Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
Geocaching HQ

Release Notes - May 5, 2015

Recommended Posts

Read previous Release Notes

 

Release Notes - May 5, 2015

 

With today’s release, we’ve made the following changes to Geocaching.com:

 


     
  • Search for geocaches using a GC code as an origin point.
  • Click through to geocache details pages directly from the suggested search dropdown.
  • Added profile images to “Not Found By” and “Hidden By” search filters.
  • You now have the option to “Message this owner” from all geocache details pages.
  • And the usual round of bug bashing!

 

58707144-2e34-45b0-a323-fed757f47e53.jpg

 

Click through to geocache details pages directly from the suggested search dropdown.

 

453ecfd8-276f-4abd-94f1-e3807ec32454.jpg

 

“Message this owner” from the geocache details page.

 

2ad14faa-5f7b-4cbd-845d-e331e632fd21.jpg

 

See profile images in the search filters.

Share this post


Link to post

 

[*]You now have the option to “Message this owner” from all geocache details pages.

 

That's a nightmare for those cache owners who do not wish to be contacted via the new message center but by e-mail.

There should at least be links for both systems. "Message this owner" is quite misleading and many cachers will now use this link instead of e-mail.

 

I would appreciate a way to opt out of the message system and to remove the link to the message center on my cache pages. I will not react to messages sent via this channel.

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

Okay, so far so good. But now, how about giving the addressee the option to [X] Receive all Messages as Email ? You can charge me 5$ extra on my premium membership for the privilege if you like, in compensation for my bypassing your oh-so-useful ads, but kindly give us the option. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post

Can you maybe slow down on pushing out links to the Message Center all over the place? It's still in beta and very much unfinished, and is unusable for a number of people for various reasons. Once the wrinkles have been ironed out and the concerns of the members have been addressed, only then should you think about pushing it on everyone.

 

You're treating it as a viable primary method of communication, when it most definitely is not in its current form.

Share this post


Link to post

 

[*]You now have the option to “Message this owner” from all geocache details pages.

 

That's a nightmare for those cache owners who do not wish to be contacted via the new message center but by e-mail.

There should at least be links for both systems. "Message this owner" is quite misleading and many cachers will now use this link instead of e-mail.

 

I would appreciate a way to opt out of the message system and to remove the link to the message center on my cache pages. I will not react to messages sent via this channel.

 

I'm not usually one to complain on forums, but this really is terrible. Why couldn't there have been a link to the old profile contact instead? I do not want to be contacted through the message system for all of my Earthcaches as it is too inconvenient to have to visit the message center to see what message was sent to me. I may have to archive all of my Earthcaches if this doesn't get fixed.

Share this post


Link to post

Geocaching HQ, you have a new message!

 

wesi has sent you a new message! No we are not telling you what it is.

Visit the website to view and reply to this message. View wesi's profile.

This is an automated message from wesi (N 41° 26.000 W 070° 36.000)

for Geocaching HQ. Add wesi to your address book to ensure delivery of a content free message!

Click here to manage your email preferences that don't really manage them.

Twitter Facebook Ad Linkedin Ad Share Tweet Whatever

 

[Edited to add: Hm. Looks like I used the wrong web site function to comment on the release. Apologies!]

Share this post


Link to post

Since we are all piling on here, I might as well also waste my time complaining. Their collective mind is already made up, but so is my singular one. I WILL NOT USE THE MESSAGE CENTER, but they are doing their best to make sure newbies stumble upon it first. So far every MESSAGE sender (after the very first what the heck is this moment), has been informed by email that I do not read (or directly respond to) MESSAGE LINKS. If they want to communicate with me, they will use email. I did see that newest link before I saw the Release Note, and my level of disgust was appropriately elevated. And here they are proudly announcing it like they are wise men bearing more gifts. There are other previously introduced MESSAGE related frustrations still littering the website, and it just keeps getting worse. Why? Is this a campaign to drive up web traffic? Stop the madness. How much warning will we be given before you announce that you are have shut down email?

Share this post


Link to post

Unbelievable.

 

What on earth possessed GS to make this unwanted, hated change?

 

"message this owner"????? The only option???????????

 

Good luck with that folks, cuz I won't respond to those messages.

 

Email me or forget about getting a response.

 

Please re-think this very bad decision to change the way we communicate.

 

 

B.

Share this post


Link to post

I am in the many who do not (and will not) respond to message center communication. Please add a similar link for the email messaging, or BETTER IDEA, allow each user to determine their preference for contact and only include that link on their cache page.

Share this post


Link to post

Can you maybe slow down on pushing out links to the Message Center all over the place? It's still in beta and very much unfinished, and is unusable for a number of people for various reasons. Once the wrinkles have been ironed out and the concerns of the members have been addressed, only then should you think about pushing it on everyone.

 

You're treating it as a viable primary method of communication, when it most definitely is not in its current form.

 

I second this post. And he's being too kind. The message center buys me NOTHING except for an extra click to find out if I needed to make that extra click. Zero, zilch, nada. I'm sure you have what you see as a valid reason for developing it, but as it stands, it is a huge step backwards for most of us.

Share this post


Link to post

Trying to be positive I do like the fact that when I clicked on the message link within an earthcache page the message line came repopulated with: Regarding GC4G724: Lynn Canyon Park Earthcache –

 

This will make sending the required answers easier.

 

Don't know if it would be possible but if there was a way that the questions that needed answering were also prepopulated.

Edited by Roman!

Share this post


Link to post

 

[*]You now have the option to “Message this owner” from all geocache details pages.

 

That's a nightmare for those cache owners who do not wish to be contacted via the new message center but by e-mail.

There should at least be links for both systems. "Message this owner" is quite misleading and many cachers will now use this link instead of e-mail.

 

I would appreciate a way to opt out of the message system and to remove the link to the message center on my cache pages. I will not react to messages sent via this channel.

Not so fast... if someone send you the answer via the new message system for the virtual that you own and you delete their log, you will be in hot water with GS. I dont think you can tell the finders which message systems they can use.

 

Just get over with it and go with the flow.

Share this post


Link to post

I understand the frustration of those who do not like or want to use the messaging center. That's certainly your right. However, if you do not wished to be messaged, I think the onus is on you to add to your cache page that you will not accept answers/inquiries through the message center and anyone wishing to contact you needs to do it via the email link in your profile. It certainly looks as though GS is putting their full weight behind the message center.

Share this post


Link to post

Trying to be positive I do like the fact that when I clicked on the message link within an earthcache page the message line came repopulated with: Regarding GC4G724: Lynn Canyon Park Earthcache –

 

This will make sending the required answers easier.

 

Don't know if it would be possible but if there was a way that the questions that needed answering were also prepopulated.

But of course if the CO does not pay attention to the message center because he has to log in to read it and deletes your log because you did not email him then it is not easier.

 

The message sent via the message center really needs to be part of the notifacation email sent to the recipient.

Edited by jholly

Share this post


Link to post

Trying to be positive I do like the fact that when I clicked on the message link within an earthcache page the message line came repopulated with: Regarding GC4G724: Lynn Canyon Park Earthcache –

 

This will make sending the required answers easier.

 

Don't know if it would be possible but if there was a way that the questions that needed answering were also prepopulated.

But of course if the CO does not pay attention to the message center because he has to log in to read it and deletes your log because you did not email him then it is not easier.

 

The message sent via the message center really needs to be part of the notifacation email sent to the recipient.

 

I do agree it would be nice if the email contained the body of the message and that it should but I can't see it being a problem of logs being deleted.

Share this post


Link to post

I've already deleted the few that I've received, and conveyed my reasons to the senders for not participating in this new system, but if/when they continue I suspect I won't be the only one trying to automate an advice to message center users that I only respond to emails.

 

Can't we just have an opt in/out though (similar to blocking friend requests)? Failing that, couldn't you include the message content in the notification, and an email reply link?

Share this post


Link to post

I've already deleted the few that I've received, and conveyed my reasons to the senders for not participating in this new system, but if/when they continue I suspect I won't be the only one trying to automate an advice to message center users that I only respond to emails.

 

Can't we just have an opt in/out though (similar to blocking friend requests)? Failing that, couldn't you include the message content in the notification, and an email reply link?

 

So you don't like the change and decide to punish the finders of your cache?

Share this post


Link to post

I've already deleted the few that I've received, and conveyed my reasons to the senders for not participating in this new system, but if/when they continue I suspect I won't be the only one trying to automate an advice to message center users that I only respond to emails.

 

Can't we just have an opt in/out though (similar to blocking friend requests)? Failing that, couldn't you include the message content in the notification, and an email reply link?

 

So you don't like the change and decide to punish the finders of your cache?

 

I don't share your definition of punishment, and you apparently don't share mine.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Not so fast... if someone send you the answer via the new message system for the virtual that you own and you delete their log, you will be in hot water with GS. I dont think you can tell the finders which message systems they can use.

 

I will not delete logs but archive the cache. As the virtual is regarded, a single message will by far not suffice for that cache.

I's say at least 3 per person for that cache.

 

I however often receive questions. In the beginning I might send out some messages by e-mail: Please send me your message again by e-mail if you wish to receive a reply, but I'm not willing to continue to do that until infinity.

 

There is also the drawback that Groundspeak can see when messages are read and can see the messages at any time they wish, including reviewers I guess. That's not acceptable for me. There is no way to delete messages from the system.

Share this post


Link to post

I understand the frustration of those who do not like or want to use the messaging center. That's certainly your right. However, if you do not wished to be messaged, I think the onus is on you to add to your cache page that you will not accept answers/inquiries through the message center and anyone wishing to contact you needs to do it via the email link in your profile. It certainly looks as though GS is putting their full weight behind the message center.

 

I added the comment that I want to be contacted by e-mail to my profile page, to the text of my virtual and wrote a note for the virtual.

I received however a number of messages sent via the MC by cachers that always have contacted me by mail previously. They just happened to continue to use the first available link on the profile that looks pretty much the same as it looked previously for using the old system.

 

The new cache pages will make it worse. Most cachers will not even realize that there is still the way to use e-mail because the link to the new system is so prominently placed and it looks like the only alternative.

 

So the onus of not being wanted to be contacted by the new message center right now is to reply to every single message and ask for the sender to use e-mail. Not very efficient.

Share this post


Link to post

Trying to be positive I do like the fact that when I clicked on the message link within an earthcache page the message line came repopulated with: Regarding GC4G724: Lynn Canyon Park Earthcache –

 

This will make sending the required answers easier.

But it would be even easier if the link went to e-mail with the e-mail box similarly populated with an initial line identifying the cache. In fact, since e-mail is sent in HTML, the ID information could including a HTML link to the cache instead of just a name and number that then has to be used to look up the cache.

 

The only reason for this to be a link to messages instead of e-mail is to drive people to use the message center no matter how deficient it is as a communication mechanism.

Share this post


Link to post

The message center is an outstanding addition to the site. And with the ability to add pictures this makes logging picture requirements so much easier! Thanks for the update! :grin:

Share this post


Link to post

Trying to be positive I do like the fact that when I clicked on the message link within an earthcache page the message line came repopulated with: Regarding GC4G724: Lynn Canyon Park Earthcache –

 

This will make sending the required answers easier.

But it would be even easier if the link went to e-mail with the e-mail box similarly populated with an initial line identifying the cache. In fact, since e-mail is sent in HTML, the ID information could including a HTML link to the cache instead of just a name and number that then has to be used to look up the cache.

 

The only reason for this to be a link to messages instead of e-mail is to drive people to use the message center no matter how deficient it is as a communication mechanism.

 

Omg, yesterday I'm agreeing with cezanne, today I'm defending GS, my world has been turned upside down.

Share this post


Link to post

I can't read the messages in the "Message Center" from my (somewhat older) smartphone, even if I wanted to. The two browsers on the phone apparently don't support the web programming used for the Message Center. So when I'm not a home, I see an e-mail telling me that someone contacted me, but I have no way to see what they actually said! This is frustrating for both parties involved. Even at home at the PC the Message Center has so many drawbacks (slow, only 1000 characters per message, can't delete anything, etc.), that I only read messages and don't write any. Of course I added a prominent note to the top of my profile page, but with the new "direkt message link" on every cache page, people will never ever see this note when they contact me via the link.

 

As others have said, this is a really big step backwards! I would like to see an option in my account preferences, where I could select the way I want to be contacted.

 

Regards

baer

Share this post


Link to post

I don't like the message center for various reasons. Others like it, fine. So the solution would be to implement a little check-mark to switch it on or off and everyone would be happy.

 

Until then, I do not pay attention to the little envelope on top of the screen, and my email system is automatically deleting all messages coming for the message center.

End of story.

 

Groundspeak is obviously not interested in listening to their users and I wondering why? Are they reading all messages and collecting those infos? Do we get personalized advertisements in the near future? What's going on?

 

MB

Share this post


Link to post
and my email system is automatically deleting all messages

 

Meanwhile, I have disabled "send me messages" in my profile <settings - email preferences - message center>.

Good for me, not so good for anyone expecting an answer. Still think, an "on-off" switch would be the best for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post

There is also the drawback that Groundspeak can see when messages are read and can see the messages at any time they wish, including reviewers I guess. That's not acceptable for me. There is no way to delete messages from the system.

I get that you don't like the message system, but quit making stuff up. You have given enough reasons without needing to resort to "guessing." Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post

There is also the drawback that Groundspeak can see when messages are read and can see the messages at any time they wish, including reviewers I guess. That's not acceptable for me. There is no way to delete messages from the system.

I get that you don't like the message system, but quit making stuff up. You have given enough reasons without needing to resort to "guessing." Thanks.

 

You have noticed that in case of the reviewers I added "I guess" because I do not have precise information and I do not want to claim anything wrong. I only know for sure that reviewers can see all logs of a cache including archived ones and also have the power to reinstate logs (I do not have an issue with that).

 

The point of the statement above was to turn the attention of other cachers to the potential data protection issue. There might be cachers who like the new system but have not thought about this aspect of the system.

 

In any case I'd appreciate if someone from Groundspeak (it could also be someone like you if that person has the required knowledge) can provide us with precise details who has access to the messages sent via the message system and who can see when a recipient of a message reads the message or if it has been read at all.

 

It is well know that the data protection regulations in the US are far more liberal than they are e.g. in my country. The way the NSA has acted, does not help to offer a secure feeling (e-mail is not secure either, but it is not under control of an US company).

 

Of course there are many other aspects that make me being against the system. The data aspect makes me feel unhappy however in addition. Even when I decide to ignore messages sent to me via the message center or even decide to

block senders after they have sent me the first message via the new system, I have no way to delete messages sent to me forever and also the sender has no such way even he/she wants to do that as soon he/she realizes that the messages

are under Groundspeak's control.

Share this post


Link to post

I intend to make use of the new message system and any CO who refuses to accept my Earthcache or Virtual Caches answers that way will have to argue with Groundspeak about it.

Share this post


Link to post

Reviewers can't see other people's messages.

 

That's good to read - thank your for the helpful reply to my question. However it does not resolve the issue that Groundspeak staff have access to the messages.

 

I'm not that I assume that someone at Groundspeak HQ is spending his/her time with reading through all the sent messages, but I see it as an issue that they have access and that

the messages are sent via the system and are not deletable. For example, someone could address me in a message by my real name (which I do not provide in my profile and do not provide to Groundspeak - one

of the reasons for not being PM) and I have no way to delete such a message from the system.

 

There have been incidents where Groundspeak handed out the names of cachers in cases where this would not be legally ok in a country like Germany or Austria.

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

Okay - full disclosure: I've never used the message center. What's so bad or "backwards" about it? Why is there so much hate and vitriol for it?

Share this post


Link to post

 

[*]You now have the option to “Message this owner” from all geocache details pages.

 

That's a nightmare for those cache owners who do not wish to be contacted via the new message center but by e-mail.

There should at least be links for both systems. "Message this owner" is quite misleading and many cachers will now use this link instead of e-mail.

 

I would appreciate a way to opt out of the message system and to remove the link to the message center on my cache pages. I will not react to messages sent via this channel.

 

+ 100

Were you listening to the feedback? Or is it something that is just non-negotiable (totally within your rights)? I noticed this change yesterday when logging an EC and actually clicked on it by accident. It wasn't until the message center thing popped up that I realized what you'd done.

 

As an EC owner, this is truly a pain in the butt. It's already tiring to get logs from cachers with no validated e-mail address claiming the find without performing the verificatin tasks, but this message center thing will prove to be the straw that breaks my own personal camel's back. EC's require a huge amount of work to get published as compared to the other cache types and HQ keeps making the "maintenance" (ie, verifying logs, answering questions, etc) harder and harder. I promise that with the first e-mail requiring me to log into the message center to see if the cacher has a legitimate find, I will archive our 3 EC's. Let someone else deal with the headaches - I'm obviously not cut out to be an EC owner in this new mobile-preferred environment.

 

Mrs. Car54

Share this post


Link to post

I intend to make use of the new message system and any CO who refuses to accept my Earthcache or Virtual Caches answers that way will have to argue with Groundspeak about it.

 

Well good for you. <_< We've been cachers since 2004 and we know under what circumstances we can and cannot delete a log. Hope you're just as happy with having fewer virts and EC's to log.

 

Mrs. Car54

Share this post


Link to post

The message center is an outstanding addition to the site. And with the ability to add pictures this makes logging picture requirements so much easier! Thanks for the update! :grin:

 

Own any EC's? Virts? No? Then you are only seeing half of the feature - from the finder's perspective. The vast majority of the complaints are coming from the other half of the feature - from the cache owner's perspective.

 

Mrs. Car54

Share this post


Link to post

Okay - full disclosure: I've never used the message center. What's so bad or "backwards" about it? Why is there so much hate and vitriol for it?

 

I can only speak for myself, but my beef with it is as an EC owner. Currently, a finder e-mails us with the answers (or not). No e-mail within a week and I send a friendly reminder. No answer within another week and I delete the find.

 

While the new message center *does* offer a way for us to contact users who can't be bothered to log into the site long enough to validate their e-mail address, any logs sent via the message center just result in a e-mail to us saying "you've got a message - log into the site to see it". Nice - don't make the new users log in, but make your loyal customers of years log in - just doesn't make sense to me.

 

Mrs. Car54

Share this post


Link to post

The message center is an outstanding addition to the site. And with the ability to add pictures this makes logging picture requirements so much easier!

But how much easier than that would it have been if they'd put the effort into attaching pictures to e-mail instead of inventing a new, redundant way to communicate?

Share this post


Link to post

Okay - full disclosure: I've never used the message center. What's so bad or "backwards" about it? Why is there so much hate and vitriol for it?

 

I can only speak for myself, but my beef with it is as an EC owner. Currently, a finder e-mails us with the answers (or not). No e-mail within a week and I send a friendly reminder. No answer within another week and I delete the find.

 

While the new message center *does* offer a way for us to contact users who can't be bothered to log into the site long enough to validate their e-mail address, any logs sent via the message center just result in a e-mail to us saying "you've got a message - log into the site to see it". Nice - don't make the new users log in, but make your loyal customers of years log in - just doesn't make sense to me.

 

Mrs. Car54

 

Okay, I get that and it seems only half-done if that's true. If the bolded part were changed - if the message DID show up in the body of the email - would you change your tune about the message center? I must say, the idea that I don't have to go into a separate app to send a message (talking mobile here) is appealing to me...and not being able to attach images via the in-site email system is frustrating.

 

Seems to me like they could address this on two fronts and make it all more acceptable:

1 - allow the message from the message center to show in the email notification and allow the receiver to reply via email.

2 - allow the attachment of image files in the current email system.

 

The message center should be more directed at mobile users while the email communication can be the default for those who log in via a standard PC. It almost seems like the two systems ought to be integrated somehow...emails sent show in the message center notification system and are accessible via the mobile apps and messages sent can be (at the "opt in" of the user) sent out to the recipient as an email.

Share this post


Link to post

Reviewers can't see other people's messages. Quit making stuff up.

Is this by policy, or just because the feature allowing reviewers to look at messages hasn't been implemented yet?

 

In the past, when you had concrete information to help people understand GS's actions, you'd just provide it without suggesting that people were being being unreasonable for speculating. It made you look impartial.

Share this post


Link to post

Okay - full disclosure: I've never used the message center. What's so bad or "backwards" about it? Why is there so much hate and vitriol for it?

 

I can only speak for myself, but my beef with it is as an EC owner. Currently, a finder e-mails us with the answers (or not). No e-mail within a week and I send a friendly reminder. No answer within another week and I delete the find.

 

While the new message center *does* offer a way for us to contact users who can't be bothered to log into the site long enough to validate their e-mail address, any logs sent via the message center just result in a e-mail to us saying "you've got a message - log into the site to see it". Nice - don't make the new users log in, but make your loyal customers of years log in - just doesn't make sense to me.

 

Mrs. Car54

 

Okay, I get that and it seems only half-done if that's true. If the bolded part were changed - if the message DID show up in the body of the email - would you change your tune about the message center? I must say, the idea that I don't have to go into a separate app to send a message (talking mobile here) is appealing to me...and not being able to attach images via the in-site email system is frustrating.

 

Seems to me like they could address this on two fronts and make it all more acceptable:

1 - allow the message from the message center to show in the email notification and allow the receiver to reply via email.

2 - allow the attachment of image files in the current email system.

 

The message center should be more directed at mobile users while the email communication can be the default for those who log in via a standard PC. It almost seems like the two systems ought to be integrated somehow...emails sent show in the message center notification system and are accessible via the mobile apps and messages sent can be (at the "opt in" of the user) sent out to the recipient as an email.

 

Yes, if those 2 changes were made, I would change my tune. It is not my intent to force others to do things "my way". I get that the mobile user is an important asset. However, some of us dinosaurs still have only a flip phone and are happy with that. I hid our EC's because it was fun to own them. I have no interest in continuing to provide those opportunities to others if it becomes a chore - that's not what I need from my hobbies.

 

Mrs. Car54

Share this post


Link to post

I think i am not the only one HATING the fact that now there are TWO places we need to checkl for contacts!! HEY!!!

Why knot "BRIDGE" those two system!... if i want all Comminication trought the New System or Trought Old system... NOT EVREYONE are using IPHONES or DROIDS

You know geocachers, with GPSr ! are Still playing the game! :)

 

So if you are a new I-Player then fine you may want all your message becoming a ICHAT message

but if you are a regular GPSr player you may want ALL communication go trought email... ( and not a stupid notification to go to website to read mail, but teh ACTUAL message)

 

So option sould be in your profile

 

Email adress : joeblow@home.com

[ x ] Allow to be contacted trought email

[ ] Alow recipient to see actual email adress

 

Message Center

[ ] Allow to be contacted Trought Message Center

( ) Alow Friend Only ( * ) Allow Only Premium and verified ( ) Allow All

 

( ) Use Both System ( * ) Send all communinication to Email Only ( ) Send All Comunication to Message Only

wich will convert the message and sent it to the right platform

 

Or something like that

Share this post


Link to post

 

[*]You now have the option to “Message this owner” from all geocache details pages.

 

That's a nightmare for those cache owners who do not wish to be contacted via the new message center but by e-mail.

There should at least be links for both systems. "Message this owner" is quite misleading and many cachers will now use this link instead of e-mail.

 

I would appreciate a way to opt out of the message system and to remove the link to the message center on my cache pages. I will not react to messages sent via this channel.

 

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post

Okay - full disclosure: I've never used the message center. What's so bad or "backwards" about it? Why is there so much hate and vitriol for it?

 

Interesting that you have not received messages sent via that channel. I have received such messages recently by cachers who never ever before have contacted me via the new system and who did not attach a photo

and who did not use the new system because they do not like e-mail. They used it out of mistake because all the prominently placed links are now linked to the new system. These people apparently just believed that Groundspeak has replaced the old system with a new one (like it happened in other contexts before).

 

The new system has a lot of drawbacks in its current form which have been discussed at length in various feedback threads. The current faq about the system also tells us that the design of the system is such that

the contents of the messages cannot be sent to the recipients which is already a knock-out criterion in particular at times when the site responds so slowly that one needs a lot of patience to read a message on the system (it does not even help if one is already logged in - one needs to access the message center). I feel like someone pulls my leg if I receive a notification that someone sent me a message and I cannot go immediately there and read what the message is about even if I'm willing to invest the extra effort to visit another place. It's like instead of delivering a letter to someone's mailbox to just leave a notice that the person can go and fetch a letter in an office 3km away that unfortunately is closed at the moment.

 

 

There are many other drawbacks: Messages can contain only 1000 chars (try to do my virtual with that restriction), messages cannot be deleted (only hidden from one's personal view), one cannot create message folders organized per cache and cannot search for messages (important for many virtual and EC owners - some cachers log weeks after having sent answers), one cannot apply filters and other modern technology offered for e-mail systems.

 

Instead of improving the message center and waiting until it gets out of beta status, the beta version is now imposed on everyone and in a way that makes many use the system who would use the old system if they knew it existed and where to find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Okay, I get that and it seems only half-done if that's true.
The new Message Center still claims to be a beta test. A number of members have indicated that they haven't been able to read the actual messages they've been sent after receiving the email notifications. As such, I think pushing the use of the Message Center over email is premature.

 

Perhaps something like this would be better:

 

A cache by AnyCacheOwner     Contact owner via email or via Message Center (Beta)     Hidden : 2012-01-23

 

But ideally, members could communicate using whichever method they prefer. Someone who prefers email (like a volunteer reviewer or an EarthCache owner) could communicate via email with someone who uses the Message Center, and vice versa. But we're a long way from that ideal.

Share this post


Link to post

The web link "send message" to an unverified member is malformed -- it doesn't include an HTTP address, so it's an empty "link" that's not clickable. I can MC a new member directly from the Message Center, and from the Intro App, so it's not that GS blocks contact of Unverified Members. It seems like a bug in the script. If the idea is to block Spam to users from a Profile, why even have that Send Message "link"?

 

I was posting about the glories of the new Message Center, especially the advantage over PM of the ability to contact Unverified Members. And that's a hard sell when the link won't work.

Share this post


Link to post
The web link "send message" to an unverified member is malformed -- it doesn't include an HTTP address, so it's an empty "link" that's not clickable.
The link I see is a relative link: href="/account/messagecenter?..."

 

That's perfectly fine. When the protocol and server are not specified, they are assumed to be the same as on the current page. So, if the page with the link is http://www.geocaching.com/... then the link

href="/account/messagecenter?..." is equivalent to the link

href="http://www.geocaching.com/account/messagecenter?..."

Share this post


Link to post

 

Seems to me like they could address this on two fronts and make it all more acceptable:

1 - allow the message from the message center to show in the email notification and allow the receiver to reply via email.

2 - allow the attachment of image files in the current email system.

 

 

Seems like a perfectly reasonable way to keep both sides happy and communications options open. The only downside would be for whoever initiated the MC contact and was expecting a reply through that interface (not checking email?). Perhaps the reverse could also apply... if the receiver of a MC notification replied through email, the MC could be CCed?

Share this post


Link to post

...so it's not that GS blocks contact of Unverified Members.

I would hope not, since that was the whole point behind creating the Message Center in the first place!

 

It still baffles me that so much unnecessary time, effort, and resources were spent to solve that problem. All that needed to be done was:

  • Require email validation for all members
  • Add the ability to attach a picture to the old email system
  • Add GC code auto-linking and auto-fill info (ie. Pre-fill the email with the GC code and cache name) to the old email system

We'd then be able to contact any member, and would have the oft-requested additional functionality in the old system. Instead of making these relatively-straightforward* changes and getting us to a good spot much faster*, tons of time was spent setting up a new system that doesn't actually solve the problem (rather than solving the unverified member problem, it simply ignores it), does give some new functionality, but also takes away other functionality, ease-of-use, and customizability (managing the emails as you desire). Add onto all that an inexplicable push to use the unfinished and unfit-for-purpose system where some members can't even use it at all, and we have a fiasco on our hands.

 

I actually used to defend Groundspeak pretty vociferously regarding some of their decisions. Those days have long since passed. I guess I just need to start accepting that I'm no longer in the target demographic that drives all of their decisions, so my needs and desires as a non-smartphone cacher will not be met. :sad:

 

*...as it appears from the outside. Maybe the code is such a mess that it would be too difficult?

Share this post


Link to post

I guess I just need to start accepting that I'm no longer in the target demographic that drives all of their decisions, so my needs and desires as a non-smartphone cacher will not be met. :sad:

 

^^^^^

This

 

Mrs. Car54

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

×