Jump to content

opencaching.com new mascot...

FickFam

By FickFam
in General geocaching topics

Followers 11

Recommended Posts

TheAlabamaRambler

+TheAlabamaRambler

Posted
Posted

The biggest problem I see (among many) is the limitation of downloading to Garmin equipment only.

With an open API it could be pretty hard for them to switch from their public stance of not blocking other manufacturers. Not impossible I suppose, but tricky.

Gothcha. Guess I wasn't paying attention. I thought I read that you could only download their files to a Garmin.

 

I think it took a VP with big brass ones to sit down with Garmin's CEO and tell him "We're building this big expensive web database to list these things called geocaches. There's already a player in the market we can't hope to compete with, but since we're giving it away for free it doesn't matter. Anyhoo, we'll get a lot of folks who have Blackberry's and iPhones and Magellans and Delormes and hope that some of these folks will buy a Garmin next time because, you know, we gave them this cool second-class listing site."

 

Nah, that's not a sales pitch I could have ever pulled off! :huh:

Link to comment
geodarts

+geodarts

Posted
Posted

Nah, that's not a sales pitch I could have ever pulled off! :huh:

 

Perhaps the sales pitch went something like, "Beginning with our initial opencaching press release, we can hype chirps as the latest innovation and advance in geocaching. Then we can build a customer base so that people will buy a garmin to use the chirps when it is time to upgrade."

 

Of course, I wonder what sales pitch convinced garmin to partner with ASUS to market phones - a debacle that officially ended a few months ago. Or the meetings that debated how to develop new customers with smartphones growing and the core automotive business in decline. I am not sure I would have thought of another listing service. We will see how well it works.

Link to comment
KDotBlueDot

+KDotBlueDot

Posted
Posted (edited)

Perhaps the sales pitch went something like this....

 

"We own a sales channel that can support the marketing of this new listing site, giving users a another reason to buy our product. Every GPS will ship with marketing plugs for it as well as an integrated user interface that interfaces with OpenCaching. Even if they don't use this feature it still gives the purchaser one more reason to rationalize their purchase.The site itself will cross-promote our products, services, and new innovations and together, these will make users covet new equipment. We will no longer be beholden to someone else to promote one of the PRIMARY uses of our handheld GPS receivers. And because we own it, the hardware and software will be much more tightly integrated than other sites.

 

New users using other equipment will experience the Garmin BRAND at it's best-- helping users use the technology for their interests. We will be seen as the brand that is the conduit between technology and the real world experiences that technology brings the user.

 

What about other GPS units and Iphone cachers? Well, they won't be iphone cachers long, and when they make the choice to go with a GPS let's make sure that GPS is Garmin.

 

I tell you what...let me launch a BETA site and see what kind of reaction we get from the geocaching community. I predict they will give us the blueprint of features before we even get to the next stage of production. This way there are no wasted dollars guessing. Plus we already have the developers and technology experts in-house! Very little budget will be needed."

 

Yeah, I could make the pitch....EASILY. Especially to an exec team who is- seemingly - sick of playing nice with Groundspeak.

 

Whether or not it will work is one thing, but to question the idea as hair-brained is naive as all heck. Just look at the changes Groundspeak have made since the launch of the BETA (B-E-T-A) and tell me if Groundspeak is dismissing this as readily as some of you folks are. I don't like the idea of competing listings sites, but demonstrating to Groundspeak that they CAN launch an alternative certainly seems to have caught Groundspeak's attention. Perhaps Garmin is using this as leverage to get more input with Groundspeak. But, failing that, they will launch a full-blown alternative and they we will be able to compare apples to apples.

Edited by KDotBlueDot
Link to comment
AndrewRJ

+AndrewRJ

Posted
Posted

 

Whether or not it will work is one thing, but to question the idea as hair-brained is naive as all heck. Just look at the changes Groundspeak have made since the launch of the BETA (B-E-T-A) and tell me if Groundspeak is dismissing this as readily as some of you folks are. I don't like the idea of competing listings sites, but demonstrating to Groundspeak that they CAN launch an alternative certainly seems to have caught Groundspeak's attention. Perhaps Garmin is using this as leverage to get more input with Groundspeak. But, failing that, they will launch a full-blown alternative and they we will be able to compare apples to apples.

 

What changes are you talking about? I am interested to hear your logic on what you think Groundspeak has done as a reaction.

 

The reason I say this is all the changes that are going to happen today, and there are some I am eagerly anticipating, were all in the planning stages long before Garmin released there site. Long before the possibility was talked about and even before the chirp was released. If you follow the feedback site everything was in planning months age, and I know from talking to friends that work at Groundspeak that they were excited and moving forward on them a while ago.

Link to comment
KDotBlueDot

+KDotBlueDot

Posted
Posted

Plans and pulling the trigger are two entirely separate things. The timing of these changes are far more aggressive then I have seen in past months. I base this on the feedback forum where several high profile suggestions sat without response by Groundspeak and then on the same day this launched, suggestions such as API moved to the planned status. If Groundspeak is in no way reacting to OpenCaching then, they are foolish. I don't suggest they are. I DO think they are pulling the trigger on some things faster than they would have, such as the ratings system (which is very remedial, from what I have seen). Don't get me wrong, I believe they are following their own strategic vision, but they ARE reacting to Garmin's presence...not entirely but it has to be a factor.

Link to comment
Geoaddict

+Geoaddict

Posted
Posted

I agree that geocaching.com isn't perfect, but at least they are making attempts to be more responsive to members. Groundspeak has pretty much developed the sport over the past ten years. They are an important part of what geocaching is today. All you need to do is to go through the opencaching.com website and see that they have duplicated much of the core aspects of geocaching.com, such as the hiding guidelines, logo colors, and replacing the GC prefix with OX for the cache number. Right now there is nothing compelling that would make me leave geocaching.com. I have enough trouble keeping up with my logs on geocaching.com without having to duplicate it over at opencaching.com.

 

About the only thing that I like about their site, is the bullseye icon for rating difficulty, terrain, size, and awesomeness. Maybe Groundspeak can take that and incorporate it into GC.com. Lord knows, Garmin stole a lot of stuff from GC.com, it would only be fair to steal this from opencaching.com.

Link to comment
Fledermaus

Fledermaus

Posted
Posted (edited)

Why does it have to be one or the other? Sometimes I shop at Target, sometimes at WalMart. More sites, more caches!

 

On topic, my guess - beaver.

 

If it's a beaver or a squirrel, it's teeth are broken and crooked!

Is there a chance the Blue creature might be related to Sonic the Hedge Hog?

 

BTW, I've noticed that a few of you are saying that you do not want to "leave" GC and participate with it's competitors and etc.

 

Consider this, if a Ford owner ignores Chevy owners and both of them ignore Dodge owners and even they all ignore Toyota owners, maybe because it's not a USA brand, then I am in big trouble, for I should ignore and/or dislike myself. Why, because I own or have owned all of them.

 

Never turn your back on a potential threat, for it just might become one, when you least suspect it. Garmin has a lot of weight and a lot of money and they are an international company. S0, turn your back if your dare!

 

"Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer."

"For one day one of your friends may become your enemy"

"And, one of your enemies may become your friend."

 

There are features within each website I like and features within each I do not like. But to ignore an entire website, because a few faults makes no sense to me. That's why I play on all the websites, to include cache placements.

 

/\/(°w°)\/\

Edited by Fledermaus
Link to comment
geodarts

+geodarts

Posted
Posted

But to ignore an entire website, because a few faults makes no sence to me. That's why I play on all the websites, to include cache placements.

 

To me, it is not a matter of ignoring a website because of a few faults. If I did that, I would not be playing this game at all. It is more of a matter of garmin not offering anything to sustain my interest. I am curious enough to look at it every once in awhile to see if any listing appears locally, and how the site is being organized. But I have enough to keep track of as it is, between this game, and the one other location-based game that I play (iSpy). I do not opencache.com in much the same way that I do not terracache, navicache, opencache.us, gowalla, foursquare, or waymark. I don't even letterbox as much as I would like, so garmin would have to offer me something significant to make me want to take up their interpretation of the game.

Link to comment
Fledermaus

Fledermaus

Posted
Posted (edited)

I was not aware of "Gowalla" and "Foursquare". So, I did a quick Wikipedia search & read and now I know that these games area "Social Networking" games using iPhones, Blackberries etc. Well, since I have a big button cellphone (bats are blind you know) that only makes phone calls, I guess I will have to "keep one eye open". OMG, and Heaven forbid I tell you I am running an antique Win98se on a year 2000 computer w/Dial-Up. /\/(°w°)\/\

Edited by Fledermaus
Link to comment
tozainamboku

+tozainamboku

Posted
Posted

Looks like Garmin finally recognized the need for some kind of review system before caches get published!

http://garmin.blogs.com/my_weblog/2010/12/opencachingcom-your-vote-counts-in-peer-review-of-caches.html

Garmin gave in to the pressure. Perhaps they were approached by a land manager who wanted then to have a review process to catch these caches before the got listed. So they came up with their new plan, which, IMO, was dead on arrival. It puts the caches in a review queue for 12 hours. During this time, the "peers" can vote on the cache. Supposedly people are answering the question "Does the cache meet the placement guidelines?". Yes votes count +1 votes and no votes count -3. If the cache has positive points at the end of 12 hours it is published.

 

There are people who are casting no votes on every cache, probably just to sabotage this system. Some are clearly sock puppets. While there is a place to indicate the reason for a no vote, it doesn't have to be filled in. I suspect people vote no on caches just because they don't like the cache owner. Or perhaps they don't like a particular type of cache. (There are people who support the peer voting system just because they can vote against caches they don't like and keep them from being listed.)I predict we will see another approach for reviewing caches soon. Hopefully one that is better thought out.

Link to comment
niraD

+niraD

Posted
Posted

For the situations that land managers care most about, I think Groundspeak's system of dedicated reviewers (who are familiar with the policies in the areas they review) will be more satisfactory than a peer review system where n knowledgeable "no" votes can be overridden by (2n+1) unknowledgeable "yes" votes.

Link to comment
Clan Riffster

Clan Riffster

Posted
Posted

Consider this, if a Ford owner ignores Chevy owners and both of them ignore Dodge owners and even they all ignore Toyota owners,...

OK, totally off topic, but this line reminded me of a funny incident many, many years ago:

 

The Riffster Clan had just moved into a duplex. We met our neighbor, exchanged pleasantries, and commenced hauling stuff inside. A while later, he met me near the bed of my Nissan pickup and drawled words to the effect of, "So, you like them there fern made cars, huh?" (I assume he meant foreign) "You must be un-A-mer-can" (Yes, only three syllables in his version of American). I point to a string of numbers on my dash, explaining that this was a V.I.N., and its relevance would become apparent in a minute. (Yes, I had to explain what relevance meant) I then walked him over to the pair of Fords in his driveway, pointing out the V.I.N. on each. I then told him, "That Ford was made in Canada. That Ford was made in Mexico. My Nissan was made in Tennessee. Which of us is un-A-mer-can?"

 

He pretty much left me alone after that. :lol:

 

OK, back to your regularly scheduled topic... :ph34r:

Link to comment
Keystone

Keystone

Posted
Posted (edited)

I suspect people vote no on caches just because they don't like the cache owner. Or perhaps they don't like a particular type of cache.

Here you have identified two key qualities that the volunteer group looks for when selecting volunteer cache reviewers. It is not just knowing the listing guidelines and the many local land manager policies with precise accuracy. Being a reviewer here also means having to say "no" to your best geo-buddy's cache because of a guidelines violation, and having to publish all caches by your biggest critics if they meet the listing guidelines. Those guidelines also mean having to say "no" to some really cool cache submissions, while holding my nose to publish caches that aren't the type I'd personally like to hunt. (That's why caches are "published," not "approved.") My decisions must be consistent from one day to the next, from one corner of my territory to the other, from one owner to the next, and from one cache of a given type to the next. I must also be consistent with the actions of more than 100 other local reviewers, whose efforts are closely coordinated.

 

Every one of those decisions is subject to immediate appeal to Groundspeak, or to an immediate flaming public forum thread. If there are enough problems or a serious ethical lapse, reviewers can be and have been removed.

 

Though far from perfect, there is a commitment to accuracy, responsibility, accountability and consistency here. Regardless of the details, any review system should offer these qualities to the community.

Edited by Keystone
corrected typo.
Link to comment
knowschad

knowschad

Posted
Posted

Thought far from perfect, there is a commitment to accuracy, responsibility, accountability and consistency here. Regardless of the details, any review system should offer these qualities to the community.

 

Durn reviewers/mods, gotta clean up after them alla time.

I dunno... he might have meant that. I suspect there are a lot of cachers that think their reviewers are far from perfect. :lol:
Link to comment
cheech gang

+cheech gang

Posted
Posted

I for one have always been happy with the performance of my local reviewer and his deliberately fair and consistent approach. Most folks in our local area agree with me and are happy with the system Groundspeak has established. An expected small proportion of the local geo-populace have also expressed dissent from time to time, which is just fine.

 

I see the "system" currently being experimented with on the other site as doomed, as their "peer review" as it is implemented right now is too easily subject to hijacking by a disgruntled few.

Link to comment
knowschad

knowschad

Posted
Posted
...while holding my nose to publish caches that aren't the type I'd personally like to hunt.

It's this quality, more than any other, that I admire about the Groundspeak reviewing staff.

I honestly don't think I have that degree of tolerance.

You, and your peers, have my undying respect, Sir. B)

I whole-heartedly agree. I have worked with at least four reviewers in my time at this activity and have had nothing but respect and admiration for all of them.

 

 

Link to comment
geodarts

+geodarts

Posted
Posted (edited)

I live in an area where there are a number of different jurisdictions in a patchwork, all with different rules. On one trail you can pass through NPS land where caching is not allowed, through water district lands (which has allowed caches), and pass through state park land (caches allowed within three feet of a trail), all the while going in and out of NPS areas. How many peer reviewers are going to know the differences? How many will know if the agency requires all caches to be listed on this site? If cachers placing hides are not familiar with the rules, how are peers going to evaluate them?

 

No system is going to be perfect. Things can occasionally slip by Groundspeak reviewers. On the trail mentioned above I have seen them disallow caches on water district land and publish them in the NPS. And state park rules are generally ignored by everyone involved. But the bottom line is that there is a single person who is familiar with the rules, allowing room for discussion, who can help resolve potential problems. I have always found reviewers to be conscientious and helpful. To replace this kind of system with nameless peers is another example of garmin's failure to think things through - to try to replace what is not broken.

Edited by mulvaney
Link to comment
johnsingleton1974

+johnsingleton1974

Posted
Posted

Well..... we all know the site was built for a sort of market investment idea for garmain, who thought about it for a little while at least as in to offer what geocaching.com couldnt, on a large scale which was an open free for all forum, and web hosting service for caches without reviewers,

 

the folks at garmain knew from reading even a little bit from these forums, and others thats what people wanted.

 

whether or not the site sticks around makes no difference. we all know Groundspeak will outlast thie garmain site, but the fact that garmain could ruffle so many feathers in such a short timeframe, is pretty astounding, and very exciting for some. you cant deny that.

 

Its interesting to see so many people finally voice an opinion of all of this just because garmain sort of threatened geocaching as we know it with the opeining of one silly little site.

Link to comment
The Moofia Mob

+The Moofia Mob

Posted
Posted

whether or not the site sticks around makes no difference. we all know Groundspeak will outlast thie garmain site, but the fact that garmain could ruffle so many feathers in such a short timeframe, is pretty astounding, and very exciting for some. you cant deny that.

 

Its interesting to see so many people finally voice an opinion of all of this just because garmain sort of threatened geocaching as we know it with the opeining of one silly little site.

 

Groundspeak's Geocaching will always be the forefather of the sport. You can't take that away from them. With Garmin coming online with OpenCaching.com will be similar to TerraCaching (which has an unknown future at the time) and OpenCaching.Us. Those two sites have been around since 2003 and Garmin's OpenCaching.com just opened up in October 2010. Groundspeak has a 10 year lead over the other sites. These debates and comments are more like the iPhone verus the Android phones. iPhone came out first and did a lot of great things but the Android's came a long and offered a better evolving product that has been giving Apple a run for their money. The same could be said about Geocaching.com and OpenCaching.com. Only time will tell for each site. the spirit of competition if a great thing. It gets both sides to fix things and to make things better for their communities. There is always resistance in the beginning of a new site and the struggles of the first year of operations. I am more that sure the Groundspeak knows as they had to go through this also. But I wouldn't underestimate Garmin. They have been a player in the Geocaching world since the beginning. The internet is a huge place and there is PLENTY of room for ALL sites to co-exist. People can pick and choose where they want to go and they will go where they fill comfortable being.

 

Many fellow cachers will continue to be negative towards other geocaching sites. My question to all of you is, why can't you do both or all of them? Maybe you just feel comfortable staying with one site and that is fine and your choice. But bickering about OpenCaching versus Geocaching is a lot of energy that could be used somewhere else. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions as I am stating mine right now. Some people will ignore the other sites because this is the original, larger site and it's more popular. That's cool too. But don't always be a follower. You can pick and choose where you want to go. The last time I read bashing threads like this was on TerraCaching about Groundspeak. Because of that, I won't even waste my time over there.

 

Sometimes people act out of fear or because they feel threatened. Maybe that is why so many are voicing their opinions about OpenCaching? Why are people feeling threatened by that site? It's the big "What If" questions in life that scare us the most. Will OpenCaching take out Geocaching? No it will not, but I for see that it will give it a run for its money. The bottom line is, you have two companies doing something that is driven by money. But which one has more to lose and which one has more to gain? That is the basis of this entire thread and like many other threads on this topic.

 

No need to hate, just step back and look at things. Go where you want to go and just be happy with it :)

Link to comment
Sioneva

+Sioneva

Posted
Posted

 

Many fellow cachers will continue to be negative towards other geocaching sites. My question to all of you is, why can't you do both or all of them? Maybe you just feel comfortable staying with one site and that is fine and your choice. But bickering about OpenCaching versus Geocaching is a lot of energy that could be used somewhere else. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions as I am stating mine right now. Some people will ignore the other sites because this is the original, larger site and it's more popular. That's cool too. But don't always be a follower. You can pick and choose where you want to go. The last time I read bashing threads like this was on TerraCaching about Groundspeak. Because of that, I won't even waste my time over there.

 

:blink: Have you counted the number of Groundspeak bashing threads that are going on over at OC? This site has a single one, that site has multiple. Maybe you can convince them somehow that Jeremy is not the anti-Christ and reviewers/moderators aren't tools? Or are you not wasting your time over there because of the bashing threads?

 

No need to hate, just step back and look at things. Go where you want to go and just be happy with it :)

 

Please have a donut!

Link to comment
The Moofia Mob

+The Moofia Mob

Posted
Posted

 

Many fellow cachers will continue to be negative towards other geocaching sites. My question to all of you is, why can't you do both or all of them? Maybe you just feel comfortable staying with one site and that is fine and your choice. But bickering about OpenCaching versus Geocaching is a lot of energy that could be used somewhere else. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions as I am stating mine right now. Some people will ignore the other sites because this is the original, larger site and it's more popular. That's cool too. But don't always be a follower. You can pick and choose where you want to go. The last time I read bashing threads like this was on TerraCaching about Groundspeak. Because of that, I won't even waste my time over there.

 

:blink: Have you counted the number of Groundspeak bashing threads that are going on over at OC? This site has a single one, that site has multiple. Maybe you can convince them somehow that Jeremy is not the anti-Christ and reviewers/moderators aren't tools? Or are you not wasting your time over there because of the bashing threads?

 

No need to hate, just step back and look at things. Go where you want to go and just be happy with it :)

 

Please have a donut!

 

Those threads are now closed to help stop the bashing. :)

Link to comment
JL_HSTRE

+JL_HSTRE

Posted
Posted
Podcast discussing the various listing sites.

 

http://www.cachersroundtable.com/crt-ep-33-listing-services-january-2011-

 

Sounds like it is a real struggle to explain the smaller and newer sites' existence.

 

Many geocachers simply aren't as familiar with the smaller sites as they are with this site.

 

I'd love someone to explain Navicache's continued existence though. That place is so horrendously obsolete.

Link to comment
ffdjeff

+ffdjeff

Posted
Posted (edited)

And I am willing to bet their pockets are deeper than Groundspeaks.

 

They also have a heckuva lot more overhead.

 

Regardless, it would take them actually PAYING folks to hide caches to build a database that might rival this 800 pound gorilla any time in the next 10 years.

 

Their marketeers need a wake up call if they think they can pull it off without spending roughly 2 to 3 times what Groundspeak is currently worth.

 

But competition is GOOD. I'm still rootin' for the Frog though.

 

Just think where we would be right now if there had been another real contender of a cache listing site since 2003. About 2005 the natives were real restless around here.

 

Terracaching fizzled in a little over a year and a half because (to me) it became a hate the frog club.... and Navicache... :rolleyes:

 

I signed up for a few alterative cache websites. The real issue was the fact none of them had caches anywhere near me.

 

I loged into opencaching.com and put in my zip code and it indicated that there are none near me when I know there are hundreds. What gives? Geocaching has no competition from here!

Edited by ffdjeff
Link to comment
Mr.Yuck

Mr.Yuck

Posted
Posted
Podcast discussing the various listing sites.

 

http://www.cachersroundtable.com/crt-ep-33-listing-services-january-2011-

 

Sounds like it is a real struggle to explain the smaller and newer sites' existence.

 

Many geocachers simply aren't as familiar with the smaller sites as they are with this site.

 

I'd love someone to explain Navicache's continued existence though. That place is so horrendously obsolete.

 

Navicache was at one time (2002-2005 maybe) the world's No. 1 alternative to Geocaching.com. Way back when, when Geocaching was much smaller, it was more serious competition than one might think all these years later. But yeah, it hasn't really been updated since like 2003, and the downloads haven't really worked since about 2006. They were pioneers for a Geocaching site having an API, but that hasn't worked since 2006 either. :lol: The reason for it's continued existence? I dunno, the guy who "runs" it now (not the founder) still pays the web hosting bill? Because German's keep cross-listing their caches there? (Over 50% of Navicache listings are in Germany).

Link to comment
Team Chinook

+Team Chinook

Posted
Posted

How will the two sites maintain congruence between the two databases? Will we have the 0.1mi rule for separatioin of GC and OC caches? Will there be double listing of caches - same cache listed on both sites? Maybe its covered, but frankly the open caching site irks me. Its really not the same as a chevy vs. a ford as someone remarked. Its more like another entity decided they wanted to open up their own airports and start attacting airlines, existing and new to fly into the new airports. Where is the coordination?

 

Garmin for a long time presented geocaches, and I think they still do, I had some load onto my Nuvi auto GPS and it definitely pulled from the GC GPX database. Somebody pissed in someones cheerios and now there's a distraction going on. Geocachers are caught in the middle or not caught depending on how you see it. There are some anti Groundspeak folks posting over at the OC forum for certain.

 

I find it all a distraction and frankly Garmin has put me off. Still like their product(s) but really question that benefit to the community, and to Garmin itself. I'll stick to using my garmin equipment to finding my Groundspeak geocaching.com geocaches. Cheers!

Link to comment
addisonbr

+addisonbr

Posted
Posted
How will the two sites maintain congruence between the two databases? Will we have the 0.1mi rule for separatioin of GC and OC caches? Will there be double listing of caches - same cache listed on both sites?

They won't, we will not, and there will be at the CO's option (many already are).

Link to comment
GeoGeeBee

+GeoGeeBee

Posted
Posted

How will the two sites maintain congruence between the two databases?

 

Why should there be?

 

Will we have the 0.1mi rule for separatioin of GC and OC caches?

I don't think they even have the 0.1 mile rule for separation of caches within OC, forget about between OC and GC caches. (I could be wrong, I haven't checked this specifically. But one of the "features" of OC is that there are no reviewers. When you submit a cache, it's automatically published. So how would a separation guideline be enforced?)

 

Will there be double listing of caches - same cache listed on both sites?

Last time I looked, nearly all of the caches on OC were duplicates of existing caches on GC. The OC site provides a tool that a cache owner can use to easily import their existing listings into that site.

Link to comment
dfx

+dfx

Posted
Posted (edited)
This is no longer true; there is a sort of peer review process now. But I don't believe OC.com has a proximity guideline regardless.

 

They do, but there's no good tool to check this other than checking it manually, which I guess hardly anybody does. Plus it's impossible to tell for multi/puzzle stages and finals. For now it looks like that in those cases, they're just gonna wait for somebody to go for the caches and then report it if something's wrong.

Edited by dfx
Link to comment
addisonbr

+addisonbr

Posted
Posted
This is no longer true; there is a sort of peer review process now. But I don't believe OC.com has a proximity guideline regardless.

They do, but there's no good tool to check this other than checking it manually, which I guess hardly anybody does.

You're absolutely right. Somehow I missed that. So, yeah, there's a similar 0.1 mile proximity guideline on OC.com too.

Link to comment
Ecylram

+Ecylram

Posted
Posted (edited)

How will the two sites maintain congruence between the two databases?

They won't. A change in one, will not cause a change in the other. They also have different rules, so caches that would not be allowed here could be allowed on their website.

 

Travelbugs that get picked up by an OC cacher can't be tracked on their website. Expect more travelbugs to go missing as the become swag in OC caches.

 

Will we have the 0.1mi rule for separatioin of GC and OC caches?

Nope, no cache separation between the sites. OC cache listing can be placed right next to a GC cache if the CO so desires.

 

Will there be double listing of caches - same cache listed on both sites?

There already are double posted caches. The logs don't sync so DNF's, NM's, NA's will not automatically carry over. Nor will travelbug inventory, gallery pictures, favorite votes, or bookmark information.

 

Where is the coordination?

Garmin is choosing not to cooperate. Apparently, they are trying to develop a website that will give their products a competitive edge over other GPS manufacturers. Their press releases seem to indicate their 'Chirp' product is the first product expected to benefit from the competing website. So far, the product adoption rates have been low. I believe, out of the 17,300+ caches in our state, only two currently use the Chirp.

 

In most of our state OC is non-issue. In the portion of the metropolitan area where I run pocket queries, there are approx 4500-5000 Geocaching.com caches. In that same area there are 2 OC caches. In the entire state, there are 17,300 Geocaching.com caches and 140 OC caches (most placed by one cacher). Almost all, if not all, of the OC caches are also listed on Geocaching.com. There have been almost no additions to the OC database in our state in the last few weeks, after the initial flurry.

 

If definitely isn't catching (caching) on here and a few of us have an informal death pool on when the plug will eventually be pulled on Garmin's OC site.

Edited by Ecylram
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 11
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...