Congrats, You're Jeremy Irish today

[+sbell111]

I would hire developers who listen to some of the suggestions made by the community. This is a community based hobby and yet whenever they roll out some new feature, it's almost always something no one was asking for or really wants. However, the things that people have been begging for for years (nano size, fixing trackable inventories, powertrail icons, etc) remain in the "we're discussing it" status until the end of time.

This is a community driven game, but the developers work for a company. That company has to make decisions that are in it's best interest, not just roll with the whims of the loudest members of the community.

[+sbell111]

If I were in charge for a day, I'd kill off challenge caches.

[+Team Microdot]

I would hire developers who listen to some of the suggestions made by the community. This is a community based hobby and yet whenever they roll out some new feature, it's almost always something no one was asking for or really wants. However, the things that people have been begging for for years (nano size, fixing trackable inventories, powertrail icons, etc) remain in the "we're discussing it" status until the end of time.

This is a community driven game, but the developers work for a company. That company has to make decisions that are in it's best interest, not just roll with the whims of the loudest members of the community.

 

I would struggle to describe features that large numbers of people have been asking for years as whims.

 

That being said - nano size and powertrail icons wouldn't be very high on my wish list.

[Mr.Yuck]

With your new power over the GS Dev team; what is the ONE thing you want them to change?

Migrate all the servers to Linux?

 

Interesting. Just a couple weeks ago in another thread, I said "surely the servers run on Linux and Apache". That is not the case?

 

No the geocaching.com frontend is running on Microsoft IIs: http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report/?url=www.geocaching.com

As are the forum servers: http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report/?url=forums.Groundspeak.com

 

the backend databases etc could be on Linux, but I would expect they'll stick to the one infrastructure and it will be Windows all round.

 

Eh, must be a Seattle thing, since GS has always been based there. The same way most Canadians still use Blackberry's.

[4wheelin_fool]

I'd lock any account that did not have a verifiable email address. Create a variety of nifty new icons, breaking the ? into several forms. Bring back virtuals, but only due to the constant cries for their return. There would be very few restrictions on them, only a flat $100 fee and an acknowledgement that they would be auto archived if the CO failed to log in for 3 months, with all proceeds being donated to the COs select charity. I'd also ban all threads with "Jeremy Irish" in the title.

[+cerberus1]

I would hire developers who listen to some of the suggestions made by the community. This is a community based hobby and yet whenever they roll out some new feature, it's almost always something no one was asking for or really wants. However, the things that people have been begging for for years (nano size, fixing trackable inventories, powertrail icons, etc) remain in the "we're discussing it" status until the end of time.

This is a community driven game, but the developers work for a company. That company has to make decisions that are in it's best interest, not just roll with the whims of the loudest members of the community.

Aren't those "loudest members" usually long-time premium members (who've invested more than a few weeks into the hobby/game), who also are the company's long-term cash cow?

Alienating long-time members doesn't seem like a bright best-interest decision to me.

[+dprovan]

I'd take the day off and go geocaching.

[+niraD]

Nobody expects to be Jeremy Irish for a day! Amongst my suggestions are to require validated email addresses, to create a new type for challenge caches, to create a user option for plain text email, to add an attribute for numbers run trails, and to add a nano size... and to make corrected coordinates work everywhere for all caches. Oh dadgum... I can't say it. Someone else will have to say it.

[+Panther&Pine]

I'd lock any account that did not have a verifiable email address. Create a variety of nifty new icons, breaking the ? into several forms. Bring back virtuals, but only due to the constant cries for their return. There would be very few restrictions on them, only a flat $100 fee and an acknowledgement that they would be auto archived if the CO failed to log in for 3 months, with all proceeds being donated to the COs select charity. I'd also ban all threads with "Jeremy Irish" in the title.

Platinum perk?

[+bflentje]

If I were Jeremy Irish for a day, I would go out of my way to eradicate all of the inconsistencies of the game. Some examples are (not even close to being complete)..

 

- Either allow cemetery hides or don't. Right now it's different by state.

- If moving caches aren't allowed don't hide a geocache on the space station. It moves.

- Either allow commercialism or don't. Joe Blow can't name a cache with Walmart but yet we get branded travelers and other junk shoved down our throat.

- Consistently enforce the guidelines across ALL REVIEWERS. The Geocaching BLOG is a prime example, caches highlighted that cross the line of guidelines yet locals that hide similar caches get squashed.

 

Oh, and I'd allow webcam maintenance to happen. Not new webcams but let those that exist to be maintained.

[+DanOCan]

So today I'm waving a magic wand and you get to be Jeremy for one post, that can ONLY cover ONE item to be changed.

With your new power over the GS Dev team; what is the ONE thing you want them to change?

Keep it clear, concise and plausible, so not overhauling the entire PQ format (unless you can get that into ONE paragraph or image).

The first two things that came to my mind were "Deem that challenge caches are ALRs and therefore are now optional" and "Eliminate power trails". I was trying to think of some change that could bring both of those things to fruition at the same time. Since I couldn't think of anything, I opted to deal with power trails over challenge caches since they are harder to Ignore. I came up with this single instruction to the developers:

 

"Hide all the Found/Hidden counts."

 

I think you hide the numbers and a lot of people would lose motivation to place a large series of [usually] mindless caches designed for no other reason than to inflate those numbers.

[+Panther&Pine]

So today I'm waving a magic wand and you get to be Jeremy for one post, that can ONLY cover ONE item to be changed.

With your new power over the GS Dev team; what is the ONE thing you want them to change?

Keep it clear, concise and plausible, so not overhauling the entire PQ format (unless you can get that into ONE paragraph or image).

The first two things that came to my mind were "Deem that challenge caches are ALRs and therefore are now optional" and "Eliminate power trails". I was trying to think of some change that could bring both of those things to fruition at the same time. Since I couldn't think of anything, I opted to deal with power trails over challenge caches since they are harder to Ignore. I came up with this single instruction to the developers:

 

"Hide all the Found/Hidden counts."

 

I think you hide the numbers and a lot of people would lose motivation to place a large series of [usually] mindless caches designed for no other reason than to inflate those numbers.

Humm, I wonder what the stats page would look like without totals, just the charts.

[+NJSquirrel]

The return of locationless caches so we can go around town photographing yellow jeeps and flagpoles again to get credit for a cache.

 

Nah, seriously, my pet peeve, update the benchmarking database.

I'm not sure that is something GS can do, but heck it is always worth asking.

I'd like to see this too. I've noticed other sites have a more current DB of newer benchmarks. GC could at least update the database on a yearly basic through cooperation with NGS or whoever manages the benchmark database.

[Mr.Yuck]

If I were Jeremy Irish for a day, I would go out of my way to eradicate all of the inconsistencies of the game. Some examples are (not even close to being complete)..

 

- Either allow cemetery hides or don't. Right now it's different by state.

- If moving caches aren't allowed don't hide a geocache on the space station. It moves.

- Either allow commercialism or don't. Joe Blow can't name a cache with Walmart but yet we get branded travelers and other junk shoved down our throat.

- Consistently enforce the guidelines across ALL REVIEWERS. The Geocaching BLOG is a prime example, caches highlighted that cross the line of guidelines yet locals that hide similar caches get squashed.

 

Oh, and I'd allow webcam maintenance to happen. Not new webcams but let those that exist to be maintained.

 

Wow, excellent points all around. It all boils down to inconsistencies, I suppose. I don't want to get in trouble with my own State reviewers, but it appears, on the surface, that they have flip flopped on whether or not cemetery hides are allowed without explicit permission about 3 times.

[+narcissa]

If I were Jeremy Irish for a day, I would go out of my way to eradicate all of the inconsistencies of the game. Some examples are (not even close to being complete)..

 

- Either allow cemetery hides or don't. Right now it's different by state.

- If moving caches aren't allowed don't hide a geocache on the space station. It moves.

- Either allow commercialism or don't. Joe Blow can't name a cache with Walmart but yet we get branded travelers and other junk shoved down our throat.

- Consistently enforce the guidelines across ALL REVIEWERS. The Geocaching BLOG is a prime example, caches highlighted that cross the line of guidelines yet locals that hide similar caches get squashed.

 

Oh, and I'd allow webcam maintenance to happen. Not new webcams but let those that exist to be maintained.

 

Wow, excellent points all around. It all boils down to inconsistencies, I suppose. I don't want to get in trouble with my own State reviewers, but it appears, on the surface, that they have flip flopped on whether or not cemetery hides are allowed without explicit permission about 3 times.

 

If Groundspeak tried to be "consistent" about cache placements, we wouldn't be allowed to place caches anywhere. Some places allow them in cemeteries, some places don't. Some places allow them on state/province park land, some places don't. Some cities have blanket permission, some don't. I think the reviewers do a pretty good job of navigating all these issues.

 

Ultimately, the cache owner is responsible for checking permission before placing the cache.

[+Mudfrog]

I would hire developers who listen to some of the suggestions made by the community. This is a community based hobby and yet whenever they roll out some new feature, it's almost always something no one was asking for or really wants. However, the things that people have been begging for for years (nano size, fixing trackable inventories, powertrail icons, etc) remain in the "we're discussing it" status until the end of time.

 

This would indeed be nice but i'm not holding my breath!

 

Replying to the OP, there's been some great ideas and it would be tough to decide on just one. I think i'd provide us the ability to filter for favorite points in pocket queries...

[+Chrysalides]

"Deem that challenge caches are ALRs and therefore are now optional"

But they are optional. You don't have to find them.

[+niraD]

If Groundspeak tried to be "consistent" about cache placements, we wouldn't be allowed to place caches anywhere. Some places allow them in cemeteries, some places don't. Some places allow them on state/province park land, some places don't. Some cities have blanket permission, some don't. I think the reviewers do a pretty good job of navigating all these issues.

My thoughts exactly. The consistency is that adequate permission is required. If you can't get permission (or your locality bans caches) at a cemetery/park/business/church/whatever, then you can't hide a cache there. If you can, then you can.

 

That's consistency.

[+AKStafford]

Require email validation... Or just get rid of the free into app all together...

[Mr.Yuck]

If Groundspeak tried to be "consistent" about cache placements, we wouldn't be allowed to place caches anywhere. Some places allow them in cemeteries, some places don't. Some places allow them on state/province park land, some places don't. Some cities have blanket permission, some don't. I think the reviewers do a pretty good job of navigating all these issues.

My thoughts exactly. The consistency is that adequate permission is required. If you can't get permission (or your locality bans caches) at a cemetery/park/business/church/whatever, then you can't hide a cache there. If you can, then you can.

 

That's consistency.

 

Yes, but neither me (who was quoted by Narcissa), or Bflentje (whom I quoted), were referring to any such situations in our inconsistency statements.

[+L0ne.R]

 

"Hide all the Found/Hidden counts."

 

I think you hide the numbers and a lot of people would lose motivation to place a large series of [usually] mindless caches designed for no other reason than to inflate those numbers.

 

Yes!

[+gpsblake]

 

"Hide all the Found/Hidden counts."

 

Should be a user option on all accounts.

[+thebruce0]

Tasty can of worms this thread is!

[+Team Microdot]

Tasty can of worms this thread is!

 

Or a creative melting pot full of opportunity - depending on your viewpoint

[+thebruce0]

Another opportunity to restate and munch on ideas that have been discussed and hashed out in other threads; more opportunities for proponents of ideas to debate with critical responders who disagree.

Hey, if everyone can be respectful and understanding, mutually working towards solutions (or resigning to no solution) that's best for as many people as possible, that's grrrrrreat! Otherwise, it'll be yet another bubbling melting pot of ideas and criticisms and disagreements and debates.

 

Anyway, I will derail no longer...

 

If I were Jeremy for a day, I'd continue promoting and evolving geocaching to provide a fun, entertaining experience for as many people as possible, knowing we have worldwide cultures and technologies evolving daily.

 

Now if I were Jeremy with all the power and capability in the world for a day, I'd provide a custom website interface for every type of user so that everyone got what they wanted in the best way possible, and it didn't have any collateral effects on any other user! #everyonehappy

 

ETA: I already failed. (as apparently did a lot of repliers )

"With your new power over the GS Dev team; what is the ONE thing you want them to change?"

* one thing

* to change

* with only the GS dev team

 

In that case, realistically, 1) require email validation. That, to me, is the most significant problem that can be most easily fixed with the web system.

Edited October 16, 2014 by thebruce0

[+Panther&Pine]

Tasty can of worms this thread is!

I see it more of a way to offer ideas in a positive manner, not just "I HATE it, change it back".

I'd love to see a poll done by GS using these things, you know rate these things in order of what you'd like to see changed the most. But that is unlikely.

I've been interested to see what are issues still, and what seems to have dropped off the want list.

I've also been interested to see how many cachers can't pick just one.

[+Team Microdot]

Another opportunity to restate and munch on ideas that have been discussed and hashed out in other threads; more opportunities for proponents of ideas to debate with critical responders who disagree.

 

I did indicate that points of view would be coloured by subjective filters

 

Hey, if everyone can be respectful and understanding, mutually working towards solutions (or resigning to no solution) that's best for as many people as possible, that's grrrrrreat!

 

Yes - wouldn't it be grrrrrreat if Groundspeak seized the opportunity

 

Otherwise, it'll be yet another bubbling melting pot of ideas and criticisms and disagreements and debates.

 

Everyday life in forum land.

 

If I were Jeremy for a day, I'd continue promoting and evolving contributing what I could to the evolution of geocaching to provide a fun, entertaining experience for as many people as possible, knowing we have worldwide cultures and technologies evolving daily.

Let's not forget the contributions made by the entire geocaching community to the evolution of geocaching

 

Now if I were Jeremy with all the power and capability in the world for a day, I'd provide a custom website interface for every type of user so that everyone got what they wanted in the best way possible, and it didn't have any collateral effects on any other user! #everyonehappy

 

An admirable aspiration - but not really necessary or realistic. Engage in open dialogue with the community, analyse their feedback, implement ideas which are considered useful by the majority of users = good enough - IMHO.

[+Team Microdot]

I'd love to see a poll done by GS using these things, you know rate these things in order of what you'd like to see changed the most. But that is unlikely.

 

To my way of thinking - it's as simple as this. And why this doesn't actually seem to happen just baffles me

[+thebruce0]

Hey, if everyone can be respectful and understanding, mutually working towards solutions (or resigning to no solution) that's best for as many people as possible, that's grrrrrreat!

Yes - wouldn't it be grrrrrreat if Groundspeak seized the opportunity

I choose to believe they watch from afar, and work in their own environment where they can work without the distraction of arguments and extremely emotional and quite often insulting users... both can happen at the same time. It just means we don't get to see (or judge accurately) what happens "over there". We only see what comes out the door.

 

Otherwise, it'll be yet another bubbling melting pot of ideas and criticisms and disagreements and debates.

Everyday life in forum land.

Sadly, yep

 

If I were Jeremy for a day, I'd continue promoting and evolving contributing what I could to the evolution of geocaching to provide a fun, entertaining experience for as many people as possible, knowing we have worldwide cultures and technologies evolving daily.

Let's not forget the contributions made by the entire geocaching community to the evolution of geocaching

I did not say the community does not contribute to the pastime.

But geocaching.com is Groundspeak. Therefore, what they do promotes and evolves geocaching.com. There are other sites. Geocaching as a pastime doesn't require Groundspeak. But in the context of "being Jeremy", continuing to promote and evolve geocaching (as far as Groundspeak is concerned) to provide a fun, entertaining experience for as many people as possible, is certainly something I would do.

 

Now if I were Jeremy with all the power and capability in the world for a day, I'd provide a custom website interface for every type of user so that everyone got what they wanted in the best way possible, and it didn't have any collateral effects on any other user! #everyonehappy

 

An admirable aspiration - but not really necessary or realistic.

... I would think that having all the power and the capability in the world for a day would not be realistic. As that was clearly a tongue-in-cheek response, I don't disagree.

 

Engage in open dialogue with the community, analyse their feedback, implement ideas which are considered useful by the majority of users = good enough - IMHO.

 

How many years old is the forum?

I think they've been down that road long ago, and the way things are now is due to the way things went when they used to do that. That is, "open dialogue" becomes arguing and strong opinions, and distraction for the development team.

No, I think the better way is to have a few forum community people (as they have) interact with the community where feasible and deemed productive, in an effort to sift away the wheat from the chaff and bring to the 'inner circle', as it were. Middle-men. Interpreters. Thick-skinned front-line moderators who see the bigger picture.

 

How about this, maybe someone could set up a 3rd party suggestion system, a feature request system, which can accomplish what Groundspeak's old system had - but it would be out of their hands. It could be managed, maintained, moderated by respectable individuals from the community who could do the volunteer work of ensuring that suggestions and bug requests that are most important to the greatest number of people bubble up to the top and can be hashed out productively or dismissed, instead of having them bouncing around repeatedly in the relatively secluded echo chamber which the forums tend to become.

Edited October 16, 2014 by thebruce0

[+tozainamboku]

"Deem that challenge caches are ALRs and therefore are now optional"

But they are optional. You don't have to find them.

ALRs are Additional Logging Requirements, not Additional Finding Requirements.

 

If there was a way to implement additioal finding requirements, that is what I would do. But even hiding the coordinates until you qualify to find a cache wouldn't stop someone who has gotten the coordinates from sharing them.

 

Since I can't think of a way to implement AFRs, if I were Jeremy I'd sell geocaching.com to Facebook or Google and go retire someplace nice where I wouldn't have to listen to all the whining.

[+OHail]

One that hasn't already been mentioned...the ability to search cache names that 'contain' a specific word, rather than 'starts with' a specific word.

 

+1 for specific icons for Challenge caches

 

It used to be "contain". It was changed to "starts with" 18 months to two years or so ago. I can't remember exactly but it was before Block Party in 2013 because I was trying to find the listing by searching using "Block Party" and got no results.

[+Chrysalides]

"Deem that challenge caches are ALRs and therefore are now optional"

But they are optional. You don't have to find them.

ALRs are Additional Logging Requirements, not Additional Finding Requirements.

 

If there was a way to implement additioal finding requirements, that is what I would do. But even hiding the coordinates until you qualify to find a cache wouldn't stop someone who has gotten the coordinates from sharing them.

I'm just going by what he said. I suppose what he really meant was that completing the challenge is now optional to logging a find. That seems silly. If you (as Jeremy Irish) really dislike challenges that much, why not just say that challenges are a form of ALR and should not be allowed?

 

... if I were Jeremy I'd sell geocaching.com to Facebook or Google and go retire someplace nice where I wouldn't have to listen to all the whining.

That's exactly what I'd do.

[+Manville Possum]

I'm going to install an ignore caches by user name feature, similar to the ignore cache feature. This will take care of the power trails in you PQ's.

[+thebruce0]

Since I can't think of a way to implement AFRs, if I were Jeremy I'd sell geocaching.com to Facebook or Google and go retire someplace nice where I wouldn't have to listen to all the whining.

 

Winner!

[+niraD]

Now if I were Jeremy with all the power and capability in the world for a day, I'd provide a custom website interface for every type of user so that everyone got what they wanted in the best way possible, and it didn't have any collateral effects on any other user! #everyonehappy

I like the idea. After all, the basic idea behind the WWW was to deliver content to the user's browser, so the content could be displayed in whatever manner the user needed/wanted. Then came the deezynerz who insisted that their content would be RUINED if it wasn't displayed exactly in 31.4159pt Rockwell Extra Bold font, in chestnut brown on a medium taupe background.

 

The ALR/Challenge battle in the geocaching world is similar. Some people insist that they be allowed to log a cache online if they physically found it and signed the log. Others insist that they be allowed to require something extra (whether it's an ALR or a Challenge) before an online log can be posted. And just in case you find some convoluted way to keep both these groups happy, others want a simple site without any complexity like that.

 

But we can dream, can't we?