Requst members only caches be a different color on map for easy identification.

[+helix149]

Requst members only caches be a different color on map for easy identification.

 

This would make it much easier when looking at map with multiple levels of accounts in same home and premium member is talking to standard member.

[+JohnE5]

If I remember correctly they used to be red. Not sure when that changed. And you can still see Groundspeak ads featuring PMO caches in the side bar and they are still red.

Edited December 12, 2009 by JohnE5

[+baloo&bd]

Requst members only caches be a different color on map for easy identification.

 

This would make it much easier when looking at map with multiple levels of accounts in same home and premium member is talking to standard member.

 

If there are premium and non premium members in the same household, why would it matter. The non PMO can just use the backdoor GS put in for such occasions to log it.

[+helix149]

Requst members only caches be a different color on map for easy identification.

 

This would make it much easier when looking at map with multiple levels of accounts in same home and premium member is talking to standard member.

 

If there are premium and non premium members in the same household, why would it matter. The non PMO can just use the backdoor GS put in for such occasions to log it.

 

Its not about logging its about sitting next to each other on separate laptops planning a day of caching using the map feature. On my map PM caches are shown on hers they are not so when I open it not knowing it is a PM cache and start talking about it she cannot even see the location let alone have access to the cache info on her computer. If the cache was on the map in a different color such as red I would know it is a PM cache and that if I was interested in it I would have to show it to her on my pute. It would save alot of headache if they were in a dif color. The shading is different on caches that are temp disabled caches so it is doable.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

 

 

Its not about logging its about sitting next to each other on separate laptops planning a day of caching using the map feature. On my map PM caches are shown on hers they are not so when I open it not knowing it is a PM cache and start talking about it she cannot even see the location let alone have access to the cache info on her computer. If the cache was on the map in a different color such as red I would know it is a PM cache and that if I was interested in it I would have to show it to her on my pute. It would save alot of headache if they were in a dif color. The shading is different on caches that are temp disabled caches so it is doable.

I hear you, That's usually the way I pick my Caches too. Sounds like a good idea to me, and should be easy enough...but maybe not a high priority.

 

I can see the blank stare now...Umm...what the ....are you talking abut...There are only three on the map...

 

Oh yeah, I seem to remember there being problems with people deducing the Cache location from the maps, and getting all uppity when they were not allowed to log it.

Edited December 13, 2009 by WRITE SHOP ROBERT

[+helix149]

 

 

Its not about logging its about sitting next to each other on separate laptops planning a day of caching using the map feature. On my map PM caches are shown on hers they are not so when I open it not knowing it is a PM cache and start talking about it she cannot even see the location let alone have access to the cache info on her computer. If the cache was on the map in a different color such as red I would know it is a PM cache and that if I was interested in it I would have to show it to her on my pute. It would save alot of headache if they were in a dif color. The shading is different on caches that are temp disabled caches so it is doable.

I hear you, That's usually the way I pick my Caches too. Sounds like a good idea to me, and should be easy enough...but maybe not a high priority.

 

I can see the blank stare now...Umm...what the ....are you talking abut...There are only three on the map...

 

Oh yeah, I seem to remember there being problems with people deducing the Cache location from the maps, and getting all uppity when they were not allowed to log it.

 

logging premium caches for non premium is actually really easy to do as there is a back door in place where they can log but see no information about the cache we have done it several times If you dont know how shoot me an email through geocachin.com and ill send send you instructions

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

 

logging premium caches for non premium is actually really easy to do as there is a back door in place where they can log but see no information about the cache we have done it several times If you dont know how shoot me an email through geocachin.com and ill send send you instructions

Thanks, I don't really need to know right now, since I'm a PM(twice over)

[+Team Cotati]

Requst members only caches be a different color on map for easy identification.

 

This would make it much easier when looking at map with multiple levels of accounts in same home and premium member is talking to standard member.

 

If there are premium and non premium members in the same household, why would it matter. The non PMO can just use the backdoor GS put in for such occasions to log it.

 

How does that 'backdoor' thing work?

[+Allanon]

 

 

Its not about logging its about sitting next to each other on separate laptops planning a day of caching using the map feature. On my map PM caches are shown on hers they are not so when I open it not knowing it is a PM cache and start talking about it she cannot even see the location let alone have access to the cache info on her computer. If the cache was on the map in a different color such as red I would know it is a PM cache and that if I was interested in it I would have to show it to her on my pute. It would save alot of headache if they were in a dif color. The shading is different on caches that are temp disabled caches so it is doable.

I hear you, That's usually the way I pick my Caches too. Sounds like a good idea to me, and should be easy enough...but maybe not a high priority.

 

I can see the blank stare now...Umm...what the ....are you talking abut...There are only three on the map...

 

Oh yeah, I seem to remember there being problems with people deducing the Cache location from the maps, and getting all uppity when they were not allowed to log it.

 

logging premium caches for non premium is actually really easy to do as there is a back door in place where they can log but see no information about the cache we have done it several times If you dont know how shoot me an email through geocachin.com and ill send send you instructions

It's not the 'logging' part that is the issue here, it's the figuring out the coordinates part.

 

Yes, anyone can log one, but not everyone is supposed to be able to just 'get' the coordinates unless you are a PM...

[+BlueDeuce]

Requst members only caches be a different color on map for easy identification.

 

This would make it much easier when looking at map with multiple levels of accounts in same home and premium member is talking to standard member.

 

Maybe given the current selections - Add the option to exclude PM caches.

[+baloo&bd]

How does that 'backdoor' thing work?

 

One way is:

 

- Go to a non MOC cache.

- Click the link, "l og your visit" in the upper right corner.

- The URL in the browser will look like http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?ID=123456

- Change the "ID=" to "WP=" and replace the number with the GC code of the PMOC. i.e. WP=GCXXXX

- Go to that link and log the cache.

 

There are a couple other methods. If you search the forums there are more than a few threads that go into how to.

Edited December 14, 2009 by baloo&bd

[+succotash]

I like this idea. We're premium members so it's not a finding or logging issue. It's this - if I'm looking at caches using the google map feature, which I love to do, and click on a cache, I don't like finding out at that point that I'm on the audit list of some PMOC. I'd rather know that before I click on the cache. I might choose not to click on it simply to avoid being on the audit list. Not a big deal, but thought I'd mention it in support of the enhancement.

 

Thanks.

[+helix149]

I like this idea. We're premium members so it's not a finding or logging issue. It's this - if I'm looking at caches using the google map feature, which I love to do, and click on a cache, I don't like finding out at that point that I'm on the audit list of some PMOC. I'd rather know that before I click on the cache. I might choose not to click on it simply to avoid being on the audit list. Not a big deal, but thought I'd mention it in support of the enhancement.

 

Thanks.

 

Didn't think of that but that is a good point as well. I know many of us both sm and pm search for caches with the map feature and if I am just perusing as I often do at work there is no reason to add to the audit list when I often dont intend on hunting the cache anytime in the near future

[+Corey]

The current workaround would have to involve creating a Pocket Query that includes "Are available to all users" and previewing that as a map.

Or, in the original example, you could log in from the non-PM account on both computers.

[+helix149]

The current workaround would have to involve creating a Pocket Query that includes "Are available to all users" and previewing that as a map.

Or, in the original example, you could log in from the non-PM account on both computers.

 

You are missing the point. I want to see all the caches but it would be nice also to have an indication on the map of which type of cache it is. Just like you can see the difference between active and inactive caches as well as mystery or multi stage caches. In that way we would be able to make better decisions on whether to look at the cache more closely or if we want to pass it up or if we need to show others in the household on our computer where it is on the map so they can join in the decision whether to add it to the days attempt list or not.