Add option to hide temporarily disabled caches from the map

[+DENelson83]

I'd like to see Groundspeak implement an option to only have those caches that are available for finding be visible on the map, so I don't get my hopes up seeing a cache on the map only to realize after a little delay that it's disabled.

[+Lil Devil]

The disabled caches are gray on the map. Works for me.

[+DENelson83]

The disabled caches are gray on the map. Works for me.

Yes, but I would like the option to simply hide them altogether.

[Keystone]

Is it annoying to see them? Then the disabled cache icons are serving one of their intended purposes. Viewers should be motivated to inquire of the owner about reenabling the listing, or logging a "needs archived" if the owner is not responsive.

[+MYater]

Is it annoying to see them? Then the disabled cache icons are serving one of their intended purposes. Viewers should be motivated to inquire of the owner about reenabling the listing, or logging a "needs archived" if the owner is not responsive.

I don't think that that seeing the disabled status is the annoying part. The annoying part is trying to plan a caching adventure with somebody and getting our hopes up because the monitor is at a bad angle or the settings are not ideal, and the grey is not as visible without taking a second look.

 

I ran a PQ on an area and came back with considerably fewer caches than what was showing on the map since I selected to not get disabled caches in the PQ.

 

Yes the grey does work, but a feature to one click ignore them each time you get into the map function, just as we can hide our own caches and finds, would alleviate people making the mistake on a cache and wasting anything from 30 seconds to 30 minutes (as in my case).

 

I know I would love to see this feature implemented, and by the amount of times I have seen this idea suggesting in the short two months that I have been reading this forum, I know that there are plenty of people who would like to see this function as well. Raine mae a comment earlier this year that the map feature had some changes in the works for down the road, this could be a feature that could be implemented. As I said, I would love to see this implemented.

 

MYater

[toczygroszek]

I was thinking about this feature and some my geocaching friends pointed it as well asking "why I can't disable these caches from my map?". So I think it will be good and helpful feature.

[+bretina]

My wife and I bring this up constantly when we plan our geocaching adventures. We try to 'clear' everything around us (or be able to hit the 'hide finds' to see a clear map). Sometimes we just like seeing smileys all over (so don't want to turn off the underlying cache type). Not sure if I am explaining this well but a filter to hide the disabled ones is one of our top requests.

 

That and it would be great if it remembered what you filtered from last time. We spend a lot of time unchecking various types (CITO events that have already passed, event caches, etc.) We just got an Oregon but before that we would hide Wherigo.. having to check that every time is a pain..

 

The premium filters is one of our favorite things about being members... we just wish it would have this extra filter

[+bretina]

Responding to my own response

 

I've logged several 'Needs Maintenance' finds before but was not aware of the "Needs Archiving" option (that mails the owner and the reviewers). It was mentioned above that the filter for disabled is not on there to encourage folks to go out and do this. So I decided to give it a try. A couple of the disabled entries I looked at already had a reviewer on top of it (usually but not always due to someone posting a Needs Archiving log). A couple were only disabled for a few weeks or a month and were reasonable. I found a couple that were disabled 4-5 months and one almost a year.

 

So I decided to try out this "Needs Archiving" feature.

 

I am now convinced it is fine the way it is. Volunteers already approve caches, they should not be expected to have to monitor every disabled site. Having users put notes on for archiving to direct them there helps a lot. If a way to encourage users to post these logs is by having grey boxes show up that can't be filtered... seems reasonable and just part of a community site.

 

So basically I retract my note above requesting the filter. If I don't want them to show up I will do my part and suggest where appropriate the ones that should be archived.

 

Thanks,

 

- the Bret of 'bretina'

My wife and I bring this up constantly when we plan our geocaching adventures. We try to 'clear' everything around us (or be able to hit the 'hide finds' to see a clear map). Sometimes we just like seeing smileys all over (so don't want to turn off the underlying cache type). Not sure if I am explaining this well but a filter to hide the disabled ones is one of our top requests.

 

That and it would be great if it remembered what you filtered from last time. We spend a lot of time unchecking various types (CITO events that have already passed, event caches, etc.) We just got an Oregon but before that we would hide Wherigo.. having to check that every time is a pain..

 

The premium filters is one of our favorite things about being members... we just wish it would have this extra filter

[+eflyguy]

No need to make the ability to hide disabled caches mandatory. Just give those who want that capability the option to do so..

 

Is it annoying to see them? Then the disabled cache icons are serving one of their intended purposes. Viewers should be motivated to inquire of the owner about reenabling the listing, or logging a "needs archived" if the owner is not responsive.

 

How long should the owner be given to repair a cache?

 

Some around here have been out since the flooding, but others have been offline for months. Is there some stated time frame within which cache owners are expected to either repair or archive their caches?

 

I thought the whole point of cache placement was that you were supposed to be actively maintaining them?

..a

Edited October 28, 2009 by eflyguy

[+rob3k]

Sounds like a good map filter option to me. It's been requested before IIRC.

[+BBosman]

I wanted this feature as well, so I wrote a small Greasemonkey script some time ago, which adds this feature to the map page.

 

For those of you who also use Greasemonkey and want to try it can find the script here.

[+pppingme]

Viewers should be motivated to inquire of the owner about reenabling the listing, or logging a "needs archived" if the owner is not responsive.

Isn't that the local reviewers job?

[+rob3k]

I wanted this feature as well, so I wrote a small Greasemonkey script some time ago, which adds this feature to the map page.

 

For those of you who also use Greasemonkey and want to try it can find the script here.

 

Just checked it out and that's pretty slick.

 

This gives you a check box to hide disabled caches just like the ones to hide your finds and your owned caches. Only caveat is that once you check the box the disabled caches disappear, but they don't automatically reappear when you uncheck it. They will reappear if you then click the 'refresh map' link.

 

I'm adding this to the set of GM scripts I always load up for GC.com. Nice job!

[+mndvs737]

I requested this feature a few weeks ago. In my local area, I kind of know which caches should be grayed-out, so I am able to see where a new one might change over to that status, or one that was disabled has come back online, or I see that the box has totally disappeared.

 

Where I think it would be really handy is when people are planning out-of-town runs from the map. If I am scouting out an area for a visit, I go in and start turning off various cache types that might not appeal to me for the time I am there -- events, CITO, webcam, caches I have found from previous visits, etc. Being able to also turn off the disabled caches in the map view would make the screen just a bit cleaner, and planning a bit easier.

[OpinioNate]

Viewers should be motivated to inquire of the owner about reenabling the listing, or logging a "needs archived" if the owner is not responsive.

Isn't that the local reviewers job?

 

Nope. They have enough to do already without babysitting every cache within 1000 miles. They have to rely on local finders to alert them to problems.

[+BBosman]

Only caveat is that once you check the box the disabled caches disappear, but they don't automatically reappear when you uncheck it. They will reappear if you then click the 'refresh map' link.

That's a bug I'd fixed.

 

Apparently I uploaded an old version. I'll update it when I get home from work tonight.

[+pppingme]

Viewers should be motivated to inquire of the owner about reenabling the listing, or logging a "needs archived" if the owner is not responsive.

Isn't that the local reviewers job?

 

Nope. They have enough to do already without babysitting every cache within 1000 miles. They have to rely on local finders to alert them to problems.

We are talking about caches that have already been identified as problem caches, thus they are disabled.

 

This isn't the reviewer going over every single cache to see if it needs disabled.

[+NinjaCacher!]

I wanted this feature as well, so I wrote a small Greasemonkey script some time ago, which adds this feature to the map page.

 

For those of you who also use Greasemonkey and want to try it can find the script here.

 

Nice.. but when I check it, it disables all other checkboxes, so I can't for example also hide my finds anymore. However if I check hide my finds first, it works fine.. so I don't see why it shouldn't work the other way round.

 

Is this on purpose, or some technical limitation, or a bug?

[+BBosman]

Is this on purpose, or some technical limitation, or a bug?

It's on purpose due to a technical reason.

 

I can't easily change the behaviour of the default checkboxes, so if you uncheck one of those checkboxes while the Hide Disabled checkbox is checked, those disabled caches relevant to the checkbox you unchecked will show. So to keep the display somewhat consistent I disable the other checkboxes so that you have to (temporary) uncheck it to change other settings.

 

Maybe I'll see if I can modify the default checkboxes behavior sometime, but this script was just a personal hack to get a feature I wanted and it fulfills that need for me.

[Keystone]

Viewers should be motivated to inquire of the owner about reenabling the listing, or logging a "needs archived" if the owner is not responsive.

Isn't that the local reviewers job?

 

Nope. They have enough to do already without babysitting every cache within 1000 miles. They have to rely on local finders to alert them to problems.

We are talking about caches that have already been identified as problem caches, thus they are disabled.

 

This isn't the reviewer going over every single cache to see if it needs disabled.

There are more than 500 disabled caches in my review territory. How often do you expect me to read each cache page and its logs, and decide correctly whether it's time to archive the listing, leave a reminder note, or take no action? How long do you think it takes to do that? How much will you pay me?

 

As it stands, I do this once per month and it takes the better part of an evening. I do it for free.

[+rob3k]

Only caveat is that once you check the box the disabled caches disappear, but they don't automatically reappear when you uncheck it. They will reappear if you then click the 'refresh map' link.

That's a bug I'd fixed.

 

Apparently I uploaded an old version. I'll update it when I get home from work tonight.

 

Sweet, works like a charm.

 

I didn't even notice the other boxes disable, not a big deal if it's a big job to work it out. Just adds a click or two on rare occasions.

[+NinjaCacher!]

Is this on purpose, or some technical limitation, or a bug?

It's on purpose due to a technical reason.

 

I can't easily change the behaviour of the default checkboxes, so if you uncheck one of those checkboxes while the Hide Disabled checkbox is checked, those disabled caches relevant to the checkbox you unchecked will show. So to keep the display somewhat consistent I disable the other checkboxes so that you have to (temporary) uncheck it to change other settings.

 

Maybe I'll see if I can modify the default checkboxes behavior sometime, but this script was just a personal hack to get a feature I wanted and it fulfills that need for me.

 

No big deal, just wondered. It works fine as it is currently. THanks for the script