Pocket Query has 0 results

[+inform8ion]

I'm trying to create my 2nd pocket query and no matter what I select it comes back "0" results found. My 1st query was on 1/11/10. Is there a limit of tries? Today I have tried 4 times with 4 slightly different selections and all were emailed saying "your pocket query had no results". The pocket query page refreshes and says "Thanks! Your pocket query has been saved and currently results in 0 caches". Any suggestions?

 

Thanks

[Motorcycle_Mama]

Typically, that means that you are selecting options that are mutually exclusive such as "That I Have Found" and "That I Have Not Found".

 

Here's a great guide to Pocket Queries. http://www.markwell.us/pq.htm

[+2beabout]

I think I had that problem when I did not check "That---Is active"

[+mr007s]

Run your query without checking the day first and preview the results. It doesn't count against your 5 a day limit. When all looks well then check the day.

[+WeightMan]

Are you checking, My Home Coordinates? I seem to recall that some people are having this problem with that as the center of the search. Try actually entering your home coords or check the postal code and see if that helps.

 

I concur, don't check the day until you know it works.

[+inform8ion]

Thanks Motorcycle Mama, That was it. I was trying for found and unfound items.

 

Thank you guys so much!

[+Markwell]

Are you checking, My Home Coordinates? I seem to recall that some people are having this problem with that as the center of the search. Try actually entering your home coords or check the postal code and see if that helps.

 

I concur, don't check the day until you know it works.

That was supposedly fixed in the last push of code.

[+WeightMan]

Are you checking, My Home Coordinates? I seem to recall that some people are having this problem with that as the center of the search. Try actually entering your home coords or check the postal code and see if that helps.

 

I concur, don't check the day until you know it works.

That was supposedly fixed in the last push of code.

Since I have never used that feature, I was just going on memory and suggested a possible solution. It turned out to be the obvious, but I didn't know that then.