Jump to content

Dreaming of a gc.com competition website (just for fun)


Recommended Posts

Everyone has probably gotten a little upset with gc.com at one time or another. Most also realize that there is nowhere else to go to play this game because gc.com has no real competition. And gc.com knows that too.

 

But there must be all the talent and resources needed in the geocaching community to start a gc.com competitor site. Don’t you agree? They say if you can dream it you can do it. I believe that.

 

If you, or the geocaching community, were to start a website to compete with gc.com how would you manage the website and what would you do differently from gc.com?

 

Let your imagination go.

 

P.S. This is just for fun, Jeremy.

Link to comment

I'd rathter give up the hobby instead of designing another website to compete with gc.com. Not because I regard it as something holy and untouchable, but because I don't want to deal with the headaches.

 

Anyway, what makes gc.com great are many of the players, and I'd never be able to convince a significant number of them to move over. Actually, I doubt I'd be able to convince even one.

Edited by Chrysalides
Link to comment

I'd like to investigate Opencaching.us. It doesn't seem to have the corporate arrogance we've seen recently on geocaching.com or Garmin's opencaching.com.

 

(That reminds me; I fully intended to list my caches there, and then totally forgot. :o )

 

To me, the only real value in GC.com (besides the huge cache database) is the reviewers, especially the relationship they have with the various park boards.

Link to comment

I think you should ask 'If you could change GC.com in any way what would you do?' The whole create a competition discussion soured most people when Opencaching.com came out. It was beat into the ground.

 

The first thing I would do is add a check for caches that NEED MAINT was flagged. If the CO hasn't reported that the visited/fixed the cache I would have it automatically archived after a set time period. There are a lot of caches in my area that are NM and appear to have no activity on and a check on the owners activity does shows no activity for over a year in some cases. I know the reviewers are supposed to check this or something, but they are busy and automation of this would not be too difficult to code.

 

This is of course what I'd like to see but does not constitute a complaint.... just a 'it'd be nice if... kind of thing.

 

Is this what you are looking for in this post A&A?

Link to comment

For a different view of how to do a caching site there are three you can look at (TC, the OC network that includes OCUS, and Garmin's OC). All survive; none really thrive because there's simply not enough of a market for real competition. Overall, I think most cachers are reasonably satisfied with what Groundspeak does here. It doesn't all go perfectly (the Challenges thing obviously did not go over as well as anyone would have hoped) and it would be great if improvements could be made faster, but I'm not itching to head elsewhere.

 

Were I to start a geocaching site tomorrow, I would try to integrate geocaching, benchmarking, and Waymarking/virtuals/challenges into a single site. I would divide my profile statistics on Finds into Physical Caches, Virtual Caches, Events, and Benchmarks with subcategories for each. But most of the features would be more like geocaching.com than the other sites, including the Reviewer system.

Edited by Joshism
Link to comment

Please don't use this thread as a way of promoting existing competing websites. Instead, follow the OP's question about designing a hypothetical competing website. Thanks.

 

I of course wouldn't have to design one, because the Opencaching network is already pre-designed, and all you have to do is say you want one in your Country if it doesn't have it. That's not promotion, is it? :o

 

Oh gosh, a competing website designed from the ground up should pretty much have all the same features, and try new cache types, such as Munzees. They should also allow old fashioned type virtual, webcam and locationless caches. History has shown that the lack of the crazed numbers competition at competing websites will not result in them being overrun by those three cache types. Here of course, it would. At least the virtuals. Every roadside historical marker in America would be a virtual by now, if they hadn't nipped them in the bud.

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

The idea of this thread is akin to walking into a womens clothing store with a survey saying you're going to open a rival women's clothing store, what would people like to see in it.

 

gc.com has been around too long, and people have histories here that they're not going to easily walk away from. My 574 finds were all hard earned, and I don't see peeps with more being any more likely to leave gc.com than I am.

 

I did sign up on opencaching.com.... but never logged a find.... I don't think,.... or maybe I logged one... it just doesn't have the same status as gc.com.

Link to comment

The idea of this thread is akin to walking into a womens clothing store with a survey saying you're going to open a rival women's clothing store, what would people like to see in it.

 

gc.com has been around too long, and people have histories here that they're not going to easily walk away from. My 574 finds were all hard earned, and I don't see peeps with more being any more likely to leave gc.com than I am.

 

I did sign up on opencaching.com.... but never logged a find.... I don't think,.... or maybe I logged one... it just doesn't have the same status as gc.com.

I think you are missing the point, the point is basically a creative way of saying, "what would you do differently". Suggestions are generally limited to what you think Groundspeak *MIGHT* do. The way this thread is set up, the sky is the limit, not Groundspeak.

Link to comment

The idea of this thread is akin to walking into a womens clothing store with a survey saying you're going to open a rival women's clothing store, what would people like to see in it.

 

gc.com has been around too long, and people have histories here that they're not going to easily walk away from. My 574 finds were all hard earned, and I don't see peeps with more being any more likely to leave gc.com than I am.

 

I did sign up on opencaching.com.... but never logged a find.... I don't think,.... or maybe I logged one... it just doesn't have the same status as gc.com.

I think you are missing the point, the point is basically a creative way of saying, "what would you do differently". Suggestions are generally limited to what you think Groundspeak *MIGHT* do. The way this thread is set up, the sky is the limit, not Groundspeak.

 

Meh - I don't see it that way.

Link to comment

No, no. Don't look at alternatives.

Could you repeat the question?

 

I'm guessing you mean how an ideal geocompetitor.com site would be set up, using all the caches and physical game pieces which are already in place.

 

At the top of the list would be communication. If someone tries to contact me, there would be a flag in my profile, right on the site. If I write to someone, I'd be informed when they view my message. No guessing if one of us had an email problem due to receiving no reply. It doesn't need to be a fullblown tweetface thing where people can follow my every move, just a little more connectivity.

 

And answer questions. Someone new asks about a common issue, and they get plenty of helpful replies that we always do that, and that we never do that. Geocompetitor.com goes a little more in-depth about how to decide what the answer may be.

 

As to how I play, why not a bunch of settings in my profile. I can switch off having traffic lights increase my Find count. I mean they sure are cool and all, and everybody else loves that new feature, and well then why don't I just not do them then. But let's just say for example, I don't want to play that part, and really need to have it gone, so it's out of the way. Well on my fun new web site, I can.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

I would do a lot of things like they are done now on the more popular sites.

 

I think I would have a map on the "main" user page, centered on the user's chosen home coordinates. Geocaching (the kind with hidden containers) would be the central focus, and would get the most attention. My site would probably cater more to puzzlers, with an integrated geocheck function that cherry-picked the best functions from the popular ones. Definitely corrected coordinates in the GPX files. For the FTF hounds, there'd be an RSS feed of new caches nearby.

 

Since I'm not a big-time developer, I'd concentrate on having a solid API, letting those with the inclination write the mobile apps. Everyone who worked on the website front-end would be an active geocacher; this would keep me from making colossal mistakes which frustrate the users.

 

What would set my site apart most would be an optional constantly-evolving interface. Once I got the site functioning adequately, I would develop a new "opt-in" interface. Those who participate would give me feedback on the new features, and I would tweak it often. The best features would float to the top, get their bugs worked out, and get rolled out to the rest of the userbase. This way the rank-and-file doesn't get a half-baked idea shoved down their throats. And those that like to try new things would get a playground.

 

As much as possible, I'd give my "standard" users a choice of the features they wanted to see. You don't like Personal Cache Notes? Uncheck a box and you will never see them again. Don't care about trackables? Poof, they're gone. Hate my rating system? It's gone. You'd rather see Yahoo! maps instead of Google? Just select them in a drop-down. Obviously some things (like cache description pages) would have to be kept consistent for everyone.

 

It's impossible to please everyone, but I think success would come if a few things were kept in mind:

 

1) My users will be smarter than me: people won't use the site as I intended and they will find better ways to do things.

2) There are many ways to get things done. Pay attention and try not to disrupt things unnecessarily.

3) The less my ego is involved, the better.

4) If I commit to something, I will finish it.

 

Basically, "respect the users".

Link to comment

I'd start with just Traditionals, of size at least large enough for a little notebook ("small" on gc.com).

 

The first product differentiator I'd build in would be fancy stats + AI: for example, let's have a cache recommendation system, a Cache of the Month award, and a variation on Favourites that takes into account the number of finders and gives a bonus to caches that attract trackables.

 

Also, from the start, I'd want to build in excellent searching/sorting/filtering capabilities, aiming to make the likes of GSAK redundant.

 

Finally, I'd definitely have a Feedback facility. But I'd have a reconditioned grandmaster-level chess computer behind it, running the latest research-grade version of PARRY :tongue:

Link to comment

There are enough wannabes out there who will add some pressure to GC.com but won't take them over. GC.com is doing it right and is teh defacto place to play the game.

 

I think they have a great team of people who are working on their own ideas while listening to the community. AS a software developer it is hard to manage both your internal backlog and new requests.

 

We need to keep applying pressure in a nice way and continue to get the sport to expand and grow. Growth ultimatley means more money for GC.com which will mean they can do more.

 

Use the website feature request tool to enter your ideas one at a time and let the community support you with votes.

Link to comment

I think if someone were to launch a new caching site they would be more successful building a site that compliments GC.com rather than competing with it. A site that is similar in nature and user friendliness but offers something uniquely different is what you want. You don't want to try to steal GC's customer base, you want to share it. If you want to be a competitor, there are some other sites out there trying, but I doubt they will ever really get there. I've looked at the others just to see what else is out there but I find that they are either too clunky to use (antiquated maps, rough user interface, etc) or are too angsty towards other caching sites. I mean, who wants to jump through a bunch of hoops and get strangers to vouch for you just so you can even see if the site has anything to offer you?

 

For the longest time now I've had an idea for a completely different type of cache that I don't believe I've ever heard anyone else mention. It's something that I think would be wildly popular but I've been reluctant to mention it to anyone, even Groundspeak, for fear that someone would take the idea and run with it. The chances of me developing it are slim to none since I can barely figure out my facebook page, but it would be a great addition to geocaching imo.

Link to comment

The idea of this thread is akin to walking into a womens clothing store with a survey saying you're going to open a rival women's clothing store, what would people like to see in it.

 

gc.com has been around too long, and people have histories here that they're not going to easily walk away from. My 574 finds were all hard earned, and I don't see peeps with more being any more likely to leave gc.com than I am.

 

I did sign up on opencaching.com.... but never logged a find.... I don't think,.... or maybe I logged one... it just doesn't have the same status as gc.com.

I think you are missing the point, the point is basically a creative way of saying, "what would you do differently". Suggestions are generally limited to what you think Groundspeak *MIGHT* do. The way this thread is set up, the sky is the limit, not Groundspeak.

What i would not do is all the annoyances gc.com does that has people using various scripts and ad block plus to get rid of.

Link to comment

I'd rathter give up the hobby instead of designing another website to compete with gc.com. Not because I regard it as something holy and untouchable, but because I don't want to deal with the headaches.

 

Anyway, what makes gc.com great are many of the players, and I'd never be able to convince a significant number of them to move over. Actually, I doubt I'd be able to convince even one.

 

I'm glad GOOGLE didn't feel that way when yahoo, msn, alta vista and a few other search engines were the staple. Anyone else remember Facebook's launch when competing with myspace? Competition breeds improvement. Still hoping here. I think it would be great to have more choices out there that had good quality (unlike the current endeavors). The monopoly GS has on this hobby right now will simply allow them to dictate the entire structure, which apparently isn't pleasing the masses as much any more, judging from the posts going around. So unlike the poster listed above, I would not rather give up the hobby but rather have other GOOD choices. Of course if the powers that be here at GC.COM get things rolling again as in the past the competition would be a hard sell.

CHEERS

 

 

Link to comment

I'd rathter give up the hobby instead of designing another website to compete with gc.com. Not because I regard it as something holy and untouchable, but because I don't want to deal with the headaches.

 

Anyway, what makes gc.com great are many of the players, and I'd never be able to convince a significant number of them to move over. Actually, I doubt I'd be able to convince even one.

 

I'm glad GOOGLE didn't feel that way when yahoo, msn, alta vista and a few other search engines were the staple. Anyone else remember Facebook's launch when competing with myspace? Competition breeds improvement. Still hoping here. I think it would be great to have more choices out there that had good quality (unlike the current endeavors). The monopoly GS has on this hobby right now will simply allow them to dictate the entire structure, which apparently isn't pleasing the masses as much any more, judging from the posts going around. So unlike the poster listed above, I would not rather give up the hobby but rather have other GOOD choices. Of course if the powers that be here at GC.COM get things rolling again as in the past the competition would be a hard sell.

CHEERS

 

Since you mentioned Google: things would certainly change in terms of performance, database speed etc if they saw a business interest in being involveed in geocaching and either starting up an alternative site or buying up an existing one :).

Link to comment

I'd rathter give up the hobby instead of designing another website to compete with gc.com. Not because I regard it as something holy and untouchable, but because I don't want to deal with the headaches.

 

Anyway, what makes gc.com great are many of the players, and I'd never be able to convince a significant number of them to move over. Actually, I doubt I'd be able to convince even one.

 

I'm glad GOOGLE didn't feel that way when yahoo, msn, alta vista and a few other search engines were the staple. Anyone else remember Facebook's launch when competing with myspace? Competition breeds improvement. Still hoping here. I think it would be great to have more choices out there that had good quality (unlike the current endeavors). The monopoly GS has on this hobby right now will simply allow them to dictate the entire structure, which apparently isn't pleasing the masses as much any more, judging from the posts going around. So unlike the poster listed above, I would not rather give up the hobby but rather have other GOOD choices. Of course if the powers that be here at GC.COM get things rolling again as in the past the competition would be a hard sell.

CHEERS

I'm glad Google didn't give up on a new search engine too. I'm not saying competition is a bad idea, I'm saying it's a bad idea for me to do it. It's a hobby to me, not a business or a career.

Edited by Chrysalides
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...