Jump to content

Audit Logs on Premium Member Caches


Mistraluna

Recommended Posts

I have just read the HQ announcement that they have removed the View Audit log feature on Premium Member caches. I found this feature very useful as it showed me who had actually been trying to solve a puzzle and who hadn't even bothered looking at the listing before posting a Found It log on the cache. Equally enlightening was the information it gave me about who was accessing the listing time and time again after having already found the cache themselves. Why would they do so? As the CO of many puzzle caches, I found this feature useful in knowing if someone was genuinely trying to solve and worthy of a slight nudge or not. I am disappointed that this feature has been removed. How do others feel about this?

  • Funny 1
Link to post
40 minutes ago, Mistraluna said:

I have just read the HQ announcement that they have removed the View Audit log feature on Premium Member caches. I found this feature very useful as it showed me who had actually been trying to solve a puzzle and who hadn't even bothered looking at the listing before posting a Found It log on the cache. Equally enlightening was the information it gave me about who was accessing the listing time and time again after having already found the cache themselves. Why would they do so? As the CO of many puzzle caches, I found this feature useful in knowing if someone was genuinely trying to solve and worthy of a slight nudge or not. I am disappointed that this feature has been removed. How do others feel about this?

I'm with you ,
and I used to use the function , in the same way as you did , and I'm missing it , nothing seems the same any more , when I open one of my cache pages what can I do I used to enjoy looking at each audit log on each cache ,,,,, as for reading logs I read them as notifications as they come in , likewise the DNF's when cachers can be ( Honest ) and log them , another thing you could see from the audit log , repeat visits , and you knew the cacher had been close finding and logging other close by caches , but not yours 

Link to post

I'm not with you. I don't use the function because I think every cache is for everyone and so I haven't any PMO-Caches.

 

1 hour ago, Mistraluna said:

it showed me who had actually been trying to solve a puzzle and who hadn't even bothered looking at the listing before posting a Found It log on the cache.

Maybe he was with a friend at the cache and his friend has solve the Puzzle...

And when a Cacher don't solve the Puzzle by himself, so what? The Owner can not change it, with or without the Audit log.

 

1 hour ago, Mistraluna said:

who was accessing the listing time and time again after having already found the cache themselves. Why would they do so?

To help friends to find the solution or find the Cache. Or he look what caches he has found in the past.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
2 hours ago, Mistraluna said:

I found this feature very useful as it showed me who had actually been trying to solve a puzzle and who hadn't even bothered looking at the listing before posting a Found It log on the cache.

 

The audit log only showed visits to the website cache page. It didn't show accesses from apps nor did it show access through PQs, lists or direct GPX download from the search functions. Inferring that someone "never bothered looking at the listing before posting a Found It log" is simply false.

 

2 hours ago, Mistraluna said:

Equally enlightening was the information it gave me about who was accessing the listing time and time again after having already found the cache themselves. Why would they do so?

 

I sometimes look back at the cache page of caches I've found to see who else might have found them since and what experiences they had, especially if it was one I particularly enjoyed or had trouble with. Or if I was with a group of people and I come back after logging my find to see what the others have written. Or if I've dropped a TB I might go back to the cache page a few months later to see if it's been moved on. Or maybe I'm trying to figure out a puzzle and I remember there was one I did a few months back that was similar so I'll go back to its cache page to jog my memory. Or if I'm trying to find a link to another cacher's profile and I remember they'd logged a cache just before I had. There are all sorts of reasons for someone doing that, and the thought that there might have been some CO studying their audit logs to imagine all sorts of devious mischief I might have been up to seems rather creepy.

 

1 hour ago, little-leggs said:

likewise the DNF's when cachers can be ( Honest ) and log them , another thing you could see from the audit log , repeat visits , and you knew the cacher had been close finding and logging other close by caches , but not yours

 

Ouch. A few weeks back I had an appointment in Sydney and planned to take the ferry across the harbour afterwards to grab some lunch and do a few caches. There were about half a dozen caches I hadn't found in the area I was likely to be in, so the night before I opened each cache page, read the descriptions and loaded the GPX files onto my GPSr. What I'd forgotten was that it was school holidays, so the suburban streets that are normally quiet on a weekday were teaming with muggles. The first two caches I got to were surrounded by them so I didn't even bother stopping, I just kept walking past. The third one I got lucky and, with no muggles in sight, I was able to make the find. After that I was too hot and bothered to try any of the others so I headed down to the beach for a swim and then went home. When I got back, I probably did what I usually do after a day's caching, which is open my Dashboard, click on my most recently viewed cache then use its View Larger Map to go directly to the map of the area where I'd been caching. I'd then click on the cache icons for the ones I needed to log (find, DNF or whatever), which may or may not be the cache page I opened to get to the map. Now by your interpretation, I've become a dishonest cacher simply because I've appeared in an audit log a couple of times, logged some nearby caches but not that one. Like I said, ouch.

 

Up until now I've never really thought about audit logs, but after seeing these comments I'm really glad they've gone away. I'd hate to think what PMO COs have made of my cache browsing habits over the years, but if I start getting strange looks at events I'll now know why.

  • Upvote 6
  • Helpful 1
Link to post

seems to me the point has been missed .

 

Ground speak have re-moved a function which we , some , a lot of us  liked and used for what ever reason .

if folk a worried that a PMO C.O can see where you ( might ) be looking at caching in the future , whats the problem with that 

you may go and look for their cache's you may not , if you do they'll know you've been there cuss you'll log that you've been 

 

I think its a C.O thing , I like to see if there will be interest in my cache's , esp when I place a new one 

to me it ( was ) all part of the game of being a C.O , 

 

I look at the other end too , should I archive a cache 

 

by looking at the audit log I could see if there was still interest in my cache's , if no one has looked at the page for months on ends I could consider archiving it , to make space for a new one ......... 

 

 

Link to post
2 minutes ago, little-leggs said:

I think its a C.O thing , I like to see if there will be interest in my cache's , esp when I place a new one 

to me it ( was ) all part of the game of being a C.O ,

 

Use your own method then. You can still do what you want but not with tool GS provided.

 

  • Helpful 2
Link to post
9 minutes ago, little-leggs said:

seems to me the point has been missed .

 

Ground speak have re-moved a function which we , some , a lot of us  liked and used for what ever reason .

if folk a worried that a PMO C.O can see where you ( might ) be looking at caching in the future , whats the problem with that 

you may go and look for their cache's you may not , if you do they'll know you've been there cuss you'll log that you've been 

 

I think its a C.O thing , I like to see if there will be interest in my cache's , esp when I place a new one 

to me it ( was ) all part of the game of being a C.O , 

 

I look at the other end too , should I archive a cache 

 

by looking at the audit log I could see if there was still interest in my cache's , if no one has looked at the page for months on ends I could consider archiving it , to make space for a new one ......... 

 

 

 

For me interest is expressed at the visit to the cache.  If my cache stops getting logged it’s an indication to me that it may have run it’s course. If I’m bored with maintaining it then I can feel better about retrieving it and archiving the listing. But for me the geocaching experience is a complete experience, foremost about the end experience, actual visits to the cache location, not the cache description. Although a good description in whatever form it takes, is a part of the whole package, whether someone pings the page just means they looked at it. It never occurred to me that it indicates that they will visit. I question the correlation between cache page pings and actual visits. 

Link to post
2 hours ago, little-leggs said:

I look at the other end too , should I archive a cache 

 

by looking at the audit log I could see if there was still interest in my cache's , if no one has looked at the page for months on ends I could consider archiving it , to make space for a new one ......... 

 

Out of interest, how frequently did you use this function?

Link to post
1 hour ago, L0ne.R said:

 

For me interest is expressed at the visit to the cache.  If my cache stops getting logged it’s an indication to me that it may have run it’s course. If I’m bored with maintaining it then I can feel better about retrieving it and archiving the listing. But for me the geocaching experience is a complete experience, foremost about the end experience, actual visits to the cache location, not the cache description. Although a good description in whatever form it takes, is a part of the whole package, whether someone pings the page just means they looked at it. It never occurred to me that it indicates that they will visit. I question the correlation between cache page pings and actual visits. 

 

While I agree with you, I don't think the poster was stating that there's a correlation between a logged visit (per the counter) and an actual visit to the cache itself.  I think, at least for this particular poster, it was more about inferred interest in the cache, which could lead to a visit to the cache to search for it.  In that vein, that was really the only thing I happened to find relevant about the use of the audit log.  As has been mentioned here and in the other thread is the idea that COs can still track page visits (ostensibly to track interest), just not using the device that GS used to provide.  It seems to me that would serve the same purpose, albeit without noting the frequency of an individual's visits.

 

For me, interest in the audit log was strictly limited to recurring visits to the page to gauge interest in a possible visit which could lead me to go check on a cache to verify that all is still well with the cache in question.  As to the OP, I have no idea how a CO is to infer from a visit to the cache page if a potential finder is "...genuinely trying to solve and worthy of a slight nudge or not."  It's impossible to tell the reason for a visit to a cache page, beyond the fact that they actually visited the cache page.  How would I know if the visitor is attempting to solve a puzzle, based on a visit to the cache page?  You can perhaps make an assumption that repeated visits over a short period of time might imply that the person visiting the cache page is truly interested in solving the puzzle (or contemplating a trip to GZ to begin looking for a PMO cache), but even that can be a faulty assumption.  The only way to gauge that interest accurately is to contact the viewer and ask them, which I would never do.  If they reached out, on their own accord, then it certainly clears up any uncertainty.

 

As to the other similar and related reasons raised by the OP about the use of the audit log, I think it's presumptuous to believe that a CO can infer all manner of things a page visitor might have for stopping by to take a look.  At best, it's guesswork.  At it's worst, I find it a bit self-aggrandizing  that a CO believes they know the reasons behind each person who visits the cache page and whether or not they were in the area, finding others' caches but not yours.  That is beginning to venture into the realm of disconcerting.

Link to post
10 minutes ago, Blue Square Thing said:

 

Out of interest, how frequently did you use this function?

 

I never do/did.  I won't archive my caches based on a lack of interest, which is supposedly based on views of a cache page.  I'll archive them based on other factors.

  • Helpful 2
Link to post
6 hours ago, Mistraluna said:

I found this feature very useful as it showed me who had actually been trying to solve a puzzle and who hadn't even bothered looking at the listing before posting a Found It log on the cache.

Equally enlightening was the information it gave me about who was accessing the listing time and time again after having already found the cache themselves. 

As the CO of many puzzle caches, I found this feature useful in knowing if someone was genuinely trying to solve and worthy of a slight nudge or not. I am disappointed that this feature has been removed. How do others feel about this?

 

A friend of mine is with me. I'm the one who logged on your cache.  He didn't.  We take turns with your puzzle and find it.  

I'm on the audit, another was with me, helping with whatever goal's needed, and will be signing that log too...  

When I did pmo caches, I often took a  basic member with me.  All who went with us logged their find.

 

I can look "time-n time again" on any of your caches,  and you'd  have  no  clue.

 

Worthy ?   We went through enough issues with some believing the pm hype thanks...    :)

  • Helpful 1
Link to post
7 hours ago, Mistraluna said:

I have just read the HQ announcement that they have removed the View Audit log feature on Premium Member caches. I found this feature very useful as it showed me who had actually been trying to solve a puzzle and who hadn't even bothered looking at the listing before posting a Found It log on the cache. Equally enlightening was the information it gave me about who was accessing the listing time and time again after having already found the cache themselves. Why would they do so? As the CO of many puzzle caches, I found this feature useful in knowing if someone was genuinely trying to solve and worthy of a slight nudge or not. I am disappointed that this feature has been removed. How do others feel about this?

 

I hardly ever did anything with The Audit Log, and it looks like even PMO users also weren't using it, not enough for IT to maintain support for it.  Many cachers didn't even want some of the more... um... attentive :ph34r: ...Cache Owners seeing their cache name pop up.  It wasn't being developed nor updated, and we knew it was going away.  It is gone now not because it was going away anyway, but "due to GPDR”, the magic law.  Go figure. B)

 

As mentioned, you can make a request in your cache description:

 

“If you're accessing this listing time and time again after having already found the cache, please write to tell me why would you do so.”

 

“If you're trying to solve the puzzle and need a slight nudge, please write.”

 

If there's a hint you will provide and no further hints, mention that.


You can't tell “why” from an Audit Log, so you could ask people to let you know.  I visit cache descriptions all the time.  Sometimes I'm planning a cache hunt, and I'm looking at nearby caches I found previously, as part of the trip planning. Sometimes it's because someone mentioned a problem with a Travel Bug, and I'm researching that TB.  Sometimes I'm intent on dropping a TB and need to see if a cache is still viable (suited to TB safety).  Sometimes I just want to view the page again.  Do you need to know “why”, each time?  If you're one of the too many Cache Owners who needs to know what cachers are up to at all times with your cache, don't expect any correspondence from me.  It kinda creeps me out.  :yikes:

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1
Link to post
7 hours ago, Mistraluna said:

Equally enlightening was the information it gave me about who was accessing the listing time and time again after having already found the cache themselves. Why would they do so?


Could just be someone using c:geo to refresh caches in their area.

  • Helpful 4
Link to post
16 minutes ago, IceColdUK said:
7 hours ago, Mistraluna said:

Equally enlightening was the information it gave me about who was accessing the listing time and time again after having already found the cache themselves. Why would they do so?


Could just be someone using c:geo to refresh caches in their area.

 

It could also be someone just yanking your chain.

 

I can neither confirm nor deny visiting all of of a CO's cache listings when that CO said something silly about how meaningful the audit log data was.

  • Funny 4
Link to post
44 minutes ago, kunarion said:

Sometimes I just want to view the page again.  Do you need to know “why”, each time?  If you're one of the too many Cache Owners who needs to know what cachers are up to at all times with your cache, don't expect any correspondence from me.  It kinda creeps me out.  :yikes:

Yep. 

Though to be clear, our past issues have more to do with those bothering the other 2/3rds more than me.

A downside maybe with her social part of this hobby...

She simply found out about it more, having so many on "paf", caching with her girl friends, and on the many online games with others.

None have ever had the backbone to say anything in my presence.  That's telling too.  Pick on the girl...  

  • Helpful 2
Link to post
6 hours ago, little-leggs said:

I look at the other end too , should I archive a cache 

 

Do you believe that no new geocachers will start this hobby in the future? New geocachers can not find the cache if you archive it. You should archive the cache if you can not maintain it.

Edited by arisoft
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
3 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

Do you believe that no new geocachers will start this hobby in the future? New geocachers can not find the cache if you archive it. You should archive the cache if you can not maintain it.

 

no ones mentioned , not being able to maintain cache's ....... where did you get that from
the thread is all about the loss of the audit log 

and being a cache owner who used to like to use the function 

please try to under stand other players point of view , were not all the same  

Link to post
6 hours ago, IceColdUK said:

Equally enlightening was the information it gave me about who was accessing the listing time and time again after having already found the cache themselves. Why would they do so?

there are so many reasons why 

it could be to check on TB listings 

it could be to read logs by others after a DNF trying to get , hints pointers  from their logs , or look at photo's

just because you have logged a find doesn't mean you not allowed to revisit the cache page 

 

Link to post
16 minutes ago, little-leggs said:

no ones mentioned , not being able to maintain cache's ....... where did you get that from

 

From the guidelines... it says nothing about audit-logs as a reason to archive a cache.

Edited by arisoft
Link to post
14 hours ago, Mistraluna said:

I have just read the HQ announcement that they have removed the View Audit log feature on Premium Member caches. I found this feature very useful as it showed me who had actually been trying to solve a puzzle and who hadn't even bothered looking at the listing before posting a Found It log on the cache. Equally enlightening was the information it gave me about who was accessing the listing time and time again after having already found the cache themselves. Why would they do so? As the CO of many puzzle caches, I found this feature useful in knowing if someone was genuinely trying to solve and worthy of a slight nudge or not. I am disappointed that this feature has been removed. How do others feel about this?

 
The audit logs were not meaningful in relation to the reason for the visit. You can not look into the minds of the visitors and find a justification, unless you are perhaps from the planet vulcan and master mind meld. :laughing:
 
The fact that you view the audit logs as enlightening, would be reason enough to carry it to the grave. In fact, however, data protection reservations are probably the reason. In the European Union, for example, such monitoring is not in line with data protection laws.
 
For example, if I'm bored, I'll call bookmark lists. There I let determine for all caches whether changed coordinates are available. In the background, the listings of all these caches are read. My user is then in the audit logs of all pmo caches. In fact, I was only looking for unresolved mysteries.
It may well be that this happened several times in one day, and for weeks, just according to the task, you know.
In my Portugal list are about 300 caches, in my pyrenees list almost 400, multi caches, mysteries, solved and unsolved ... .
 
Since I have no supernatural telepathic abilities, I can not know what an owner will think. Maybe he just wonders, maybe he's worried about his cache ... even though I'm such a nice guy :anicute: ... that's not fair. :cry:
 
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
On 11/3/2019 at 3:51 AM, Mistraluna said:

I have just read the HQ announcement that they have removed the View Audit log feature  ....Why would they do so?

 

Why: The announcement stated the reason, "Due to privacy concerns and GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) considerations, we will remove the Audit Log....

 

Lackey Rock Chalk reiterated this in the Audit Logs to Be retired thread, "Trying to keep track of and respond to all the false information in the forums is a fool's errand. But I'll pipe up to say GDPR is the reason for this. Period.

Privacy issues are going to continue to be a thing, both on Geocaching.com and tons of other websites. GDPR is a big deal. A really, really big deal. So is the California Consumer Privacy Act, which takes effect January ."

 

And arisoft offered some good insight in that same thread, "It doesn't have to be a specified part of GDPR. The problem is the penalty which is " 20 million euros, or in the case of an undertaking, up to 4 % of their total global turnover of the preceding fiscal year, whichever is higher. " If you suspect that your acts may violate GDPR you want to be sure that you don't. "

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2
Link to post

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...
×
×
  • Create New...