Members-Only Caches - Discuss

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

There aren't any members-only caches within 100 miles of me (but there are 400 caches within 100 miles). I was thinking about hiding a members-only cache and wondered what people generally feel about these caches?

I want to hide one becasue I'm tired of pouring hours of work designing and building a cache and researching the area only to have people leave the cache out in the open and take all the good items out in a few days.

Can you make a members-only cache into a regular cache later? How about the other way around?

What do you think about members-only caches?

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

Difficult question.

I think that it's good to support our hobby financially. On another hand I think that's ok too that everybody can use it freely. And than again I'm happy that others clearly see that I support GC by giving me some special features.

But... members only caches... I'm not sure what to say.

What I will try this summer, is to create a multi cache with one part for members only. But... again we are discussing much about that, since GC is a community, there shouldn't be separations between people. But than again how can you underline that some people pay freely and others do not.

Well, well, well, as I said difficult question.

hello

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

I haven't found any MOC's yet, but I don't have a problem with them. I do doubt that making a cache a MOC would cut down much on the degradation of contents, etc... I think a lot of the people who do this stuff are probably memebers anyway.

And yes, you can switch it from a MOC to a generally available cache at any time.

"An appeaser is one who keeps feeding a crocodile-hoping it will eat him last" -Winston Churchill

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

Now keep in mind....I've only been involved since December....but here is my theory (based on personal observation and reading the forums and discussions with fellow cachers at social events.) Nobody for sure knows if a members only cache will stay a "quality" cache any longer than a non members only cache. There are not enough members only caches out there to really do any kind of test. My second theory is that members only caches PROBABLY will be slightly safer because people that just use the web site to find and plunder caches probably aren't going to pay for that. Yesterday I finished and posted my first members only cache. When reporting a cache, there is a button to click to make it members only or not. You can also go back and edit a cache you've preveiously hidden and either make it members only, or open it up for everyone. While I believe its important for members to continue to help non-members get involved and have caches out there to find.....since there are enough caches out here for non members already,,,,I think most of mine will be members only....at least I'll be able to see how they are treated. Plus, I think if there were more members only caches,,,it would encourage more people to support the site.

Earth First!!! We'll cache the other planets later!!

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

if you are having problems with caches being plundered in your area, create some MOC's and see if that makes any difference in the "plunder rate". if you do create MOC's, you will probably see a sharp reduction in the number of logs for the cache, but if it makes the cache less likely to be plundered, you've reached your objective.

this is an interesting idea, please post again in a few weeks and let us know if the MOC's do get plundered less, i would like to know the outcome of your test.

Creativity Within The Bounds Of Conformity

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Northern-Lights:
.....since there are enough caches out here for non members already,,,,I think most of mine will be members only....

I too are fairly new to this sport, since January 2003. But have thought there should be more member only caches. Right now there is only one in both VT and NH. While there is not a lot of caches in these two states as compared to other, less than 300 combined, the percentage of member only caches is less than 1 percent.

I would think more member only caches would help our sport in two ways. First it would give the paying members some additional caches to find for their support. Second if there is enough of them then it would convince more to support our sport finacially in order to have access to them.

SilverRubicon

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

I have put out three Members Only Caches as a rule when ever I put more that $85.00 worth of stuff in the box. I want those that find it to be playing the same game that I am ………JOE

Caching for Life or Divorce which ever comes first

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Team GeoDillo:
There aren't any members-only caches within 100 miles of me (but there are 400 caches within 100 miles). I was thinking about hiding a members-only cache and wondered what people generally feel about these caches?

I dislike MOCs, they exclude potential visitors and offer no assurance of anything IMO.

quote:
I want to hide one becasue I'm tired of pouring hours of work designing and building a cache and researching the area only to have people leave the cache out in the open and take all the good items out in a few days.

That sucks. But just making the cache an MOC does not mean that it will not be found by accident, or that some thoughtless cacher won't leave it out, or trade unfairly.

quote:
Can you make a members-only cache into a regular cache later? How about the other way around?

Yea, you can change them back and forth, as long as your paid up.

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

Well, as a paid member, I don't really have to seperate them in my head. I see them all. But, the few I have found are upsetting to me. The big reason is that on Dan's stats page, they don't show up. I know this is a trivial reason, but I would like all of my finds to count as finds. If I have found 200 caches, the sight of the 198 in the list just hits my eye wrong. Maybe I have a disorder, but that is how I feel.

Other than that, I would say that if you are making them MOC for the sole purpose of stopping people from trading down, I don't think that will be very effective. Just because people are paid members does not say anything about their caching ethics.

Ever notice that anyone that caches less than you do is a moron, while anyone that caches more than you do is a maniac? -Dru Morgan

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

OK I'll sound like a noob but what is Dan's stats page?

And I do consider myself a noob

== If at first you don't succeed, skydiving isn't for you. ==

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by SeventhSon:
OK I'll sound like a noob but what is Dan's stats page?

This...

- - - - -

Wisconsin Geocaching Association

Posted March 24, 2003 · March 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Dru Morgan:
... Maybe I have a disorder, but that is how I feel....

http://www.theheavenlyhost.com/dru

I have to agree with you, Dru!

--majicman

Posted March 25, 2003 · March 25, 2003

This website could offer many more features and incentives to join than creating MOCs. I don't like them I won't create them or patronize them.

It is just another form of discrimination.

South Cache

"To live only for some future goal is shallow. It's the sides of the mountain that sustain life, not the tops." Robert M. Persig

Posted March 25, 2003 · March 25, 2003

No biggie. The usually become non MO after a while. They're generally not any more special than a regualar cache.

I'll put out a MO cache if I've left a FTF prize but after the first finds I take it of MO.

george

Pedal until your legs cramp up and then pedal some more.

Posted March 25, 2003 · March 25, 2003

I've found four MOCs and placed one. Here's the breakdown:

Two of the MOCs I found were later changed to "public caches" by their owners; one of those owners told me he was interested in seeing the audit list. I never asked, but I think the second person changed their cache from a MOC to a public cache because people weren't seeking it.

The third and fourth MOCs I found remain MOCs. One contains (well, it did originally ... I have no idea what it contains by now) an unusual trade item and is located in a very public location. That owner wanted to limit the number of visitors. The fourth and final MOC I found was somebody's idea of a joke; it's a 1/1 dash-and-grab with a cache page that intentionally misrepresents it as a 5/5. To be honest, I don't have a high opinion of that one.

There were two reasons I placed a MOC: I also wanted to see how the audit feature worked, and secondly, I wanted to limit the number visitors to the area I had selected. Since only one person sought the cache before I archived it, it appears I succeeded.

I concluded that, from a cache owner's perspective, the audit list is a terrific feature. And from a cache finder's perspective, I concluded that MOCs aren't, in general, designed or implemented any better than the average public cache.

Posted March 25, 2003 · March 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by majicman:

quote:
Originally posted by Dru Morgan:
... Maybe I have a disorder, but that is how I feel....

http://www.theheavenlyhost.com/dru

I have to agree with you, Dru!

--majicman

Ooooo look who's talking!

http://fp1.centurytel.net/Criminal_Page/

Posted March 25, 2003 · March 25, 2003

I just became a Geocaching.com member yesterday after 2 years of gecocaching. I did it primarily for the PDA functionality, but I would also like to do a search on the site for "Members Only" caches. I can't figure out how to do this. Can anybody offer some advice?

Scott

Posted March 25, 2003 · March 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by South_Cache:
I don't like them I won't create them or patronize them.

It is just another form of discrimination.

Perhaps you like gumbo; many others don't.

Perhaps you like beer; many others don't.

Perhaps you like action movies; many others don't.

Perhaps you like foreign cars; many others don't.

Perhaps you support a particular political party; many others don't.

Perhaps you belong to a particular religion; many others don't.

Perhaps you prefer 1/1 (or 5/5) caches; many others don't.

You choose not to take advantage of an option available to you as a supporting member; many others do.

Those are all examples of "discrimination," which is not in itself a bad thing ... it's a positive attribute.

Posted March 25, 2003 · March 25, 2003

I use the members only feature to give hard-core (paying) cachers a chance to find the cache first. I fully support the membership concept and wish to provide a small reward to others that feel the same way. This is a wonderful website. If money is needed, we should (all?) chip in.

Generally, I will change my caches to "public" after a short time.

The audit feature should be available to all caches, or at the very least, we should be able to see who is watching our caches.

I agree that quality is not guaranteed. My caches all degrade as time goes on. It's a fact of life, along with death and taxes. I am pleased that plundering is not a problem in my area.

Posted March 25, 2003 · March 25, 2003

I recently launched a Virtual cache and made it Members Only for the first two weeks to give members some bang for their buck. Then I made it public. I don't have any problem giving some people preferential treatment - especially when I fully intend to make it public eventually.

---------------

Go! And don't be afraid to get a little wet!

Posted March 25, 2003 · March 25, 2003

but I just don't see ANY benifit to a members virtural........what's the point?

Earth First!!! We'll cache the other planets later!!

Posted March 25, 2003 · March 25, 2003

Recently there have been quite a few MOC placed in my area.. My concern is this, what happens if I research a cache and place it, not knowing there is a MOC within .10 miles. Will it be denied

because of the .10 mile rule?

It seems this can be a problem for non mebers when setting up new cache locations.

Posted March 25, 2003 · March 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by srumrill:
I just became a Geocaching.com member yesterday after 2 years of gecocaching. I did it primarily for the PDA functionality, but I would also like to do a search on the site for "Members Only" caches. I can't figure out how to do this. Can anybody offer some advice?

Scott

They come up in the normal search, but have a little "man" icon next to them

== If at first you don't succeed, skydiving isn't for you. ==

Posted March 26, 2003 · March 26, 2003

I finally became a paying member because I wanted the PDA capabilities. I had known of a MOC close to me for a while and was excited that I could finally see where it was. Then came the disappointment. It's in the same park as 3 other public caches that I've already found and it costs $5 to get in to the park. Can't see having to fork out the entrance fee again for one cache. The logs show it's mostly full of junk anyway. But to make the matter even more bad, it was placed from someone who doesn't even live in this area. That just irritates me. If you're gonna place one I think it should be near you. Also don't think you should be putting them in parks you have to pay to enter when there are already several public ones there. This one cache has managed to totally turn me off to MOC's.

--------------------------------

Magellan Meridian GPS

L.O.S.T. - http://www.kjjeep.com

Posted March 26, 2003 · March 26, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by BassoonPilot:
Those are all examples of "discrimination," which is not in itself a bad thing ... it's a _positive_ attribute.

The guy asked for opinions... so shoot me or don't.

South Cache

"To live only for some future goal is shallow. It's the sides of the mountain that sustain life, not the tops." Robert M. Persig

Posted March 26, 2003 · March 26, 2003

Why? Because I thought it might help to support the site. The caches were made public in a week or 2. A good portion of the local cachers are members and I wanted to give them a chance to get there early before the others. As for the caches not showing up on Dan's page that is the least of my worries. I have tried for months to get my listings on that site straightened out to no avail. I'm sorry but a data base that refuses to reflect reality is of no use to me. I've given up even referencing it anymore. I know he's busy and I appreciate all the hard work. But.....

I have my own little world. But it's OK...they know me here.

Posted March 26, 2003 · March 26, 2003

i'm for being a member. i have a hard time with MOC because i want to be inclusive. i know some people leave new caches MO for a limited time so that first finds go to members. that's ok by me.

but i think the best thing is to let everryone play.

to love us is to be us is to love us is to be us is...

it doesn't matter if you get to camp at one or at six. dinner is still at six.

Posted March 26, 2003 · March 26, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by South_Cache:

The guy asked for opinions... so shoot me or don't.

Oh. That was your opinion? Sorry; I mistook it for a rant. So do you also consider caches that are outside of your abilities to be, by your usage of the word, "discriminatory?"

Just curious.

To comment very briefly on what a couple of others have mentioned, except for perhaps the easiest of 1/1 caches placed in plain view 30" off a flat, paved surface, I don't believe there is such a thing as an "all-inclusive" cache.

Posted March 26, 2003 · March 26, 2003

This was an initial concern in this topic. It seems to me that multi-caches are avoided much more than regulars and are less likely to plundered or have useless junk in a short period. Even real easy multis seem to have better stuff. The finds for most multis are much lower--

Members-Only Caches - Discuss

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation