Minor Benchmark Logging Error

[+ODragon]

So I post dated a log on a bench mark that I found (at the time I didn't realize it was a bench mark).

 

Benchmark KU3344

 

And while it has the correct date that I found it, it's not ordering it properly so my 5/05 found date is above someone who found it in 6/05.

 

Further on the search page, it has me finding it on 6/2/05 (even though that's only the day I logged it).

[Jeremy]

I added the bug to my bug list. I'll post back once I find out the problem. Thanks!

Edited June 3, 2005 by Jeremy

[+jmstacey]

I'm not sure how the internals of geocaching.com work but if in the database two dates are stored, one being the user specified find date and the second the date the log was submitted, it's possible that pages are loaded using the date submitted and not the date specified found. (or dispalying in the order submitted)

 

Of couse I could be clueless, that's always a possibility.

Edited June 4, 2005 by jmstacey

[+Black Dog Trackers]

Jeremy -

 

There are 2 different issues pointed out by odragon.

 

I agree that the "You" date should be the found date, not the log-creation date.

 

However, I don't agree with changing the order that the logs are shown to all. I think the order should be left in the order that the item was logged. An example is HW3569 where I logged this benchmark as a first-to-find.

 

Like with geocaches, first-to-find logs are signifant to us benchmark hunters. I specifically drove out to HW3569 since it would be a first-to-find. Several months later someone entered a log for more than a year before my log. I like having my log seen first since that's the way it was when I logged it. I saw this same mark back in the middle 1970's, but what matters to me now is the date of the log here on geocaching.com.

[+Prime Suspect]

I'm not sure how the internals of geocaching.com work but if in the database two dates are stored, one being the user specified find date and the second the date the log was submitted, it's possible that pages are loaded using the date submitted and not the date specified found.  (or dispalying in the order submitted)

 

Of couse I could be clueless, that's always a possibility.

On a lark, Jeremy decided to store the dates for benchmarks using the Mayan calendar. Since the Mayan calendar runs out (and, it's thought, the world ends) on December 23, 2012, it seems rather pointless to waste time fixing it.

[+beejay&esskay]

I think the order should be left in the order that the item was logged.

I'll disagree with that. I think the order should be in the date the find is claimed.

 

That's how it is with geocaches, and that's how it makes sense when you are reading the history of finds.