Jump to content

Geocaching's Class Warfare


WMIM
Followers 9

Recommended Posts

I know that this thread is already a bit warm right from the outset, but let's try to remember to keep civil with each other, please.

Oh, Brother. With all this cheese talk and your forums signature..... :laughing:

I take my cheese without wine, but I love the stuff. :)

As a PM I have no issues with basic members logging my caches. Groundspeak left the back door open so that they can. :anibad:

Link to comment

 

I am curious, however, on how you're defining cheating. Looking at a few of your caches I see a several cases where you're not just placing caches for others to find, but are trying to dictate to others how they're supposed to find them. In one case you write "Do a little exploring while you're here, don't just park and grab." It appears that the cache actually has two waypoints, but was published as a traditional (rather than as a multi cache). For another cache, you tell finders to download and play an MP3 file (again, making up your own rules). While you can *suggest* listening to that music clip, you can't make it a requirement. That's a Additional Logging Requirement and is in violation of the guidelines (which apply to both basic and premium members). On a third cache, it appears that some internet searching is required to derive a combination to unlock something. That should have been published as an unknown cache rather than a traditional. What it looks like to me is that rather than adhering the guidelines you're trying to establish you're own rules and conventions and when others (who also happen to be premium members) aren't complying with your wishes you're characterizing them as cheaters.

 

Yes, I noticed that too on their hides. So concerned with how the game is played but can't even be bothered enough to read the established rules and play the game correctly.

 

 

Yep, you're right. All's well here among caching's finest, the *Premiums*. Join them or punch the red X.

 

No.. Just you punch the red X. Plenty of basic members see welcome. You however? You're going to have a heart attack soon with the amount stress you're spewing out. This game seems to be causing your great distress. It's not worth it....

 

Personally, I give this effort at trolling a C- at best.

 

Really? That high huh?

 

I'd give this a D. I guess that's just as close, but a C- is technically passing...

Link to comment

WMIM--

 

I'm interested in how you came up with an average of 15 years for a typical cache to get its first favorite point. The first cache was hidden less than 14 years ago, and favorites are only 4-5 years old. Are you using some type of poisson distribution? What are your assumptions?

Link to comment

Volunteer Reviewers are paid, just not in the form of a salary. They get free Premium Membership. They can also avoid the proximity issues from PMOs/multis/puzzles/unpublished listings (since they can see all of those on their reviewer map). If you think they deserve more than that sure, but you seem much angrier about their perceived exploitation than they do - not only in terms of lack of complaints on their part but also given how many of them have been Reviewers for years.

 

Are some PMOs jerks? Do some cachers brag about their Find count and look down on those with lesser stats? Do some cachers log bogus finds and otherwise not care about the integrity of the game? Yes, to all of those. But I don't see any connection between those things and being a PMO. Jerks, braggarts, and armchair loggers would exist in geocaching regardless of whether it was 100% free for everyone or had a $1000/year membership.

 

FWIW, I paid $29.99 for a year of premium membership when I first signed up and that's still what it is now. I maintain a bunch of bookmark lists, find Favorites pretty useful, and make extensive use of the API via GSAK (at an access level that requires being a PM here). Being able to run some PQs then filter them through GSAK easily saves me $30 a year (less than 1 tank of gas) by helping me avoid looking for caches I don't want to find. There are certainly some things I wish Groundspeak did better, but I'm reasonably satisfied for the service I receive.

 

Geocaching is a hobby that at minimum requires ownership of a smartphone and, especially if you want to go seeking good caches in good rural locations, a good GPS. Not to mention the gas most people need to spend if they want to do more than cache within walk/biking distance of home.

 

Most hobbies, by virtue of being a leisure activity, have some kind of "class warfare" in the context you describe it. Better lures for fishing, better clubs for golfing, better parts for my car racing, new models/rulebooks for my wargaming, new/better cards for my Magic The Gathering deck, better shoes for running, personal trainers and gym memberships for anything athletic, better tickets for sports fans, FastPass at theme parks, etc.

 

If you're really concerned about class warfare go protest something like Walmart where it really matters to how lots of people just try to feed their families.

Link to comment

 

Did I insult you? Did I call you a "five-year-old"? Did I call your complaints "rants"?

That's all your noble friends have been doing since I first expressed my observations. They stand:

 

1. Premium members cheated on my first cache.

2. Then they insulted me. Cursed me for calling them out when they cheated.

Not ONE of you has addressed such reprehensible conduct. Not ONE of you.

3. I spoke to another fellow and he confirmed that he found Premium Members (gasp!) engaging in widespread cheating.

 

But hey, when you get to a Mega Event, you can show everyone your Cyber Medals.

And won't that be cool.

1. Some people who happen to be Premium Members "cheated" on your first cache. Please don't paint with such a broad brush.

2. Some people with poor taste and short tempers insulted you. They had thin skin, and without knowing how you opened the conversations with these "elitists", we don't know why they might have come back with insults and curses. I'm going to venture a guess that you may have come out, guns blazing, and that is why they responded in kind. Your words and reactions here support my hypothesis. I'll await the evidence (your conversations with these "elitists") to see if I may be wrong.

3. Some people are jerks. Some people cheat. If you stick around long enough you will learn that they come in all shapes and sizes. Some are PMs, some are not. Most people who play this game (and who value it enough to contribute to it financially) are kind, approachable, and adherents to the guidelines.

 

I'll give you two cents of advice: Tone it down. I'm guessing that your approach may be contributing to your experiences with other geocachers.

Link to comment

This may exlpain the dislike of premium members and reviewers.

http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC4N7DV_the-bike-trail-not-taken

 

Must be a lot missing there. I see it was archived for inappropriate discussions, but that's it...

Yep, looks like quite a bit missing that the CO deleted according to the reviewers note.

Cache pages are NOT the place to vent or to engage in arguments or debates. Take that content to the forums and follow the Guidelines for that type of communication. And for the record, any REQUIREMENTS other than signing the log are not allowed. Those are considered ALRs -- Additional Logging Requirements -- and other than certain Challenge Caches (which have their own special rules), there are no ALRs allowed for traditional caches. Cache owners CANNOT delete logs for failure to follow any requested rules or actions. Requests can be made, but the cache owner has no right to delete any log so long as the cacher has signed the physical cache log.

 

Finally, I have deleted the commercial link to the bike rental shop. Links like that violate the Commercial Cache Guidelines.

 

Thank you for your understanding.

 

Marko Ramius

Volunteer Cache Reviewer

 

Looks like the CO had some ALR's on the listing and deleted some legitimate finds, which normally gets a complaint sent to TPTB. That explains why they will not pay to use this site, they want things done their way or no way and it just don't work here like that. :huh:

Link to comment

Thank you to Moon Pie Mafia and Manville Possum Hunters for shedding light on "the rest of the story."

 

The full, true story is played out in the archived logs on the cache page you identified. The story is not pretty and involves a number of issues, principally impermissible Additional Logging Requirements. In summary, the "cheating" premium members allegedly failed to ride a bike to the cache and/or remove bags of trash from the cache area, in violation of the OP's / CO's "wishes." Such wishes do not form the basis for deleting a valid find log or to label someone as a "cheater" should they fail to honor the wishes.

 

Regards,

Keystone

Unpaid Sap for nearly 11 years

Link to comment
"How much is Google.com again? It's FREE.

What's the charge for YouTube? FREE!

As to what is "slowly going downhill," what have you to say for rampant cheating?

How about paying the reviewers... .NOTHING?

"Thanks, saps. Keep up the good work."

Oh yeah, and you know that minimum wage raise thing Barack Obama is yammering about?

We're all over it. We're DOUBLING your wages. Zero times two. ha ha ha ha"

 

Actually Google makes billions of dollars on advertising and selling premium search results to companies so NO it's not free. You pay for it when you buy products that are advertised.

 

YouTube also makes money by selling advertising..... Same principal and if I remember correctly same company...

 

What does cheating have to do with PMO? I have seen a lot of cheating from non-PMO. If someone claims a find on your cache and didn't sign the log, delete the log. Some will argue that those people cache a different way than you and it doesn't hurt you. One way or another, it's a game, enjoy it your own way or not. Best advice when I started this hobby was, if something about a cache is no longer fun, don't do those type of caches.

 

Not sure what your rave about minimum wage here is about. All in all your arguments have been done before. It's all been stated. If you don't like this site there are 2 to 4 other similar sites you can go to or even other similar type games.

 

So at this point, I say you've started to beat the dead horse that's been dug up and buried over and over again just so you can beat. No point made...

Link to comment
The truth is that there just ISN'T 5 million premium members, they'd be very lucky to have half a million.
Assuming 5 million accounts, half a million premium members would be a conversion rate of 10%, which would be wildly successful. The highest conversion rates I've seen for freemium sites are in the single digits. Conversion rates less than 1% are more typical.

 

On the subject of alleged cheating, AFAICS it boils down to (premium) members being knowledgeable enough to know that Additional Logging Requirements must be optional, and cannot be enforced by deleting online Find logs. But it's hard to sift through all the rants to figure out what the OP's underlying complaint really is, and as Keystone indicated, there's part of the story that we're missing.

Link to comment

Thank you to Moon Pie Mafia and Manville Possum Hunters for shedding light on "the rest of the story."

 

The full, true story is played out in the archived logs on the cache page you identified. The story is not pretty and involves a number of issues, principally impermissible Additional Logging Requirements. In summary, the "cheating" premium members allegedly failed to ride a bike to the cache and/or remove bags of trash from the cache area, in violation of the OP's / CO's "wishes." Such wishes do not form the basis for deleting a valid find log or to label someone as a "cheater" should they fail to honor the wishes.

 

Regards,

Keystone

Unpaid Sap for nearly 11 years

So this brings to light some of the discussion in the "Intro App" thread. What does the community do when someone is new to the game and not open to learning the finer points of the game?

 

It sounds like the OPs caches are set up to be interesting and unique, albeit misguided and mislabeled. A Trad that should be a multi, a Trad that should be an Unknown, ALR use, etc are all things that can be addressed through the community use of NM/NA logs and kindly emails to the owner.

 

However, it doesn't seem the owner is receptive to feedback. So, what to do in this case? :shocked:

Link to comment

This may exlpain the dislike of premium members and reviewers.

http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC4N7DV_the-bike-trail-not-taken

That cache had a short, weird history. If we could see the deleted posts, it would be even weirder. :wacko:

 

It's nice to meet a CO at a cache. It's unusual to go to a cache and end up in a "spirited debate" with the CO about Groundspeak's rules.

 

Someone needs to chill - that's a statement of concern for another human being. As another comment said, making a relaxing game stressful can lead to health issues including heart attacks.

Link to comment

Thank you to Moon Pie Mafia and Manville Possum Hunters for shedding light on "the rest of the story."

 

The full, true story is played out in the archived logs on the cache page you identified. The story is not pretty and involves a number of issues, principally impermissible Additional Logging Requirements. In summary, the "cheating" premium members allegedly failed to ride a bike to the cache and/or remove bags of trash from the cache area, in violation of the OP's / CO's "wishes." Such wishes do not form the basis for deleting a valid find log or to label someone as a "cheater" should they fail to honor the wishes.

 

Regards,

Keystone

Unpaid Sap for nearly 11 years

So this brings to light some of the discussion in the "Intro App" thread. What does the community do when someone is new to the game and not open to learning the finer points of the game?

 

It sounds like the OPs caches are set up to be interesting and unique, albeit misguided and mislabeled. A Trad that should be a multi, a Trad that should be an Unknown, ALR use, etc are all things that can be addressed through the community use of NM/NA logs and kindly emails to the owner.

 

However, it doesn't seem the owner is receptive to feedback. So, what to do in this case? :shocked:

I don't mean to be rude, but who is this community you often speak of?

Seems to me, most go about their caching with little interest of guidelines or anything, as long as it doesn't affect their smiley.

How often do you hear of caches with guidelines broken some times for years and found by many before it's reported.

No NMs or NAs have been going on now for years. You oughtta know that.

The community (to me) seems to be a heck of a lot of people minding their own business and just caching.

- I guess I just don't understand what you think the community will do about anything.

Link to comment

Personally, I give this effort at trolling a C- at best.

 

Oh woe is me! Arthur gives me a C-. I think I shall take poison, and die!

 

On second thought, why don't I investigate Arthur's Absolute Awesomeness, the better to learn from him.

 

Let's see, oh my, what an impressive array of cybermedals, and statistics. This fellow has really been around the Premium Geocaching Kingdom, n'est-ce pas? Unfortunately Arthur overlooked some of his essential statistics. Arthur has 16 active caches as opposed to 30 archived ones. I see one of Arthur's efforts rates 0 favorites for 148 finds. A grade of F would be appropriate for Arthur's quantity and quality. Arthur's mean, median and mode favorite scores for page 1 of his 3 page Traditional Cache list are .167, 0, and 0 respectively. This is how his *Premium* friends graded him. So, Artie, how do you like being the target? And this is just one on one for you, not the entire *Premium* clique so gleefully bullying me.

 

Incidentally, .167, 0 and 0 are approximately the stats for all caches from everything I have seen to date.

 

Of the recent threads Arthur frequents here at geocaching is "WHAT IRKS YOU THE MOST."

 

Nota bene: It has 22,789 views as I type this and 603 replies, virtually all from *Premium Members* who so clearly and obviouisly love to whine themselves.

 

F to all of you for your cliquey hypocrisy.

 

And that fellow who had the temerity to intimate that I might be calling it cheating when someone didn't listen to the soundtrack I provided? Also a grade of F for that, and other pablum.

 

This is really getting boring. You fellows can't put all your best stuff together and make one Huckleberry.

Edited by WMIM
Link to comment

You speak of rules and the fact that rules were violated, both with the rules you established on your caches and the rules that Ground Speak established for participating in geocaching on their website.

 

First off, let's establish some rules of debate. 1) Use logical arguments. You are generalizing an entire group based off your interaction with a very small selection of people that you have encountered. It's not fair and it's not logical. 2) Being factious is helping no one, stick to the facts. Stop mocking people just because they disagree with you. 3) Know what are facts and what you are just making up. You can not know how many Premium Members have viewed this thread, you can only know how many Premium Members have responded to this thread (and once again you are generalizing) 4) In the words of the great Wil Wheaton, "Don't be a dick".

 

Now, let's discuss your involvement within the geocaching community. You have refused to follow any of the rules yourself. You violated the rules Ground Speak established for the listing of geocaches on their website, namely by creating Alternative Logging Requirements for the caches. I understand that you had a specific experience you wanted associated with your cache, but that is not how geocaching works. The geocaching community is individuals participating in geocaching in the way that they enjoy the most. You cannot demand that someone do specific actions when searching for your cache. If you want people to visit specific locations because they are beautiful or important, you can create a multicache with a stage at each of the locations, but you still can't demand that they look at a specific waterfall or listen to a certain bird. All you can do is say, "I think this area is important enough to bring you here, enjoy it in your own way."

 

One last point to discuss. Please understand that YOU only can control YOUR actions and reactions. Let other people play the game however they want. If they are cheating, they are only cheating themselves. They are taking nothing from you by claiming they signed a log that they really didn't.

 

And just so you know, I work 30 hours a week at a minimum wage job, so I am clearly within the class of individuals that you propose that Ground Speak has chosen to wage war against. I have decided that the benefits of being a Premium Member outweighs the $29.99 a year that it costs to be one. I do not think I am better than anyone else because of this, but this is how I enjoy the games, so this is how I choose to participate.

Link to comment

Many times when I observe a tempting bit of post, slowly trolling by, and notice the line attached to it leading to the boat, I can't resist taking a bite at the hook.

 

This time I am going to offer the OP a bit of advice.... see that little red "X" up in the corner??? Good!!! Click that, and your troubles will go away!!

 

You're welcome!!:lol:

 

"Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." - Winston Churchill

 

You quoted Winston Churchill who was famous for being counterculture. He spoke his mind no matter how the majority felt.

Obviously you can neither tolerate my opinions, nor listening to them. Tsk, tsk.

 

Show some courage and sit down and listen.. IF you can...

 

The first cache I hid was instantly lauded by people who had thousands of finds. They gave it rave reviews.

Now the dark side, all from your vaunted *Premium Members*.

 

1. Some of the lied in claiming that they found it and logged the book.

I thought this was an honorable activity. It is not.

 

2. When I called them on their lies, one cursed me, reviled me, called me every imaginable name, and said he never wanted to hear from me or my caches again. I forwarded his foul missive to Big Brother who... did NOTHING.

 

Pretty good start to this wonderful, *friendly* activity.

 

3. There are scads of rules, and the rules have rules. One *Premium Member* chastened me with my second cache, claiming "You can't tell us what to do. You can only give us the location, blah blah blah."

 

Oh really? How about: Bring a pencil. Bring a flashlight. Climb this tree. Use this TOTT. Bring scuba gear, climbing gear, a mirror, etc.

 

4. Oh look, I have XX,000 finds.

 

Isn't that special. I just finished a vacation on the Big Island, then hopped to Honolulu to climb Koko Head. From there I hunted feral hogs in Texas before leaving on a driving tour of the United States. We shipped our car home from Fort Lauderdale and went through the Panama Canal to Los Angeles for fifteen days, stopping in Aruba, Colombia, Panama, Costa Rica, and Mexico. That was in the space of about four months. We went to Alaska last year. How many of those cyber medallions do you have on your little geocaching page again?

 

So call me Winston. He was quite able to stand alone, and so am I. Your cliquiness is so high school.

 

"If I were married to you, Nancy, I would drink it." - Winston Churchill, who also said, "My friends are few in number but entirely sufficient."

If I was as unhappy as you are I think I would find a new activity before my blood pressure went too high. As far as the price of a premium membership one two dollar beer would cover close to a month of dues. I don't pay for a premium membership to become a "vaunted premium member", I use the bookmarks, PQs, and caches along a route. Equate it to buying any product and paying extra to move up to a better model, and then maybe you will understand the concept.

Link to comment

Yep, you're right. All's well here among caching's finest, the *Premiums*. Join them or punch the red X.

 

If you come out the gate acting like the world is against you, and you act like it, well then yeah. The world will be against you.

 

Every single post from you has been filled with anger, is antagonistic, and berates cachers and Groundspeak, whose forums you are using for free. This is obviously not a hobby you should be continuing in as I would hate to see it adversely impact your stress level and health.

Link to comment

this thread really should be locked. There's not a whole lot more that can be said, and obviously nothing more that will be listened to.

 

Yup.

 

Not a discussion, but an ongoing rant, with the OP refusing to face facts or listen to what people are saying. Rather pointless, and not even entertaining.

 

:rolleyes:

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment
Oh woe is me! Arthur gives me a C-. I think I shall take poison, and die!

 

On second thought, why don't I investigate Arthur's Absolute Awesomeness, the better to learn from him.

 

Let's see, oh my, what an impressive array of cybermedals, and statistics. This fellow has really been around the Premium Geocaching Kingdom, n'est-ce pas? Unfortunately Arthur overlooked some of his essential statistics. Arthur has 16 active caches as opposed to 30 archived ones. I see one of Arthur's efforts rates 0 favorites for 148 finds. A grade of F would be appropriate for Arthur's quantity and quality. Arthur's mean and mode favorite scores for page 1 of his 3 page Traditional Cache list are .167, and 0 respectively. This is how his *Premium* friends graded him. So, Artie, how do you like being the target? And this is just one on one for you, not the entire *Premium* clique so gleefully bullying me.

 

I place caches because I enjoy placing caches. Some are winners and some are failed experiments. It happens over time. I like getting favorite points, but that is not the only reason why I place caches, so if I don't get those points that's okay. Honestly, I don't feel like a target at all. What is patently obvious, though, is that you're a very bitter geocacher who didn't like having the rules enforced when it came to one of your caches. So...in the end...I feel far more sorry for you than any amount of shame. Perhaps you might get rid of your misplaced anger, learn the rules and abide by them and learn to get along better with others.

 

You still fail at trolling.

Link to comment

this thread really should be locked. There's not a whole lot more that can be said, and obviously nothing more that will be listened to.

 

Yup.

 

Not a discussion, but an ongoing rant, with the OP refusing to face facts or listen to what people are saying. Rather pointless, and not even entertaining.

 

:rolleyes:

 

 

B.

 

I tend to agree. The OP is not going to listen at all, and that much is apparent. It's simply a vehicle for rants.

Link to comment

You still fail at trolling.

This actually shows just the opposite. People keep biting onto his "hook".

 

He did fail in the UK forum, as someone noted. That post was a classic troll. The OP is an epic rant, if premium membership really did cost $40, there were 5,000,000 subscribers, and they brought in 200 Million a year just from premium memberships. It's kind of hard to take him serious if he's that off the mark. By the way, if he's reading this, a company the size of Groundspeak brings in 10 Mill a year max. :ph34r:

Link to comment

This thread seems to have degraded into just talking about the OP. I'm wondering if it can get back to some semblance of the original topic. Which I think is about premium memberships and if there is some sort of class warfare that is caused by them.

I vote to lock it. There is no class warfare in geocaching that I am aware of. I am a Premium Member and have two basic members in my household, we all maintain geocaches. This thread is all about the OP and their unwillingness to understand that they just can't make up rules for us to go by and call it cheating if we don't follow their ALR requirements. Groundspeak is sucessful because it enforces these rules. I have ran across angry CO's that delete logs just to be mean, and if Groundspeak did not make things right, well this site would stink and I would not want to play the game. Lock this thread so the OP can start another rant thread and let my friend Mr. Keystone explain to them how to play nice, I'm not very good at it. :laughing:

Link to comment

Another note. Leave your personal attacks at the door. If you want to insult someone you may find yourself in a time out. You can hold a discussion, but I don't want to hand out any warnings or time outs, I dislike doing it.

It's very hard when simply talking about the subject of the post feeds the trolling. It's a cycle that will continue.

 

Frankly, I'm surprised that this thread stayed alive, and that the time out and warnings are seemingly directed toward those who are trying to discuss how the OP had issues with other cachers because of their ignorance of the listing guidelines.

 

I'm still not sure how productive a talk with a new cacher can be if they are completely against listening to where they have a misunderstanding of how the game is played. If their walls are up, their decisions made, and presumtions about others created, where are we supposed to go?

 

I hope that we might be able to get through that the issues here are about:

1. The approach taken by the OP when up against cognitive dissonance

2. The improper listing of cache type for their caches

3. The breaking of guidelines when listing one of their caches (ALR)

4. The possible approach taken by some geocachers when talking to the OP about the guidelines and their caches' issues against the guidelines

5. The approach taken by the OP when approached about their caches' issues against the guidelines

6. The OP's feeling that all Premium Members are unkind (interactions, in person, on cache pages, and in the forums), cheats (cache logs on an ALR Trad that should be a multi), bratggarts (badges and such that Groundspeak awards cachers when they geocache), and big spenders (fees to become a PM)

 

These are either misconceptions, a bad attitude, or a disregard by the OP for the guidelines. How is this about us, again?

 

How are we to approach this OP to show them that PMs aren't the enemy? They are hellbent on saying that we are all cheats and horrible people...and most of that stems from their interactions with some PMs who tried to discuss the issues of the OP's caches against the guidelines. (Which we have no record of to know how that interaction went--who said what, how it was said, etc)

 

So, we have nothing to go on except what the OP has said here, and the fact that they continue to disregard reasonable explanations about why there might be a problem.

 

The issue is that the OP's caches are not properly listed, and one was against the ALR guideline and was archived. If the logs on the archived cache were also archived, I'm guessing that there was some fighting about why the cache was against the guidelines, why the finds they claimed were still valid, and is likely degraded into a shouting match.

 

So, how is the OP's disregard for the guidelines something we must adjust our behavior for? Why is their broad brush of Premium Member disdain allowed to continue unwarned?

 

To the OP:

Not all of us are "bad", "mean", or "cheats". In fact, I think that a period of calm and a break from the situation will help you understand that your caches, while apparently interesting, unique and fun, are listed as the wrong cache types. The people you claim are "cheats" were actually claiming a find according to how the guidelines allow. I urge you to read the guidelines, take some constructive criticism for your caches, and let it go.

 

This isn't a "Premium" versus "Basic" member issue. This is an issue of those who follow the guidelines against those who don't. Some are trying to help your caches follow the guidelines. Please try to learn how to play this game according to those guidelines, and stop calling those who follow them names.

Edited by NeverSummer
Link to comment

WMIM--

 

I'm interested in how you came up with an average of 15 years for a typical cache to get its first favorite point. The first cache was hidden less than 14 years ago, and favorites are only 4-5 years old. Are you using some type of poisson distribution? What are your assumptions?

 

Probably because lots of caches had been in place for years before there were favorite points. Not that many people went back through their old finds to award points. But it was a good way to skew statistics to try to "prove" his point.

Link to comment

WMIM--

 

I'm interested in how you came up with an average of 15 years for a typical cache to get its first favorite point. The first cache was hidden less than 14 years ago, and favorites are only 4-5 years old. Are you using some type of poisson distribution? What are your assumptions?

 

Probably because lots of caches had been in place for years before there were favorite points. Not that many people went back through their old finds to award points. But it was a good way to skew statistics to try to "prove" his point.

And this is part of the history of the game the OP might not know because they are new to the game.

 

Any cache placed before the creation of Favorite Points is less likely to have been reviewed by anyone to have a backdated favorite added. Any cache archived before favorites existed won't have any favorites at all. Any cache archived cannot be lumped together in an argument that a cacher places "bad" caches; rather, there are many reasons caches are archived, and the list of why is far too large to itemize.

 

Again, the OP needs to realize that there is a lot of history in this game to understand, and part of that history is how the guidelines came about. The guidelines exist for a reason, and others--likely Premium Members--will likely be the ones to give a nudge in the right direction about the guidelines because they have the game context, gameplay history, and financial and time investment in the game to offer the feedback.

Link to comment

This thread seems to have degraded into just talking about the OP. I'm wondering if it can get back to some semblance of the original topic. Which I think is about premium memberships and if there is some sort of class warfare that is caused by them.

 

Okay, here is my discussion on the subject: "There is no class warfare here"

 

Any further attempts expand a discussion will naturally have to allude to the OP and his bogus allegations and may result in a time-out. Why not just wrap up this train wreck?

Link to comment

This thread seems to have degraded into just talking about the OP. I'm wondering if it can get back to some semblance of the original topic. Which I think is about premium memberships and if there is some sort of class warfare that is caused by them.

 

Okay, here is my discussion on the subject: "There is no class warfare here"

 

Any further attempts expand a discussion will naturally have to allude to the OP and his bogus allegations and may result in a time-out. Why not just wrap up this train wreck?

An the moral of this story?

 

Be kind to each other when trying to offer suggestions, be constructive in our criticisms, and don't make assumptions.

 

Now let's play the Full House feelgood outro music and shut 'er down.

Link to comment

This may exlpain the dislike of premium members and reviewers.

http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC4N7DV_the-bike-trail-not-taken

That cache had a short, weird history. If we could see the deleted posts, it would be even weirder. :wacko:

 

It's nice to meet a CO at a cache. It's unusual to go to a cache and end up in a "spirited debate" with the CO about Groundspeak's rules.

 

Someone needs to chill - that's a statement of concern for another human being. As another comment said, making a relaxing game stressful can lead to health issues including heart attacks.

It sounds like from the reviewers note that the cache page was an exchange of words that needed deleted.

But this part here

Finally, I have deleted the commercial link to the bike rental shop. Links like that violate the Commercial Cache Guidelines.

Why was the cache published in the first place if it did not meet guidelines or did the CO change/alter the listing after it was published. From reading the cache page and reviewers notes I would guess that the CO owns the bike shop and was using their geocache as advertisement for their business. There is more to the story but I just don't understand the part about premium members and Groundspeak making money unless they wanted some free advertisement, and the part about premium members makes no sense to me. Is that because I am a basic member? :lol:

Link to comment
Why was the cache published in the first place if it did not meet guidelines or did the CO change/alter the listing after it was published.

 

I am guessing the latter.

I just read you forum signature. I don't work on Wall Street or consider my uniform dressing in drag, but I am expected to act accordingly even when picking up trash in the parking lot where I work. I'm sure all of this has brought negative attention to the bike shop.

And if it makes a difference I do have a geocache placement at my place of employment but it is not advertisement.

Link to comment

Pay your $29.99 a year and get all these wonderful benefits, geocaching.com tells the world.

And if you do not, well, you will not be permitted to:

A. See where the Premier Class has hidden their specially selected caches,

B. Get any notifications from www.geocaching.com,

C. Access our many, many other *Premium* Functions, which are available only to those who

pay tribute to the owners of www.geocaching.com

 

I protest. Something like 5,000,000 geocachers pay $30 every year, for a total of around $200,000,000

and Big Brother doesn't even pay a shekel to the Reviewers...?

 

For about twenty years, I have enjoyed myriad benefits of the internet. This is the most offensive class

warfare I have ever seen at any website.

 

Be one of us *Premium Members* or else... You're out in the cold.

 

Hey, look at my find count now, and all of my cyber medals to boot. Woo woo.

 

 

You are right!!!

 

This service should be free!!!!

 

It does tend to serve those with money, it is true. I mean, to really get into caching you've got to have a smart-phone or a GPS. Those are not cheap, so geocaching is really a game for people who are above the poverty level.

 

Yes there are many free services in the world, and I think there should be more too!!

 

Geocaching is just a game, just a hobby. People who can't afford a geocaching device really aren't missing out on what they need to survive by not playing (although some may argue that).

 

I think the things in life people need to survive should be free. I think we should not pay for water. Of all things, for the utilities to charge people for water when we need that to survive!!! That's pretty ridiculous you've got to agree.

 

And garbage pick up. I mean I'm really talking about the basics of life here. What if all your neighbors stopped getting their garbage picked up??? Gross, really.

 

What about food, housing, basic internet service? Electricity. Now who lives in the US without electricity? We need it.

 

What about cable TV? Do you have cable? How much do you pay for that? Maybe $120. a month? That is definitely not a necessity. I do not think we should get that free. In fact I really believe it is detrimental to everyone's mental health. Do you have Cable TV? Okay, then just drop that and buy a premium membership. It's much cheaper and much better for you. That's what I did. I like geocaching much more than watching TV.

 

So who would pay for all that stuff if we got it free? Who would pay for geocaching.com if we got it for free?

So if they paid for the website that would be like paying us to geocache. Well wouldn't we all like that.

 

Well wait!!! You know you don't actually have to pay for it?!?!?! You CAN geocache for free. How about that?

Well that was just right-nice of them to do that.

I think that is a great way to have a business. People who want to pay for the website can do that, and those who don't want to don't have to. It's nice that they give us some extra benefits if we choose to support the website.

 

 

As far as your beefs with the members who "cheated" on your caches:

 

This world is full of wars, extreme poverty, nuclear radiation killing our fish and oceans, children dying of lack of food or medicine, people sick and in pain... if this is your worst complaint in your life, that people are not logging your caches correctly, or not finding them and logging them, or eating them when they find them, or whatever, then you, brother, are very blessed.

 

I would suggest to take the time and energy you're spending on this forum and go volunteer at a children's hospital: hold the hand of a dying child. Or maybe take some cub scouts geocaching. Volunteer at a food kitchen for the homeless. Go do some good in the world. There is a whole lot out there to be done. A whole lot more than free premium member caches for the masses.

 

You will see there are a lot of important causes out there. And perhaps whether someone signs your cache or not will have a little less significance. I mean, REALLY, how much does it really matter in the grand scheme of things?

 

And for those who REALLY want that premium membership, it's not that hard to come up with $30 bucks a year. You don't have to be earning 50K a year to do it.

Just turn off your cable and you can buy us all premium memberships.

Edited by Sol seaker
Link to comment

The Additional Logging Requirements and Commercial material were added post-publication.

Sorry, I did not see your post. I am very confident with Groundspeak reviewers. I do know that they are voulnteers but are asked to be reviewers, so it is an honor to be one.

Thank you for you volunteer work here in the forums and as a reviewer. You do a great job. :)

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 9
×
×
  • Create New...