Premium Member Only caches are elitist!

[+fox-and-the-hound]

Hmmm...

 

By definition "Elitism is the belief or attitude that those individuals who are considered members of the elite are those whose actions are most likely to be constructive to society as a whole."

 

So... a group of "elite" (or feel free to insert "just plain generous") people happily pay for a hobby that the rest of our geocaching society enjoys playing for free. If they're happy to pay for 100% why should I complain about the couple extra caches they put out as a thanks to the others also paying (or for any reason for that matter)?

 

As for being "freeloaders"? Who on earth said that?

[+linuxxpert]

Almost all of my hides PMO, for me the reason is this:

I have caches out there that have cost me a few hundred dollars to place (some more)... I just don't want a brand new cacher with a borrowed GPSr that doesn't know how this whole geocaching works taking my cache or vandalizing it (by accident or not).

Another reason is that some of my caches are EXTREMELY dangerous and a brand new cacher may not know how crazy this sport can get and get hurt.

Now I realize that anybody can become a PM right away but most if not all people find a few caches before they pay for this sport.

Oh yeah, I like the audit feature too.

I know a few cachers that are very active cachers and don't have a Premium account simply because they cannot afford it.... I know about the work around to log but it seems that for most this is just too technical, maybe this should be made easier?

I know making my caches PMO just not make them bullet proof but it does greatly improve my chances.

[+Grigorii Rasputin]

But, at some point, when do you sally up to the bar and pay your bill? A little opinion here, but that is what is wrong with this country. "I want to play, but I don't want to pay."

 

The Premium Members are the ones who financially keep GC.Com alive. I'm not sure how contributing $30 a year (and maybe asking others to do the same to support the sport) makes one an elitist?

 

Cache Safe,

Pete

WWW.Glass-Cockpit.org

[+Jackalgirl]

Howdy --

 

I honestly, truly don't mean to be snide, but...

 

If you don't like PMOCs and/or if there are a lot of PMOCs in your area and you think it discourages new geocachers (and clever workarounds notwithstanding)...

 

What's to stop you from going out and hiding some great non-member-only caches?

 

Especially if you're a PM -- that way, you can actually scope out the area and find a spot that's relatively free.

 

I realize that in some areas, especially urban areas, the area is packed with caches, so this might be difficult. But it seems to me that the solution to not liking PMOCs is to place cool non-PMOC caches.

 

How many areas are there that are so tightly jam-packed with PMOCs that the placement of non-PMOCs is impossible?

 

(And please do correct me if I'm misunderstanding the placement of caches; I haven't figured everything out yet.)

Edited November 7, 2008 by Jackalgirl

[4x4van]

IMHO, there are very few legitimate reasons to make a cache MOC. Yes I've heard all the excuses to try to justify them, such as:

 

1. "It makes them less likely to be muggled". Wrong. Muggles, by definition, are non-cachers, and therefore didn't get the coordinates from the website, they stumbled onto the cache.

2. "It protects them from inexperienced cachers damaging or destroying them." Really? Weren't we all inexperienced at one time? Does that mean that every premium member damaged or destroyed most of the caches they found early on? I certainly didn't, and I doubt most of you did either. And does a single $30 payment really improve the integrity of a person? Boy, that's a scary opinion.

3. "It's to reward those who support the site." So are you trying to tell me that the thousands of caches placed by regular members are not in any way supporting the site? I'd lay odds that if every cache placed by a regular member disappeared tomorrow, the site would be in a world of hurt, regardless of your generous $30 support.

4. "It's to limit the number of visitors to the cache, because it's a sensitive area." Perhaps there shouldn't be a cache there in the first place if it's so sensitive.

5. "It's to limit the number of visitors because I spent so much on the cache & it's contents." That was your decision, and simply hiding it in a location that takes more work to get to, like a longer hike, would accomplish the same thing.

6. "I only make my caches MOC till the first few finders have logged visits, then I open it up for the rest of cachers." I don't buy it, at least not in my area. I have yet to see an MOC in my area be changed over to a regular cache.

7. "There is a cache maggot in the area so I need to protect it." Okay, I'll give you this one, but even then it should be temporary, since cache maggots tend to get bored and go away after awhile.

 

There are many more reasons given as well, but realistically there are other ways of addressing nearly every one of those reasons. Ways that don't exclude a large number of cachers who make this game possible in the first place. Caches are the reason for the site, not the other way around.

 

In many previous threads on this subject, I've been called cheap, a freeloader, been told that they are subsidizing my caching, etc, and even been told some things or called some things that I'd rather not even repeat. But when it's all said and done, the reality is that they are telling me that I am not good enough to search for their caches, but they are good enough (better) to search for mine. In other words, people who pay $30 are better than those of us who don't. And that is what makes alot of people look at MOCs as being "elitist".

 

I have found about 300+ caches, which is actually a small number considering that I've been caching since 2001. I may go several months between cache outings, but then go out on a Saturday and seek 10-12 or more. Then it may be another couple of months before I get the chance to get out again. When I cache, I love it, but do I "live" for caching? No. Do I think I am freeloading because I have not paid my $30? No, since I have a placed high quality caches that get very good feedback, I trade up, I rehide caches well, I maintain & repair caches that are in need. There are more ways to support the site other than with cash, and the most important is hiding quality caches and treating found caches with respect.

 

At some point, I may decide to become a premium member, but I really hope that I will never feel the need or the desire to exclude any cachers from my hides. After all, I want people to find my caches.

Edited November 7, 2008 by 4x4van

[+FluCacher]

I can see how some might find the concept to be discriminatory.

 

However, in defense of the idea, I actually have placed a members-only cache. There were two principle reasons for this.

 

One was security. We've run into some caches that when activated turned up muggled very quickly, since anyone can access the information on the locations, including the one-and-only timers.

 

The second was that it was an odd cache, somewhat unique. Again, I didn't want first timers to go out and find this one and then expect other caches to be similar and discover that it was quite literally the only one of its kind.

 

Keep in mind that I have a very good friend who is not a premium member, who lives in this area and who won't be able to find this cache. I explained to him what I was doing in regards to it, and he actually agreed with me on the decision to make it members-only.

[+chuckwagon101]

I have absolutely no qualms with Members Only Caches.....none whatsoever......as long as they follow the

**CODE**

 

The **CODE** is a BIG PILE OF STICKS!

 

(Ray Barone Voice) "THAAAT'S RIGHHHT!!"

 

As long as a big pile of sticks is at the end of my rainbow.....I'm happy!

 

I want my Big Pile Of Sticks! So THERE! I've said it!

 

That's my story.....and I'm sticking to it!!

 

[+hairball45]

If membership were $30 per day, yeah, I might see something eliteist about it. If you had to meet certain qualifications, (education, physical appearance, race, money-in-the-bank, that sort of thing), yeah maybe. howsumever, it's thirty bucks a year and they'll sell it to anybody. I pay by the month and it sets me back a whoppin' three bucks. That's less than one latte at your local overpriced coffee mill, maybe the price of one beer at your favorite watering hole. I know even that might be a stretch for a kid on a short allowance from the family, but that's a pretty special case. That kid likely isn't hitting Starbucks either. Still, even that doesn't make it eliteist. Most kids should be able to con Mom or Dad out of $30. Mine never had trouble. PMOCs aren't real common around here, and none of them anything special. A small part of PM benefits yes, but elitist, nah.

[AZcachemeister]

All my cache hides are Premium Member Only and I'll tell you why. It's not to keep out good people who can't afford to pay for a Premium Membership in these hard economic times. It's to maintain some control and accountability. There's a limited number of cachers who can access the location now and I can see which accounts have viewed the cache page, when and how many times. I like that.

 

I'm hardly an elitest at 85 finds.

 

- Elle

 

Actually, I think that the audit log is a.) A violation of my web surfing privacy (some nosy person once actually sent me an email asking why I looked at their MOC; all I was doing was surfing the freaking web ) and b.) Can lead to baseless allegations and angst over missing TB's and coins, cache mugglings etc...

 

And I don't need to view the cache page online if it comes to me in a PQ.

[+fox-and-the-hound]

1. "It makes them less likely to be muggled". Wrong. Muggles, by definition, are non-cachers, and therefore didn't get the coordinates from the website, they stumbled onto the cache.

 

Sorry, but you are absolutely wrong here. People (insert "Muggles" here) who don't like caches make a point to download coords and then go out and muggle those caches. There have been numerous threads about this in the past. It happens and it's a fact. They have even made a point to log those caches online as having been removed/destroyed/or even being held for ransom. Muggles DO get the coordinates from the website and they DO destroy caches.

 

2. "It protects them from inexperienced cachers damaging or destroying them." Really? Weren't we all inexperienced at one time? Does that mean that every premium member damaged or destroyed most of the caches they found early on? I certainly didn't, and I doubt most of you did either. And does a single $30 payment really improve the integrity of a person? Boy, that's a scary opinion.

 

Every member makes mistakes early on. Of the caches of mine that have been damaged or destroyed, 100% of those instances involved either muggles or new cachers. Of course paying $30 doesn't improve integrity, but it does allow us to use the site which otherwise wouldn't exist.

 

3. "It's to reward those who support the site." So are you trying to tell me that the thousands of caches placed by regular members are not in any way supporting the site? I'd lay odds that if every cache placed by a regular member disappeared tomorrow, the site would be in a world of hurt, regardless of your generous $30 support.

 

Placing caches doesn't pay for the financial requirements of the site. If every non PM cache disappeared tomorrow, they only thing that would keep the site running at all would be those premium memberships.

 

4. "It's to limit the number of visitors to the cache, because it's a sensitive area." Perhaps there shouldn't be a cache there in the first place if it's so sensitive.

 

Perhaps they're putting what's best for nature ahead of what's best for people who feel self-entitled to search for caches. There are limits for the number of people to visit all manner of parks, monuments, business, etc. It benefits the greater good and state otherwise without knowing all the facts is irresponsible at best.

 

5. "It's to limit the number of visitors because I spent so much on the cache & it's contents." That was your decision, and simply hiding it in a location that takes more work to get to, like a longer hike, would accomplish the same thing.

 

I can almost agree with you here and in many cases feel the same way. However, there are caches that may for various reasons need to be put in a very specific location to function. When that location is easily accessed the only way to limit numbers of visitors is to restrict the number who have access to the coords.

 

6. "I only make my caches MOC till the first few finders have logged visits, then I open it up for the rest of cachers." I don't buy it, at least not in my area. I have yet to see an MOC in my area be changed over to a regular cache.

 

That's your area and not representative of every other caching area in the world so why should it affect the rules for everyone else everywhere else?

 

7. "There is a cache maggot in the area so I need to protect it." Okay, I'll give you this one, but even then it should be temporary, since cache maggots tend to get bored and go away after awhile.

 

So now it's okay, but only for as long as you think it's appropriate?

 

There are many more reasons given as well, but realistically there are other ways of addressing nearly every one of those reasons. Ways that don't exclude a large number of cachers who make this game possible in the first place. Caches are the reason for the site, not the other way around.

 

Sorry, hate to break it to you, but the large number of caches placed by non PM cachers DO NOT make this game possible. They DO make it much, much more enjoyable and I'm infinitely grateful to them for their hard work and their generosity. This site IS possible because charter members plunked down their dollars so everyone else could play. They took a chance and gave generously so we could play for free. They and their memberships make this site possible.

 

...when it's all said and done, the reality is that they are telling me that I am not good enough to search for their caches, but they are good enough (better) to search for mine. In other words, people who pay $30 are better than those of us who don't. And that is what makes alot of people look at MOCs as being "elitist".

 

When it's all said and done, YOUR reality is how you perceive it. Presuming you know how every premium member feels based about non PMs on your limited debate with a few in the forums is just not reality. I'm a PM, my wife, child and most of my friends are not. They don't think I'm elitist and I don't think any less of them either. We're all just cachers and some of us are lucky enough to have the ability to donate some dollars to a great activity that we all enjoy.

 

Do I think I am freeloading because I have not paid my $30? No, since I have a placed high quality caches that get very good feedback, I trade up, I rehide caches well, I maintain & repair caches that are in need. There are more ways to support the site other than with cash, and the most important is hiding quality caches and treating found caches with respect.

 

I completely, 100% agree with you here. There are more ways to support the site than cash, but unfortunately high quality caches don't pay the bills. The reality is this site costs money. The people who make it possible have bills to pay. Premium Memberships pay those bills. People who place high quality caches, trade up, and rehide caches well are what make caching great and you're a testament to the kind of cacher I want to spend time with, but that's not what we're talking about here.

[+succotash]

Much of this thread doesn't separate the idea of Premium Membership from the MOC feature. We're PMs, happy to have the features available, and are happy to add that to our ways of supporting the site. We don't own any MOC and haven't had any reason to restrict our caches. We had a "live and let live" attitude about them until learning about the audit feature. For someone who enjoys surfing the caching web, usually using the map feature (which does not let you know if a cache is MOC until you click on it), that feature does seem misguided. According to Geocacher-U:

 

"The purpose of MOC was to prevent cache piracy. Owners of MOC caches have the ability to view an "audit page" which shows the names of all the users who have viewed the cache page, how many times they have viewed it and the last time they viewed it."

 

To me, that implies that if I click on a MOC I am instantly a suspect in the event of future mishaps to befall that cache. Do the people who like this feature want to have to provide their name and contact information every time they enter Joe's convenience store, just in case the store discovers shoplifting later and wants to know who to accuse?

 

On the plus side, MOC owners who research clicks by succotash get to see information on our favorite caches. So maybe it's worth it to give a little extra advertising to those good caches.

 

Bean

[+Too Tall John]

On the plus side, MOC owners who research clicks by succotash get to see information on our favorite caches. So maybe it's worth it to give a little extra advertising to those good caches.

I believe they can only see when you've clicked on their page, not the other pages you have clicked on.

 

I don't own a PMOC, so I don't know for sure, but I bet the average audit page has enough people listed on it that won't narrow down to a usable suspect list if you needed it, especially since a PQ will give a PM cache maggot all the pertinent info w/out disclosing their identity at all.

 

So, as far as worrying about being a suspect, don't. There is no way anyone thinking logically could ever accuse you of such things based solely on the fact you viewed their page.

 

Unless, of course, you are the only one who looked at a number of PMOCs that all got muggled. That might look a little funny...

[+The Jester]

IMHO, there are very few legitimate reasons to make a cache MOC. Yes I've heard all the excuses to try to justify them, such as:

 

1. "It makes them less likely to be muggled". Wrong. Muggles, by definition, are non-cachers, and therefore didn't get the coordinates from the website, they stumbled onto the cache.

2. "It protects them from inexperienced cachers damaging or destroying them." Really? Weren't we all inexperienced at one time? Does that mean that every premium member damaged or destroyed most of the caches they found early on? I certainly didn't, and I doubt most of you did either. And does a single $30 payment really improve the integrity of a person? Boy, that's a scary opinion.

3. "It's to reward those who support the site." So are you trying to tell me that the thousands of caches placed by regular members are not in any way supporting the site? I'd lay odds that if every cache placed by a regular member disappeared tomorrow, the site would be in a world of hurt, regardless of your generous $30 support.

4. "It's to limit the number of visitors to the cache, because it's a sensitive area." Perhaps there shouldn't be a cache there in the first place if it's so sensitive.

5. "It's to limit the number of visitors because I spent so much on the cache & it's contents." That was your decision, and simply hiding it in a location that takes more work to get to, like a longer hike, would accomplish the same thing.

6. "I only make my caches MOC till the first few finders have logged visits, then I open it up for the rest of cachers." I don't buy it, at least not in my area. I have yet to see an MOC in my area be changed over to a regular cache.

7. "There is a cache maggot in the area so I need to protect it." Okay, I'll give you this one, but even then it should be temporary, since cache maggots tend to get bored and go away after awhile.

 

There are many more reasons given as well, but realistically there are other ways of addressing nearly every one of those reasons. Ways that don't exclude a large number of cachers who make this game possible in the first place. Caches are the reason for the site, not the other way around.

I think fox-and-the-hound covered most of the points I would make to this.

 

In many previous threads on this subject, I've been called cheap, a freeloader, been told that they are subsidizing my caching, etc, and even been told some things or called some things that I'd rather not even repeat. But when it's all said and done, the reality is that they are telling me that I am not good enough to search for their caches, but they are good enough (better) to search for mine. In other words, people who pay $30 are better than those of us who don't. And that is what makes alot of people look at MOCs as being "elitist".

PMOCs are a additional service offered by this site to those who are paid members, so calling them 'elitist' is calling GC.com elitist. You must then call all other additional services 'elitist'.

 

I have found about 300+ caches, which is actually a small number considering that I've been caching since 2001. I may go several months between cache outings, but then go out on a Saturday and seek 10-12 or more. Then it may be another couple of months before I get the chance to get out again. When I cache, I love it, but do I "live" for caching? No. Do I think I am freeloading because I have not paid my $30? No, since I have a placed high quality caches that get very good feedback, I trade up, I rehide caches well, I maintain & repair caches that are in need. There are more ways to support the site other than with cash, and the most important is hiding quality caches and treating found caches with respect.

The above bolded activities do NOT support this site - they support geocaching but do nothing to help pay the bills on this site (as it's been said before GC.com is not geocaching - it's a listing service).

 

At some point, I may decide to become a premium member, but I really hope that I will never feel the need or the desire to exclude any cachers from my hides. After all, I want people to find my caches.

That's a nice sounding statement. But are all of your hides handicaped accessible, easy hides? No long hikes (as you suggested to "limit the visits"), no 'special' hides (climb, scuba, night-only), no puzzles - as all these will limit (i.e. exclude) people who can find that cache. Anybody can become a PM, so anybody can find PMOCs.

[Mr.Yuck]

Much of this thread doesn't separate the idea of Premium Membership from the MOC feature.

 

Ding Ding Ding. We have a winner!!

 

 

So, as far as worrying about being a suspect, don't. There is no way anyone thinking logically could ever accuse you of such things based solely on the fact you viewed their page.

 

 

Wanna bet? It hasn't happened close to me that I know of first hand, but I've seen the horror stories. Someone will come along, I'm sure.

 

In the meantme, how about what I mentioned earlier in the thread? I was contacted by a nosy person (for lack of a better term ) via email who asked why I looked at their MOC (across the Country, pretty much). I was just surfing Geocaching Google maps, didn't even know this was an MOC.

Edited November 7, 2008 by TheWhiteUrkel

[CoyoteRed]

PMOCs are a additional service offered by this site to those who are paid members, so calling them 'elitist' is calling GC.com elitist. You must then call all other additional services 'elitist'.

Ummm... No other feature of being a PM is designed to prevent a non-PM from viewing the cache listing. "I paid. You didn't. You can't see my listing." Take that however you want, but some of us see that as elitist.

[+Renegade Knight]

PMOCs are a additional service offered by this site to those who are paid members, so calling them 'elitist' is calling GC.com elitist. You must then call all other additional services 'elitist'.

Ummm... No other feature of being a PM is designed to prevent a non-PM from viewing the cache listing. "I paid. You didn't. You can't see my listing." Take that however you want, but some of us see that as elitist.

People are elitist. Caches aren't. It falls to the motive of the owner. They can be elitist snobs or they can merely like the audit log. However if the onwer is an elitist snob...it snobbery could contaminate all their caches. Not just the PMOC.

 

The "Regular Member Only" cache has the owner working to be anti elitist but I'm not sure they aren't being somewhat elitist in the process.

Edited November 7, 2008 by Renegade Knight

[+Tequila]

PMOCs are a additional service offered by this site to those who are paid members, so calling them 'elitist' is calling GC.com elitist. You must then call all other additional services 'elitist'.

Ummm... No other feature of being a PM is designed to prevent a non-PM from viewing the cache listing. "I paid. You didn't. You can't see my listing." Take that however you want, but some of us see that as elitist.

 

I use the PM caches on all of my caches for the simple reason of the audit log seeing who has visited my cache page.

 

Any non-PM members that contact me for cache description, I send it to them.

 

And of course, it is well documented, that non-PM's can log finds on PM caches.

[+The Jester]

PMOCs are a additional service offered by this site to those who are paid members, so calling them 'elitist' is calling GC.com elitist. You must then call all other additional services 'elitist'.

Ummm... No other feature of being a PM is designed to prevent a non-PM from viewing the cache listing. "I paid. You didn't. You can't see my listing." Take that however you want, but some of us see that as elitist.

Oh, you are so right - no other feature is designed to prevent a non-PM from viewing a cache listing.

 

But...

 

No other feature is designed to let only PMs get multiple cache files like a PQ.

 

No other feature is designed to let only PMs get the cache page listing file (GPX) like the on page button.

 

No other feature is designed to let only PMs set up lists like Bookmarks.

 

All these are features of Premium Membership, along with PMOCs. If one is elitist they all are elitist. They are a package deal, like it or not. If you pay you get to enjoy the benefits - if you think that's elitist, then use the same brush to paint them all.

[Dinoprophet]

PMOCs are a additional service offered by this site to those who are paid members, so calling them 'elitist' is calling GC.com elitist. You must then call all other additional services 'elitist'.

Ummm... No other feature of being a PM is designed to prevent a non-PM from viewing the cache listing. "I paid. You didn't. You can't see my listing." Take that however you want, but some of us see that as elitist.

Oh, you are so right - no other feature is designed to prevent a non-PM from viewing a cache listing.

 

But...

 

No other feature is designed to let only PMs get multiple cache files like a PQ.

 

No other feature is designed to let only PMs get the cache page listing file (GPX) like the on page button.

 

No other feature is designed to let only PMs set up lists like Bookmarks.

 

All these are features of Premium Membership, along with PMOCs. If one is elitist they all are elitist. They are a package deal, like it or not. If you pay you get to enjoy the benefits - if you think that's elitist, then use the same brush to paint them all.

I wouldn't call PMOCs elitist, but...if I use PQs, bookmarks, whatever that GPX thing you're describing is, or the Off-Topic forum, non-PMs are not affected. They never know the difference (unless I bookmark their page). If I use the PMOC feature, they are. That's the difference.

 

I think citing the audit feature is something of a red herring in this debate. I'm not really clear why that ability is tied to PMOCs. Would those of you who use the auditing still make caches PMOCs if the audit feature was available separately? I know I'd like auditing for my caches but I don't care to make them PMOC.

Edited November 7, 2008 by Dinoprophet

[+Too Tall John]

There is no way anyone thinking logically could ever accuse you of such things based solely on the fact you viewed their page.

Wanna bet? It hasn't happened close to me that I know of first hand, but I've seen the horror stories. Someone will come along, I'm sure.

Actually, someone already did, I believe.

 

I would bet, however, that the cache owners in question were not thinking logically when the accusations were made.

[+blb9556]

Personally I love premium caches. Most of mine are and most of my town is. I am fine with it 100%

[4x4van]

My point is that all of the other features (PQs, GPX files, bookmarks, audit logs, etc.) available to Premium members are there to make geocaching easier, more conveinient, more "productive", etc. By contrast, MOCs are, by design, there to exclude many geocachers. Therefore, I think it's perfectly fair to paint MOCs with a different brush than the other Premium "perks".

 

If you pay extra for first class and I fly coach, you rightly get extras that make your flight much more conveinient, comfortable, and enjoyable, but we still go to the same place and they don't prevent me from getting off the plane when it reaches it's destination.

 

I simply think that the net result of MOCs on the geocaching community is more negative than positive. So I ask PMs to think about what they are trying to accomplish with a cache, and then decide if making it MOC is really necessary. Ultimately, TPTB have decided to offer MOCs, so any Premium member does indeed have the right to use that feature. I would like to hope it is not used simply to exclude and/or divide geocachers into two groups based on something as arbitrary as the desire or ability to pay $30. Unfortunately, based on some of the responses in this (and many previous) threads, that does seem to be the very purpose of some MOCs.

[+fox-and-the-hound]

If you pay extra for first class and I fly coach, you rightly get extras that make your flight much more conveinient, comfortable, and enjoyable, but we still go to the same place and they don't prevent me from getting off the plane when it reaches it's destination.

 

If you were paying for coach you'd get to go to the same place. This is a bit more like hitching a ride and then complaining that the person giving you the ride doesn't invite you to their home, too.

 

What I'd be most interested in learning is why you feel you're entitled to a PM cache. PM caches have solved numerous problems for numerous cachers. Even you have admitted that much. Show me some realistic options that will work better and maybe we'll all learn something new that will improve the game. Keep in mind though that you're talking about sweeping changes that have to work everywhere and in every instance.

[Mr.Yuck]

If you pay extra for first class and I fly coach, you rightly get extras that make your flight much more conveinient, comfortable, and enjoyable, but we still go to the same place and they don't prevent me from getting off the plane when it reaches it's destination.

 

If you were paying for coach you'd get to go to the same place. This is a bit more like hitching a ride and then complaining that the person giving you the ride doesn't invite you to their home, too.

 

What I'd be most interested in learning is why you feel you're entitled to a PM cache. PM caches have solved numerous problems for numerous cachers. Even you have admitted that much. Show me some realistic options that will work better and maybe we'll all learn something new that will improve the game. Keep in mind though that you're talking about sweeping changes that have to work everywhere and in every instance.

 

I don't want to answer for 4x4, but as far as other options, how about not having them at all? Or having them, but without the "big brother is watching you" audit log? They are only one of many "features" of premium membership, after all. And they certainly aren't that effective against cache maggots. Just ask the people from the Utica/Rome/Southern Adirondacks area of NY, who have had an active cache maggot for over 3 years, last time I checked. I'm sure he learned long ago he could pull a PQ, without ever viewing a cache page.

 

P.S. I just checked a few disabled MOC's in the Utica area to make sure the maggot is still active (he is). Gorsh, I hope I'm not a suspect now.

Edited November 8, 2008 by TheWhiteUrkel

[Mr.Yuck]

Personally I love premium caches. Most of mine are and most of my town is. I am fine with it 100%

 

Holy Crud, most of your town is. So say I'm some guy in Dublin, Ohio with a GPS who just discovered geocaching.com a couple of weeks ago. I have to shell out $30 to see the caches? Sounds kind of whacked, to me.

[Clan Riffster]

I'm sure he learned long ago he could pull a PQ, without ever viewing a cache page.

Don't you need to be a PM to get a PQ?

If a cache maggot is willing to shell out $30 a year, then I would agree that MOC'ing your caches won't help, but it's been my observations that most maggots are in it for the short term thrill of destruction, and as such, won't spend $$$ just to iritate people. I'd guess this guy was an exception.

 

Gorsh, I hope I'm not a suspect now.

That would be a heck of a commute!

[+DonB]

I guess life is not fair.

[+michigansnorkelers]

FOX AND THE HOUND pretty much summed up my views.

 

You get what you pay for. Or should I say, you'll pay to get what you want.

 

If something has added value to you, you buy it. If not, you don't.

 

I pay A LOT more for cable internet, when I could get cheap dial-up. To some people it's not worth it, but to me it is. I pay for cable TV. I pay even more for HBO and CINEMAX. Gee, I think they should be giving it to me for free. How elitist!

 

I paid for annual passes to our State Parks, and our County Parks, and our Metro Parks. Without these passes totaling about $75, ANY caches in those parks are off limits. How elitist.

 

There are also caches in our city waterfront beach park. Non-residents pay to enter the park. But residents who pay our ridiculous property taxes get in free. How unfair. How elitist.

 

Would I be a premium member if it were JUST to support the site and there were NO additional benefits?

NO!

But being a PM DOES have extra value to me.

 

Would I stop being a paying PM if some of these benefits were given to all members? Probably.

 

It's the FREE MARKET in action. (oops, politically incorrect )

 

(Sorry for beating this dead horse to death again!)

[Dinoprophet]

I'm sure he learned long ago he could pull a PQ, without ever viewing a cache page.

Don't you need to be a PM to get a PQ?

I believe TWU was talking about using audits to track maggots. The only maggots you'll catch with audits is a PM maggot, because a non-PM maggot can't see the page. And since the maggot is a PM, they can circumvent audits by using PQs.

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

I'm okay with PM-only caches.

 

I'm also a PM - so na-na-na-na to you!

 

As a cache-hider, I like the audit logs. I also like PM to get "first chance" at the caches. I then often move them into the realm for the general public to enjoy.

 

While not universal - statistically on my caches (54 hidden) - PM's do a better job of trading fair, maintaining quality of trade items, etc.

 

Like it or not - the "elitists" are "better" cachers.

 

Are there exceptions? - you betcha! (as some momentarily famous politician once said).

 

I'm just going with the odds on this one.

[+BoggyWoggy]

Am I alone here?

 

Ummm...no sympathy from me.

I think the forums need to become a "No-Whiners-Allowed" place!

[4x4van]

What I'd be most interested in learning is why you feel you're entitled to a PM cache. PM caches have solved numerous problems for numerous cachers. Even you have admitted that much.

I never said I felt entitled to a PM cache. I also never "admitted" that MOCs have solved numerous problems, because I don't believe that. Perhaps you should go back and re-read what I actually wrote before you make those accusations.

 

Show me some realistic options that will work better and maybe we'll all learn something new that will improve the game. Keep in mind though that you're talking about sweeping changes that have to work everywhere and in every instance.

That's where you're wrong, and you make my next point for me: MOCs are actually the easy "sweeping" way to solve many problems that most likely could have been solved without excluding a large number of cachers. I've already suggested at least one way for each of the problems that I listed in my first post here, ways that could in fact improve the game, as per you suggestion. Will those solutions work in every situation? Of course not. Sometimes you have to be creative to find specific workable solutions to specific problems, rather than simply taking the easy route.

 

What I'd be interested in learning is why you feel excluding a large number of cachers "improves the game"?

Edited November 10, 2008 by 4x4van

[+SG One]

Most of this has been said, but I have to add my two cents. Around here we have ONE pm only cache out of 1000+. This is a great feature and one I have not used yet. However, I am debating whether or not to make my TB motel PM only. I had two newbie's clean it out about 2 weeks ago. They have not even logged all the bugs they took. I'm giving them a little more time before I mark them missing. I digress...

 

I have to agree with basically everyone else. PM caches are a nice perk for paying members and one that is entirely optional.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

.... What I'd be interested in learning is why you feel excluding a large number of cachers "improves the game"?

 

Ok, but I would opine that Puzzle caches exclude FAR more cachers than Premium Member only caches. And what about micros for the the micro haters. If someone goes around spewing micros all over and taking up "all the good places" in a particular area, that's not fair to those who want to find larger caches.

 

And what about SCUBA caches or those requiring a boat or those requiring climbing skills?

 

I think that we should eliminate Puzzle caches so that the system is more fair to people who aren't able to solve puzzles. Puzzle caches are elitist. And definitely no caches that require a boat. If I can't afford $30 a year for a membership, I certainly can't afford a boat, so those caches are elitist as well.

 

I guess I just can't see how Premium Member caches are that big of a deal. There are plenty of caches that people can't get to for one reason or another and there are still PLENTY of caches for everyone to find.

[+The Jester]

What I'd be interested in learning is why you feel excluding a large number of cachers "improves the game"?

You're looking at it the wrong way. They weren't designed to "exclude" a large number of cachers, but to "include" any number of cachers who are willing to support this site (i.e.. pay money voluntarily).

[+TrailGators]

Maybe it's the name "Premium" cache that is causing people to falsely perceive PMO caches as elitist. Perhaps if they called these caches "Signal Club" caches instead, then maybe this would make these caches not seem so elitist to these people. Then if these people didn't want to join the Signal Club; they wouldn't have to. Maybe then it wouldn't bug them that people that did join the Signal Club were enjoying their Signal Club caches as well as their other Signal Club membership benefits.

[+ThePachecos]

ney placing a cache rather than forking it over to this site to join their "Premium Members" club.

 

Am I alone here?

 

I would be more angry at the people who make it a premium cache. I make mine available to everyone so I can have more traffic.

[4x4van]

What I'd be interested in learning is why you feel excluding a large number of cachers "improves the game"?

You're looking at it the wrong way. They weren't designed to "exclude" a large number of cachers, but to "include" any number of cachers who are willing to support this site (i.e.. pay money voluntarily).

Thanks for the reminder that there are two sides to every coin!

[+KBI]

Restriction of access is immoral, period.

 

I therefore consider all caches placed outside easy bicycling distance from my house to be elitist.

 

[EDIT: edit]

Edited November 10, 2008 by KBI

[AZcachemeister]

.... What I'd be interested in learning is why you feel excluding a large number of cachers "improves the game"?

 

Ok, but I would opine that Puzzle caches exclude FAR more cachers than Premium Member only caches. And what about micros for the the micro haters. If someone goes around spewing micros all over and taking up "all the good places" in a particular area, that's not fair to those who want to find larger caches.

 

And what about SCUBA caches or those requiring a boat or those requiring climbing skills?

 

I think that we should eliminate Puzzle caches so that the system is more fair to people who aren't able to solve puzzles. Puzzle caches are elitist. And definitely no caches that require a boat. If I can't afford $30 a year for a membership, I certainly can't afford a boat, so those caches are elitist as well.

 

I guess I just can't see how Premium Member caches are that big of a deal. There are plenty of caches that people can't get to for one reason or another and there are still PLENTY of caches for everyone to find.

 

Hear! Hear! Move all the despicable puzzles to their own site and call it Puzzle-marking!

Let's leave in the boat/kayak/canoe caches, I can at least still (barely) afford to rent one...

[4x4van]

There will never be a consensus on the issue of MOCs, of that I am sure. My own thought is that every cacher, regardless of their level of caching involvement or membership status, fully believes that the line that defines "elitism" is probably just slightly beyond what they themselves are willing to engage in. After all, perception is reality, and we all have different perceptions. Put another way...You can justify anything to yourself!

Edited November 10, 2008 by 4x4van

[+WRASTRO]

My local movie theater is elitist.

My local doctor is elitist.

My local toll road is elitist.

My local gas station is elitist.

My local grocery store is elitist.

 

Geocaching.com is inclusive because it allows anyone to use the vast majority of the services it provides without having to pay. Adjust your attitude.

[+traildad]

My point is that all of the other features (PQs, GPX files, bookmarks, audit logs, etc.) available to Premium members are there to make geocaching easier, more conveinient, more "productive", etc. By contrast, MOCs are, by design, there to exclude many geocachers. Therefore, I think it's perfectly fair to paint MOCs with a different brush than the other Premium "perks".

 

If you pay extra for first class and I fly coach, you rightly get extras that make your flight much more conveinient, comfortable, and enjoyable, but we still go to the same place and they don't prevent me from getting off the plane when it reaches it's destination.

 

I simply think that the net result of MOCs on the geocaching community is more negative than positive. So I ask PMs to think about what they are trying to accomplish with a cache, and then decide if making it MOC is really necessary. Ultimately, TPTB have decided to offer MOCs, so any Premium member does indeed have the right to use that feature. I would like to hope it is not used simply to exclude and/or divide geocachers into two groups based on something as arbitrary as the desire or ability to pay $30. Unfortunately, based on some of the responses in this (and many previous) threads, that does seem to be the very purpose of some MOCs.

I think it is about how you choose to look at it. You choose to look at it as though you are being "harmed" in some way. Your example of the first class ticket could be instead the difference between flying and hitch hiking. One costs money and one is free. If you don't have money you will be excluded from things in the real world. Everybody has the right to go to the beach. If you don't pay you are excluded from the resort. Everybody has the right to go to Hawaii, but if you are not willing to pay money you better be able to swim. It seems to me that you don't care much about the other perks so it is no big deal. It is only because you want to hunt those caches that cause you to see it as elitist. The site is set up to offer certain features to people that pay money. Choose to pay or not, can pay or can't pay makes no difference. You will never be able to make the world a place where a lack of money won't get you excluded from things that cost money. Calling someone elitist because they won't run the site the way you think it should be run is counter productive.

[+DonB]

.... What I'd be interested in learning is why you feel excluding a large number of cachers "improves the game"?

 

Ok, but I would opine that Puzzle caches exclude FAR more cachers than Premium Member only caches. And what about micros for the the micro haters. If someone goes around spewing micros all over and taking up "all the good places" in a particular area, that's not fair to those who want to find larger caches.

 

And what about SCUBA caches or those requiring a boat or those requiring climbing skills?

 

I think that we should eliminate Puzzle caches so that the system is more fair to people who aren't able to solve puzzles. Puzzle caches are elitist. And definitely no caches that require a boat. If I can't afford $30 a year for a membership, I certainly can't afford a boat, so those caches are elitist as well.

 

I guess I just can't see how Premium Member caches are that big of a deal. There are plenty of caches that people can't get to for one reason or another and there are still PLENTY of caches for everyone to find.

Well said.......Amen

[+Magnesium]

What I'd be most interested in learning is why you feel you're entitled to a PM cache. PM caches have solved numerous problems for numerous cachers. Even you have admitted that much.

I never said I felt entitled to a PM cache. I also never "admitted" that MOCs have solved numerous problems, because I don't believe that. Perhaps you should go back and re-read what I actually wrote before you make those accusations.

 

Show me some realistic options that will work better and maybe we'll all learn something new that will improve the game. Keep in mind though that you're talking about sweeping changes that have to work everywhere and in every instance.

That's where you're wrong, and you make my next point for me: MOCs are actually the easy "sweeping" way to solve many problems that most likely could have been solved without excluding a large number of cachers. I've already suggested at least one way for each of the problems that I listed in my first post here, ways that could in fact improve the game, as per you suggestion. Will those solutions work in every situation? Of course not. Sometimes you have to be creative to find specific workable solutions to specific problems, rather than simply taking the easy route.

 

What I'd be interested in learning is why you feel excluding a large number of cachers "improves the game"?

 

Wow Can't we just go Caching already!

 

If GC wants to added a MO feature which includes MOC option, then so be it. Their site, to do as they please (It's a listing service.) They need money to maintain the site for heavens sake.. Not everything has to be free for all.

 

If members want to have PMOC, that's great too. It's a pay option. If I want access to the stuff, I pay for the added benefits. The beauty is, they don't force me and you to pay anything to use the Cache listings.

 

Maybe some PM's respect the fact that you have gone out of your way to contribute to the support of Groundspeak and all of the services they provide, by creating a Cache to show there appreciation. It's an option/perk of premium membership.

Your right, we all have different perceptions, it's just that parting with Greenbacks seems to alter some peoples perceptions more then others, and their realities for that matter.

 

Either way, you are not forced to FLY FIRST CLASS. But don't expect someone to pass the Caviar and Vodka!

Edited November 10, 2008 by Magnesium

[+KBI]

I think it is about how you choose to look at it. You choose to look at it as though you are being "harmed" in some way. Your example of the first class ticket could be instead the difference between flying and hitch hiking. One costs money and one is free. If you don't have money you will be excluded from things in the real world. Everybody has the right to go to the beach. If you don't pay you are excluded from the resort. Everybody has the right to go to Hawaii, but if you are not willing to pay money you better be able to swim. It seems to me that you don't care much about the other perks so it is no big deal. It is only because you want to hunt those caches that cause you to see it as elitist. The site is set up to offer certain features to people that pay money. Choose to pay or not, can pay or can't pay makes no difference. You will never be able to make the world a place where a lack of money won't get you excluded from things that cost money. Calling someone elitist because they won't run the site the way you think it should be run is counter productive.

I’ll second that.

 

Great post, TrailDad.

[+Kit Fox]

4x4van,

 

In the past five years, you have always argued against premium member caches. In your 7 years as a geocacher, how have you supported this website? Do you honestly expect others to pay for your entertainment forever? To me this is an elitist mentality.

Edited November 10, 2008 by Kit Fox

[+fox-and-the-hound]

What I'd be most interested in learning is why you feel you're entitled to a PM cache. PM caches have solved numerous problems for numerous cachers. Even you have admitted that much.

I never said I felt entitled to a PM cache. I also never "admitted" that MOCs have solved numerous problems, because I don't believe that. Perhaps you should go back and re-read what I actually wrote before you make those accusations.

 

Uh, yeah, just re-read it and you just said it again: "MOCs are actually the easy "sweeping" way to solve many problems".

 

Show me some realistic options that will work better and maybe we'll all learn something new that will improve the game. Keep in mind though that you're talking about sweeping changes that have to work everywhere and in every instance.

That's where you're wrong, and you make my next point for me: MOCs are actually the easy "sweeping" way to solve many problems that most likely could have been solved without excluding a large number of cachers. I've already suggested at least one way for each of the problems that I listed in my first post here, ways that could in fact improve the game, as per you suggestion. Will those solutions work in every situation? Of course not. Sometimes you have to be creative to find specific workable solutions to specific problems, rather than simply taking the easy route.

 

What I'd be interested in learning is why you feel excluding a large number of cachers "improves the game"?

 

Um, no I don't (I could and I do, but I certainly don't have to). I pay for an easy sweeping way to solve all those many varied problems. Since your methods (and mine) have already been tried and PMs have also been tried, I have to think the fact that PMOs are still being set (or caches are becoming PM only after problems arise) means they are in fact working and they're the only thing that have worked in our area with the local "cache jihad" nut jobs.

 

BTW, you still haven't answered the question, but I'll answer yours anyway. I feel "excluding a large number of 'cachers' 'improves the game'", because anyone (not just cachers) can get a free account and therefore anyone who wants to bother can find your cache. Your assumption that every account is held by an actual dedicated cacher is the problem. They're not and we all know it has been proven numerous times. Some are held by maggots, some are held by people bent on cache destruction for any number of odd reasons. However, a smaller number of invested cachers have proven to be less likely to do damage or cause problems.

 

There is an even easier solution. Pay to play. Everybody pays to play and all the PM features are available to everyone. Would that make you happier?

[+KBI]

What I'd be interested in learning is why you feel excluding a large number of cachers "improves the game"?

Your implied premise is incorrect.

 

Groundspeak does not "exclude a large number of cachers." Groundspeak does not exclude any cacher for that matter. (Excepting, of course, those who have been accepted at one time but have later been 'invited to leave' due to bad behavior.)

 

Groundspeak does not exclude anyone. As far as I know Groundspeak has never turned down a Premium Membership payment – at least all of *my* payments have been accepted so far.

 

Any organization who would have me as a member cannot, by any straight-faced definition, be considered "elite."

[+nelson crew]

I've been following this thread for a while now, and despite claims that "it's not about feeling entitled," that's what your argument is really all about. You already get a lot for free, but you want everything for free. To allow myself just a brief hint of a rant, that attitude is what is wrong with our country. The new American Dream is to win a lawsuit and get rich for doing nothing. Same attitude. Ok, rant over.

 

$30 a year is not that much money. $3 a month is even less. You could buy one months Premium Membership, download everything you want with a string of PQs, and bam - you get what you want, you've paid for your share and you're only out 3 measly dollars.

 

The last time we had someone babysit our kids, she told me at the end of the night that "kids now are getting $5 - $7 per hour for babysitting." Wait, what? For sitting on your a**, watching my television and eating my food? No thanks. Again, same attitude.

 

But that's just me. I believe in paying my fair share. Perhaps I'm a freak.