Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Parabola

Temp caches

Recommended Posts

I have asked many of people where I can e-mail an idea for logging temp caches. No one can give me a e-mail address.

 

The reason for this I think is pretty important. First off let me say I don't agree with logging a temp but I'm not attack anyone who does. No one in my area will talk about it on a calm level. The logging of temps has created a huge stir in Iowa. It has really put a strain on cachers getting along.

 

My idea for them is to make an icon for temps kind of like the benchmarks. A quick write up page that doesn't have to be approved by an admin. I have noticed that if an event holder doesn't want temps to be logged on their event then someone will just throw out a cache near the event and everyone will log the temps there. So when you go through the cache page there can be upwards of 500 finds in a day, if not a lot more.

 

I would also like to suggest a Found log it once and only once on all caches. Can it be made that if someone has logged a find they can't be able to log it again. When I was first starting out I double logged 5 caches, and never relized it until 700 caches later. I went all the way through all my finds and found out which ones and deleted the second found log. Can it be made so that if someone goes to log a find on a cache they have found it give them a block and say you have already found this cache.

 

I'm just trying to help solve alot of probelms that are be cause in my area. If it's goning on here, I'm sure it's going on elsewhere.

 

Again, this is not an attack on anyone that has double logs or logged temps on events or logged them on other cache. It's just an idea to end all the bickering.

 

Personally I think temps are just for fun and that's it. I have found atleast 40 temps and never logged them anywhere. But I can see if from the other side and say that some temps are harder that some published caches and it would be nice to log them somewhere.

 

Now go ahead and let me have it.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm getting the strong feeling that 280,000+ listed caches in the US isn't quite enough for some people.....

Share this post


Link to post

My idea for them is to make an icon for temps kind of like the benchmarks. A quick write up page that doesn't have to be approved by an admin.

Regardless of the reason for doing so, creating a mechanism for listing unreviewed caches is not a good idea. From the perpective of a land manager, there would be no meaningful distinction between a 'real' cache and a 'temporary' cache when both of them are listed on this site.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm just trying to help solve alot of probelms that are be cause in my area. If it's goning on here, I'm sure it's going on elsewhere.

 

Again, this is not an attack on anyone that has double logs or logged temps on events or logged them on other cache. It's just an idea to end all the bickering.

 

I don't understand why there are problems in Iowa. Perhaps you can have a caucus and decide on whether people should log temporary cache or not.

 

The way I see it, a strong argument can be made that you should use a Found It log to report when you found that particular cache and an Attended log to indicate that you attended that event. People get upset when others use a Found It or Attended log to indicate they found something else like a temporary cache. So we have people making suggestions for ways to allow the temporary caches that are placed at an event to be logged.

 

One argument is that you don't need another log type. You could just write a longer Attended log where you list which temporary caches you found, or you could write a Note for each temporary cache. But these options have the drawback of not counting in your statistics.

 

If you are proposing a special log for events for temporary caches and this log did increment your find count it may satisfy both the people who oppose misusing the attended log and those who wish to count the temporary caches as caches they have found. But would this stop the bickering? Probably not. There would undoubtedly be people who would complain the temporary event caches are too easy and should be counted like traditional caches or that it is unfair to have so many caches available only for one day when not everybody might be able to go to that event. Someone might even ask that the site show two numbers - one count including these temporary caches and the other only counting traditional cache finds.

 

CTD - I don't think the OP is asking for a new cache type. Temporary caches would be listed on the event cache page or even just given out at the event. What there would be is a new log type. The cacher's statistics would show a new icon for the number of 'Found a temporary cache at an event' Eg.

 

2.gif Traditional Caches * 734

3.gif Multi-Cache * 69

4.gif Virtual Caches * 11

6.gif Event Caches * 15

11.gif Webcam Caches * 1

sundial.gif Temporary Caches * 490

12.gif Locationless (Reverse) Caches * 4

27.gif NGS Benchmarks 18

Share this post


Link to post

I don't understand why there are problems in Iowa. Perhaps you can have a caucus and decide on whether people should log temporary cache or not.

 

Hey, thanks for answering the question.

Share this post


Link to post

CTD - I don't think the OP is asking for a new cache type. Temporary caches would be listed on the event cache page or even just given out at the event. What there would be is a new log type. The cacher's statistics would show a new icon for the number of 'Found a temporary cache at an event' Eg.

Perhaps the OP will provide some clarification, but I'm interpreting "A quick write up page that doesn't have to be approved by an admin" to mean a separate listing that, when logged as a find, would result in a different icon, but not count towards your overall find count.

Share this post


Link to post

I have asked many of people where I can e-mail an idea for logging temp caches. No one can give me a e-mail address.

 

 

I wasn't aware the issue resurfaced recently. It does come up from time to time. I guess that's what happens when you stop watching every cache within 50 miles.

 

If I had my choice I'd set it like Travel Bugs. It doesn't matter how many times you've found one, you only get one stat count.

 

Really though whether or not you are allowed to log more than one find is up to the cache owner. Any owner having difficulty with anyone wanting to log multiple finds can make a private report to a reviewer.

Edited by BlueDeuce

Share this post


Link to post
I would also like to suggest a Found log it once and only once on all caches. Can it be made that if someone has logged a find they can't be able to log it again. When I was first starting out I double logged 5 caches, and never relized it until 700 caches later. I went all the way through all my finds and found out which ones and deleted the second found log. Can it be made so that if someone goes to log a find on a cache they have found it give them a block and say you have already found this cache.

 

It would be neat if a member could select an option to block themselves from logging multiple times, which would help folks that don't want to multilog from making a mistake. I don't, however, think you should make it so nobody could ever log a cache more than once.

 

The people logging events 100 times are having fun and not hurting anyone, so why take that fun away from them?

Share this post


Link to post

CTD - I don't think the OP is asking for a new cache type. Temporary caches would be listed on the event cache page or even just given out at the event. What there would be is a new log type. The cacher's statistics would show a new icon for the number of 'Found a temporary cache at an event' Eg.

Perhaps the OP will provide some clarification, but I'm interpreting "A quick write up page that doesn't have to be approved by an admin" to mean a separate listing that, when logged as a find, would result in a different icon, but not count towards your overall find count.

 

Yes, that's what I mean. I'm not very good at explaining what the voices in my head are saying. :unsure: I just think a place to log temps would be a good thing. Not just logging them on the event page.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe it should just be a different Log type on the event cache page? I mean, 20 participation logs from the same cacher on a single CITO event is kind of weird.

Edited by kablooey

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe it should just be a different Log type on the event cache page? I mean, 20 participation logs from the same cacher on a single CITO event is kind of weird.

So because it seems weird to you, even though it's fun for the people that do it, you're suggesting changes to the site to make it not weird for you.

 

Would it matter to you if the change you suggested removed the fun these people had with it?

Share this post


Link to post

I have asked many of people where I can e-mail an idea for logging temp caches. No one can give me a e-mail address.

 

 

Really though whether or not you are allowed to log more than one find is up to the cache owner. Any owner having difficulty with anyone wanting to log multiple finds can make a private report to a reviewer.

 

Then you also get threats of your logs being deleted on their other caches. It's a sick twisted power play.

Share this post


Link to post

I have asked many of people where I can e-mail an idea for logging temp caches. No one can give me a e-mail address.

 

 

Really though whether or not you are allowed to log more than one find is up to the cache owner. Any owner having difficulty with anyone wanting to log multiple finds can make a private report to a reviewer.

 

Then you also get threats of your logs being deleted on their other caches. It's a sick twisted power play.

 

Yep.

And then I threaten to go steal their caches if my logs are deleted.

So they threaten to steal mine if I do.

 

Really, let the stupid people do stupid things, as long as nobody gets hurt...WHO CARES!

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe it should just be a different Log type on the event cache page? I mean, 20 participation logs from the same cacher on a single CITO event is kind of weird.

 

Do they get one icon for each beer bottle or coke can they find? Do they get a bigger one if they CITO a mattress or old stove?

 

Its just absurd I think, to rack up 20 smilies in a day for finding temp caches at an event cache. When I started caching, it was expected that you might find several temp caches at any event. It was just part of the fun you got for that one event cache smilie. Sort of like a multicache. Or do they try and log every stage of a multi as a seperate cache too in Iowa?

Share this post


Link to post

I think the current system, where the owners of events may allow multi logging of the event if cachers wish to increment find count for temporary hides is the best system possible. People that want to do it can, people that don't needn't, and the event owner can chose to allow it or not per their wishes.

 

A quick write up page that doesn't have to be approved by an admin" to mean a separate listing that, when logged as a find, would result in a different icon, but not count towards your overall find count.

 

There's no way that GC.com is going to publish pages which haven't been reviewed for content. My other account is a reviewer account. Trust me, a huge number of cache pages need vetting before publication, commonly either for commercial content, agenda content, or family friendly content. The idea that a listing can go live unread is unrealistic.

 

From the perpective of a land manager, there would be no meaningful distinction between a 'real' cache and a 'temporary' cache when both of them are listed on this site.

 

And this too.

 

In this area there are several land managers contemplating permit systems. They've not gone to them as they've come to rely on the GC.com admins to administer the GC.com guidelines as they understand them (especially saturation). Suddenly publishing unread caches outside those guidelines wouldn't do anything to foster that trust.

 

Altering the website to accommodate those that wish to police other cachers logs on cache pages they don't own doesn't strike me as useful work for the programming staff.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe it should just be a different Log type on the event cache page? I mean, 20 participation logs from the same cacher on a single CITO event is kind of weird.

 

Do they get one icon for each beer bottle or coke can they find? Do they get a bigger one if they CITO a mattress or old stove?

 

Its just absurd I think, to rack up 20 smilies in a day for finding temp caches at an event cache. When I started caching, it was expected that you might find several temp caches at any event. It was just part of the fun you got for that one event cache smilie. Sort of like a multicache. Or do they try and log every stage of a multi as a seperate cache too in Iowa?

 

Are you saying that you log your multicaches only once and not each time for each stage? :mad:

Share this post


Link to post

I cannot begin to imagine the absurd problems that would arise from unreviewed temp cache pages.

 

I vote no.

 

My idea is to have a restriction that equates 1 GC number = 1 and only 1 find count.

 

If they want to "record" temp caches - have the host set the total number available on the listing page and when folks log an attended log - they can select a little spin contol to indicate the number of temps they found out of the possible number. Still just one smilie and one log generated.

 

Might add the cute little icon from above to the stats but the total count should not include them.

 

logit.jpg

Edited by StarBrand

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe it should just be a different Log type on the event cache page? I mean, 20 participation logs from the same cacher on a single CITO event is kind of weird.

 

Do they get one icon for each beer bottle or coke can they find? Do they get a bigger one if they CITO a mattress or old stove?

 

Its just absurd I think, to rack up 20 smilies in a day for finding temp caches at an event cache. When I started caching, it was expected that you might find several temp caches at any event. It was just part of the fun you got for that one event cache smilie. Sort of like a multicache. Or do they try and log every stage of a multi as a seperate cache too in Iowa?

This is exactly how I feel about it too. :mad:

Share this post


Link to post

I completely disagree with unreviewed "temp" cache listings. Way too many problems to cover them all, but most have already been mentioned.

 

As for multiple logs on a single event, well, I'm of the opinion that 1 cache = 1 find max. I don't care if you log a cache 2000 times, it should only count for ONE find in your total. This is the way TB's are handled now, and I don't see why caches aren't.

 

As for getting "credit" for a temp cache find... how hard are these finds? Could I get credits for placing 20 hide-a-keys under 5 picnic tables at a CITO event? What about credits for signing the event log 41 times? What if someone looses the cooler of beer, then someone else finds it (would that be one find, or one per bottle/can)? What about finding a "traveling cache" in the pocket of a random event attendee?

 

My point is that you get a Groundspeak find point for finding a cache (or attending an event) that was properly reviewed, approved, and published by Groundspeak. You do NOT, and you should not, get a find point for anything else, nor should you get mulple find points for an approved cache (or event). Otherwise, number hounds could claim "finds" for successfully locating their car keys before driving to an event.

Share this post


Link to post

I would like to see it, where if a logged find is made then if someone goes to log a find a second time it gives them a screen that says you have already logged a find. I would like to see Groundspeak close the loop hole for logging caches more than once.

 

The temp idea was just so both sides might be happy.

Edited by Parabola

Share this post


Link to post

 

If they want to "record" temp caches - have the host set the total number available on the listing page and when folks log an attended log - they can select a little spin contol to indicate the number of temps they found out of the possible number. Still just one smilie and one log generated.

 

Might add the cute little icon from above to the stats but the total count should not include them.

 

logit.jpg

 

That's kind of the idea I'm trying to suggest. :mad:

Share this post


Link to post

 

Are you saying that you log your multicaches only once and not each time for each stage? :mad:

 

Please tell me you're joking.

Share this post


Link to post

I would like to see it, where if a logged find is made then if someone goes to log a find a second time it gives them a screen that says you have already logged a find. I would like to see Groundspeak close the loop hole for logging caches more than once.

Why?

 

Earlier in this thread I asked a question you may have missed, so I'll ask it again.

 

The people logging events 100 times are having fun and not hurting anyone, so why take that fun away from them?

Share this post


Link to post
Or do they try and log every stage of a multi as a seperate cache too in Iowa?

 

I've haven't ever noticed this happening.

 

Some people here log temp caches at events and some don't. I simply don't have temp caches at my events so it's not an issue.

Share this post


Link to post

I would like to see it, where if a logged find is made then if someone goes to log a find a second time it gives them a screen that says you have already logged a find. I would like to see Groundspeak close the loop hole for logging caches more than once.

Why?

 

Earlier in this thread I asked a question you may have missed, so I'll ask it again.

 

The people logging events 100 times are having fun and not hurting anyone, so why take that fun away from them?

 

If the event holder doesn't want them logged and won't allow them then people are just finding a near by cache or putting out a cache just to log them. The logs on the temps are a joke. found temp#1, found temp #2. Nobody can seem to put more though into their logs. Which I see as dissapointing. I try to give a good log every cache. If someone is taking the time to place and mantain a cache then I at least owe them a good log.

Share this post


Link to post

....Now go ahead and let me have it.

 

Here you go. You presented two ideas. One that you can only log a cache once as a fine. That's easy enough to do from a site standpoint and I support the idea.

 

The other to allow a temp cache icon. Maybe a second page to the Event Cache can hold all the temp cache logs so the event itself isn't cluttered up with all the cache logs. I think that would also work fairly well.

 

The problem isn't the temp caches at events. People won both sides of the issue normally like them. Most of the debate is over how they are logged.

Edited by Renegade Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Or do they try and log every stage of a multi as a seperate cache too in Iowa?

 

I've haven't ever noticed this happening.

 

Some people here log temp caches at events and some don't. I simply don't have temp caches at my events so it's not an issue.

BD, I think he was being sarcastic. I also think there is truth in the sarcasm. I bet it will happen. It's just a matter of time. It's called entropy. Edited by TrailGators

Share this post


Link to post

I have asked many of people where I can e-mail an idea for logging temp caches. No one can give me a e-mail address.

 

 

I wasn't aware the issue resurfaced recently. It does come up from time to time. I guess that's what happens when you stop watching every cache within 50 miles.

 

If I had my choice I'd set it like Travel Bugs. It doesn't matter how many times you've found one, you only get one stat count.

 

Really though whether or not you are allowed to log more than one find is up to the cache owner. Any owner having difficulty with anyone wanting to log multiple finds can make a private report to a reviewer.

Busy working through this thread and have generated a reply. What bugged me when I first wanted to place a cache is that I could not ascertain beforehand what the response to my suggestion would be - it would be "up to the reviewer" or "up to the owner". That that goes against the my sensibilities of freedom of thought. I prefer a set of rules that everyone can understand as opposed to relying to the opinion of a reviewer or owner - I get a better sense of being in control of my destiny that way.

 

I vote for: 1 event cache = one Found it. I don't see any scope for ambiguity there.

 

My 2 drachmas/roubles worth (are they still worth anything?)

Share this post


Link to post
Or do they try and log every stage of a multi as a seperate cache too in Iowa?

 

I've haven't ever noticed this happening.

 

Some people here log temp caches at events and some don't. I simply don't have temp caches at my events so it's not an issue.

BD, I think he was being sarcastic. <snip>

 

Yeah, I know. Talking trash about Iowans. I just decided to answer as if he were asking a real question.

 

No, I'm pretty sure they don't. Next question please.

 

 

edit was/were

Edited by BlueDeuce

Share this post


Link to post

The people logging events 100 times are having fun and not hurting anyone, so why take that fun away from them?

 

I have fun bouncing a basketball. From now on I think I'll log every bounce on GC.com

Just think, the possibilities are endless. I can pass CCCA in no time. And because it's fun and I'm not hurting anyone, it can't be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Or do they try and log every stage of a multi as a seperate cache too in Iowa?

 

I've haven't ever noticed this happening.

 

Some people here log temp caches at events and some don't. I simply don't have temp caches at my events so it's not an issue.

BD, I think he was being sarcastic. I also think there is truth in the sarcasm. I bet it will happen. It's just a matter of time. It's called entropy.

 

She.

 

Tsegi Mike works and doesnt read forums or even the cache pages. Desert Viking is wife who has more time to sit in front of the computer reading forums and cache pages.

 

And yes I was being sarcastic to make a point. Temp caches at an event cache are just like stages of a mu;ticache. They are a part of the one whole (event/ multi)cache. They shouldnt be logged seperately unless they have real cache listings of their own at this site.

Share this post


Link to post

The people logging events 100 times are having fun and not hurting anyone, so why take that fun away from them?

 

I have fun bouncing a basketball. From now on I think I'll log every bounce on GC.com

Just think, the possibilities are endless. I can pass CCCA in no time. And because it's fun and I'm not hurting anyone, it can't be wrong.

:mad:

Share this post


Link to post

I cannot begin to imagine the absurd problems that would arise from unreviewed temp cache pages.

 

I vote no.

 

My idea is to have a restriction that equates 1 GC number = 1 and only 1 find count.

 

If they want to "record" temp caches - have the host set the total number available on the listing page and when folks log an attended log - they can select a little spin contol to indicate the number of temps they found out of the possible number. Still just one smilie and one log generated.

 

Might add the cute little icon from above to the stats but the total count should not include them.

 

logit.jpg

 

Thats a nice idea. But will people use it or still try and log finds for their temp caches? I may be wrong, but it seems to be about numbers, adding to their find count.

Share this post


Link to post

....Thats a nice idea. But will people use it or still try and log finds for their temp caches? I may be wrong, but it seems to be about numbers, adding to their find count.

I don't know - the recent discussion held that some do it for numbers while others do it for "an accurate record" of thier own geocaching. Still others stated that no one should put any stock in anybody's numbers.

 

I think this allows for a little bit of each. So long as a new count of temps is added to the stats page (Although i still don't think the temps should be included in totals).

Share this post


Link to post

I cannot begin to imagine the absurd problems that would arise from unreviewed temp cache pages.

 

I vote no.

 

My idea is to have a restriction that equates 1 GC number = 1 and only 1 find count.

 

If they want to "record" temp caches - have the host set the total number available on the listing page and when folks log an attended log - they can select a little spin contol to indicate the number of temps they found out of the possible number. Still just one smilie and one log generated.

 

Might add the cute little icon from above to the stats but the total count should not include them.

 

logit.jpg

 

Thats a nice idea. But will people use it or still try and log finds for their temp caches? I may be wrong, but it seems to be about numbers, adding to their find count.

I like the idea too, but I am wondering the same thing. I really don't think the temp caches loggers will use it because they want the find count. If they didn't want the find count, they would log events like everyone else and just mention how many temp caches they found in their main attended log.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't support logging event temp caches in any way, but I don't care if others do. This idea has been brought up before and I think it is a good compromise...

 

Allow cache owners to specify, when they submit caches for review, the max number of finds/attendeds to allow per finder/attendee. It would default to 1, but the owner could set it to "0" for unlimited logging or any number up to, I dunno, maybe 99, to set the limit THEY find acceptable for THEIR cache. Then when finders/attendees start logging, the number of their logs is compared t this number and when they try to exceed the limit, no more logs are permitted.

 

This would allow folks to continue to play their way if the cache owner wishes to support that, but owners that don't support mutli-logging can clamp a lid on it on their own caches/events.

Share this post


Link to post
I don't support logging event temp caches in any way, but I don't care if others do. This idea has been brought up before and I think it is a good compromise...

 

Allow cache owners to specify, when they submit caches for review, the max number of finds/attendeds to allow per finder/attendee. It would default to 1, but the owner could set it to "0" for unlimited logging or any number up to, I dunno, maybe 99, to set the limit THEY find acceptable for THEIR cache. Then when finders/attendees start logging, the number of their logs is compared t this number and when they try to exceed the limit, no more logs are permitted.

 

This would allow folks to continue to play their way if the cache owner wishes to support that, but owners that don't support mutli-logging can clamp a lid on it on their own caches/events.

I like this idea too. But the OPs idea would remove the clutter from event pages and stop the spam. A lot of people including myself enjoy reading everyone's attended logs and looking at their photos. However, there are some events that have as many as 15,000 attended logs. Could you imagine trying to read the real attended logs if they were mixed in with 15,000 temp cache attended logs? Also could you imagine getting 15,000 emails if you had one of those events on your watchlist? :D

Share this post


Link to post

The people logging events 100 times are having fun and not hurting anyone, so why take that fun away from them?

 

I have fun bouncing a basketball. From now on I think I'll log every bounce on GC.com

Just think, the possibilities are endless. I can pass CCCA in no time. And because it's fun and I'm not hurting anyone, it can't be wrong.

If I hold an event cache that people want to log multiple times for temp caches that are placed, and as the owner I don't mind, then this doesn't hurt anyone and the people logging multiple times are having fun.

 

If you hold an event and don't want people to log multiple times, that is your choice, and you can keep this from happening.

 

The OP wants to remove the fun from the first set because HE doesn't think it's fun. I don't understand why this upsets the people that it appears to upset.

 

If you log every bounce of your basketball on a cache are you really hurting anyone? I, for one, wouldn't give a rats butt because your numbers truly don't matter to me. Neither do CCCA's. Knock yourself out.

Share this post


Link to post

 

If you hold an event and don't want people to log multiple times, that is your choice, and you can keep this from happening.

 

.

 

No, you can't keep it from happening. People are just throwing out caches near the event and logging them there. Even the cache owner is logging their own cache many times.

Share this post


Link to post

If you hold an event and don't want people to log multiple times, that is your choice, and you can keep this from happening.

 

No, you can't keep it from happening. People are just throwing out caches near the event and logging them there. Even the cache owner is logging their own cache many times.

Yes you can. If you own an event you can establish on the cache page that multiple logging is not allowed, and you'll delete any multiple logs. Then, if someone logs more than once, delete it. That's how you can do it.

 

If someone else has another cache near the event that allows multiple logs, what do you care? What does it matter? How does that take away from your fun or have any effect on your event what-so-ever???

 

I still don't understand.

Share this post


Link to post

 

If you hold an event and don't want people to log multiple times, that is your choice, and you can keep this from happening.

 

.

 

No, you can't keep it from happening. People are just throwing out caches near the event and logging them there. Even the cache owner is logging their own cache many times.

I guess all along some of us have been saying the the way the site works an event owner can chose to allow logging of temporary caches. Now it seems the problem is that the event owner doesn't allow them but they can still be logged by someone else setting up a cache and allowing the temporary caches to be log there. Let me get back to you on this one.

Share this post


Link to post

Ok I've thought about. They way the site works anyone can create a cache and invite people to log multiple finds on it - possibly for no reason. In addition anyone can log a find on their own cache. I personally think this is pretty cheesy. However it seems silly that event owner would decide to delete people's attended logs because of this. It would probably be more effective just to use the event page to point out who is logging the temporary caches and who is letting them do it. If you delete their attended log, they could just log another find on the other cache if they want their count to be "correct". If they are instead retaliating by deleting the event owners log on another cache, that is even sillier. The event owner in this case should log multiple attended on his event for each of his logs someone else deleted. Eventually everyone's count is what they want it to be. Seems there is no way to make someone else's count be what you want it to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Seems there is no way to make someone else's count be what you want it to be.

Nor a reason to.

Share this post


Link to post
Seems there is no way to make someone else's count be what you want it to be.

Nor a reason to.

 

You guys need to get back on topic. The OPs idea would remove the clutter from event pages and stop the spam. It would also let those people track their temp cache counts. So the OPs idea has some practical benefits.

Share this post


Link to post
Seems there is no way to make someone else's count be what you want it to be.

Nor a reason to.

 

You guys need to get back on topic. The OPs idea would remove the clutter from event pages and stop the spam. It would also let those people track their temp cache counts. So the OPs idea has some practical benefits.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Seems there is no way to make someone else's count be what you want it to be.

Nor a reason to.

 

You guys need to get back on topic. The OPs idea would remove the clutter from event pages and stop the spam. It would also let those people track their temp cache counts. So the OPs idea has some practical benefits.

When people ask for a new feature on Geocaching.com I always ask what its for. What problem does it solve? I even suggested one approach in this thread because I thought the problem was that people who want to log a temporary event cache but believe that attended is reserved for attending the event have no way to do so. But the OP indicated that wasn't his goal. Once he finally explained that problem was an event owner who didn't allow multiple attended couldn't stop people from logging a find on another cache some had set up for this, Mushtang and I are simply questioning if there really is a problem with this. If there is a problem, how does creating a cache page for each temporary cache solve this problem? If the problem is that extra attended logs clutter the event page and cause extra emails to people who are watching the event, then a discussion on ways to handle this would be in order. So I ask the OP, what is the problem you are trying to solve?

Share this post


Link to post

I won't get into a discussion that is off topic here but to me the"problem" is multiple logging of events as a means to log temp caches.

 

Now I realize that some of you do not see that as a problem and you are welcome to vote "no" on a feature to fix it.

 

However, some of us do see it as a problem and are offering suggestions on how to deal with it.

Edited by StarBrand

Share this post


Link to post
Seems there is no way to make someone else's count be what you want it to be.

Nor a reason to.

 

You guys need to get back on topic. The OPs idea would remove the clutter from event pages and stop the spam. It would also let those people track their temp cache counts. So the OPs idea has some practical benefits.

When people ask for a new feature on Geocaching.com I always ask what its for. What problem does it solve? I even suggested one approach in this thread because I thought the problem was that people who want to log a temporary event cache but believe that attended is reserved for attending the event have no way to do so. But the OP indicated that wasn't his goal. Once he finally explained that problem was an event owner who didn't allow multiple attended couldn't stop people from logging a find on another cache some had set up for this, Mushtang and I are simply questioning if there really is a problem with this. If there is a problem, how does creating a cache page for each temporary cache solve this problem? If the problem is that extra attended logs clutter the event page and cause extra emails to people who are watching the event, then a discussion on ways to handle this would be in order. So I ask the OP, what is the problem you are trying to solve?

I don't know about you but Mushtang thinks that people should be allow anything including how many times someone bounced a basketball:
If you log every bounce of your basketball on a cache are you really hurting anyone? Knock yourself out.

What he doesn't realize is that the spam this creates does adversely impact people. So do cluttered up event pages. So could caches that are never reviewed. These are some of the problems that lead to bickering, which is what the OP was trying to stop. :D

Edited by TrailGators

Share this post


Link to post

These are some of the problems that lead to bickering, which is what the OP was trying to stop. :D

Guess he wasn't successful :D

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

×