TB date changes?

[+Condorito]

So I logged a cache the other day a few days after I found it... I found three on that day, and for the first forgot to change the date... I have quite a few tbs with me at the moment, think around 40(I think, most mine) and I always visit all tbs with me in the cache I found... So when I noticed the error, I went and edited the date of the log...

 

When you fix the date of the log, it doesn't change the date of the tb visits. It's happened to me before, and I feel like it stuffs up the logs a bit, but I don't have time to change it on each tbs page...

 

Can't it just change all the tb visit/drop dates as well? It can log them all from the log page, as that's what it does when you visit/drop them when writing the log, so it should be able to correct those tb logs when you change the found date for the cache...

 

Any comments?

[+Team Microdot]

Would likely require a database restructure to actually maintain relational links between your log on the cache and all the trackable logs so I wouldn't hold your breath.

 

The bit I find annoying is that you have to change the date on every single trackable log individually and ensure that you actually add some text to the log before it can be submitted - you can't just leave the text field blank - that's the painful bit.

 

The ability to 'check' a number of previous logs and change the date on them in one go would be useful and probably only require a script rather than restructuring of the database.

[+dprovan]

Any comments?

Yeah: don't visit TBs indescriminately. It's bad enough when people automatically add 3 TBs to the past TB list of every cache they visit, but 40 seems beyond the pale.

[+Condorito]

Any comments?

Yeah: don't visit TBs indescriminately. It's bad enough when people automatically add 3 TBs to the past TB list of every cache they visit, but 40 seems beyond the pale.

Hi dprovan,

Thanks for your comment!

When Geocaching or doing other things in life, I try to use this as a motto/guide: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. (based on Matthew 7:12), and hope I am at least partly living up to that standard.

At the present I have around 37 TBs active. Most are with me, so I visit them in every cache I go to, as I like them to have as many kms as possible. I enjoy people visiting their TBs in my caches, as it adds to the history of the cache, and gives the TB owner more kms and another log for his TB.

 

Some of my TBs aren't with me. With those TBs, I would much rather that the TB visit as many caches as possible while in someone's hands, as that reassures me that it is still safe and that the geocachers are responsible enough to visit it. So when I take other people's TBs, I always visit them in caches.

 

I went on a holiday several months ago, and grabbed quite a few TBs to bring back with me. Some have been dropped off, but I only like dropping TBs in caches that aren't likely to be muggled, but where the TB will move on shortly. So I still have many with me....

 

I hope you understand my reasons for visiting caches better now

Condorito

[+dprovan]

I hope you understand my reasons for visiting caches better now

Condorito

I understood your reasons from the beginning. Now I hope you understand that there's a down side. A cache's list of past TBs can be useful information for tracking down TB movement, but it becomes useless for that purpose when most of the entries in the list are TBs that really had nothing to do with the cache other than being autovisited because they were in some cacher's inventory.

 

(One can hope the TBs were actually in the cacher's possession when they were signing the log, but, of course, that's not a given, either. To be honest, I have my doubts about whether someone with 40 TBs would actually carry what must be a faily large bag full of TBs to each and every cache. I'd be much more inclined to believe that they leave the bag in the trunk -- if it gets that far. Why bother to carry them to the caches when there's no intention of actually leaving one in any of the caches they find?)

 

I'm not trying to tell you not to do that, I'm just asking you to look at it from the point of view of people that don't care about TBs that are never really put into caches. To us, those logs you consider so important are just junk we have to step around.

[+Condorito]

I hope you understand my reasons for visiting caches better now

Condorito

I understood your reasons from the beginning. Now I hope you understand that there's a down side. A cache's list of past TBs can be useful information for tracking down TB movement, but it becomes useless for that purpose when most of the entries in the list are TBs that really had nothing to do with the cache other than being autovisited because they were in some cacher's inventory.

 

(One can hope the TBs were actually in the cacher's possession when they were signing the log, but, of course, that's not a given, either. To be honest, I have my doubts about whether someone with 40 TBs would actually carry what must be a faily large bag full of TBs to each and every cache. I'd be much more inclined to believe that they leave the bag in the trunk -- if it gets that far. Why bother to carry them to the caches when there's no intention of actually leaving one in any of the caches they find?)

 

I'm not trying to tell you not to do that, I'm just asking you to look at it from the point of view of people that don't care about TBs that are never really put into caches. To us, those logs you consider so important are just junk we have to step around.

 

In response to your paragraphs in order:

 

I agree that some might think that the TB hasn't really had much to do with the cache if it only visits. Personally, my understanding of trackable items is that they travel to as many locations as possible. As they don't have microchips, the only way to know where they have been is to visit them in caches they go to. The tbs I have don't auto visit, they actually do visit caches. If we didn't visit them, how would we know where they have been? In my humble opinion, they did have something to do with the cache as they went to its location with the cacher. Therefore they have the same amount to do with the cache as the finder. I also think it adds history to the cache itself. Maybe you could start a feature discussion to distinguish the visited tbs from tbs that have actually been dropped off in a cache on the past tbs page. Just a thought.

 

To this one it is again a personal reply. I always carry all TBs that I visit in a cache to each cache they visit. I have a t-shirt tb that I carry with me. Sometimes, if it is in the washing, it will not visit the caches I find when it is not with me. I do not believe it is honest or truthful, to yourself, the TB owner, or the cache owner, to visit TBs in a cache if they haven't been there. I can honestly say this. Also, I am 16, and can't drive myself around yet, so cache a lot on foot. I have a backpack that I take everywhere with me- work, geocaching etc. I carry it on, not in, my trunk/back . the tbs always stay in that bag, and they do visit the caches. I recently went up to this cache. My Mum tried to convince me that it would be too heavy to take them, so I should just print a page with the codes and visit that. I didn't think it was right, and all the tbs went to the summit with me.

As I explained before, many are mine, and I am keeping them with me until I feel like I should let them go. The rest I would only like to place in 'tb friendly' caches, for reasons I have explained previously. There aren't many big enough or safe enough for them, so I would rather keep them with me until I find a suitable cache to leave them in.

 

Again, I will eventually let my tbs go. I just paid a lot for them, and know they will most likely disappear soon after their release, so would rather give them a few KMs before releasing them.

 

I suppose if I ever find one of your caches(highly unlikely- I'm in Australia), I won't visit the tbs in my inventory in them. If I ever find one of your tbs, I won't visit it in caches, I'll just take it and drop it off somewhere else, or maybe just discover it. I respect your thoughts, and I hope you can understand mine...

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree

 

Condorito

[+dprovan]

Condorito,

 

First of all, let me say that I'm glad you're having fun, since that's the most important thing. I'm not trying to tell you what to do, I'm just offering another perspective.

 

And I'm impressed that you take each and every TB to every cache, and that you make an individual decision about visiting for each one. I agree with you that should be a requirement, but keep in mind that when most people see a cacher visiting a bunch of TBs, they're going to assume they're autovisits, not "history".

 

Even if that weren't the case, I'm not sure that the identities of every TB in your backpack is very interesting as history. Even less sure when 19 of those TBs are identical.

 

On the other hand, Qld - top secret looks like quite an impressive cache, so a mass visit there strikes me as a perfectly reasonable exception.

 

My rule of thumb is that if I don't have anything to say about the visit that warrants me editting the visit log to write up the visit, then I don't consider the visit historically interesting.

 

I suppose if I ever find one of your caches(highly unlikely- I'm in Australia), I won't visit the tbs in my inventory in them. If I ever find one of your tbs, I won't visit it in caches, I'll just take it and drop it off somewhere else, or maybe just discover it.

Thanks, I'd appreciate that, but this clutter is just as much of a problem when I'm looking at other people's TBs and other people's caches.

 

I respect your thoughts, and I hope you can understand mine...

Sure thing. If you ever visit San Francisco, drop me a line and we'll do some caching together. Just don't ask me to carry your TB bag!

[+Condorito]

Sure thing. If you ever visit San Francisco, drop me a line and we'll do some caching together. Just don't ask me to carry your TB bag!

 

Sound good