Please explain

[+Zekester & Simon]

I am well aware false discovery logs.  Over the past few days a new twist.  I have had a number of email notifications for Groundspeak that my trackable, "Green Rules" https://coord.info/TBJJGF has been discovered.  It went missing in 2005, and has been marked missing since then.  While there is an off- chance that someone has actually found it and entered it back in the system, none of the logs that I have received email notification for in the last few days show up on the TB's log page.

 

Huh?

 

Anyone has any idea of how that is happening, I'd like to hear about it.

[+IceColdUK]

It seems that Groundspeak are acting proactively to remove these bogus Discover logs.

[+cerberus1]

6 hours ago, Zekester & Simon said:

Anyone has any idea of how that is happening, I'd like to hear about it.

 

Sure.  Some maggot has started a campaign to ruin the hobby for others by placing a ridiculous amount of codes on faceboook.

[+MtnGoat50]

13 hours ago, Zekester & Simon said:

Anyone has any idea of how that is happening, I'd like to hear about it.

Sounds like a good question to ask FB. Geocaching.com is doing what they can to mitigate the problem but as long as FB allows it, it's going to continue.

 

The other option, I suppose, would be to remove the ability to log trackables via the API. That would stop this in it's tracks but it would also mean you could no long log TBs using an app (even the official one). I'm old school and log everything directly from the site but I suspect a lot of newer cachers that only use the app, and may not even understand the site exists, might be unhappy. 

 

[+Zekester & Simon]

@cerberus1

 

Well aware of posted or passed lists of TB codes, a photo of my tattoo has long been on Pinterest, and I am spammed daily on that one.  What puzzled me about this scenario was that I got the email notification of a log on the TB, but when I went to the TB's page, there was no log entry to match.  If Groundspeak has implemented a crack-down in some manner, it is only partially working if I still get spammed with an email notification for a log that they determined is bogus.

 

The solution to all of this is to allow the TB owner to determine whether or not their trackable is discoverable.  Simple and to the point.  There was a time when discovery logs did not exist.  Allowing the TB owner (who owns the trackable and has supported Groundspeak by purchasing the trackable code) to opt out of discovery is the best answer.

[+Zekester & Simon]

@MtnGoat50

 

I appreciate the suggestion, but I avoid any involvement at all with Facebook.

[+hal-an-tow]

On 2/8/2020 at 2:19 AM, MtnGoat50 said:

 

The other option, I suppose, would be to remove the ability to log trackables via the API. That would stop this in it's tracks but it would also mean you could no long log TBs using an app (even the official one). I'm old school and log everything directly from the site but I suspect a lot of newer cachers that only use the app, and may not even understand the site exists, might be unhappy. 

 

I log TBs on the website too (apart from auto dipping one of my own TB in all my  finds using gsak) , but if the option for logging via the app was removed the vast numbers of people who apparently never visit the site, but only use the app. would be unable to keep the record updated, whilst still able to physically pick up any TB they found, which would effectively vanish. I doubt they would bother going to the website 'just' for that ... 

 

The api I believe 'throttles' the download of cache information (the number of caches I can get or refresh in gsak in a 24 hour period is large but limited) , could a similar artificial restriction  be made for TB discoveries ? I've seldom seen more than 5 TBs in a cache over the years (maybe a couple of dozen at some events) , who would it hurt to have a low daily limit on discovered logs , apart from these cheats ?

[+Goldenwattle]

6 minutes ago, hal-an-tow said:

I log TBs on the website too (apart from auto dipping one of my own TB in all my  finds using gsak) , but if the option for logging via the app was removed the vast numbers of people who apparently never visit the site, but only use the app. would be unable to keep the record updated, whilst still able to physically pick up any TB they found, which would effectively vanish. I doubt they would bother going to the website 'just' for that ... 

 

The api I believe 'throttles' the download of cache information (the number of caches I can get or refresh in gsak in a 24 hour period is large but limited) , could a similar artificial restriction  be made for TB discoveries ? I've seldom seen more than 5 TBs in a cache over the years (maybe a couple of dozen at some events) , who would it hurt to have a low daily limit on discovered logs , apart from these cheats ?

People place hundreds of TBs on tables at Mega events to be discovered. How would people be able to log them? They are genuine discovers, because they see the TB. I'm not into this, but many are. Also, I have found more than five TBs in a cache. My TB Hotel has had more than five TBs in it.

[+hal-an-tow]

3 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

People place hundreds of TBs on tables at Mega events to be discovered. How would people be able to log them? They are genuine discovers, because they see the TB. I'm not into this, but many are. Also, I have found more than five TBs in a cache. My TB Hotel has had more than five TBs in it.

I did say "I've seldom seen more than 5 TBs in a cache" not I've never seen more than 5 TBs in a cache .

 

There is no way for the system to distinguish genuine , saw it on  the table at an event discoveries from non genuine , got the TB code from somewhere else is there ?

 

Either Groundspeak reconciles itself to cachers being disenchanted with buying TBs, therefore having a reduced revenue stream from sales, or it does something to lessen the irritation for paying customers with these dishonest automated bulk logs. If the side game of crazy levels of TB discovery is seen as more important than selling TBs , that's up to Groundspeak

[+cerberus1]

1 hour ago, hal-an-tow said:

 ... could a similar artificial restriction  be made for TB discoveries ?

I've seldom seen more than 5 TBs in a cache over the years (maybe a couple of dozen at some events) , who would it hurt to have a low daily limit on discovered logs , apart from these cheats ?

 

So when I hit a  couple of remote caches that have trackables in them (and can't take them with me...), I'd have to pick which can be logged because there's a cut-off ?

Some odd reason we find a fair amount of trackables that have been sitting months or years in remote or high-terrain caches.

I don't cache enough to take them with me, but I can say what condition they're in, and whether they're even in the correct cache.

Sure, I can do a Write Note, but if a TO is going to be so anal as to cut me from logging it Discovered, they can still wonder where it's at too...

 

I do agree though that the persons responsible for this should be handled, and I feel  through court.

The days of "just buy another one    " are gone,  and even the other 2/3rds hasn't bought a trackable in some time for her collection (getting these "Discovers"  off n on even before this latest batch).

[+cerberus1]

2 hours ago, hal-an-tow said:

could a similar artificial restriction  be made for TB discoveries ? 

 

If the site would consider a "restriction" on Discoveries, I might be fine with it if a restriction was also placed on folks that supposedly still have another's property for months or years at a time on "Visit" logs too.      

Let's say, oh ... one month ?      

Without photos, no one really even knows if that person still has the trackable they're using as their own personal mileage tracker.

[+hal-an-tow]

15 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

So when I hit a  couple of remote caches that have trackables in them (and can't take them with me...), I'd have to pick which can be logged because there's a cut-off ?

Some odd reason we find a fair amount of trackables that have been sitting months or years in remote or high-terrain caches.

I don't cache enough to take them with me, but I can say what condition they're in, and whether they're even in the correct cache.

Sure, I can do a Write Note, but if a TO is going to be so anal as to cut me from logging it Discovered, they can still wonder where it's at too...

 

Couldn't you note the tracking numbers, and log the discovery the next day if you'd exceeded the daily  limit ?

The cut off number doesn't have to be as low as 5 (which was given not as a log limit, but rather a number I''ve not often seen more than in a single cache), it would just need to be enough to keep honest discoverers happy after a day's caching, whilst making it an annoying task for the dishonest 'discoverers' ... I don't know what would be a reasonable number ... 10, 15 , 20 ?

 

I'm trying to come up with workable ideas, but I can't see any other way to preserve 'discovered' logs and  make the false ones less easy to do in bulk . 

I did think a 'capcha' requirement or similar annoyance (I hate the things on checkers etc ) might make every sort of TB log an individual , bulk-cheat proof thing, but I don't know if that could be implemented through the app. : if not, it's a bad idea for the reasons I gave earlier in this thread.

 

 

[+cerberus1]

5 hours ago, Zekester & Simon said:

 

The solution to all of this is to allow the TB owner to determine whether or not their trackable is discoverable.  Simple and to the point.  

There was a time when discovery logs did not exist.  

Allowing the TB owner (who owns the trackable and has supported Groundspeak by purchasing the trackable code) to opt out of discovery is the best answer.

 

The Discover log helps TOs know about their trackables by folks who can't take them with them.  Simple and to the point.   

My Discover log not only says what the condition of your trackable is, but whether it's in the correct cache, and I'd even give the name of the hoarder who's been bringing your trackable (along with thirty others in a box...), dumped on a table at events.

 - But if you don't want that helpful info, I'm okay with that...  

 

There was a time when the Visit log didn't exist too.   

It was supposedly meant to "make it easier" on the few people who "dipped"  (dropped, then retrieved) trackables from caches visited.

Odd, but most we know who dropped/retrieved used their own trackables, and didn't hold onto another's property for months on end.

That wasn't an "option" for a TO either...

 

[+cerberus1]

10 minutes ago, hal-an-tow said:

I'm trying to come up with workable ideas...

 

I think everyone understands that.  The other 2/3rds isn't too happy with this (around 300 coins to deal with) either.

 - But I don't feel punishing everyone for the actions of a few is the answer.   

[+kunarion]

2 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

I don't feel punishing everyone for the actions of a few is the answer.   

 

It does seem like doing what you learned from Kindergarten teachers.  Couple of kids misbehave and the new rule clamps down upon everybody.

 

Didn't recently the entire Internet suddenly become "privacy law" compliant?  We now all love never violating "privacy", and Groundspeak even got rid of nosy "Audit Logs" and fractured the whole web site for "privacy".  Facebook censors all that is bad and deletes entire accounts that post incorrect speech.  But after all this, third-party publication of private serial numbers is OK?!  How odd.  How telling.  

 

 

Edited February 9, 2020 by kunarion

[+hal-an-tow]

14 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

I think everyone understands that.  The other 2/3rds isn't too happy with this (around 300 coins to deal with) either.

 - But I don't feel punishing everyone for the actions of a few is the answer.   

Yeah, I get that, but how does Groundspeak manage to sanction those who choose to cheat (or, as I expect they would characterize it, 'exploit a loophole'  ) without having those people stop paying for their premium membership, and therefore impacting the profits ? (then they, and any non premium cachers locked out with them could just make a new free account and start again with the bulk logs.)

 

Those cachers who are making these logs are customers, part of the revenue stream, and it seems there's quite a few of them, so there's a tough decision to be made by TPTB : sanction and  alienate however many paying members, or have the sale of TB codes dip because this annoying problem makes the things less fun to own.

 

Less controversial for them if they can find a way to tighten up the logging system and make it difficult (or preferably  impossible) for those published TB codes to be so easily used in bulk .

[+kunarion]

11 minutes ago, hal-an-tow said:

Less controversial for them if they can find a way to tighten up the logging system and make it difficult (or preferably  impossible) for those published TB codes to be so easily used in bulk .

 

Don't tighten it too much.  There are a ton of posts in these very Fori where a Taker has an annoyance while logging a TB, and the respondents suppose that they "would probably just" unilaterally do such things as keep it, "put it in a drawer", or "chuck it".  Which also happens with TBs those guys find that are cool.  

 

Anyway, I'm just sayin' don't make that situation worse.

 

 

Edited February 9, 2020 by kunarion

[+31BMSG]

32 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

The Discover log helps TOs know about their trackables by folks who can't take them with them.  Simple and to the point.   

My Discover log not only says what the condition of your trackable is, but whether it's in the correct cache, and I'd even give the name of the hoarder who's been bringing your trackable (along with thirty others in a box...), dumped on a table at events.

 - But if you don't want that helpful info, I'm okay with that...  

 

There was a time when the Visit log didn't exist too.   

It was supposedly meant to "make it easier" on the few people who "dipped"  (dropped, then retrieved) trackables from caches visited.

Odd, but most we know who dropped/retrieved used their own trackables, and didn't hold onto another's property for months on end.

That wasn't an "option" for a TO either...

 

I understand what you are saying about keeping the TO informed without the trackable being moved but other than bugs outside of the US I don't remember ever having one of these discoveries on one of mine, most are discovered out of a hoarder's pocket or at an event to be eventually lost. I still think the TO should be given the option to make their trackable discoverable based on their personal situation, maybe they make a mess of things but at least the TO had the option to try something to keep their items moving. From my experience with the discovery logs on my trackables still in the US it's the exit sign for the trackable black hole highway.

 

[+cerberus1]

17 minutes ago, hal-an-tow said:

Those cachers who are making these logs are customers, part of the revenue stream, and it seems there's quite a few of them, so there's a tough decision to be made by TPTB : sanction and  alienate however many paying members, or have the sale of TB codes dip because this annoying problem makes the things less fun to own.

 

Well, we've heard of a few examples that the site is attempting to delete these fake logs.

The result (as the OP says in their opening posts...) is an email  showing the action, but go to the page and see that the site "fixed" it .   

 

Similar to kunarion and the "school" idea, sometimes these people need to be treated like kids.  It's the only way they knock this carp off.

I don't recall many of the "multi-log/log your own cache" people quitting.   Who they gonna complain to ?    

They site says that it's up to the trackable Owner to allow virtual  logs.  Seeing codes on faceboook is definitely that...

 

 

[+kunarion]

1 hour ago, cerberus1 said:

 

I think everyone understands that.  The other 2/3rds isn't too happy with this (around 300 coins to deal with) either.

 - But I don't feel punishing everyone for the actions of a few is the answer.   

 

Shut down all TB log capability for the offenders, and I'd approve .  I can tell if a log is suspicious, and especially when it's outright armchair-logged, such as when it's logged in a foreign country while I have the TB in my possession.  Give me the capability to flag a log as fake (or... *ahem"... take all such Help Center requests seriously), and if one guy creating the fake logs accrues enough flags, shut off his log privileges.  Or if TPTB deletes a mass of Discovers by one guy, next shut off his log privileges.  Don't make the rest of us "fix our settings" in a vain attempt to "stop people from messin with us", instead fix that one account.  And if there's an "account" that's incrementally testing TB numbers, why is that stuff not shut down?

 

Sometimes it's an App acting up, that guy didn't even know all those fake logs were happening.  That's probably what it was. 

 

Edited February 9, 2020 by kunarion

[+hal-an-tow]

3 hours ago, kunarion said:

 

Don't tighten it too much.  There are a ton of posts in these very Fori where a Taker has an annoyance while logging a TB, and the respondents suppose that they "would probably just" unilaterally do such things as keep it, "put it in a drawer", or "chuck it".  Which also happens with TBs those guys find that are cool.  

 

Anyway, I'm just sayin' don't make that situation worse.

 

 

These lists of codes are used for discovered logs  , and the loggers never have sight of the actual TB,  let alone have it in their hands .

[+cerberus1]

3 hours ago, kunarion said:

Shut down all TB log capability for the offenders, and I'd approve . 

I can tell if a log is suspicious, and especially when it's outright armchair-logged, such as when it's logged in a foreign country while I have the TB in my possession. 

Give me the capability to flag a log as fake (or... *ahem"... take all such Help Center requests seriously), and if one guy creating the fake logs accrues enough flags, shut off his log privileges. 

Or if TPTB deletes a mass of Discovers by one guy, next shut off his log privileges.  Don't make the rest of us "fix our settings" in a vain attempt to "stop people from messin with us", instead fix that one account. 

And if there's an "account" that's incrementally testing TB numbers, why is that stuff not shut down?

 

Agreed.  The site should be able to tell who's bilking the system. 

I'd think It should at least fall under, "interfere with the ability of others to enjoy our services" in the Terms of Use.

I should have kept track of all the people who sent mail thanking us for our virtual Discover logs.   

Most were to let them know I found  the trackable and it's code  on another cacher's gallery, yet never entered into the trackable's page.

 - Some were for finding pics of it on other sites not even associated with this hobby. 

This is one of the things Discover is for.    

I don't care about stats, so if the TO wants to delete my find after my helpful information, I'm okay with it. 

I understand that some have that knee-jerk reaction to fix the NOW,  but we need to think about the issues a quick fix can do to others later too.

 

[+31BMSG]

18 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Agreed.  The site should be able to tell who's bilking the system. 

I'd think It should at least fall under, "interfere with the ability of others to enjoy our services" in the Terms of Use.

I should have kept track of all the people who sent mail thanking us for our virtual Discover logs.   

Most were to let them know I found  the trackable and it's code  on another cacher's gallery, yet never entered into the trackable's page.

 - Some were for finding pics of it on other sites not even associated with this hobby. 

This is one of the things Discover is for.    

I don't care about stats, so if the TO wants to delete my find after my helpful information, I'm okay with it. 

I understand that some have that knee-jerk reaction to fix the NOW,  but we need to think about the issues a quick fix can do to others later too.

 

Thanks, sometimes grounding is a good thing

[+Goldenwattle]

7 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

If the site would consider a "restriction" on Discoveries, I might be fine with it if a restriction was also placed on folks that supposedly still have another's property for months or years at a time on "Visit" logs too.      

Let's say, oh ... one month ?      

Without photos, no one really even knows if that person still has the trackable they're using as their own personal mileage tracker.

I have had trackables for months (not years) sometimes with COs permission, so what about those? The owners enjoy where I take them and the photographs, and in one case the regular 'letter' home from the trackable about its travels. "Dear Granny.....Earnestly Ernie." Also, I will sometimes hang onto a trackable for a few months because I know in a few months I can get the TB to its goal, or I am going somewhere the TB hasn't been. Meanwhile I add photographs of where the TB travelled to. Otherwise I could drop it off in the same old area it's been travelling about for months, to continue visiting the same old caches again. Then again when I have dropped some TBs off they have sat in that cache for months. Also, I wonder how that would affect a TB you owned. I have one that visits all the caches, but never leaves my possession.

 

The three in my possession at present:

Australia Had in my possession since 18/Mar/2019.This belonged to a friend in Austria who sent this TB to visit me, and it made it all the way to me. She has now died . I am holding it until I can hopefully pass it onto another geocaching friend of hers (who is expecting to be able to see the TB) who will soon visit Australia, and who I will ask if she minds taking it back to Europe with her to maybe pass it to others who knew her.
Oz Mega 2014 Murray Bridge Geocoin This is my  trackable that travels with me.
Red Bell Travel Bug #84 I have only had this one since 29/Jan/2020. I am going travelling soon (thousands of kms away) and will try to drop this off during that.

 

However I do know a geocacher who holds onto TBs 'forever'. Any restriction on that person will make no difference to them. They might not even have logged them. I nag them trying to get the TBs out of their hands, that is if they can 'find' them, and occasionally I do get handed a TB by them, but I know some TBs I have been asking them to give me for years they still have.

[+Twinklekitkat]

Perhaps the new removal of the number of discoveries from the dashboard will help curtail this behavior of false logging.  It has been replaced with the number of favorite points you have earned on your cache hides.

[+cerberus1]

29 minutes ago, Twinklekitkat said:

Perhaps the new removal of the number of discoveries from the dashboard will help curtail this behavior of false logging.  It has been replaced with the number of favorite points you have earned on your cache hides.

 

I don't ever remember a time that "Discoveries" were ever on my profile page.    

It was never broken down between logs types.  Yours was ?    Please explain.    Thanks.     

Mine simply said "Trackables Logged" as it has since I started.  

For example, I look at yours and it  still says "1657 Trackables Logged"... 

 

I'm assuming that the "new"  profile  again was used in the announcement in the release forums ?   

I'd think a lot of folks are still trying to figure out why nothing works (at home using IE or Edge).

 We still use the old because it simply works better.   

By threads over the last couple weeks with the new one, the "old" profile continued to have no issues.    Go figure.

 

[+Twinklekitkat]

2 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

I'm assuming that the "new"  profile  again was used in the announcement in the release forums ?

 

Clarification - I meant total trackables logged.  It is no longer on the NEW dashboard and yes that was specified in the release notes.  I have never had one single issue with the new dashboard and prefer it over the old one which, in my opinion, looks very dated.

[+Thewins5]

On 2/7/2020 at 11:16 PM, Zekester & Simon said:

Anyone has any idea of how that is happening, I'd like to hear about it.

Certainly has happened to me - I have two TBs that appear to be on the list and though I get the notification, there is nothing on the log (have had 3 and 2 hits so far - but only one person on both)

 

I contacted a couple of people and they said that Groundspeak had deleted the logs. By the tone of their response they may have also been told that it wasn't appropriate (or maybe they were just trying to cover up their dodgy ways).

 

Maybe they are not announcing it as that might just encourage more people to find the FB page and bulk log (but pretty well every local group on FB has already discussed it). Would be good to know as it saves having to monitor the TBs and just look at genuine logs.

 

[+Zekester & Simon]

Some interesting discussion here and a few viable ideas, but my key suggestion stands:

 

I bought theTB number so control of whether it can be treated as a discoverable should be upturn to me.  That should not be a go/no-go of "it is in circulation or not" (which is what the current ability to place it in a "collection" does.  That choice should still exist, but an additional choice as to whether the TB can be logged using a discovery log should be added. I would choose to have my traveling trackables not be loggable as discoverable.  There are some trackables I own that I would choose to allow discovery logs on (the sticker on my truck or the tag on my dog come to mind).  My tattoo is a special case, and is a more difficult issue.  The twit who has photos (for which they did not obtain my permission) posted of it in their Pinterest page refuses to take it down, so I receive almost daily logs (SPAM) on that from people all over the world.  I'm thinking I'd be eliminating discovery on that too, but might turn it on fo a bit fo you to log a discovery if you had met me.    

[+hal-an-tow]

Here's a random thought : could TB's 'out in the wild' have their discovery log only permitted if the 'discoverer' also logs the cache they are in as found , and if the CO deletes the cache find, the TB discover associated with it also vanishes ? I can imagine this might help for the trackables actually in boxes , and any attempt to subvert it by holding an 'event' where some ninny posts a list of codes 'dropped' in the event so people can log an attended and discover all the TBs would at least be under Groundspeak's jurisdiction, so could be stopped.

 

For personal TBs held by the owner , that won't work I know. Some control given to the paying customer who owns the code would be a good idea, maybe a specific, select able category of 'personal TB', for which a discover log requires an extra step of some kind to confirm the agreement of the trackable owner ?

 

[+cerberus1]

52 minutes ago, hal-an-tow said:

Here's a random thought : could TB's 'out in the wild' have their discovery log only permitted if the 'discoverer' also logs the cache they are in as found , and if the CO deletes the cache find, the TB discover associated with it also vanishes ?

 

Sounds good, but here, we're one of maybe a handful of COs who've ever checked online logs to cache logs.

 - We know by others saying so in these forums that it isn't done regularly elsewhere either.