Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 11
FickFam

opencaching.com new mascot...

Recommended Posts

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.

Yes, my question is a serious one, so thanks. Why would you double-log? It takes twice as long. What does that gain you or the cache owner? The same cache owner is going to get two logs from you on the same cache, most likely saying at least roughly the same thing. Your find count will not be doubled, so obviously that is not the point... so... what IS? Edited by knowschad

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.

 

How is that a serious question? Why would that affect you on ebit? If I find a cache that is listed on both sites why wouldn't I log it on both sites? Isn't that why the cache owners listed them for? I hope the ones that I find aren't crossed listed and only set up for the site that it was intended for. So far the only one that is in my range that I don't own is crossed listed and I went back and resigned the log anyways in the spirit of the game. I could do what most do and armchair log caches but that is not how I play. When I go to Nevada in less than a month I see the cache owners there pretty much have OC only caches listed so that should be no problems. I plan on supporting all the cache listing sites that interest me. Without us, they wouldn't have a cache to list.

Share this post


Link to post

That second question was supposed to be "one bit" and not "on ebit"

 

I don't like to edit logs cause it looks like you are trying to hide something or that you said something out of line that you are hiding.

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.

 

How is that a serious question? Why would that affect you on ebit? If I find a cache that is listed on both sites why wouldn't I log it on both sites? Isn't that why the cache owners listed them for? I hope the ones that I find aren't crossed listed and only set up for the site that it was intended for. So far the only one that is in my range that I don't own is crossed listed and I went back and resigned the log anyways in the spirit of the game. I could do what most do and armchair log caches but that is not how I play. When I go to Nevada in less than a month I see the cache owners there pretty much have OC only caches listed so that should be no problems. I plan on supporting all the cache listing sites that interest me. Without us, they wouldn't have a cache to list.

Geeze, dude... chill!! I am just asking a question, for cryin' out loud!

 

As to why wouldn't you... I don't know. That's why I'm asking. Too much trouble, perhaps? Too time consuming? Maybe since you already logged on one site, you'd figure that the cache owner already has the information that you found it, so a 2nd log would be redundant?

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.

 

(MORE NUMBERS)

 

 

Hey, that's educational. So there are like 400+ unique caches and only 200+ with logs. The USA has almost half of that 400+.

 

I'm opting out of giving a rat's patoot about where this site is headed. I hope that Garmin returns to cranking out incrementally upgraded car units and high-dollar handhelds and drops the whole thing.

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.

Yes, my question is a serious one, so thanks. Why would you double-log? It takes twice as long. What does that gain you or the cache owner? The same cache owner is going to get two logs from you on the same cache, most likely saying at least roughly the same thing. Your find count will not be doubled, so obviously that is not the point... so... what IS?

I just do it for my enjoyment. Many users don't use both sites, but I do. Waymarking is currantly my favorite site, but it is quite time consuming. I upload my photos and write a note about my visit. I am not a numbers cachers, I only seek caches and waymarks that interest me.

I really don't understand what your point is either. Does it bother you that I enjoy geocaching and Waymarking and like to take part in it?

One of my favorite caches is a Earthcache, a waymark, and a traditional cache at the same location about the same subject, but by three different CO's. Hopefully soon it will also be a new virtual listing too.

Edited by Manville Possum Hunters

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.

 

How is that a serious question? Why would that affect you on ebit? If I find a cache that is listed on both sites why wouldn't I log it on both sites? Isn't that why the cache owners listed them for? I hope the ones that I find aren't crossed listed and only set up for the site that it was intended for. So far the only one that is in my range that I don't own is crossed listed and I went back and resigned the log anyways in the spirit of the game. I could do what most do and armchair log caches but that is not how I play. When I go to Nevada in less than a month I see the cache owners there pretty much have OC only caches listed so that should be no problems. I plan on supporting all the cache listing sites that interest me. Without us, they wouldn't have a cache to list.

Geeze, dude... chill!! I am just asking a question, for cryin' out loud! As to why wouldn't you... I don't know. That's why I'm asking. Too much trouble, perhaps? Too time consuming? Maybe since you already logged on one site, you'd figure that the cache owner already has the information that you found it, so a 2nd log would be redundant?

 

I don't really know what you are trying to start with me. Telling me to chill out and all. ????????? I just don't understand why I can't ask a question without you getting in my face with the chill out stuff. Borders close to a personal attack. I have all the time in the world so if I would like to long one cache on seven cache listing sites I am free to do so as long as that cache is listed there. You play your game the way you want to play and others will play as they see fit to play.

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.

 

How is that a serious question? Why would that affect you on ebit? If I find a cache that is listed on both sites why wouldn't I log it on both sites? Isn't that why the cache owners listed them for? I hope the ones that I find aren't crossed listed and only set up for the site that it was intended for. So far the only one that is in my range that I don't own is crossed listed and I went back and resigned the log anyways in the spirit of the game. I could do what most do and armchair log caches but that is not how I play. When I go to Nevada in less than a month I see the cache owners there pretty much have OC only caches listed so that should be no problems. I plan on supporting all the cache listing sites that interest me. Without us, they wouldn't have a cache to list.

Geeze, dude... chill!! I am just asking a question, for cryin' out loud! As to why wouldn't you... I don't know. That's why I'm asking. Too much trouble, perhaps? Too time consuming? Maybe since you already logged on one site, you'd figure that the cache owner already has the information that you found it, so a 2nd log would be redundant?

 

I don't really know what you are trying to start with me. Telling me to chill out and all. ????????? I just don't understand why I can't ask a question without you getting in my face with the chill out stuff. Borders close to a personal attack. I have all the time in the world so if I would like to long one cache on seven cache listing sites I am free to do so as long as that cache is listed there. You play your game the way you want to play and others will play as they see fit to play.

Some users just log TFTC or DNF, and that is not good enough for some. :blink: So what if we take extra time and enjoy more than one site? That's just what some of us enjoy. Even geocachers on this site call Waymarking "why bother marking". Most users won't use the forums, but I enjoy them too. But why bother? :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post

<<< personal attack deleted >>>>>

Edited by briansnat

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.

 

How is that a serious question? Why would that affect you on ebit? If I find a cache that is listed on both sites why wouldn't I log it on both sites? Isn't that why the cache owners listed them for? I hope the ones that I find aren't crossed listed and only set up for the site that it was intended for. So far the only one that is in my range that I don't own is crossed listed and I went back and resigned the log anyways in the spirit of the game. I could do what most do and armchair log caches but that is not how I play. When I go to Nevada in less than a month I see the cache owners there pretty much have OC only caches listed so that should be no problems. I plan on supporting all the cache listing sites that interest me. Without us, they wouldn't have a cache to list.

Geeze, dude... chill!! I am just asking a question, for cryin' out loud! As to why wouldn't you... I don't know. That's why I'm asking. Too much trouble, perhaps? Too time consuming? Maybe since you already logged on one site, you'd figure that the cache owner already has the information that you found it, so a 2nd log would be redundant?

 

I don't really know what you are trying to start with me. Telling me to chill out and all. ????????? I just don't understand why I can't ask a question without you getting in my face with the chill out stuff. Borders close to a personal attack. I have all the time in the world so if I would like to long one cache on seven cache listing sites I am free to do so as long as that cache is listed there. You play your game the way you want to play and others will play as they see fit to play.

 

Oh, jeez...quit playing the victim card. There is no personal attack at all.

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.

 

How is that a serious question? Why would that affect you on ebit? If I find a cache that is listed on both sites why wouldn't I log it on both sites? Isn't that why the cache owners listed them for? I hope the ones that I find aren't crossed listed and only set up for the site that it was intended for. So far the only one that is in my range that I don't own is crossed listed and I went back and resigned the log anyways in the spirit of the game. I could do what most do and armchair log caches but that is not how I play. When I go to Nevada in less than a month I see the cache owners there pretty much have OC only caches listed so that should be no problems. I plan on supporting all the cache listing sites that interest me. Without us, they wouldn't have a cache to list.

Geeze, dude... chill!! I am just asking a question, for cryin' out loud! As to why wouldn't you... I don't know. That's why I'm asking. Too much trouble, perhaps? Too time consuming? Maybe since you already logged on one site, you'd figure that the cache owner already has the information that you found it, so a 2nd log would be redundant?

 

I don't really know what you are trying to start with me. Telling me to chill out and all. ????????? I just don't understand why I can't ask a question without you getting in my face with the chill out stuff. Borders close to a personal attack. I have all the time in the world so if I would like to long one cache on seven cache listing sites I am free to do so as long as that cache is listed there. You play your game the way you want to play and others will play as they see fit to play.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. I was trying to calm things down here by asking you a straightforward question. I was not challenging you or opencaching.com. I was just curious about something, yet you came back with what looked to me like a very defensive and suspicious response. I was not, and am not, trying to "start anything here" except for a non-confrontational dialog.

Share this post


Link to post

Hey, that's educational. So there are like 400+ unique caches and only 200+ with logs. The USA has almost half of that 400+.

 

I'm opting out of giving a rat's patoot about where this site is headed. I hope that Garmin returns to cranking out incrementally upgraded car units and high-dollar handhelds and drops the whole thing.

I think that is a harsh assessment of a site that has been open for less than three months with no advertising.

For whatever reason some folks are feeling threatened by the other site that I find very funny to read.

I am actually hoping that it succeeds so I can see the reaction of these folks. LOL

Share this post


Link to post

I think that is a harsh assessment of a site that has been open for less than three months with no advertising.

For whatever reason some folks are feeling threatened by the other site that I find very funny to read.

I am actually hoping that it succeeds so I can see the reaction of these folks. LOL

 

If OC does succeed, don't be surprised if folks on this thread aren't upset.

 

If you read the comments carefully you'll find that the concern is with specific policies and practices of OC. For OC to succeed they will need to address the very real issues that have given us folks some concern. If they do that, you'll see most of the criticism go away.

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.

 

How is that a serious question? Why would that affect you on ebit? If I find a cache that is listed on both sites why wouldn't I log it on both sites? Isn't that why the cache owners listed them for? I hope the ones that I find aren't crossed listed and only set up for the site that it was intended for. So far the only one that is in my range that I don't own is crossed listed and I went back and resigned the log anyways in the spirit of the game. I could do what most do and armchair log caches but that is not how I play. When I go to Nevada in less than a month I see the cache owners there pretty much have OC only caches listed so that should be no problems. I plan on supporting all the cache listing sites that interest me. Without us, they wouldn't have a cache to list.

Geeze, dude... chill!! I am just asking a question, for cryin' out loud! As to why wouldn't you... I don't know. That's why I'm asking. Too much trouble, perhaps? Too time consuming? Maybe since you already logged on one site, you'd figure that the cache owner already has the information that you found it, so a 2nd log would be redundant?

 

I don't really know what you are trying to start with me. Telling me to chill out and all. ????????? I just don't understand why I can't ask a question without you getting in my face with the chill out stuff. Borders close to a personal attack. I have all the time in the world so if I would like to long one cache on seven cache listing sites I am free to do so as long as that cache is listed there. You play your game the way you want to play and others will play as they see fit to play.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. I was trying to calm things down here by asking you a straightforward question. I was not challenging you or opencaching.com. I was just curious about something, yet you came back with what looked to me like a very defensive and suspicious response. I was not, and am not, trying to "start anything here" except for a non-confrontational dialog.

 

So starting your statement will,"Geeze, dude... chill!! I am just asking a question, for cryin' out loud!" is your way of keeping this calm? Your only trying to pull this thread off topic again with nit picking.

 

Sorry Brad about my pulling this off topic to explain myself to him.

 

Let me answer your important question to you again "calmly" since I must on upset you and I am sorry, I don't mind logging caches on three different sites. I have logged on two for the past year or so, so another is no big deal. I will be in Nevada at the end of the month doing the E.T. Highway and Rt.66 series so that is almost 2000 caches by itself to log so a dozen of two OC only listed caches will be no problem. I cache because I want to and thank that there is cache listing sights out there to keep me busy.

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.

 

How is that a serious question? Why would that affect you on ebit? If I find a cache that is listed on both sites why wouldn't I log it on both sites? Isn't that why the cache owners listed them for? I hope the ones that I find aren't crossed listed and only set up for the site that it was intended for. So far the only one that is in my range that I don't own is crossed listed and I went back and resigned the log anyways in the spirit of the game. I could do what most do and armchair log caches but that is not how I play. When I go to Nevada in less than a month I see the cache owners there pretty much have OC only caches listed so that should be no problems. I plan on supporting all the cache listing sites that interest me. Without us, they wouldn't have a cache to list.

Geeze, dude... chill!! I am just asking a question, for cryin' out loud! As to why wouldn't you... I don't know. That's why I'm asking. Too much trouble, perhaps? Too time consuming? Maybe since you already logged on one site, you'd figure that the cache owner already has the information that you found it, so a 2nd log would be redundant?

 

I don't really know what you are trying to start with me. Telling me to chill out and all. ????????? I just don't understand why I can't ask a question without you getting in my face with the chill out stuff. Borders close to a personal attack. I have all the time in the world so if I would like to long one cache on seven cache listing sites I am free to do so as long as that cache is listed there. You play your game the way you want to play and others will play as they see fit to play.

 

Oh, jeez...quit playing the victim card. There is no personal attack at all.

 

Please keep this thread on the topic at hand Micheal. Thanks.

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.

 

How is that a serious question? Why would that affect you on ebit? If I find a cache that is listed on both sites why wouldn't I log it on both sites? Isn't that why the cache owners listed them for? I hope the ones that I find aren't crossed listed and only set up for the site that it was intended for. So far the only one that is in my range that I don't own is crossed listed and I went back and resigned the log anyways in the spirit of the game. I could do what most do and armchair log caches but that is not how I play. When I go to Nevada in less than a month I see the cache owners there pretty much have OC only caches listed so that should be no problems. I plan on supporting all the cache listing sites that interest me. Without us, they wouldn't have a cache to list.

Geeze, dude... chill!! I am just asking a question, for cryin' out loud! As to why wouldn't you... I don't know. That's why I'm asking. Too much trouble, perhaps? Too time consuming? Maybe since you already logged on one site, you'd figure that the cache owner already has the information that you found it, so a 2nd log would be redundant?

 

I don't really know what you are trying to start with me. Telling me to chill out and all. ????????? I just don't understand why I can't ask a question without you getting in my face with the chill out stuff. Borders close to a personal attack. I have all the time in the world so if I would like to long one cache on seven cache listing sites I am free to do so as long as that cache is listed there. You play your game the way you want to play and others will play as they see fit to play.

 

Oh, jeez...quit playing the victim card. There is no personal attack at all.

 

Please keep this thread on the topic at hand Micheal. Thanks.

Let me try one more time. I asked you a conversational caching question that I thought would help establish some neutral middle ground in an otherwise heated conversation. Your response began with, "How is that a serious question? Why would that affect you one bit? " (which was not bolded in the original post). That response is what caused my "Chill" response. You challenged me with your "Why would that affect you one bit" question. I am not, and was not, trying to "start something" with you, but I will now end something with you, as you are apparently so defensive about this whole matter that you are unable to carry on a conversation that is not confrontational. So long... thanks for the fish.

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.

 

How is that a serious question? Why would that affect you on ebit? If I find a cache that is listed on both sites why wouldn't I log it on both sites? Isn't that why the cache owners listed them for? I hope the ones that I find aren't crossed listed and only set up for the site that it was intended for. So far the only one that is in my range that I don't own is crossed listed and I went back and resigned the log anyways in the spirit of the game. I could do what most do and armchair log caches but that is not how I play. When I go to Nevada in less than a month I see the cache owners there pretty much have OC only caches listed so that should be no problems. I plan on supporting all the cache listing sites that interest me. Without us, they wouldn't have a cache to list.

Geeze, dude... chill!! I am just asking a question, for cryin' out loud! As to why wouldn't you... I don't know. That's why I'm asking. Too much trouble, perhaps? Too time consuming? Maybe since you already logged on one site, you'd figure that the cache owner already has the information that you found it, so a 2nd log would be redundant?

 

I don't really know what you are trying to start with me. Telling me to chill out and all. ????????? I just don't understand why I can't ask a question without you getting in my face with the chill out stuff. Borders close to a personal attack. I have all the time in the world so if I would like to long one cache on seven cache listing sites I am free to do so as long as that cache is listed there. You play your game the way you want to play and others will play as they see fit to play.

 

Oh, jeez...quit playing the victim card. There is no personal attack at all.

 

Please keep this thread on the topic at hand Micheal. Thanks.

For some reason this sub-thread is stirring up family trip flashbacks that involved Mom yelling at the kids in the back seat. sig_icecream.gif

 

This is the point where I'd normally try to get the thread back on track, not sure how to do that with this sub-topic...

 

Uhmmm...I would hope that Joranda cross-posts their finds so that all cachers are informed about the state of the cache (or lack there of).

Edited by Ecylram

Share this post


Link to post

<<< personal attack deleted >>>>>

I really just don't get this? :blink: This is the second time that I have saw it in this thread. Is it just off topic humor or what? :unsure:

When I post a no no and delete it, I get told that you can't unblow a horn then kicked out of the forum? I can only guess that the moderator has a sense of humor and is posting this? Ha Ha, I think it is funny too if this is the case. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
I would hope that Joranda cross-posts their finds so that all cachers are informed about the state of the cache.

If I ever start seriously playing on both sites, and came across a cross listed cache, I would likely post my find on both sites for this very reason. While, right now, just about everybody who plays over there also plays over here, that may one day be untrue. If they fix the more obvious problematic issues with their process, I think they have a good chance of providing an alternative listing site. Once that happens, it is quite likely that there will be members over there who do not play over here. My copy/paste log on the OC listing would be for their benefit.

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.

Looks like the US is in the lead. You are really good at figuring these numbers. Are there any other listing services that compare? Other than GC, and no others compare to this site.

Edited by Manville Possum Hunters

Share this post


Link to post

I think that is a harsh assessment of a site that has been open for less than three months with no advertising.

For whatever reason some folks are feeling threatened by the other site that I find very funny to read.

I am actually hoping that it succeeds so I can see the reaction of these folks. LOL

 

If OC does succeed, don't be surprised if folks on this thread aren't upset.

 

If you read the comments carefully you'll find that the concern is with specific policies and practices of OC. For OC to succeed they will need to address the very real issues that have given us folks some concern. If they do that, you'll see most of the criticism go away.

Many posts are concerns over the reviewing methods at Open Caching or about potential problems with cross posting of caches, and it is true that many of these issue will need to be addressed. However, some of the criticism in this thread is either some unfounded belief as to what is actually happening - perhaps based on a real incident that is already being addressed - or people arguing just for the sake of arguing. However, the success or failure of Opencaching doesn't depend so much on what a few geocachers on GC.com think but on whether they can address some real niche need in the general population that GC.com doesn't care to address. I still believe it is about letting people have access to cache information in GPX format so that casual geocachers can enjoy the full capabilities of whatever devices they use, and perhaps presenting a simple (some may say dumbed down) interface to make it easier for beginners to find and hide caches.

 

I would hope that Joranda cross-posts their finds so that all cachers are informed about the state of the cache.

If I ever start seriously playing on both sites, and came across a cross listed cache, I would likely post my find on both sites for this very reason. While, right now, just about everybody who plays over there also plays over here, that may one day be untrue. If they fix the more obvious problematic issues with their process, I think they have a good chance of providing an alternative listing site. Once that happens, it is quite likely that there will be members over there who do not play over here. My copy/paste log on the OC listing would be for their benefit.

I asked knowschad why he cared and haven't gotten an answer from him. But Ecylram and now Clan Riffster, have given a reasonable answer why you should log finds on both sites.

 

It isn't very practical however. I'm not going to check every GC.com cache I find to see if it is cross listed and then enter the same log on OC.com. I wouldn't expect an opencaching user to do the same on GC.com. In fact, even if the cache is only listed on one site, I am fully aware that some people won't log their finds at all, and others will log TFTC or a blank log if the site supports it. It's nice when cachers have useful information in the log but that isn't a requirement. I supposed so long as most cachers are using GC.com, I'll do without the logs left by OC.com cachers. If they ever become a significant part of the finds on a cross listed cache, I might load the logs into GSAK and have them in GPSr to check in the field but for now I really don't care if someone logs the find one, the other, both, or neither sites.

Share this post


Link to post
I'm not going to check every GC.com cache I find to see if it is cross listed...

I doubt I would either. If, in this hypothetical future, I happen to know it is cross listed, I would likely cross log it. I can practically guarantee I'm not going to search through two separate databases just to log my finds on two sites. A bit off topic: I looked at some of the caches I cross listed over yonder, seeing that some have old found logs. Presumably these logs were drug over when I cross listed the cache? I see that only those logs from GC, by folks with OC accounts were brought over. It makes me wonder, if I log a find on a GC cache, that is cross posted, would my log automatically go to the OC cache?

Share this post


Link to post
I would hope that Joranda cross-posts their finds so that all cachers are informed about the state of the cache.

If I ever start seriously playing on both sites, and came across a cross listed cache, I would likely post my find on both sites for this very reason. While, right now, just about everybody who plays over there also plays over here, that may one day be untrue. If they fix the more obvious problematic issues with their process, I think they have a good chance of providing an alternative listing site. Once that happens, it is quite likely that there will be members over there who do not play over here. My copy/paste log on the OC listing would be for their benefit.

I asked knowschad why he cared and haven't gotten an answer from him. But Ecylram and now Clan Riffster, have given a reasonable answer why you should log finds on both sites.

 

It isn't very practical however. I'm not going to check every GC.com cache I find to see if it is cross listed and then enter the same log on OC.com. I wouldn't expect an opencaching user to do the same on GC.com. In fact, even if the cache is only listed on one site, I am fully aware that some people won't log their finds at all, and others will log TFTC or a blank log if the site supports it. It's nice when cachers have useful information in the log but that isn't a requirement. I supposed so long as most cachers are using GC.com, I'll do without the logs left by OC.com cachers. If they ever become a significant part of the finds on a cross listed cache, I might load the logs into GSAK and have them in GPSr to check in the field but for now I really don't care if someone logs the find one, the other, both, or neither sites.

To clarify what I wrote...

 

It's my opinion that if you choose to use a second listing service there is an obligation to your fellow cachers to post your logs on both sites for cross-listed caches. However, I don't believe their is any obligation for a cacher to cross-post logs onto listing sites they don't use.

 

Of course, a large percentage of cachers who use two (or more) sites won't cross post because of the hassle. Couple that with those who don't use both sites and you have a recipe for incomplete logs & confusion. Toss in random features of each unique site such as travelbugs and you've got the makings of a real mess. For that reason I'd be more supportive of a website that didn't encourage cross-listing.

Edited by Ecylram

Share this post


Link to post
I'd be more supportive of a website that didn't encourage cross-listing.

 

As long as this site allowes us CO's to cross list our hides to other listing sites I will still support this site by being a PM. I enjoy trackables that this site supports, but they all have "trackable at geocaching.com" written on them. I just can't reason any confusion if one were found in a OC cache where they are not supported. Maybe the OC user would create an account on this site to log the trackable and GC would gain another user? Also most of us on OC are veteran cachers and not noobs, we know what trackables are and how to log them properly.

Share this post


Link to post
I'd be more supportive of a website that didn't encourage cross-listing.

 

As long as this site allowes us CO's to cross list our hides to other listing sites I will still support this site by being a PM. I enjoy trackables that this site supports, but they all have "trackable at geocaching.com" written on them. I just can't reason any confusion if one were found in a OC cache where they are not supported. Maybe the OC user would create an account on this site to log the trackable and GC would gain another user? Also most of us on OC are veteran cachers and not noobs, we know what trackables are and how to log them properly.

 

I believe you asked this exact same question in post #930, and Ecylram answered it in posts #936 and #940.

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?

Sorry I didn't answer your question... I didn't see it when you asked. As I tried to explain to Joranda... I was mostly trying to make neutral conversation. There was no hidden agenda... just a simple question.

Share this post


Link to post
I'd be more supportive of a website that didn't encourage cross-listing.

 

As long as this site allowes us CO's to cross list our hides to other listing sites I will still support this site by being a PM. I enjoy trackables that this site supports, but they all have "trackable at geocaching.com" written on them. I just can't reason any confusion if one were found in a OC cache where they are not supported. Maybe the OC user would create an account on this site to log the trackable and GC would gain another user? Also most of us on OC are veteran cachers and not noobs, we know what trackables are and how to log them properly.

 

I believe you asked this exact same question in post #930, and Ecylram answered it in posts #936 and #940.

That may be true, but I was making a statement in this post and not asking a question. But thanks for your help. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post

Hey, that's educational. So there are like 400+ unique caches and only 200+ with logs. The USA has almost half of that 400+.

 

I'm opting out of giving a rat's patoot about where this site is headed. I hope that Garmin returns to cranking out incrementally upgraded car units and high-dollar handhelds and drops the whole thing.

I think that is a harsh assessment of a site that has been open for less than three months with no advertising.

For whatever reason some folks are feeling threatened by the other site that I find very funny to read.

I am actually hoping that it succeeds so I can see the reaction of these folks. LOL

 

That's a rather harsh assessment of my criticisms that I've laid out in great detail throughout this thread. I do not feel personally threatened by this site. I have some valid concerns that I won't repeat yet again.

 

I find it funny that some people feel threatened by the fact that several of us have these concerns. Funny "he he" not funny "har har".

Share this post


Link to post

Final Warning

 

Please review the subject of this forum topic and keep the future posts on subject.

 

Please refrain from challenging the wisdom or motives of other posters. Questions about features and posted ideas are fine, but lay off of challenging each other personally.

 

Tip: Using the word "why" is nearly always a challenge, and it often causes a defensive response from the other party. That takes the discussion off topic.

 

I'm going to close the thread for a while so those following it will encounter this post. When it reopens, please remember that many of us, including me, would like for it to stay open - so let's all play nice.

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:

 

<numbers edited for space>

 

Ecylram, did you know that this post has been quoted in its entirety on another website?

https://forums.opencaching.com/showthread.php?159-Impressive&p=3221&viewfull=1#post3221

 

I'm sure they asked your permission first, right?

Share this post


Link to post

I really hope this doesn't become the thread of "you'll never guess what they said on that other forum".

 

 

gladyskravitz.gif

Edited by Castle Mischief

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:

 

<numbers edited for space>

 

Ecylram, did you know that this post has been quoted in its entirety on another website?

https://forums.openc...full=1#post3221

 

I'm sure they asked your permission first, right?

Nope. Hopefully if they find any errors, they'll cross-post that information here so I can correct it.

 

Looks like those who responded considered the stats to be good news, which isn't my take on the numbers.

Edited by Ecylram

Share this post


Link to post

Final Warning

 

Please review the subject of this forum topic and keep the future posts on subject.

 

Please refrain from challenging the wisdom or motives of other posters. Questions about features and posted ideas are fine, but lay off of challenging each other personally.

 

Tip: Using the word "why" is nearly always a challenge, and it often causes a defensive response from the other party. That takes the discussion off topic.

 

I'm going to close the thread for a while so those following it will encounter this post. When it reopens, please remember that many of us, including me, would like for it to stay open - so let's all play nice.

Again, thanks for your time on all this. I know we can sometimes be a pain-in-the-keester, but we are a lovable pain-in-the-keester. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post

I had a look but the nearest cache to me is 24 miles away :(

 

However I did cross post a cache I had listed here and it was reviewed in 2 days - half the time it took here -now that is a unique selling point!

B)

Share this post


Link to post

How ironic this was bumped! Garmin is having a little GPS give-away, if you list 10 or more caches on Opencaching.com in August, you get one entry. The number of caches for review in the cue has gone from I'd guesstimate about 5-10 a day to a few hundred. Of course they're almost all imports from Geocaching.com (you can do it with a GPX file, no need to type all that stuff over). Imports which will never see any "electronic maintenance" such as having coords updated, be temporarily disabled, or eventually archived but never removed from their listings. Think Navicache on Steroids. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Think Navicache on Steroids. :ph34r:

 

...and that is all Garmin's Opencaching is.

 

This latest promotion is actually kind of sad and pathetic. It shows that Garmin is desperate to gain new membership and listed caches.

Edited by Arthur & Trillian

Share this post


Link to post
Think Navicache on Steroids. :ph34r:

 

...and that is all Garmin's Opencaching is.

 

This latest promotion is actually kind of sad and pathetic. It shows that Garmin is desperate to gain new membership and listed caches.

 

I think it's just an efficient way to catch up to geocaching.com. They really do have a decent site, they are just lacking the userbase that this site has. If they get their listing count up, more newbies are likely to start there rather than here. Competition drives innovation. As sites add additional features to best their competitors, it's the geocachers that win in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Think Navicache on Steroids. :ph34r:

 

...and that is all Garmin's Opencaching is.

 

This latest promotion is actually kind of sad and pathetic. It shows that Garmin is desperate to gain new membership and listed caches.

 

I think it's just an efficient way to catch up to geocaching.com. They really do have a decent site, they are just lacking the userbase that this site has. If they get their listing count up, more newbies are likely to start there rather than here. Competition drives innovation. As sites add additional features to best their competitors, it's the geocachers that win in the end.

 

You can't be serious. Using another site's listings is a way for them to grow? All one has to do is look at Navicache to see how well basing a site on cross listed caches works out. Their site is nothing more than a big middle finger to Groundspeak and nothing more. They do not offer anything new to the field, so how is the going to drive innovation?

Share this post


Link to post
Think Navicache on Steroids. :ph34r:

 

...and that is all Garmin's Opencaching is.

 

This latest promotion is actually kind of sad and pathetic. It shows that Garmin is desperate to gain new membership and listed caches.

 

I think it's just an efficient way to catch up to geocaching.com. They really do have a decent site, they are just lacking the userbase that this site has. If they get their listing count up, more newbies are likely to start there rather than here. Competition drives innovation. As sites add additional features to best their competitors, it's the geocachers that win in the end.

 

You can't be serious. Using another site's listings is a way for them to grow? All one has to do is look at Navicache to see how well basing a site on cross listed caches works out. Their site is nothing more than a big middle finger to Groundspeak and nothing more. They do not offer anything new to the field, so how is the going to drive innovation?

 

Firstly, their not using another site's listings. Groundspeak does not own them, the geocachers do - and they voluntarily listed them there.

Secondly, how is their site "a big middle finger to Groundspeak"? As far as I know, there has been no communication from either party saying that there was any disagreement between them. I could wrong, but if you know something I don't about it, would you mind sharing?

Finally, they did bring something new to the field - an open API. Groundspeak did not even begin working on theirs until opencaching.com had released their own to the public. Also, they came up with a system, (although not perfect), for the geocachers to act as their own reviewer, eliminating the need for designated volunteers. They also designed a map system that was capable of displaying many more caches at once on a map - again well before Groundspeak released theirs. I'd say that they were very innovative. One has to ask if geocaching.com would have some of their new features if it wasn't for competition.

 

I don't mean to come across as anti-Groundspeak. I support them and am happy with all of the improvements they have come up with. But I think we may have their competition to thank for that.

 

Edit for spelling

Edited by cb82

Share this post


Link to post

How ironic this was bumped! Garmin is having a little GPS give-away, if you list 10 or more caches on Opencaching.com in August, you get one entry. The number of caches for review in the cue has gone from I'd guesstimate about 5-10 a day to a few hundred. Of course they're almost all imports from Geocaching.com (you can do it with a GPX file, no need to type all that stuff over). Imports which will never see any "electronic maintenance" such as having coords updated, be temporarily disabled, or eventually archived but never removed from their listings. Think Navicache on Steroids. :ph34r:

 

So I could just run a PQ on the Alien Power Trail, put my name on it and be a cinch for getting a new GPS.

 

Kewl !

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

How ironic this was bumped! Garmin is having a little GPS give-away, if you list 10 or more caches on Opencaching.com in August, you get one entry. The number of caches for review in the cue has gone from I'd guesstimate about 5-10 a day to a few hundred. Of course they're almost all imports from Geocaching.com (you can do it with a GPX file, no need to type all that stuff over). Imports which will never see any "electronic maintenance" such as having coords updated, be temporarily disabled, or eventually archived but never removed from their listings. Think Navicache on Steroids. :ph34r:

 

So I could just run a PQ on the Alien Power Trail, put my name on it and be a cinch for getting a new GPS.

 

Kewl !

 

No, the "peer reviewers" are actually pretty good about catching people trying to upload other people's hides. That is after they came up with the peer reviewer system on the fly after a few weeks, after people said "what, you don't have a review system"? :)

Share this post


Link to post

How ironic this was bumped! Garmin is having a little GPS give-away, if you list 10 or more caches on Opencaching.com in August, you get one entry. The number of caches for review in the cue has gone from I'd guesstimate about 5-10 a day to a few hundred. Of course they're almost all imports from Geocaching.com (you can do it with a GPX file, no need to type all that stuff over). Imports which will never see any "electronic maintenance" such as having coords updated, be temporarily disabled, or eventually archived but never removed from their listings. Think Navicache on Steroids. :ph34r:

 

So I could just run a PQ on the Alien Power Trail, put my name on it and be a cinch for getting a new GPS.

 

Kewl !

 

No, the "peer reviewers" are actually pretty good about catching people trying to upload other people's hides. That is after they came up with the peer reviewer system on the fly after a few weeks, after people said "what, you don't have a review system"? :)

 

I thought it was supposed to be "Open" caching. Now they are getting all judgemental?

Share this post


Link to post
Firstly, their not using another site's listings. Groundspeak does not own them, the geocachers do - and they voluntarily listed them there.

 

You missed the point. Using listings that are already on another site to populate yours is not the brightest idea. Most people will not be bothered to log finds on both sites. They will likely log them on the site they play most and leave it at that. people encountering cross listed hides on another site will probably not take the time to find them again for credit. To be successful, a site must really have their own unique hides. Sites like Opencaching.us and Terraaching have their own hides as the backbone of their operation, wholly unlike Garmin's site.

 

Secondly, how is their site "a big middle finger to Groundspeak"? As far as I know, there has been no communication from either party saying that there was any disagreement between them. I could wrong, but if you know something I don't about it, would you mind sharing?

 

While there hasn't been an outright statement, there is plenty of evidence to back up the theory if you look. For example, if you look at Garmin's site, virtually any mention of GC.com has been erased when it used to plug the site pretty well.

 

Finally, they did bring something new to the field - an open API. Groundspeak did not even begin working on theirs until opencaching.com had released their own to the public. Also, they came up with a system, (although not perfect), for the geocachers to act as their own reviewer, eliminating the need for designated volunteers. They also designed a map system that was capable of displaying many more caches at once on a map - again well before Groundspeak released theirs. I'd say that they were very innovative. One has to ask if geocaching.com would have some of their new features if it wasn't for competition.

 

Actually, if I am not mistaken, Opencaching.us had an open API long before Garmin. Peer review has been a cornerstone of the Terracaching site...long before Garmin. So again, they offer nothing unique.

Share this post


Link to post

How ironic this was bumped! Garmin is having a little GPS give-away, if you list 10 or more caches on Opencaching.com in August, you get one entry. The number of caches for review in the cue has gone from I'd guesstimate about 5-10 a day to a few hundred. Of course they're almost all imports from Geocaching.com (you can do it with a GPX file, no need to type all that stuff over). Imports which will never see any "electronic maintenance" such as having coords updated, be temporarily disabled, or eventually archived but never removed from their listings. Think Navicache on Steroids. :ph34r:

 

So I could just run a PQ on the Alien Power Trail, put my name on it and be a cinch for getting a new GPS.

 

Kewl !

 

No, the "peer reviewers" are actually pretty good about catching people trying to upload other people's hides. That is after they came up with the peer reviewer system on the fly after a few weeks, after people said "what, you don't have a review system"? :)

 

I thought it was supposed to be "Open" caching. Now they are getting all judgemental?

 

It IS open...as long as you conform to what those people think listings should look like. Oh yeah...you'd better not even THINK of trying to list a virtual cache there if they even THINK a regular cache can be placed there!

Share this post


Link to post
Firstly, their not using another site's listings. Groundspeak does not own them, the geocachers do - and they voluntarily listed them there.

 

You missed the point. Using listings that are already on another site to populate yours is not the brightest idea. Most people will not be bothered to log finds on both sites. They will likely log them on the site they play most and leave it at that. people encountering cross listed hides on another site will probably not take the time to find them again for credit. To be successful, a site must really have their own unique hides. Sites like Opencaching.us and Terraaching have their own hides as the backbone of their operation, wholly unlike Garmin's site.

 

Secondly, how is their site "a big middle finger to Groundspeak"? As far as I know, there has been no communication from either party saying that there was any disagreement between them. I could wrong, but if you know something I don't about it, would you mind sharing?

 

While there hasn't been an outright statement, there is plenty of evidence to back up the theory if you look. For example, if you look at Garmin's site, virtually any mention of GC.com has been erased when it used to plug the site pretty well.

 

Finally, they did bring something new to the field - an open API. Groundspeak did not even begin working on theirs until opencaching.com had released their own to the public. Also, they came up with a system, (although not perfect), for the geocachers to act as their own reviewer, eliminating the need for designated volunteers. They also designed a map system that was capable of displaying many more caches at once on a map - again well before Groundspeak released theirs. I'd say that they were very innovative. One has to ask if geocaching.com would have some of their new features if it wasn't for competition.

 

Actually, if I am not mistaken, Opencaching.us had an open API long before Garmin. Peer review has been a cornerstone of the Terracaching site...long before Garmin. So again, they offer nothing unique.

 

I didn't miss the point, I simply understand that beginning a new site with nothing but unique caches in just not possible. There is no possible way for Garmin to ever catch up to this site's listings by requiring only new caches. I agree that most people will not bother to post finds on both sites, but cross listing provides a base for the site to grow rather than starting from nothing at all.

As far as Garmin no longer advertising for geocaching.com, that's just obvious. Of course they are not going to advertise their competitors site. Regardless of wheteher the two had a disagreement or not, I hardly see the site as being nothing more than a "big middle finger". If Garmin's only intent was to hurt Groundspeak, there are better ways than designing an entire competing site.

As far as Opencaching.us having an open API and terracaching having a peer review system, I honestly did not know that. I have never used either site other than a quick search of both for any nearby caches (for which there were none). The fact remains that Groundspeak didn't bother with any of this until opencaching.com did. Maybe they saw them as being a possible contender (unlike navicaching and opencaching.us). It's hard to ignore the fact that opencaching probably drove these developments.

 

Edit for more spelling errors

Edited by cb82

Share this post


Link to post
I didn't miss the point, I simply understand that beginning a new site with nothing but unique caches in just not possible. There is no possible way for Garmin to ever catch up to this site's listings by requiring only new caches. I agree that most people will not bother to post finds on both sites, but cross listing provides a base for the site to grow rather than starting from nothing at all.

 

Sure, it's possible to start out with unique hides. Why is it requisite to cross list to achieve the goal of cache population? Again, I refer to Terracaching because they do not want cross listed caches and never have. They managed to succeed in their niche.

 

As far as Garmin no longer advertising for geocaching.com, that's just obvious. Of course they are not going to advertise their competitors site. Regardless of wheteher the two had a disagreement or not, I hardly see the site as being nothing more than a "big middle finger". If Garmin's only intent was to hurt Groundspeak, there are better ways than designing an entire competing site.

 

Well, I am not going to hold your hand and show you every example out there. Do some digging and you'll see what I mean.

 

As far as Opencaching.us having an open API and terracaching having a peer review system, I honestly did not know that. I have never used either site other than a quick search of both for any nearby caches (for which there were none). The fact remains that Groundspeak didn't bother with any of this until opencaching.com did. Maybe they saw them as being a possible contender (unlike navicaching and opencaching.us). It's hard to ignore the fact that opencaching probably drove these developments.

 

I hardly call it being a leader in development when their site lacks the basics that others do have.

Edited by Arthur & Trillian

Share this post


Link to post

Last week I received email notices that two of my opencaching caches had been found. I met the cacher and I said that I look forward to seeing her logs for these caches on geocaching.com. She looked confused but I dismissed it. I later tried to find her profile. She has not profile on geocaching.com. She is strictly an opencaching customer.

Share this post


Link to post

I didn't miss the point, I simply understand that beginning a new site with nothing but unique caches in just not possible. There is no possible way for Garmin to ever catch up to this site's listings by requiring only new caches. I

 

It's basically a marketing problem.

 

Groundspeak was first. They have a huge user base. They are to geocaching what FedEx is to overnight deliveries, or what Domino's is to pizza delivery.

 

In marketing, you can either be first, or you can be better. A good marketing campaign has to have a Unique Selling Proposition -- something you can offer that you competitors can't, that will make customers want to choose you.

 

Garmin has no USP. In order to give users a reason to switch, or new users a reason to choose them, they need to come up with one.

 

They've tried.

 

They have virtuals, GS doesn't, right now. That's not enough to get many people to switch.

 

They have an API. Nobody cares, because there just aren't a ton of great apps doing cool stuff with that API. And by the time they get any, GS will have one, too.

 

So far, judging by their few unique listings and the activity on their forums, they do have one Unique Selling Proposition: they are the place to go after being banned by Groundspeak. I don't see how that's going to be very appealing for anyone who has NOT been banned by GS.

Share this post


Link to post
So far, judging by their few unique listings and the activity on their forums, they do have one Unique Selling Proposition: they are the place to go after being banned by Groundspeak. I don't see how that's going to be very appealing for anyone who has NOT been banned by GS.

 

:ph34r::lol:

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...