Jump to content

Good Bye Utah Admin


DeViDe
Followers 8

Recommended Posts

Well I hope some of these people find out because it VIOLATES emplyment practices.  But firing always entitles you to unemployment pay.  Yes it does not cause insurance to increase, but companies find some reason to drive people away rather then fire them.  I have seen it numerous times.  The same is true for employee injury I have seen many companies spin it so that the injuries do not reflect the companies true injury rate. 

 

Your lucky you have your own business.

 

Cheers

I don't have my own business. Currently, I work for the gubmint.

 

You are incorrect about automatically getting unemployment. I have testified at several unemployment hearings. I have always come prepared and the fired individuals have not collected unemployment.

 

Also, unemployment premiums go up or down based on the number of people who have been granted unemployment benefits after leaving a company.

 

Further, it giving information about the leaving of a past employee does not violate any employment practices (laws). Many companies do not give this information for fear of being sued for libel.

LTC Bell is correct. In fact, getting fired for cause is a pretty good way to ensure you WON'T get unemployment benefits. As is quitting.

 

Although, I once collected unemployment after quitting a job when I successfully argued to the unemployment commission that I was employed in a hostile work environment that left me no choice but to quit.

Link to comment

Oh.. so much invective here. Half-truths, anger. Lets cut to the chase:

 

1. GC.com has a right o run its business as it sees fit.

 

2. The real issue is about controlling geocaching for profit. Not gc.com, but geocaching the sport. That is why the current topic is an issue. That is why so many other sites have come and gone, why access is closed, why open discussion is not allowed, etc. UtahAdmin is challenging the geocahing giant and they don't like it. That is to be expected. This will work out in the end and hopefully we will all be better off for it.

Link to comment

I don't know about you all but all this stuff is getting out of hand. A lot of reacting and over reacting is going on all over the gc.com forums.

 

It's friday, how about we all just go out and cache for awhile???

Have a good time and maybe I'll see you out in the woods or a event this weekend.

Shilo

Link to comment
I wish I had the time, resources and inclination to start my own cache-listing site. I can't wait till someone else does and gets it right.

Perhaps if you don't have the time, resources and inclination to start up your own you shouldn't BP&M about those that have.

 

You know, I think this needs to be said in all the grief-filled threads that are ongoing right now.....if this hobby, the way its handled on this website, or any other aspect is truly bothiering you (and by "you", I mean everyone and anyone that is in a tizzy) as much as you'd have us believe, maybe you need to find a less stressful hobby. Or perhaps you should go find a cache or two and try to remember....ITS A GAME!

 

That being said, I think I'll go back into Off-Topic.....

Link to comment
Or maybe we should stop coming to the forums.

 

Geesh, I have a great time when out geocaching and placing caches. The forums are what stress me out. Too much drama at times.

:drama:

 

Exactly why there are plenty of us that have retreated to the Off-Topic area. There's plenty of cachers in there that have many times more posts in there than out here, mostly due to all the negativity out here.

Link to comment
In this situation, the discussion of a yet-unfinished policy was used to recruit members to a commercial website. It was immediately realized from the content of UtahAdmin's email that this information was leveraged outside of the Admin Only Forum for the benefit of his commercial web site. Not only was Groundspeak upset by this, but other moderators were offended by this breach of trust.

 

This is the only meaningful bit of information I've seen in the whole 3 page thread.

Link to comment

What some people fail to understand, or if they do understand, they want ignore the fact that Groundspeak is a business. The objective of a business is to make money and be profitable. Jeremy has never eluded to the fact that this site was non-profit or that he didn't intend to make money from Geocaching.com.

 

I've seen a lot of pugnacious people out there that given any chance will try to portray Groundspeak in a bad light. Once again,Groundspeak's goal is to be profitable. They saw the craze for Geocoins, and as any heads up business would do, they moved to capitalize on the current market.

 

Utah Admin then made a move to stymie their efforts. Basically there was nothing wrong with his move, except for the fact that he was a team member of Groundspeak. He instantly became a conflict of interest. He had insider knowledge of what Groundspeak was planning and he took steps to counter those plans. Therefore he caused a breach of trust.

 

For those that don't like the fact that Groundspeak attempts to make a profit, think about where we would be if they folded and called it quits?

 

El Diablo

Edited by El Diablo
Link to comment

Hear, hear, El Diablo. I agree fully.

 

I have no problem with Groundspeak working as a business model, especially one that does let large numbers of people use it and its resources for free. And I also agree that if Groundspeak got out of the geocaching business, geocaching would suffer. If it's not seen as a business, one that is profitable enough to support itself and the owners and managers, it will fail, and so will the network of cache listings it provides. Can you imagine having to go to five, ten, or twenty listing sites just to get the information now centralized here?

 

Also, for all of the whining and hand-wringing about how evil Jeremy and Groundspeak are, can you imagine if it was sold out to a corporation like Disney? Does anyone honestly think he or she would have any say whatsoever in that arena? I also doubt that you'd have much free content in that venue either...

 

The simple fact here is that Utah Admin, however great a guy he is, didn't live up to the recognized code of the Admin Forum by using inside information to subvert a policy designed to keep the company financially soluble, and as such, should have made his own decision to leave, rather than wait until asked to.

Link to comment
...Also, for all of the whining and hand-wringing about how evil Jeremy and Groundspeak are, can you imagine if it was sold out to a corporation like Disney?  Does anyone honestly think he or she would have any say whatsoever in that arena?  I also doubt that you'd have much free content in that venue either... 

Yeah, and I bet the Mouse wouldn't allow hamster caching either... :(:P

Link to comment
...Also, for all of the whining and hand-wringing about how evil Jeremy and Groundspeak are, can you imagine if it was sold out to a corporation like Disney?  Does anyone honestly think he or she would have any say whatsoever in that arena?  I also doubt that you'd have much free content in that venue either... 

Yeah, and I bet the Mouse wouldn't allow hamster caching either... :(:P

Maybe not, but the idea of "E Ticket" caches does sound good.

Link to comment
In this situation, the discussion of a yet-unfinished policy was used to recruit members to a commercial website. It was immediately realized from the content of UtahAdmin's email that this information was leveraged outside of the Admin Only Forum for the benefit of his commercial web site. Not only was Groundspeak upset by this, but other moderators were offended by this breach of trust.

 

Not at all true! He is not that kind of person and you who have worked with him for years KNOW that!

Link to comment
...Basically there was nothing wrong with his move, except for the fact that he was a team member of Groundspeak. He instantly became a conflict of interest. He had insider knowledge of what Groundspeak was planning and he took steps to counter those plans. Therefore he caused a breach of trust....

I agree with you half way. You are correct that there was nothing wrong with his move except for being a volunteer for grounspeak.

 

The letter in question was one designed to create traffice for his site. Traffic is vital for any web business. He capatalized on the crackdown in the Geocoin forum to say that you could discuss those things being banned on his site. So far so good unless Groundspeak doesn't want those things being discussed on any other site. I don't know if they did or didn't have that desire.

 

The other items in the letter addressed all the types of discussions that did take place in the Geocoin forum and may very well have mirrored some of the issues that were also being discussed in the admin forum. It's a moot point since the bottom line is he was well within his rights to disucss what types of things can be discussed in his forum.

 

There was no breach of trust. For there to be one Groundspeak would have to have a formal agreement that put bounds on his website (and all other approver and mod websites/geocaching business).

 

There was a conflict of interest. Groundspeaks. Not UtahAdmins. Grounspeaks more recent moves make their interests in the geocoin arena pretty clear. It's not in grounspeaks interests to allow discussion of coin sales that don't make them money.

 

Lastly even if there were a breach of trust, it's a double edged sword because even if that letter had never been sent by Utah Amin the rules just announced have put a crimp on some of the traffic that this site generated for their site (but not vice versa Thier site does generate busines for Groundspeak). Since Groundspeak doesn't make coins, doesn't design coins, it was no skin off their back to allow some mutual back scratching since the reality was both sites benefited from each other.

 

I'd love to see those admin forums, because that could confirm or deny what I've seen on all this.

Link to comment

It's all about the mighty dollar. I think we all see that. Sad but true. Groundspeak has the right to remove anyone at anytime,if they feel the need. I think the belt was tightened a bit too much in this issue IMHO. I am very tired of all the hostility in these forums since the new rules. That should tell TPTB a little something. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Link to comment
It's all about the mighty dollar. I think we all see that. Sad but true.

Why is that sad? You don't think that businesses have the right to make money? I assume that you work and the company that you work for strives to make money. Also their ability to make money pays your salary. Why would you expect anything else from this business?

 

It puzzeles me that some people think Groundspeak should donate their time and resources to provide a service for free. Groundspeak provides a service for profit. They provide that service for a fair market value.

 

The majority of people that complain about this site making money are ones that are jealous that someone came up with an idea that they weren't capable of coming up with on their own.

 

El Diablo

Link to comment

Man I am really hating this thread -- I am now having to agree with El Diablo, all is lost. ;)

 

Yes hello, of course it is about the mighty dollar. And what is the problem with that? The possibility of profit is the factor that drives people to take a chance and try something. It is a great system.

 

I think to some degree people still have the feeling that this is some guy running this site on a couple of spare computers out of his basement. Yes things were a little different then. But it has grown beyond that, it is a business and without the ability to make money there would have been no reason to take the chances needed to make it grow. Hey I feel the same way about major league sports. When I was growing up I had the feeling it was about people that really enjoyed the game. It is not that way any more, millions of dollars are thrown around like it is just beer money. And it is allowed to continue because the fans don't seem to mind being played the fool and continue to support it. Well as long as they do it will not stop. Good for all of them, I don't watch pro sports at all any more.

 

If anybody does not like the fact that people are making money on this activity, then don't involve yourself in it. Or go start something that is not based on a profit model. Or go start something where you make all the money. Hey if it works, good for you. But if you are in business to make money and someone who you allow to have more information than just the average customer is using it to hit your bottom line then it would be silly to allow them to continue doing that.

 

I don't really know if that is the case here, but for the moment lets say it is. I don't see a problem with that. It would also seem that gc.com gave the person a way out so that there would be no need for the dirty laundry to be aired. The person choose a different route, as I said before, it was their choice. Again it would seem they wanted to kick it up a notch, again I have no problem with that. But don't expect that gc.com is just going to roll over and wait to be kicked in the backside without showing their teeth a little.

 

Do you have any idea how silly this all sounds if I am taking gc.com side on this?

Link to comment
It's all about the mighty dollar. I think we all see that. Sad but true.

Why is that sad? You don't think that businesses have the right to make money? I assume that you work and the company that you work for strives to make money. Also their ability to make money pays your salary. Why would you expect anything else from this business?

 

It puzzeles me that some people think Groundspeak should donate their time and resources to provide a service for free. Groundspeak provides a service for profit. They provide that service for a fair market value.

 

The majority of people that complain about this site making money are ones that are jealous that someone came up with an idea that they weren't capable of coming up with on their own.

 

El Diablo

I believe that any business has the right to make money. It's certain business practices that get my goat. I, like thousands of others don't use this site for free,I pay for the membership. Why can't some folks see that part? As for corporate america...salary...paychecks...most companys tend to screw their lower tier employees over. I have seen good people laid off because the boss came in short on his bottom line and was going to lose his yearly bonus and the only way to pick up capital and get the bonus was to chop a head or two. When I joined my company almost twenty years ago...I was told by my boss..."If you want to get anywhere in this company,you have to figure a way to cut heads". To this day I have not cut anyone that did not deserve it. Flash forward twenty years and now I don't even have the power to cut heads. Way too many politics. Anyhow, I do respect your comments. Do you respect mine? ;)

Link to comment
It's all about the mighty dollar. I think we all see that. Sad but true.

Why is that sad? You don't think that businesses have the right to make money? I assume that you work and the company that you work for strives to make money. Also their ability to make money pays your salary. Why would you expect anything else from this business?

 

It puzzeles me that some people think Groundspeak should donate their time and resources to provide a service for free. Groundspeak provides a service for profit. They provide that service for a fair market value.

 

The majority of people that complain about this site making money are ones that are jealous that someone came up with an idea that they weren't capable of coming up with on their own.

 

El Diablo

I believe that any business has the right to make money. It's certain business practices that get my goat. I, like thousands of others don't use this site for free,I pay for the membership. Why can't some folks see that part? As for corporate america...salary...paychecks...most companys tend to screw their lower tier employees over. I have seen good people laid off because the boss came in short on his bottom line and was going to lose his yearly bonus and the only way to pick up capital and get the bonus was to chop a head or two. When I joined my company almost twenty years ago...I was told by my boss..."If you want to get anywhere in this company,you have to figure a way to cut heads". To this day I have not cut anyone that did not deserve it. Flash forward twenty years and now I don't even have the power to cut heads. Way too many politics. Anyhow, I do respect your comments. Do you respect mine? ;)

There is nothing wrong with Groundspeak's business practice. They saw a new market and reacted to the demand.

 

I've been a manager for many years and I've had to lay off people, and I've fired many. Never have I done it for personal gain. Sometimes it's necessary to lay off 10 people to save the jobs of 50 people.

 

Groundspeak is a business and they have employees. They have an obligation to protect those employees that depend upon their sucess. Besides those employees there are countless people that have made an income from Groundspeak, myself included.

 

On the surface we look at the fact that Utah Admin was released from his position. I'm sure he was a great Reviewer (Thanks Co Admin for the proper term.) but if we look beneath the surface it's clear that he started a project that was detrimental to Groundspeaks sucess.

 

It's very easy and convenient to look at it on the surface. However, Jeremy has an obligaton to his employees and advertisers. If it means letting go an individual that counterminds the efforts of the company, then he made the right decision.

 

El Diablo

Link to comment
It's all about the mighty dollar. I think we all see that. Sad but true.

Why is that sad? You don't think that businesses have the right to make money? I assume that you work and the company that you work for strives to make money. Also their ability to make money pays your salary. Why would you expect anything else from this business?

 

It puzzeles me that some people think Groundspeak should donate their time and resources to provide a service for free. Groundspeak provides a service for profit. They provide that service for a fair market value.

 

The majority of people that complain about this site making money are ones that are jealous that someone came up with an idea that they weren't capable of coming up with on their own.

 

El Diablo

I believe that any business has the right to make money. It's certain business practices that get my goat. I, like thousands of others don't use this site for free,I pay for the membership. Why can't some folks see that part? As for corporate america...salary...paychecks...most companys tend to screw their lower tier employees over. I have seen good people laid off because the boss came in short on his bottom line and was going to lose his yearly bonus and the only way to pick up capital and get the bonus was to chop a head or two. When I joined my company almost twenty years ago...I was told by my boss..."If you want to get anywhere in this company,you have to figure a way to cut heads". To this day I have not cut anyone that did not deserve it. Flash forward twenty years and now I don't even have the power to cut heads. Way too many politics. Anyhow, I do respect your comments. Do you respect mine? ;)

There is nothing wrong with Groundspeak's business practice. They saw a new market and reacted to the demand.

 

I've been a manager for many years and I've had to lay off people, and I've fired many. Never have I done it for personal gain. Sometimes it's necessary to lay off 10 people to save the jobs of 50 people.

 

Groundspeak is a business and they have employees. They have an obligation to protect those employees that depend upon their sucess. Besides those employees there are countless people that have made an income from Groundspeak, myself included.

 

On the surface we look at the fact that Utah Admin was released from his position. I'm sure he was a great Reviewer (Thanks Co Admin for the proper term.) but if we look beneath the surface it's clear that he started a project that was detrimental to Groundspeaks sucess.

 

It's very easy and convenient to look at it on the surface. However, Jeremy has an obligaton to his employees and advertisers. If it means letting go an individual that counterminds the efforts of the company, then he made the right decision.

 

El Diablo

We will have to agree to disagree on a few things. If you have earned a salary from Groundspeak, as you stated, then your comments are somewhat biased. I see nothing wrong with Groundspeak as a whole, just certain practices. Microsoft had a few bad business practices and look what happened. I am sure Utah Admin did a great job, I just don't think it should have been ironed out here. Frankly...I am suprised that this thread is still going. I wish Utah Admin the best, and long live the El Diablo Hiking Staff!! :lol:

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 8
×
×
  • Create New...