Jump to content

No way to hide found/hidden geocaches on profile?


Recommended Posts

Some reasons why someone might want their chronological list to be their right to disclose.

  • They cache with  a group of people and one of those people regularly checks the "All Geocache Finds" list to see what the group members have been up to and sometimes comments via social media/text message/meetup  about where you've been. Sometimes asking why they didn't call her/him.  
  • Their manager/colleague geocaches too and sometimes checks the "All Geocache Finds" list. They occassionally comment at the water cooler or meeting 'Hey Fred, what was Rochester like this weekend?'. Sometimes they'd rather choose what to share with their colleagues about where they've been. 
  • A family member checks their "All Geocache Finds" list to see where they've been and asks why they were in the area and didn't get in touch.  
  • Their angry ex is actually stalking them.
  • A person at a geocaching event, that they briefly met a couple of times, has taken an uncomfortable interest in their life and mentions how they noticed that they've been travelling out of state frequently.
  • They don't want anyone to know that they travelled overseas last year for 3 days of geocaching adventure during a pandemic. 
  • They just want a modicum of privacy on the web where it can be had, especially when the feature involved is "oversharing".  Is the "All Geocache Finds" feature necessary for others to find geocaches efficiently?

We are not entitled to know where another geocacher has been. 

 

Regarding the "All Geocache Hides" feature. Is the AGH list necessary for others to geocache efficiently? I think a case can be made that "All Geocache Hides" feature is necessary for others to geocache efficiently. The AGH list is necessary to for efficiently getting a list of geocaches that a finder might find enjoyable. Where a person has been isn't an efficient tool for finding good caches. Many of the caches I've found were caches in rough shape or in unattractive locations. You are better off looking at my Favourites list (that list is meant for sharing to help others find good caches). 

Edited by L0ne.R
grammar
  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
2 hours ago, me N u said:

If somebody is "creeped out" by the prospect of someone casing them, why would they contact the cache owner (probably a total stranger) at all?

If someone has a flat tire and asks a passerby for help, do you view that as an invitation to secretly find out everything you can about them? Rhetorical question.

 

This is also irrelevant, as the person from barefootjeff’s story isn’t here asking for better privacy controls, nor do they represent all geocachers.

Link to post

Entertaining thread :drama:

 

Suppose a CO hides his (M/F/X) hides and someone creates some PQ's and imports these GPX's into GSAK or any other software and then runs a filter "placed by".... What horror, that someone sees all of the CO's caches in one go.

 

The same goes for "do not share via API". Missing info in GSAK (or other software) can easily be filled in by downloading a PQ or GPX from the cachelisting.

 

CO's worried about people easily seeing their hides should create a CO-only profile.

Cachers worried about people seeing their founds should not log online.

 

In fact, those worried about people finding out stuff about them shouldn't post anything online and stay off the streets so they are not seen (there's a vacant cave in Pakistan somewhere to live in :ph34r:).

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, on4bam said:

Cachers worried about people seeing their founds should not log online.

 

Yes and COs I'm sure would be happy for it. ;) 

 

Personally, I'd rather they left a note. Especially if they will write a 'shared experience' log and add the community feel of geocaching that so many of us thrive on. I don't need to know that they were caching in Thailand in 2008, or even that they visited the nearby cache before they visited mine. 

Edited by L0ne.R
  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
21 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Cachers worried about people seeing their founds should not log online.

 

Yep.  :)   The couple thinking similar in my area are the same ones on faceboook, talking about where they went for lunch.  :laughing:

Maybe I missed it, but if someone wanted to have cache finds hidden, why on Earth would they post photos in their gallery with GC #s ?

Edited by cerberus1
whowhatwhere
  • Funny 1
Link to post

I think the AGF list should generate a list like the old Premium membership feature where if you looked at their PM cache your name appeared on a list. :bad: 

 

I recall a lot of people feeling very uncomfortable about the PMO list. Some used workarounds so they didn't appear on them. Or didn't search for PMO caches so they wouldn't show up on the list. Not because they had nefarious intentions, but because of their own sense of privacy. The PMO list affected how they played the game. The AGF lists affects how some can enjoy and participate in the game and affects how some COs get feedback. 

  • Funny 1
  • Surprised 2
Link to post
4 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

Yep.  :)   The couple thinking similar in my area are the same ones on faceboook, talking about where they went for lunch.  :laughing:

 

They made the choice to talk about their lunch on Facebook. Maybe even limited that online discussion to "friends" (not public). The AGF list is not a choice. 

Edited by L0ne.R
  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
3 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

I think the AGF list should generate a list like the old Premium membership feature where if you looked at their PM cache your name appeared on a list. :bad: 

 

I recall a lot of people feeling very uncomfortable about the PMO list. Some used workarounds so they didn't appear on them. Or didn't search for PMO caches so they wouldn't show up on the list. Not because they had nefarious intentions, but because of their own sense of privacy. The PMO list affected how they played the game. The AGF lists affects how some can enjoy and participate in the game and affects how some COs get feedback. 

 

Not sure what the heck an "AGF" list is, but we were ones who had issues with pmo audits. 

The issue was anal, micromanaging COs emailing, wondering why I clicked on their hide more than once. Some weekly.

 -  Apparently some think no one plans things out, maybe months in advance...

It wasn't about a "sense of privacy" at all, where I've been means nada.  It was actual harassment.

A few I finally had to say I was notifying HQ to end the harassment.  A big difference...

On one, a cache went missing, and this person told everyone at an event it was us who took it, just because I clicked on it a few times the last couple months,  and was the last to "click on it" before it went missing. There were a couple similar...

Even though that audits gone, and there's numerous ways to bypass it anyway, I haven't done a pmo cache since.

  • Funny 1
Link to post

PMO audits were finally found to be a privacy issue and were finally canned.  I said that for years earlier...

 

Clicking on a pmo cache meant that you were aware that a CO may notice you simply looked at their cache .

That's not the same as a CO seeing who logged their cache found after the fact.

 - And it's definitely not the same as someone simply seeing what caches you did well-after the fact on your profile.

 

Link to post
16 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

We are not entitled to know where another geocacher has been. 

 

In that case, logs should be just a private diary and not shown on cache pages or notified to COs or anyone with a Watchlist. Or better yet, do away with logs altogether and just have a +1 smiley button, with only a tally of the total number of finds shown on the cache page. Just like ALs, I guess.

 

Edit to add: You'd better get rid of instant notifications, too, because I could use those to spy on all the caching activity in my region (or any other region), and not just finds but DNFs, WNs and pretty much any log type. Nobody is safe.

Edited by barefootjeff
  • Surprised 1
Link to post

"entitled" is different than "able to be determined". Entitled means you have a right to know where someone has been. Yeah. no. But you are able to, by your choice, do research to make your best deduction (and that person should realize what is public knowledge). That's different.

 

Look, what it comes down to is, I know I don't have a 'right" to know any other geocacher's hiding history. But I do have the ability to make use of the tools at hand to discern what that history may be. The tools at hand do not provide a complete picture (apart from the profile list). But they do provide an active picture. So I know that if I wanted to know a geocacher's great hides so I can enjoy them, I am indeed able to do so. But if I wanted to know a geocacher's entire hiding history, I need that "AGH" list on their profile. The question becomes, does my right to that list trump their right to have the option to hide that list?  What are the arguments for/against?

 

I would think that concern over the ease of attaining that full list in the potential for antagonizing behaviour would trump my desire to make it easier to attain that information. In this case it's more about "think of others before yourself" - I'm not going to say "No, I want to be able to see all your hides, even though you're worried about stalkers". I know I have other ways to find what I'm looking for.  Of course, they should also know that too - but again, the "AGH" list is much more complete and simple to attain.

 

This doesn't mean I believe this should absolutely be implemented ASAP.  If no one has that concern, then it doesn't bother me one way or another. But if it is implemented, then if I were wanting to stalk by use of that list, then it would make it harder for me as a stalker.

 

As mentioned, there are other solutions - like creating a creator-only account for hides. Or even multiple.  That could be borderline 'sock puppet' account abuse, but it's one way around separating your finder-account from your hider-account (if that's relevant to the reason someone may be stalking).

 

I hate the "it doesn't bother me so it shouldn't bother you" argument. I'd rather find a way to encourage people not to be bothered, rather than just deny possible resolutions to reasonable concerns.

It's "Here's why having your face on street view shouldn't bother you as much as it does" rather than "No they shouldn't change anything and you should accept it"

Or, "Rather than turning off the camera whenever there's a human around like you're advocating, how about they blur faces if they're spotted in the imagery?"

ie, I don't care if my face is on streetview, but someone else might. So how do we deal with that concern productively?

 

How about the option to, if you want, hide your AGH list from your public-facing profile?

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to post
2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

How about the option to, if you want, hide your AGH list from your public-facing profile?

 

That'd be great for chronic maintenance-shirkers to cover their tracks. A trend like this is pretty obvious if you look at the AGH list but would be much harder to spot without it:

 

image.png.053e7a0c8079a5cfb3b720197e888530.png

Link to post
17 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:
3 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

How about the option to, if you want, hide your AGH list from your public-facing profile?

 

That'd be great for chronic maintenance-shirkers to cover their tracks.

 

Do you poke around people's profiles to search for geocaches they own with NM flags on them, regularly? To do what? In my mind it's cache police who will do this much more often than people looking for caches to ignore. Even so, community and reviewers crack down on caches and cache owners with regular ongoing maintenance issues as needed (or should). And if you really want that list, you can (just as one can use search) use other tools to come to that list. Your or my desire to see a complete list of a geocacher's listings that are flagged as NM I would say is still far less important than the concern of a cache owner who has dealt with or worries about a stalker making use of that all-in-one easy-access list of everything. As described above.

 

17 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

chronic maintenance-shirkers

 

My reviewers crack down on such people by disabling and/or archiving caches, and keeping an eye on repeat offenders. And, such owners gain a reputation organically in the community.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to post
1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

Do you poke around people's profiles to search for geocaches they own with NM flags on them, regularly? To do what? In my mind it's cache police who will do this much more often than people looking for caches to ignore. Even so, community and reviewers crack down on caches and cache owners with regular ongoing maintenance issues as needed (or should). And if you really want that list, you can (just as one can use search) use other tools to come to that list. Your or my desire to see a complete list of a geocacher's listings that are flagged as NM I would say is still far less important than the concern of a cache owner who has dealt with or worries about a stalker making use of that all-in-one easy-access list of everything. As described above.

 

So now I'm a cache cop as well as a stalker. Great. I don't want to be either, I just think that a communal game like geocaching that relies on interactions between players (someone has to hide the caches for someone else to find them) works best and fosters good communities when all the game activity is out in the open and not secreted away.

  • Upvote 4
  • Funny 2
Link to post
44 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

So now I'm a cache cop as well as a stalker.

Dude. I didn't say you were. You focused on the worst instead of seeing I also included "much more often than people looking for caches to ignore" and "Your or my desire to see a complete list of a geocacher's listings that are flagged as NM" which by your reading makes me a cache cop and stalker as well. You completely missed the gist of my comment.

 

44 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

a communal game like geocaching that relies on interactions between players works best and fosters good communities when all the game activity is out in the open and not secreted away

I don't disagree. But it's not always that simple. WE may not have a concern with it. Others do. That's what we're exploring.

 

Edited by thebruce0
Link to post

 

On 4/2/2021 at 4:22 AM, mustakorppi said:

Yeah, and some people are creeped out by the prospect of someone casing them like this, possibly because a similar thing has lead to unwanted interactions in the past. I don’t really see why anything further needs to be said on the topic.

But why? Its not likely someone will re-visit a cache, logging is done after the fact, how could this possibly lead to stalking or casing someone? Outside of "will attend" logs, there is simply no way to find or stalk someone through the gc site.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to post
16 hours ago, pppingme said:

 

But why? Its not likely someone will re-visit a cache, logging is done after the fact, how could this possibly lead to stalking or casing someone? Outside of "will attend" logs, there is simply no way to find or stalk someone through the gc site.

 

On 4/2/2021 at 5:16 PM, L0ne.R said:

Some reasons why someone might want their chronological list to be their right to disclose.

  • They cache with  a group of people and one of those people regularly checks the "All Geocache Finds" list to see what the group members have been up to and sometimes comments via social media/text message/meetup  about where you've been. Sometimes asking why they didn't call her/him.  
  • Their manager/colleague geocaches too and sometimes checks the "All Geocache Finds" list. They occassionally comment at the water cooler or meeting 'Hey Fred, what was Rochester like this weekend?'. Sometimes they'd rather choose what to share with their colleagues about where they've been. 
  • A family member checks their "All Geocache Finds" list to see where they've been and asks why they were in the area and didn't get in touch.  
  • Their angry ex is actually stalking them.
  • A person at a geocaching event, that they briefly met a couple of times, has taken an uncomfortable interest in their life and mentions how they noticed that they've been travelling out of state frequently.
  • They don't want anyone to know that they travelled overseas last year for 3 days of geocaching adventure during a pandemic. 
  • They just want a modicum of privacy on the web where it can be had, especially when the feature involved is "oversharing".  Is the "All Geocache Finds" feature necessary for others to find geocaches efficiently?

We are not entitled to know where another geocacher has been. 

 

  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to post

The point is that the occasional visitor who looks up caches by a certain CO or looks at previous finds of a cacher will not be able to do so but a real stalker still has no problems to see that info. 

If this info is "blockable" then as long as people can download GPX files, PQ's and lists it's still available.

 

Maybe souvenirs should be hidden too as they show the date someone earned it and it then known to others they were in country xx at a certain moment.

 

I would be a lot more worried about the FB hack a few years back that now has data (name, date of birth, phone, location...) from over 500 million accounts downloadable for free than someone knowing that "geodude123" was in majorcity555 on a certain date.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
5 hours ago, on4bam said:

Maybe souvenirs should be hidden too as they show the date someone earned it and it then known to others they were in country xx at a certain moment.

:D    Yep.  Silly. 

The OP who asked for this has pics of caches found with their GC#s too.   Probably didn't stop to think that everything's connected somewhere...  :) 

Link to post
On 4/5/2021 at 12:39 PM, pppingme said:

 

But why? Its not likely someone will re-visit a cache, logging is done after the fact, how could this possibly lead to stalking or casing someone? Outside of "will attend" logs, there is simply no way to find or stalk someone through the gc site.

 

I'm completely with Jeff on this one regarding the 'social' state of the hobby, but for the sake of argument, logs can absolutely be used for stalking in some circumstances.

 

If a person is on some sort of cache string (rail-trail, woods-trail, numbers-run, etc.) and they submit caches live, then their progress and position can be tracked in real-time, down to the interval between caches.

 

So you can say, "Log when you get home!", or "File Draft Logs on-site (even if they're fully-written on-site) and SUBMIT them later!"

 

If you're worried, there's your suggestion. But, it's a restriction on your caching hobby, isn't it? It's fundamentally not fair.

 

And, it's easy for me to say; as a white American male, I'm lucky enough to not have to live with the fears of people who are more often victimized than I. Me. Whichever.

 

On the flip side, "Hey, watch my logs while I'm out on the trail; you'll know when to start dinner!"

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
4 minutes ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

<...>

 

On the flip side, "Hey, watch my logs while I'm out on the trail; you'll know when to start dinner!"

 

I've been directed by the Team Cap'n to change that to, ""Hey, watch my logs while I'm out on the trail; you'll know when I'm gonna pick up dinner!"

  • Funny 2
Link to post
On 4/3/2021 at 1:16 AM, L0ne.R said:
  • They cache with  a group of people and one of those people regularly checks the "All Geocache Finds" list to see what the group members have been up to and sometimes comments via social media/text message/meetup  about where you've been. Sometimes asking why they didn't call her/him.  
  • Their manager/colleague geocaches too and sometimes checks the "All Geocache Finds" list. They occassionally comment at the water cooler or meeting 'Hey Fred, what was Rochester like this weekend?'. Sometimes they'd rather choose what to share with their colleagues about where they've been. 
  • A family member checks their "All Geocache Finds" list to see where they've been and asks why they were in the area and didn't get in touch.  
  • Their angry ex is actually stalking them.
  • A person at a geocaching event, that they briefly met a couple of times, has taken an uncomfortable interest in their life and mentions how they noticed that they've been travelling out of state frequently.
  • They don't want anyone to know that they travelled overseas last year for 3 days of geocaching adventure during a pandemic. 
  • They just want a modicum of privacy on the web where it can be had, especially when the feature involved is "oversharing".  Is the "All Geocache Finds" feature necessary for others to find geocaches efficiently?

We are not entitled to know where another geocacher has been. 

 

Caching is an activity done in public and there's no entitlement not to be seen by either other cachers or people we know in real life. This happened twice to me last year, both while caching in the Newcastle region about 100km from home. On one, I was searching for a cache next to a bike path when a cyclist approached then stopped. He was someone I knew through work (our contact with a supplier we used) who I hadn't seen for over a decade. He's also good friends with other work colleagues so no doubt word of our encounter will have spread through the office. The other was just after I'd found a bushland cache and was walking along the track back to the road, when someone approached from the other direction with a big grin on his face. It was the CO out doing a routine maintenance run. Going back further, in 2015 I was out searching for a cache at a remote spot in the Watagan Mountains (again about 100km from home) when I heard an approaching vehicle. It was the CO with a group of his mates he was showing the cache and its spectacular location to.

 

My father had a knack of always bumping into someone he knew no matter how far from home we were. I once ran into another work associate (this time a customer) on an international flight to the USA, and on another occasion bumped into a fellow cacher at the airport when returning from Lord Howe Island. Making logs (and hides) private won't stop your activities from being noticed by others.

Link to post
1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:

My father had a knack of always bumping into someone he knew no matter how far from home we were.

 

Did your father want a chronological list of where those people were for the past 5 years before they bumped into each other? And did he feel it was his right to anonymously access that list? Perhaps available at city hall for those who are curious, and without notifying those people (after all the person looking has a right to some privacy :bad:). 

Edited by L0ne.R
  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
12 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 

Did your father want a chronological list of where those people were for the past 5 years before they bumped into each other? And did he feel it was his right to anonymously access that list? Perhaps available at city hall for those who are curious, and without notifying the those people (after all the person looking has a right to some privacy :bad:). 

 

No, but he couldn't stop them telling other friends and relations about their encounters. Word spreads fast in small communities and no doubt by the time he'd returned home all his mates would have known about where he'd been. The point is there's no privacy in public, and list of finds or no list of finds, people will find out where you've been and what you've been doing one way or another. Making logs and hides private won't stop a determined stalker since there are so many other ways to easily obtain the same information (searches, watchlist, instant notifications, etc.), it'll just destroy the communal atmosphere of the game where sharing stories about our activities is what it's all about.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post

No one has claimed to even believe that stopping one method means it'll stop antagonistic behaviour entirely. Of course it won't. There are a myriad ways of "stalking" someone. But should we just make everything public just because having the option to make one thing private won't "stop" it?  Why not broadcast our physical location 24/7 because it's known and people can get it if they're smart enough? Because we know there's some arbitrary threshold where we can strike a reasonable balance.

The concern is not to completely end stalking. The concern is that there's one location where everything is accessible easily. It's thwarting one (and arguably the easiest) method that people have had issues with. Of course they can't all be thwarted, but you can make it harder. It's exactly the same with hacking in IT. Or even cheating in geocaching.  The question one needs to ask is how much effort is worth the effort to reduce the chance of something undesirable or unintended or harmful happening? Doing nothing is naive and is basically leaving your front door open to thieves. Can we do something? That's the question. Or is it really pointless? And simply saying it is isn't really an argument :P

 

  • Upvote 3
  • Funny 1
Link to post

Friends "just passing by..."  know where we are simply by spotting one of our vehicles at parking.  Calls saying so show that.   :)

 - But I could be close by, or miles into the woods.  Unless I log real-time with a phone, or tell them, they won't know.

Certain locations, I worry more of the condition of my vehicle when I get back, than someone knowing where I am...

Link to post
4 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

The question one needs to ask is how much effort is worth the effort to reduce the chance of something undesirable or unintended or harmful happening? Doing nothing is naive and is basically leaving your front door open to thieves. Can we do something? That's the question. Or is it really pointless? And simply saying it is isn't really an argument :P

 

 

The question I'm asking is whether any benefits outweigh the downside it would have on the communal aspect of caching. To see what a world of private finds and hidden hides would be like, you only have to look at ALs. The waypoints of my two have between them handed out 166 smileys but only 28 have completed the entire Adventures and of those only 20 have left Activity logs (mostly just a few words). The rest are completely anonymous. Did they like it? Did they hate it? Is there anything I could do better if I got another credit, or any pitfalls I should avoid? I'll never know, because the owner might just as well not exist once an AL goes live. Even if someone does leave an Activity log, I don't get told about it.

 

You can't see what ALs another player has done, even if they do leave Activity logs, or what ALs they own. I know many of my caching friends have received credits, but I can't look at their profiles to see what they've created. The only way is to pan around on the map, open each AL and see who created it, not really practical when there are lots of them spread over a large area. ALs are individualist and impersonal with no sense of community around them. Once the novelty wears off, there's nothing left. Maybe that's why they're dead here; the last AL to go live in these parts was in early December.

 

Then there's the integrity side of it. Armchair loggers and maintenance shirkers are fairly easy to spot from their All Finds and All Hides lists, but could easily hide their tracks if their activities were concealed. There are frequent complaints in the AL forums of rampant cheating through location spoofing, and that will only be made worse with the recent introduction of multi-choice questions, but the extent of the problem will never be known because the cheating can be done in complete privacy.

Edited by barefootjeff
  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
14 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

The question I'm asking is whether any benefits outweigh the downside it would have on the communal aspect of caching.

You really think giving the occasional user the option to hide their profile list of hidden caches would have a more significant effect on the "communal aspect" of caching than the state of mind of that user? (that's rhetorical, I expect you'd say yes = P)

 

14 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

To see what a world of private finds and hidden hides would be like, you only have to look at ALs.

What "world"? I see that option being used probably no more than the voting options on logs, or the GDPR option to make your profile activity private to 3rd party apps.

 

14 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Did they like [my adventure lab]? Did they hate it? Is there anything I could do better if I got another credit, or any pitfalls I should avoid?

I don't know. But I don't see what relevance the discussion about AL implementations has to do with increased privacy (or reduced visibility) of user's complete list of hidden caches.

 

14 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

You can't see what ALs another player has done, even if they do leave Activity logs, or what ALs they own.

To a limited degree, yes. I think we're of the same mind on ALs, but not about privacy, rather about functionality. This is not a forcing of universal information hiding. This is about providing the option for someone who cares to hide their own complete hidden cache list. I cannot see a parallel between that and the limited functionality of Adventure Labs.

 

14 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Armchair loggers and maintenance shirkers are fairly easy to spot from their All Finds and All Hides lists, but could easily hide their tracks if their activities were concealed.

I would argue it's not on us (as cache police) to be monitoring other maintenance shirkers. Reviewers will deal with them as legitimate issues arise. I don't care if someone shirks maintenance if their caches are fine which I end up searching for. I'm not going to go searching for who I believe to maintenance shirkers based on a sole list. And if it were between the choice of users who want to proactively seek out problem cache owners which they are not obligated to do, and the choice of users who are concerned over the visibility of their owned property and entire cache hiding history to public eye, I would absolutely favour the latter over the former.

  • Upvote 2
  • Surprised 1
Link to post
10 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

I would argue it's not on us (as cache police) to be monitoring other maintenance shirkers. Reviewers will deal with them as legitimate issues arise. I don't care if someone shirks maintenance if their caches are fine which I end up searching for. I'm not going to go searching for who I believe to maintenance shirkers based on a sole list. And if it were between the choice of users who want to proactively seek out problem cache owners which they are not obligated to do, and the choice of users who are concerned over the visibility of their owned property and entire cache hiding history to public eye, I would absolutely favour the latter over the former.

 

It's not about being cache police, it's about having everything out in the open discouraging bad behaviour in the first place. Unscupulous cachers are less likely to log hundreds or thousands of caches across the globe if their antics are easily visible. If they can hide their list of finds such activity is far less likely to be noticed by anyone and reported, so if they think they can get away with it, they will. The cloak of secrecy around AL logs is a big factor in the widespread spoofing of those.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 3
Link to post
On 4/8/2021 at 8:09 PM, barefootjeff said:

It's not about being cache police, it's about having everything out in the open discouraging bad behaviour in the first place.

Bad behaviour 1: Cache owner isn't good at maintaining caches.

[So geocacher wants that complete list of all that owner's hides with which to do .. something .. honourable? Like pre-emptively reporting?]

[Even so, publicize the owner's entire hiding history to dissuade the owner from being bad with maintenance]

 

Bad behaviour 2: Stalker wants to cause harm or fear to another geocacher or geocacher's property.

[So stalker wants that complete list of that user's hides, styles, locations, themes, with which to plan]

[Even so, publicize the owner's entire hiding history to... dissuade stalkers from using it?]

 

I think one bad behaviour is a little more concerning than the other, and the option to hide that list would have a greater net positive effect.

 

On 4/8/2021 at 8:09 PM, barefootjeff said:

If they can hide their list of finds

Don't know why you keep going back to hiding finds, we're talking about hiding the complete list of account hides in the public profile page.  Geocachers go geocaching by seeking out caches to find; active caches to find. The better tool for such activity is the search function, not the users's all-time hides list; and not having a right to see that all-time hides list, I think someone concerned about a stalker, for example, has a legitimate and more pressing reason to have the ability to hide that list, even though there are other ways to see their active owned caches. But we've already gone over all of that in prior comments.

Link to post
1 hour ago, on4bam said:

How big is this "stalking" problem anyway? I haven't heard about this around here.

Apparently big enough that this feature has been requested multiple times and that some people resort to not logging finds online at all.

 

Also, let's be real here: you came to this thread to belittle and make jokes. If I had a stalking problem in your area and needed help, I wouldn't want to discuss it in a forum where you can "hear about it" either.

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1
Link to post
2 minutes ago, mustakorppi said:

Also, let's be real here: you came to this thread to belittle and make jokes. If I had a stalking problem in your area and needed help, I wouldn't want to discuss it in a forum where you can "hear about it" either.

 

You are reading things that are not there.

 

I can understand people hiding stats but hiding their hides?

Why would you place caches and then make it harder for people to find them on the site so they can go out and find them in the field? What's next? Place caches but hide the listing too and have people mail a CO (via anonymous web interface) requesting the listing?

GC is a public listing service so those who are worried their cachelistings can be easily found might better consider a different hobby. As I wrote before, there are many different ways to obtain the same info by just using the tools on the website. PQs, Lists, API, GPX + database software will do the same and more.

 

So again, how big is this problem? Having a few people posting about this on a forum doesn't make it a big problem.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
12 minutes ago, on4bam said:

You are reading things that are not there.

No, I'm reading your posts. I'm fairly sure I reported at least one, but I just checked and unfortunately they are still there. You can't tell people with a problem to go hide in a cave in Pakistan and then turn around and say that there must not be a problem because you haven't heard about it. You are creating an atmosphere that is hostile to people with problems.

 

15 minutes ago, on4bam said:

I can understand people hiding stats but hiding their hides?

This is not the stance you've taken in your previous posts, and I do not see why this discussion should be repeated every time someone comes here to move goalposts around. And I personally have no inclination to debate your slippery slope arguments and whataboutism.

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1
Link to post
8 minutes ago, mustakorppi said:

No, I'm reading your posts. I'm fairly sure I reported at least one, but I just checked and unfortunately they are still there.

 

 

I'll make it easy for you.. I just put you on my ignore list so I don't see you posts anymore. Please to the same (or not, I don't care).

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...