Return to Project-GC

Welcome to Project-GC Q&A. Ask questions and get answers from other Project-GC users.

If you get a good answer, click the checkbox on the left to select it as the best answer.

Upvote answers or questions that have helped you.

If you don't get clear answers, edit your question to make it clearer.

0 votes
225 views
I've been keeping an eye on top hiders (by logs received) in our county and noticed that 2 of our top hiders actually had their log count go DOWN significantly compared to about three weeks ago.   I know both have archived several caches recently and wonder if this indicates that the project-GC count excludes archived caches or if there is another explanation.

This is for US/California/"San Luis Obispo" county.  Second place (DarkZen) went from a reported log count of 15209 on 12/29/2017 to 15172 today (01/19/2018) -- dropping by 37.   Third place (Evil Cow Pie) went down from 13462 to 13458 during the same 3 week period -- dropping by 4.

I'm not particularly worried about their numbers but more curious what this indicates about how Project-GC calculates these numbers and if the number doesn't indicate total logs received.    Maybe archived caches are excluded?   Or caches that changed ownership?   Something else?

Thanks.   I love Project-GC and am only a little obsessed with it.  :)
in Support and help by SLOFolks (360 points)

1 Answer

0 votes
 
Best answer

No. It lists also archived caches (at least in my case).

It can have several reasons:

  • Some caches were adopted, so the logs count decreased
  • Some logs were removed (either by owner or by the cacher), for example not fulfilling challenges/earth caches

Simplest way to compare the data is by checking the cachers profile stats. In the tab "hides", you see the same number as "Total finds of my caches:" and even though for example I have some archived caches, the number is the same as in the "top logs received" list.

by Jakuje (Moderator) (117k points)
selected by SLOFolks
Ahhh!   Caches adopted by others,  I bet that's it.  The two cache owners whose counts went down aren't in the county any longer so may be adopting out some  of their existing caches.   I hadn't thought of that.    

I did wonder about removed logs, but since the difference was so great (a net of -37 in 3 weeks), that seemed very unlikely.

Thanks for the info.
...