Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
GOF and Bacall

Hide the find counts.

Recommended Posts

There are many cachers who don't log on line or who use other means to keep there count to themselves. May we please have an option to keep our find counts to ourselves?

Share this post


Link to post

There are many cachers who don't log on line or who use other means to keep there count to themselves. May we please have an option to keep our find counts to ourselves?

I don't see the connection between not logging on line, and whether or not a find tally is displayed.

Share this post


Link to post

There are many cachers who don't log on line or who use other means to keep there count to themselves. May we please have an option to keep our find counts to ourselves?

 

As the OP's have been caching for better than 3 years I was surprised to not see this "new" topic introduced with something along the line of: I know this has been debated extensively in the past but we think it's time for a revisit.

 

Here is a good sample of what you can expect to hear again. Find Counts, Hasta! See ya!

 

Re-reading the entire post by GOF & Bacall I see I had only addressed the Hide the find counts portion. I think the Or rather an option to do it subtitle has also been mentioned previously. I don't recall it ever being seriously considered by TPTB. We'll see if you can get an opinion out of them.

Edited by Cardinal Red

Share this post


Link to post

There are many cachers who don't log on line or who use other means to keep there count to themselves. May we please have an option to keep our find counts to ourselves?

 

As the OP's have been caching for better than 3 years I was surprised to not see this "new" topic introduced with something along the line of: I know this has been debated extensively in the past but we think it's time for a revisit.

 

Here is a good sample of what you can expect to hear again. Find Counts, Hasta! See ya!

 

Re-reading the entire post by GOF & Bacall I see I had only addressed the Hide the find counts portion. I think the Or rather an option to do it subtitle has also been mentioned previously. I don't recall it ever being seriously considered by TPTB. We'll see if you can get an opinion out of them.

 

So adding that sentence would have avoided you being surprised, ok, then what?

Share this post


Link to post

OK, I'll bite, is there a way to add to your found count without logging your finds online at geocaching.com?

Share this post


Link to post

There are many cachers who don't log on line or who use other means to keep there count to themselves. May we please have an option to keep our find counts to ourselves?

I don't see the connection between not logging on line, and whether or not a find tally is displayed.

 

If you log zero, your profile will display a zero... he's asking for another way to keep his public find record at zero.

Share this post


Link to post

There are many cachers who don't log on line or who use other means to keep there count to themselves. May we please have an option to keep our find counts to ourselves?

I don't see the connection between not logging on line, and whether or not a find tally is displayed.

 

If you log zero, your profile will display a zero... he's asking for another way to keep his public find record at zero.

 

Small point perhaps, but I'd wager that the OP would prefer there be no display of found count whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post

I am fully aware that this has been brought up before. But it doesn't hurt to ask.

 

I have taken to logging my finds as notes. Then bookmark and ignore to help keep those caches I have found out of PQs. It is an imperfect system though and more of a pain than it needs to be. If there was an option to hide the count from the public it would make it easier for me to give the CO the feedback they deserve and remain outside of the numbers issues. At the same time all the rest of the features that are effected by the found it log will still work. PQs, maps, search features that are useless to me now.

 

If it were just me I know it would never be done. But it isn't just me. there are many who do not want to play the numbers game. So I ask again. May we please have the option to hide the tally of our finds from the general public?

Share this post


Link to post

There are many cachers who don't log on line or who use other means to keep there count to themselves. May we please have an option to keep our find counts to ourselves?

I don't see the connection between not logging on line, and whether or not a find tally is displayed.

 

If you log zero, your profile will display a zero... he's asking for another way to keep his public find record at zero.

 

Small point perhaps, but I'd wager that the OP would prefer there be no display of found count whatsoever.

 

Just to be clear. My request is for an option for each user to decide to hide their own numbers. I know that for many the numbers are important. I am not asking to remove that fun from them, just to be allowed to be left out of it without loosing some of the basic functionality.

Share this post


Link to post

I am fully aware that this has been brought up before. But it doesn't hurt to ask.

 

I have taken to logging my finds as notes. Then bookmark and ignore to help keep those caches I have found out of PQs. It is an imperfect system though and more of a pain than it needs to be. If there was an option to hide the count from the public it would make it easier for me to give the CO the feedback they deserve and remain outside of the numbers issues. At the same time all the rest of the features that are effected by the found it log will still work. PQs, maps, search features that are useless to me now.

 

If it were just me I know it would never be done. But it isn't just me. there are many who do not want to play the numbers game. So I ask again. May we please have the option to hide the tally of our finds from the general public?

Whew! I was worried there for a moment that you actually were the first person to have ever resurrected a topic that had been discussed before.

 

Thank you very much for clearing that up. :)

Share this post


Link to post

Just to be clear. My request is for an option for each user to decide to hide their own numbers. I know that for many the numbers are important. I am not asking to remove that fun from them, just to be allowed to be left out of it without loosing some of the basic functionality.

 

If there was such an option, I'd use it too. I'd like to opt out of the numbers game, yet I'd still like to see a tally of my finds on my personal profile. If it's not possible to do both, i.e. public - no tally, private - tally, then I'd opt for no tally in both cases.

Share this post


Link to post

There are many cachers who don't log on line or who use other means to keep there count to themselves. May we please have an option to keep our find counts to ourselves?

 

As the OP's have been caching for better than 3 years I was surprised to not see this "new" topic introduced with something along the line of: I know this has been debated extensively in the past but we think it's time for a revisit.

 

Here is a good sample of what you can expect to hear again. Find Counts, Hasta! See ya!

 

Without having to read through over 400 posts, would someone mind summing up what people felt about hiding counts publically... were most cachers for or against the idea....what were the reasons against hiding counts publically?

Share this post


Link to post

Just to be clear. My request is for an option for each user to decide to hide their own numbers. I know that for many the numbers are important. I am not asking to remove that fun from them, just to be allowed to be left out of it without loosing some of the basic functionality.

 

If there was such an option, I'd use it too. I'd like to opt out of the numbers game, yet I'd still like to see a tally of my finds on my personal profile. If it's not possible to do both, i.e. public - no tally, private - tally, then I'd opt for no tally in both cases.

It's only a numbers game if YOU choose to consider it so.

Share this post


Link to post

Is there a good reason why some of us should not be allowed to hide our count?

Just a guess...but how about because it's more work than it's worth.

Share this post


Link to post

Just to be clear. My request is for an option for each user to decide to hide their own numbers. I know that for many the numbers are important. I am not asking to remove that fun from them, just to be allowed to be left out of it without loosing some of the basic functionality.

 

If there was such an option, I'd use it too. I'd like to opt out of the numbers game, yet I'd still like to see a tally of my finds on my personal profile. If it's not possible to do both, i.e. public - no tally, private - tally, then I'd opt for no tally in both cases.

It's only a numbers game if YOU choose to consider it so.

 

Or you go to an event and some schmuck says "Haven't you found a thousand yet?"Or "What does he know? He only has a hundred finds." Or you find out your caching name is on a list that ranks cachers by find count. Sorry sir, but that doesn't work.

Share this post


Link to post

Is there a good reason why some of us should not be allowed to hide our count?

Just a guess...but how about because it's more work than it's worth.

 

I wouldn't know. Is it really all that much work? Any programmers care to chime in?

Share this post


Link to post
I wouldn't know. Is it really all that much work? Any programmers care to chime in?

In programming terms, unless the site is really, really badly designed, it would not be a lot of effort. You'd need a check box in the profile ("check this box to hide your find count in logs") and a single line ("only if box isn't checked" before "show stats") in the code which generates the cache pages.

 

However, people can still click on your profile and read your stats. It would probably be a lot more work to give you "security" in this area.

 

Now, the fact that something is cheap to do in the code, doesn't mean it will get done. Groundspeak is a pretty conservative company (remarks about "old soldiers" versus "bold soldiers" come to mind), and they have a winning formula. So while you would like to see this, and so would I, and it wouldn't require them to hire a guru for 6 months at $2,000 a day to implement, it may not happen any time soon.

Share this post


Link to post

I am fully aware that this has been brought up before. But it doesn't hurt to ask.

 

I have taken to logging my finds as notes. Then bookmark and ignore to help keep those caches I have found out of PQs. It is an imperfect system though and more of a pain than it needs to be. If there was an option to hide the count from the public it would make it easier for me to give the CO the feedback they deserve and remain outside of the numbers issues. At the same time all the rest of the features that are effected by the found it log will still work. PQs, maps, search features that are useless to me now.

 

If it were just me I know it would never be done. But it isn't just me. there are many who do not want to play the numbers game. So I ask again. May we please have the option to hide the tally of our finds from the general public?

 

I have been doing the same "Note/Ignore/Bookmark" methodology for almost a year now. It takes a couple of extra steps but does work. I use GSAK to track my actual finds.

 

I agree with the OP that it would be nice if there was a profile option that would hide your find count. We don't show DNF counts.

Share this post


Link to post

I am fully aware that this has been brought up before. But it doesn't hurt to ask.

 

I have taken to logging my finds as notes. Then bookmark and ignore to help keep those caches I have found out of PQs. It is an imperfect system though and more of a pain than it needs to be. If there was an option to hide the count from the public it would make it easier for me to give the CO the feedback they deserve and remain outside of the numbers issues. At the same time all the rest of the features that are effected by the found it log will still work. PQs, maps, search features that are useless to me now.

 

If it were just me I know it would never be done. But it isn't just me. there are many who do not want to play the numbers game. So I ask again. May we please have the option to hide the tally of our finds from the general public?

 

I have been doing the same "Note/Ignore/Bookmark" methodology for almost a year now. It takes a couple of extra steps but does work. I use GSAK to track my actual finds.

 

I agree with the OP that it would be nice if there was a profile option that would hide your find count. We don't show DNF counts.

 

That's too bad. My DNF count would be quite impressive indeed. :D

 

I have never seen an "official position" on this one. How about it Groundspeak? Nate? Is there a practical reason not to? Does GS figure that it would hurt the bottom line? What do TPTB think about this subject?

Edited by GOF & Bacall

Share this post


Link to post

If I were to have the option, I would hide my find count from public view as well. However, it doesn't bother me enough to go through the effort GOF and others seem to go through.

Share this post


Link to post

If I were to have the option, I would hide my find count from public view as well. However, it doesn't bother me enough to go through the effort GOF and others seem to go through.

 

Tell me about it. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Just to be clear. My request is for an option for each user to decide to hide their own numbers. I know that for many the numbers are important. I am not asking to remove that fun from them, just to be allowed to be left out of it without loosing some of the basic functionality.

If there was such an option, I'd use it too. I'd like to opt out of the numbers game, yet I'd still like to see a tally of my finds on my personal profile. If it's not possible to do both, i.e. public - no tally, private - tally, then I'd opt for no tally in both cases.

It's only a numbers game if YOU choose to consider it so.

Or you go to an event and some schmuck says "Haven't you found a thousand yet?"Or "What does he know? He only has a hundred finds." Or you find out your caching name is on a list that ranks cachers by find count. Sorry sir, but that doesn't work.

Only of you let it bother you.

 

Why would you care about the opinion of a schmuck? Me, I prefer to ignore the schmucks. Like you, I do not participate in the competitive comparisons.

 

One’s find count is one’s own business. The fact that it is posted publicly does not automatically enter one into any competition.

 

Besides, those who truly understand this hobby know that the find count number is almost completely meaningless anyway. The schmucks who cannot understand that do not deserve your respect for their misinformed opinion.

Share this post


Link to post

Only of you let it bother you.

 

True!

 

GOF is a friend of mine and I respect him immensely, but I just cannot understand why he has an issue with the numbers. I have not been around as long as him though and I also respect his position to not want his seen.

Share this post


Link to post

Just to be clear. My request is for an option for each user to decide to hide their own numbers. I know that for many the numbers are important. I am not asking to remove that fun from them, just to be allowed to be left out of it without loosing some of the basic functionality.

 

If there was such an option, I'd use it too. I'd like to opt out of the numbers game, yet I'd still like to see a tally of my finds on my personal profile. If it's not possible to do both, i.e. public - no tally, private - tally, then I'd opt for no tally in both cases.

It's only a numbers game if YOU choose to consider it so.

 

Or you go to an event and some schmuck says "Haven't you found a thousand yet?"Or "What does he know? He only has a hundred finds." Or you find out your caching name is on a list that ranks cachers by find count. Sorry sir, but that doesn't work.

 

The solution isn't to hide Find counts. It's to stop listening to schmucks. You're name is on a list? So what? Is your self-esteem that fragile?

Share this post


Link to post

Just to be clear. My request is for an option for each user to decide to hide their own numbers. I know that for many the numbers are important. I am not asking to remove that fun from them, just to be allowed to be left out of it without loosing some of the basic functionality.

 

If there was such an option, I'd use it too. I'd like to opt out of the numbers game, yet I'd still like to see a tally of my finds on my personal profile. If it's not possible to do both, i.e. public - no tally, private - tally, then I'd opt for no tally in both cases.

It's only a numbers game if YOU choose to consider it so.

 

Or you go to an event and some schmuck says "Haven't you found a thousand yet?"Or "What does he know? He only has a hundred finds." Or you find out your caching name is on a list that ranks cachers by find count. Sorry sir, but that doesn't work.

 

The solution isn't to hide Find counts. It's to stop listening to schmucks. You're name is on a list? So what? Is your self-esteem that fragile?

Somewhat agreed. Who really cares what some 100 per week 6 month cacher thinks about where you are after 5 years.

 

I was going to write a different response but this fairly well sums up what I was going to say. Seems like a whole different "numbers' game when you want to "opt out". Tells me you are placing some weight or value on numbers by wanting them hidden. Makes no sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post

Just to be clear. My request is for an option for each user to decide to hide their own numbers. I know that for many the numbers are important. I am not asking to remove that fun from them, just to be allowed to be left out of it without loosing some of the basic functionality.

 

If there was such an option, I'd use it too. I'd like to opt out of the numbers game, yet I'd still like to see a tally of my finds on my personal profile. If it's not possible to do both, i.e. public - no tally, private - tally, then I'd opt for no tally in both cases.

It's only a numbers game if YOU choose to consider it so.

 

Or you go to an event and some schmuck says "Haven't you found a thousand yet?"Or "What does he know? He only has a hundred finds." Or you find out your caching name is on a list that ranks cachers by find count. Sorry sir, but that doesn't work.

 

The solution isn't to hide Find counts. It's to stop listening to schmucks. You're name is on a list? So what? Is your self-esteem that fragile?

Somewhat agreed. Who really cares what some 100 per week 6 month cacher thinks about where you are after 5 years.

 

I was going to write a different response but this fairly well sums up what I was going to say. Seems like a whole different "numbers' game when you want to "opt out". Tells me you are placing some weight or value on numbers by wanting them hidden. Makes no sense to me.

 

What is the 'bad' thing that results from you, me or anyone not being able to see another member's found count?

Share this post


Link to post

....

What is the 'bad' thing that results from you, me or anyone not being able to see another member's found count?

The only bad thing I can think of is not being able to tell if that latest DNF or comment on my cache is from an experienced finder or a newbie - so I can give some amount of relative value to the comment.

 

I'll flip the question on you - short of satisfying some kind of bruised ego feelings (high, low or otherwise) - What is the 'good' thing that results from you, me or anyone not being able to see another member's found count??

Share this post


Link to post

I'll flip the question on you - short of satisfying some kind of bruised ego feelings (high, low or otherwise) - What is the 'good' thing that results from you, me or anyone not being able to see another member's found count??

 

For me, it would definitely not be about a bruised ego. It's more about the principle, not feeding into the numbers mentality. In a way, it might be nice if no one's find count was displayed, maybe we'd have fewer cache finds/hides meant only to only up the numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Or you go to an event and some schmuck says "Haven't you found a thousand yet?"Or "What does he know? He only has a hundred finds." Or you find out your caching name is on a list that ranks cachers by find count. Sorry sir, but that doesn't work.

But why worry about it? There are people like that in all aspects of life. "My sports coupe that cost me $75,000 is much better than you're little family sedan..." "My dad earns more than your dad..."

 

Just cache the way you want, enjoy yourself and not worry about what others think?

Share this post


Link to post

If you want a revelation, start looking at disabled cache logs, and you'll quickly see how a lot of these "big number" cachers got those big numbers. Found something that looks like it might at one time have been a tupperware lid? Log it as a Find! Found where you're pretty sure the cache probably was? It's a Find! Can't find anything, so you put out a "replacement" cache? Don't forget to log it as a Find. And a big slap on the back for being able to actually find the cache you just placed!

 

Keep the above in mind, next time someone talks about their "numbers".

Share this post


Link to post

I never thought of logging Finds as buying into the numbers game. I could not possibly care less about what someone thinks of my Find count.

 

Anyway, I don't see harm one way or the other, whether the numbers are displayed or not. However, given that adding the option is work and there are only so many resources to go around I suspect there are more important things for the lackeys to work on.

Share this post


Link to post

I'll flip the question on you - short of satisfying some kind of bruised ego feelings (high, low or otherwise) - What is the 'good' thing that results from you, me or anyone not being able to see another member's found count??

 

For me, it would definitely not be about a bruised ego. It's more about the principle, not feeding into the numbers mentality. In a way, it might be nice if no one's find count was displayed, maybe we'd have fewer cache finds/hides meant only to only up the numbers.

I tend to not go with the theory that reason there are all those caches that Lone R doesn't enjoy finding is because these caches are hidden/found by people for the sole purpose of increasing one's find count. I believe that if the find count were not not displayed, quick park and grabs would still be among the most popular caches. Some people will tend to search for the caches that take the minimum effort and time to find. I would further assume that even without find counts and leader board sites, there would be people trying to find the most caches in a day, week, or year and they would be sharing their numbers some way or another. At least with find counts we know the number is the number of found it, attended, and photo taken logs that they have entered on the site. Who knows what they would be talking about if there was no number on Geocaching.com you could check against.

 

The find count is not the cause of people hiding and finding quick and easy caches and hiding the find count will not end the fact that these caches are enjoyed by many geocachers.

 

If you want a revelation, start looking at disabled cache logs, and you'll quickly see how a lot of these "big number" cachers got those big numbers. Found something that looks like it might at one time have been a tupperware lid? Log it as a Find! Found where you're pretty sure the cache probably was? It's a Find! Can't find anything, so you put out a "replacement" cache? Don't forget to log it as a Find. And a big slap on the back for being able to actually find the cache you just placed!

 

Keep the above in mind, next time someone talks about their "numbers".

The find count s is the number of found, attended, and photo taken logs entered by a Geocaching.com user that have not be deleted. That's all the number means. One can make assumptions that most people are not sitting at their computer entering logs just to make this number bigger and that it therefore has something to do with the number of geocaches they found, events they attended, or webcams where they had their photo taken. However since not everyone is a puritan about what they log, one can also assume that the numbers mean different things to different people. I think you will find that "big number" cachers are not anymore likely to do some of the things mentioned above than a newbie. There are probably even a few "big number" cachers that are bona fide puritans and never log a found unless the have actually found the cache and signed the log.

Share this post


Link to post

LOL. Someone thinks it is about my self esteem? Don't know me do he?

 

Yes kids, I can ignore morons. I do it quite often actually. But despite what some seem to think there is a large numbers driven segment of this community we call geocaching. I don't wish to be a part of the part of the game. I honestly don't see what the big deal is. Are my numbers so important to some that they think they need to convince me that I should share them? It ain't gonna happen.

 

There is a bunch of us who would just as soon be left out of all the stat comparisons and counting of coupe. Usually when one of us asks for this option people come out of the woodwork to convince us that we should just make do. I'd rather not and have yet to hear a reasonable explanation why I should.

 

So, once again, may we please have the option to hide our find counts? Is it really so much to ask for?

Share this post


Link to post

I never thought of logging Finds as buying into the numbers game. I could not possibly care less about what someone thinks of my Find count.

 

Anyway, I don't see harm one way or the other, whether the numbers are displayed or not. However, given that adding the option is work and there are only so many resources to go around I suspect there are more important things for the lackeys to work on.

 

"there are only so many resources to go around I suspect there are more important things for the lackeys to work on."

 

And that right there is always going to be true and it is always a dismissive cop-out.

Share this post


Link to post

I have taken to logging my finds as notes. Then bookmark and ignore to help keep those caches I have found out of PQs. It is an imperfect system though and more of a pain than it needs to be. If there was an option to hide the count from the public it would make it easier for me to give the CO the feedback they deserve and remain outside of the numbers issues. At the same time all the rest of the features that are effected by the found it log will still work. PQs, maps, search features that are useless to me now.

 

Can I politely ask why you don't log finds as "found"? I understand the "not wanting to be part of the numbers game" element, but given (as you say) the existing site becomes less usable, why do you do it?

 

Genuinely interested!

 

Thanks

 

Matt

Share this post


Link to post

I have taken to logging my finds as notes. Then bookmark and ignore to help keep those caches I have found out of PQs. It is an imperfect system though and more of a pain than it needs to be. If there was an option to hide the count from the public it would make it easier for me to give the CO the feedback they deserve and remain outside of the numbers issues. At the same time all the rest of the features that are effected by the found it log will still work. PQs, maps, search features that are useless to me now.

 

Can I politely ask why you don't log finds as "found"? I understand the "not wanting to be part of the numbers game" element, but given (as you say) the existing site becomes less usable, why do you do it?

 

Genuinely interested!

 

Thanks

 

Matt

 

It doesn't really become "less usable".

 

By "Ignore Listing" the caches no longer show up on PQ's which emulates a Found log.

Share this post


Link to post

"there are only so many resources to go around I suspect there are more important things for the lackeys to work on."

 

I wish the lackeys would respond and let us know if that's the case. Tell us whether it's too much to ask, tell us what they are working on, tell us what's on the to-do list.

Share this post


Link to post

"there are only so many resources to go around I suspect there are more important things for the lackeys to work on."

 

I wish the lackeys would respond and let us know if that's the case. Tell us whether it's too much to ask, tell us what they are working on, tell us what's on the to-do list.

 

""there are only so many resources to go around I suspect there are more important things for the lackeys to work on."

 

And that right there is always going to be true and it is always a dismissive cop-out."

 

Yeah, me too.

Share this post


Link to post

I have taken to logging my finds as notes. Then bookmark and ignore to help keep those caches I have found out of PQs. It is an imperfect system though and more of a pain than it needs to be. If there was an option to hide the count from the public it would make it easier for me to give the CO the feedback they deserve and remain outside of the numbers issues. At the same time all the rest of the features that are effected by the found it log will still work. PQs, maps, search features that are useless to me now.

 

Can I politely ask why you don't log finds as "found"? I understand the "not wanting to be part of the numbers game" element, but given (as you say) the existing site becomes less usable, why do you do it?

 

Genuinely interested!

 

Thanks

 

Matt

 

Because I really don't want to be a part of the numbers game. I think for my purposes the trade off is worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Can I politely ask why you don't log finds as "found"? I understand the "not wanting to be part of the numbers game" element, but given (as you say) the existing site becomes less usable, why do you do it?

Because I really don't want to be a part of the numbers game.

But that’s just it: You are NOT part of the numbers game. You are already where you want to be!

 

The numbers game isn’t something one must actively opt out of in order to be out. It’s the other way around: One must actively opt IN to the numbers game in order to participate.

 

Unless you voluntarily choose to compete, you are not a competitor. And as a non-competitor, whenever anyone makes noise about your numbers, that’s all it is: noise.

 

Look at me. Like you, I also prefer not to participate in the informal competitions – yet I have no problem with my numbers being displayed.

 

You wouldn’t start taking your meals in seclusion over the mere existence of a local hot dog eating contest, would you?

 

You wouldn’t pave over your lawn just because a few neighbors started competing and trash-talking each other over how fast they can mow, would you?

 

My advice: Do like the rest of us and ignore the schmucks. Don’t let them get to you.

 

I think for my purposes the trade off is worth it.

For your purposes maybe, but what about the rest of us? Why should a popular feature be taken away from hundreds of thousands of cachers just to satisfy your individual purpose? Your proposal may benefit you, but it would require a wholesale game-wide change. Do you understand the scale of your request?

 

You are asking for ALL lawns WORLDWIDE to be paved over, just to protect you from your neighborhood lawnmowing schmucks – when all you really have to do is ignore them.

Share this post


Link to post
I suspect there are more important things for the lackeys to work on.

 

Does it have anything to do with mt'ing brown bottles?

Share this post


Link to post

You need to take another look at what I asked for. What I'd like is to have the option to hide my numbers. If this boon is granted you can still post all your silly stats and compare yourself to anyone you want. The only way I could see this having a negative impact on you is if for some reason you feel you must have the ability to compare my numbers to those of you or others.

Share this post


Link to post

You are asking for ALL lawns WORLDWIDE to be paved over, just to protect you from your neighborhood lawnmowing schmucks – when all you really have to do is ignore them.

 

Actually, what he asked for was the choice to pave over HIS lawn and not have the neighborhood association demand that all lawns have grass.

 

Personally, I don't care if anyone looks at my numbers or what they think if they do. And I wouldn't mind giving folks the OPTION to hide their counts if they wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
You are asking for ALL lawns WORLDWIDE to be paved over, just to protect you from your neighborhood lawnmowing schmucks – when all you really have to do is ignore them.

Actually, what he asked for was the choice to pave over HIS lawn and not have the neighborhood association demand that all lawns have grass.

You are correct.

Share this post


Link to post
You need to take another look at what I asked for. What I'd like is to have the option to hide my numbers.

You are correct. My mistake. You did in fact ask for an option, not a ban.

 

In that case, please ignore the parts of my post that are contaminated with my mistaken assumption -- and tell me what you think about my main point, which addresses what I think is a much better way for you to view this issue.

 

In fact, I asked you a couple of direct and very relevant questions:

 

You wouldn’t start taking your meals in seclusion over the mere existence of a local hot dog eating contest, would you?

 

You wouldn’t pave over your lawn just because a few neighbors started competing and trash-talking each other over how fast they can mow, would you?

Would you please do me the honor of answering those two questions?

Share this post


Link to post

Programming-wise, it is simplistic to add checkboxes for inhibiting the display of elements of a website.

 

The issue is not technical and I'd like to see GS comment on why they don't implement this feature.

 

Also, I wouldn't mind knowing my DNF count, and I wouldn't have a problem sharing it with others.

Share this post


Link to post

Programming-wise, it is simplistic to add checkboxes for inhibiting the display of elements of a website.

It always amuses me when someone claims to know how easy or difficult it would be to modify a Web site when they know little or nothing about the actual internals of the site. As a former Web developer, I'm all too aware that something that looks "simplistic" on the surface might be a whole lot more complicated under the hood.

 

--Larry

Share this post


Link to post

You wouldn’t pave over your lawn just because a few neighbors started competing and trash-talking each other over how fast they can mow, would you?

 

He's not asking to pave over his lawn he's just asking to be screened off i.e. not visible, while mowing his lawn so the neighbors can't compare and compete with his lawn mowing speed. He would rather not be on display.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

×
×
  • Create New...