Feature Request: Make "DNF"- and "NM"-like comments possible

[+baer2006]

Currently, AL credits are handed out to cachers en masse. Consequently a lot of new ALs are created in "cacher-rich" regions. When asking, why so many cachers are so eager to become ALOs instead of COs, an answer you read quite often goes along the lines of "No maintenance needed" - the ideal Fire-And-Forget "cache" placement.

However, this is short-sighted. While there is no cache container to be maintained, the sources for the AL answers (signs etc.) will eventually change. So, in a few months or years, there will be an ever growing number of ALs, which don't "work" any more. And given given the often sketchy track record in the CO community to fix problems with physical caches, despite DNFs and NMs being logged, I somehow doubt that ALOs will be quick to realize, let alone fix, problems with their ALs without any negative logs.

 

Because of this, I think it would be really useful, if there was an option in the AL app to write "DNF" or "NM" type of logs (of course without the option to rate the AL). And to automatically message the ALO when such a log is posted (and BTW, I see no reason, why an ALO shouldn't receive a copy of any log, just like for regular caches).

[+HHL]

4 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

Because of this, I think it would be really useful, if there was an option in the AL app to write "DNF" or "NM" type of logs (of course without the option to rate the AL).

+1

[+barefootjeff]

Yep, definitely! I get the strong impression that owners are considered redundant from the moment an AL goes public, with no notifications of activity or any direct way to provide feedback on problems. Even the owner's name on the overview page isn't tappable so if you want to send them a message you have to copy it and then go to the geocaching app or website.

 

Most ALs I've done have used information on signs for the location questions as these are often the easiest things to ask questions about that require a visit to the location, but signs tend to have a relatively short life. A good example of this is a multi I did in 2020 that, for some of the waypoints, required the use of Street View or similar to get information from signs in foreign cities. It was published in 2015 but, by the time I did it, all the signs had changed - businesses had changed their names or had renovated their premises and some signs had been removed, painted over or replaced with entirely different content. Luckily a previous finder was able to give me a link to historical images so I was able to complete it, but after my log the CO archived it. The same thing will almost inevitably happen to many ALs and, unless the owner goes and regularly checks, they'll be unlikely to notice.

[+Goldenwattle]

12 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

I get the strong impression that owners are considered redundant from the moment an AL goes public

Which is why I have never wanted to publish an AL.

[+Max and 99]

On a recent adventure lab I worked on, we spent almost 30 minutes trying to find the answer to a location question. I was so frustrated and finally sent a message to the creator, who responded with something like: "Yeah, I've been told before that the answer to that location can no longer be found there. Here it is."

Grrrrrrr. A NM log would be nice. 

On that same trip I did other adventure labs where the answers to more than one location in the same adventure lab were no longer available. I was able to guess and Google the answers and later saw in the review that others have also noted the missing information. But no action from the person who created it. 

[+Team Canary]

Not real caches!?!

 

The implementation is poor. They count here, they don't count here. Not possible to report, DNF, message owner, etc.

 

Ignore.

[+Mermaid.Man]

1 hour ago, Team Canary said:

Not real caches!?!

To be fair, Groundspeak have made it very clear that they aren't geocaches. There are two separate games - one called geocaching and one called adventure labs.

The only thing that makes no sense is the +5.

[+Team Canary]

3 hours ago, Mermaid.Man said:

To be fair, Groundspeak have made it very clear that they aren't geocaches. There are two separate games - one called geocaching and one called adventure labs.

The only thing that makes no sense is the +5.

 

Stop inflating other peoples Find counts then. Stop Bonus Caches. Get them out of my Geocachng App.

 

Keep them completely separate. 

[+barefootjeff]

I just struck this very problem today, with the first stage of the sequential AL I was attempting surrounded by a three-metre high hessian-covered fence while refurbishment of the tourist attraction takes place (which is likely to take many months, if not years). I found a small gap in the hessian that I was able to see the plaque through but couldn't read the names on it, so I took a photo on my phone camera's maximum optical zoom and then zoomed in on the image until I could just make out part of a name. I hoped firstly it was the right name (there are several more on the plaque in smaller print and unreadable in the image) and secondly that my guess based on the letters I could make out was right, but the caching gods must have been smiling on me because it was the right answer.

 

After completing the other four stages, I mentioned the problem at the first one in my review but, since owners aren't notified of reviews, the chances are they won't see it. Why is it assumed that, once an AL goes live, it'll never need owner attention?

[+JL_HSTRE]

On 9/13/2022 at 11:47 PM, Team Canary said:

Stop inflating other peoples Find counts then. Stop Bonus Caches. Get them out of my Geocachng App.

 

I wish Bonus Caches would go away and ALs counted as 1 Find not 5. I love ALs as psuedo-Virtuals.

 

I'm frustrated I can't PQ them because that means I can't plan in advance to visit them nor exclude in advance all the lame ones. Those are both things I do for regular geocaches.