Caches For Premium Members

[+nfa]

[+clearpath]

[+GeoBlank]

I am not a premium member and other than being able to find members only caches I see no reason to become one. None of the other features would be useful to me. I would be glad to send the $30 or whatever to support the web site, but the idea that it is also paying to find some caches that in my experience... yes I do have member friends ... are no better than normal free ones doesn't sit well with me. The only excuse I can think of to make a cache "members only" except for the oft quoted "elitist cacher" reason, is if your cache is hidden in an area that can not withstand much traffic because of environmental, political, or land owner issues.

 

It would be nice to be able to filter them out of my closest unfound caches list. Maybe if I got a premium membership I could do that!!!

 

Didn't use a dictionary or spell check so go at it guys....

Edscott you have found over 700 caches and so you must like the sport. It seems that supporting GC.com would be enough to become a paying member. Also don't knock the features until you try them. Pocket queries are worth it by themselves.

[+edscott]

Edscott you have found over 700 caches and so you must like the sport. It seems that supporting GC.com would be enough to become a paying member. Also don't knock the features until you try them. Pocket queries are worth it by themselves.

Pocket Queries.. do they give me a perfect 1:5000 map with the cache location marked? That is really all I need to find a cache....

[+clearpath]

Pocket queries are worth it by themselves.

GeoBlank, I'm pretty sure that edscott does not use a GPS to find caches. However, because he doesn't want to pay the Premium Member fee, we should make him pay for his induction into the Geocaching Hall of Fame.

[+Mule Ears]

Not entirely on-topic, but not too far off: How does the audit-trail feature work from the standpoint of the owner of a MOC? What info does he see? I ask because one of our locals has taken to making all puzzles MOCs, and it dawned on me that the purpose is to monitor activity by potential solvers--when they first saw the page, how often they check back, etc. I've been growing disillusioned with puzzles, and the high ick factor of being monitored hasn't helped I'm trying to train myself to download the cache page on the first viewing and then work from a copy, but I often forget.

 

Bottom line question: How much info does the MOC cache owner get and what does it look like?

[+clearpath]

The info you see in the audit trail is listed below...

 

An audit log is a list of users who have viewed your premium member-only cache on the web site. Click on the user's name to visit their profile.

 

Last Visit                    First Visit                        User              #Times

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

10/24/2005 7:53 AM  4/29/2004                        clearpath        28

10/23/2005 4:24 PM  10/13/2005                      wardnkathy      3

10/19/2005 2:38 PM  10/12/2005                      Ecorangers        3

10/17/2005 7:10 PM  10/29/2004                      dragonfly44      3

10/16/2005 1:39 PM  10/16/2005                      borand              1

10/16/2005 9:34 AM    9/11/2005                      WallyW            12

10/12/2005 8:31 AM  10/11/2005                      GPSJay            3

10/8/2005 8:52 AM    10/8/2005                        awhsom            2

9/26/2005 8:37 PM    12/16/2004                      OlatheGIS        11

[+Mule Ears]

Thanks! That's what I was looking for.

[+welch]

Your kidding right? It is based on the fact that they paid.

 

If you don't want to reward premium member then don't place any MOCs.

 

As for your misuse of the word arbitrary I don't know what to say. By your definition people who are members of the country club are arbitrarily allowed to play golf there just because they paid. No one checks to see if they are a good golfer or not.

 

But I will say it one more time. The reason people are allowed to hunt MO caches are because they paid. The reason people place MOCs are to reward those who have supported the site.

 

Saying is is arbitrary is a total miss characterization and implies Groundspeak is victimizing or somehow being unfair to people who are not premium members. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Yes, 'premium' membership is based on who paid, but a MOC is based on a whim. And to repeat what I said already, I don't care if cache owners restrict who gets the info for their caches, it's their cache.

 

Don't worry I don't.

 

The definition of country club on http://dictionary.reference.com was vauge, so I'm sure you'll say i've misused another one. If you want to create a country club and charge for it, then do so. But wouldn't it be inaccurate if that club were publicized as 'free' or 'public'?

 

They're allowed to hunt MOC because someone said paying for 'premium' membership gets you access to MOC pages. Have you read this thread? 'rewarding' others is only one of many reasons that cache owners have for making MOCs. Why those owners made the cache that way was because of the owners individual judgment or preference (which is their right).

 

victimizing- 1. To subject to swindle or fraud. 2. To make a victim of., no I was thinking maybe more like misinform. One of the reasons given for becoming a 'premium' member is the MOCs. There is often a poor job pointing out that, there may not any of these special caches, and that if there are special caches why their 'special'. (Yes I realize the subscribe page says they may not be better, thats one place.)

[+Thrak]

I don't really care one way or the other. I'm a premium member so I see all the caches. I LOVE my pocket query ability. Why wouldn't I be willing to pay the tiny fee requested in order to be able to use the information and tools provided by the folks who run this place?

 

I benefit greatly from the forums, the cache listings, the entire package. $3 per month is a very small amount indeed to pay for what I'm getting. If you can't afford that price I wonder how you afforded to purchasd a GPSr or to pay for a gallon of gas to go caching. I understand that sometimes what seems like a small amount of money to one person can be an unreasonable expense for another. If that is the case then perhaps this is not the proper hobby for those folks. I've BEEN poor. I rode a crummy old 3 speed (women's model no less) bike to work all one winter back in the day because I simply couldn't afford $10 for a set of points to repair my broken down Volkswagon. I had no money for much of anything. However, I also didn't take up any hobbies that required money.

 

I feel for those who may miss out on (perhaps) excellent caches due to them being listed as MOC. However, as stated above, I think the small fee is more than fair for the services being provided. I'd really HATE for this site to go down.

[+Team Torque]

'rewarding' others is only one of many reasons that cache owners have for making MOCs. Why those owners made the cache that way was because of the owners individual judgment or preference (which is their right).

Great I glade to see you finally admit that rewarding is "one of many reasons" and since they are reasons they are not arbitrary.

[+humanloofa]

Heck I like the premium membership just for the map feature, that saves a lot of time when I plan a route.

[+edscott]

<big snip ...> I think the small fee is more than fair for the services being provided. I'd really HATE for this site to go down.

I agree with this part. I do not object to helping finance the web site. I just object to paying for access to a geocache. In fact aren't there rules against that in the guide lines?

[+welch]

Great I glade to see you finally admit that rewarding is "one of many reasons" and since they are reasons they are not arbitrary.

wouldn't know, you say I misuse the word

[+BigCarbonFootprint]

I hide my first MOC today. My intention is to open it up to general membership after the first thirty days. I decided to make it MOC because of the great time I have had enjoying this activity due primarily to the efforts of Premium members. I did not say exclusively to the efforts of Premium members. I may have found caches that have been placed by non-Premium members. For this reason, my other thirty cache hides are open to all. I decided to give something back to those that financially support this site.

[+Airmapper]

I agree that the company deserves the money for it's services. These services are to help find, organize, and display data that is sometimes difficult to obtain manually. And from what I hear they are worth their cost.

 

I do not agree with caches being placed solely for the paying members, that is against the entire spirit of this game. What if all the premium (Or a large percentage) hid only MOC caches. This site would turn in to a paying members only site, making newbies think the only way to participate is to send a check. What ever happened to all you need to cache is a GPS, Internet (free at any library), and a sense of adventure?

 

From my understanding, certain state parks have adopted policies which prohibit MOC caches on their land. They have good reason, caches are for everyone to enjoy, newbie, old-timer, paying member and even Mr. Tightwad Cacher.

[+BigCarbonFootprint]

In actuality, the “spirit of the game “ is to allow cache hiders to do whatever they wish with their caches as log as they are within the guidelines of GC.com and the reviewing approver. Not trying to be a wise-a** at all and I agree that your scenario of members hiding only MOC caches would be as unfortunate as it is unlikely that it would occur. I wonder what the ration of paying members are to non-paying users. Since there are very few MOC caches out there, I would be willing to bet in the single digit percentage, non-paying users do not suffer from not being able to log a find on an MOC. MOC caches are like many things in life regarding rules and exclusion. Some are illegal, some are by preference of the majority, and some are by rule of the elite. So what. We are not talking about backs of busses or gas showers here. It is a game. If you want something to bitch about how about members and non-paying users that do not bother to hide caches at all or hide too few and leech of the efforts of a few devotees. I was chastised as a newbie not long ago for asking about maintaining a 10% hide to find ratio, but that is another forum.

[+welch]

In actuality, the “spirit of the game “ is to allow cache hiders to do whatever they wish with their caches as log as they are within the guidelines of GC.com and the reviewing approver. Not trying to be a wise-a** at all and I agree that your scenario of members hiding only MOC caches would be as unfortunate as it is unlikely that it would occur. I wonder what the ration of paying members are to non-paying users. Since there are very few MOC caches out there, I would be willing to bet in the single digit percentage, non-paying users do not suffer from not being able to log a find on an MOC. MOC caches are like many things in life regarding rules and exclusion. Some are illegal, some are by preference of the majority, and some are by rule of the elite. So what. We are not talking about backs of busses or gas showers here. It is a game. If you want something to bitch about how about members and non-paying users that do not bother to hide caches at all or hide too few and leech of the efforts of a few devotees. I was chastised as a newbie not long ago for asking about maintaining a 10% hide to find ratio, but that is another forum.

so this "spirit of the game" is whatever gc.com says it can be?

[Clan Riffster]

so this "spirit of the game" is whatever gc.com says it can be?

As long as GC owns the website, yes.

Don't worry, there's also Terracaching, Navicaching, etc...

[+BigCarbonFootprint]

No, not what I said. The "spirit of the game" is what ever the paying members say it is. No money, no website, no game, spirit dead.

[+Jester2112]

Since this seems to be an active debate over the benefit of whether or not Premium Membership is worth the money or not, figured I'd throw my story in here and hope that some of you Premium Members who've been here a while could offer some assistance/point me in the correct direction as I'm at my wits end:

 

10/17/05: Attempted to purchase 1-Year Premium Membership using VISA and received error screen advising issue with system prevented transaction from being completed and to try again, which I did 3 times. Then I got worried that I just funded my addiction for the next 4 years which wouldn't be that bad of a thing I guess. So, I send an email to Groundspeak customer service, with an attached screen shot of the error message, asking for assistance and whether or not I did purchase 4 years of fun.

 

10/18/05: Received a response from Groundspeak advising there appeared to have been a system issue at the time of purchase, we'll just forget the fact that the system, and attached screenshot from the system, told me this in plain English thus prompting me to send my email, and to retry my purchase. No mention of whether or not I had just purchased 4 years of membership, but I assumed since they requested I attempt it again, that the answer was no. So, I attempted it again. Received an error message again, but this time, a different message. Becoming frustrated, I again emailed customer service, again with a screenshot of the error, and requested further assistance.

 

10/20/05: Received a response from Groundspeak asking for the 3 digit security code on the back of my card. Feeling none too comfortable sending this little tid-bit of knowledge via email, but reminding myself it would be OK since this is a VISA that I'm not responsible for unauthorized charges on, I sent the requested information.

 

10/25/05: That was last Thursday...it's now Tuesday evening (10/25/05) and I've heard nothing back in response. I've actually checked the card on-line several times over the last 5 days checking for a charge to Groundspeak and/or somebody's lavish shopping spree on my dime. I expect to work hard to earn my money, but I'd have to say that I've never worked this hard to spend any of it??? So, I decide to send my first smart %$@! email. It simply reads "Hello...Anybody Home?"

 

10/26/05: The update for today, Thursday, would have to be another DNF for Groundspeak. I haven't heard anything and am rapidly approaching my first event on Saturday. I so wanted to run my first PQ, dump it into my new GSAK program that I've been looking at for the last 2 weeks, upload for the first time to the GPSr and head out early on Saturday to enjoy some caching with my daughter prior to the 3:00PM start time for the event. It appears that I'll be using the old "burn up the printer and paper supply" yet again until I can find someone with a pulse that can take my money. Does anybody reading this want $30.00?

Edited October 27, 2005 by Jester2112

[+BigCarbonFootprint]

Hello J, giving away money can be very frustrating. Shoot me a note to my email with your PQ criteria and I will run the PQ for you and email it back to you. I know this is not a long-term solution, unless you would like to send me $3.50 per query, but it will get you to the event paperless.

[+Airmapper]

Here is an example of a land management agency which prohibits MOC caches.

 

http://www.geocky.org/rules/boone.htm

 

Geocaching Policy for the Daniel Boone NF

 

The following policy applies when developing a geocache on the Daniel Boone National Forest:

 

1. Contact the District Ranger’s office prior to development in order to inquire about any designated and/or "off limit" areas and to learn interesting facts that may enhance the educational value of your virtual cache

 

2. Caches should last no more than one year. Notify the District Ranger Office upon removal.

 

3. Access routes and caches should avoid fragile areas, such as rockshelters, caves, bogs, wetlands, steep slopes, historic structures, and other sensitive sites. Do not use areas closed to the public.

 

4. Follow all posted information for developed recreation sites.

 

5. Do not interfere with or detract from other visitors' experiences.

 

6. Do not dig soil or cut vegetation when developing a cache.

 

7. Caches should be no more than 2 gallons in size.

 

8. Only virtual caches are allowed in the Red River Gorge. These caches are allowed by permit only.

 

9. Caches must not contain any food or hazardous materials.

 

10. Containers must be labeled on the outside so that it would not be mistaken as containing hazardous materials.

 

11. Caches need to be public, no member only or subscription caches.

 

12. Permits are required for commercial events.

 

13. No caches are allowed in Clifty or Beaver Creek Wilderness.

 

14. Encourage friends and fellow geocachers to follow these guidelines.

Edited October 27, 2005 by Airmapper

[+Airmapper]

............

Edited October 27, 2005 by Airmapper

[+edscott]

Here is an example of a land management agency which prohibits MOC caches.

 

http://www.geocky.org/rules/boone.htm

 

Geocaching Policy for the Daniel Boone NF

 

The following policy applies when developing a geocache on the Daniel Boone National Forest:

 

1. Contact the District Ranger’s office prior to development in order to inquire about any designated and/or "off limit" areas and to learn interesting facts that may enhance the educational value of your virtual cache

 

2. Caches should last no more than one year. Notify the District Ranger Office upon removal.

 

3. Access routes and caches should avoid fragile areas, such as rockshelters, caves, bogs, wetlands, steep slopes, historic structures, and other sensitive sites. Do not use areas closed to the public.

 

4. Follow all posted information for developed recreation sites.

 

5. Do not interfere with or detract from other visitors' experiences.

 

6. Do not dig soil or cut vegetation when developing a cache.

 

7. Caches should be no more than 2 gallons in size.

 

8. Only virtual caches are allowed in the Red River Gorge. These caches are allowed by permit only.

 

9. Caches must not contain any food or hazardous materials.

 

10. Containers must be labeled on the outside so that it would not be mistaken as containing hazardous materials.

 

11. Caches need to be public, no member only or subscription caches.

 

12. Permits are required for commercial events.

 

13. No caches are allowed in Clifty or Beaver Creek Wilderness.

 

14. Encourage friends and fellow geocachers to follow these guidelines.

Well done!!!! What if all government agencies adopted this attitude? Then ALL the Members Only Caches would be under lamp posts

[+BigCarbonFootprint]

Mmmm, interesting about DBNF. I see that that quote comes from a private geocaching organization in KY. Can you provide a link to a federal website regarding DBNF and their guidelines for geocaching? Right now, all I saw was a list of rules established by a geocaching group, not necessarily by a legal state or federal entity.

[+Airmapper]

At your request....

 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/boone/recreation/geocaching.shtml

[+BigCarbonFootprint]

I see your validation from the Fed. That is very interesting. Since I do not have an MOC cache published yet, can any tell me how a user of the GC.com website would be able to determine a cache were listed as MOC. Can only members see the cache, does the description page appear to all, but the coordinates are only viewable by members? How does this work?

[+Airmapper]

They appear when you search for a cache, they have an icon designation for MOC. You get the mileage and direction from the search point. They even list the type of cache (I.e puzzle, traditional, multi...) However when you click on the listing, you are blocked, and get a error screen.

 

<edit for wording>

Edited October 27, 2005 by Airmapper

[Clan Riffster]

The "spirit of the game" is what ever the paying members say it is. No money, no website, no game, spirit dead.

Not even closely resembling the truth. GC existed before Premium Memberships, and will most likely exist after PM's go the way of the Dodo. We, as PM's have little to no say in GC policy, and as such, we cannot set the rules for them. GC sets the rules according to their needs, establishing the so called "spirit" of the game.

 

Paid memberships result in more capital for GC, however, it's not their only source of revenue. I'd be willing to bet, (based on my experience running another forum/website, that they make more $$$ from advertising and merchandising then they do from PM's. Of course, I'm not privy to their financial records, so that's just speculation.

 

If your "spirit" doesn't match theirs, try another caching site. GC isn't the only site offering cache coordinates, just the best.

[+Moose Mob]

<snip>GC isn't the only site offering cache coordinates, just the best.

See what putting out a couple buck will get you?

 

I know a few people that make thier cache MO because they have a much less chance of being stolen by cache maggots. That is thier choice.

[+Airmapper]

Now that Jeremy has made it so only geocachers with accounts can view the coords for a cache, wouldn't that give a MOC a different meaning. No longer is it's purpose to hide the cache location from potential "muggles" or "cache maggots", but now it is hiding the cache from account holding Geocachers.

 

I would like to see the MOC cache disappear, and perhaps be replaced by another method. How about if a member chooses, only cachers with say 100 finds could get access to the cache page. This would weed out some of the non interested cachers, yet anyone who is an active cacher would be able to find it. (This is just a suggestion, I use it as an example and am aware that that course may have faults of it's own, I mention this only to say there are other options than MOC's.) (I am also aware I only have 40 finds, but I plan to change that, I am by no means an inactive cacher.)

[+Kit Fox]

Now that Jeremy has made it so only geocachers with accounts can view the coords for a cache, wouldn't that give a MOC a different meaning. No longer is it's purpose to hide the cache location from potential "muggles" or "cache maggots", but now it is hiding the cache from account holding Geocachers.

 

The theory is that if you actually have to pay for something, then you would be less likely to destroy it. Now anyone with a valid email address can become a basic member on this website, there is nothing preventing cache maggots from signing up.

 

The audit log is still a valuable tool to track who visits your cache page.

[+Team Perks]

The theory is that if you actually have to pay for something, then you would be less likely to destroy it. Now anyone with a valid email address can become a basic member on this website, there is nothing preventing cache maggots from signing up.

 

The audit log is still a valuable tool to track who visits your cache page.

Ah, but how many people have run pocket queries that include your subscriber-only caches? Those don't show up on your audit log.

 

So you really have no idea how many times I've viewed your cache pages *offline*. (Hate to disappoint you, Bill, but the answer isn't "millions"... )

 

For some reason there seems to be some misconception that cache owners will be able to know exactly who has information on the whereabouts of their subscriber-caches. The audit log isn't quite as useful as many people think.

 

And while MOC's might deter the "recreational" cache-maggot, three bucks for a months' access probably wouldn't deter someone who's truly dedicated to destroying someone's caches.

[+nfa]

I have a "JOC" (Jamie only cache) that is cache-maggot proof!!!

 

I'm the only one that knows the coordinates, and I'm not even sure that I remember...

[+Jeep_Dog]

I would like to see the MOC cache disappear, and perhaps be replaced by another method. How about if a member chooses, only cachers with say 100 finds could get access to the cache page. This would weed out some of the non interested cachers, yet anyone who is an active cacher would be able to find it.

From the description of PM features:

 

"Some caches are only available to Premium Members. This has been a request of many geocachers who want to put more energy into designing a cache for dedicated geocachers. As the cache owner, you can make any of your caches "subscriber only" so folks will need a subscription to seek it out. "

 

It would appear the angst in this thread is over the definition of "dedicated geocachers." In my immediate area, I have seen quite a number of non-PM cachers that seemed quite "dedicated" (although they, too, have become PMs). No doubt there are some PMs that are "not dedicated," but I would hazard to guess this number is much lower than non-PMs that would be "dedicated." So, where would GC draw the line? Your suggestion is a good one, yet I would suggest that drawing the line at PMs is a good one that is already in place. Based upon my observations, GC does not discriminate between members and premium members; members have the requisite tools to geocache and do not receive any less consideration in placing caches.

 

Now, I submit a final observation. While I regularly (defined as at least monthly) physically check on all of my caches (regardless of what is happening in the on-line logs), two of my caches are easily visible when I pass by them every day. Since they are easily observed and monitored, it is an easy task to note when a cache has not been returned to the EXACT spot or re-hidden EXACTLY as it was found. I frequently stop and adjust these caches (the others are not so critical in their placement, so bi-weekly or monthly adjustments are adequate). Naturally, from the logs, I know who has been there and exactly whom was probably responsible for not returning the hide as they found it. Now, what I have observed is that PMs that log these caches nearly ALWAYS are careful to return the cache exactly as they found it; I have noticed that all placement and camo transgressions occur by "regular" members. Coincidence? Very possibly, but since placement and camo is vital to these caches, I would consider activating them as MOCs if I was out of town for an extended period of time...

[+edscott]

Hey now there's a thought... have a hundred people each hide a cache and don't tell anyone, hide a regular cache and list it on Geocaching.com, and hide a MOC. See which ones gets muggled most often. I'll personally bet that cache location has a lot more to do with it than the listing method.

[+V-I-cacher]

I suppose these are just extended puzzle-caches:

Go find a cache with the only informations being the (rough) distances to other

caches in the area... I guess some triangulation and then a large search-area

will reveal these...

[+Airmapper]

I assume there would be ways for a non member to get access to a MOC cache, it would take a lot of computer work and some dead reckoning, but it's possible.

 

The point made by Jeep Dog that the issue is over a dedicated cacher makes a lot of sense. MOC may be "just another cache" to someone already paying their dues and enjoying all the features. But some of us who aren't paying for membership feel a little cheated in this deal. I have reasons I'm not a PM, like I don't have a PDA or a reliable computer. (A little hard to convince the library to let you install GSAK don't you think.) I fully plan on becoming a PM when I get some things set up like I want it. I think the PM setup is great, but when it comes to restricting you from caches, I don't see anything good coming from that.

 

So is it only paying members who are considered "worthy" enough to find certain caches? I said this before and I'll repeat it here: Groundspeak has no experience requirement for a cacher before cashing their check.

[+edscott]

I assume there would be ways for a non member to get access to a MOC cache, it would take a lot of computer work and some dead reckoning, but it's possible.

 

If this response was in reference to my idea that location was more important than listing type you missed my point. I'll bet more trashed caches are stumbled upon by mistake than by people using geocaching.com to find them. Selecting a muggle-proof location will help more than making it members only. If your response was to something else then I missed your point

Edited October 28, 2005 by edscott

[+Airmapper]

I suppose these are just extended puzzle-caches:

Go find a cache with the only informations being the (rough) distances to other

caches in the area... I guess some triangulation and then a large search-area

will reveal these...

My response was to the above quote, it was suggesting you can find a MOC cache without the coords, he is saying doing so will be like doing a puzzle cache. I wouldn't take the time or put out the effort to look for a cache that the owner obviously doesn't want me to participate in finding. I was merely stating that it would be possible.

[vagabond]

I assume there would be ways for a non member to get access to a MOC cache, it would take a lot of computer work and some dead reckoning, but it's possible.

 

Yes there are ways to do it, but with approx. 600 caches within a 52.9 mile area

and only one is a moc and its archived why worry about mocs.

Heck I'd be out there cachin

[+Airmapper]

I can tell by your personalized text under your avatar that you are a premium member. As such you have no trouble with caches being restricted from you. The principle of this matter is my focus, not attempting to find MOC caches.