Do Not Update My Find Total On Old Finds

[+Scott Johnson]

I would like the number of finds I have not to be updated on old caches.

 

When I find a cache, I would like its number to remain as part of my history.

 

Only the current find being logged should show the current number.

 

Or perhaps, we could list both...finds at the time/current find number.

[+palmetto]

If any cache owner deletes a log your count has to alter. This makes retaining the count as you go rather difficult. I do see cachers keep a running count in their logs.

[+TEAM 360]

I would like the number of finds I have not to be updated on old caches.

 

When I find a cache, I would like its number to remain as part of my history.

 

Only the current find being logged should show the current number.

 

Or perhaps, we could list both...finds at the time/current find number.

 

You've got 156 caches so far....I would recommend that NOW is the time for you to keep track of your finds on your own set of records as well.

Make a table in 'WORD' that includes the find number, the GC number, the date, the name of the cache, a FF checkbox and what state it was in.

That's what I do and that pretty much covers everything.

[+Teamhawaii1981 & blueicyrose]

An easy way to do it is write the number cache it was in your log then DL a PQ of found caches into GSAK. Then organize them by log date. Even if the ones on a particular date might be a little out of order, that PQ only contains your log and you can see what number it was.

 

That is what I do anyway I really like going back to read my logs, much fun!

[+Quiggle]

An easy way to do it is write the number cache it was in your log then DL a PQ of found caches into GSAK.

If you use Firefox and Greasemonkey, check out Prime Suspect's Log Find Counter script.

 

[+Cardinal Red]

This is not a new discussion.

 

If you have the time and interest Read All Of This

[+sTeamTraen]

Why not write "Thanks for my cache find #NNN" in each log?

[+Mopar]

This is not a new discussion.

 

If you have the time and interest Read All Of This

 

Not only is it not a new discussion, it was actually tried once. Needless to say the majority of the users were not happy with that change and it was changed back within a short time.

[+Wacka]

Do what I do. At the top of a post, I put #XXXX and the time rounded off to the nearest 5 minutes. If I go back and check an old log, I can see which find it was.