Could this be made possible?

[+Hobo2]

Wouldn’t it be great if we could (as the owner of a cache), contact, or send out a message to all who have visited our caches at one time, without having to contact them individually? This would be nice (as an example), if the owner was looking for a lost TB, or would just like to send a message thanking all for playing the game, and for visiting his cache… as I would like to do. This would be a very handy feature to have for other applications as well, I‘m sure.

 

Each owner of a cache can contact each visitor now, so this wouldn’t break any rules. The cache visitor could opt out of having this information available, just as they can now, so it wouldn’t change anything. It would just be very handy to have an automated list appear, to the owner of a cache, with each cache visitors contact information for reference. So if need be the owner could contact everyone using one single e-mail, without having to pull up each individuals profile, one at a time.

 

What do you all think about this idea?

Edited October 7, 2007 by Hobo2

[+cache_test_dummies]

What do you all think about this idea?

I would argue that such as system already exists, sort of. People who have an interest in the cache can already watchlist it, and the simple posting of a note by the owner will result in an email being sent to all those who have 'opted in'.

[+Hobo2]

What do you all think about this idea?

I would argue that such as system already exists, sort of. People who have an interest in the cache can already watchlist it, and the simple posting of a note by the owner will result in an email being sent to all those who have 'opted in'.

 

This is true, I hadn't thought of that, but it does limit contacts. For instance, the cache in question (one of my caches), currently only has three people watching it, but it has had over 40 visitors so far. So if I would like to thank them all, it would be quite a laborious process... you can see what I mean?

[+cache_test_dummies]

What do you all think about this idea?

I would argue that such as system already exists, sort of. People who have an interest in the cache can already watchlist it, and the simple posting of a note by the owner will result in an email being sent to all those who have 'opted in'.

 

This is true, I hadn't thought of that, but it does limit contacts. For instance, the cache in question (one of my caches), currently only has three people watching it, but it has had over 40 visitors so far. So if I would like to thank them all, it would be quite a laborious process... you can see what I mean?

Laborious to you, the cache owner. But if it is truly something you'd like to do, I would think you would be willing to go through all the trouble. Sort of a Labor of Love.

 

I know that is just one example, but your 'thank you' example would better be served by just thanking the cache owners as they log, wouldn't it? I mean, you wouldn't want to thank people continuously, right?

 

I like not having to opt out (that is, I like opting in via watchlist). And I wouldn't want an over-zealous cache owner to continuously bombard me with information that they think I might be interested in. Has kind of a 'spam' feel to it.

[+Nachtraaf]

I don't see the additional value of it...

 

Actually I don't want to receive a 'Thank you' mail for each cache I have found, altough it is nice and polite. Until now I count only 85 caches, but what if you have 1.000 or even more...nah...

 

The 'opt-in' feature of the watchlist is more than enough to me.

 

Regards,

Hans

[+mtn-man]

I would agree that the mechanism is already in place with the watchlist. I would hate to have to opt out every time I find a cache. With over 2,000 finds at this point, it would be a lot of email. It is nice that you want to thank people though.

 

This is more of a Geocaching.com Web Site forum feature request, so I will move this topic there.

[+BlueDeuce]

Getting a broadcast email for every cache I've found would be rather annoying. Some people are just a little too friendly and like to share a little too much for my taste.

 

I'd hate to be subject to a new list every time I found a cache.

 

For lost TBs I'll target the likely suspects that come up in my research.

[+hukilaulau]

No thanks. I would not appreciate a form letter email every time a TB goes missing from a cache I have previously found. As for thank you notes, I like them when they are personal notes from the owner, but again... a generic form letter is a waste of time.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I see value in the idea, certainly not as a broadcast email to all finders on any regular basis, but in the ability to do it on occasion.

 

I recently hosted an event in a little-cached part of our state, with the intent of building and promoting caching in that area.

 

Most of the existing caches had been found by folks traveling through the area and who were therefore unknown to the cache owners.

 

I had a volunteer scour all of the local caches and send an email to all finders telling them about the event and pointing them to the listing.

 

A large number of the folks who attended said they only learned about the event via the email as they don't watch the gc event calender.

 

It sure would have been easier if the cache owners could have broadcast this event notice to their finders instead of having to do it one log at a time!

[ParentsofSAM]

I think this would be a good idea but only for events not other cache types.

 

When the owner posts a note that contains special information for event attendees they could check a box that says email to all logs or something like that. Then the important note would go out as a mass email.

 

Yes the cachers could put a watch on the event listing but I know lots of people do not watch events due to all the annoying bug and coin drop notes.

[+mtn-man]

Wow. That is actually one great use for this idea. Good call. I like that one.

[+ChileHead]

I would hate that. While thanking is nice, if you thank the 30 people who found your cache now, what happens in 6 months when you have 30 more people. Do you thank all 60 then? This has WAY too much opportunity to be abused.

 

ParentsOfSam - ok, you found a great use for it! Something like "send an email to all 'will attend'" people.

[+Glenn]

I'm all for it as long as there is a option in my profile to automatically opt out of all group emailings.

[+Prime Suspect]

Wouldn’t it be great if we could (as the owner of a cache), contact, or send out a message to all who have visited our caches at one time, without having to contact them individually? This would be nice (as an example), if the owner was looking for a lost TB, or would just like to send a message thanking all for playing the game, and for visiting his cache… as I would like to do. This would be a very handy feature to have for other applications as well, I‘m sure.

 

Each owner of a cache can contact each visitor now, so this wouldn’t break any rules. The cache visitor could opt out of having this information available, just as they can now, so it wouldn’t change anything. It would just be very handy to have an automated list appear, to the owner of a cache, with each cache visitors contact information for reference. So if need be the owner could contact everyone using one single e-mail, without having to pull up each individuals profile, one at a time.

 

What do you all think about this idea?

Why would I want to get email about a bug missing from a cache I visited 5 years ago? Thanks, but no thanks.

[+Hobo2]

Yes being able to opt out is necessary for something like this (I think that goes without saying), but as TheAlabamaRambler and ParentsofSAM stated it would be nice to have for their reasons alone. As for the other coments, I just don’t think anyone here would be so mistaken as to contact people who visited a cache five years ago about a resent missing TB, or be so inept as to contact over and over the same cachers to say thanks as ChileHead and PrimeSuspect has suggested… remember, if they don't like it they could just opt out.

 

I do hope something like this could be installed, I think it could turn out to be a very useful tool.

Edited October 14, 2007 by Hobo2

[+Michael]

I just don’t think anyone here would be so mistaken as to contact people who visited a cache five years ago about a resent missing TB, or be so inept as to contact over and over the same cachers to say thanks as ChileHead and PrimeSuspect has suggested

 

The problem is, this is exactly what does happen on a weekly basis. Some people in the attempt to find a TB will write everyone that ever logged the last cache it was in. It happens. While you might feel that it would only be used for important purposes the truth is different people have different ideas of what is important. The potential for abuse is so great that I am willing to bet that it would not take long before most people would opt out.

[+mousekakat]

I think that the OP meant like what is done with some guestbooks, where when you sign it you get a thank you note for signing it, nothing more, ever.

 

I donät think that is that bad a thing, actually. I do try to send thanks out to some folks who log my caches. This would just do it for me automatically.

[+Hobo2]

I just don’t think anyone here would be so mistaken as to contact people who visited a cache five years ago about a resent missing TB, or be so inept as to contact over and over the same cachers to say thanks as ChileHead and PrimeSuspect has suggested

 

The problem is, this is exactly what does happen on a weekly basis. Some people in the attempt to find a TB will write everyone that ever logged the last cache it was in. It happens. While you might feel that it would only be used for important purposes the truth is different people have different ideas of what is important. The potential for abuse is so great that I am willing to bet that it would not take long before most people would opt out.

 

Take a moment and look to see what kinds of folks have visited your cache, depending upon if you have one. Most folks are professional, adventurous, nice people. On the other hand, the worst of Geocachers seem to gather here. In fact the most complaining, arguing, and just downright mean spirited people I have encountered in this sport, are here in Groundspeek. But I have found the opposite is true for the average Geocacher. I find the average cacher out in the field to be friendly, respectful, and very courteous. Moreover, just as you can opt out of being contacted, I believe most cachers are already opting out of posting anything on Groundspeek for these same reasons… but that doesn’t mean they aren’t watching, or lurking, or wanting something like this, that is why I‘m posting this.

 

Yes, some would do it wrong, a very small amount would misuse it, but I’m optimistic about most of the people who play this sport. I would keep my e-mail address available even though some would use it wrongly, because I am sure most people who would use this tool have a need, and I would like to help. See, if you decide what type of individual most fit’s the average Geocacher by judging what you read here, you’re very much missing the big picture, and nothing new will be added. Always try to remember, penalizing the rest for the actions of a few has never grown anything! Let's please not do that here!

 

PS, I doubt if you get contacted on a weekly basis about a lost TB's, but even if you do, and you don't want to help, don't. You could also just remove you're e-mail address from your profile now, if this lost TB's thing bathers you so much... simple.

Edited October 14, 2007 by Hobo2

[+Prime Suspect]

Yes being able to opt out opt in is necessary for something like this (I think that goes without saying), but as TheAlabamaRambler and ParentsofSAM stated it would be nice to have for their reasons alone. As for the other coments, I just don’t think anyone here would be so mistaken as to contact people who visited a cache five years ago about a resent missing TB, or be so inept as to contact over and over the same cachers to say thanks as ChileHead and PrimeSuspect has suggested… remember, if they don't like it they could just opt out like it they could just opt in.

 

I do hope something like this could be installed, I think it could turn out to be a very useful tool.

Post fixed.

Edited October 14, 2007 by Prime Suspect

[+Hobo2]

Yes being able to opt out opt in is necessary for something like this (I think that goes without saying), but as TheAlabamaRambler and ParentsofSAM stated it would be nice to have for their reasons alone. As for the other coments, I just don’t think anyone here would be so mistaken as to contact people who visited a cache five years ago about a resent missing TB, or be so inept as to contact over and over the same cachers to say thanks as ChileHead and PrimeSuspect has suggested… remember, if they don't like it they could just opt out like it they could just opt in.

 

I do hope something like this could be installed, I think it could turn out to be a very useful tool.

Post fixed.

 

Thanks for making my point so clear

[+cache_test_dummies]

Yes being able to opt out opt in is necessary for something like this (I think that goes without saying), but as TheAlabamaRambler and ParentsofSAM stated it would be nice to have for their reasons alone. As for the other coments, I just don’t think anyone here would be so mistaken as to contact people who visited a cache five years ago about a resent missing TB, or be so inept as to contact over and over the same cachers to say thanks as ChileHead and PrimeSuspect has suggested… remember, if they don't like it they could just opt out like it they could just opt in.

 

I do hope something like this could be installed, I think it could turn out to be a very useful tool.

Post fixed.

 

Thanks for making my point so clear

I'm not sure which point you think was made so clear in Prime Suspect's post, but an opt-in version of what you are requesting (as suggested by Prime Suspect in his 'fixed' post), as I said above, is already in place, and working just fine.

[+The Leprechauns]

I'd be in favor of an "Owner Mass E-mail" feature, but ONLY for the owners of Event Caches and CITO Event Caches, to contact people who have logged a "will attend." That way, I can receive important updates about the event, without having to watchlist the cache and be subjected to multiple "bug drop" and "coin collection drop" e-mail notifications. If I didn't even want the owner e-mails, I would log a "note" instead of a "will attend," so the opt-in, opt-out functionality is already there.

[ParentsofSAM]

I'd be in favor of an "Owner Mass E-mail" feature, but ONLY for the owners of Event Caches and CITO Event Caches, to contact people who have logged a "will attend." That way, I can receive important updates about the event, without having to watchlist the cache and be subjected to multiple "bug drop" and "coin collection drop" e-mail notifications. If I didn't even want the owner e-mails, I would log a "note" instead of a "will attend," so the opt-in, opt-out functionality is already there.

 

Yep...this is what I was saying.

 

I hope we can get this feature, it would be perfect!

[+PeterNoG]

I'd be in favor of an "Owner Mass E-mail" feature, but ONLY for the owners of Event Caches and CITO Event Caches, to contact people who have logged a "will attend." That way, I can receive important updates about the event, without having to watchlist the cache and be subjected to multiple "bug drop" and "coin collection drop" e-mail notifications. If I didn't even want the owner e-mails, I would log a "note" instead of a "will attend," so the opt-in, opt-out functionality is already there.

 

This would be an excellent feature.

[+Hobo2]

I still think this would be a great tool to have for all, not just for the event owners. Remember, anyone could simply opt-out of the mass email notification if they choose to, but keep there ability to be notified the way it is right now... win, win.

 

So how do we submit an idea like this to the powers to be?

[+Prime Suspect]

I still think this would be a great tool to have for all, not just for the event owners. Remember, anyone could simply opt-out of opt-in to the mass email notification if they choose to, but keep there ability to be notified the way it is right now... win, win.

 

So how do we submit an idea like this to the powers to be?

Another post fixed.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

Absolutely! Opt-in not opt-out.

Edited October 28, 2007 by Motorcycle_Mama

[+GeoBlank]

Maybe a feature to email all your listed friends... and while you are at it make it so you can see this in more of a grid view with other columns

[+mtn-man]

I still think this would be a great tool to have for all, not just for the event owners. Remember, anyone could simply opt-out of the mass email notification if they choose to, but keep there ability to be notified the way it is right now... win, win.

 

So how do we submit an idea like this to the powers to be?

You have by posting this topic.

 

I still think this is a bad idea except for events. While you have only found 60 caches in total, I found 52 caches in four days this week. I would hate to have had to opt out of all of those caches because I have no desire to get emails from all of those caches. Would this also mean I have to go back to all 2,100 cache I've found so far? What about cachers that have far more logs than I do? Lose, lose.

 

If the cache owner wants to contact me, it is easy enough to do.

[+Hobo2]

I still think this would be a great tool to have for all, not just for the event owners. Remember, anyone could simply opt-out of the mass email notification if they choose to, but keep there ability to be notified the way it is right now... win, win.

 

So how do we submit an idea like this to the powers to be?

You have by posting this topic.

 

I still think this is a bad idea except for events. While you have only found 60 caches in total, I found 52 caches in four days this week. I would hate to have had to opt out of all of those caches because I have no desire to get emails from all of those caches. Would this also mean I have to go back to all 2,100 cache I've found so far? What about cachers that have far more logs than I do? Lose, lose.

 

If the cache owner wants to contact me, it is easy enough to do.

It is suggested you would need to opt-in rather than having to opt-out. This could be a setting you make as you do any notification form Groundspeek, i.e. new cache postings.

 

Also, does it mean that just because I only have 60 caches found so far, I couldn't possibly come up with any good suggestions, emphasis being on suggestion? If this is true, how many caches do you feel I need to score before my suggestions will have Merritt?

Edited October 29, 2007 by Hobo2

[+mtn-man]

Also, does it mean that just because I only have 60 caches found so far, I couldn't possibly come up with any good suggestions, emphasis being on suggestion? If this is true, how many caches do you feel I need to score before my suggestions will have Merritt?

No, not what I meant at all.

 

What I mean is that it takes a lot of time to log 52 caches on the site in a four day period. It was 15, 15, 12 and 10 the last day. It is a lot of typing and a lot of mouse-clicks and page loads to log that many caches. Your suggestion that you have to opt-out of of these notifications each time would make me do several additional mouse-clicks and page loads for every cache I find. With page loading taking a serious toll on the servers at this point, your suggestion as an opt-out for every cache makes me spend valuable time that I don't want and would most likely cause tremendous additional load on an already stressed server. I don't think many people want this (if this topic is any indication), so tons of people would be forced to stress the servers even more to opt-out of every cache.

 

I've already said that it is a great idea for events, so you probably have hit on a good idea for limited applications. For the whole site though, it is not a good idea in my opinion.

[+ChileHead]

I like it for events, but for everything else, it is just way to easy to start abusing.

 

I really don't want to get mail from geocaching.com that says:

"Make Money Fast"

"Enlarge your ..."

"Nigerian needs help getting money out of country ..."

"blah, blah, blah"

 

This would happen if any cache had the ability to mass spam everybody who logged the cache.

[+Hobo2]

Also, does it mean that just because I only have 60 caches found so far, I couldn't possibly come up with any good suggestions, emphasis being on suggestion? If this is true, how many caches do you feel I need to score before my suggestions will have Merritt?

No, not what I meant at all.

 

What I mean is that it takes a lot of time to log 52 caches on the site in a four day period. It was 15, 15, 12 and 10 the last day. It is a lot of typing and a lot of mouse-clicks and page loads to log that many caches. Your suggestion that you have to opt-out of of these notifications each time would make me do several additional mouse-clicks and page loads for every cache I find. With page loading taking a serious toll on the servers at this point, your suggestion as an opt-out for every cache makes me spend valuable time that I don't want and would most likely cause tremendous additional load on an already stressed server. I don't think many people want this (if this topic is any indication), so tons of people would be forced to stress the servers even more to opt-out of every cache.

 

I've already said that it is a great idea for events, so you probably have hit on a good idea for limited applications. For the whole site though, it is not a good idea in my opinion.

Thanks for setting the record straight.

[+Hobo2]

I like it for events, but for everything else, it is just way to easy to start abusing.

 

I really don't want to get mail from geocaching.com that says:

"Make Money Fast"

"Enlarge your ..."

"Nigerian needs help getting money out of country ..."

"blah, blah, blah"

 

This would happen if any cache had the ability to mass spam everybody who logged the cache.

Wow, your exactly right... I hadn't thought about spam abuse. In fact some promoters of events do have intentions of attracting buyers, don't you think? It could be misused by them as well. Lets chalk this thread up to "not a good idea after all"... but it was fun to participate.