Jump to content

Unexpected email notification for an old log...


Delta68
Followers 5

Recommended Posts

On Saturday 30/07/2016 I received an email notification of a Found It log on an archived and locked cache which I have on a Bookmark List

 

The log was dated 03 Nov 2002

I thought maybe the cacher had found a way to log it and had made a backdated log but this does not appear to be the case because the 'GL' codes immediately before and after it have the same date.

 

Probably not worth investigating but I just thought I would mention it...

 

M

Link to comment

On Saturday 30/07/2016 I received an email notification of a Found It log on an archived and locked cache which I have on a Bookmark List

 

The log was dated 03 Nov 2002

I thought maybe the cacher had found a way to log it and had made a backdated log but this does not appear to be the case because the 'GL' codes immediately before and after it have the same date.

 

Probably not worth investigating but I just thought I would mention it...

 

M

 

It would probably be a lot easier for someone to check into if the GC code was supplied.

 

B.

Link to comment

It would probably be a lot easier for someone to check into if the GC code was supplied.

Yep. People, don't be so general in your posts, these things (caches, logs, TBs... user accounts as well) are public so why not include the identificator of what you are referring to.

Sounded (to me) as a ruse to have something, "probably not worth investigating", into something that now needs to be investigated. :)

Link to comment

Please provide the GC Code, since you are posting in the website bugs forum. It's not possible to do anything with your report without investigating.

 

Okey-doke

 

The GL code is GL16YGP

The preceding GL code: GL16YGN the following one: GL16YGQ are both dated with the same date which suggests that the log has been in the system for a long, long time.

 

M

Link to comment

It would probably be a lot easier for someone to check into if the GC code was supplied.

 

If anyone who could check wanted to check they would ask me.

 

I wondered if anyone else had had a similar experience.

 

M

Yes. Even archived caches can be logged if 'found' if the finder can determine the gc code, and if a newly found archived cache is on one of your lists for which you're being notified, you're going to get a notification.

 

Example: I had a DNF that I returned to and found. Turns out the cache had been archived two days earlier. Since it was on my watch list, I got a notification of my own find.

Link to comment

Yes. Even archived caches can be logged if 'found' if the finder can determine the gc code, and if a newly found archived cache is on one of your lists for which you're being notified, you're going to get a notification.

 

Example: I had a DNF that I returned to and found. Turns out the cache had been archived two days earlier. Since it was on my watch list, I got a notification of my own find.

How about reading the ENTIRE thread BEFORE commenting??!!!! :rolleyes:

Edited by Delta68
Link to comment

I was just notified of a 3 Nov 2002 log on a Locationless.

https://coord.info/GL17034

 

Have all the old logs been from 3 Nov 2002? seems like it...

 

That's a very interesting observation!

 

The notification I got for GC5569 (https://coord.info/GL16ZFF) was dated October 26th 2002 but looks like it was actually logged on November 3rd 2002 as the logs either side are (GL16ZFE and GL16ZFG ) are both dated November 3rd! B)

 

M

Link to comment

Yes. Even archived caches can be logged if 'found' if the finder can determine the gc code, and if a newly found archived cache is on one of your lists for which you're being notified, you're going to get a notification.

 

Example: I had a DNF that I returned to and found. Turns out the cache had been archived two days earlier. Since it was on my watch list, I got a notification of my own find.

How about reading the ENTIRE thread BEFORE commenting??!!!! :rolleyes:

My, aren't we friendly?

 

For others who might be reading this thread, and since your early post asked "I wondered if anyone else had had a similar experience.", and since it has happened to me in the past, a positive response with an explanation seemed in order. YOURS is not the only case where this can occur. Those searching for answers that run across this thread in the future might benefit from other possible explanations for such an event.

Link to comment

My, aren't we friendly?

Sometimes...

 

For others who might be reading this thread, and since your early post asked "I wondered if anyone else had had a similar experience.", and since it has happened to me in the past, a positive response with an explanation seemed in order. YOURS is not the only case where this can occur. Those searching for answers that run across this thread in the future might benefit from other possible explanations for such an event.

 

EVERYONE knows it's possible to log finds on archived caches which is what your example was.

 

Logging finds on LOCKED caches is rarer

Being notified of finds logged on caches nearly 14 years ago was unheard of until very recently.

 

M

Link to comment

Actually, 'everyone' doesn't know that it's possible.

 

Another thought...

 

We know that the system will won't permit a new log entry on a locked cache, but can a user EDIT a previous log on a locked cache, and what results? One would not expect a new notification to go out to those with the cache in a list under such circumstances, but having never tried to edit a log on a locked cache ... ???

 

A lot of folks have been editing their prior logs en masse with a variety of tools to pull out BB Code and replace with this new 'markdown' stuff.

 

Even similar caches (GCC859) which one might expect to be locked are only archived. I don't know that I've found any that are now locked so that I could try to edit my log to see what happens.

Link to comment

I can't be sure, and the developer who recently worked on the new notification service is not currently available, but I believe he mentioned that he discovered a backlog of old messages in the queue that had been "lost" by the old service. I recall him mentioning the possibility that the new service might pick these up and deliver them, much later than expected. It is possible that this might be what is occurring in these cases.

Link to comment

But insta-notify didn't exist in 2002, when these logs were initially recorded. :unsure:

 

I seem to recall to have watched some caches in the early times and to have to have received watch list mails. According to my memory one received mails in November 2002.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

I received another email for another 3 Nov 2002 log on a locationless GC9876.

https://coord.info/GL170T7

 

Like Delta68, this would evidently be coming from a bookmark list, not from a notification (though I appreciate there may be little to no difference from the coding side).

 

To cerberus1 - when notifications were new, a Locationless could have all logs posted that are the basis of notifications EXCEPT publish:

Found it Didn't find it

Temporarily Disable Listing Enable Listing

Write note Post Reviewer Note

Update Coordinates

Needs Archived Archive Unarchive

Needs Maintenance Owner Maintenance

Publish Listing

 

I appreciate that most users set up only Publish notifications. The bulk of mine are for archive and retract.

Edited by palmetto
Link to comment

I received another log notification dated 11/1/2002. This one was on a virtual that is archived but not locked. The log itself appears to have been deleted by the owner, but the owner hasn't logged in since 2005.

 

"Wow - what a view! This was an incredible climb up for us, only to find it locked and no ranger in site. We took a picture of the lock (utbob2 will send) so we hope that counts. Still, a heck of a climb and an incredible view."

Link to comment

I just received a notification for this 11/4/2002 log. I was not watching the cache at the time, and in fact did not even join GC until a few years later. The logging member (an elderly couple) have not logged on to the web site in three years and have not logged a find in five years, and no one knows if they are even still alive. I'll be happy to supply the message source if that will help.

 

EDIT: I already had that log in GSAK, so I know it didn't change, at least not visibly.

 

Edward

Edited by paleolith
Link to comment

I have bookmark lists of all archived caches in Australia and set to receive emails for any posts on all of them.

 

I have received a number of emails for logs in 2002 in the last 24 hours. I can give GC codes if required...

 

At least one of these caches was locked.

 

I have all of the caches in my GSAK database and have checked and the logs were in the Database prior to my emails so it looks like they are somehow GC is sending delayed emails for postings back in 2002.

Link to comment

I can't be sure, and the developer who recently worked on the new notification service is not currently available, but I believe he mentioned that he discovered a backlog of old messages in the queue that had been "lost" by the old service. I recall him mentioning the possibility that the new service might pick these up and deliver them, much later than expected. It is possible that this might be what is occurring in these cases.

 

That's an interesting information for this other bug...

I wouldn't want to be the guy who messed up the instant notifications before going on holiday once he returns...

Sorry for the interruption ;)

Link to comment

It's really weird that it's not just random logs popping up out of the grave. It's only logs from early November, and perhaps late October, of 2002. And though the log PnavE81 cited may have been on an archived cache, the one I cited was on a still-active cache. (Which is why I watch that cache.)

 

Edward

Link to comment

It's really weird that it's not just random logs popping up out of the grave. It's only logs from early November, and perhaps late October, of 2002. And though the log PnavE81 cited may have been on an archived cache, the one I cited was on a still-active cache. (Which is why I watch that cache.)

I wonder if these are being sent because the system thinks it's sending one of the notifications on a new cache, i.e., the notifications that are missing. These all seem to be old caches, so perhaps it's being caused by an overflow in an index calculation.

Link to comment

It's really weird that it's not just random logs popping up out of the grave. It's only logs from early November, and perhaps late October, of 2002. And though the log PnavE81 cited may have been on an archived cache, the one I cited was on a still-active cache. (Which is why I watch that cache.)

 

Edward

The log is archived. The caches is still active. https://coord.info/GC2B36

So far all logs posted in this thread are from november 1-5 2002

Link to comment

I continue to receive these. Now I'm getting most as duplicate emails:

 

[LOG] Bookmark: IT-gubben found Väderkvarnar/windmill (Archived) (Locked) (Locationless (Reverse) Cache)

 

[LOG] Bookmark: IT-gubben found Väderkvarnar/windmill (Archived) (Locked) (Locationless (Reverse) Cache)

Link to comment

I continue to receive these. Now I'm getting most as duplicate emails:

 

[LOG] Bookmark: IT-gubben found Väderkvarnar/windmill (Archived) (Locked) (Locationless (Reverse) Cache)

 

[LOG] Bookmark: IT-gubben found Väderkvarnar/windmill (Archived) (Locked) (Locationless (Reverse) Cache)

surprise surprise...IT-Gubben found this one on 7 november 2002 (https://coord.info/GL1776T)...another log from the beginning of november 2002

Link to comment

Just a heads up that this is on our radar and we are investigating. Our present-day selves are not working on a time machine, but I can't speak for our future selves. Perhaps Geocaching HQ is using the notification system to communicate with ourselves in the past (which is our present). And no - we don't have anyone on staff named John Connor.

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...
Followers 5
×
×
  • Create New...