Jump to content

Premium Member Only Caches


bubbledadj

Recommended Posts

there seems to be a rise in the number of people putting out caches which are premium member only, now I am a premium member but some of my caching friends aren't. Now I understand if it's a special well cammoflaged one off cache in a high traffic area, but when it's a series of 15 - 20 35mm film canister micros I honestly don't see the need to have these as premium member only. It means I cannot go and find these caches with my friends and I feel this sort of behavoiur by certain geocachers discriminating against those who cannot afford to be a premium member, shouldn't the sport of geocaching be "for all"

Link to comment

While I agree with your basic premise that the PMO label should be reserved for special caches, there isn't any guideline or text that reinforces this idea. It is up to the CO to determine when and where they will apply this feature.

1. The workaround for logging PMO caches by regular members is well documented in these forums. Your non PM friends can still find and log these all they want.

2. Geocaching is for everyone, that's one of the great things about it. But not all geocaches are for all geocachers.

Link to comment
shouldn't the sport of geocaching be "for all"

 

Those who choose to use the site without contributing to operating costs, get to use less of it. Seems reasonable.

 

If Geocaching.com charged a nominal sum to join the site, then the cost$ of running it could be distributed among "all".

But everyone would have to pay something to play.

 

However, the site would likely never have grown much with an upfront fee. The decision to offer the service free to all, and then offer extras for fee seems to have worked quite well.

 

I do agree with your premise that the numbers of PMO caches are up. The first time I checked for that in my local area, it was around 2%, and stayed fairly steady for some time. PMO % began rising (along with phone app caching, I think) and is now up to

~10% in my part of the world.

Meaning that 90% of caches are still available to non-paying players. And they can still log finds on them, should they find them while caching with a PM friend.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?wp=GCCODE

Edited by Isonzo Karst
Link to comment

there seems to be a rise in the number of people putting out caches which are premium member only, now I am a premium member but some of my caching friends aren't. Now I understand if it's a special well cammoflaged one off cache in a high traffic area, but when it's a series of 15 - 20 35mm film canister micros I honestly don't see the need to have these as premium member only. It means I cannot go and find these caches with my friends and I feel this sort of behavoiur by certain geocachers discriminating against those who cannot afford to be a premium member, shouldn't the sport of geocaching be "for all"

 

Yeah, I understand what you're saying. Maybe it's because of the word "Premium". When someone puts out a PM cache I assume there will be something premium about it. It would be interesting to see if the CO makes all of their hides PM. If so, then my guess is they really like the "big brother is watching" feature of PM caches. Or maybe they feel they paid their membership fee so they're going to use what they paid for. Perhaps there are a few out there who are fundraiser types who want to see more money going to Groundspeak (not that that's a bad thing - we have 2 premium accounts).

Link to comment

there seems to be a rise in the number of people putting out caches which are premium member only, now I am a premium member but some of my caching friends aren't. Now I understand if it's a special well cammoflaged one off cache in a high traffic area, but when it's a series of 15 - 20 35mm film canister micros I honestly don't see the need to have these as premium member only. It means I cannot go and find these caches with my friends and I feel this sort of behavoiur by certain geocachers discriminating against those who cannot afford to be a premium member, shouldn't the sport of geocaching be "for all"

 

In your area, perhaps this is an issue. But, there have been many anxiety-riddled threads that have gone around and around on this. PMO caches are not "better", for the most part. They are, simply put, geocaches that premium members "only*" get to find. That is all. Just like there are caches that people who don't like to climb trees, hike long distances, or are in a wheelchair can't access.

 

(*there's a way around it! Holy smokes!)

Link to comment

We are all equal, but some are more equal than the others :ph34r:

 

Who doesn't love an Orwell reference? :ph34r:

 

The OP is from The UK, but this has come up a lot in the past year or two, and it has been shown there are some areas of the U.S. that are being rather saturated with PMO's, and it really seems to be "just because they can", and "monkey see, monkey do". I personally agree this is getting out of hand in a few select regions, and am against it.

 

Sincerly,

 

An elitist who has been a card-carrying Premie since February, 2004. :P

 

P.S. this forum is primarly made of of Premium members, and you're going to get very few sentiments like mine. As I edit this, one calling you a whiner has already come in. :blink:

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

there seems to be a rise in the number of people putting out caches which are premium member only, now I am a premium member but some of my caching friends aren't. Now I understand if it's a special well cammoflaged one off cache in a high traffic area, but when it's a series of 15 - 20 35mm film canister micros I honestly don't see the need to have these as premium member only. It means I cannot go and find these caches with my friends and I feel this sort of behavoiur by certain geocachers discriminating against those who cannot afford to be a premium member, shouldn't the sport of geocaching be "for all"

 

Your friends CAN go caching with you. Share the coords with them. When you are done, copy and paste the URL of the "post log" page and send it to them so they can log it.

Link to comment

You get what you pay for.

Well then shouldn't I as a premium member get the premium caches I am paying for? When what I am getting is a matchstick container on a street sign that is just like the 'free' one down the road it almost seems as if I am not getting any added value by paying to access these 'premium' caches.

 

It is a local trend that seems to be growing. While I may agree with some of the reasons for making a cache a PMO, the one reason I just can't agree with is 'just because you can'.

 

I also don't see how being a PMO would help against the cache being muggled. Muggles don't know about geocaching therefore they would not know what type of listing the cache is under. Muggles don't use the listing to find the cache, they see someone else finding it or they stumble across it on their own. Checking a box making the listing PMO would not change any of that.

Link to comment

Two words: audit log.

 

Thats why people have their caches on PMO.

 

Gotta love sweeping generalizations. I could not care less about audit logs. Don't think I've ever looked at them. Also has nothing to do with muggles. I start my caches as PMO caches just as a little way of giving something to the premium members. After a while I revert them to regular caches.

 

As for the quality of PM caches, I think the OP is missing the point. They are not called "Premium Caches" as if there is something special about them. They are "Premium Member Caches". Caches listed, at least initially, as a perk to Premium Members.

Link to comment

I believe that this issue, whether it is in reality really very important or not, has little to do with economics or encouraging cachers to become premium members. The sad fact is that a lot of people sign up for a free account, cache a few times with their friends and then move on to something new. They often don't last long enough to learn how important it can be to put things back where they were found, and/or end up with a small collection of TB's that are never heard of again. It was not long ago that the cost of a good GPSr tended to make the buyer somewhat serious right away, but with the nearly free aps for smartphones now, it is really cheap to jump in and out of caching. In a way, it's like my Dad used to say about a free dog. People often don't fully appreciate anything that doesn't require a financial commitment. I have placed just a few caches over the three years I have been caching, but I prefer the PMO caches because I am much more confident that the finder will take my efforts more seriously. At the same time, there are plenty of free caches in my area, and when a cacher gets a little experience and steps up to a PM, there are a few more to find. I also think that TB Hotels should always be PMOs.

Link to comment

It means I cannot go and find these caches with my friends and I feel this sort of behavoiur by certain geocachers discriminating against those who cannot afford to be a premium member, shouldn't the sport of geocaching be "for all"

(bolding mine)

 

The "excuse" that a person can't afford it is pure bull. An inexpensive GPS can be found starting at $100 and a smart phone isn't cheap either. So if a person can afford either of those items then stretching to another $30 a year isn't all that far.

 

OK... so much for that. Nothing is stopping you and your friends from finding all kinds of caches, when I first started I wasn't a premium member but my partner was. It meant that I had to work a bit more to log them online. Also as someone has mentioned, I like the audit log. I can see who is looking at my listing and how many "hits" it is getting.

Link to comment

I believe that this issue, whether it is in reality really very important or not, has little to do with economics or encouraging cachers to become premium members. The sad fact is that a lot of people sign up for a free account, cache a few times with their friends and then move on to something new. They often don't last long enough to learn how important it can be to put things back where they were found, and/or end up with a small collection of TB's that are never heard of again. It was not long ago that the cost of a good GPSr tended to make the buyer somewhat serious right away, but with the nearly free aps for smartphones now, it is really cheap to jump in and out of caching. In a way, it's like my Dad used to say about a free dog. People often don't fully appreciate anything that doesn't require a financial commitment. I have placed just a few caches over the three years I have been caching, but I prefer the PMO caches because I am much more confident that the finder will take my efforts more seriously. At the same time, there are plenty of free caches in my area, and when a cacher gets a little experience and steps up to a PM, there are a few more to find. I also think that TB Hotels should always be PMOs.

 

I'm with you Frito! Why can't we all just Go Caching? ENJOY IT, don't whine about it.

Link to comment

I believe that this issue, whether it is in reality really very important or not, has little to do with economics or encouraging cachers to become premium members. The sad fact is that a lot of people sign up for a free account, cache a few times with their friends and then move on to something new. They often don't last long enough to learn how important it can be to put things back where they were found, and/or end up with a small collection of TB's that are never heard of again. It was not long ago that the cost of a good GPSr tended to make the buyer somewhat serious right away, but with the nearly free aps for smartphones now, it is really cheap to jump in and out of caching. In a way, it's like my Dad used to say about a free dog. People often don't fully appreciate anything that doesn't require a financial commitment. I have placed just a few caches over the three years I have been caching, but I prefer the PMO caches because I am much more confident that the finder will take my efforts more seriously. At the same time, there are plenty of free caches in my area, and when a cacher gets a little experience and steps up to a PM, there are a few more to find. I also think that TB Hotels should always be PMOs.

 

Interesting. You might be on to something there. Smartphone apps may be spurring the increase in PM caches. I totally get the dog analogy (you don't see many dogs that folks paid $1000 for, surrendered to the pound).

Link to comment

I like the audit log. I can see who is looking at my listing and how many "hits" it is getting.

 

Would you (or anyone else for that matter) know under what circumstances these 'hits' are generated for the audit log?

Does a PQ that includes your listing generate a 'hit'?

Does viewing the listing via an app generate a 'hit"?

Would using field notes for logging count as a 'hit' since it doesn't call up the full listing?

If a user suddenly logged your cache prior to appearing in any audit logs would you find that log suspicious?

 

Just curious about the audit log, not trying to make a comment on why anyone likes them or finds them useful.

Link to comment

some folks seem to intentionally find ways to make sure they never show up in the cache log on PMO caches. You can download the cache into GSAK and never view the cache page. And then log the cache through some of the means mentioned above to never show up on the back end. Personally, I think that is a lot of effort to just not show up in a cache log. Seems as silly to me as the folks who intentionally use the cache logs for information on who has seen the cache listing and when and how many times, especially on puzzles.

Link to comment

I keep seeing this thing with the audit logs come up, why does anyone find it necesary to not show up, it seems to be because some PM CO's find fault with people looking at their caches. Whats that all about?

 

As to PMO caches round here - we have 1 within my immediate caching zone, I have found it (eventually!!) but I looked at it regulary when I DNF it (multiple more times than I recorded :huh: ) to see if I could glean any more clues and often check back to see if anyone else has, the idea that the CO might take umbrage with this seems rather odd.

Link to comment

some folks seem to intentionally find ways to make sure they never show up in the cache log on PMO caches. You can download the cache into GSAK and never view the cache page. And then log the cache through some of the means mentioned above to never show up on the back end. Personally, I think that is a lot of effort to just not show up in a cache log. Seems as silly to me as the folks who intentionally use the cache logs for information on who has seen the cache listing and when and how many times, especially on puzzles.

 

It's a privacy issue. Not a big one, but it still annoys me when someone posts a link in the forums and I click it only to find myself on PMO listing page.

 

It's only a slight annoyance because I have never had anyone accuse me of shennanigans with their cache. But I have seen a number of incidents where people have been falsely accused just because they showed up on someone's audit log and I would rather just avoid it unless I actually go visit the cache.

Link to comment

From a relative newbie's point of view...

 

I recently placed my first cache, and I chose to make it PMO. The main reason for my decision was to protect it from local kids (of all ages!) who learn one day that they can download a free or cheap app for their phone and then go out and collect free stuff. Yeah, there are plenty of losers around here who would do just that, and I suspect that they exist pretty much everywhere. I figured that if they have to pay 30 bucks to find mine, it's much less likely to happen.

 

After all, 30 dollars buys a lot of beer! <_<

Link to comment

It's a privacy issue. Not a big one, but it still annoys me when someone posts a link in the forums and I click it only to find myself on PMO listing page.

 

I don't click on cache links in the forums for this very reason; I will copy-and-paste them into a different browser where I am not logged in to screen for PMO status.

 

I've asked this before, but why would someone PMO an Earthcache?

 

Also, can a cache owner do what they want with the audit log? Specifically, could I publish a PMO cache then add daily or weekly notes to it with a digest or possibly all the content of its audit log?

Link to comment

there seems to be a rise in the number of people putting out caches which are premium member only, now I am a premium member but some of my caching friends aren't. Now I understand if it's a special well cammoflaged one off cache in a high traffic area, but when it's a series of 15 - 20 35mm film canister micros I honestly don't see the need to have these as premium member only. It means I cannot go and find these caches with my friends and I feel this sort of behavoiur by certain geocachers discriminating against those who cannot afford to be a premium member, shouldn't the sport of geocaching be "for all"

We paid to be premium members and those who chose to make their caches PMO have their reason to do so. Whether to reduce muggles, or to be found by PM cachers.

Though you are a PM now how is this stopping you from caching with your friends. You can still share the coords and they can still log their finds.

So what's the big deal?

Link to comment

some folks seem to intentionally find ways to make sure they never show up in the cache log on PMO caches. You can download the cache into GSAK and never view the cache page. And then log the cache through some of the means mentioned above to never show up on the back end. Personally, I think that is a lot of effort to just not show up in a cache log. Seems as silly to me as the folks who intentionally use the cache logs for information on who has seen the cache listing and when and how many times, especially on puzzles.

 

It's a privacy issue. Not a big one, but it still annoys me when someone posts a link in the forums and I click it only to find myself on PMO listing page.

 

It's only a slight annoyance because I have never had anyone accuse me of shennanigans with their cache. But I have seen a number of incidents where people have been falsely accused just because they showed up on someone's audit log and I would rather just avoid it unless I actually go visit the cache.

 

I agree, I'm a privacy advocate, and it's a minor annoyance. The few times I've said this, I pretty much get raked over the coals though. :lol:

 

The false accusation thing does bother me too. Especially when the following ways exist to circumvent the audit log:

 

1) Pocket Queries

2) Smartphone Apps

3) Text Message inquiry

 

And I might add, anyone (USA only) who can recieve texts on a cell phone can get PMO cache coordinates sent to them. Little known loophole there. :o

Link to comment

I like the audit log. I can see who is looking at my listing and how many "hits" it is getting.

 

Would you (or anyone else for that matter) know under what circumstances these 'hits' are generated for the audit log?

Does a PQ that includes your listing generate a 'hit'?

Does viewing the listing via an app generate a 'hit"?

Would using field notes for logging count as a 'hit' since it doesn't call up the full listing?

If a user suddenly logged your cache prior to appearing in any audit logs would you find that log suspicious?

 

Just curious about the audit log, not trying to make a comment on why anyone likes them or finds them useful.

 

I only know PQs don't register on the log. Not sure about the rest, but I think only web views of cache pages register on the log.

Link to comment

I believe that this issue, whether it is in reality really very important or not, has little to do with economics or encouraging cachers to become premium members. The sad fact is that a lot of people sign up for a free account, cache a few times with their friends and then move on to something new. They often don't last long enough to learn how important it can be to put things back where they were found, and/or end up with a small collection of TB's that are never heard of again. It was not long ago that the cost of a good GPSr tended to make the buyer somewhat serious right away, but with the nearly free aps for smartphones now, it is really cheap to jump in and out of caching. In a way, it's like my Dad used to say about a free dog. People often don't fully appreciate anything that doesn't require a financial commitment. I have placed just a few caches over the three years I have been caching, but I prefer the PMO caches because I am much more confident that the finder will take my efforts more seriously. At the same time, there are plenty of free caches in my area, and when a cacher gets a little experience and steps up to a PM, there are a few more to find. I also think that TB Hotels should always be PMOs.

 

Interesting. You might be on to something there. Smartphone apps may be spurring the increase in PM caches. I totally get the dog analogy (you don't see many dogs that folks paid $1000 for, surrendered to the pound).

 

Start an anti-app rebellion! Create PMO caches! :D

 

Being a PM costs 3 times the amount of the app..

Link to comment

I believe that this issue, whether it is in reality really very important or not, has little to do with economics or encouraging cachers to become premium members. The sad fact is that a lot of people sign up for a free account, cache a few times with their friends and then move on to something new. They often don't last long enough to learn how important it can be to put things back where they were found, and/or end up with a small collection of TB's that are never heard of again. It was not long ago that the cost of a good GPSr tended to make the buyer somewhat serious right away, but with the nearly free aps for smartphones now, it is really cheap to jump in and out of caching. In a way, it's like my Dad used to say about a free dog. People often don't fully appreciate anything that doesn't require a financial commitment. I have placed just a few caches over the three years I have been caching, but I prefer the PMO caches because I am much more confident that the finder will take my efforts more seriously. At the same time, there are plenty of free caches in my area, and when a cacher gets a little experience and steps up to a PM, there are a few more to find. I also think that TB Hotels should always be PMOs.

You also left out another one. I've seen in our area many new members who find a few caches then place a cache and then never log on again. Whether sock puppets or those who thought it would be fun then lose interest. Then those caches need maintenance or disappear and the CO isn't around to take care of it.

Link to comment

It means I cannot go and find these caches with my friends and I feel this sort of behavoiur by certain geocachers discriminating against those who cannot afford to be a premium member, shouldn't the sport of geocaching be "for all"

(bolding mine)

 

The "excuse" that a person can't afford it is pure bull. An inexpensive GPS can be found starting at $100 and a smart phone isn't cheap either. So if a person can afford either of those items then stretching to another $30 a year isn't all that far.

 

OK... so much for that. Nothing is stopping you and your friends from finding all kinds of caches, when I first started I wasn't a premium member but my partner was. It meant that I had to work a bit more to log them online. Also as someone has mentioned, I like the audit log. I can see who is looking at my listing and how many "hits" it is getting.

I too look at the audit list. Some of my caches I would notice more hits on some of my caches by a few cachers then my hits. Especially by cachers who have found them already.

Link to comment

I like the audit log. I can see who is looking at my listing and how many "hits" it is getting.

 

Would you (or anyone else for that matter) know under what circumstances these 'hits' are generated for the audit log?

Does a PQ that includes your listing generate a 'hit'?

Does viewing the listing via an app generate a 'hit"?

Would using field notes for logging count as a 'hit' since it doesn't call up the full listing?

If a user suddenly logged your cache prior to appearing in any audit logs would you find that log suspicious?

 

Just curious about the audit log, not trying to make a comment on why anyone likes them or finds them useful.

 

I only know PQs don't register on the log. Not sure about the rest, but I think only web views of cache pages register on the log.

And API. Thanks God that GS open up their API server a bit for 3rd party users. :anibad:

Edited by SwineFlew
Link to comment

Ah I see Geobain might have answered my question - if I show up on the audit log but haven't logged it or something and a cache then goes missing then the CO might jump to the conclusion that it was me that stole it (really they do that? they must do). Actually the one I have found might well be missing but it was the sea not me!

No, but it does narrow some down.

I have a cache that I was working on and disabled it. I procrastinated on it and I got a message from a reviewer that I needed to take care of it or they would archive it. Most reviewers don't do that unless it has been requested either online or by message to the reviewer. I checked the audit list and there had been no one viewing the cache page for awhile except the reviewer and just before that within an hour was a cacher who helped to get me banned a years back. Because I had left the cache there during the time I was planning on upgrading it, I enabled it, with a note thanking the cacher for reminding me I left it disabled so long. Both the reviewer and the cacher had viewed the cache again, and only them.

Link to comment

Ah I see Geobain might have answered my question - if I show up on the audit log but haven't logged it or something and a cache then goes missing then the CO might jump to the conclusion that it was me that stole it (really they do that? they must do). Actually the one I have found might well be missing but it was the sea not me!

No, but it does narrow some down.

I have a cache that I was working on and disabled it. I procrastinated on it and I got a message from a reviewer that I needed to take care of it or they would archive it. Most reviewers don't do that unless it has been requested either online or by message to the reviewer. I checked the audit list and there had been no one viewing the cache page for awhile except the reviewer and just before that within an hour was a cacher who helped to get me banned a years back. Because I had left the cache there during the time I was planning on upgrading it, I enabled it, with a note thanking the cacher for reminding me I left it disabled so long. Both the reviewer and the cacher had viewed the cache again, and only them.

It's quite possible that someone alerted the reviewer. But also, some reviewers do periodic sweeps of disabled caches, as well. :)

Link to comment

Personally, I think that is a lot of effort to just not show up in a cache log.

Well I am not so sure about it being a great deal of effort. I rarely will look at the actual cache page because it is easier for me just to view the listings in GSAK. So unless it is a puzzle cache all the information I need is in GSAK. I just view the actual listing to see the background image, view the page source and check for EXIF data, things like that.

And since I almost always use the upload field notes from my gps I don't need to view the cache page to log.

So for me at least the easiest method that I have developed over trial and error just happens it seems to also be a method that avoids audit logs. Totally coincidental since I hadn't really given the audit logs much thought.

Link to comment

Ah I see Geobain might have answered my question - if I show up on the audit log but haven't logged it or something and a cache then goes missing then the CO might jump to the conclusion that it was me that stole it (really they do that? they must do). Actually the one I have found might well be missing but it was the sea not me!

No, but it does narrow some down.

I have a cache that I was working on and disabled it. I procrastinated on it and I got a message from a reviewer that I needed to take care of it or they would archive it. Most reviewers don't do that unless it has been requested either online or by message to the reviewer. I checked the audit list and there had been no one viewing the cache page for awhile except the reviewer and just before that within an hour was a cacher who helped to get me banned a years back. Because I had left the cache there during the time I was planning on upgrading it, I enabled it, with a note thanking the cacher for reminding me I left it disabled so long. Both the reviewer and the cacher had viewed the cache again, and only them.

It's quite possible that someone alerted the reviewer. But also, some reviewers do periodic sweeps of disabled caches, as well. :)

yes that I know and that's why I thought it strange the only cacher who logged on the site before reviewers message would be this cacher even though they had found it already. This cacher is also not very active in finding caches. So I see it had become a more personal issue focused on me.

Luckily and hopefully this cacher has moved on because there hasn't been any more issues since the archival of my caches on OC that the cacher harassed me on.

Link to comment

Ah I see Geobain might have answered my question - if I show up on the audit log but haven't logged it or something and a cache then goes missing then the CO might jump to the conclusion that it was me that stole it (really they do that? they must do). Actually the one I have found might well be missing but it was the sea not me!

No, but it does narrow some down.

I have a cache that I was working on and disabled it. I procrastinated on it and I got a message from a reviewer that I needed to take care of it or they would archive it. Most reviewers don't do that unless it has been requested either online or by message to the reviewer. I checked the audit list and there had been no one viewing the cache page for awhile except the reviewer and just before that within an hour was a cacher who helped to get me banned a years back. Because I had left the cache there during the time I was planning on upgrading it, I enabled it, with a note thanking the cacher for reminding me I left it disabled so long. Both the reviewer and the cacher had viewed the cache again, and only them.

It's quite possible that someone alerted the reviewer. But also, some reviewers do periodic sweeps of disabled caches, as well. :)

yes that I know and that's why I thought it strange the only cacher who logged on the site before reviewers message would be this cacher even though they had found it already. This cacher is also not very active in finding caches. So I see it had become a more personal issue focused on me.

Luckily and hopefully this cacher has moved on because there hasn't been any more issues since the archival of my caches on OC that the cacher harassed me on.

That's the hard thing with audit logs. It could show a person who is "bothering" you in a certain way, or it could be a complete coincidence.

 

I wouldn't want to be able to see audit logs on my caches, knowing me, it would probably make me go crazy. :anibad:

Link to comment

snip>

 

I also don't see how being a PMO would help against the cache being muggled. Muggles don't know about geocaching therefore they would not know what type of listing the cache is under. Muggles don't use the listing to find the cache, they see someone else finding it or they stumble across it on their own. Checking a box making the listing PMO would not change any of that.

 

That depends on how you define muggle. Recently, a person in our general area discovered a cache and after s/he went online and figured out what it was s/he decided it didn't belong there and removed it. The same individual then signed up for a free account and then went around removing other caches that s/he felt were inappropriate, leaving nasty notes (and found logs!!??!!) on the cache pages. By my reckoning, that person is still a muggle, just a muggle with free access to cache coordinates. If the caches were PMO, that individual would have had to at least cough up $30 to find them (assuming that they figured out such an option exists)

It isn't perfect protection as many have pointed out but it is something. If a CO is using the PMO option for that reason, more power to them.

Link to comment

I just started a new series of cahces that hopefully will spread all across the state. They will all be PMO's for the following reasons....

 

1) Theses caches each take a lot of planning and effort to write up and place. I don't want some middle school kid who heard about this cool treasure game in class messing up the caches for others.

 

2) These caches will not be just hidden by me. I hope that others will hide/maintain caches in this series. I want them to be cachers that care enough to spend a little extra time/money for caching.

 

3) I want to reward those that help pay for my addiction by giving them a little something extra.

 

If that means I'm being selfish, so be it.

Link to comment

I just love it when people who get something for free complain that it's not as good as what you can get if you pay for it. The best part is that they don't seem to understand the principle at all.

 

Actually all the people who have posted here are Premium Members. No one that has posted here (or complained for that matter ) is getting something for free!!

Link to comment

I understand the need for PMO caches and thank you for those hints in my friends logging these caches. What I am objecting to are whole series where there is nothing special about the caches, not really at much risk, quiet paths. I like the PMO for a little while then opened up to all idea, that would be a nice sentiment.

Link to comment

I understand the need for PMO caches and thank you for those hints in my friends logging these caches. What I am objecting to are whole series where there is nothing special about the caches, not really at much risk, quiet paths. I like the PMO for a little while then opened up to all idea, that would be a nice sentiment.

 

PMO reduces the traffic in an area, and is the probable reason for PMO earthcaches.

Link to comment

there seems to be a rise in the number of people putting out caches which are premium member only, now I am a premium member but some of my caching friends aren't. Now I understand if it's a special well cammoflaged one off cache in a high traffic area, but when it's a series of 15 - 20 35mm film canister micros I honestly don't see the need to have these as premium member only. It means I cannot go and find these caches with my friends and I feel this sort of behavoiur by certain geocachers discriminating against those who cannot afford to be a premium member, shouldn't the sport of geocaching be "for all"

 

I can't afford a Ferrari, am I still entitled to one? NO!

 

Can't pay? Life sucks, find a cheaper hobby.

Link to comment

shouldn't the sport of geocaching be "for all"

 

Why should it be "for all"? Geocaching.com costs money to run. It also costs money for the volunteers to put caches out for you to find.

 

The argument has been made many times, but anybody who can afford a GPS or smartphone and gas and a car to drive to caches can afford $2.50 per month to buy a premium membership. Where I live that won't even buy you 1 trip to the gym or a Big Mac.

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...