Jump to content

Geocaching Website Feedback


Recommended Posts

there is no "get satisfaction" anymore, its been gone for a very long time and replaced with feedback

the link is on the left on the geocaching.com pages

 

and you do need to log in on the feedback site to make a post

 

02-11-20117-43-54AM.png

Edited by t4e
Link to comment

The various feedback forums here were all reinstated and updated last night with new stickies, though.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=284600

 

This forum is intended for users to report and discuss bugs and feature requests related to the Geocaching.com web site.

 

The other feedback forums have "start new topic" buttons. It looks like just the Geocaching.com Website is missing it. (for now?)

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

The various feedback forums here were all reinstated and updated last night with new stickies, though.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=284600

 

This forum is intended for users to report and discuss bugs and feature requests related to the Geocaching.com web site.

 

The other feedback forums have "start new topic" buttons. It looks like just the Geocaching.com Website is missing it. (for now?)

 

Interesting. Who knows what's going on there.

 

They were not satisfied with Get Satisfaction, pun intended. It was shown to be susceptable to an ugly troll attack, although who am I to say that was the only reason they dropped it. The new feedback section is powered by uservoice.com, a competitor to Getsatisfaction.com, so to speak.

Link to comment

Very interesting! Now that we have finally become accustomed to using the Feedback site... the rug gets pulled out from under us! :o No loss for me, though... while it may (arguably) have been more useful to Groundspeak, it sucked for the end-user.

 

It seems to be working for me now although I didn't try adding a Feedback suggestion.

 

The problem that I have with the Feedback site is that once a suggestion has been "Accepted" and it's status changes to either "Under Review" or "Planned" it often goes into a black hole. We have no idea what it's priority might be (in the case of something that is Planned), what "under review" actually means, or any details about the progress or how an issue might be implemented. I think that was pretty evident on the "Bring Back Virtuals" suggestion. In come cases we even see a comment in a forum post to the effect that a feature will be implemented in the upcoming release, the release goes out, and the feature/bug fix is not include.

Link to comment
The problem that I have with the Feedback site is that once a suggestion has been "Accepted" and it's status changes to either "Under Review" or "Planned" it often goes into a black hole. We have no idea what it's priority might be (in the case of something that is Planned), what "under review" actually means

 

It means: "Nice idea, but we can't be bothered actually implementing it. Instead, we'll just tie up your votes indefinitely so you can't annoy us with any other ideas" :P:lol:

Link to comment
The problem that I have with the Feedback site is that once a suggestion has been "Accepted" and it's status changes to either "Under Review" or "Planned" it often goes into a black hole. We have no idea what it's priority might be (in the case of something that is Planned), what "under review" actually means

 

It means: "Nice idea, but we can't be bothered actually implementing it. Instead, we'll just tie up your votes indefinitely so you can't annoy us with any other ideas" :P:lol:

No, it doesn't.

That said, we are working on more effective ways to communicate what we do mean when something has been reported to engineering.

Link to comment

So now we'll have the old-school bulletin board style forum and the new-fangled bloggy feedback website. Both for suggesting changes to the system.

 

Not the best idea GS has come up with methinks.

 

One could give the newest method a bit of a chance, eh?

 

I, for one, am glad to see the bug report / feature request returned to the forums. The Feedback site was a right royal pain to navigate and participate in.

Link to comment

So is it official? Is the UserVoice system on the way out? I've read rumors, but nothing official from anyone at Groundspeak.

 

We will have our official messaging presented at the next site release (currently scheduled for next Tuesday, Nov. 8).

 

I suspect you already have it all hammered out, and it may be too late for suggestions, but the idea of heading the subjects with [bUG] or [REQUEST]... wouldn't it be more efficient to simply split it into bug and request forums? I think it would be much easier for us to look through, at least, and I suspect the same would hold true on your end. Just a thought.

Link to comment

So is it official? Is the UserVoice system on the way out? I've read rumors, but nothing official from anyone at Groundspeak.

 

We will have our official messaging presented at the next site release (currently scheduled for next Tuesday, Nov. 8).

 

I suspect you already have it all hammered out, and it may be too late for suggestions, but the idea of heading the subjects with [bUG] or [REQUEST]... wouldn't it be more efficient to simply split it into bug and request forums? I think it would be much easier for us to look through, at least, and I suspect the same would hold true on your end. Just a thought.

4 sections is easier to maintain than 8, so this will work well for us and the team of forum Mods who will work with us.

Link to comment

 

I suspect you already have it all hammered out, and it may be too late for suggestions, but the idea of heading the subjects with [bUG] or [REQUEST]... wouldn't it be more efficient to simply split it into bug and request forums? I think it would be much easier for us to look through, at least, and I suspect the same would hold true on your end. Just a thought.

4 sections is easier to maintain than 8, so this will work well for us and the team of forum Mods who will work with us.

 

In addition, the distinction between "bug" and "feature request" is not always black and white.

Link to comment

I suspect you already have it all hammered out, and it may be too late for suggestions, but the idea of heading the subjects with [bUG] or [REQUEST]... wouldn't it be more efficient to simply split it into bug and request forums? I think it would be much easier for us to look through, at least, and I suspect the same would hold true on your end. Just a thought.

4 sections is easier to maintain than 8, so this will work well for us and the team of forum Mods who will work with us.

 

In addition, the distinction between "bug" and "feature request" is not always black and white.

 

Excellent point! My feature request is that you fix this bug.:D

Link to comment

So now we'll have the old-school bulletin board style forum and the new-fangled bloggy feedback website. Both for suggesting changes to the system.

 

Not the best idea GS has come up with methinks.

 

I disagree. I have been hoping that there might be a better mechanism for an integration of feedback suggestions and discussion of those suggestions. I find the forums much better for discussion/debate on an issue, especially if it's controversial. If one can post a feedback suggestion and easily link to a forum topic here then lackeys can easily review the feedback site to see what we're suggesting and link to the forums to read the details.

Link to comment

It means that there will be more clarity, better community support and more eyes on user reports and requests.

 

But why did you restrict the Groundspeak website forum area to premium members only as writing access is regarded?

Are only PMs eligible to identify bugs and report them?

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

It means that there will be more clarity, better community support and more eyes on user reports and requests.

 

But why did you restrict the Groundspeak website forum area to premium members only as writing access is regarded?

Are only PMs eligible to identify bugs and report them?

 

Cezanne

being fixed as we speak - thank you for bringing this up.

Link to comment

But why did you restrict the Groundspeak website forum area to premium members only as writing access is regarded?

Are only PMs eligible to identify bugs and report them?

 

Cezanne

being fixed as we speak - thank you for bringing this up.

 

That was an overlooked carryover from when these forums were previously live and restricted to paying members. I've finished adjusting the settings now so that they are properly open to everyone. Thanks!

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...