Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
CX15

CO deleted EC log because "answers not e-mailed"

Recommended Posts

Recently I have logged a huge amount of Earth Caches in Yellowstone Park. Most CO's responded with no problem.

 

One CO though deleted my logs.

 

I sent my answers with the messaging system.

I received a message back to say some answers are wrong and I should try again.

I replied with the corrected answers.

 

Then my logs were deleted.

 

I e-mailed CO, she replied that she never received my corrected answers.

I can still see all the answers in the Messaging System.

 

I have to assume? that the CO don't use the messaging system, but only rely on e-mails.

I also have to assume that not all the messages from the Messaging System gets sent to e-mail?

 

Is this normal?

What do I do from here?

Any advice will be appreciated as I would like to prevent this from happening in the future.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post

So, when logging an EC, I should NOT use the messaging system in the new APP?

Share this post


Link to post

I guess what I'm asking is: Is it the EC owner's responsibility to check the messaging system (available in the app or online) or can they choose to solely use e-mail (in which case the messaging system is completely redundant)

Share this post


Link to post

Ya could just email them.

 

When I am travelling, it is very easy to use the Geocaching App. When I log the cache as found, I get the option to send my answers to the CO. This option obviously uses the Messaging System (also accesible in the app).

So it's not very intuitive to use e-mail.

 

I received all the responses from the CO through the messaging system, so I dont know why they did not receive my responses.

Very confusing

Share this post


Link to post

If she responded to the first set of answers, then she uses the messaging system. I'd suggest giving the benefit of the doubt and not making a big deal about this just yet. Just send her the answers again - by the message system OR by email, whichever you prefer. Then give her enough time to get the message, and re-log.

 

If she deletes it again, ask Groundspeak to reinstate your log.

 

EDIT: P.S. You may want to change your thread title. It appears that nowhere did the CO say that she deleted your log because the answers weren't emailed. You made that assumption.

Edited by TriciaG

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks TriciaG

Helpful advice!

 

After my log was deleted, I e-mailed the CO.

She replied that I should have e-mailed her my corrected answers and not use the messaging system.

 

But like you say, she initially replied to my first answers via the messaging system.

 

I'm not that worried about this cache (I can live with a deleted log), I'm more worried about how the system works and future logging.

 

Is the Messaging System an official form of communication for submitting EC answers?

Or can the CO insist on e-mails?

Share this post


Link to post

OK, that clarifies things a bit. :)

 

I know some users HATE the messaging system and say they will delete finds that have answers sent through that system. I don't know what Groundspeak's official stance is on that.

 

A finder could be a pain in the rump and insist on using the Message Center when the CO has clearly said they hate the MC and want answers sent by email. But if it were me, I'd fight the temptation to push their buttons, take on the little extra inconvenience, and send the answers the way they'd like them.

 

If they don't say anything about it on their earthcache page, I'd assume the MC is okay.

Share this post


Link to post

[...]

Is the Messaging System an official form of communication for submitting EC answers?

Yes.

Or can the CO insist on e-mails?

Definitely not.

 

Hans

Share this post


Link to post

I dislike the way messages stay forever in that messaging system.

The same message showing in that system and email anyway seemed like an odd setup, so prefer email.

 

When the messaging system first came out, and Reviewers said not to send mail through it to them, I figured whatever reasoning they had was good enough for me. :)

 

There's an appeals process through the Help Center.

Explain your situation, I suppose they can see your messages, and get you your smiley back.

Share this post


Link to post

COs can't actually do that. I also prefer email, and while I won't answer messages through the new thing, I must allow Earthcache logs to stand if I receive responses that way.

Share this post


Link to post

Is this normal?

What do I do from here?

Any advice will be appreciated as I would like to prevent this from happening in the future.

You're at the point in this case, where you should contact Groundspeak and appeal, as mentioned.

 

But as for what to do in the future...

If the CO has an actual email address posted, that plan can work, if you send it directly to that actual email address from email software, because then if the email doesn't arrive, you get an error message from the email server. The web site "email" feature that Groundspeak and everyone keeps calling “email” which is instead “PM” that first goes through a server for anonymity and then to email, can get messages lost without either party knowing there's a problem, because an undeliverable email is bounced back to a “No-Reply” place where it vanishes. And PM has even worse issues than MC at times.

 

If you use the Message Center, there is a persistent record of communications, so you see the text is there and know it can be read. This is, in theory, a much better way to assure open communication within the App. But if one party doesn't use the App (or prefers to read or type a reply using a PC), it gets trickier. Each person must be willing to check the Message Center and use it, even if they don't have the App. But the MC is not really a PC web browser communication tool. It's designed for the App.

 

I once thought the MC was the ideal way to avoid confusion, if both parties are normal mature persons, open to communication. But in the past few months, the MC has become completely buggy at times. It was hugely frustrating to find a way to even read an MC message. I began to dread the notice that I had a message waiting, since that meant trying all my browsers and their various settings in the futile hope that I might read and reply. I'm leery of using the MC now. Groundspeak has serious trouble keeping it functioning. The MC is a huge pain when it breaks, and then requires a lot of extra time and work. And it's iffy for web browser users even on a good day. For one thing, on a computer, there's no popup when a new message arrives. So you must cut each other some slack.

 

However, as a basic plan of communicating cache answers, you did fine by using the MC. Once you've posted correct cache answers on the MC and made the proper cache logs, and then if the log gets deleted and you wish to have it restored, contact Groundspeak for a resolution.

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post

I'm moving this thread from the Geocaching Topics forum to the Earthcaching forum.

 

In passing, I note that the Help Center article about logging an earthcache has the answer to the OP's questions:

 

Contact through the geocaching Message Center and through email sent via Geocaching.com are both legitimate ways for geocache finders to send required answers to a geocache owner. A cache owner cannot require that this information be sent through one particular tool.

Share this post


Link to post

I guess what I'm asking is: Is it the EC owner's responsibility to check the messaging system (available in the app or online) or can they choose to solely use e-mail (in which case the messaging system is completely redundant)

What you should be asking is "What can I do to make this easier for the CO of the EarthCache I enjoyed so much?" You have the answers. She wants to see them. Stop worrying about who's allowed to do what. This is a simple mechanical problem. You gain absolutely nothing by turning it into a legal battle.

 

I'm not that worried about this cache (I can live with a deleted log), I'm more worried about how the system works and future logging.

The system works best when people cooperate with each other and go out of their way to keep the game fun. Why in the world would you be worried about a deleted log when you can just send her the answers in e-mail? Yeah, so it's not as convenient for you, but that doesn't mean it's hard or anything, and it's certainly way easier than sending an appeal and turning this into a real fight.

Share this post


Link to post

I probably get the majority of my EC Logging answers through the Message Center now. It works fine, and I've never had any difficulty with it.

 

There could be a variety of reasons it didn't work in your situation. I would give the cache owner the benefit of the doubt and try the email route. As stated above, they aren't allowed to choose which form of communication they prefer, but sometimes things don't work the way they are supposed to. I'd just workaround the issue rather than knocking my head against it.

Share this post


Link to post

Is this normal?

What do I do from here?

Any advice will be appreciated as I would like to prevent this from happening in the future.

You're at the point in this case, where you should contact Groundspeak and appeal, as mentioned.

 

But as for what to do in the future...

If the CO has an actual email address posted, that plan can work, if you send it directly to that actual email address from email software, because then if the email doesn't arrive, you get an error message from the email server. The web site "email" feature that Groundspeak and everyone keeps calling “email” which is instead “PM” that first goes through a server for anonymity and then to email, can get messages lost without either party knowing there's a problem, because an undeliverable email is bounced back to a “No-Reply” place where it vanishes. And PM has even worse issues than MC at times.

 

If you use the Message Center, there is a persistent record of communications, so you see the text is there and know it can be read. This is, in theory, a much better way to assure open communication within the App. But if one party doesn't use the App (or prefers to read or type a reply using a PC), it gets trickier. Each person must be willing to check the Message Center and use it, even if they don't have the App. But the MC is not really a PC web browser communication tool. It's designed for the App.

 

I once thought the MC was the ideal way to avoid confusion, if both parties are normal mature persons, open to communication. But in the past few months, the MC has become completely buggy at times. It was hugely frustrating to find a way to even read an MC message. I began to dread the notice that I had a message waiting, since that meant trying all my browsers and their various settings in the futile hope that I might read and reply. I'm leery of using the MC now. Groundspeak has serious trouble keeping it functioning. The MC is a huge pain when it breaks, and then requires a lot of extra time and work. And it's iffy for web browser users even on a good day. For one thing, on a computer, there's no popup when a new message arrives. So you must cut each other some slack.

 

However, as a basic plan of communicating cache answers, you did fine by using the MC. Once you've posted correct cache answers on the MC and made the proper cache logs, and then if the log gets deleted and you wish to have it restored, contact Groundspeak for a resolution.

 

+1

 

The cache owner is in the wrong here. There's no fight to be had. Your log will be restored upon appeal and the cache owner will learn a valuable lesson about how the game works.

 

There is no sense in trying to appease a cache owner who thinks she can make up her own rules. It's a wasted effort. With situations like this, use the big stick immediately.

 

We all have our own preferences about things, but it is simply inappropriate to delete logs over it. This is exactly why we have a mechanism for appealing when a cache owner is poorly behaved.

Share this post


Link to post
I have to assume? that the CO don't use the messaging system, but only rely on e-mails.
Some of us don't like it. Some of us cannot use it because it does not work properly on our platform. Email is much more reliable.

 

I also have to assume that not all the messages from the Messaging System gets sent to e-mail?
That is also correct. Some of this is by design: When multiple messages are sent through the Messaging System, only the first is sent via an email notification with the default Message Center configuration. And as I said, the Message Center doesn't work reliably for everyone.

 

So, when logging an EC, I should NOT use the messaging system in the new APP?
Well, "should NOT" might be a bit strong, and as you've seen, it contradicts Groundspeak's official policy that the Message Center is a valid way to contact EC owners. But I wouldn't use the Message Center to contact anyone unless the person I'm contacting insists on it.

 

When I am travelling, it is very easy to use the Geocaching App. When I log the cache as found, I get the option to send my answers to the CO. This option obviously uses the Messaging System (also accesible in the app).

So it's not very intuitive to use e-mail.

FWIW, when I'm traveling (and even when I'm not), I use field notes for everything. And then I log everything later, from the comfort of a real keyboard.

Share this post


Link to post
The cache owner is in the wrong here. There's no fight to be had. Your log will be restored upon appeal and the cache owner will learn a valuable lesson about how the game works.

 

There is no sense in trying to appease a cache owner who thinks she can make up her own rules. It's a wasted effort. With situations like this, use the big stick immediately.

 

We all have our own preferences about things, but it is simply inappropriate to delete logs over it. This is exactly why we have a mechanism for appealing when a cache owner is poorly behaved.

Huh...

 

All this time I thought this was another case where the EC owner didn't get an email copy of the second MC message. That is the default configuration for the system, after all.

 

I e-mailed CO, she replied that she never received my corrected answers.

 

To me, it sounded like the CO was telling the OP to use a more reliable system (email) rather than using a less reliable system (the MC). It didn't come across as "making up her own rules" except in the speculations of others.

Share this post


Link to post

All this time I thought this was another case where the EC owner didn't get an email copy of the second MC message. That is the default configuration for the system, after all.

That is possible. In the App, there's a notification that a message arrived, and a quick tap sends the viewer to the message. In a web browser while viewing Geocaching.com, after refreshing the page, you get a yellow dot.

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post

All this time I thought this was another case where the EC owner didn't get an email copy of the second MC message. That is the default configuration for the system, after all.

That is possible. In the App, there's a notification that a message arrived, and a quick tap sends the viewer to the message. In a web browser while viewing Geocaching.com, after refreshing the page, you get a yellow dot.

 

If you log into the site, then you see the yellow dot, yes.

 

The yellow dots are annoying however too as when one typically prefers to reply by e-mail also to messages sent via the message center one has already read the messages in the message center and it is annoying to go to them to get rid of the yellow dot. So easily one can end with old yellow dots and start to simply ignore them.

 

As to the OP, I do not think that you can find out whether the cache owner replied via e-mail or via the message center as one can reply by e-mail and the recipient gets the answers in their message center if the original contact was established via the message center. I sometimes replied via the memssage center - typically I however copy messages into an e-nmail and reply via e-mail as then

I do not end up with copies in the Groundspeak system (which cannot be sorted and cannot be deleted and are lso nothing I want to leave at Groundspeak's server).

Share this post


Link to post

You're at the point in this case, where you should contact Groundspeak and appeal, as mentioned.

The cache owner is in the wrong here. There's no fight to be had. Your log will be restored upon appeal and the cache owner will learn a valuable lesson about how the game works.

I'm sorry, but why the CO the 'bad guy' here? How does anyone know that the CO actually received the message with the corrected answers?

 

I received a message from a cacher (who was also an EC CO) not too long ago that contained their message to me, as well as their message to an EC finder to confirm that the EC finder's answers were correct. The cacher sent 2 messages (one to me and one to the EC finder), yet both of those messages ended up in my message center view as if both messages were sent to me.

 

There have been at least 3 different times that I've used the Groundspeak app to send messages to a CO while out caching. I don't think those messages ever got sent, since they never showed up my list of 'message center' conversations and I never received a reply message from the CO. Of course, maybe I didn't receive a reply message because the CO simply didn't send a reply. I have no idea.

 

ETA: Point being, the 'Send a message' option seems much more 'buggy' than the 'Send an email' option. That is one reason that I, personally, prefer to send EC answers via email. The other reason I prefer to use email to send EC answers is then I can get a copy of my answers emailed to me and I can save those answers more easily within my email folders.

 

It seems a bit harsh to assume that the CO is denying the EC find because of the chosen method of communication. The CO did not say that they were denying the find because the OP used the message center. The CO said they're denying the find because they didn't receive the corrected answers. I don't see any reason to view CO's in such a negative light.

Edited by noncentric

Share this post


Link to post

The cache owner is in the wrong here. There's no fight to be had. Your log will be restored upon appeal and the cache owner will learn a valuable lesson about how the game works.

It's still a fight even if you're whacking them with a big stick.

 

There is no sense in trying to appease a cache owner who thinks she can make up her own rules. It's a wasted effort. With situations like this, use the big stick immediately.

Yeah! Why try to get along with anyone? Just assume they're wrong, stupid, and mean, and then club them over the head.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks everyone for some good (if slightly polarised) replies.

 

To elaborate a bit:

 

After my logs were deleted, I first checked the Message Centre. All my answers and corrected answers are still there.

 

I then sent a very amicable e-mail to CO to tell them that the answers are all still there and asked if they could have a look at the answers in MC.

 

I received a pretty blunt e-mail back saying sorry, we did not receive e-mails and that I should not use the MC as they do not get all the messages in their e-mail inbox.

 

So, it seems to me that CO is either unwilling or unable to access the MC.

 

But from everyone's replies I gather that the MC is buggy and sometimes does not function properly. I have never experienced that, but will keep it in mind for future logging.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks everyone for some good (if slightly polarised) replies.

 

To elaborate a bit:

 

After my logs were deleted, I first checked the Message Centre. All my answers and corrected answers are still there.

 

I then sent a very amicable e-mail to CO to tell them that the answers are all still there and asked if they could have a look at the answers in MC.

 

I received a pretty blunt e-mail back saying sorry, we did not receive e-mails and that I should not use the MC as they do not get all the messages in their e-mail inbox.

 

So, it seems to me that CO is either unwilling or unable to access the MC.

 

But from everyone's replies I gather that the MC is buggy and sometimes does not function properly. I have never experienced that, but will keep it in mind for future logging.

 

In this situation, the cache owner should really give you the benefit of the doubt if she isn't able to access the messages. Regardless of how "buggy" people claim the system is, the fact remains that the MC is an appropriate channel for Earthcache responses and you are not wrong for logging the find. You shouldn't be treated as a delinquent cacher because the cache owner isn't willing to use the system.

 

It isn't always fun to stand up to poorly-behaved cache owners, but eventually someone has to, or they just bully everyone for perpetuity. We have an efficient system for reporting these transgressions, and it is 100% okay to use that system when a cache owner decides to ignore or disobey the rules.

Share this post


Link to post

I haven't had any major issues with the Message Center, but I understand that others have. If you want to duke it out with the cache owner, you could send him a link to this Help Center article that spells out the current state of Logging Earthcaches and Virtuals, which was added shortly after the Message Center went live:

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=688

 

Failing that, contacting Groundspeak to reinstate your Find log (assuming your answers are satisfactory), would be the final stop on this unfortunate situation.

 

Best of luck.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah! Why try to get along with anyone? Just assume they're wrong, stupid, and mean, and then club them over the head.

 

Given Groundspeak's policy they are wrong. Just like an EC owner who insists on a photo is wrong. But before I appealed to Groundspeak or dismiss them as stupid, I would ask if they were aware that answers must be accepted through either email or the MC?

 

I have never had this problem since I don't use the MC, however I would dig in my heels if my log were deleted simply because of the way it was set or because I did not choose to submit a photo,

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah! Why try to get along with anyone? Just assume they're wrong, stupid, and mean, and then club them over the head.

 

Given Groundspeak's policy they are wrong. Just like an EC owner who insists on a photo is wrong. But before I appealed to Groundspeak or dismiss them as stupid, I would ask if they were aware that answers must be accepted through either email or the MC?

 

I have never had this problem since I don't use the MC, however I would dig in my heels if my log were deleted simply because of the way it was set or because I did not choose to submit a photo,

 

My thinking for going to the big stick immediately is this: most geocachers are good people who play fair and don't cause trouble. I don't think I have ever had a cache owner delete a log or question the validity of an Earthcache or virtual find. This bad behaviour is so exceedingly rare that I can only assume that the sort of cache owner who would behave this way is an extreme outlier beyond reason, and that a personal conversation with such a person is not worth my time.

Share this post


Link to post

I received a pretty blunt e-mail back saying sorry, we did not receive e-mails and that I should not use the MC as they do not get all the messages in their e-mail inbox.

 

So, it seems to me that CO is either unwilling or unable to access the MC.

 

For someone so quick to pull the trigger on deleting a log, you'd think they would be savvy enough to be able to verify the MC answers. Sounds to me they're just being stubborn and petulant about not wanting to use the message center. I'm all for using the proverbial 'big stick' to disabuse them of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Sounds to me they're just being stubborn and petulant about not wanting to use the message center. I'm all for using the proverbial 'big stick' to disabuse them of that.

 

The message center is an extreme pain to use (apart from privacy issues involved). One should be able to rely on a reliable notification system which allows to deal with messages sent via the MC without using the center itself. However the notification system is not always reliable which is however not the cachers' fault.

Share this post


Link to post

I've noticed that the message center won't send out multiple emails a day from the same sender. If someone messages me, I get an email. If they send me a second message the same day, I don't get an email. However, if they send me a new message the next day, I get an email.

 

I like the use of the message center for Earthcaches and Virtuals, because it is a permanent unaltered record of my answers and conversation if there is a dispute. But then again, I live in a corporate world where audit tracing is a big issue.

Share this post


Link to post

Given Groundspeak's policy they are wrong. Just like an EC owner who insists on a photo is wrong. But before I appealed to Groundspeak or dismiss them as stupid, I would ask if they were aware that answers must be accepted through either email or the MC?

Talking it over with them is, of course, the best plan. Remember that they appear to be having trouble reading messages, so be sure to discuss it with them in e-mail. And, hey, while you're at it, copy the answers into the e-mail, too...

 

My thinking for going to the big stick immediately is this: most geocachers are good people who play fair and don't cause trouble.

I can't get my head around this. I read it as "most people are good, but never mind that: I assume this person is bad, so they should be swatted."

 

My position isn't merely that most geocachers are good people who play fair and don't cause trouble, but rather that all geocachers should be treated as if they're good people who play fair and don't cause trouble. In particular, it seems somewhat off the mark to cause trouble yourself because you've decided they want to cause trouble.

 

I don't think I have ever had a cache owner delete a log or question the validity of an Earthcache or virtual find. This bad behaviour is so exceedingly rare that I can only assume that the sort of cache owner who would behave this way is an extreme outlier beyond reason, and that a personal conversation with such a person is not worth my time.

No, I've never had any trouble, either, which makes me wonder whether that's because people in my area don't expect to have any trouble. This discussion has me imagining communities where all the geocachers are constantly at each others throats, and that concerns me.

Share this post


Link to post

My position isn't merely that most geocachers are good people who play fair and don't cause trouble, but rather that all geocachers should be treated as if they're good people who play fair and don't cause trouble. In particular, it seems somewhat off the mark to cause trouble yourself because you've decided they want to cause trouble.

 

Yes, geocachers should be treated as if they're good people, i.e. not subject to arbitrary log deletion.

 

Reporting abuse to the site immediately is the simplest way to avoid trouble, particularly when dealing with someone who seems eager to take the conversation off the site, where it is more difficult for Groundspeak to hold them accountable for their poor behaviour.

 

It is always 100% okay to go to Groundspeak when experience trouble with a cache owner. Nobody should be made to feel they are causing trouble by using the site's features to their best advantage in a bad situation that someone else caused.

Share this post


Link to post

I've noticed that the message center won't send out multiple emails a day from the same sender. If someone messages me, I get an email. If they send me a second message the same day, I don't get an email. However, if they send me a new message the next day, I get an email.

 

I like the use of the message center for Earthcaches and Virtuals, because it is a permanent unaltered record of my answers and conversation if there is a dispute. But then again, I live in a corporate world where audit tracing is a big issue.

 

People have different preferences and that's okay. It is 100% okay for you to contact a cache owner with Earthcache responses through the email system or the message system. The cache owner should not penalize you for using the system that you prefer or that was easier for you to access.

Share this post


Link to post

[...]

Is the Messaging System an official form of communication for submitting EC answers?

Yes.

Or can the CO insist on e-mails?

Definitely not.

 

Hans

 

The last time I hid an EC I was told by the reviewer that I could not require one method over the other.. not that I made any requirement. But my language implied I would only accept emails. I personally don't have a preference. As a finder of EC's, I prefer to use the messaging center as proof that I sent my qualifiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Sounds to me they're just being stubborn and petulant about not wanting to use the message center. I'm all for using the proverbial 'big stick' to disabuse them of that.

 

The message center is an extreme pain to use (apart from privacy issues involved). One should be able to rely on a reliable notification system which allows to deal with messages sent via the MC without using the center itself. However the notification system is not always reliable which is however not the cachers' fault.

 

Part of owning a virtual or EC is accepting that people will communicate via one of two "official" methods allowed for in the geocaching site. I don't know Groundspeak's stance on it, but I've seen COs offer up other means of submitting answers (alternate emails, etc.). Those two main methods, however, are the only ones that GS would likely enforce on the either the CO's or cacher's behalf. Whether it's a "pain" to use or not is not a valid argument against it.

Share this post


Link to post

Part of owning a virtual or EC is accepting that people will communicate via one of two "official" methods allowed for in the geocaching site.

 

The big majority of Earthcaches and all virtuals have been designed long before GS came along with the message centre.

 

I don't know Groundspeak's stance on it, but I've seen COs offer up other means of submitting answers (alternate emails, etc.). Those two main methods, however, are the only ones that GS would likely enforce on the either the CO's or cacher's behalf. Whether it's a "pain" to use or not is not a valid argument against it.

 

The pain comes in when it makes cachers handle messages via e-mail instead of via a direct usage of the message centre, i.e. reply by e-mail to sent messages and receive messages via the e-mail gateway. It's Groundspeak's job to make that system reliable (otherwise the system makes no sense at all) and also to make it more evident to cachers which are the default settings regarding message centre notification. It was GS who changed something and not the individual cachers (cache owners).

Share this post


Link to post

The big majority of Earthcaches and all virtuals have been designed long before GS came along with the message centre.

 

That's too bad. Almost immediately after the message centre came out, Groundspeak made it clear that Earthcache owners are required to accept answers that way.

 

The Earthcache is in Yellowstone Park. It is very unlikely that this is the first time this cache owner has encountered this. There is no excuse.

Edited by narcissa

Share this post


Link to post

I only use email and have the system send me a copy of my mail so I have proof of sending the answers for virtuals/EC but for the first time I got an email from a CO claiming I didn't send answers.

 

Hi I notice you have logged my cache xxxxxxxxx. I don't seem to have received from you the answer to the question. In fairness to other cachers who have please send the answer to email yyyyyyyyyyy Regards CO

 

For some reason the CO didn't get GS's mail or it was filtered out as spam at his end. As I was at the airport when I got his mail I couldn't easily search my mails but once back home I found my e-mail copy that was send the evening of my find.

BTW, I did resend my answer and haven't heard from the CO again (and my log still stands) so I guess it's OK now.

 

Of all the EC/virtual caches we logged during our holiday (34) I only got a few (10) replies to my answers. No wonder so many EC's/virtuals get "armchair logged", Some CO's haven't even logged in to the site for months/years.

Share this post


Link to post

I've noticed that the message center won't send out multiple emails a day from the same sender. If someone messages me, I get an email. If they send me a second message the same day, I don't get an email. However, if they send me a new message the next day, I get an email.

 

I like the use of the message center for Earthcaches and Virtuals, because it is a permanent unaltered record of my answers and conversation if there is a dispute. But then again, I live in a corporate world where audit tracing is a big issue.

 

People have different preferences and that's okay. It is 100% okay for you to contact a cache owner with Earthcache responses through the email system or the message system. The cache owner should not penalize you for using the system that you prefer or that was easier for you to access.

 

It is quite obvious that the problem is with the Message Center. It does not work well. The CO did not receive the message. That's the fault of the Messsage Center, not of the CO. So don't blame the CO.

The OP can keep trying through the Message Cwenter. Maybe eventually it will work. Or try something that does work!

Share this post


Link to post

I've noticed that the message center won't send out multiple emails a day from the same sender. If someone messages me, I get an email. If they send me a second message the same day, I don't get an email. However, if they send me a new message the next day, I get an email.

 

I like the use of the message center for Earthcaches and Virtuals, because it is a permanent unaltered record of my answers and conversation if there is a dispute. But then again, I live in a corporate world where audit tracing is a big issue.

 

People have different preferences and that's okay. It is 100% okay for you to contact a cache owner with Earthcache responses through the email system or the message system. The cache owner should not penalize you for using the system that you prefer or that was easier for you to access.

 

It is quite obvious that the problem is with the Message Center. It does not work well. The CO did not receive the message. That's the fault of the Messsage Center, not of the CO. So don't blame the CO.

The OP can keep trying through the Message Cwenter. Maybe eventually it will work. Or try something that does work!

 

Deleting the log was the CO's fault.

Share this post


Link to post

I've noticed that the message center won't send out multiple emails a day from the same sender. If someone messages me, I get an email. If they send me a second message the same day, I don't get an email. However, if they send me a new message the next day, I get an email.

 

I like the use of the message center for Earthcaches and Virtuals, because it is a permanent unaltered record of my answers and conversation if there is a dispute. But then again, I live in a corporate world where audit tracing is a big issue.

 

People have different preferences and that's okay. It is 100% okay for you to contact a cache owner with Earthcache responses through the email system or the message system. The cache owner should not penalize you for using the system that you prefer or that was easier for you to access.

 

It is quite obvious that the problem is with the Message Center. It does not work well. The CO did not receive the message. That's the fault of the Messsage Center, not of the CO. So don't blame the CO.

The OP can keep trying through the Message Cwenter. Maybe eventually it will work. Or try something that does work!

 

Deleting the log was the CO's fault.

Do you have proof that the CO ever received the corrected answers that the OP sent?

 

The Message Center is not infallible and is more 'buggy' then the email system. I'm assuming the message center set-up is more technically complex than the email system.

 

I've already seen at least one example where Cacher A sent a message to Cacher B and another message to Cacher C. It showed in Cacher A's 'conversations' that messages were sent to B and C. Yet Cacher C ended up receiving both messages, the one intended for Cacher B and the one intended for Cacher C.

Share this post


Link to post

That's too bad. Almost immediately after the message centre came out, Groundspeak made it clear that Earthcache owners are required to accept answers that way.

 

I'm aware of that but to accept answers you first need to receive them.

 

The Earthcache is in Yellowstone Park. It is very unlikely that this is the first time this cache owner has encountered this. There is no excuse.

 

It can easily be the case that it was the first time they had an issue like that. Note that the first message with the wrong answers was also sent via the message centre but apparently arrived via the message centre e-mail gateway.

 

It's Groundspeak's job to make the gateway and the message centre more reliable. BTW: I believe without the message centre we also would not have this annoying freezing down of browsers. With a reliable notitfication system those who do not intend to use the message centre directly could deactive the check for new messages.

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

That's too bad. Almost immediately after the message centre came out, Groundspeak made it clear that Earthcache owners are required to accept answers that way.

 

I'm aware of that but to accept answers you first need to receive them.

 

The Earthcache is in Yellowstone Park. It is very unlikely that this is the first time this cache owner has encountered this. There is no excuse.

 

It can easily be the case that it was the first time they had an issue like that. Note that the first message with the wrong answers was also sent via the message centre but apparently arrived via the message centre e-mail gateway.

 

It's Groundspeak's job to make the gateway and the message centre more reliable. BTW: I believe without the message centre we also would not have this annoying freezing down of browsers. With a reliable notitfication system those who do not intend to use the message centre directly could deactive the check for new messages.

 

Whether or not GS needs to fix the MC is beside the point.

 

As an Earthcache owner, I know that if I don't receive a response by email, and someone logs my Earthcache, I need to go look at the message centre. That's due diligence. Blaming the message centre for petty kneejerk log deletion is nonsense.

 

This is why it is best to just go directly to Groundspeak on the rare occasion that someone acts like this. There is no point in trying to have a rational conversation with a cache owner who is going to make silly excuses for treating other geocachers badly.

 

There's a record that the message was sent, and the log will be restored. No need to shed tears for the cache owner. Next time she'll know better.

Share this post


Link to post

It is quite obvious that the problem is with the Message Center. It does not work well. The CO did not receive the message. That's the fault of the Messsage Center, not of the CO. So don't blame the CO.

The OP can keep trying through the Message Cwenter. Maybe eventually it will work. Or try something that does work!

 

The only issue I've ever had with the message center is the email forwarding, as in my note above. If I log into the the website and use the message center that way, I've never had an issue, sending or receiving.

Share this post


Link to post

As both an earthcache owner and finder, I prefer the message center over emails, but I accept both. I think only once did a cacher claim they sent a message and I didn't receive it; they sent it again and I was good to go.

Share this post


Link to post

For someone so quick to pull the trigger on deleting a log, you'd think they would be savvy enough to be able to verify the MC answers. Sounds to me they're just being stubborn and petulant about not wanting to use the message center. I'm all for using the proverbial 'big stick' to disabuse them of that.

This.

If the answers were sent via MC, and you can still see your sent message in the history, then you can

A] Inform them at the answers are easily available to them in their MC history, if indeed they didn't receive the 2nd email

B] Just copy and paste the answers to send by email and forget about all the hubbub.

 

I dunno which I'd choose... [A] is about the principle of the thing, and is the pacifist approach :)

If [A] doesn't work, the CO is being stubborn. At some point you just have to draw the line and ask yourself, is it worth pursuing or just end it at .

If there are still problems after all that, Appeals can reinstate your log.

 

 

I've been logging all mine via MC, because of the email notification that gets sent making it effectively the same as contacting by email, but the message is automatically recorded in the history. If sending by email, I tend to want to uncheck the option to send me a copy of the email :P

Share this post


Link to post

Again, thank you everyone for your kind input.

I do Geocaching to relax and have fun.

As a owner of some EC's and a multitude of different caches I take logging requirements very seriously though.

 

Having a log deleted has never happened to me before, so I guess I let some emotion get in the way here.

 

theBruce0, you boiled it down very nicely for me.

Option B will obviously end this, but there is some form of principal here, as pointed out in the EC logging rules.

 

I have emailed the CO and informed them of the answers being available in the MC. They replied by asking for an e-mail copy.

 

I have sent another e-mail to ask whether they are perhaps unable to access the MC.

Waiting for reply.

Share this post


Link to post

because of the email notification that gets sent making it effectively the same as contacting by email,

 

Only if it is sent (which assumes that the notification system works and that the recipient has chosen the appropriate settings for notifications which often will not be the case for cachers who happen to be around for many years but do not

follow what has been changed within the last two years closely).

 

BTW: I also wonder what happens if a cacher previously ended up on the ignore list of another cacher and then later sends answers for a cache via the MC. That's not the situation dealt with in this thread but something which

can happen.

Share this post


Link to post

because of the email notification that gets sent making it effectively the same as contacting by email,

Only if it is sent (which assumes that the notification system works and that the recipient has chosen the appropriate settings for notifications which often will not be the case for cachers who happen to be around for many years but do not follow what has been changed within the last two years closely).

...Same with clicking "Send Email". Or "Send Message". Or "Post Log".

I like to presume stuff works as it's intended until it's shown not to and is intentionally or unavoidably not fixed. For all intents and purposes, email notifications and the MC work as intended. There are glitches, but they are so rare I'm not going to let that dictate the way I use it. So, based on the fact that the system sends email notifications with a new MC message, just as if I sent an email message the 'old' way, I'll favour the MC because of its other benefits and record-keeping. If there's an issue, I'll deal with it when it arises. The MC handles two birds with one stone.

 

BTW: I also wonder what happens if a cacher previously ended up on the ignore list of another cacher and then later sends answers for a cache via the MC. That's not the situation dealt with in this thread but something which can happen.

That would be a way to find out if you're on someone's ignore list :P Find one of their Earthcaches, answer via MC, and if they say they didn't get the email and you tell them you used the MC, then that's a step towards discovering if they ignored you :P.

 

That may well be one downside of the MC though, yep. If COs are required to accept answers by MC but the MC allows people to ignore other accounts and their messages, then... #conflict

 

But then, I'd just say go back to option - just copy and paste by email and skip all the drama.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post

...Same with clicking "Send Email". Or "Send Message". Or "Post Log".

I like to presume stuff works as it's intended until it's shown not to and is intentionally or unavoidably not fixed. For all intents and purposes, email notifications and the MC work as intended.

 

No, it#s not like the other examples as for the MC what comes in additionally is the default setting of the MC notification which does not what those who do not use the MC themselves would expect. It needs some proactive change of the settings (at least this used to be the case - I have not checked whether that's still the case) to get notified about every message.

 

It's a similar issue than the hassle GS created a few months ago when they sent info about the August souvenir puzzles only to those who have checked certain boxes (without telling the cachers in advance about this).

 

I'll favour the MC because of its other benefits and record-keeping. If there's an issue, I'll deal with it when it arises. The MC handles two birds with one stone.

 

That's of course your right. I prefer the e-mail approach and apart from personal preferences I favour it due to the fact that I do not think that GS should have access to what I write to other cachers. It's not that I usually send along secrets (e-mail is not safe either) - it is a matter of principle to me.

Edited by cezanne

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

×