[beejay&esskay]

Displaying a route PQ and attempting to sort on "favorite count" has resulted in
http://www.geocachin...m/error/500.htm
every time I've tried.

This post has been edited by beejay&esskay: 21 December 2010 - 07:42 PM

[dfx]

cw1710, on 21 December 2010 - 07:41 PM, said:

I love, love, LOVE the new trackables collection! I have been tired of looking at my inventory on my profile page and seeing so many of my own and trying to sort through them all.

welcome to last june

[beejay&esskay]

Moun10Bike, on 21 December 2010 - 05:08 PM, said:

I'll get this added to the list we keep for traveling and armchair caches, all of which are excluded for determination of distance statistics. If you hear of others, please note them here so that we can add them, too.

Thanks!

GC8D77 - the travel cd (Oost-Vlaanderen, Belgium)

[t4e]

*TnT*, on 21 December 2010 - 06:33 PM, said:

What happened to the watchlist?

under "List"

[Kenser321]

niraD, on 21 December 2010 - 05:16 PM, said:

Kenser321, on 21 December 2010 - 04:48 PM, said:

Anyone else having problems with nearby searches on the c:geo app for the Droid?

Unauthorized third-party apps that scrape the web site should be expected to break when the web site updates. In the past, the developer of this app has published a new version after each update of the geocaching.com site.

Yeah it was my bad I jumped the gun. I checked out the developers web page he expected it a few days ago when the update was announced. Getting a Garmin for Christmas I don't plan on using c:geo afterwards. It's an awesome program, but the battery life is horrible.

This post has been edited by Kenser321: 21 December 2010 - 08:01 PM

[pickatree]

I found a cache today that does not give the option to add a log note. The code is GCMJ7Z. It was logged last week. Not sure if this has happened to anyone else since today's update.

Thanks for keeping the site going and adding the excitement.

[savant9]

dfx, on 21 December 2010 - 07:43 PM, said:

cw1710, on 21 December 2010 - 07:41 PM, said:

I love, love, LOVE the new trackables collection! I have been tired of looking at my inventory on my profile page and seeing so many of my own and trying to sort through them all.

welcome to last june

Maybe he drives a Delorean.

[OpinioNate]

pickatree, on 21 December 2010 - 07:59 PM, said:

I found a cache today that does not give the option to add a log note. The code is GCMJ7Z. It was logged last week. Not sure if this has happened to anyone else since today's update.

Thanks for keeping the site going and adding the excitement.

I don't see your log on that cache, pickatree, nor are there any archived (deleted) logs by you.

[pickatree]

Thanks for the reply. There are no options to add a log or note for me. Do you see them? I've checked IE and Firefox.

Geocaching > Hide and Seek A Geocache > Geocache Details

GCMJ7Z ▼

Hello, I'm Johnny Cache 0
Favorites
What is this? A cache by ARF!
Difficulty: Terrain: (1 is easiest, 5 is hardest)
Size: (Micro) Hidden : 01/20/2005

N 34° 42.584 W 085° 17.105 Other Conversions
UTM: 16S E 657047 N 3842192
N 60.1mi from your home location
In Georgia, United States View Map

Print:
No Logs 5 Logs 10 Logs · Driving Directions

[PDF:] No Logs 5 Logs 10 Logs

Download: Read about waypoint downloads

| | |

This post has been edited by pickatree: 21 December 2010 - 08:22 PM

[Tatty]

pickatree did you scroll to the right?

[pickatree]

Wait I found the issue. The option to add a note/log seems to be behind the main page, or at least to the right. This is the first cache that I've seen like this. All other logs today were normal.

Again, thanks for the site updates. I'm looking forward to using the new maps.

[pickatree]

Tatty, on 21 December 2010 - 08:25 PM, said:

pickatree did you scroll to the right?

Thanks Tatty, yeah finally scrolled over. I've never had to do that before.

[Don_J]

I may be out of bounds here, because this is related to the Forum overhaul, and there does not see to be an established topic about this that the Lackys are watching.

Is it possible to customize the email headers on the email messages that are sent out for topics/forums that we are watching? Specifically, [NEW] and [REPLY] this is in line with your other notification system [LOG] and [GEO]. I rely heavily on my mail rules putting my messages in the proper folder. This allows me to prioritize, not only Groundspeak mail but all of my mail.

I always read, and respond to the replies before taking on the the new topics. Right now, everything is just a big mess.

I absolutely love the new forums, but I feel that I, as well as many others do not actually browse the home page. We know what forums we want to watch, and we check our email to see what is new.

[steben6]

What happened to the little box on cache pages that used to tell you how many people were watching a cache? Just wondering!

[savant9]

steben6, on 21 December 2010 - 09:27 PM, said:

What happened to the little box on cache pages that used to tell you how many people were watching a cache? Just wondering!

It seems to be there on caches that you dont own, but not if you are the CO.

Edit, disregard previous statement, as I just toggled Watch on one of your caches and it didnt display. I see now that it only shows up on caches that you have found, as it is in the same box that says "you logged this as found on <date>". In short, if the "You found" box shows, so does the number of watchers.

This post has been edited by savant9: 21 December 2010 - 10:35 PM

[steben6]

savant9, on 21 December 2010 - 10:30 PM, said:

steben6, on 21 December 2010 - 09:27 PM, said:

What happened to the little box on cache pages that used to tell you how many people were watching a cache? Just wondering!

It seems to be there on caches that you dont own, but not if you are the CO.

We have a number of caches on our watchlist that we have not found. The little box does not show up on these pages, but does show up on pages of caches that we have found.
Never mind! Just read your reply before I posted this! Sorry.
Yes, it does appear to only show up on caches that you have found. Would like it to show up on all cache pages like it used to.

This post has been edited by steben6: 21 December 2010 - 10:37 PM

[savant9]

Sorry I editted my post above.

[Dr. House]

DNStephens, on 21 December 2010 - 06:00 PM, said:

DanPan, on 21 December 2010 - 01:28 PM, said:

Stats page:

It seems that "distance to finds" does not take into account the "Display Units" preferences.

Distance to finds shows Mi, my preference is "Use Metric Units"...

I have same complaint. I actually went back to make sure that the metric units was still my choice, and they are, but my stats display in imperial units. Need bug fix.

OpinioNate, on 21 December 2010 - 04:22 PM, said:

In the next phase of development we'll offer those statistics in metric in addition to imperial.

Nate has addressed this concern so that those who have a preference can select it in a future release. Until then, we'll need to be patient.

[Potato Finder]

Still can't sort by distance after doing a keyword/cache name search.

[Boost]

The Stats page does not look right in Firefox, compared to IE.

[Lil Devil]

Potato Finder, on 21 December 2010 - 10:52 PM, said:

till can't sort by distance after doing a keyword/cache name search.

I don't think you ever could. It only shows distance if you search based on a location.

[Mauison]

Moun10Bike, on 21 December 2010 - 05:08 PM, said:

MotorBug, on 21 December 2010 - 04:55 PM, said:

Several years ago in a moment of stupidity, I logged GC55A5, Änglamarken, a mis-identified traditional that was an armchair virtual. Now it shows up as my furthest cache as well as most northerly. I would guess this is the case for many a geocacher. I'm very willing to delete my log on this one but it seems the correct action would be to change the category to a virtual and exclude it from the statistics.

Please advise if this is a possibility.

Thanks.

I'll get this added to the list we keep for traveling and armchair caches, all of which are excluded for determination of distance statistics. If you hear of others, please note them here so that we can add them, too.

Thanks!

Here's a virtual that used to be an armchair: GC6D43 What in the World Cache? I logged it back in 2005, when it was an armchair but now it's a legit virtual. But it's showing up as Farthest from Home and Farthest East for me. Not sure what could be done with that one.

[DanPan]

steben6, on 21 December 2010 - 10:35 PM, said:

Yes, it does appear to only show up on caches that you have found. Would like it to show up on all cache pages like it used to.

Me too.

[DanPan]

cache listing:

If you click on the link "View all x bookmark lists..." (under Bookmark Lists) you enter "Your Bookmark Lists" page.

Please fix it.

This post has been edited by DanPan: 21 December 2010 - 11:37 PM

[colin&daddy]

Sorry if I missed it, but is there a current justification why my owned caches do not show on the new beta map? Can I safely assume that will be added at some point? I find it quite helpful to use my own caches as reference points, as I know exactly where they are.
Thanks!

[Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat]

I think there should be separation between text in the forums, and your signature.

[Mauison]

colin&daddy, on 21 December 2010 - 11:43 PM, said:

Sorry if I missed it, but is there a current justification why my owned caches do not show on the new beta map? Can I safely assume that will be added at some point? I find it quite helpful to use my own caches as reference points, as I know exactly where they are.
Thanks!

It will be implemented in future phases (updates). See the first post of this thread under the maps section.

[DanPan]

colin&daddy, on 21 December 2010 - 11:43 PM, said:

Sorry if I missed it, but is there a current justification why my owned caches do not show on the new beta map?

i do not have this issue... My owned caches do show on the new beta map.

[two bison]

OpinioNate, on 21 December 2010 - 12:34 PM, said:

gushoneybun, on 21 December 2010 - 12:32 PM, said:

Stats Page

Not keen on the distance being displayed on the closest to home. Over a period of time if you find other close caches someone could plot where I live.

Only the distance is displayed for users viewing your stats, not the GC ID.

I'm happy to see this change and then new line on the my stats indicating the fact the the GC ID is not shown for nearest find. Thank you.

[two bison]

DanPan, on 21 December 2010 - 11:53 PM, said:

colin&daddy, on 21 December 2010 - 11:43 PM, said:

Sorry if I missed it, but is there a current justification why my owned caches do not show on the new beta map?

i do not have this issue... My owned caches do show on the new beta map.

I have this issue. The cache owned by me is shown but I think the OP meant that the icon is not different from any other cache. I'm guessing that will come later along with smilies for found by me caches.

[two bison]

On the list?
Traveling cache - Little Known Park Finder 2 GC9253

[rickrich]

Cache size, difficulty, terrain gets a ?.

[mamoreb]

LOVE the mobile friendliness of this forum! Haven't seen it mentioned as a new feature. It's perfect!

[BigFurryMonster]

Where do I see which of my caches have accumulated Favorites (other than on the cache pages themselves) ?

[Mauison]

BigFurryMonster, on 22 December 2010 - 01:36 AM, said:

Where do I see which of my caches have accumulated Favorites (other than on the cache pages themselves) ?

Go to "Hide and Seek A Cache", and put in your geonick in the Hidden by Username box. Then sort by favorites and you'll see your caches listed by how many favorites it has.

[BigFurryMonster]

Ah, I see! Would be good to also include Favorites on the http://www.geocachin...m/my/owned.aspx page, and to also include a total-per-cacher.

[monsterbox]

Hi!

After playing around a little bit I've found some more things to discuss ;-)

1. New Map: As far as I've seen it doesn't necessarily show ALL the caches if you zoom out too far. Tried with some power trails and it then seems to only show every 2nd cache (or so) if you're zooming out. Just check the ET Highway and if you're zooming out to 50 miles you don't even see a single cache out of this trail. Additionally hovering over the cache symbol only seems to give you some pop up box at at resolution of 2 Miles and below.

2. Favorites: Thought about this new feature for some more time and I'm still not exactly happy with how it is implemented ;-) Just think about the following: You do have 2 caches. One with 10 finds and the other with 100 finds. The first cache gets 5 votes and the 2nd gets 10 votes. But which cache is better? In my eyes it should be the first one as it got a rate of 50% vs. 10% for the other. So I would more like to see THIS being reflected in the lists. This exactly is the reason why I don't care about these kind of lists ;-) I would prefer giving a cache a grade like at school instead of simply adding single votes regardless the number of logs...

Bye,
Christian

[BigFurryMonster]

It has been extensively discussed:

Here: http://feedback.geoc...he-award-system
and here: http://feedback.geoc...k-rating-system

[j robin]

Andy_and_Matt, on 21 December 2010 - 12:45 PM, said:

janandsteve, on 21 December 2010 - 12:41 PM, said:

"Why are you here?
You've been redirected to this page because the site has noticed some unusual activity.
You may start using the site after one minute has passed and you have shown that you are human."

Wont let me do anything......... have to keep waiting 60secs...... then again...... then again...... no other programs running only IE8

Same here - happens on IE, Firefox and Flock

can't search ANYthing via my phone on any android apps. couldn't log finds & was even unable to find my own hides. please don't say this is a way to have people get Groundspeak's app because it's not the best out there & those better are free.

[j robin]

monsterbox, on 22 December 2010 - 02:59 AM, said:

Hi!

After playing around a little bit I've found some more things to discuss ;-)

1. New Map: As far as I've seen it doesn't necessarily show ALL the caches if you zoom out too far. Tried with some power trails and it then seems to only show every 2nd cache (or so) if you're zooming out. Just check the ET Highway and if you're zooming out to 50 miles you don't even see a single cache out of this trail. Additionally hovering over the cache symbol only seems to give you some pop up box at at resolution of 2 Miles and below.

2. Favorites: Thought about this new feature for some more time and I'm still not exactly happy with how it is implemented ;-) Just think about the following: You do have 2 caches. One with 10 finds and the other with 100 finds. The first cache gets 5 votes and the 2nd gets 10 votes. But which cache is better? In my eyes it should be the first one as it got a rate of 50% vs. 10% for the other. So I would more like to see THIS being reflected in the lists. This exactly is the reason why I don't care about these kind of lists ;-) I would prefer giving a cache a grade like at school instead of simply adding single votes regardless the number of logs...

Bye,
Christian

favorites bug me. there are great caches that few people are going to learn about. when we log it, as if we liked it. that's all. would a rating convince me NOT to do a cache. maybe if it had terrain issues or the CO was a butt. who's going to rate a light pole as a favorite unless it's in her favorite mall? still, they have their place, just like guardrails. go by the log & word of mouth. it's worked well so far...

[The Trekbuddies]

scraping the site for details of 5 new caches must be less server demanding than generating a PQ with 1000 caches in!( yes you can filter new caches in a pq, but the chance of getting a FTF after waiting 3 hours for a pq to be ran may not be to everyones tastes).

favotite caches a simple vote out of 10 for each cache found would be better than a 10% voting rating.

generating stats that show distance from home and setting then to show as default( yes you can select to turn them off)is just lack of respect for peoples security.

i feel gc.com have got it very wrong

[Born2Run GeoCaching]

Thanks so much for all the improvements! Favorites was a great idea.

[monsterbox]

Hi!

BigFurryMonster, on 22 December 2010 - 03:34 AM, said:

It has been extensively discussed:

Here: http://feedback.geoc...he-award-system
and here: http://feedback.geoc...k-rating-system

And here you can see the next less perfect implemented feature. I can't vote AGAINST something ;-)

Additionally I would also like to vote for really bad caches! So a 1-5 rating scheme would fit way better in my eyes! But in the end it simply means that right now I won't waste my time voting at all...


Bye,
Christian

[Delta68]

BUG: If I preview a PQ and then click sort by 'Favorite', the first page shows caches which weren't in the original PQ

This post has been edited by Delta68: 22 December 2010 - 05:14 AM

[Atwell Family]

The Trekbuddies, on 22 December 2010 - 04:13 AM, said:

scraping the site for details of 5 new caches must be less server demanding than generating a PQ with 1000 caches in!( yes you can filter new caches in a pq, but the chance of getting a FTF after waiting 3 hours for a pq to be ran may not be to everyones tastes).

favotite caches a simple vote out of 10 for each cache found would be better than a 10% voting rating.

generating stats that show distance from home and setting then to show as default( yes you can select to turn them off)is just lack of respect for peoples security.

i feel gc.com have got it very wrong

Not sure you are correct here. When I run a PD on most days it runs in about 10-15 minutes. I also have notification set for caches within 5 miles of my house. That way when they are published I get an email.

As for the Favorite, check out this blog http://firennice.squ...-favorites.htmlIt does a nice job explaining why the favorite system should work better.

The distance from home thing has been answered a number of times. The GC number for the cache is not shown when someone else looks at your profile. All that shows is you found a cache .5 miles from your home. plain and simple. Look at my profile to see what others see when they look at yours.


I feel GC.com has gotten it very right!

Edit: Fixed blog link

This post has been edited by OpinioNate: 22 December 2010 - 09:15 AM

[martinx8]

In Beta map I cant see PM caches. Why?

[Keystone]

martinx8, on 22 December 2010 - 05:50 AM, said:

In Beta map I cant see PM caches. Why?

As explained above, "layers" have not yet been rolled out in the beta maps. Distinguishing PM caches is a "layer" because basic and premium members will see different results. Other layers include found vs. unfound by your account, and owned vs. not owned by your account. These features will roll out in a later update.

[Team Monkeyboy]

Don't know if it's new to this update or not, but if you click on "View all {XX} bookmark lists..." to see the rest of the bookmarks that include the current cache you're viewing, it takes you instead to YOUR bookmark manager and shows all of YOUR bookmark lists.

This post has been edited by Team Monkeyboy: 22 December 2010 - 06:32 AM

[Team Monkeyboy]

j robin, on 22 December 2010 - 03:51 AM, said:

monsterbox, on 22 December 2010 - 02:59 AM, said:

Hi!

After playing around a little bit I've found some more things to discuss ;-)

1. New Map: As far as I've seen it doesn't necessarily show ALL the caches if you zoom out too far. Tried with some power trails and it then seems to only show every 2nd cache (or so) if you're zooming out. Just check the ET Highway and if you're zooming out to 50 miles you don't even see a single cache out of this trail. Additionally hovering over the cache symbol only seems to give you some pop up box at at resolution of 2 Miles and below.

2. Favorites: Thought about this new feature for some more time and I'm still not exactly happy with how it is implemented ;-) Just think about the following: You do have 2 caches. One with 10 finds and the other with 100 finds. The first cache gets 5 votes and the 2nd gets 10 votes. But which cache is better? In my eyes it should be the first one as it got a rate of 50% vs. 10% for the other. So I would more like to see THIS being reflected in the lists. This exactly is the reason why I don't care about these kind of lists ;-) I would prefer giving a cache a grade like at school instead of simply adding single votes regardless the number of logs...

Bye,
Christian

favorites bug me. there are great caches that few people are going to learn about. when we log it, as if we liked it. that's all. would a rating convince me NOT to do a cache. maybe if it had terrain issues or the CO was a butt. who's going to rate a light pole as a favorite unless it's in her favorite mall? still, they have their place, just like guardrails. go by the log & word of mouth. it's worked well so far...

I think that's why they only gave you 1 favorites vote for each 10 caches you find... so you'll be judicous in their use. Think about it - chances are if a cache is really good, it's going to have more than 1 favorite vote, unless only 1 person has found it. In that case I'd think people would be smart enoug to look at the logs and description for an explination as to why there's not more finders.

There's going to be abuse of the system one way or another... but this at least will highlight the really good caches in an area.

I do agree that being able to flag BAD caches would be nice as well, but the politics behind that would get really messy.

[Team Monkeyboy]

Mauison, on 22 December 2010 - 02:29 AM, said:

BigFurryMonster, on 22 December 2010 - 01:36 AM, said:

Where do I see which of my caches have accumulated Favorites (other than on the cache pages themselves) ?

Go to "Hide and Seek A Cache", and put in your geonick in the Hidden by Username box. Then sort by favorites and you'll see your caches listed by how many favorites it has.

You can also see which of your caches have favorite votes by selecting "All Geocache Hides" under the "Geocaches" tab in your public profile.