Twelve PAGES of "dips" - why not delete them?

[+charliewhiskey]

One cacher got three of my TBs and dipped them into over 100 caches before leaving them in a cache. They now have twelve PAGES of bland "took it to" logs.

 

I feel these detract from the history of the bugs. Does anyone have any good ideas why I shouldn't go ahead and delete most of these?

 

Here are the TBs:

 

Violet Tag #1

 

Indigo/Blue Tag

 

Green Tag

Edited February 1, 2012 by charliewhiskey

[+BlueDeuce]

Does anyone have any good ideas why I shouldn't go ahead and delete most of these?

 

Only that you don't want to waste too much time on such an effort.

 

Five minutes once a month will eventually take care of it.

[+kunarion]

I feel these detract from the history of the bugs. Does anyone have any good ideas why I shouldn't go ahead and delete most of these?

This will happen again. Several of my Trackables have lots of those (but not 12 pages). It's a selection in the cache logs, and can happen automatically until the bugs are dropped. I've even double-checked my own logs to be sure I wasn't doing that to other people's bugs.

 

Maybe adding something to the Trackable goal may help, asking people to place the Trackable into a cache, not go cache-to-cache with it. You'd still have to wait til they find a suitable container.

 

Like you, I don't think pages of "visits" are all that interesting. Maybe they add some miles. Maybe they let you know the Trackable is still doing OK. But I doubt anyone would be too upset if you thin the logs out. Well except you (the Trackable owner) -- it might be a lot of work editing them. And, bear in mind that someone will make more.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

From a previous thread:

I was wondering how you all feel about your TB visiting caches when a cacher has it? When I log I picked up a TB my phone automatically logs them as visiting any cache I go to.

 

Although visiting was intended to replace the somewhat tedious method of "dipping", placing a trackable and immediately retrieving, some smart phone users have discovered the ability to "set and forget" an automatic logging process for each and every cache that they log as found. This has led to the activity of your trackables exactly as you described.

 

While not "wrong", it can be a nuisance to some with Trackable Owners with pages upon pages of unremarkable "visit" logs. Twelve pages of such is certainly out of the norm.

 

Just my opinion, but it shows a degree of laziness on the part of some, allowing "auto" settings to go on and on and on and...

Perhaps they just don't know...

 

In direct response to the posed question of should you go ahead and delete them? It's your trackable, go ahead if you wish. Be prepared to explain to the cacher whose logs you deleted as to why. I do not know if they receive an email that the logs are deleted or not. The results of the deletions will have "0" effect upon any their stats.

 

EDIT: added "their" (stats).

Edited February 1, 2012 by Gitchee-Gummee

[+thebruce0]

This thread raises a good point... I hadn't thought about the trackable log history view - I just had a trackable for a number of weeks, and had it visit the caches I did, primarily for mileage and whatnot. But yeah, the 'dips' quickly fill up the log history. If there are pictures or anything to go with them, then that's different, or if they're fulfilling the tackable goal (perhaps it's to log travel distance)... but dipping for the sake of dipping I think could detract from the TB history.

 

Of course, the owner is free to leave them or delete them, but I think as a TB mover, it is appropriate to consider that aspect of the log history.

Now please excuse me while I go and delete a bunch of logs...

[+kunarion]

the 'dips' quickly fill up the log history. If there are pictures or anything to go with them, then that's different, or if they're fulfilling the tackable goal (perhaps it's to log travel distance)... but dipping for the sake of dipping I think could detract from the TB history.

Maybe if it's a record of a journey around the world, you'd leave them all undeleted. FWIW, I haven't touched any such logs yet. These Visits are probably the most action the TB will ever see before falling off the planet. And if I'm deleting "all the boring ones", there won't be many logs left.

 

My only issue is, it looks like a cacher has a setting on autopilot and that the TB was not really at all those caches, in which case, it's not a list of TB logs, it's a record of someone's cache trail.

 

I think as a TB mover, it is appropriate to consider that aspect of the log history.

Some dip runs begin with "I'll put some miles on this then drop it". But most seem to almost be unaware that the Visit Spam is happening. There's not a lot of site feedback to tell when that happens until you go to the page and discover a list.

Edited February 1, 2012 by kunarion

[+Eartha]

Did you check the cache pages it visited to see if there was a story written there? Not everyone writes a story twice.

[+kunarion]

Not everyone writes a story twice.

That's a good point. I have sometimes posted a TB picture to a cache page (then need to re-post the same photo on the TB page). But if it's a photo of two or three TBs composed on the cool structure at the cache, I may just post it only as a cache log photo.

 

But I do change the text on the TB page, and often post a couple of photos. I can't stand the default "I make log, I make log, I make log" stuff. It seems obnoxious, considering I picked up the TB allegedly to help it on its mission. And the mission is not to fill pages with Visits. Maybe it's a fine point. I forgive people for the itchy trigger finger that switched on their Dip Autopilot, but I don't inflict that on others.

[+howarthe]

I think the answer to this problem is really going to be a function to view only certain logs when you read the page. In my experience, only the retrieve logs are ever interesting to read, so it would be nice to limit our view to only the retrieve logs.

[+fuzziebear3]

Yes, the person whose log you are deleting will get a notification (really one for each log that you delete).

 

So in the act of deleting them, you will also be filling their mailbox with notifications -- you probably should know that before you do it.

 

And it is in turn likely that they will respond to you with a 'why are you deleting all my logs, I was just moving it along and getting it miles'.

 

If they still have your bug, you probably don't want to upset them, or they might take it out on your bug.

[+thebruce0]

heh, interesting how the table could turn there.

Should the owner 'respect' the TB holder's inbox when the TB holder already logged all those visits to the owner?

But then does the fact they're holding the TB give them the upper hand? heh

 

I think howarthe had a good point - filter the logs for viewing. There isn't really any custom text requirement when posting logs to a TB, insofar as they're done when logging caches. Perhaps if the visit logs were even less prominent. If there's no custom log text, why waste all that space? Display that it visited a cache, provide the GC code and distance traveled, and don't have it count towards the per-page log count.

On that note, if any log doesn't have any log text, does it need to take up so much space?

 

Or maybe the other solution is just to convert the TB log list to the same format as the geocache listing logs - scroll to the bottom to load more - so you don't have to deal with pages and whatnot... *shrug*

[+BlueDeuce]

Deleting bug logs do not generate an email.

Edited February 1, 2012 by BlueDeuce

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Don't know if this would be related or not: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=289763

 

Is a thread suggesting Groundspeak not allow deletion of TB/geocoin logs by Trackable Owners.

 

EDIT to add: Above mentioned thread seems to be addressing "clean slate" deletions, akin to starting it over all new and "shiny" again.

Edited February 2, 2012 by Gitchee-Gummee

[+charliewhiskey]

Deleting bug logs do not generate an email.

Thank you.

 

And thank you to everyone who took the time to reply. I appreciate your insights and advice.

[+Team Triggerfinger]

Personally, I'm not a fan of "took it to" logs.

 

I wish there was an option on the trackable page that I could click on that would enable or disable "took it to" posts for that particular trackable.

 

That way, people who like them can "enable" it, and people who dont like them can "disable" the posts.

 

Simple idea, but I have no idea how hard it would be to implement such a thing.

[+BlueDeuce]

As far as I'm concerned a traveler should get credit for every cache it has visited. Seems to me the issue is more about viewing logs than controlling cacher conduct. Or at least it should be.

 

 

 

bd

Edited February 2, 2012 by BlueDeuce

[+musta9]

Maybe One person could only take One GC or TB to 15 caches. That would work

[+G & C]

Speaking as someone who moves a good deal of TBs and GCs, I did appreciate Groundspeaks addition of the "visited" button. But I don't use it for every cache I visit. I can easily see how that would get irritating for someone more interested in details about the places that the coin or TB visited. If I'm caching in an area and have a TB with me, typically I pick the best cache (or two if there's some real good ones) and dip it into that one. If I have a story to tell, it gets dropped and picked up so that the TB owner gets the log in an email. If not, I just let it visit, and save myself the time of having to pick it back up.

[+BlueDeuce]

I would love to see your best Visited log.

[+G & C]

I would love to see your best Visited log.

 

Visited logs, as far as I use them anyway, are for tracking mileage only. If I'm writing a log and posting pics, I drop the coin in the cache. Rarely is there a log attached to a visited log from me.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

I would love to see your best Visited log.

 

Visited logs, as far as I use them anyway, are for tracking mileage only. If I'm writing a log and posting pics, I drop the coin in the cache. Rarely is there a log attached to a visited log from me.

While the bolded portion MAY be true in the minds of most geocachers, it is untrue for others. I notice that you did state "as far as I use them", so the exception is noted.

 

We and the geocachers that we personally know, use the "visited" log, but we do so specifically with a purpose in mind. Oftentimes those visited logs are edited later to reflect a true log -- be it about the place, the cache, the travel or relevant photos. We are aware that the TO does not receive an email for the edit, but they will eventually notice the change.

 

We are VERY hesitant to use the "visit" log for each and every cache that we hit. It isn't that difficult either, as we do not use a phone and have no access to a set-it-and-forget-it auto log. If we did use a phone, we certainly would not use that option anyway. We just see it as a type of laziness and as such, well... we just do not agree with it. True, we could make a cut-n-paste type of log (field note) with our Delorme, but it ain't gonna happen, either.

 

That said, if we are traveling and have "plans" for the trackable to show the trip, we do use the "visit" logs to show the route -- still, many of those are edited to say something, anyway.

 

Why is this important? It may not be to some/many/most, but it is to us.

 

Do we wish others would do things that way? Sure -- but, it ain't gonna happen either.

 

There are two sides to this coin, and it depends upon which side of it you like to look at.

[+hzoi]

It could be worse -- you could have gotten an email for all of those visited logs.

 

I've seen a bunch on some of our bugs. Now that folks can just click "visit all" for their TBs when they log a cache, more are doing it. I do it on a more limited basis, say, if I'm in a different state or visit a neat cache.

[+Eartha]

Here is your reason for not deleting the logs.

 

Do you really need the angst?

This cacher surely thought it mattered, and the discussion took off from there, with strong feelings on either side.

 

I request that if you visit that thread, to keep it on topic. Feelings were so strong, that it started getting personal, amd we want to avoid any plilng on.

Thanks.

[+kunarion]

Here is your reason for not deleting the logs.

 

Do you really need the angst?

This cacher surely thought it mattered, and the discussion took off from there, with strong feelings on either side.

Retrieve.

Twelve pages of dips.

Dropped.

 

That might have been vastly entertaining to the TB holder. It obviously has great meaning and value, and by deleting the pages of Visits, we'd lose all those great memories. Remember "User took it to...?" Yeah, good times...

 

Yet I can't help but wonder if it's a mistake. The TB was accidentally lost in a junk drawer, and eventually got placed into a cache when it was again found... oops! In the meantime, the dips accumulated.

 

I can't believe I need yet another set of instructions on my Trackable pages. I have twelve pages of instructions.

[+charliewhiskey]

Here is your reason for not deleting the logs.

Thank you. I'm considering asking the logger if he minds if I delete most of those "took it to" logs.

[+kunarion]

Here is your reason for not deleting the logs.

Thank you. I'm considering asking the logger if he minds if I delete most of those "took it to" logs.

Optional filtering of "Visits" might be good as a Feature request. Then nobody gets hurt.

Edited February 2, 2012 by kunarion