Do you use the ignore list?

[+BulldogBlitz]

I too would like to see a "Ignore this cache owner", but the site probably figures that's not playing nice.

Odd though, as I can ignore posters here...

 

ignore cacher would present one superficial problem: what happens if that particular cacher comes for one of your caches and marks it as "NM" for some legit reason?

 

i'm pretty free and liberal with my use of the ignore list though, and ignore user would come in handy, even if there were the issue above.

[Mr.Yuck]

I too would like to see a "Ignore this cache owner", but the site probably figures that's not playing nice.

Odd though, as I can ignore posters here...

 

ignore cacher would present one superficial problem: what happens if that particular cacher comes for one of your caches and marks it as "NM" for some legit reason?

 

 

Absolutely nothing. Ignoring a cache is ignoring a cache id in the database. Ignoring all caches by user x would be (if it existed), ignoring all cache id's owned by user x.

 

If that makes any sense. Believe me, I'm no database guru.

 

I believe we were once specifically told (paraphrasing) "it's never gonna happen", and probably for the not playing nice reason cerberus1 states.

[+Walts Hunting]

GSAK allows ignore cacher in the API call. Also you can filter for a cacher in the db and them add them all in a single click with a macro to the ignore list. I've done that twice.

[+sholomar]

I used to want to but not anymore.... Ive become more tolerant of micros and power trails ... but you must keep in mind I live in a fairly rural area with low pop density.

 

Also cricket wireless has a 10 gb data cap which makes data no issue....

Edited October 9, 2014 by sholomar

[+edscott]

I use it for puzzles that I don't intend to ever attempt to solve and for "needle in the haystack" micros that I've already spent time on and have no intention of ever returning.

[+niraD]

I wish you could make the Ignore list public

You could create a public bookmark list and then add all caches on your ignore list to it.

[+Walts Hunting]

Why would you want it public? Bare you aware that if you make it public if would be listed on the webpage of every cache?

Edited October 10, 2014 by Walts Hunting

[+sbell111]

Why would you want it public? Bare you aware that if you make it public if would be listed on the webpage of every cache?

I think that that's his point and the best reason why ignore lists shouldn't be made public.

[+Flintstone5611]

I never use the ignore list. I don't need to clear out my map and so the caches that I won't find don't bother me. I just don't see the point of eradicating them from my vision. There is no cache that so bothers me that I want it out of my sight. I still don't get the concept in all honesty.

[Mr.Yuck]

I never use the ignore list. I don't need to clear out my map and so the caches that I won't find don't bother me. I just don't see the point of eradicating them from my vision. There is no cache that so bothers me that I want it out of my sight. I still don't get the concept in all honesty.

 

Welcome back Flintstone5611!! Yeah, I personally know like 2 people who use the ignore list besides me. If I'm not mistaken, one time there was a thread here about "enhancements" (i.e. ignore all caches by a hider), we were told that "almost no one is even using the ignore list". I will say one thing, it works. If YOU find a cache on my ignore list, it doesn't even show to me if I was looking at your list of finds. Ignored caches are pretty much eradicated from your view throughout the website.

[+Flintstone5611]

I never use the ignore list. I don't need to clear out my map and so the caches that I won't find don't bother me. I just don't see the point of eradicating them from my vision. There is no cache that so bothers me that I want it out of my sight. I still don't get the concept in all honesty.

 

Welcome back Flintstone5611!! Yeah, I personally know like 2 people who use the ignore list besides me. If I'm not mistaken, one time there was a thread here about "enhancements" (i.e. ignore all caches by a hider), we were told that "almost no one is even using the ignore list". I will say one thing, it works. If YOU find a cache on my ignore list, it doesn't even show to me if I was looking at your list of finds. Ignored caches are pretty much eradicated from your view throughout the website.

 

Thanks Mr.Yuck, good to be back. The funny thing with ignore lists and their clearly effective methods is that it would probably bother me to know that there is one out there and I can't see it. I must be on some kind of "Attention Hog" list, lol.

[+niraD]

I never use the ignore list. I don't need to clear out my map and so the caches that I won't find don't bother me. I just don't see the point of eradicating them from my vision. There is no cache that so bothers me that I want it out of my sight. I still don't get the concept in all honesty.

In my case, it isn't that the caches on my ignore list bother me. I really don't care about the caches themselves. What bothers me is that they clutter up my list of nearest unfound puzzles when I'm looking for a list of puzzles to work on. The fact that they appear on my "list of puzzles to work on" is what bothers me.

 

When I'm viewing my "list of puzzles to work on", I don't want to see challenge caches that don't require puzzle solving. I don't want to see challenge caches that require thousands of miles of travel (for caches with an obscure difficulty–terrain combination, or an obscure Hidden date). So I use my ignore list.

[+Flintstone5611]

I never use the ignore list. I don't need to clear out my map and so the caches that I won't find don't bother me. I just don't see the point of eradicating them from my vision. There is no cache that so bothers me that I want it out of my sight. I still don't get the concept in all honesty.

In my case, it isn't that the caches on my ignore list bother me. I really don't care about the caches themselves. What bothers me is that they clutter up my list of nearest unfound puzzles when I'm looking for a list of puzzles to work on. The fact that they appear on my "list of puzzles to work on" is what bothers me.

 

When I'm viewing my "list of puzzles to work on", I don't want to see challenge caches that don't require puzzle solving. I don't want to see challenge caches that require thousands of miles of travel (for caches with an obscure difficulty–terrain combination, or an obscure Hidden date). So I use my ignore list.

 

I get that, if there was hundreds of them. How many could there be in an area you are looking at? Within my own area there is maybe a couple that I won't bother with and that is within my city that has well over 1000 caches to find. It would have to be some crazy coincidence to have thus huge list of caches locally that interferes with your viewing those that you desire. Not trying to be argumentative just wondering, maybe I have a great caching area, I can't imagine casting off half the available caches.

[+niraD]

I get that, if there was hundreds of them. How many could there be in an area you are looking at?

Not many. I have fewer than a dozen challenge caches on my ignore list. But when a challenge cache that I expect never to complete appears on one of my "nearest unfound puzzles" lists, it's a simple click to ignore it.

 

If challenge caches had their own type, then I wouldn't use my ignore list at all. (But that's another topic.)

 

Within my own area there is maybe a couple that I won't bother with and that is within my city that has well over 1000 caches to find. It would have to be some crazy coincidence to have thus huge list of caches locally that interferes with your viewing those that you desire. Not trying to be argumentative just wondering, maybe I have a great caching area, I can't imagine casting off half the available caches.

Why does it have to be "half the available caches" before it's worth using the ignore list? For me, it was just a single challenge cache that always showed up on my "puzzles to work on" list. After a few puzzle-solving sessions, I got tired of seeing it on the list, knowing that it wasn't a puzzle, and that I'd probably never complete the challenge.

 

<click>

 

That's all it took. No trumpets, no fanfare. One moment I had an empty ignore list. The next moment I was one of the few geocaching.com members who actually uses the ignore list.

[+Flintstone5611]

I get that, if there was hundreds of them. How many could there be in an area you are looking at?

Not many. I have fewer than a dozen challenge caches on my ignore list. But when a challenge cache that I expect never to complete appears on one of my "nearest unfound puzzles" lists, it's a simple click to ignore it.

 

If challenge caches had their own type, then I wouldn't use my ignore list at all. (But that's another topic.)

 

Within my own area there is maybe a couple that I won't bother with and that is within my city that has well over 1000 caches to find. It would have to be some crazy coincidence to have thus huge list of caches locally that interferes with your viewing those that you desire. Not trying to be argumentative just wondering, maybe I have a great caching area, I can't imagine casting off half the available caches.

Why does it have to be "half the available caches" before it's worth using the ignore list? For me, it was just a single challenge cache that always showed up on my "puzzles to work on" list. After a few puzzle-solving sessions, I got tired of seeing it on the list, knowing that it wasn't a puzzle, and that I'd probably never complete the challenge.

 

<click>

 

That's all it took. No trumpets, no fanfare. One moment I had an empty ignore list. The next moment I was one of the few geocaching.com members who actually uses the ignore list.

 

I find that interesting.

[+Great Scott!]

Current ignore list is around 2200. Micros in shrubbery, puzzles, kayak and challenges mostly. Plus others I know I will never get to.

 

Same here. Plus PNGs, geoart series (don't want to sit around doing hundreds of puzzles that lead to PNGs) and most power trails.

Over 6000 geocaches on the ignore list.

[+Walts Hunting]

It is interesting to look at different areas when i travel. Went to San Mateo CA and did a search for the nearest 2000 caches and 600+ were mystery. Going to Palm Springs and the nearest 2,000 had 40.

[+DubbleG]

There are a couple of COs in my area that don't maintain their caches. I grew tired of finding containers with mold, pulpy logs, etc. and now just ignore their caches.

[+jwmoe1973]

I got to thinking about this topic while out and about today. I frequently use the ignore list in conjunction with my watch list. I'll put temp disabled caches or caches with CO's who post "I'll get out to maintain it soon" in both lists. They stay off the map so I'm not actively looking and waiting, but I still get notices of any action on them. If they're archived, I simply remove them from both lists. Likewise, if a worthy cache gets enabled, I clear it from the lists so it repopulates on the map til I go find it.

[+marc_54140]

2784 and growing .........

[+WRASTRO]

I don't find so many caches that I feel there is any need for me to filter. I can easily read each cache page and choose which ones I want to try to find. I expect the vast majority of cachers can easily fit into this model if they chose to. Sadly there are many cachers who proudly proclaim they do not read the cache pages. In my opinion, not reading the cache page reduces the cache to a number rather than the experience the cache hider hoped you would experience.

[+Pablo Mac]

I ignore yard caches out of respect for the cache owner's neighbors. I wouldn't want my neighbors worrying about strangers lurking around my property at all odd hours of day and night.

 

 

I recommend ignoring a few of my caches, like this one, for example.

[+-CJ-]

Tried to use that function but wasn't impressed by it. Ignoring caches in my area made it more difficult to choose place for my own new caches.

[+Walts Hunting]

It shouldnt. Just run a query and dont check the Not On My Ignore List nd you will get them.

[+-CJ-]

Not that many caches that I wished to ignore; however, pretty much work with placing and maintenance of my own caches. So, don't want to do additional PQs for this purpose.

[+popokiiti]

I don't use the ignore list - I know what I won't be seeking....