Benchmark link

[greywolf1242]

What happened to the Benchmark link on the left side of the main page?

[+dfx]

It's at the bottom now, under "more".

[greywolf1242]

It's at the bottom now, under "more".

 

Thanks!

[ArtMan]

Let's see ...

 

No update to the benchmark database in almost a decade.

 

Exiling the main page link to the Web version of Siberia (despite no lack of room in the left nav column).

 

A less generous member might conclude that Geocaching.com (Groundspeak) does not consider us benchmarkers as a very valued member of the community.

 

~ArtMan~

[+Bullygoat29]

Let's see ...

 

No update to the benchmark database in almost a decade.

 

Exiling the main page link to the Web version of Siberia (despite no lack of room in the left nav column).

 

A less generous member might conclude that Geocaching.com (Groundspeak) does not consider us benchmarkers as a very valued member of the community.

 

~ArtMan~

 

Yet there are plans to add benchmarks to the maps.

[+LSUFan]

 

A less generous member might conclude that Geocaching.com (Groundspeak) does not consider us benchmarkers as a very valued member of the community.

 

~ArtMan~

 

Well, we red-headed step-benchmarkers still have our forum here.

[AZcachemeister]

Let's see ...

 

No update to the benchmark database in almost a decade.

 

Exiling the main page link to the Web version of Siberia (despite no lack of room in the left nav column).

 

A less generous member might conclude that Geocaching.com (Groundspeak) does not consider us benchmarkers as a very valued member of the community.

 

~ArtMan~

 

Yes...but at least we still have our own little corner where we can still go about our own business.

Considering that there were some noises made that benchmarking should be removed completely, I can live with this.

[AZcachemeister]

Yet there are plans to add benchmarks to the maps.

 

You're kidding!

 

Where did you come up with that tidbit?

 

I should live so long!

[+Bullygoat29]

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/1054597-show-benchmarks-on-geocaching-maps?ref=title

[+shorbird]

Let's not roll over on this one, folks. If we all go to the feedback part of the forum and insist that "Find a Benchmark" be restored to the main menu, perhaps they will listen. The new location is too obscure and makes navigation difficult.

[kayakbird]

My forever Mozilla bookmark into Geocaching.com takes me to the Benchmark Hunting page so I had not noted the missing link. Re-bookmarking to that page should be a feasible work around for everyone. kayakbird

[+shorbird]

My forever Mozilla bookmark into Geocaching.com takes me to the Benchmark Hunting page so I had not noted the missing link. Re-bookmarking to that page should be a feasible work around for everyone. kayakbird

 

A re-bookmark may work if you're only looking at one benchmark. How many of us do that? Sure, we can scroll around and find the new, almost hidden link to find another benchmark, but why should we have to do that? I don't remember anyone at the website asking for our thoughts about this change before they just "went ahead and did it."

[kayakbird]

Have I been missing a multi-PID search feature all along? The page that I am taking about has the box to enter a PID - which is copy/paste smart (just tested my bookmarked page with a typed in entry, and copy/paste from Excel, GSAK, and GC view original DS. MEL

[+t4e]

i wish they will take it off all together, move them over to Waymarking

 

if virtuals don't belong in geocaching why do we have Benchmarks?

 

and they are not even counted in the find total

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Let's not roll over on this one, folks. If we all go to the feedback part of the forum and insist that "Find a Benchmark" be restored to the main menu, perhaps they will listen. The new location is too obscure and makes navigation difficult.

Let's try. But, how do you go about posting a new request? I cannot seem to find out how.

 

Shirley~

[+Bullygoat29]

Have I been missing a multi-PID search feature all along? The page that I am taking about has the box to enter a PID - which is copy/paste smart (just tested my bookmarked page with a typed in entry, and copy/paste from Excel, GSAK, and GC view original DS. MEL

 

You know you can setup GSAK so you don't have to copy and paste all the time right?

 

http://www.ngs.noaa....rl?PidBox=%code - gives you the NGS datasheets

 

http://www.geocachin....aspx?PID=%code - gives you the geocaching web page if it's in the database.

 

Copy link address to add to GSAK. I have the geocaching one setup for when I double click on the benchmark and the NGS one setup under Tools>Options>HTML so I can right click and select it.

 

How many benchmarkers actually use the GC site for benchmarking? It's so much easier to get better up to date data by using the NGS site and GSAK and other third party programs.

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Let's not roll over on this one, folks. If we all go to the feedback part of the forum and insist that "Find a Benchmark" be restored to the main menu, perhaps they will listen. The new location is too obscure and makes navigation difficult.

Let's try. But, how do you go about posting a new request? I cannot seem to find out how.

 

Shirley~

 

Ok, I figured it out and now, please everyone go vote. Move the "Find a Benchmark" back to the left side menu on the main GC page.

 

You will need to sign in the way you do here and then click 'vote' and click "3". That will let your vote count the most and then if you would like to further support Benchmark Hunting, leave a comment also.

 

Thank you very much.

 

Shirley~

 

-------------------------------

[AZcachemeister]

i wish they will take it off all together, move them over to Waymarking

 

if virtuals don't belong in geocaching why do we have Benchmarks?

 

and they are not even counted in the find total

 

Why don't you just go hang out at the WHYmarking site and leave us alone, then?

[+LSUFan]

i wish they will take it off all together, move them over to Waymarking

 

if virtuals don't belong in geocaching why do we have Benchmarks?

 

and they are not even counted in the find total

 

Why don't you just go hang out at the WHYmarking site and leave us alone, then?

 

AZ, don't get baited into a forum argument.

 

I was looking for funny pic to describe the situation and ran across the following. Doesn't it favor something?

 

 

Back on topic, I am heading over to cast my comments to gc.com

[+king.hubi]

Let's not roll over on this one, folks. If we all go to the feedback part of the forum and insist that "Find a Benchmark" be restored to the main menu, perhaps they will listen. The new location is too obscure and makes navigation difficult.

Let's try. But, how do you go about posting a new request? I cannot seem to find out how.

 

Shirley~

 

Ok, I figured it out and now, please everyone go vote. Move the "Find a Benchmark" back to the left side menu on the main GC page.

 

You will need to sign in the way you do here and then click 'vote' and click "3". That will let your vote count the most and then if you would like to further support Benchmark Hunting, leave a comment also.

 

Thank you very much.

 

Shirley~

 

-------------------------------

 

Shirley,

 

thanks for bringing this into the feedback site,

 

You got 3 of my votes and a comment.

 

King Hubi

Edited March 11, 2011 by king.hubi

[redcanyonkids]

We are pretty new to geocaching and just have recently been wondering what benchmarks are... but I haven't found a good explanation of them anywhere on the site. Can anyone give me a link or tell em the history of benchmarks? Sounds like they are a rather historical thing and have been around for a long time. If so, what were they used for? Thanks!

[+Bullygoat29]

http://www.geocaching.com/mark/default.aspx

 

This is the link that's buried at the bottom of the geocaching page that we're trying to get put back. You're a perfect example of why the link should be put back. You want to learn but Groundspeak took away a very easy way to learn. Think of all of the people that would like to hunt for benchmarks but would never be introduced to it.

[redcanyonkids]

http://www.geocaching.com/mark/default.aspx

 

This is the link that's buried at the bottom of the geocaching page that we're trying to get put back. You're a perfect example of why the link should be put back. You want to learn but Groundspeak took away a very easy way to learn. Think of all of the people that would like to hunt for benchmarks but would never be introduced to it.

 

Thank you I will look at that link!

[+zionzr2]

I was shocked to find my link to benchmarking gone.

Quickly located the new location of the link after reading this forum.

 

I did my part and voted to move the link back, to update the database, and to and benchmarks to the maps.

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Good news, we are now at 103 votes!

 

There is one negative comment so far. If anyone else would like to go vote please follow this link and feel free to leave a comment.

 

Thank you all who have voted thus far.

 

Shirley~

 

---------------------------------

[+shorbird]

I tried a "request" to restore the link to the menu. This was the response:

 

We thank you for your email and appreciate your concern about Benchmarks. Benchmarks are still a part of Geocaching.com and will remain on the site at http://www.geocaching.com/mark/. They have simply been removed from the menu tabs at the site of the page to make room for easier access to our Geocaching.com videos. This change was announced in the Release Notes for March 8th.

 

"Simply?" (sigh)

[Wintertime]

I posted a comment, but didn't see a way to cast a pro or con vote, much less more than one. It looks like this system just counts each posting as a "vote," whether the person is for or against the original idea. So I'm not sure what good it would do to post multiple votes anyway, but I'll do so if someone will tell me how.

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

I posted a comment, but didn't see a way to cast a pro or con vote, much less more than one. It looks like this system just counts each posting as a "vote," whether the person is for or against the original idea. So I'm not sure what good it would do to post multiple votes anyway, but I'll do so if someone will tell me how.

Hi Wintertime,

 

In the upper left corner just under the currant vote count, is the little tab (labeled vote). Click on it to vote. It will have a pop up with 0 votes, 1 votes, 2 votes and 3 votes to choose from.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Shirley~

 

---------------------------

[Wintertime]

Thanks, Shirley. When I clicked that button earlier this evening, all it did was bring up a Comment box. Dunno why it didn't offer me a choice of vote numbers before, but it worked this time.

 

I guess Gc's feedback system is designed with the assumption that any vote is a positive one!

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Thanks, Shirley. When I clicked that button earlier this evening, all it did was bring up a Comment box. Dunno why it didn't offer me a choice of vote numbers before, but it worked this time.

 

I guess Gc's feedback system is designed with the assumption that any vote is a positive one!

 

I now see a number 3 on your avatar on your comment. That is how we can tell if someone voted and how important they feel the request for the site is.

 

The feedback site is what I consider "Not user friendly" at first.

 

Shirley~

--------------------

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Everyone who left comments, please go back (here is the link ), and look at your avatar there. If it has a number in the bottom left corner, then your vote processed correctly. If there is not a number there, then your vote did not process correctly.

 

All you have to do is to click on the "Vote" button just under the count total in the upper left of the page. Then select how many votes by clicking on a number.

 

Thank you all very much.

 

By the way, we are now at 136 votes!

 

Shirley~

 

----------------------

Edited March 14, 2011 by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders)

[+LSUFan]

I just got an email from gc.com, stating that our suggestion was under review.

Edited March 15, 2011 by LSUFan

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

I just got an email from gc.com, stating that our suggestion was under review.

 

I just got home from work and I saw our email. I do believe that is good news! They are going to review it and that is an accomplishment.

 

Us getting this kind of feedback from GC this soon, says they do pay attention.

 

Thank you all for your comments and/or votes. The last I looked, we were up to 164.

 

Shirley~

 

---------------------------------------

[+zionzr2]

I got a couple emails today.

 

the relocation of the link under review.

 

The adding of benchmarks to searchable maps was denied.

[+rogbarn]

I finally got around to going over and adding my 3 votes. I don't like to go over there, it's an awful site in my opinion but I can see how it helps GC. Anyway, we are now up to 170 votes. If you are an occasional visitor here, please take a minute to do the same.

Thanks.

Roger

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

The vote count is now up to 177. If anyone else wants to comment, please do, so the PTB will know how many people really use or have used that link to get to the benchmark page.

 

Here is the link again to the feedback site.

 

Thank you all for any comments that you have made.

 

Shirley~

Edited March 20, 2011 by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders)

[NGS Surveyor]

I sent an email yesterday AND voted today, hope all this works.

 

Also, how does one get to the on-line photos, I couldn't find a link?

 

GeorgeL

NGS

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

I sent an email yesterday AND voted today, hope all this works.

 

Also, how does one get to the on-line photos, I couldn't find a link?

 

GeorgeL

NGS

 

Here you go.

 

I assume you meant the Benchmark Gallery? I went to the Benchmark home page and left of where you enter the PID # is where the link is for the "Benchmark Gallery".

 

Thank you for voting and sending an email.

 

Shirley~

 

-------------------------

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Well, I found another feedback post that some of you might want to vote and comment on.

 

Upgrade the benchmark database.

 

Shirley~

 

--------------------

[Wintertime]

Well, I found another feedback post that some of you might want to vote and comment on.

 

Upgrade the benchmark database.

The original poster says, "I have found quite a few various types of Benchmarks that I have been UNABLE to log because they aren't in the database that geocaching.com currently is using." I wonder whether he/she is referring to marks that truly have been added to the NGS database in the past 11 years, or simply thinks that the marks he/she has found will automatically show up with an update, not understanding what is and isn't in the NGS database.

 

The Groundspeak folks would have to make some decisions and perhaps do some careful coding before they could update their database. Adding new marks would be straightforward (I think), but what about ones that have been removed from the NGS database in the past 11 years? Should those be deleted from Gc.com as well to stop people from incorrectly logging them, or left in for historical interest?

 

Of course I would like to see the Gc.com database updated, but I can understand why they're reluctant to put in the necessary staff time to do it.

 

Patty

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Well, I found another feedback post that some of you might want to vote and comment on.

 

Upgrade the benchmark database.

The original poster says, "I have found quite a few various types of Benchmarks that I have been UNABLE to log because they aren't in the database that geocaching.com currently is using." I wonder whether he/she is referring to marks that truly have been added to the NGS database in the past 11 years, or simply thinks that the marks he/she has found will automatically show up with an update, not understanding what is and isn't in the NGS database.

 

The Groundspeak folks would have to make some decisions and perhaps do some careful coding before they could update their database. Adding new marks would be straightforward (I think), but what about ones that have been removed from the NGS database in the past 11 years? Should those be deleted from Gc.com as well to stop people from incorrectly logging them, or left in for historical interest?

 

Of course I would like to see the Gc.com database updated, but I can understand why they're reluctant to put in the necessary staff time to do it.

 

Patty

You have to admit though, it would be to their advantage to have the GEOCAC logs show on the GC pages. Yes?

 

Shirley~

[AZcachemeister]

 

You have to admit though, it would be to their advantage to have the GEOCAC logs show on the GC pages. Yes?

 

Shirley~

 

holograph (Jim) does it on a monthly basis, I don't think it would be THAT difficult.

 

OTOH, if they do anything with it, then they have opened the door to questions about why they don't maintain the quality of the logs, and remove the obviously incorrect (bogus) ones.

 

Getting back to the issue of the left-column link, I recently noticed that 'GPS Reviews' is so important that it needs two links on each page, one in the left column, AND one in the footer.

 

Looks like someone in the Department of Redundancy Department is getting carried away.

[+king.hubi]

Bad news for Move the "Find a Benchmark" back to left side of main GC page.

Received an email today, it was declined after careful consideration.

King Hubi

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Are they trying to tell us that it is time to start learning how to way-mark?

 

That definitely answers the question of getting an update to the benchmark database!

 

John

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

What a disappointing decision

 

Can Groundspeak elaborate on this decision? We supporters of the link on the main tool bar had carefully listed our our reasons, but Groundspeak simply said NO. I would like for Groundspeak to elaborate on their decision process. What did they "carefully consider", and why SPECIFICALLY did they decline. Tell us why -- and why there is no room for our benchmark link, but room for videos.

 

The "declined" response is very bureaucratic, and does nothing to build trust with the caching and BM hunting community that our concerns are not just listened to, but really heard and considered. We are being treated like children, when really we are adults, and PARTNERS with Groundspeak. We are CUSTOMERS. We PAY for premium access. We BUY GC gear. We spread the hobby. And we get declined with a form-letter style comment when we ask that a popular feature that supports our hobby be restored.

 

Come on, Groundspeak! DIALOGUE with us -- do not just DICTATE. We are all grown-ups here. We deserve the respect of a dialogue, and an explanation for the rationale. After all, without this community of cachers, waymarkers, and BM hunters (we do all 3) where would Groundspeak be? We are friends -- let's talk.

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

Are they trying to tell us that it is time to start learning how to way-mark?

 

Our challenge with Waymarking is that one waymark can be in multiple different categories -- we ran into this big-time in Philadelphia. I want to log my visit to a historic waymark, and I find it in this category here, and another category there, and there too, and over there, and there -- and in 3 more categories. ENOUGH!!! What a drag!

 

That definitely answers the question of getting an update to the benchmark database!

 

John

 

Yeah -- looks like.

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Well, I for one, am totally bummed out. We had 210 votes and I thought we had it accomplished. NOT!

 

It would be extremely nice if someone, like an official Groundspeak person type would come and say something to us. But, I am not going to hold my breath waiting for that.

 

Maybe we should stay silent again and hope they forget that benchmarking exists yet on this site?

 

Sorry to all the folks who voted and posted.

 

Shirley~

 

-----------------------------