Member Only Caches

[+Kit Fox]

I have released two caches to date and hope to release a third in several days from now. In one of the threads that pertained to this subject, one cache from Pennsylvania had been raided and the owner ended up doing a MOC as a way to monitor who was looking at the cache page. My first cache was very expensive to set up and after reading the Pennsylvania post, decided that I would to the the MOC status for my own piece of mind. Since then, I have also realized that MOC status is a way to reward people for getting the premium membership. My second cache wasn't as expensive to set up, but I stuck with the MOC status for the rewarding members reasoning. I might take off the MOC status eventually to allow others to find it, and in that way, I reward members and offer it to non-members too.

 

Be aware, the audit log is not 100% effective. Someone who downloads pocket queries can get the coords for your cache without ever visiting the actual cache page. The GPX files for each cache in the query, contain all necessary information.

[+wapahani]

Why is it "Elitist" to set up a MOC?

There is little in regard to make it "elitist" at any point.

To me, making a cache and only giving it to a few select friends that you feel are "good enough to find it, that would be elitist.

But when you make it MOC, you make a cache that any premium member can see and go after.

 

While I am sure some would say "premium members are few" but I don't see it that way.

I have a MOC cache that is only 3 weeks only and gotten plenty of views. Its actually opened it up and drawing people from all over Indiana and Ohio.

 

I'm starting to make caches that are tougher, into MOC's. Why? Because generally what I have seen, those that are into the hobby that go after my 5 star caches, are mostly PMer's.

[+chuckwagon101]

I think that if I was a premium member...........And I decided to hide a cache................I would make it a Premium Members only cache!

 

This way, it would cut out all those "riff-raff" cachers that are just looking for a BIG Field, a BIG Tree and a BIG Pile of Sticks!!

 

LET THE GOOD TIMES.........ROLL!!

[+nashuan]

I have released two caches to date and hope to release a third in several days from now. In one of the threads that pertained to this subject, one cache from Pennsylvania had been raided and the owner ended up doing a MOC as a way to monitor who was looking at the cache page. My first cache was very expensive to set up and after reading the Pennsylvania post, decided that I would to the the MOC status for my own piece of mind. Since then, I have also realized that MOC status is a way to reward people for getting the premium membership. My second cache wasn't as expensive to set up, but I stuck with the MOC status for the rewarding members reasoning. I might take off the MOC status eventually to allow others to find it, and in that way, I reward members and offer it to non-members too.

 

Be aware, the audit log is not 100% effective. Someone who downloads pocket queries can get the coords for your cache without ever visiting the actual cache page. The GPX files for each cache in the query, contain all necessary information.

 

Thanks for the info. It makes perfect sense and I never gave that a thought, but If these folks are downloadding pocker queries, then at least they are members. For some reason, it make me feel a bit more at ease, but you're right, those wouldn't show up in the audit log.

[+nashuan]

Just a few more passing thoughts:

 

I'm not for excluding folks from testing the waters before they join. If they are new to the game and unsure if they want to fork over $30 to start, I can understand that, but I also think the paying members should get a little bang for their buck. I said in an earlier post that I had a couple of caches that are MOCs. One will probably stay a MOC, though I have "invited" people to come seek it out that were not premium members and work with those people to log their find; but my other one will likely be "declassified" eventually after the PMs have had a fair crack at it.

 

Frankly, because I don't set up that many, I try to stock my caches with a little higher quality swag and I think that the people who have paid to support mother geocaching.com, will tend to be more serious about trading fairly. I have seen caches that I know started out well stocked, but end up with matchbox cars that were dug up from the back yard (still full of mud), broken toys, soiled stuffed animals and other forms of JUNK. My first cache has been up and running for a couple of months now and has had about 30 people come to see it. Almost all of what has been left has been something that I would call tradeworthy. I get fewer cachers because of it being MOC, but I think I'm happier with it as a result.

 

I haven't set out any micros yet, but just contemplated what I would do with those and I think in those cases, where you're only talking about a log, I would release them as MOC for a few weeks and then stand them down for whoever wanted to seek them out.

[+DanOCan]

Let's pretend I am a non-paying member. I look at the nearby caches to home and I see the following caches which I cannot do:

 

-- Puzzles for which I have no idea where to start

-- Caches on the tops of mountains which I am not in condition to hike to

-- Caches on the bottom of a lake requiring SCUBA which I don't own or know how to use

-- Premium Members Only caches

-- Caches requiring the use of a 4x4

 

Why is it the MOC always generate the angst? Why do people assume they must be able to find EVERY cache which gets published?

[+TrailGators]

Let's pretend I am a non-paying member. I look at the nearby caches to home and I see the following caches which I cannot do:

 

-- Puzzles for which I have no idea where to start

-- Caches on the tops of mountains which I am not in condition to hike to

-- Caches on the bottom of a lake requiring SCUBA which I don't own or know how to use

-- Premium Members Only caches

-- Caches requiring the use of a 4x4

 

Why is it the MOC always generate the angst? Why do people assume they must be able to find EVERY cache which gets published?

That is another great point!

[Motorcycle_Mama]

Amen.

[+KBI]

Let's pretend I am a non-paying member. I look at the nearby caches to home and I see the following caches which I cannot do:

 

-- Puzzles for which I have no idea where to start

-- Caches on the tops of mountains which I am not in condition to hike to

-- Caches on the bottom of a lake requiring SCUBA which I don't own or know how to use

-- Premium Members Only caches

-- Caches requiring the use of a 4x4

 

Why is it the MOC always generate the angst? Why do people assume they must be able to find EVERY cache which gets published?

Some folks seem to have an entitlement mentality, a "don’t you dare lock me out" attitude that causes them to see snobbish elitism where none exists.

 

Instead of being happy that most caches are free, they choose to be annoyed that a few caches require paid access.

 

It’s the old proverbial:

 

"Is the glass 95% full or is it 5% empty?"

[+BlueDeuce]

Who here is annoyed with PMO caches?

[+TrailGators]

"Is the glass 95% full or is it 5% empty?"

[+KBI]

Who here is annoyed with PMO caches?

I don't know that anybody here is annoyed with PMO caches ... but apparently someone somewhere is, at least according to this guy:

 

I think that when people look at the playing field, being restricted from certain caches is not the best marketing approach to gain paying members. It has been my experience that it causes, at times, a level of angst.

[+BlueDeuce]

Who here is annoyed with PMO caches?

I don't know that anybody here is annoyed with PMO caches ... but apparently someone somewhere is, at least according to this guy:

 

I think that when people look at the playing field, being restricted from certain caches is not the best marketing approach to gain paying members. It has been my experience that it causes, at times, a level of angst.

 

a level of angst.

 

tsk, tsk. I already said that I wasn't annoyed. In fact I was having a discussion that had I would have been happy to continue.

 

Kit fox's post about "I've had a few cachers admit to me that they became a premium member just to find some of my caches." was enough for me to agree that PM caches can add PM cachers, but I was distracted with other things. Which was my fault.

 

So I retract the statement that "it probably alienates them more than encouraging them to sign up".

[+TrailGators]

I retract the statement that "it probably alienates them more than encouraging them to sign up".

That's cool that you can change your mind. SSO JOAT and his two friends joined as well. I think they do help raise awareness. I also think that it's great that 95% of caches are free. Groundspeak could easily make it so only 5% were free. Most companies operate this way. Edited August 17, 2008 by TrailGators

[+BlueDeuce]

PMO caches advertise the PM option better but I wonder how many people signed up for reasons like PQs. It seems to me that a PMO cache might make someone want to sign up to find it, but if PMOs were all that was offered eventually people might decide that there are enough caches out there to search for so they might as well save themselves 30 bucks.

 

Giving people the other options, such as to search for the types of caches they want to find probably has a better membership retention rate, over PMO caches.

 

 

Edit: missing word

Edited August 17, 2008 by BlueDeuce

[+Bad_CRC]

I'd like to make a cache that was non-member only for the first week or so.

 

Just so someone other than the same people who have gotten FTF on every cache in the city for the past few years got a chance.

[+DanOCan]

Giving people the other options, such as to search for the types of caches they want to find probably has a better membership retention rate, over PMO caches.

 

100% agree. My motivation for being a PM was all about the PQs. To be honest, other than the PQs and PMO caches I'm not even sure what other benefits I am getting from being a paid member.

[+m.austin]

Personally, it was a MOC that prompted me to become a PM cause I just HAD to know what that cache was just down the road from me. Seems it was a series of caches, all old missile bases that are all over this area (each one held a number=letter, with a final cache being found through a math problem using the codes obtained in the previous 17). This series is fairly spread out and I can see why the owner wanted to protect the caches as best he could. I don't mind the $3 per month for the few perks (yes, I know it's cheaper to pay by the year, but heck, I wouldn't even save enough to buy a gallon of gas!)

[+Airmapper]

Who here is annoyed with PMO caches?

 

I am.

 

Learned that trying to discuss it here is a waste of time.

[+KBI]

Who here is annoyed with PMO caches?

I am.

 

Learned that trying to discuss it here is a waste of time.

Do you believe your reasons to be sound and valid? If so, then why would discussing them here be a waste of time?

[+Airmapper]

Who here is annoyed with PMO caches?

I am.

 

Learned that trying to discuss it here is a waste of time.

Do you believe your reasons to be sound and valid? If so, then why would discussing them here be a waste of time?

 

Well, IMHO I don't think it really matters what I think. Given the number of times this has come up and the length of time nothing has changed, what good do you think discussing it further will honestly do in a realistic sense? It has been a pretty well established that discussing it over the years has had zero effect.

 

It makes for good forum drama if your into that, and does so pretty consistently. I used to participate and throw my unpopular opinion out there, but all it served was to fuel more ranting over one point or another. And I admit I might not have expressed myself as calmly or clearly as I would have liked, given a few years to think about it.

 

Sure I don't like PMOC's that well, but I still renew my subscription every year, go hunt the few I run across in my travels, and leave nice logs on those I find. I won't place one however, and that is all I can do.

[+BlueDeuce]

Who here is annoyed with PMO caches?

I am.

 

Learned that trying to discuss it here is a waste of time.

Do you believe your reasons to be sound and valid? If so, then why would discussing them here be a waste of time?

 

Well, IMHO I don't think it really matters what I think.

 

It does, but if he agreed with you he wouldn't bother to respond.

[+TrailGators]

Who here is annoyed with PMO caches?

I am.

 

Learned that trying to discuss it here is a waste of time.

Do you believe your reasons to be sound and valid? If so, then why would discussing them here be a waste of time?

 

Well, IMHO I don't think it really matters what I think.

 

It does, but if he agreed with you he wouldn't bother to respond.

You've noticed that pattern too. I have seen him do do it on a rare occasion. Edited August 17, 2008 by TrailGators

[+KBI]

Who here is annoyed with PMO caches?

I am.

 

Learned that trying to discuss it here is a waste of time.

Do you believe your reasons to be sound and valid? If so, then why would discussing them here be a waste of time?

Well, IMHO I don't think it really matters what I think. Given the number of times this has come up and the length of time nothing has changed, what good do you think discussing it further will honestly do in a realistic sense? It has been a pretty well established that discussing it over the years has had zero effect.

If having PMO caches removed as a site feature is your goal, and if you are convinced (as am I) that the removal of PMO caches is never going to happen, then I would agree that you have a sound and valid reason for concluding that discussing your reasons for disliking PMO caches here would be a waste of time.

 

It makes for good forum drama if your into that, and does so pretty consistently. I used to participate and throw my unpopular opinion out there, but all it served was to fuel more ranting over one point or another. And I admit I might not have expressed myself as calmly or clearly as I would have liked, given a few years to think about it.

 

Sure I don't like PMOC's that well, but I still renew my subscription every year, go hunt the few I run across in my travels, and leave nice logs on those I find. I won't place one however, and that is all I can do.

I understand all that, and I sympathize. (Trust me, I am familiar with the experience of expressing an unpopular opinion in these forums.)

 

... but you still didn’t give your reasons. If you’ve done so in the past, I missed it. If you don’t want to do so now, that’s fine; I was just curious as to why anyone would be against Premium Member Only caches.

[+KBI]

Do you believe your reasons to be sound and valid? If so, then why would discussing them here be a waste of time?

Well, IMHO I don't think it really matters what I think.

It does, but if he agreed with you he wouldn't bother to respond.

You've noticed that pattern too. I have seen him do do it on a rare occasion.

As I have explained before, I have what I believe are perfectly valid reasons for severely limiting the number of times I post nothing but the words "I agree" along with a quoted post: It annoys me when other people overdo it, it adds nothing of value to the discussion, and it only serves to clutter up the thread.

 

If I have a thought, but it’s not something I think I would find interesting if I were the one reading it, then I generally don’t post it. A simple "I agree" post in an otherwise stimulating thread is like a bland rice cake on an otherwise richly-stocked dessert buffet.

 

One exception: There are certain fine individuals—forum regulars—with whom I find I disagree on a fairly regular basis. If any of those folks posts something I perceive to be particularly agreeable to me, or something that is notably astute or insightful, I am usually happy to post a simple “I agree”-type post, if for no other reason than to honor the fact that truth is truth and a good idea is a good idea no matter the source. (I have even done so in this very thread.)

 

I don’t agree or disagree with individuals; I only agree or disagree with their ideas.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

For those who don't like PMOs and think they should be removed, what about other types of caches?

 

Suppose I decide that I don't like puzzle caches and multi-caches? Should I start a thread every month or so say how much I don't like them and how I think they discriminate against those who can't do them and how they alienate those users? And that they should be removed?

[+TrailGators]

Do you believe your reasons to be sound and valid? If so, then why would discussing them here be a waste of time?

Well, IMHO I don't think it really matters what I think.

It does, but if he agreed with you he wouldn't bother to respond.

You've noticed that pattern too. I have seen him do do it on a rare occasion.

As I have explained before, I have what I believe are perfectly valid reasons for severely limiting the number of times I post nothing but the words "I agree" along with a quoted post: It annoys me when other people overdo it, it adds nothing of value to the discussion, and it only serves to clutter up the thread.

What we agree with is equally as important as what we disagree with. It's very useful to understand the consensus. I also think if all you do is disagree with people that you will be perceived as a very negative person. Edited August 17, 2008 by TrailGators

[+BlueDeuce]

A simple "I agree" post in an otherwise stimulating thread is like a bland rice cake on an otherwise richly-stocked dessert buffet.

 

So people who support an idea and say so are a waste of bandwidth.

 

I don’t agree or disagree with individuals; I only agree or disagree with their ideas.

 

Interesting, but definitely a twisted viewpoint.

[+D@nim@l]

<snip>...I was just curious as to why anyone would be against Premium Member Only caches.

 

..because the owner of the site was?

 

The Pledge

[+KBI]

A simple "I agree" post in an otherwise stimulating thread is like a bland rice cake on an otherwise richly-stocked dessert buffet.

So people who support an idea and say so are a waste of bandwidth.

I didn't say that. I was only explaining the reasons why *I* don’t do it.

 

If you don’t share my reasons, then you should of course do whatever you think is right each time you post a post.

 

If you are unhappy with my posting behavior and think I should post simple “I agree” posts more often, then please say so.

 

I don’t agree or disagree with individuals; I only agree or disagree with their ideas.

Interesting, but definitely a twisted viewpoint.

Really? How is that?

[+TrailGators]

<snip>...I was just curious as to why anyone would be against Premium Member Only caches.

 

..because the owner of the site was?

 

The Pledge

Key phrase: "But the traditional game will remain purely free."

[+KBI]

<snip>...I was just curious as to why anyone would be against Premium Member Only caches.

 

..because the owner of the site was?

 

The Pledge

Key phrase: "But the traditional game will remain purely free."

Jeremy actually leaves himself more than one "out" in that "pledge."

 

Is that post really genuine? Not that I have any reason to doubt it -- other than the fact that it looks like something anyone could have created.

[+KBI]

I also think if all you do is disagree with people that you will be perceived as a very negative person.

I agree.

[+BlueDeuce]

Key phrase: "But the traditional game will remain purely free."

 

Yep, seems like reasons are sound and valid.

 

 

edit: misspelling

Edited August 17, 2008 by BlueDeuce

[+D@nim@l]

<snip>...I was just curious as to why anyone would be against Premium Member Only caches.

 

..because the owner of the site was?

 

The Pledge

Key phrase: "But the traditional game will remain purely free."

Jeremy actually leaves himself more than one "out" in that "pledge."

 

Is that post really genuine? Not that I have any reason to doubt it -- other than the fact that it looks like something anyone could have created.

 

I think the original is located in the National Archives under tight security with access limited to those who petition through the Freedom of Information Act. You'll have to settle for this electronic version on such short notice.

[+Airmapper]

If having PMO caches removed as a site feature is your goal, and if you are convinced (as am I) that the removal of PMO caches is never going to happen, then I would agree that you have a sound and valid reason for concluding that discussing your reasons for disliking PMO caches here would be a waste of time.

 

At one time I thought a compromise might be made where the feature still existed, but more options were available to those who had various reasons for making a cache PMO. For example making the audit log available to all caches, not just PMO. Also if newbie avoidance was the concern, a cap of say 50 finds must be reached before it is available, no payment required. Complete removal wasn't necessarily a goal.

 

... but you still didn’t give your reasons. If you’ve done so in the past, I missed it. If you don’t want to do so now, that’s fine; I was just curious as to why anyone would be against Premium Member Only caches.

 

I got some time to kill, and I don't care to say my reasons. Of course they are subject to change and modification based on reasons and examples that I may be able to understand.

 

1. It opens the door to further restriction of caches based on money. Right now it is by member option, in the future it could be for all caches. Pay up or don't play. Your loyalty to PMOC now is suggestive that you will be open to the idea of paying to access the cache listings in the future.

 

2. Paying a subscription to find a cache suggests it is in some way special, or worth the extra effort. PMOC caches are not placed by Groundspeak staff, they are not stocked, maintained, or planned out to be in above ordinary locations by Groundspeak staff. The people you pay have nothing to do with the cache other than listing it. A PMOC is placed by someone spending their own time, effort and money to make it available to you. It could be extraordinary, so-so, or just plain lame, their choice. I don't think for whatever reason it is their place to say it is worth your paying someone to find it.

 

3. The feature is faulty. A workaround exists to log a PMOC without being a PM at the allowance of Groundspeak. If it's for PM only, why let the non-PM's log it at all? Using triangulation or other somewhat clever methods, a PMOC can be found using the search page. So if you are clever and the cache owner doesn't care or isn't paying attention, you can still find and log the cache. It's no more difficult than some puzzle caches out there. It doesn't hold to it's description.

 

4. There are so many other awesome features to gain from becoming a PM, why do we need PMO caches? All the other features deal with data organization or web features unconnected from the physical cache locations themselves, why have this one stand alone feature that ties to the actual cache, if not for my reason #1.

 

I doubt the current powers that be even had pay to play in mind when the feature was introduced, I'm not sure they do now, and I wouldn't accuse them of such, I don't have that kind of information. However, that is not to say it won't be in the future, with new management and company goals. Originally I think the idea was to have a way to restrict users from accessing the cache page for security from unwanted members, most likely thieves or brand new players who don't know simple game guidelines (like don't take or empty the cache). It was a quick fix for an apparently small scale problem, and not a completely effective one. However I've seen it used in large scale applications for nothing more than marketing the website, and in that use I'm not a fan.

 

So, there is why I dislike PMOC and it's principle. I'm not going to be a pain and try to get it removed or argue with people who use and like the feature. That would be a waste of time.

[+zircon_215]

Just a few more passing thoughts:

 

I'm not for excluding folks from testing the waters before they join. If they are new to the game and unsure if they want to fork over $30 to start, I can understand that, but I also think the paying members should get a little bang for their buck. I said in an earlier post that I had a couple of caches that are MOCs. One will probably stay a MOC, though I have "invited" people to come seek it out that were not premium members and work with those people to log their find; but my other one will likely be "declassified" eventually after the PMs have had a fair crack at it.

 

Frankly, because I don't set up that many, I try to stock my caches with a little higher quality swag and I think that the people who have paid to support mother geocaching.com, will tend to be more serious about trading fairly. I have seen caches that I know started out well stocked, but end up with matchbox cars that were dug up from the back yard (still full of mud), broken toys, soiled stuffed animals and other forms of JUNK. My first cache has been up and running for a couple of months now and has had about 30 people come to see it. Almost all of what has been left has been something that I would call tradeworthy. I get fewer cachers because of it being MOC, but I think I'm happier with it as a result.

 

I haven't set out any micros yet, but just contemplated what I would do with those and I think in those cases, where you're only talking about a log, I would release them as MOC for a few weeks and then stand them down for whoever wanted to seek them out.

Human nature being what it is, if something is free there's gonna be a lot of folks who take advantage of it....especially if it provides the level of enjoyment that geocaching does. If the site were to go under because of financial reasons, they would most likely be the ones complaining the loudest. If you can afford a GPSr, I think you can afford the cost for a Premium Membership. I'd like to see it set up so that you'd have a month or two free and then if you want to access the site, you pay.

Where I'm located is a small area and the new cache sites in the area are few. I've been a member for two months and have placed out eight caches with a half dozen more ready to go. Containers with good quality swag inside are costing anywhere from $7-$10+ . I just made two of the latest MOC and some in the area are complaining because of that. When you check...they've been members for 3 and 4 years or more and have one(1) cache out...reaping the benefits of new blood and putting nothing back. (Can't say they are putting back an item of equal or lesser value when they take something out either....but that's a totally different topic). Surely, one or two new caches a year is not too much to ask. So, most of mine will stay MOC. If I see someone wants to access one or more and they e-mail me and I see they are contributing to the enjoyment of others I will gladly give them the co-ords.

[+Guinness70]

(this isnot about you zircon_215, Airmapper, D@nim@l you just happen to be the previous posters )

 

wondering wether certain posters can still read the print on their quote button? < thats sarcasme, before you quote me and "worryingly enquire as to wether or not" i'm computer illiterate and the other one then quote the first one stating that is rude and so on and on...

 

carry on...

 

best way to distract two fighting dogs is to make a loud noise.

Edited August 18, 2008 by Guinness70

[+DavidMac]

I'd like to make a cache that was non-member only for the first week or so.

 

Just so someone other than the same people who have gotten FTF on every cache in the city for the past few years got a chance.

 

I've seen caches like that before.

 

The catch is that you would have to list it as a mystery cache, because of the ALR. There was one published recently in my area that could not be logged for the first 30 days by anyone with over 200 finds.

[+Bad_CRC]

I'd like to make a cache that was non-member only for the first week or so.

 

Just so someone other than the same people who have gotten FTF on every cache in the city for the past few years got a chance.

 

I've seen caches like that before.

 

The catch is that you would have to list it as a mystery cache, because of the ALR. There was one published recently in my area that could not be logged for the first 30 days by anyone with over 200 finds.

 

TBH, I would not be in favor of a non-member cache, any more than I like the member-only caches. I was just joking about that. I think everyone should have an equal chance, and I don't like any restrictions such as those, which I consider silly, but what is, is.

[+TrailGators]

I'd like to make a cache that was non-member only for the first week or so.

 

Just so someone other than the same people who have gotten FTF on every cache in the city for the past few years got a chance.

 

I've seen caches like that before.

 

The catch is that you would have to list it as a mystery cache, because of the ALR. There was one published recently in my area that could not be logged for the first 30 days by anyone with over 200 finds.

 

TBH, I would not be in favor of a non-member cache, any more than I like the member-only caches. I was just joking about that. I think everyone should have an equal chance, and I don't like any restrictions such as those, which I consider silly, but what is, is.

What if you heard that PMOCs have been responsible for raising ~$100K over the years (hypothetical number) by making new members more aware of the premium membership? There are several people in this thread that have joined or know people that have joined because of PMOC caches. So I see a very positive aspect of these caches. The people that don't want to pay still have 95% of caches that are free to find. Edited August 19, 2008 by TrailGators

[+Bad_CRC]

What if you heard that PMOCs have been responsible for raising ~$100K over the years (hypothetical number) by making new members more aware of the premium membership? There are several people in this thread that have joined or know people that have joined because of PMOC caches. So I see a very positive aspect of these caches. The people that don't want to pay still have 95% of caches that are free to find.

 

if we are making up numbers, I could ask what if you heard that PMO caches cost the site ~$150K over the years (hypothetical number) by making new members decide to never get a premium membership?

 

anyway,

 

There are plenty of things that I accept, and understand why they exist, but still don't have to like them.

 

war, dentists, coupons, diet soda, reality television shows, (I could go on)

[+TrailGators]

What if you heard that PMOCs have been responsible for raising ~$100K over the years (hypothetical number) by making new members more aware of the premium membership? There are several people in this thread that have joined or know people that have joined because of PMOC caches. So I see a very positive aspect of these caches. The people that don't want to pay still have 95% of caches that are free to find.

 

if we are making up numbers, I could ask what if you heard that PMO caches cost the site ~$150K over the years (hypothetical number) by making new members decide to never get a premium membership?

 

anyway,

 

There are plenty of things that I accept, and understand why they exist, but still don't have to like them.

 

war, dentists, coupons, diet soda, reality television shows, (I could go on)

 

The bottomline is that if they weren't benefitting the site they wouldn't have them. I still see them as as an effective marketing tool.

[+Bad_CRC]

The bottomline is that if they weren't benefitting the site they wouldn't have them. I still see them as as an effective marketing tool.

 

like popup ads?

[+TrailGators]

The bottomline is that if they weren't benefitting the site they wouldn't have them. I still see them as as an effective marketing tool.

 

like popup ads?

Yes, but not as effective as those. Jeremy has already commented on how those have been far more successful than they ever thought they would be.

[+mudsneaker]

When I hide a new cache, especially if spend a bit of effort on making it extra-special, I like to keep it in members only status until a pre-specified number of finds have appeared, usually five. After that I remove the PM-only restriction.

 

I copied the idea from having seen another cacher do it. I think it is a neat way to reward fellow dues-payers while not being completely exclusive.

 

I do it for the same reasons as well. All my caches start out PM only for the first week or two depending on it's quality and the number of finders. Paying members get the first shot at it before the swag degrades to far and the geotrail is too obvious. Then I drop the PM tag so everyone can go for it, but in reality, pretty much everyone in the area is a PM so I'm just going through the motions I think out of principal..LOL

[+BoggyWoggy]

Members Only...My 1983 boyfriend wore one. I thought he was sexy.

[ajkiwi88]

Who here is annoyed with PMO caches?

 

to be honest i new to this been doing it barely a week and i am slightly annoyed with PMO caches i found a few around my area which i though sounded cool (the name) to find out its a PMO.

 

but hey if im to tight to pay the money to become a PM its my own fault but to be fair im a student without a job so im broke..... lol

 

but saying that the few out there that are PMO are not stopping my fun as there is still loads and i can see why people would do it. Infact i would be tempted my self to set on up (if i was a pm of course) it guarentees that the people who come to your cache have a certain level of comitment to your cache so that it might not get as trashed as easily or muggled.

[+cashingrrl]

I'm a newbie. Found my first 2 caches last week. I decided to become a paying member. I want to support this fantastic sport.

 

Altho, I might save some hunts for colder weather. That copperhead picture was scary.

 

There are plenty out there for everyone. Limits are OK for some.