Promises, Promises

[+Don_J]

Just off the top of my head, these are issues from the Feedback forum that are "planned", where put "under review" or put on the priority list, all with favorable comments from the Lackeys. Some of these are approaching their second year.

 

• 
   
  
• Working maps, especially with previewing PQs
  
• More criteria options added to PQs, particularly "owned by" and "found by".
  
• Favorites added to PQ criteria.
  
• Favorite points added to GPX files.
  
• Personal notes added to GPX files.
  
• Ability to delete photos with deleting the entire log.
  
• Ability to add text to the auto generated message that is sent when we delete another player's log.
  
• Change text from "Needs Archive" to "Needs Reviewer Attention".
  
• Ability to ignore all of a users caches.
  
• Return the users location to the forum sidebar for users that have provided it in their profiles, (lost in the forum upgrade)
  
• Ability to add corrected coordinates to puzzle cache page and have those coordinates included in the GPX file.
  
• Notification for when photos are added to your cache page.
  
• Notification for when logs are edited on your cache page.
  
• Notification for "Needs Archived" and "Note" logs, (Actually part of the May '11 update, but it didn't work)
  
• New hiders are presented with a simple quiz to verify they have at least glanced at the guidelines.
  
• Add a Nano size.
  

 

How long do we keep our votes on these issues? If we remove them, supposedly they drop in priority, yet last Thursday, they introduced at least four new bugs that deserve our votes.

 

It is very frustrating to see these issues linger when features that were not on the RADAR are introduced that actually break useability. It's to the point of, "Why ask"?

[+BlueDeuce]

When did a $30 wish list become so dam important.

[+Keelmann And Cici]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

[+GeoBain]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

 

Where?

[+BlueDeuce]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

 

Where?

 

You paid your money knowing what you where getting no?

[+GeoBain]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

 

Where?

 

You paid your money knowing what you where getting no?

 

My brain must not be working tonight. I'm still not following.

 

I see an OP asking when ideas "under review" will be acted on so his votes will be released. I see GOF saying it doesn't matter what you do with your votes since they are going to do what they want anyway. Then your post about a $30 wish list being so important.

 

Frustration I see. Entitlement is not as apparent. Please point it out to me.

[+BlueDeuce]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

 

Where?

 

You paid your money knowing what you where getting no?

 

My brain must not be working tonight. I'm still not following.

 

I see an OP asking when ideas "under review" will be acted on so his votes will be released. I see GOF saying it doesn't matter what you do with your votes since they are going to do what they want anyway. Then your post about a $30 wish list being so important.

 

Frustration I see. Entitlement is not as apparent. Please point it out to me.

 

My apologies. Usually when I see someone asking where are the entitlements, they are using subterfuge.

 

edit: missing s

Edited September 18, 2011 by BlueDeuce

[+GeoBain]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

 

Where?

 

You paid your money knowing what you where getting no?

 

My brain must not be working tonight. I'm still not following.

 

I see an OP asking when ideas "under review" will be acted on so his votes will be released. I see GOF saying it doesn't matter what you do with your votes since they are going to do what they want anyway. Then your post about a $30 wish list being so important.

 

Frustration I see. Entitlement is not as apparent. Please point it out to me.

 

My apologies. Usually when I see someone asking where are the entitlements, they are using subterfuge.

 

edit: missing s

 

I'm genuinely interested in knowing where K&C's comment came from.

[+Dgwphotos]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

Not really. If you went to Amazon, ordered a book, then never received the book, but they still charged you for it, you would either demand the book or your money back. We simply wish to see the value of the product that we paid for.

[+dfx]

,,, or put on the priority list

 

Just wanted to comment that there's no such thing as a "priority list". All they ever say is that the issues "have been prioritized". I still think that this means that they've been prioritized down, to the bottom of the list.

[+GeoBain]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

Not really. If you went to Amazon, ordered a book, then never received the book, but they still charged you for it, you would either demand the book or your money back. We simply wish to see the value of the product that we paid for.

 

I don't even see anyone saying "I ain't getting my $30 worth." I just see a valid question about why do ideas remain "under review" so long as other ideas, many which have not even been requested, are implemented. And when these ideas are implemented, things break but the OP can't vote on the ideas because they have votes tied up in yet to be implemented, but "under review" ideas.

 

It's a valide concern, considering the way the Feedback site works. No votes, no voice.

 

Perhaps once they mark ideas "under review" they could release those votes. Even better, once they are "under review", then actually do something with those ideas. Don't let them linger for months on end. At some point TPTB either need to decide to implement and mark them Planned/Started/Completed or decide it's not worth implementing and mark them Declined. Just don't keep dragging it on indefinitely.

[+BlueDeuce]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

 

Where?

 

You paid your money knowing what you where getting no?

 

My brain must not be working tonight. I'm still not following.

 

I see an OP asking when ideas "under review" will be acted on so his votes will be released. I see GOF saying it doesn't matter what you do with your votes since they are going to do what they want anyway. Then your post about a $30 wish list being so important.

 

Frustration I see. Entitlement is not as apparent. Please point it out to me.

 

My apologies. Usually when I see someone asking where are the entitlements, they are using subterfuge.

 

edit: missing s

 

I'm genuinely interested in knowing where K&C's comment came from.

 

It comes from assuming your membership fees guarantee something beyond what you where offered when you signed up.

[knowschad]

I propose that we bump that list weekly. I think it is an excellent reminder. There are still many things missing from that list, too. But it does serve to point out how things that the users request, and even the lackey's seem to agree with, get bumped in favor of some half-thought-out new "feature" that does nothing but get in the way, at best.

 

>> Change text from "Needs Archive" to "Needs Reviewer Attention".

 

Hey... that one is pretty difficult. I think you should take it off your list for now. Changing a text string is a pretty big deal.

[+Team Taran]

I paid 30 dollars for a range of offered perks. I am receiving those perks. No one ever promised me any of the things on the list. At most they said they were thinking about implementing them. They've given me what I paid for.

[+dfx]

Hey... that one is pretty difficult. I think you should take it off your list for now. Changing a text string is a pretty big deal.

 

We have prioritized this in the system. Please continue to vote to help us in our future planning.

[+BlueDeuce]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

 

Where?

 

You paid your money knowing what you where getting no?

 

My brain must not be working tonight. I'm still not following.

 

I see an OP asking when ideas "under review" will be acted on so his votes will be released. I see GOF saying it doesn't matter what you do with your votes since they are going to do what they want anyway. Then your post about a $30 wish list being so important.

 

Frustration I see. Entitlement is not as apparent. Please point it out to me.

 

My apologies. Usually when I see someone asking where are the entitlements, they are using subterfuge.

 

edit: missing s

 

I'm genuinely interested in knowing where K&C's comment came from.

 

It comes from assuming your membership fees guarantee something beyond what you were offered when you signed up.

 

edit: where/were

[+sword fern]

I havent been paying attention to the feedback, but yeah, they need to be addressed.

[+BlueDeuce]

I havent been paying attention to the feedback, but yeah, they need to be addressed.

 

Well there's a relative definition of need if I've ever heard one.

[+GeoBain]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

 

Where?

 

You paid your money knowing what you where getting no?

 

My brain must not be working tonight. I'm still not following.

 

I see an OP asking when ideas "under review" will be acted on so his votes will be released. I see GOF saying it doesn't matter what you do with your votes since they are going to do what they want anyway. Then your post about a $30 wish list being so important.

 

Frustration I see. Entitlement is not as apparent. Please point it out to me.

 

My apologies. Usually when I see someone asking where are the entitlements, they are using subterfuge.

 

edit: missing s

 

I'm genuinely interested in knowing where K&C's comment came from.

 

It comes from assuming your membership fees guarantee something beyond what you where offered when you signed up.

 

Where are you seeing that? If I didn't pay a dime, I still expect ideas marked "under review" to actually have some progress after a while or to be moved to the declined column?

 

I don't think my membership guarantees anything. But do expect that when someone says they're going to work on something that they will actually do what they say and work on it. That's not entitlement.

 

Entitlement would be "Here is an idea I have and because I paid $30 I expect you to implement it". Quite different from, "You said you would do whatever, but you haven't. What's up because I can't vote on any other ideas until you release those votes".

[+GeoBain]

I havent been paying attention to the feedback, but yeah, they need to be addressed.

 

Well there's a relative definition of need if I've ever heard one.

Why?

 

If you're going to have a feedback system and ask your users to actually use that system, then you should follow through when you make commitments.

 

There is nothing wrong with Groundspeak building whatever service they want. They don't have to give us any input at all. It's there playpen and they get to make any rules they want. If you pay $30 for membership, then hopefully you are paying for a service already offered and not with expectation of services promised.

 

But, if you are using a feedback system that relies on a finite amount of votes in order to use that system, then those votes should not be tied up indefinitely. Either act on the ideas or not. Or better yet, close down the feedback system altogether and just build whatever service you want. But don't keep stringing everyone along.

[+BlueDeuce]

<snip>...I don't think my membership guarantees anything. But do expect that when someone says they're going to work on something that they will actually do what they say and work on it. That's not entitlement.

 

Assuming they are going to work on every issue and provide it in...what time line? and then complain they don't.....

 

Talking about customer service is one thing, complaining about promises is another.

[+BlueDeuce]

excuse me, work on every issue listed by the OP.

[knowschad]

<snip>...I don't think my membership guarantees anything. But do expect that when someone says they're going to work on something that they will actually do what they say and work on it. That's not entitlement.

 

Assuming they are going to work on every issue and provide it in...what time line? and then complain they don't.....

 

Talking about customer service is one thing, complaining about promises is another.

 

Passing on issues that affect many serious geocachers while implementing new features that hinder them, , or at best are useless to them, is indeed an issue worth discussing IMO... make no bones about it. You have been around long enough to know that this is a chronic problem. Instead of map fixes, we get avatars on the logs. Doh! Avatars on the logs don't help anybody find caches. Maps do. Fix the friggin maps!

Edited September 18, 2011 by knowschad

[knowschad]

excuse me, work on every issue listed by the OP.

 

Yes, please.

[+BlueDeuce]

<snip>...I don't think my membership guarantees anything. But do expect that when someone says they're going to work on something that they will actually do what they say and work on it. That's not entitlement.

 

Assuming they are going to work on every issue and provide it in...what time line? and then complain they don't.....

 

Talking about customer service is one thing, complaining about promises is another.

 

Passing on issues that affect many serious geocachers while implementing new features that hinder them is an issue... make no bones about it. You have been around long enough to know that this is a chronic problem. Instead of map fixes, we get avatars on the logs. Doh! Avatars on the logs don't help anybody find caches. Maps do. Fix the friggin maps!

 

I used the feedback forum to report troubles but overall I think we had better support when it was there in this forum.

[+Don_J]

I havent been paying attention to the feedback, but yeah, they need to be addressed.

 

Well there's a relative definition of need if I've ever heard one.

Why?

 

If you're going to have a feedback system and ask your users to actually use that system, then you should follow through when you make commitments.

 

There is nothing wrong with Groundspeak building whatever service they want. They don't have to give us any input at all. It's there playpen and they get to make any rules they want. If you pay $30 for membership, then hopefully you are paying for a service already offered and not with expectation of services promised.

 

But, if you are using a feedback system that relies on a finite amount of votes in order to use that system, then those votes should not be tied up indefinitely. Either act on the ideas or not. Or better yet, close down the feedback system altogether and just build whatever service you want. But don't keep stringing everyone along.

 

That right there is the only thing that I feel entitled to.

[+Dgwphotos]

 

I used the feedback forum to report troubles but overall I think we had better support when it was there in this forum.

I agree. I think it works better for ideas, but not for tech support. Maybe it would work better if posting something in the site problems feedback section didn't require a vote.

[+BlueDeuce]

I havent been paying attention to the feedback, but yeah, they need to be addressed.

 

Well there's a relative definition of need if I've ever heard one.

Why?

 

If you're going to have a feedback system and ask your users to actually use that system, then you should follow through when you make commitments.

 

There is nothing wrong with Groundspeak building whatever service they want. They don't have to give us any input at all. It's there playpen and they get to make any rules they want. If you pay $30 for membership, then hopefully you are paying for a service already offered and not with expectation of services promised.

 

But, if you are using a feedback system that relies on a finite amount of votes in order to use that system, then those votes should not be tied up indefinitely. Either act on the ideas or not. Or better yet, close down the feedback system altogether and just build whatever service you want. But don't keep stringing everyone along.

 

That right there is the only thing that I feel entitled to.

 

pfft, votes. More than one to mean you meant it?

Edited September 18, 2011 by BlueDeuce

[+tozainamboku]

excuse me, work on every issue listed by the OP.

These were all issues where Groundspeak either responded with Planned or Under Review. So long as Groundspeak is releasing updates with changes nobody asked for (in the feedback forum at least), it would be nice to see some indication these planned or under reiview ideas are still on their radar.

 

We don't have visibility to their internal tracking tool or much of an idea of how their developers prioritize the work they do. The Scrum methodology they supposedly use is suppose to have a product owner who represents the voice of the customer and ensure the team delivers value. Scrum views some stakeholders as chickens and others as pigs. And usually, since developers are the ones implementing the Scrum method, the users are chickens whose input (the egg) is important, but they aren't as committed as the developers who work full time on the project and thus are like the pig who is asked to provide the bacon. There has been much criticism of the Scrum method for its use of this analogy. Sometimes the importance of developing a project that the end user wants is lost.

[+BlueDeuce]

excuse me, work on every issue listed by the OP.

These were all issues where Groundspeak either responded with Planned or Under Review. So long as Groundspeak is releasing updates with changes nobody asked for (in the feedback forum at least), it would be nice to see some indication these planned or under reiview ideas are still on their radar.

 

We don't have visibility to their internal tracking tool or much of an idea of how their developers prioritize the work they do. The Scrum methodology they supposedly use is suppose to have a product owner who represents the voice of the customer and ensure the team delivers value. Scrum views some stakeholders as chickens and others as pigs. And usually, since developers are the ones implementing the Scrum method, the users are chickens whose input (the egg) is important, but they aren't as committed as the developers who work full time on the project and thus are like the pig who is asked to provide the bacon. There has been much criticism of the Scrum method for its use of this analogy. Sometimes the importance of developing a project that the end user wants is lost.

 

Well considering I have yet to see a method many aren't complaining about, I prefer the Snake Pit method. That is, let the cream rise to the top of the crab bucket.

Edited September 18, 2011 by BlueDeuce

[knowschad]

excuse me, work on every issue listed by the OP.

These were all issues where Groundspeak either responded with Planned or Under Review. So long as Groundspeak is releasing updates with changes nobody asked for (in the feedback forum at least), it would be nice to see some indication these planned or under reiview ideas are still on their radar.

 

We don't have visibility to their internal tracking tool or much of an idea of how their developers prioritize the work they do. The Scrum methodology they supposedly use is suppose to have a product owner who represents the voice of the customer and ensure the team delivers value. Scrum views some stakeholders as chickens and others as pigs. And usually, since developers are the ones implementing the Scrum method, the users are chickens whose input (the egg) is important, but they aren't as committed as the developers who work full time on the project and thus are like the pig who is asked to provide the bacon. There has been much criticism of the Scrum method for its use of this analogy. Sometimes the importance of developing a project that the end user wants is lost.

 

I wasn't knowledgeable about Scrum, although I had heard the term. At least on the surface, it would seem to me that this methodology forgets that sometimes those chickens are also pigs. And in the case of something like geocaching, I'd guess at leat 1/3 of us are one sort of pig or another. Me, I've been a pig for about 30 years, and I can tell you that this is NOT the way to make happy chickens!!

[knowschad]

excuse me, work on every issue listed by the OP.

implementing the Scrum method, the users are chickens whose input (the egg) is important, but they aren't as committed as the developers who work full time on the project and thus are like the pig who is asked to provide the bacon. the end user wants is lost.

Which is exactly why all the lackeys need to do more geocaching. The developers have very little idea which features really do help in real life geocaching, and which ones are merely pretty trinkets. Come on, Groundspeak... you say "we think Geocaching all day long, we really don't want to GO geocaching" (that is a rough quote from Jeremy). Well, that just isn't good enough. Go geocaching all day long once in a while, like the rest of us, and those things that we complain about, and those features that we ask for, just might start making sense to you! You can't figure real life out from within a cubicle.

[+BlueDeuce]

 

I used the feedback forum to report troubles but overall I think we had better support when it was there in this forum.

I agree. I think it works better for ideas, but not for tech support. Maybe it would work better if posting something in the site problems feedback section didn't require a vote.

 

Honestly I've found it poor for both ideas and troubles reports. The topic is about promises, which I think is a complete misunderstanding of the feedback forum.

 

edit: poor in comparison to before.

Edited September 18, 2011 by BlueDeuce

[+GeoBain]

<snip>...I don't think my membership guarantees anything. But do expect that when someone says they're going to work on something that they will actually do what they say and work on it. That's not entitlement.

 

Assuming they are going to work on every issue and provide it in...what time line? and then complain they don't.....

 

Talking about customer service is one thing, complaining about promises is another.

 

Passing on issues that affect many serious geocachers while implementing new features that hinder them is an issue... make no bones about it. You have been around long enough to know that this is a chronic problem. Instead of map fixes, we get avatars on the logs. Doh! Avatars on the logs don't help anybody find caches. Maps do. Fix the friggin maps!

 

I used the feedback forum to report troubles but overall I think we had better support when it was there in this forum.

 

I agree wholeheartedly. But that is not the issue being discussed.

[+GeoBain]

it would be nice to see some indication these planned or under reiview ideas are still on their radar.

 

A good example is when they broke the Android app. It used to respect the ignore list. They pushed out an update that broke this functionality.

 

Someone posted it in the Feedback site on May 18th. On the same day OpinioNate responded that they were looking into the issue. Not a word since. The thread is buried. I've asked twice for an update and not a word. Can they not at least give an update?

[+TerraViators]

Come on, Groundspeak... you say "we think Geocaching all day long, we really don't want to GO geocaching" (that is a rough quote from Jeremy).

 

This was really said?

Edited September 18, 2011 by TerraViators

[+RobDJr]

Looking at the things that have been changed and the things on the 'wish list' makes me think that what we're seeing is decisions being made with an eye on growing the business as opposed to satisfying the desires of a core group of serious users (who likely aren't going anywhere).

 

As much as I'd like to see many of the things on the list implemented, I have to admit I don't see how those things will matter as far as pulling in new people to the game is concerned?

[Keystone]

Which is exactly why all the lackeys need to do more geocaching. The developers have very little idea which features really do help in real life geocaching, and which ones are merely pretty trinkets. Come on, Groundspeak... you say "we think Geocaching all day long, we really don't want to GO geocaching" (that is a rough quote from Jeremy). Well, that just isn't good enough. Go geocaching all day long once in a while, like the rest of us, and those things that we complain about, and those features that we ask for, just might start making sense to you! You can't figure real life out from within a cubicle.

That is such brilliant insight. I recommend that Groundspeak start off by hiring someone with, say, 8800+ finds to be the primary monitor for the Feedback forum, and to monitor development efforts from the user acceptance perspective.

 

Oh, wait. They already did that.

[AZcachemeister]

Apparently some users are resistant to the placebo effect that reporting/voting in the Feedback area was expected to produce.

[+tozainamboku]

Which is exactly why all the lackeys need to do more geocaching. The developers have very little idea which features really do help in real life geocaching, and which ones are merely pretty trinkets. Come on, Groundspeak... you say "we think Geocaching all day long, we really don't want to GO geocaching" (that is a rough quote from Jeremy). Well, that just isn't good enough. Go geocaching all day long once in a while, like the rest of us, and those things that we complain about, and those features that we ask for, just might start making sense to you! You can't figure real life out from within a cubicle.

That is such brilliant insight. I recommend that Groundspeak start off by hiring someone with, say, 8800+ finds to be the primary monitor for the Feedback forum, and to monitor development efforts from the user acceptance perspective.

 

Oh, wait. They already did that.

Usually Moun10bike does a real good job monitoring the feedback forums and posting that a suggestion is under review by Groundspeak. But we have no insight as to what happens after that. I believe it was Moun10bike who indicated that Grounspeak uses some form of the Scrum methodology to do their development. What I imagine is that the Scrum team meets as the beginning of each sprint (development cycle) and decides what items on the backlog list will get implement. Supposedly the Product Owner (perhaps this is Moun10bike) is a full member of the team at this point (a pig and not a chicken) and can help prioritize the backlog so the output from the next sprint adds value for the customers. The developers should be providing rough estimates of the effort to complete an item so that the Product Owner and Scrum Master can guide the selection of items to implement and remove impediments that are keeping developers from completing these items.

 

I sometimes wonder if the developers have too much power and can ignore user request because they prefer to work on something else.

 

====================================

 

One problem with the feedback forum is how some ideas get buried. I used the feedback forum last week to start a request to review a guideline relative to he placement of bonus caches. It was getting some support because I and several others were able to post a link to it from a discussion in this forum on a particular incident where a series of caches were denied based on this guideline. Unfortunately, keystone locked the thread here, ostensibly because the OP was accusing the reviewer of misreading the guideline and that was considered disrespectful got the thread locked. Once the thread here was lock, my feedback idea has fallen off the radar. I don't expect I will ever here from Moun10bike or anyone else. Instead we have a guideline that bans some series I think cachers would enjoy and I still don't know the rationale for this guideline in the first place.

[knowschad]

Which is exactly why all the lackeys need to do more geocaching. The developers have very little idea which features really do help in real life geocaching, and which ones are merely pretty trinkets. Come on, Groundspeak... you say "we think Geocaching all day long, we really don't want to GO geocaching" (that is a rough quote from Jeremy). Well, that just isn't good enough. Go geocaching all day long once in a while, like the rest of us, and those things that we complain about, and those features that we ask for, just might start making sense to you! You can't figure real life out from within a cubicle.

That is such brilliant insight. I recommend that Groundspeak start off by hiring someone with, say, 8800+ finds to be the primary monitor for the Feedback forum, and to monitor development efforts from the user acceptance perspective.

 

Oh, wait. They already did that.

Doesn't seem to be working. Or, at least that is insufficient.

Edited September 18, 2011 by knowschad

[+L0ne.R]

I think RobDJr has it right:

Looking at the things that have been changed and the things on the 'wish list' makes me think that what we're seeing is decisions being made with an eye on growing the business as opposed to satisfying the desires of a core group of serious users (who likely aren't going anywhere).

 

As much as I'd like to see many of the things on the list implemented, I have to admit I don't see how those things will matter as far as pulling in new people to the game is concerned?

 

The one item from the feedback forums that they did implement was the Favorite Vote, but wasn't that in response to Garmin's new geocaching database. The threat of losing customers to Garmin seemed to spur Groundspeak into action.

 

I don't see how it's good business sense to placate your members. But as RobDJr said, we're likely not going anywhere so where's the incentive?

[+Frank Broughton]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

 

Where?

 

You paid your money knowing what you where getting no?

 

so, that is not a reason that the reasonable changes should not be made as a priority!

[+Walts Hunting]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

Not really. If you went to Amazon, ordered a book, then never received the book, but they still charged you for it, you would either demand the book or your money back. We simply wish to see the value of the product that we paid for.

 

You get the value of the product you paid for. What he wants are upgrades not included in the original price.

[+Frank Broughton]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

Not really. If you went to Amazon, ordered a book, then never received the book, but they still charged you for it, you would either demand the book or your money back. We simply wish to see the value of the product that we paid for.

 

You get the value of the product you paid for. What he wants are upgrades not included in the original price.

 

Please let us dispense with the oration. He is only asking for some LOGICAL updates to a site that is in constant state of updating. Hardly out of order to suggest to a place that is in such a condition - to consider requests by those who use it.

 

You are OVER THINKING this.

[+dphickey]

That is quite some sense of entitlement there.

 

Where?

 

You paid your money knowing what you where getting no?

 

My brain must not be working tonight. I'm still not following.

 

I see an OP asking when ideas "under review" will be acted on so his votes will be released. I see GOF saying it doesn't matter what you do with your votes since they are going to do what they want anyway. Then your post about a $30 wish list being so important.

 

Frustration I see. Entitlement is not as apparent. Please point it out to me.

 

My apologies. Usually when I see someone asking where are the entitlements, they are using subterfuge.

 

edit: missing s

 

I'm genuinely interested in knowing where K&C's comment came from.

 

It comes from assuming your membership fees guarantee something beyond what you where offered when you signed up.

 

I really don't see the OP asking why something that is guaranteed that is not being delivered. What I see is a consumer asking a business for a better product. By taking votes and posting that something is under review implies that the business may be acting on those suggestions. So if Groundspeak opens a forum for suggestions and replies to those suggestions, what is wrong about asking for a status?

 

Most businesses offer comment cards and most of those act on the comments to improve their customer's experience. If the customer is happy, they will continue to be a customer. If not another company may offer that product with the features/benefits requested and that customer may take their money to the new company.

[+Frank Broughton]

Just off the top of my head, these are issues from the Feedback forum that are "planned", where put "under review" or put on the priority list, all with favorable comments from the Lackeys. Some of these are approaching their second year.

 

• Working maps, especially with previewing PQs
• More criteria options added to PQs, particularly "owned by" and "found by".
• Favorites added to PQ criteria.
• Favorite points added to GPX files.
• Personal notes added to GPX files.
• Ability to delete photos with deleting the entire log.
• Ability to add text to the auto generated message that is sent when we delete another player's log.
• Change text from "Needs Archive" to "Needs Reviewer Attention".
• Ability to ignore all of a users caches.
• Return the users location to the forum sidebar for users that have provided it in their profiles, (lost in the forum upgrade)
• Ability to add corrected coordinates to puzzle cache page and have those coordinates included in the GPX file.
• Notification for when photos are added to your cache page.
• Notification for when logs are edited on your cache page.
• Notification for "Needs Archived" and "Note" logs, (Actually part of the May '11 update, but it didn't work)
• New hiders are presented with a simple quiz to verify they have at least glanced at the guidelines.
• Add a Nano size.

 

How long do we keep our votes on these issues? If we remove them, supposedly they drop in priority, yet last Thursday, they introduced at least four new bugs that deserve our votes.

 

It is very frustrating to see these issues linger when features that were not on the RADAR are introduced that actually break useability. It's to the point of, "Why ask"?

 

ANY PROGRESS NATE?

[knowschad]

Just off the top of my head, these are issues from the Feedback forum that are "planned", where put "under review" or put on the priority list, all with favorable comments from the Lackeys. Some of these are approaching their second year.

 

• Working maps, especially with previewing PQs
• More criteria options added to PQs, particularly "owned by" and "found by".
• Favorites added to PQ criteria.
• Favorite points added to GPX files.
• Personal notes added to GPX files.
• Ability to delete photos with deleting the entire log.
• Ability to add text to the auto generated message that is sent when we delete another player's log.
• Change text from "Needs Archive" to "Needs Reviewer Attention".
• Ability to ignore all of a users caches.
• Return the users location to the forum sidebar for users that have provided it in their profiles, (lost in the forum upgrade)
• Ability to add corrected coordinates to puzzle cache page and have those coordinates included in the GPX file.
• Notification for when photos are added to your cache page.
• Notification for when logs are edited on your cache page.
• Notification for "Needs Archived" and "Note" logs, (Actually part of the May '11 update, but it didn't work)
• New hiders are presented with a simple quiz to verify they have at least glanced at the guidelines.
• Add a Nano size.

 

How long do we keep our votes on these issues? If we remove them, supposedly they drop in priority, yet last Thursday, they introduced at least four new bugs that deserve our votes.

 

It is very frustrating to see these issues linger when features that were not on the RADAR are introduced that actually break useability. It's to the point of, "Why ask"?

 

ANY PROGRESS NATE?

 

You forgot to increase the font size so Nate could hear you. I fixed it, though.

[+riffraff9000]

"Favorite points added to GPX files."

 

I came here searching for this. Glad to see I'm not the only one.

[+Dgwphotos]

"Favorite points added to GPX files."

 

I came here searching for this. Glad to see I'm not the only one.

They are in the GSAK API.