+inix99 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 If someone created a new Geocache it is good custom to let "Beta-Test" it. It is sometimes very cumbersome and incomplete to provide someone the information for this test. (Especially with complex listings / caches). I would like to have a way for cache owners to invite another user to have access to the UNPUBLISHED website. (Write protection or something like that) As a luxury variant, I could also imagine is to communicat over logs with the Betatester about for example a "Betatester - lognote"! I think it would be very helpful and would raise the quality of new caches very much! best regards Volker aka inix99 Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 If someone created a new Geocache it is good custom to let "Beta-Test" it. It is sometimes very cumbersome and incomplete to provide someone the information for this test. (Especially with complex listings / caches). I would like to have a way for cache owners to invite another user to have access to the UNPUBLISHED website. (Write protection or something like that) As a luxury variant, I could also imagine is to communicat over logs with the Betatester about for example a "Betatester - lognote"! I think it would be very helpful and would raise the quality of new caches very much! best regards Volker aka inix99 If someone acts as a "beta tester" for another, and receives all the information needed, curious how that information could be incomplete. If you choose to send another information for a geocache you create, I can't see how that becomes cumbersome either. Most we see, the FTF often acts as the "beta tester", and we don't see many instances where there are any issues with that method. Quote Link to comment
+Manville Possum Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 If someone created a new Geocache it is good custom to let "Beta-Test" it. It is sometimes very cumbersome and incomplete to provide someone the information for this test. (Especially with complex listings / caches). I would like to have a way for cache owners to invite another user to have access to the UNPUBLISHED website. (Write protection or something like that) As a luxury variant, I could also imagine is to communicat over logs with the Betatester about for example a "Betatester - lognote"! I think it would be very helpful and would raise the quality of new caches very much! best regards Volker aka inix99 Traditional geocaches? Quote Link to comment
+The Leprechauns Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Rather than changing the security settings for viewing unpublished caches (after several holes were plugged over the years), it would be less risky -- and less work -- if the cache owner simply sent the beta tester an email like this made up example: Hello GeoFriend, Remember that complex puzzle multicache I was telling you about? I've placed the containers and I'd like for you to beta-test it. There's a geocoin in the final stage container with your name on it. The first stage is located at N40 12.345, W080 23.456 and it has information that must be plugged into the following formula: blah blah blah etc etc. - COPY THE LONG DESCRIPTION FROM THE CACHE LISTING. Thanks for testing out my cache! Send me a message with any problems or feedback, or call my cell if you're stuck at any point while doing the cache. Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Rather than changing the security settings for viewing unpublished caches (after several holes were plugged over the years), it would be less risky -- and less work -- if the cache owner simply sent the beta tester an email like this made up example: Hello GeoFriend, Remember that complex puzzle multicache I was telling you about? I've placed the containers and I'd like for you to beta-test it. There's a geocoin in the final stage container with your name on it. The first stage is located at N40 12.345, W080 23.456 and it has information that must be plugged into the following formula: blah blah blah etc etc. - COPY THE LONG DESCRIPTION FROM THE CACHE LISTING. Thanks for testing out my cache! Send me a message with any problems or feedback, or call my cell if you're stuck at any point while doing the cache. +1 The few we've known who asked others to "beta test" their caches, simply sent the long description (with coordinates), and maybe the hint. On others, the CO went with the "tester" , and were able to fix problems while there. The coin reward's a nice touch. Quote Link to comment
+TeamRabbitRun Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 Since we know that ANYTHING on the cache page could be part of the experience, maybe this idea is worthy of discussion. Hints could be hidden in graphics, text, invisible stuff, display variables, relative positioning, color choices...literally ANYTHING. It just might be useful to be able to designate a "BetaTest" userid on the cache submission form. That user could then see the page, prepublication. Just sending them the details or a printout might not be enough. The more tricky or complex, the greater the usefulness of this proposed feature. WHAT ABOUT FTF!! UNFAIR ADVANTAGE!!! - Who cares. Side game. A CO can give his or her buddy early location info now, so there's no change. In fact, if the betatester gets no help other than except early access to the page, then they indeed Found it First the way the CO intended, so they should be able to claim it. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE COMPETITION!!! Like I said, side game - who cares. BUT PEOPLE WILL GIVE THEIR FRIENDS EARLY ACCESS!!! THAT'S NOT FAIR! Not fair, like letting the Birthday Boy find his Birthday Cache first? Oh, for goodness' sake, go outside and find some caches and stop twisting your knickers over other people who don't care what you do, either. Personally, I kinda like this idea. Comments? Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 Since we know that ANYTHING on the cache page could be part of the experience, maybe this idea is worthy of discussion. Hints could be hidden in graphics, text, invisible stuff, display variables, relative positioning, color choices...literally ANYTHING. It just might be useful to be able to designate a "BetaTest" userid on the cache submission form. That user could then see the page, prepublication. Just sending them the details or a printout might not be enough. The more tricky or complex, the greater the usefulness of this proposed feature. WHAT ABOUT FTF!! UNFAIR ADVANTAGE!!! - Who cares. Side game. A CO can give his or her buddy early location info now, so there's no change. In fact, if the betatester gets no help other than except early access to the page, then they indeed Found it First the way the CO intended, so they should be able to claim it. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE COMPETITION!!! Like I said, side game - who cares. BUT PEOPLE WILL GIVE THEIR FRIENDS EARLY ACCESS!!! THAT'S NOT FAIR! Not fair, like letting the Birthday Boy find his Birthday Cache first? Oh, for goodness' sake, go outside and find some caches and stop twisting your knickers over other people who don't care what you do, either. Personally, I kinda like this idea. Comments? Yes thanks... Who here said any of that ? Twisted knickers? You're commenting on things that haven't even happened... Quote Link to comment
+Mudfrog Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 I don't see any reason for Groundspeak to change anything. If i thought, for some reason, that one of my caches needed beta testing, then i'd just give my geocaching password to my trusted beta tester so they could see the page. I could always change the password afterwards if i felt the need. Quote Link to comment
+inix99 Posted May 26, 2017 Author Share Posted May 26, 2017 cerberus 1, that is exactly what i mean - I would like to do this with a few examples of my one caches (Unfortunately all listings only in German) https://coord.info/GC31E5G - The correct graphics to solve this, only appears to ghost hours (MEZ) https://coord.info/GC31E5G and https://coord.info/GC31E5G - Advent Calendars Every day you can call another puzzle over a link in die Grafik (external web application with internal checker) and if this puzzle is answered correctly the graphic shows a burning candle or a hook. https://coord.info/GC4PJ8Y - In the listing is a link to an external log-in page or that simple Multi: https://coord.info/GC6VZPW - Many stations to be loaded onto the GPS / Testing Links for external documents Quote Link to comment
+TeamRabbitRun Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 Since we know that ANYTHING on the cache page could be part of the experience, maybe this idea is worthy of discussion. Hints could be hidden in graphics, text, invisible stuff, display variables, relative positioning, color choices...literally ANYTHING. It just might be useful to be able to designate a "BetaTest" userid on the cache submission form. That user could then see the page, prepublication. Just sending them the details or a printout might not be enough. The more tricky or complex, the greater the usefulness of this proposed feature. WHAT ABOUT FTF!! UNFAIR ADVANTAGE!!! - Who cares. Side game. A CO can give his or her buddy early location info now, so there's no change. In fact, if the betatester gets no help other than except early access to the page, then they indeed Found it First the way the CO intended, so they should be able to claim it. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE COMPETITION!!! Like I said, side game - who cares. BUT PEOPLE WILL GIVE THEIR FRIENDS EARLY ACCESS!!! THAT'S NOT FAIR! Not fair, like letting the Birthday Boy find his Birthday Cache first? Oh, for goodness' sake, go outside and find some caches and stop twisting your knickers over other people who don't care what you do, either. Personally, I kinda like this idea. Comments? Yes thanks... Who here said any of that ? Twisted knickers? You're commenting on things that haven't even happened... Well, nobody said any of that. I was countering my own internal footstamping. Sorry if the format was a little unclear. My point was that I thought the OP's idea was worth discussing. Quote Link to comment
+niraD Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 I think a "beta test" mode could be useful for certain types of cache. Perhaps not critical or otherwise high priority, but it could be useful. But before it is implemented, I think Groundspeak will need to sort out how to prevent people from turning the "beta test" mode into a defacto method for publishing private caches. In other words, how do we prevent people from using it to create caches that only a handful of friends are allowed to find. Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 I think a "beta test" mode could be useful for certain types of cache. Perhaps not critical or otherwise high priority, but it could be useful. But before it is implemented, I think Groundspeak will need to sort out how to prevent people from turning the "beta test" mode into a defacto method for publishing private caches. In other words, how do we prevent people from using it to create caches that only a handful of friends are allowed to find. I agree. It was only a couple days ago one was looking for a way to "block" others... Quote Link to comment
+TeamRabbitRun Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 I think a "beta test" mode could be useful for certain types of cache. Perhaps not critical or otherwise high priority, but it could be useful. But before it is implemented, I think Groundspeak will need to sort out how to prevent people from turning the "beta test" mode into a defacto method for publishing private caches. In other words, how do we prevent people from using it to create caches that only a handful of friends are allowed to find. That's a good point. What do we think of cases where a CO decides to cancel a cache because his betatester went for it and they decide it's an untenable plan? That could be considered proof of concept, but it could also be abuse of the feature. Quote Link to comment
+RCH65 Posted June 13, 2017 Share Posted June 13, 2017 I think a "beta test" mode could be useful for certain types of cache. Perhaps not critical or otherwise high priority, but it could be useful. But before it is implemented, I think Groundspeak will need to sort out how to prevent people from turning the "beta test" mode into a defacto method for publishing private caches. In other words, how do we prevent people from using it to create caches that only a handful of friends are allowed to find. Do not allow logs on unpublished caches... Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.