Jump to content

Cache count missing


the Seagnoid

Recommended Posts

In the old days - a year ago? The cache count on the statistics page was reported as Found x caches on y discrete caches.

The problem is that geocaching.com counts Found It logs, not caches. This was due to some earlier caches moving, inviting people to find them again.

 

So the message Found x caches on y discrete logs was an easy way for me to find that I had accidentally double logged a cache, something that needs fixing. This message is gone - can it be restored please.

 

Actually, a better solution is to show the finds by cache type stats, both on the my profile page and on the public profile page, to count the actual caches (rather than number of Found It logs) and provide a self explanatory title, eg "Number of discrete caches found: y"

 

Yes, this information can be found in third party tools, such as Project-GC. I think it is something that Groundspeak should support, especally as moving caches are no longer supported, and multiple Found It logs are now simply errors.

(I also think Geocaching should no longer provide a Found It option on a existing find, or automatically change a new Found It log to a Write Note.)

Link to comment

In the old days - a year ago? The cache count on the statistics page was reported as Found x caches on y discrete caches.

The problem is that geocaching.com counts Found It logs, not caches. This was due to some earlier caches moving, inviting people to find them again.

 

So the message Found x caches on y discrete logs was an easy way for me to find that I had accidentally double logged a cache, something that needs fixing. This message is gone - can it be restored please.

 

Actually, a better solution is to show the finds by cache type stats, both on the my profile page and on the public profile page, to count the actual caches (rather than number of Found It logs) and provide a self explanatory title, eg "Number of discrete caches found: y"

 

Yes, this information can be found in third party tools, such as Project-GC. I think it is something that Groundspeak should support, especally as moving caches are no longer supported, and multiple Found It logs are now simply errors.

(I also think Geocaching should no longer provide a Found It option on a existing find, or automatically change a new Found It log to a Write Note.)

I agree that "distinct" was a good way to spot multiples/errors.

- Often when others would talk carp on the forums. :laughing:

And I agree third-party option work-arounds aren't a fix.

Since the "numbers" are created by Groundspeak, they should keep track where.

 

But multiple, "Found its" are not simply errors though.

There's still a few moving caches left and some Countries have caches representing benchmarks not covered in Groundspeak's U.S.-only benchmark list.

- Though in the US, they're not counted as finds...

Edited by cerberus1
Link to comment

I think it is something that Groundspeak should support, especally as moving caches are no longer supported, and multiple Found It logs are now simply errors.

(I also think Geocaching should no longer provide a Found It option on a existing find, or automatically change a new Found It log to a Write Note.)

 

While moving caches are no longer allowed, there are a few still in existence. So, a discrete caches count would still be useful.

 

Bookmark list of moving caches

 

It would be nice if you could get a count of the number of finds for a cache, or something similar, so you can easily find duplicate postings. As it is, I have to use third party tools to get this info.

 

Skye.

Link to comment

Groundspeak is simplifying things for IPhone users. Don't want to clutter up their screens. So what if it was something we GPSr users liked. It clutters up those tiny screens!

The "discrete" count wasn't removed as part of the current simplification blitz. It was removed just prior to that in June, as a result of changes to the statistics related to Lab caches and because it seemed to confuse a lot of people. With the purgatory-like state of Lab caches, they couldn't easily get the counts to be correct*, so they simply removed it. We were told that if there was enough support, they'd look into bringing it back, so a request was created here.

 

*I believe this was the reason

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...