Feature Addition - Cacher Stats

[+fuzzynz]

Would it be possible to show both the find number and total number of finds to date beside a cachers name on the logs?

 

ie. In Feb 2009 a cacher found GC1N3EM and it was their 140th find at that time. Now they've found 1169 finds but for someone to look back on when that person found it, it shows the person's current finds. Does this make sense?

 

The reason I think this would be useful is because we we're trying to find GC1N3EM Retrieval could be a problem... (Auckland) on the weekend and see that a friend found it more than a year ago, while they were still relatively new, whereas more experienced cachers can't find it! A lot of cachers log their find number in their log.

 

It could say: fuzzynz (Find 268/329 Found)

[+roziecakes]

I think this is a really cool suggestion. I've taken to logging my find # with each log, but it would be nice if it were already a feature on the site.

[+Chrysalides]

One problem is that some people don't log in order, either because they can't be bothered, or if a log got deleted and they had to relog.

 

For example, if they have 2 finds, one in January and the other in February, but they log February before January, should that be find #1, or should the January find be find #1, and February changed from 1 to 2 when January is entered? If a log gets deleted, all logs after it will need to get renumbered. Lots of issues.

 

Personally I think it is a nice bit of historical information, but perhaps best done manually. I know some people say something like "Find #123" before the rest of their log. I thought it was a fairly harmless thing to do, but to my surprise there had been some upset COs complaining about that here.

 

Prime Suspect has a GM script that you may be interested in. I don't know if this is one of his fixed scripts (the January site update broke many things) so if it doesn't work, you can try fixing it yourself or send him an email for help.

 

http://gmscripts.locusprime.net/Log_Find_Counter.html

Edited April 20, 2010 by Chrysalides

[+Matthew 7:7 Too]

I do this on my logs using Firefox and the great Prime Suspect greasemonkey script so can confirm the latest version is working fine again.

 

Chris

[+baloo&bd]

I think a better solution would be to just leave the number of finds off completely in the logs. There is no real purpose for it anyway there.

[+Lil Devil]

I think a better solution would be to just leave the number of finds off completely in the logs. There is no real purpose for it anyway there.

To quote an AOLuser, "Me too!"