Cache Rating system

[The Hornet]

I came across this somewhere else and thought it was a great way of offering people the chance to rate caches. It's a Greasemonkey script so will only work for Firefox users but it's better than what is on offer from Groundspeak (i.e. Nothing )

[Dave Gerrie]

this looks really rather useful! I notice that none of the caches local to me have been rated yet... Do we need to encourage everyone to use it?!

[Bill D (wwh)]

I came across that recently and then forgot about it - thanks for the reminder, Peter!

[The Hornet]

this looks really rather useful! I notice that none of the caches local to me have been rated yet... Do we need to encourage everyone to use it?!

To my mind the more publicity this gets, the more useful it will become.

[Bill D (wwh)]

To my mind the more publicity this gets, the more useful it will become.

Agreed!

Aaaggh - I supppse I've got to wade back through all my finds and rate them now...

At least I'm a slow cacher, lol...!

[The Wombles]

This is a nice easy system and seems to work well. It appears to allow the owner to rate their own caches but apart from that I like it.

[Bill D (wwh)]

Well, I've rated all my finds now (I think), and it was much quicker than I'd expected - if you choose to see the list of all your finds there's a rating box beside each one, so you can just work down the page. I'd expected to have to go to each cache individually.

My only complaint about this script is that the ratings at the top of cache pages are slow to appear (for me, anyway), and I think many people might miss them by scrolling down before they appear.

[molfrew-mosstoad]

Finally finished rating all my caches now, with the exceptions of the ones I cant remember , I was surprised how many have been archived its frightening especially the further back down the list I went. So many of them were good caches aswell

[uktim]

I came across this somewhere else and thought it was a great way of offering people the chance to rate caches. It's a Greasemonkey script so will only work for Firefox users but it's better than what is on offer from Groundspeak (i.e. Nothing )

I trust you haven't been voting for your own caches

[Bill D (wwh)]

Originally Posted by The Hornet
I came across this somewhere else and thought it was a great way of offering people the chance to rate caches. It's a Greasemonkey script so will only work for Firefox users but it's better than what is on offer from Groundspeak (i.e. Nothing )

I trust you haven't been voting for your own caches

Every little counts...

[uktim]

Every little counts...

It potentially makes the ratings look a bit of a nonsense in our area at present ;(

As far as I can see this system has no means to edit your vote if you click on the wrong rating by mistake and I wouldn't mind betting that there's no block on voting more than once for each cache. IME anonymous rating systems are open to abuse and worth very little ;(

What we really need is a system where folks can leave comments with their name attached......

ah hang on....

we already have one of those

[Bill D (wwh)]

It potentially makes the ratings look a bit of a nonsense in our area at present ;(

As far as I can see this system has no means to edit your vote if you click on the wrong rating by mistake and I wouldn't mind betting that there's no block on voting more than once for each cache. IME anonymous rating systems are open to abuse and worth very little ;(

What we really need is a system where folks can leave comments with their name attached......

ah hang on....

we already have one of those

I do take your point about ratings looking a bit of a nonsense if only the owner has voted for them. This system does seem to be in its infancy though, and if it takes off then that will change.

As far as I can tell, you can vote again on the same cache, but it only changes your earlier vote(s), and doesn't give you extra votes. I've just tried it with one of my own caches (which no-one else has voted on), and whatever rating I click on, the cache rating changes to that, and the total number of votes still shows as 1.

One way in which the system is open to abuse is that someone who's got a grudge against another cacher could vote all their caches down. But again, if the system becomes popular their votes would be a drop in the ocean.

[Al & Tracy Smith]

Ok OK I will conform and join the ranks of Firefox users .

After reading in various posts about Firefox & greasemonkey scripts, this one finally got my attention and I have decided to give it ago. I quite like the new (for me anyway) browser and I found the cache rating system easy and suprisingly quick to use. I also found as Bill D mentioned in his post above you can change your rating but you still only get the one vote. No slowness in the ratings apearing for me at the moment, I will see what happens when things get more busy.

Now to look for other useful scripts etc.

[Bill D (wwh)]

No slowness in the ratings apearing for me at the moment

Ah, it must be my steam-powered computer and carrier pigeon internet connection then!

This Google search will point you in the direction of a lot of caching scripts for Greasemonkey.

[uktim]

I do take your point about ratings looking a bit of a nonsense if only the owner has voted for them. This system does seem to be in its infancy though, and if it takes off then that will change.

As far as I can tell, you can vote again on the same cache, but it only changes your earlier vote(s), and doesn't give you extra votes. I've just tried it with one of my own caches (which no-one else has voted on), and whatever rating I click on, the cache rating changes to that, and the total number of votes still shows as 1.

I wonder how it works out who you are?

[BlackAndTabbyFamily]

I wonder how it works out who you are?

IP address maybe???

[Just Roger]

IP address maybe???

You have to be logged in to rate caches so presumably it uses your Username

[The Hornet]

I trust you haven't been voting for your own caches

AH! It's been a while.

Maybe it's not perfect but many people may find it useful. The beauty of this is that if you don't like it just don't bother installing the script and you'll never know how other people are rating your local caches.

[uktim]

AH! It's been a while.

Maybe it's not perfect but many people may find it useful. The beauty of this is that if you don't like it just don't bother installing the script and you'll never know how other people are rating your local caches.

It is potentially useful given time and enough ratings. I was just rather amused by the pattern that emerged when I installed the script and checked out our closest caches

[uktim]

IP address maybe???

Thats the most likely option but how many of us have a static IP address. I can envisage a situation where we can either get a second vote or maybe even accidently overwrite someone elses vote if thats the system they are using.

[martybartfast]

Thats the most likely option but how many of us have a static IP address. I can envisage a situation where we can either get a second vote or maybe even accidently overwrite someone elses vote if thats the system they are using.

No, Just Roger was right, it uses your GC.com username.

[uktim]

No, Just Roger was right, it uses your GC.com username.

I'm not sure , sometimes the voting option comes up when I'm noit logged on

[martybartfast]

I'm not sure , sometimes the voting option comes up when I'm noit logged on

Theory: Looking at the code it uses the user name.

Practical: When logged in as myself it only allows me to change my existing vote, but logging out and then logging in as my missus allows me to add a second vote. Logging out altogether doesn't allow me to vote.

[markandlynn]

Information

content

Hopefully he can add to this script a way to stop votes on caches you have not found otherwise abuse may set in. Otherwise a potentially very usefull add in.

[Lakeuk]

Excellent addition to greasemonkey.

I can also recommend adding GC Tour to your greasemonkey collection

[Maple Leaf]

I thought I would *bump* this post.

I have been using it for a couple of years - with the various firefox/greasmonkey add ons.
It is especially useful when I am visiting a new area and just have time for a couple of caches - I choose the high rated ones to pick/read up on before making my selection as to which ones to do.

However, I am suprised how few people use the voting system especially when looking at the last three UK Mega events.

Harrogate - 501 caching names (928 people) - 10 Votes
Weston-super-Mare - 533 caching names (1044 people) - 18 votes
Perth - 538 caching names (1301 people) - 9 votes

Go on .... have a look linky