Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
#Tenzin

Delete "visit log" on TB page

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

 

I was wondering.

If I would delete a log on my own TB page, a "visited" log.

Would the writer of the log also get a notification?

 

Does anyone know?

Share this post


Link to post

Why would you delete it?

 

Because, they're incredibly annoying? Need to go delete some log finds, every .21 miles on my trackables. No reason for that to happen!

Share this post


Link to post

Why would you delete it?

 

Because, they're incredibly annoying? Need to go delete some log finds, every .21 miles on my trackables. No reason for that to happen!

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post

Hi everyone,

 

I was wondering.

If I would delete a log on my own TB page, a "visited" log.

Would the writer of the log also get a notification?

 

Does anyone know?

I think the answer is yes, if you delete a visit log o your own travel bug page the writer of the log will get a notification because you are deleting their caching history. But I could be wrong because it would never occur to me to do such a thing.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree pages of visited that don't show much movement are annoying. This issue has been discussed many times. If you are going to delete logs you might want to do three things.

 

Put in CAPS on the page no more than one visit log a day more will be deleted.

 

Make up a boiler plate response about how annoying that practice is to email back to the offender

 

Don't delete any logs until that person has actually placed your traveler in a cache.

Share this post


Link to post
Don't delete any logs until that person has actually placed your traveler in a cache.

I don't delete any such logs, although it's obnoxious to hijack a TB and forever log one's own travels with it. <_<

 

But after the whirlwind tour of empty "took it to" logs, when the holder actually places it into a cache, I send a thank you note. Yeah, that probably encourages the practice. But I'm just relieved to know the TB is in fact still in play (something you can only guess when you see "took it to"), and I know that the holder is back on his meds and all is well.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi everyone,

 

Thanks for all the replies.

I did yesterdag delete the visited logs. I already got a mail from somebody that was not happy and asked me why I deleated them. So I explained it to her, and I didn't mean to offend her. :( It was just I have a TB (not the same as who mailed me) that had logged some "visits" while it was already dropped somewhere. And I also have found a TB that was still "visiting" caches while I already got the thing for 3 days... (the previeus owner never dropped it).

 

So with this I hope to make my TB pages more clear, and I would be fine with only seeing the caches where it was dropped/retrieved/discovered/grabbed.

 

Thanks for the answers. :)

 

Adding a note:

I have put on my TB pages that I would like "no visit" logs, in a polite message ofcourse.

Edited by #Tenzin

Share this post


Link to post

Personally it does not bother us to see "visited" logs. At least we know the current holder is doing something with it. You don't get emails everytime a "visited" is posted, so that is nice.

There have been times when we planned to drop a tb at a certain cache but changed our minds once we found the cache. For example the container was in bad shape. The tb actually visited the cache, but we did not drop it off.

Really can't see why someone would get upset over visited logs when it is such a very small part of this game.

Share this post


Link to post

I also do not like to see all those visited messages on the TBs page. I just want to see who picked it up, where they picked it up and where they dropped it. A note occasionally if they had planned to drop it somewhere but changed their mind would be ok. Or a special cache they visited in keeping with the TB goal would be fine. Anything else is just annoying to see in my opinion.

I do not visit most TB's we pick up in any subsequent caches that we go to. I log the pick up and the drop off. I send the owner an email if I have a plan for the TB that is in keeping with its goal and I won't be dropping it for a month or so.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally it does not bother us to see "visited" logs. At least we know the current holder is doing something with it. You don't get emails everytime a "visited" is posted, so that is nice.

There have been times when we planned to drop a tb at a certain cache but changed our minds once we found the cache. For example the container was in bad shape. The tb actually visited the cache, but we did not drop it off.

Really can't see why someone would get upset over visited logs when it is such a very small part of this game.

 

Having someone hold onto your trackable for 3 months or more, logging NOTHING but "visited", probably an automated phone thing, is keeping the trackable from its mission and other cachers. It's incredibly rude to the trackable owner and to other cachers.

 

If someone wants a personal mileage tracker, they should get their own trackable.

 

Posting notes, etc on the trackable's page does nothing. These people never look at the trackable page, so they never see those messages.

 

Keeping other people's trackables for months on end, with nothing more than empty "visited" logs, is rude and pointless. It also doesn't prove anything, other than the holder still has it in their inventory. The trackable could still be sitting in their house, but they log the "visited" thing as an auto-log. Meaningless.

 

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol

Share this post


Link to post

Why would you delete it?

 

Because, they're incredibly annoying? Need to go delete some log finds, every .21 miles on my trackables. No reason for that to happen!

 

I totally agree!

 

Had a guy pick up one of my coins two weeks ago and drop it off the other day. I look at my page and there are a 100 visit logs. Since there are only 10 logs per page, I have to scroll back 10 pages to see the last cache that it was actually in.

 

"Visit All" was a great idea that should have been reserved for only TBs that you owned. Tracking your movements with someone elses coin is tacky, imo.

Share this post


Link to post

The answer is: Yes. The logger is notified of the loge deletions. I got a rather nasty e-mail from such a logger.

 

Interesting that we don't get a notification when they post a Visit log, (not that I would want one), yet they get a notification if we delete it.

Share this post


Link to post

I wasn't aware that visiting trackables into caches was considered rude or tacky or in fact negative in any way :o

 

Personally I'm not bothered by the multiple logs as I'd rather have some indication of any movement on my trackables.

 

Is it fair to say that the mileage on a trackable will be closer to reality if the 'carrier' visits it into every cache they find while they have it about their person?

Share this post


Link to post

Whether it is rude or tacky is an individual opinion. I am not fond of it but it doesn't bother me enough to do anything. I can see where a couple hundred logs 528 feet apart would fill up the map screen. The amount of distance traveled in most days really doesn't affect mileage that much.

 

I travel with a bunch of TBs and only dip them once per location.

Share this post


Link to post

Why would you delete it?

It's a mystery to me, too. A nice mix of visits & drop-offs is fine with me. TB visits are better than no activity in my book. I understand both types of preferences. I don't understand people getting hyper about it.

 

Hello! This is a game.

Share this post


Link to post
It's a mystery to me, too. A nice mix of visits & drop-offs is fine with me. TB visits are better than no activity in my book.

TBs have "Don't Keep Me" imprinted. If it's "better" for people to keep your TBs, adopt your Tbs to them. Otherwise, require "Don't Keep Me" to be observed. The TB must be placed into a cache for another cacher. There is no mystery. :rolleyes:

 

I don't understand people getting hyper about it.

I do. I stand opposed to people messing with others anonymously. It's dead wrong, and I will do everything I can to mitigate this activity. It doesn't matter who "doesn't understand".

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post
It's a mystery to me, too. A nice mix of visits & drop-offs is fine with me. TB visits are better than no activity in my book.

TBs have "Don't Keep Me" imprinted. If it's "better" for people to keep your TBs, adopt your Tbs to them. Otherwise, require "Don't Keep Me" to be observed. The TB must be placed into a cache for another cacher. There is no mystery. :rolleyes:

 

A fair point.

 

Although a person may have a TB on them for some time before coming across a cache which is large enough and safe enough for them to have reasonable confidence that it won't immediately vanish - which I think is preferable to them dumping it in the first cache they come to?

Share this post


Link to post
Although a person may have a TB on them for some time before coming across a cache which is large enough and safe enough for them to have reasonable confidence that it won't immediately vanish - which I think is preferable to them dumping it in the first cache they come to?

What happened to the cache they took it from? That one was large and safe.

 

preferable to them dumping it in the first cache they come to?

This is the issue. It's not that people are keeping a TB safe by keeping it, they are messing with TB Owners by making excuses, with the threat of an "unsafe cache" if the Owner complains. It's not related to cache size, and it's not a Geocaching problem. :shocked:

 

This Topic is about deleting obviously fake "visit" logs, so it cannot be a problem of "finding safe caches", and in this case certainly, the visit has no value at all. I take found TBs on visits to a couple of selected caches, then place them, usually that same day, and I make the logs correctly. If I have no plan to place them, I don't take the TBs. My Visit logs have some text of the visit, and photos. There's no excuse for the blank logs, and no excuse for a bahzillion of them. It's good show to some respect to TB Owners. They paid for the TB, they will lose it too soon to people who make excuses for keeping it.

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post

I wasn't aware that visiting trackables into caches was considered rude or tacky or in fact negative in any way :o

 

Personally I'm not bothered by the multiple logs as I'd rather have some indication of any movement on my trackables.

It would be nice if visit logs at least did that, but it's obvious to me that strings of empty visit logs are done on autopilot -- often literally an automated mechanism, and in some cases one the person carrying the TB isn't even be aware of -- so the messages actually don't tell you one single thing about where the TB is or where it's been. No one that does unending visits admits it, but I suspect many of the TBs visited to every single cache are sitting at home forgotten the whole time.

Share this post


Link to post

Although a person may have a TB on them for some time before coming across a cache which is large enough and safe enough for them to have reasonable confidence that it won't immediately vanish - which I think is preferable to them dumping it in the first cache they come to?

This comment presumes the person carrying the TB is not going to take the TB's requirements into account and go online to look for a suitable cache to put it in. If someone does nothing but drive ups in parking lots, and they aren't willing to go out of their way to find a cache large enough to hold a TB, they shouldn't pick TBs up to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
Although a person may have a TB on them for some time before coming across a cache which is large enough and safe enough for them to have reasonable confidence that it won't immediately vanish - which I think is preferable to them dumping it in the first cache they come to?

What happened to the cache they took it from? That one was large and safe.

 

So on that basis it should be left there? Permanently?

Share this post


Link to post
Although a person may have a TB on them for some time before coming across a cache which is large enough and safe enough for them to have reasonable confidence that it won't immediately vanish - which I think is preferable to them dumping it in the first cache they come to?

What happened to the cache they took it from? That one was large and safe.

 

So on that basis it should be left there? Permanently?

Yes, please. To understand the reasons, see this thread.

 

Wait a minute. When people take TBs from caches with no plan for placement… carry them around because there’s “no cache yet big & safe enough to place them into”... that’s considered viable alternative to “permanently” leaving the TB in the cache it was found in? If so, the missing TB is a sign that the plan is working! Imagine the problems if every cache were filled to the brim with TBs. People would be complaining in the Forums, “why are there so many TBs in caches all the time!” Let’s get the word out. All these missing TBs are a sign that they are alive and well, in the hands of people just waiting breathlessly for the day when they find a cache to place the TBs into. I hope someone else removes the TBs right away, and holds them again for a while, seeking that One Great Cache!

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post

Although a person may have a TB on them for some time before coming across a cache which is large enough and safe enough for them to have reasonable confidence that it won't immediately vanish - which I think is preferable to them dumping it in the first cache they come to?

This comment presumes the person carrying the TB is not going to take the TB's requirements into account and go online to look for a suitable cache to put it in. If someone does nothing but drive ups in parking lots, and they aren't willing to go out of their way to find a cache large enough to hold a TB, they shouldn't pick TBs up to begin with.

 

I tend to pick up trackables if I come across them while out caching - assuming nothing more than the CO wants them to move.

 

When I get home I'll check the TB's mission. If I'm able to further it with reasonable effort then I will do.

 

I've brought TB's from UK to US before today because the CO wanted their trackable to visit Disneyworld (not that I made a special trip - we were visiting anyway :laughing: ) and took loads of photographs of the trackables in interesting locations and being held by Disney characters.

 

I dipped those trackables in the virtuals we did - as those were our only finds during that vacation. Then brought them back to UK and dropped them off in a nearby cache.

 

Generally though I'm not going to go to massive effort / expense to further a TB's mission - so should I just leave them where they are in future?

Share this post


Link to post

I think the point of this thread is not about leaving them where they are, but if you do take a TB, unless they are special caches pursuant to the TB's goal, don't visit it in every cache you go to for months on end before dropping. A person has had a coin of mine since Feb and he keeps taking it to caches and visiting it there. Pages and pages of cache visists. He keeps saying he has a certain cache in mind, but each time he goes there, it's been muggled. But he hasn't left it anywhere else either. I would have rather that he had put it in a cache back in March and left it move on naturally. I would rather see it get into as many hands as possible instead of being held hostage for all these months. And if it should go missing, well that's the chance we take when we release TB's and coins.

Share this post


Link to post

I think the point of this thread is not about leaving them where they are, but if you do take a TB, unless they are special caches pursuant to the TB's goal, don't visit it in every cache you go to for months on end before dropping. A person has had a coin of mine since Feb and he keeps taking it to caches and visiting it there. Pages and pages of cache visists. He keeps saying he has a certain cache in mind, but each time he goes there, it's been muggled. But he hasn't left it anywhere else either. I would have rather that he had put it in a cache back in March and left it move on naturally. I would rather see it get into as many hands as possible instead of being held hostage for all these months. And if it should go missing, well that's the chance we take when we release TB's and coins.

 

Oh well that doesn't apply to me - I never hold on to trackables for months on end.

 

The ones I took to Florida I did have for a couple of months - but I did contact the owner to let them know why I planned to hold onto them - because they wanted to visit Disneyworld, and I was due to visit there.

 

Presumably you've contacted the person in question and asked them to drop it somewhere?

Share this post


Link to post

Although I don't post a "visit" log for every cache I find with a traveler in my pocket, I often change directions with each load. I like to log "visited" once in each state I pass through with a traveler, particularly if I change directions so it's travel map is accurate. For example, pick up in Ohio, visit in Indiana and Wisconson, then Illinois before dropped in Mississippi.

 

I don't log a traveler into each cache between corners as I am not marking a power trail.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Presumably you've contacted the person in question and asked them to drop it somewhere?

 

Oh yeah, I've been in email contact for quite awhile. Last time was about the 4th of July when he said he was going to try one more time for a specific cache, and if he wasn't successful with that one, he would release it. When he went back to that cache, he noted it was again muggled so he kept the coin, but he has had other opportunities to leave it.

Share this post


Link to post

he said he was going to try one more time for a specific cache, and if he wasn't successful with that one, he would release it. When he went back to that cache, he noted it was again muggled so he kept the coin, but he has had other opportunities to leave it.

Is he nervous about placing the coin, only to see it vanish? If he’s embarrassed about carrying a coin too long, maybe he’s worried that no cache is safe, or, safer than being carried. I know I'd feel pretty bad if I finally placed a coin, and it then disappeared without a Retrieve log. That pretty much happened with the very first TB I placed (I did place it promptly). I guess them’s the breaks.

Share this post


Link to post

I've picked up enough trackables over the years that didn't show in the cache I found them in. One I found in Wisconsin had showed in a cache in Maine for about a year and a half. Looking back at the logs, I went to the cache it last showed in and was able to find who picked it up and moved it to Wisconsin. I tracked their cache finds and there was about seven states that they cached in between Maine and Wisconsin, so I dipped the TB in one of those caches in each state. I was able to do that because there weren't pages and pages and pages and pages of Visit logs. Now, I don't even bother. I am not going to scroll back through 1000 Visit logs to find where it was last dropped into a cache.

 

It would be nice if Groundspeak gave us the option to hide the Visit logs or to only display the logs we wish to see.

 

Presumably you've contacted the person in question and asked them to drop it somewhere?

 

Oh yeah, I've been in email contact for quite awhile. Last time was about the 4th of July when he said he was going to try one more time for a specific cache, and if he wasn't successful with that one, he would release it. When he went back to that cache, he noted it was again muggled so he kept the coin, but he has had other opportunities to leave it.

I don't understand his mentality...why is he hell bent on dropping a coin into a cache that goes missing all the time?

Share this post


Link to post

 

It would be nice if Groundspeak gave us the option to hide the Visit logs or to only display the logs we wish to see.

 

I don't understand his mentality...why is he hell bent on dropping a coin into a cache that goes missing all the time?

 

I think being able to hide the visit logs would be the answer to this dilemma. Those who like to visit - can visit away, and people like me who only want to see pick ups and drop offs would be happy also.

 

As far as why hasn't he dropped it elsewhere, I don't know. I understand if he's nervous about it going missing after he drops it, but it's my coin and I've accepted that risk. I have checked on TB's that I have moved along from time to time and some are still moving and some are not. But, I feel that I did the right thing by picking them up and moving them along as quick as I was able. Usually within a week or two. I do watch where I leave them, if the cache hasn't been found in a long time, or is a wet mess, I don't leave anything there. If the TB's go missing after that, that's the breaks.

Share this post


Link to post

I have a TB that has a local mission (New York State, USA)), but it's currently on a multi-year European tour!

 

LOTS of 'visit' logs, and lots of drop/grabs in places I'm never gonna get to go, so personally, I WANT to see all of them. I want to be able to look at each place it's been to (I don't, but I want to be able to!)

 

Yeah, makes for a big, long log list. For me, it's not a problem.

Share this post


Link to post

For me, it's not a problem.

... yet. We'll see you again after 15 pages of fake logs. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

fake logs.

I really don't mind!

 

Me too :)

The option to filter the logs by tabs, just like you can filter Cache logs, could be made available whether you mind or not. It would need to be a little more specialized, so you can view your own Visit logs.

 

But "visit" logs that continue after the TB is lost, that's an issue that the rest of us must address. If Groundspeak can lock a TB for virtual "discover" logs (and they sure do), they could lock for virtual "visits", too. Some of us are trying to prevent that.

 

Deleting all Visits is a bad idea, since as we've seen, some people think a bahzillion "Visit" logs are a great service. And I don't think a couple of Visits followed by a Drop is a problem, especially if the logs are good. Hiding the view is the best option.

Share this post


Link to post

Deleting all Visits is a bad idea, since as we've seen, some people think a bahzillion "Visit" logs are a great service. And I don't think a couple of Visits followed by a Drop is a problem, especially if the logs are good. Hiding the view is the best option.

 

Nah. It's a good idea. Most of the 'visit' logs are worthless, and clog up the pages. As noted elsewhere, I'm following a TB. Over 300 'visited' logs in three months. That serves absolutely no porpoise! Fortunately, I did not receive the 330 'visited' logs!

Share this post


Link to post

Deleting all Visits is a bad idea, since as we've seen, some people think a bahzillion "Visit" logs are a great service. And I don't think a couple of Visits followed by a Drop is a problem, especially if the logs are good. Hiding the view is the best option.

 

Nah. It's a good idea. Most of the 'visit' logs are worthless, and clog up the pages. As noted elsewhere, I'm following a TB. Over 300 'visited' logs in three months. That serves absolutely no porpoise! Fortunately, I did not receive the 330 'visited' logs!

"Most of the 'visit' logs are worthless, and clog up the pages"....for YOU.

 

Please don't make blanket statements like that with no regard for what other people have already said. It's dismissive, and extremely flipper, uh....'flippant'.

Share this post


Link to post

Deleting all Visits is a bad idea, since as we've seen, some people think a bahzillion "Visit" logs are a great service. And I don't think a couple of Visits followed by a Drop is a problem, especially if the logs are good. Hiding the view is the best option.

 

Nah. It's a good idea. Most of the 'visit' logs are worthless, and clog up the pages. As noted elsewhere, I'm following a TB. Over 300 'visited' logs in three months. That serves absolutely no porpoise! Fortunately, I did not receive the 330 'visited' logs!

"Most of the 'visit' logs are worthless, and clog up the pages"....for YOU.

 

Please don't make blanket statements like that with no regard for what other people have already said. It's dismissive, and extremely flipper, uh....'flippant'.

 

No. Actually, it is a true statement. Pure and simple, it is clutter, with no porpoise served.

Share this post


Link to post

 

"Most of the 'visit' logs are worthless, and clog up the pages"....for YOU.

 

 

If someone wants a TB to visit every cache they go to then they should get their own personal TB..

 

Not hijack someones TB

Share this post


Link to post

Deleting all Visits is a bad idea, since as we've seen, some people think a bahzillion "Visit" logs are a great service. And I don't think a couple of Visits followed by a Drop is a problem, especially if the logs are good. Hiding the view is the best option.

 

Nah. It's a good idea. Most of the 'visit' logs are worthless, and clog up the pages. As noted elsewhere, I'm following a TB. Over 300 'visited' logs in three months. That serves absolutely no porpoise! Fortunately, I did not receive the 330 'visited' logs!

"Most of the 'visit' logs are worthless, and clog up the pages"....for YOU.

 

Please don't make blanket statements like that with no regard for what other people have already said. It's dismissive, and extremely flipper, uh....'flippant'.

 

No. Actually, it is a true statement. Pure and simple, it is clutter, with no porpoise served.

All I meant was that some people love to actually bring TBs to all those caches, over a period of months. They actually did the logs for real. They're crazy, but that's what they love. The hijacking part is uncool, and I don't understand what they're thinking with all those logs without a request from the TB Owner to do so, but, whatever.

 

So here's the deal: If we delete the logs, we're disposing of somebody's hard work that they thought we'd appreciate. However mistaken that idea was, the logs are real (in this hypothetical case). If we instead have the option to hide the logs from our view, the logs don't matter, and everybody wins. You don't delete the visits, just hide them. Just like Geocaches where you don't delete people's finds just to get them out of view, there's a Tab for that. :anicute:

 

it is clutter

I agree. I also think the logs must stand (just hide them). It's part of an evil plan, so don't tell anybody :anibad:. Manually deleting the logs is counterproductive. I want them out of view, and I want the Groundspeak servers to fill up with those logs until Groundspeak comes around by themselves. They "fixed" drop/retrieve by inventing "visits", the next thing they will fix is "visits". We won't have to lift a finger. Once it becomes a huge server problem, the "clutter" will go away.

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post

Deleting all Visits is a bad idea, since as we've seen, some people think a bahzillion "Visit" logs are a great service. And I don't think a couple of Visits followed by a Drop is a problem, especially if the logs are good. Hiding the view is the best option.

 

Nah. It's a good idea. Most of the 'visit' logs are worthless, and clog up the pages. As noted elsewhere, I'm following a TB. Over 300 'visited' logs in three months. That serves absolutely no porpoise! Fortunately, I did not receive the 330 'visited' logs!

"Most of the 'visit' logs are worthless, and clog up the pages"....for YOU.

 

Please don't make blanket statements like that with no regard for what other people have already said. It's dismissive, and extremely flipper, uh....'flippant'.

 

If there are enough visit logs to clog up the page, they're almost certain to be worthless. If you happen to be climbing Mt. Whitney and want to visit my coin in the cache on top, I'd be honored. If you also visit it into the 200 caches that you stopped at on your drive across the country, I'd never be able to find that log.

Share this post


Link to post

 

"Most of the 'visit' logs are worthless, and clog up the pages"....for YOU.

 

 

If someone wants a TB to visit every cache they go to then they should get their own personal TB..

 

Not hijack someones TB

 

I've been saying that since '06 when someone took one of my favorite coins on an RV trip and dropped/retrieved it into about 150 caches over 2000 miles, then dropped off the face of the Earth. I'm guessing the coin is still in the RV somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post

I am not sure if I break the rules of bringing up an old topic but I think it's better than using old topic then starting new topics over and over again about a same topic.

 

I don't know if there has been any enhancement by Groundspeak behind the scene to limit this logs.

 

I also have a zillion 'took-it-to'/'visited' logs @ my TB's and I hate it because they screw the MAP of the actual journey of the bugs. In the description, from the beginning, I asked NOT to log visited-logs....

Especially in Portugal it goes wrong. I think they use an app which automatically logs the visits when logging a cache.

See image below.. From low numbers till 700+ just at a small area... :(

 

But now my question: is it possible to delete multiple visited-logs in a few clicks? I want to clean up my map and see how the TB's really travel. So I only want to see drops on my map to find out the real Journey. Goal: travel after it B)

 

Thank you for answers!

 

knip_24.jpg

Edited by GeoZoomer

Share this post


Link to post

Personally it does not bother us to see "visited" logs. At least we know the current holder is doing something with it. You don't get emails everytime a "visited" is posted, so that is nice.

There have been times when we planned to drop a tb at a certain cache but changed our minds once we found the cache. For example the container was in bad shape. The tb actually visited the cache, but we did not drop it off.

Really can't see why someone would get upset over visited logs when it is such a very small part of this game.

 

+1

Finally a calm response to what is only a game.

 

Going further:

 

The TB visited rather than being dropped off. So??? Why is it better for 5 people to drop it in 5 different caches rather than 1 person to have it visit 5 caches??? Either way it's traveling and there's interesting action! And with the visits, it's often traveling faster.

 

Okay, some may prefer the former (for reasons I can't relate to or don't agree with). Fine - it's a game, and people have their preferences.

 

But why the strong feelings and harsh criticism? Why the "incredible annoyance" and the "they're back on their meds" reactions that some have posted??

 

Preferences, fine. IMO overreactions? Crazy!

Share this post


Link to post

I am not sure if I break the rules of bringing up an old topic but I think it's better than using old topic then starting new topics over and over again about a same topic.

 

I don't know if there has been any enhancement by Groundspeak behind the scene to limit this logs.

 

I also have a zillion 'took-it-to'/'visited' logs @ my TB's and I hate it because they screw the MAP of the actual journey of the bugs. In the description, from the beginning, I asked NOT to log visited-logs....

Especially in Portugal it goes wrong. I think they use an app which automatically logs the visits when logging a cache.

See image below.. From low numbers till 700+ just at a small area... :(

 

But now my question: is it possible to delete multiple visited-logs in a few clicks? I want to clean up my map and see how the TB's really travel. So I only want to see drops on my map to find out the real Journey. Goal: travel after it B)

 

Thank you for answers!

 

knip_24.jpg

 

For me that map does show "the real journey." And as a result I don't have to spend time figuring out how to delete things and getting someone else incredibly annoyed, because I'm not incredibly annoyed. And so there's better karma all around.

 

Do you think the great philosophers would worry about "dropped" versus "visited.". I doubt it!

Share this post


Link to post
But now my question: is it possible to delete multiple visited-logs in a few clicks? I want to clean up my map and see how the TB's really travel. So I only want to see drops on my map to find out the real Journey. Goal: travel after it B)

Not that I'm aware of.

I agree, a map wouldn't have been like that before these visited logs started, but you'll have to thank other cachers for this silly "took it to" function.

Folks claimed it too time-consuming to drop/retrieve every cache visited.

 

- Though I believe it was mostly trackable owners asking for another option, not someone spending six months or better holding another's property hostage.

Share this post


Link to post

In some forum, probably a couple of years ago, someone said that they didn't like visit logs because there were pages of these 'lame' logs in between *REAL* logs with the possibility of some meaningful text.

 

It seemed that either the GS app or some other popular app had a setting to 'auto-visit every trackable in your inventory with every FOUND log', so if you had 25 TB's in a box at home, every cache log was accompanied by 25 TB VISIT logs.

 

Obviously, this is bogus, but the problem isn't with the 'visit' system, it's with how people USE it. And in that case, "some people" included the company that programmed the app. If it was GS, well, that's just dumb.

 

Personally, I think the VISIT system is good. As wmpastor said, <if done honestly> it reflects the actual travels of the TB. If someone picks up one of mine and carries it to England, France, Morocco, India, Nepal, Viet Nam, Korea, Japan, Siberia, Hawaii, San Diego, Tijuana, Brownsville, Atlanta, Baltimore, Brooklyn, Yonkers, Poughkeepsie, and right back here to New Paltz, NY, I'd want to see that journey!

 

"Visits" lets you record that with a few mouseclicks, instead of having to file a "Drop", then a "Retrieve", which includes searching through your cachebag for the TB to get the number. That's gonna get old real quick.

 

Plus, if you happen to drop off a TB later that day and don't remember to record the Tracking #, then you're SOL! You can't go back and record the Drop/Retrieves.

 

So what do people want? I looked at GeoZoomers "Luca's Coin" TB, and one guy, "Pocoyo & TuchaT" has 'visited' it at about 35 caches in the last week. Would it be any more legitimate of it were 70 Dropped&Retrieved combinations? What's the point of tracking an object if you don't want to track it's path?

 

Is it the lack of descriptive text in the logs? No requirement to add text in any other type of TB log - would you want to delete a 'dropped' or 'retrieved' log because it was blank?

 

Is it that many visits in a small area is annoying? Again, a 'usage' issue - encourage people to only use Visits for significant travels.

 

For mine, go ahead and record visits. "Holy Smokes, how annoying is this paging, but look at where it's been!"

 

Yes, I get that having to go through lots of pages to get through the Visit logs is tedious, boring and uses data. So encourage Groundspeak to enhance the website's TB log display to do the same thing as the cache log display: keep doing CTRL-END to load more logs!

 

So, instead of railing against the Visit Logs, let's encourage proper usage. "No Visits unless it's a physical VISIT!"

Edited by TeamRabbitRun

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

×
×
  • Create New...