Announcing one (and only one) Locationless Cache for 2020

[+colleda]

I'm now watching the number of watchers. Gone down 156 since my last post 28 minutes ago.

[+lee737]

25 minutes ago, colleda said:

I'm now watching the number of watchers. Gone down 156 since my last post 28 minutes ago.

Reminds me of a Dr Seuss book I read to the kids! The Bee-Watcher-Watchers.....

Its funny to watch it dropping in real time.....

[+BethDaddyKaty]

16 hours ago, hzoi said:

 

Ouch.  Where's this coming from?

Being British and therefore thinking everything is ironic or sarcastic, and being bitterly disappointed when it isn't.

[+mustakorppi]

7 hours ago, The A-Team said:

Fixing the app would be the correct way to resolve this problem, but I guess that takes longer than just unlocking the listing.

 

Yeah, but to be fair it's not like they only learned about the limitations of the app now...

 

Does the "View larger map" link on the cache page work for a cache in this state? I know it doesn't for archived and locked caches, but not sure about locked but not archived.

[+Bigmada]

I added it to my watch list. Then I went to bed. When I woke up I had 80 emails with people leaving notes or "finding" the cache, so I had to take it off watch. It was at 1944 when I clicked watch now it's at 1354.

[+thebruce0]

I have a feeling there are a bunch of watchers who use the watchlist like a bookmark, not realizing the effect it'll have with a hugely popular/active/abused listing like this. =P To keep track of it, have a bookmark list for interesting caches and add it there. Quick access. You really don't want to have this listing watched.

But I totally understand the perspective of watching it since it's locked (if only perhaps in case of announcements?).  That was just an explosion of logs and emails that must have been sent out the moment it got unlocked. kaboom!

 

Agree with A-Team, the app should be fixed to show locked listings, especially if it fixes the reason why this one had to be unlocked. Since active caches can be locked, why does the app hide them in the first place?  The API shouldn't allow log posting to locked caches.

[+lee737]

3 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

 

Agree with A-Team, the app should be fixed to show locked listings, especially if it fixes the reason why this one had to be unlocked. Since active caches can be locked, why does the app hide them in the first place?  The API shouldn't allow log posting to locked caches.

 

I agree this is something they should fix - I suppose this issue has never popped up in the past, as locked caches are generally also archived, and the app doesn't need to show them.

[+thebruce0]

20 minutes ago, lee737 said:

I agree this is something they should fix - I suppose this issue has never popped up in the past, as locked caches are generally also archived, and the app doesn't need to show them.

 

Right, so let the Archived status hide it, no need to also hide locked. If active caches can be locked, then 'hidden' shouldn't be a property of locked caches. Who knows if they'll make that change =P

[+The A-Team]

14 hours ago, mustakorppi said:

Does the "View larger map" link on the cache page work for a cache in this state? I know it doesn't for archived and locked caches, but not sure about locked but not archived.

 

Unfortunately, we don't have a way to test now. Locked caches are invariably already archived. This Locationless was an exception to that rule, but now it's no longer locked and we can't see what happens.

[+K13]

Not everything need be accessible on the App. Let's keep it easy on those app developers, and use these obscure reasons to bring people to the website.

[+ecanderson]

One hopes they'll have the back end squared away so that finders aren't all seeing Washington State added to their stats and souvenirs.

I remember when 'travelers' caused a lot of that kind of weirdness, too.

[+funkymunkyzone]

On 12/20/2019 at 6:08 PM, ecanderson said:

One hopes they'll have the back end squared away so that finders aren't all seeing Washington State added to their stats and souvenirs.

I remember when 'travelers' caused a lot of that kind of weirdness, too.

 

There's already functionality built into the website to ignore certain geocaches from location/distance/souvenir etc stats, and a "blacklist" of the caches it applies to.  This list includes some effectively locationless caches, or at least ones that can be logged from anywhere (I could probably list a few that are on this list).  I'm not mentioning it to get into a debate about their validity, just pointing out this exists.  Presumably, this new locationless cache will be on that list also and therefore not mess with anyone's stats.  Or I could be wrong.

[+baer2006]

1 hour ago, funkymunkyzone said:

 

There's already functionality built into the website to ignore certain geocaches from location/distance/souvenir etc stats, and a "blacklist" of the caches it applies to.  This list includes some effectively locationless caches, or at least ones that can be logged from anywhere (I could probably list a few that are on this list).  I'm not mentioning it to get into a debate about their validity, just pointing out this exists.  Presumably, this new locationless cache will be on that list also and therefore not mess with anyone's stats.  Or I could be wrong.

This "blacklist" is an actual public bookmark list. The comment on this bookmark list includes the line "LOCATIONLESS CACHES are not included in this list as they are already excluded as a class." Therefore there's no need to explicitly exclude GC8FR0G from stats.

[+funkymunkyzone]

37 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

This "blacklist" is an actual public bookmark list. The comment on this bookmark list includes the line "LOCATIONLESS CACHES are not included in this list as they are already excluded as a class." Therefore there's no need to explicitly exclude GC8FR0G from stats.

Yeah that's the list I was thinking of.  Problem solved, before there was even a problem

[+igator210]

On 12/19/2019 at 4:12 PM, The A-Team said:

 

Unfortunately, we don't have a way to test now. Locked caches are invariably already archived. This Locationless was an exception to that rule, but now it's no longer locked and we can't see what happens.

When it was published... I threw it on a bookmark list. I could see it on the "Search" map, but not the "Browse" map on the computer

EDIT: just checked, still can't see it on the "Browse" map

Edited December 23, 2019 by igator210

[+hostanut]

Geocching HQ stated "But the cache type didn’t fit well with geocaching."

 

If Locationless caches don't fit well with geocaching........why bring ONE back?

The one and only Locationless cache can be obtained at Mega and Giga Events......which requires you to attend a Mega or Giga.......I'm sure that leaves many cachers out.

 

In this vein, why not bring back some of the archived APE caches so more  cachers will be able to log one.

 

When limited Virtuals were brought back....they were Virtual Rewards so why not make the new Locationless cache a Locationless Reward to distinguish it from the original Locationless caches?

[+hostanut]

If a banner is acceptable......why not any banner.

Why not a picture of Signal?

Edited December 23, 2019 by hostanut

[+dprovan]

3 hours ago, hostanut said:

If Locationless caches don't fit well with geocaching........why bring ONE back?

They created one single locationless cache just to have fun. That's fine with me. After all, this isn't anything like a locationless cache -- it's really a few TBs with a single log, a picture requirement in lieu of a tracking number, and a super special icon -- so one can't really worry about this cache not fitting into geocaching just because it's being called "locationless".

 

3 hours ago, hostanut said:

In this vein, why not bring back some of the archived APE caches so more  cachers will be able to log one.

I'm sure GS has discussed this several times over the years. I think the guess that's sufficient to explain why APE caches haven't been revived is that it hasn't gotten to the top of the priority list. But I suspect the real reasons are probably have more to do with the people making the decision feeling something along the lines of APEs shouldn't be sullied by imitations, and that coupled with the fact that the external justification for the APE caches is so long obsolete, it's silly. I also can't rule out that there are actual legal reasons they can't produce any more APE caches.

 

 

[+arisoft]

49 minutes ago, dprovan said:

They created one single locationless cache just to have fun.

 

I don't buy this explanation. I think that the reason is to advertise these events.

[+Harry Dolphin]

1 hour ago, dprovan said:

They created one single locationless cache just to have fun. That's fine with me. After all, this isn't anything like a locationless cache -- it's really a few TBs with a single log, a picture requirement in lieu of a tracking number, and a super special icon -- so one can't really worry about this cache not fitting into geocaching just because it's being called "locationless".

 

I'm sure GS has discussed this several times over the years. I think the guess that's sufficient to explain why APE caches haven't been revived is that it hasn't gotten to the top of the priority list. But I suspect the real reasons are probably have more to do with the people making the decision feeling something along the lines of APEs shouldn't be sullied by imitations, and that coupled with the fact that the external justification for the APE caches is so long obsolete, it's silly. I also can't rule out that there are actual legal reasons they can't produce any more APE caches.

 

 

 

Since it's nothing like a Locationless cache, it shouldn't be a Locationless cache!  Call it a Signal Cache!

I'm happy to have found the APE Cache in Maryland!

[+MartyBartfast]

20 minutes ago, Harry Dolphin said:

Since it's nothing like a Locationless cache, it shouldn't be a Locationless cache!  Call it a Signal Cache!

 

Actually it's more like the Geocaching Challenges,  and that started with have your picture taken with/kissing a frog, but I suspect they wouldn't want to resurrect that idea

[+The A-Team]

2 hours ago, dprovan said:

5 hours ago, hostanut said:

In this vein, why not bring back some of the archived APE caches so more  cachers will be able to log one.

I'm sure GS has discussed this several times over the years. I think the guess that's sufficient to explain why APE caches haven't been revived is that it hasn't gotten to the top of the priority list. But I suspect the real reasons are probably have more to do with the people making the decision feeling something along the lines of APEs shouldn't be sullied by imitations, and that coupled with the fact that the external justification for the APE caches is so long obsolete, it's silly. I also can't rule out that there are actual legal reasons they can't produce any more APE caches.

 

HQ has a clearly defined stance on the Project APE caches. Their policy is that the original container is what matters. When that original container is gone, so is the cache. When Mission 9 originally went missing, they archived it as per this policy. By extending the same policy, when the original container was found, they reactivated the cache listing.

 

So, if you want some of the archived APE caches to come back, we'll need the original container. If you have some of them just laying around, then we're in business.

[+elyob]

4 hours ago, MartyBartfast said:

 

Actually it's more like the Geocaching Challenges,  and that started with have your picture taken with/kissing a frog, but I suspect they wouldn't want to resurrect that idea

 

I knew this seemed very familiar.  It is exactly that, a Geocaching Challenge.  How many of us spent dozens of hours chasing challenges only to have all that fun and effort deleted forever?

[+dprovan]

On 12/23/2019 at 11:56 AM, arisoft said:

On 12/23/2019 at 11:03 AM, dprovan said:

They created one single locationless cache just to have fun.

I don't buy this explanation. I think that the reason is to advertise these events.

Advertising big events is one source of the fun they're having.

[+hostanut]

On 12/23/2019 at 4:36 PM, The A-Team said:

 

HQ has a clearly defined stance on the Project APE caches. Their policy is that the original container is what matters. When that original container is gone, so is the cache. When Mission 9 originally went missing, they archived it as per this policy. By extending the same policy, when the original container was found, they reactivated the cache listing.

 

So, if you want some of the archived APE caches to come back, we'll need the original container. If you have some of them just laying around, then we're in business.

HQ also had a clearly defined stance on Locationless caches.........didn’t fit well with geocaching and they were archived.

[+Ragnemalm]

On 12/18/2019 at 12:42 AM, daddybeth said:

A frog as a mascot.

 

Rubbish. But there you are.

 

Kermit the frog is offended by your post!

 

[+Ragnemalm]

On 12/19/2019 at 12:32 AM, JL_HSTRE said:

Over two dozen logs (mostly Notes) on the cache page in three hours. This cache page needs to be configured to only allow Finds. Unwatching.

 

It must be very tempting to post a "will attend"-style log to something like this. I mean, we log "will attend" to events, so a similar log on this feels natural, although not very desirable.

 

I can mention here, instead, that this will be a snap to log, since I will be part of arranging a Mega in september. No problem finding Signal there! Well, as long as I don't have to wear the costume myself of course! (That could be an interesting log picture.)

[+thebruce0]

Also, there's likely a legal aspect to APE caches not returning (as 'new', rather than revived). It was a marketing partnership for a movie. It's by definition a completed promotion, and the promotion is the only visible distinction (apart from icon) between an ape cache and a traditional cache. So there are a number of reasons, in my estimate, that APE caches will not and cannot be created new.