activity stats & homepage - beta testing [merged]

riblit · Post by **riblit** » 27 August 04 10:50 am

There seems to be a bit of artistic licence in the cache locations...

embi · Post by **embi** » 27 August 04 10:56 am

ideology wrote:
embi wrote:Can locationless ones be removed??
done. we've filtered out locationless, virtual and webcam caches

Thanks guys

Cached · Post by **Cached** » 27 August 04 10:58 am

Why the virtual and locationless? You still have to actually go there for those.

riblit · Post by **riblit** » 27 August 04 11:04 am

All Cached Up wrote:Why the virtual and locationless? You still have to actually go there for those.

There is one here that can be logged in the comfort of your own house..

Cached · Post by **Cached** » 27 August 04 11:26 am

wasn't there a rumour that was to be archived at a given number of logs?

The word "Found" probably needs to be "Logged" or "Hunted" because is shows no-finds as well and is misleading.

Snuva · Post by **Snuva** » 27 August 04 1:45 pm

Looks great. . .. . .and I liked Tassie being the sample page you posted

Rabbitto · Post by **Rabbitto** » 27 August 04 2:10 pm

An absoloute triumph dear chap. Simply Spiffing.

Snuva · Post by **Snuva** » 27 August 04 3:21 pm

There seems to be a bit of artistic licence in the cache locations...

Yes, I'm finding this too. Didn't know if it was because there haven't been enough cachers in Tas to warrant anyone getting decent maps

But the big question is: how is Rabbito able to log so many caches as well as make so many posts in the forum?! Must log in remotely from cache locations.

dcr · Post by **dcr** » 27 August 04 6:06 pm

Snuva wrote:But the big question is: how is Rabbito able to log so many caches as well as make so many posts in the forum?! Must log in remotely from cache locations.

Wabbito the WiFi Warrior ?

The Ginger Loon · Post by **The Ginger Loon** » 28 August 04 1:12 am

We found more caches than i! last month! WOOHOO!

BTW. Well done georges, top work!

ideology · Post by **ideology** » 28 August 04 9:19 am

thanks for the feedback - we're glad you find this view as fascinating as we do. we never realised how much caching was going on!

riblit wrote:There seems to be a bit of artistic licence in the cache locations...

can you please give us some examples of incorrect locations so we can see what's going on. it works with a table of postcode lat/lons. we don't have the exact boundaries of the postcodes, so we need to assume that postcode areas are circles and just look for the closest centre. unfortunately the centre of an adjoining smaller postcode is often closer to a cache than the centre of a large postcode. if we or anyone can figure out an algorithmic way of improving it, we'll do so. down the track we plan to have additional information stored on caches in geocaching australia and this could be part of that info.

All Cached Up wrote:The word "Found" probably needs to be "Logged" or "Hunted" because is shows no-finds as well and is misleading.

the query is for what we believe are found logs only. if you see an example of a DNF showing up, please let us know which one it is. it could be a weird situation where the log was originally a found, then edited to a DNF, etc. we are thinking of putting DNFs underneath the finds but it would add clutter to show data that only some cachers actually enter.

CraigRat wrote:The screen shots look great!

thanks - there's a semi-working prototype in a link in our third message to this thread.

Snuva wrote:Didn't know if it was because there haven't been enough cachers in Tas to warrant anyone getting decent maps

we haven't deliberately biased the maps to any area - as soon as we find some geo-coded data for anywhere in australia, we import it. if you have any more accurate data to share, please let us know!

The Ginger Loon wrote:We found more caches than i! last month!

essentially this comes down to a leaderboad - would it be useful to rank the players so people can gloat that they are number #23 or something?

Ebenezer · Post by **Ebenezer** » 28 August 04 9:54 am

Keep up the good work. The stats pages look great.

TEAM LANDCRUISER · Post by **TEAM LANDCRUISER** » 28 August 04 1:15 pm

Great work I!,I noticed on the stats page as you scroll down you get to the caches that haven't been found (0 logs) then the list restarts at 13 finds but these caches have no 'hidden by:' listed. Is this a glitch or intentional does it seperate them from last months? ... for example on WA list scroll down to White feather 0 logs and the next cache is Waltzing matilda finds 13 and no hidden by

swampgecko · Post by **swampgecko** » 28 August 04 6:32 pm

ideology wrote:thanks for the feedback - we're glad you find this view as fascinating as we do. we never realised how much caching was going on!
riblit wrote:There seems to be a bit of artistic licence in the cache locations...
can you please give us some examples of incorrect locations so we can see what's going on. it works with a table of postcode lat/lons. we don't have the exact boundaries of the postcodes, so we need to assume that postcode areas are circles and just look for the closest centre. unfortunately the centre of an adjoining smaller postcode is often closer to a cache than the centre of a large postcode. if we or anyone can figure out an algorithmic way of improving it, we'll do so. down the track we plan to have additional information stored on caches in geocaching australia and this could be part of that info.

The Ginger Loon wrote:We found more caches than i! last month!
essentially this comes down to a leaderboad - would it be useful to rank the players so people can gloat that they are number #23 or something?

I have one for you, Scaring crows is listed as Kurrajong Heights, and Boots and ALL is listed as Kurrajong, now Scaring crows is actually in the centre of Kurrajong Village. Boots and ALL is closer to Kurrajong Heights than its sibling cache. Only Scaring crows needs to have it's location adjusted.

The stats are interesting.... I had plans on beating the Chaotic Ones to 300 but that aint going to happen now...

Keep up the good work boys... Ideology rocks......

ideology · Post by **ideology** » 28 August 04 7:23 pm

TEAM LANDCRUISER wrote:...as you scroll down you get to the caches that haven't been found (0 logs) then the list restarts at 13 finds but these caches have no 'hidden by:' listed

this was intentional but poorly designed. the aim was to be able to see the most interesting caches at a glance. we figured the most interesting ones are new caches and frequently logged caches. we put the new ones at the top (with "hidden" listed and sorted by number of finds) and then other caches, sorted by number of finds. it's a bit hard to read, so we're planning to change it to sorting by number of finds, then using colour to indicate new caches.

swampgecko wrote:Scaring crows is listed as Kurrajong Heights, and Boots and ALL is listed as Kurrajong, now Scaring crows is actually in the centre of Kurrajong Village.

our postcode lat/lon table had these two suburbs in exactly the same spot, so it was randomly choosing which suburb to list those caches under. we've moved kurrajong heights to the correct position and edited scaring crows. the postcode data is pretty dodgy but it's the best we have. we are planning to offer user-editable maps so that when a suburb is in the wrong position, you can edit it just like a moveable cache. after all, what's a suburb other than a cache without a tupperware container?