Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 11
FickFam

opencaching.com new mascot...

Recommended Posts

There is whole lot of content in this thread that I would not describe as civil.

Agreed. There is also a whole lot of content in this thread that I would describe as civil. ;)

Share this post


Link to post

There is whole lot of content in this thread that I would not describe as civil.

Agreed. There is also a whole lot of content in this thread that I would describe as civil. ;)

 

There's 1200 posts...that's a whole lot of content, period. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post

Why reopen this thread? Geocaching is a game so why get so worked up over an alternative site? Some folks need to get a life! :ph34r:

To answer your first statement... yes, it is a game. It is a game that we all love to play, and so we are all going to take a serious look at anything that we feel threatens that game. If you don't feel that opencaching threatens that game, then there is nothing for you to discuss, really. But there are things for us to discuss, debate, and consider. That is why we "get so worked up", as you so delicately put it.

 

As to your "Some folks need to get a life comment", let me quote Brad_W's comment from when he reopened this thread:

 

Please remember to keep persons out of the discussions. It is fine to talk about objects, comment on them, note your agreement or disagreement with a post or an opinion, and when disagreeing, to disagree without being disagreeable.

 

Those "some folks" that you referred to are included in the "some folks" that he was referring to.

Share this post


Link to post

"that we feel threatens that game"

There are a lot of important threats in life, but we don't believe geocaching is being threatened by anything much less OC!

 

I believe it is. As it has been stated before, some places only want GC.com caches and would frown on interlopers from other sites placing them. Also again, the lack of a good review staff will do more harm than good to the hobby/sport/obsession/etc.

Share this post


Link to post

"that we feel threatens that game"

There are a lot of important threats in life, but we don't believe geocaching is being threatened by anything much less OC!

OK. I have no problem with that. Please allow us to be concerned about what we are concerned about. There is no need to belittle those that you disagree with.

Share this post


Link to post

"that we feel threatens that game"

There are a lot of important threats in life, but we don't believe geocaching is being threatened by anything much less OC!

OK. I have no problem with that. Please allow us to be concerned about what we are concerned about. There is no need to belittle those that you disagree with.

As we see the current World events, there is a lot to be "concerned" with, but geocaching?

Pardon me!

No one is belittling anyone. We are only trying to tone down the rhetoric and bring this discussion back to Earth. As we said before......................geocaching is a game and the World will not end if there are two or three sites that offer alternatives to the game!

Play on! :)

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

Both sites are just cache listing sites. When you submit a cache you are checking boxes that say the cache is yours and not the sites cache so in the long run you are held liable for that cache, not them. I really don't think either site has a beef with one or the other just that one charges for a PM account but they both have a free option. Without us, neither site would be here. I choose to cache on both sites, I can live with the fact that both sites can and will exist with the other being around. ;)

Share this post


Link to post

"that we feel threatens that game"

There are a lot of important threats in life, but we don't believe geocaching is being threatened by anything much less OC!

OK. I have no problem with that. Please allow us to be concerned about what we are concerned about. There is no need to belittle those that you disagree with.

As we see the current World events, there is a lot to be "concerned" with, but geocaching?

Pardon me!

No one is belittling anyone. We are only trying to tone down the rhetoric and bring this discussion back to Earth. As we said before......................geocaching is a game and the World will not end if there are two or three sites that offer alternatives to the game!

Play on! :)

Yes, you are belittling. And despite the current world events, you seem to be quite concerned about what we are discussing here. Opencaching is a game, and the world will not end if opencaching is discussed here.

Share this post


Link to post

"that we feel threatens that game"

There are a lot of important threats in life, but we don't believe geocaching is being threatened by anything much less OC!

 

And because you believe it then others can't discuss it? unsure.gif

Share this post


Link to post

We don't know what is going on behind the scenes. It might be Groundspeak will be able to convince Garmin to pull the plug once they realize it's flatlining. Since it pretty much only exists now because of all the cross-listed caches. Somehow, it doesn't seem like taking a chunk of work from another site is a good way of starting out as an independent site... but that's just my opinion. I have no "we" to speak for.

Share this post


Link to post

I choose to cache on both sites

I'm curious... when you find a cross-listed cache, do you log on both sites?

Share this post


Link to post

"that we feel threatens that game"

There are a lot of important threats in life, but we don't believe geocaching is being threatened by anything much less OC!

 

Granted. But in a world where I can probably do little about the events in Egypt, global warming, or the effects of trickle down economics, it is sometimes nice to come here just because it is a game.

 

And quite frankly, garmin caching is only a blip on my radar. There are two cross listed caches in my general area. I don't feel threatened by them. Although I wish that garmin had used its resources to design a unit where the color of the buttons do not start wearing off within a short period of time, rather than launch a new web site through which they hope to sell more of these units.

 

Still, there are things about their site that make me curious. Why did they choose that particular name? Why do they adopt guidelines than are arguably more restrictive than Groundspeak's but rely on a peer system to make it work? Will the peer system be able to figure out the local boundaries of the NPS, state parks, water districts, and open space land better than the Groundspeak reviewers, who sometimes find it rather confusing? What is attracting its core base of users?

 

Will people actually follow through with suggestions on the garmin site to place caches near existing ones listed here, with advertising in Groundspeak listings referring people to the other cache and the garmin site? Will a cache like that be placed near one of mine? Will garmin open up opencaching to virtuals or an equivalent of earthcaches? Has their web site increased their sales? If it doesn't, will it go the way of the nuviphone?

 

And the ultimate question related to the original topic -- will Opie encourage Groundspeak to give Signal a makeover? Or make any other changes in this site?

 

Of course these are not the key issues of the day and there is no need to take anything personally. But if I want to discuss what is actually threatening me, I will go to other sites, as I sometimes do. If I want to discuss a game that has little effect on the world, except for giving many of us a diversion and taking us to nice places, then this seems like a good place to do it. And garmin caching may not threaten, but as Alice said, it is "curiouser and curiouser."

Edited by mulvaney

Share this post


Link to post

Did some more number crunching on OC's North America & Caribbean caches. Ten Cachers account for nearly 1/4 of all the caches listed:

 

Placed by Count Pcent

bikephotog 202 5.3%

M&M_Melted 143 3.7%

OF-ERAD 91 2.4%

TeamDotOne 86 2.2%

Wallace-River 85 2.2%

SWAMPER68 82 2.1%

Nuttyguy 79 2.1%

CLANRIFFSTER 64 1.7%

philbeer 58 1.5%

ManvillePossumHunters 57 1.5%

Totals 947 24.7%

Sorry about the formatting, the forum removes extra spaces and tabs when posting.

Share this post


Link to post

"that we feel threatens that game"

There are a lot of important threats in life, but we don't believe geocaching is being threatened by anything much less OC!

 

Nobody is putting any of the global threats to life liberty and the pursuit of tasty donuts on the same scale as geocaching. This is all being discussed as it exists in the microcosm of geocaching. Thanks for your concern.

Share this post


Link to post

CLANRIFFSTER 64 1.7%

 

Well, prom my poush.

 

There's other recognizable names on the list as well. I know that some cachers posted their caches so they wouldn't lose their locations if OC took off and became popular. So I wouldn't read too much into the names.

 

Though I will note a person critical of this thread was ranked 13th on the list.

Share this post


Link to post

 

CLANRIFFSTER 64 1.7%

 

Well, prom my poush.

 

Its good to see clanriffster helpling out the new kids on the block. A neighborly thing to do, although I hope it's not a plot to lead unsuspecting opencachers nipple deep into an alligator infested swamp.

 

But the garmin site is still new and numbers at this point mean little. The question for me is whether garmin will have the staying power to build the kind of critical mass necessary for a listing service to be a commercial success that warrants further investment. That takes time and I am not sure that the chirp sales are increasing fast enough to make it all work.

Edited by mulvaney

Share this post


Link to post

Of the 501 accounts that have placed caches on OC's website (for North America & the Caribbean), 223 only placed one cache.

Share this post


Link to post

 

CLANRIFFSTER 64 1.7%

 

Well, prom my poush.

Yikes! Now I feel like Steve Martin's character in "The Jerk" upon seeing his name in a phone book: "I'm somebody now!" :lol:

Actually, to be fair to those keeping track, my rating is at that level because I cross listed all my active GC hides to test drive their system. I wanted to see how well it worked, and what kind of data was included. I also wanted to test their guidelines, and their review process, as most of these hides are in places that require explicit permission, and a few are in places that specifically prohibit caches listed at sites other than GC. All 64 got published without so much as twitching an eyebrow. Personally, I see my 64 hides as ample proof that the OC peer review system is a failure.

Share this post


Link to post

But the garmin site is still new and numbers at this point mean little. The question for me is whether garmin will have the staying power to build the kind of critical mass necessary for a listing service to be the kind of commercial success that warrants further investment. That takes time and I am not sure that the chirp sales are increasing fast enough to make it all work.

 

That's the million dollar question. So far, there has been too little activity to have had any affect on their sales. As it sits now, the Chirp isn't selling. I believe there are only two in my state that are in use.

 

Aside from their policies, which we've rehashed several times, they still have a long ways to go in developing their site. Geocaching.com has had a lot of years to add features to this website and it's going to be hard for Garmin to catch up, especially when Groundspeak is working to upgrade their product as well.

 

As it sits now, Groundspeak is adding an API to this website and is reworking their mapping feature to something that is far more robust. Frankly, if Groundspeak would bring in an interface expert and rework the website so it was more intuitive it would be very hard for Garmin or another company to gain much market share.

Share this post


Link to post

Did some more number crunching on OC's North America & Caribbean caches. Ten Cachers account for nearly 1/4 of all the caches listed:

 

Placed by Count Pcent

bikephotog 202 5.3%

M&M_Melted 143 3.7%

OF-ERAD 91 2.4%

TeamDotOne 86 2.2%

Wallace-River 85 2.2%

SWAMPER68 82 2.1%

Nuttyguy 79 2.1%

CLANRIFFSTER 64 1.7%

philbeer 58 1.5%

ManvillePossumHunters 57 1.5%

Totals 947 24.7%

Sorry about the formatting, the forum removes extra spaces and tabs when posting.

Hey, I made the list! :D This is great news to me. I really love to develope geocaches and waymarks, guess it shows. All of mine are cross listed on both sites. I can hardly wait until Groundspeak reinstates virtual caches. I have been collecting data and getting ready for them. I enjoy geocaching on both sites, but this one has more to offer. :anibad: Thanks Ecylram for the post, it made my day! :laughing::laughing::laughing: I made the list!!!!

Share this post


Link to post

Hey, I made the list! :D This is great news to me. I really love to develope geocaches and waymarks, guess it shows. All of mine are cross listed on both sites. I can hardly wait until Groundspeak reinstates virtual caches. I have been collecting data and getting ready for them. I enjoy geocaching on both sites, but this one has more to offer. :anibad: Thanks Ecylram for the post, it made my day! :laughing::laughing::laughing: I made the list!!!!

 

Glad I could be of service! biggrin.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Hey, I made the list! :D This is great news to me. I really love to develope geocaches and waymarks, guess it shows. All of mine are cross listed on both sites. I can hardly wait until Groundspeak reinstates virtual caches. I have been collecting data and getting ready for them. I enjoy geocaching on both sites, but this one has more to offer. :anibad: Thanks Ecylram for the post, it made my day! :laughing::laughing::laughing: I made the list!!!!

 

:rolleyes:

Edited by Arthur & Trillian

Share this post


Link to post

 

CLANRIFFSTER 64 1.7%

 

Well, prom my poush.

Yikes! Now I feel like Steve Martin's character in "The Jerk" upon seeing his name in a phone book: "I'm somebody now!" :lol:

Actually, to be fair to those keeping track, my rating is at that level because I cross listed all my active GC hides to test drive their system. I wanted to see how well it worked, and what kind of data was included. I also wanted to test their guidelines, and their review process, as most of these hides are in places that require explicit permission, and a few are in places that specifically prohibit caches listed at sites other than GC. All 64 got published without so much as twitching an eyebrow. Personally, I see my 64 hides as ample proof that the OC peer review system is a failure.

 

No fear, I didn't read too much into it. One of my caches is listed over there too- but not by me. That's all the proof I need that it's a total fail.

Share this post


Link to post
No fear, I didn't read too much into it. One of my caches is listed over there too- but not by me. That's all the proof I need that it's a total fail.

 

Have you tried to get it removed?

Share this post


Link to post

 

CLANRIFFSTER 64 1.7%

 

Well, prom my poush.

Yikes! Now I feel like Steve Martin's character in "The Jerk" upon seeing his name in a phone book: "I'm somebody now!" :lol:

Actually, to be fair to those keeping track, my rating is at that level because I cross listed all my active GC hides to test drive their system. I wanted to see how well it worked, and what kind of data was included. I also wanted to test their guidelines, and their review process, as most of these hides are in places that require explicit permission, and a few are in places that specifically prohibit caches listed at sites other than GC. All 64 got published without so much as twitching an eyebrow. Personally, I see my 64 hides as ample proof that the OC peer review system is a failure.

 

No fear, I didn't read too much into it. One of my caches is listed over there too- but not by me. That's all the proof I need that it's a total fail.

 

You have hit on the only reason I would even think about cross-listing - so that someone doesn't steal my user name/work/cache locations. But I'm not too worried, opencaching hasn't exactly caught on in Nebraska. Though it has been brought up, over on OC, about deliberately placing OC caches closed to GC ones, to confuse people into signing the wrong logbook, and camping out at GC events to try to coerce people to join OC. I'd be thrilled to have any and all geocachers at my events, but don't come so you can push your private agendas. Please. Again, though, not too worried about this happening.

Share this post


Link to post
You have hit on the only reason I would even think about cross-listing - so that someone doesn't steal my user name/work/cache locations. But I'm not too worried, opencaching hasn't exactly caught on in Nebraska. Though it has been brought up, over on OC, about deliberately placing OC caches closed to GC ones, to confuse people into signing the wrong logbook, and camping out at GC events to try to coerce people to join OC. I'd be thrilled to have any and all geocachers at my events, but don't come so you can push your private agendas. Please. Again, though, not too worried about this happening.

 

I am with you in that I do not think it'll happen, but if anyone were to do something like that to my caches or local events, I don't think I'd be so cordial. To me, such actions are nothing more than parasitic.

Share this post


Link to post
No fear, I didn't read too much into it. One of my caches is listed over there too- but not by me. That's all the proof I need that it's a total fail.

 

Have you tried to get it removed?

 

I shouldn't have to. No worries, the five people logging finds on that site don't live in this area. Again, the resemblances to Waymarking are remarkable. :wacko::P

Share this post


Link to post

No fear, I didn't read too much into it. One of my caches is listed over there too- but not by me. That's all the proof I need that it's a total fail.

 

You have hit on the only reason I would even think about cross-listing - so that someone doesn't steal my user name/work/cache locations. But I'm not too worried, opencaching hasn't exactly caught on in Nebraska. Though it has been brought up, over on OC, about deliberately placing OC caches closed to GC ones, to confuse people into signing the wrong logbook, and camping out at GC events to try to coerce people to join OC. I'd be thrilled to have any and all geocachers at my events, but don't come so you can push your private agendas. Please. Again, though, not too worried about this happening.

 

I thought about cross-listing to avoid the "data theft", for lack of a better word, but I don't want to even participate in their venture much less provide hides for it. I thought about uploading my hides but never releasing them- putting a "hold" on my GC number in their system, but there's nothing to stop somebody from listing a cache right on top of my location and using my physical cache to collect the finds.

 

I'm starting to gravitate towards your attitude on the subject. There's not enough inertia on that site at the moment and they actually seem to be losing momentum instead of gaining it. When somebody lists 100 new caches on that site in our area that aren't cross-posted and then more than three people log finds on them, I'll think about cross-posting mine and retrieving the one cache of mine that was posted on there by some low-down-dirty varmint.

Share this post


Link to post
No fear, I didn't read too much into it. One of my caches is listed over there too- but not by me. That's all the proof I need that it's a total fail.

 

Have you tried to get it removed?

 

I shouldn't have to. No worries, the five people logging finds on that site don't live in this area. Again, the resemblances to Waymarking are remarkable. :wacko::P

One of these days, I'll log a find on it and then anybody checking my OC profile will be able to track it down and shoot it. But I won't announce when I do it, so they'd better keep checking.

Share this post


Link to post
Again, the resemblances to Waymarking are remarkable.

 

I really just don't understand it. :blink: I enjoy Waymarking, and it is part of this site. Waymarking is one of the reasons that I am a PM on this site. Why do people care which site that others enjoy with our GPS unit adventures? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Again, the resemblances to Waymarking are remarkable.

 

I really just don't understand it. :blink: I enjoy Waymarking, and it is part of this site. Waymarking is one of the reasons that I am a PM on this site. Why do people care which site that others enjoy with our GPS unit adventures? :blink:

Nobody cares what site you use or how many, the Discussion is over the merits of the sites themselves, it isn't personal, I am glad you and the others are enjoying it, I just personally doubt it will survive long in its present form, it must become far more GC.com like or it will fail.

Share this post


Link to post

More Stupid Statistical Tricks - Worldwide Numbers...

I pulled down the entire cache database for OC. Here's more trivia:

 

Total Worldwide Caches: 8495

Logged in December: 1273 (15%)

Logged in January: 543 (6.4%)

Percent with logs (any date): 49.1%

 

Total Finds For December: 995

Total Finds for January: 499

Drop From Dec To Jan: 49%

Placed in December: 1517 (17.9%)

Placed in January: 303 (3.6%)

Drop From Dec To Jan: 80%

Number of Multicaches: 675 (7.9%)

Number of Traditional: 7181 (84.5%)

Number of Unknown: 639 (7.5%)

 

Containers by size

Large 278 (3.3%)

Micro 3662 (43.1%)

Regular 1813 (21.3%)

Small 2742 (32.3%)

 

Top Countries

United States 3103 36.5%

Germany 1898 22.3%

South Korea 1001 11.80%

Canada 729 8.6%

Top four countries account for 79% of all OC caches

Top 10 Cache Placers

GeoKing 1011 (11.9%)

bikephotog 202 (2.4%)

M&M_Melted 143 (1.7%)

Reodor 102 (1.2%)

mrplenty 92 (1.1%)

OF-ERAD 91 (1.1%)

TeamDotOne 86 (1.0%)

Wallace-River 85 (1.0%)

SWAMPER68 82 (1.0%)

Nuttyguy 79 (0.9%)

Total Number of Accounts With Placed Caches: 1424

Number of Cachers who've only placed one Cache: 731 (51.3%)

Number of Cachers who've placed more than 10 Caches: 197 (13.8%)

 

Caches By U.S. State:

Three States Do Not Have Caches

AK 172 2.0%

AL 48 0.6%

AR 16 0.2%

AZ 101 1.2%

CA 85 1.0%

CO 140 1.6%

CT 69 0.8%

FL 308 3.6%

GA 57 0.7%

HI 20 0.2%

IA 16 0.2%

ID 62 0.7%

IL 151 1.8%

IN 18 0.2%

KS 80 0.9%

KY 10 0.1%

MA 44 0.5%

MD 34 0.4%

ME 15 0.2%

MI 16 0.2%

MN 103 1.2%

MO 33 0.4%

MS 37 0.4%

MT 20 0.2%

NC 32 0.4%

ND 3 0.0%

NE 8 0.1%

NH 7 0.1%

NJ 25 0.3%

NM 4 0.0%

NV 33 0.4%

NY 21 0.2%

OH 219 2.6%

OK 11 0.1%

OR 94 1.1%

PA 195 2.3%

RI 17 0.2%

SC 39 0.5%

SD 34 0.4%

TN 35 0.4%

TX 146 1.7%

UT 266 3.1%

VA 91 1.1%

VT 1 0.0%

WA 121 1.4%

WI 38 0.4%

WV 7 0.1%

Number of Travel Bug Hotels (and variants): 30

 

Sorry for the formatting issues. All data pulled from GSAK.

Share this post


Link to post

Why do people care which site that others enjoy with our GPS unit adventures? :blink:

 

If it didn't affect the cachers here, I doubt most would care. But various OC practices and policies have the potential to negatively affect Geocaching. (If you read through the thread, you'll see the concerns that various geocachers have.)

Share this post


Link to post

Why do people care which site that others enjoy with our GPS unit adventures? :blink:

 

If it didn't affect the cachers here, I doubt most would care. But various OC practices and policies have the potential to negatively affect Geocaching. (If you read through the thread, you'll see the concerns that various geocachers have.)

 

This.

Share this post


Link to post

We don't know what is going on behind the scenes. It might be Groundspeak will be able to convince Garmin to pull the plug once they realize it's flatlining. Since it pretty much only exists now because of all the cross-listed caches. Somehow, it doesn't seem like taking a chunk of work from another site is a good way of starting out as an independent site... but that's just my opinion. I have no "we" to speak for.

My theory is that Garmin will pull the plug when Groundspeak provides GPX format to everyone with no charge. That seems to be the main reason for the site, so that people who buy Garmin (and other manufacturer) GPS units that import geocache information using GPX will be able to the this information without being forced to pay for it.

 

I choose to cache on both sites

I'm curious... when you find a cross-listed cache, do you log on both sites?

I'm curious... why would this matter?

 

No fear, I didn't read too much into it. One of my caches is listed over there too- but not by me. That's all the proof I need that it's a total fail.

 

Have you tried to get it removed?

 

I shouldn't have to. No worries, the five people logging finds on that site don't live in this area. Again, the resemblances to Waymarking are remarkable. :wacko::P

Waymarking is doing quite well thank you. Using the number of visits as a measure of success shows a geocaching mindset. Not all waymarks are intended to be visited. My Hollywood Sign waymark gets visited about as often as the physical cache that is located nearby and usually by different people.

 

There is no doubt that for someone already on Geocaching.com, particularly someone who is a premium member so they already get GPX format files, there is not much to attract them to use the other site. So I'm surprise that it will start off slowly and mostly with cross listed geocaches.

 

It is a shame that someone would post a geocache that doesn't belong to them on the other site. This is probably an area where the peer review could be tweaked. The peer reviewers there can easily make the check of who owns the cache on GC.com (since it appears that many already bring up the cache on GC.com and vote for publication there since it is already published here).

 

I suspect that it isn't hard to list someone else's archived cache or cache listed on a alternative site here on GC.com. I doubt the volunteers would check for this.

Share this post


Link to post

I choose to cache on both sites

I'm curious... when you find a cross-listed cache, do you log on both sites?

I'm curious... why would this matter?

 

Because logs do matter. Here's an example from OC's most northernmost cache:

 

Please read the most recent logs and help us maintain this cache.

If you are unable to help while you are on the island, leave a note

in your log for the next visitor indicating the cache needs

attention.

 

Vacation cache issues aside...I've been grateful to hear in a log that a rattlesnake was just seen next to the cache and that there are hidden wasp issues. I might choose to not search for a cache with a broken container, local construction problem, or a problem neighbor.

 

Heck, DNF might also send me to a different cache.

Edited by Ecylram

Share this post


Link to post

We don't know what is going on behind the scenes. It might be Groundspeak will be able to convince Garmin to pull the plug once they realize it's flatlining. Since it pretty much only exists now because of all the cross-listed caches. Somehow, it doesn't seem like taking a chunk of work from another site is a good way of starting out as an independent site... but that's just my opinion. I have no "we" to speak for.

My theory is that Garmin will pull the plug when Groundspeak provides GPX format to everyone with no charge. That seems to be the main reason for the site, so that people who buy Garmin (and other manufacturer) GPS units that import geocache information using GPX will be able to the this information without being forced to pay for it.

 

So your theory is that Garmin is trying to blackmail Groundspeak into giving everyone premium membership for free? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post

We don't know what is going on behind the scenes. It might be Groundspeak will be able to convince Garmin to pull the plug once they realize it's flatlining. Since it pretty much only exists now because of all the cross-listed caches. Somehow, it doesn't seem like taking a chunk of work from another site is a good way of starting out as an independent site... but that's just my opinion. I have no "we" to speak for.

My theory is that Garmin will pull the plug when Groundspeak provides GPX format to everyone with no charge. That seems to be the main reason for the site, so that people who buy Garmin (and other manufacturer) GPS units that import geocache information using GPX will be able to the this information without being forced to pay for it.

 

So your theory is that Garmin is trying to blackmail Groundspeak into giving everyone premium membership for free? :blink:

 

Why is Garmin against capitalism?

Share this post


Link to post

More Stupid Statistical Tricks - Worldwide Numbers...

 

(NUMBERS)

 

 

What I'm really interested in are the find numbers. I know that wouldn't be possible to pull together in any form, but I'd like to know how many unique (not carried over from gc.com) finds they are getting.

 

I'd also like to know how many unique hides there are too.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm still waiting for Joranda to answer my serious question about cross-logging cross-posted caches. I am seriously curious about that.

 

I ain't trying to start no issues, and I understand that your question is serious. I feel that I may be able to better answer your question than Joranda if I understand your question correctly. I am one of the top ten CO's on that site. I log caches on both sites. I like both sites. I enjoy Waymarking and other benefits that this site offers. I enjoy being a PM on this site more than a basic user. I do not like PMO caches that are not made avalable to basic members after PM"s get a first chance at FTF. I support this site by being a PM, but I also support the other site because I enjoy geocaching and GPS fun.

Share this post


Link to post

What I'm really interested in are the find numbers. I know that wouldn't be possible to pull together in any form, but I'd like to know how many unique (not carried over from gc.com) finds they are getting.

 

I'd also like to know how many unique hides there are too.

 

I can give you some approximate numbers.

 

It appears that caches that were entered into the system without valid GC numbers, starting with 12/07/10 (launch date), were assigned OX codes that started with OXZT. To date...

 

443 Caches

205 have Found logs.

 

The found caches are distributed among these countries:

 

Country Count Pcent

Unknown 2 1.0%

Australia 2 1.0%

Austria 4 2.0%

Belgium 2 1.0%

Brazil 1 0.5%

Canada 11 5.4%

China 1 0.5%

Czech Republic 15 7.3%

Denmark 1 0.5%

Finland 2 1.0%

France 10 4.9%

Germany 25 12.2%

Hong Kong 1 0.5%

Italy 2 1.0%

Luxembourg 1 0.5%

Netherlands 1 0.5%

New Zealand 2 1.0%

Poland 3 1.5%

Portugal 4 2.0%

South Africa 1 0.5%

Spain 2 1.0%

Sweden 4 2.0%

Switzerland 2 1.0%

Taiwan 1 0.5%

United Kingdom 6 2.9%

United States 99 48.3%

 

EDITED TO ADD:

It appears that only 33 unique caches were added during the month of January.

Edited by Ecylram

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 11

×
×
  • Create New...