How about the ability to block a cache log?

[GOF and Bacall]

One of the ongoing arguments has been when to delete a log. Often a CO would just as soon not delete a log if they had a better option. The problem is spoilers can take away from the challenge and fun but the logger did find the cache. Heck, they may not even realize they have posted a spoiler. If the CO could select an option to block a log and/or associated pictures it could take some of the angst out of it. The logger gets to keep their smilie and the CO gets to protect the secrets of their cache. If the logger edits the log the CO can still restore it. Just seems like a kinder, gentler way to handle the whole issue.

[+flask]

sure.

[+Cardinal Red]

No. If you don't have the courage to delete the log, live with it.

[GermanSailor]

The CO can permanently decrypt any log. Nice, but this almost certainly makes everybody read it.

 

It would be nice if individual pictures could be deleted by the CO. But as the CO you can always ask the finder to remove a certain picture. I was asked once, because my picture disclosed to much, so I deleted it myself. On the other hand, some COs consider themselves a bit to important. It's just geocaching. A hobby, not a religion or an international peace conference.

 

GermanSailor

[CoyoteRed]

Just seems like a kinder, gentler way to handle the whole issue.

I've been wanting this for a long time.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

If we want to be kinder and gentler, how about calling it "Hide" this log.

[+baloo&bd]

While I think it would work MOST of the time, there are the few COs that delete without seeming to have a reason, set up TB prisons and ALRs and already abuse the audit log on MoCs.

 

I can see some COs just hiding every log to give the illusion of being more "secure" just like making a cache a MoC.

 

I think the reason for online logging is to share your experience otherwise there would be no need for it.

 

I do like the idea, however don't think it would work in the long run.

[GOF and Bacall]

If we want to be kinder and gentler, how about calling it "Hide" this log.

 

Sure, not a bad idea.

[GOF and Bacall]

While I think it would work MOST of the time, there are the few COs that delete without seeming to have a reason, set up TB prisons and ALRs and already abuse the audit log on MoCs.

 

I can see some COs just hiding every log to give the illusion of being more "secure" just like making a cache a MoC.

 

I think the reason for online logging is to share your experience otherwise there would be no need for it.

 

I do like the idea, however don't think it would work in the long run.

 

Seems to me that those who would abuse this are the same ones abusing the delete log option. Overall I think the impact would be lower. If they hide a log that they wold have deleted before it is a net positive gain.

[+baloo&bd]

While I think it would work MOST of the time, there are the few COs that delete without seeming to have a reason, set up TB prisons and ALRs and already abuse the audit log on MoCs.

 

I can see some COs just hiding every log to give the illusion of being more "secure" just like making a cache a MoC.

 

I think the reason for online logging is to share your experience otherwise there would be no need for it.

 

I do like the idea, however don't think it would work in the long run.

 

Seems to me that those who would abuse this are the same ones abusing the delete log option. Overall I think the impact would be lower. If they hide a log that they wold have deleted before it is a net positive gain.

 

Correct, however now you have the recourse to have GC reinstate the log if it was deleted without cause. Not so with the proposed hide since it would not affect the hiders numbers. It would, however, negate the purpose of online logs.

[+bittsen]

I think it's a stupid idea.

 

Just adding my opinion.

[GOF and Bacall]

Well so much for a kinder, gentler way to handle things.

[+TeamSeekAndWeShallFind]

One of the ongoing arguments has been when to delete a log. Often a CO would just as soon not delete a log if they had a better option. The problem is spoilers can take away from the challenge and fun but the logger did find the cache. Heck, they may not even realize they have posted a spoiler. If the CO could select an option to block a log and/or associated pictures it could take some of the angst out of it. The logger gets to keep their smilie and the CO gets to protect the secrets of their cache. If the logger edits the log the CO can still restore it. Just seems like a kinder, gentler way to handle the whole issue.

 

I used to get upset when spoilers were posted in found logs on our challenging hides. We would spend hours hiding a great cache and then the hide would be totally given away by the first finder. Deleting logs IS NOT the answer because, as stated above, the person who "gave away," the hide, most times, doesn't even realize it and probably did so because they were excited to find your challenging cache !

 

I have learned that deleting logs is both insulting and hurtful and I think blocking logs would induce the same feelings.

 

Now, if someone posts what I think is a spoiler, I simply write to them and politely ask them if they wouldn't mind editing their post. I've never received a negative response and the logger has always edited their post.

 

It's tough asking someone to edit their thoughts/words/experience, but if you do it in a polite and respectful manner, you'll get positve results.

 

I used to think that protecting the "secret," of a cache was really important but I have since learned that it's more important to protect and respect your fellow cacher. Does that sound dorky ?

 

This is just my experience and what I've learned.

[CoyoteRed]

I used to think that protecting the "secret," of a cache was really important but I have since learned that it's more important to protect and respect your fellow cacher. Does that sound dorky ?

Kind of sounds like the "everyone's a winner and no one should feel like a failure" mentality to me.

 

No, I don't think spoilers should be let stand. If you don't care about spoilers then you might as well change your cache to a 1/1 traditional.

 

No, I don't think everyone should be able to post a find on every cache. If you're not smart enough or physically fit enough to actually complete a hunt then just face it and move on.

[GOF and Bacall]

One of the ongoing arguments has been when to delete a log. Often a CO would just as soon not delete a log if they had a better option. The problem is spoilers can take away from the challenge and fun but the logger did find the cache. Heck, they may not even realize they have posted a spoiler. If the CO could select an option to block a log and/or associated pictures it could take some of the angst out of it. The logger gets to keep their smilie and the CO gets to protect the secrets of their cache. If the logger edits the log the CO can still restore it. Just seems like a kinder, gentler way to handle the whole issue.

 

I used to get upset when spoilers were posted in found logs on our challenging hides. We would spend hours hiding a great cache and then the hide would be totally given away by the first finder. Deleting logs IS NOT the answer because, as stated above, the person who "gave away," the hide, most times, doesn't even realize it and probably did so because they were excited to find your challenging cache !

 

I have learned that deleting logs is both insulting and hurtful and I think blocking logs would induce the same feelings.

 

Now, if someone posts what I think is a spoiler, I simply write to them and politely ask them if they wouldn't mind editing their post. I've never received a negative response and the logger has always edited their post.

 

It's tough asking someone to edit their thoughts/words/experience, but if you do it in a polite and respectful manner, you'll get positve results.

 

I used to think that protecting the "secret," of a cache was really important but I have since learned that it's more important to protect and respect your fellow cacher. Does that sound dorky ?

 

This is just my experience and what I've learned.

 

I still feel it important to protect the raw experience of the cache. I look at like this, protect one cachers over-sensitive feelings, or each subsequent cachers experience? I want cachers to look at the logs and know that previous finders had a good time looking for my cache. I do not want any surprises ruined by someone carelessly posting a spoiler. If the only choice is to delete then so be it. I was just looking for a way to do it without causing quite so much animosity.

[+flask]

i've decided it's a bad idea after all. here's why:

 

right now there's a considerable social pressure to keep cache owners from deleting legitimate find logs.

 

while i have no problem at all with the sudden deletion (with polite explanation and option to re-log) of spoiler logs, i think the block option, being kinder and gentler, would make it more acceptable to do what is essentially deleting a log.

 

i care little about my find count as opposed to the public availability of my logs.

[CoyoteRed]

i've decided it's a bad idea after all. here's why:

 

right now there's a considerable social pressure to keep cache owners from deleting legitimate find logs.

 

while i have no problem at all with the sudden deletion (with polite explanation and option to re-log) of spoiler logs, i think the block option, being kinder and gentler, would make it more acceptable to do what is essentially deleting a log.

 

i care little about my find count as opposed to the public availability of my logs.

I think that is precisely the reason it's a good idea.

 

The whole notion is to hide a spoiler or any information that shouldn't be public. (Remember, this could include detailing illegal or even undesirable activities like entry after hours.) Someone who might brag that he went in outside open hours to get that FTF is someone who wants public availability of logs. Getting into a delete/re-log war with someone is not pretty. Just hide the log and let the find stand.

 

The ultimate point is who has more say? The cache owner or the person writing the log?