Archived caches in a pocket Queries

April 9, 2009

Well i have come across a problem in my gsak. When i do a pocket query and download it into gsak, caches that have been archived, since the last time i have done a query, do not get updated into my gsak. I don't think there is anything i am doing wrong. I even call Groundspeak and had them go through it with me. And we, together, could not get any archived caches to show up. Only disabled. In the end, the representative told me to start a forum to get the higher up people to see that we want to get archived caches to show up in pocket queries. If you are also wanting them to show up, put your words here and be heard.

So what i am trying to say is, i am wanting to see Groundspeak put an option in the pocket queries to be able to pull archived caches and update them in my gsak.

Edited April 10, 2009 by Rookieboy

2.8k · April 9, 2009

Why would I want archived caches in my PQs?

That would just fill up my GSAK database, which I use for finding active caches, with data that's useless to me.

No thank you.

April 10, 2009

Why would I want archived caches in my PQs?

That would just fill up my GSAK database, which I use for finding active caches, with data that's useless to me.

No thank you.

ok maybe i should revise what i said. I would like to see them put and option for archived caches in pocket queries. This data is useful for me for when i do "My Statistics" and also just want to know what has been archived around me.

8.3k · April 10, 2009

Why would I want archived caches in my PQs?

That would just fill up my GSAK database, which I use for finding active caches, with data that's useless to me.

No thank you.

ok maybe i should revise what i said. I would like to see them put and option for archived caches in pocket queries. This data is useful for me for when i do "My Statistics" and also just want to know what has been archived around me.

How could archived caches that you have not found ever be useful in your stats? Are you thinking it would be useful in your FOUND stats? then it sounds like your running the wrong PQ. The My Finds PQ includes archived caches. As for what has been archived, just look at the last GPX date. If the date is not updated then it probably is archived.

Jim

April 10, 2009

no what i am looking for in doing this is. When i run a query it does not update the caches that have been archived. So they still show as available in gsak. That is what i am having a problem with.

2.8k · April 10, 2009

Why would I want archived caches in my PQs?

That would just fill up my GSAK database, which I use for finding active caches, with data that's useless to me.

No thank you.

ok maybe i should revise what i said. I would like to see them put and option for archived caches in pocket queries. This data is useful for me for when i do "My Statistics" and also just want to know what has been archived around me.

An option would be OK, but...

For the "My Statistics" issue, use the "My Finds" PQ at the bottom of your PQ list, it DOES include archived PQs that you have found.

As for the "just want to know...", do a filter with the criteria:

Not Found, and

Last GPX Date on or before a date that is older than your last updated PQ (or other date of your choosing)

Then delete the results.

Pretty easy.

Oh, and I'm not trying to make light of your issue or anything. Just trying to point out an alternate way to use GSAK.

Edited April 10, 2009 by Allanon

38.2k · April 10, 2009

no what i am looking for in doing this is. When i run a query it does not update the caches that have been archived. So they still show as available in gsak. That is what i am having a problem with.

Then each time you load new waypoints, delete your old ones before you load new ones.

8.3k · April 10, 2009

no what i am looking for in doing this is. When i run a query it does not update the caches that have been archived. So they still show as available in gsak. That is what i am having a problem with.

So you check the Last GPX date. If the date did not update to the current date then they were not in the PQ, and likely archived. You can filter on the date and then run a waypoint check on each waypoint that was not archived and if they were archived delete them. That is what everyone else does.

Jim

2k · April 10, 2009

no what i am looking for in doing this is. When i run a query it does not update the caches that have been archived. So they still show as available in gsak. That is what i am having a problem with.

I'm surprised that nobody has given you the real answer.

This has been discussed many times before.

Groundspeak has no interest in helping you maintain an offline database.

There are workarounds for this (as have been pointed out in this thread) but I would not expect Groundspeak to ever give you archived caches in the normal PQs.

You will get more detailed information and a more sympathetic hearing at

http://gsak.net/board/index.php

5.3k · April 10, 2009

no what i am looking for in doing this is. When i run a query it does not update the caches that have been archived. So they still show as available in gsak. That is what i am having a problem with.

And exactly why is this a problem that Groundspeak should have to solve? Sounds to me like you should talk to the people who do GSAK, since it is a GSAK problem.

9.4k · April 10, 2009

You can't do a PQ on archived caches because you aren't supposed to go looking for them. PQs (with the exception of the "My Finds" PQ) are designed to help you go geocaching. Getting a PQ of archived caches doesn't help you do that (those caches aren't supposed to be there anymore).

Groundspeak does not support building your own offline database of caches (through GSAK or some other tool). The most current data is on the website, not stored on your computer. Downloading archived caches in a PQ isn't going to help you go caching, so the only use can be to build an offline database. If you want to build one anyway, you'll have to manage it on your own because Groundspeak is not going to give you the tools to make it easy.

As others have said, you can eliminate archived caches from your database by filtering on the date of the last PQ. Anything that did not update when you loaded the new PQ is likely archived and you can delete those items based on the results of the filter.

1.2k · April 10, 2009

The quick answer to your delimma is that PQs do not include archived caches, ever (except the My Finds query). So, when you upload the PQ to GSAK, the caches in your database can't be updated because they are no longer in the PQ.

Just sort your database by the last GPX update date - those that are older than you PQ are suspect. Then go online to verify it's status. If it's important to you to have this data forever, edit the cache record in GSAK (there is a field in the edit dialog box (middle right) where you can mark it as archived).

Edited April 10, 2009 by Cache O'Plenty

8.9k · April 10, 2009

http://markwell.us/archivedcaches.htm

April 10, 2009

When you look up those caches on line that had old last PQ update dates in GSAK, you can create a bookmark list that contains the ones that have been archived. (or maybe bookmark all of them, so those that are not archived get updated dates) Then do a PQ against the bookmark list, and import the resulting file into GSAK.. It won't delete them for you, but it will convert them to archived status, and won't download them to your GPS going forward.. You still have to purge your GPS to get rid of them.. But I seem to erase my GPS and reload it fairly often anyway..

5.6k · April 10, 2009

no what i am looking for in doing this is. When i run a query it does not update the caches that have been archived. So they still show as available in gsak. That is what i am having a problem with.

And exactly why is this a problem that Groundspeak should have to solve? Sounds to me like you should talk to the people who do GSAK, since it is a GSAK problem.

I've never understood your line of reasoning on this (as you have spouted this previously) - it's a GSAK problem that it can't do something with information it doesn't have and can't get??? And the guy writing GSAK is supposed to be able to make it do something with this data it doesn't have??? Huh???

The "problem" isn't with GSAK, nor is it with GC.com. As the Saxman pointed out, info on archived caches doesn't help you find caches, so GC.com doesn't supply it. GSAK can't do something magical with no data, but has built in tools/features to help (i.e.. the Last GPX date among others). It is a tool to help you, but doesn't and can't do all the work itself. There are somethings you have to do yourself - including checking for archived caches.

5.6k · April 10, 2009

When you look up those caches on line that had old last PQ update dates in GSAK, you can create a bookmark list that contains the ones that have been archived. (or maybe bookmark all of them, so those that are not archived get updated dates) Then do a PQ against the bookmark list, and import the resulting file into GSAK.. It won't delete them for you, but it will convert them to archived status, and won't download them to your GPS going forward.. You still have to purge your GPS to get rid of them.. But I seem to erase my GPS and reload it fairly often anyway..

If you are already looking at the cache online, why make a bookmark list? Just hit the button to download the GPX file on the page, and import it into GSAK.

7.7k · April 10, 2009

Then each time you load new waypoints, delete your old ones before you load new ones.

No good. Then corrected waypoints and notes will be deleted as well. As well as potentially older logs.

Instead I sort by last GPX date and delete the ones that did not get updated.

5.3k · April 10, 2009

no what i am looking for in doing this is. When i run a query it does not update the caches that have been archived. So they still show as available in gsak. That is what i am having a problem with.

And exactly why is this a problem that Groundspeak should have to solve? Sounds to me like you should talk to the people who do GSAK, since it is a GSAK problem.

I've never understood your line of reasoning on this (as you have spouted this previously) - it's a GSAK problem that it can't do something with information it doesn't have and can't get??? And the guy writing GSAK is supposed to be able to make it do something with this data it doesn't have??? Huh???

The design of GSAK encourages people to think that they should keep large offline databases. That's a design problem with GSAK, in my opinion. The program could easily have been designed to work better with the site, but, for whatever reason, the author decided not to.

We have had to put up with a seemingly infinite number of threads in which geocachers seem to think that the purpose of geocaching.com is to cater to those who keep offline databases with GSAK. Once again, that's a problem with GSAK.

In the interests of full disclosure, you might not want to take my position too seriously, as I have other issues with GSAK and Clyde's propensity for charging money for other people's freely-shared ideas without giving them even minimal credit.

April 10, 2009

no what i am looking for in doing this is. When i run a query it does not update the caches that have been archived. So they still show as available in gsak. That is what i am having a problem with.

And exactly why is this a problem that Groundspeak should have to solve? Sounds to me like you should talk to the people who do GSAK, since it is a GSAK problem.

In the interests of full disclosure, you might not want to take my position too seriously, as I have other issues with GSAK and Clyde's propensity for charging money for other people's freely-shared ideas without giving them even minimal credit.

<Begin Rant>

Oii!!! What a Crock of... Crikey! Either way, he DOES give credit where it is due, its just up to you to request it(that I know of) As for the charging money for it GOOD FOR HIM! That means that if Thousands of Geocachers use and pay for it, then thats the mark of a GREAT piece of Useful Software.

<End Rant>

Of course, one could also figure that IF in GSAK a cache is not updated in a Month, then there MAY be something wrong with it. You could also do like I do, and Purge All Databases every Year. This assures that I don't go hunting for a cache that was archived X Years ago.

What about writing a macro that would comparethe Last GPX Update, and if its more than 32 days ago, change the Cache Status to Un-Avaliable at least.

Course, the EASY Solution would be like this thread was Started for... Being able to get a PQ of Archived caches. Even to just get the GC Code, and the Status updated would be GREAT!!!

The STeaks

April 10, 2009

When I first started using GSAK, I ran into the problem with archived and disabled caches not being removed.

From my experience there's two practical options:

1) Use a filter on the Last GPX column to identify to caches that haven't been updated and delete manually.

2) Delete the database and reload with fresh PQ's.

Usually I choose to delete the database and load new queries as it's the easiest option and results in the freshest data. It's a pain to reload on my Palm, but it works.

8.9k · April 10, 2009

http://markwell.us/archivedcaches.htm

In case no one bothered to read that link, it's a whole page devoted to this problem and the work-around solutions.

8.3k · April 10, 2009

We have had to put up with a seemingly infinite number of threads in which geocachers seem to think that the purpose of geocaching.com is to cater to those who keep offline databases with GSAK. Once again, that's a problem with GSAK.

The problem is not with GSAK and the problem is not with GC.com. The problem is with the person behind the keyboard.

Jim

April 10, 2009

http://markwell.us/archivedcaches.htm

In case no one bothered to read that link, it's a whole page devoted to this problem and the work-around solutions.

Yes, I bothered to read the link. It was informative, but did not yield the intended result. If Someone at HQ would add this into the PQ Page, that would be GREAT!

PQ Generation page(line 286)

</tr><tr>
		<td><input id="cbOptions_12" type="checkbox" name="cbOptions$12" /><label for="cbOptions_12">Is Not Active</label></td><td><input id="cbOptions_13" type="checkbox" name="cbOptions$13" /><label for="cbOptions_13">Is Active</label></td>
</tr><tr>
		<td><input id="cbOptions_14" type="checkbox" name="cbOptions$14" /><label for="cbOptions_14">Is <B>Archived</b></label></td><td><B>Note: Archived caches Will Drastically change overall area.</b> </td>
	</tr>

Of course, this is NOT meant to keep an offline DB, but to keep the overall Server load down. If people DO Easially have data they Know is Actually up to date(within a few days), they are less likely to spend HOURS clicking and checking each and every cache to verify that it is actually avaliable or archived. Isn't that the REAL reason we got PQs in the first place?

The Steaks

2k · April 10, 2009

Of course, this is NOT meant to keep an offline DB, but to keep the overall Server load down.

The "server load" argument has been tried before and rejected. It would reduce the load from those of us who are maintaining information offline, but then, we have to realize we "are doing it wrong".

April 11, 2009

I came to this thread via a search. I wanted to see if there was a way to search for local archived caches that might be deserving of a rescue. The two I own are from adoptions of caches that were near death. I'm looking at another that was archived from the same user that transferred one to me already. The only reason I knew it used to be there is from that user's profile page. It still shows up as a cache they own.

So, to sum up, there is a use for being able to PQ archived caches aside from this silly "offline database" idea. I'm not sure why anyone would do that anyway.

'Goose

Edited April 11, 2009 by DatCrazyMongoose

2k · April 11, 2009

I'm looking at another that was archived from the same user that transferred one to me already.

'Goose

You can search for all the caches for a particular owner from his profile and see the archived ones.

It used to be possible to search online for archived caches in an area. We have been told this ability will be restored at some point.

But even when that was available, archived caches weren't available in PQs.

Edited April 11, 2009 by beejay&esskay

8.3k · April 11, 2009

I came to this thread via a search. I wanted to see if there was a way to search for local archived caches that might be deserving of a rescue. The two I own are from adoptions of caches that were near death. I'm looking at another that was archived from the same user that transferred one to me already. The only reason I knew it used to be there is from that user's profile page. It still shows up as a cache they own.

So, to sum up, there is a use for being able to PQ archived caches aside from this silly "offline database" idea. I'm not sure why anyone would do that anyway.

'Goose

Adoption rules have changed. You can't adopt an archived cache, so being able to search for them is not needed. And if the owner does not use geocaching.com/adopt or give Groundspeak written permission there can be no adoption.

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

2k · April 11, 2009

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Curiosity remains a reason.

April 11, 2009

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Curiosity remains a reason.

I agree and i just hate getting to a cache signing the log and getting home just to find out that it was archived over a month ago. And i dont want to sit there and spend the time to check every single cache to find out what the status is.

2k · April 11, 2009

Sometimes the answer is no.

TPTB have made it clear that they will not program to accommodate off line databases in third party software. As I understand it they are not in favor of such off line DBs and would rather they not be kept.

I have never understood the need for them myself. It is way too easy to get a fresh pq for the area you are going to cache in on the way out the door.

8.3k · April 11, 2009

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Curiosity remains a reason.

I agree and i just hate getting to a cache signing the log and getting home just to find out that it was archived over a month ago. And i dont want to sit there and spend the time to check every single cache to find out what the status is.

So you had out of date information and still managed to find the cache. Is there some reason you feel you can not log an archived cache? There is a very famous archived mystery cache in Seattle that is logged all the time by people all over the world.

Jim

2.8k · April 11, 2009

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Curiosity remains a reason.

I agree and i just hate getting to a cache signing the log and getting home just to find out that it was archived over a month ago. And i dont want to sit there and spend the time to check every single cache to find out what the status is.

If you found a cache and signed the logbook and get home to find it archived, log it online anyway...what is stopping you?

April 11, 2009

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Curiosity remains a reason.

I agree and i just hate getting to a cache signing the log and getting home just to find out that it was archived over a month ago. And i dont want to sit there and spend the time to check every single cache to find out what the status is.

If you found a cache and signed the logbook and get home to find it archived, log it online anyway...what is stopping you?

well whats stopping me is the fact that i try not to make people mad around here. I had told the owner of one once that i had found about 6-8 of his caches that had been archived, found due to the same main reason here. He told me to learn how to do my pq's and that i will not be allowed to log any archived caches of his. So i told him that he better clean up his "messes" so to say, after they had been archived after a month. He told me to mind my own business and to think that the cache may be in use by another game. So that is why i do not like or want to log archived caches.

2.8k · April 11, 2009

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Curiosity remains a reason.

I agree and i just hate getting to a cache signing the log and getting home just to find out that it was archived over a month ago. And i dont want to sit there and spend the time to check every single cache to find out what the status is.

If you found a cache and signed the logbook and get home to find it archived, log it online anyway...what is stopping you?

well whats stopping me is the fact that i try not to make people mad around here. I had told the owner of one once that i had found about 6-8 of his caches that had been archived, found due to the same main reason here. He told me to learn how to do my pq's and that i will not be allowed to log any archived caches of his. So i told him that he better clean up his "messes" so to say, after they had been archived after a month. He told me to mind my own business and to think that the cache may be in use by another game. So that is why i do not like or want to log archived caches.

That was exactly the right response. Those old caches left in place are often called GeoLitter or GeoTrash. It was and is his responsibility to go get them and clean up the area.

You can still log them, he may delete the logs, but you can still log them.

As for the caches, if it were me I'd go get them myself and re-use them in other locations...or even just throw them away...but with that attitude he should have no expectation that they would stay out there.

2k · April 11, 2009

The exception not the norm. As you insist on maintaining an off line database and his caches are already archived how hard is it to go through and delete them? Then log any others you happen across.

Just get a fresh pq for whatever area you are going to cache in when you are getting ready to leave the house. That way your info will be April fresh.

2k · April 11, 2009

That was exactly the right response. Those old caches left in place are often called GeoLitter or GeoTrash. It was and is his responsibility to go get them and clean up the area.

You can still log them, he may delete the logs, but you can still log them.

As for the caches, if it were me I'd go get them myself and re-use them in other locations...or even just throw them away...but with that attitude he should have no expectation that they would stay out there.

But the cache owner indicated they may be in use as something else. Maybe he got mad at Groundspeak, archived his caches here and listed them elsewhere. (Which really seems like the only reason he'd care enough to delete the find logs here.)

(When I'm planning a caching trip, after I've selected the caches, I create a bookmark list and generate a PQ from that. And the day before I leave, I run that PQ again to get the latest information. It saves me looking for disabled or archived caches. [Yes, I'm "doing it wrong" by having my own database.])

April 12, 2009

(quoting from various posters)

The quick answer to your delimma is that PQs do not include archived caches, ever (except the My Finds query).

Accurate for the purposes of this thread, but in the interest of precision, archived caches on bookmark lists are included in PQs based on the bookmark list.

gc.com could aid in this issue by returning archived caches one more time if they have previously been returned by the same PQ. However, this would require a lot of additional bookkeeping (AFAIK, PQ results are not kept), and would still not work correctly in all situations.

The argument of not supporting an offline database is weak, since the data in your GPSr is an offline database. However, I suppose the effort of clarifying the intent isn't really worth the trouble. I understand what they mean.

The design of GSAK encourages people to think that they should keep large offline databases. That's a design problem with GSAK, in my opinion. The program could easily have been designed to work better with the site, but, for whatever reason, the author decided not to.

My guess is that it would have been designed to integrate better with the site, but the gc.com T&C say no automated usage, and they have not relented in this. GSAK uses quite well the tools which the gc.com T&C allow it to use.

GSAK could add an option to delete caches not in a PQ being loaded. I for one would not use it, as I want to know what's been archived since the last PQ. So for me, sorting on the last GPX date not only shows me which caches are no longer available, but also gives me the chance to examine them. Two birds with one stone.

For those who are curious about archived caches, there are various techniques available for finding them as long as you are willing to spend some time. In this sense, it's simply been made difficult enough to avoid the potential problems cited when refusing to allow PQs of archived caches. Find cachers who have been around for a long time in the area of interest and look at their hidden caches -- the archived ones don't have check boxes by them. Look at the old find logs on some old caches, and then look for other caches which the same cachers found on the same date -- some (perhaps many) of those will have been archived and are usually nearby. With enough effort, you can find a link to every cache except those which were never found and whose hider never found another cache, such as GC1P49G.

Edward

2.8k · April 12, 2009

Note to self...don't give opinions before hearing all the background... :laughing:

Do as you want...

April 12, 2009

Adoption rules have changed. You can't adopt an archived cache, so being able to search for them is not needed. And if the owner does not use geocaching.com/adopt or give Groundspeak written permission there can be no adoption.

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Forgive me for being sentimental. I believe that there are good caches that for one reason or another have been abandoned/archived. My only interest is bringing them back from the dead. If I could search for them, I could then try to contact the owner via the cache page and request an adoption. (Is it even possible for a CO to adopt out an archived cache?) Hopefully, they still have the same email address. If not, oh well, it's gone forever. Or maybe I'll put a new one there and maintain it myself. I'd still like to give it a try.

Again I say, there IS a reason to search for archived caches, whether you agree with it or not.

8.3k · April 12, 2009

Adoption rules have changed. You can't adopt an archived cache, so being able to search for them is not needed. And if the owner does not use geocaching.com/adopt or give Groundspeak written permission there can be no adoption.

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Forgive me for being sentimental. I believe that there are good caches that for one reason or another have been abandoned/archived. My only interest is bringing them back from the dead. If I could search for them, I could then try to contact the owner via the cache page and request an adoption. (Is it even possible for a CO to adopt out an archived cache?) Hopefully, they still have the same email address. If not, oh well, it's gone forever. Or maybe I'll put a new one there and maintain it myself. I'd still like to give it a try.

Again I say, there IS a reason to search for archived caches, whether you agree with it or not.

Tell you what. Why don't you go find an archived cache and write up your success story on getting it adopted to you and back as an active cache and maybe I'll reconsider. Until then implementing a search for archived caches is a waste of cpu cycles and programmer time.

Jim

5.6k · April 12, 2009

Adoption rules have changed. You can't adopt an archived cache, so being able to search for them is not needed. And if the owner does not use geocaching.com/adopt or give Groundspeak written permission there can be no adoption.

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Forgive me for being sentimental. I believe that there are good caches that for one reason or another have been abandoned/archived. My only interest is bringing them back from the dead. If I could search for them, I could then try to contact the owner via the cache page and request an adoption. (Is it even possible for a CO to adopt out an archived cache?) Hopefully, they still have the same email address. If not, oh well, it's gone forever. Or maybe I'll put a new one there and maintain it myself. I'd still like to give it a try.

Again I say, there IS a reason to search for archived caches, whether you agree with it or not.

Another reason is to look at the history of a potential cache hide. Knowing that a cache (or more) has had trouble with muggles (for example) may change how (or if) you hide a cache there.

9.4k · April 12, 2009

Adoption rules have changed. You can't adopt an archived cache, so being able to search for them is not needed. And if the owner does not use geocaching.com/adopt or give Groundspeak written permission there can be no adoption.

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Forgive me for being sentimental. I believe that there are good caches that for one reason or another have been abandoned/archived. My only interest is bringing them back from the dead. If I could search for them, I could then try to contact the owner via the cache page and request an adoption. (Is it even possible for a CO to adopt out an archived cache?) Hopefully, they still have the same email address. If not, oh well, it's gone forever. Or maybe I'll put a new one there and maintain it myself. I'd still like to give it a try.

Again I say, there IS a reason to search for archived caches, whether you agree with it or not.

I've seen it posted that reviewers will not unarchive a cache just so it can be adopted by someone else. Just place a new cache there if the spot was so good.

April 13, 2009

Adoption rules have changed. You can't adopt an archived cache, so being able to search for them is not needed. And if the owner does not use geocaching.com/adopt or give Groundspeak written permission there can be no adoption.

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Forgive me for being sentimental. I believe that there are good caches that for one reason or another have been abandoned/archived. My only interest is bringing them back from the dead. If I could search for them, I could then try to contact the owner via the cache page and request an adoption. (Is it even possible for a CO to adopt out an archived cache?) Hopefully, they still have the same email address. If not, oh well, it's gone forever. Or maybe I'll put a new one there and maintain it myself. I'd still like to give it a try.

Again I say, there IS a reason to search for archived caches, whether you agree with it or not.

I've seen it posted that reviewers will not unarchive a cache just so it can be adopted by someone else. Just place a new cache there if the spot was so good.

How can you place a "new" cache if there's no way to find out if there was an "old" one there to begin with? I'm new to the hobby, but I have a deep appreciation for history and culture. I would like to be able to bring back, or keep from dying, good caches, rather than have someone stick a film canister under a rock and take up a good chunk of a nice park or similar area.

Edited April 13, 2009 by DatCrazyMongoose

5.2k · April 13, 2009

How can you place a "new" cache if there's no way to find out if there was an "old" one there to begin with? I'm new to the hobby, but I have a deep appreciation for history and culture. I would like to be able to bring back, or keep from dying, good caches, rather than have someone stick a film canister under a rock and take up a good chunk of a nice park or similar area.

So you're saying that the only options are to 1. re-use an old spot, or 2. stick a film can under a rock? :rolleyes:

Why not go find a new and interesting spot and hide a nice cache? If you happen to, by chance, find an old spot, but hide your cache in a new and interesting way, that works too.

9.4k · April 13, 2009

Adoption rules have changed. You can't adopt an archived cache, so being able to search for them is not needed. And if the owner does not use geocaching.com/adopt or give Groundspeak written permission there can be no adoption.

There is no reason or need to be able to search for archived caches.

Jim

Forgive me for being sentimental. I believe that there are good caches that for one reason or another have been abandoned/archived. My only interest is bringing them back from the dead. If I could search for them, I could then try to contact the owner via the cache page and request an adoption. (Is it even possible for a CO to adopt out an archived cache?) Hopefully, they still have the same email address. If not, oh well, it's gone forever. Or maybe I'll put a new one there and maintain it myself. I'd still like to give it a try.

Again I say, there IS a reason to search for archived caches, whether you agree with it or not.

I've seen it posted that reviewers will not unarchive a cache just so it can be adopted by someone else. Just place a new cache there if the spot was so good.

How can you place a "new" cache if there's no way to find out if there was an "old" one there to begin with? I'm new to the hobby, but I have a deep appreciation for history and culture. I would like to be able to bring back, or keep from dying, good caches, rather than have someone stick a film canister under a rock and take up a good chunk of a nice park or similar area.

Um...in your post you pretty much said you want to be able to search for archived caches so you can contact the owner, have the cache unarchived and adopted over to you. My reply was that reviewers will not unarchive a cache for it to be adopted, so why would you need to search for these "old" caches?

If there isn't a cache somewhere, you are free to place your own, regardless of whether there was a cache there before or not. i.e. once a cache is archived, that spot opens up for a new cache. That new cache doesn't have to just be a micro under a rock.

April 13, 2009

OK, I thought cache owners could unarchive their own caches. If not, and reviewers aren't going to do it, even if the owner has been contacted and is willing to do the adoption, then it's almost pointless. There would still be the option of searching for others' archived caches and then placing new ones of my own in the same location, with the same themes/ideas as the originals.

I don't know, maybe I'm lying to myself about the sentimentality of it all. Maybe I'm just not creative enough to come up with one of my own from scratch. :rolleyes:

April 18, 2009

Of course, this is NOT meant to keep an offline DB, but to keep the overall Server load down.

The "server load" argument has been tried before and rejected. It would reduce the load from those of us who are maintaining information offline, but then, we have to realize we "are doing it wrong".

Not so long as we Realize that our Offline DB IS x days out of date, and keep it updated with PQs regularly.

Perfect example. I went over to Seattle a few weeks ago, and only ran 1 PQ.(I know...) Of course, then I found myself on the site looking up cache info anyways. Had I been able to run a couple 'Archived PQs', I would have been able to just load them into GSAK, and go from there.

Also, I won't usually search for a cache unless the 'Last GPX' date is within 15 days. This would be Great if there was a State by State(or Province/area) download-able gpx of the caches that are archived in a specific Year(a cache created in 2001 and archived in 2008 would be in the 2008 file), and then Month for the current year. The Previous month would be available 5 days after the end of the month, or 10 Days after the beginning of the year. That way, Groundspeak could 'Run' those PQs Once, and the only other time that info would be gathered would be at the beginning of the next year(for the Yearly Compiling). Once the Year is compiled, all the Monthly compiled files are deleted, and references removed.

I.E. Run an Archived Caches ONLY PQ for WA for 2000-2002, then save the file. Create a folder for them(geocaching.com/archived) and make it a simple page that is like the page I will link in my next post to this thread. The filename would be WA2000.zip. The next would be WA for 2003(WA2003.zip), WA for 2004(WA2004.zip), WA for 2005(WA2005.zip),WA for 2006(WA2006.zip), WA for 2007(WA2007.zip), WA for 2008(WA2008.zip). WA for Jan of 2009(WA012009.zip), WA for Feb 2009(WA022009.zip), and WA for March 2009(WA032009.zip). April would not be avaliable til 5 May 09.

Just a thought. Now to actually make a simple webpage.

The Steaks

2k · April 18, 2009

Just a thought. Now to actually make a simple webpage.

The Steaks

I thought from your join date that you've been around long enough to realize that one of the prime canons of the Church of Groundspeak is "Thou shalt not aid in maintaining offline databases." <_<

More orthodox members will stop by to correct your heresy.

April 18, 2009

Here is the Rough Draft... Of course its JUST an Idea, but Could be Seriously Considered.

Archived Geocache Listing

The Steaks

P.S. I would include a link to this feature on the Premium Features, but NOT advertise it.

Edited April 18, 2009 by eagsc7

8.3k · April 18, 2009

Probably 98% of the users of GC.com could care less about archived caches. Just about all of these users would not care about the issues of archived caches in GSAK databases. Seems to me to be a waste of time and resource that could be put to better use.

Jim

Edited April 18, 2009 by jholly

Archived caches in a pocket Queries

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment