Feature Request - Permanently Ignore This Cache

[lowracer]

Would like to have some way of telling gecocaching.com that I'd like to "Ignore this cache," either as a note to the cache page, or by clicking a checkbox on the search results page.

 

For example, there is a cache nearest to me called "Scuba Doo." I'm not a scuba diver and never will be. Yet there it is, always first on my nearest list. Would like to just be able to tell geocaching.com that I don't want to see this cache anymore.

 

I've thought about posting a "found it," then explaining in a note on the post that I didn't really find it, just want to ignore it, then go to some far away state where I cached on vacation, and change one smiley there to a 'post a note,' to sorta even the score, but that's really not a very elegant solution.

 

Thanks,

-mark.

[+Sparky-Watts]

I can see where this could be quite annoying, especially if you live in the desert!

 

I don't see any way around it, either. For a while, the top 3 on my list were archived, and equally annoying, but since then they have been removed completely.

[+The Navigatorz]

I agree there should be a way of removing such caches from your "Nearest Caches" list. I have three that always show up on my top 20 list which I may never get: one is at the bottom of a lake requiring diving gear, another on an island in a river requiring a raft, another by a lake requiring a boat. While these are interesting caches, I'll probably never be able to get them and would prefer they not show up on the list every time I search for nearest caches.

Edited December 13, 2003 by The Navigatorz

[+DustyJacket]

I agree.

I have always wanted an "ignore" list.

There are some caches I will never go to find, and I don't want them showing up in my pocket queries.

 

Some are caches I wouldn't have fun with.

Others are DNFs that I've given up on.

Others are DNFs where people E-mailed me spoilers, so I'll not go after them again, either.

 

I hate seeing them on my GPSr screen as I am driving by.......

Edited December 13, 2003 by DustyJacket

[Deego]

It would be a good idea. The nearest one to me needs climbing gear. I have tried without and could not get to it but there it is at the top of the list mocking me.

[+Runaround]

This feature request has come up a few times before. I'd like to see it myself.

 

I've got this cache at the top of my list. The funny thing, it's also a vacation cache.

[+Sparky-Watts]

This feature request has come up a few times before. I'd like to see it myself.

 

I've got this cache at the top of my list. The funny thing, it's also a vacation cache.

And yet another reason I don't like virts.....what's the significance of this? What's the point? Where's the interest? Lame, lame, lame, and again, lame!

[+briansnat]

Might be a nice feature for premium members.

[+Sparky-Watts]

Might be a nice feature for premium members.

READ: Might be another way to get money from people.

[+webscouter.]

This is what I use GPXspinner for. It has an ignore list and I download the PQ weekly and run it through spinner before I upload it to my PDA and GPSr.

[+Harrald]

Ignoring it won't make it go away.

[+BlueDeuce]

Ignoring it won't make it go away.

That's right. Someday you'll need to find it, because it's there.

 

Edited for punctuation

Edited December 14, 2003 by TeamX40

[+ironman114]

I have three that always show up on my top 20 list which I may never get: one is at the bottom of a lake requiring diving gear, another on an island in a river requiring a raft, another by a lake requiring a boat. While these are interesting caches, I'll probably never be able to get them and would prefer they not show up on the list every time I search for nearest caches.

Well just invite a fellow cacher with a boat to go with you and you can get 2 of them off that list

[+The Navigatorz]

Well just invite a fellow cacher with a boat to go with you and you can get 2 of them off that list

Hmmm...good idea...except I don't know any fellow geocachers with a boat...and even if I did, they'd be crazy to take it down the Wenatchee river (need a raft instead). I have a better idea! Give us the option of "Ignoring this Cache" for those caches we don't care to do or are not able to do.

Edited December 14, 2003 by The Navigatorz

[+ironman114]

I've got a boat, been your way last couple of times in the past hunting. maybe next time I'll bring it and bag that one on the lake

[+The Navigatorz]

Sounds good, pick me up on the way. It's at Lake Chelan. Farview - Lake Chelan

If you're a diver, the scuba dive cache is nearby Chelan Scuba cache

[+ironman114]

maybe I'll do that. found out a week ago that my ex neighbor is a cacher too! He used to dive don't know if he still does.

 

Then you have acouple you won'thave to ignore till they can do something

[+Team GPSaxophone]

I have three that always show up on my top 20 list which I may never get: one is at the bottom of a lake requiring diving gear, another on an island in a river requiring a raft, another by a lake requiring a boat.  While these are interesting caches, I'll probably never be able to get them and would prefer they not show up on the list every time I search for nearest caches.

Well just invite a fellow cacher with a boat to go with you and you can get 2 of them off that list

And if you make the meeting an event cache, you'll get another find!

[+Divine]

Might be a nice feature for premium members.

READ: Might be another way to get money from people.

Yup. The basic gameplay of geocaching (i.e. to get the coordinates & the cache description and to be able to log finds online) should be free to all who bother to create an account here. Like it is now. Those who want to support the site by a volunteer membership fee, could well get some extra features that are neat, but not dead necessary in order to play the game.

 

I see nothing wrong in persuading people to upgrade their memberships with such little extra neato chocolate chewy features.

 

Edit: grammar.

Edited December 14, 2003 by Divine

[+Sparky-Watts]

....extra neato chocolate chewy.......

[+Team GPSaxophone]

....extra neato chocolate chewy.......

...with caramel!

[+sbukosky]

I've requested that feature too. I'm a bit on the fence on it because some of those that I'd like to ignore, I end up doing. However, your example of a scuba required cache is a good point. I've got an underwater one in my area too and I can't see me ever doing it. Also a locationless cache can remain there forever and no way of logging it without just listing it as a find and telling the cache owner why you did it.

 

My biggest concern about this feature is that it has been requested many times, and Jeremy does not indicate yes, no or maybe. Or if he has, I missed it.

[+9Key]

I would *love* that feature! Especially if you could filter by....ummm....cache owner.

 

edit - spelling error

Edited December 15, 2003 by 9Key

[+ironman114]

I would love to search by cache owner. That way I could do all theirs at once and anylize how they think,see if there is a pattern.

[+ironman114]

I would love to search by cache owner. That way I could do all theirs at once and anylize how they think,see if there is a pattern.

DOH

 

Man do I feel stupid there is a way to search by cache owner.

 

Thereally STUPID part is I've already been there!! It's a good thing there isn't too many out there tonight or they would let me have it!

[+shunra]

I'm a bit on the fence on it because some of those that I'd like to ignore, I end up doing. However, your example of a scuba required cache is a good point. I've got an underwater one in my area too and I can't see me ever doing it. Also a locationless cache can remain there forever and no way of logging it without just listing it as a find and telling the cache owner why you did it.

How can a locationless cache sit there among your 'Nearest 20 Unfound'?

 

But yes, I would support that Ignore function. the caches I would want to ignore are not necessarily the challenging ones - quite the contrary - I put them on my watch list!, but some lame ones. At the moment, I'm also thinking of one particular cache (GCF304) which has never been found yet, which has been 'temporarily' disabled since April '03 without any indication on the site when it will be opened again, which isn't being archived, and which has a cache owner who doesn't respond to private messages.

 

Instead of getting annoyed every time I see it, I'd much rather be positive, and just pretend it isn't there - which is probably true anyway.

[+pdxmarathonman]

and just pretend it isn't there

Or you could post a This Cache Should Be Archived message on the page. If that doesn't get the owner's attention, then it will most likely get archived.

[+nctreker]

I'd like to see this for the above mentioned reasons, but also because a couple on my closest list are ones I helped to hide. It doesn't seem right to claim them as a find.

[+bigredmed]

I would like GC to list near by caches that I haven't found yet as opposed to all of them.

[+Sissy-n-CR]

I would like GC to list near by caches that I haven't found yet as opposed to all of them.

Tack "&f=1" to the end of the URL and all of the caches you have found and the ones you own will not be listed.

 

CR

[+yumitori]

I would like GC to list near by caches that I haven't found yet as opposed to all of them.

You can do this now.

 

Either use pocket queries if you wish to download the information, and simply select for caches you haven't found; or on-line you can filter for caches you haven't found, but to do so you'll need to add home coordinates to your profile.

[+Pharmadude]

Add my vote to the request for an "ignore-this-cache" feature. As an example, the first three caches on my "closest to home" list are spurious coordinates.

 

#1 says "IGNORE THE ABOVE POSITIONS. IT ONLY TELLS YOU THE CACHE IS IN WESTERN CANADA."

 

#2 says "The coordinates listed above ... point to degree confluence unrelated to this cache.

 

#3 says "Ok here we go. Ignore all the above UTM/Lat Long information it will only tell you that this cache is somewhere in British Columbia Canada."

 

I would simply prefer to filter these and others out of my nearest caches listings.

[+fizzymagic]

If you use Pocket Queries, the ability to ignore caches already exists in Spinner and gpx2html, at least. I think that it is more likely that this feature will be added to other GPX utilities than it is that it will ever be added to the site.

[+shunra]

If you use Pocket Queries, the ability to ignore caches already exists in Spinner and gpx2html, at least.  I think that it is more likely that this feature will be added to other GPX utilities than it is that it will ever be added to the site.

Obviously, I can use programs to delete certain caches from my GPX file before uploadfing them. However, this thread is about filtering them out on the GC page, to stop them from popping up continuously. Caches of the type that were mentioned here just create on-screen clutter, as do some indefinitely 'temporarily' disabled caches, caches which one for one reason or another is unable or unwilling to go for, etc.

Edited January 12, 2004 by Shunra

[+MarcB]

It would be a good idea. The nearest one to me needs climbing gear. I have tried without and could not get to it but there it is at the top of the list mocking me.

Lol, "Don't look down" isn't too far off the top of mine either!

MarcB

[Jeremy]

I posted this in another thread, but I have an idea for creating custom lists, like "my favorite caches" and "caches I want to visit while on vacation." Any of these lists will be available to ignore when you create pocket queries or searches in the future. It's a bigger solution but will cover many more bases.

[+Mejas]

Each night I bring up the nearest cache pages ( to my home cords) startes out with one I own and those I have found. I like to scan down and see who has found what that day. Even the ones that I will not go after for one reason or another. (some people like them)

 

When I am planning a day to go out caching I use the Filter finds pages. and that's when the ones that I don't care for takes up half the page. I don't want to do away with the cache because other cachers enjoy them. I would just like for them not to show up on my page. I don't want to clam a find that would make the found count useless. I would just like to check a box and they not show on the filter find page. If I every changed my mine (which I have ) I could still get to them on the closest cache page.

 

And as for the remarks on paying. If you enjoy and use the GC site you should be happy to help pay a small fee for the use of the site.

back in the early day of computers my son had a Bulletin Board. The ones that complain the most were the one that use it free.

 

Mejas

[Tinker69]

I have 11 caches on my first page that I would like to ignore.

 

Tinker

[+shunra]

I have a 'GC20' shortcut in my browser bar, which used to show me the first page of the 'filtered' nearest caches: the 20 nearest not-found and not-owned.

 

Recently, the Pocket Query layout was redone, and if you now click on RUN next to the query of the caches nearest to your home coordinates, you get a very similar window, which will at least allow you to remove event caches, locationless caches, temporarily disabled caches, etc. For me this makes quite a difference. Somehow, in my area, lots of people 'temporarily' disable their caches and leave them like that indefinitely By having my GC20 shortcut link to THAT page now, I'm at least able to ignore those annoying cache listings, now.

 

Still, I would be happy if we could ignore individual caches as well, if they happen to be so located that we'll never be able to get to them. Case in point: An annoying British Columbia cacher has his 'false' coordinates pointing right at my backyard, across the Strait of San Juan. True, on his cache pages he says that these are not the true coordinates, but I can't get rid of that guy's two caches, whatever I do.

Edited January 31, 2004 by Shunra