Archiving Caches

[+fatblokecaver]

Should I decide to archive all of my caches and then to join a different type of caching group, can these be used on the other site?

Bearing in mind that they technically belong to me and GC.com is only a listing site I can not see a problem with this?

 

Fatblokecaver

[+briansnat]

Of course you can. They are your caches. Not sure why you'd want to do that though. Don't you want your caches to be found?

[+Happy Humphrey]

There are plenty of other cache listing sites, and your caches have nothing to do with Groundspeak except that they list them. So you can do what you like. It might be advisable to make sure that there's no reference to geocaching.com on the physical cache, and ensure that there's a notice to NOT drop off any trackables in the caches. Groundspeak have no control over how you might describe your caches on any other website either, so if it turns out that the description is the same as the archived cache then there is no problem AFAIK.

 

I've recently looked for a couple of archived caches that are listed elsewhere (in several places in fact). There are sites that cater for people whose caches would fall outside GC.COM's listing guidelines (some of these are very popular sites, although much inferior in many ways to this site).

[+briansnat]

There are sites that cater for people whose caches would fall outside GC.COM's listing guidelines

 

There sure are. My favorite is www.railroadtrackcaching.com

 

I also tried terracaching. it got kind of boring after I found both caches.

Edited August 9, 2008 by briansnat

[+Isonzo Karst]

If you do archive the listings on GC.com and list elsewhere, I'd suggest adding something in the logbook about it. Otherwise some well intended cacher is likely to remove your hide, assuming that you archived it and then never removed it.

I've seen this happen.

[+Packanack]

Without knowing what the guidelines for listing on the other site are, it would be impossible for us to say if you can list your caches on that site. There is nothing to prevent you from archiving and moving your caches if that site would allow. I personally am not aware of what other sites there are in the UK. What other sites are there in the UK?

 

But I know that there are some club groups popping up over here to meet the demands of special class cachers. Such as clubs whose members put together Virtuals for each other, preparing for the day that that class comes back.

[+hukilaulau]

 

But I know that there are some club groups popping up over here to meet the demands of special class cachers. Such as clubs whose members put together Virtuals for each other, preparing for the day that that class comes back.

Kind of like the cargo cults in the Pacific Islands, huh?

[+gof1]

So, what happened that you wish to withdraw from GC.com? Having trouble with your reviewer? Bang your head on a guideline? There has to be something that has made you think about this.

[+J-Way]

If you do archive the listings on GC.com and list elsewhere, I'd suggest adding something in the logbook about it. Otherwise some well intended cacher is likely to remove your hide, assuming that you archived it and then never removed it.

I've seen this happen.

Even better, shift the physical cache location a hundred feet or so for the same reason.

[+Wild Thing 73]

Your kidding of course...........

[+CrippledBlindSquirrel]

A newbie question or two

 

Would Ground Speak accept caches coming from other sites?

 

Why couldn't he just post them on both sites - assuming that they fit the requirements on both sites.

 

I know that there's answers to both of these questions somewhere on the site I haven't found them by rambling around

[+gof1]

Many caches are listed on multiple sites. It is not a problem. I think you may not want to mention another listing service on the cache page as it will most likely trigger a conflict with the commercial cache restrictions.

[+Tequila]

A newbie question or two

 

Would Ground Speak accept caches coming from other sites?

 

Why couldn't he just post them on both sites - assuming that they fit the requirements on both sites.

 

I know that there's answers to both of these questions somewhere on the site I haven't found them by rambling around

 

Unless he tells Groundspeak, how would they know?? I doubt they have the resources to be cross referencing every cache with the other sites.

[+fatblokecaver]

Gof1

There have been a few silly niggles going on in the UK over the past few months and I have had enough of rules for rules sake - some of which have been very petty.

I like geocaching and have 3 caches out of my own (1 under my sons logon) and a few travellers out and about.

I dont like being told what to do by face less people 1000s of miles away (probably why I like caving).

I have been looking at other UK caching sites and have seen that the 'rules' are a little more relaxed.

This is the reason I may archive my ones and place elsewhere.

 

FBC

[+gof1]

Not sure what "rules for rules sake" rules you are talking about but most of them have a reason. But that aside, they are your caches. If you wish to list them elsewhere that is your choice. You will most likely have way fewer visits, but those who find them will still get to enjoy them. Good luck.

[+Happy Humphrey]

Not sure what "rules for rules sake" rules you are talking about but most of them have a reason.

US Moderators seem to have had a policy of very heavy policing of the UK forum and of cache guidelines in recent months, and this has inevitably caused fallout. Particularly as it's often been shown to be short on consistency and long on interpretation. The established and highly regarded UK reviewers were both forced to resign, regional forums are gaining as the Groundspeak one loses respect, and several premium memberships have allegedly been handed back.

 

As you'd expect, each time a blow is struck some people begin looking elsewhere for their caching experience (or at least, their forum experience). Either in protest, or simply because of the bad feeling generated. The latest spat has resulted in a couple of forum suspensions for what looks like fairly trivial offences. Hardly a desperate problem, but with all the recent unrest a lighter touch would have been advisable when the moderating style is so much under the spotlight in the UK. That the boot was used has stoked the fire somewhat.

 

I'm not wanting to take sides or debate the wisdom of the actions taken by various parties, I'm just passing on the news (as I see it, and trying to take a balanced view) for those who are unaware.

 

Personally, I'm prepared to ignore the forum altogether if I get a bad feeling about it. Instead, I could just concentrate on the caching, and if something on the site suddenly changes or stops working, I'll probably get information locally. I don't regard geocaching and the forum as one and the same.

[+briansnat]

I don't regard geocaching and the forum as one and the same.

 

You're one of the sensible ones. Many people think they are somehow the same thing, yet there are many thousands of geocachers who have never visited these forums and are happily pursuing the sport.

[+wimseyguy]

Also keep in mind that not everyone caches with super lemon fresh data. Just another reason to consider shifting the hide 100' or more for the new listing service. Unless of course you are doing so with the agenda of luring more cachers over to that service when they find they cannot log that cache as a find here.

 

Editing to add a thought, as an hour or so passed between the time I typed the reply and was able to hit the submit button.

 

Yes, the forums and caching in the wild are very very different. See my sig line below (which is a quote from someone wiser than I who has already contributed to this discussion). I'd bet that fewer than 18% of active cachers ever bother reading the forums, and perhaps half that amount visit here on a regular basis. (stats are also commented on below. )

Edited August 9, 2008 by wimseyguy

[+Isonzo Karst]

A newbie question or two

 

Would Ground Speak accept caches coming from other sites?

 

Why couldn't he just post them on both sites - assuming that they fit the requirements on both sites.

 

Groundspeak is fine with cross listed caches, though they don't want the other listing service referenced on the listing here. Some other listing services don't like cross-listed caches, some don't care.

[+Happy Humphrey]

Sorry to bring this back to the top, but it has been pointed out that I seem to infer in my post above that the new UK reviewers are not so highly regarded. Apologies to them, that's not what I meant!