Jump to content

You've been busted!


hukilaulau

Recommended Posts

While looking for an event I could attend in August, I noticed two different cases where someone had logged the event as "attended" a couple of weeks before it was scheduled to take place. In one case the CO deleted his smiley, but several days later he still has both the "socializer" and the "achiever" souvenirs. (No he did not attend any other events, in fact he had exactly one of each type of find for the souvenir, each with "tftc" logs) Aside from the irony of cheating to get a badge that says you are a socializer, I wondered about why the souvenir doesn't disappear.

In a similar situation, I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared! OK, I don't know anything about computer programming, but couldn't this work the same way for corrected souvenirs?

Link to comment

While looking for an event I could attend in August, I noticed two different cases where someone had logged the event as "attended" a couple of weeks before it was scheduled to take place. In one case the CO deleted his smiley, but several days later he still has both the "socializer" and the "achiever" souvenirs. (No he did not attend any other events, in fact he had exactly one of each type of find for the souvenir, each with "tftc" logs) Aside from the irony of cheating to get a badge that says you are a socializer, I wondered about why the souvenir doesn't disappear.

In a similar situation, I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared! OK, I don't know anything about computer programming, but couldn't this work the same way for corrected souvenirs?

I am sure it could, but I am not sure the weight of such a task. You would need a procedure that would go through every find the user had and see if any of them qualified them for a souvenir. You would then have to run a procedure every time a log was deleted or changed from Found It. There are people with quite a few finds and going through each one on a delete could be costly to performance.

 

At this point it seems to only do that check once on posting and then it just flips the souvenir flag or adds the souvenir id, user id, and date to a reference table.

Link to comment

Yes, it could work out that deleting a log would delete the souvenir you got for posting the log. But it isn't as easy as deleting a Favorite Point when you delete or edit the log. In the case of a Favorite Point, there is only one cache involved, so it's a quick search. In the case of the souvenir, there are any number of caches that could have awarded the souvenir, so they all have to be checked.

 

A cheap computation to fix your Favorite Points makes sense, especially since others use Favorite Points, so cheating affects others. An expensive computation to fix your souvenirs may not be as much of a priority, especially since your souvenirs don't really affect anyone else.

Link to comment

While looking for an event I could attend in August, I noticed two different cases where someone had logged the event as "attended" a couple of weeks before it was scheduled to take place. In one case the CO deleted his smiley, but several days later he still has both the "socializer" and the "achiever" souvenirs. (No he did not attend any other events, in fact he had exactly one of each type of find for the souvenir, each with "tftc" logs) Aside from the irony of cheating to get a badge that says you are a socializer, I wondered about why the souvenir doesn't disappear.

In a similar situation, I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared! OK, I don't know anything about computer programming, but couldn't this work the same way for corrected souvenirs?

I am sure it could, but I am not sure the weight of such a task. You would need a procedure that would go through every find the user had and see if any of them qualified them for a souvenir. You would then have to run a procedure every time a log was deleted or changed from Found It. There are people with quite a few finds and going through each one on a delete could be costly to performance.

 

At this point it seems to only do that check once on posting and then it just flips the souvenir flag or adds the souvenir id, user id, and date to a reference table.

 

It shouldn't be that hard to have a database trigger on deletions or updates.

 

If a log was deleted or the log type was changed, flag the user for souvenir regeneration. The system can already identify which souvenir(s) a particular log would have earned, so go through those souvenirs and check the user still qualifies for them.

Link to comment

This is one reason I've never cared for the idea of the souvenirs. Back when they were still a new feature, I logged a will attend on an event, then wasn't able to make it after all. I never did log that I attended, but I still have a souvenir for that event. (10/10/10, event.)

 

I don't know if they ever changed it, but at the time there was no way for me to get rid of the souvenir. Now when I look at my souvenirs I see that and know I didn't do it. That makes the rest of mine somewhat useless to me. What good are they if I never earned them?

Link to comment

While looking for an event I could attend in August, I noticed two different cases where someone had logged the event as "attended" a couple of weeks before it was scheduled to take place. In one case the CO deleted his smiley, but several days later he still has both the "socializer" and the "achiever" souvenirs. (No he did not attend any other events, in fact he had exactly one of each type of find for the souvenir, each with "tftc" logs) Aside from the irony of cheating to get a badge that says you are a socializer, I wondered about why the souvenir doesn't disappear.

In a similar situation, I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared! OK, I don't know anything about computer programming, but couldn't this work the same way for corrected souvenirs?

I am sure it could, but I am not sure the weight of such a task. You would need a procedure that would go through every find the user had and see if any of them qualified them for a souvenir. You would then have to run a procedure every time a log was deleted or changed from Found It. There are people with quite a few finds and going through each one on a delete could be costly to performance.

 

At this point it seems to only do that check once on posting and then it just flips the souvenir flag or adds the souvenir id, user id, and date to a reference table.

 

It shouldn't be that hard to have a database trigger on deletions or updates.

 

If a log was deleted or the log type was changed, flag the user for souvenir regeneration. The system can already identify which souvenir(s) a particular log would have earned, so go through those souvenirs and check the user still qualifies for them.

I am not saying its not possible, but it is much more costly than the current process for minimal benefit.

Link to comment

This is one reason I've never cared for the idea of the souvenirs. Back when they were still a new feature, I logged a will attend on an event, then wasn't able to make it after all. I never did log that I attended, but I still have a souvenir for that event. (10/10/10, event.)

 

I don't know if they ever changed it, but at the time there was no way for me to get rid of the souvenir. Now when I look at my souvenirs I see that and know I didn't do it. That makes the rest of mine somewhat useless to me. What good are they if I never earned them?

 

You can contact Groundspeak and they will delete it for you.

Link to comment

There are two thing I don't understand about this:

 

1. What is the value in getting a souvenir for something you didn't actually do?

 

2. What is the point of scrutinizing other people's profiles?

Thanks for all the great responses! That clears it up quite a bit!

 

1. I'm guessing it's like acquiring stolen artwork and keeping it in your basement.

 

2. I thought that's why they are published? For me it's just one aspect of this fun hobby.

Link to comment

While looking for an event I could attend in August, I noticed two different cases where someone had logged the event as "attended" a couple of weeks before it was scheduled to take place. In one case the CO deleted his smiley, but several days later he still has both the "socializer" and the "achiever" souvenirs. (No he did not attend any other events, in fact he had exactly one of each type of find for the souvenir, each with "tftc" logs) Aside from the irony of cheating to get a badge that says you are a socializer, I wondered about why the souvenir doesn't disappear.

In a similar situation, I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared! OK, I don't know anything about computer programming, but couldn't this work the same way for corrected souvenirs?

I am sure it could, but I am not sure the weight of such a task. You would need a procedure that would go through every find the user had and see if any of them qualified them for a souvenir. You would then have to run a procedure every time a log was deleted or changed from Found It. There are people with quite a few finds and going through each one on a delete could be costly to performance.

 

At this point it seems to only do that check once on posting and then it just flips the souvenir flag or adds the souvenir id, user id, and date to a reference table.

 

It shouldn't be that hard to have a database trigger on deletions or updates.

 

If a log was deleted or the log type was changed, flag the user for souvenir regeneration. The system can already identify which souvenir(s) a particular log would have earned, so go through those souvenirs and check the user still qualifies for them.

I am not saying its not possible, but it is much more costly than the current process for minimal benefit.

 

I don't see how it would be more costly. And if the original coder put that in, I suppose it wouldn't cost a penny. Certainly if you delete your own find log, it decreases your find count by one. This is not from Geocaching.com, but an insiders look at another website. :ph34r:

 

$rsGeneralStat =sql("SELECT count(*) count FROM `cache_logs` WHERE cache_logs.deleted=0 AND (type=1 OR type=2 OR type=7) AND cache_id=&1 ",$cache_id);

 

English translation: If cache_logs.deleted=1, it doesn't count in your find count.

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

A souvenir can be earned by multiple logs on multiple caches. If you earned a souvenir for finding a cache in Latvia, but then deleted/edited that log, the website would have to go through all of your logs and all caches you have found and check that you have or have not found another cache in Latvia. Worse still, it would have to check every single one of your logs against ALL the souvenirs possible.

 

That's a much bigger load in the server than simply checking one log (the found it log you just submitted) against souvenir criteria to see if you just earned one.

Link to comment

A souvenir can be earned by multiple logs on multiple caches. If you earned a souvenir for finding a cache in Latvia, but then deleted/edited that log, the website would have to go through all of your logs and all caches you have found and check that you have or have not found another cache in Latvia. Worse still, it would have to check every single one of your logs against ALL the souvenirs possible.

 

That's a much bigger load in the server than simply checking one log (the found it log you just submitted) against souvenir criteria to see if you just earned one.

 

The system knows that the cache qualified you for a souvenir, because it awarded a souvenir for it.

 

So if a log that would qualify for a souvenir is changed, all it needs to do is check your other logs to see if any of them qualify for the souvenir in question.

 

If I logged a cache in Oregon and then deleted the log (or changed it to DNF) the system doesn't need to revalidate all my souvenirs. It just checks to see if I found any other caches in Oregon, and if I didn't then it deletes the Oregon souvenir.

Link to comment

While looking for an event I could attend in August, I noticed two different cases where someone had logged the event as "attended" a couple of weeks before it was scheduled to take place. In one case the CO deleted his smiley, but several days later he still has both the "socializer" and the "achiever" souvenirs. (No he did not attend any other events, in fact he had exactly one of each type of find for the souvenir, each with "tftc" logs) Aside from the irony of cheating to get a badge that says you are a socializer, I wondered about why the souvenir doesn't disappear.

In a similar situation, I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared! OK, I don't know anything about computer programming, but couldn't this work the same way for corrected souvenirs?

I am sure it could, but I am not sure the weight of such a task. You would need a procedure that would go through every find the user had and see if any of them qualified them for a souvenir. You would then have to run a procedure every time a log was deleted or changed from Found It. There are people with quite a few finds and going through each one on a delete could be costly to performance.

 

At this point it seems to only do that check once on posting and then it just flips the souvenir flag or adds the souvenir id, user id, and date to a reference table.

 

It shouldn't be that hard to have a database trigger on deletions or updates.

 

If a log was deleted or the log type was changed, flag the user for souvenir regeneration. The system can already identify which souvenir(s) a particular log would have earned, so go through those souvenirs and check the user still qualifies for them.

I am not saying its not possible, but it is much more costly than the current process for minimal benefit.

 

As things stand the souvenirs mean next to nothing. If they are based on actual caching that's one thing but as it stands anyone can armchair log anything to get the souvenirs and even if the log is deleted they still collect the souvenirs.

 

It's a bit pointless having the souvenirs if the system is so easy to cheat for anyone so inclined.

Link to comment

While looking for an event I could attend in August, I noticed two different cases where someone had logged the event as "attended" a couple of weeks before it was scheduled to take place. In one case the CO deleted his smiley, but several days later he still has both the "socializer" and the "achiever" souvenirs. (No he did not attend any other events, in fact he had exactly one of each type of find for the souvenir, each with "tftc" logs) Aside from the irony of cheating to get a badge that says you are a socializer, I wondered about why the souvenir doesn't disappear.

In a similar situation, I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared! OK, I don't know anything about computer programming, but couldn't this work the same way for corrected souvenirs?

I am sure it could, but I am not sure the weight of such a task. You would need a procedure that would go through every find the user had and see if any of them qualified them for a souvenir. You would then have to run a procedure every time a log was deleted or changed from Found It. There are people with quite a few finds and going through each one on a delete could be costly to performance.

 

At this point it seems to only do that check once on posting and then it just flips the souvenir flag or adds the souvenir id, user id, and date to a reference table.

 

It shouldn't be that hard to have a database trigger on deletions or updates.

 

If a log was deleted or the log type was changed, flag the user for souvenir regeneration. The system can already identify which souvenir(s) a particular log would have earned, so go through those souvenirs and check the user still qualifies for them.

I am not saying its not possible, but it is much more costly than the current process for minimal benefit.

 

I don't see how it would be more costly. And if the original coder put that in, I suppose it wouldn't cost a penny. Certainly if you delete your own find log, it decreases your find count by one. This is not from Geocaching.com, but an insiders look at another website. :ph34r:

 

$rsGeneralStat =sql("SELECT count(*) count FROM `cache_logs` WHERE cache_logs.deleted=0 AND (type=1 OR type=2 OR type=7) AND cache_id=&1 ",$cache_id);

 

English translation: If cache_logs.deleted=1, it doesn't count in your find count.

 

From a processing standpoint not money. Instead of just deleting a log you would have the overhead of checking all existing finds to see if they qualify for a souvenir.

 

That little bit of code only is concerned with finds and that is relatively simple as you are only looking for logs that are not deleted and have a status of found and its only pulling from a single table. Where souvenirs are concerned there would be one of those(in some form)for each souvenir each with a cross reference to the cache table to get information such as location or type. But souvenirs are not calculated on the fly and are most likely populated in a separate table so it's a quick access when someone looks at the souvenir page. So each of these would involve a precheck to see if a record already existed in the souvenir table and then an insert if the find met the criteria.

Link to comment

While looking for an event I could attend in August, I noticed two different cases where someone had logged the event as "attended" a couple of weeks before it was scheduled to take place. In one case the CO deleted his smiley, but several days later he still has both the "socializer" and the "achiever" souvenirs. (No he did not attend any other events, in fact he had exactly one of each type of find for the souvenir, each with "tftc" logs) Aside from the irony of cheating to get a badge that says you are a socializer, I wondered about why the souvenir doesn't disappear.

In a similar situation, I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared! OK, I don't know anything about computer programming, but couldn't this work the same way for corrected souvenirs?

I am sure it could, but I am not sure the weight of such a task. You would need a procedure that would go through every find the user had and see if any of them qualified them for a souvenir. You would then have to run a procedure every time a log was deleted or changed from Found It. There are people with quite a few finds and going through each one on a delete could be costly to performance.

 

At this point it seems to only do that check once on posting and then it just flips the souvenir flag or adds the souvenir id, user id, and date to a reference table.

 

It shouldn't be that hard to have a database trigger on deletions or updates.

 

If a log was deleted or the log type was changed, flag the user for souvenir regeneration. The system can already identify which souvenir(s) a particular log would have earned, so go through those souvenirs and check the user still qualifies for them.

I am not saying its not possible, but it is much more costly than the current process for minimal benefit.

 

As things stand the souvenirs mean next to nothing. If they are based on actual caching that's one thing but as it stands anyone can armchair log anything to get the souvenirs and even if the log is deleted they still collect the souvenirs.

 

It's a bit pointless having the souvenirs if the system is so easy to cheat for anyone so inclined.

Souvenir - a thing that is kept as a reminder of a person, place, or event. If someone goes to ebay and buys a I visited Niagra Falls tee shirt, that doesn't make the memories attached to the shirt you bought, while in Niagra Falls, any less valuable.

Link to comment

A souvenir can be earned by multiple logs on multiple caches. If you earned a souvenir for finding a cache in Latvia, but then deleted/edited that log, the website would have to go through all of your logs and all caches you have found and check that you have or have not found another cache in Latvia. Worse still, it would have to check every single one of your logs against ALL the souvenirs possible.

 

That's a much bigger load in the server than simply checking one log (the found it log you just submitted) against souvenir criteria to see if you just earned one.

 

The system knows that the cache qualified you for a souvenir, because it awarded a souvenir for it.

 

So if a log that would qualify for a souvenir is changed, all it needs to do is check your other logs to see if any of them qualify for the souvenir in question.

 

If I logged a cache in Oregon and then deleted the log (or changed it to DNF) the system doesn't need to revalidate all my souvenirs. It just checks to see if I found any other caches in Oregon, and if I didn't then it deletes the Oregon souvenir.

 

How does the system know that a later cache logged didn't also qualify for the souvenir? Your method would have the souvenir disappear despite you having other logs that also qualify for it. It also needs to check if altering that log affects your validity of any other souvenir as we have already established that the log that earned you a souvenir might not be the one that causes it to be removed if the log is deleted/changed.

 

Edit - actually it seems that you agree with me, that all that checking would need to be done anyway, which would be a great deal of server processing for every deleted/changed log everywhere in the world.

Edited by funkymunkyzone
Link to comment

A souvenir can be earned by multiple logs on multiple caches. If you earned a souvenir for finding a cache in Latvia, but then deleted/edited that log, the website would have to go through all of your logs and all caches you have found and check that you have or have not found another cache in Latvia. Worse still, it would have to check every single one of your logs against ALL the souvenirs possible.

 

That's a much bigger load in the server than simply checking one log (the found it log you just submitted) against souvenir criteria to see if you just earned one.

 

The system knows that the cache qualified you for a souvenir, because it awarded a souvenir for it.

 

So if a log that would qualify for a souvenir is changed, all it needs to do is check your other logs to see if any of them qualify for the souvenir in question.

 

If I logged a cache in Oregon and then deleted the log (or changed it to DNF) the system doesn't need to revalidate all my souvenirs. It just checks to see if I found any other caches in Oregon, and if I didn't then it deletes the Oregon souvenir.

 

How does the system know that a later cache logged didn't also qualify for the souvenir? Your method would have the souvenir disappear despite you having other logs that also qualify for it.

Also I am not sure if the log and the souvenir are attached in the database. If they were that would be great and you could only look for the changed souvenir if not you are stuck re-qualifying all of them.

Link to comment

While looking for an event I could attend in August, I noticed two different cases where someone had logged the event as "attended" a couple of weeks before it was scheduled to take place. In one case the CO deleted his smiley, but several days later he still has both the "socializer" and the "achiever" souvenirs. (No he did not attend any other events, in fact he had exactly one of each type of find for the souvenir, each with "tftc" logs) Aside from the irony of cheating to get a badge that says you are a socializer, I wondered about why the souvenir doesn't disappear.

In a similar situation, I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared! OK, I don't know anything about computer programming, but couldn't this work the same way for corrected souvenirs?

I am sure it could, but I am not sure the weight of such a task. You would need a procedure that would go through every find the user had and see if any of them qualified them for a souvenir. You would then have to run a procedure every time a log was deleted or changed from Found It. There are people with quite a few finds and going through each one on a delete could be costly to performance.

 

At this point it seems to only do that check once on posting and then it just flips the souvenir flag or adds the souvenir id, user id, and date to a reference table.

 

It shouldn't be that hard to have a database trigger on deletions or updates.

 

If a log was deleted or the log type was changed, flag the user for souvenir regeneration. The system can already identify which souvenir(s) a particular log would have earned, so go through those souvenirs and check the user still qualifies for them.

I am not saying its not possible, but it is much more costly than the current process for minimal benefit.

 

I don't see how it would be more costly. And if the original coder put that in, I suppose it wouldn't cost a penny. Certainly if you delete your own find log, it decreases your find count by one. This is not from Geocaching.com, but an insiders look at another website. :ph34r:

 

$rsGeneralStat =sql("SELECT count(*) count FROM `cache_logs` WHERE cache_logs.deleted=0 AND (type=1 OR type=2 OR type=7) AND cache_id=&1 ",$cache_id);

 

English translation: If cache_logs.deleted=1, it doesn't count in your find count.

 

From a processing standpoint not money. Instead of just deleting a log you would have the overhead of checking all existing finds to see if they qualify for a souvenir.

 

That little bit of code only is concerned with finds and that is relatively simple as you are only looking for logs that are not deleted and have a status of found and its only pulling from a single table. Where souvenirs are concerned there would be one of those(in some form)for each souvenir each with a cross reference to the cache table to get information such as location or type. But souvenirs are not calculated on the fly and are most likely populated in a separate table so it's a quick access when someone looks at the souvenir page. So each of these would involve a precheck to see if a record already existed in the souvenir table and then an insert if the find met the criteria.

 

OK, I'm ready to post here now. :lol: I don't profess to know what the heck I'm talking about, but this website already uses it's "processing power" to check it's mysql database for the extremely rare case of log deletions and the find count. Would it be too much to throw in another AND statement in there to delete Souvies associated with a log deletion? I don't know, but I don't think it would be that big of a deal. Enlighten me, please. And I'm sure 99.9% of people who have read this far are all like WTF? :laughing:

 

And that is pretty much what the OP is asking, in layman's terms.

Link to comment

This is one reason I've never cared for the idea of the souvenirs. Back when they were still a new feature, I logged a will attend on an event, then wasn't able to make it after all. I never did log that I attended, but I still have a souvenir for that event. (10/10/10, event.)

 

I don't know if they ever changed it, but at the time there was no way for me to get rid of the souvenir. Now when I look at my souvenirs I see that and know I didn't do it. That makes the rest of mine somewhat useless to me. What good are they if I never earned them?

I think that's just because you found a cache on that day. The 10-10-10 souvenir wasn't associated with events -- Any finds got you the souvenir that day.

Link to comment

Also I am not sure if the log and the souvenir are attached in the database. If they were that would be great and you could only look for the changed souvenir if not you are stuck re-qualifying all of them.

 

I doubt they are linked well enough. Every log would have to know about every souvenir it qualifies for along with every other log that qualifies for the same souvenir(s) so that it could check every permutation of whether there are or are not any other logs remaining that still qualify for the souvenir(s)...

 

Way too complex, especially when things like showing the coordinate-corrected positions of multis and puzzles on the map is considered too server processor intensive!

Edited by funkymunkyzone
Link to comment

but this website already uses it's "processing power" to check it's mysql database for the extremely rare case of log deletions and the find count. Would it be too much to throw in another AND statement in there to delete Souvies associated with a log deletion?

 

Yes, the website does a LOT of processing all the time constantly with people accessing cache pages and seeing find counts etc etc. Counting things is pretty easy though, so when a log is added or deleted, a simple count will be performed. Not very processor intensive. Reconfirming every log from a user against every souvenir's criteria though.... just think if you had to do those manually how much more work, orders of magnitude of work, would be involved... every time a log was added, deleted or changed...

Link to comment

This is one reason I've never cared for the idea of the souvenirs. Back when they were still a new feature, I logged a will attend on an event, then wasn't able to make it after all. I never did log that I attended, but I still have a souvenir for that event. (10/10/10, event.)

 

I don't know if they ever changed it, but at the time there was no way for me to get rid of the souvenir. Now when I look at my souvenirs I see that and know I didn't do it. That makes the rest of mine somewhat useless to me. What good are they if I never earned them?

I think that's just because you found a cache on that day. The 10-10-10 souvenir wasn't associated with events -- Any finds got you the souvenir that day.

 

I'm pretty sure you can delete it now as that was brought up on our facebook page.

Link to comment

This is one reason I've never cared for the idea of the souvenirs. Back when they were still a new feature, I logged a will attend on an event, then wasn't able to make it after all. I never did log that I attended, but I still have a souvenir for that event. (10/10/10, event.)

 

I don't know if they ever changed it, but at the time there was no way for me to get rid of the souvenir. Now when I look at my souvenirs I see that and know I didn't do it. That makes the rest of mine somewhat useless to me. What good are they if I never earned them?

 

You can contact Groundspeak and they will delete it for you.

 

At the time they wouldn't(or couldn't)Delete it, if they will now I will give it a shot.

Link to comment

I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared!

I know of one cache that still has a favorite point from a person who logged a Found It, awarded a favorite point, then deleted their log. Maybe the code has changed since your experiment. Or maybe a DNF has a different effect on favorite points than a log deletion.

Link to comment

but this website already uses it's "processing power" to check it's mysql database for the extremely rare case of log deletions and the find count. Would it be too much to throw in another AND statement in there to delete Souvies associated with a log deletion?

 

Yes, the website does a LOT of processing all the time constantly with people accessing cache pages and seeing find counts etc etc. Counting things is pretty easy though, so when a log is added or deleted, a simple count will be performed. Not very processor intensive. Reconfirming every log from a user against every souvenir's criteria though.... just think if you had to do those manually how much more work, orders of magnitude of work, would be involved... every time a log was added, deleted or changed...

 

Counting is simple. If a Find log is deleted or changed the process is as simple as "update user set finds = finds-1 where name = 'team tisri'"

 

Souvenirs are marginally more complex, but since a Find log generates the souvenir automatically all the system needs to do is figure which, if any, souvenirs would have been awarded by the find in question and revalidate them. So if I changed a Find log that would have awarded the Oregon souvenir all the system needs to do is look for other finds in Oregon to see if I still qualify. There's no need to revalidate my Kentucky souvenir because the change I made doesn't affect it. Likewise if the souvenir was for a date the system just needs to check whether I found any other caches on that date.

 

The database doesn't even need to count such qualifying logs, it just needs to verify whether at least one such log exists. If I delete a Find log in Oregon all that is required of the database is an answer to the question "does team tisri have any remaining finds in Oregon?", and if the answer is that I don't then the souvenir is deleted.

Link to comment

...since a Find log generates the souvenir automatically all the system needs to do is figure which, if any, souvenirs would have been awarded by the find in question and revalidate them.

If things were set up that way, I agree that it wouldn't be as resource-costly. However, I suspect the system isn't set up this way. The only reason one would set it up in this way would be to allow for automatic deletion of souvenirs, and we've already determined that this doesn't happen.

Link to comment

I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared!

I know of one cache that still has a favorite point from a person who logged a Found It, awarded a favorite point, then deleted their log. Maybe the code has changed since your experiment. Or maybe a DNF has a different effect on favorite points than a log deletion.

Hmm... I delete logs on my webcam cache that do not meet the requirements of a photo taken by the webcam. I still have the favorite points...

Link to comment

I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared!

I know of one cache that still has a favorite point from a person who logged a Found It, awarded a favorite point, then deleted their log. Maybe the code has changed since your experiment. Or maybe a DNF has a different effect on favorite points than a log deletion.

Hmm... I delete logs on my webcam cache that do not meet the requirements of a photo taken by the webcam. I still have the favorite points...

Are you able to give us the caching name of someone who gave it a FP but later had their log deleted? I was under the impression that this could happen for a short time a while back, but that it had later been fixed. It would be interesting to hear that it's possible again.

Link to comment

I delete logs on my webcam cache that do not meet the requirements of a photo taken by the webcam. I still have the favorite points...

Harry contacted me off-list and I can confirm that there are 7 cachers who had their logs deleted, but still have favourite points awarded to the cache. This seems like a bug to me. It doesn't make sense for a cache to have favourite points awarded by a cacher who hasn't found the cache. I was sure this had been fixed at some point, so the bug may have resurfaced at some point.

Link to comment

...since a Find log generates the souvenir automatically all the system needs to do is figure which, if any, souvenirs would have been awarded by the find in question and revalidate them.

If things were set up that way, I agree that it wouldn't be as resource-costly. However, I suspect the system isn't set up this way. The only reason one would set it up in this way would be to allow for automatic deletion of souvenirs, and we've already determined that this doesn't happen.

 

We've determined that auto deletion doesn't happen already, but whenever I've earned a souvenir it has appeared the moment I've submitted the Find log. So the system knows that a Find qualifies for a souvenir. Presumably what it does is figure whether the Find earns a souvenir, then looks to see whether the user already has the souvenir, although whatever it does it should be easy enough to work with.

 

All it needs to do is figure whether a user with no finds would earn a souvenir based on the find in question, and at a stroke it knows whether to revalidate that souvenir. If the souvenirs are awarded based on some combination of location, cache type and date all it needs to do to revalidate is to determine whether the user has any Find logs remaining that match the souvenir's criteria.

Link to comment

Which is still a lot more processing that just flipping a deleted flag in a single record.

 

... and still a lot less processing than "show me all the caches nearest to a point I specified, that I haven't found, that aren't disabled, that have a difficulty rating of less than 4 and a terrain rating of less than 4.5, don't have the Needs Maintenance flag set, and are within 15 miles of that point I specified".

 

Groundspeak lets premium members run such a query 10 times every single day. If processing a log deletion was unacceptably slow it could flag users as needing souvenir revalidation and process them in batches, like it does with pocket queries.

Link to comment

There are more than a few people who, like me, think that attending events should not be included in the same overall find count as real caches. So I log events with notes. But notes won't qualify you for a souvenir. The solution is to log it as Attended, then change it to a Note.

 

Like the ability for non-premium members to log premium caches, this is a "loophole" that I doubt Groundspeak is in any hurry to fix, because, while a few may abuse it, it does serve a purpose.

Link to comment

I remember when favorite points came out I did an experiment where I logged a cache as found, gave it a favorite, and then changed the log to DNF. The favorite point disappeared!

I know of one cache that still has a favorite point from a person who logged a Found It, awarded a favorite point, then deleted their log. Maybe the code has changed since your experiment. Or maybe a DNF has a different effect on favorite points than a log deletion.

Hmm... I delete logs on my webcam cache that do not meet the requirements of a photo taken by the webcam. I still have the favorite points...

Are you able to give us the caching name of someone who gave it a FP but later had their log deleted? I was under the impression that this could happen for a short time a while back, but that it had later been fixed. It would be interesting to hear that it's possible again.

This is getting OT but very interesting. The reason I did the "favorites" experiment was because there WERE a couple of caches I could not find, but I enjoyed the hunt so much I wanted to give the point. Now it seems there were a couple of ways I could have done that.

1) just delete the find, and maybe post a DNF on a different day

2) email the owner and have him/her delete my find, and post a DNF on a different day.

Sound about right?

Link to comment

I made it right today by finding a crappy "?" cache. (The cache was in an abandoned outhouse).

 

Good to hear you can sleep at night now. :P

 

I did something much worse, which is when this thread started, I went a logged a bunch of my own caches to get the souvies! I've been a good girl, though and went out and redeemed myself by finding the required caches, unfortunately the dates on the souvies remain permanently screwed up. :lol:

 

It feels good to be bad. B)

Edited by The_Incredibles_
Link to comment

Like the ability for non-premium members to log premium caches, this is a "loophole" that I doubt Groundspeak is in any hurry to fix, because, while a few may abuse it, it does serve a purpose.

 

Not a loophole, that is the way it is intended to work with MoCs, hence the reason they rush to fix it when it breaks.

 

As to the OP, it really does not affect anyone except those of us dealing with OCD that want our numbers (and subsequent souvenirs) to be accurate at all cost.

Link to comment

I have a 1 difficulty mystery cache. (Yes! Despite what people say about me, I do have a 1 difficulty mystery cache!) About a mile away, my nephew has a fairly easy EarthCache. This combo has attracted a number of August 2014 souvenir hunters. The last four finders (a group) have not responded to the request for answers for the EarthCache. We checked their personal page, and all four have received the "The Achiever" souvenir, even though their list of caches found does not include a log for "The Collector". It appears that they might have logged a cache that qualifies but either deleted their logs, or had them deleted by the cache owner. And it looks probable that their EarthCache finds will be deleted as well.

But they will still have their souvenirs! Cheat, cheat, dolphin feet!

Link to comment

I just noticed today that there was a name on one of my cache page logs that was not in the physical log when I checked on it. I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt and check again in case I just missed it seeing as I was doing regular maintenance and not specifically checking logs for inaccuracies. The cacher is from another country and was visiting Oregon for a few weeks in August. They completed the 7 while here. None of this seems all that unlikely, but they never signed the physical log. There was one cache in their home country which was logged on the same day as a few from here, but that could have been an entry error. Oh, Lord. I'm becoming one of you! I've actually spent time looking this guys (gals) profile up to check for discrepancies! :o I just don't get the point of cheating with no gain. I don't agree with cheating anyway, but at least understand when someone does it to try to get ahead. But a cartoon pic on a page on the computer which, other than by people falling into the dismal hole of becoming cache NSA :ph34r: , will never be seen? Why go through the trouble?

Link to comment

I have a 1 difficulty mystery cache. (Yes! Despite what people say about me, I do have a 1 difficulty mystery cache!) About a mile away, my nephew has a fairly easy EarthCache. This combo has attracted a number of August 2014 souvenir hunters. The last four finders (a group) have not responded to the request for answers for the EarthCache. We checked their personal page, and all four have received the "The Achiever" souvenir, even though their list of caches found does not include a log for "The Collector". It appears that they might have logged a cache that qualifies but either deleted their logs, or had them deleted by the cache owner. And it looks probable that their EarthCache finds will be deleted as well.

But they will still have their souvenirs! Cheat, cheat, dolphin feet!

 

Very creative! :laughing: Honestly, I would just laugh at them.

Link to comment

I have a 1 difficulty mystery cache. (Yes! Despite what people say about me, I do have a 1 difficulty mystery cache!) About a mile away, my nephew has a fairly easy EarthCache. This combo has attracted a number of August 2014 souvenir hunters. The last four finders (a group) have not responded to the request for answers for the EarthCache. We checked their personal page, and all four have received the "The Achiever" souvenir, even though their list of caches found does not include a log for "The Collector". It appears that they might have logged a cache that qualifies but either deleted their logs, or had them deleted by the cache owner. And it looks probable that their EarthCache finds will be deleted as well.

But they will still have their souvenirs! Cheat, cheat, dolphin feet!

 

Very creative! :laughing: Honestly, I would just laugh at them.

 

I know a Brazilian geocacher that, to get all the August 2013 daily souvenirs would log a found in each day and then delete it... Just to get all the souvenirs!!!!

Link to comment

I have a 1 difficulty mystery cache. (Yes! Despite what people say about me, I do have a 1 difficulty mystery cache!) About a mile away, my nephew has a fairly easy EarthCache. This combo has attracted a number of August 2014 souvenir hunters. The last four finders (a group) have not responded to the request for answers for the EarthCache. We checked their personal page, and all four have received the "The Achiever" souvenir, even though their list of caches found does not include a log for "The Collector". It appears that they might have logged a cache that qualifies but either deleted their logs, or had them deleted by the cache owner. And it looks probable that their EarthCache finds will be deleted as well.

But they will still have their souvenirs! Cheat, cheat, dolphin feet!

 

Very creative! :laughing: Honestly, I would just laugh at them.

 

I find it incredible that you would find deliberate cheating 'creative'.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...