Found one too many premium-only caches, I'm out of here..,

[+JohnnyVegas]

I decided to sign up for geocaching after accidentally finding a cache and trackable. How fun, I thought! I'll give it a try. Since then, I've found several PMO only caches that I couldn't log and feel like I'm constantly nagged online on nearly every click to sign up for a premium membership that seems to offer only relief from artificially imposed limitations rather than premium add-ons. I think I'm done with geocaching already. Probably I'll keep the latest trackable I found in a PMO cache as a reminder of what a scam this site turns to be. I'll keep an eye out for a user revolt at some time in the future.

I can not take RhizomicSearcher seriously. Reading the His/Her profile I see one logged find in an area of California that is filled with non premium caches. I refuse to believe that a person would only look for premium caches when there are plenty on non premium caches to be found.

[+wmpastor]

I decided to sign up for geocaching after accidentally finding a cache and trackable. How fun, I thought! I'll give it a try. Since then, I've found several PMO only caches that I couldn't log and feel like I'm constantly nagged online on nearly every click to sign up for a premium membership that seems to offer only relief from artificially imposed limitations rather than premium add-ons. I think I'm done with geocaching already. Probably I'll keep the latest trackable I found in a PMO cache as a reminder of what a scam this site turns to be. I'll keep an eye out for a user revolt at some time in the future.

I can not take RhizomicSearcher seriously. Reading the His/Her profile I see one logged find in an area of California that is filled with non premium caches. I refuse to believe that a person would only look for premium caches when there are plenty on non premium caches to be found.

Post 79, quoted in Post 100, calls this the OP a troll-poster. Maybe boredom set in, & the idea was, "let's stir up some controversy."

[+RenMin]

Reading the thread, I can't tell if this is a trolling thread or not.

Don't worry. The rest of us can.

 

Trolling or not the topic of Premium Only caches comes up with me from time to time with other users. I tend to us the PO feature as a way of protecting more expensive or unique containers and on all my ammo can hides. If non-members can cirmcumvent the PO feature then maybe its all for nothing. As for trackeables, I learned quickly that if you want to never see your trackeable again release it into the wild. Most of the

ones I have sent out have stopped moving or have gone missing. I don't buy them anymore but do have a small collection at home. If loopholes exist than Groundspeak should close them so PO can be PO. With cache thieves abounding its the only way to help preserve good quality containers.

[+Team OPJim]

 

Trolling or not the topic of Premium Only caches comes up with me from time to time with other users. I tend to us the PO feature as a way of protecting more expensive or unique containers and on all my ammo can hides. If non-members can cirmcumvent the PO feature then maybe its all for nothing. As for trackeables, I learned quickly that if you want to never see your trackeable again release it into the wild. Most of the

ones I have sent out have stopped moving or have gone missing. I don't buy them anymore but do have a small collection at home. If loopholes exist than Groundspeak should close them so PO can be PO. With cache thieves abounding its the only way to help preserve good quality containers.

I agree. Many of my caches are premium because the containers took extra effort to make/hide. Also, I had an unusually high number of caches which I had identified on the webpage as "ammocans" disappear, making me think that muggles were signing on, identifying them, and then stealing them. I figure that the person who signs up for premium membership is less likely to find my letterbox hybrid and take the stamp as a trade item, only to never signing on again after finding 3 caches.

[+Glenn]

I decided to sign up for geocaching after accidentally finding a cache and trackable. How fun, I thought! I'll give it a try. Since then, I've found several PMO only caches that I couldn't log and feel like I'm constantly nagged online on nearly every click to sign up for a premium membership that seems to offer only relief from artificially imposed limitations rather than premium add-ons. I think I'm done with geocaching already. Probably I'll keep the latest trackable I found in a PMO cache as a reminder of what a scam this site turns to be. I'll keep an eye out for a user revolt at some time in the future.

I can not take RhizomicSearcher seriously. Reading the His/Her profile I see one logged find in an area of California that is filled with non premium caches. I refuse to believe that a person would only look for premium caches when there are plenty on non premium caches to be found.

I can understand accidentally finding one PMO cache, then joining as a free member, and finding more geocaches. That happens quite often. But finding several PMO caches he must be the luckiest geocacher in the world to be able to find PMO caches without being able to see the coordinance! Either that or he is having trouble logging non-PMO caches and is assuming that his difficulties in logging non-PMO caches are somehow related to PMO caches.

[jholly]

I decided to sign up for geocaching after accidentally finding a cache and trackable. How fun, I thought! I'll give it a try. Since then, I've found several PMO only caches that I couldn't log and feel like I'm constantly nagged online on nearly every click to sign up for a premium membership that seems to offer only relief from artificially imposed limitations rather than premium add-ons. I think I'm done with geocaching already. Probably I'll keep the latest trackable I found in a PMO cache as a reminder of what a scam this site turns to be. I'll keep an eye out for a user revolt at some time in the future.

I can not take RhizomicSearcher seriously. Reading the His/Her profile I see one logged find in an area of California that is filled with non premium caches. I refuse to believe that a person would only look for premium caches when there are plenty on non premium caches to be found.

I can understand accidentally finding one PMO cache, then joining as a free member, and finding more geocaches. That happens quite often. But finding several PMO caches he must be the luckiest geocacher in the world to be able to find PMO caches without being able to see the coordinance! Either that or he is having trouble logging non-PMO caches and is assuming that his difficulties in logging non-PMO caches are somehow related to PMO caches.

 

Their are members who find PMO caches just fine. One posts in the forums frequently. With a bit of work and looking at it as a puzzle to solve they enjoy pursuing this this activity.

[+basscat5]

It's 30 bucks a year or whatever I pay....It is the cheapest activity that I participate in...These guys complaining about having to pay it are out of their minds, do they think this site runs for free????

 

I haven't been doing this long but GeoCaching.com and their active members have given me a reason(and motivation) to get out, exercise, and enjoy the outdoors without breaking the bank...I would pay 10 times the premium cost...

Edited November 10, 2013 by basscat5

[+Glenn]

Their are members who find PMO caches just fine. One posts in the forums frequently. With a bit of work and looking at it as a puzzle to solve they enjoy pursuing this this activity.

 

Forgive my ignorance in these matters but I was under the understanding that PMO cache listings can't be viewed by regular members. In fact I was under the impression that PMO caches aren't returned in the searches or cache listings for regular members.

[jholly]

Their are members who find PMO caches just fine. One posts in the forums frequently. With a bit of work and looking at it as a puzzle to solve they enjoy pursuing this this activity.

 

Forgive my ignorance in these matters but I was under the understanding that PMO cache listings can't be viewed by regular members. In fact I was under the impression that PMO caches aren't returned in the searches or cache listings for regular members.

It is true the listings can not be viewed. But they are listed when you do a search by location or other search that returns a list of caches. It is the documented in the help files for checking for saturation. It is the way suggested for regular members to check for saturation.

[+Glenn]

It is true the listings can not be viewed. But they are listed when you do a search by location or other search that returns a list of caches. It is the documented in the help files for checking for saturation. It is the way suggested for regular members to check for saturation.

 

I'm impressed. However I am in agreement with the other who are saying that $30 is a good deal.

[Blue Square Thing]

It's 30 bucks a year or whatever I pay....It is the cheapest activity that I participate in...These guys complaining about having to pay it are out of their minds, do they think this site runs for free????

Not necessarily "out of their minds" - there are a number of reasons why someone might not want to pay to become a premium member in 2013. You might simply not appreciate what they are.

[+Glenn]

It's 30 bucks a year or whatever I pay....It is the cheapest activity that I participate in...These guys complaining about having to pay it are out of their minds, do they think this site runs for free????

Not necessarily "out of their minds" - there are a number of reasons why someone might not want to pay to become a premium member in 2013. You might simply not appreciate what they are.

There is a difference here. If someone doesn't want to pay for premium membership I can respect that. However, RhizomicSearcher is suggesting that he should get premium membership for free. The reason appears to be because he would only use one or very few premium member features. I suppose it would be fairer if we were charged only for the features that we used but buying features a la carte tend to cost more than bundled features. Another issue RhizomicSearcher seems to have is with the advertizing model on the site. Not only has this model been used successfully on this site for years it is being used successfully on many other sites.

[Blue Square Thing]

There is a difference here. If someone doesn't want to pay for premium membership I can respect that. However, RhizomicSearcher is suggesting that he should get premium membership for free.

I agree with you - and have no problem with the way things operate at all.

 

I was probably just reacting a the choice of words of a couple of other people ;-)

[+basscat5]

It's 30 bucks a year or whatever I pay....It is the cheapest activity that I participate in...These guys complaining about having to pay it are out of their minds, do they think this site runs for free????

Not necessarily "out of their minds" - there are a number of reasons why someone might not want to pay to become a premium member in 2013. You might simply not appreciate what they are.

There is a difference here. If someone doesn't want to pay for premium membership I can respect that. However, RhizomicSearcher is suggesting that he should get premium membership for free. The reason appears to be because he would only use one or very few premium member features. I suppose it would be fairer if we were charged only for the features that we used but buying features a la carte tend to cost more than bundled features. Another issue RhizomicSearcher seems to have is with the advertizing model on the site. Not only has this model been used successfully on this site for years it is being used successfully on many other sites.

That is kind of what I was getting at...The powers that be at this sight offer basic services for free. That is great that they can do that and still maintain the sight from the funding they get from premium members and other sources. They don't have to do that and for anyone to feel that they are entitled to any services let alone premium benefits is asking alot.

I am making the assumption that the reason they offer free basic service is the hope that the basic member will get hooked and go all in...

 

Glenn, You are correct in that I am ignorant on why someone wouldn't pay for a premium membership but I am pretty open minded.....(I am sure it is more than just Financial reasons)

 

Has the ratio of premium members to basic members dropped since the popularity of Smart phone apps???

Edited November 10, 2013 by basscat5

[jholly]

It's 30 bucks a year or whatever I pay....It is the cheapest activity that I participate in...These guys complaining about having to pay it are out of their minds, do they think this site runs for free????

Not necessarily "out of their minds" - there are a number of reasons why someone might not want to pay to become a premium member in 2013. You might simply not appreciate what they are.

There is a difference here. If someone doesn't want to pay for premium membership I can respect that. However, RhizomicSearcher is suggesting that he should get premium membership for free. The reason appears to be because he would only use one or very few premium member features. I suppose it would be fairer if we were charged only for the features that we used but buying features a la carte tend to cost more than bundled features. Another issue RhizomicSearcher seems to have is with the advertizing model on the site. Not only has this model been used successfully on this site for years it is being used successfully on many other sites.

That is kind of what I was getting at...The powers that be at this sight offer basic services for free. That is great that they can do that and still maintain the sight from the funding they get from premium members and other sources. They don't have to do that and for anyone to feel that they are entitled to any services let alone premium benefits is asking alot.

I am making the assumption that the reason they offer free basic service is the hope that the basic member will get hooked and go all in...

 

Glenn, You are correct in that I am ignorant on why someone wouldn't pay for a premium membership but I am pretty open minded.....(I am sure it is more than just Financial reasons)

 

Has the ratio of premium members to basic members dropped since the popularity of Smart phone apps???

 

One member that I am aware of lives in an area with low cache density and few PMO caches. PQ's and CAR's are not that attractive to them. Other than bookmarks and favorite points there are few other reasons. And like a lot of members that choose not to pay for premium, caching is a sporadic activity that does not justify the expense of PM.

[+Don_J]

There is a difference here. If someone doesn't want to pay for premium membership I can respect that. However, RhizomicSearcher is suggesting that he should get premium membership for free.

I agree with you - and have no problem with the way things operate at all.

 

I was probably just reacting a the choice of words of a couple of other people ;-)

 

You seemed to ignore the other words that he used. He was not referring to basic members in general but those that complain because they don't get the paid product for free.

 

If you drove into a gas station and told the attendant that you deserved free gas, he would probably think that you were out of your mind.

[Blue Square Thing]

You seemed to ignore the other words that he used. He was not referring to basic members in general but those that complain because they don't get the paid product for free.

 

If you drove into a gas station and told the attendant that you deserved free gas, he would probably think that you were out of your mind.

Yes, I know - it was, as I've said, a reaction to the ways that a range of things that have been written in this thread. It sometimes seems to be implied that anyone who declines to become a premium member should be stopped from doing a variety of things. Not always, but sometimes.