Logging a PM cache

[jholly]

I know there is a way to log a pm cache as a regular member. How is that done?

 

I am a PM, but would like to know.

 

You can answer via email (address in profile) if you wish.

 

TIA,

 

Jim

[+pppingme]

My wife does this, we only have one premium membership, but we don't log as a team like a lot of husband/wife teams do, we log individually.

 

I know this has come up lots of times before and the answer almost seems to be a secret, so I'll email it to you.

[jholly]

My wife does this, we only have one premium membership, but we don't log as a team like a lot of husband/wife teams do, we log individually.

 

I know this has come up lots of times before and the answer almost seems to be a secret, so I'll email it to you.

 

thanks,

 

Jim

[+KoosKoos]

It's no secret...it's been posted many times in the forums:

 

(from the other thread on "elite" MOCs):

 

Go to any non-PMOC cache page. Click the link, "log your visit" in the upper right corner.

The url will look like this http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?ID=232624

then change the "ID=" to "WP=" and replace the number with the GC code of the PMOC in question so you get:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?WP=GCNJVY

go to that link and log the cache.

[+trainlove]

Both the ?ID= and the ?WP= should work. It's almost impossible though to find the ID number of a PM cache when you are not a PM so the way togo is as KoosKoos says.

 

You can then on see your log, and edit your log, and upload photos to it, but you will not be able to read the cache page, ever, or see other photos in that cache.

[+pppingme]

Both the ?ID= and the ?WP= should work. It's almost impossible though to find the ID number of a PM cache

 

Look at a program called geocalc, its extremely handy for other stuff, but this one of the things it does.

[Seve]

But how to get the GC code of such a PM cache?

If I find a PM cache by chance or if I am caching with another cacher who is a premium member and then we find such a cache, I still neither have the GC code nor the ID of this cache...

 

thx and greetinx

[lakeuk]

PM caches appear in searches where you'll see the GC number for the cache you want to log

[Seve]

PM caches appear in searches where you'll see the GC number for the cache you want to log

 

yes, that works! thank you!

[+gollie]

I'm a PM, but I don't intend to ever restrict any of my caches to just Premium Members. It bugs me that my companions on some hunts have to 'sit out' a cache I have on my GPSr. Still, I like the PQ and InstaNotify features of being a premium member.

 

Here's a silly question, but as for logging premium caches, why not have person who wants to do this, just become a member? Can a gift membership be given?

[+Corey]

Can a gift membership be given?

Giving a Gift of Premium Membership

[+pppingme]

Here's a silly question, but as for logging premium caches, why not have person who wants to do this, just become a member? Can a gift membership be given?

Because sometimes its not really a separate account. For example, a lot of husband/wife teams log as one, others log as separate people, My wife and I choose to log separately, but that doesn't justify a 2nd "premium" membership, if it were enforced to the point that someone said she should have a separate premium membership, we would probably abandon her account and just log as one, or she just wouldn't log the premium caches.

 

We have actually asked around and none of the local cachers who place premium caches have no problem with us doing this. Most have even gone as far as saying as long as there is at least one premium member they don't care who goes along and logs it.

[+team_goobie]

The url will look like this http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?ID=232624

then change the "ID=" to "WP=" and replace the number with the GC code of the PMOC in question so you get:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?WP=GCNJVY

go to that link and log the cache.

 

Except - it does not work. I've tried the hint, from a few different browsers, logged in under our standard account, and it always returns the "Sorry bub you need to upgrade" message.

 

Like many others we have a premium account for the household and a standard (two actually) for individuals. Any ideas?

Edited November 21, 2008 by team_goobie

[LQ]

I did beleive that this was a feature blessed by Jeremy. But apparently it doesn't work anymore.

[+Tequila]

Isn't it sad that they have time to "fix" this but don't have time to fix the PQ Generator.

[Barnie's Band of Gold]

Hey Tequila work is based on REVENUE GENERATION not CUSTOMER SATISFACTION!

 

Given their history with fixing then breaking things I doubt this is really FIXED!

[+gollie]

Potato Finder seems to understand there are reasons/situations where one needs to conform to different member features, but seems to be waiting for someone to say when that it is.......but I imagine we all know the boundaries. Of course logging as a team makes great sense. And to me that seems like a fair way for 2 to log under one premium membership. As Potato Finder said,

 

"My wife and I choose to log separately, but that doesn't justify a 2nd "premium" membership, if it were enforced to the point that someone said she should have a separate premium membership, we would probably abandon her account and just log as one, or she just wouldn't log the premium caches."

 

As food for thought, in my own business dealings I'd feel conflicted about clients using workarounds to take advantage of features that were clearly marked as being for paying members. I'm not saying that Potato Finder is doing that----maybe the issue is that Groundspeak let this workaround occur for a while.

 

But, and I don't have any particular soft spot for, or gripes against Groundspeak, but I do sympathize with a response to disable such a workaround. I imagine that the premium fees help pay for running the site (yes I know that ads do that too) and other costs. The cool thing is that basic membership is free. And if there is no palpable advantage to the 2 kinds of membership it is hard to encourage new premium members. Actually, I think logging separately does justify separate memberships. And I'd feel odd if I were logging premium caches while appearing in my profile as a basic member? But that's just me..................

[+gollie]

I HAVE told other basic members with me on some caching forays to go ahead and sign a premium log in the field-- because they were planning to upgrade. They kept a record of those PM caches, and went back later as a PM and logged them for their count.

 

>gollie wrote previously: [ And I'd feel odd if I were logging premium caches while appearing in my profile as a basic member? But that's just me..................

[+sbell111]

... As food for thought, in my own business dealings I'd feel conflicted about clients using workarounds to take advantage of features that were clearly marked as being for paying members. I'm not saying that Potato Finder is doing that----maybe the issue is that Groundspeak let this workaround occur for a while.

Jeremy acknowledged the workaround and didn't have a problem with it, citing the very example given by the OP.

But, and I don't have any particular soft spot for, or gripes against Groundspeak, but I do sympathize with a response to disable such a workaround. I imagine that the premium fees help pay for running the site (yes I know that ads do that too) and other costs. The cool thing is that basic membership is free. And if there is no palpable advantage to the 2 kinds of membership it is hard to encourage new premium members. Actually, I think logging separately does justify separate memberships. And I'd feel odd if I were logging premium caches while appearing in my profile as a basic member? But that's just me..................

Again, TPTB have no problem with this logging practice. The ability to log MOCs was never a benefit that only went to PMs. It was never a benefit that gave 'a palpable advantage' to buying a PM. There are plenty of other such benefits, however, like PQs.

[Nylimb]

Now that the back door for regular members to log PM caches has been closed, what should we do about travel bugs? If I drop a TB in such a cache, I no longer have any way to make it show up in the cache's inventory.

[+gollie]

Thanks for pointing that other thread out to me, it illuminates the discussion here.

 

Guess I'm just on the side of the fence with members at that thread like Blaylock who feel somewhat as I do. Having to 'manipulate' a URL seems like a sign that a boundary is being crossed. Why not go to Jeremy instead and petition for a formal feature to sanction what I think is logical, families or teams paying a single $30.00 and logging as such.

 

The sentiment I'm feeling these days is that many of us have issues with members of society at large playing a little loose with rules, etc.; just read the news. Don't want to go off-topic but I felt a red flag going off in my gut at the workaround, I feel that integrity starts with the tiniest grain of sand.

 

I believe that Jeremy was not the one who created or offered the workaround, so it's not like he sanctioned it from the beginning. I imagine when he gets time he'll probably create a family/team membership more formally. Else the fact that the workaround is visible to almost anyone will lead to, or has already led to, individual advantage being taken.

 

The following is being technical at this point, and I don't want to pursue the discussion much more on that plane, but you said: "The ability to log MOCs was never a benefit that only went to PMs." Wasn't it? Or at least wasn't it latently intended to be, if the cache info page and ability to download the .loc or gpx file was protected? Just because some owners don't mind, can we assume that we've polled all PM's who post MO caches? I applaud those who've said "the owner of the cache should be consulted before logging their cache as a non-PM." (paraphrase).

 

It seems a little incongruous to me, when even the cache page says: "The owner has made this a member-only cache" (paraphrased) It doesn't say: "just for the finding it portion. The logging element is open to all......" Personally, I don't even intend to place any MOC's, that's not my issue, it's more the 'slippery slope' element.

 

I'm not trying to stir trouble. My sentiment goes to my own ethic of working within some civil framework. If it's broken or has an unfair element, I support a solution that is less hacking, and more working on it with a transparent method of altering it. It's not exactly a transparent solution if it doesn't show up on Geocaching.com's 'getting started' page or similar. Confusing to good-faith newbies to have this be a back-door, over-the-forums solution.

 

I gotta climb off what now seems to be growing into a 'high horse' on my part, fellow geocachers. Don't want to get a nosebleed, and am here to tell you I am NOT perfect, far from it; I'm not better than anyone else. Just sharing my thoughts.

[+gollie]

Why vilify revenue generation? Don't we all do things right when we actually make revenue pursuing our work? I imagine that's not purely what you meant to say, it's just that you still have some unsolved customer satisfaction issues?

[+gollie]

This shows why a formal solution, not a hacked solution, needs to be reached. The solution is a 'back-door' one, thus not a mature solution. So, in the meantime, regular members would do well to not drop anything (or take) from a premium cache. It becomes clear why it is a disservice to support (or engage in) a hacked solution. It doesn't fully or fairly enhance the experience.

[+trainlove]

Now that the back door for regular members to log PM caches has been closed,..

Did I miss some announcement somewhere.

I'll have to just attempt to log a PM cache with one of my non-PM accounts just to see if you are blowing smoke.

[Dinoprophet]

Now that the back door for regular members to log PM caches has been closed,..

Did I miss some announcement somewhere.

I'll have to just attempt to log a PM cache with one of my non-PM accounts just to see if you are blowing smoke.

I tried, with both WP= and ID=. It's true. Intentional or no?

[Nylimb]

So, in the meantime, regular members would do well to not drop anything (or take) from a premium cache.

(gollie, it would be helpful if you would quote the message that you're replying to.)

 

When I go caching with a premium member, we share information before the trip. When we get to a cache, I usually don't remember whether it's a PM cache or not. I don't find that out until I try to log it, at which point it's too late to retrieve any TBs that I dropped.

 

I'll try to keep track of that as long as this change is in effect, but I doubt that everyone else will.

 

It becomes clear why it is a disservice to support (or engage in) a hacked solution.

I don't consider it a disservice. In fact, logging the cache benefits the cache owner and anyone who's planning to look for the cache, letting them know that it's still there, and about any problems with the cache.

 

So I'm hoping that the disappearance of this feature is just a programming error which will eventually be fixed. As you say, the method is a bit of a hack, so maybe it could be replaced by something simpler.

[+sbell111]

The following is being technical at this point, and I don't want to pursue the discussion much more on that plane, but you said: "The ability to log MOCs was never a benefit that only went to PMs." Wasn't it? Or at least wasn't it latently intended to be, if the cache info page and ability to download the .loc or gpx file was protected?

No. Keeping people from logging MOCs was never given as the reason that MOCs came to be. They were mainly started as a way to combat cache thievery. The idea being that if you couldn't see the cache page, you would have a difficult time stealing the cache.

Just because some owners don't mind, can we assume that we've polled all PM's who post MO caches? I applaud those who've said "the owner of the cache should be consulted before logging their cache as a non-PM." (paraphrase).

 

It seems a little incongruous to me, when even the cache page says: "The owner has made this a member-only cache" (paraphrased) It doesn't say: "just for the finding it portion. The logging element is open to all......" Personally, I don't even intend to place any MOC's, that's not my issue, it's more the 'slippery slope' element.

How is this a slippery slope? A non-PM still doesn't have the ability to see the cache page. Having the ability to log the find will never morph into the ability to see the page.

I'm not trying to stir trouble. My sentiment goes to my own ethic of working within some civil framework. If it's broken or has an unfair element, I support a solution that is less hacking, and more working on it with a transparent method of altering it. It's not exactly a transparent solution if it doesn't show up on Geocaching.com's 'getting started' page or similar. Confusing to good-faith newbies to have this be a back-door, over-the-forums solution.

 

I gotta climb off what now seems to be growing into a 'high horse' on my part, fellow geocachers. Don't want to get a nosebleed, and am here to tell you I am NOT perfect, far from it; I'm not better than anyone else. Just sharing my thoughts.

I think that you are seeing an ethical dilemna where one does not exist. Edited November 21, 2008 by sbell111

[+gollie]

Nylimb, Very good point about how to tell just what is a PM and what is a regular cache. I would love it if they had different color or symbol or waypoint code on the actual GPSr screen when we're out in the field--without having to manually alter my waypoint loads, that is..... sorry about quotes, having trouble getting them to work--my error. Will try here.

 

When I go caching with a premium member, we share information before the trip. When we get to a cache, I usually don't remember whether it's a PM cache or not. I don't find that out until I try to log it, at which point it's too late to retrieve any TBs that I dropped............. I don't consider it a disservice. In fact, logging the cache benefits the cache owner and anyone who's planning to look for the cache, letting them know that it's still there, and about any problems with the cache.

 

I don't think logging is a disservice, of course it is an essential tool for monitoring cache status in general. But this issue is about who is eligible to log what. If you are eligible to log, of course you get to play a useful part when doing said logging. When I said disservice, I meant the phantom sanctioning of 'logging as a PM' when you are not. Sanctioning (by Groundspeak/Jeremy) just leads to confusion and a lack of universal access to a clearly defined feature--it's a tacit promise not fairly fulfilled. It isn't serving you very well with it's TB hassles, etc. I'll bet that's why the URL hack no longer works. Jeremy has probably had some time to think about the complications. The workaround was dumped in his lap as a fait accompli by creative hackers; he 'blessed' it when he first heard about it, but now has to study it closer for it's problems overall.

 

..... the method is a bit of a hack, so maybe it could be replaced by something simpler.

 

I wouldn't mind if the whole 'hidden only for PMs' concept went away, and we focused on other PM benefits as true features.)

 

Anyway I feel this glitch will get improved eventually so I'm not worried.

[+gollie]

Slippery slope, lets think on that. (I'm still having trouble with quotes--sorry.)

 

...Keeping people from logging MOCs was never given as the reason that MOCs came to be. They were mainly started as a way to combat cache thievery. The idea being that if you couldn't see the cache page, you would have a difficult time stealing the cache.

 

--Good point, that. But does it justify hacking a solution?

 

from 'sbell111': How is this a slippery slope? A non-PM still doesn't have the ability to see the cache page. Having the ability to log the find will never morph into the ability to see the page.

 

--Will it never morph? I wonder.

 

The slippery slope ethics-wise is ourselves wanting something more or better, and just taking it, using a hack. We may all agree that regular cachers accompanying PM's should have the pleasure of logging such a visit to a PM cache. But I don't agree that a hidden/hacked/backdoor solution is the way to make that possible.

 

And doesn't it follow that if thievery is really taking place due to people 'seeing the cache page' then aren't we as PM's 'breaching security' in sanctioning the concept of hacking? It's only a matter of time before viewing the PM cache info/waypoint is hacked, not just hacking the ability to log................and the value of the cache has already been advertised as being high to a thief since it is a 'Premium Cache'. A juicy target, so the motivation to hack it is there. Why encourage it, even in a little way. Let's get Jeremy to draw better lines around this.

 

from 'sbell111': I think that you are seeing an ethical dilemna where one does not exist.

I stand by the dilemma; if we have civil methods for pursuading Jeremy to address our desires, issues, I'm for that. What will the next hacked solution be? Why make Jeremy chase his tail whacking backdoor moles that we create? Maybe a petition/feature request was made, and he refused or ignored it? I don't know if it was, I haven't read every single thread here....................but does that make hacking solutions okay?

[+trainlove]

I just had to check one aspect of this issue to see if the problem is widespread.

 

I was able to do the following on MY Premium Member cache, me not being a PM since somewhere around 6/21/2007 2:07 PM:

1. I am able to view MY PMO cache page as always I have been able to do.

2. I was able to view the audit list for MY cache as I always have been able to do.

3. I was able to write a note log for MY cache as I have always been able to do.

4. I received an email of my note log for MY cache as I have been always able to do, well; I know that it's been debated whether one should or should not get an email for ones log of ones own caches and travel bugs but I guess the outcome is YES.

5. I am able to edit MY cache page as I have been able always to do.

5. My last geocaching.com recognized visit to MY cache page is 6/21/2007 2:07 PM which it has always been since I stopped being a Premium Member sometime after that date.

6. Darn it, I can't think of 2 more sentences to put the always in alternate positions...

 

So this current issue, if it really applies, only applies to a non Premium Member logging someone elses PMO cache. I'm heading out to one right now so that I can try to actually post a Find It log for one.

[+Tequila]

I just had to check one aspect of this issue to see if the problem is widespread.

 

I was able to do the following on MY Premium Member cache, me not being a PM since somewhere around 6/21/2007 2:07 PM:

1. I am able to view MY PMO cache page as always I have been able to do.

2. I was able to view the audit list for MY cache as I always have been able to do.

3. I was able to write a note log for MY cache as I have always been able to do.

4. I received an email of my note log for MY cache as I have been always able to do, well; I know that it's been debated whether one should or should not get an email for ones log of ones own caches and travel bugs but I guess the outcome is YES.

5. I am able to edit MY cache page as I have been able always to do.

5. My last geocaching.com recognized visit to MY cache page is 6/21/2007 2:07 PM which it has always been since I stopped being a Premium Member sometime after that date.

6. Darn it, I can't think of 2 more sentences to put the always in alternate positions...

 

So this current issue, if it really applies, only applies to a non Premium Member logging someone elses PMO cache. I'm heading out to one right now so that I can try to actually post a Find It log for one.

 

We already told you that is what the problem is. You are doing a bunch of things on your own cache. It is when someone tries to do something on someone else's cache AND we have already tested it. But enjoy your hike.

[+trainlove]

We already told you that is what the problem is. You are doing a bunch of things on your own cache. It is when someone tries to do something on someone else's cache AND we have already tested it. But enjoy your hike.

Yup, I know. Yup it's the 'backdoor' method. Yup...

 

But as I said in sentence 1, I wanted to see if it also applies to the other logical thing that it could logically possibly apply to since sometimes database problems and programming problems at geocaching.com have the frequent ability to migrate to other related, and not related, parts of the general web pages that we call geocaching.com.

And since nobody else had verified that I had put in my own2¢.

[+Team Evil Fish]

I just had to check one aspect of this issue to see if the problem is widespread.

 

I was able to do the following on MY Premium Member cache, me not being a PM since somewhere around 6/21/2007 2:07 PM:

1. I am able to view MY PMO cache page as always I have been able to do.

2. I was able to view the audit list for MY cache as I always have been able to do.

3. I was able to write a note log for MY cache as I have always been able to do.

4. I received an email of my note log for MY cache as I have been always able to do, well; I know that it's been debated whether one should or should not get an email for ones log of ones own caches and travel bugs but I guess the outcome is YES.

5. I am able to edit MY cache page as I have been able always to do.

5. My last geocaching.com recognized visit to MY cache page is 6/21/2007 2:07 PM which it has always been since I stopped being a Premium Member sometime after that date.

6. Darn it, I can't think of 2 more sentences to put the always in alternate positions...

 

So this current issue, if it really applies, only applies to a non Premium Member logging someone elses PMO cache. I'm heading out to one right now so that I can try to actually post a Find It log for one.

 

We already told you that is what the problem is. You are doing a bunch of things on your own cache. It is when someone tries to do something on someone else's cache AND we have already tested it. But enjoy your hike.

 

Ok things you are missing...

 

Does the cache show on a nearby caches search?

Can the location be found using the tried and true caches near coordinate search?

Can those caches when found be logged by all who see them?

 

Wait only the PM cache can be logged/accessed by PM!! As I see it and saw it if a regular member can see a PM caches location and find its location for free I should not have to pay to log it..yeah the solution is either is Geocaching a pay to play site?? driving people that way is a death knell..

[+trainlove]

Does the cache show on a nearby caches search?

Can the location be found using the tried and true caches near coordinate search?

Can those caches when found be logged by all who see them?

 

Wait only the PM cache can be logged/accessed by PM!! As I see it and saw it if a regular member can see a PM caches location and find its location for free I should not have to pay to log it..yeah the solution is either is Geocaching a pay to play site?? driving people that way is a death knell..

Yes, yes, yes, and yes people in groups where only one member is a PM CAN and do go to PMO caches so they can and have always been able to log PMO caches as Jeremy allowed up till now.

 

I didn't go to a PMO cache yesterday as I planned, I was too busy in Facebook congratulating Mr. Jeremy Irish on his annual special day observance.

 

But I have thought of several other things that all of you have not so far thought of.

 

1. In wap.geocaching.com I have not been able to see MY PMO cache by GCname as I always have not been able to do.

2. In Wap.geocaching.com I have not been able to see MY PMO cache by nearby coordinate search as I have always not been able to do.

3. In wap.Geocaching.com I have not been able to log my PMO cache as I have not always been able to do. Well I don't think I even tried this last month when everyoone was up in arms, carying pitchforks, axes and torches when a major bug surfaced.

 

P.S. Here's the link for those of you who don't know.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...t&p=1422176

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...p;#entry1327861

I assume there's going to be an announcement of the recindation of this edict.

 

P.s. I have yet to try the method, the very hard way, of ?guid= but I think that can be done still, getting the guid will be as easy as getting the GC number or the IDnumber, but using it is harder.

[+Team Evil Fish]

Why have a PMO cache? is there something special about a altoids tin? is there something special about a ammo can in the mountians? is there something special left as a trade item?, oh wait those are the exception because anything worth trading is taken.. See if PMO caches were so special and unique they when found would not be like all the rest....it is a cancer that those who think PMO caches will not be muggled ect. can exercise their Hugo upon...

[+trainlove]

Why have a PMO cache? is there something special about a altoids tin? is there something special about a ammo can in the mountians? is there something special left as a trade item?, oh wait those are the exception because anything worth trading is taken.. See if PMO caches were so special and unique they when found would not be like all the rest....it is a cancer that those who think PMO caches will not be muggled ect. can exercise their Hugo upon...

No, some people/owners like PMO caches since they have the perception that they are Big Brother and can see just who's looking at their cache online using the Audit List feature and how many times they observe your cache and when the last time was and when the first time was. But there are ways around that so it's not all encompasing and there are 'invisible' people everywhere.

[+Tequila]

Why have a PMO cache? is there something special about a altoids tin? is there something special about a ammo can in the mountians? is there something special left as a trade item?, oh wait those are the exception because anything worth trading is taken.. See if PMO caches were so special and unique they when found would not be like all the rest....it is a cancer that those who think PMO caches will not be muggled ect. can exercise their Hugo upon...

 

Because we can.

[+gollie]

Why have a PMO cache? is there something special about a altoids tin? is there something special about a ammo can in the mountians? is there something special left as a trade item?, oh wait those are the exception because anything worth trading is taken.. See if PMO caches were so special and unique they when found would not be like all the rest....it is a cancer that those who think PMO caches will not be muggled ect. can exercise their Hugo upon..

 

Maybe a separate thread would be illuminating about "why do you place premium caches?" I think I could learn from this myself--admittedly I'm a skeptic about it. Because for me I think the contents of a cache aren't needing that much defending, Are PM's really placing that much better contents in their caches? I put cool stuff in my ordinary caches and trust I that it will be okay.

 

But for this thread I still think that logging PM's 'for free' is the issue. (I don't think this about team or couples logging as one-- but even for that I don't think we should have to do backdoor url hack to log this way.)

[+trainlove]

Another experiment:

1. http://coord.info/ also does not allow me to see MY PMO cache. I have no idea if this ever did.

2. I don't have a cell phone to try logging a note usinig the coord.info site but think that's completely shutdown due to my very next statement.

 

I think the pitchforks and torches were related to this site and any non member being able to see any and all PMO caches whether you are an owner of one or not.

[+Tequila]

My caches are PM for two reasons. One, I can use the Audit capability. And second, to prevent theft by one individual who has been a bit of a challenge in this area.

[+the hermit crabs]

My caches are PM for two reasons. One, I can use the Audit capability. And second, to prevent theft by one individual who has been a bit of a challenge in this area.

How does it prevent theft? It's pretty easy for someone to read your cache page without showing up in your Audit log.

[Nylimb]

P.s. I have yet to try the method, the very hard way, of ?guid= but I think that can be done still, getting the guid will be as easy as getting the GC number or the IDnumber, but using it is harder.

If I understand what you're suggesting, that doesn't work either. For example, the guid of Power Loop Cache, which I found today, is fad5f908-a463-4b4a-9053-0940dde7c281. So the URL for the log page should be http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?gu...53-0940dde7c281 . When I put that (the whole thing, not the shortened version shown here) in my browser's address bar, I get the now-familiar "Sorry, the owner of this listing has made it viewable to subscribers only.".

 

Or did you have some other method in mind?

Edited November 23, 2008 by Nylimb

[+trainlove]

Or did you have some other method in mind?

No that's what I said. And I also said that I had yet to try it out to see if that method also didn't work. Which you have verified that it doesn't work, like all others. I had checked it but not replied to this thread with my results,s ince some people don't like my experiments. I did reply to the following 'release notes' thread with a demand by the powers that be to tell us why they changed their long standing policy.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...t&p=3722767

Edited November 23, 2008 by trainlove

[LQ]

Or did you have some other method in mind?

No that's what I said. And I also said that I had yet to try it out to see if that method also didn't work. Which you have verified that it doesn't work, like all others. I had checked it but not replied to this thread with my results,s ince some people don't like my experiments. I did reply to the following 'release notes' thread with a demand by the powers that be to tell us why they changed their long standing policy.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...t&p=3722767

 

Thank's for digging up the thread where Jeremy commented this logging "loop hole". As you, I would also like to see some "official" comments from TPTB about this. Until then I'll consider this "fix" as an unintentional side effect of some other update. We have seen numerous examples of such side effects in earlier gc.com releases before, especially when the problems only show up for non premium members.

[Nylimb]

Thank's for digging up the thread where Jeremy commented this logging "loop hole".

I don't see that in trainlove's post. But for anyone who's interested, here it is: Jeremy's post

 

P.S.: Oh, I see. It was in one of his earlier posts, #34. Never mind.

Edited November 23, 2008 by Nylimb

[+frivlas]

Wow, I really hope this this can be "unfixed". My husband,children and I all have separate accounts. I have the only premium membership in the family ( cannot afford 4) and we have always used the backdoor method to log the PM caches we found for the rest of the family. I have never had a cache owner complain about us doing it because we cache together. Now, after a weekend of caching together, there are caches that they can't log. Please fix this.

[+trainlove]

This actaully appears to be the result of a software fix for something else at geocaching.com.

 

I just noticed that when trying to log a PM cache (or any cache), using either ?id= or ?wp= or ?guid= in addition to the warning (if it is a PMO cache) there is a bookmark that has nothing to do with the cache in question listed there. In this case, and it might change randomly as bugs appear to do, is:

Nachtcaches im Dreiländereck F,CH,D
        by LM1984  
View all bookmark lists...  

 

So to have a repeatable way to see what the following OP is talking about just do as I tried above.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=208610

[+Wild Thing 73]

I wonder how the geocachers feel when they "cheat". and it is cheating because you are not paying your PM dues.....These "dues" provide much of the "bells and whistles" that we enjoy. The cheaters are playing the game that others support with their membership $. I knew there was a method to circumvent the PM, so, when I'm aware of this cheating, I delete their log entry on my "PM only" caches...What part of "only" don't they understand...Why would geocaching condone cheating? Stay safe and stick to the rules....

[+sbell111]

I wonder how the geocachers feel when they "cheat". and it is cheating because you are not paying your PM dues.....These "dues" provide much of the "bells and whistles" that we enjoy. The cheaters are playing the game that others support with their membership $. I knew there was a method to circumvent the PM, so, when I'm aware of this cheating, I delete their log entry on my "PM only" caches...What part of "only" don't they understand...Why would geocaching condone cheating? Stay safe and stick to the rules....

Perhaps it is generally 'condoned' because most people don't see logging a cache that you found to be 'cheating'.

[+trainlove]

I wonder how the geocachers feel when they "cheat". and it is cheating because you are not paying your PM dues.....

1. You obviously do not know what a Premium Membership is for. It's not to pay for the sport, it's for special benefits. Go to https://www.geocaching.com/Membership/Default.aspx to see just what you pay for.

 

2. Geocaching is free as it states on https://www.geocaching.com/Membership/default.aspx

 

3. The guy who invented the geocaching.com web site itself, has stated that non-members logging a Premium Member Only cache is A-OK with him. You found the cache, using whatever method you used such as going with other members or previously being a member and having PMO caches in a stored PQ or whatever, so you should be able to log the PMO cache. That's what this thread is all about. Making people figure out how to log a PMO cache while not being a PM 'was' the concern of the OP of this thread.

 

4. It's the inability to actually read a PMO cache page that's part of what you actually pay for.