, Boolean bObfuscate) at Groundspeak.Wherigo.ZonesLinker.ZonesLinker.CreateZonesFile(String luaFilename, String binaryFilename, String cartridgeId, String playerName, Int64 playerId, String completionCode, DeviceType targetDevice, EngineVersion engineVersion) at Wherigo.CartridgeService.ExtractCompileCartridgeWithMetaData(GWZMetaData gwzMetaData, String gwzFilename, String cartridgeId, Int64 playerId, String playerName, DeviceType deviceType, String completionCode, String binaryFilename) at Wherigo.CartridgeService.GetCompiledCartridgeWithMetaData(GWZMetaData gwzMetaData, String CartridgeFileName, String CartridgeId, Int64 PlayerId, String PlayerName, DeviceType deviceType, String CompletionCode) --- End of inner exception stack trace --- at System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapHttpClientProtocol.ReadResponse(SoapClientMessage message, WebResponse response, Stream responseStream, Boolean asyncCall) at System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapHttpClientProtocol.Invoke(String methodName, Object[] parameters) at Wherigo.GSPCartridgeService.CartridgeService.GetCompiledCartridgeWithMetaData(GWZMetaData gwzMetaData, String CartridgeFileName, String CartridgeId, Int64 PlayerId, String PlayerName, DeviceType deviceType, String CompletionCode) at cartridge_download.btnDownload_Click(Object sender, EventArgs e)

Okay, we'll go ahead and weigh in on this topic. Our current streaking of finding at least one cache every day is 677. We are proud of it and we have really worked our tails off to keep it going. We are a husband and wife team that mostly cache together, but there have been those days where only one of us caches that day. But it's still our goal to continue but only for as long as we want to. Like someone mentioned earlier, this is strictly a personal milestone and only we know for a fact that we really found one every day. And thank you TL for mentioning us earlier.

Any response from the Groundspeak folks? This is an easy request and should not be hard to implement?

I have to agree. If it doesn't have something to do with the cache, why would you want to upload it. Can you imagine how many pictures the website gets everyday and how much space that takes? Geez. I'm impressed that the site even allows it. Every picture has something to do with a specific cache or caching experience, right?