<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
    <channel>
        <title>Update Request on Read First</title>
        <description> Hi there!

In the Read First thread, there is a statement:
(http://project-gc.com/forum/read?8,13,13#REPLY)

What a checker can not do 
* The checkers does not have access to logs from others on the geocaches logged. Therefore a challenge to log a geocaches that hasn&amp;#039;t been logged for one year isn&amp;#039;t possible. We are however looking into solving this in the near future (June is expected). Details are yet to be determined.

I understand how difficult this is, and was surprised to see it mentioned in the thread. Is there any news on if this is feasible yet? This is a challenge a lot of cachers in my area take part in and it would be great to have an official challenge for it :)

Thanks,
icklelego</description>
        <link>/forum/read.php?9,3818,3818#msg-3818</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 19:42:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Phorum 5.2.23</generator>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?9,3818,3995#msg-3995</guid>
            <title>Re: Update Request on Read First</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?9,3818,3995#msg-3995</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ You are correct, it is not allowed now with the new guidelines. Like FTF though (which also isn&#039;t allowed as a challenge in the new guidelines), it&#039;s one of those stats we all look at and I personally feel that it is a positive way of encouraging people to go get caches that haven&#039;t been found for a long time. Keeps the game fresh as they say.<br />
<br />
No worries though, you&#039;ve answered my question. As I said, I was surprised it was specifically called out in the *Read First* and was curious. Might be worth removing that reference if it&#039;s not something that will be worked on any time soon. :)<br />
<br />
Thanks again,<br />
icklelego]]></description>
            <dc:creator>icklelego</dc:creator>
            <category>Miscellaneous</category>
            <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2016 10:50:27 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?9,3818,3994#msg-3994</guid>
            <title>Re: Update Request on Read First</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?9,3818,3994#msg-3994</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ No worries. I don&#039;t know where the thread is myself, and it might only have been visible to script developers.<br />
<br />
As I mentioned, I doubt that a challenge like this can be published with today&#039;s guidelines, but I might be wrong. But if it&#039;s not allowed, there is no point in &quot;setting the standard&quot;, otherwise I do agree with you.<br />
<br />
The best solution in my personal opinion would be something like this:<br />
For every found cache by the user, figure out the last find date prior to his/hers. Return all logs (inclusive) between that date and the users found date. Example for user A:<br />
<br />
(date, username, logtype)<br />
2016-10-06 B found<br />
<b>2016-10-05 C found<br />
2016-10-05 A found<br />
2016-10-05 D note<br />
2016-10-04 D DNF<br />
2016-10-03 E found<br />
2016-10-03 F found</b><br />
2016-10-02 G found<br />
Would return the bolded ones.<br />
<br />
EDIT: We would however need to look into how fast we can make this, and the memory consumption. Imagine a user with 50000 finds. It could easily become half a million rows returned.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>magma1447</dc:creator>
            <category>Miscellaneous</category>
            <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2016 10:43:36 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?9,3818,3993#msg-3993</guid>
            <title>Re: Update Request on Read First</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?9,3818,3993#msg-3993</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ Thanks for the reply ganja1447 :)<br />
<br />
I apologise, I hadn&#039;t seen that thread asking for feedback so couldn&#039;t weigh in. My thought would be that if Project-GC implemented 1 method, then it would become the standard. There&#039;s no need to try and meet every requirement. Like for an FTF, everyone who cares about stats, uses {FTF} in their logs as that is the standard that has been set by P-GC. <br />
<br />
Either way, I understand why it has been de-prioritised and I know you all have been very busy trying to improve user experience for the whole community, so thank you! I was very surprised to see that comment on the thread knowing about all the other stuff the team is working to achieve! :)<br />
<br />
Thanks for taking the time to respond,<br />
icklelego]]></description>
            <dc:creator>icklelego</dc:creator>
            <category>Miscellaneous</category>
            <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2016 10:39:03 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?9,3818,3992#msg-3992</guid>
            <title>Re: Update Request on Read First</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?9,3818,3992#msg-3992</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ I am glad we didn&#039;t specify what year. :) But we obviously meant 2016.<br />
<br />
This has been down-prioritized due to other important work, including requirements from Geocaching HQ. We got that far that we started a thread here somewhere asking about feedback of what was needed. Since the input wasn&#039;t clear enough and everyone wanted different solutions and data it was postponed. The fact that it&#039;s irrelevant for new challenges due to the guidelines also weights in.<br />
<br />
It&#039;s not that it&#039;s complex to implement. But it&#039;s complex to implement in a way that actually will help all different requirements from all different challenges, and at the same time doesn&#039;t take an hour to run.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>magma1447</dc:creator>
            <category>Miscellaneous</category>
            <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2016 10:29:41 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>/forum/read.php?9,3818,3818#msg-3818</guid>
            <title>Update Request on Read First</title>
            <link>/forum/read.php?9,3818,3818#msg-3818</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ Hi there!<br />
<br />
In the Read First thread, there is a statement:<br />
(http://project-gc.com/forum/read?8,13,13#REPLY)<br />
<br />
<i>What a checker can not do <br />
* The checkers does not have access to logs from others on the geocaches logged. Therefore a challenge to log a geocaches that hasn&#039;t been logged for one year isn&#039;t possible. <span style="color:#0000CC">We are however looking into solving this in the near future (June is expected)</span>. Details are yet to be determined.</i><br />
<br />
I understand how difficult this is, and was surprised to see it mentioned in the thread. Is there any news on if this is feasible yet? This is a challenge a lot of cachers in my area take part in and it would be great to have an official challenge for it :)<br />
<br />
Thanks,<br />
icklelego]]></description>
            <dc:creator>icklelego</dc:creator>
            <category>Miscellaneous</category>
            <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2016 16:14:30 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
