Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 13
Geocaching HQ

Release Notes (Privacy law compliance) - December 31, 2019

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, The A-Team said:

I've been using the Personal Cache Note feature for monitoring the script loading. Once I see the "Click here to enter a note" text get populated, then I know the scripts have finally loaded.

Minor aside: There's about a 1/2 second between that text appearing for me and the link turning green (clickable) so it's not quite fully accurate. I'm not sure yet if there's another function still applied later than the coordinates link edit button

Share this post


Link to post

I'm having issues with the site. Specifically, when using the map option and clicking on a cache. I get a 404 error screen. The same occurs when I click my profile icon from my dashboard. I get a different, but another error screen, occasionally when clicking through the forums. Anyone else having this issue? 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, bluesnote said:

when using the map option and clicking on a cache. I get a 404 error screen

 

Same here!  Hit reload, same error.  Hit reload, --> cache page!

 

Clicking the Home Page button is a waste of time, it's not where you wanted to go.  Reload instead.

 

And really, that's Error 500 (internal server error), not 404.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't recall if this has been mentioned, but I can't see any more than the first page of picture gallery on cache pages.

 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, The Jester said:

I don't recall if this has been mentioned, but I can't see any more than the first page of picture gallery on cache pages.

 

Same here… 

 

(Win10 with EDGE, IE 11 and as extra Opera - all Browsers and Computers with the same malfunction)

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, The Jester said:

I don't recall if this has been mentioned, but I can't see any more than the first page of picture gallery on cache pages.

 

But it works with Firefox and Chrome under Win10.

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/5/2020 at 5:45 PM, 2Abendsegler said:

@zookeepertx
It is always good to put the feet up and wait a bit. The problems will be solved over time and the pages will work as before. I mean, you don't have to understand everything of the thousand things you mentioned. Many of us, including myself also, don't understand everything. Wait a bit, the time will come again, that it's just about caching.

 

But it's still gonna make me accept cookies at SOME point, and that's the point that STARTED all this anxiety! I just want to play a game; I don't want to have to be a genius to do it! And to figure out which cookies to allow, I'd have to be. And, I don't want to go through each of the cookies individually, to figure out which ones to allow. Who has time for that?!

  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, zookeepertx said:

 

But it's still gonna make me accept cookies at SOME point, and that's the point that STARTED all this anxiety! I just want to play a game; I don't want to have to be a genius to do it! And to figure out which cookies to allow, I'd have to be. And, I don't want to go through each of the cookies individually, to figure out which ones to allow. Who has time for that?!

 

I still haven't seen any cookie acceptance popup on my main computer but I block lots of stuff by default. I did see the popup on my tablet though and it takes 2 seconds "to go through them". If fact, the choice was made for you, allow "functional" cookies (needed to make a website work) and not allow all others (advertising, tracking.... ).

 

Share this post


Link to post
43 minutes ago, zookeepertx said:

 

But it's still gonna make me accept cookies at SOME point, and that's the point that STARTED all this anxiety! I just want to play a game; I don't want to have to be a genius to do it! And to figure out which cookies to allow, I'd have to be. And, I don't want to go through each of the cookies individually, to figure out which ones to allow. Who has time for that?!

If you were fine with what went on before you first saw the cookie prompt, just click ok. You are not granting any extra rights.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, 2Abendsegler said:

But it works with Firefox and Chrome under Win10.

 

Maybe this works for you with the browsers you mentioned.
Here at least with Firefox it doesn't work for me. I tested this on another computer. This also runs under Win10.
I don't like testing Chrome. Especially since Groundspeak can't tell me which browser i have to use. Groundspeak can give me a recommendation for the browser to use, but not a requirement, not a "must".

Edited by *AGUK*

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, on4bam said:

 

I still haven't seen any cookie acceptance popup on my main computer but I block lots of stuff by default. I did see the popup on my tablet though and it takes 2 seconds "to go through them". If fact, the choice was made for you, allow "functional" cookies (needed to make a website work) and not allow all others (advertising, tracking.... ).

 

Thats all right.
But since I have allowed the necessary cookies, a large part of the actual functions definitely no longer work as before.
Other cookie settings do not help here either, and not every cacher is a proven IT expert.

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, *AGUK* said:

Thats all right.
But since I have allowed the necessary cookies, a large part of the actual functions definitely no longer work as before.
Other cookie settings do not help here either, and not every cacher is a proven IT expert.

Well, my setup is not very special.

Win10 Pro, FF 72.0.1 64-bit and a bunch of add-ons (Tampermonkey + GClh II, NoScript, Ghostery, AdblockPro, Disconnect and others). The reason I've been using all these add-ons is because I was concerned about privacy and tracking before GDPR and the CA law.

 

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

If you're so concerned about privacy that you want to know what's going in to your browser, you'll have to learn about the details that seem complex, you'll have to self-teach the meanings and purposes, or learn from someone. No way around that. Interestingly, many who are well-versed in technology don't tend to be so concerned about that level of privacy (eg accepted cookies), because the knowledge is there that not everything is Bad Big Brother.  Basically, if you don't want to have ad tracking (which personalizes ads, not a Big Brother tracking your every personal move) then you'll need to learn and understand more of how the technology works, which implementations or companies are good, bad, neutral, to a degree how the browser functions, all of that...

You won't be able to maintain a customized, flexible, easy to use personal privacy ethic on the internet if you don't sufficiently understand 'how the system works'. Just sayin' ;)

 

That's why these popups tend to give an outline of the issue and an Agree button (or in some cases the ability to customize) - because usually the details of the setting are much too complex or intricate for the lay person to grasp.  In the end, that can either be interpreted as "shady" by people who don't understand, or a sincere attempt to make it easy for lay people if they're able to trust the source and just hit to Okay button.  People who understand tend to hit the Okay button ;)

 

Another reason these laws are frustrating. They're forcing laypeople to have to understand more complex technical concepts, which tends to push them into camps of either paranoia, apathy, or becoming a techie :P

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, 2Abendsegler said:

But it works with Firefox and Chrome under Win10.

7 hours ago, *AGUK* said:

Here at least with Firefox it doesn't work for me. I tested this on another computer. This also runs under Win10.

 

For me it makes no difference whether I accept all cookies, or only those that I have to, or whether I leave the blue banner "This website uses cookies". I tested it again with Firefox with privacy and security in standard and strict mode under Win 10, always with the "Next" banner on the gallery. It always worked for me.

 

Maybe you have other things active that you did not take into account during your first test. Add ons or scripts or I don't know ...

 

Otherwise, I don't have any other ideas either, why it doesn't work for you.

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, zookeepertx said:

 

But it's still gonna make me accept cookies at SOME point, and that's the point that STARTED all this anxiety! I just want to play a game; I don't want to have to be a genius to do it! And to figure out which cookies to allow, I'd have to be. And, I don't want to go through each of the cookies individually, to figure out which ones to allow. Who has time for that?!

I understand this!

We have to live with the questions of accepting cookies. Accept them, anytime, anywhere. Don't drive yourself crazyRealize, that was the state before the data protection laws. So far that was fine for you. Why not for the future too. Ask yourself: Why not. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, 2Abendsegler said:

 

For me it makes no difference whether I accept all cookies, or only those that I have to, or whether I leave the blue banner "This website uses cookies". I tested it again with Firefox with privacy and security in standard and strict mode under Win 10, always with the "Next" banner on the gallery. It always worked for me.

 

Maybe you have other things active that you did not take into account during your first test. Add ons or scripts or I don't know ...

 

Otherwise, I don't have any other ideas either, why it doesn't work for you.

 

That's the joke.

I have no add-ons, additional scripts or similar running in the browsers I used and tested. No "blockers", spam filters - nothing.

I have no more ideas.


But maybe one or the other setting or the corresponding cookies will change.

Share this post


Link to post

Well it's now the 11th/12th of January and the site still SUCKS.   I can not look at any of the other pages of my own tracables except page 1.  Every time I try to go to pages 2-4 just rolls me back to page 1.

 

Tried to accept the "necessary" cookies but it won't let us check mark that one.  

 

Beginning to wonder if we are done with Geocaching.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, puppyboy said:

Well it's now the 11th/12th of January and the site still SUCKS.   I can not look at any of the other pages of my own tracables except page 1.  Every time I try to go to pages 2-4 just rolls me back to page 1.

 

Tried to accept the "necessary" cookies but it won't let us check mark that one.  

 

Beginning to wonder if we are done with Geocaching.

I emailed HQ a few weeks ago with the same issues and this was their reply: 

 

"Geocaching.com performs best on Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and Safari (for iOS and Mac computers).

Internet Explorer has reached "End of Support" from Microsoft. This means there will be no more security updates, non-security updates, free or paid assisted support options, or online technical content updates. We highly recommend switching to an alternate browser for the best experience online."

 

I installed Firefox and so far everything works as usual there but not on IE or Microsoft Edge.

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/3/2020 at 9:00 PM, ecanderson said:

Rather than arguing over c:geo -- which is very old news indeed, could we return to the immediate problem at hand?  There seem to be quite a few folks here who can't even make use of the site at all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, macatac1961 said:

I emailed HQ a few weeks ago with the same issues and this was their reply: 

 

"Geocaching.com performs best on Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and Safari (for iOS and Mac computers).

Internet Explorer has reached "End of Support" from Microsoft. This means there will be no more security updates, non-security updates, free or paid assisted support options, or online technical content updates.

Guess they've never heard of IE11 as shipped with Win 10 and Microsoft's life cycle policy?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, macatac1961 said:

I emailed HQ a few weeks ago with the same issues and this was their reply: 

"Geocaching.com performs best on Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and Safari (for iOS and Mac computers).

Internet Explorer has reached "End of Support" from Microsoft.

This means there will be no more security updates, non-security updates, free or paid assisted support options, or online technical content updates. We highly recommend switching to an alternate browser for the best experience online."

47 minutes ago, ecanderson said:

Guess they've never heard of IE11 as shipped with Win 10 and Microsoft's life cycle policy?

 

Yep.   I'm often the last to "change" these things, since much that's "updated" I don't benefit from anyway...,  but even I knew that's not true.  :)

 I realized I needed to switch to 10.   Installing it this evening.

Microsoft, IE11 is supported until the end of Windows 10, which is on October 14, 2025.  So I "should" be good another five years

 

But UI5 ( javascript ) will end support when Microsoft stops supporting Windows 7 on January 14, 2020.

 - So it seems (to me) that javascript is the issue, and not really all about IE11...   Is that correct ?

 

Edited by cerberus1

Share this post


Link to post

Seems to me that part of the problem there is that developers seem to insist on using new tool features even when non-deprecated ones are serving the purpose perfectly well, which is how we often get into these problems of non-reverse-compatibility.  Classic "If it ain't broke..." scenario.   Anyway, pondering why OpenUI5 isn't a solution, other than NIH.

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, ecanderson said:

Seems to me that part of the problem there is that developers seem to insist on using new tool features even when non-deprecated ones are serving the purpose perfectly well, which is how we often get into these problems of non-reverse-compatibility.

 

Yep, I often see some very simple functionality making use the New And Shiny, which doesn't work on common/old browsers. Just use the simple and old. And if it ever becomes obsolete (that is, no longer works at all in the vast majority of browsers) then make a quick update. But, ultimately, it depends on your own internal research about what demographic uses the site most. If you largest browser use is New And Shiny, then you'd ample reason to employ New And Shiny. But at least find some way to help Old And Workable still get the job done. Chances are most of the Old And Workable crowd have adopted that state willingly and known that general support out in the internets is dwindling. The rest of them probably just need a little nudge to upgrade.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

In the case of browsers, new is certainly the way to go (shiny is not needed). People get in trouble when not using updated browsers as malicious websites and/scripts can infect a computer a lot easier via outdated browsers.

OTOH, some website keep using old technology that's no longer supported (with good reason) by new browsers. I still bump into the occasional "flash" website which is not only outdated but using unsafe  code. Modern browser won't even display flash.

You can get away with a lot of outdated software but anything that interacts with the internet better be secure ans as immune as possible to the latest threats.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, on4bam said:

In the case of browsers, new is certainly the way to go (shiny is not needed). People get in trouble when not using updated browsers as malicious websites and/scripts can infect a computer a lot easier via outdated browsers.

 

I'm not referring to cases of using broken old browsers or web functionality, obviously, and I'm sure I made that point, but maybe not clear enough. I'm referring to abandoning functionally sufficient simpler content - "new and shiny" for the sake of "new and shiny" is precisely what leaves out "old and functional".  "Old and broken" should be updated.  But what I see are some websites that abandon "old and functional" simply for the sake of appearing "new and shiny".

(IMO, we see some of that design mentality on gc.com often a newly designed page has functions that simply do not work, or old and simple functionality is abandoned for whatever reason, leaving people to implement scripts to bring back those functions, which ultimately may never make a comeback; occasionally I look at some code and see complex "new" stuff added and wonder why simple and "old" wasn't used, other than for the fact that it's "old")

That's what I'm referring to, not forcing people to use unsafe or broken browsers or functions.

But anyway, this is a realm of web and app development, and every developer has their own methods and mentalities, sometimes enforced by their commanding officers :P

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Sometimes the new and shiny will force people to update their browsers to more recent versions. In that case it's a good thing. Of course, changing things "because we can" shouldn't be done.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Sometimes the new and shiny will force people to update their browsers to more recent versions.

Yes, but sometimes new browsers work just as well will old-and-not-broken methods. Everyone should be updated sufficiently to not be broken.

 

3 minutes ago, on4bam said:

In that case it's a good thing. Of course, changing things "because we can" shouldn't be done.

This is the crux of my point.  But let's move on now

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/12/2020 at 3:19 PM, macatac1961 said:

I emailed HQ a few weeks ago with the same issues and this was their reply: 

 

"Geocaching.com performs best on Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and Safari (for iOS and Mac computers).

Internet Explorer has reached "End of Support" from Microsoft. This means there will be no more security updates, non-security updates, free or paid assisted support options, or online technical content updates. We highly recommend switching to an alternate browser for the best experience online."

 

I installed Firefox and so far everything works as usual there but not on IE or Microsoft Edge.

 

That is an interesting answer.


Only, I don't want to have more software, in this case more browsers, on my computer.
That IE is a phase-out model, okay. But I don't give up Edge, especially since I have problems with one, really only one, page there: geocaching.com.
The recommendation from other browsers is well meant. But why should i switch to other browsers because of a single page that implements its cookie policy in a very strange way?
Sorry, no! Groundspeak has to explain this to me very conclusively.

 

Note: The computer I used is from the beginning of 2019. With Win10 EDGE came on this device, and at least EDGE obviously continues to receive updates. (If I look at the update history like this.) So that's a current and usually correspondingly secure browser.

Edited by *AGUK*
Change font size and add annotation.

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎1‎/‎3‎/‎2020 at 1:43 PM, The A-Team said:

Getting back to the CCPA changes, I have the following questions:

-Does CCPA even apply to Groundspeak Inc.?

It only applies if one of the following is true:

--The company has annual gross revenues in excess of $25 million

--The company buys or sells the personal information of 50000 or more consumers

--The company earns more than half of its annual revenue from selling consumers' personal information

 

I didn't think they made that much money, and I wouldn't have thought that they'd be buying or selling PI. Have we been wrong and one of these is actually true, or is Groundspeak following the CCPA voluntarily?

 

-If CCPA does apply, why are the actions being taken different than what's required by CCPA?

Nowhere in the CCPA does it say that users should be able to anonymize their voluntarily, publicly-posted information. Request that all of their PI be deleted? Yes, just like GDPR. Keep their account active but anonymize their publicly-posted content? Nope, that isn't in the CCPA. What was the reason for allowing users to hide their logs, which walks back nearly 20 years of logs being public? It wasn't CCPA, and it starts a dangerous decline in the community aspect of caching, so I'd like to know what led to this policy change being enacted?

 

It's saddening to see that neither of these questions have been answered.

 

With no assurance that they aren't selling our personal information (and California members having an option to opt-out), I think it can be safely assumed that HQ is indeed selling our personal information. HQ, I'd rather that you just charge us more for memberships in order to make more money rather than stoop to selling our personal information.

 

It's also saddening that anonymization of log content looks to be staying around. That's a pretty significant step onto the top of a slippery slope that I hope doesn't carry us all away into a scenario where caches essentially become private.

  • Upvote 4
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

52 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

 

It's saddening to see that neither of these questions have been answered.

 

With no assurance that they aren't selling our personal information (and California members having an option to opt-out), I think it can be safely assumed that HQ is indeed selling our personal information. HQ, I'd rather that you just charge us more for memberships in order to make more money rather than stoop to selling our personal information.

 

It's also saddening that anonymization of log content looks to be staying around. That's a pretty significant step onto the top of a slippery slope that I hope doesn't carry us all away into a scenario where caches essentially become private.

 

Perhaps your question wasn't answered because it's already covered quite thoroughly in the Privacy Policy that's linked on every page of the Geocaching.com website.  You will see that, although Geocaching.com doesn't bundle up all our email addresses to sell lists to mass marketers (spammers), they do *share* described data elements with vendors (e.g., mapping services, API partners, etc.).  There is a raging debate in the privacy compliance world as to whether "sharing" constitutes "selling," and Geocaching HQ has taken the conservative approach to that issue.  I recommend that you read the Privacy Policy and bone up on the definition of "selling" personal information before jumping to the conclusion that your information is being sold to mass marketers.

 

Once you understand that "selling" includes "sharing" (unless and until clarified by California regulations not yet issued) and that CCPA says individuals have a right to say "don't sell my information," then the opt-out function for sharing information with third party API partners ought to make more sense to you.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Keystone said:

Perhaps your question wasn't answered because it's already covered quite thoroughly in the Privacy Policy that's linked on every page of the Geocaching.com website.  You will see that, although Geocaching.com doesn't bundle up all our email addresses to sell lists to mass marketers (spammers), they do *share* described data elements with vendors (e.g., mapping services, API partners, etc.).  There is a raging debate in the privacy compliance world as to whether "sharing" constitutes "selling," and Geocaching HQ has taken the conservative approach to that issue.  I recommend that you read the Privacy Policy and bone up on the definition of "selling" personal information before jumping to the conclusion that your information is being sold to mass marketers.

 

Once you understand that "selling" includes "sharing" (unless and until clarified by California regulations not yet issued) and that CCPA says individuals have a right to say "don't sell my information," then the opt-out function for sharing information with third party API partners ought to make more sense to you.

 

Thanks for the explanation. This is exactly what I was looking for, and frankly what HQ should have proactively provided to all members before making the changes. I wasn't aware that there was ongoing confusion surrounding the terms "sharing" and "selling", so that does help explain what happened.

 

I understand that the Privacy Policy explains this (albeit far less concisely, and without the background surrounding the terms), but "we've made changes to the Privacy Policy, go read it" isn't a reasonable way of introducing changes. Members should be advised which changes are being made and for what reasons. I'm sure Legal will say "just tell them to read the policy and you're covered", but a diligent and caring company will explain what changes are being made and how they'll affect you.

 

Anyway, I hope common sense prevails and "sharing" is defined as not being the same as "selling" (which, IMO, it clearly isn't). Considering that it sounds like many other states may follow what California does, let's hope that they get this sorted out quickly.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know if it has been posted in this thread or not.

 

But did this update change something to the JS of the entire site?

It seems that a lot of "popups" that use JS take a long time to get ready before they respond or they seem to get stuck in a never working loop

I often have to reload the cache page and not click anything for a while otherwise it might get stuck in the loop again.

 

e.g.

the "Add to list" on the cache page

or clicking the GC number on the cache page to copy it

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, ardila.nl said:

But did this update change something to the JS of the entire site?

It seems that a lot of "popups" that use JS take a long time to get ready before they respond or they seem to get stuck in a never working loop

I often have to reload the cache page and not click anything for a while otherwise it might get stuck in the loop again.

 

Have you blocked the cookiebot.com domain? If you haven't, it'd be worthwhile to try blocking it and seeing what difference it makes. NoScript, Adblock, either would do.

 

When this all started I noticed that a page would mostly load, then, after about a second's pause, it would actually complete (it was the page displaying with mostly broken image icons before the pause that gave it away). Clicking anything before that pause had completed and the actual images appeared created problems. With cookiebot.com blocked, that pause disappeared and the pages behaved as they had before.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, van der Decken said:
7 hours ago, ardila.nl said:

But did this update change something to the JS of the entire site?

It seems that a lot of "popups" that use JS take a long time to get ready before they respond or they seem to get stuck in a never working loop

I often have to reload the cache page and not click anything for a while otherwise it might get stuck in the loop again.

 

Have you blocked the cookiebot.com domain? If you haven't, it'd be worthwhile to try blocking it and seeing what difference it makes. NoScript, Adblock, either would do.

 

I've had cookiebot blocked since the change, but scripts still load dreadfully and painfully slowly, and still after the pages have rendered applying essential page functionality long after the visuals have loaded, in many cases breaking functionality or making things do what is not expected or implied.

 

...update: I had used my hosts file to block consentcdn.cookiebot.com, but failed to notice one JS loaded from consent.cookiebot.com.  I just added the latter domain and it looks, on preliminary loading just now, like that block has made a difference. If that's the case, it's consent.cookiebot.com/uc.js that is the culprit for ridiculously awful loading priority...

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

...update: I had used my hosts file to block consentcdn.cookiebot.com, but failed to notice one JS loaded from consent.cookiebot.com.  I just added the latter domain and it looks, on preliminary loading just now, like that block has made a difference. If that's the case, it's consent.cookiebot.com/uc.js that is the culprit for ridiculously awful loading priority...

 

I had not.

But I've added cookiebot.com and *.cookiebot.com to the blocklist and stuff is indeed faster again

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/13/2020 at 7:43 AM, thebruce0 said:

 

Yep, I often see some very simple functionality making use the New And Shiny, which doesn't work on common/old browsers. Just use the simple and old. And if it ever becomes obsolete (that is, no longer works at all in the vast majority of browsers) then make a quick update. But, ultimately, it depends on your own internal research about what demographic uses the site most. If you largest browser use is New And Shiny, then you'd ample reason to employ New And Shiny.

Assuming that the function of the page really IMPROVES with the use of "New and Shiny".

 

Can't wait for TT to sort out that Microsoft is about to dump Edge's original architecture for a Chromium based system.  Playing with a pre-release version of it here.  You gotta believe that there are going to be hiccups in that transition.  Have never seen two entirely different browser architectures handle everything identically.

 

Wonder what fun that will bring to the web designers who have been working at the bleeding Edge (yes, pun intended) of design because it also was New and Shiny.

 

Share this post


Link to post

I was going to post on the "Irk" thread...

 - That neither of two browsers that are standard on my now-upgraded OS just to do basics don't work.

"Change your browser" isn't really a fix.   It worked before, doesn't now (with this site only...)  , and I can't seem to get a real answer why it isn't apparently going to.

I don't mind change.  Change usually means somethings going to be easier in its application.  "Change for the better".

 - But when change means I have to "rig" things that worked before, that just makes no sense to me...         

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post

Ok, it is February now and we can't use the gc website on Firefox properly any more.

  • we still can't see any logs
  • we still can't see the small map on the cache site.

That makes it really hard to respond to logs and just as hard to go and have fun in finding a cache if I don't even know where I have to go.
Considering archiving our 40 odd caches cause it is just no fun like this.
Any useful hints on how to fix this please? I am not a computer savvy person, so it will need to be a simple fix please ;-)
Cheerio

 

Geocaching no logs.png

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, StamStars said:

Ok, it is February now and we can't use the gc website on Firefox properly any more.

  • we still can't see any logs
  • we still can't see the small map on the cache site.

That makes it really hard to respond to logs and just as hard to go and have fun in finding a cache if I don't even know where I have to go.
Considering archiving our 40 odd caches cause it is just no fun like this.
Any useful hints on how to fix this please? I am not a computer savvy person, so it will need to be a simple fix please ;-)
 

The website works as it always did with FF + Windows 10 as well as FF +Android.

The solution to your problems is in this thread but if you have problems working with computers you might ask a friend to carry out the necessary steps.

Blocking cookiebot.com can be done by using the NoScript add-on for firefox but you'll have to "teach" the add-on what to allow (all scripts are blocked by default). It can also be done in your hosts file but you might ask someone to do that for you too depending on your computer skills.

Installing the Tapermonkey add-on and then installing the GClh II script will further help and let you customize the gc website in lots of ways. Again, asking for help if you don't know how this works.

The above shouldn't take more than 5 minutes to do.

As I have used these add-ons for many years I wouldn't even have known about the changes to the website if not for the forum.

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, StamStars said:

Ok, it is February now and we can't use the gc website on Firefox properly any more.

  • we still can't see any logs
  • we still can't see the small map on the cache site.

That makes it really hard to respond to logs and just as hard to go and have fun in finding a cache if I don't even know where I have to go.
Considering archiving our 40 odd caches cause it is just no fun like this.
Any useful hints on how to fix this please? I am not a computer savvy person, so it will need to be a simple fix please ;-)
Cheerio

 

 

 

OK, so the tech savvy may laugh at this , as I'm no kind of expert when it comes to computers. That does however put me in the ideal situation to explain things in simple terms (because I only understand them in simple terms ... ) So, as others have suggested try adding NoScript to firefox , its quick, easy and can be removed simply if it turns out to not help:

 

To add NoScript
1 Open firefox (any page , doesn't matter)
2 Click on the 3 horizontal bar icon at top right
3  Select from the drop down menu the jigsaw icon with the label 'add ons'
4  In the new screen select the top option 'get add ons'  you are looking for 'NoScript Security Suite' , you probably need to click 'find more add ons' and
scroll down , if it doesn't show in the popular section, find it by typing NoScript in the search box.
5 Once you find the page, download NoScript by clicking 'download'.

 

I don't recall if I had to restart firefox to see the change , but there will now be a little blue or red 'S' in a circle in the bar to the right of your address bar.
Click on it when you are on a webpage, and you will see that you have the option of setting various things as trusted, temporarily trusted, default or untrusted.

 

I've set my  preference to 'geocaching.com' trusted, ' cookiebot.com' untrusted, which works for me.

If any webpage doesn't display properly, click that 'S' and play around with the permissions until it does.

 

Your preferences can be changed with a click on the dropdown if needed, but once set you don't need to do anything the next time you on a geocaching.com page, NoScript remembers the setting for you.
If this doesn't solve your problem , and you want to bin what you downloaded, all you need to do is click that 3 bar thing again from any web page, click on 'extensions', you see a list of your installed extensions, you can disable or remove NoScript with a click.

 

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, on4bam said:

Blocking cookiebot.com can be done by using the NoScript add-on for firefox but you'll have to "teach" the add-on what to allow (all scripts are blocked by default).

 

I accepted the default cookie settings and don't run any script-blocking add-ons, and I don't have any issues using Firefox. That may not be the problem.

 

I seem to remember some people initially saying that they only allowed the "required" cookies and then found that some features weren't working. Could that be the case here?

Share this post


Link to post

I entered the new update to Edge.   All profile tabs on other's profiles now work, and I can get past page one on lists.   :)

Not sure if it's the update to Edge, or this site (little said...), but it is (so far...) working as before.  Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

 

I accepted the default cookie settings and don't run any script-blocking add-ons, and I don't have any issues using Firefox. That may not be the problem.

 

I seem to remember some people initially saying that they only allowed the "required" cookies and then found that some features weren't working. Could that be the case here?

I have only allowed 'required' cookies and have no problem*  seeing cache pages with firefox  .

 

I'd hope 'required' means 'these are all the cookies you need for the site to function', rather than 'these are some of the cookies you need for the site to function', but after all the website <cough> improvements , it's not easy to be confident .

 

*No problem that is apart from the difficulty of trying to distinguish the coloured marks from the not-at-all contrasting coloured background when trying to check/uncheck boxes in the cookie consent thing .

 

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

I entered the new update to Edge.   All profile tabs on other's profiles now work, and I can get past page one on lists.   :)

Not sure if it's the update to Edge, or this site (little said...), but it is (so far...) working as before.  Thanks. 

 

The new Edge (known informally as Chredge or Edgium) is based on the same underpinnings as Chrome. If something works in Chrome, it should work in the new Edge too. It isn't that the site has been fixed to work with Edge, but rather that Edge has changed such that it isn't affected by the issues. The new Edge is optional, though, so there's a good chance that there will be lots of people still using the older Edge for a while, and it would be ideal if the various issues could be fixed so that the site works in old Edge/IE11.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Not going top read through 5 pages of notes.

 

Unable to edit my logs probably at least back to the first of the year, using Microsoft Edge browser.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, ambegador said:

Not going top read through 5 pages of notes.

 

Too bad... Not going to do the work for you as the answer is given in this thread. :ph34r:

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

Speaking of privacy,

 

I do not see any options to delete conversations in the Message Center nor disable it in my profile.

I don't like using the MC and want to encourage people to send correspondence via e-mail.

 

When do you think we'll see this functionality?

If not an option, who do we contact who has the ability to DELETE all of the messages in the message center (NOT HIDE them) ?

 

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I would think zapping an entire conversation at whim wouldn't be a feature well accepted. But if you were to request that your entire account be removed as per GDPR, then I would assume that either a] the chat conversations would all be grouped under "Deleted User", or removed entirely.  But I would not support a simple button to delete an entire two-way conversation. If you want to claim privacy concerns legally, then the logical conclusion would be deleting your entire gc account.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

I would think zapping an entire conversation at whim wouldn't be a feature well accepted. But if you were to request that your entire account be removed as per GDPR, then I would assume that either a] the chat conversations would all be grouped under "Deleted User", or removed entirely.  But I would not support a simple button to delete an entire two-way conversation. If you want to claim privacy concerns legally, then the logical conclusion would be deleting your entire gc account.

 

If "well accepted" would be a valid reason a lot of the changes GC made would not have happened :ph34r:

A button to delete a (two-way) conversation exists on these forums although it's overkill concerning GDPR, only one's own posts should be deleted (and quotes). The same could be done for message center posts.

There's no reason to delete a complete account just to get rid of MC content. BTW, none of the content I have in the MC is mine, people send me stuff but I don't send anything there myself.

 

Share this post


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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 13

×
×
  • Create New...