Elimination of the old Cache Submission Form

[+DragonsWest]

The bright and shiny future is here. TPTB have scrubbed the site of the old submission form and you can only (as far as I can see) submit caches using a multiple page process, which is newbie friendly.

 

I liked and only used the old submission form, so this is a very solemn occasion - it means I'll experience a lot of frustration, gnash my teeth and utter more than my daily allowance of cuss words, as I plod through this thing, where I once could focus on all of my details in the order I had them and got my submission done in a jiffy.

 

How's it working out for everyone else?

[+SwineFlew]

The old submission form is a "must" for power trails.

[+DragonsWest]

The old submission form is a "must" for power trails.

 

I've no power trails, but I did find it very easy for publishing 3 or 4 at once.

[jholly]

The bright and shiny future is here. TPTB have scrubbed the site of the old submission form and you can only (as far as I can see) submit caches using a multiple page process, which is newbie friendly.

 

I liked and only used the old submission form, so this is a very solemn occasion - it means I'll experience a lot of frustration, gnash my teeth and utter more than my daily allowance of cuss words, as I plod through this thing, where I once could focus on all of my details in the order I had them and got my submission done in a jiffy.

 

How's it working out for everyone else?

I think the new submission forum is the cat's meow. When I suddenly discover a lamp post in the Wally world parking lot or a brand new shinny guard rail I can hide a film can in when I'm out and about with my smartphone it is far better than that old stodgy form. I think it is great that GS gave us a form that we can quickly and easily use to publish those forgettable skirt lifters. But, of course, if you want to spend some time making a nice page with local history and other interesting things and want to check things over the next day before you hit the submit button it really sucks. Unfortunately I don't have a smartphone and I do like to check my page over the next day before I submit so, yes, the new submission wizard sucks swamp water. Can I have the old newbie unfriendly page back?

[jholly]

The old submission form is a "must" for power trails.

 

Maybe this is the only way GS has to stop power trails. Naw, I bet they will accommodate power trail hides with a link to the old form. But who knows, maybe the next release of the wizard will give you an unlimited table for the cache locations and the cut and paste text for the descriptions. Press one button and you just fired off 3250 caches. And the reviewers will have a similar button to press to publish all 3250 caches in one fell swoop.

[+Viajero Perdido]

The old submission form is a "must" for power trails.

AHA!

 

[+Mudfrog]

I was hoping there was still a link to the old submission form somewhere but i sure didn't find it. Just for grins, i went ahead and decided to try out the new process with a "mystery" cache submission. After three or four mouse clicks, i finally made it to where i needed to input coordinates. I not only had problems doing that, but then had to figure out why i couldn't hide those coordinates. I'm just not understanding why it's been made more complicated. Imo, it's not user friendly at all.

[BlueRajah]

I think it is great that GS gave us a form that we can quickly and easily use to publish those forgettable skirt lifters. But, of course, if you want to spend some time making a nice page with local history and other interesting things and want to check things over the next day before you hit the submit button it really sucks. Unfortunately I don't have a smartphone and I do like to check my page over the next day before I submit so, yes, the new submission wizard sucks swamp water. Can I have the old newbie unfriendly page back?

You can still take a few days to work on your cache.

[cezanne]

You can still take a few days to work on your cache.

 

That's true, but does not change the fact that the new form makes the job more tiresome than more convenient for experienced cache hiders and also for all those who submit involved caches with many waypoints (which occurs very often in my area). I wonder whether the new system got beta-tested by any cache owners who have much experience with caches with >20 waypoints per cache.

 

I do not think that it is a good idea to have to rely on quitting the submission form prematurely. If this is intended as a feature, this option should be mentioned right from the beginning in the form.

 

In any case, the impression that the new form is only addressed to newcomers will not fade away.

[+DragonsWest]

I think it is great that GS gave us a form that we can quickly and easily use to publish those forgettable skirt lifters. But, of course, if you want to spend some time making a nice page with local history and other interesting things and want to check things over the next day before you hit the submit button it really sucks. Unfortunately I don't have a smartphone and I do like to check my page over the next day before I submit so, yes, the new submission wizard sucks swamp water. Can I have the old newbie unfriendly page back?

You can still take a few days to work on your cache.

 

Hello Blue Rajah,

 

Here's a reality nugget for you. There are some areas where caches are very dense and when a spot frees up and you wish to plop a Puzzle in there, you really want to get a "save" on those final coordinates as quick as you can. A few times I've been stymied because a puzzle I worked on ended up losing out to a quick traditional publish.

 

We in the trenches clearly have a different view of "making cache publishing easier" than the folks at the lilypad. Please pass this along for consideration.

[+JL_HSTRE]

Caches with 20+ waypoints?! I've never seen such a thing and can't imagine they are anything but rare.

[BlueRajah]

 

Here's a reality nugget for you. There are some areas where caches are very dense and when a spot frees up and you wish to plop a Puzzle in there, you really want to get a "save" on those final coordinates as quick as you can. A few times I've been stymied because a puzzle I worked on ended up losing out to a quick traditional publish.

 

We in the trenches clearly have a different view of "making cache publishing easier" than the folks at the lilypad. Please pass this along for consideration.

 

And a nugget for you as well.

 

It tells you that you are too close to another cache, it does not stop you from creating the cache page. It just give you a warning to move it farther away. You can step through all the other process to create the page, and submit it if you wish. It just lets you know up front you are within 528'.

[+briansnat]

I think it is great that GS gave us a form that we can quickly and easily use to publish those forgettable skirt lifters. But, of course, if you want to spend some time making a nice page with local history and other interesting things and want to check things over the next day before you hit the submit button it really sucks. Unfortunately I don't have a smartphone and I do like to check my page over the next day before I submit so, yes, the new submission wizard sucks swamp water. Can I have the old newbie unfriendly page back?

You can still take a few days to work on your cache.

 

I'm not seeing what prevents people from taking time to work on the cache page. I've submitted a few under the new system where it took me time to work on the page.

[+niraD]

Caches with 20+ waypoints?! I've never seen such a thing and can't imagine they are anything but rare.

Yeah, they're rare. But they do exist.

[cezanne]

Caches with 20+ waypoints?! I've never seen such a thing and can't imagine they are anything but rare.

 

They are not that rare as you might think at least not in some countries in Europe.

 

My most recent cache has 46 waypoints (10 virtual stages, one final and the remaining ones are reference points, parking coordinates and other auxiliary points).

I have done a considerable number of caches with more than 20 waypoints and recently a Dutch guy reported about an error message he got for his cache with 24 stages.

 

Cezanne

[+J Grouchy]

I think it is great that GS gave us a form that we can quickly and easily use to publish those forgettable skirt lifters. But, of course, if you want to spend some time making a nice page with local history and other interesting things and want to check things over the next day before you hit the submit button it really sucks. Unfortunately I don't have a smartphone and I do like to check my page over the next day before I submit so, yes, the new submission wizard sucks swamp water. Can I have the old newbie unfriendly page back?

You can still take a few days to work on your cache.

 

I'm not seeing what prevents people from taking time to work on the cache page. I've submitted a few under the new system where it took me time to work on the page.

 

Yeah...I don't understand what's wrong with it. Seems like it's pretty much the same process as before with only a few interface tweaks.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I've tried using the new form. But it's so user-unfriendly, I kept using the old one. Oh, well. I guess I've hidden enough caches. Time to stop hiding caches.

[+The_Incredibles_]

I'm fine with the new form. I don't see the big deal. If you're hiding so many new caches to get annoyed with the new form, maybe you've got too many caches.

[+cheech gang]

I am not fine with the new form. I am annoyed with the new form and therefore I have too many caches. I took logic in college.

[+Mudfrog]

 

Here's a reality nugget for you. There are some areas where caches are very dense and when a spot frees up and you wish to plop a Puzzle in there, you really want to get a "save" on those final coordinates as quick as you can. A few times I've been stymied because a puzzle I worked on ended up losing out to a quick traditional publish.

 

We in the trenches clearly have a different view of "making cache publishing easier" than the folks at the lilypad. Please pass this along for consideration.

 

And a nugget for you as well.

 

It tells you that you are too close to another cache, it does not stop you from creating the cache page. It just give you a warning to move it farther away. You can step through all the other process to create the page, and submit it if you wish. It just lets you know up front you are within 528'.

 

I'm wondering why anyone would want to "step through all the other process to create the page"? Why has this been made into a long drawn out process? It's certainly not user friendly and i don't think it's helpful to anyone.

 

I spent about 10 mninutes messing with it last night and after several clicks of my mouse, only got to where i needed to input coordinates for the final stage of a mystery cache. I didn't know how the page wanted me to format the coordinates so i first put them in without an N or a W. Also didn't know if i needed to separate the latitude and lognitude with a comma. Took a couple of tries but i did get figured it out. After all this, i believe i was still on the first of five tabs of the total process.

 

Not fun and definitely discourages me from wanting to place a new cache.

[BlueRajah]

 

Here's a reality nugget for you. There are some areas where caches are very dense and when a spot frees up and you wish to plop a Puzzle in there, you really want to get a "save" on those final coordinates as quick as you can. A few times I've been stymied because a puzzle I worked on ended up losing out to a quick traditional publish.

 

We in the trenches clearly have a different view of "making cache publishing easier" than the folks at the lilypad. Please pass this along for consideration.

 

And a nugget for you as well.

 

It tells you that you are too close to another cache, it does not stop you from creating the cache page. It just give you a warning to move it farther away. You can step through all the other process to create the page, and submit it if you wish. It just lets you know up front you are within 528'.

 

I'm wondering why anyone would want to "step through all the other process to create the page"? Why has this been made into a long drawn out process? It's certainly not user friendly and i don't think it's helpful to anyone.

 

I am guessing someone would want to step through the process so they could do what DragonsWest was describing. A cache may be disabled, and soon archived, and he wants to place a cache there. Someone may want to start on a cache page so they can archive their old cache, or a friend may archive their cache nearby. Someone may think they may want to ask the reviewer to approve the cache 524.458' from another cache, giving it a shot. So there are reasons.

Edited May 17, 2014 by BlueRajah
oops mentioned the wrong person

[cezanne]

I am guessing someone would want to step through the process so they could do what DragonsWest was describing. A cache may be disabled, and soon archived, and he wants to place a cache there. Someone may want to start on a cache page so they can archive their old cache, or a friend may archive their cache nearby. Someone may think they may want to ask the reviewer to approve the cache 524.458' from another cache, giving it a shot. So there are reasons.

 

That does not explain why expert users are forced to go through several steps that are unnecessary for them, including to answer the question that they already know where to hide their cache and performing an extra click if they do not want to hide a traditional or multi cache. There are many other examples of this type including the necessity to either start with the wrong cache type and change it later or to change the visibility mode of the final coordinates later when one intends to hide a mystery cache.

 

I can believe that it could work that in the long run the new system will make life easier for the reviewers. The new form even when left prematurely in any case means a slowdown and inconvenience for experienced cachers to which some of them will react with frustration and a decreased motivation for hiding new caches. Of course not every experienced user will react annoyed - some are very patient and/or do not mind some extra clicks and steps that much.

 

Cezanne

[+palmetto]

miscellaneous responses to this thread;

 

I miss the old form too ;-) I had it bookmarked. But it's really gone.

 

I've created many caches on the new form while trying to break it. You can get PDQ on it with repetition. For the experienced hider - do a trad creation, coords in the Mid Atlantic, one letter title, no text, no waypoints, no attributes, brief reviewer note, and Save. Yes, it's more clicks than the old form, but it's not going to take more than a minute. I just created a listing in 40 seconds.

 

Now you can use the edit form, which looks a lot like what you're used to. This may change when the edit form gets updated. Currently there are some disconnects - cache report uses Mystery only, no Unknown - edit form uses Unknown only, no Mystery. Cache report doesn't have a Related Web Page module, edit form does. Don;t use the related web page section, it's not supported by phone aps now and eventually will be gone.

 

As a reviewer, I see this new system has the potential to help with about half of the non-publishable cache pages I read. Roughly half of what I disable for error is cache saturation (Traditional to Traditional) or bad coords: cache description favorite fishing hole, coords in highway. IF people would take advantage of what the form offers, simple litmus and Preview on Map - they can figure this out for themselves. And use the form as a first saturation check. Will this happen? can't say yet, this morning disabled several caches created on the new form with Trad to Trad saturation errors, from both experienced and novice hiders. These cachers got the error message with then nice illustration of their coords inside the red circle of an existing cache - choose to continue anyway. I'm hoping that they'll only do this once (?). Maybe they thought they could override cache saturation? Possibly some different message on that. I think people should be able to create pages with sat errors(you might want to own one with error to your own cache that you're planning to archive, or some other cache that you know is going to be archived.)

 

Caches with 20+ waypoints?! I've never seen such a thing and can't imagine they are anything but rare

 

They are a lot rarer than they used to be. 2006 I worked through the all staged caches in Quebec, backfilling waypoints into the then new tool from archived notes.

The absolute standard at that time in Quebec was 7 -14 stages, sometime hidden, often visible tour guide type with questions to answer to build final coords. I still see these from time to time - commoner in Europe than in the US.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

miscellaneous responses to this thread;

 

I miss the old form too ;-) I had it bookmarked. But it's really gone.

 

I've created many caches on the new form while trying to break it. You can get PDQ on it with repetition. For the experienced hider - do a trad creation, coords in the Mid Atlantic, one letter title, no text, no waypoints, no attributes, brief reviewer note, and Save. Yes, it's more clicks than the old form, but it's not going to take more than a minute. I just created a listing in 40 seconds.

 

I hope that a success metric for the new form isn't "elapsed time for completion of the form".

 

I think that I would generally enjoy a cache with a listing that a CO spent 40 minutes creating than one created in 40 seconds.

 

As a reviewer, I see this new system has the potential to help with about half of the non-publishable cache pages I read. Roughly half of what I disable for error is cache saturation (Traditional to Traditional) or bad coords: cache description favorite fishing hole, coords in highway. IF people would take advantage of what the form offers, simple litmus and Preview on Map - they can figure this out for themselves. And use the form as a first saturation check.

 

This is, to me, is a better metric. If the form can reduce (I don't expect that it will ever eliminate then) listing submissions to a reviewer that will never get published due to the saturation guideline because the form provides instant feedback then I think it's met a useful goal.

 

 

[+palmetto]

and you can only (as far as I can see) submit caches using a multiple page process,

 

My reference to creating a listing in 40 seconds was speaking to this point in the original post.

 

Once created as sort of shell on the new CSP, the listing can then be edited at leisure on the one page edit form, as before.

[+Mudfrog]

miscellaneous responses to this thread;

 

I miss the old form too ;-) I had it bookmarked. But it's really gone.

 

I've created many caches on the new form while trying to break it. You can get PDQ on it with repetition. For the experienced hider - do a trad creation, coords in the Mid Atlantic, one letter title, no text, no waypoints, no attributes, brief reviewer note, and Save. Yes, it's more clicks than the old form, but it's not going to take more than a minute. I just created a listing in 40 seconds.

 

I hope that a success metric for the new form isn't "elapsed time for completion of the form".

 

I think that I would generally enjoy a cache with a listing that a CO spent 40 minutes creating than one created in 40 seconds.

 

As a reviewer, I see this new system has the potential to help with about half of the non-publishable cache pages I read. Roughly half of what I disable for error is cache saturation (Traditional to Traditional) or bad coords: cache description favorite fishing hole, coords in highway. IF people would take advantage of what the form offers, simple litmus and Preview on Map - they can figure this out for themselves. And use the form as a first saturation check.

 

This is, to me, is a better metric. If the form can reduce (I don't expect that it will ever eliminate then) listing submissions to a reviewer that will never get published due to the saturation guideline because the form provides instant feedback then I think it's met a useful goal.

 

I too agree that i would much rather see caches published that have some thought put into them. Unfortunately, the 40 minutes used with this new process isn't because a cache hider is trying to better his cache.

 

But i agree that this will probably be of some help to reviewers. I think it will help the submitter to catch mistakes up front. And i do think it will slow down the totasl number of cache submissions in general which will give reviewers more time to spend on a submission.

[+briansnat]

I too agree that i would much rather see caches published that have some thought put into them. Unfortunately, the 40 minutes used with this new process isn't because a cache hider is trying to better his cache.

 

40 minutes?

[+BCandMsKitty]

I submitted one last night, and other than a bit of confusion about how to actually enter the coordinates, it was just click, add the required info, click again, and so-on. The style editing is a lot better than having to do our own HTML, IMO.

I liked the old form, and resisted using the new one, but it's really more a resistance to change, than there being any thing wrong with the new form. It really didn't take me any longer to get to the submit button than the old way.

[cezanne]

I've created many caches on the new form while trying to break it. You can get PDQ on it with repetition. For the experienced hider - do a trad creation, coords in the Mid Atlantic, one letter title, no text, no waypoints, no attributes, brief reviewer note, and Save. Yes, it's more clicks than the old form, but it's not going to take more than a minute. I just created a listing in 40 seconds.

 

I do believe the 40 seconds for an essentially empty listing - however with the old page I did need much less time to arrive at the same result.

It certainly depends on the individual how she/he will react. I'm the type of person who gets angry if a system is designed such that it costs me more time than before and this certainly will decrease my motivation to hide further caches as I will experience the anger each time when submitting a cache.

 

I spend many hours for my listings, so it is not about the additional 40 seconds. It is about the fact that this additional time is not linked with any sort of positive outcome for me (I'm not a reviewer and moreover, I think that more intelligent systems exist that help the reviewers without bothering experienced cachers with stupid systems).

 

Moreover, my biggest concern is that some edit options that currently exist will go away because if everyone is using the system in the dummy way and then uses the edit command nothing will really change.

I've experienced too many examples where changes have been possible and later on got locked (admittedly because some cachers abused the freedom).

 

 

Cezanne

[+tozainamboku]

miscellaneous responses to this thread;

 

I miss the old form too ;-) I had it bookmarked. But it's really gone.

 

I've created many caches on the new form while trying to break it. You can get PDQ on it with repetition. For the experienced hider - do a trad creation, coords in the Mid Atlantic, one letter title, no text, no waypoints, no attributes, brief reviewer note, and Save. Yes, it's more clicks than the old form, but it's not going to take more than a minute. I just created a listing in 40 seconds.

 

I hope that a success metric for the new form isn't "elapsed time for completion of the form".

 

I think that I would generally enjoy a cache with a listing that a CO spent 40 minutes creating than one created in 40 seconds.

A form that take longer to fill in, and where the way the form is presented requires more work and perhaps some confusing warning messages, means less time for users to concentrate on the content of the submission. If you're expected to enter thing in a minimalist way and they go back and work on polishing up your submission, I'm afraid that some people will do the minimum to get a cache submitted and leave it at that. One the other hand, it may be the new form presents some sections in a way that encourages more thought go into the entry, so I'll postpone judgment till we see if there is any noticeable change.

As a reviewer, I see this new system has the potential to help with about half of the non-publishable cache pages I read. Roughly half of what I disable for error is cache saturation (Traditional to Traditional) or bad coords: cache description favorite fishing hole, coords in highway. IF people would take advantage of what the form offers, simple litmus and Preview on Map - they can figure this out for themselves. And use the form as a first saturation check.

 

This is, to me, is a better metric. If the form can reduce (I don't expect that it will ever eliminate then) listing submissions to a reviewer that will never get published due to the saturation guideline because the form provides instant feedback then I think it's met a useful goal.

Again I'm not sure that automating some reviewer work benefits anyone (not even the reviewers). In the past, when reviewers found errors that kept a cache from being published, or even found things which the reviewer felt could be improved on, even thought they would pass an initial check, the reviewers would work with the cache owner to fix and/or improve the cache page. An automated system will either frustrate a person to the point they give up, or they will figure out just what they need to do to get the cache accepted by the system. Then when something passes the automated check, but a reviewer still feels needs some change or improvement, we will soon be seeing the threads about overly strict and unfair reviewers.

[+DOC-WHO]

I HATE the new Form of Submission, its long and laborious. Several pages, several scrolling pages ughhh.

Some of us are power users and quite capable of doing this on a single page and wide screen monitor, which would be a hell of a lot easier and actually increase the ease for some of us doing hides and submissions.

 

How about a Pro-Submission page?

The current one is NOT easier, no way in the world. It looks like a 5 year old created it.

I personally don't like Wizards at all, put cache pop-up tips sure lets have them, lots more of them in fact.

 

EDIT: Heres my workaround - create a Dummy Cache as suggested by a few above.

Then Edit a single page form - why cant we just start with this !!!

Edited May 18, 2014 by DOC-WHO

[+eagsc7]

You and me both... I went to post a handfull of caches today, and due to the www.geocaching.com/hide/report.aspx link being Broken and

not wanting to use the new Bug Filled*by others observations here* page, am waiting til this issue is fixed...

 

I'm seeing multiple people having issues with the 'new' cache submission process, and like you am Seriously wondering why such a Concise and One Click Cache submission page that has worked for YEARS is now not even available...

 

The Steaks

[+T.D.M.22]

To be fair Groundspeak was very open that the old forms will go away. Now they have. So they said it would happen and it happened. Is that really a surprise? AND the "new" forms have been available for us to use for more than a year. Granted I think it was in BETA mode so it may be different-but it was out there for us to know...

[+Mudfrog]

I too agree that i would much rather see caches published that have some thought put into them. Unfortunately, the 40 minutes used with this new process isn't because a cache hider is trying to better his cache.

 

40 minutes?

 

I was replying to NYPaddleCacher's statement which included the words, 40 minutes. Don't think he was saying that using the new process took 40 minutes, just that the idea of someone using the old form to submit a cache in as little as 40 seconds might also give the implication that the cache had no thought put into it..

[+DOC-WHO]

To be fair Groundspeak was very open that the old forms will go away. Now they have. So they said it would happen and it happened. Is that really a surprise? AND the "new" forms have been available for us to use for more than a year. Granted I think it was in BETA mode so it may be different-but it was out there for us to know...

 

Yeah its a surprise to me, no-one asked me, no-one told me. I don't frequent these forums until something goes horribly wrong, and it has.

'We' the 'Hiders' of geocaches deserve a decent tool to do our work, and its thats simple. I can put up with what we had before today, but at present it actually deters me from coming back to use that Wizard. Its not hard to keep every single geocacher informed - its called email and Courtesy. You don't change something for the worse and say oh-well its too late.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Keystone
removed disguised potty language. It still smelled like a potty.

[Moun10Bike]

I'm merging this duplicate topic with the one that it already underway.

[+andyakashrek]

To be honest I don't see the problem. I just tried the new form and whizzed through it in no time at all and I was using a playbook.

Simply put spoof co ords a single letter in all the text boxes save and then do all the work on the edit form. Easy.

[+maxkim]

I'm merging this duplicate topic with the one that it already underway.

Where is the other thread?

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I too agree that i would much rather see caches published that have some thought put into them. Unfortunately, the 40 minutes used with this new process isn't because a cache hider is trying to better his cache.

 

40 minutes?

 

I was replying to NYPaddleCacher's statement which included the words, 40 minutes. Don't think he was saying that using the new process took 40 minutes, just that the idea of someone using the old form to submit a cache in as little as 40 seconds might also give the implication that the cache had no thought put into it..

 

Close. My point was mostly that I don't think that the primary design goal of the cache submission process should be to create a listing as fast as possible. I think that the CSP should be designed to create the "best" listing possible for submission to the reviewer even if that means it takes longer for a CO to submit caches for a 800 cache power trail.

Edited May 18, 2014 by NYPaddleCacher

[+lumbricus]

For me everything is fine! I submitted three new geocaches, it was totally easy with the new system.

[+Ma & Pa]

I hate change. It will take me a while to even try using the new system. But maybe i have too many caches anyway

[cezanne]

I think that the CSP should be designed to create the "best" listing possible for submission to the reviewer even if that means it takes longer for a CO to submit caches for a 800 cache power trail.

 

I hide and submit caches for my fellow cachers and not for the reviewers. For your information: So far all my caches except my virtual went through in the first run without any need for corrections, debate etc in the review process

My first cache has been a multi cache that still exists. I do own a number of complex caches and I will never submit several caches at the same day. I do know what I'm doing and I'd like to have a system that takes this into account.

I hate the new form and I hate power trails.

 

The more a system makes me angry, the higher would be the danger that I commit a mistake using it.

 

It's weird (to put it politely) from my point of view that there is no option to switch to an expert user mode and then start right away with what the workaround of entering bogus dummy data leads anyway.

 

It's a long time ago that Groundspeak has implemented a change that I actually considered as useful and helpful from my personal point of view.

 

Cezanne

Edited May 18, 2014 by cezanne

[+BCandMsKitty]

UNBELIEVABLE!

 

I come on these forums to read and discuss about finer points of Geocaching, get insights into web changes, share ideas, and read about other's experiences, etc. NOT to see a bunch of whiners complaining about NOTHING!

 

THE NEW FORM WORKS JUST FINE! Nothing is "horribly wrong" with the submission form ... it's just different! All the data, and info we've always submitted before is still required to be entered, and in fact some of it flows smoother, and easier, for a couple of examples, we can check easily if there's another cache too close, and we can select the attributes easier while we submit the description!

 

Most of what I've seen here are people complaining simply because it's different! "It's not the way it's always been"! "No body asked me, or told me, and now I'm gonna whinge and complain"! "And I might not even hide any more caches because I don't like the new form"! WAAAHHH!

 

REALLY!? So what? Get on with learning to use the new form. It's what we have now, and we might as well just learn to live with it. Do any of the dissenters really think it will make any difference?

 

Have a "pro" submission form for us "experts"? Honestly!? Give me a break!

 

I think it's more resistance to change just because of change's sake ..... or maybe you just can't figure out how to use the new form. If that's it, I'm sure there are lots of folks here that can help you.

[+Mudfrog]

For me everything is fine! I submitted three new geocaches, it was totally easy with the new system.

 

I'm not saying that it's all that hard to use. When i tried it the other night, there were a couple of spots in the process that slowed me down. I have no doubt that i'd get through them more easily on future uses.

 

The thing is, we had a perfectly good process in the first place. For basic cache submission, it was simple, intuitive, and quick. It wasn't limited to the basics though since a person could also be as creative as they wanted with their submission.

 

Sure, we'll all get used to the new process. Just seems that this was yet another one of those Gc.com changes that was not asked for and that was made for no good reason.

[+BCandMsKitty]

I don't love the new form either, and I always clicked through to the old one when submitting, but it is what it is, and even though the trend with GC seems to be dummying down fur smart phones, etc., I'll just keep on playing and submitting as always oin spite of changes.

Edited May 18, 2014 by BC & MsKitty

[+Mudfrog]

REALLY!? So what? Get on with learning to use the new form. It's what we have now, and we might as well just learn to live with it. Do any of the dissenters really think it will make any difference?

 

I think it's more resistance to change just because of change's sake ..... or maybe you just can't figure out how to use the new form. If that's it, I'm sure there are lots of folks here that can help you.

 

Why should i have to learn something that, imo, makes no sense? From what i understand, it's supposed to be a change that is helpful and easier to use. It's not. You, stating that some people may not can figure it out, seem to agree.

 

For you who want to use the new set up, more power to you. But if some of us users want something more streamlined, why not offer it as well. I don't need my hand held while submitting a cache. Honestly, if given a choice, i'd bet good money that most everyone would opt to use the simpler and to the point older submission process.

[+DragonsWest]

My general view on Multi Page forms follows something like this...

 

If you are running someone through a process the first time, gathering information through narrative (several pages with lots of explanation and perhaps examples) is a good way to introduce people to it.

 

If those people already know what they want, the long narrative process is a bother and the briefest means of posting their information is desired.

 

Th US Treasury has this figured out - they rolled out the 1040 EZ form for people who don't need all the pages, schedules, etc. of a complex tax form. You can still choose to go through the long 1040 form, but if you can accomplish your filing entirely with the 1040 EZ, why go through the extra bother of the long form?

 

The new submission is putting everyone on the long form, no matter how proficient they are.

[jholly]

My general view on Multi Page forms follows something like this...

 

If you are running someone through a process the first time, gathering information through narrative (several pages with lots of explanation and perhaps examples) is a good way to introduce people to it.

 

If those people already know what they want, the long narrative process is a bother and the briefest means of posting their information is desired.

 

Th US Treasury has this figured out - they rolled out the 1040 EZ form for people who don't need all the pages, schedules, etc. of a complex tax form. You can still choose to go through the long 1040 form, but if you can accomplish your filing entirely with the 1040 EZ, why go through the extra bother of the long form?

 

The new submission is putting everyone on the long form, no matter how proficient they are.

I think a better analogy is Turbo-Tax. I can choose to subject myself to endless pages of questions or I can choose to do those sections I know I need to do and go straight to them. GS submission form is like that, only they forgot the choice where I can go right to what I want.

[+SwineFlew]

Its another way for GS to boost up the page view.

[+Mudfrog]

My general view on Multi Page forms follows something like this...

 

If you are running someone through a process the first time, gathering information through narrative (several pages with lots of explanation and perhaps examples) is a good way to introduce people to it.

 

If those people already know what they want, the long narrative process is a bother and the briefest means of posting their information is desired.

 

Th US Treasury has this figured out - they rolled out the 1040 EZ form for people who don't need all the pages, schedules, etc. of a complex tax form. You can still choose to go through the long 1040 form, but if you can accomplish your filing entirely with the 1040 EZ, why go through the extra bother of the long form?

 

The new submission is putting everyone on the long form, no matter how proficient they are.

 

This is how i see it as well. Newer hiders might like the hand holding at first. But i'd bet that after a few times of going through the process, most would probably rather use a more efficient format if it were available. Everyone is now forced to use a process that is less efficient and more cumbersome.