Jump to content

Do The Powers That Be Listen To Users ?


kph100

Recommended Posts

It appears a lot of people were supportive of Virtual caches where you have to answer questions set at the location.

 

I agree that there should not be too many of these at a given locality, but feel they enhance the sport of caching.

 

A mixture of both especially when caching away from home is great and feel there should be new Virtuals to be allowed again.

 

Ii this view supported ? and if so do you think the gods would ever listen ?

Link to comment
It appears a lot of people were supportive of Virtual caches where you have to answer questions set at the location.

 

I agree that there should not be too many of these at a given locality, but feel they enhance the sport of caching.

 

A mixture of both especially when caching away from home is great and feel there should be new Virtuals to be allowed again.

 

Ii this view supported ? and if so do you think the gods would ever listen ?

Yes it is, but the decision has been taken.

Link to comment

I've enjoyed many - almost all, actually - Virts that I've done (never found one muggled) but the decision was taken in the US to return GeoCACHING back to its physical cache roots. It's a shame in many ways, but I can understand their thinking. Now Waymarking is running, anyone wanting to place a virtual will be sent there. But a backdoor has been left open to us (hooray!) in the shape of offset-multis. The site of interest is still seen and there's a logbook to sign - even if it's in a box a bit of a walk away. There's no conformation emails to bounce back, get lost or go unanswered as the owner's on holiday... So, not all bad news.

Edited by Simply Paul
Link to comment
I've enjoyed many - almost all, actually - Virts that I've done (never found one muggled) but the decision was taken in the US to return GeoCACHING back to its physical cache roots. It's a shame in many ways, but I can understand their thinking. Now Waymarking is running, anyone wanting to place a virtual will be sent there. But a backdoor has been left open to us (hooray!) in the shape of offset-multis. The site of interest is still seen and there's a logbook to sign - even if it's in a box a bit of a walk away. There's no conformation emails to bounce back, get lost or go unanswered as the owner's on holiday... So, not all bad news.

I've been saying that for ages SP but no one listens to me :(:unsure: Anyway, couldn't agree more - I expect to see a rise in offsets now. How far away are we allowed to offset? a couple of miles????

 

Anyway - lets hope we can get round the ban this way....

Link to comment

They're not "gods" or "powers", just some other geocachers. It was discussed ad nauseam at the time: perhaps you didn't put your views forward strongly enough (if at all). Oddly enough, even the guy who runs Groundspeak frequently joins in these forums (fora?) :unsure: . I've never come across any other business where even the CEO or MD is so accessible in a public forum.

 

If you can see that things are moving away from how you like them, why not air your views in the geocaching threads, and challenge Jeremy directly? It's probably a bit late now for virtuals though!

 

HH

Link to comment

I was always a fan of virtuals especially abroad as there always seemed to be at least one in a major city. One of the advantages was that there were just enough to make it interesting and give a bit of variety. However I can understand why they have been moved to Waymarking.

 

Geocaching has grown a lot over the last couple of years and I believe that we would have been swamped with them if they hadn't brought to a halt. For everyone who has a really good idea for a virtual I bet there would have been 10 pathetic ones set up just to boost placed figures. After all they are an easy option as (generally) no maintenance is needed and they can be placed quickly without much effort. At least when a container is placed a little thought is needed. I always thought earthcaches would have quickly gone the same way. I thoroughly enjoyed Jan and the Percey Boys Dee Bore earthcache because it neded a bit of planning and was clearly well thought out but I have noticed a few which seem to be of no special interest whatsoever. The same argument could be applied to locationless caches. I am very sorry to see them go but without any quality control hundreds of them would have appeared over the last couple of years and you can guarantee that someone would have done a McDonalds one by now. Everyone would have placed at least one just to get another icon. I strongly believe that if there had been no ban on virtuals then the whole face of geocaching would have changed and we would have been on this board moaning about the lack of traditional caches.

 

That was a bit longer than I thought it was going to be. :unsure:

Link to comment

"Do The Powers That Be Listen To Users ?"

 

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!...

 

in my opinion, No

 

Still, it's very sweet that some people continue to think so. Read some of Jeremy's proclamations from on high in the general forums and decide what YOU think.

Edited by Alibags
Link to comment

Virtuals really hit a low point when someone created a series for road signs down a highway.

 

Im not sad at all at seeing them go and a few more offset caches (keep em simple please) will be no hardship we may see an explosion in micros though :antenna:

 

Im looking forward to some creative hides and finding these locations we have previously avoided.

 

NB

I believe Jeremy allways listens just like i always listen to my children doesnt mean i act on it but i always listen :antenna:

Link to comment
It's just bad Customer management really!

"Customer" is an interesting word to use.

 

How many GC.com members are actual "customers" in that they are paying for their membership?

 

I don't have any statistics, but I'd be prepared to bet that a big percentage (myself included) are freeloaders.

 

In my (and many other "freeloader's") defence we still contribute to Groundspeak directly (buying TBs) etc and indirectly (setting caches, which in turn encourages other (potentially paying) members.

Link to comment
Dave from Glanton Posted on Jan 13 2006, 02:27 PM

 

"Customer" is an interesting word to use. How many GC.com members are actual "customers" in that they are paying for their membership? I don't have any statistics, but I'd be prepared to bet that a big percentage (myself included) are freeloaders.

 

It would be interesting to know - and I don't think 'non-payers' are 'freeloaders', rather that those that do pay are 'contributors'.

 

OK so Vs, Ls and Es have gawn ..... some regrets but a browse through what was 'available' showed a vast amount of dross. Just 5% of our caches were VLEs, and five of those we did without leaving our armchair. There is still a case to answer in exceptional circumstances and hopefully Jeremy can just once in a while be persuaded. As for Waymarking .... makes Big Brother seem interesting :antenna:

Link to comment
The biggest offset I've done is 18 miles (25 or more driven)

 

The biggest offset I know of is about 200 - 250 miles.

I was officially told that an offset, or in my case a puzzle, could not be any more than 1 mile away from the set co-ords, this allowing TB's to keep their mileage accurate.

 

with this said I have done puzzles that are a long way away from the set co-ords.

Link to comment
Alibags: "Do The Powers That Be Listen To Users ?"

 

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!...

 

in my opinion, No

 

Still, it's very sweet that some people continue to think so. Read some of Jeremy's proclamations from on high in the general forums and decide what YOU think.

 

At risk of looking like one of those appalling Jeremy "groupies" <_< ;

 

I just read the latest thread about the changes to geocaching.com, and it appears that Jeremy incorporated into a change suggested by budd-rc within ten minutes!

 

Few new changes

 

HH

Link to comment
Do The Powers That Be Listen To Users ?

Listen, yes.

Respond they way everyone wants (if they respond at all), no.

At some point decisions have to be made one way or the other about what is / is not, acceptable. Hardly ever does everyone totally agree.

If you want something you have to ask. Either it happens or it doesn't. Some things make little difference and get added quickly and easily (new links, changing FAQs), other things will probably never happen but Jeremy et al. are set against the idea (leader board for example). Still other things are out in the middle and either no decision is made, or put off till later when its seen how it will work out. (like website changes that apprently need bigger changed to happen first, the dang forum search comes to mind.)

Link to comment

It might have taken a while, but this may be of interest...

 

do you think the gods would ever listen ?

See this thread for an example of them not listening. First post from TPTB was in September 2004, and it still hasn't be implemented.

 

T

 

Great news! Raine has been working hard on this and has created the first official pocket query of caches along a predefined route. Once we get it through the beta testing process we'll discuss how it works.

 

In general terms, however, you upload a GPX file containing a route and it saves in our database which can be shared with other users. You can then run a pocket query against the route, indicating a distance from the route where you want the results. There are other experimental ideas but this will be generation 1 of the concept.

 

More to come.

Link to comment

It appears a lot of people were supportive of Virtual caches where you have to answer questions set at the location.

 

I agree that there should not be too many of these at a given locality, but feel they enhance the sport of caching.

 

A mixture of both especially when caching away from home is great and feel there should be new Virtuals to be allowed again.

 

Ii this view supported ? and if so do you think the gods would ever listen ?

 

When it comes to listening to geocachers the answer is yes they do. That doesn't mean that they will do what the masses would like. TPTB have their own vision of what geocaching is and what it should be. That's what they work for. That vision is a mix of what's good for geocaching, what's good for business, and personal bias.

 

As for virtuals the final scoop as I see it is this.

Virtuals are dead. Waymarking is the replacment. End of discussion.

 

That may seem harsh in that Waymarks are not Virtuals and are not an especially good replacment. However virtuals had issues that had nothing to do with geocachers liking them. Land managers also liked them over traditional caches and most cachers prefer traditional over virtual even if they also like virtual.

Link to comment

My opinion of TPTB, is that they do not listen, they have their own agenda and if they think you are wrong, then you are wrong without a qualified explanation. I know this as I recently emailed Groundspeak, their reply just was none understanding of the issue. But I guess as log as they cream $30 off you every 12 months then they ain't selling you owt! Maybe they should realize that as they sell in the UK / EU they are legally obliged to follow the Laws of these lands!

Link to comment

My opinion of TPTB, is that they do not listen, they have their own agenda and if they think you are wrong, then you are wrong without a qualified explanation. I know this as I recently emailed Groundspeak, their reply just was none understanding of the issue. But I guess as log as they cream $30 off you every 12 months then they ain't selling you owt! Maybe they should realize that as they sell in the UK / EU they are legally obliged to follow the Laws of these lands!

 

Sorry Moote but I disagree with you. I have always found gc.com open to suggestions. Just because they disagree, doesn't always make them wrong. They are like referees at a football match. They have to make hard decisions which some disagree with. Without them however, there would be annarchy and nobody would have guidelines to follow. If you disagree with a decision the referee has made, we should live with it and not throw our dummys out of the pram, otherwise a red card might be shown. :blink:

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...