Jump to content

Should more caches be made Member Only?


Recommended Posts

There are several of my caches which I have recently made member-only caches. I felt that either they were having problems with "outsiders" or there was potential for someone who just wants to cause trouble to do so, or that they were in a place that deserved respect. While I don't want to segregate members from non-members, I feel that anyone that is truly interested in geocaching is probably a member - or will be a member after caching for a couple of months.

 

What are everyone's thoughts?

Link to comment
There are several of my caches which I have recently made member-only caches. I felt that either they were having problems with "outsiders" or there was potential for someone who just wants to cause trouble to do so, or that they were in a place that deserved respect. While I don't want to segregate members from non-members, I feel that anyone that is truly interested in geocaching is probably a member - or will be a member after caching for a couple of months.

 

What are everyone's thoughts?

It's up to you. The nice thing about making one of your caches a Member's Only cache is that you can watch who is viewing at your cache and when they are viewing it. :ph34r:
Link to comment
There are several of my caches which I have recently made member-only caches. I felt that either they were having problems with "outsiders" or there was potential for someone who just wants to cause trouble to do so, or that they were in a place that deserved respect. While I don't want to segregate members from non-members, I feel that anyone that is truly interested in geocaching is probably a member - or will be a member after caching for a couple of months.

 

What are everyone's thoughts?

It's up to you. The nice thing about making one of your caches a Member's Only cache is that you can watch who is viewing at your cache and when they are viewing it. :ph34r:

 

Provided they don't get it in a pq and load it into gsak and a palm :(

Link to comment
There are several of my caches which I have recently made member-only caches. I felt that either they were having problems with "outsiders" or there was potential for someone who just wants to cause trouble to do so, or that they were in a place that deserved respect. While I don't want to segregate members from non-members, I feel that anyone that is truly interested in geocaching is probably a member - or will be a member after caching for a couple of months.

 

What are everyone's thoughts?

It's up to you. The nice thing about making one of your caches a Member's Only cache is that you can watch who is viewing at your cache and when they are viewing it. :ph34r:

 

Provided they don't get it in a pq and load it into gsak and a palm :(

This is true. I only use this option for my mystery caches.
Link to comment

I just had a cache published that I had spent about six months establishing. Since all the problems I had experienced with my other caches had involved non-subscribers and I was in no hurry to see it disappear, I made it a subscriber only. While it does reduce the number of visitors, quality makes up for quantity. There are some veteran cachers who choose not to subscribe that this will disappoint but I can live with that. :unsure: I'll likely open it up after a period of time anyway.

Link to comment

You could make it a members only cache if you want, but I wouldnt expect much difference in wear & tear, damage to the cache, or any difference in the way it gets rehidden (or the lack thereof). I've been disappointed just as much with members as non-members as to how I see them get to cache areas, find caches, and rehide them.

I think you'll just end up limiting the number of hits your cache gets.

I was not a paying member for the first 3yrs I was caching.

The ONLY reason I became a paying member is to get PQs so I could go paperless.

Link to comment
Most damage to caches are done by muggles or mother nature.
Do you have data to back up that assertion, or are you just revealing the fruits of your omniscience?

 

In my part of the world, the most damaging thing that happens to caches is that geocoins disappear from them. The members-only caches don't have much trouble with this.

Link to comment
Most damage to caches are done by muggles or mother nature.
Do you have data to back up that assertion, or are you just revealing the fruits of your omniscience?

 

In my part of the world, the most damaging thing that happens to caches is that geocoins disappear from them. The members-only caches don't have much trouble with this.

This is a great point. A lot of newbies think you can trade for geocoins and keep them. This is very frustrating for the owner because coins typically cost $5-$10. Most premium members would know better but it still could happen. :unsure:
Link to comment
Most damage to caches are done by muggles or mother nature.
Do you have data to back up that assertion, or are you just revealing the fruits of your omniscience?

 

In my part of the world, the most damaging thing that happens to caches is that geocoins disappear from them. The members-only caches don't have much trouble with this.

This is a great point. A lot of newbies think you can trade for geocoins and keep them. This is very frustrating for the owner because coins typically cost $5-$10. Most premium members would know better but it still could happen. :unsure:

 

This is precisely why we made our last two regular sized caches "Premium members only". TBs and coins had been disappearing in some of our other ones. When we checked the paper logs for those caches, we found there were people visiting the caches but not logging online. This is fine as long as they're not moving trackables, but sadly, this is sometimes not the case. Being able to compare the paper logs with the audit logs on a PMO cache makes it easier to keep tabs on trackables should they go missing.

Edited by team moxiepup
Link to comment
Most damage to caches are done by muggles or mother nature.
Do you have data to back up that assertion, or are you just revealing the fruits of your omniscience?

 

In my part of the world, the most damaging thing that happens to caches is that geocoins disappear from them. The members-only caches don't have much trouble with this.

This is a great point. A lot of newbies think you can trade for geocoins and keep them. This is very frustrating for the owner because coins typically cost $5-$10. Most premium members would know better but it still could happen. :unsure:

 

What MOCs will probably eliminate are those people who find 2-3 caches, grab some TBs and/or geocoins, then never come back to the sport. A good portion of travelers seem to be lost to those types.

 

I do like the audit feature in MOCs and have made some caches MOC just to see who has been looking at my cache. It's interesting to see that cachers from all over the world are often viewing your cache pages. I wish they would make that feature available to premium members.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment
Most damage to caches are done by muggles or mother nature.
Do you have data to back up that assertion, or are you just revealing the fruits of your omniscience?

 

In my part of the world, the most damaging thing that happens to caches is that geocoins disappear from them. The members-only caches don't have much trouble with this.

This is a great point. A lot of newbies think you can trade for geocoins and keep them. This is very frustrating for the owner because coins typically cost $5-$10. Most premium members would know better but it still could happen. :unsure:

 

I took the original post as physical damage to the cache. I don't consider missing TBs or coins to be damage to a cache, altho pretty irritating to the traveler owner. I'm also guessing most coins that come up missing aren't owned by the owner of the cache they visited last.

Link to comment

There are several of my caches which I have recently made member-only caches. I felt that either they were having problems with "outsiders" or there was potential for someone who just wants to cause trouble to do so, or that they were in a place that deserved respect. While I don't want to segregate members from non-members, I feel that anyone that is truly interested in geocaching is probably a member - or will be a member after caching for a couple of months.

 

What are everyone's thoughts?

This is how i feel about MOC.

simoncowellmu3.jpg

 

I disagree with your comment about those truly interested in geocaching being a member for at least two reasons.

 

1) There are many students that do not have a source of income and a membership to Groundspeak is not a small purchase for a student. Also for kids that visit caches with their parents they cannot log them which is a bummer. (Yes there is a workaround but i would think fewer than 10% of people in this situation know about it.)

 

2)I like Groundspeak. I want to support caching. But- Groundspeak is a for profit business. Someone is making money on this. Unless financials are shared with the community showing that the sport is in danger- i don't think anyone should judge whether or not others should be members.

 

You can be truly interested in caching and not willing to pay the $3 a month. It is not a necessity. There are many other ways that a user could support the game.

 

Please understand. I am not criticizing Groundspeak. Obviously someone is doing something right.

Link to comment
or that they were in a place that deserved respect.

 

While the focus of my original post seems to point more toward damage by non-members, I think that the above statement is more indicative of where I intended my focus to be. Three of my six caches are MOCs. On of them, In Their Honor, is in a cemetery near a war memorial. I don't think that muggles will find this one, but I want those dedicated to geocaching (not that paying the money insures that) to be the ones to find it. There is a reverence to places like that.

 

The other two caches each have their own stories as to why I have made them member-only.

 

Like a politician, my viewpoint on this issue may change at any moment.

Link to comment

There are several of my caches which I have recently made member-only caches. I felt that either they were having problems with "outsiders" or there was potential for someone who just wants to cause trouble to do so, or that they were in a place that deserved respect. ...

 

Your reasons above are all ones that I have seen are legitimate for MO Caches.

 

Your call. As for me I don't like MOC for other reasons.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment

All of my Psycho Urban Caches, most of my Psycho Backcountry caches, and many of Sue's puzzle caches are PMOCs, and we do very well with that. Inf act, the PMOC status seems to be one very important contributing element to the fact that we have an amazingly low rate of caches needing maintenance. Best of all, however, we get to limit the ability of casual web surfers -- who may have stumbled upon the GC site and joined as a free member on a whim -- to even see the cache listing pages, and we also get to use the Audit Log feature, which is a lot of fun!

Link to comment

What I am hearing (it may not be what you intend me to hear) is that as a non paying member I am:

 

-more likely to damage the area around the cache

-not as good at rehiding caches

-take geocoins and travel bugs

-not log my finds on line

-not able to show proper reverence to cache placed in special places

 

I don't believe you can judge the above pruely on someone paying or not.

Having said that it is your choice just don't expect everyone to be jumping with joy because there is another moc out there.

Link to comment

Never looked for a MOC probably won't out of principle.

 

 

I do like the audit feature in MOCs and have made some caches MOC just to see who has been looking at my cache. It's interesting to see that cachers from all over the world are often viewing your cache pages. I wish they would make that feature available to premium members.

 

A 1x1 transparent/white gif hosted on my webserver does it for me. That way I can see everybody not only members.

Link to comment

I read back over all the replies so far and we keep going over two things. Damages to caches and cost of membership. Cache damage can be caused by many things. I've seen a Raccoon gnawing on a cache container. After getting up to the cache there was no food in it. Appears the previous cache finder might have had something on their hands that led the Raccoon to the cache (but that's for another topic). Cost of membership. I see individuals complaining about membership fees that have well over 1,000 finds. Every compute the cost of gas in finding those caches? I think the membership fees that goes into supporting this web site and this great sport is well worth it. And if it means getting a couple extra caches that non-paying members don't get then that's fine with me. The one's in my area aren't any different than the ones that non-premium members can find. So, they're not special. Just an added bonus for the premium members.

Link to comment
or that they were in a place that deserved respect.

 

While the focus of my original post seems to point more toward damage by non-members, I think that the above statement is more indicative of where I intended my focus to be. Three of my six caches are MOCs. On of them, In Their Honor, is in a cemetery near a war memorial. I don't think that muggles will find this one, but I want those dedicated to geocaching (not that paying the money insures that) to be the ones to find it. There is a reverence to places like that.

 

The other two caches each have their own stories as to why I have made them member-only.

 

Like a politician, my viewpoint on this issue may change at any moment.

 

These are the same thing. If you mean non-paying members, and you have seen that non-paying members show less respect to your caches and cache sites than paying members, then I guess making them a SOC might fix the problem. However, since your SOCs are traditional caches, it is possible for non-paying members to locate them by triangulation. I've done that just for fun :unsure:

Link to comment

What I am hearing (it may not be what you intend me to hear) is that as a non paying member I am:

 

-more likely to damage the area around the cache

-not as good at rehiding caches

-take geocoins and travel bugs

-not log my finds on line

-not able to show proper reverence to cache placed in special places

 

I don't believe you can judge the above pruely on someone paying or not.

Having said that it is your choice just don't expect everyone to be jumping with joy because there is another moc out there.

Thanks for making those great observations. It does seem like what you said doesn't it?

Link to comment

Most damage to caches are done by muggles or mother nature. Making them a SOC won't make them more invisible or more weatherproof.

 

I don't buy this assumption one bit. Out my 102 caches hidden, the primary caches that "disappeared" were in remote areas, and were open to everyone (non pmoc). The possibility that muggles "stumbled" upon my caches is so remote, that is doesn't even register with me. In one area where I cache, and large swath of geocaches disappeared , and none of them were PMOCs. Most of us figured a "maggot" drove around and removed all of the caches.

 

My "safest" caches all have the following traits (long hikes, PMOCs, and puzzles, or require special equipment.)

 

Most damage to caches are done by muggles or mother nature.
Do you have data to back up that assertion, or are you just revealing the fruits of your omniscience?

 

In my part of the world, the most damaging thing that happens to caches is that geocoins disappear from them. The members-only caches don't have much trouble with this.

This is a great point. A lot of newbies think you can trade for geocoins and keep them. This is very frustrating for the owner because coins typically cost $5-$10. Most premium members would know better but it still could happen. :unsure:

 

What MOCs will probably eliminate are those people who find 2-3 caches, grab some TBs and/or geocoins, then never come back to the sport. A good portion of travelers seem to be lost to those types.

I do like the audit feature in MOCs and have made some caches MOC just to see who has been looking at my cache. It's interesting to see that cachers from all over the world are often viewing your cache pages. I wish they would make that feature available to premium members.

 

That is so true about the one or two cache finders. The audit log is one of the coolest features, but it is not foolproof for detecting cache pirates (in Traditionals and Multis), because a PQ is all that is needed to garner the coords to your cache.

 

I've always been a big supporter of PMOC caches, because they (at least in my case) offer some additional safety for my caches.

Link to comment
or that they were in a place that deserved respect.

 

...Three of my six caches are MOCs. On of them, In Their Honor, is in a cemetery near a war memorial. I don't think that muggles will find this one, but I want those dedicated to geocaching (not that paying the money insures that) to be the ones to find it. There is a reverence to places like that....

That's not necessarily so. (At least they played by the rules.)

Having a MOC will not guarantee that it will not be found by muggles. The only thing that will do that is to hide it really well; even then, stuff happens.

I've lost a few coins to people dropping out of caching (suppose it serves me right, putting them out to be found :unsure: ). While putting the coins/tbs into MOCs, not everyone out there caching will. It's just a matter of time before the odds begin to catch up with you.

I like the idea of MOCs, but if all my local caches, or a good number of them were MO when I started caching, I may have (probably not, but...) been disillusioned by geocaching.

Link to comment

What I am hearing (it may not be what you intend me to hear) is that as a non paying member I am:

 

-more likely to damage the area around the cache

-not as good at rehiding caches

-take geocoins and travel bugs

-not log my finds on line

-not able to show proper reverence to cache placed in special places

 

I don't believe you can judge the above pruely on someone paying or not.

Having said that it is your choice just don't expect everyone to be jumping with joy because there is another moc out there.

You have misinterpreted -- likely for your own preferred slant/effect -- the words of the poster(s) whose posts you were referencing, but the reality is as follows:

  • no one said tha all non-paying members are problematic, but it IS also true that
  • the collective experience of many of us shows that a far greater percentage of the population non-paying members turn out to cause damage to caches or cache contents than the members of the PM population.
  • so, there are some bad apples in each group, but there are more in the non-paying group.
  • an additional problem with the non-paying member population is that is unfortunately includes as a small percentage of its members some persons who are NOT geocachers at all but rather were simply browsing the web, stumbled upon the GC website, and spent thirty seconds to create a free membership so that they could browse cache listings. Some of the persons in this latter-mentioned group are persons who have no clue what geocaching is really about, and who instead may cause harm to caches, if only out of stupidity and lack of awareness and not out of malice.

Does this help?

Link to comment

Most damage to caches are done by muggles or mother nature. Making them a SOC won't make them more invisible or more weatherproof.

 

I don't buy this assumption one bit. Out my 102 caches hidden, the primary caches that "disappeared" were in remote areas, and were open to everyone (non pmoc). The possibility that muggles "stumbled" upon my caches is so remote, that is doesn't even register with me. In one area where I cache, and large swath of geocaches disappeared , and none of them were PMOCs. Most of us figured a "maggot" drove around and removed all of the caches.

 

My "safest" caches all have the following traits (long hikes, PMOCs, and puzzles, or require special equipment.)

 

 

I was speaking overall, but your example of including just your own and local caches does coincide with the original posters example of including only his own caches. I still believe if all caches were included, it would be evident that most damage was done by non-cachers or nature.

 

I guess I prefer to give more credit to cachers, checkbook notwithstanding. :unsure:

Link to comment

Placement has to do a lot with it as well. We have an area were a lot of mountain bikers like to ride. They love to sit on logs and take breaks. If you don't hide a cache real good they will find it. So, it's not an issue with premium or non-premium member. It's knowing the area you are hiding the cache in. If it's a highly traffic area use a micro. If this is your concern.

Link to comment

I think the cost of membership is a great value considering the enjoyment I get from playing the game and as long as there are new caches for me to find, I intend on paying the dues and playing the game.

 

This said, NONE of my 80+ caches are "Member Only".

To make a point by using extreme examples, if all or even most caches were "Member Only" how would you attract, then hook, new players?

Without new players joining the game (leading to new caches) I would have hunted out my area long ago and moved onto a different hobby.

If it don't grow, it stagnates, if it stagnates, it don't grow, if it don't grow...

 

The quote below (from another reply) describes me as I was in early 2003, just before I became a PM.

"...stumbled upon the GC site and joined as a free member on a whim"

 

Thankfully there is a regular influx of net surfers stumbling upon the GC site on a whim, giving it a try, liking it, and then producing some great caches for me to hunt.

Link to comment

Having caches avaliable only for certain people, as suggested with the Members Only (and I guess you mean Premium Members), would create a two-league sport with an elite squad and a common one.

 

I am not interested in that kind of split, I think the Geocaching sport should be equal for all.

Edited by The Vikings
Link to comment
What are everyone's thoughts?

I got a couple of them.

 

First, I think there is really only a single reason to make a cache MOC and that is to protect a certain type of valuable cache, a coin (real, not geocoin) collector's cache for example. We haven't made any of our caches MOC simply because we want our caches to be all inclusive. We may have some secret caches or bonus caches, but those are found through merit, not simply because you paid someone some money.

 

I also know of some folks who hide their puzzles behind an MOC simply to reduce the "how do you solve this puzzle" whining.

 

Second, making a traditional cache for members only is useless to protect against anyone but the most clueless of how the site works. This URL http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.asp...;lon=-96.592733, which is available to everyone, gives the coordinates to your supposedly protected cache. Doesn't matter if the visitor is a paying member, not a paying member, or even logged on.

 

Making a cache MOC in order to get folks to pony up really isn't that effective. If you want to support the site the hider can create a gift certificate for the first non-paying member to find the cache for a free year of paid membership. Or you can buy a bunch of Groundspeak merchandise to put in your caches. How about a t-shirt as FTF prize? There are better ways of supporting Groundspeak than being exclusive with your caches as a form of arm-twisting.

 

Okay, so that was three.

Edited by CoyoteRed
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...