Forum: Using The Website
Topic: Delisting caches
started by: southdeltan

Posted by southdeltan on Jan. 26 2004,4:13 pm
How do I delist (archive) my caches?  I don't see a feature that allows me to do this.

southdeltan

Posted by PC Medic on Jan. 26 2004,4:33 pm
You may Edit/Retire a cache from the cache page by clicking on "Edit Cache' in the top menu. The option to retire the cache is near the top of the form.

Just out of curiosity, have the caches been retired or was there a problem with the listings here?

Posted by welch on Jan. 27 2004,7:46 am
Quote (PC Medic @ Jan. 26 2004,5:33 pm)
Just out of curiosity, have the caches been retired or was there a problem with the listings here?

What sort of problems can there be with the listing here? :withstupid
Posted by PC Medic on Jan. 27 2004,12:37 pm
None that I can think of, but my concern was due to the question being "How do I delist (archive) my caches?" as in plural/all.

While I understand caches get retired, the wording had me concerned and I want to make sure it is not due to a dissatisfactin with the site.

Posted by welch on Jan. 31 2004,7:59 am
Ih, I see. I didn't read cacheS that literal.
Like how can I edit the location on my caches? when I really only need to know for one, but it works the same way everytime :;):

Posted by CoyoteRed on Nov. 27 2004,7:17 am
I've just retired my caches and I'm not shy about why.  Pretty much it's just because they were all cross listed with gc.com.  Really, there is little point in cross listing.  I have a local copy of the listings and most of the logs are on gc.com.  So, really, there is little reason.  I've got enough on my plate keeping up with gc.com and my letterbox listings to have to worry about redundancy.

A bit of advise if you're looking for more traffic.  Talk to ClydeE, the creator of GSAK, and try to get him to implement an open source GPX format to transfering cache data.  You've got to make it easy for folks to get the data.  The XML is a good start, but falls far short.  I would be interested in an open format as I'm sure other alternative site developers would be.  If we can show Clyde that there is a market--and I've already got Jeremy to commit to saying he doesn't care if GSAK imports an alternative--then that would be a major step.

Second, encourage unique listing.  Designate a field to show it is a unique listing so dual users can come here and find just the caches not listed at gc.com.  It's next to impossible as it is now.

Hope this helps.

Posted by Scout on Nov. 27 2004,7:24 am
Quote (CoyoteRed @ Nov. 27 2004,8:17 am)
I've just retired my caches and I'm not shy about why.  Pretty much it's just because they were all cross listed with gc.com.

So, don't cross-list on gc.com ;-)

Posted by PC Medic on Nov. 27 2004,1:56 pm
Quote (CoyoteRed @ Nov. 27 2004,9:17 am)
I've just retired my caches and I'm not shy about why.  Pretty much it's just because they were all cross listed with gc.com.  Really, there is little point in cross listing.  I have a local copy of the listings and most of the logs are on gc.com.  So, really, there is little reason.  I've got enough on my plate keeping up with gc.com and my letterbox listings to have to worry about redundancy.


Sorry to hear this, but I would tend to agree with Scout on this one  :grinnin  and not just for the obvious reason.

I could give reasons for cross listing such as being able to have 2 legs of a multi (or even yours and anothers) cache within 528' of one another, open database for use by other sites like Buxley's Waypoints, No worry about getting that Virtual listed, No charge to access ANY part of our database... And the list goes on.

Quote

A bit of advise if you're looking for more traffic.  Talk to ClydeE, the creator of GSAK, and try to get him to implement an open source GPX format to transfering cache data.  You've got to make it easy for folks to get the data.  The XML is a good start, but falls far short.  I would be interested in an open format as I'm sure other alternative site developers would be.  If we can show Clyde that there is a market--and I've already got Jeremy to commit to saying he doesn't care if GSAK imports an alternative--then that would be a major step.


As for traffic, while we appreciate the advice I must say that in comparison you can not get much easier for acquiring our data. Also the the simple fact that one would feel they needed the Frogs approval for GSAK to import 'an alternative' would be cause for concern in my book and tells me it GSAK is not so 'Open Format' after all.


Quote

Second, encourage unique listing.  Designate a field to show it is a unique listing so dual users can come here and find just the caches not listed at gc.com.  It's next to impossible as it is now.


Perhaps Jeremy would like to implement this over on GC.com. I mean considering WE support the open-caching database  this would not be so hard for him to do. On the other-hand, with his very restrictive rules to cache data we can accomplish the same quite as easily.

Getting a little off topic for this 'How To' thread though, so further discussion on this would be best in a topic of its own.


Quote

Hope this helps.


Always welcome suggestions.

Posted by MOCKBA on Nov. 27 2004,6:16 pm
Quote (CoyoteRed @ Nov. 27 2004,9:17 am)
Designate a field to show it is a unique listing so dual users can come here and find just the caches not listed at gc.com.  

As your own example shows perfectly well, listings which are dual today may end up being unique tomorrow. Likewise some unique listings may end up crosslisted in the future.
And since gc.com wouldn't share its lists of archived or active caches, or allow 3rd parties to do it for them, I don't see how you are gonna find out about any changes in xlisted vs. unique status to keep the darn flag up-to-date.
But pardon me ... why would anyone really need this flag? How would it change anyone's take on any particular cache? Beats me.

Powered by Ikonboard 3.1.2a
Ikonboard © 2001 Jarvis Entertainment Group, Inc.