+Mistraluna Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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? 1 Quote Link to comment
+little-leggs Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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 Quote Link to comment
+capoaira Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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. 2 Quote Link to comment
Popular Post +Max and 99 Posted November 3, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted November 3, 2019 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 Your assumptions could be very wrong. I could solve a puzzle and be FTF and never show up on an audit log. Just because someone doesn't show up on an audit log does not mean they didn't look at the puzzle or listing. 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? What enlightening information did the audit log give you about someone who looked at the listing after they logged a Found It? Maybe they wanted to read the other logs. 1 hour ago, little-leggs said: 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 So if I print your puzzle and look at the paper 100 times trying to solve it, I'm not worthy of a hint? But if I look at the cache page on my computer and my name shows up on the audit log 100 times, then I am worthy of a hint? 2 hours ago, Mistraluna said: How do others feel about this? Over the years, my feelings about the audit log have evolved. I'm kinda glad it's gone. COs can and do make too many assumptions when a name does or doesn't show up on the audit log. 9 2 1 Quote Link to comment
+barefootjeff Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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. 6 1 Quote Link to comment
+little-leggs Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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 ......... Quote Link to comment
+on4bam Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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. 2 Quote Link to comment
+little-leggs Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 1 minute ago, on4bam said: Use your own method then. You can still do what you want but not with tool GS provided. Please tell me more , I'd love to continue to see ? the activity on my cache pages Quote Link to comment
+on4bam Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 I've given examples in another thread about this, use the search option. Use a search engine to find info on 'how to view traffic on websites". That'll keep you busy for a while Quote Link to comment
+L0ne.R Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment
Blue Square Thing Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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? Quote Link to comment
+coachstahly Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment
+coachstahly Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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. 2 Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 This doesn't seem to be a bug report or a website feature... 1 1 Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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... 1 Quote Link to comment
+kunarion Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 (edited) 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 ...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. 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. Edited November 3, 2019 by kunarion 3 1 Quote Link to comment
+IceColdUK Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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. 4 Quote Link to comment
+niraD Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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. 4 Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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. 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... 2 Quote Link to comment
+arisoft Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 (edited) 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 November 3, 2019 by arisoft 1 Quote Link to comment
+little-leggs Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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 Quote Link to comment
+little-leggs Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 7 hours ago, Blue Square Thing said: Out of interest, how frequently did you use this function? Daily ? esp on the newly published cache's to me it was part of my game which has now been removed Quote Link to comment
+little-leggs Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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 Quote Link to comment
+arisoft Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 (edited) 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 November 3, 2019 by arisoft Quote Link to comment
+2Abendsegler Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 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. 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 ... that's not fair. 1 Quote Link to comment
+thebruce0 Posted November 4, 2019 Share Posted November 4, 2019 How about the discussion continue in the original thread 2 Quote Link to comment
+Isonzo Karst Posted November 4, 2019 Share Posted November 4, 2019 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. " 1 2 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.