No more benchmark geocaching

[BootsWalker]

I spent a lot of time and effort on a recent Grand Canyon backpacking trip to locate a benchmark that was not listed in the geocaching benchmark section. Seems it doesn't matter as the geocaching gods have decided ANY benchmark hunting must be benchmarks listed on their site. In an attempt to place the cache this is the response I received:

 

" Message:

I'm sorry but since an entire sister web site has been devoted to US benchmarks we won't

post a virtual cache consisting of finding one on www.geocaching.com.

erik - geocaching.com admin "

Of course I replied with my own opinion but have gotten no response.

 

Most of my caches are benchmarks because many parks and all National parks and refuges don't allow regular caches. Until now benchmarks could be used.

 

Over the past year+ I have been very active promoting geocaching. I hold geocachers meetings ever month and recently did a TV interview and demonstration on geocaching. Since my preferred form of geocaching has been deemed inappropriate my enthusiasm has fallen too.

 

[This message was edited by BootsWalker on November 12, 2002 at 12:10 PM.]

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

http://www.fgdc.gov I am also working with the USA FREEDOM CORPS http://www.usafreedomcorps.gov it seems that we are finally starting to get things going don't give up yet there is no time for discouragement, only action Many Happy Geotrails

Create your own data base for now and when we get a place to log them we are ahead of the game.

When all else fails Geotry again.

 

[This message was edited by Trailblazer # 1 on November 12, 2002 at 07:49 AM.]

[+infosponge]

You can't use a benchmark per se, but you can use the benchmark as an intermediate step to a virtual cache.

Something like "find the object at location N ... W ... and then add ... to get the final location's coordinates." and treat it like a standard virtual cache from there.

[iryshe]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trailblazer # 1:

http://www.fgdc.gov I am also working with the USA FREEDOM CORPS http://www.usafreedomcorps.gov it seems that we are finally starting to get things going

---

 

What does this have to do with anything?

 

As always, put it to a vote. If you get enough votes to override the "geocaching gods" then it will be overruled.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location™

[bk11]

My enthusiasm for benchmarking waned once geocaching.com got involved with it. I mean, the geocaching gods (heh) have an iron grip on "their" cache data, but it's okay for them to use the benchmark database. It just never jived right with me, seems a bit hypocritical.

[+embra]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bk11:

My enthusiasm for benchmarking waned once geocaching.com got involved with it.

---

 

I don't get what you're saying (I think I get your point about hypocrisy, although I don't believe I would agree with it)...how does what we do here interfere with what you were doing before? Or are you saying the hypocrisy issue takes the shine off the whole venture?

[bk11]

Thank you for your response. =)

 

Oh, I just don't know... yes, I'd say the shine is gone. I found benchmarking through geocaching so when "geocaching.com got involved with it" isn't really what I meant, sorry about that.

 

I'm talking about when the benchmarking subsite was made. They basically put a front end on somebody else's database. Which is all fine and dandy... this is, afterall, what the Internet is about (to me) - making information available to others.

 

But this is exactly opposite of geocaching.com's position with "their" cache data. If the benchmark database people had the same attitude, there would be no benchmarking subsite at geocaching.com.

 

It goes against my grain just enough to bug me and in turn, tarnish it.

[Rubbertoe]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BootsWalker:

Seems it doesn't matter as the geocaching gods have decided ANY benchmark hunting must be benchmarks listed on their site. In an attempt to place the cache this is the response I received:

[snip]

Of course I replied with my own opinion but have gotten no response.

---

 

Umm - did you make it clear that this particular benchmark was not included in the database? I'm sure that with the many caches that need approving, they don't have time to sort through and see if someone is posting a virtual at a benchmark - er.. to see if the benchmark is already listed, etc.

 

How much time did you give them to reply? You just seem pretty snippy already, when you even admit that they've not had a chance to reply to you yet.

 

The Toe Pages

[Rubbertoe]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bk11:

They basically put a front end on somebody else's database. Which is all fine and dandy... this is, afterall, what the Internet is about (to me) - making information available to others.

 

But this is exactly opposite of geocaching.com's position with "their" cache data. If the benchmark database people had the same attitude, there would be no benchmarking subsite at geocaching.com.

 

It goes against my grain just enough to bug me and in turn, tarnish it.

---

 

Oh geeze... I know I complain about a lot of things, but this is a little bit silly. So the benchmark database is public... well goody for us! We can be happy that the proper agencies have made the data public. Now, here at the site - they might not wanna give out their data. So what? We choose to list our caches here on this site, so why should anyone expect that they give that data to some other sites. Some people might even be bothered by THAT, if the data that we gave to geocaching.com were shared with other sites. *gasp*

 

This is the way the world works, folks... some people will give stuff away, some people won't. Just because the grocery store downtown gives away free samples of cheesy poofs, it doesn't mean I should be bitter at the local five and dime if they don't.

 

FWIW, I think that virtual should be accepted, if it is a benchmark that isn't in the database.

[BootsWalker]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rubbertoe:

Umm - did you make it clear that this particular benchmark was not included in the database?

 

How much time did you give them to reply?

---

 

Yes, I explained this particular benchmark was not included in the database.

 

How much time do they need to reply? Jeromy has had replied here so I guess he's had time to reply to my email.

 

Didn't mean to come across as snippy. I PI**ED OFF.

 

OK, I've let off some steam and feel better now.

 

But this is my perfered method of placing a cache and the new policy bumps me out of the game.

[+Uncle Alaska]

I have to agree (reluctantly ) with Rubbertoe...I think there is a distinct difference between the NGS database and the Geocaching database...NGS is a public entity serving the public and providing for a relatively uniform storage system to keep our surveying in good form. Geocaching.com is a private company. As far as them using public data but not releasing their own...If you want free domain databases start your own company and release the data to whomever. If that turns out to be more popular, then other sites will adapt or succomb to competition...Isn't that what America is about...build a better mousetrap....

 

That being said, if the Benchmark is not listed on the NGS Database I think it should be allowed as a virtual.

-UA

 

***********************************************************

...Proudly ranked 620th in the state of California!My Home

[iryshe]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BootsWalker:

 

How much time do they need to reply? Jeromy has had replied here so I guess he's had time to reply to my email.

---

 

At a wedding over the weekend (no Internet access) and just jumped on to take the pulse of the site and the forums. So no, I haven't had time to catch up on email.

 

You could at least cut and paste my name, assuming you had time to respond to my post.

 

Keep in mind that the "gods" are more than me... There are many folks that approve and disapprove caches. Just click on the person who archived your cache (since they all leave notes) and send them an email.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location™

[bk11]

I understand, toe. I just prefer to spend time with a project that facilitates data movement. Look other places on the web and it's all about xml/rss feeds. With popularity, I don't feel that the geocaching.com site can give the localized attention. It's just not possible - the info needs to be filtered at a lower level. In my opinion, not offering this will encourage local cache database efforts.

 

With the cheesy poofs, I agree. =) My point is... with the benchmark project, geocaching.com showed me that they find data access beneficial and one can make something really cool with it. Just as long as it's not *their* data.

 

uncle alaska, the build a better mousetrap thing... yeah, I know. I don't want to build another one, I think they're doing a great job. =) I just wish there was more fun for geeks. Data is fun.

[+Zahrim]

I feel that if the cache is a valid virtual cache in it's own right, then, using information on a benchmark that happens to be in the area as verification of a find should be just fine. Be it in the database or not.

 

The key here being that the cache meets all other requirements. I am in no way advocating the use of any and all benchmarks as virtual caches. Most benchmarks are by no means in a spot worthy of a virtual cache, but the ones that are should be usable.

 

Zahrim....

 

"There's no need to be afraid of strange noises in the night.

Anything that intends you harm will stalk you silently."