Too Tall John

How many of my friends have you checked with to determine which ones don't want to read about my caching? Because it sounds like you're implying no one would ever want to do that. Have any data to back that up?See, you're missing the fact that you aren't the only one who'll be using this feature. Search the forums for smartphone and logging. You'll see tons of complaints about brief, if not completely empty, logs. Now, you'll have neophyte cachers, excited to share those blank logs with all their FB friends! Woo-hoo! But, to answer your question directly, the only data I've collected as to whether your friends will want to read your logs is that I've read some of your logs. Exciting stuff, I'm telling you. Did you log those on your iPad? I showed you mine. You show me yours. Where's your data that your friends want to read your logs? Oh, and you never answered my initial question: If you see no problem with making your friends who don't want to read every cache you find click away to block the app, why do you have a problem with having to manually share?

A logical person would put Groundspeak's resources on enhancements that will benefit the caching experience, not the Facebook experience. Oh, in case you missed it, I poked holes in the man with the pink mask's analogy. Heck, I didn't need to poke holes, it was a sieve to begin with. Riddle me this? If you see no problem with making your friends who don't want to read every cache you find click away to block the app, why do you have a problem with having to manually share? You said because it was inconvenient for you. Hmm... so as long as it's only inconveniencing other people... I bet they write real riveting stuff while out in the field: They might go back and edit the log later, but the initial log is what will be shared on FB if this feature is based on a phone app.

You do, of course, realize that you wouldn't be able to block it because you can't see FB at all, thus alleviating the need to block it until you can actually see FB, right? It's akin to arguing your neighbor is blasting his music and it's annoying you while you're at work 10 miles away. No, it's more like, while you're at work your neighbor starts putting a pink flamingo on your lawn every ten minutes. Once you get back home, he may have stopped, but you still got a mess to clean up. Your neighbor shrugs their shoulders and says "But you could have blocked the app..." Ah-hah! I get your concern now. You honestly don't understand how hiding stuff in facebook works. You don't have to hide each and every posting--you only have to hide the app *once*, and every single posting by that app gets hidden immediately. In your case, all you have to do is go to the first posting you find, click the little "x" beside the message, and click the option "hide all by geocaching app". Poof! They all disappear, never to be seen again. Again, I say, that's just the way facebook works! Anybody who uses facebook knows that, and accepts that. Anybody who gets upset by boring/annoying posts probably shouldn't be on facebook. If the bad outweighs the good, don't use facebook at all. I'm fortunate that I have enough funny/interesting friends to outweigh the annoying/boring ones. If that ever changes, I'll just stop using it. Before you believe that people are ignorant on a subject, perhaps you should make sure you are understanding what they are saying. Just because one individual doesn't have to block dozens of posts doesn't mean that dozens of posters don't need to block one app. NYPC is talking about the 2nd scenario. Oh, and see how I juxtaposed one user/dozens of posts vs dozens of users/one app? I used dozens for aesthetics. It'd be closer to 100's of users, assuming we're still talking about one person using the app. If we want to go back to hundreds of users telling hundreds of friends, you're already getting into the thousands.

I'm really not concerned about having to block the app myself. I'm concerned about the impression the app will make on non-geocaching Facebook users. Some of them might eventually become interested in geocaching. But not if their first exposure to it is having to block it. I don't want non-geocaching facebook users to equate Geocaching with Mafia Wars. YES! YES!! YESSS!!!!! This is the real problem. Hundreds of users sending dozens of notifications to hundreds of friends= lots of bad impressions to non-cachers. How many? I already did the math. (300 posters)*(25 caches)*(200 friends)=1.5 million bad impressions per day. Many will block them, but only after they are already irritated. If that's what Groundspeak wants to do, I guess we can't stop them, but I hope they fix Wherigo first. That actually has something to do with geocaching.

How do you explain those bajillions of people who play farmville or mafia wars or the tons of other similar games. Those people obviously welcome those related messages. Just because others do not does not make the messages spam.To the people that do not wish to play those games they are spam. To the people that do not want to know about your record-setting power trial find, those messages would be spam too.I signed up for Facebook to keep in touch with people, not to read:

If I had a camero-phone, I'd just turn on the headlights.

Wow. "My reviewer isn't publishing my caches" angst. Power Trails. (For the number of caches being talked about, that's what it sounds like...) Posting SBAs on caches. The "How do I become a Reviewer" question. I'd call this the trifecta of forum angst, but it seems we've got a bonus topic... In all seriousness, I'd imagine your reviewer is having to spend more time looking at your caches and it's just plain easier for them to "slip a few others past" while they finish reviewing yours. If I'm right about the PT, I bet they're getting them all ready so they can be published all at once, rather than have the FTF hounds have to make ten trips back to the same spot. Have you contacted your reviewer, other than with the note on one of the 64 caches you have written up? Maybe they haven't gotten to the one with a note yet. Can't stress enough: 64 caches? Gonna take some time. I bet if you ask the owners of the really big, successful PTs, they are in close communication with their reviewer during the process. As to the rest, I'm sure someone's going to jump on you for a few different things, seriously, you've got enough angst to supply a couple more threads.

I've thought about doing the Caches Along a Route thing around here. With the White Mountain National Forest so close by, there are caches that I'll never get to on the off chance that I'm passing by that are included in my regular PQ, but there are places I go somewhat regularly that are beyond the limits of the same PQ, so if I can figure out the right route, I should be able to include the caches I might find on a whim, but can still load up those caches that are out of the way when... I'm going out of the way to get them. Oh, and it isn't a D/T filterable thing, either. There's caches along the Kancamagus Highway that are almost PnGs, but there's no reason to go down the Kanc when I'm doing errands.

What they said, although this only helps with PQ's, you also mentioned notifications, I think. Perhaps the first half of niraD's post might be starting down the right path. A series of notifications, each one big enough to cover it's own area, but not extend out to the mainland. The only problem is that these would overlap, so you would get multiple notifications for caches in the overlapping areas.

The whole "Hey, no problem! Block it!" mentality overlooks the fact that by virtue of the fact that you're saying people can/will block it, it is unwanted.

Even if you did find 100 caches/day and send them to 3000 people, that's a fraction of what will happen if your idea goes live. If this hits the market, hundreds of people will send out dozens of cache finds a day to hundreds of friends. May not sound as impressive as your strawman numbers, but do the math: 250 cachers * 20 caches * 200 friends = 1 million spammings. Did you really take into consideration how this app would be used? Just be careful, or you'll paint yourself into a corner.

Hmm... Who's been painting the conversation? You've called and/or implied that people in this thread are:Children ignoring logic Obtuse Belligerent Denizens Speculating (while you're just offering an opinion??) Narrow minded and "insultory" Stalkers (does it make me a stalker for going back and reading your posts?) Stubborn (and to the point that would be detrimental to others & ourselves!) Curmudgeons (My personal favorite!) I'd bring up a certain pair of stovetop denizens, but you'd be compelled to remind me how it was unoriginal again. Oh, I forgot to add that one to the list. As I read through your posts, I did notice one thing. You seem to think that this app wouldn't be a problem because you don't log that many caches. You even go so far as accusing people of "over inflating" the numbers. You've failed to take into consideration the fact that every person who has this new app you're asking for will suddenly have to option to spam Facebook. So, nobody's inflating anything, you're just assuming that you'll be the only one using the feature. Pretty egocentric to not think about the impact on others, eh? Oh, sorry, you can add that one to my list of brush strokes.

Ah, but I do use Facebook, I just don't want to use it in that way because I find games, etc that people spam me with quickly get ignored. Assuming that anyone arguing against this doesn't use Facebook is a flaw in your argument. One of the original "pros" for the idea was "Free Advertizing for GC.com!" Working under the idea that friends would hide the app because of the boring/annoying status updates (underlined words yours, not mine) seems contrary to that original "pro." So, what were the rest of the "pros"? That flies in the face of logic, and I think you know it.

Because I pay to use PQ's and rarely read the weekly update at all.

Unfortunately, if suspicious activity is reported behind the restaurant, the owner's first call is not going to be the cache owner, it is going to be the police. While the CO might be buddy-buddy with the owner, how's their relationship with the chief? Good enough to avoid a situation like the one I sited above? Any fool can learn from their own mistakes, it takes a wisdom to learn from someone else's.

This cache behind a business caused quite a stir. The local police declared a ban on geocaching when it first happened. That statement was, fortunately, retracted. Why risk it?

And as we keep pointing out, my request has nothing to do with the web site.It has everything to do with the website! I believe jholly's referring to the effect geocachers suddenly spamming* their friends with "I Found This Cache" posts. It would result in people thinking of geocaching in the same way I think of Farmville, Mafia Wars, FrontierVille, and the like. Another bunch of annoying notifications. There's your black star. Nothing to do with coding the website, everything to do with perception of the website. *Yes, I said spamming. Any notification where a potential reaction is "Block This" could be considered spam. What you present as a solution is actually an indication of the problem

Half a gallon of change? I helped count and roll 5 gallons and it was over $1000. If there's a correlation, you can pay for mine and BlueDeuce's, too. Cough it up!

Like this? Pricey at $5 a pop. I got a "Sin Boldly" pint glass for Christmas a couple years back. One of my favorites. Seen any Festivus Tracts? I'd put some in!

I'm waiting on a response from my reviewer. I've found the million dollar bill tracts and the GOOHF cards, and if things continue, I'll be ordering some. They come in packs of 100. I'll send you some in trade if you want. That goes for anyone else who has some interesting tracts out there!

So, aside from what the guidelines say about prescient, this answers my first question. Or at least shows that it has happened with one particular type of literature, and I'm open to any themed tract. How about the rest? Once I've verified with my reviewer that this would be ok, anyone have sources for interesting tracts? Don't forget: Thanks for the replies so far!

After participating in a recent thread that was started on that old subject (Religious Tracts in Caches, for those of you who didn't read the topic title or click on the link to the other thread) I've decided I want to start a cache with all the swag being Tracts and the like. In the other thread, I mentioned that there were two pieces of such swag that I took just because I thought they were clever. From the other thread: Someone later posted a link to a news article about how some of these got seized by the gub'ment as counterfeit, which I think makes these even funnier! I've heard mention of other tracts that I'd trade for without a second thought. The Sweet Potato Tract, and the Pastafarian Tract come to mind. So, here's my questions: If stocked with a variety of tracts touting different ideas, would a themed-swag cache of this type be within the guidelines? Who knows where I can get Tracts like the Sweet Potato/Pastafarian Tracts? What tract have you seen/heard of that you would enjoy finding in such a cache? Other than all that, what other issues does anyone see arising from a cache like this? How would you deal with them if you are the cache owner? This thread is about clever tracts. It isn't about the morals of proselytizing in a cache, since that isn't the intent of the cache.

Hmm... I've found 4 on the list. Someone here in NH put out a challenge cache based on the most favorited caches in the state. Wonder how long before someone does it for this national list?

Just because something can be done doesn't mean that it should be done.Has someone been reading my sig line?