+Mule Ears Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 The new cache-page format adds the line: Description written by [current cache owner] In the case of an adopted cache, this line is likely to be wrong. I have been adopting some of the classic caches in my area in order to maintain them, and it bugs me that this line gives me credit for the original owner's work. Even in cases in which the line correctly indicates authorship, it's redundant. A proud author could add this line himself. The new format goes a long way toward organizing and de-cluttering the cache pages. Why not remove this unnecessary and sometimes inaccurate snippet of text, too? Link to comment
+Bambography Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 I'll second that. My only cache (currently) is adopted! Link to comment
+DavidMac Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 When I first noticed this, I saw it on an event page and thought it was added by one of the organizers because several people are collaborating on the event planning. I am also of the opinion that it isn't needed. It's either redundant (since there is already a link to the owner of the listing near the top of the page) or inaccurate, as is the case with adopted caches or those hidden by more than one person. Link to comment
+Cache Heads Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 Good point. Our MISSION 3 cache is adopted and the description was not written by us, it was written by hawkmonk. Link to comment
+Jennifer&Dean Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 I hate to say it but the Description area seems to be an unnecessary addition to the cache page. I would vote that it be removed. -J Link to comment
+Stunod Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 I agree...it should be the "Who placed the cache?" data from the cache submission form (not the name of the actual owner). Not that the new information is even needed, but if it is gonna be there, make it the info supplied on the form. Link to comment
+Monkeybrad Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 I actually like several of the new design features, but I have got to toss my hat into the ring on this one. I have several that are placed under different names (teams, organizations, etc.), one where the actual placer is part of the puzzle and several where the name of the placer that I provided is a big clue in finding the cache. This new "description by" thing kind of screws up several of my caches, not to mention the ones I have adopted. So, if we could go back to the old way I would appreciate it. Link to comment
+Mudfrog Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Well, i just adopted a cache this morning and now i see first hand, that there is a problem with this. I didn't change any of the wording that the orignal owner had, but now it shows the description was written by me. It would be nice if this "description written by" wording was gone completely, made optional, or at least, have it setup where it can be changed by the cache owner. I really don't see a need for it in the first place. Link to comment
+sTeamTraen Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 I really don't see a need for it in the first place. My guess is that the point is to clearly separate "stuff generated by the site" and "stuff for which the owner takes responsibility for the carppy layout". The wording on this feature has already been changed a couple of times, but since the system can't know with certainty who actually wrote the description, there will be cases where it doesn't work. That said, I don't think there's a Web site in the world where the user's view of the data, as presented by a computer, isn't the literal truth. I'd be inclined to let it slide. (Besides, if you adopt a cache, you can always change the description. One could argue that by not doing so, you accept it. End of philosophy 101.) Link to comment
+DavidMac Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 My guess is that the point is to clearly separate "stuff generated by the site" and "stuff for which the owner takes responsibility for the carppy layout". That's probably the reason, I just wonder if this ever was in question to begin with. The fact that the description was written by the cache hider seems pretty intuitive, at least to anybody who has used the site for any length of time. IMO if the page is cluttered enough that the text is necessary to separate the website-generated stuff from the owner-generated stuff, the page is too cluttered. Link to comment
+Raine Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Let the world rejoice, its gone! Link to comment
+ShadowAce Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Let the world rejoice, its gone! And life is once more special and gleeming. [] Link to comment
+n0x0n Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Thank you Raine. Yes, thank you Raine! I'm glad that you are not only reading the threads, but also considering their contents Link to comment
+n0x0n Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 (edited) Sorry, double post... Edited June 7, 2007 by n0x0n Link to comment
+Mule Ears Posted June 7, 2007 Author Share Posted June 7, 2007 Wow, that's service. Thanks! Excellent! Link to comment
+Stunod Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Thanks, Raine. And I didn't even have to light my torch or grab my pitchfork... Link to comment
Recommended Posts