opencaching.com new mascot...

[Mr.Yuck]

Jake from Garmin was interviewed about opencaching.com on Geocachingpodcast.com for a good 35 minutes last night.

 

He addressed a couple of things that have come up here over and over. One, they had 2,000 caches listed in the first 36 hours. The ease of .GPX uploads of your existing caches had something to do with that, I would think. By comparison, Opencaching.us, a more traditional competing website, went online 18 August 2010, and reached 400 cache listings in about 3 1/2 months. A brilliant ploy to get a bunch of caches listed quickly, really.

 

This is still the Beta phase. Personally, I think it's more like Triple Alpha. They do plan to have a "peer review" process. Sort of like Terracaching.com, I would imagine.

[+Happy Humphrey]

The ease of .GPX uploads of your existing caches had something to do with that, I would think.

Doesn't that violate the Waypoint License Agreement?

Uses Not Permitted: Licensee shall not sell, rent, lease, sublicense, lend, assign, time-share, or transfer, in whole or in part, or provide access to the Data, Related Materials, any updates, or Licensee's rights under this Agreement to any third party whatsoever.

Unless you can prove otherwise, I think that it's fair to assume that a .GPX file containing caches (even if they're all your own) was downloaded from GC.com under the terms of the Waypoint License Agreement.

[+briansnat]

Moderators. Strange isn't it how we impose rules and regulations to protect us from ourselves.

 

Not all. It's why laws were invented.

 

Regarding the rest of your post, going to a golf course and hitting a beach ball with a baseball bat might be fun, but it isn't golf. What you describe might be fun but it isn't geocaching. There are other sites that cater to that sort of stuff, Bookcrossing for one. If there is a demand for that activity, then people will start more sites.

Edited December 10, 2010 by briansnat

[+Tobias & Petronella]

Jake from Garmin was interviewed about opencaching.com on Geocachingpodcast.com for a good 35 minutes last night.

 

He addressed a couple of things that have come up here over and over. One, they had 2,000 caches listed in the first 36 hours. The ease of .GPX uploads of your existing caches had something to do with that, I would think. By comparison, Opencaching.us, a more traditional competing website, went online 18 August 2010, and reached 400 cache listings in about 3 1/2 months. A brilliant ploy to get a bunch of caches listed quickly, really.

 

This is still the Beta phase. Personally, I think it's more like Triple Alpha. They do plan to have a "peer review" process. Sort of like Terracaching.com, I would imagine.

 

I just listened to the podcast with Jake from Garmin. Sounds like they expect us geocachers to be their reviewers. And when pushed for a number of caches that he found, he danced around the question with - I've found some but the numbers are not important. As far as his PR skills on a scale 1-10 (with 10 being best), I would give him maybe a 3. And on the BS scale a 8. He and their geocaching team clearly have no idea what it is like to cache in the real world. This is from their site:

 

Keep your fellow geocachers safe. Don’t hide your caches on cliffs, down abandoned mines, in trenches or anywhere that might put the safety of geocachers in peril.

 

First of all, that is what a rating system is for. Almost any place can be dangerous. A busy street, a bad neighborhood, or any trail where you could slip and fall down the side of a hill or cliff. And let's not forget about about all the nasty spiders, snakes, bears and other things that could mess you up. Do they think that caches should only go in city parks?

 

They should stick with what they do best, and that is making really great GPSr systems and stop trying to reinvent the wheel.

[+Lostby7]

There is no review process at 'open'caching.com. (snip).

For a site with no review process the sure did remove violating cache fast. hmmmmm... I think this is a moot point, they will regulate caches - next argument boys....

 

Its pretty obvious from their responses to issues brought up here that they are monitoring this thread. I suspect they are taking a close look at caches mentioned here. I bet caches that are not brought up in this thread will not receive the same scrutiny.

I think that is obvious...just as Groundspeak is monitoring their forums...and checking out the profiles of those who post there. It will be interesting to see how both sites improve because of this development.

[+Lostby7]

So... how exactly are trackable items being handled on this site? I'm guessing not at all. Great. Another black hole for all our bugs and coins to disappear into.

What's the point of trackables other than profit for the listing service...how many placed actually still roam free...maybe 50%...if it's a coin maybe 20%? Thank's I can do without the trackables.

[+Tigerz]

You really need to check the feedback site every now and then .....

i'm quite aware of what's going on there, thank you.

There is a rumor that GSAK will be making use of the API. Now it does not say that any Bozo that just fell off the turnip truck gets to use the API, I'm sure we will see more application development using it.

exactly my point. i don't care about GSAK. obviously you have no idea about how open source development works. it literally lives off the "Bozos that just fell off the turnip truck", because those are exactly the people who have the brilliant ideas but never get to turn them into something real because of corporate restrictions. several whole worlds of operating systems and related applications were born from that very idea. chances are you're using at least one of them (firefox).

You should care about GSAK. I've been playing with the API (and some suggested snippets from Clyde) and have a macro that will download caches in seconds from the opencaching.com website. Call me one of those bozos ... I don't have a programming background (although I've written a number of GSAK macros) and all I was doing was kicking the tires. No way would have GS allowed me to do that ... and it was literally in minutes that I accomplished what I wanted. An open API anyone can play with gives a decided advantage to opencaching.com.

[+Castle Mischief]

So... how exactly are trackable items being handled on this site? I'm guessing not at all. Great. Another black hole for all our bugs and coins to disappear into.

What's the point of trackables other than profit for the listing service...how many placed actually still roam free...maybe 50%...if it's a coin maybe 20%? Thank's I can do without the trackables.

 

Good for you. For the rest of us, those that do like to see our trackables move and like to move those of others, it's a concern.

[Mr.Yuck]

You really need to check the feedback site every now and then .....

i'm quite aware of what's going on there, thank you.

There is a rumor that GSAK will be making use of the API. Now it does not say that any Bozo that just fell off the turnip truck gets to use the API, I'm sure we will see more application development using it.

exactly my point. i don't care about GSAK. obviously you have no idea about how open source development works. it literally lives off the "Bozos that just fell off the turnip truck", because those are exactly the people who have the brilliant ideas but never get to turn them into something real because of corporate restrictions. several whole worlds of operating systems and related applications were born from that very idea. chances are you're using at least one of them (firefox).

You should care about GSAK. I've been playing with the API (and some suggested snippets from Clyde) and have a macro that will download caches in seconds from the opencaching.com website. Call me one of those bozos ... I don't have a programming background (although I've written a number of GSAK macros) and all I was doing was kicking the tires. No way would have GS allowed me to do that ... and it was literally in minutes that I accomplished what I wanted. An open API anyone can play with gives a decided advantage to opencaching.com.

 

Didn't happen with Navicache. Of course it's been broken since about 2006.

[+Lostby7]

So... how exactly are trackable items being handled on this site? I'm guessing not at all. Great. Another black hole for all our bugs and coins to disappear into.

What's the point of trackables other than profit for the listing service...how many placed actually still roam free...maybe 50%...if it's a coin maybe 20%? Thank's I can do without the trackables.

 

Good for you. For the rest of us, those that do like to see our trackables move and like to move those of others, it's a concern.

The best way to avoid or reduce further loss in the traveler population is not to have caches cross listed. I think listing GCs caches there is a bad idea.

[knowschad]

Now it does not say that any Bozo that just fell off the turnip truck gets to use the API

I just hope that every dog will get it's day.

 

Edited December 10, 2010 by knowschad

[+addisonbr]

The best way to avoid or reduce further loss in the traveler population is not to have caches cross listed. I think listing GCs caches there is a bad idea.

It does highlight an interesting question. What obligation does the CO have to facilitate a side game played by some? FTFs, travelers, challenge caches that use other caches as game pieces, etc.

 

I think I would argue that as long as you're not being intentionally provocative, using GC.com as a listing service doesn't make you particularly beholden to the side games that people have come up with.

[+dfx]

You should care about GSAK. I've been playing with the API (and some suggested snippets from Clyde) and have a macro that will download caches in seconds from the opencaching.com website. Call me one of those bozos ... I don't have a programming background (although I've written a number of GSAK macros) and all I was doing was kicking the tires. No way would have GS allowed me to do that ... and it was literally in minutes that I accomplished what I wanted. An open API anyone can play with gives a decided advantage to opencaching.com.

bingo. i don't care about GSAK simply because i don't use it. in your example, GSAK just provided the framework for you to interface with the API, but that doesn't have to be GSAK. the same could be done by anyone from any platform using any framework or language.

 

if/when GSAK gets access to any potential GS API, then i still won't care about GSAK. good for GSAK and their users, but everyone else will be left in the dark.

[+Castle Mischief]

The best way to avoid or reduce further loss in the traveler population is not to have caches cross listed. I think listing GCs caches there is a bad idea.

It does highlight an interesting question. What obligation does the CO have to facilitate a side game played by some? FTFs, travelers, challenge caches that use other caches as game pieces, etc.

 

I think I would argue that as long as you're not being intentionally provocative, using GC.com as a listing service doesn't make you particularly beholden to the side games that people have come up with.

 

Trackables are much more than a "side game that people have come up with." All the data is maintained on geocaching.com, they are just as much a part of the game, as played on geocaching.com, as any ammo can found in the woods. They are inseparable.

 

FTF is a different story.

 

Apples to aardvarks.

[+GeoGeeBee]

you have no idea about how open source development works. it literally lives off the "Bozos that just fell off the turnip truck", because those are exactly the people who have the brilliant ideas but never get to turn them into something real because of corporate restrictions.

 

Wozniak was a technician at Hewlett Packard. When he and Jobs designed a nifty computer in his garage, he gave H-P first crack at it. They wouldn't even look at it, because he wasn't an engineer.

 

Which makes Apples lack of open-source support sort of ironic, doesn't it?

[+Castle Mischief]

The best way to avoid or reduce further loss in the traveler population is not to have caches cross listed. I think listing GCs caches there is a bad idea.

 

I don't disagree, but this brings me back to a question I asked earlier- what's to stop another cacher from importing my caches and listing them on opencaching?

 

Should I be proactively cross-posting my caches to protect them from being claimed by somebody else?

[+Tigerz]

You should care about GSAK. I've been playing with the API (and some suggested snippets from Clyde) and have a macro that will download caches in seconds from the opencaching.com website. Call me one of those bozos ... I don't have a programming background (although I've written a number of GSAK macros) and all I was doing was kicking the tires. No way would have GS allowed me to do that ... and it was literally in minutes that I accomplished what I wanted. An open API anyone can play with gives a decided advantage to opencaching.com.

bingo. i don't care about GSAK simply because i don't use it. in your example, GSAK just provided the framework for you to interface with the API, but that doesn't have to be GSAK. the same could be done by anyone from any platform using any framework or language.

 

if/when GSAK gets access to any potential GS API, then i still won't care about GSAK. good for GSAK and their users, but everyone else will be left in the dark.

All I can say is wow ... opencaching's version of a PQ is "limited" to 5000 caches. You can run it any time on any frequency. It's lightning fast ... I downloaded around 3700 caches and had them in GSAK in well under a minute. There was no 1000 limit, no need to open a browser and download a GPX/ZIP, and then no need to upload it to my software/GPSr of choice. It is all done simply and straightforward by the user. Yes, they need to correct issues like cross posting and proximity, but the possibilities for opencaching.com are truly limited solely by our own imagination.

[+Frank Broughton]

 

This is the main problem with geocaching. If we played the game properly NO ONE WOULD KNOW! Geotrails are a sad sight and they do not need to exist. Torn up trees are a shame and they do not need to exist.

 

If you leave behind any evidence of you being in a place or if you are seen you simply are not playing the game properly in my not to popular book - obviously in light of the awful mess many geocachers make on the trails.

 

And how do you avoid geo trails?

You shoot all the bear, elk, deer, coyotes, foxes, cattle and anything bigger than a squirrel. Then once they stop making trails the humans won't bother.

 

Then why the concern from landowners? We can be way more careful then we are and that for sure. Some people need to learn to softstep, I am 225 pounds and I can walk softer than some teens I know that weigh 100! All of you know I speak the truth with this, it is a little dirty secret of geocaching that is hushed up. We do not have to create trails. Talk the long way around you lazy bums!

Edited December 10, 2010 by Frank Broughton

[+Frank Broughton]

There is no review process at 'open'caching.com. (snip).

For a site with no review process the sure did remove violating cache fast. hmmmmm... I think this is a moot point, they will regulate caches - next argument boys....

 

Its pretty obvious from their responses to issues brought up here that they are monitoring this thread. I suspect they are taking a close look at caches mentioned here. I bet caches that are not brought up in this thread will not receive the same scrutiny.

 

Experiment underway!

 

Dude. *Announcing* that you're about to start an experiment is hardly the way to be stealthy about it!

 

Really now, there people go reading into things that are not there. Dude, where did I say "I" was doing the experiment!

[+Castle Mischief]

All I can say is wow ... opencaching's version of a PQ is "limited" to 5000 caches. You can run it any time on any frequency. It's lightning fast ... I downloaded around 3700 caches and had them in GSAK in well under a minute. There was no 1000 limit, no need to open a browser and download a GPX/ZIP, and then no need to upload it to my software/GPSr of choice. It is all done simply and straightforward by the user. Yes, they need to correct issues like cross posting and proximity, but the possibilities for opencaching.com are truly limited solely by our own imagination.

 

That was 3700 caches from a database of how many...? Color me uninpressed.

[+Castle Mischief]

We do not have to create trails. Talk the long way around you lazy bums!

 

Does your GPS unit have a "long way around" routing function? Yeah, neither does mine.

 

Sometimes taking the path of least resistance and a trail means that I don't stomp over the plantlife that is not on the trail. Should I be wandering like a drunken bee and clearing out as much flora as possible?

Edited December 10, 2010 by Castle Mischief

[+Frank Broughton]

Wozniak was a technician at Hewlett Packard. When he and Jobs designed a nifty computer in his garage, he gave H-P first crack at it. They wouldn't even look at it, because he wasn't an engineer.

 

Which makes Apples lack of open-source support sort of ironic, doesn't it?

A moment of silence please - the mention of the Great Woz has happened.

.

.

.

.

Sorry cannot help myself..... Now if only the Woz would start a geocaching site, that would be the cat's meow! He is a man of great integrity and honor!

Woz shared his with the rest of the team - do it for FUN - don't do it for MONEY! 8-)

[+Frank Broughton]

We do not have to create trails. Talk the long way around you lazy bums!

 

Does your GPS unit have a "long way around" routing function? Yeah, neither does mine.

 

Sometimes taking the path of least resistance and a trail means that I don't stomp over the plantlife that is not on the trail. Should I be wandering like a drunken bee and clearing out as much flora as possible?

 

First question: yes, mine does have the long way around built into it. It is called a topo map! Second question, you want a real answer or a silly one like the question? Of course you should not be wandering around like a drunken bee and clearing out as much flora as possible.

 

Cache placers have as much or maybe more responsibility to prevent this sad reality of geocaching. You will not see geotrails at my quality hiking caches for sure. I made sure of that.

Edited December 10, 2010 by Frank Broughton

[+addisonbr]

It does highlight an interesting question. What obligation does the CO have to facilitate a side game played by some? FTFs, travelers, challenge caches that use other caches as game pieces, etc.

 

I think I would argue that as long as you're not being intentionally provocative, using GC.com as a listing service doesn't make you particularly beholden to the side games that people have come up with.

Trackables are much more than a "side game that people have come up with." All the data is maintained on geocaching.com, they are just as much a part of the game, as played on geocaching.com, as any ammo can found in the woods. They are inseparable.

 

FTF is a different story.

 

Apples to aardvarks.

In my own mind, trackables and challenge caches are an optional activity. Challenge caches are listed on geocaching.com as well, with full reviewer oversight, but I wouldn't hesitate to change the ratings of my caches, or the name of my caches, or anything else about my caches, even though it might monkey with other people's challenges. I wouldn't do it capriciously. But if as a CO I had a good reason to do it, I wouldn't worry about how it affects the optional challenge cache activity.

 

I would never do something insidious to mess with someone's trackable. But I don't think I have an obligation not to cross-list a cache because a trackable owner doesn't want me to. All TBs have instructions to visit Groundspeak for more information, all geocoins have "Trackable at geocaching.com" printed on them, and all trackable owners have the option of attaching further instructions if they choose.

 

Given that reviewers often defend people's abilities to publicize their caches in other ways than by using the GC.com listing service (phone call to friends, private web site, another listing service, etc. - all usually cited in FTF threads), as long as I'm conscientiously following all of GC.com's guidelines it's not clear to me what else I owe trackable owners.

[+Castle Mischief]

First question: yes, mine does have the long way around built into it. It is called a typo map! Second question, you want a real answer or a silly one like the question? Of course you should not be wandering around like a drunken bee and clearing out as much flora as possible.

 

Typo map, huh? I don't see much difference in taking the long way around and wandering around like a drunken bee.

 

Cache placers have as much or maybe more responsibility to prevent this sad reality of geocaching. You will not see geotrails at my quality hiking caches for sure. I made sure of that.

 

Okay, what's you secrect recipe for controling the actions of other people that I don't know about? Tell me how you are possibly forcing cachers to take different routes to your caches.

[+addisonbr]

That was 3700 caches from a database of how many...? Color me uninpressed.

It's not very many compared with GC.com that's absolutely for sure. But it's only been about three days, and they already have 10x as many listings as opencaching.us has after several months. I don't know enough about TC.com and NC.com but I'm guessing 3700 would represent a reasonable percentage of their total listings even though they've been around for years.

 

I'm fairly certain that the vast majority of the OC.com listings are cross-posted from here, although there are probably a handful of unique postings.

[+Castle Mischief]

...as long as I'm conscientiously following all of GC.com's guidelines it's not clear to me what else I owe trackable owners.

 

Yeah, I don't have an answer either.

 

I guess I'm just looking into the future and seeing trackables from cross-posted caches winding up in oc.com only caches and never finding their way back on the gc.com "grid".

[knowschad]

Does your GPS unit have a "long way around" routing function?

<snip>

yes, mine does have the long way around built into it. It is called a typo map!

 

I saw it before the edit, and loved the irony!!

Edited December 10, 2010 by knowschad

[+Castle Mischief]

That was 3700 caches from a database of how many...? Color me uninpressed.

It's not very many compared with GC.com that's absolutely for sure. But it's only been about three days, and they already have 10x as many listings as opencaching.us has after several months. I don't know enough about TC.com and NC.com but I'm guessing 3700 would represent a reasonable percentage of their total listings even though they've been around for years.

 

I'm fairly certain that the vast majority of the OC.com listings are cross-posted from here, although there are probably a handful of unique postings.

 

I'm just saying that pulling query result from a relatively smaller pool (with less total queries running at a given time, natch) should be faster.

 

When their database hits the gabillion mark with over a godzillaplex of users and you can pull a query at the same speed, then I'll be impressed.

[+Frank Broughton]

First question: yes, mine does have the long way around built into it. It is called a typo map! Second question, you want a real answer or a silly one like the question? Of course you should not be wandering around like a drunken bee and clearing out as much flora as possible.

 

Typo map, huh? I don't see much difference in taking the long way around and wandering around like a drunken bee.

 

Cache placers have as much or maybe more responsibility to prevent this sad reality of geocaching. You will not see geotrails at my quality hiking caches for sure. I made sure of that.

 

Okay, what's you secrect recipe for controling the actions of other people that I don't know about? Tell me how you are possibly forcing cachers to take different routes to your caches.

 

SECRET - CONTROLLING

 

I fixed the TYPO before I saw your post I did I really did.

 

Place caches off existing maintained trails or in areas that contain STONE! that is one tip. Another, place your cache in an area infested with evasive weeds - you just cannot kill them suckers, not in an area that has tons of these:

 

.

Common sense is needed and of course YOU know that already!

 

There are areas that have great flora:

 

 

That still provide areas safe to place a cache near of one uses there brain to think for than a second or two. I know that is hard in 2010 but it can be done.

Edited December 10, 2010 by Frank Broughton

[knowschad]

I'm still waiting to hear the official stance on sharing My Finds and My Hides pocket queries. Has it occurred to anyone else that there is a possibility that this is a cooperative venture, and that they will be sharing information via their respective API's? I don't really *think* so (nor can I imagine why) but that might explain why they don't apparently have an issue with the cross-posting. Just a thought.

[+Avernar]

He and their geocaching team clearly have no idea what it is like to cache in the real world.

Everyone who's used a Garmin geocache capable GPSr could have told you that a long time ago.

 

They've only recently added a "next stage" for multicaches and you can only have one "next stage" active at one time so you can't be doing several multis simultaneously. And if you reload the caches you loose the next stage so no resuming a multi at a later date.

 

Plus the child waypoints are not linked to the caches, no attributes, no attended log type, etc. Cachers they are not.

[+Frank Broughton]

Does your GPS unit have a "long way around" routing function?

<snip>

yes, mine does have the long way around built into it. It is called a typo map!

 

I saw it before the edit, and loved the irony!!

 

What irony?

[+Frank Broughton]

I'm still waiting to hear the official stance on sharing My Finds and My Hides pocket queries. Has it occurred to anyone else that there is a possibility that this is a cooperative venture, and that they will be sharing information via their respective API's? I don't really *think* so (nor can I imagine why) but that might explain why they don't apparently have an issue with the cross-posting. Just a thought.

My finds and my hides GPX files can be generated outside of geocaching.com's system, but you know that, right?

[+briansnat]

We do not have to create trails. Talk the long way around you lazy bums!

 

Does your GPS unit have a "long way around" routing function? Yeah, neither does mine.

 

Sometimes taking the path of least resistance and a trail means that I don't stomp over the plantlife that is not on the trail. Should I be wandering like a drunken bee and clearing out as much flora as possible?

 

First question: yes, mine does have the long way around built into it. It is called a topo map! Second question, you want a real answer or a silly one like the question? Of course you should not be wandering around like a drunken bee and clearing out as much flora as possible.

 

Cache placers have as much or maybe more responsibility to prevent this sad reality of geocaching. You will not see geotrails at my quality hiking caches for sure. I made sure of that.

 

In well over a thousand cache hunts and maintenance trips I've yet to see more than a handful of these geotrails that you claim are so rampant. What it is it in the water in your area?

[+Frank Broughton]

We do not have to create trails. Talk the long way around you lazy bums!

 

Does your GPS unit have a "long way around" routing function? Yeah, neither does mine.

 

Sometimes taking the path of least resistance and a trail means that I don't stomp over the plantlife that is not on the trail. Should I be wandering like a drunken bee and clearing out as much flora as possible?

 

First question: yes, mine does have the long way around built into it. It is called a topo map! Second question, you want a real answer or a silly one like the question? Of course you should not be wandering around like a drunken bee and clearing out as much flora as possible.

 

Cache placers have as much or maybe more responsibility to prevent this sad reality of geocaching. You will not see geotrails at my quality hiking caches for sure. I made sure of that.

 

In well over a thousand cache hunts and maintenance trips I've yet to see more than a handful of these geotrails that you claim are so rampant. What it is it in the water in your area?

 

Ya, you cache on rocks! awesome ones too!

[+Ecylram]

A fair point was brought up around trackables...

 

If Garmin gets it's way, newbies that just got a new GPS and are new to Geocaching will not know about 'Trackables'. A person using GC.com can unknowingly move a trackable to a cross posted cache where a OC.com cacher will treat it like a normal swag item, causing it to disappear.

[+addisonbr]

Sounds like they expect us geocachers to be their reviewers.

I went into the interview with an open mind, because using cachers as reviewers has worked pretty well on GC.com. But he still didn't address the problem of "publish first, think about it after". If they're paying as close attention to the feedback from the community as they claim they are, I'd think that wouldn't have escaped notice that it's probably the #1 concern long-time geocachers have about the new operation.

 

Quotes like "Hand the keys to the car to the community", "Don't want to make people wait an inordinate amount of time for their cache to be approved", "we can make sure we're deleting caches that are breaking the rules"... None of that gives me much confidence that they think the lack of an a priori review process is at all important.

 

At one point he said something about deleting caches "...often before they're even published" but didn't give any insight whatsoever about what he meant, given that it differs from everything else he said in the interview and how they do things now. And the interviewers didn't follow up. Missed opportunity.

 

And when pushed for a number of caches that he found, he danced around the question

Yes. It's a relatively straight-forward question, but the extent to which he avoided it was interesting.

[+addisonbr]

I'm just saying that pulling query result from a relatively smaller pool (with less total queries running at a given time, natch) should be faster.

 

When their database hits the gabillion mark with over a godzillaplex of users and you can pull a query at the same speed, then I'll be impressed.

That's a pretty good point. I hadn't thought of that.

[+addisonbr]

In well over a thousand cache hunts and maintenance trips I've yet to see more than a handful of these geotrails that you claim are so rampant. What it is it in the water in your area?

I see a lot of them in New York. But caches in New York have a higher find rate than in most places, so it may be a biased sample.

[knowschad]

I don't suppose he said anything about whether or not they intend to purge their database when this "beta" goes into production?

[+Ecylram]

Does your GPS unit have a "long way around" routing function? Yeah, neither does mine.

 

Sometimes taking the path of least resistance and a trail means that I don't stomp over the plantlife that is not on the trail. Should I be wandering like a drunken bee and clearing out as much flora as possible?

A fair point.

 

This discussion reminds me story about a woman in Texas who filed a complaint with the state that she knew that hunters were not using a proper toilet while in the woods. The judge closed the complaint with a humorous response that included:

"The problem is, we have recently had a rash of reports of cows, horses, sheep and goats defecating at will in pastures throughout the county."

&

"I strongly believe that both are taking place, since hunters have long been suspected of taking a good amount of liquid refreshments with them into the woods. Also, we are collecting samples of the activities of these diabolical, defecating reprobates. Should we send these to you, or directly to Austin?"

Gotta love a judge with a sense of humor.

[+addisonbr]

Has it occurred to anyone else that there is a possibility that this is a cooperative venture, and that they will be sharing information via their respective API's...

It never occurred to me... but as I chew on it, I'm with you. While I can't rule it out, it seems unlikely.

[+Hynr]

As to why Garmin would do this: There is only one reason why a publicly traded company does anything: "Return on investment" for the shareholder (a.k.a "Profit" + "increase in value")! Which is "= to money".

 

As for sticking to something they do best: They are! (marketing a high-tech product line) This is not about making you or me happy or somehow teaching Groundspeak something; this is about "access to market". I see them becoming much closer to their geocaching clients (you and me) with this move. We can expect to see them at more of our events. We can expect more GPS toys geared towards geocaching. We can expect entire product lines suddenly becoming aware of how we do things. This is certainly great for the game.

 

As to "will this be for Garmin users only, or for all geocachers?" I’m sure Garmin has noted that many geocachers keep buying new GPSrs every few years. What better way to get access to a customer base than to have them visit your site regularly. Even better if you can deliver new features that the competition can’t touch.

 

While there are clearly tons of glitches at the beta site, it is functional for geocaching. The level of innovation is amazing relative to what we have become accustomed to here.

[+addisonbr]

A fair point was brought up around trackables...

 

If Garmin gets it's way, newbies that just got a new GPS and are new to Geocaching will not know about 'Trackables'. A person using GC.com can unknowingly move a trackable to a cross posted cache where a OC.com cacher will treat it like a normal swag item, causing it to disappear.

I always treat trackables assuming that the next person to find it may be a new geocacher who doesn't know anything about TBs or geocoins. The TBs have instructions on the tag and the geocoins say "Trackable at Geocaching.com", but I don't think that's enough protection from the typical brand-new cacher. I'd attach a laminated card or other printed instructions to cut down on the chances that the items accidentally join a new cacher's swag collection.

 

I'd keep the same approach in mind w.r.t. OC.com.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

You will not see geotrails at my quality hiking caches for sure. I made sure of that.

 

So there is only one way to get from parking to your caches...no exceptions? And they are sitting right in the middle of the existing trail?

[+BuckeyeClan]

There is no review process at 'open'caching.com. (snip).

For a site with no review process the sure did remove violating cache fast. hmmmmm... I think this is a moot point, they will regulate caches - next argument boys....

 

Its pretty obvious from their responses to issues brought up here that they are monitoring this thread. I suspect they are taking a close look at caches mentioned here. I bet caches that are not brought up in this thread will not receive the same scrutiny.

 

Experiment underway!

 

Dude. *Announcing* that you're about to start an experiment is hardly the way to be stealthy about it!

 

Really now, there people go reading into things that are not there. Dude, where did I say "I" was doing the experiment!

 

Phew! Had me worried there for a moment! Hopefully it's someone not participating in this thread. Report back in a few days. I'm really interested in how they'll enforce the proximity issue with caches listed on their site.

 

I did get a form-type e-mail last night acknowleging the issue of signing up with your e-mail address, which is then displayed as your username in the forums. They changed mine, and sounds like they are working on a fix.

[knowschad]

You will not see geotrails at my quality hiking caches for sure. I made sure of that.

 

So there is only one way to get from parking to your caches...no exceptions? And they are sitting right in the middle of the existing trail?

I know that it is sooooo tempting to follow Frank's forum geotrail through the unrelated woods, but perhaps we should stay on the main path before the flora gets trompled.

[+sTeamTraen]

I don't disagree, but this brings me back to a question I asked earlier- what's to stop another cacher from importing my caches and listing them on opencaching?

 

Should I be proactively cross-posting my caches to protect them from being claimed by somebody else?

If you don't want your caches to appear on OpenCaching.com, the way to do it is to... upload them to OpenCaching.com!

 

Let me explain.

 

First, create a GPX file with all of your caches in it.

 

Now, create an account on OpenCaching.com - of course, you can't call it "Castle Mischief" because OpenCaching.com doesn't allow spaces in usernames, in case you use that to upload a virus or something. When signing up, you can put anything you like as the e-mail address, because that isn't checked during sign-up (astonishingly, there is no validation step).

 

Having logged in, go to "Settings" (hey, isn't it obvious that cache uploads will be there?), then "Import", and click on "Import Hides". Upload your GPX file. Don't panic! They won't be published.

 

You will now have a red link at the top of the page saying "Your draft geocaches (20)", if there were 20 caches in the GPX file (and if the logs and descriptions weren't too complicated so that the upload failed, but hey, this is Beta). Click on that link and you will see all of your caches.

 

That's it! Now just forget about your caches. The draft version in your account is sitting on the OX12345 number which corresponds to the GC12345 number of your cache, so nobody else can upload it. You can use a sock puppet ask a friend who has an OpenCaching.com account to try this: delete two of the draft caches and have the sock friend upload the same GPX file, and only those two will appear in their draft list.

Edited December 10, 2010 by sTeamTraen

[+dfx]

The draft version in your account is sitting on the OX12345 number which corresponds to the GC12345 number of your cache, so nobody else can upload it. You can use a sock puppet ask a friend who has an OpenCaching.com account to try this: delete two of the draft caches and have the sock friend upload the same GPX file, and only those two will appear in their draft list.

is that really how it works, did you try that? i was under the impression that a specific OX code will only be given out if it's still available, and if it isn't then it will just receive another OX code. because otherwise one couldn't upload an existing cache with waypoint code OCXXXX if GCXXXX had been uploaded before, even though this would be a valid scenario.

 

of course the matching could also happen on the GC code itself, i.e. if GCXXXX gets uploaded, ignore that waypoint if GCXXXX has been uploaded before by someone else, independent of the OX code that would be given out.

Edited December 10, 2010 by dfx