Jump to content

Shocking


Recommended Posts

Quote from geocaching.com:

 

'The traditional geocaching game will always be free.'

 

What do I find today....

 

'Sorry, the owner of this listing has made it viewable to subscribers only. Visit the premium member page to find out how to upgrade your account to a premium member.'

 

Dosn't look very free to me :o

Link to comment

Quote from geocaching.com:

 

'The traditional geocaching game will always be free.'

 

What do I find today....

 

'Sorry, the owner of this listing has made it viewable to subscribers only. Visit the premium member page to find out how to upgrade your account to a premium member.'

 

Dosn't look very free to me :o

Sounds like a "Members Only" cache:-

 

Quote from Geocaching.com:-

 

"Member Only Caches

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. (Note: Member Only caches may not be any better than public geocaches. Each cache is managed by its cache owner.)"

 

These are set as Member Only caches by the cache setters themselves. Don't worry, there are very few of these type and are highly unlikely to become more prolific. :o:o

Link to comment

Becoming a Premium Member is not such a big deal for the benefits involved.

 

Considering the dollar / pound exchange rate at the moment, there's never been a better time either.

 

I personally would far rather pay a bit more and have some servers that dn;t go down at busy times, and I suspect I am not alone in that.

 

For some it is a contentious issue, personally, I find it simple, it is a cheap, really good deal for so much fun in a year!!!! Compare the cost of one years membership to a night in the pub ... :o

Link to comment

its worth paying just to get unlimited pocket queries......

 

or search by counties......

 

oh well we can but dream.

 

ps

 

most of my future caches will be member only ones hopefully to encourage more to sign their lives away.

Link to comment

What do I find today....

 

'Sorry, the owner of this listing has made it viewable to subscribers only. Visit the premium member page to find out how to upgrade your account to a premium member.'

 

Dosn't look very free to me :o

 

What you may find is caches associated with an event are set to members only for the first few hours/days to shorten the odd of attendees bagging them first.

 

Is this the case with the caches you have identified?.

 

The few hours I've been without premium membership due to a renewal problem has had me tearing my hair out, its certainly worth the £15 each year. Anyone know how to re-enable a subscription that has dropped after a few hours?

Link to comment

I think its good to be a prmium member just for the fact you are contibuting back into the geo community think of how much webspace is used by this including each members logs. thats a whole lot of something for nothing. so why not make it a whole lot more of something for very little.

Link to comment

I don't really have an opinion one way or another....

 

However, when it comes to releasing caches, I make them premium member only for the 1st 24 hours.... at least then only those who pay up get a chance for the FTF!

 

Lots of people do that around here!

Link to comment
Quote from geocaching.com:

 

'The traditional geocaching game will always be free.'

If all caches were members only, wouldn't it put off new cachers, and rather undermine one of the core values and principles of caching? With 18,000 to choose from, and only 164 PM caches, I'd say do another one. And if you *really* want to do the one you're looking at, contact the owner and ask if they'll bend their rules for you. They can only say no* :drama:

 

*Although when I've done a PM cache by accident while out with a group of PM cachers in the past, they've always said yes. Generosity of spirit is not dead.

Link to comment

*Although when I've done a PM cache by accident while out with a group of PM cachers in the past, they've always said yes. Generosity of spirit is not dead.

 

Nothing wrong in a non-PM logging a PM cache they've completed, I've done it in the past

Link to comment

Don't forget that Reviewers get paid double for each Members Only cache we review. That's why they always get published first.

:drama:

Is that a double scotch?

With around 1000 caches published last month that would mean the reviewers are permanently intoxicated. Reflecting on it that does makes some sense. :-)

Link to comment

I don't really have an opinion one way or another....

 

However, when it comes to releasing caches, I make them premium member only for the 1st 24 hours.... at least then only those who pay up get a chance for the FTF!

 

Lots of people do that around here!

 

Thats like holding a race but only telling half the runners.

 

Instanty notification gives the advantage to PM's allready.

Link to comment

Don't forget that Reviewers get paid double for each Members Only cache we review. That's why they always get published first.

:wub:

Is that a double scotch?

With around 1000 caches published last month that would mean the reviewers are permanently intoxicated. Reflecting on it that does makes some sense. :-)

 

You might be describing my 2 colleagues :sad: but I'm a Sparkling Water man [preferably Perrier :wub: ]

 

As for double pay for Reviewing PM cache's, you don't get that benefit until you've been Reviewing for 12 months :drama:. It's all the backhanders in my case which moves em to the top :wub::sad:

Link to comment

Don't forget that Reviewers get paid double for each Members Only cache we review. That's why they always get published first.

:sad:

Is that a double scotch?

With around 1000 caches published last month that would mean the reviewers are permanently intoxicated. Reflecting on it that does makes some sense. :-)

 

you've met them then!!! :drama:

 

this has been hashed over so many times. to be honest £15 is hardly much for anyone to pay for a years worth of fun, and if you don't want to then you're missing out on very little. like most things caching is a priviledge not a right. :sad:

Link to comment

Quote from geocaching.com:

 

'The traditional geocaching game will always be free.'

 

What do I find today....

 

'Sorry, the owner of this listing has made it viewable to subscribers only. Visit the premium member page to find out how to upgrade your account to a premium member.'

 

Dosn't look very free to me :ph34r:

 

Just send me the waypoint and I'll send you the co-ordinates.... Then it will be free!!!!!!!!

 

:D:P:P

Link to comment

Its the best £15.50 ive spent in a long time. When you do your PQs and paperless caching you save SO much money on ink & paper. Also, having the option to see who and when people look at your member only caches is a lot of fun. We know who you are FTF hounds!

Edited by GeoCornetto
Link to comment

*Although when I've done a PM cache by accident while out with a group of PM cachers in the past, they've always said yes. Generosity of spirit is not dead.

 

Nothing wrong in a non-PM logging a PM cache they've completed, I've done it in the past

 

I don't think ALL PM cache setters would agree with that bold statement!!!

Link to comment

No doubt I'll upset 90% of people with this remark, but I completely agree that there should be some members-only caches. Not loads and loads, but a few, as there are now. We pay to help keep gc.com running, why shouldn't we have a little reward? :rolleyes:

 

And no, to be honest, if I had a members-only cache, I would not be happy about a non-subscriber logging it. It sort of defeats the object then. :huh:

Link to comment

 

And no, to be honest, if I had a members-only cache, I would not be happy about a non-subscriber logging it. It sort of defeats the object then. :rolleyes:

 

I would object to a person with a members only cache logging one of mine - it doesn't seem fair... :huh:

 

Edited to add: According to my profile I'm a Premium Member - I'm not...

Edited by The Golem
Link to comment

 

And no, to be honest, if I had a members-only cache, I would not be happy about a non-subscriber logging it. It sort of defeats the object then. :o

 

I would object to a person with a members only cache logging one of mine - it doesn't seem fair... :o

 

Edited to add: According to my profile I'm a Premium Member - I'm not...

That is were you don't actually have any choice. To place a cache you must allow any cacher to be able to find and log it, with no exceptions. A paying member has a little bit of leeway on this rule as they can place a members only cache. Which means they must allow all paying members to be able to find and log the cache, but as they pay for the privilege, they do not have to let non paying members log it if they do not wish them to. Finding it is out of their control though.

 

Now it doesn't matter if you like this rule or not, but it is there. If you wish to place caches, then you don't have much choice about it. Just like I don't have much choice about people getting the services that I pay to, for free.

 

So to sum up, it doesn't seem fair that you have access to thousands of caches for free, but I only have access to a select few extra caches at an extra cost. It really does annoy me people who get something for nothing and expect more? :)

Link to comment

What amuses* me is how people are adamant that they won’t spent fifteen odd quid because of some bizarre principle but they’ll drive hundreds of miles at great cost without batting an eyelid in order to find a bit of plastic. C’mon, people, it’s only fifteen quid, for heaven’s sake.

*it actually irritates the heck out of me, truth be told.

Link to comment

HH, surly the services you pay for are the premium ones (the clue's in the name) which non-paying members don't have access to? The general use of GC.com is free.

 

The Golem seems an odd choice of person to moan to about the lack of premium-members only caches. He's not one, so can't place them.

 

What really annoys me is people taking a moral high ground they've bought not earned, who bang on about a sport being free to play, while enjoying all of the advantages their paid membership affords them.

 

The original post to this thread includes the very important sentence from the first days of Geocaching.com and Groundspeak (a profit-making organisation) - 'The traditional geocaching game will always be free.' If you don't like it, write to Jeremy. He's the only one who can change it.

 

What amuses* me is how people are adamant that they won’t spent fifteen odd quid because of some bizarre principle but they’ll drive hundreds of miles at great cost without batting an eyelid in order to find a bit of plastic. C’mon, people, it’s only fifteen quid, for heaven’s sake.

*it actually irritates the heck out of me, truth be told.

Put yourself in my (and other non-paying members') shoes for a moment. The 'bizarre' principle of which you speak is the fact I don't have a data cable for my GPS, or a PDA, or any of the equipment needed to be a paperless cacher. My £15 would be better spent on placing caches than on services I couldn't use and don't want to use. Is that really so bizarre?

If it irritates you that much, I'd be happy to accept a gift subscription.

 

Edit to add a missing L to Pay. Toupee?

Edited by Simply Paul
Link to comment

 

So to sum up, it doesn't seem fair that you have access to thousands of caches for free, but I only have access to a select few extra caches at an extra cost. It really does annoy me people who get something for nothing and expect more? :o

 

No EVERYBODY has access to thousands of caches for free as the OP has found on the website..

 

Quote from geocaching.com:

 

'The traditional geocaching game will always be free.'

 

 

What premium membership pays for is the extras (PQs/Instant notifications/the ability to find MO caches etc) and while I think the $30 a year is worth it for the PQs, I dont believe that any cacher would believe that $30 was a good deal for an extra few caches???? The only reason we pay for premium membership is to get the extras - definitely not the PMO caches (which we wont do anyway until they are open to all)

Link to comment

Surly the services you pay for are the premium ones (the clue's in the name) which non-paying members don't have access to? The general use of GC.com is free.

 

The Golem seems an odd choice of person to moan to about the lack of premium-members only caches. He's not one, so can't place them.

 

What really annoys me is people taking a moral high ground they've bought not earned, who bang on about a sport being free to pay, while enjoying all of the advantages their paid membership affords them.

 

The original post to this thread includes the very important sentence from the first days of Geocaching.com and Groundspeak (a profit-making organisation) - 'The traditional geocaching game will always be free.' If you don't like it, write to Jeremy. He's the only one who can change it.

 

Similarly, it is quite clear when you sign up that there are members-only caches that only premium members can see. If you don't like that, write to Jeremy. He's the only one who can change it :o

Link to comment

My daughter (she is too young to be able to pay for stuff over the internet) would like an account to log caches at her next birthday do i have to pay up for her as well ?

Would her logs be deleted on any of your PM only caches ?

 

The site will probably add family memberships in tonights upgrade now ive said the above :o

Link to comment
Similarly, it is quite clear when you sign up that there are members-only caches that only premium members can see. If you don't like that, write to Jeremy. He's the only one who can change it :o
I've never complained about PM caches. People are free to set whatever they like, within the guidelines. Allowing a non PM to log a PM cache is within the capabilities of the owner, if they wish to allow it. No need to bother Jeremy with it :)
Link to comment

HH, surly the services you pay for are the premium ones (the clue's in the name) which non-paying members don't have access to? The general use of GC.com is free.

 

The Golem seems an odd choice of person to moan to about the lack of premium-members only caches. He's not one, so can't place them.

 

What really annoys me is people taking a moral high ground they've bought not earned, who bang on about a sport being free to pay, while enjoying all of the advantages their paid membership affords them.

 

The original post to this thread includes the very important sentence from the first days of Geocaching.com and Groundspeak (a profit-making organisation) - 'The traditional geocaching game will always be free.' If you don't like it, write to Jeremy. He's the only one who can change it.

 

You have totally misquoted me. I have not singled out Golem for anything. I have made a response to his remarks with my reasoning.

 

 

So to sum up, it doesn't seem fair that you have access to thousands of caches for free, but I only have access to a select few extra caches at an extra cost. It really does annoy me people who get something for nothing and expect more? :(

 

No EVERYBODY has access to thousands of caches for free as the OP has found on the website..

Do I have to spell everything out every time I make a post? I think you are being pedantic with that reply? The OP doesn't like the fact that he can't get a few others caches because he is to tight to pay for them. Plenty of free ones out there to bag. Including all of my currently active ones.

 

Surly the services you pay for are the premium ones (the clue's in the name) which non-paying members don't have access to? The general use of GC.com is free.

 

The Golem seems an odd choice of person to moan to about the lack of premium-members only caches. He's not one, so can't place them.

 

What really annoys me is people taking a moral high ground they've bought not earned, who bang on about a sport being free to pay, while enjoying all of the advantages their paid membership affords them.

 

The original post to this thread includes the very important sentence from the first days of Geocaching.com and Groundspeak (a profit-making organisation) - 'The traditional geocaching game will always be free.' If you don't like it, write to Jeremy. He's the only one who can change it.

 

Similarly, it is quite clear when you sign up that there are members-only caches that only premium members can see. If you don't like that, write to Jeremy. He's the only one who can change it :P

Nicely put.

 

My daughter (she is too young to be able to pay for stuff over the internet) would like an account to log caches at her next birthday do i have to pay up for her as well ?

Would her logs be deleted on any of your PM only caches ?

 

The site will probably add family memberships in tonights upgrade now ive said the above :D

I have the exact same situation, and every time I voice my opinion on this subject I make it clear that in such situations, I personally will allow a find to be made on any PM caches that I have.

My daughter has logged a PM cache, but I immediately sent an email explaining why, and offered for it to be deleted if this was not OK!

 

Family membership is something that would be nice to see, but difficult to maintain.

Link to comment
HH, surly the services you pay for are the premium ones (the clue's in the name) which non-paying members don't have access to? The general use of GC.com is free.

 

The Golem seems an odd choice of person to moan to about the lack of premium-members only caches. He's not one, so can't place them.

 

What really annoys me is people taking a moral high ground they've bought not earned, who bang on about a sport being free to pay, while enjoying all of the advantages their paid membership affords them.

 

The original post to this thread includes the very important sentence from the first days of Geocaching.com and Groundspeak (a profit-making organisation) - 'The traditional geocaching game will always be free.' If you don't like it, write to Jeremy. He's the only one who can change it.

You have totally misquoted me. I have not singled out Golem for anything. I have made a response to his remarks with my reasoning.
I've not quoted you at all, let alone misquoted you. As you were responding the The Golem's post, I assumed you were replying to him (you do say 'you' in the first sentence. It looks like a direct response) but if you were speaking in general terms, I'm sorry for reading your post otherwise. My mistake.
Link to comment

<<<lots snipped for netiquette>>>

 

Family membership is something that would be nice to see, but difficult to maintain.

 

I believe its on the list of things the website want to do and it fits with the i want to be in a group with some buddies idea as well (for group finds) it will be interesting to see if they can do something along those lines.

Link to comment

<<<lots snipped for netiquette>>>

 

Family membership is something that would be nice to see, but difficult to maintain.

 

I believe its on the list of things the website want to do and it fits with the i want to be in a group with some buddies idea as well (for group finds) it will be interesting to see if they can do something along those lines.

It is something I would like to see. I can see the possibility of it being abused, such as friends using it to share the features. (one pays the other rides on that account type of thing)

Link to comment
Similarly, it is quite clear when you sign up that there are members-only caches that only premium members can see. If you don't like that, write to Jeremy. He's the only one who can change it :P
I've never complained about PM caches. People are free to set whatever they like, within the guidelines. Allowing a non PM to log a PM cache is within the capabilities of the owner, if they wish to allow it. No need to bother Jeremy with it :(

 

Isn't this thread about PM caches though? Discussing the rights and wrongs of paying fro premium membership in general is a bit off-topic?

Link to comment

Okay, I'm bored of going out of my way to be diplomatic with my forum posts. This thread has actually made me wonder why I bother to pay for Premium membership at all? I don't use PQ's, I receive the Instant Notification emails, but I can't recall any instances where I've then rushed out to get a FTF (no doubt someone will look through my profile and prove me wrong now!).

 

Yes, I've found a couple of members-only caches, and it gave me a nice 'glowy' feeling to do so, but that on it's own is not what I paid for.

 

To answer my own question, the reason I bought Premium Membership was because I enjoy Geocaching, use the site a lot and I know that gc.com has to be funded somehow. I would hope that my membership money goes towards its upkeep in some way. If there were no premium members, would/could the site still exist in its present form?

 

Considering that, on more than one occasion, hubbie and I have booked holidays elsewhere in the UK specifically to go Geocaching which have cost a few hundred pounds, the £15 or so doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

 

However, I do appreciate that I am in a position to afford it at the moment, whereas perhaps not everyone is. It kind of reminds me of free-range chickens and eggs - :P - they are more expensive, but I can afford them at present, I feel that battery farming is morally wrong, so I buy them. If my circumstances were different, perhaps I couldn't do that.

 

In short, I have no objections to whether people want to pay for membership or not, but I do object if non-paying members complain that they can't access premium features / caches :( (and at last I have found a use for the violin smiley). Some people have racked up literally thousands of caches without paying for membership, why is it such a big deal that a handful are not available to all?

 

:D

Link to comment

In short, I have no objections to whether people want to pay for membership or not, but I do object if non-paying members complain that they can't access premium features / caches :( (and at last I have found a use for the violin smiley). Some people have racked up literally thousands of caches without paying for membership, why is it such a big deal that a handful are not available to all?

 

:P

Exactly! :D

Link to comment

As the adverts say, other cache listing services are available. I would sign up for a premium account today even though I don't have the equipment for paperless caching. However I have an irrational haterid of Paypal.

I think you can pay by snail mail? May take a while before you get your membership upgraded though?

Link to comment

To answer my own question, the reason I bought Premium Membership was because I enjoy Geocaching, use the site a lot and I know that gc.com has to be funded somehow. I would hope that my membership money goes towards its upkeep in some way. If there were no premium members, would/could the site still exist in its present form?

That's why I pay. I think the fact that folk get uppity about it is because the facilities you get if you don't pay are similar to those you get if you do pay. I think people should pay for it: the whole thing. I take Paul’s* point – and others – that paying’s not necessary to get the features they use. I’d be interested to know where my membership money goes. Actually I’d be interested to know where all my money goes generally.

*It doesn’t irritate me quite that much :(

Link to comment
Isn't this thread about PM caches though? Discussing the rights and wrongs of paying fro premium membership in general is a bit off-topic?
Very much so, and I'm really glad it wasn't me who brought it up! :D

 

Yes, this thread is about PM caches, but the OP was questioning why these were not available to everyone. The :P smiley kind of indicated that they weren't happy about this arrangement. Surely therefore it's directly related to the issue of premium membership, and whether it's right or wrong to have to pay for any elements of GC.com?

 

Anyway, I'm done now, I've said my piece and I'll try and keep quiet. :(

Link to comment

You have to allow for Bat Fink's 2 forum posts, 17 finds and 1 hide (well done! It's good to put back into caching, and hiding is the best way -in my opinion- of doing this) when looking at the :( in context. You have to admit, the bold statement, 'Geocaching is free, and always will be' should have a 'but...' after it.

 

I'd be interested where the hundreds of thousands of dollars (approx.) that come into GroundSqueak's account yearly go to too. If it were a public company, I could buy shares, and have legally guaranteed access to that information, in their yearly statement to shareholders. As it's a private firm, they can do with it as they like, including: Buying a big car/house/pool/drink/drugs/prostitutes - if the owners wish. When your money becomes their money, with no firm guarantees on quality or availability of service, you have to decide if it's value for money for yourself. With so many people saying how it's wonderful service for a mere $30, expect prices to go up, or the service to worsen. That's how business works... Sorry, off topic :P

Edited by Simply Paul
Link to comment

Buying a big car/house/pool/drink/drugs/prostitutes

 

Similar to what I'd spend it on...

Buying a caravan/a country cottage/by the sea/cups of tea/more cups of tea/prostitutes. :D

Oh well,5 out of 6 aint bad! :(

 

Edited to put a t into the last word. :P

Edited by currykev
Link to comment

Buying a big car/house/pool/drink/drugs/prostitutes

 

Similar to what I'd spend it on...

Buying a caravan/a country cottage/by the sea/cups of tea/more cups of tea/prostitutes. :P

Oh well,5 out of 6 aint bad! :(

 

I don't like caravans either

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...