How many is too many?

Discussion about the Geocaching Australia web site
Team737
Posts: 92
Joined: 07 October 14 10:12 pm
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lee.drury.71066/
Location: Newcastle

Re: How many is too many?

Post by Team737 » 02 May 22 12:44 pm

caughtatwork wrote:
02 May 22 11:34 am

I an not yet planning on implementing an automatic process to change Found it to Noted in the event that there is no evidence attached. I hope that the cache owners will continue to manage that aspect, but if that also falls to the wayside more drastic measures may be taken.
These changes look great - thanks.
I'd like to see an auto mechanism (requiring log photos) in play to be honest.... and even have it extended to trigs, and perhaps virtuals (if they require a photo - you'd need a CO-set flag for that I assume) - it would save CO's from having to be the ogre.... just let the system enforce it.

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16615
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: How many is too many?

Post by caughtatwork » 02 May 22 12:56 pm

oldfella wrote:
02 May 22 11:40 am
Thankyou for the update. How effectively can a cache owner manage their own publications when all we can do is send a message pointing out whatever the issue may be in relation to compliance to wiki guidelines. I have archived all my Published locationless up to 1 April that meet the wiki or not with the intention of re publishing those that I did archive that did meet the wiki criteria to bring them back towards the top of the list as some go back many years. This is all my Jigsaw and other armchair type publications.
I did this with not knowing what the seven active at a time really meant. Again my interpretation.
We don't allow a cache owner to delete a log because we know there are at least two factions that fight and would readily delete logs "just to annoy the other side". If we were dealing with adults this could be addressed but we won't be drawn into mediating those factions.

The best you can do is note that if there are too many non-complaint logs, take the toys away and archive the cache.

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16615
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: How many is too many?

Post by caughtatwork » 02 May 22 1:00 pm

Team737 wrote:
02 May 22 12:44 pm
caughtatwork wrote:
02 May 22 11:34 am

I an not yet planning on implementing an automatic process to change Found it to Noted in the event that there is no evidence attached. I hope that the cache owners will continue to manage that aspect, but if that also falls to the wayside more drastic measures may be taken.
These changes look great - thanks.
I'd like to see an auto mechanism (requiring log photos) in play to be honest.... and even have it extended to trigs, and perhaps virtuals (if they require a photo - you'd need a CO-set flag for that I assume) - it would save CO's from having to be the ogre.... just let the system enforce it.
:-)
I'll log this photo for every requirement
Image

The system cannot recognise what is an appropriate image or not, so we can't automate the appropriateness, we could only check for "there" or "not there".

If we're bringing the photo requirement to another level for virtual, locationless, trigpoint, etc, then this is a larger discussion and one for outside the thred.

User avatar
oldfella
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 498
Joined: 08 September 07 5:50 pm
Location: Innes Park QLD

Re: How many is too many?

Post by oldfella » 02 May 22 1:01 pm

Thank you and thanks for all that you do for GCA and our enjoyment.

Cybergran V
Posts: 10
Joined: 21 August 14 10:15 am
Location: Shepparton

Re: How many is too many?

Post by Cybergran V » 02 May 22 9:57 pm

I am finding this all totally confusing. My wish is that previous finds be left as they are and any new alterations implemented take effect from that date forward.
I really appreciate the work done by the administrators and are very grateful for the entertainment that was provided through this site during two of the worst years of my life.

User avatar
oldfella
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 498
Joined: 08 September 07 5:50 pm
Location: Innes Park QLD

Re: How many is too many?

Post by oldfella » 03 May 22 6:59 am

Agree with this.

User avatar
oldfella
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 498
Joined: 08 September 07 5:50 pm
Location: Innes Park QLD

Re: How many is too many?

Post by oldfella » 03 May 22 1:32 pm

Just something I have had a look at. Locationless caches began on 13/01/2004.
From a post posted by C@W re the wiki criteria
A Locationless cache listing must require the finder to locate an object or perform a task in the real world, collect the co-ordinates and log the find with accompanying photographic evidence.

So if any actions are going to take place prior to COVID and I suggest a date of 01/03/2020 then there are many locationless published from 2004 up to 2020 that do not meet the criteria of
" A Locationless cache listing must require the finder to locate an object or perform a task in the real world, collect the co-ordinates and log the find with accompanying photographic evidence."
This includes GA0001
I stopped counting those that did not have or require co ordinates and many did not require co ordinates and or photos and I got to 145 and thought this was a waste of time.
What a can of worms this could turn out to be.
Last edited by oldfella on 04 May 22 8:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

Sol de Lune
Posts: 1904
Joined: 09 December 07 7:08 pm
Location: Wright ACT

Re: How many is too many?

Post by Sol de Lune » 03 May 22 2:01 pm

oldfella wrote:
03 May 22 1:32 pm
Just something I have had a look at. Locationless caches began on 13/01/2004.
From a post posted by C@W re the wiki criteria
A Locationless cache listing must require the finder to locate an object or perform a task in the real world, collect the co-ordinates and log the find with accompanying photographic evidence.

So if any actions are going to take place prior to COVID and I suggest a date of 01/03/2020 then there a many locationless published from 2004 up to 2020 that do not meet the criteria of
" A Locationless cache listing must require the finder to locate an object or perform a task in the real world, collect the co-ordinates and log the find with accompanying photographic evidence."
This includes GA0001
I stopped counting those that did not have or require co ordinates and many did not require co ordinates and or photos and I got to 145 and thought this was a waste of time.
What a can of worms this could turn out to be.
GA0001 is a special cache and always will be. However in the listing it states:

"Please tick the boxes on the donation page to recieve a receipt and be sure to post the receipt with your find."

While I agree there may be the other odd few caches that don't say you need to attach a photo, GA0001 certainly does.

User avatar
oldfella
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 498
Joined: 08 September 07 5:50 pm
Location: Innes Park QLD

Re: How many is too many?

Post by oldfella » 03 May 22 2:58 pm

I am not disputing that GA0001 is a special cache BUT Wiki says:-
A Locationless cache listing must require the finder to locate an object or perform a task in the real world, collect the co-ordinates and log the find with accompanying photographic evidence.

Who decides what is special cache and this is all about what is about to happen and if everything is back dated to 13/01/2004 then GA0001 does not meet the requirements as per the Wiki. Picking at straws I know but where there is one rule for one then that rule does apply to every locationless ever published if and it is a BIG IF.

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16615
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: How many is too many?

Post by caughtatwork » 04 May 22 9:20 am

oldfella wrote:
03 May 22 2:58 pm
I am not disputing that GA0001 is a special cache BUT Wiki says:-
A Locationless cache listing must require the finder to locate an object or perform a task in the real world, collect the co-ordinates and log the find with accompanying photographic evidence.

Who decides what is special cache and this is all about what is about to happen and if everything is back dated to 13/01/2004 then GA0001 does not meet the requirements as per the Wiki. Picking at straws I know but where there is one rule for one then that rule does apply to every locationless ever published if and it is a BIG IF.
I decide.
caughtatwork wrote:
26 April 22 12:13 pm
Existing locationless caches will be reviewed on a one-by-one basis and if the locationless geocache is not in line with the wiki guidelines for a locationless cache it will be archived and locked so no more logs can be made.
If I decide that an exemption is to be made for some geocaches then an exemption will be made. GA0001 is the sole reason that Geocaching Australia exists as a listing site. Rules or not. Guidelines or not. GA0001 is not going to be archived by my hand. Others which do not carry the same historical weight will be subject to review and if applicable, archiving.

I quickly checked the first 6 this morning https://geocaching.com.au/caches/locati ... ort=Hidden and they seem to be valid. It will take time to check them all, but it will be done.

Notification will be set up for the site to run for some weeks prior to archiving so if people are visiting the site they should be aware of what will be happening. If not, then they will be a little surprised, undoubtedly annoyed in some cases and for a few this will be the last straw.

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16615
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: How many is too many?

Post by caughtatwork » 17 May 22 8:39 am

The changes will be implemented this week.
  • Existing locationless caches will be reviewed on a one-by-one basis and if the locationless geocache is not in line with the wiki guidelines for a locationless cache it will be archived and locked so no more logs can be made. This will take time and should occur over the upcoming days and weeks.
  • Locationless caches that have a jigsaw puzzle to be solved will be archived and locked so no more logs can be made. This will occur towards the end of May 2022.
  • A new and temporary geocache type will be created that is specifically targeted towards solving jigsaw puzzles. A review for the need of this geocache type will be undertake in 2023 and a decision made as to whether restrictions on movement still warrant the cache type.
    https://wiki.geocaching.com.au/wiki/Jigsaw_cache
  • Jigsaw caches will have a "Solved" log type which will replace "Found It". "Solved" log types will not be counted in your geocache finds and will not contribute to your finds rewards milestones.
  • Jigsaw caches should have a link to the external site to solve the jigsaw puzzle which provides a keyword or codeword to log the geocache.
  • All archived locationless and jigsaw caches will be locked so no more logs can be made.
  • Locationless and jigsaw caches archived after the change is implemented will be automatically locked so no more logs can be made. If the locationless cache is unarchived, the lock will be lifted.
  • Locationless caches will require the finder to log a set of co-ordinates to their instance of the item to be found or task to be completed. It remains the responsibility of the locationless cache owner to monitor accuracy of the co-ordinates posted.
  • Locationless caches will require photographic evidence of their instance of the item to be found or task to be completed as per the wiki guidelines and your log may be converted into a "Note" if evidence is not attached within 7 days. It remains the responsibility of the locationless cache owner to monitor photographic evidence.
  • For a locationless or jigsaw cache that does not fit the wiki guidelines for a locationless or jigsaw cache and a player wants the locationless or jigsaw cache reviewed, they will be able to log a "Should Be Archived" which will trigger a review of the locationless or jigsaw cache. The administration team will then review the cache and have it archived (and locked) or a note placed as to why the cache does not require archiving. Abuse of the "Should Be Archived" log to harass owners will not be tolerated. A "Maintained" log by the owner will not remove this status. If you log a "Should Be Archived" and delete your log the details of the log will still be available to the administrators so they can understand why the "Should Be Archived" status was set. i.e. You cannot hit the SBA and remain anonymous.
  • A limit on the number of locationless or jigsaw caches a cacher may have active at any one time will be created and initially set to 7 for each type. This allows you to create and archived one per day and still allow you time to review logs for accuracy and completeness. If you have more than 7 locationless caches then you will not be able to list (or unarchive) a new locationless cache or if you have more than 7 jigsaw caches you will not be able to the list (or unarchive) a new jigsaw cache

User avatar
Just a cacher
Posts: 629
Joined: 03 July 10 3:01 am
Location: Northside, Canberra, Australia

Re: How many is too many?

Post by Just a cacher » 17 May 22 9:11 am

Thank you for all your hard work on this.

Do you need people to operate it? A team, perhaps? I'm happy to be part of whatever you need.

My computer skills are the "learn by rote" type. :(

User avatar
oldfella
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 498
Joined: 08 September 07 5:50 pm
Location: Innes Park QLD

Re: How many is too many?

Post by oldfella » 17 May 22 11:55 am

Just a cacher wrote:
17 May 22 9:11 am
Thank you for all your hard work on this.
Do you need people to operate it? A team, perhaps? I'm happy to be part of whatever you need.
Thank you. As stated before I am happy to assist.

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16615
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: How many is too many?

Post by caughtatwork » 17 May 22 12:10 pm

There's nothing I need help with at the moment. I can address the jigsaws in bulk and will do the locationless as time permits.

User avatar
oldfella
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 498
Joined: 08 September 07 5:50 pm
Location: Innes Park QLD

Re: How many is too many?

Post by oldfella » 17 May 22 12:40 pm

Thanks

Post Reply