Best Around

July 17, 2005

Just wanted to say that I did some online investigating and found out the geocaching.com has the most subscribers out of them all. One site just to become a member you had to be spocered and all that. then they only had about two caches in the state of michigan. Thanks for being the best guys, you dont get enough credit. :blink: Keep it alive. Take a kid geocaching!

July 17, 2005

I also registered to the site you are talking about and the nearest cache from me was like a couple hundred miles. I 10x prefer Geocaching over any of the other sites.

1.6k · July 17, 2005

for those interested, they are refering to the terracaching group.

July 17, 2005

I also registered to the site you are talking about and the nearest cache from me was like a couple hundred miles. I 10x prefer Geocaching over any of the other sites.

Terracaching is ridiculous, you need to get sponsored to get into a site that has like 12 caches in the United States. If one got stolen the whole 4 people that use that site would go into a frenzy. Geocaching is the best and will keep up top for a long time with competition like navicahing and terracaching.

July 17, 2005

It's a chicken and egg thing. geocaching.com has a huge head start on all the other sites.

I have done 2 terracaches (one in AZ, one in LA) - both were above average quality (compared to all caches I have done), but neither were they the greatest caches I have ever done. I believe that TC's self-policing system does have certain attributes which make it a better experience for some cachers. I do expect to keep an eye on caches there just like on all the other sites; and hunt them and find them.

There's no rule that says you can't use every site to get listings to hunt or have listings on multiple sites (cross-listing doesn't make any sense, though, since logs might be spread out across sites and make maintenance difficult), and geocaching isn't the only GPS-based game/sport/hobby/activity around. I even include dashpoints from geodashing in my GSAK database.

From all indications, it looks like the new locationless game/sport/hobby/activity here on geocaching.com is really going to be separate from what we call "caching", which I'm sure will appeal to the camp that insists that log-less caches (virtuals, locationless, etc) are not really caches.

July 28, 2005

I have registered on tc.com . . . got my sponsors in minutes, it's easy and different but not better. Found 2-3 tc caches, good quality ones.

As for current cache volumes, I heard that gc.com started with only one cache and then grew to greatness. Maybe tc.com will do as well or simply crash & burn.

I do see that the cache volumes are growing in some areas much faster than others.It is up to the local people . . . you hide them & they will come.

My opinion is that it's all caching to me - the hunt, the exercise, the experience outdoors, the joy of the find and supporting the hider & the site that make it happen. I say 'Hurray for gc.com and grow on tc.com'

1.1k · July 28, 2005

Ignorance must be bliss must be bliss.

cheers

July 28, 2005

HUH

July 28, 2005

Ignorance must be bliss must be bliss.
cheers

I will second the HUH?

Who is ignorant? The OPer? You? Someone else? What are they ignorant of? TC.com's wonderfullness? Or are you saying it is *better* to be ignorant of TC.com? If you had used the QUOTE button we might have had a clue...

Please help us understand. Thanks.

July 28, 2005

I also registered to the site you are talking about and the nearest cache from me was like a couple hundred miles. I 10x prefer Geocaching over any of the other sites.

I had a similar experience over there. Got picked up quite quickly, but only 1 TC witnin 100 miles of me. :laughing:

They appear to be growing though and I like the general premise. What interested me in particular is that the members can rate the caches they find. Granted everybody has different ideas about what constitutes a "good" cache, but I think with enough ratings some trends would emerge and give you a general idea of how good the cache is.

But this place is still the best.

July 29, 2005

Hey Folks, thanks for all the replies back. i have just recently started geocaching and have been amazed by the comrodery of people. lets keep it that way! if anything we need to support other sites like the ones described in this post. they like the game just as much as we do. maybe one day we can hold a caching game that will incorperate all sites, kind of like a caching olympics. just one guys thoughts though.

ps i think we would still kick their collective a**^$ though! :blink:

1.5k · July 29, 2005

I also registered to the site you are talking about and the nearest cache from me was like a couple hundred miles. I 10x prefer Geocaching over any of the other sites.

Terracaching is ridiculous, you need to get sponsored to get into a site that has like 12 caches in the United States. If one got stolen the whole 4 people that use that site would go into a frenzy. Geocaching is the best and will keep up top for a long time with competition like navicahing and terracaching.

Twelve in the US??? I have more than that within a 15 mi radius of me.

Yes, gc.com is far and away the biggest and most active site. It started in the early days and has been a great solution during huge growth in our activity.

Terracaching is an alternative site for the hobby and is still in its infancy. Hopefully, it'll one day grow large enough to give gc.com some friendly competition, which is better for everyone!

July 29, 2005

I've checked out tc.com's website, but didn't find any near me. But to each his own, I don't really care how others are playing, I'm still having too much fun! :blink:

July 29, 2005

OBTW, I've taken several kids (my own, the neighbors, the Cub Scout Pack) geocaching! :blink:

3.3k · July 29, 2005

Hey Folks, thanks for all the replies back. i have just recently started geocaching and have been amazed by the comrodery of people. lets keep it that way! if anything we need to support other sites like the ones described in this post. they like the game just as much as we do. maybe one day we can hold a caching game that will incorperate all sites, kind of like a caching olympics. just one guys thoughts though.
ps i think we would still kick their collective a**^$ though!

Wasn't Terracaching founded by a bunch of Disgruntled Geocaching.com cachers, from Texas?

9.4k · July 29, 2005

Obviously we've been around the longest so there will be more caches listed here.

As some have already said there isn't really much of a difference between the other sites and this one, which, IMO, is the reason why they don't pull users as much as they would like. They're just too similar to make a difference. Personally if I were them I would have come up with new ideas, not rehash old ones. Folks have been clamoring for a solution for locationless caches, for example. And the solution isn't, say, just allowing them as they are on this site. The current solution stinks here for many reasons (which is why we're working hard to fix that).

Not that I'm not saying that this whole sponsorship is novel, but from what I've heard they will basically sponsor anyone, so it's like the gmail account promo. It has a certain amount of mystique but at the end of the day it is just a gimmick.

1.5k · July 29, 2005

Hey Folks, thanks for all the replies back. i have just recently started geocaching and have been amazed by the comrodery of people. lets keep it that way! if anything we need to support other sites like the ones described in this post. they like the game just as much as we do. maybe one day we can hold a caching game that will incorperate all sites, kind of like a caching olympics. just one guys thoughts though.
ps i think we would still kick their collective a**^$ though!

Wasn't Terracaching founded by a bunch of Disgruntled Geocaching.com cachers, from Texas?

Ummm...no.

"TerraCaching.com is the home of the TerraCaching Point System (TPS); the world wide version of the absurdly addictive SGPS. Previously strictly limited to Western Montana and Northern Idaho, SGPS was a side game that awarded points to cachers based on the difficulty of the caches they found. For those interested, TPS is the ultimate in friendly caching competition."

Yes, it did experience some growth from cachers who weren't happy with policies, people, personalities, etc. on this site...that's why competition is a good thing.

I know of very few people who are active solely on tc.com...I'm not that active over there myself.

The purpose of the site isn't to be the site for the kids who stomp out of here with a chip on their shoulder....it's offering alternative forms of the caching "game" and we'll see if it catches on or not.

24.7k · July 29, 2005

...Wasn't Terracaching founded by a bunch of Disgruntled Geocaching.com cachers, from Texas?

Right after TC.com got started a few things happened that caused a lot of Texas cachers to leave GC.com and join TC.com.

So far as I know TC.com grew out of the orignial Skydiver point system that could not be reasonably expanded beyond a certain radius of Missoula Montana due to difficutly in obtaining the data needed to run the point system.

Skydiver was ultimatly banned from GC.com.

9.4k · July 29, 2005

The purpose of the site isn't to be the site for the kids who stomp out of here with a chip on their shoulder....it's offering alternative forms of the caching "game" and we'll see if it catches on or not.

I have friends who use the site so I can say that there are many who do not go there because of any chip on their shoulder. However the other sites do get many of them as converts. Unfortunately there is a reason why they were disgruntled here and that generally doesn't benefit the new sites either.

38.2k · July 29, 2005

What interested me in particular is that the members can rate the caches they find. Granted everybody has different ideas about what constitutes a "good" cache, but I think with enough ratings some trends would emerge and give you a general idea of how good the cache is.

Though rating caches isn't a bad idea, they allow you to, and even encourage you to rate caches that you haven't found. I think that's ridiculious.

I had one cache there rated so low it was automatically archived, yet there was not a single logged find on it.

July 29, 2005

What interested me in particular is that the members can rate the caches they find. Granted everybody has different ideas about what constitutes a "good" cache, but I think with enough ratings some trends would emerge and give you a general idea of how good the cache is.

Though rating caches isn't a bad idea, they allow you to, and even encourage you to rate caches that you haven't found. I think that's ridiculious.

I had one cache there rated so low it was automatically archived, yet there was not a single logged find on it.

It must have really stunk! :blink:

July 30, 2005

I like Terracaching, and I like Geocaching. There's a huge difference between my find count here and my find count there, but overall I'd say I like the average terracache much, much better than the average geocache. (I also tend to prefer the discussions on the terracaching forums!) But liking one more than the other doesn't mean I dislike the other. They're both good. Yay.

I dislike irrational site-bashing, though, when people are like, "dude, that other site sux, there's like nothing near my house," or "what's up with those losers who find hundreds of film cans in ditches and act like they're special?" Calling another site ridiculous is ridiculous in and of itself, because all it does is insult the many, many people who enjoy using both sites.

3.8k · July 30, 2005

Though rating caches isn't a bad idea, they allow you to, and even encourage you to rate caches that you haven't found. I think that's ridiculious.

I'm always in support of good competition, and I appreciate the general concept that drives TerraCaching.com, but I have to agree with Brian. Rating caches before you find them just isn't right.

I visited the TC forums just the other day, and it appears their members are in some disagreement about that practice.

The closest TerraCaches to me are about 100 miles (I know, I should place one, but, but, but...). :blink:

38.2k · July 30, 2005

What interested me in particular is that the members can rate the caches they find. Granted everybody has different ideas about what constitutes a "good" cache, but I think with enough ratings some trends would emerge and give you a general idea of how good the cache is.

Though rating caches isn't a bad idea, they allow you to, and even encourage you to rate caches that you haven't found. I think that's ridiculious.

I had one cache there rated so low it was automatically archived, yet there was not a single logged find on it.

It must have really stunk!

Well it did, but that's besides the point.

Calling another site ridiculous is ridiculous in and of itself, because all it does is insult the many, many people who enjoy using both sites.

If you're referring to my post, I was calling the policy ridiculious, not the site itself.

July 30, 2005

WEll I just signed up with them to check it out, y'all got me curious. I really like the fact that their site is best viewed with Firefox. Other than that it is somewhat complicated to sign up compared to GC.com. We shall see with time whether it is of any use as caches are pretty limited in this neck of the desert.

July 30, 2005

Didnt want to turn this into a site bashing post. Just a simple thanks to everybody who makes Geocaching.com possible and its fallowers who make it a great game. Once agian thanks all! :blink:

July 30, 2005

As for current cache volumes, I heard that gc.com started with only one cache and then grew to greatness.

I think you heard wrong ... I believe geocaching.com was developed from data turned over by Mike Teague from his early listings effort.

Edited July 30, 2005 by Yankees Win!

38.2k · July 30, 2005

As for current cache volumes, I heard that gc.com started with only one cache and then grew to greatness.

I think you heard wrong ... I believe geocaching.com was developed from data turned over by Mike Teague from his early listings effort.

Yeah with maybe 100 caches worldwide at the time.

9.4k · July 30, 2005

As for current cache volumes, I heard that gc.com started with only one cache and then grew to greatness.

I think you heard wrong ... I believe geocaching.com was developed from data turned over by Mike Teague from his early listings effort.

Yeah with maybe 100 caches worldwide at the time.

There were 75. I hand entered the majority of them from the newsgroups like Mike Teague did.

Since the original poster said his peace I'll go ahead and lock it. The owner can open it back up if there is more to be done in the thread.

Best Around

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment