First to Find Statistics

[+Buddaman]

So it all comes down to this Your just too lazy to go through your own stats and you want Groundspeak to do the work for you. other people have took the time to bookmark and such so why don't you!

[+Mopar]

Haggis Hunter

You allready use cashestats on your profile page which keeps track of ftf's(only if you put FTF in your log) so why have Groundspeak mess with it. you are allready keeping track yourself!

If you read back you will see that I have taken several days to put that list together, it still isn't accurate and I have already mentioned it.

 

As for the rest............You know what I really don't give a toss. I am actually quite peeved off at repeating myself, especially with the competition argument. Many thanks must go to Groundspeak for at least coming forward with some sort of interim answer. Ooops there I go again, you haven't. It really is poor customer service allowing your customers to reiterate your comments for you. Especially when those comments are misquoted.

 

Why don't one of the mods just close this, as I really can't be bothered with your lack of service!!! A couple of minutes to post an answer would have been nice?

 

Where did someone misquote? Did someone hack the forums and change the text of Jeremy's posts that you were linked to?

You also understand that despite having over a million registered users, Groundspeak is a fairly small operation, right? Most answers come right from the horses mouth, so to speak. I hope he has better things to do then sit around all day reading the forums and reposting the same answers over and over and over again. I also hope he is spending the weekend with his family, or out caching himself, rather then reading and replying in the forums 24hrs a day 7 days a week. You probably don't work 24/7, why cant he get a few days off?

Edited March 4, 2007 by Mopar

[+Haggis Hunter]

Oh Lord save me!! It is misquoted because my suggestion has bugger all to do with a competition. The list was suggested as PRIVATE. You can't compete when you don't know your competitors stats now can you?? The links provided where to a thread that suggested competition. Which part of that can't you lot understand???

There is also more than Jeremy who work on this site. I do expect him to have time off. But I also don't expect several days without an answer. Even if it was one from his office saying that the horse (so to speak) isn't available until such a date.

 

I also don't like the remarks that I am lazy. I have done a lot for geocaching within Scotland. Admittedly this is because I love the hobby, but my actions done in my free time, have seen members subscribe to this site.

 

If it is the purpose for the small minded people to wind me up and make me angry you have certainly succeeded. It was only a simple suggestion that doesn't require to be kicked into the gutter by anyone other than a member of staff from Groundspeak.

 

[+Haggis Hunter]

Looks like Jeremy hasn't made a post since the 15th February. I would presume that he is actually enjoying something like a holiday? (I hope and it isn't something worse).

 

Why couldn't someone from Groundspeak have pointed this out? You could see that the topic was getting heated, and it was required for Jeremy to give an answer. And yet no one appeared to want to enlighten anyone to this!!!

 

Like I said poor customer service!

[+DcCow]

There are a lot of cachers who enjoy getting the FTF on caches. At the present moment there doesn't appear to be any way that you can look up the caches that you have had as a FTF.

 

What would be nice to see is a list of the caches that you logged either first or on the same date as the FTF. I think the latter would be better as you do get people logging before you.

 

It is only a small request but one I think many people will enjoy. It could be listed along with the caches link on your account page?

 

I would also like to see the ability to have this stat added.

[+DcCow]

Kit Fox re-read the whole thread, then you shall see that you are making comments that I have answered and explained in full. I think you are trolling just like flask was, therefore unless you come up with something different, it isn't worth replying to you any more!!

 

Trolling? Thats a first for me.

 

I offered you two links where the website owner clearly mentioned his distaste for competition, and the "FTF Game." You didn't like his answer, so you went in circles trying to argue your point. I tried to tell you in a polite manner that your roundabout argument wouldn't lead to any cache page changes. If you want to highlight your FTF or your "First to log on the webpage," figure it out on your own. Once again, I suggest the bookmark feature.

I felt that you were being unjustly argumentative to keep me saying the same thing over and over. To me that is just the same as trolling! Even in your explanation here you still bring up the word competition, despite myself saying several times that is not what I want!!

 

It's obvious that you can't figure it out for yourself that I am not asking for what you are being argumentative about???

 

Jeremy I would be extremely grateful if you could give your view on this request. Rather than other members giving us what they believe to be your view on this request!! Which I believe is a misquoted view, until you say otherwise.

Wow, who's making WHO repeat themselves here? Kit's already given you direct links to Jeremy's view from his own fingers on this subject, not someone's misquoted view. Did you bother to read them?

 

 

I think the bone of contention here is that Jeremy is addressing adding features that would enforce competition. If the stat was only visible to the member (as Haggis is requesting) and nobody else - how would this be enforcing "competition"?

 

I don't think that specific quote is really relevant to this request.

 

DC

Edited March 4, 2007 by DcCow

[+Mopar]

Sure it is. Even if it's only something the cacher can see, the programming and social problems stay the same.

FTF is still a competition, no matter how you slice it or display it. It's a race to beat other cachers to the cache. That's not an aspect of the game that Groundspeak cares to promote. If they offer the stat, hidden or not, people will of course use it. Duh. It will be taken as GC.com approves and endorses it.

Also, as was noted many times, there is no perfect foolproof way to automate the function, especially for hundreds of thousands of caches that have already been hidden. Rarely is the First To Log also the FTF so the only possible stats GC.com could compile would be "First To Log" or "Logged on First Day", neither of which is what was asked for or anyone really cares about. In some areas 15-20 people may log the cache the first day. So what?

That leaves some form of human intervention to determine who gets FTF credit, and all the angst that will generate. There will be people complaining they didnt get proper credit for FTF because the cache owner no long plays/is banned/doesn't like them/cheats/is mistaken/doesn't have the logbook from a muggled cache to check/whatever. Again, Jeremy said that they don't want to get involved in enforcing those disputes or deal with all the resulting arguments. So those quotes are totally relevent.

Edited March 4, 2007 by Mopar

[+fizzymagic]

i don't get this. If it is only for the private use of the cacher, then why can't the cacher keep a simple text file with the GC numbers of the caches for which they have been FTF? Then they know instantly how many they have. If they want momre information, they can use Excel or something and add a few columns for cache name, type, etc.

 

If they want links to their caches, they can build a bookmark list.

 

I just don't understand why people want such a massive change to the GC database when it is completely trivial to do this themselves.

[+Haggis Hunter]

DcCow thank you for your comments.

 

Sure it is. Even if it's only something the cacher can see, the programming and social problems stay the same.

FTF is still a competition, no matter how you slice it or display it. It's a race to beat other cachers to the cache. That's not an aspect of the game that Groundspeak cares to promote. If they offer the stat, hidden or not, people will of course use it. Duh. It will be taken as GC.com approves and endorses it.

Groundspeak already promote the main part of what can be viewed as a competition. We can all see the most important stats of them all (fact that has already been pointed out). FTF is going to happen whatever Groundspeak decide, I can't see why a private list is so bad?

 

Also, as was noted many times, there is no perfect foolproof way to automate the function, especially for hundreds of thousands of caches that have already been hidden. Rarely is the First To Log also the FTF so the only possible stats GC.com could compile would be "First To Log" or "Logged on First Day", neither of which is what was asked for or anyone really cares about. In some areas 15-20 people may log the cache the first day. So what?

I'm not sure if you are reading what comments of mine that you want to or not?? I have already pointed this out myself. In my very FIRST post, and several posts afterwards. So that is exactly what I have been asking for, thanks for coming back up with the suggestion. Just because a handful of people don't care, doesn't mean that the whole customer market doesn't care.

 

i don't get this. If it is only for the private use of the cacher, then why can't the cacher keep a simple text file with the GC numbers of the caches for which they have been FTF? Then they know instantly how many they have. If they want momre information, they can use Excel or something and add a few columns for cache name, type, etc.

 

If they want links to their caches, they can build a bookmark list.

 

I just don't understand why people want such a massive change to the GC database when it is completely trivial to do this themselves.

As already said (getting a touch of Groundhog Day here) not everyone when they first start out actually realise that this is a part of the hobby that can be so enjoyable (fact whether Groundspeak like it or not). So like myself they don't keep a track. In my case and others even some of which are against, realise a couple of years later that this is something they would like to look back on. It does take several days to compile a list (unless you have several hours to sit on your rear end and do it all at once) so why not a private list to make it that bit easier.

Also not everyone is computer literate. Everything that I know about computing (not much I must say) is self taught. I have tried to use excel on many occasions and I still can't get my head around it. So because something is easy for one to do, doesn't mean it's easy for another.

 

I just don't understand why so many people are against change, especially change that doesn't actually affect them if they don't want it to? You just need to look through this forum and peoples suggestions. Most of the time it is the customer who is saying no, shouldn't it be the horses mouth so to speak that says what is what? There I go again, that point has already been made, by someone who is actually guilty of being against a change that does no harm and won't affect them.

[+Algonquin Bound]

Not sure if this has been suggested or not, but you could use GSAK to help setup the info you want. GSAK has a built in macro capability, which you could easily use to find caches which you logged on the day of placement. You could then manually go through that much smaller list, to refine your personal FTF list. From then on, just keep track of it in GSAK. You could also build another macro to go through all the FTFs in your list and mark them as FTF. GSAK has a check-box built in for FTF.

[+StarBrand]

Quick recap - The OP wants a feature to track all the caches that he found on the first day that logs are dated. This list will be private and not seen by anybody else.

 

He wants the site to do this for him.

 

 

And this helps to do what?? I don't get it.

[+tozainamboku]

Quick recap - The OP wants a feature to track all the caches that he found on the first day that logs are dated. This list will be private and not seen by anybody else.

 

He wants the site to do this for him.

 

 

And this helps to do what?? I don't get it.

While the OP was to have the site track FTF, after the reasons why this is not practical were explain is seems that Haggis Hunter is now asking simply for the ability to run a query that returns all caches that he found where no there are no finds with an earlier date and include all the logs that are on the same date as his finds. He can then review this list to determine which of these he was FTF and use this to update a personal list.

 

The problem is why should Groundspeak provide a special query? First of all, would this do what he wants? What if the the FTF never logged on line at all or used the wrong date when he logged on line? What if none of the logs contained any indication of the FTF? I suspect that many people would like to create custom queries of the Groundspeak database beyond the functionality of PQs. How does Groundspeak determine which of these are practical? How many geocachers will benefit from the query? Groundspeak already provides the My Finds query that returns all of your Found It logs, including archived caches. Cachestats can process this file looking for your logs where you mentioned FTF or First To Find or even 'defiled a virgin cache' (Does the UK site really use this term for FTF? ) Since most cachers will have put something in their logs for FTF, this solution is satisfactory for most cachers who want to get a count of their FTF. Haggis Hunter, and anyone else, who didn't put something in their logs to indicate they were first to find, may just be out of luck.

[+Haggis Hunter]

 

While the OP was to have the site track FTF, after the reasons why this is not practical were explain is seems that Haggis Hunter is now asking simply for the ability to run a query that returns all caches that he found where no there are no finds with an earlier date and include all the logs that are on the same date as his finds. He can then review this list to determine which of these he was FTF and use this to update a personal list.

 

Totally stumped on were you came up with that from? Is this going to be the new line of interrogation???

[+Haggis Hunter]

Not sure if this has been suggested or not, but you could use GSAK to help setup the info you want. GSAK has a built in macro capability, which you could easily use to find caches which you logged on the day of placement. You could then manually go through that much smaller list, to refine your personal FTF list. From then on, just keep track of it in GSAK. You could also build another macro to go through all the FTFs in your list and mark them as FTF. GSAK has a check-box built in for FTF.

This has got to be the best alternative suggestion that has been made. One which I was not aware of. Unlike the cache stats that searches by words, your macro searches by what I want it to search by.

My problem is that I use GSAK, but I keep it simple. I really don't know how to run such a filter. Any chance you can post a step by step idiots guide for me?

 

I may then give up on this futile quest? Which would be a pity as I wasn't just asking for myself but for all those that like to know. As mentioned in my very first post.

[+Prime Suspect]

I may then give up on this futile quest?

Not a bad idea, since you're only 15% away from Prime's 50/100 rule.

[+Haggis Hunter]

I may then give up on this futile quest?

Not a bad idea, since you're only 15% away from Prime's 50/100 rule.

Gotcha, nice way to sum the plan up. So people keep repeating the same points over and over making the OP rather peeved off with them, and the OP unwittingly keeps reiterating the same thing over and over again, not really understanding why these people can't read properly? You then post your rule to make the OP think he is on a losing quest. An interesting piece of psychology?

[Mushtang]

HH, don't take it personal. Some people just can't comprehend simple english no matter how many times you spell it out clearly. As evidence, I'll point you to the LPC thread in the general topics.

 

Of course, it depends on which side of the debate someone is on as to which side contains the people that "just don't get it".

[+Midnight Cobra]

http://www.logicweave.com/cachestats.html will do that for you.

I got to agree this program is awesome! I only have 40 FTFs out 800 finds, but its enough to want some help keeping the track straight. I know some who have a couple hundred FTFs and I can't image them going back and counting from the beginning.

 

GSAK is another program which has allowed me to discontinue a couple of other programs. It has checkbox columns for FTF, DNF, & user flags, which allow you to keep track of these things at home. If I had to limit myself to one program for caching this would be it.

 

Midnight Cobra

 

Caching is like quicksand, the more you try to stop, the deeper in you get

[+BBosman]

... GSAK has a built in macro capability...

This has got to be the best alternative suggestion that has been made. One which I was not aware of. Unlike the cache stats that searches by words, your macro searches by what I want it to search by.

My problem is that I use GSAK, but I keep it simple. I really don't know how to run such a filter. Any chance you can post a step by step idiots guide for me?

1. Save the code below into a textfile called ftf.txt somewhere on your harddisk.

2. In GSAK go to the menu item Macro and select Run.

3. Use the small folder icon left of the Macro File box to browse to the saved ftf.txt from step 1.

4. Klik OK.

5. You get a list of all caches in your current view that you found within 7 days of being published.

 

MacroFlag Type=Clear Range=All
Goto Position=Top
While not ($_eol)
 If $d_Found = True
If $d_FoundByMeDate <= $d_PlacedDate + 7
  $d_MacroFlag = True
EndIf
 EndIf
 Table Active=caches
 Goto position=Next
EndWhile
Mfilter If=$d_MacroFlag

There are some things to take note of:

1. It doesn't take changed Placed Dates into account.

2. It doesn't include caches where the FTF was more than 7 days after publishing.

3. It works on my GSAK. That's as far as the support goes.

4. If you want to tweak the 7 days, just change the $d_PlacedDate + 7 part.

[+Haggis Hunter]

Thanks BBosman, I shall certainly give that a try.