Time limit

[+dprovan]

The correct analogy would be the OP pulls up to the drive-up speaker and starts making a very complex order. The clerk says "uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh" for 2 hours, and then when the OP says, "OK, that's everything," the clerk says, "Sorry, we closed an hour and 20 minutes ago."

This would work as an analogy if the clerk started by stating, "Sir, I'll be happy to take your order. But please be aware that we are closing in 40 minutes. If you don't have your order completed by closing time, we won't be able to serve you. Would you like fries with that?". Any analogy that ignores the fact that the customer knew they were on a limited time factor won't work.

More like that disclaimer was printed in some corner of the menu board, but, yeah, OK. It would still be annoying to discover you were screwed 2 hours later after you lost track of time and forgot about the opening disclaimer, and it would still be reasonable to wonder if there wasn't a better way for them to handle that. Although it might not have been so bad as long as he got fries when his cache submission failed.

[+Don_J]

I'm curious as to how displaying a form on my screen, waiting for me to click a button uses their resources? This is an honest question, not a sarcastic one. I was always under the impression that a web site would log you off or poof your form after a time out because of security reasons.

 

For the new cache-entry pages, the session state is stored on the server. When you click on the new form, it has to remember all the pages you clicked through to make the GC, and combine all that information to make a single listing. The info is on their server, not your computer. If you never get around to finishing the page, it is just hanging there, and the server needs to occasionally go through and garbage-collect all the unfinished data.

 

For the old forms, where it was only one page, the situation was different. In that case, I suspect the motivation was primarily one of security. But since it was trivially easy for any reasonably-competent Web programmer to get around it, it didn't add much security. Maybe that is part of the reason they went to the new system.

 

Thanks for that explanation. I gives me a better understanding of the process. However, by security, I thinking of for the user, not the server. For example, if I log into my bank account and then go eat dinner, I won't be logged on when I get back to my computer.

[zulutime]

Never saw a warning pop up.

 

I do see all the attacks coming. Nice bunch of folks here.

 

No doubt you saw the first attack before you began this thread. Maybe you are the nicest. =)

Edited May 30, 2013 by zulutime

[+Don_J]

We've all heard the term "Denial of Service Attacks" - it's in the news all the time. It happens when someone throws so much stuff at a company's web server that it can't possibly respond to everybody in a reasonable period of time. NOBODY gets in.

Denial of service is not really a factor here, since 40 minutes is plenty of time to gum up the works and keep it gummed up with new pages as the old ones time out. They're much more worried --and rightly so -- about pages piling up because of incidental legitimate activity over a long period of time.

 

Makes me wonder... if the OP pulled up in the parking lot of a fast food joint 40 minutes before closing time and sat there contemplating the menu for 2 hours, would he be ticked off at the management for closing the place before he placed his order, or upset at himself for taking too long to make it?

The correct analogy would be the OP pulls up to the drive-up speaker and starts making a very complex order. The clerk says "uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh" for 2 hours, and then when the OP says, "OK, that's everything," the clerk says, "Sorry, we closed an hour and 20 minutes ago."

 

Mind you, I agree with everyone that the limit's perfectly reasonable and the OP should, now that he knows, save his work. I'm just rejecting the logic of these arguments that seem to suggest that it wasn't reasonable of him to have been upset when he discovered this little quirk. Yeah, he made a mistake, but it wasn't because he's stupid.

 

You mean like this:

 

[+ras_oscar]

Soooo just out of curiosity, since I'm not a web designer, Why exactly is there a time limit to enter info into a cache listing?

 

As Fizzy says above, the server needs to occasionally purge un-saved data to remain efficient.

 

If a bunch of people started (but didn't finish) a bunch of cache pages and they were just sitting there in limbo, server performance would degrade and eventually grind to a halt.

 

This would be a pretty easy way to attack Groundspeak if you were somehow upset with them. It would probably take thousands (hundreds of thousands? millions??) of unfinished cache pages to cause an issue, but there ARE people with that kind of determination...not to mention it would probably be fairly easy to create a bot to do the job.

ok, that makes sense. I knew there must be a valid reason. Thanks for edumacating me, and sorry for the duplicate question. Guess I need to read the entire thread before posting

[+ras_oscar]

dupe

Edited May 30, 2013 by ras_oscar

[+Manville Possum]

When I fail at something and it is totally my fault I don't feel good about it, but I don't try and blame others for my actions. I even had the same thing happen once because I type too slow, but I learned from my mistake and save my work often to keep it from being lost.

[+dprovan]

When I fail at something and it is totally my fault I don't feel good about it, but I don't try and blame others for my actions. I even had the same thing happen once because I type too slow, but I learned from my mistake and save my work often to keep it from being lost.

I'm sorry, but I'm having a really, really hard time believing that your first reaction wasn't "Why you so and so!", just like any normal person, before you learned your lesson. I wouldn't be surprised if you hit your keyboard just to punish it. And even if you didn't do that, surely you can understand someone else having that reaction without considering it a character flaw.

[Pup Patrol]

When I fail at something and it is totally my fault I don't feel good about it, but I don't try and blame others for my actions. I even had the same thing happen once because I type too slow, but I learned from my mistake and save my work often to keep it from being lost.

 

The very first time I attempted to write up a cache page, I saw that I would only have 40 minutes to complete it.

 

I backed out of that page, and started a draft, including coordinates, in a notepad file or something like that. Once I had gone over it a million times and was finally happy with it, I opened the cache submission page again and copied and pasted everything.

 

That was in 2007, and I'm pretty sure the submission form hadn't changed from that time until rustynails. started hiding caches in 2009. One assumes that if someone has done something over 70 times, that person would be well-versed in the procedure.

 

 

 

B.

[Clan Riffster]

When I fail at something and it is totally my fault I don't feel good about it, but I don't try and blame others for my actions. I even had the same thing happen once because I type too slow, but I learned from my mistake and save my work often to keep it from being lost.

I'm sorry, but I'm having a really, really hard time believing that your first reaction wasn't "Why you so and so!", just like any normal person, before you learned your lesson. I wouldn't be surprised if you hit your keyboard just to punish it. And even if you didn't do that, surely you can understand someone else having that reaction without considering it a character flaw.

Sorry. I'll have to side with MPH on this one, as I have also been in his, (and the OP's), shoes. In my case, I was called away from my computer for some minor emergency, and when I returned, my work was lost. Naturally, I was aggravated, but all my angst was directed inward, for my failure to click a button before walking away. It never occurred to me that I might try holding Groundspeak responsible for my screw up. If I did have such a bloated ego that I was unable to recognize that the fault was entirely mine, even then I can't envision coming to the forums and ranting/raving about it.

 

Edit to add: I did not hit my keyboard, though I did mutter a minor expletive.

Edited May 30, 2013 by Clan Riffster

[+Manville Possum]

When I fail at something and it is totally my fault I don't feel good about it, but I don't try and blame others for my actions. I even had the same thing happen once because I type too slow, but I learned from my mistake and save my work often to keep it from being lost.

I'm sorry, but I'm having a really, really hard time believing that your first reaction wasn't "Why you so and so!", just like any normal person, before you learned your lesson. I wouldn't be surprised if you hit your keyboard just to punish it. And even if you didn't do that, surely you can understand someone else having that reaction without considering it a character flaw.

I have no idea how you get that I think the OP has a character flaw from my post. I agree with the OP that it is upsetting when we make mistakes. But what you describe I do not consider normal.

[+kunarion]

The correct analogy would be the OP pulls up to the drive-up speaker and starts making a very complex order. The clerk says "uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh" for 2 hours, and then when the OP says, "OK, that's everything," the clerk says, "Sorry, we closed an hour and 20 minutes ago."

This would work as an analogy if the clerk started by stating, "Sir, I'll be happy to take your order. But please be aware that we are closing in 40 minutes. If you don't have your order completed by closing time, we won't be able to serve you. Would you like fries with that?". Any analogy that ignores the fact that the customer knew they were on a limited time factor won't work.

This clerk has 12 different windows. At the last window, I confirm my order, and she pronounces “Oops, I forgot everything!” Or she locks up and starts spinning til I leave.

 

But extending the time will cause posts about the extended time, "How come I only get 60 Minutes! Don't you know how long it takes to copy a whole Wikipedia article!"

Edited May 30, 2013 by kunarion

[+bflentje]

The very first time I attempted to write up a cache page, I saw that I would only have 40 minutes to complete it.

 

That's funny, I've been hiding caches for six years and don't recall ever seeing the timeout listed, at least not on the old-style page. I mean, it might be there but I didn't notice. If I didn't notice who else wouldn't have noticed? But then as a developer I instinctively know that pages timeout. Some of the less web technical might not catch on to that idea and I wouldn't even think about insulting them over it.

[Pup Patrol]

The very first time I attempted to write up a cache page, I saw that I would only have 40 minutes to complete it.

 

That's funny, I've been hiding caches for six years and don't recall ever seeing the timeout listed, at least not on the old-style page. I mean, it might be there but I didn't notice. If I didn't notice who else wouldn't have noticed? But then as a developer I instinctively know that pages timeout. Some of the less web technical might not catch on to that idea and I wouldn't even think about insulting them over it.

 

Being blunt isn't always being "insulting". Exactly how can one sugar-coat telling someone it ain't Groundspeak's fault, it's yours.

 

Maybe some of us like to read everything before signing on the dotted line.

 

Maybe some of us have a lot of experience with trying to post on a forum, and having "something" happen that we lose all that text. After getting burned just once, I highlight/copy everything I type.

 

Old cache sumbission form makes two attempts to help people not lose their work. It's not Groundspeak's fault if they can't be bothered to read

 

They even put the "backup your information" warning in bold print:

 

Please fill out the information below regarding your geocache. Once you are done, click on the button at the bottom of the page to send it for review. You will receive a confirmation if your cache report was successfully submitted.

 

Always keep a backup of your geocache information.

 

You have a limited session timeframe (40 minutes). You'll need to enter your cache report within this time, or your session will end and your submission won't be sent. If you need more time, we suggest writing your report in a text editor and copying and pasting the text onto this page.

 

Bottom line...the OP has published over 70 caches. Not a newbie, and could have taken 5 seconds to read what's put before him on numerous occasions.

 

 

B.

[+bflentje]

Being blunt isn't always being "insulting". Exactly how can one sugar-coat telling someone it ain't Groundspeak's fault, it's yours.

 

 

A couple dozen people being blunt saying the same thing was uncalled for. The first responce or two was sufficient. Everything else was mean spirited.

[+Manville Possum]

Being blunt isn't always being "insulting". Exactly how can one sugar-coat telling someone it ain't Groundspeak's fault, it's yours.

 

 

A couple dozen people being blunt saying the same thing was uncalled for. The first responce or two was sufficient. Everything else was mean spirited.

And someone even wanted to take it out on me. I've been a mechanic long enough to know that things don't always go right the first time and I have to start over and try again.

[+Don_J]

When I fail at something and it is totally my fault I don't feel good about it, but I don't try and blame others for my actions. I even had the same thing happen once because I type too slow, but I learned from my mistake and save my work often to keep it from being lost.

I'm sorry, but I'm having a really, really hard time believing that your first reaction wasn't "Why you so and so!", just like any normal person, before you learned your lesson. I wouldn't be surprised if you hit your keyboard just to punish it. And even if you didn't do that, surely you can understand someone else having that reaction without considering it a character flaw.

 

I've learned long ago that if I immediately accept responsibility for my own actions, life just flows along much more smoothly. I've also learned that if I try to remain patient and try to understand the situation, I can respond appropriately instead of reacting rashly.

 

I also find it sad that you have a really, really hard time believing that people can behave as such.

Edited May 30, 2013 by Don_J

[+Don_J]

The very first time I attempted to write up a cache page, I saw that I would only have 40 minutes to complete it.

 

That's funny, I've been hiding caches for six years and don't recall ever seeing the timeout listed, at least not on the old-style page. I mean, it might be there but I didn't notice. If I didn't notice who else wouldn't have noticed? But then as a developer I instinctively know that pages timeout. Some of the less web technical might not catch on to that idea and I wouldn't even think about insulting them over it.

 

I guess some of us just approach new things differently. When I first loaded the form in Aug/05, I read it top to bottom to familiarize myself with what information was required to be submitted in order to become a cache owner. I didn't actually hide a cache for another month, but I wanted to know what the process was before I even started. The warning was there at that time, and has been since.

 

I'm kind of weird about stuff. I bought a Super Nintendo a couple of decades back and left it in the box until I had read the manual cover to cover. My friends were literally screaming at me to "hook the darn thing up, already."

[+Don_J]

Being blunt isn't always being "insulting". Exactly how can one sugar-coat telling someone it ain't Groundspeak's fault, it's yours.

 

 

A couple dozen people being blunt saying the same thing was uncalled for. The first responce or two was sufficient. Everything else was mean spirited.

 

I agree. I originally posted a sarcastic comment before reading all of the responses. When I realized that it was turning into a big "pile on", I edited my comment out as it no longer seemed appropriate.

[+Ambrosia]

I like to read everything, but I don't remember seeing the warning. But I figured it out the hard way early on, probably in 2002 or 2003. It was an easy fix - as long as I just make a bare bones cache page and submit it without having it go in the queue, then I can take as long as I want with all the editing.

[+cerberus1]

I like to read everything, but I don't remember seeing the warning. But I figured it out the hard way early on, probably in 2002 or 2003. It was an easy fix - as long as I just make a bare bones cache page and submit it without having it go in the queue, then I can take as long as I want with all the editing.

That's how I've done it since timing out our first hide.

Always changing things anyway, much easier when not watching the clock.

[+JKMonkey]

Write the cache stuff up in a word document, then save it and just copy it into GS this way this wont happen.

[+Mudfrog]

Write the cache stuff up in a word document, then save it and just copy it into GS this way this wont happen.

 

I use notepad to do my cache write ups. I can type in name of the cache, coordinates, the description, add html, and then save it all before ever going online. This kills two birds with one stone,, Makes it easy to copy/paste to the cache submission page fairly quickly and provides a backup on my computer.

 

Edited to add that i've been seeing the time out warning listed on the old submission form for as long as i can remember. Even so, i never went over about 10 or 15 minutes because i knew there were all kinds of things that could cause my work to go away.

Edited May 31, 2013 by Mudfrog

[+SSO JOAT]

Technique-wise, my method was always to start the online form, enter name, type, size, D/T, coordinates, etc. and then just type one word in each of the description boxes. Save the cache page and you get your GC# issued. Once that part is complete, go back and edit the listing and you have all the time you need to fiddle with getting your listing just right. I hand code all my HTML, so I have a great dislike of the wysiwyg editor on the new creation form (though I really like how it runs through setting up all the header and attribute info during the rest of the process). I find it's much easier to hand code in a plain text document (e.g. Notepad) and then C/V to the page editor. With each follow-up tweak, you just save the page and go right to viewing the page to see how it looks. Really simple to bounce back and forth between edit and view with a page save in between.

 

One more thing... for those who claim they've never seen the time limit warning at the top of the submission page, if ya'll can't see that, how could you ever find a nano cache in the field?

Edited May 31, 2013 by SSO JOAT

[+ArtieD]

Technique-wise, my method was always to start the online form, enter name, type, size, D/T, coordinates, etc. and then just type one word in each of the description boxes. Save the cache page and you get your GC# issued. Once that part is complete, go back and edit the listing and you have all the time you need to fiddle with getting your listing just right.

 

This is precisely what I do.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Being blunt isn't always being "insulting". Exactly how can one sugar-coat telling someone it ain't Groundspeak's fault, it's yours.

 

 

A couple dozen people being blunt saying the same thing was uncalled for. The first responce or two was sufficient. Everything else was mean spirited.

 

I've used all sorts of forums, mailing lists, and online discussion groups and for some reason in these forums the notion of a "pile-on" seems to be a lot more common than in other forums.

 

 

[+Don_J]

Technique-wise, my method was always to start the online form, enter name, type, size, D/T, coordinates, etc. and then just type one word in each of the description boxes. Save the cache page and you get your GC# issued. Once that part is complete, go back and edit the listing and you have all the time you need to fiddle with getting your listing just right.

 

This is precisely what I do.

 

This has pretty much been my method since my second or third cache. I keep the edit page on one tab and the finished product on a tab next to it. I make a change, save it and then click the other tab and refresh and I can instantly see what my changes look like.

 

I'm a three finger and one thumb typist and it's a little late in life to learn html just to write cache pages, so I do rely on a wysiwyg html plugin, but I try keep it simple. The plugin will save the code to a text file so I have my backups.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I like to read everything, but I don't remember seeing the warning. But I figured it out the hard way early on, probably in 2002 or 2003. It was an easy fix - as long as I just make a bare bones cache page and submit it without having it go in the queue, then I can take as long as I want with all the editing.

That's how I've done it since timing out our first hide.

Always changing things anyway, much easier when not watching the clock.

 

I do remember seeing the warning when I hid my first cache almost nine years ago. Just hid my 100th cache, and I've never run into a problem. I guess that's because I like to see what the page looks like. Save. Check page. Ad nauseum. Especially with a puzzle cache! Insert puzzle. Check it out. Oops I'm in html now. Insert those codes < p > < br / >. < center > < squoosh > See previous puzzle to see how I did that last time! Have to add my geochecker. But I guess that's just me. Probably six to eight save listing to see what it looks like before I'm done! Correct six more typos!

My consolation to the OP.