I was able to get cache stats program to work properly though.

quote:

It was the multiple finds that is messing things up On the not-numbers site

Could you elaborate on that? By multiple finds do you mean more than one smilie on a single cache? I have a few like that where the cache was relocated and people were invited to hunt for and log the new one.

~erik~

Yup, multiple finds on a single cache... ie - Hydropalooza, The august 2003 GGA meeting, Starhopping, etc.

In GSAK, why would it upload starhopping 6 times? It does, but overwrites itself. Same with easy gps.

I think that either the not-numbers site or gc.com has done a small change in programming. Gc.com in the output (so small that they don't realize the reprecussions to the stand alone programs) or not-numbers changed their programming of how it reads the gc.com output. Either way, I'm not going to worry about it, I've wasted enough time on it and there isn't anything I can do to fix them.
I'll use my own database to spin my stats and smile.

I couldn't have been the only one with the problem I presented to them 2 years ago and they didn't deem it too important to "waste their time on" .

am I bitter...

About this - Yes I am. Not a proper way to treat a paying customer. If I did that, I wouldn't have a job.

I have multiple finds also. Itsnotaboutthenumbers.com (INATN) site give both total finds and finds on unique caches.

For what it is worth, INATN is back up again it appears. If you look at my profile on GC.com and scroll down to the bottom, I have my INATN stats down there. You see a statistic for the "total finds" I have logged and for "unique caches". I have two caches that I've logged a second time after they were changed, two logs on two event caches where they had "pocket caches" (a GGA one and the first Geowoodstock), and one make-up log on the first Geowoodstock to keep my numbers straight after a guy deleted a legitimate find of mine on a cache of his in retribution for a cache I would not list of his some time before that find. INATN accounts for all of my multiple finds properly. If you go to the site tonight and pull up my nick and look at the first page of my data, there is a link right at the end of the total finds that says "List Multiple Finds". It confirms the finds I list above.

My totals on GC.com at the time of the PQ were 2,360.
* INATN has 2,360 finds on 2,355 caches. Multiple finds detailed above.
* EasyGPS showed 2,355 caches, but all multiple logs are included in the file and are shown in EasyGPS when I click on the cache.
* GSAK showed 2,355 caches, but all multiple logs are included in the file and are shown in GSAK when I click on the cache.

You might want to check to see if this is the case with your PQ as well. The problem with the caches with multiple logs only showing once in EasyGPS and GSAK is not the fault of Groundspeak in my opinion. The file from Groundspeak returns caches that you have logs on and returns each of those logs you have on each cache. It is not log specific, it is cache specific.

Slay, a lot has changed in two years at GC.com. Your old ticket is either closed or lost. Jeremy is no longer the only person working on bugs. In fact, Jeremy doesn't really do any of that any more. That is why I suggest sending them another ticket. If the problem is that not all of the caches or not all of the logs are being sent in the PQ, they would want to look into that. If the problem is that the logs are there but the cache is only shown once as detailed above, then the file they are sending is currently correct based on the fact that it is cache specific and not find specific. You would need to contact Clyde to request a change in GSAK to accommodate this issue. EasyGPS is just used primarily to upload coordinates into a GPS, so I don't see them changing the program to accommodate multiple finds.

got it.

It's obvious it probably wasn't a PQ error when I realized that the 3 stand alone programs I used to check the query was overwriting the cache. I figured it out 100% when I finally found the link to the 4th caching program... cache stats.

It showed all the finds.... seperately and the counts were fine.

I had finally just thrown my hands up and figured out how to make things work for me, knowing that the other stuff would come around when it was darn good and ready. I had a way of getting the stats I wanted with my own database, so why waste my ever draining energy levels waiting for GC.com to work on something that wasn't even a problem. It is never my first knee jerk reaction to send stuff to the help desk. Because:

• I don't like talking to India
• I probably overlooked something
• the help desk will probably make things worse
• I want to rule out user error
• those who do get things accomplished don't need to waste their time on things that might not be broken because of outside things

I can go on listing reasons, but frankly I don't want to anymore.

I am most bothered about the other issue of the open ticket of nearly 2 years ago. What I was dissappointed with is that you are sure fire ready to stand up for the "help desk" but never offered to step in and assist. Not a "Hey. What is that ticket Number? or What is it about? Maybe I can check on it for you...?" Nope, Not even a "Daaaaaaang! That's a freakin' long time." Just send me out to do what I have already done. Frankly, as much as I hate it, I would rather talk to India ... at least they want to help even though they can't. You have the ability and wouldn't.

I guess I was right all along... it isn't that important.

Keep in mind that I don't work for Groundspeak. Nor am I paid by them to answer your questions. The people at the contact address are. It specifically is their job. To do as you say I "have the ability and wouldn't", I would just basically have to email the contact address, same as you. The fact that Jeremy hired people to pick up the slack shows that they know they had a problem two years ago. Oh yeah, they had a problem. I'll agree with that. There are now three customer service people that field emails from the contact address -- Michael, Annie and Erik. They deal with the issues they can *or* filter the problems to the right people in development.

That said, I did answer your question, which you confirmed.

I took my free time to take my last all finds pocket query and unzipped it, something I never do. I usually just upload it to INATN and that's it. Instead -- for you -- I unzipped it and then loaded it into GSAK. I haven't paid for GSAK since I rarely use it, so I had to sit though the nag screen for two minutes. To import the file, I had to sit through the nag screen again for another two minutes. I then checked the ones I had multiple logs on to verify that the multiple logs were there. I have 2,300+ caches, so it took some time. Close GSAK. I then opened up EasyGPS and did the same verification process. Oddly enough, EasyGPS does not make it easy to count the total number of waypoints in a file. You have to select them all, then look very quickly down at the bottom address bar. It only shows the number of files selected briefly. I had to do this a few times to figure it out, but I wanted to make sure I had the correct answer for you. I then checked the caches with multiple logs to make sure all of the logs were there, which again took time. Close EasyGPS. In addition, I went to INATN and verified all of the information I typed into the post above as well. I had been holding off on uploading my file to INATN to make sure it was fixed, but to check my hypothesis about your problem, I went ahead and uploaded it and crossed my fingers that it would not eat my file as it had done to a few yesterday. In addition to all of this, I searched and read the first three pages of the GC.com Web Site forums looking to see if anyone in there had reported any other similar problems as you (there have been some PQ related issues lately, so I wanted to see if anyone reported anything similar to yours, which there were none).

I could have been doing other things. Since you are a pal, I went through all of this to make sure my all finds PQ was correct, which it is. My hypothesis was that yours was too, which turns out to be correct.

To try to make it sound as if I didn't want to help you bothers me frankly. Before asking what your ticket number was, I wanted to know if there even *was* a problem. If that isn't helping you, what is it?

Greg.

You haven't read what I have said in ANY of my posts. I don't care about the PQ. I figured out what I needed to know yesterday morning.

The problem I keep refering to (BTW...which you have not bothered to ask me what it's about) is something completely different.

I appreciate the time you took to look at your query. Those nag screens are truly annoying. But if you had just read the posts, you could have done the other things you wanted to do.

My last post told you why I don't immediately go to customer service. Usually it's my fault - USER ERROR - as this was. I was looking for totals that couldn't come from any of those products because of multiple finds. Aaaaaand because I seem to be the only one having the issues, I investigated even more and figured it out.

quote:

Keep in mind that I don't work for Groundspeak. Nor am I paid by them to answer your questions.

quote:

would just basically have to email the contact address, same as you.

You may not work for GC.com but you do represent them - in the GC.com forums, you say it at meetings and in our forums. Whether you get paid or not is non of my concern... you are part of that team. And I was hoping because you are a friend that you would have been at least interested in what the real issue was and even if it was the same as I could do, you could have changed my attitude towards gc.com's CS by just sending that email.

You missed the chance to be my hero.

You know that just really is the whole crux.

quote:

Before asking what your ticket number was, I wanted to know if there even *was* a problem. If that isn't helping you, what is it?

There is nothing I can say here that really just won't cheeze you off. But I will give it my best try not too... so know - no matter how this comes out - I have tried to be delicate and not snarky, mean or smart-assey.

But if you had just read... really read ... not skimmed - I know I write really long posts and it is my habit to do the same (skim that is) - you would see that I didn't have a ticket number for this problem... it was another problem. Something completely different. I only brought up that ticket number problem to make a point Of why I wouldn't go to GC.com CS.

A point, I must sadly say was completely missed. Aaaaand probably shouldn't have been brought up here.

I am sorry I bothered you.

quote:

Originally posted by Slayerette:
First... I have had a ticket out for 2 years and all I have gotten is the usual techie run-a-round.

Right there you said you DID have a ticket. Which is it?

In addition, ~erik~ also posted and tried to help. Are you upset with him too?

If this is about GC.com customer service, I've said that they have attempted to correct the problems they had in the past. They still are not perfect, but who is? I saw no reason to send them an email because I saw no problem. I'm suppose to bog a system that you feel is inept down by making them chase a non-existent problem, one that I saw the solution to?

I totally understand the India thing. I hate calling Earthlink for any tech support. They answer and say their name is "Bob" or "Steve". I'm not stupid. That isn't their real name. I'm there with you. It isn't just you.

Me sending that email to GC.com would actually not be the thing to do in my opinion. It would show some sort of expected favoritism toward problems that a volunteer asks about and demeans the rank and file members who have to wait in line like everyone else. Why should I get special treatment? Because I happen to volunteer to review caches and moderate the forums? And does this mean that a select few people that are my friends will get special treatment over just the ordinary geocacher throughout all of the territory I review caches in?

Let me give you a perfect example of me waiting like everyone else. Way back in January, I was with Jeremy at a dinner and asked him about reducing the time it takes to re-run the "All Finds" query down from seven days to six days. I explained the "creep" factor that takes place. He thought it was a great idea and saw no reason why they would not change that. Now, let's move to the middle of March. This topic gets started in the forums asking for the same thing. My post in that topic is #6 confirming that I talked to Jeremy about it. I continued to post with others in support of that move. It took until just a couple of weeks ago for it to finally happen. Six months. Am I upset? Not in the least. I know the progression of a task list and I know that this request was entered down on the bottom of the task list just like any other feature request. Eventually, it worked its way to the top. I also understand that it did not affect a large majority of cachers and that large issues that affect a majority of cachers will indeed be bumped up, such as the performance issues we experienced on the weekends. That was way more important. Just because I asked for it did not mean it got special attention. I would not expect it to.

As a friend, I was totally interested in your problem. I have to wait in the same line as everyone else though. Me sending the email should carry the same weight as you sending the email.

If I *was* your friend, you would tell me what in world is going on and stop beating around the bush and keeping me guessing. This isn't said in anger, it is said in exasperation. Rather than being evasive and testing me, why not just be honest so you can get to the point you are trying to get at, so that I will get the point you are trying to get at and so I don't have to waste time trying to *guess* what point you are trying to make.

Feel free to send me an email if you feel that is best. Why don't you just help me "get it". It would have saved us both a lot of time.

Boys really are from Mars and Girls are from Venus...
Here is the translations...

quote:

Second... I think even a lowly little panty data monkey like me could figure this one out. After inestigating the issue myself I was able to narrow it down. It was the multiple finds that is messing things up On the not-numbers site, GSAK, Easy-GPS and Geobuddy. At least in my case.

I put it right there... I was going to figure it out and I did.

quote:

I think that either the not-numbers site or gc.com has done a small change in programming. Gc.com in the output (so small that they don't realize the reprecussions to the stand alone programs) or not-numbers changed their programming of how it reads the gc.com output. Either way, I'm not going to worry about it, I've wasted enough time on it and there isn't anything I can do to fix them.
I'll use my own database to spin my stats and smile.

I had let it gooooooo! Things would work out on not numbers site and I was going to move on to my happy place.

quote:

I couldn't have been the only one with the problem I presented to them 2 years ago and they didn't deem it too important to "waste their time on" .

New paragraph... Look I went a little off subject here. This is where I waited for you to say "What Problem was that dear?" (inserted "dear" for humor at my expense).

You answered that with a nice post that let me know a couple things.

• that the site was back up - which I didn't know.
• some of the functions of not numbers - which I did know (this is where i started feeling talked down to).
• an important thing in GSAK - that I didn't think to look at and it made everything make sense

At the end of that post you are telling me to send them an email about a problem that apparantly and obviously didn't exist.

My next post Says it more clearly. Let me translate it for you.

quote:

It's obvious it probably wasn't a PQ error when I realized that the 3 stand alone programs I used to check the query was overwriting the cache. I figured it out 100% when I finally found the link to the 4th caching program... cache stats.

Translated to:
CRAP I screwed up. It was me. There is nothing wrong with the PQ. I actually took a minute to figure out how the programs would work and CRAP I was wrong.

Yes I am sure you are exasperated, probably about as much as me. Because as much as you think you shouldn't have just offered to send that email, you should have at least asked me what the issue was. You could either speak to it or realize that helping someone who has waited in line for 2 years would not be pushing to the front of the line. It would be just helping it get noticed.

I have said I shouldn't have brought it up here in this forum topic, but instead of just asking me what the sitch was you felt it necessary to beat that dead horse some more. And the more you beat it the more you made a better case for me.

A girl may not want to dance, but it still really is nice to be asked. I don't play the girl card very often, but it is totally obvious that in this conversation back and forth we were both playing our gender cards. I'm speaking between the lines and you are not reading them. It happens. I know it's hard to forget I am a girl, but I am and there you go. So as Geroge Jetson would say... "Jane Stop this crazy thing!". Now lets get to the meat of this thing and what people have been tuning in to read...

What was that issue from 2 years ago?????

The issue from 2 years ago has to do with the Spawn (traveling) Caches and the inability to change the coords to reflect the cache it is residing in without an act of congress.

Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 16:33:25 -0800
Subject: [GEO #IWW-523396]:
From: "Geocaching.com General Inquiries" <contact@geocaching.com>
To: annenordstrom@charter.net

Hi there,

I have passed along your issue to our development team to resolve, as it's
beyond my abilities to. This may take up to 8 weeks to resolve. However, I
will contact you again when I know more.

Eric
Groundspeak Inc

Ticket Details
===================
Ticket ID: IWW-523396
Department: Geocaching
Priority: Low
Status: Open

=============

And that was the last I heard personally from them.

Greg wrote:

quote:

There are now three customer service people that field emails from the contact address -- Michael, Annie and Erik. They deal with the issues they can *or* filter the problems to the right people in development.

Just to elaborate, I am not the "Erik" cited above. However Jeremy has expanded the number of paid customer service people who respond to the "contact@geocaching.com" e-mails, which is great.

I've seen Jeremy fix things on the fly, and I've seen things take forever to get changed, and I've still got bees in my bonnet about things that I requested that were never changed.
Like Annie, I found my own workaround.

Life's to short to loose sleep over most of these niggling little problems.

However now you've got me wondering if the INATN chart I produced is right. Maybe I really do have all 81 squares filled in but don't know it. Dream on.....

~erik~

Edited to add, I sent a request to Michael to see if he can learn anything about the unresolved ticket.

thanks so much erik.

My Hero.


As for the not numbers thing. it's working. But if you need to double check here is a small way to check...

export your finds from GSAK into CSV.

Then with Microsoft excel open it up and run a pivot off that information. Diff on the left side, Terr on the top and put waypoint in the center (make sure to count not sum as the function). And there you go. Now the counts may be off by a little, but that will be because of your multiples. But the WRC grid used only needs one find in each grid space. But that is a great way to test to make sure that the caches haven't changed in Diff / Terr. I am in the process of printing out each cache page and my log on it that I have in the WRC. Not sure if that will satisfy the inspector (phillips4) that I did it, but at least I will know which cache got changed and I can prove it. There are some folks out there changing the ratings on purpose to mess people up, because they don't approve of this endeavor.

quote:

Originally posted by Slayerette:
There are some folks out there changing the ratings on purpose to mess people up, because they don't approve of this endeavor.

Long before people started trying to "fill the D/T matrix", hiders would indicate that if the logs seem to warrant it they would change the ratings. I have done it myself and I neither approve or disapprove of the endeavor. So I don't know if all changes of D/T ratings have anything to do with this endeavor.

But you know what, I would be impressed if a hider legitimately fill the matrix with geocache hides.

quote:

But you know what, I would be impressed if a hider legitimately fill the matrix with geocache hides.

Are you suggesting that someone hide 81 caches with all the combinations of difficulty and terrain?

No way I would stoop so low as to hide a 1/1 cache!

(a 1/1 hide should not require any stooping. )

~erik~

I am not suggesting anyone really do it, I just said I would be impressed.

quote:

Originally posted by Slayerette:
The issue from 2 years ago has to do with the Spawn (traveling) Caches and the inability to change the coords to reflect the cache it is residing in without an act of congress.

Much easier if you just say it.

I asked about that around October or November of 2007, specifically about your caches and one other persons in fact. Back then I was told that no other ones would be pushed through until after Project Phoenix (V2) was completed. Since that is still underway, there is no telling what the answer might be. I know they have begun to sneak in a hard code update from time to time (which this is), so they might be able to sneak this in.

So I guess I have actually been working on the issue without you having to ask me about it. That was much easier, eh? I will ask again as well since I was working on the issue for you and for another cacher in one of the other territories I review.

quote:

Originally posted by ~erik~:
Greg wrote:

quote:

There are now three customer service people that field emails from the contact address -- Michael, Annie and Erik. They deal with the issues they can *or* filter the problems to the right people in development.

Just to elaborate, I am not the "Erik" cited above. However Jeremy has expanded the number of paid customer service people who respond to the "contact@geocaching.com" e-mails, which is great.

Yep, and I always spell his name wrong. It is "Eric" actually.

quote:

Much easier if you just say it.

You never asked.

The Mars and Venus thing makes more sense too...

I'm on Mars thinking the whole problem relates to PQ's, including the two year old problem you have. I'm thinking I am solving your problem.

Meanwhile, you are on Venus with a completely different problem not related to the topic being discussed at all.

<--Slayerette | mtn-man-->

OK, I'm married and should know that shouldn't I.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mtn-man,

YES!!!!!
EXACTLY!!!!




Phew! I am so glad we are back on the same planet dude!

quote:

OK, I'm married and should know that shouldn't I.

I was totally wondering the same thing too!