Great Story and Helpful Log Options

[+TerraViators]

I noticed there are 'Great Story' and 'Helpful' option to select in e-logs.  There is also a sort menu - sortable by newest, oldest or best story.  I really like the idea.  I'm hoping it will encourage geocachers to write better stories.  When was this feature implemented?

[+Max and 99]

Check out the other thread to see the comments on this feature.

 

 

Edited October 8, 2018 by Max and 99

[+Isonzo Karst]

It began in Norway  in May and, a bit later I think, in Canada. Here's the Blog post on the subject https://www.geocaching.com/blog/2018/05/faq-log-upvotes/

Edited October 8, 2018 by Isonzo Karst

[+hzoi]

On 10/8/2018 at 5:53 AM, TerraViators said:

When was this feature implemented?

 

I thought this was still in beta, first tested in Norway and currently being tested in Canada.  Did you see it on a Norwegian or Canadian cache, or somewhere else?

[+nericksx]

I love this idea. Similar to reputation points in the forum.

[+TeamRabbitRun]

After much consideration, as attractive as this initiative sounds, I think I'm against it.

 

My concern is that people will naturally set their preference to "GREAT STORY FIRST" or whatever instead of the current chronological order.

 

Therefore, the funny ones among us will get their logs read, and everyone else will have their logs pushed down into obscurity.

 

Now, I'm told I write amusing logs, so mine might float, but that's not fair. My log shouldn't have any more prominence that the one that says, "Thanks for the cache - I had a great time introducing my kid to his first caching experience. Here's what he liked about it....". Probably, no one will up-vote THAT log, but it expresses the kind of information that Geocaching has always celebrated!

 

Also, things like:

• "TFTC - Watch out for bees!"
• "Log is moldy. I replaced it."

 

Current, recent information is frequently IMPORTANT! The ability to sort logs, especially as a settable default will relegate many cachers to IMMEDIATE oblivion.

 

So, I feel that this might just have the opposite of the intended effect; to make many people simply write "TFTC" because they know that they're not good enough to be seen.

 

Some more reasons:

• The 'up-voting' will be done by the cache-reading public. If my humor doesn't match the tastes of the local college kids, for example, I don't stand a chance of getting any buoyancy.
• Even if it's not humor-based (and it will be in many places) What I think is important may not be what others think is important, and others will get to down-vote me (by not up-voting me).
• I cache alone, or with my wife. Despite my caching name, I have no 'team' or bunch of caching buddies. However, in my area, there are several groups that hang out together, hide together, search together, etc., and OF COURSE people will up-vote their buddy's stuff. I tried running for Class President in school once, WITHOUT the crowd of friends. I don't want to be back there.

 

This turns log-writing into a competition, and I don't need another damned competition in my life, especially in my relaxing hobby.

 

The worst part of THAT point is that it's a competition that YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO OPT OUT OF!

 

Even if YOU don't up-vote any logs, and don't care about that feature, YOUR logs will be playing the game, and losing.

 

Yup - the more I think about it, this feature is antithetical to the basic community nature of our hobby. It's a way to hold up the shiny stuff for adoration, and everyone else falls by the wayside.

 

Even though it ain't perfect, "TIME" should the only discriminating factor that fades logs.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I've always felt a little bad when I write a creative log anyway on a BUSY cache, because I know that very soon, very few people will ever read my work.  Of course, my #1 target audience is the CO, but the general caching crowd is a CLOSE #2.

[+TeamRabbitRun]

So, let's say a cache gets published in January of 2019.

 

The FTF and his or her two buddies writes logs, and each up-votes the other's.

 

Five years later, a thousand people have found it and written logs, which no one up-voted.

 

Guess who's still at the top?

[+MartyBartfast]

1 hour ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

So, let's say a cache gets published in January of 2019.

 

The FTF and his or her two buddies writes logs, and each up-votes the other's.

 

Five years later, a thousand people have found it and written logs, which no one up-voted.

 

Guess who's still at the top?

 

1. Mostly I read logs because I want to see what's been going on with the cache recently (both mine and ones I'm searching for), not years ago, so my default order will be most recent first.

2. Sometimes I read logs on caches I'm searching for to see if there's any extra hint, in those cases I  might sort by "Most Helpfull" to see if I can glean anything.

3. If I want to read a great story I'll get out a book, not go reading cache logs, so I can't see me ever sorting by "Great Story" (for that reason I don't see much point in that classiication).

 

I'm unlikely to ever read your (or anyone elses) logs unless they are in the first two categories.

 

If others choose to sort logs another way then I really don't care, and I don't see why anyone should be  fretting about how others choose to order their logs.

 

To be honest I really didn't expect such stringent opposition to the idea and I just can't understand it.

 

 

Edited October 29, 2018 by MartyBartfast

[+TeamRabbitRun]

3 minutes ago, MartyBartfast said:

 

I'm unlikely to ever read your (or anyone elses) logs unless they are in the first two categories.

 

If others choose to sort logs another way then I really don't care, and I don't see why anyone should be  fretting about how others choose to order their logs.

 

To be honest I really didn't expect such stringent opposition to the idea and I just can't understand it.

 

 

 

Well, I thought I laid out my point of view pretty clearly. I do care about that.

You explained how and why it wouldn't matter to your own caching experience because you wouldn't sort by "Great Story", but my concern is also for the general state of and trends in the hobby, and the seemingly inevitable march toward Social Media, of which I am not in favor.

 

OF COURSE newer cachers would take advantage of the sorting options. Just signing on, who wouldn't?

[+Pontiac_CZ]

13 hours ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

So, I feel that this might just have the opposite of the intended effect; to make many people simply write "TFTC" because they know that they're not good enough to be seen.

 

Majority won't care about the upvoting system at all. Others already write descriptive logs about how they liked a specific cache, what happened on their way to find it etc. (like me) and I am not going to stop whether or not my logs get upvoted. I write them for the CO and for me as well to be able to enjoy my past adventures again while reading my old logs.

[+nericksx]

15 hours ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

Current, recent information is frequently IMPORTANT! The ability to sort logs, especially as a settable default will relegate many cachers to IMMEDIATE oblivion.

 

 

 

Even though it ain't perfect, "TIME" should the only discriminating factor that fades logs.

 

Just remove the sorting portion of it, problem solved. People get to leave a "helpful / good story" tag, but unloved logs don't get pushed to the bottom. Like the reputation points on this forum, as opposed to the upvote model on Reddit.

 

I stopped playing for about a year, and came back to the game this summer. After I wrote my logs from last week, a few days later I thought, "I wonder if anyone liked my log or found anything helpful in it, or if the CO has seen it?"

I'm so used to Facebook and other forums that it was second nature to want to circle back and see (realizing that I have that little tug now, is a *whole other* psychology thread...) 

"Oh, yeah", I thought, "it just goes into the void. I don't even know if the CO even ever sees it. That's kinda too bad." I think "helpful / good" tags would encourage thoughtful logs. 

[+TeamRabbitRun]

3 hours ago, nericksx said:

 

Just remove the sorting portion of it, problem solved. People get to leave a "helpful / good story" tag, but unloved logs don't get pushed to the bottom. Like the reputation points on this forum, as opposed to the upvote model on Reddit.

<...>

 

I could go with that.

 

I think part of the initial concept was to include the ability to designate your viewing options, and that IS the part I guess I object to most strongly.

[+noncentric]

Yikes, it seems this test is spreading.  Besides the way it looks on the cache page, there are multiple reasons that I don't like the new feature - reasons that I think are reasonable.  I think people like the 'idea' of these log indicators, but the feature should be judged after thinking about how it would actually be used.

 

Instead of rearranging logs on a cache page, then just have the counter and maybe have a page on the website where logs that have a lot of points are displayed, across all caches. They will get more eyes on them that way.  Cachers might see a log that gets them interested in a cache they wouldn't have looked at previously and cachers will get ideas of how to write 'great story' logs from a wider range of cachers than in their local area.

 

Quote

I'm concerned about how it's being tested.  From what I can tell, the 'helpful and 'great story' options are only available when viewing cache logs on the website.  If not available in the app, then the test is only in regards to cachers that read logs on the website.

 

Many cachers only refer to previous logs while they are searching for the cache, which means they are looking at the cache logs in an app or GPSr. They are not able to 'upvote' previous logs using those devices. So, they search for caches, then submit their logs. How many of those cachers are then going to open the cache page on the website just to flag the previous logs that they read during their search?  Wouldn't someone need to find the actual cache to judge whether a log was "helpful" or not?

On 6/16/2018 at 11:48 PM, noncentric said:

Will a cacher's selection of "Newest", "Best story", or "Most helpful" be sticky?

 -- If not, then certainly come cachers will complain and want their selection to be sticky, since they don't want to have to re-select "Most helpful" every time they look at a cache page.

 -- If yes, then it's certainly possible that cachers could miss recent DNF's and/or changes to the cache hide.  For example, a cache might have 3 DNF's in the past week, but they were not flagged as "Helpful" as much as the older "Found It" logs from last month. The cacher will not see that the cache has a string of DNF's.  Another example, the CO might've adjusted the hide two weeks ago - a log from one week ago mentions the new hide and gets 1 Helpful vote, but logs from last month that mentioned the old hide got 5 Helpful votes - a cacher that sorts by "Most helpful" will see last month's logs that don't apply to the current hide.  These examples are problematic whether the selection is sticky or not.  At least, if the selection is not sticky, then maybe the cacher will see the recent DNF's before selecting "Most helpful" and ending up with a not-so-helpful view.

On 6/17/2018 at 10:05 PM, noncentric said:

The problem with trying to treat cache logs like product reviews, where 'helpful' is actually helpful, is that product reviews are for a static product that doesn't change over time the way caches do.

 

For example, someone reviews a particular phone like an iPhone 7. Those reviews are for that specific phone model, which doesn't substantially change over time. When the phone gets an upgrade, then it's a different model, like an iPhone 8. That upgraded product would then have a separate page with different reviews that are relevant for that upgraded phone model.

 

Cache logs are only helpful if the cache doesn't change. As long as the cache is always hidden the same way and never goes missing, then previous cache logs are accurate. But caches change over time, so the best way to present cache logs are chronologically.

 

If cachers really, really, really want to have logs 'judged' - then maybe add a 'helpful'/'good story' counter to the log, but don't change the order of the logs because cachers need to see the sequential activity of the cache.

[+Wet Pancake Touring Club]

noncentric makes a good point regarding helpful logs, that they should be sorted in date order, newest to oldest. Great story logs can be sorted by count (I don't really care, I probably would not use a great story filter.)

 

Back to helpful logs, IMO the count can be displayed, but should not be used for the sort order. And, I'll go back to my suggestion, there are a number of log types that should automatically be considered helpful. All of the status type log entries (NM, NA, OM, Reviewer Note, HQ Note, etc.) should automatically be consider helpful. Without them included, the filter is simply a 'spoilers that may still be valid, I have more research to do' filter. With them included as helpful logs, I can see that the old log that 10 people found helpful because it suggested updated coordinates has been rendered moot because the CO moved the cache afterwords. If the sort order is based on date, I start with the most recent, and review up until I get to the log that shows the cache was moved. No sense in continuing, the cache has changed. This would partially address noncentric's point that "Cache logs are only helpful if the cache doesn't change."

[+Viajero Perdido]

BUG:  It stopped working.

 

Clicking "Great Story" makes that text disappear, to be replaced with a tiny green dot.  (The animation to turn the text green and update the count didn't run.)  Wait...  Nothing further happens.  Reload page...  Great-story compliment not awarded.  This is with Firefox 68.0.1 on Linux with Privacy Badger and NoScript entirely disabled for this site.  EDIT: also on Android Firefox, latest version with NoScript again disabled.

 

Did you include this feature in your test suites?  (You have test suites, right?)

 

EDIT: It's working again.  Thank you! 

 

Edited August 22, 2019 by Viajero Perdido
++info;

[+Pontiac_CZ]

The devs do not watch the "Geocaching topics" forum for bugs, post that into Website instead.

[+Viajero Perdido]

Whatever broke it two posts ago, might've broken it again.

 

Can somebody give it a smack, and see what happens?    Thanks.  Got a compliment I'd like to send.

 

(I had an old CRT monitor that did respond well to a smack on the side.  But the condition got worse, and it took harder smacks to make the diagonal jaggies go away.  Ow.)

 

Edited March 23, 2020 by Viajero Perdido
Story, why not?

[+Viajero Perdido]

Still broken.

 

It's not coming back, is it?

[+Pontiac_CZ]

When I open for instance https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCXF23 and click "Great story" button under the latest log, it behaves as expected now in my FF 75.0 on Win 7 x64.

 

 

 

[+Viajero Perdido]

Ah yes, fixed again!

 

Thank you for allowing me to once again drop compliments. 

 

Now where the heck where the ones I tried to compliment when it wasn't possible?

[+Goldenwattle]

As long as the logs with more upvotes don't go to the top of the list the idea might be okay. I want the last logs at the top of the list. That gives more information as to the relevance of the cache condition/experience as it is now, than a five year old log with lots of favourites from their friends. Not something that appeals to me though. If Headquarters wants a really useful feature, how about finders being able to rate the D/T of each cache? That would be really useful, and say so much more about that cache, and overcome those COs refusing to rate their cache truthfully. The COs rating should also continue to show. To get a truer picture, maybe the cache needs a minimum of finds (say ten) before this kicks in, but even the first finders could rate it; only their ratings wouldn't show until the minimum number of finds were passed. A minimum number of finds should be needed first too (say 100?) to bypass the beginners who couldn't find the cache, because they didn't know what a cache looks like.  Could be a Premium member feature too.

Ratings people's logs has very little use.

Edited April 20, 2020 by Goldenwattle

[+cerberus1]

12 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Ratings people's logs has very little use.

 

I agree, though for those who play this as a game, maybe there is one more thing to add to stats.   

I write logs of my experience out.  So someone wants to "rate" my log ...like they're some sorta critic.  It's my experience...

It's a rare thing for me to go back to the cache page.  What for ?  So if it's meant for past finders to see, it's wasted on me.

I can see folks who "sneak in" extra hints being "Helpful", and long winded blather getting "Great Story".  

 - But it's not in the way, so I can skip it.

 

[+TeamRabbitRun]

1 hour ago, cerberus1 said:

 

I agree, though for those who play this as a game, maybe there is one more thing to add to stats.   

I write logs of my experience out.  So someone wants to "rate" my log ...like they're some sorta critic.  It's my experience...

It's a rare thing for me to go back to the cache page.  What for ?  So if it's meant for past finders to see, it's wasted on me.

I can see folks who "sneak in" extra hints being "Helpful", and long winded blather getting "Great Story".  

 - But it's not in the way, so I can skip it.

 

Emphasis is mine.

 

Ah, but it IS in the way if it's sortable, ESPECIALLY if a player can specify a default sort order.

On that specific point, please refer to the posts above from October 29th and 30th, 2018.

 

Those who dismissed the points made were. I fear, not seeing the effects and consequences broadly enough, and stating that THEY don't care, therefore it's not an issue.

 

Has anyone actually said yet that they ONLY want to easily see logs that someone else has 'liked', regardless of the age?

 

------------------------

 

Here's another point. If a log is essentially 'pinned' to the number one spot for everyone who sorts by 'funniest' for example, then that log essentially becomes part of the cache page.

If the CO really has a problem with it (but not the sort of problem that allows them to take action), then they're stuck with an unwanted 'permanent' feature on their cache description. Without 'default sorting', they only have to put up with it until newer logs push it down.

 

[+Viajero Perdido]

There's no sorting option, not even in the Logbook feature.  Logs are still chronological as always.

[+TeamRabbitRun]

6 minutes ago, Viajero Perdido said:

There's no sorting option, not even in the Logbook feature.  Logs are still chronological as always.

 

Yes, but it's been discussed here.

[+cerberus1]

1 hour ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

Ah, but it IS in the way if it's sortable, ESPECIALLY if a player can specify a default sort order.

On that specific point, please refer to the posts above from October 29th and 30th, 2018.

 

Those who dismissed the points made were. I fear, not seeing the effects and consequences broadly enough, and stating that THEY don't care, therefore it's not an issue.

 

However ... I did say "But it's not in the way, so I can skip it."     It may well be an issue for others, but not for me. 

I enter caches singly, and manually to a GPSr , after reading logs, any possible trackables, and sometimes the hint.

It's not in the way.  I can skip it...

[+TeamRabbitRun]

46 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

However ... I did say "But it's not in the way, so I can skip it."     It may well be an issue for others, but not for me. 

I enter caches singly, and manually to a GPSr , after reading logs, any possible trackables, and sometimes the hint.

It's not in the way.  I can skip it...

 

I now get what you meant, specifically.

[+JL_HSTRE]

On 10/29/2018 at 1:20 PM, TeamRabbitRun said:

So, I feel that this might just have the opposite of the intended effect; to make many people simply write "TFTC" because they know that they're not good enough to be seen.

 

Some more reasons:

• The 'up-voting' will be done by the cache-reading public. If my humor doesn't match the tastes of the local college kids, for example, I don't stand a chance of getting any buoyancy.
• Even if it's not humor-based (and it will be in many places) What I think is important may not be what others think is important, and others will get to down-vote me (by not up-voting me).
• I cache alone, or with my wife. Despite my caching name, I have no 'team' or bunch of caching buddies. However, in my area, there are several groups that hang out together, hide together, search together, etc., and OF COURSE people will up-vote their buddy's stuff. I tried running for Class President in school once, WITHOUT the crowd of friends. I don't want to be back there.

 

All of these arguments can essentially be made against the Favorite points system yet I think that has been very successful.

[Keystone]

I am closing this bumped thread, because it duplicates the active current thread in the Release Notes forum.