Premium Member Only caches are elitist!

[+Scubasonic]

' timestamp='1306215237' post='4720518']

If you can't ante up, don't play.

 

Roman,

 

Now this part of your post I agree with.

 

SS

[+Sol seaker]

I've never heard someone who doesn't pay for the site called a "freeloader".

I've only heard appreciation for the fact that all people can play.

 

It drives me nuts when people say geocaching should be free to everyone with no one ever having to pay to get more. This time the reasoning is that it started free.

Did you know land in the US used to be free? If you squatted on it, you got it. You had to build or plant or something, but it was free. So I suppose you think that still should be free too? Yeah, I do too.

But as that last big upgrade shows, geocaching.com takes a whole lot of money to run. Jeremy has to pay the rent just like everyone else. Keeping up this website is a full time job for many people. They all have bills to pay.

I'm just grateful they keep it free to those who don't want to pay.

 

So what's the big deal with some premium member caches? It has saved many caches from cache maggots over the years. A lot of people have written into the forums saying their cache got muggled regularly until it became premium member.

[+Scubasonic]

Premium member caches are a terrible idea, after having been away for a while I find this site is getting far too commerical.

 

Theres a relatively new cache in my area, for premium members only. Wtf? you are hiding some object out in the wild but only want it to be found by people who open up their credit card details to some site which isn't even theirs. Definitely elitist

 

I was so moved by this thread that I went back on most of my hides which isn't all that many about 50 and changed them to PM caches will get to the rest later got tired.

 

SS

[+Roman!]

Premium member caches are a terrible idea, after having been away for a while I find this site is getting far too commerical.

 

Theres a relatively new cache in my area, for premium members only. Wtf? you are hiding some object out in the wild but only want it to be found by people who open up their credit card details to some site which isn't even theirs. Definitely elitist

 

You do realize that it's the CO that decides wether a cache is a PMOC or not right? And if the CO invests his or her time and money to place a cache they have every right to determine who can find it. Don't like it? Too bad, no one ever said life is fair. Get me in to a Playboy mansion party and I might change my mind, till then pay up or suck it up.

[+geocat_]

Get me in to a Playboy mansion party and I might change my mind, till then pay up or suck it up.

 

Woo hoo! Now there's an idea for a geo-event!

 

 

[Trader Rick & Rosie]

Am I alone here?

 

Yup. pretty much.

 

Nope. not at all

[Trader Rick & Rosie]

 

I waited a week before I posted this, giving myself time to cool off and think about it more...

 

 

Apparently you didn't wait long enough.

 

actually, you waited just the right amount of time.

Edited May 24, 2011 by Trader Rick & Rosie

[+baloo&bd]

' timestamp='1306217897' post='4720535']

You do realize that it's the CO that decides wether a cache is a PMOC or not right? And if the CO invests his or her time and money to place a cache they have every right to determine who can find it.

 

Umm....no. PM caches only mean it is more difficult for BMs to see the info on the page. GS included a feature that let's everyone, PM and BM, find and log the cache.

[+Aggrajag]

I became a PM within a couple of weeks of starting to play, in my opinion it's a negligible amount of money for 12 months worth of fun (about the same as 10 drinks???)

 

I don't know how to calculate it easily but I would estimate over 50% of caches within 10 miles of my home are PM only.

 

I also publish my puzzles as PM only and then drop them to BM after they've been out a while.

[Mr.Yuck]

Why would that bother you?

It doesnt matter if it bothers me or not, its invasion of privacy.

 

Btw could someone please point me to the place where its indicated that PM owners will be able to see when someone visits their page?

 

Let me rephrase that, then... why would it be an invasion of privacy?

You cant see it? Think about it for awhile, it will come to you.

 

Im just waiting for someone to show me where I gave the consent for anyone to be able to see when I visited their cache page?

 

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

 

Yes, you can see I found a cache last night in Wheatfield, NY. I even play foursquare. But I could turn both those off in a second if I wanted to. I never signed up for people being to see when and how many times I viewed a page on the internet.

[+jon.hemlock.Chantal]

Why would that bother you?

It doesnt matter if it bothers me or not, its invasion of privacy.

 

Btw could someone please point me to the place where its indicated that PM owners will be able to see when someone visits their page?

 

Let me rephrase that, then... why would it be an invasion of privacy?

You cant see it? Think about it for awhile, it will come to you.

 

Im just waiting for someone to show me where I gave the consent for anyone to be able to see when I visited their cache page?

 

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

 

Yes, you can see I found a cache last night in Wheatfield, NY. I even play foursquare. But I could turn both those off in a second if I wanted to. I never signed up for people being to see when and how many times I viewed a page on the internet.

Call me ignorant, but I do not have a clue how someone can know if/when I visited their cache, unless I logged something.

Am I missing something here???

Edited May 24, 2011 by jon.hemlock.Chantal

[+terrkan78]

Call me ignorant, but I do not have a clue how someone can know if/when I visited their cache, unless I logged something.

Am I missing something here???

Not how many times you visited their cache, but how many times you looked at their cache's webpage. If they have their cache set to "premium member only," then they get an audit log that shows who looked at their cache's webpage and when.

 

I have to admit that even though I'm sure no one gives a rip that I've looked at their PM cache page, it still bugs me that the feature exists. I like to go back and look at recent logs, etc., on caches that I enjoyed, or caches that I'm thinking about hunting. Sometimes I'll go back once, twice, ten times--or at least I used to do so until I found out that people know that I've looked at their PM page ten times - it's akin to being embarrassed at getting caught snooping (I know it's not exactly "snooping" since it's a public page, but...)

[+jon.hemlock.Chantal]

Call me ignorant, but I do not have a clue how someone can know if/when I visited their cache, unless I logged something.

Am I missing something here???

Not how many times you visited their cache, but how many times you looked at their cache's webpage. If they have their cache set to "premium member only," then they get an audit log that shows who looked at their cache's webpage and when.

 

I have to admit that even though I'm sure no one gives a rip that I've looked at their PM cache page, it still bugs me that the feature exists. I like to go back and look at recent logs, etc., on caches that I enjoyed, or caches that I'm thinking about hunting. Sometimes I'll go back once, twice, ten times--or at least I used to do so until I found out that people know that I've looked at their PM page ten times - it's akin to being embarrassed at getting caught snooping (I know it's not exactly "snooping" since it's a public page, but...)

Yuck! That is creepy!

I am also the type who likes to look at logs many times, but now that I am aware of this feature, I may avoid the PM only caches altogether.

Thanks for the explanation.

Edited May 24, 2011 by jon.hemlock.Chantal

[+The Jester]

As I understand it, there is an audit log on every cache page. Only on the PMO can the CO see it, but TPTB can see all the activity on all pages.

[+Ecylram]

Wtf? you are hiding some object out in the wild but only want it to be found by people who open up their credit card details to some site which isn't even theirs. Definitely elitist

 

I'd be one of those "elitists" you're referring to.

 

In my little corner of the world there has been an influx of people with newly acquired GPS-enabled phones that can pull up information on geocaches without any in-depth knowledge about the game. Some actually believe (initially) that it's a treasure hunt and if they find the cache they can keep it. Others don't know the importance of treating the cache respectfully and protecting the hide from muggles by being stealthy and replacing the cache properly.

 

Short version...in our area, nice non-premium caches don't have a long shelf life.

 

Premium members are a self-selected group of geocachers that have made a determination that Geocaching is going to be a regular activity. They are more knowledgeable and more invested into the activity (on average). As a result, premium-only caches have a longer shelf life (here, anyway).

 

I just placed a cache that took over six months to accumulate the needed parts, It cost over $120 to construct and took six weeks to construct and deploy. If (when) it is muggled or destroyed it would take me months to replace with an equivalent cache. So I made it a PMO cache to extend it's life and my investment.

 

If I ever decided to throw out uninteresting film canisters and pill bottles, I wouldn't bother with the PMO. But, if I've got a lot of time, money and effort invested into a "better" cache, I'll be an "elitist" and make it a PMO.

[knowschad]

' timestamp='1306215237' post='4720518']

IMHO, they should make a rule that for every 10 caches one places at least 9 have to be PMOC caches of various levels, 1 silver, 3 gold and 5 platinum. There should also be 3 premier membership levels, $30 gets you silver, $900 gets you gold and $27,000 gets you platinum. If you can't ante up, don't play.

 

Wouldn't that be elitist, though?

[+Roman!]

' timestamp='1306215237' post='4720518']

IMHO, they should make a rule that for every 10 caches one places at least 9 have to be PMOC caches of various levels, 1 silver, 3 gold and 5 platinum. There should also be 3 premier membership levels, $30 gets you silver, $900 gets you gold and $27,000 gets you platinum. If you can't ante up, don't play.

 

Wouldn't that be elitist, though?

 

Well, according to the OP geocaching already is is so with that in mind my philosophy is go big or go home.

[+A & J Tooling]

Anyone going online has to realize that everyone and their brother is tracking everything they do, including Big Brother. Their info is stored in databases all over the world and being sold to the highest bidder.

 

As for the premium memberships, as said before, it's to keep out the Riffraff.... except for those of us who are Riffraff and are Elitest...

[Mr.Yuck]

Call me ignorant, but I do not have a clue how someone can know if/when I visited their cache, unless I logged something.

Am I missing something here???

Not how many times you visited their cache, but how many times you looked at their cache's webpage. If they have their cache set to "premium member only," then they get an audit log that shows who looked at their cache's webpage and when.

 

I have to admit that even though I'm sure no one gives a rip that I've looked at their PM cache page, it still bugs me that the feature exists. I like to go back and look at recent logs, etc., on caches that I enjoyed, or caches that I'm thinking about hunting. Sometimes I'll go back once, twice, ten times--or at least I used to do so until I found out that people know that I've looked at their PM page ten times - it's akin to being embarrassed at getting caught snooping (I know it's not exactly "snooping" since it's a public page, but...)

Yuck! That is creepy!

I am also the type who likes to look at logs many times, but now that I am aware of this feature, I may avoid the PM only caches altogether.

Thanks for the explanation.

 

There are many among us who publicly admit they like looking at the data of their fellow Geocachers web-surfing habits, and some who even admit making some of their caches PMO just because of the audit log. As a matter of fact, I'm sure we'll be hearing from some of them.

[+Ecylram]

There are many among us who publicly admit they like looking at the data of their fellow Geocachers web-surfing habits, and some who even admit making some of their caches PMO just because of the audit log. As a matter of fact, I'm sure we'll be hearing from some of them.

 

There really is value to the audit logs for a cache owner. Here are some examples:

• A friend has a very cool and very complicated multi-stage mystery cache. When someone is actively working the cache he makes sure the electronic portion of the cache is still working properly when they get to the final.
• Some cachers are known to be hard on the area around the cache and don't post their DNF's. It gives the CO a heads up to make sure the environment around the cache is all as it should be.
• There have been some cases of multi-cache thefts in area recently. The affected cache owners use the logs in an attempt to identify the perpetrator and to identify possible muggled caches they don't know about yet.

For me, I haven't had any need for the audit logs and it doesn't bother me if CO's know if I've viewed their cache description. I've also had people log legitimate finds that never showed up in the audit logs.

Edited May 24, 2011 by Ecylram

[+Scubasonic]

Call me ignorant, but I do not have a clue how someone can know if/when I visited their cache, unless I logged something.

Am I missing something here???

Not how many times you visited their cache, but how many times you looked at their cache's webpage. If they have their cache set to "premium member only," then they get an audit log that shows who looked at their cache's webpage and when.

 

I have to admit that even though I'm sure no one gives a rip that I've looked at their PM cache page, it still bugs me that the feature exists. I like to go back and look at recent logs, etc., on caches that I enjoyed, or caches that I'm thinking about hunting. Sometimes I'll go back once, twice, ten times--or at least I used to do so until I found out that people know that I've looked at their PM page ten times - it's akin to being embarrassed at getting caught snooping (I know it's not exactly "snooping" since it's a public page, but...)

Yuck! That is creepy!

I am also the type who likes to look at logs many times, but now that I am aware of this feature, I may avoid the PM only caches altogether.

Thanks for the explanation.

 

There are many among us who publicly admit they like looking at the data of their fellow Geocachers web-surfing habits, and some who even admit making some of their caches PMO just because of the audit log. As a matter of fact, I'm sure we'll be hearing from some of them.

 

Mr. Yuck is 100% right I enjoy seeing who is looking at my caches the Audit function is a great idea and I love it.

 

Scubasonic

Edited May 24, 2011 by Scubasonic

[Mushtang]

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

And I've been calling BS on this for years. And I just did it again.

[+Scubasonic]

I had some very cool Geocoins that I put in my Travel Bug Hotel and before I made it a premium cache a new cacher with 2 finds at the time (Non-Premium member) took the coins and never moved them, I emailed him several times and never got a response. I changed it to a PM cache and that was 2 years ago and never had a problem since.

 

Scubasonic

[GOF and Bacall]

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

And I've been calling BS on this for years. And I just did it again.

 

I doubt very much the Mr Yuck would make up such a story. I don't think it is a big deal though if someone wants to email me and ask why I am looking at their cache page. There is no invasion of privacy. Nobody knows who you are unless you tell them!

 

I made a few of my caches PMO for a while. I bought into the idea that GS needed the support. Servers and developers cost money. That and I liked the audit log. It was fun to see who was interested in my cache. Yes, I know it is an incomplete list. So what?

 

But I don't have any PMOs left. Groundspeak is doing very well without my PMO caches. It seems that plenty of us are paying our dues as it is. The audit log I just found I wasn't paying attention to it very much any more.

[+jhellwig]

A premium member only cache just means that some of the more "senior" cachers are making the FTF prize a Members Only jacket they found hanging in their closet and are to embarrassed to go to Good Will and get rid of it.

 

The website needs money to run. People won't always give them money out of the kindness of their hearts so there needs to be some gain to be had from paying for a membership. If you had to pay for a membership to use this site at all there would be nothing wrong with that. (This would be a non issue if that was the case.) Someone put forth their time and money to make this so they get to call the shots. Using any web site is not a right. It is a privilege and it someone wants to make you pay for it, that is their right.

[Mr.Yuck]

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

And I've been calling BS on this for years. And I just did it again.

 

He-he. Made you post.

[Mushtang]

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

And I've been calling BS on this for years. And I just did it again.

I doubt very much the Mr Yuck would make up such a story.

The BS I'm calling isn't on if someone emailed him or not. What I think is BS is his interpretation of WHY they emailed him.

 

I have no doubt he got an email that was something like, "Hi there. This is XXX and I noticed on my audit log that you were looking at my cache page. Can you tell me why you were looking at it?"

 

His reaction was in line with someone emailing him and instead saying, "What the HELL do you think you're doing looking at MY cache page?!?! You have no business looking at it and I'd appreciate it if you'd keep your fat nose out of any of my cache pages in the future". And that's what I think is BS. Nobody was upset that he'd been looking at their page like he's making it sound.

 

What almost certainly happened was that someone was looking at their audit log and maybe noticed a name that they didn't recognize as being from the area. So out of curiosity they checked his profile and saw that he was 4 states away. They thought to themselves, "Cool! Someone really far away is looking at my cache. That's pretty neat. Gee I wonder what led them to the page? It might have been a friend of theirs that lives nearby that mentioned my cache was a good one. Or maybe it was mentioned in the forums? Perhaps they just randomly look at pages around the world for ideas. Since it could be anything, I think I'll email him and ask. This might be fun". And so they sent their email which was taken in the worst possible way.

[+Ecylram]

The BS I'm calling isn't on if someone emailed him or not. What I think is BS is his interpretation of WHY they emailed him.

 

Why are you calling BS on Mr. Yuck when he isn't presenting his interpretation and just mentioned that an incident had happened? The quote from above:

 

 

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

 

Now, if he does present his interpretation AND you have first-hand facts that contradict his statement, not an uninformed opinion...then it might be reasonable response (if it'd done within the forum guidelines on civil behavior).

[+jon.hemlock.Chantal]

The BS I'm calling isn't on if someone emailed him or not. What I think is BS is his interpretation of WHY they emailed him.

 

Why are you calling BS on Mr. Yuck when he isn't presenting his interpretation and just mentioned that an incident had happened? The quote from above:

 

 

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

 

Now, if he does present his interpretation AND you have first-hand facts that contradict his statement, not an uninformed opinion...then it might be reasonable response (if it'd done within the forum guidelines on civil behavior).

I second that.

[knowschad]

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

And I've been calling BS on this for years. And I just did it again.

I doubt very much the Mr Yuck would make up such a story.

The BS I'm calling isn't on if someone emailed him or not. What I think is BS is his interpretation of WHY they emailed him.

 

I have no doubt he got an email that was something like, "Hi there. This is XXX and I noticed on my audit log that you were looking at my cache page. Can you tell me why you were looking at it?"

 

His reaction was in line with someone emailing him and instead saying, "What the HELL do you think you're doing looking at MY cache page?!?! You have no business looking at it and I'd appreciate it if you'd keep your fat nose out of any of my cache pages in the future". And that's what I think is BS. Nobody was upset that he'd been looking at their page like he's making it sound.

 

What almost certainly happened was that someone was looking at their audit log and maybe noticed a name that they didn't recognize as being from the area. So out of curiosity they checked his profile and saw that he was 4 states away. They thought to themselves, "Cool! Someone really far away is looking at my cache. That's pretty neat. Gee I wonder what led them to the page? It might have been a friend of theirs that lives nearby that mentioned my cache was a good one. Or maybe it was mentioned in the forums? Perhaps they just randomly look at pages around the world for ideas. Since it could be anything, I think I'll email him and ask. This might be fun". And so they sent their email which was taken in the worst possible way.

I'll see your BS and raise you one.

[Mushtang]

The BS I'm calling isn't on if someone emailed him or not. What I think is BS is his interpretation of WHY they emailed him.

Why are you calling BS on Mr. Yuck when he isn't presenting his interpretation and just mentioned that an incident had happened? The quote from above:

 

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

 

Now, if he does present his interpretation AND you have first-hand facts that contradict his statement, not an uninformed opinion...then it might be reasonable response (if it'd done within the forum guidelines on civil behavior).

Thanks for quoting him, it kept me from having to do it.

 

He's told the story before, and I'd heard it before. It didn't make sense then and it doesn't make sense now. I called a BS on it before and I'm calling a BS on it again.

[jholly]

I'm sorry, I seemed to have lost the train of thought. What are we arguing about again?

[Mushtang]

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

And I've been calling BS on this for years. And I just did it again.

I doubt very much the Mr Yuck would make up such a story.

The BS I'm calling isn't on if someone emailed him or not. What I think is BS is his interpretation of WHY they emailed him.

 

I have no doubt he got an email that was something like, "Hi there. This is XXX and I noticed on my audit log that you were looking at my cache page. Can you tell me why you were looking at it?"

 

His reaction was in line with someone emailing him and instead saying, "What the HELL do you think you're doing looking at MY cache page?!?! You have no business looking at it and I'd appreciate it if you'd keep your fat nose out of any of my cache pages in the future". And that's what I think is BS. Nobody was upset that he'd been looking at their page like he's making it sound.

 

What almost certainly happened was that someone was looking at their audit log and maybe noticed a name that they didn't recognize as being from the area. So out of curiosity they checked his profile and saw that he was 4 states away. They thought to themselves, "Cool! Someone really far away is looking at my cache. That's pretty neat. Gee I wonder what led them to the page? It might have been a friend of theirs that lives nearby that mentioned my cache was a good one. Or maybe it was mentioned in the forums? Perhaps they just randomly look at pages around the world for ideas. Since it could be anything, I think I'll email him and ask. This might be fun". And so they sent their email which was taken in the worst possible way.

I'll see your BS and raise you one.

 

I call.

[+dfx]

The BS I'm calling isn't on if someone emailed him or not. What I think is BS is his interpretation of WHY they emailed him.

 

I have no doubt he got an email that was something like, "Hi there. This is XXX and I noticed on my audit log that you were looking at my cache page. Can you tell me why you were looking at it?"

 

His reaction was in line with someone emailing him and instead saying, "What the HELL do you think you're doing looking at MY cache page?!?! You have no business looking at it and I'd appreciate it if you'd keep your fat nose out of any of my cache pages in the future". And that's what I think is BS. Nobody was upset that he'd been looking at their page like he's making it sound.

 

Actually, that doesn't matter at all. A CO has no business emailing people and asking them why they looked at his cache listing, no matter what the circumstances are.

[Mushtang]

The BS I'm calling isn't on if someone emailed him or not. What I think is BS is his interpretation of WHY they emailed him.

 

I have no doubt he got an email that was something like, "Hi there. This is XXX and I noticed on my audit log that you were looking at my cache page. Can you tell me why you were looking at it?"

 

His reaction was in line with someone emailing him and instead saying, "What the HELL do you think you're doing looking at MY cache page?!?! You have no business looking at it and I'd appreciate it if you'd keep your fat nose out of any of my cache pages in the future". And that's what I think is BS. Nobody was upset that he'd been looking at their page like he's making it sound.

 

Actually, that doesn't matter at all. A CO has no business emailing people and asking them why they looked at his cache listing, no matter what the circumstances are.

 

No business? We're not allowed to contact other cachers with friendly questions? I've looked at Audit Logs before and have seen people from far away, and have been curious about how they got to my cache, but I didn't ask only because my curiosity wasn't high enough. Not because I didn't think I would have stepped over some line of appropriateness.

 

I've had people email me asking about how I did something on a cache, or asking about something I mentioned in the forums. I've emailed people from the forums asking about something they'd mentioned. These, to me, are all examples of the same thing: contacting a fellow cacher with a friendly question.

 

I just think in the above example that the email was worded in such a way that it was possible to be misunderstood. And possibly the reader was already predisposed to take things in a bad tone.

 

But to say that someone has no business emailing with a question is just beyond my understanding of what is acceptable for friendly people to do.

[+Kameharem]

thanks for this discussion. after reading all this I think I'm going to change my only cache to PMO. it's a puzzle cache and nobody has been logging finds but it would be nice to know if anyone is even atempting to solve the puzzle.

[+dfx]

No business? We're not allowed to contact other cachers with friendly questions? I've looked at Audit Logs before and have seen people from far away, and have been curious about how they got to my cache, but I didn't ask only because my curiosity wasn't high enough. Not because I didn't think I would have stepped over some line of appropriateness.

 

I've had people email me asking about how I did something on a cache, or asking about something I mentioned in the forums. I've emailed people from the forums asking about something they'd mentioned. These, to me, are all examples of the same thing: contacting a fellow cacher with a friendly question.

 

Not quite, there's a subtle difference. When you post a log to a cache listing or make a forum post, it's an explicit action you take. You choose to do that and you choose to make yourself visible in the way that you do, knowingly opening the door to other members replying to you or contacting you. But looking at a cache listing is not an explicit action, it's something passive. You might not even know that it's a PMO cache ahead of time, so you have no chance to keep yourself out of the audit log. That's why it's not appropriate for a CO to contact random users who have looked at their listing, even if it's just out of curiosity. Having the audit log is a privilege, randomly contacting users from it is an abuse thereof.

Edited May 24, 2011 by dfx

[+Ecylram]

The BS I'm calling isn't on if someone emailed him or not. What I think is BS is his interpretation of WHY they emailed him.

Why are you calling BS on Mr. Yuck when he isn't presenting his interpretation and just mentioned that an incident had happened? The quote from above:

 

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

 

Now, if he does present his interpretation AND you have first-hand facts that contradict his statement, not an uninformed opinion...then it might be reasonable response (if it'd done within the forum guidelines on civil behavior).

Thanks for quoting him, it kept me from having to do it.

 

He's told the story before, and I'd heard it before. It didn't make sense then and it doesn't make sense now. I called a BS on it before and I'm calling a BS on it again.

 

Sigh...With a nod to the bespeckled one, I think this will be one of those times where I delete all my potential responses and leave it at that.

[Mushtang]

No business? We're not allowed to contact other cachers with friendly questions? I've looked at Audit Logs before and have seen people from far away, and have been curious about how they got to my cache, but I didn't ask only because my curiosity wasn't high enough. Not because I didn't think I would have stepped over some line of appropriateness.

 

I've had people email me asking about how I did something on a cache, or asking about something I mentioned in the forums. I've emailed people from the forums asking about something they'd mentioned. These, to me, are all examples of the same thing: contacting a fellow cacher with a friendly question.

Not quite, there's a subtle difference. When you post a log to a cache listing or make a forum post, it's an explicit action you take. You choose to do that and you choose to make yourself visible in the way that you do, knowingly opening the door to other members replying to you or contacting you. But looking at a cache listing is not an explicit action, it's something passive. You might not even know that it's a PMO cache ahead of time, so you have no chance to keep yourself out of the audit log. That's why it's not appropriate for a CO to contact random users who have looked at their listing, even if it's just out of curiosity. Having the audit log is a privilege, randomly contacting users from it is an abuse thereof.

Well I guess I'll do like others are doing, and just acknowledge that we don't agree. I see no abuse when contacting someone as long as the email sent isn't rude in nature and I would hope that most people would accept the email with a smile rather than to be upset about something so innocent.

 

Perhaps I'm naive about how people can be.

[+dfx]

I see no abuse when contacting someone as long as the email sent isn't rude in nature and I would hope that most people would accept the email with a smile rather than to be upset about something so innocent.

Well, some people don't, that's exactly the point.

 

If I don't want people contacting me in reply to a forum post, I can just not post.

If I don't want people contacting me in reply to a cache log, I can just not log.

If I don't want people contacting me in reply to me looking at a cache listing, I can .... well, nothing.

[+DanOCan]

I was not aware that PMO had an audit that showed who visited their page... The cache owner can see when and how many times I visited their cache, isnt there a breach of privacy somewhere?

 

If you feel this way, may I be so bold as to suggest that perhaps the internet isn't for you?

[Mr.Yuck]

The BS I'm calling isn't on if someone emailed him or not. What I think is BS is his interpretation of WHY they emailed him.

Why are you calling BS on Mr. Yuck when he isn't presenting his interpretation and just mentioned that an incident had happened? The quote from above:

 

C'mon KC, I've been ranting about this for years. And don't make me tell the story again how someone once emailed me through the website and asked me why I looked at her cache page. Oops, I just did.

 

Now, if he does present his interpretation AND you have first-hand facts that contradict his statement, not an uninformed opinion...then it might be reasonable response (if it'd done within the forum guidelines on civil behavior).

Thanks for quoting him, it kept me from having to do it.

 

He's told the story before, and I'd heard it before. It didn't make sense then and it doesn't make sense now. I called a BS on it before and I'm calling a BS on it again.

 

Mr. Yuck's interpretation is much simpler than the one offered by Mushtang. My response was just "none of her beeswax why I looked at a page on the internet" (her cache page). Yep, that's it.

 

And Mushtang never said this, but I don't want people thinking I came here ranting to the forums and started a thread. I have however, brought it up in these sorts of threads several times.

[+fuzziebear3]

If I don't want people contacting me in reply to me looking at a cache listing, I can .... well, nothing.

 

1.) Don't look at PM listings.

2.) Don't put your email address in your profile (or put in some bogus one that you never check, because you don't like unsolicited emails from geocachers).

[+Vater_Araignee]

I see no abuse when contacting someone as long as the email sent isn't rude in nature and I would hope that most people would accept the email with a smile rather than to be upset about something so innocent.

Well, some people don't, that's exactly the point.

 

If I don't want people contacting me in reply to a forum post, I can just not post.

If I don't want people contacting me in reply to a cache log, I can just not log.

If I don't want people contacting me in reply to me looking at a cache listing, I can just not look at a the cache listing on line.

Another acceptable response for #3 in red.

[+geocat_]

Yeah, just like those elitists that get to dine on steak and have fine wine served to them. They only give it to those idiots who actually pay for it. Imagine that! Ticks me off almost as much as those other elitists who I saw at the baseball game after they bought a ticket. I know they were just in there laughing at me when I was turned away for demanding entry at the gate and was turned away because I figured I deserved it even though I refused to be an elitist ticket-buyer.

 

Been a while since seeing a post this far off the subject.

 

Sorry you think I am off topic. Simply pointing out that you don't get things for free. Sorry to be so metaphorical.

 

 

[+Strike Anywhere]

 

The true reason for getting a PM is to support the sport/game/hobby we all love.

 

I could care less about the support of it/them all - some of the paid heavies are very tight crackwise - but one would be missing out on the downloading of caches in 1000 loads and not by way of nit-picking a few at a time in a list or bookmark... that is worth 2.50 a month for me. And no goofy ads to mull over... I log for my kids here and there and they can get quite annoying when you are used to it. I dont know why we have PMOC's but I dont understand half of the rules and changes that Seattle makes but just let it go (well not today but most of the time.)

[+dfx]

If I don't want people contacting me in reply to me looking at a cache listing, I can .... well, nothing.

 

1.) Don't look at PM listings.

The only way to know if a cache listing is PMO is to look at it. At least in many cases, like a link posted here in the forums.

 

2.) Don't put your email address in your profile (or put in some bogus one that you never check, because you don't like unsolicited emails from geocachers).

That would keep me from getting any messages at all. That's not what I want.

[mresoteric]

If I don't want people contacting me in reply to me looking at a cache listing, I can .... well, nothing.

 

1.) Don't look at PM listings.

 

 

Or remain a regular member. I have accidently landed on several PMO listings, mainly clicking links in the forums. Not everyone that views one of these pages means to view it.

 

I agree with dfx except that I would say it's a huge difference between actively participating in a conversation or logging a cache and passively viewing a cache listing.

 

I really don't think it's anyone's business if I look at a cache listing.

 

Just curious, if a regular member lands on a pmo page, does it show up even though all we see is the ad asking us to upgrade?

[+dfx]

Just curious, if a regular member lands on a pmo page, does it show up even though all we see is the ad asking us to upgrade?

 

Just tested it: they don't.

[mresoteric]

Just curious, if a regular member lands on a pmo page, does it show up even though all we see is the ad asking us to upgrade?

 

Just tested it: they don't.

 

Cool. One more reason to avoid premium membership.