Jump to content

New States


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

42 in East Midlands as of 5 minutes ago.

 

I'm sure it will be very useful for some folks, but for me not. I live right on the border of Leics/Staffs/Derbys, so I run 20 odd PQ's for most of middle England anyway.

 

It is an interesting stat generator though. Good work people...

Link to comment

 

Set the region to that of the Posted Coordinates [those at the top of the page]. If it's one of the caches mentioned, searchers will be aware that from reading the cache page. If it's a puzzle cache searchers should already have read the page, so as to be aware of any requirements with the cache if it has a Mandatory Additional Logging Requirement.

 

Thanks for that Deci. Now I'm just wondering what happens about U-110 :rolleyes::blink:

 

You always get one awkward cache. I'll leave that one to the cache owner to decide. The posted coordinates will never show up in various types of searches. Maybe the owner will decide to list it as Scotland North :rolleyes: .

 

Once there is a full Reviewer team for the UK, I'll be doing exactly the same as I do for caches created before Additional Waypoints became Mandatory and which don't have them. And add the details to the cache page. Why because to have full benefit the majority of caches need to have the correct region. If you object to me doing this to benefit of the community,please feel free to make a official complaint to Groundspeak!

 

 

Let me get this right.... You're going to personally go through 30 odd thousand UK caches and edit the location onto each cache page... :o:o:o

 

'kin 'ell.... and I thought you'd stepped back from moderating this forum because you were short of time :blink::lol:

 

I did say when there is a Full UK Reviewer Team ie: more than 3 people ;)

 

You know when the UK Reviewers made the use of Additional Waypoints Mandatory [well before Groundspeak did], there was the same sort of Negativity towards them. It's a "site feature" which takes 2 seconds when creating a new cache page, and whilst of no use for those with the negative attitude,will be of great use to others.

 

Once there is a full Reviewer team for the UK, I'll be doing exactly the same as I do for caches created before Additional Waypoints became Mandatory and which don't have them. And add the details to the cache page. Why because to have full benefit the majority of caches need to have the correct region. If you object to me doing this to benefit of the community,please feel free to make a official complaint to Groundspeak!

 

Our caches, our choice surely!!!!!!!!!

 

As it's a site feature exactly the same as Additional Waypoints, Groundspeak consider the lack of AW's to older caches, before the use of them became mandatory. To be a lack of maintenance, I'm taking the same line with UK regions. It's a site feature which will benefit members of the UK whether they be PM's or not. Please remember just because you and several other people who have been negative about this, are PM's have GSAK and are techno savvy enough to make use of many of the features. Not all are,and the majority do not even visit this forum.

 

Has anyone got a link to the full-sized Google Map please?

Some of mine are close to the border and I can't tell in which region they should be :huh:

 

Thanks,

Russ

 

We've got a Web page being sorted out and I'm hoping to arrange hosting of it soon. I've PM'd you a link to download the Google Earth Overlay. Sorry it's on someones private hosting,who doesn't have the bandwidth to make it publicly available.

 

Dave, prove the point to me, give me a practical/real example of how this is going to be of benefit!

 

Whatever happened to Grandfathering?

 

Oh, n can you get your other half to ring me about a completely unrelated matter please :sunsure:

 

Phone call sorted and she sends thanks.

 

Non PM's and new members will gain the most benefit from the regions. possibly followed by the Reviewers after seeing it actually implemented. Followed by PM's who don't use or struggle to use GSAK.

 

I can tell you that a benefit to Reviewers did not come into the equation to produce the list and ask Groundspeak. As the 3 of us had agreed to leave the status quo as to how we divided the country into Reviewing areas the same.

 

As for Grandfathering In that generally applies to Guideline Changes and not to site features, which have been implemented for the benefit of Members.

 

To get the most benefit people need the data on as many caches as possible. There will always be a small No which don't have the data. From seeing the results of the older caches without coordinate information for hidden waypoints,I'd say these caches will lose out as more users make use of the regions filter.

Link to comment

Ok, a little confused here. There appears to be 14 regions/states. If you can only get 500 returns from a PQ, surely you're gonna miss a shed load of caches. Does the regional PQ still take it's centre from the postcode or co-ords entered in the filter..I assume so.

 

Am I missing the point? Is it not a search option per se, but just a "geography helper" that shows under the listing when you do a search. If it is thats fine, just wanted to understand the driver for it.

Link to comment

 

Once there is a full Reviewer team for the UK, I'll be doing exactly the same as I do for caches created before Additional Waypoints became Mandatory and which don't have them. And add the details to the cache page. Why because to have full benefit the majority of caches need to have the correct region. If you object to me doing this to benefit of the community,please feel free to make a official complaint to Groundspeak!

 

I wish you'd said that yesterday. I went through all our caches adding the region last night (well there's only 12).

 

Would you like me to go and remove them all so that you have something to do when there's a full team in place :rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

P

Link to comment

Ok, a little confused here. There appears to be 14 regions/states. If you can only get 500 returns from a PQ, surely you're gonna miss a shed load of caches. Does the regional PQ still take it's centre from the postcode or co-ords entered in the filter..I assume so.

 

I'm pretty sure that's the way it works

 

Am I missing the point? Is it not a search option per se, but just a "geography helper" that shows under the listing when you do a search. If it is thats fine, just wanted to understand the driver for it.

 

Both as a geography helper in searches, but will also help someone like me who gets caches in South Wales when I do PQ's for North Devon. Select the southwest region and caches that are a 170 mile drive away are excluded.

 

Philip

Link to comment

 

Once there is a full Reviewer team for the UK, I'll be doing exactly the same as I do for caches created before Additional Waypoints became Mandatory and which don't have them. And add the details to the cache page. Why because to have full benefit the majority of caches need to have the correct region. If you object to me doing this to benefit of the community,please feel free to make a official complaint to Groundspeak!

 

I wish you'd said that yesterday. I went through all our caches adding the region last night (well there's only 12).

 

Would you like me to go and remove them all so that you have something to do when there's a full team in place :huh::blink:

 

P

 

Would you believe I'm going to sit with a large bottle of Perrier :lol: next to me, and actually finish the Latch hook Kit of a Labrador that I started :sunsure::rolleyes: . Off course thats after I've had a full 24 hours sleep in celebration :rolleyes: Then I might even find time to actually go out and find a few caches :blink:

 

And yes it's a geographical helper and a extra level of search filter

Link to comment

00d5063b-b97a-4ed0-ae21-91ebbd259ab7.jpg

 

 

Where is the North East supposed to be :rolleyes:

 

The pink splodge that is us has a push pin in it with nothing attached to it and North East England is wrote across the West of England and Scotland South and is attached to a push pin in Ireland :sunsure:

 

No wonder I am confused :rolleyes:

 

Mandy :blink:

Edited by Us 4 and Jess
Link to comment

A usefull feature for some I suppose, but I cant see myself using it:-

 

1. I have run a query on Yorkshire this morning for all unforund caches and due to the size of Yorkshire some are 70 miles away !

 

2. What happens when the cache publisher gets them in the wrong county.... 3 caches were published 5 miles away (deff in Yorkshire) and the person put them in North East... So these are not on the list

 

3. As someone said before not very useful if you are near a border

 

I think I shall still continue to use the nearest unfound until someone points out how this feature is useful.

 

(awaiting people to point me in the right direction)

Link to comment

rotfl, here we go again.

 

I can definitely see the benefit for PQs (providing everyone conforms of course), I can now do two PQs instead of the five I had before, to do my searches.

 

Anyway whats the big deal, the thing I really object to is having to include Lat and Long in my cache info, I cant see what benefit they would be to me, i know where they are, (Joke intended for those who cant see it).

Link to comment

Am I just slow or does this not actually work for PQs?

 

I was surprised that, after a couple of days of lots of people updating caches, so few caches in GSAK had the state filled in. So I did some investigation.

 

The state does not appear in the GPX file delivered by PQ. The tag is empty, even where the cache page shows that the owner has updated the state.

 

An individual GPX file from the cache page does correctly report the state.

Link to comment

Deceangi, I just wanted to be clear about what you said earlier.

 

Is it you intention that in time you will be requiring all existing caches to be updated to include the region? Or are you treating existing caches as "grandfathered" and exempting them from HAVING to be updated?

Link to comment
Am I just slow or does this not actually work for PQs?

 

I was surprised that, after a couple of days of lots of people updating caches, so few caches in GSAK had the state filled in. So I did some investigation.

 

The state does not appear in the GPX file delivered by PQ. The tag is empty, even where the cache page shows that the owner has updated the state.

 

An individual GPX file from the cache page does correctly report the state.

 

Groundspeak need to also include the state information in the GPX file this seems not to have been done as yet :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Surely for any of this to work the "state" has to be entered correctly on the cache page? A new cache has just apeared near me. As it is just outside Gloucester I would expect (from the map elsewhere on this thread), it to be South of England not South West of England.

 

Am I being slow :rolleyes: , but a search for caches in the South of England would therefore not incude this one?

 

ayepee

 

edited for spelling

Edited by ayepee
Link to comment

Surely for any of this to work the "state" has to be entered correctly on the cache page?

 

Yes, it requires everyone to agree on the same map. The site code doesn't know or care where the regions are; it just hosts a list of names from which you can choose.

 

My guess is that when someone places a cache in the "wrong" area, someone will probably drop them a polite e-mail or leave a note on the cache page. That's what happens everywhere else.

 

Is it you intention that in time you will be requiring all existing caches to be updated to include the region? Or are you treating existing caches as "grandfathered" and exempting them from HAVING to be updated?

 

I would be amazed if any present or future UK reviewers would "require" this. In a couple of smaller countries which "got provinces" the local reviewers have actually gone through the "unprovinced caches" and did it themselves, but the numbers were an order of magnitude smaller than in the UK.

Link to comment

The map that everyone sees here is just a screenshot of a Google Earth overlay which when downloaded to your own machine will show you exactly where your cache is.

 

That will be available for full download once I get the website sorted but I'd like everyone to note that I'm on holidays until later this week and have no intention of doing it until near the weekend so you'll have to be patient. This happened very suddenly and we weren't aware of it coming so we've been a little caught on the hop :sunsure:

 

edit to add: as already pointed out in various other threads the cache may be yours but the listing is Groundspeak's and they can do what they want with it :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Edited by dino-irl
Link to comment

Surely for any of this to work the "state" has to be entered correctly on the cache page?

 

Yes, it requires everyone to agree on the same map. The site code doesn't know or care where the regions are; it just hosts a list of names from which you can choose.

 

My guess is that when someone places a cache in the "wrong" area, someone will probably drop them a polite e-mail or leave a note on the cache page. That's what happens everywhere else.

 

Is it you intention that in time you will be requiring all existing caches to be updated to include the region? Or are you treating existing caches as "grandfathered" and exempting them from HAVING to be updated?

 

I would be amazed if any present or future UK reviewers would "require" this. In a couple of smaller countries which "got provinces" the local reviewers have actually gone through the "unprovinced caches" and did it themselves, but the numbers were an order of magnitude smaller than in the UK.

 

And there encapsulates almost all the issues. We did agree on the divisions: not everyone may like them (I'm not happy about being in South rather than Southeast, and Bristol is obviously confusing) but the current arrangement is a least worse option while providing the functionality that many people are looking for.

 

And all - or at least most - active caches have to be updated otherwise the functionality won't achieve its objective. Hopefully cache owners will do that, and hopefully they'll get it right. But it would have been so much better if existing caches were updated by a script using the cache coords and a set of polygons. These polygons must exist otherwise the map couldn't have been created. So who has them, and why not publish them? With those polygons I could update the whole of the UK in GSAK on a PC in a few minutes: on a Groundspeak server it would take seconds, and the job would be done.

 

And that just leaves PQs, which don't currently return the state; and the broken link on the cache page to the map.

 

We will get there, but it's clearly going to take some time.

Edited by Alan White
Link to comment

the cache may be yours but the listing is Groundspeak's and they can do what they want with it :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Not entirely true. Firstly, Groundspeak have often said that there are aspects of the listing that belong to the cache owner and they wouldn't want to touch. Indeed, would want to dissociate themselves from. This is the reason for the "description written by..." on the cache page. It's commented out because no-one wants to see it, but it's still there. Secondly, the cache description is the copyright of the cache owner or the person who wrote it. Another reason why Groundspeak wouldn't want to, and shouldn't, get involved.

 

All that said, I'd be very happy for Groundspeak to automatically update the state and country :sunsure:.

 

So as you have this GE overlay presumably you have the polygons? Care to publish them? They'll be much more useful than a GE overlay.

Link to comment

So as you have this GE overlay presumably you have the polygons? Care to publish them? They'll be much more useful than a GE overlay.

I have the overlay but don't have a clue how it was built. As I didn't build it I'm not prepared to release the info until the person that did gives full approval and as they haven't come forward yet I can't say who it is. We need to discuss a few other things with them anyway but this is another volunteer thing and will take a while to get sorted.

Link to comment

I'm amazed this isn't an automated function. If people have been able to do this for years with GSAK the surely GC can get the server to work out where a cache is using the polygons shown on the map??

Although I see the use of this feature in given circumstances I don't think it'll ever be perfect unless the reviewer(s) really are going to sit and amend each and every cache page. I'm sure many cache owners will not sit and change all their caches, many won't even notice the feature exists and all those 'abandoned' caches certainly won't get done.

It seems like another great idea only half implemented.

Link to comment

 

And there encapsulates almost all the issues. We did agree on the divisions: not everyone may like them (I'm not happy about being in South rather than Southeast, and Bristol is obviously confusing) but the current arrangement is a least worse option while providing the functionality that many people are looking for.

 

And all - or at least most - active caches have to be updated otherwise the functionality won't achieve its objective. Hopefully cache owners will do that, and hopefully they'll get it right. But it would have been so much better if existing caches were updated by a script using the cache coords and a set of polygons. These polygons must exist otherwise the map couldn't have been created. So who has them, and why not publish them? With those polygons I could update the whole of the UK in GSAK on a PC in a few minutes: on a Groundspeak server it would take seconds, and the job would be done.

 

And that just leaves PQs, which don't currently return the state; and the broken link on the cache page to the map.

 

We will get there, but it's clearly going to take some time.

 

Really! When did "we" agree on the divisions and how did "we" reach that agreement. I'm sure that I'm not the only caher that hadn't even heard of this until a few days back.

 

Come to think of it what is this "functionality" and "objective" you speak of come from, how was that decided and do we really have to update caches to achieve it?

Link to comment

Are we good or what :rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

Thought it might be easier to change the status of our UK caches sooner rather than later

 

Spent an hour last night updating some of our caches, but as progress slowed to a snail's pace, gave up and went to bed.

 

Back from a wonderful day out in South Wales, decided to tackle the remaining caches.

 

Total time taken about 2½ hours, but now more than half of the South Wales caches belong to us (84 out of 146)

Link to comment

Really! When did "we" agree on the divisions and how did "we" reach that agreement. I'm sure that I'm not the only caher that hadn't even heard of this until a few days back.

It was discussed (and discussed and discussed!!) some months ago and it is only now that it has been implemented. This was before you became active on the UK forum at the end of April so it's not surprising you may have missed the extensive discussions.

Link to comment

Really! When did "we" agree on the divisions and how did "we" reach that agreement. I'm sure that I'm not the only caher that hadn't even heard of this until a few days back.

 

Come to think of it what is this "functionality" and "objective" you speak of come from, how was that decided and do we really have to update caches to achieve it?

 

About the third hit on an appropriate search:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=185279

Link to comment

Although I see the use of this feature in given circumstances I don't think it'll ever be perfect

 

You could have stopped there. :sad: If you want perfection, stay at home and download a PQ. There: for 30 seconds or so, you have a correct view of the active caches in your area. Now wait a day or two and watch the disables and the archives pile in. Eek!

 

If geocaching teaches anything, it's that the world is imperfect, that any attempt to represent reality in a computer system will always be flawed, and that "for historical reasons" should be written in front of almost every declarative statement.

 

Groundspeak has never attempted to localise every cache against country or US state boundaries, so they are not going to do it for a minor upgrade to the UK. Perhaps a future site upgrade will do this, but it would be a big change in policy. It would have potential political consequences in some areas of the world, and cost a lot of resources to implement, especially on the current platform (but also, more generally, because metre-level polygon data isn't cheap).

 

Experience from Germany shows that within a year, about 70% of caches will have the "state" data on them. For most regular cachers, this is fairly close to "perfect", since it will cover all caches less than a year old, and generally speaking, frequent cachers don't have many caches older than that unfound near them.

 

Plus, as some of the other people bashing this feature have pointed out, it's perfectly possible to get the PQ data you require without using the State information. This is just a "nice to have" feature.

 

How about a positive campaign (at events, in regional forums, whatever) to get the word out? In a few months, perhaps people could take it on themselves to post a note to a cache when they find it, saying "By the way, it would be cool if you could edit your cache page to add the region"?

Edited by sTeamTraen
Link to comment

If I have to update all my caches it'll take a while, and I do have some right on a border. I don't mean close to one, I mean in the middle of a hedgerow which splits counties, and regions... I also have series which span regions. It seems daft to have people see Cache X of a series and not to see Y and Z too. Oh well. I'll just have to 'do my best' I suppose. :sad:

Link to comment

[ In a few months, perhaps people could take it on themselves to post a note to a cache when they find it, saying "By the way, it would be cool if you could edit your cache page to add the region"?

 

People could I am sure, however I would suggest that in some cases they may not like the note that comes with the log deletion.

Link to comment
I also have series which span regions. It seems daft to have people see Cache X of a series and not to see Y and Z too.
Presumably if people live 29.9 miles from cache X and 30.1 from Y and Z and run a 30-mile PQ, they already have the same problem...
Quite right, but people running PQs are usually experienced cachers- they already like the sport enough to pay for bonus features. Searching by regions will be (is?) open to anyone, and thus newbies may not realise they're missing out on parts of some series. :sad:
Link to comment
Are we good or what :huh::D

Thought it might be easier to change the status of our UK caches sooner rather than later

Spent an hour last night updating some of our caches, but as progress slowed to a snail's pace, gave up and went to bed.

Back from a wonderful day out in South Wales, decided to tackle the remaining caches.

Total time taken about 2½ hours, but now more than half of the South Wales caches belong to us (84 out of 146)

You may have a lot to do, but at least they are all most definitely in South Wales. :sad: Until we get the overlay it's going to be impossible to categorize several of ours. Living with a mile or two of three divisions certainly doesn't help either. :sad:

We have a couple of caches straddling the English / Welsh border, so that'll be fun. Let's hope they gets put back precisely by each finder. :huh:

Link to comment

but people running PQs are usually experienced cachers- they already like the sport enough to pay for bonus features. Searching by regions will be (is?) open to anyone, and thus newbies may not realise they're missing out on parts of some series. :sad:

 

Good point actually, didn't think about that. Could even be a revenue generator ('aint nowt wrong with profit comrades). Y'know, like handing out free diet coke samples....but if ya want full fat get PQ strength. :sad:

Link to comment

but people running PQs are usually experienced cachers- they already like the sport enough to pay for bonus features. Searching by regions will be (is?) open to anyone, and thus newbies may not realise they're missing out on parts of some series. :unsure:

 

Good point actually, didn't think about that. Could even be a revenue generator ('aint nowt wrong with profit comrades). Y'know, like handing out free diet coke samples....but if ya want full fat get PQ strength. :laughing:

Looking at the map it appears that the rumours are true: the North West ie Lancashire has Annexed Yorkshire :laughing:

I'll go fetch me coat.......

Edited by studlyone
Link to comment

but people running PQs are usually experienced cachers- they already like the sport enough to pay for bonus features. Searching by regions will be (is?) open to anyone, and thus newbies may not realise they're missing out on parts of some series. :unsure:

 

Good point actually, didn't think about that. Could even be a revenue generator ('aint nowt wrong with profit comrades). Y'know, like handing out free diet coke samples....but if ya want full fat get PQ strength. :laughing:

Looking at the map it appears that the rumours are true: the North West ie Lancashire has Annexed Yorkshire :laughing:

I'll go fetch me coat.......

 

They can have what's left, we stole Saddleworth years ago.

Link to comment

In South Africa we got provinces on 17/9/2007 and with cooperation of cachers and some extra individual effort we had 100% of caches updated by 18/10/2007 (that's right - a month). OK - I know we are only approaching 3000 and you have gone past 30000...

 

For caching purposes I draw PQ's using centre point/radius coordinates, but it is a really useful feature when browsing caches (looking at what other cachers have been up to / perusing favourites lists etc) to get a ball park idea of where the cache is without looking at a map. Most cachers would realise if they are looking for caches near a border, that they should go by centrepoint/radius and not state/county/province. In fact - if I plan to go to an area I will always draw a centrepoint/radius PQ.

 

It's a nice feature to have - it gives one a sense of place and is there mainly for information purposes. I don't think it is that useful in pocket queries.

Link to comment

 

It's a nice feature to have - it gives one a sense of place and is there mainly for information purposes. I don't think it is that useful in pocket queries.

 

I agree, but your cat needs modifying..see below.

 

catsass1.jpg

 

I'm surprised that 'the dog' left the tail on too! :unsure:

Link to comment
I also have series which span regions. It seems daft to have people see Cache X of a series and not to see Y and Z too.
Presumably if people live 29.9 miles from cache X and 30.1 from Y and Z and run a 30-mile PQ, they already have the same problem...
Quite right, but people running PQs are usually experienced cachers- they already like the sport enough to pay for bonus features. Searching by regions will be (is?) open to anyone, and thus newbies may not realise they're missing out on parts of some series. :unsure:

 

Surely somewhere on the cache page there will be mention that the cache is in fact part of a series and as such a cacher if interested will search for the remainder of the said series.

Link to comment
Surely somewhere on the cache page there will be mention that the cache is in fact part of a series and as such a cacher if interested will search for the remainder of the said series.
Probably- but by no means definitly. I'm talking in general terms- I think all my series explain themselves but I bet there are some that don't. Anyway, it's all achedemic. The change has been made, probaby for the best in the long-term (I still have 130ish caches to update, so it sucks in the short-term!) and I'd better get used to it. Now, what about the Channel Isles? Not listed as an option :unsure:
Link to comment

It's been pointed out to me that these new states also turn up when you activate a trackable item. I've just found out that if you have retained your activation code for your TB you can go back and re-reactivate it and add in the state (should your heart desire to do so). I can't seem to find a way to do this without using the activation code though... :laughing:

 

MrsB

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...