[Feature] - Membership Levels

[+Checkm8!]

Don't know if this has been discussed before, but I was talking with a fellow cacher about the possibility of extending the Free / Paid for membership into something along the lines of Free/Bronze/Silver/Gold/Platinum, with the higher levels being available to premium members and being achieved by the number of caches found. This could relate to something like Bronze(100), Silver(500), Gold (1000), Platinum(5,000).

 

The basic idea of this would be so CO's could define the level at which the cache becomes 'unlocked'. i.e. Where a lot of work has gone into developing and making a cache, perhaps the CO would like only 'really serious' cachers who have already found 1,000+ caches to be able to have access to it. As an aside, it could of course also form the basis for another 'performance indicator' (the number of platinum caches found being the ultimate).

 

It could encourage folks to get out there and find more caches to 'unlock' those additional caches at the next level.

 

What do folks think?

 

Regards

 

Checkm8!

[+TriciaG]

Absolutely not.

 

People who go on power trail runs and log their own throwdowns shouldn't have more privileges than those who don't.

 

This is NOT a numbers game. Making levels based on numbers will lead to even more focus on numbers and temptation to cheat.

[+Bear and Ragged]

I'd rather they sorted a "Family Membership" first...

 

Would save the youngsters from having to log by the 'Back Door' method when caching with adults.

[Mr.Yuck]

I think the idea is dead on arrival being based on find counts.

 

However, before any bashes the idea too badly, the Letterboxing site Atlas Quest has had a concept like this for years. You can stipulate seekers have x number of plants (hides to us) or finds, to be able to see your listing. And Atlas Quest certainly hasn't imploded. Yes, I know, much smaller hobby.

[+Semper Questio]

Absolutely not.

 

People who go on power trail runs and log their own throwdowns shouldn't have more privileges than those who don't.

 

This is NOT a numbers game. Making levels based on numbers will lead to even more focus on numbers and temptation to cheat.

 

This.

 

No find count will ever indicate the true experience level or qualities of a geocacher and should never be used as a basis for ranking, rating, or otherwise granting status or privilege.

[+Corfman Clan]

Perhaps not the intended impression, but it seems this would promote elitism. I don't consider that a good thing.

[+Manville Possum]

Not a good idea.

[+niraD]

I agree with those who say that find count is absolutely the wrong measure. Someone who has found a dozen varied caches would be a much more experienced geocacher than someone who has logged hundreds of fungible film canisters along a rural highway.

[+NeverSummer]

Absolutely not.

 

People who go on power trail runs and log their own throwdowns shouldn't have more privileges than those who don't.

 

This is NOT a numbers game. Making levels based on numbers will lead to even more focus on numbers and temptation to cheat.

I think this sums up the argument against quite well.

[team tisri]

Don't know if this has been discussed before, but I was talking with a fellow cacher about the possibility of extending the Free / Paid for membership into something along the lines of Free/Bronze/Silver/Gold/Platinum, with the higher levels being available to premium members and being achieved by the number of caches found. This could relate to something like Bronze(100), Silver(500), Gold (1000), Platinum(5,000).

 

The basic idea of this would be so CO's could define the level at which the cache becomes 'unlocked'. i.e. Where a lot of work has gone into developing and making a cache, perhaps the CO would like only 'really serious' cachers who have already found 1,000+ caches to be able to have access to it. As an aside, it could of course also form the basis for another 'performance indicator' (the number of platinum caches found being the ultimate).

 

It could encourage folks to get out there and find more caches to 'unlock' those additional caches at the next level.

 

What do folks think?

 

Regards

 

Checkm8!

 

Utterly pointless.

 

If someone finds 1,000 film pots along a 105-mile-long guardrail they are still a less rounded cacher than someone else who has found 81 caches and filled their D/T grid.

 

It would also encourage armchair logging - it's not hard to find caches with inactive owners and it would be daft to create "awards" (as they would inevitably be seen, sooner or later) that encourage people to log finds they never made.

 

There's also nothing to say a user with 403 finds isn't still a very serious cacher while another user with 15,000 finds might just be getting to the end of their tether and developing a grudge against another cacher or against the game in general. If they can see these "platinum caches" have a lot of time and effort put into them they've got an obvious target if they want to launch their own vendetta.

 

And on top of all that, putting a lot of time and effort into making a cache and hiding it doesn't offer any guarantee that a passing muggle won't find it, an animal won't turf it out of a prime nesting spot, or the council won't cut down the tree that it was hidden in.

[+The A-Team]

...

And on top of all that, putting a lot of time and effort into making a cache and hiding it doesn't offer any guarantee that a passing muggle won't find it, an animal won't turf it out of a prime nesting spot, or the council won't cut down the tree that it was hidden in.

...or a platinum member taking his family of bronze members and their muggle friends to find a platinum cache.

 

Also, as we see currently with the PMO caches, they aren't necessarily of any higher quality than regular caches. Premium members have many different reasons for making their caches PMO, and the "elite" members under your proposed scheme would be no different. A platinum cache may still be a film canister on the back of a sign; it's just that it's a film canister cache that's restricted to "the elite". I see no benefit.

[+cerberus1]

...

And on top of all that, putting a lot of time and effort into making a cache and hiding it doesn't offer any guarantee that a passing muggle won't find it, an animal won't turf it out of a prime nesting spot, or the council won't cut down the tree that it was hidden in.

...or a platinum member taking his family of bronze members and their muggle friends to find a platinum cache.

 

Also, as we see currently with the PMO caches, they aren't necessarily of any higher quality than regular caches. Premium members have many different reasons for making their caches PMO, and the "elite" members under your proposed scheme would be no different. A platinum cache may still be a film canister on the back of a sign; it's just that it's a film canister cache that's restricted to "the elite". I see no benefit.

+1

[+geodarts]

Platinum members already have access to the fleet of Groundspeak jets, the lounges where they can enjoy a spa while a cadre of lackeys find caches for them, and the secret signals. There is no reason to give them additional containers to find.

Edited October 4, 2014 by geodarts

[+tozainamboku]

The basic idea of this would be so CO's could define the level at which the cache becomes 'unlocked'. i.e. Where a lot of work has gone into developing and making a cache, perhaps the CO would like only 'really serious' cachers who have already found 1,000+ caches to be able to have access to it. As an aside, it could of course also form the basis for another 'performance indicator' (the number of platinum caches found being the ultimate).

 

It could encourage folks to get out there and find more caches to 'unlock' those additional caches at the next level.

You can already hide caches that are 'unlocked', in a manner of speaking, based on the number of caches someone has found. It's called a challenge cache.

[team tisri]

The basic idea of this would be so CO's could define the level at which the cache becomes 'unlocked'. i.e. Where a lot of work has gone into developing and making a cache, perhaps the CO would like only 'really serious' cachers who have already found 1,000+ caches to be able to have access to it. As an aside, it could of course also form the basis for another 'performance indicator' (the number of platinum caches found being the ultimate).

 

It could encourage folks to get out there and find more caches to 'unlock' those additional caches at the next level.

You can already hide caches that are 'unlocked', in a manner of speaking, based on the number of caches someone has found. It's called a challenge cache.

 

... except that doesn't hide the listing from people who don't qualify.