Jump to content

Feature Request: Group Logging


Creakhead
Followers 1

Recommended Posts

I had an idea today while out caching with 2 of my friends. It seems kind of repetitive that once we found a cache that we all go home, and then each of us end up writing a log to get credit for find the cache. To me it seems that this just fills up the log. My idea would be to have a group post, maybe it would work like the following.

 

1. One person steps forward to write a log, and can then invite others in the group to add to their comments.

2. Invited person gets a PM/email with a link and clicking that adds them to the group post, so they too get credit and if they wish they can add/edit the comment.

 

To me this seems like it would eliminate a lot of repetitive posts that are like, I found this with person x and z, then person z posts and says they found it with x and y, etc...

 

Thanks for you time

 

[edited]

Edited by Creakhead
Link to comment

had an idea today while out caching with 2 of my friends. It seems kind of repetitive that once we found a cache that we all go home, and then each of us end up writing a log to get credit for find the cache. To me it seems that this just fills up the log. My idea would be to have a group post, maybe it would work like the following.

 

1. One person steps forward to write a log, and can then invite others ( who where their with them) to add to their comment

2. Invited person gets a PM/email with a link and clicking that adds them to the group post, so they too get credit and if they wish they can add/edit the comment.

 

To me this seems like it would eliminate a lot of repetitive posts that are like, i found this with person x and y, then person y posts and says they found it with x an y, etc..

 

Thanks for you time

 

 

I know a solution that wouldn't require any technical website upgrade to fix this problem.

 

Write something worth reading. Both may have had the same experience but certainly their perspectives are different.

 

 

note to self: Spellcheck before posting.

Edited by BlueDeuce
Link to comment
It seems kind of repetitive that once we found a cache that we all go home, and then each of us end up writing a log to get credit for find the cache. To me it seems that this just fills up the log.

Exactly. I'm pretty sure all of you didn't have exactly the same experience finding the cache, so your respective logs will all be different, depending on your viewpoint. That's the whole point of logs. I don't consider the point of the log to be "to get credit for [the] find."

 

Jamie

Link to comment

I commonly cache in large groups. We all look forward to writing our own logs - everyone sees it differently. Getting multiple views on one cache find can be entertaining reading and writing. What one person remembers, another tends to forget. It's fun to heckle your fellow cacher in a log for being the last to find it, or tripping and falling in the mud hole. Heck, funny things happen in groups and those moments get recorded forever because someone will certainly write about it!!

 

It seems if its too repetitive or whatever for everyone in the group to write a log for the same cache, than perhaps solo caching should be considered?

 

Katrina

AstroD-Team

Link to comment

At least this idea would minimize those annoying cache machine posts (granted not all cache machines create garbage logs). Nothing is more exciting than getting 10 emails in a matter of minutes that all say, "On our way to Mt. Hood with the "City name" cache machine. TFTH". I suppose it wouldn't be a bad idea as long as everyone signs the log book individually. <shrug>

Link to comment

If, and when, you put out any caches, you will look forward to those "Found It" logs. Those are your reward for putting out a cache.

 

It is really great to get individual logs from members of a group, especially if they are different and not "cut and paste" logs . . . but those are better than nothing, or better than a "group log."

Link to comment

I had an idea today while out caching with 2 of my friends. It seems kind of repetitive that once we found a cache that we all go home, and then each of us end up writing a log to get credit for find the cache. To me it seems that this just fills up the log. My idea would be to have a group post, maybe it would work like the following.

 

1. One person steps forward to write a log, and can then invite others ( who where their with them) to add to their comment

2. Invited person gets a PM/email with a link and clicking that adds them to the group post, so they too get credit and if they wish they can add/edit the comment.

 

To me this seems like it would eliminate a lot of repetitive posts that are like, i found this with person x and y, then person y posts and says they found it with x an y, etc..

 

Thanks for you time

 

I see nothing wrong with a group logging a find seprately but it would be much better if each person had something different to say, if everybody just post a found it log then yes thats just clutter and lame but alot of local cachers in my area hunt in groups of 4,6 and more and they each log there find and write a different story about the find, infact I really enjoy those logs as they often have a good/funny story to tell.

Link to comment

If, and when, you put out any caches, you will look forward to those "Found It" logs. Those are your reward for putting out a cache.

 

It is really great to get individual logs from members of a group, especially if they are different and not "cut and paste" logs . . . but those are better than nothing, or better than a "group log."

 

Ditto. Good logs are a treat for the cache owner. I take the short logs as a way of saying there was nothing interesting about the hunt/hike.

 

I look forward to the FOUND IT logs and don't want to see either cookie cutter logs OR group logs.

Link to comment
I had an idea today while out caching with 2 of my friends. It seems kind of repetitive that once we found a cache that we all go home, and then each of us end up writing a log to get credit for find the cache. To me it seems that this just fills up the log. My idea would be to have a group post, maybe it would work like the following.

 

1. One person steps forward to write a log, and can then invite others ( who where their with them) to add to their comment

2. Invited person gets a PM/email with a link and clicking that adds them to the group post, so they too get credit and if they wish they can add/edit the comment.

 

To me this seems like it would eliminate a lot of repetitive posts that are like, i found this with person x and y, then person y posts and says they found it with x an y, etc..

 

Thanks for you time

I still like the idea.

 

Implementing this idea will not lead to 'bad' logs, no more than not implementing it keep logs 'good'.

Link to comment

Thanks for the feedback. I had a few comments I wanted to add. I see your point against the group post, as I have yet to place my own cache, so getting the different feedback is the silent reward. But in my post I did mention that each person could still add their own comment/experience to the group post.

Maybe instead of thinking of it as one post, think of it more as a way to organize and display a group's find. Each person would always have the choice to post their own entry and not with the group.

Link to comment

 

To me this seems like it would eliminate a lot of repetitive posts that are like, i found this with person x and y, then person y posts and says they found it with x an y, etc..

 

Thanks for you time

 

wouldnt the second one be posting they foudn it with x and z, as they are y.

 

On to my thoughts, i like this idea as i often go cacheing with my 2 cousins, or my 2 friends, or my parents. i often get to loggining my finds first, and they jsut say "waht he said" this would elimintate those boring postes. I can also see the con side tho :rolleyes:<_<

Link to comment

I had an idea today while out caching with 2 of my friends. It seems kind of repetitive that once we found a cache that we all go home, and then each of us end up writing a log to get credit for find the cache. To me it seems that this just fills up the log. My idea would be to have a group post, maybe it would work like the following.

 

1. One person steps forward to write a log, and can then invite others in the group to add to their comments.

2. Invited person gets a PM/email with a link and clicking that adds them to the group post, so they too get credit and if they wish they can add/edit the comment.

 

To me this seems like it would eliminate a lot of repetitive posts that are like, I found this with person x and z, then person z posts and says they found it with x and y, etc...

Well, you already have the option of creating a team account for all the members of your party and logging the find from the team account. However, beyond that, looking at the possibility of filing one find log subsuming multiple finders/accounts, well, I find this idea most bizarre and distasteful. To me, any quality cache deserves a sincere and genuine and personal log entry (whether it be find, DNF or note) from each finder/seeker, and I prefer that it be personalized and hopefully personal and unique, i.e., that person's tale of their search for the cache. I personally put a lot of care and heart into each of my log entries, whether they be finds, DNFs or notes, and tend to write long log entries (on the other hand, my wife tends to write much shorter log entries.) And, if a cache was not worth such an effort in logging, then I will not seek it in the first place -- I am very selective about the caches which I will seek.

Link to comment

I agree with Creakhead and do find it uncessary and repetitive to have multiple entries if the cache is found by a group. Quite frankly I am apalled at the negative attitudes displayed in this thread, on a forum about geocaching of all things! On one hand, you mention this is not a numbers game, but some of your comments lead me to believe otherwise. Just as there are those who cache just to build up their stats, it seems like some of you get off on people finding your caches and logging, disregarding the fact that the last 5 logs were found by the same group. "Each experience might be different?" How much different could it be? You think one guy saw a Yeti while he was walking, while another parachuted in, while another battled angry pirates? Give me a break. Logs look like this:

 

Entry 1: I found this with Joe today. Beautiful day, TNLN. Thanks!

Entry 2: I found this with Jack today. TNLN. You rock!

Link to comment

Wow. Do you happen to have kids? I am frequently amazed at what my daughter writes in her logs, vs. my own impressions of the same cache. I am so glad that we write separate, meaningful logs. I posted an example in the other thread that's linked from this one. I encourage you to check it out.

 

If the average logs in your area are like you say in your post, then I am truly sorry.

Link to comment

I love this idea. I cache both alone and with my team, consisting of my kids, my girlfriend, and her daughter. I maintain accounts for me individually and for the team. We have a rule that there must be at least 2 of us from the team in order to count the find as a team find. When we hunt as a team, I'm logging for both the team and my individual account. Consequently, I do a cut & paste from one account to the other. A feature like this would reduce my workload and the frustration of cache owners and future hunters of these caches from reading multiple, redundant logs. I know it's a bummer for me when my PDA with gpxview gives me only the most recent 5 logs and 2 or more are the same or virtually so. I know I'm creating that same situation for others when I do my logging, but I'm not going to write two separate stories for the same find. As for the other members of the team - none have shown an interest in logging. My kids love the hunt, but have shown zero interest in logging. My girlfriend has recently started her own individual account, but is yet to log ANY of the finds she's made since then. I sometimes ask whether anyone wants me to add anything to a log, but in those cases the same input is entered as part of both find logs.

 

Great idea. I agree that a feature like this would reduce the boring logs while still providing people the opportunity to write their gloriously descriptive unique experiences either as part of a group log or as a separate log, as they prefer.

Link to comment

I had an idea today while out caching with 2 of my friends. It seems kind of repetitive that once we found a cache that we all go home, and then each of us end up writing a log to get credit for find the cache. To me it seems that this just fills up the log. My idea would be to have a group post, maybe it would work like the following.

 

1. One person steps forward to write a log, and can then invite others in the group to add to their comments.

2. Invited person gets a PM/email with a link and clicking that adds them to the group post, so they too get credit and if they wish they can add/edit the comment.

 

To me this seems like it would eliminate a lot of repetitive posts that are like, I found this with person x and z, then person z posts and says they found it with x and y, etc...

 

Thanks for you time

 

[edited]

 

If I don't get to write a meaningful, descriptive, and hopefully clever log of my own for the cache, I feel cheated. Nonetheless, cookie-cutter caches get cookie-cutter logs.

What you propose is little different than what happens as it is. One of the group is going to write the nice log, and the others will either completely agree, or perhaps add a few notes of their own. Maybe I'll even get to find out that my cache was #27 of 45 for the day! WHOOPEE!

 

I do agree with the concept of creating a temporary 'Team for a Day' moniker to sign the physical log with (especially for large groups hunting urban micros), and there is a group (with variable members) in our area who does just this...I guess this is what they call a cache machine.

Anyway, I really don't see the advantage for the online log, nor do I see how the site could handle team group logging when the membership of the group could be variable.

 

I love this idea. I cache both alone and with my team, consisting of my kids, my girlfriend, and her daughter. I maintain accounts for me individually and for the team. We have a rule that there must be at least 2 of us from the team in order to count the find as a team find. When we hunt as a team, I'm logging for both the team and my individual account. Consequently, I do a cut & paste from one account to the other. A feature like this would reduce my workload and the frustration of cache owners and future hunters of these caches from reading multiple, redundant logs. I know it's a bummer for me when my PDA with gpxview gives me only the most recent 5 logs and 2 or more are the same or virtually so. I know I'm creating that same situation for others when I do my logging, but I'm not going to write two separate stories for the same find. As for the other members of the team - none have shown an interest in logging. My kids love the hunt, but have shown zero interest in logging. My girlfriend has recently started her own individual account, but is yet to log ANY of the finds she's made since then. I sometimes ask whether anyone wants me to add anything to a log, but in those cases the same input is entered as part of both find logs.

 

Great idea. I agree that a feature like this would reduce the boring logs while still providing people the opportunity to write their gloriously descriptive unique experiences either as part of a group log or as a separate log, as they prefer.

 

I can understand why you would want to keep track of the finds made with your group as opposed to those made alone, but there are just too many variables here. What about someone who caches with several overlapping groups (just as you have the potential for)?

You have created your own additional workload by making this separate team account. It's for your own benefit, and it looks like the other team members are less than enthusiastic about the online part of the game.

Personally I would simply note in my log that I was out with 'Team Rutabaga' in my log, and leave it at that. If the other members of 'Team Rutabaga' don't care to log online, that is their prerogative. At least you have provided a mechanism for them to back-log their finds someday if they want to.

 

If you were to log one of my caches, I would prefer to simply see 'Team Rutabaga strikes again!' for Team Rutabaga's log, rather than an exact copy of what you wrote for yourself.

 

<DISCLAIMER>

***'Team Rutabaga' is a completely fictitious account made up expressly for this forum post. Any resemblance to an actual 'Team Rutabaga' is purely coincidental and unintentional.***

Link to comment

I'm not sure I see the "too many variables". I think it boils down to 2 accounts, 1 author. The rest is simply perspective or background.

 

I realize the workload is my choice, but for the sake of being able to look back at the logs from either account, I'd rather cut & paste the log than use a generic log. Many of my logs are generic, but when I choose to write a descriptive account or when I mention specific TBs by name that were dropped or retrieved, I want that info available to both accounts. The group log feature described here would accomplish that, essentially making both accounts co-owners of the log - 1 log, 1 author, 1 perspective, 2 accounts. (It's not lost on me that the feature describer also accounts for having multiple perspectives by having additional descriptions added by different account holders later. Mine isn't the primary use for which he/she would intend this feature to be used, but it is a valid use of it.)

Link to comment

I would have to say no way!!!!

 

Most of the group caching logs in my area are not worth the time to read. I would prefer a person take a little bit of time to write something worth reading.

 

Everyone in a group would/should have a little different perspetive on their hunt, so a unique log is in order. The copy and paste logs are getting very bad. I don't no if it's due to cachers being able to find more and more in one shot and spend less time on the computer, so they just slap the old TFTC SL on it and move along to the next log.

 

I've personally spent lots of time write out the logs I do. I always try to write something decent because I truely don't believe a person has taken the time and effort to place, list, maintain a cache to get a Thanks, good one.

 

Yes, I do have some short and quick logs but also do have some very long and thought out ones. It all depends on how much the cache impressed me or if the owner really lives up to their obligations as a cache owner.

 

So ya I could see your system taking away some fo the Found it, thanks. Log's, but really if you want you can already set up a "team account" and have one person do all of the logging I guess. I'm not sure why a person would want to go that route. Really the olny kind of acount like that I would care to see is a family type account.

Link to comment

Quick, easy, not-worth-reading logs aren't going away. A feature like this would reduce them. Aside from this forum topic about a potential feature enhancement, there are AT LEAST 3 others with hundreds of posts that focus on those short logs with the majority of the posts being against them. This feature would reduce the logs that 'everyone' seems to hate. For that reason alone there should be more support for it.

 

There are a few well written explanations of why people write short logs that I'll not repeat here. Regardless of whether the majority of cachers want to see longer, more descriptive logs, the short ones won't go away and it's no one's place to tell others how to enjoy their geocaching activities. Regardless of what geocaching once was for a select few, it has grown and will morph into something other than what it was in its infancy. Everyone needs to realize that and get past it. This feature suggestion is one way to reduce the logs that people don't appreciate.

 

Another feature that would accomplish that would be allowing someone to log a find without any written log whatsoever. Let people score the number without having something specific to say. Short one-word logs might disappear in favor of zero-word logs if that were available. Would a cache owner rather see 20 "TFTC" logs, or simply know 20 people found their cache without wasting their time to read these 'zero' logs? I understand they'd rather read 20 descriptive logs, but that simply ISN'T going to happen in all cases. Like it or not, short logs live and will continue to do so. The question asked by this forum topic and my embedded suggestion in this post is whether you want to allow the reduction of those through feature enhancements.

Link to comment

Let people score the number without having something specific to say.

 

This idea comes up from time to time. As one who has gone on urban cache runs as well as on hikes with large groups I was even in favor of it at one time. But the problem is shown in the quote above. There is a misconception that your find count and thus the 'found it' log is for keeping score. There is no score in geocaching. You win by having fun not by having a higher find count than someone else. The purpose of the online log is to write about your experience and thank the hider for the cache. It's better if you write something more than TFTC, but not everyone is a great author. Sometimes, if you found a lot of caches during the day you might not remember them all. Some may not be worth remembering. Short logs are going to happen and there is not much that can be done about it. But that really isn't a reason for having a designated logger for a temporary group write the logs and let everyone get 'credit' whether or not they have something to add. You can always log "I was with TeamLogger and have nothing to add".

 

What may make more sense is something that premium members already have in the ignore list. Some people will mark a cache found - whether or not they found it - just to mark it as "complete" so they won't see it on their nearest list of unfound caches and won't go back to look. They have nothing to say about the cache, they just want it marked someway so they know they have completed it. Premium members could use the ignore list to do this.

 

Some people have chosen to use team accounts if they generally cache as team. When someone from the team caches alone they have a choice. They can have a personal account for logging cache they found alone or they can use the team account. Some people who have two accounts will log both accounts if they are with the team. If there is any problem here, it has to do with the person wanting their multiple accounts to have the "correct score". If they were to drop this idea that there is a "correct score" they wouldn't have a problem. Either always use the team account and state who was there to find the cache or use your personal account when you want to let us know you were caching alone and not as part of your team. Stop worrying that your personal account doesn't show the caches you found with the team or that the team account has finds when there was only one team member.

Link to comment

Much like "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder", "geocaching is what it is, or isn't, in the eyes of the geocacher". For a geocacher who wants to keep score, it is about the score or numbers. For someone who's in it purely for the joy of it, it's about the journey. To each his own.

 

One of the disturbing things about this and other discussions, about logging in particular, is that too many people are trying to preserve what geocaching means to them at the cost of imposing their will on others. Feature enhancements like those expressed in this discussion allow each person to enjoy geocaching in their own way. There are no "rules" requiring online logging of geocaches or of their length or minimum content. There are no "rules" about geocaching not being a numbers game or a scored event.

 

If geocaching isn't about scores or numbers then why do any exist? We celebrate geocaching milestones as expressed in numbers of caches found. Where are the suggestions from the idealists to remove all numbers (find counts, trackables found, items owned / released, etc.) from geocaching.com. Where are the suggestions to close the database connections so that itsnotaboutthenumbers, cachestats, and other geocaching statistics engines don't have any data to work with? Why aren't geocaching milestones expressed in time spent in the hobby rather than in find counts? Oh, wait, is it possible we might not want to equally celebrate two people in the hobby, each for 4 years, but one with 4 finds done on their first and only day of caching and the other with 4000 finds?

 

For those of you who would impose your version of geocaching on others, what's next? Shall we require all access to geocaching.com be done from a particular web browser? Shall we limit users to a specific set of software tools with which to geocache with (e.g. you can use GSAK, but not gpxview)? Shall logs have to be checked for proper grammar, capitalization, and spelling?

 

Should Microsoft poll one set of users and modify its Office suite of applications to suit just them and not consider feature enhancements that benefit different classes of users?

Link to comment

I should probably let this just sink to the bottom, but I can't help adding one more post for the OP's benefit.

 

Your idea may, or may not have side advantages, but how would it save anyone any effort?

 

If Team Y and Z both need to log on to 'opt in' on the find and add their comments (or not), wouldn't it be just as easy for them to log on and write their own log (or enter TFTC, if that's all their creativity will allow)?

 

To Mr. Canning:

Nobody wants to stifle anyone's creative ideas for enhancing the game (or this site), but we are here to discuss the 'perceived community value' of any suggested enhancements. If enough respondents agree that a suggestion has merit, then TPTB will (hopefully) take note and perhaps implement that enhancement.

 

There is no requirement to log online. But, if you want to, the site will keep track of the caches you have logged for you.

 

There is no score.

There will be no winner. (Even so, there may be a lot of losers. <_< )

 

Other sites or programs will slice, dice and display statistics about those finds that may or may not be relevant to a cacher's experience or to their enjoyment of this R.A./S./H.

 

It would be nice if all logs with poor grammar or incorrect spelling were disallowed, but that's just a pipe dream! :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 1
×
×
  • Create New...