The Snowdog

Hmmm... OK thanks for the info. That "Last visit" date might not be as useful as I thought for seeing if a CO was inactive.

A cache I logged today had a note from the CO dated 12/21/2017. But when I looked at the CO's profile the "last visit" date was Friday, 15 September 2017. So how was the CO able to post that note without logging in and registering a visit to the web site?

As I recall, when I joined up "Snowdog" was already taken. "The Snowdog" was my second try at a username and it went through.

I was certainly amused (back in '06) that I could have a username with a space in it. Ain't ever gonna change it, either

I have been "The Snowdog" since '06; I have never altered my geo name.

That would be me! I would be curious to see a screen shot of what you see on my profile. I didn't start caching until '06 so no visits since '05 would be...odd.

Go development team!

Put together a cache this morning (central USA) and noticed, much to my surprise and pleasure, that the "State" field was filled in automatically for me! Is that a new feature? If so, very nice.

That's a good idea. Hope the GS folks are reading this!

Well at least it's only one check box now, rather than two!

Well it looks like "Related Web Page" is gone so my request for a fix is now irrelevant. But I would like to see the highlighted defaults change away from "Submit." I just KNOW I'm going to submit something when I intended to edit.

I've read the posts and see no mention of what really jumped out at me today. When making a new cache page we edit many, many times but submit only once. Therefore the default action at the bottom of the edit page should be either "Save" or "Save and Preview" but most definitely NOT "Submit for Review." Likewise, the default action at the top of the view page should be "Edit" and NOT "Submit for Review." You want the default (highlighted) actions to be the most common ones, not the ones you'll do only once.

I met the new "Edit" form today. Some nice new features, some bugs, some things that weren't broken but got fixed anyway. Here's my initial take (as posted on the Geocaching Blog. For starters, there's no way to enter the URL of a "Related Web Page" on the new edit form. And of course the cache I'm creating today has a Related Web Page, which I can't put on the page until this is fixed or until I can get back to the old edit page. Now on to editing. When making a new cache page we edit many, many times but submit only once. Therefore the default action at the bottom of the edit page should be either "Save" or "Save and Preview" but most definitely NOT "Submit for Review." Likewise, the default action at the top of the view page should be "Edit" and NOT "Submit for Review." You want the default (highlighted) actions to be the most common ones, not the ones you'll do only once. And this will just require a change in habit. I posted a Reviewer Note (as usual), then submitted the cache - which then pops up a text box requires you to write ANOTHER reviewer note! I also just found out that submitting a cache now locks it for editing, so if you're in the habit of submitting a cache, then tweaking the page, you're now out of luck. Hope the "Related Web Page" issue gets fixed soon. THANKS.

You guys are awesome, thanks!

Absolutely. The cacher setting most of these is actively trying to inspire us to go beyond, and there are several of us who are actively working on the ones that did get approved, before the reviewer tightened up on them. And that to me is what challenge caches are about - to inspire us to go beyond what we have already accomplished. As it is to sign (and get started on) challenges like this I have to drive several hours to larger metro areas, where such caches are generally available.

Our reviewer (who shall remain unnamed) is rejecting many new challenge caches because "not enough people in your area have already completed that challenge." He wants us to demonstrate that at least ten people within fifty miles qualify for any new challenges. Is this an official Groundspeak position (it's not anywhere in the guidelines that I can find) or something that is left to the discretion of the reviewer?

This is a change in the Google Maps API and effects every site that uses Google Maps. The default for gestureHandling is now "cooperative" (requires two fingers on a touch screen, or CTRL + scroll on a PC rather than "greedy" which is the old way. If Groundspeak wants maps to act like they used to, all they need to do is fix (or add) one line of code.

Same problem here. Once you enter a "bad" TB all subsequent searches say not found. I just refresh the page and that usually works. Must be some bug in their search script somewhere.

This is indeed a change in the Google Maps API. It seemed to hit pretty much all of my web aps that use Google Maps last week. The default for gestureHandling is now "cooperative" which requires two fingers (on a touch screen) or ctrl-scroll with a mouse to zoom. Yes I agree that it is a pain in the tail - before you could scroll, pan, and zoom with one hand but now it takes two. If Groundspeak wishes to revert back to the old way all they need to do is add a little code - set gestureHandling to "greedy" rather than "cooperative." There is also an "automatic" setting that goes both ways, depending on the screen (it's the "old" way if the map isn't scrollable, the "new" way otherwise, or something like that). In the meantime I am praying for a browser plugin that will "fix" this for all sites.

Well that answered my question. I have found that the data on the geocaching site is often out of date (that is, not reflecting recent reports on the condition of the mark). Is this data never updated?

Just installed the app on a new phone and I always have the yellow dot indicating unread messages. How do I clear that?

OOPS, I should have said "hidden date." But most of these are just traditionals with bizarre hidden dates.

I just noticed that there are a lot of caches, mostly with German titles, with false publication dates - years 1900, 1901, and so on right up to 2000. I did not know that Groundspeak allowed that. Any explanation or reason for this? Thanks.

Yep, finally got that pic uploaded. Thanks to the "top men" who got it running again!

I know the web site has been pretty flaky lately, but here's a new one - every time I try to upload a log photo it progresses for a while, then crashes to the oh so familiar "500 - Server Error" page.