Jump to content

DECLINED - [FEATURE] Increase/Unlimit the Found Log Character Limit


Hurricane Luke

Recommended Posts

The current 4000 character log limit implementation is a bit arbitrary don't you think? Why am I restricted to writing within the confines of a predetermined number? While I have not ever bumped into this limit myself, I tend to write longer logs than most, and will probably be writing a 4000+ character log in the coming month. Why the limit? It doesn't have any effect on stopping people writing longer logs, it just makes it the whole process inconvenient and cumbersome. Why do those who write long logs have to split their entry into a separate note? Why are such workarounds needed? If anything, I'd triple it to around 12,000.

 

I've seen one topic on this issue before and I believe Groundspeak should reconsider their stance. I've heard counter-arguments such as "Brevity is the soul of wit". Well...? So what?... We aren't required to be short and sweet - a long log is a sign of respect by the finder to the cache owner, it tells them they enjoyed the cache. Much more than 'TFTC' does, anyway. Another counter-argument to long logs: "Keep It Simple, Stupid" - well, can't the same principle of simplicity be applied to the process of publishing a long log on the website with a single click of a button, instead of a (relatively) arduous process involving copying, selecting and pasting?

 

Groundspeak do a great job in aspects around maintaining the logs and the cache listings, but this is one (small) spot I believe they fall short.

Edited by Hurricane Luke
Link to comment

I usually try to write somewhat detailed logs. I have only ever bumped into the character limit one time. I split it across two logs. Not a problem. You don't always have to be excessively verbose to get your point across.

 

It does not surprise me that you did not run that often into the limit as you mostly did single stage caches. Most of the caches where the vast majority of loggers need more than one log (it can be much more than two) are multi stage caches that cover a large distance and collect the experience of several days. I am aware of several such long distance hiking caches where the 4000 character limit is very unfortunate as splitting up logs in 4 and more parts is not that convenient, neither for the loggers nor for the readers.

I really love to read about the experiences and adventures of cachers who e.g. walked from Munich to Venice http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=9e649f3d-7a10-43d8-ad2f-6db609c1a574 , or from Graz to Mariazell

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=05632c19-bec3-4f96-b708-ef59c47db982 .

One needs to take into account that the same amount of time which is invested into such caches can be used to find hundreds or even thousands of caches (depending on the area). Needing more than 4000 characters does not necessarily imply to be excessively verbose.

More space per log is also needed if someone writes a log in two or even more languages.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

I'm currently #19 in found log length on mygeocachingprofile.com, yet I very seldom run into the log length limit. One reason is that I tend to write the story of a day, and I can shift elements from one cache to another.

 

No one has ever complained that my logs are too long. Of course, by saying that, I'm inviting complaints ...

 

If it's an easy change and wouldn't cause any problems, I'd say do it. But if it's going to take a significant effort, or if there are related problems, I'm happy to continue as is.

 

Edward

Link to comment

My friend ran into a log-length issue when submitting Reviewer Notes that had extensive links to external elements (photos, GPS track logs etc)

 

Since then, they have installed the Greasemonkey script that enhances the log editing screen and includes a character count. This avoids finding out after-the-fact that your log was too long and needed to be split.

 

If GS is going to limit the number of characters, they should consider adding a counter as a built-in feature.

Link to comment

Domo!!! (= Howdy in Japanese)

 

First of all, I totally agree to Increase or Unlimit the text character count per found logs. Just found logs, though.

 

Just happened to stumble upon this [FEATURE] request, and happy to find other cachers who write looooong logs like I do.

I would say, "It's my log. Why is there a limit to that???"

 

I have jumped over the limit especially when having the most memorable geocaching experience. So much to write about!

I also have split my logs into a 'Found' log and a 'Note'.

Also, I have tried posting also in Japanese which requires the HTML Encoding, making the same text more that 5 times heavy on characters, easily hitting the limit.

Adding links and the usual everything, how could it be JUST be TFTC or even just a '.'... LAME...

 

PLEASE, Groundspeak!

 

BTW, paleolith noted that you can see the "found log length" rankings on mygeocachingprofile.com. Where is this?

My Profile's Stats generator GCStatistic says:

Logs written: 704 logs - Chars: 1363685 total & 1937 average - Words: 221871 total & 315 average.

WAIT!

I just found it in the EXTRAS/Cacher Rankings/Average 'Found It' Log Length

Link: http://www.mygeocachingprofile.com/cacherrankings.aspx?sort=10

WOW!

I'm No.3!!!

SOOO Honored!

 

I'll start surfing around, checking Profiles & logs of everyone posting here, just to see how other looooong logger write. :laughing:

 

Oh, 'never short found logs' is one of my geo-mottos, though I always post picture to them as well. Always.

My long text, plus a thousand words, how better can it get!

 

Good Luck & Cache On!

 

~ Dr.MORO

Link to comment

I just found it in the EXTRAS/Cacher Rankings/Average 'Found It' Log Length

Link: http://www.mygeocachingprofile.com/cacherrankings.aspx?sort=10

 

Just a side comment: The list only captures those cachers who have uploaded their

myfind data to this site. This fact of course has quite some effect on the list.

 

Moreover, for those who have to split up their found it logs into at two or more parts

from time to time, the calculated average log length is wrong as only one part counts.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

I'm currently #19 in found log length on mygeocachingprofile.com, yet I very seldom run into the log length limit. One reason is that I tend to write the story of a day, and I can shift elements from one cache to another.

 

But that only works if you do more than one cache per day. If the hunt for a single cache lasts a full day or even several days up to weeks, then this approach is not any longer feasible.

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

I just found it in the EXTRAS/Cacher Rankings/Average 'Found It' Log Length

Link: http://www.mygeocachingprofile.com/cacherrankings.aspx?sort=10

 

Just a side comment: The list only captures those cachers who have uploaded their

myfind data to this site. This fact of course has quite some effect on the list.

 

Cezanne

 

Domo again!!!

 

And Thanks Cezanne for the input.

 

Yep, I kinda noticed that. But hey, #3/12910 would roughly calculate to #1162/5 million active cachers. I'll even take that! :anibad:

 

Just read everyone's latest found logs. Impressive!

Wish everyone could 'share' their geo-adventures as nice as all of you do!

 

Limit-less, PLEASE!

Link to comment

I think this issue is probably more complicated than people might think. If any internal code or external application/database is designed to accommodate only up to 4000 characters in a single log entry. they all need to be changed. I would image there would be a tremendous amount of effort involved just to cover this very corner case requirement that already has a very easy workaround.

Link to comment

If you have that much to say 1. no one is going to read it and 2. it is no longer a log but a blog. Post it elsewhere.

 

I do not agree: I know many cachers who e.g. follow the logs of this cache

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=9e649f3d-7a10-43d8-ad2f-6db609c1a574

even though they will never manage to go for this cache.

Writing logs of length less than 4000 characters for such a cache, ends up in logs that do not take into account the

special character of this cache. It takes at least one month. Take all the logs of a regular cacher during one month together and

let's see whether 4000 characters are appropriate.

 

Of course splits are possible, but they are not user-friendly at all.

 

I prefer by far to read the logs for caches on gc.com and not on some external sites.

 

Cezanne

Link to comment

If you have that much to say 1. no one is going to read it and 2. it is no longer a log but a blog. Post it elsewhere.

 

Short logs are lame. MUCH less worth reading, don't you think?

Oh, I guess you JUST DON'T read longer logs anyways, no matter what it says.

And who cares who reads it or not.

It's MY log. And each cache page it not a blog either.

Post it elsewhere? Where elsewhere??? For what?

 

It's all about the geocaching experience.

 

On the very first line of explaining Geocaching:

"GEOCACHING is a real-world outdoor treasure hunting game. Players try to locate hidden containers, called geocaches, using GPS-enabled devices and then share their experiences online."

Read to the very end, IF you care read that long.

Link to comment

Historical post in this forum in a thread called "Why so severe log length limitation (max. 4000 characters)?" - which interestingly enough started almost 2 years ago to the day:

 

I'm all for great logs that contain great descriptions for great caches. However they are logs on Geocaching.com. The Gettysburg Address only had 1,188 characters. Lou Gehrig's farewell to baseball speech was only 1,504 characters. Winston Churchill's Blood, Toil, Sweat and Tears was 3,441 characters. A single page document in 12 point Times New Roman with 1 inch margins on all sides is approximately 4400-4500 characters.

 

Is it possible to be eloquent and brief?

Link to comment

Historical post in this forum in a thread called "Why so severe log length limitation (max. 4000 characters)?" - which interestingly enough started almost 2 years ago to the day:

 

I'm all for great logs that contain great descriptions for great caches. However they are logs on Geocaching.com. The Gettysburg Address only had 1,188 characters. Lou Gehrig's farewell to baseball speech was only 1,504 characters. Winston Churchill's Blood, Toil, Sweat and Tears was 3,441 characters. A single page document in 12 point Times New Roman with 1 inch margins on all sides is approximately 4400-4500 characters.

 

Is it possible to be eloquent and brief?

 

I still can recall your old posting. Nevertheless I think that one cannot compare a political speech or similar speeches to reporting about the experience of at least 28 hiking days through a fascinating landscape. Of course one can log such a cache with less than 4000 characters, but this will make up all logs quite similar and not fun to read for those who have not been there. If the log is broken down to the level of individual experiences, it is not possible to stay within the 4000 characters limit and still tell stories that are fun to read.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

My friend indicates that they really enjoy reading cache logs and there's no such thing as too much detail.

 

The Gettysburg Address only had 1,188 characters.

 

The Wikipedia article about it shows a graphic that demonstrates that one of the copies was written on more than one piece of paper. What if Lincoln didn't have the option to split?

 

 

Is it possible to be eloquent and brief?

 

Eschew verbosity?

Link to comment

I just tried to write a log for a MegaEvent here in Florida; my initial draft was over 5000 characters. I had to break up a log for a paddle/CITO event a couple weeks ago because it was also over 4000 characters.

 

Maybe extent the max log length for events? I would guess that is the most common cause of logs over 4000 characters.

Link to comment

 

[..] reporting about the experience of at least 28 hiking days through a fascinating landscape. Of course one can log such a cache with less than 4000 characters, but this will make up all logs quite similar and not fun to read for those who have not been there. If the log is broken down to the level of individual experiences, it is not possible to stay within the 4000 characters limit and still tell stories that are fun to read.

 

Cezanne

 

As Cezanne has mentioned GC1FPN1 several times, here's a short overview giving an indication how much geocachers have to tell about their personal adventures there using words and pictures:

 

The average overall length of logs related to a find is about 5,500 characters.

20% of the finders logged more than 10,000 characters.

More than 5% of the finders logged even more than 25,000 characters (using up to 9 log entries).

 

The average number of pictures uploaded related to a find is 20.

One cacher uploaded more than 100, another even more than 150 pictures - really crazy people doing that by hand ... :blink:

 

Almost 650 geocachers are watching this listing.

Guess why !

- Probably because they like reading those stories about the (geocaching) experiences. :)

 

TheGodfather B)

 

By the way: From a computer science point of view, there are several relational database systems (e.g. MS SQL Server) limiting the maximum field length for classical string datatypes (e.g. (n)varchar) to something about 4,000 characters unicode and even the overall length per data row (typical database page size: 8KB), but of course internal concatenation using e.g. linked lists had been invented decades ago. :huh:

Nevertheless I can understand that there are more important changes to be made.

The missing character counter and the small input text area for logs are more annoying. :o

Edited by DerPate
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...