Jump to content

Don't Want To See The Member-only Caches


explorerboy

Recommended Posts

I'm not a premium member and I don't feel like I have to. Because I live in Eugene, OR, I have over 400 caches to work on. I don't need any more to fill my schedule. Something that annoys me, though, is when I see member only caches in the list near my home. Why can't you just make it so that they are hid from normal members? :P:blink:B)

Edited by explorerboy
Link to comment

I don't have a problem with members only caches. They should be there. I don't care myself, but I think it's obnoxious to say that there is one there, but not give any details.

In answer to test dummy, I don't like it when people are money hogs and try to get more and more people to give them more and more money. The people behind geocaching.com have been awsome in this respect. Thanks guys!

Link to comment

If I put out a really hard puzzle and a VERY well pretty high dollar container I am going to make it member's only because I don't want to run the chance a muggler by mistakes stumbles on it.

'

now explain that. I've seen remarks like, "I made it hard so it wouldn't get muggled" or in your case, You make it MOC so it won't get muggled... like they have access to the site? Well anyone could but if that's so, is it really "muggled" then? Being MOC won't keep someone from stumbling across it by mistake.

 

I know I know.. being a pita here but it seems like the wrong wording and not picking on you, yours was just the handy post for my question :blink:

Link to comment

I'm not a premium member and I don't feel like I have to. Because I live in Eugene, OR, I have over 400 caches to work on. I don't need any more to fill my schedule. Something that annoys me, though, is when I see member only caches in the list near my home. Why can't you just make it so that they are hid from normal members? :ph34r:B):P

If you become a premium member you can ignore them. :blink:

Link to comment

1. Groundspeak wants to you to see there are members only caches so you know what you are missing :P

 

2. You could be like this guy who paid for a premium membership thinking there would be more caches to find nearby, and discovered there weren't any. At least you can decide if there are enough MOCs to make a premium membership worthwhile :blink:

Link to comment

 

2. You could be like this guy who paid for a premium membership thinking there would be more caches to find nearby, and discovered there weren't any. At least you can decide if there are enough MOCs to make a premium membership worthwhile :blink:

 

It's funny you say that because the only 2 member-only caches I know of near me are a good 40 or 50 miles out on Long Island. You'd think in a big area like metro NY there'd be a lot more.

Link to comment

I started caching for 1 day prior to becoming a premium member. $30 per year is VERY CHEAP for the amount of extra features and the amount of fun I've had with this hobby. In fact after having my own coin minted, a line of personal trackable patches, making multiple signature items and purchasing about 250 different geocoins and travel bugs.......$30 seems like a drop in the bucket. Pay the price my friend....you'll be glad ya did. If I were Geocaching I'd say $50 next year, but what and who do I know?

Edited by Castle Man
Link to comment

I'm not a premium member and I don't feel like I have to. Because I live in Eugene, OR, I have over 400 caches to work on. I don't need any more to fill my schedule. Something that annoys me, though, is when I see member only caches in the list near my home. Why can't you just make it so that they are hid from normal members? :blink:<_<:)

Thats an interesting request. My question would be, what happens when someone places a cache that turns out to be within 528ft of a MOC cache? I mean if they were made 'invisable' how can you expect all cache placers to respect cache proxmity (at least within gc.com) ?

There are already sometimes complains along these lines... someone places a cache, but since they aren't allowed to see the 'exact' coords, they get it a little too close and the cache is rejected. There aren't that many MOCs, but I could see making them invisible causing more complains and angst from cache placers.

Link to comment

1. Groundspeak wants to you to see there are members only caches so you know what you are missing

 

Got to agree and that's why its appropriate. Simple principle, you want people to buy your product you have to let them know what it is but not let them have it until they pay. Nothing wrong with that.

 

If it annoys that much maybe you should spend the $30. You'll find the premium membership is cheap at the price.

 

JD

Link to comment

I have no clue where these caches are! So how can i check if one of my caches is too close?!

 

Please...this is not meant as a shot or flame.

 

Am I the only one that sees an irony in a request to have programing time spent to allow someone to not see what they are not paying for? This type of programming request is one of the multitude of things the $2.50 a month supports.

Link to comment

I have no clue where these caches are! So how can i check if one of my caches is too close?!

I'm not sure if your joking or being serious. If you want to find a MOC, just run a search like you normally one. If see a listing that has a keyhole next to it, thats a MOC (Example list), and if your not a premium member you won't be able to view the page.

If that icon wasn't shown, some cacher might place a cache too close since they can't easily run a search and see the listing. (its also a problem with multis and puzzles, but those could at least know they're in the area)

Link to comment

If see a listing that has a keyhole next to it, thats a MOC

 

FWIW, that's a silhouette of a person, not a keyhole. small_profile.gif

 

I once created an icon for an application that I thought was obviously a white arrow pointing up, inside a blue circle. Later I found out that some people thought it was a pair of headphones.

Link to comment

If see a listing that has a keyhole next to it, thats a MOC

 

FWIW, that's a silhouette of a person, not a keyhole. small_profile.gif

 

I once created an icon for an application that I thought was obviously a white arrow pointing up, inside a blue circle. Later I found out that some people thought it was a pair of headphones.

:( You could be right, I just always thought since the page is 'locked' that it being a keyhole made more sense :D

keyhole.gif

Link to comment

If see a listing that has a keyhole next to it, thats a MOC

 

FWIW, that's a silhouette of a person, not a keyhole. small_profile.gif

 

I once created an icon for an application that I thought was obviously a white arrow pointing up, inside a blue circle. Later I found out that some people thought it was a pair of headphones.

:( You could be right, I just always thought since the page is 'locked' that it being a keyhole made more sense :(

keyhole.gif

 

I always thought it was the top of Godzilla's head in front of a Japanese flag :D

Link to comment

I don't have a problem with members only caches. They should be there. I don't care myself, but I think it's obnoxious to say that there is one there, but not give any details.

In answer to test dummy, I don't like it when people are money hogs and try to get more and more people to give them more and more money. The people behind geocaching.com have been awsome in this respect. Thanks guys!

 

There are caches that are not MOC that I don't want to do. Fortunately I'm a PM so that problem is taken care of via the ignore option.

 

Now, if hiding MOC keeps non-PMs from logging them, I'm all for it. My opinion is, mak'em 'PM Only' all the way, or get rid of them.

Link to comment

The MOC caches need to show up. Non PMs need to be able to check if caches they're going to place are too near other cache, including MOCs.

There were several similar posts that said something to this effect -- not picking you personally.

 

This argument does not work at all. There are many many caches whose true locations are invisible: stages of multis, puzzle caches.

 

This is why TPTB require you to submit the actual location as an invisible waypoint. Only the reviewers can see if there are any 'invisible' caches within the 528 ft of your submission.

Edited by wheetree
Link to comment

The MOC caches need to show up. Non PMs need to be able to check if caches they're going to place are too near other cache, including MOCs.

There were several similar posts that said something to this effect -- not picking you personally.

 

This argument does not work at all. There are many many caches whose true locations are invisible: stages of multis, puzzle caches.

 

This is why TPTB require you to submit the actual location as an invisible waypoint. Only the reviewers can see if there are any 'invisible' caches within the 528 ft of your submission.

But it's still the hiders responsibility to check whatever they can check, and that includes MOC traditionals and the 1st stage of MOC multis. I'd wager that the vast majority of proximity issues with submission are caused by things the cache hider could have checked, if they had bothered to.

Link to comment
The MOC caches need to show up. Non PMs need to be able to check if caches they're going to place are too near other cache, including MOCs.
There were several similar posts that said something to this effect -- not picking you personally.

 

This argument does not work at all. There are many many caches whose true locations are invisible: stages of multis, puzzle caches.

 

This is why TPTB require you to submit the actual location as an invisible waypoint. Only the reviewers can see if there are any 'invisible' caches within the 528 ft of your submission.

But it's still the hiders responsibility to check whatever they can check, and that includes MOC traditionals and the 1st stage of MOC multis. I'd wager that the vast majority of proximity issues with submission are caused by things the cache hider could have checked, if they had bothered to.

Even if it's not the hider's responsibility to check what they can, it is still in their best interest to do so. If you can avoid having to go back out to nudge your cache 100 feet west, why wouldn't you?

 

Back to the topic at hand, even if it wasn't necessary for MCOs to show up on your list to verify that your cache isn't too close to another, I think they should be left as they are. As others have stated, this is for the benefit of Groundspeak as well as the player. Groundspeak gets to give you a little reminder to become a PM without overt advertisements and a player who is on the fence about becoming a PM is able to see how many MOCs are in his/her area.

Link to comment

I don't have a problem with members only caches. They should be there. I don't care myself, but I think it's obnoxious to say that there is one there, but not give any details.

In answer to test dummy, I don't like it when people are money hogs and try to get more and more people to give them more and more money. The people behind geocaching.com have been awsome in this respect. Thanks guys!

If the ignore list works for you, use that. That should make them effectivly dissapear.

Link to comment

You can Easily run a Pocket Query that eliminates members only caches.

 

Oh Wait! That is a Premium Members feature. As well as Bookmarks, better map features, the list goes on and on.

 

Premium member features are just that, extras. It takes manpower to bring these into existence. THAT costs additional money. If some members can't fork out less than 9 cents per day for features that are worth Every Penny of that, then so be it! You get what you pay for.

 

Personally, caching is expensive. I figure that the average cache takes about 10 miles of travel find. Lets say that the average vehicle costs 25 cents per mile to operate, not including gasoline. Lets also say that the average cacher gets 20 miles per gallon and that gas is $2.00 per gallon. Both of these estimates are modest at best. If we stop there, neglecting all other costs, we have $3.50 cost per cache. Lots of things effect this cost. If geocaching.com costs us a minimal percent of the total cost ... lets say 3 percent (that is on the order of 1/3 of a typical tax on a purchase), we get approximately 10 cents per day.

 

I don't know about you, but I find about 3 caches per day on average. That makes my per cache geocaching.com expense about 3 cents.

 

If I take a wrong turn, or the road I need to use to get to my next cache is no longer open (closed, private, never really existed), my additional cost to detour to the cache will Easily cost 3 cents. It may cost me 30 cents here in Texas. If I choose to leave the car running because I want the air conditioning to stay on while I get a park and grab, that will Easily cost 3 cents, if not 5 times that.

 

My point: Anyone NOT spending the Easy $2.50 per month for Premium Membership either really isn't a geocacher or doesn't really know what finding a cache costs!

 

DON'T BE SO CHEAP !!!

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